Talk:Standing on the shoulders of giants

The page says "see below" with regards to Newton's quote, but doesn't have anything below referring to it.

Why not just get rid of the Latin and put the actual English quotation there? Bradridder (talk) 14:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Cannot be traced to this source. This is the whole point of Robert Merton's book, cited below, that the attribution to Lucan is a pure fabriction by Bartlett's book of quotations. Didacus Stella (Diego de Estella) was a Franciscan monk who wrote a book about the gospel of Luke (not Lucan) a few decades before Burton wrote his Anatomy.- John Rodgers Oct 3, 2005]

Newton's use of the phrase
Newton says, in his letter to Hooke: "if I have seen further..."; thus he is, in the style of the age, modestly portraying himself as the dwarf (note: rhetorically, as the expression has always been meant, and not physcically) who extends the concepts by building on the work of others whom he praises with the use of giants. The falling-out with Hooke came later. There is nothing in this quotation which can been seen as a slight to Hooke. NAFC 2012-01-01 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.231.128.68 (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

"Newton was perhaps making a more personal point than the mere expression of modesty seeing that Hooke was a man of remarkably short stature." What personal point? Sounds like original research to me. Superm401 | Talk 09:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

also it is Known that Newton was so small when born, that everyone thought that the baby wouldn't survive the day, and didn't bother to harry for a doctor. So if he was mocking Hooke, he would qualify himself in the same category    —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomCh (talk • contribs) 21:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

"What Des-Cartes did was a good step. You have added much several ways, and especially in taking the colours of thin plates into philosophical consideration. If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."

This statement of Newton's, in a letter on the 5th of February 1675 to Hooke, has relatively recently begun to be construed to be, or is even reported as "certainly" having been somehow an insult to the small stature of Hooke, either physically, intellectually, or both, but I cannot see that there is anything either certain, obvious, or even the least bit valid to such an interpretation.

A statement by William C. Waterhouse, Professor of Mathematics, at Penn State University presented at http://www.science-jokes.refleksje.pl/9_3.html indicates that the idea that this was somehow intended as a personal insult seems to have originated with Frank Manuel, in his book A Portrait of Isaac Newton (1968), and that he has "never seen any reason to believe it."

I have found that there is even an irresponsibly warped and presumptive interpretation of Newton's "Shoulder of Giants" statement in An Underground Education (1997) by Richard Zacks which declares: ''You might translate Newton's sentiments: "While I admit to building on the work of my scientific predecessors, I certainly didn't learn anything from a dwarf like you." ''

Personally, from what is indicated by the statement, I wouldn't translate Newton's sentiments into anything of the sort, and would consider this and other such interpretations as some people have made upon it to be an insult to normal human intelligence, if it were not plainly an indication of an appalling deficiency in their own. ~ Achilles † 19:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

''Someone needs to check the accuracy of the Latin translation to clarify the difference between "sitting" and "standing". Currently, the Latin version says one but the English the other.'' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.104.134 (talk) 16:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I have read a history of Physics book that alludes to this insult. Further, one of the books cited on the Robert Hooke's WIKI page suggests some major controversial influences in the Newton-Hooke dynamic. From my understanding, he was a hunchbacked dwarf, and Newton ridiculed him from a vanity perspective in the quote [The whole book will unveil the ill-will toward one another] See http://books.google.com/books?id=n6oJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=robert+hooke+hunchback&source=web&ots=3Ree4f-r4N&sig=JmQZRjYej_ERjFWo8QmzsjNWPuo#PPA28,M1 MonteShaffer 02:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The phrase is quoted in the book Isaac Newton: The Last Sorcerer by Michael White at at this amazon link for free: http://www.amazon.com/reader/073820143X?_encoding=UTF8&openid.assoc_handle=usflex&openid.return_to=https://www.amazon.com/gp/search-inside/sign-in%3Fie%3DUTF8%26query%3Dgiants%26asin%3D073820143X&openid.mode=id_res&openid.ns=http://specs.openid.net/auth/2.0&openid.claimed_id=https://www.amazon.com/ap/id/amzn1.account.16JFC2EVMJCZAM&query=giants&openid.signed=assoc_handle,claimed_id,identity,mode,ns,op_endpoint,response_nonce,return_to,signed&openid.sig=WO0FuWkloxuDxkmHX%2BQZkxCrl/GRqhkh3U6XNNWqvaQ%3D&openid.op_endpoint=https://www.amazon.com/ap/signin&openid.response_nonce=2010-10-29T09:48:35Z8672971983931184796&openid.identity=https://www.amazon.com/ap/id/amzn1.account.16JFC2EVMJCZAM

"If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants." Earlier in the passage, the author mentions that the convention of the time "personal letters between gentlemen should remain outwardly polite and mutually respectful." The author builds a case for Newton repeatedly warring with Hooke through letters and this quote being a possibility. If this author is correct, why is this quote misquoted all over wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.87.32.5 (talk) 10:09, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Lucan or no Lucan
what about Lucan now? We cannot say "it can be traced to Lucan, except... it can't". Can it or can't it? I have to admit there is nothing of the sort in Pharsalia 2.10, Edward Ridley (1896) has:
 * Matter unformed to his subduing hand,
 * And realms unbalanced, fix by stern decree

and the original :
 * Se quoque lege tenens, et saecula iussa ferentem
 * Fatorum immoto divisit limite mundum:

nothing about pygmies or shoulders indeed. Searching the entire text of the translation for "shoulder", "giant", "titan" or "pygmy" yields no result either. I will remove Lucan for now, but it will be interesting to see how the attribution came about. dab (&#5839;) 14:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I figured it out, from de:. dab (&#5839;) 14:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

The Book
Note that there is a book titled "On the Shoulders of Giants" compiled by Steven Hawking. It has original works of Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, and Einstein.

There is nothing in this article about the book nor an article for the book.Gagueci 22:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Abelson's roommate
What if someone calls Abelson or confirms this in person; how do you cite that? --Alan Au 06:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You don't - it's not a reliable source. Thanks/wangi 08:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I've also got no idea what you're on about, but hey... /wangi 09:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Rose window
Regarding this:
 * The thirteenth-century stained glass of Chartres Cathedral's south transept may also be influenced by the metaphor. The tall windows under the Rose Window show four major Old Testament prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel as gigantic figures and the four New Testament evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as sitting on their shoulders. The evangelists, though smaller, "see more" than the larger Old Testament prophets in that they see the Messiah about whom the prophets spoke.

As far as I know this is original research. The Chartres Cathedral's rose window is an instance of theological typology (see also medieval allegory), prevalent throughout the Middle Ages, in which the Old Testament is seen as pre-figuring (analogy) of the life of Christ and the events of the New Testament. I do have a source for this if anyone is interested - but as far as I know, the original "shoulder of giants" phrase was in relation to the pagan authors (Aristotle and Plato etc) while the rose window is a typological pre-figurement. Also, showing the Apostles as "dwarfs" might have even been heretical - medieval iconography commonly re-sized things to different proportions to give the viewer a sense of importance. If someone can show there was in fact a direct connection between the rose window and the phrase, but otherwise I think its a loose analogy of modern origin. -- Stbalbach 16:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Gigantum or gigantium?
Which of the above is right? The article states gigantium whereas there seems to be enough books that used gigantum. Wiki San Roze†αLҝ 14:59, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I liked this picture better
because the current picture seems like more sitting than standing :-( Erkan Yilmaz 18:03, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Note that John of Salisbury actually uses the word insidentes, which means "sitting (on)", not "standing (on)". This implies that he conceived of the size disparity between the giants and dwarfs as much less extreme than modern people might imagine it to be; if the eyes of a dwarf are situated higher than those of a giant on whose shoulders the dwarf is seated, this means that the dwarf's upper body is (at least) about as large as the giant's head. This is much more in line with the differences between extremely tall and extremely short real humans, rather than creatures of pure imagination. Think of a child sitting on the shoulders of an adult: this is a situation where even in real life the child will have a considerably higher point of view than the adult. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Translation of John of Salisbury quote
Why have an inline ref to a translation of John's quote when the article provides a different translation? That's pretty silly.

I think, however, that both translations are inaccurate regarding magnitudine gigantea: as the original has no pronoun, where does the "their" come from? The phrase should be simply translated as "by giant size" or "by gigantic size", or more idiomatically "by the size/height of giants". --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Using Newton's actual words...
Hi. If there are no objections, I'd like to update the "References during the 16th to 19th Century" Section.

1. I'm going to replace the Newton quote with his original words, punctuation and spelling, as found in "The correspondence of Isaac Newton volume I, edited by HW Turnbull, 1959 p416", thus:

"What Des-Cartes did was a good step. You have added much several ways, & especially in taking ye colours of thin plates into philosophical consideration. If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants".

2. "Robert Burton, in The Anatomy of Melancholy (1621–51)". Deleting the -51, which seems to be a typo.

3. I don't understand why the article doesn't quote Didacus Stella directly, rather than citing Burton's reference to him. The external link at the end of the article gives a reference:

"Dwarfs on the shoulders of giants see further than the giants themselves." - Stella Didacus, Eximii verbi divini CONCIONATORIS ORDINNIS MINORUM Regularis Observantiae, 1622

The problem is, I can't find a source for that i.e. a copy of the book. And I don't know what the original language was (Didacus was Spanish). It is possible to find a Latin version on many places on the Web ("Pigmaei gigantum humeris impositi plusquam ipsi gigantes vident"), but most of them erroneously attribute that quote to Newton - which I was also going to mention.

Another problem is that date of 1622; Stella Didacus died in 1578. Can anyone help with this third point?

Gnu Ordure (talk) 17:01, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth, Didacus Stella's book is called "In Sacrosanctum Iesu Christi Domini Nostri Evangelium Secundum Lucam Enarrationum". The quotation can be found here: http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=1UyyFZ89CrMC&pg=RA6-PA12#v=onepage&q&f=false in the 1578 edition (volume II; volume I is from 1575). It's halfway down the second column and goes "Absit ut ego velim condemnare, quod tot tantique sapientes simul et docti affirmarunt: bene tamen scimus, Pygmaeos gigantum humeris impositos, plusquam ipsos gigantes videre", which R.K. Merton translates "Far be it from me to condemn what so many and so great wise men and learned men have affirmed; nevertheless, we know it well, that Pigmies..." (Merton omits the quote, which literally says "Pygmies put on the shouldes of giants see more than the giants themselves").
 * But Merton in his book mentions several other authors that use the metaphor. The article right now gives the impression that Didacus Stella recovered it from obscurity, when it was actually popular before him. For example, Juan Luis Vives in "De Disciplinis" (1531) says:
 * "Falsa est atque inepta illa quorundam similitudo, quam multi tanquam acutissimam, atque appositissimam excipiunt, nos ad priores collatos esse, ut nanos in humeris gigantum: non est it, neque nos sumus nani, nec illi homines gigantes, sed omnes eiusdem staturae, et quidem nos altius evecti illorum beneficio: maneat modo in nobis, quod in illis studium, attentio animi, vigilantia, et amor veri: quae si absint, iam non nani sumus, nec in gigantum humeris sedemus, sed homines iustae magnitudinis humi prostrati."
 * http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=y_ZdpJcUcKUC&pg=PA29#v=onepage&q&f=false (1551 edition)
 * "multi" here shows how well known it was in his time. In fact, Vives' work could be a more likely source for later writers including Newton. Anyway, I think this section of the article could be rewritten using many data from Merton's book.
 * Other instances in Google Books:
 * Joseph Duchesne: http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=8FM6AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA110#v=onepage&q&f=false (1591)
 * Pedro Martínez de Brea: http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=Q99sOtY9JBQC&pg=RA3-PA43#v=onepage&q&f=false (1582)
 * --Tirachinas (talk) 23:21, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. Regarding the Newton quotation, I have proposed the same amendment at Wikiquote, and they have agreed to it, and already changed the quote. So I am going to go ahead and make the same change here. I'll also amend the date of Burton's book. But I won't do anything about point three until we have more information about it.

Hope that's OK. Gnu Ordure (talk) 22:25, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I know this discussion is almost a year old, but I'm wondering if the "ye" is appropriate. My understanding is that Newton would have written something that looked like "ye", in writing the cursive "þ" (thorn) in the style described at Ye Olde and at English articles. Since we are using modern typography, shouldn't it say "the"? Thanks, SchreiberBike (talk) 23:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi SB. Interesting point. Surely the obvious solution would be to cite Newton's exact words and archaic spelling, and then provide the modern translation? If you want to pursue that, feel free. I haven't seen the original letter, only Turnbull's version of it. As far as I know, the original resides with the Library of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Gnu Ordure (talk) 02:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * It looks to me like it's a question of typography more than spelling. I've looked at some of Newton's writings such as this at the Cambridge Digital Library's collection of Newton's papers and in his handwritten notes a "the" looks like "yE". Turnbull seems to be the source for all usages of the "ye sholders of Giants" phrase I can find on line. I've ordered Turnbull from my library. Perhaps in the notes, it will explain how they handled typographical issues like the þ (thorn). An interesting challenge to find reality here. SchreiberBike (talk) 17:49, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Define reality, SB. Heh-heh, just kidding. But listen, I understand your point. Wikiquote doesn't cite Shakespeare verbatim. Shakespeare actually wrote: If Musicke be the food of Loue, play on; Giue me excesse of it: that surfetting, The appetite may sicken, and so dye. But no-one quotes him like that; we update the spelling so that we can pronounce it correctly according to contemporary phonetics. So if you want to amend Newton's quote on the grounds that what he wrote (ye) would have been pronounced 'the', I'm cool with that. Gnu Ordure (talk) 01:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * There is a reality out there, and I see it as Wikipedia's job to get as close as we can. Anyway, if there's no objection, I'll change the use of "ye" to "the". Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 16:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * A little information to help us approach reality. I received The Correspondence of Isaac Newton: Volume I 1661-1675, ed. H.W. Turnbull, by inter-library loan, and the letter dated "Cambridge Feb. 5. 1675[6]" and transcribed in Turnbull on page 416 reads just as Gnu Ordure printed above. I did find this note about abbreviations on page xxx of the preface: "Most of the abbreviations that occur have raised letters representing the shortened part of a word: in the printed form these letters have been lowered, so that, for example, a word written as 'ye' is printed 'ye' and represents the definite article 'the'." That leaves me quite comfortable using "the" in the quote in the article. Thanks, SchreiberBike (talk) 03:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * If anyone is interested, an image of the original letter is available at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Thanks, SchreiberBike (talk) 06:11, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I would have loved to have seen that original letter, but the link you posted no longer works. Can anyone upload the image to wikimedia? Aroundthewayboy (talk) 14:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Pascal addition
On two occasions an IP editor has added "This statement is derived from ‘Dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants see farther ahead than the giants.’ the saying made famous by Pascal..." to the start of this article. Does anyone have a source for this? I can't even find a source attributing it Pascal, let alone it being made famous by him. shellac (talk) 13:14, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Pascal does not seem have used the exact expression but he did discuss the same idea, and Marin Mersenne does use it in 1634. I inserted the passages in the original, will need to find translations. --Akisery (talk) 01:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Standing on the shoulders of giants. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140720175829/http://digitallibrary.hsp.org/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/9565 to http://digitallibrary.hsp.org/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/9565

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I marked the check as "failed" as the Wayback link does not include the image from the collection. I will remove the external link. Thank you.  SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨   01:28, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Move page: Dwarf standing on the shoulders of giants
The title should be "dwarf standing on the shoulders of giants". The latin expression "nanos gigantum humeris insidentes" contains "nanos" which means dwarfs. Also the general metaphor usually refers to "Dwarfs".--PunGNU (talk) 11:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Pedant with too much spare time.
"According to medieval historian Richard William Southern . . ." States the current article.

I do not think so, did Southern live in c13? Compare Wikipedia description of, eg, Froissart. Southern was English, lived in c20, was a historian, was a historian of the Mediaeval period in Western Europe.

Thucydides was a Greek. Thucydides was a historian. Thucydides was a historian of Greek History.

Polybius was a Greek Historian. But not a historian of Greece.

"According Richard William Southern, a c20 English historian specialising in Medieval European history, . . ." Better?

"According to RW Southern . . ." Then anyone interested in RW's Christian names or his life can follow the link. Better still? AnnaComnemna (talk) 20:12, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

More prominence for Robert K. Merton
I'm surprised that Robert K. Merton's great book 'On the Shoulders of Giants' doesn't get a standalone bullet in this article, although it is used to bolster the Chartres quote. Comments, before I add it? Bellagio99 (talk) 15:22, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Standing on the shoulders of giants. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081229083808/http://www.royalmint.com/Corporate/facts/coins/TwoPoundCoin.aspx to http://www.royalmint.com/Corporate/facts/coins/TwoPoundCoin.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:57, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

feet of clay standing on the shoulders of giants
an erroneous interpretation of some tested and valid theory — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:8767:B900:A557:363B:8541:94C1 (talk) 11:39, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

To complicated!!!!!
To complicated!!!! This article doesn't even have a proper definition!!!!

Standing on the shoulders of giants is a metaphor which means "Using the understanding gained by major thinkers who have gone before in order to make intellectual progress".

Moscowdreams (talk) 05:09, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Robert Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy
The article gave the date of the first edition (1621) of Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy as the source for the quotation, but it doesn't appear until the second edition (1624). I've changed the article to reflect it.

There is a full-text version of the first edition available publicly through the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Images only, and not a full text, are available for the second edition, behind a paywall on ProQuest/Chadwyck Healey's Early English Books Online, and the relevant text is on p.7: "a dwarfe standing on the shoulders of a Giant, may see farther then a Giant himselfe". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.124.181.159 (talk) 17:52, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Translate French quotes to English
Can we get a translation of Marin Mersenne's and Blaise Pascal's quotes from French to English and use them in the article? 2601:547:500:6940:C129:6A82:732A:ACFF (talk) 16:12, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

John Wilkins
Thought the text below may help fill a gap -

‘twere a shame for these later ages to rest our selves meerly on the labours of our forefathers, as if they had informed us of all things to be knowne, and when we set ourselves upon their shoulders, not to see further than they themselves did. ‘Twere a superstitious, a lazie opinion to think Aristotles works the bounds and limits of all humane invention, beyond which there could be no possibility of reaching. Certainely there are yet many things left to discovery, and it can be no inconvenience for us, to maintain a new truth or rectifie an ancient errour (John Wilkins 1638). From "Newton's Apple" by Peter Aughton 92.18.124.236 (talk) 14:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

The picture of being carried on the giant - is that appropriate
The picture shows the servant being carried on the shoulders of the giant, indeed. But is it the best depiction of the meaning of the phrase. The servant is not seeing farther, rather it is the blind giant who is benefiting. Is this the best picture that we have? But I suggest that we keep it, until a better picture is found. But I won't object any further if it is just removed. TomS TDotO (talk) 14:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Another contemporary example
In the REM song King of Birds, the Choruses start with Standing on the shoulders of Giants 2601:182:1:6340:680E:FB7B:9752:145B (talk) 02:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)