Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:42:12.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Crystallization of a New Narrative Form in Experimental Reports (1660–1690)

The Experimental Evidence as a Transaction between Philosophical Knowledge and Aristocratic Power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Christian Licoppe
Christian Licoppe
Affiliation:
Centre National d'Etudes des Télécommunications
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay describes the emergence and stabilization in French and English experimental accounts, in second half of the seventeenth century, of the narrative sequence: X did (some process in the laboratory) and X saw (something happen), where X stands for a pronoun, I or we in English, je, nous or on in French. Focussing on the French case, it shows how the use of the collective pronoun on in the experimental accounts registered in the files of the Académie des Sciences is directly related to the will of this newly created institution to assert a collective authority on the production and legitimization of experimental matters-of-fact produced in the laboratory. It is argued, through the case of the discovery of the blind spot in the eye by Mariotte, that this new narrative form imbeds a construal of the experiment as a public spectacle, and of the proof as a witnessing event, which eludes the Academy's attempts to monopolize the process of fact validation and favors the diffusion and display of experiments in front of larger audiences. The question of whether a privileged witness such as the King of France who patronized the Academy could not have constituted by himself a suitable audience to ensure a full legitimization of experimental matters-of-fact while remaning within the bounds of academic practices is addressed. It is answered in the negative by providing evidence for the lack of interest of the absolute monarch in experiments. On the other hand, the outdoor practices of observation and measurement are shown to interfere in a constructive manner with the absolutist power and to capture the attention of the absolutist monarch, where laboratory experiments had failed. It is proposed that natural philosophers in the early modern period bear the burden of proof in buying credibility for the phenomena they try, by paying a tribute to the standing of the patrician elites that witness their experiments. This makes sense in a straightforward manner of the lack of interest of the King of France in a practice which exalts the power of the very group he is trying hard to control through the absolutist structure of power.

Type
Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , Summer 1994 , pp. 205 - 244
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

A.Ac.Sc., Registres. Archives de l'Académie des Sciences, Registres des Procès-Verbaux des séances de l'Académie Royale des Sciences.Google Scholar
Apostolidès, Jean-Marie. 1981 Le Roi-Machine: Spectacle et politique au temps de Louis XIV. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Auzout, Adrien. 1665 Ephéméride du Comète. Paris.Google Scholar
Ben-David, Joseph. 1971 The scientist's Role in society. Chicago: University of Chicago press.Google Scholar
Bertrand, Joseph. 1869 L'Académie des sciences et les académiciens de 1666 à 1793. Paris Hetzel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biagioli, Mario. 1990. “Galileo the Emblem-Marker.” Isis 18: 230–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biagioli, Mario. 1992. “Social Revolution, soical Bricolage and Etiquett.” In scientific Revolution in National Context, eidited by Porter, Roy and Teich, Mikulas, 24–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bluche, François. 1986. Louis XIV. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
Boyle, Robert. 1772a. “Certain Physiological Essays and Other Tracts: ‘An Advertisement to the Reader’”. In Boyle 1772d, 1:304–5.Google Scholar
Boyale, Robert. 1772b. “New Experiments Physico-Mechanical Touching the Spring of the Air, and Its Effects.” In Boyle 1772d, 1: 94–95.Google Scholar
Boyale, Robert. 1772c. “A Proëmial Essay.” In Boyle 1772d, 2: 299–318.Google Scholar
Boyale, Robert. 1772d. Works. London.Google Scholar
Brown, Harcourt. 1934. Scientific Organizatoins in Seventeenth-Century France. (1620–1680). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Chapelain, Jean. 1880–1883. Letters. Edited by TAmizey de Larroque, P.. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. In print. The moral Economy of science.Google Scholar
Dear, Peter. 1985. “Totius in Verba: Rhetoric and Authority in the Early Royal society.” Isis 76: 145–61.Google Scholar
Dear, Peter. 1987. “Jesuit Mathematical style and the Reconstitution of Experience in the Early seventeenth Century.” Studies in the HIstory and Philosophy of science 18: 133–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de la Hire, Philippe. [1717] 1718. “Preface to E Mariotte, Traité du mouvement des eaux et autres corps fluides.” (English translation in Mariotte [1717] 1718, ix–x.)Google Scholar
Douglas, Mary. 1967. Purity and Danger. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. [1969] 1983. The Court society. New York: Pantheon Books. Originally published as Die höfischen Aristokratie. Neuwied Berlin, H. Luchterhand.Google Scholar
Felibien, André. 1674a. Descriptions sommaire du chasteau de Versailles. Paris: G. Desprez.Google Scholar
Felibien, André. 1674b. Les Divertissements de versailles donnez par le Roy au retour de la conqueste de la Franche-Comteé, en l'année 1674. Paris: J.-B. Coignard.Google Scholar
Fontenelle, B. Le Bovier de. 1705. “Eloge de M. Amontons.” In Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences [1666–1699] (hereafter cited as HARS), pp. 150–54.Google Scholar
Fontenelle, B. Le Bovier de. [1707] 1715. “Eloge de M. l'Abbé Gallois.” In HARS 1: 176–81. Reprinted in Fontenelle 1715b, Vol. 8.Google Scholar
Fontenelle, B. Le Bovier de. 1715a. “Histoire du renouvellement de l'Académie roylae des sciences en 1699.” In Fontenelle 1716b, vol. 8.Google Scholar
Fontenelle, B. Le Bovier de. 1715b. Oeuvres diverses, 2nd ed. Paris: M. Brunet.Google Scholar
Fontenelle, B. Le Bovier de. 1733. “Preface.” In HARS 1: 13–16.Google Scholar
Gombroust, , and Petit, Pierre. [1652] 1980. “Adresse au lecteur.…” Full text in Marin 1980, 50.Google Scholar
Grmek, Mirko D. 1986. “Mariotte et la physiologie de la vision.” In Mariotte, savant et philosophe (+ 1684): Analyse d'une renommée, edited by Costabel, Pierre, 155–85. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Hahn, Roger. 1971. The Anatomy of a scientific Institution: The Paris Academy of Sciences, 1666–1803. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannaway, Owen. 1986. “Laboratory Design nad the Aim of Science.” Isis 77: 585–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARS. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences [1666–1699] 1733.Google Scholar
Hirschfield, John M. 1981. The Acaémie Royale des Sciences (1666–1683): Inauguration and Initial Problems of Method. New York: Arno Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, Frederich L. 1991. “Argument and Narrative in Scientific Writing.” In The Literary Structure of Scientific Argument: Historical studies, edited by Dear, Peter, 164–81. Philadelphia: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael. 1981. Science and Society in Restoration England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael. 1986. “Towards Solomon's House: Rival Strategies for Reforming the Early Royal Society.” History of science 14: 49–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konwitz, Josef W. 1987. Cartography in France 1660–1848: Science, Engineering and Statecraft. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Licoppe, Chirstian. 1993. “La forme-de-ve expérimentale en France au milieu du XVIIe siècle: Blaise Pascal et less expériences sur le vide.” Revue de synthèse 114 (3–4): 383–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lux, David S. 1989. Patronage and Royal Science in Seventeenth-Century France: The Académie de Physique in Caen. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marin, Louis. 1980. “Les voies de la carte.” In Cartes et figures de la Terra. Paris: Centre Georges Pompidou.Google Scholar
Marin, Louis. [1981] 1988. Portrait of the King, translated by Houle, M. M.. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Originally published as Le Portrait du Roi. Paris: Editions de Minuit.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mariotte, Edme. 1717a. Discours sur la nature de l'air. In Mariotte 1717b, 1: 163.Google Scholar
Mariotte, Edme. 1717b. Oeuvres. Paris: P. Vander.Google Scholar
Mariotte, Edme. 1717c. “Essai de Logique.” In Mariotte 1717b, 2:609–701.Google Scholar
Mariotte, Edme. [1717] 1718. The Motion of Water and Other Fluids: Being a Treatise of Hydrostaticks, translated by Desaguliers, J. T.. London: J. Senex. Originally published as “Traité du mouvement des eaux et des autres corps fluides,” in Mariotte 1717b, 2: 393–94.Google Scholar
Mariotte, , Edme, , Pecquet, , and Perrault, Claude. 1668. “A New Discovery Touching vision.” Philosophical Transactions 3: 668–71. This is a partial translation of the original, which was published as “Nouvelle découverte concernant la vüe, contenüe en plusieurs letters écrites par Messrs. Mariotte, Pecquet et Perrault, de l'Acaémie royale des science,” in Mariotte 1717b, 2: 495–538.Google Scholar
Mayr, Otto. 1989. Authority Liberty and Automatic Machinery in Early Modern Europe. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Naylor, Robert H. 1989. “Galileo's Experimental Discourse.” In The Uses of Experiment: Studies in the Natural Sciences, edited by Gooding, David, Pinch, Trevor, and Schaffer, Simon, 117–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.Google Scholar
“Observations, Made by a Curious and Learned Person, sailing from England to the Caribe-Islands.” 1667. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal society, 2: 493.Google Scholar
Oldenburg, Henry. 1665. “Epistle Dedicatory ‘To the Royal Society’,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, vol. 1.Google Scholar
Papin, Denis. [1674] 1675–76a. “Dédicace à Huygens.” In Papin [1674] 1675–76b.Google Scholar
Papin, Denis. [1674] 1675–76b. Nouvelles Expériences du vuide avec la description des machines qui servent à les faires. Paris: Cussion. A partial translation appeared in English, under the general title: “Some Experiments Made in the Air-Pump by Monsieur Papin, Directed by Huygens, Monsieur.” Philosophical Transactions 10: 443–47, 477–81, 492–95.Google Scholar
Papin, Denis. [1674] 1675–76c. “Expériences sur le vuide.” In Papin [1674] 1675–76b.Google Scholar
Perrault, Claude. 1721. “Recueil de plusieurs Machines de nouvelle invention.” In Perrault, , Oeuvres diverses de physique et de mécanique. Paris.Google Scholar
Petit, Pierre. 1665. Dissertation sur la nature des comètes au Roy avec un discours sur les prognostiques des éclipes et autres matières curieuses. Paris: T. Jolly.Google Scholar
Pomian, Krzystof. [1987] 1992. Collectors and Curiosities. paris and Venice, 1500–1800. Cambridge: Backwell. Originally published as Collectionneurs, amateurs et curieux, Paris, Venise, XVIe–XVIIIe siècles, Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Racine, Jean. 1966. “Discours prononcé à l'Académic française, 2 janvier 1685.” In Racine, Oeuvres. Paris: Gallimard (La pléiade).Google Scholar
Rohault, Jacques. [ 1671] 1728–1729. Rohault's system of Natural Philosophy, 2nd ed., translated by Clarke, J.. London: J. Knapton. Originally published as Traité physique, Paris, V. de C. Saureuz. The English translation is from S. Clarke's Latin version: Rohault, physica, 2nd ed. London: J. Knapton, 1702.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1984. “Pump and Circumstance: Robert Boyle's Literary Technology.” Social studies of science 14: 481–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1988. “The House of Experiment in Seventeenth-Century England.” Isis 79: 373–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1989. “The Invisible Technician.” American Scientist 77: 554–63.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1991. “A scholar and a Gentleman': The Problematic Identity of the Scientific Practitioner in Early Modern England.” History of Science 29: 279–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven, and Schaffer, Simon. 1985. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University press.Google Scholar
Sorbière, Samuel. [1664] 1709. A Voyage to England, Containing Many Things Relating to the State of Learning, Religion, and Other Curiosities of that Kingdom. London: J. Woodward. Originally published as Relation d'un voyage en Angleterre, où sont touchées plusieurs choses qui regardent l'état des sciences et de la religion et autres matières curieuses, Paris. I. Jolly.Google Scholar
Sprat, Thomas. 1667. The History of the Royal Society for the Improving of Natural Knowledge. London: J. Martin and J. Allestry.Google Scholar
Stroup, Alice. 1990. A Company of Scientists: Botany, Patronage and Community at the seventeenth-Century Parisian Royal Academy of sciences. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Targosz, Karolina. 1977. “Johann Hevelius et ses démarches pour trouver des mécènes en France.” Revue d'Histoire des sciences 30: 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar