{"title":"Expectations and utility in eighteenth-century knowledge economiesNotes and Records special issue introduction","authors":"L. Stewart, K. Whitmer","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0004","url":null,"abstract":"Creating a sketch, a plan or a model for the future is often closely related to endeavouring to predict what it may yield. It is also a process that stabilizes contemporary portrayals of social realities, including those aspects understood as problems, or in need of improvement. As Sang-Hyun Kim and Sheila Jasanoff have shown in their work on ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’, frequently plans and ‘visions of scientific and technological progress’ act as vehicles for communicating ideas, implicitly and explicitly, about ‘public purposes, collective futures and the common good’ in a particular historical moment.1 Plans and sketchy visions for the future are worthy of study in their own right, even if they are never realized, because of the efforts to organize expectations and to assimilate ideas about what is (and is not) in the ‘public interest’ that they purport to represent.2 Attending to the origins and expectations inducing projects of envisioning the future, that is, attending to ‘dreamscapes’ that may or may not have been realized in the long eighteenth century, is a major task of this special issue. All of the essays take as their starting point that the imagined futures of this period reveal a distinct constellation of agendas, moral imperatives and politics.\u0000\u0000Indeed, the eighteenth century was full of dreamscapes. Their makers routinely devised particular categories and practices to both articulate and, in some cases, to actually build the imagined futures they desired—or claimed to desire. In this period's ‘knowledge economy’, a term now generally associated with the work of economic historian Joel Mokyr, makers of dreamscapes and professional analysts of the future were often called ‘projectors’ or ‘project makers’.3 This particular cadre of ‘dreamscapers’ tended to anchor their visions in sketches, schemes or plans for improvement(s). Mokyr focused on the British context during the dramatic …","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"111 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49632826","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The hydrostatical works of George Sinclair (c.1630–1696): their neglect and criticism","authors":"A. Craik","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2017.0044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0044","url":null,"abstract":"The Scottish natural philosopher George Sinclair (or Sinclar) (c.1630–1696) was one of the earliest British writers on hydrostatics. He visited London in 1662, when he met Sir Robert Moray and Robert Boyle and left a manuscript treatise at the Royal Society. Receipt of this work was never recorded by the Society, and Sinclair felt that he had been dealt with unfairly. A Latin version, Ars nova et magna gravitatis et levitatis, was published in 1669, followed by his Hydrostaticks in 1672. All Sinclair's works were vituperatively and pseudonymously criticized by James Gregory and William Sanders in The Great and New Art of Weighing Vanity of 1672. Here, Sinclair's life is summarized, and his disputes with the Royal Society and with Gregory and Sanders are examined. It is argued that, despite his other limitations, Sinclair's knowledge of hydrostatics was considerable, and that the criticisms made against him were exaggerated. Yet his work was subsequently neglected. Sinclair's treatment sheds light both on academic rivalries and on the procedures of the early Royal Society.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"239 - 273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0044","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46487239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Robert Sibbald's Scotia Illustrata (1684): A faunal baseline for Britain","authors":"L. Raye","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2017.0042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0042","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines a pre-industrial Scottish natural history text by Robert Sibbald called Scotia Illustrata (Edinburgh, 1684), which is significant for two reasons: (i) it is based on data submitted by correspondents from across Scotland, and (ii) it only includes biological species attested to be present by witnesses or found in previous historical accounts of the country. These facts allow us to adopt a unique methodology: After its introduction, this paper approaches the text as a potential source of biodiversity information, and extracts data on the presence/absence of fauna in the seventeenth century. The extracted species are identified (as far as possible) to species level, and then the gathered information is used as a baseline to discuss later losses from the biodiversity of Scotland during the industrial period.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"383 - 405"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0042","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48311226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Particular popular science: British scientists writing, speaking and broadcasting on science and religion from the 1980s","authors":"P. Merchant","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2017.0045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0045","url":null,"abstract":"This paper draws on extended life story oral history interviews with scientists who, beginning in the 1980s, turned to writing popular books, making radio and television programmes and taking to the stage for public lectures and debates, with relations between science and religion often a key topic: Peter Atkins, Nicholas Humphrey, Steve Jones, John Polkinghorne, Russell Stannard and Lewis Wolpert. I show that these interviews capture aspects of motivation and experience missed in much existing work on popular science. Stressing historical and individual particularity, I argue that what these scientists say about their decisions, aims and rewards should make us question a strong tendency in recent scholarship both to regard popular science as part of scientific work in general, and also to read the outcomes of popular science – such as advocacy for science or the promotion of certain theories – as the motivations for its production.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"365 - 381"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0045","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46717999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Seventeenth-Century ‘double writing’ schemes, and a 1676 letter in the phonetic script and real character of John Wilkins","authors":"W. Poole","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2017.0041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0041","url":null,"abstract":"Royal Society Classified Papers XVI contains a letter written in not one but two seemingly mysterious scripts. As a result, this letter has remained until now effectively illegible, and has been miscatalogued. These scripts are rare examples of the written forms devised by John Wilkins to accompany his proposals for an artificial language, published under the auspices of the Royal Society in 1668. This article therefore first correctly identifies and decodes this letter, which is shown to be from the Somersetshire clergyman Andrew Paschall to Robert Hooke in London in 1676, and then surveys other surviving texts written in Wilkins's scripts or language. Finally the article addresses the contents of the letter, namely its author's attempt to build a workable double writing device, in effect an early ‘pantograph’. Designs for such instruments had been much touted in the 1650s, and the complex history of such proposals is unravelled properly for the first time.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"23 - 7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0041","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45662336","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Living with, learning from and managing scientific failure","authors":"B. Marsden","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0001","url":null,"abstract":"This issue of Notes and Records is characteristically heterogeneous in content, its papers covering topics such as phonetics, scientific naturalism, chemistry and biomedicine in the seventeenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. But one theme that is touched upon throughout, obliquely or directly, in all the research papers is ‘failure’. It is not, on the face of it, surprising that historians of science, technology and medicine have hardly lavished attention on failed, transitory or marginal projects of the past. Incoherence is hard to write about coherently; the roads not taken, one might think, are harder still to learn from. Yet historians have in fact learned much from investigating apparently marginal, transitory and bizarre ventures; and to explore the richness of science's past culture requires the historian to delve into the discussions and practices behind and beneath failed activities as well as successful ones. Follow the actors, however circuitous, vertiginous or truncated their paths might be.\u0000\u0000The first paper fuses …","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"5 - 6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48183171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Natural knowledge in the 1660s: probing an iconic image","authors":"L. Jordanova","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2017.0053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0053","url":null,"abstract":"Michael Hunter, The image of Restoration science: the frontispiece to Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society (1667). With a chapter on the instruments by Jim Bennett . Routledge, London and New York, 2017. Pp. xvi+150. £115 (hardback). ISBN 978-1-4724-7872-6.\u0000\u0000Take one iconic image, add two distinguished historians and a huge amount of painstaking research and what results is a fascinating, interdisciplinary account of a single printed frontispiece, its origins and afterlife that is of the widest possible interest. Read this as a detective story for anyone intrigued by the second half of the seventeenth century, the friendships, collaborations, cultural buzz and intellectual quests that characterized it. Hunter and Bennett deserve the heartfelt appreciation not just of historians of science, but of anyone who researches the history of collecting and connoisseurship, print makers and their techniques, seventeenth-century culture, intellectual networks and visual culture.\u0000\u0000The book's full title provides a neat summary. The print that shows a bust of Charles II being crowned by fame, and flanked by Francis Bacon on one side and the first President of the Royal Society on the other, is well known (figure 1). There is a lot going on here, visually speaking, and the authors explicate all aspects of the figures, their setting and the many accoutrements in so far as this is possible. \u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000Figure 1. \u0000Frontispiece to The history of the Royal Society of London, for the improving of Natural Knowledge, by Thomas Sprat (printed by T. R. for J. Martyn, London, 1667). Presentation copy, The Royal Society of London. …","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"107 - 108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0053","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49074202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Newton's financial misadventures in the South Sea Bubble","authors":"A. Odlyzko","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3068542","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3068542","url":null,"abstract":"A very popular investment anecdote relates how Isaac Newton, after cashing in large early gains, staked his fortune on the success of the South Sea Company of 1720 and lost heavily in the ensuing crash. However, this tale is based on only a few items of hard evidence, some of which are consistently misquoted and misinterpreted. A superficially plausible contrarian argument has also been made that he did not lose much in that period, and John Maynard Keynes even claimed Newton successfully surmounted the South Sea Bubble. This paper presents extensive new evidence that while Newton was a successful investor before this event, the folk tale about his making large gains but then being drawn back into that mania and suffering large losses is almost certainly correct. It probably even understates the extent of his financial miscalculations. Incidental to the clarification of this prominent issue, a controversy between Dale et al. and Shea about an aspect of market rationality during that bubble is settled. Some new information is also presented about Thomas Guy, famous for making a fortune out of the Bubble that paid for the establishment of Guy's Hospital, and other investors. The work reported here suggests new research directions and perspectives on bubbles.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"73 1","pages":"29 - 59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/ssrn.3068542","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47386368","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Victorian telegrams: the early development of the telegraphic despatch and its interplay with the letter post","authors":"Jean-François Fava-Verde","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2017.0031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0031","url":null,"abstract":"The paper examines the early development of the Victorian inland telegraph, and more precisely the telegraphic despatches, or telegrams, as they became widely known. The first telegram service in Britain was launched by the Electric Telegraph Company two decades before nationalization of the telegraphs in 1870. It is argued that this service was not as innovative as the electric telegraph technology that underpinned it. Attention is drawn to the parallels between the telegram and mail services. To this end, the evolution of postal communication is first explored, with a focus on the nineteenth century, when innovations such as mail-trains and prepayment by stamp considerably accelerated the mail and increased the volume of letters from 67 million in 1839 to a staggering 741 million in 1865. It was in this context that the telegram service was introduced to the public. The operating model adopted by the Electric Telegraph Company to deliver this service is deconstructed to show the similarities with the mail service and to demonstrate that a telegram was not always faster than letter post.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"275 - 292"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0031","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46116552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Address of the president, Sir Venki Ramakrishnan, given at the anniversary meeting on 30 November 2017","authors":"Venki Ramakrishnan, M. Barnier","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2017.0059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0059","url":null,"abstract":"As always seems to be the case these days, this has been quite a year. Today, I want to explore some of the key issues facing the science community and the Society's engagement with them. They are: our future relationship with the EU, and more generally with other countries; science funding; and what is needed to make optimal use of funding.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"101 - 105"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0059","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"62043546","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}