Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:10:38.312Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Politics and vocation: French Science, 1793–1830

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Dorinda Outram
Dorinda Outram
Affiliation:
Department of History, Royal Holloway College, University of London, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

French science of the period between 1793 and 1830 is now a major focus of study. The large body of work produced since the nineteenth century, particularly in the field of institutional history, has provided the background for important attempts in the last ten or fifteen years to apply tools of sociological analysis to this field of enquiry. Particularly important have been theories of professionalization and institutionalization. It is the purpose of this paper to examine the consequences of the use of such models in relation to this specific historical context. In particular, I shall suggest that such questions as the importance of institutions in the conduct of science, and the extent to which science became a profession or remained a vocation, may be better understood once the world of French science has been situated in a wider political and intellectual context. An article, however, can do no more than suggest new perspectives, and must leave to more extended treatments the work of amplification and correction. Briefly, however, this paper will argue for a view of science at this period as locked in a conflict between the ambiguous demands of the political world on the one hand, and on the other pressures on individuals and groups within the vocation of science to conform to an ideology which viewed science as completely non-political.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , March 1980 , pp. 27 - 43
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

This is a revised version of a paper read at the summer meeting of the British Society for the History of Science at the University of Durham, July 1978. I would like to thank Peter Brown, Jean-Claude Guedon, Robert Fox, Ludmilla Jordanova, John Pickstone, Roy Porter, Jack Morrell, and Steven Shapin for their helpful criticism of many successive drafts.

1 See, for example, Maindron, E., L'Académie des sciences, Paris, 1888Google Scholar; Prévost, A., L'Ecole de santé de Paris, 1794–1809, Paris, Paris, 1901Google Scholar; idem, La Faculté de médecine de Paris de 1794 à 1800, Paris, 1900Google Scholar; Pinet, , Histoire de l'Ecole polytechnique, Paris, 1887Google Scholar, Bresson, C., Historie de la chaire d'anatomie à l'Ecole d'Alfort, Paris, 1928Google Scholar; Sédillot, L. A., Les professeurs de mathématique et de physique générale au Collège de France, Rome, 1869Google Scholar; Lefranc, A., Histoire du Collège France depuis ses origines jusqu'à la fin premier Empire, Paris, 1893.Google Scholar Contemporary institutional histories include Deleuze, J. P. F., Histoire et description du Muséum royal d'histoire naturelle, 2 vols., Paris, 1823CrossRefGoogle Scholar; de la Sarthe, J-L. Moreau, Mémoire de l'histoire de l'Ecole de médecine de Paris de 1795 à 1822, Paris, 1824Google Scholar; Biot, J. B., Essai sur l'histoire générale des sciences pendant la Révolution française, Paris, 1803.Google Scholar The tradition has survived strongly into this century in, for example, Petot, J., Histoire de l'administration des ponts-et-chausées, 1599–1815Google Scholar; Chesnau, G., L'Ecole des mines, Paris, 1931Google Scholar; and to a lesser extent in Favet, J., La Révolution française et la science, Paris, 1960Google Scholar; Ackerknecht, E., Medecine at the Paris hospital, 1794–1848, Baltimore, 1967.Google Scholar Lastly, Denise, L., Bibliographie historique et iconographique du Jardin des plantes, Paris, 1903Google Scholar, remains useful for much besides. General histories of education should also be consulted, such as Liard, L., L'enseignement supérieur en France, 2 vols., Paris, 1894Google Scholar; Artz, F. B., The development of technical education in France, 1500–1850, Cambridge Mass., 1966.Google Scholar

2 Recent studies explicitly treating these problems include Crosland, M. P., ‘Development of a.professional career in science in France, Minerva, 1975, 13, 38–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reprinted in idem (ed.), The emergence of science in western Europe, London, 1975, pp. 139–60Google Scholar; Hahn, R., The anatomy of a scientific institution: the Paris Academy of sciences, 1666–1803, Berkeley & London, 1971Google Scholar. The use of such models was reappraised in Hahn, R., ‘Scientific careers in eighteenth-century France’Google Scholar, in Crossland, M. P. (ed.), op. cit., pp. 127–38Google Scholar; Fox, R., ‘Scientific enterprise and the patronage of research in France, 1800–1870’, Minerva, 1973, 11, 442–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reprinted in Turner, G. L'E. (ed.), The patronage of science in the nineteenth century, Leyden, 1976Google Scholar; Ben-David, J., The scientist's rôle in society: a comparative study, Englewood Cliffs, 1971Google Scholar, chapter VIII, an earlier version of which appeared as ‘The rise and decline of France as a scientific centre’, Minerva, 1970, 8, 161–72Google Scholar. However, these studies still move against the back-drop of professionalization and institutionalization; what is now needed is a double re-examination of the internal life of the scientific community and of its political context.

3 Reingold, N., ‘Definitions and speculations: the professionalization of science in America in the nineteenth century’, in Oleson, A. and Brown, S. C. (eds.) The pursuit of knowledge in the early American republic, Baltimore & London, 1976, pp. 33–69.Google Scholar

4 Diehl, C., Americans and German scholarship, 1770–1870, New Haven & London, 1978, chapter 1Google Scholar; Turner, R. S., ‘Reformers and professional scholarship in Germany, 1760–1800’, in Stone, L. (ed.), The university in society, 2 vols., Princeton, 1975. Vol. iiGoogle Scholar: Europe, Scotland, and the United States from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries, pp. 459–531Google Scholar; Dieckmann, H., ‘The concept of knowledge in the Encyclopédie’, in Essays in comparative literature, St Louis, 1961, pp. 73–107Google Scholar; Hahn, , op. cit. (2, ‘Scientific careers’)Google Scholar denies the possibility of a research career in the modern sense in eighteenth-century France.

5 Crosland, , op. cit. (2)Google Scholar, gives information on the numbers of degrees in science being awarded at the end of this period by the Facultés, as well as on the growth of the numbers of subordinate positions at the Muséum and at the Bureau des Longitudes. But he has still to prove that such positions, treated in his account as part of a cursus in ‘professional’ science, were awarded in relation to success in examination, or that such examinations were regarded as the only or the main way in which candidates for such posts were defined. Medical competence was of course the subject of examination throughout this period, as long before, and medical training was often used by individuals who wished to pursue scientific enquiry while insuring themselves, through medical practice, against its financial risks. But medical knowledge was no necessary guide to competence in the more general field of the life sciences, which remained very largely outside the examination structure of early nineteenth-century France. For the combination of medicine and natural history, see Théodoridès, J., ‘Quelques documents inédits sur Toussaint Bastard (1784–1846), médecin et naturaliste’, Histoire des sciences médicales, 1967, 1, 1–10.Google Scholar

6 Hahn, , op. cit. (2, Anatomy), p. xGoogle Scholar. Of those under discussion, this book is by far thé best defined in its use ot sociological theory. Elsewhere, vague formulations of key concepts recur; e.g., Ben-David, , ‘Science was now institutionalized in the sense that scientists… could aspire to all the honours and influence they might have wished for’, op. cit. (2), p. 89Google Scholar; Merton, R. K., Social theory and social structure, Glencoe, 1968Google Scholar, remains the most important compendium of functionalist ideas. In this section 1 benefit from Shapin, S., ‘Origins of scientific institutions’ (unpublished typescript).Google Scholar

7 Besides the works listed in nn. 1 and 2, above, unpublished work in progress includes detailed study of the Muséum by Camille Limoges, of the Société philomatique by Jonathan Mandelbaum, of the Bureau des longitudes by John Schuster, of the Lycée républicain by Judith Powell, of provincial learned societies in the nineteenth century by Robert Fox, and of the Académie des sciences in the same period by Maurice Crosland.

8 The best single source of information here remains Taton, R. (ed), Enseignement et diffusion des sciences en France au XVIIIe siècle, Paris, 1964Google Scholar, supplemented by Huard, P., Sciences, médecine et pharmacie de la Révolution à l'Empire, 1789–1815, Paris, 1970.Google Scholar

9 Taton, , op. cit. (8), pp. 29, 126, 136, 172, 182, 212, 236–9, 293, 357, 390Google Scholar. Deliberately omitted here have been private institutions such as the Lycée de Paris, the scientific courses offered by private individuals, private scientific collections, private scientific societies, the scientific interests of the provincial Académies, and the Académie des sciences in Paris, whose members were mainly elected from among the existing scientific community.

10 Williams, L. P., ‘Science, education, and the French revolution’ Isis, 1953, 44, 311–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, ‘Science, education, and Napoleon I, ibid., 1956, 47, 369–82. For the increasing pressure of state imperatives on education in the period from 1802, see Vaughan, M. and Scotford-Archer, M., Social conflict and educational change in England and France, 1789–1848, London, 1971, pp. 16–32, 180–5, 202–30.Google Scholar

11 The Almanack impérial for 1813 lists 24 Académies or university centres in metropolitan France outside Paris. Sixteen out of this twenty-four had no faculty of science at all. The eight faculties of science possessed a total of 54 teaching posts (not all of them filled, and many of them doubling with teaching at the local lycée) compared with 237 posts in letters, law, and theology combined. See below n. 12 for the numbers of posts in Paris.

12 For example, there were three teaching posts at the Jardin du Roi before 1793, when its new constitution increased the number to twelve—a 400% increase, but still a small absolute number. The Almanack impénal for 1813 gives 19 posts at the Ecole Polytechnique, 6 each at the veterinary schools at Alfort and Lyon, 24 at the Muséum, including 11 aides-naturalistes, 8 at the Bureau des Longitudes, 14 at the Paris Faculté de Médecine, 13 at the Ecole de Pharmacie, 15 at the Faculté des Sciences, 6 at the Ecole des Mines, and 3 at.the Collège de France. The number of posts in general science in the capital is of crucial importance, since a truly successful career in science was only possible through admission to the Parisian scientific world. These figures, howevèr, only gain real significance when measured against a) the demand for the teaching of science, and b) the numbers of potential aspirants to each post. Numbers for a) could relatively easily be established from the sources in nn. 1 and 2 above, and more impressionistically from those in n. 34 below, as well as from any necessary archival research in the records of scientific teaching institutions, many of which are listed in the bibliography to Hahn, , op. cit. (2, Anatomy). For b)Google Scholar the absence of a formal competition system under the Empire makes calculations more difficult. Perhaps one method would be to compare numbers of posts with numbers of members of private scientific societies at any given time, as an indicator of the unabsorbed potential members of scientific institutions.

13 In the Muséum, for example, the Lucas family, directly descended from-Buffon, monopolized lower administrative posts; Frédéric Cuvier directed the menagerie whilst his elder brother Georges regularly headed the governing body of the Muséum; André Thouin directed the botanical gardens, whilst his brother Jacques was in charge of the Muséum's secretariat. See Lacroix, A., ‘Une famille de bons serviteurs de l'Académie des sciences et du Jardin des Plantes: les Lucas’, Bulletin du Muséum national d'histoire naturelle, 1938, 10, 440–71.Google Scholar

14 Use of the Almanack impérial, its predecessor the Almanach national and its successor the Almanack royal, under the headings for the institutions listed in n. 12 above, gives the following individuals as holding two or more posts within the scientific orbit. Additional posts held in general administration are specifically indicated. 1798–9: Vauquelin, Deyeux, Fourcroy (also député to the Convention nationale), Portal, Daubenton, 1810: Laugier, Desfontaines, Hallé, Delambre (also conseil général of the Imperial University), Biot, Poisson, Cuvier (also Imperial University), de Jussieu, Portal, Thenard, R-J. Haüy, Geoffroy St Hilaire, Brongniart (also Sèvres porcelain manufactory), Huzard, Girard. 1813: Vauquelin, Laugier, Hallé, de Jussieu, Corvisart, Portal, Geoffroy St Hilaire, R-J. Haüy, Cuvier (also Conseil d'Etat and Imperial University), Dubois, Delambre (also Imperial University), Biot, Poisson, Thenard, Desfontaines. 1830: Laugier, Delafosse, Duméril, Clarion, Guilbert, Portal, Desfontaines, Geoffroy St Hilaire, Cuvier (also Conseil d'Etat, Minstère des Cultes, Conseil royal d'instruction publique), Mirbel (also Conseil royal d'argriculture), Biot, Lacroix, Recamier, Thenard (also député). Also to be considered are such cases as Berthollet, from 1804 a senator and administrator of the Mint, but holding no formal connexion with a state institution of science, and Lacépède, holding a chair at the Musèum as his only scientific post, yet also directing the Légion d'honneur; and Fourcroy, a member of the Conseil d'Etat since 1805, and director of public instruction from 1804 until 1808 (died 1809). See also the non-pluralistic science careers of those mentioned in n. 25 below. The numbers are too small to permit much meaningful statistical juggling; nevertheless, some remarks may be made. From 1810 to 183O, numbers of pluralists, ie., those in a position to exercise really effective patronage, remained fairly constant (13 in 1810, 16 in 1813, 14 in 1830). Total numbers of post-holders in these years are respectively 79, 88, and 89. No striking new concentrations of power can thus be discerned after the Empire (compare the 1798–9 ratio of 6 pluralists to 71 office-holders). It should also be remembered that the Empire saw a continuous expansion of posts, with the foundation of the Faculté des sciences, which makes the steadiness of the ratio all the more striking. Precise forms of pluralism are also interesting; it was rare for office-holders in the ‘applied science’ institutions also to hold posts in the ‘pure science’ sector. Posts at Alfort and Lyons, the veterinary schools, and at the Ecole des Mines were rarely if ever held in conjunction with appointments at the Collège de France or the Muséum, for example. There is a virtually complete overlap between membership of the scientific section or first Class of the Institut, and appearance in the list of pluralists. Lastly, it will also be noted that the ‘super-pluralists’, such as Cuvier, who combined multiple office in both science and general administration were in fact rare; more common were figures such as Lacépède, pluralist only in virtue of one post in each sphere. Pluralism was a valuable patronage resource because it generated work which could be delegated to protégés, and gave them income.

15 See n. 5 above.

16 For the fierce running battle between the Imperial University and the army, for example, see Outram, D., ‘Education and politics in Piedmont, 1796–1814’, Historical journal, 1976, 19, 611–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 The administration of the Imperial University was controlled at least as much by literary men as it was by scientists. See Outram, , op. cit. (16), p. 628Google Scholar. Biographies of such literary figures include Wilson, A., Fontones: essai biographique et littéraire, 1757–1821, Paris, 1928Google Scholar; de Reynal, P., Les correspondants de joubert, Paris, 1883Google Scholar; Arnault, A. V., Souvenirs d'un sexagénaire, 4 vols., Paris, 1835, iii, 292Google Scholar. On the general topic of the influence of this ‘literary group’ on the evolution of educational policy, see Outram, D., Education and the state in the Italian départements annexed to France, 1796–1814, University of Cambridge PhD thesis, 1974, chapter IV.Google Scholar

18 Forthcoming work by Barbara Haines on St Simon and by John Hooper on Fourier will help to clarify some of these points. Still valuable is Hayek, F. A., ‘The counter-revolution of the engineers’ Economica, 1941, 8, 119–150, 281–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The implications of this growing division between pure and applied science cannot be treated at length here; but see n. 14 above and n. 23 below, for some of the issues raised.

19 For a general approach to this problem, see O'Boyle, L., ‘The problem of an excess of educated men in Western Europe, 1800–1850’, Journal of modern history, 1970, 4, 471–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Roche, D., ‘Milieux académiques provinciaux et société des lumières, in Bollème, G., Ehrard, J., Furet, F., Roche, D., and Roger, J. (eds.), Livre et société dans la France du XVIIIe siècle, Paris, 1975, pp. 93–184.Google Scholar

21 This conflict between ‘clean’ power from knowledge of nature, and ‘dirty’ power from the political world, has been examined in Outram, D., ‘The language of natural power: the funeral éloges of Georges Cuvier’, History of science, 1978, 16, 153–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 Brambilla, E., ‘Professioni giuridiche e mobilità sociale nella Francia pre-rivoluzionaria’, Studi storici, 1978, 4, 819–30.Google Scholar

23 See Roche, D., ‘Talents, raison et sacrifice: l'image du médecin des lumières d'aprés les éloges de la Société royale de médecine, 1776–1789’, Annales: économies societés civilisations, 1977, 32, 86686CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Cuvier, G., Eloges historiques, 3 vol., Paris, 1819–1827, i, 38, 167Google Scholar; Outram, , op. cit. (21)Google Scholar; the theme of the break with the family and with human society in general as a condition of the attainment of certain forms of knowledge, is of course very firmly rooted in Christian culture. See Theis, L., ‘Saints sans famille? Quelques remarques sur la famille dans le monde franc à travers les sources hagiographiques’, Revue historique, 1976, 155, 3–20Google Scholar. Only the private forms of scientific community seem to have been able to develop a truly cooperative ethos. It was only in the good fellowship in natural enquiry insisted upon, for example, by the Société philomatique, that the two conflicting definitions of prestige—one asocial because scientific, and the other political because institutional and state-guaranteed—were able to be resolved. I rely here on unpublished work by Jonathan Mandelbaum.

24 Chaussinand-Nogaret, G., Bergeron, L., and Forster, R., ‘Les notables du Grand-Empire en 1810’, Annales: économies, sociétés, civilisations, 1971, 26, 1052–75Google Scholar. Many scientists such as Berthollet and Cuvier were also awarded state endorsement through gifts of land and revenues in the occupied territories of the Empire. See Senkowska-Gluck, M., ‘Les donataires de Napoléon’, Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine, 1970, 17, 680–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Lacépéde's direction of the Légion d'honneur implicated science in the honorific system of the Empire even further. Numbers of scientists given titles and other honours by Napoleon and the Bourbons might easily be calculated from the Almanack imperial and Almanack royal.

25 For Napoleon's personal interest in the Institut, see Lacour-Gayet, G., Bonaparte membre de l'Institut, Paris, 1923Google Scholar. Chaptal, for example, became minister of the interior from 1800 to 1804, as Laplace had for six disastrous weeks in 1799. Fourcroy's political career is well known. For other such examples see n. 14 above. On Fourcroy himself see Kersaint, G., ‘Antoine-François de Fourcroy, 1755–1809’, Mémoires du Muséum national d'histoire naturelle, série D, 1966, 1, 1–296Google Scholar. It is noticeable, however, that with the settling of the political arena after the 1803 purge of remaining republicans, it became uncommon to find intellectuals occupying posts as elected representatives. Increasing property qualifications for election also intensified this development. The same is true of the Restoration, except, for obvious reasons, for 1815 and 1830.

26 Biot, , op. cit. (1), p. 1.Google Scholar

27 Hahn, , op. cit. (2, Anatomy), p. 262Google Scholar, argues that bureaucratic employment of scientists in the early years ot the Revolution caused a traumatic abandonment of the scientific for the bureaucratic ethos. He does not, however, prove the previous existence of this latter ethos. The confusion of the years of the Terror, and the intense personalization of power under the Consulate and Empire would seem rather to indicate that if anything, the debate within science over the nature of power was not altered; see n. 20 above. Recognisable ideals of bureaucratic government did of course exist in eighteenth-century Germany, but their influence in France is unclear, and even in Germany itself severe confusion was caused by their subjection to the arbitrary personal power of the ruler. See Raeff, M., ‘The well-ordered police state’, American historical review, 1975, 80, 1221–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The growing influence of biological metaphors on social description is an example, rather, of overlap between science and field of government.

28 Fox, R., ‘The rise and fall of Laplacian physics,’ Historical studies in the physical sciences, 1974, 4, 89–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Frankel, E., ‘Career-making in post-revolutionary France: the case of J. B. Biot’, British journal for the history of science, 1978, 11, 36–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Formal competition for posts under the Empire was used far less than a system of recommendation to the competent Minister; this of course reinforced the power of the patron.

30 Geoffroy St Hilaire was instrumental in saving both Haüy and Daubenton from imprisonment and persecution under the Terror. Such actions forged indissoluble links with important patron figures. If the Terror shattered the unity of the scientific community as it had existed in 1793, it also provided opportunities for young recruits to lay immense purchase upon it. See Hilaire, I. Geoffroy St, Vie, travaux et doctrine scientifique d'Etienne Geoffroy St Hilaire, Paris, 1847, chapter I.Google Scholar

31 I owe this definition of patronage efficiency to Jean-Claude Guédon and Camille Limoges.

32 For a review of this literature, see Gellner, E., ‘Patrons and clients’, in Gellner, E. and Waterbury, J. (eds.), Patrons and clients in Mediterranean societies, London, 1977, pp. 1–6Google Scholar. Ben-David, J., op. cit. (2), p. 3, nn. 3–4Google Scholar, gives a comprehensive review of sociological literature concerned with modern science, none of which addresses itself specifically to this problem in a historical context of a Western preliberai state.

33 Degérando, Joseph-Marie (1772–1842)Google Scholar could be taken as representative of this sub-class of patron. Though not himself scientifically active, his contributions to the Décade philosophique, his membership of the Institut, his important administrative posts in the Ministry of the Interior and in the adminstration of Genoa and Tuscany under Napoleon, gave him a range of contacts in the whole politico-cultural world of Europe which few could have equalled, and which resulted from his mixing of many distinct sources of power. Again, Cuvier's early patrons included not only such obvious figures as Lacépède, but also the politician Miot de Mélilo; see Cuvier, 's ‘Autobiography’Google Scholar, MS Flourens 2598 (3) of the library of the Institut de France.

34 Comprehensively listed in Tulard, J., Bibliographie critique des mémoires sur le Consulat et l'Empire écrits ou traduits en français, Geneva & Paris, 1971.Google Scholar

35 See Hatin, E., Bibliographie historique et critique de la presse périodique française, Paris, 1866Google Scholar, reprinted Turin, 1960–an invaluable tool here. For some of the societies, see Agulhon, M., Le cercle dans la France bourgeoise, 1810–48: étude d'une mutation de sensibilité, Paris, 1977Google Scholar. Study of the resulting lists of names and the different structures of social and cultural affiliation would reveal much about the structure of contacts within the politico-cultural élite.

36 Bryant, D., ‘Revolution and introspection: the appearance of the private diary in France’, European studies review, 1978, 8, 259–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Outram, D., op. cit. (1)Google Scholar lists autobiographies produced by members of the scientific section of the Institut to be used in their funeral éloges.

37 The best recent study of general applicability of the salon as a problem in the sociology of knowledge is Hertz, D., ‘Salonières and literary women in late eighteenth-century Berlin’, New German critique, 1978, 1, 97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The problem of attracting the attention of a Parisian patron was of course intensified if the aspirant came from a provincial milieu. In this context, correct handling of the letter form assumed great importance. See some of Cuvier's first letters in this direction to Oliver, in Théodoridès, J., ‘Jean-Guillaume Bruguière 1749–1798, et Guillaume-Antoine Oliver, 1756–1814, médicins, naturalistes et voyageurs’, 86′ Congrés des sociétés Savantes, 1961, pp. 173–83.Google Scholar

38 Social anthropology may also be utilized in these contexts; e.g., Paine, R., ‘What is gossip about?: an alternative hypothesis’, Man, 1967, 2, 278–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

39 See for example Laplace's graceful bowing-out speech to Biot, quoted in Frankel, , op. cit. (29)Google Scholar. This whole article is a repertoire of such gestes between patron and client.

40 Gellner, , op. cit. (32), p. 3Google Scholar: [as such]… the liberal state… does not give rise to patronage relations’.

41 Hahn, , op. cit. (2, Anatomy), pp. 311–12Google Scholar, emphasizes the fossil, static character of the Institut as the embodiment of the values of the state, rather than as a dynamic forum for the production of science.

42 Mémoires de Larévellière-Lépeaux, membre du directoire exécutif de la république françiaise et de l'Institut national, publiés par son fils, 2 vols., Paris 1895, ii, 463–81.Google Scholar

43 Idéologie is presented as surviving as a diffused tendency in French culture in Moravia, S., It tramonoto dell illuminismo: filosofia e politica nella società francese, 1770–1810, Bari, 1968.Google Scholar

44 See the description of the attacks on Laplace, tor example, in Fox, R., op. cit. (28).Google Scholar

45 Extended discussion of the nature of ‘scientific method’ in this period would cover too much space to be attempted here. Such questions as the nature of objectivity and of ‘positive knowledge’ will be treated largely as they were utilized in the power-structure of organized science. The question of how far such a methodology was produced by this organization must be left for more extended treatment than this article can provide.

46 Gellner, , op. cit. (32), pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

47 Fox, , op. cit. (28)Google Scholar

48 See n. 44 above for Laplace; a representative attack on Cuvier on these grounds is contained in [Eymery, A. B.], Dictionnaire des girouettes; ou, nos contemporains peints d'après eux-mèmes, 2nd edn., Paris, 1815Google Scholar: ‘Cuvier’. Cuvier's former protégé Henri Ducrotay de Blainville was to base his entire analysis of the faults in Cuvier's style of science on what he conceived to be the tundamental flaws in Cuvier's character; see his Cuvier et Geoffrey St Hilaire: biographies scientifiques, Paris, 1890Google Scholar. It should be noted that although Crosland, M. P.'s The society of Arcueil: a view of French science at the time of Napoleon I, London, 1967CrossRefGoogle Scholar, is avowedly a study of patronage, it seeks to abstract this patronage from the political field, and to maintain that ‘…the familiar political and military history must be put to one side… Men of science tend to be less sensitive to political changes than scholars in other fields…’, (p. ix).

49 Outram, D., op. cit. (21).Google Scholar

50 The most thorough single study of this conflict is Appel, T. A., The Cuvier-Geoffroy debate and the structure of nineteenth-century French zoology, University of Princeton PhD dissertation, 1975.Google Scholar

51 Cuvier's reasons for repressing public discussion of his scientific differences with Lamarck were concerned with the maintenance of a respectable public ‘image’ for science; they thus also illustrate the extent to which science did not have a secure place as a vocation in French life. See Burkhardt, R. W. Jr., ‘J-B Lamarck, evolution, and the politics of science,’ Journal of the history of biology, 1970, 3, 275–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52 Frankel, , op. cit. (29)Google Scholar. Cuvier, 's Règne animal appeared in 4 vols., Paris, 1817Google Scholar, and in a second edition in 5 vols, in 1829; vols, i and ii of the Histoire naturelle des poissons appeared in 1828, iiiGoogle Scholar and iv in 1829, v and vi in 1830, and vii and viii in 1831. After Cuvier's death in 1832, the work was carried to completion by Valenciennes alone. See also Laplace, Pierre-Somon, Traité de mécanique céleste, 5 vols., Paris, 1799–1825.Google Scholar

53 Philosophie zoologique, ou exposition des considérations relatives à l'histoire naturelle des animaux, à la diversité de leur organisation et des facultés qu'ils en obtiennent, aux causes physiques qui maintiennent en eux la vie et donnent lieu aux mouvements qu'ils executent; enfin, à celles qui produisent les unes les sentiments et les autres l'intelligence de ceux qui en sont doués, 2 vols., Paris, 1809.Google Scholar

54 This for example is the ideal of science explicitly favoured in the preface to the 1817 edition of Cuvier's Régne animal.

55 For development of this theme, which is again too large to be properly treated within this paper, see for example Ben-David, , op. cit. (2, Minerva)Google Scholar, Fox, R., op. cit. (2).Google Scholar

56 Withdrawal from society, for example, was early identified as a condition of the attainment of insight and objectivity. See Brown, P. R. L., ‘The rise and function of the Holy Man in late antiquity’, Journal of Roman studies, 1971, 61, 80–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The end of the eighteenth century saw as much confusion over the signs by which an authentic savant should be recognized as it did over the definition of élite status in general, as can be seen in the debates chronicled in Darnton, R., Mesmerism and the end of the Enlightenment in France, Cambridge, Mass., 1968Google Scholar. The typologies of the funeral éloges (see n. 21 above) may also represent attempts to solve these problems of definition.

57 An example of the application of models of vocation to scientific careers is Porter, R., ‘Gentlemen and geology: the emergence of a scientific career, 1660–1920’, Historical journal, 1978, 21, 809–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar