Pub Date : 2020-03-20Epub Date: 2019-01-09DOI: 10.1098/rsnr.2018.0055
Mike A Zuber, Leigh T I Penman
Using previously neglected manuscript sources, this paper sheds light on a puzzling episode in the later life of Robert Boyle and the early career of his laboratory assistant Ambrose Godfrey. Currently, the only account of their disappointing encounter with an unnamed German adept derives from Godfrey's lost manuscript treatise 'An Apology and Letter touching a Crosey-Crucian', excerpts of which were published in 1858. Based on a comparison between that source and the papers of the virtually forgotten chymical practitioner and convicted heretic Peter Moritz (1638-ca. 1700), the authors argue that Godfrey's anonymous 'Crosey-Crucian' was none other than Moritz himself. The first part establishes that various significant and seemingly insignificant details agree precisely and thus corroborate this identification. The second part focuses on those passages among Moritz's papers that contain explicit evidence of his dealings with both Boyle and Godfrey, a sheet of notes and a lengthy epistolary 'Memorial' to an unnamed addressee. The authors contend that Moritz's 'Memorial' is a version of the same document that the adept sought to deliver to Boyle who refused to accept it, according to Godfrey's 'Apology'. For this reason, and on the basis of strong internal evidence, Boyle is identified as the intended recipient of Moritz's 'Memorial'. Taken together, these two identifications solve a long-standing riddle in Boyle scholarship and introduce a significant addition to his extant correspondence.
{"title":"Robert Boyle's anonymous 'Crosey-Crucian' identified: The German alchemist and religious dissenter Peter Moritz.","authors":"Mike A Zuber, Leigh T I Penman","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0055","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Using previously neglected manuscript sources, this paper sheds light on a puzzling episode in the later life of Robert Boyle and the early career of his laboratory assistant Ambrose Godfrey. Currently, the only account of their disappointing encounter with an unnamed German adept derives from Godfrey's lost manuscript treatise 'An Apology and Letter touching a Crosey-Crucian', excerpts of which were published in 1858. Based on a comparison between that source and the papers of the virtually forgotten chymical practitioner and convicted heretic Peter Moritz (1638-<i>ca.</i> 1700), the authors argue that Godfrey's anonymous 'Crosey-Crucian' was none other than Moritz himself. The first part establishes that various significant and seemingly insignificant details agree precisely and thus corroborate this identification. The second part focuses on those passages among Moritz's papers that contain explicit evidence of his dealings with both Boyle and Godfrey, a sheet of notes and a lengthy epistolary 'Memorial' to an unnamed addressee. The authors contend that Moritz's 'Memorial' is a version of the same document that the adept sought to deliver to Boyle who refused to accept it, according to Godfrey's 'Apology'. For this reason, and on the basis of strong internal evidence, Boyle is identified as the intended recipient of Moritz's 'Memorial'. Taken together, these two identifications solve a long-standing riddle in Boyle scholarship and introduce a significant addition to his extant correspondence.</p>","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0055","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"37648328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 1667, ‘The History of Saltpetre and Gunpowder’ by Thomas Henshaw was published in Thomas Sprat's The History of the Royal Society. Three years later, Henshaw's work was subject to a scathing review by the notorious anti-Royal Society pamphleteer, Henry Stubbe. I argue that, for Stubbe, Henshaw was not merely a passive representative of the Royal Society through which he could direct his ire, but gunpowder, the subject of Henshaw's research, was important. Both Henshaw and Stubbe employed gunpowder deliberately and strategically. In this article I explore the reasons behind the Royal Society deciding to publish a ‘Baconian history’ of gunpowder. First I argue that the high status of gunpowder was used as a justification for experimental pursuits, and it provided a direct connection to the Society's forebear Francis Bacon. But Stubbe, who was already a critic of the Royal Society, happened to have knowledge that made him uniquely placed to write animadversions against Henshaw's paper. Secondly, gunpowder can shed light on the Baconian histories and the challenges faced by Baconian scholars in putting this project into practice.
{"title":"A gunpowder controversy in the early Royal Society, 1667–70","authors":"Haileigh Robertson","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0050","url":null,"abstract":"In 1667, ‘The History of Saltpetre and Gunpowder’ by Thomas Henshaw was published in Thomas Sprat's The History of the Royal Society. Three years later, Henshaw's work was subject to a scathing review by the notorious anti-Royal Society pamphleteer, Henry Stubbe. I argue that, for Stubbe, Henshaw was not merely a passive representative of the Royal Society through which he could direct his ire, but gunpowder, the subject of Henshaw's research, was important. Both Henshaw and Stubbe employed gunpowder deliberately and strategically. In this article I explore the reasons behind the Royal Society deciding to publish a ‘Baconian history’ of gunpowder. First I argue that the high status of gunpowder was used as a justification for experimental pursuits, and it provided a direct connection to the Society's forebear Francis Bacon. But Stubbe, who was already a critic of the Royal Society, happened to have knowledge that made him uniquely placed to write animadversions against Henshaw's paper. Secondly, gunpowder can shed light on the Baconian histories and the challenges faced by Baconian scholars in putting this project into practice.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0050","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48435697","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}
Christopher Middleton (d. 1770) was a sea captain, first with the Hudson's Bay Company, then in the Royal Navy, who was awarded the Royal Society's Copley Medal in 1742. His early work on magnetic variation in northern latitudes was encouraged by Edmond Halley, as he published a series of tables of variation in the Philosophical Transactions. These tables illustrate Middleton's transition from the priorities characteristic of the seaman's interest in variation to the wider, natural philosophical agenda of the Society. They illustrate also his enthusiasm for novel instrumentation, in particular altitude instruments for use at sea, such as Hadley's quadrant. Middleton was persuaded by Arthur Dobbs to resign from the Hudson's Bay Company and accept a commission in the Royal Navy so as to command an expedition to search for a Northwest Passage to the East Indies from Hudson's Bay. It was his report on this voyage that won him the Copley Medal but which also led to a bitter and, for Middleton, ruinous public dispute with Dobbs. Middleton emerges as an outstanding seaman and a worthy, if relatively unknown, medallist.
{"title":"Adventures with instruments: science and seafaring in the precarious career of Christopher Middleton","authors":"J. Bennett","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0046","url":null,"abstract":"Christopher Middleton (d. 1770) was a sea captain, first with the Hudson's Bay Company, then in the Royal Navy, who was awarded the Royal Society's Copley Medal in 1742. His early work on magnetic variation in northern latitudes was encouraged by Edmond Halley, as he published a series of tables of variation in the Philosophical Transactions. These tables illustrate Middleton's transition from the priorities characteristic of the seaman's interest in variation to the wider, natural philosophical agenda of the Society. They illustrate also his enthusiasm for novel instrumentation, in particular altitude instruments for use at sea, such as Hadley's quadrant. Middleton was persuaded by Arthur Dobbs to resign from the Hudson's Bay Company and accept a commission in the Royal Navy so as to command an expedition to search for a Northwest Passage to the East Indies from Hudson's Bay. It was his report on this voyage that won him the Copley Medal but which also led to a bitter and, for Middleton, ruinous public dispute with Dobbs. Middleton emerges as an outstanding seaman and a worthy, if relatively unknown, medallist.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0046","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49353216","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}
I want to start by congratulating my former colleague Greg Winter on his Nobel Prize, as well as the winners of this year's Medals and Awards. It is also with great sadness that I note that Aaron Klug, who was president from 1995 to 2000, died 10 days ago.
{"title":"Anniversary address Friday 30 November 2018","authors":"Venki Ramakrishnan","doi":"10.1098/RSNR.2018.0067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/RSNR.2018.0067","url":null,"abstract":"I want to start by congratulating my former colleague Greg Winter on his Nobel Prize, as well as the winners of this year's Medals and Awards. It is also with great sadness that I note that Aaron Klug, who was president from 1995 to 2000, died 10 days ago.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/RSNR.2018.0067","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45939179","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}
This essay considers the two institutions that, between them, contain the most significant collections relating to British polar exploration in the UK: the Scott Polar Research Institute and the National Maritime Museum. A discussion of the differences between the two institutions, from their foundations to the substance of their collections, is followed by an indication of their similarities—particularly relating to the interpretation of the objects of exploration in museums, including artefacts of science and surveying. Histories of exploration, particularly in the polar regions, have been dominated by stories of individual sacrifice and achievement. This is despite the origins of many of the expeditions being rooted in scientific goals. This paper considers the role of survey stories within narratives of exploration, and the challenges that curators face in presenting them to audiences who continue to be drawn in by stories of well-known figures such as Scott and Amundsen.
{"title":"Survey stories in the history of British polar exploration: museums, objects and people","authors":"C. Connelly, Claire Warrior","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0038","url":null,"abstract":"This essay considers the two institutions that, between them, contain the most significant collections relating to British polar exploration in the UK: the Scott Polar Research Institute and the National Maritime Museum. A discussion of the differences between the two institutions, from their foundations to the substance of their collections, is followed by an indication of their similarities—particularly relating to the interpretation of the objects of exploration in museums, including artefacts of science and surveying. Histories of exploration, particularly in the polar regions, have been dominated by stories of individual sacrifice and achievement. This is despite the origins of many of the expeditions being rooted in scientific goals. This paper considers the role of survey stories within narratives of exploration, and the challenges that curators face in presenting them to audiences who continue to be drawn in by stories of well-known figures such as Scott and Amundsen.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0038","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41259310","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}
In the early nineteenth century, the material culture of British science was being transformed by an increasingly centralized colonial information order. Surveys conducted during and immediately after the Napoleonic Wars were particularly important to the growth of the East India Company's new collections in London. In the wake of territorial gains, surveyors and their staff bought, plundered, collected and otherwise acquired a wide range of materials related to arts, sciences, history, natural history and literature. Focusing on survey collections formed in Ceylon, Mysore and Java between 1795 and 1820, this essay explores the place of the Company's culture of surveying and collecting within both Company science and wider shifts in the political economy of colonial collecting. Such shifts include changes in property claims, the growing clout of the Company's library and museum in London and, most importantly, the Napoleonic Wars. The wartime context enabled not only basic access to new materials but also cheap modes of collection and a motive to collect—or to value collections—driven by commercial and territorial competition.
{"title":"Hand-in-hand with the survey: surveying and the accumulation of knowledge capital at India House during the Napoleonic Wars","authors":"J. Ratcliff","doi":"10.1098/RSNR.2018.0039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/RSNR.2018.0039","url":null,"abstract":"In the early nineteenth century, the material culture of British science was being transformed by an increasingly centralized colonial information order. Surveys conducted during and immediately after the Napoleonic Wars were particularly important to the growth of the East India Company's new collections in London. In the wake of territorial gains, surveyors and their staff bought, plundered, collected and otherwise acquired a wide range of materials related to arts, sciences, history, natural history and literature. Focusing on survey collections formed in Ceylon, Mysore and Java between 1795 and 1820, this essay explores the place of the Company's culture of surveying and collecting within both Company science and wider shifts in the political economy of colonial collecting. Such shifts include changes in property claims, the growing clout of the Company's library and museum in London and, most importantly, the Napoleonic Wars. The wartime context enabled not only basic access to new materials but also cheap modes of collection and a motive to collect—or to value collections—driven by commercial and territorial competition.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/RSNR.2018.0039","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49026596","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}
In an era where science is increasingly specialized, what is the value of interdisciplinary research? I argue that research across disciplinary boundaries plays a pivotal role in scientific inquiry, and it has a threefold value: it is exploratory; it is unifying; and it offers critical engagement. Philosophy of science is an interesting example of interdisciplinary research at the junction between the sciences and the humanities. What good can philosophy of science do for science? Despite anecdotal reports to the contrary, philosophy of science can in fact do important work for science. When it comes to critical engagement, I highlight what I call the social function of philosophy of science and I illustrate it with three examples taken from contemporary debates about evidence, progress and truth in science. A socially responsible philosophy of science—which is not afraid to speak up for evidence, progress and truth in science—best serves the needs of science in a tolerant, pluralist and democratic society.
{"title":"2017 Wilkins–Bernal–Medawar Lecture: why philosophy of science matters to science","authors":"M. Massimi","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0054","url":null,"abstract":"In an era where science is increasingly specialized, what is the value of interdisciplinary research? I argue that research across disciplinary boundaries plays a pivotal role in scientific inquiry, and it has a threefold value: it is exploratory; it is unifying; and it offers critical engagement. Philosophy of science is an interesting example of interdisciplinary research at the junction between the sciences and the humanities. What good can philosophy of science do for science? Despite anecdotal reports to the contrary, philosophy of science can in fact do important work for science. When it comes to critical engagement, I highlight what I call the social function of philosophy of science and I illustrate it with three examples taken from contemporary debates about evidence, progress and truth in science. A socially responsible philosophy of science—which is not afraid to speak up for evidence, progress and truth in science—best serves the needs of science in a tolerant, pluralist and democratic 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":"2018-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0054","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43328790","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}
By the early decades of the nineteenth century, with surveys established as the weapon of choice for the fiscal military state, their instrumentation provided a focal point for radical attacks on political establishments. This paper considers a notorious dispute over mastery of iron in the instrumentation of magnetic surveying that took place in the 1830s between an Admiralty committee and the Reverend William Scoresby, a whaler-turned-clergyman. Scoresby staked his claim by drawing on the labour law of the whaleboats, a culture peculiarly preoccupied with the properties of bone and blubber, ink and skin, parchment and iron, where magnetism was forged in the ‘combinations’, as Scoresby put it, of such specific materials. The enterprises of his most avid reader, peer and fellow labour rights activist, Herman Melville, showcase the salience of Scoresby's struggle with Admiralty authority. The eminent Australian scholar Greg Dening's approach to ethnohistory proves the appropriate instrument with which to analyse such an encounter between traditions, negotiated through material forms. In the fraught exchange between whaler and maritime state, the combination laws that helped prompt the threat of revolution in early nineteenth-century Britain were translated into Scoresby's iron. Extant material and archival collections in Greenwich and Whitby offer traces of a battle between ways of knowing this protean metal: ‘not down in any map; true places never are’.
{"title":"Cetacean citations and the covenant of iron","authors":"Jenny Bulstrode","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0033","url":null,"abstract":"By the early decades of the nineteenth century, with surveys established as the weapon of choice for the fiscal military state, their instrumentation provided a focal point for radical attacks on political establishments. This paper considers a notorious dispute over mastery of iron in the instrumentation of magnetic surveying that took place in the 1830s between an Admiralty committee and the Reverend William Scoresby, a whaler-turned-clergyman. Scoresby staked his claim by drawing on the labour law of the whaleboats, a culture peculiarly preoccupied with the properties of bone and blubber, ink and skin, parchment and iron, where magnetism was forged in the ‘combinations’, as Scoresby put it, of such specific materials. The enterprises of his most avid reader, peer and fellow labour rights activist, Herman Melville, showcase the salience of Scoresby's struggle with Admiralty authority. The eminent Australian scholar Greg Dening's approach to ethnohistory proves the appropriate instrument with which to analyse such an encounter between traditions, negotiated through material forms. In the fraught exchange between whaler and maritime state, the combination laws that helped prompt the threat of revolution in early nineteenth-century Britain were translated into Scoresby's iron. Extant material and archival collections in Greenwich and Whitby offer traces of a battle between ways of knowing this protean metal: ‘not down in any map; true places never are’.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0033","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47653465","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":"Frontispiece","authors":"","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0040","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":"2018-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0040","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46179116","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}
By the 1860s a number of thermometer stands, screens and boxes were being used at public observatories and in private settings. The ultimate object of these humble pieces of scientific infrastructure was to protect the thermometers from precipitation and radiation. In response to concerns over the quality of designs and the comparability of results a trial of the various apparatuses was staged at Strathfield Turgiss, Hampshire, in 1868, and subsequent discussions were organized by Britain's Meteorological Society (from 1883 the Royal Meteorological Society). In an attempt to guarantee uniformity of exposure, the Society recommended the adoption of the Stevenson screen, a double-louvred box designed by Thomas Stevenson in 1866. It was promoted as an essential part of the Society's network of second-order and climatological stations across England. Despite the Meteorological Society's aim of overcoming the idiosyncrasies of geography through recourse to a uniform pattern screen, their chosen design ended up embodying a particular geography: the aesthetic and moral codes of the suburban domestic garden.
{"title":"Thermometer screens and the geographies of uniformity in nineteenth-century meteorology","authors":"S. Naylor","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2018.0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0037","url":null,"abstract":"By the 1860s a number of thermometer stands, screens and boxes were being used at public observatories and in private settings. The ultimate object of these humble pieces of scientific infrastructure was to protect the thermometers from precipitation and radiation. In response to concerns over the quality of designs and the comparability of results a trial of the various apparatuses was staged at Strathfield Turgiss, Hampshire, in 1868, and subsequent discussions were organized by Britain's Meteorological Society (from 1883 the Royal Meteorological Society). In an attempt to guarantee uniformity of exposure, the Society recommended the adoption of the Stevenson screen, a double-louvred box designed by Thomas Stevenson in 1866. It was promoted as an essential part of the Society's network of second-order and climatological stations across England. Despite the Meteorological Society's aim of overcoming the idiosyncrasies of geography through recourse to a uniform pattern screen, their chosen design ended up embodying a particular geography: the aesthetic and moral codes of the suburban domestic garden.","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2018.0037","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47089618","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}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号