{"title":"Frontispiece","authors":"","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0032","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0032","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48305148","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":"Experimentation in the agricultural EnlightenmentPlace, profit and norms of knowledge-making in eighteenth-century Germany","authors":"D. Phillips","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0011","url":null,"abstract":"Most research into history of eighteenth-century experimentation has focused on the instrument-based traditions of natural philosophers and chemists. This article explores an alternate, but related, tradition: the experiments carried out by agricultural improvers. While authors interested in improving farming were aware of natural philosophical practices, they self-consciously devised different strategies in their own forms of experimentation. Experiments in the chemical and physical sciences generally sought to find universal laws operative everywhere; agricultural experimentation often explored the particular possibilities of a given place. The cost and likely economic success of an experiment was also worked explicitly into its design.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41315490","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":"Projects and pedagogical expectations: Inside P. J. Marperger's ‘golden clover leaf’ (Trifolium), 1700–1730","authors":"K. Whitmer","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0005","url":null,"abstract":"Many eighteenth-century projectors believed in the potential of pedagogy, including its ability to improve lives and to radically reconfigure the structure of society. Despite an obvious inability to predict how effective their projects would be if implemented, those who managed to gain the support of state leaders very frequently peddled educational reform schemes they expected would generate real improvements, including heightened abilities to apprehend the quality of usefulness. This paper considers the relationship between pedagogy and expectations in a three-part reform project put forward by an early commercial advisor and projector named Paul Jacob Marperger (1656–1730). Keenly aware of the pedagogical dimensions of ongoing efforts to both generate useful knowledge and to cultivate skilled observers and makers of it, Marperger used his project to showcase his commitment to the incremental improvement of society via the creation of new training regimens for young people and adults. The paper studies how he linked his expectations to existing institutions, technologies and ongoing reform efforts, including new teaching methods and materials.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47354049","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":"What is a useful university? knowledge economies and higher education in late eighteenth-century Denmark and central Europe","authors":"Dominik Hünniger","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0006","url":null,"abstract":"Universities were an important site of Enlightenment improvement discourse and knowledge economies in the German-speaking lands and Scandinavia. Late eighteenth-century state building and scholars’ expectations of their own ‘usefulness’ regarding these processes were closely intertwined. The life and publications of the German-speaking Danish naturalist Johann Christian Fabricius (1745–1808) are used here to understand contemporary debates on the state of education, political economy and the development of the sciences in relation to ideas about economic and social progress. Fabricius was professor for ‘œconomics, cameral sciences and natural history’ at Kiel University for more than 30 years, from 1775 to 1808, and was one of the most outspoken writers on economic reform in Schleswig-Holstein and Denmark. Fabricius’ suggestions for improvement involved directly addressing social categories as well as the re-organization of universities in form and curricular content. Fabricius was engaged in debates on how to best achieve the specific knowledge and skills considered useful for the emerging nation-state. The essay analyses Fabricius’ interventions in these debates in the context of the contemporary development of the ‘research university’ around 1800.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48274197","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":"Einstein in Oxford","authors":"R. Fox","doi":"10.1098/RSNR.2018.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/RSNR.2018.0002","url":null,"abstract":"Albert Einstein made three visits to Oxford between 1931 and 1933, staying for a month in the spring of each year. For our understanding of Einstein's work, the Rhodes Memorial Lectures that he delivered during his first visit are of special interest. They show him in a period of intense rethinking of his cosmological views in the light of Edwin Hubble's recent evidence in favour of an expanding universe, an idea that Einstein had hitherto opposed. The lectures, heavily mathematical and delivered in German, were challenging. Nevertheless, they were well received, and Frederick Lindemann (later Lord Cherwell) saw them as a springboard for a continuing association between Einstein and the University's Clarendon Laboratory. To that end, Lindemann persuaded his college, Christ Church, to invite Einstein for a month in 1932 and each of the four years that followed. The arrangement, part of Lindemann's plan to revitalize Oxford physics, was soon overtaken by political events in Germany and Einstein's emigration to Princeton in October 1933.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/RSNR.2018.0002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44876265","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":"Deprogramming Baconianism: The meaning of desiderata in the eighteenth century","authors":"Vera Keller","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0008","url":null,"abstract":"The historiographical construct of the ‘Baconian programme’ rose to prominence in the mid-twentieth century. It has since shaped views of Bacon and his followers, particularly concerning Bacon's utilitarianism. It has also set expectations concerning how defined and prescriptive Bacon's vision of the future ought to be for later Baconians. Yet, neither Bacon nor those who claimed to follow him thought of his work in programmatic ways. The early modern view of Bacon's futuristic writing allowed his followers great agency in re-sketching it to fit changing times. This essay first follows the rise of a ‘Baconian programme’ in historiography. It then returns to the past to outline some of the rich vocabulary for future-oriented writing deployed by the first generation of Bacon's self-proclaimed followers. Finally, testing how Bacon's plans appeared over a longer durée, it skips forward to Peter Shaw (1694–1763) and Joseph Priestley (1733–1804). Shaw employed one of Bacon's futuristic terms (desiderata), dropped another (optativa) and developed the significance of a new category (hint). Shaw's case illustrates the creativity that even Bacon's most ardent followers expected to be within their rights. Baconianism invited future redrafting and haphazard invention, rather than adherence to a predictive programme.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0008","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46808630","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":"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":null,"pages":null},"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":null,"pages":null},"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":null,"pages":null},"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":null,"pages":null},"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}