The Lelacke, Or Pipe Tree

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Lelacke, Or Pipe Tree The Lelacke, or Pipe Tree In Le Mans, France, there is a statue of a man with long curly hair, seated, reading a book. It is a statue of Pierre Belon, a French naturalist born about 1517, and, as far as we know, the first European to describe the lilac. As a young man Pierre Belon studied medicine in Paris, and after receiving his doctor’s degree he became a pupil of the German botanist, Euricius (or Valerius) Cordus, and travelled with him throughout Germany. He returned to France when he was about 29 years old, and his ability and knowledge attracted the attention of two Cardinals, Tournon and Chastillon, who became his patrons. Financed by them the intrepid young man set out on an extensive journey of scientific discovery to Greece, Asia Minor, Egypt, Turkey, Arabia, and Palestine. After his return Belon published in 1553 a full account of his travels. Writing of the Turkish people’s fondness for flowers, he de- scribed a bush with flowering branches the length of an arm, of violet color, which the Turks called Foxtail, the bush which we now call lilac. It was only two years later, in 1555, that a Flemish scholar, Augier de Busbecq, went to Constantinople, sent by the Emperor Ferdinand I, as Ambassador to Suleiman II, Sultan of Turkey. Busbecq lived in Constantinople for eight years. When he re- turned to his home in Vienna he brought with him many plants from Turkey including the lilac which he grew in his garden. The Viennese gave it the name Turhisher Holunder (Turkish Elderberry). Word of the new plant soon reached Italy. A physician of Siena, Pietro Andrea Mattioli, was publishing a series of com- mentaries on the first-century writings of Dioscorides (who was still, in the 16th century, an authority on medicine) and in the 1565 edition of his Commentaries he published a woodcut of a plant he called "lilac," and stated that the plant was brought from Constantinople by Busbecq. The picture, although inac- curate in showing flowers and fruits on the same branch, was the first published picture of the lilac. In a later edition of the Commentaries, in 1598, Mattioli published a more accurate il- 114 115 116 lustration, after he had received flowering and fruiting branches from Giacomo Cortusi, head of the Botanic Garden at Padua. There is no doubt that the new bush proved popular. In 1597 John Gerard, surgeon and gardener (and author of Gerard’s Herball) reported it in his garden in England "in very great plenty," and by 1601 it was well established in western European gardens and had escaped and become naturalized. The white lilac must have appeared about this time; it was first mentioned by Basil Besler, a German botanist, in 1613, and its origin is unknown. In 1629 John Parkinson, a writer and gardener in England, referred to a "Pipe tree ... of a milke or silver colour, which is a kind of white ... coming some- what neare unto an ash-color." Lord Bacon, in an essay on gardening written in 1625 re- ferred to the Lelacke tree. It was also called Laylock, Lilach, and Pipe-tree. The name lilac may have come from lilaj, the Turkish name for the indigo plant, or from lilak, meaning bluish. The Latin name for the lilac, syringa, was used by a French botanist, Mathieu de l’Obel (Lobelius), in 1576. Alfred Rehder, an American authority on trees and shrubs, suggested that the name came from the Greek word syrinx, meaning "pipe," referring to the hollow stems of Philadelphus (mock orange) which were used by the Turks to make pipes. Both the lilac and the mock orange were originally placed in the genus syringa and the name pipe tree was used indiscriminately for both. It is reasonable to believe that the lilac appeared early in Spain, as 1’Obel wrote of a lilac, Syringa caerula Lusitanica, Lusitanica referring to the part of the Iberian peninsula now known as Portugal. It is quite possible that the lilac came to Spain with the Moors, in fact an Arab botanist, Serapio, men- tioned Jasminum caeruleum (Blue Jasmine) in the eleventh century. Later, in the 16th century the name of ]eser~zinum caerulium Arabum appeared as a synonym for the common lilac, Syringa vulgaris. Many of the features of Moorish gardens in Spain had their origins in Persia, coming by way of Egypt. Egypt was conquered by the Persians in 525 B.C. and remained under Persian domination for about two centuries, during which time there was a continuous interchange of ideas between the two cultures. When the Moors went to Spain from north Africa in the eighth century they took their art and architecture with them, and it is conceivable that the Blue Jasmine mentioned by Serapio was brought to Spain at an early date. The Moors, in their almost eight centuries in the Iberian peninsula, penetrated Top. Syringa chinensis in the Arboretum. Bottom: Syringa persica. 118 into the central and northern areas, where lilacs at present do grow (such as in the Parque del Oeste, Madrid). In 1753 Linnaeus standardized the Latin name of the com- mon blue lilac as Syringa vulgaris and gave its native land as the Orient, although there was a belief among some botanists of that day that it came from Persia. It was not until 1828 that the naturalist Anton Rochel found it growing wild in western Rumania, and within a few years it was reported growing wild along the Danube river and in Bulgaria. In spite of this, the belief that it was from Persia or China continued into the twentieth century. However in 1903 J. Lochot, who was in charge of the gardens of the Prince of Bulgaria, wrote of travel- ling through the Balkans and seeing it growing wild. Three of the plants collected by Rochel at that time were brought to the Arnold Arboretum. The lilac which is referred to as the Persian lilac was first described by John Bauhin, a Frenchman. He described it in 1619 as a lilac with cut leaves, which he received from a Vene- tian who grew it in his garden. He gave it the Latin name of Ligustrum foliis laciniatis. It appeared again in a book pub- lished in 1627 by an Italian botanist, Prosper Alpinus, who re- ported that it was sent to Venice by Jerome Capelli. Apparently Capelli was ambassador to the Sultan, so this lilac also appears to have been introduced by way of Constantinople. A Persian lilac with entire leaves was reported in 1660, listed in a catalog of the Jardin des Plantes, Paris, as Jasminum per- sicum seu ligustrum persic. (The Jardin des Plantes later be- came part of the Musee d’Histoire Naturelle.) No record has ever been found to indicate where this plant came from. Linnaeus in 1753 based his description of the Persian lilac, S. persica, on a specimen with entire leaves, and at the time many botanists included the cut-leaved form and the entire- leaved one in the same species, since it was recognized that certain of the plants had both kinds of leaves. Toward the end of the 1700’s one German writer suggested that the Persian lilac came from China, by way of Constantinople, later than S. vul- garis ; and in the early 1800’s the belief grew that it was not a native of Persia, as it was only found there as a cultivated plant. In 1770 Richard Weston referred to the Persian lilac with cut leaves as S. persica variety laciniata and finally it was accepted as such by most botanists. In 1922 a specimen of this plant was collected in Kansu, China, which had two branches, one with entire leaves, and one with both cut leaves and entire leaves. This specimen is preserved in the herbarium of the 119 Arnold Arboretum. Mrs. Susan Delano McKelvey in her monu- mental monograph of the lilac suggested that S. persica with entire leaves only, is a garden plant, not appearing in the wild. Many plants were carried from China to Persia: walnuts, grapes, peaches, and many others, and Mrs. McKelvey suggested that the cut-leaved type was brought along with them, and that the form with only entire leaves may have originated in a Persian garden as a seedling or sport, or was propagated from a branch or twig which bore only entire leaves. In the Botanic Garden of Rouen in the 1700’s both the Persian lilac and the common lilac bloomed simultaneously. In about 1777 a third lilac appeared there, which was later given the misleading name of S. chinensis. This plant has since proved to be a hybrid of S. persica and S. vulgaris. Jacques Varin, the di- rector of the Botanic Garden, for several years sowed the seed of the cut-leaved Persian lilac, and obtained what he considered a degenerate variety, unaware that what he really had was a hybrid. In America the common lilac was quickly adopted and be- came quite popular in the eighteenth century. Lilacs were grown in the garden of the mansion of Governor Wentworth in Portsmouth, N.H., which is believed to have been planted in 1750. The garden book of Thomas Jefferson written at Shadwell, Virginia, on April 2, 1767, mentioned planting lilacs and Spanish Broom, and even earlier Peter Collinson wrote on December 20, 1737, to his botanist friend in America, John Bartram, "I wonder that thou should be sorry to see such a bundle of white and blue lilacs ... But as your neighbours of Virginia, in particular Colonel Custis at Williamsburgh, who has undoubtedly the best collection in the country, desired some, I thought possibly you might want them ..
Recommended publications
  • Invented Herbal Tradition.Pdf
    Journal of Ethnopharmacology 247 (2020) 112254 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Ethnopharmacology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jethpharm Inventing a herbal tradition: The complex roots of the current popularity of T Epilobium angustifolium in Eastern Europe Renata Sõukanda, Giulia Mattaliaa, Valeria Kolosovaa,b, Nataliya Stryametsa, Julia Prakofjewaa, Olga Belichenkoa, Natalia Kuznetsovaa,b, Sabrina Minuzzia, Liisi Keedusc, Baiba Prūsed, ∗ Andra Simanovad, Aleksandra Ippolitovae, Raivo Kallef,g, a Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Via Torino 155, 30172, Mestre, Venice, Italy b Institute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Tuchkov pereulok 9, 199004, St Petersburg, Russia c Tallinn University, Narva rd 25, 10120, Tallinn, Estonia d Institute for Environmental Solutions, "Lidlauks”, Priekuļu parish, LV-4126, Priekuļu county, Latvia e A.M. Gorky Institute of World Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 25a Povarskaya st, 121069, Moscow, Russia f Kuldvillane OÜ, Umbusi village, Põltsamaa parish, Jõgeva county, 48026, Estonia g University of Gastronomic Sciences, Piazza Vittorio Emanuele 9, 12042, Pollenzo, Bra, Cn, Italy ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Ethnopharmacological relevance: Currently various scientific and popular sources provide a wide spectrum of Epilobium angustifolium ethnopharmacological information on many plants, yet the sources of that information, as well as the in- Ancient herbals formation itself, are often not clear, potentially resulting in the erroneous use of plants among lay people or even Eastern Europe in official medicine. Our field studies in seven countries on the Eastern edge of Europe have revealed anunusual source interpretation increase in the medicinal use of Epilobium angustifolium L., especially in Estonia, where the majority of uses were Ethnopharmacology specifically related to “men's problems”.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Appropriation in the 'Red' Atlantic: Translating a Mi'kmaq
    1 Medical Appropriation in the ‘Red’ Atlantic: Translating a Mi’kmaq smallpox cure in the mid-nineteenth century Farrah Lawrence-Mackey University College London Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History and Philosophy of Science Department of Science and Technology Studies 2018 2 I, Farrah Mary Lawrence-Mackey 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. 3 ABSTRACT This thesis answers the questions of what was travelling, how, and why, when a Kanien’kehaka woman living amongst the Mi’kmaq at Shubenacadie sold a remedy for smallpox to British and Haligonian colonisers in 1861. I trace the movement of the plant (known as: Mqo’oqewi’k, Indian Remedy, Sarracenia purpurea, and Limonio congener) and knowledges of its use from Britain back across the Atlantic. In exploring how this remedy travelled, why at this time and what contexts were included with the plant’s removal I show that rising scientific racism in the nineteenth century did not mean that Indigenous medical flora and knowledge were dismissed wholesale, as scholars like Londa Schiebinger have suggested. Instead conceptions of indigeneity were fluid, often lending authority to appropriated flora and knowledge while the contexts of nineteenth-century Britain, Halifax and Shubenacadie created the Sarracenia purpurea, Indian Remedy and Mqo’oqewi’k as it moved through and between these spaces. Traditional accounts of bio-prospecting argue that as Indigenous flora moved, Indigenous contexts were consistently stripped away. This process of stripping shapes Indigenous origins as essentialised and static.
    [Show full text]
  • Leguminosae Subfamily Papilionoideae Author(S): Duane Isely and Roger Polhill Reviewed Work(S): Source: Taxon, Vol
    Leguminosae Subfamily Papilionoideae Author(s): Duane Isely and Roger Polhill Reviewed work(s): Source: Taxon, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Feb., 1980), pp. 105-119 Published by: International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1219604 . Accessed: 16/08/2012 02:44 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Taxon. http://www.jstor.org TAXON 29(1): 105-119. FEBRUARY1980 LEGUMINOSAE SUBFAMILY PAPILIONOIDEAE1 Duane Isely and Roger Polhill2 Summary This paper is an historical resume of names that have been used for the group of legumes whose membershave papilionoidflowers. When this taxon is treatedas a subfamily,the prefix "Papilion-", with various terminations, has predominated.We propose conservation of Papilionoideae as an alternative to Faboideae, coeval with the "unique" conservation of Papilionaceaeat the family rank. (42) Proposal to revise Code: Add to Article 19 of the Code: Note 2. Whenthe Papilionaceaeare includedin the family Leguminosae(alt. name Fabaceae) as a subfamily,the name Papilionoideaemay be used as an alternativeto Faboideae(see Art. 18.5 and 18.6).
    [Show full text]
  • Gerard's Herbal the OED Defines the Word
    Gerard’s Herbal The OED defines the word ‘herbal’ (n) as: ‘a book containing the names and descriptions of herbs, or of plants in general, with their properties and virtues; a treatise in plants.’ Charles Singer, historian of medicine and science, describes herbals as ‘a collection of descriptions of plants usually put together for medical purposes. The term is perhaps now-a-days used most frequently in connection with the finely illustrated works produced by the “fathers of botany” in the fifteenth and sixteenth century.’1 Although the origin of the herbal dates back to ‘remote antiquity’2 the advent of the printing press meant that herbals could be produced in large quantities (in comparison to their earlier manuscript counterparts) with detailed woodcut and metal engraving illustrations. The first herbal printed in Britain was Richard Banckes' Herball of 15253, which was written in plain text. Following Banckes, herbalists such as William Turner and John Gerard gained popularity with their lavishly illustrated herbals. Gerard’s Herbal was originally published in 1597; it is regarded as being one of the best of the printed herbals and is the first herbal to contain an illustration of a potato4. Gerard did Illustration of Gooseberries from not have an enormously interesting life; he was Gerard’s Herbal (1633), demonstrating the intricate detail that ‘apprenticed to Alexander Mason, a surgeon of 5 characterises this text. the Barber–Surgeons' Company’ and probably ‘travelled in Scandinavia and Russia, as he frequently refers to these places in his writing’6. For all his adult life he lived in a tenement with a garden probably belonging to Lord Burghley.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Review of Systematic Biology and Nomenclature - Alessandro Minelli
    BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. II - Historical Review of Systematic Biology and Nomenclature - Alessandro Minelli HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY AND NOMENCLATURE Alessandro Minelli Department of Biology, Via U. Bassi 58B, I-35131, Padova,Italy Keywords: Aristotle, Belon, Cesalpino, Ray, Linnaeus, Owen, Lamarck, Darwin, von Baer, Haeckel, Sokal, Sneath, Hennig, Mayr, Simpson, species, taxa, phylogeny, phenetic school, phylogenetic school, cladistics, evolutionary school, nomenclature, natural history museums. Contents 1. The Origins 2. From Classical Antiquity to the Renaissance Encyclopedias 3. From the First Monographers to Linnaeus 4. Concepts and Definitions: Species, Homology, Analogy 5. The Impact of Evolutionary Theory 6. The Last Few Decades 7. Nomenclature 8. Natural History Collections Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary The oldest roots of biological systematics are found in folk taxonomies, which are nearly universally developed by humankind to cope with the diversity of the living world. The logical background to the first modern attempts to rationalize the classifications was provided by Aristotle's logic, as embodied in Cesalpino's 16th century classification of plants. Major advances were provided in the following century by Ray, who paved the way for the work of Linnaeus, the author of standard treatises still regarded as the starting point of modern classification and nomenclature. Important conceptual progress was due to the French comparative anatomists of the early 19th century UNESCO(Cuvier, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire) – andEOLSS to the first work in comparative embryology of von Baer. Biological systematics, however, was still searching for a unifying principle that could provide the foundation for a natural, rather than conventional, classification.SAMPLE This principle wasCHAPTERS provided by evolutionary theory: its effects on classification are already present in Lamarck, but their full deployment only happened in the 20th century.
    [Show full text]
  • HUNTIA a Journal of Botanical History
    HUNTIA A Journal of Botanical History VOLUME 16 NUMBER 2 2018 Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh The Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation, a research division of Carnegie Mellon University, specializes in the history of botany and all aspects of plant science and serves the international scientific community through research and documentation. To this end, the Institute acquires and maintains authoritative collections of books, plant images, manuscripts, portraits and data files, and provides publications and other modes of information service. The Institute meets the reference needs of botanists, biologists, historians, conservationists, librarians, bibliographers and the public at large, especially those concerned with any aspect of the North American flora. Huntia publishes articles on all aspects of the history of botany, including exploration, art, literature, biography, iconography and bibliography. The journal is published irregularly in one or more numbers per volume of approximately 200 pages by the Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation. External contributions to Huntia are welcomed. Page charges have been eliminated. All manuscripts are subject to external peer review. Before submitting manuscripts for consideration, please review the “Guidelines for Contributors” on our Web site. Direct editorial correspondence to the Editor. Send books for announcement or review to the Book Reviews and Announcements Editor. All issues are available as PDFs on our Web site. Hunt Institute Associates may elect to receive Huntia as a benefit of membership; contact the Institute for more information. Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation Carnegie Mellon University 5th Floor, Hunt Library 4909 Frew Street Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 Telephone: 412-268-2434 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.huntbotanical.org Editor and layout Scarlett T.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Steps in Ichthyology and New Challenges*
    ISSN: 0001-5113 ACTA ADRIAT., UDC: 597(091) AADRAY 49(3): 201 - 232, 2008 Evolutionary steps in ichthyology and new challenges* Walter NELLEN 1* and Jakov DULČIĆ 2 1 Institut for Hydrobiology and Fisheries, University of Hamburg, Olbersweg 24, 22767 Hamburg, Germany 2 Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries, P.O. Box 500, 21 000 Split, Croatia * Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] One may postulate that man’s interest in fish emerged as soon as he was able to express his thoughts and notions as fish, among other animals, were subject of early communications. These were transmitted first by drawings, later by inscriptions and in writings. It was but much later that fishes began to occupy man’s interest as objects of science. Aristotle’s treatises on “History of Ani- mals” is the first known document dealing with fish as a zoological object. No earlier than in the 16th century fish regained the interest of learned men, among these Olaus Magnus (1490 –1557), Gregor Mangolt (1498–1576), Guillaume Rondelet (1507–1557), Pierre Belon (1512–1564), Hip- polyto (Ippolito) Salviani (1513–1572) and, above all, Conrad Gesner (1516–1565). The 17th and more so the 18th century is known as the period of Enlightenment. Respect must be paid to three pioneers in this field, i.e. Francis Willughby (1635–1672), Peter Artedi (1705–1735), and Marc Elieser Bloch (1723–1799) who became clearly aware that the class of fish consists of species which may be classified and typically described as such. After the species concept had been embodied in the scientific way of thinking by Linné, a tremendous expansion of activities emerged in the field of ichthyology.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    Chapter 1 History Systematics has its origins in two threads of biological science: classification and evolution. The organization of natural variation into sets, groups, and hierarchies traces its roots to Aristotle and evolution to Darwin. Put simply, systematization of nature can and has progressed in absence of causative theories relying on ideas of “plan of nature,” divine or otherwise. Evolutionists (Darwin, Wallace, and others) proposed a rationale for these patterns. This mixture is the foundation of modern systematics. Originally, systematics was natural history. Today we think of systematics as being a more inclusive term, encompassing field collection, empirical compar- ative biology, and theory. To begin with, however, taxonomy, now known as the process of naming species and higher taxa in a coherent, hypothesis-based, and regular way, and systematics were equivalent. Roman bust of Aristotle (384–322 BCE) 1.1 Aristotle Systematics as classification (or taxonomy) draws its Western origins from Aris- totle1. A student of Plato at the Academy and reputed teacher of Alexander the Great, Aristotle founded the Lyceum in Athens, writing on a broad variety of topics including what we now call biology. To Aristotle, living things (species) came from nature as did other physical classes (e.g. gold or lead). Today, we refer to his classification of living things (Aristotle, 350 BCE) that show simi- larities with the sorts of classifications we create now. In short, there are three featuresCOPYRIGHTED of his methodology that weMATERIAL recognize immediately: it was functional, binary, and empirical. Aristotle’s classification divided animals (his work on plants is lost) using Ibn Rushd (Averroes) functional features as opposed to those of habitat or anatomical differences: “Of (1126–1198) land animals some are furnished with wings, such as birds and bees.” Although he recognized these features as different in aspect, they are identical in use.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Morphology of Fishes in the Early 21St Century
    Copeia 103, No. 4, 2015, 858–873 When Tradition Meets Technology: Systematic Morphology of Fishes in the Early 21st Century Eric J. Hilton1, Nalani K. Schnell2, and Peter Konstantinidis1 Many of the primary groups of fishes currently recognized have been established through an iterative process of anatomical study and comparison of fishes that has spanned a time period approaching 500 years. In this paper we give a brief history of the systematic morphology of fishes, focusing on some of the individuals and their works from which we derive our own inspiration. We further discuss what is possible at this point in history in the anatomical study of fishes and speculate on the future of morphology used in the systematics of fishes. Beyond the collection of facts about the anatomy of fishes, morphology remains extremely relevant in the age of molecular data for at least three broad reasons: 1) new techniques for the preparation of specimens allow new data sources to be broadly compared; 2) past morphological analyses, as well as new ideas about interrelationships of fishes (based on both morphological and molecular data) provide rich sources of hypotheses to test with new morphological investigations; and 3) the use of morphological data is not limited to understanding phylogeny and evolution of fishes, but rather is of broad utility to understanding the general biology (including phenotypic adaptation, evolution, ecology, and conservation biology) of fishes. Although in some ways morphology struggles to compete with the lure of molecular data for systematic research, we see the anatomical study of fishes entering into a new and exciting phase of its history because of recent technological and methodological innovations.
    [Show full text]
  • HSS Paper 2000
    The Many Books of Nature: How Renaissance naturalists created and responded to information overload Brian W. Ogilvie* History of Science Society Annual Meeting, Vancouver, Nov. 3, 2000 Copyright © 2000 Brian W. Ogilvie. All rights reserved. Renaissance natural history emerged in the late fifteenth century at the confluence of humanist textual criticism, the revival of Greek medical texts, and curricular reform in medicine.1 These streams had been set in motion by a deeper tectonic shift: an increasing interest in particular, empirical knowledge among humanists and their pupils, who rejected the scholastic definition of scientific knowledge as certain deductions from universal principles.2 Natural history, which had been seen in antiquity and the Middle Ages as a propaedeutic to natural philosophy or medicine, emerged from this confluence as a distinct discipline with its own set of practitioners, techniques, and norms.3 Ever since Linnaeus, description, nomenclature, and taxonomy have been taken to be the sine qua non of natural history; pre-Linnaean natural history has been treated by many historians as a kind of blind groping toward self-evident principles of binomial nomenclature and encaptic taxa that were first stated clearly by the Swedish naturalist. Today I would like to present a different history. For natural history in the Renaissance, from the late fifteenth through the early seventeenth century, was not a taxonomic * Department of History, Herter Hall, University of Massachusetts, 161 Presidents Drive, Amherst, MA 01003-9312; [email protected]. 2 science. Rather, it was a science of describing, whose goal was a comprehensive catalogue of nature. Botany was at the forefront of that development, for the study of plants had both medical and horticultural applications, but botanists (botanici) rapidly developed interests that went beyond the pharmacy and the garden, to which some scarcely even nodded their heads by 1600.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministers of ‘The Black Art’: the Engagement of British Clergy with Photography, 1839-1914
    Ministers of ‘the Black Art’: the engagement of British clergy with photography, 1839-1914 Submitted by James Downs to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English in March 2018 This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Signature: ………………………………………………………….. Abstract 1 Ministers of ‘the Black Art’: the engagement of British clergy with photography, 1839- 1914 This thesis examines the work of ordained clergymen, of all denominations, who were active photographers between 1839 and the beginning of World War One: its primary aim is to investigate the extent to which a relationship existed between the religious culture of the individual clergyman and the nature of his photographic activities. Ministers of ‘the Black Art’ makes a significant intervention in the study of the history of photography by addressing a major weakness in existing work. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, the research draws on a wide range of primary and secondary sources such as printed books, sermons, religious pamphlets, parish and missionary newsletters, manuscript diaries, correspondence, notebooks, biographies and works of church history, as well as visual materials including original glass plate negatives, paper prints and lantern slides held in archival collections, postcards, camera catalogues, photographic ephemera and photographically-illustrated books.
    [Show full text]
  • Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis Reviewed Work(S): Theory of International Politics
    Review: Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis Reviewed Work(s): Theory of International Politics. by Kenneth N. Waltz Review by: John Gerard Ruggie Source: World Politics, Vol. 35, No. 2 (Jan., 1983), pp. 261-285 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2010273 Accessed: 04-10-2017 18:15 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to World Politics This content downloaded from 128.103.193.216 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 18:15:39 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms CONTINUITY AND TRANSFORMATION IN THE WORLD POLITY: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis By JOHN GERARD RUGGIE* Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics. Reading, Mass.: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company, 1979, 251 pp., $7.95 (paper). IN The Rules of Sociological Method, Emile Durkheim sought to es- tablish the "social milieu," or society itself, "as the determining factor of collective evolution." In turn, he took society to reflect not the mere summation of individuals
    [Show full text]