Popular Astronomy Lectures in Nineteenth Century Britain
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Commercial and Sublime: Popular Astronomy Lectures in Nineteenth Century Britain Hsiang-Fu Huang UCL Department of Science and Technology Studies Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in History and Philosophy of Science March 2015 2 I, Hsiang-Fu Huang, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Date of signature: 9th March 2015 Supervisors: Joe Cain (UCL) Simon Werrett (UCL) Examiners: Frank A. J. L. James (UCL / Royal Institution of Great Britain) Richard Bellon (Michigan State University) Date of examination: 16th December 2014 3 4 Abstract This thesis discusses the practitioners, sites, curriculums, apparatus and audiences of popular astronomy lecturing in nineteenth-century Britain. Lecturers who were active approximately between 1820 and 1860 are the focus. This thesis emphasises popularisers who were not scientific elites, including C. H. Adams (1803-1871), George Bartley (c. 1782-1858), and D. F. Walker (1778-1865). Activities of private popularisers are compared with those in scientific establishments, such as the Royal Institution. Private entrepreneurs were not inferior to institutional competitors and enjoyed popularity among audiences. Until the 1860s, popular astronomy lecturing was a shared arena of institutional and private popularisers. A theatrical turn occurred in the popular astronomy lecturing trade before 1820. Popularisers moved lectures into theatres and adopted theatrical facilities in performance. They developed large onstage devices, such as the transparent orrery, for achieving scenic and dramatic effects. These onstage astronomical lectures were a phenomenon in the early nineteenth century and were usually performed during Lent. This thesis highlights ‘commercial’ and ‘sublime’ features in popular astronomy lecturing of this period. The lecturing trade had an economic side involving paying, selling, profits and competitions in everyday practices. In addition to this material aspect, lectures also had emotional appeal. Lecturers exploited the sublime: the display of beautiful visual representations, the use of natural theology rhetoric, plus religious and moral reflections, all appealed for the sublimilty of the universe and the Creator behind it. 5 Contents Acknowledgements 9 List of Figures 11 List of Tables 14 List of Abbreviations 15 Notes on Currency 16 1. Introduction 17 1.1 Main Thesis 17 1.2 Science in Context 21 1.3 Public Lecturing in the Eighteenth Century 27 1.4 A Nation of Show-keepers 31 1.5 Commercial and Sublime: A Contested Sphere 34 2. Affiliation 44 2.1 C. H. Adams, “The Only Orthodox Interpreter” 46 2.2 Bachhoffner and the Royal Polytechnic 57 2.3 Affiliated or Independent 68 2.4 The Wrangler and the Carpenter: Qualification for Lecturing 77 Chapter Conclusion 90 3. Geography 92 3.1 Metropolis: A Cornucopia of Amusements 95 3.2 Astronomy inside Theatres 107 3.3 Astronomy in Institutions 120 3.4 Astronomy for the People 130 3.5 Country: Every Nook and Cranny 138 6 Chapter Conclusion 142 4. Subjects 146 4.1 Syllabus in Common 149 4.2 News of Discovery 157 4.3 A Playwright’s Work 165 4.4 Devotion, “Daughter of Astronomy” 175 4.5 Progress and the Plurality of Worlds 187 Chapter Conclusion 199 5. Apparatus 201 5.1 Material Culture of Public Lecturing 204 5.2 Orreries in the Crystal Palace 206 5.3 Stage Machines: Astronomers are not Amused 215 5.4 Scenic Transparencies 225 Chapter Conclusion 232 6. Audiences 234 6.1 Audience Composition 238 6.2 Reminiscences of Show Visiting 248 6.3 A Fashionable Motive for Science 255 6.4 Reception: A Matter of Truth 265 Chapter Conclusion 275 7. Conclusion 279 7.1 Epilogue: The End of an Era 279 7.2 Summary of the Thesis 284 7.3 Future Work 293 7 Appendix A: Directory of Astronomical Lecturers in Britain, 1800-1870 299 Appendix B: Transcription of Samuel James Arnold’s Ouranologia 303 Bibliography 357 List of Archives and Databases 357 Primary Sources (before 1900) 357 Secondary References 360 8 Acknowledgements PhD research is a long journey and now I come to the end. There is no curtain call in the journey’s end. However, I view the acknowledgements as the curtain call for those who are ‘behind the scenes’. First and foremost, a tribute goes to my supervisors. I thank Joe Cain and Simon Werrett, who made enormous efforts to guide my research and to provide necessary supports. We have spent much wonderful time in enjoyable discussions. I especially enjoy Joe’s extrovert philosophy – Joe is never an armchair investigator; he would stroll all over the streets of London and the Crystal Palace Park rather than hiding in a library. I also wish to give a special thank to Jane Gregory, who was my supervisor in the first year of my PhD study. This research project was initially granted admission by her. Jane helped me to accommodate in the UCL and London; without her, my PhD research would not begin. The UCL Department of Science and Technology Studies provides all important resources and supports throughout the course of my study. I have an excellent group of colleagues, whether faculty members, staff, alumni, visiting researchers, or fellow PhD students. I cannot list every name but sincerely appreciate my colleagues’ company. Among them, I especially thank Jon Agar and Chiara Ambrosio, who are the graduate tutors. I also thank Alastair Tatam, whose administrative support is extremely helpful. During the course of my study, many people contributed their professional knowledge, commented on my points, or provided useful information. I appreciate these people’s advice. Among them, I especially thank these three: Geoffrey Cantor, who clarified the religious context in nineteenth-century British science and improved my discussions concerning religion in this thesis; Jonathan Topham, who provided insights and useful references on natural theology and nineteenth-century periodicals; Iwan Morus, who commented on the part of astronomical performances in theatres. I also wish to thank Richard Bellon, Tim Boon, Martin Bauer, Alison Boyle, Rita Cain, Hasok Chang, Silvia De Bianchi, Jonathan Everett, Jean-Baptiste Gouyon, Rebekah Higgitt, Frank James, Melanie Keene, Michael Kliegl, Yuto Ishibashi, Don Leggett, Bernard Lightman, Dan Lloyd, William Macauley, Felicity Mellor, Thomas Rose, 9 Charlotte Sleigh, James Sumner, and Haiyan Yang. Many people kindly helped proofread my final drafts. English is not my first language, so these volunteers made great efforts to correct my use of language and to sharpen my writing. I am much obliged to Joe Cain, Geoffrey Cantor, Rupert Cole, Melanie Keene, Oliver Marsh, Matthew Paskins, and Simon Werrett. This thesis would be more flawed without the above proofreaders. The transcription of Samuel James Arnold’s Ouranologia is a very important project in my research. It was a quite challenging task and would not be completed without the support of the UCL Department of Science and Technology Studies. The fruits of my labours are shown in Appendix B. I would like to thank Aileen Robinson, who first reminded me to notice this manuscript at the British Library. I also appreciate that Tom O’Donnell proofread my transcript. Many archives, libraries and museums, contributed materials to my research. I got many helps from the staff of these institutions during my investigation. Unfortunately I cannot list every librarian who had given me assistances, so I only list the organisations: the UCL libraries; the Royal Institution of Great Britain; the Royal Astronomical Society; the Science Museum; the Victoria and Albert Museum; the British Library; the Manchester Archives; the Derby Museums and Art Gallery; the Bill Douglas Cinema Museum, Exeter; the Priaulx Library, Guernsey; the Jodrell Bank Discovery Centre, Manchester. I also thank the British Society for the History of Science, which awarded me travel grants to present my research in several conferences. Finally, and literally, I owe my parents. My PhD study would not realise without their supports, whether financial or emotional. I am much obliged to my parents. There is an old popular saying in Chinese: “So many people we have to thank, therefore we thank heavens.” Indeed, I encountered many wonderful people during the course of my research. I regret that I cannot list them all in the acknowledgements. Thank heavens, I complete this thesis. 10 List of Figures Figure 1.1 Punch cartoon of Michael Faraday 381 Figure 1.2 The title page of A Short Account of Natural and 382 Experimental Philosophy (1772) by J. Arden Figure 1.3 A new construction of an orrery by Benjamin Martin 383 Figure 1.4 A Philosopher giving that Lecture on the Orrery 384 (1766) by Joseph Wright Figure 1.5 Timeline of popular astronomy lecturers in London 385 and vicinity Figure 2.1 Playbill of C. H. Adams’s lecture, 15th April 1854 386 Figure 2.2 George Bachhoffner’s demonstration of the rotation 387 of the Earth at the Polytechnic Institution Figure 2.3 Handbill of John Bird’s lectures, 15th to 17th June 388 1830 Figure 3.1 Map of London of 1827 389 Figure 3.2 ‘The Grand Transparent Scene of the System’ from 390 the London Lions (1826) Figure 3.3 ‘Pit, Boxes and Gallery’ (1836) by George 391 Cruickshank Figure 3.4 Ground plan for the new Lyceum Theatre 392 Figure 3.5 Walker’s Eidouranion at the English Opera House, 393 21st March 1817 11 Figure 3.6 Playbill of George Bartley’s lecture, 1827 394 Figure 3.7 Attendance records of John Wallis’s juvenile lectures 395 at the Royal Institution in 1838 Figure 3.8 Stranger’s tickets of the Royal Manchester 396 Institution Figure 3.9 Handbill of D. F. Walker’s lectures at a pub, 397 September 1820 Figure 4.1 Syllabus of John Wallis’s juvenile lectures at the 398 Royal Institution in 1846 Figure 4.2 Playbill of C.