did not mention any of his predecessors by name. He merely stated that it was "likely" such a simple idea had occurred to others previously, but if so, they had "presented it in a vague and ill-assured fashion". He went on to ask rhetorically why none of these supposed predecessors (of whom he professes to have no definite knowledge) "pushed these consequences to their conclusion and communicated their research". He suggested that the answer was that they had no clear view of the subject, had not firmly grasped the principles of the theory, had allowed themselves to be seduced by specious sophisms, had bowed to the authority of great names, or had "lacked sufficient love of truth or courage of their convictions to abandon easy pleasures and exterior advantages in order to devote themselves to researches at the time difficult and little welcome.". Prévost praised his friend Le Sage for "scrupulously giving credit to his predecessors in all of his writings". However, although he sometimes referred to those predecessors, he often spoke in a derogatory way about them – see his comments in "Lucrece Newtonien", and his appraisal of Cramer as too vague and scientifically not valuable. Lord Kelvin and Aronson repeated Prevost's praise, based only on Prevost's account. Notes For the complete references see the biographies and the historical references in Le Sage's theory of gravitation References Biographies An English summary can be found in: Other references Jean-François Bert, Comment pense un savant ? Un physicien des Lumières et ses cartes à jouer'', Anamosa, 2018 External links 1724 births 1803 deaths Physicists from the Republic of Geneva Protestants Fellows of the Royal Society Contributors to the Encyclopédie (1751–1772) 18th-century writers from the Republic of Geneva