A History of British Seismology

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A History of British Seismology Bull Earthquake Eng (2013) 11:715–861 DOI 10.1007/s10518-013-9444-5 ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER A history of British seismology R. M. W. Musson Received: 14 March 2013 / Accepted: 21 March 2013 / Published online: 9 May 2013 © The Author(s) 2013. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract The work of John Milne, the centenary of whose death is marked in 2013, has had a large impact in the development in global seismology. On his return from Japan to England in 1895, he established for the first time a global earthquake recording network, centred on his observatory at Shide, Isle of Wight. His composite bulletins, the “Shide Circulars” developed, in the twentieth century, into the world earthquake bulletins of the International Seismolog- ical Summary and eventually the International Seismological Centre, which continues to publish the definitive earthquake parameters of world earthquakes on a monthly basis. In fact, seismology has a long tradition in Britain, stretching back to early investigations by members of the Royal Society after 1660. Investigations in Scotland in the early 1840s led to a number of firsts, including the first network of instruments, the first seismic bulletin, and indeed, the first use of the word “seismometer”, from which words like “seismology” are a back-formation. This paper will present a chronological survey of the development of seismology in the British Isles, from the first written observations of local earthquakes in the seventh century, and the first theoretical writing on earthquakes in the twelfth century, up to the monitoring of earthquakes in Britain in the present day. Keywords History of seismology · British Isles · John Milne · Robert Mallet · Seismic monitoring · Macroseismology 1Preface In choosing this title for the 14th Mallet-Milne lecture, I am of course calling to mind Charles Davison’s “History of British Earthquakes” (Davison 1924), which for many years was the This paper is released on Open Access under the terms of the CC-BY license. The terms of this do not apply to the illustrations used in this paper, many of which were supplied under academic licenses, or CC-NC-BY licenses. R. M. W. Musson (B) British Geological Survey, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, UK e-mail: [email protected] 123 716 Bull Earthquake Eng (2013) 11:715–861 standard text on the seismicity of the UK. However, all three words of the title come with questions attached, and dealing with them at the outset will serve to outline the scope of this monograph. History, according to the humorists Sellar and Yeatman, is what you can remember. I have suggested before now that all earthquakes are historical. By the time a seismologist hears about one, it’s already over. A volcanologist hearing that Vesuvius is erupting has plenty of time to pack a bag, head for the airport, arrive in Naples and find the eruption is still continuing. An earthquake is over in a minute or two at most, and the best the seismologist can do is visit the ruins and perhaps record the aftershocks. The main event is already in the past. For most people, though, it would be stretching definitions to describe yesterday’s earth- quakes as historical events. For the man in the street, history is something that happened a long time ago. It is the bane of archivists everywhere that while anyone who discovers a letter dated 1762 will immediately recognise it as being of historical interest, a letter dated 1962 will probably be consigned to the bin. This is a significant contributor to the poor survival of documents from all periods—they get discarded before they become sufficiently old to be considered interesting as historical documents. Only those of financial value: wills, title deeds, etc, survive. So is there a date at which history ends and current affairs begin? In seismology there often is. It has been the practice in the UK to treat the start of modern instrumental monitoring as the end of history. Thus all British earthquakes before 1970 are classed as historical, those after as modern—although many twentieth century British earthquakes before 1970 are reasonably well instrumentally recorded. Similar distinctions probably exist in other countries, with different pivotal dates. I will follow the same distinction in this study, but I will carry the history up to the present day, although the main focus will be on the period before John Milne’s death in 1913, the centenary of which this lecture commemorates. The word “British” has other problems. The distinction between England, Britain, Great Britain, the United Kingdom, and the British Isles is a constant source of difficulty to many, and not just to those who live in none of those divisions. Here I intend to use the term “British” in its widest geographical (and not political) sense, to encompass the whole British Isles. I am not one who sees the use of this term as loaded (and I speak as a citizen of the Irish Republic), and the alternative, “Atlantic Isles”, would seem to include at least the Faeroes, if not Iceland and the Canaries as well. Furthermore, for most of the period under discussion, Ireland and Great Britain were part of the same political entity, and to try and exclude Ireland would mean writing Robert Mallet out of the Mallet-Milne lecture, which would hardly do. Seismology is the study of earthquakes, but one can differentiate between theoretical and practical seismology, by which I mean on the one hand, the attempt to understand what earthquakes are and why and how they occur, and on the other hand, the attempt to monitor and measure them. With respect to the present monograph, I focus to a large extent on observational seismology, and in particular, the observation of British earthquakes. Before the twentieth century, earthquake monitoring was restricted for the most part to documenting earthquakes through their felt effects, not always scientifically. Up to 1900, I will consider developments in theoretical seismology in Britain; over this period, the nature and cause of earthquakes was very much in doubt, and it is interesting to trace the evolution of thinking about them; it makes sense to write about what individual scientists thought about earthquake phenomena. 123 Bull Earthquake Eng (2013) 11:715–861 717 After the end of the nineteenth century, I will concentrate almost exclusively on the development of seismology as earthquake monitoring. From the twentieth century on, the development of scientific thinking about earthquakes has been such an international enterprise that it makes no sense to try and distinguish a purely “British seismology”. Regrettably, this means passing over much of the seismological research undertaken by universities in Britain in the twentieth century, which could occupy several chapters. As a result, some important figures like Sir Harold Jeffreys (1891–1989) are largely passed over. Similarly, the history of explosion monitoring is regrettably omitted. One could question whether it was ever possible to isolate British theoretical seismology from that elsewhere. The earliest writers on earthquakes in Britain took their cue from clas- sical authors such as Aristotle and Seneca. In the seventeenth century, the Belgian writer Fromondus (Libert Froidmont 1587–1653) was influential. The earthquake committee of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in the 1840s was informed about inves- tigations in Italy. Robert Mallet was a friend of Alexis Perrey in France, and John Milne was influenced by Ernst von Rebeur-Paschwitz in Germany. It is doubtful if it is possible to be so complete as to mention everyone who has ever written about earthquakes in Britain, so the account that follows is necessarily partial. I have left out, for instance, authors of short papers on earthquakes of a particular county, such as Edward Parfitt’s (1820–1893) account of earthquakes in Devon (Parfitt 1884); Parfitt was the Librarian of the Devon and Exeter Institute. Some writers of now forgotten theoretical pamphlets are also passed over; I have given more weight to those who actually were involved in investigations of British earthquakes. I have passed over rather briefly the work of British seismologists overseas, apart from brief notes on the work done by Milne and his contem- poraries in Japan. Regrettably, this means passing over the work of Richard Dixon Oldham (1858–1936), the first Director of the Geological Survey of India, and the discoverer of the earth’s core. Also, although this monograph is structured largely by devoting sections to particular individuals, there was in reality much overlap—as will be apparent. 2 Earliest British writings on earthquakes: to the end of Aristotelianism The story of writings on earthquakes in Britain starts, perhaps surprisingly, in Iona (Fig. 1). This small island off the west of Scotland is today only reachable by two ferry crossings; a car ferry to Mull and a passenger-only ferry to Iona itself. But as Professor William Kirk, an inspirational figure to Irish geographers, used to remind undergraduates, ideas of centrality depend on where you put the spokes. Ireland and the west of Scotland may seem today like the extreme periphery of Europe, but there was a period when they were the intellectual hub of Europe, a centre of learning, and the base from which Christian missionaries were dispatched to turn back the tide of paganism across the continent (see, for instance, MacCulloch 2010). 2.1 Irish annals The earliest written mention of earthquakes in the British Isles are notes of their occurrence in monastic annals, and the earliest of these refer to earthquakes in Ireland. These are mentioned in Irish annals, but the relationship between the early chronicles is complex and difficult to untangle.
Recommended publications
  • Newton's Aether Model
    Newton’s aether model Eric Baird ([email protected]) Isaac Newton is usually associated with the idea of absolute space and time, and with ballistic light-corpuscle arguments. However, Newton was also a proponent of wave/particle duality, and published a “new” variable-density aether model in which light and matter trajectories were either bent by gravitational fields, or deflected by an aether density gradient. Newton’s (flawed) aether model can be considered as an early attempt at a curved-space model of gravity. 1. Introduction In “Opticks”, Newton’s idealised absolute space Modern textbooks typically say that Newton is occupied by a “new” form of medium whose believed that space and time were absolute and density depends on gravitational properties, inviolable. However, a reading of Newton’s with variations in aether density producing the “Principia” [1] and “Opticks” [2] reveals a effects that would otherwise be described as the rather different picture, with Optiks in results of a gravitational field. The resulting particular documenting Newton’s attempt to metric associates a gravitational field with produce a model of gravity in which a signal flight-time differences (see: Shapiro gravitational field could be represented as a effect) that deflect light, leading to a normalised series of light-distance differentials, or as a lightbeam-geometry that is not Euclidean. Since variation in lightspeed or refractive index. This these effects are described in modern theory as can be compared to Einstein’s “refractive” the effects of curved space, it seems reasonable approach to gravitational light-bending in 1911 to interpret Newton’s “absolute space” as an ( [3] §4 ) and to his description of general absolute Euclidean embedding-space that acts relativity as a (nonparticulate!) gravitational as a container for non-Euclidean geometry, aether model in 1920 [4][5].
    [Show full text]
  • Weighing the World the Reverend John Michell of Thornhill
    66 Human Sciences Springer News 7/2011 springer.com/NEWSonline R. McCormmach, Eugene, OR, USA (Ed.) Weighing the World The Reverend John Michell of Thornhill The book about John Michell (1724-93) has two parts. The first and longest part is biographical, an account of Michell’s home setting (Notting- hamshire in England), the clerical world in which he grew up (Church of England), the university (Cambridge) where he studied and taught, and the scientific activities he made the center of his life. The second part is a complete edition of his known letters. Half of his letters have not been previously published; the other half are brought together in one place for the first time. The letters touch on all aspects of his career, and because they are in his words, they help bring the subject to life. His publi- cations were not many, a slim book on magnets and magnetism, one paper on geology, two papers on astronomy, and a few brief papers on other topics, but they were enough to leave a mark on several sciences. He has been called a geologist, an astronomer, and a physicist, which he was, though we best remember him as a natural philosopher, as one who investigated physical nature broadly. His scientific contribution is not easy to summa- rize. Arguably he had the broadest competence of any British natural philosopher of the eighteenth century: equally skilled in experiment and obser- vation, mathematical theory, and instruments, his field of inquiry was the universe. From the structure of the heavens through the structure of the Earth to the forces of the elementary particles of matter, he carried out original and far-reaching researches on the workings of nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Michell, Laplace and the Origin of the Black Hole Concept
    Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage , 12(2), 90-96 (2009). MICHELL, LAPLACE AND THE ORIGIN OF THE BLACK HOLE CONCEPT Colin Montgomery, Wayne Orchiston and Ian Whittingham Centre for Astronomy, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland 4811, Australia E-Mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract: Black holes are fundamental to our understanding of modern astrophysics, yet the origin of this concept can be traced back to the writings of England’s John Michell and France’s Pierre-Simon Laplace in 1784 and 1796 respectively. Both independently postulated the existence of “non-luminous bodies”, and while Michell used graphical methods to explain his concept, Laplace published a mathematical ‘proof’ in 1799. Key Words: Michell, Laplace, black holes, missing mass, dark matter 1 INTRODUCTION There is no known image of John Michell but we have a description of him which was recorded in Cole The concept of a black hole is now widely accepted in MSS XXXIII, 156, in the British Library : astronomy and is applied to a range of bodies, extend- ing from extremely small primordial black holes form- John Michell, BD is a little short Man, of a black ed during the Big Bang with masses less than the Complexion, and fat; but having no Acquaintance with him, can say little of him. I think he had the care of St. mass of the Earth, to stellar-remnant black holes with Botolph’s Church, while he continued Fellow of masses of 3-30 M resulting from supernova explos- Queens’ College [Cambridge], where he was esteemed ions, up to supermassive black holes with masses of a very ingenious Man, and an excellent Philosopher.
    [Show full text]
  • Sir James Alfred Ewing, K.C.B., M.A., D.Sc, LL.D., F.R.S
    150 Obituary Notices. Sir James Alfred Ewing, K.C.B., M.A., D.Sc, LL.D., F.R.S. JAMES ALFRED EWING, a great engineer, scientific man, and charming Scot, was distinguished in many fields of activity. Born in 1855 at Dundee, where his father was a minister of the Free Church of Scotland, he grew up in an intellectual and spiritual atmosphere in which his early education was greatly influenced by his mother, whose critical taste in letters was passed on to her children. From Dundee High School Ewing proceeded in the early seventies to the University of Edinburgh, where his great ability soon manifested itself in the classes of Tait and Fleeming Jenkin, the latter of whom brought him into touch with Sir William Thomson (afterwards Lord Kelvin), then engaged in the development of submarine telegraph cables, an introduction which led to Ewing taking part in three cable-laying voyages to Brazil and the River Plate. Fleeming Jenkin was a man of wide culture, and his literary and scientific circle included Ewing and another young student, Robert Louis Stevenson, then at the commence- ment of an engineering training, soon to be abandoned for a literary career of the greatest distinction, the beginnings of which have been happily described by Ewing in "The Fleeming Jenkins and Robert Louis Steven- son." In 1878, at the early age of twenty-three, Ewing went to Japan as Professor of Mechanical Engineering in the University of Tokyo, a post which he occupied for five years, and there he made his classical researches in the widely different fields of magnetism and seismology.
    [Show full text]
  • Cavendish Weighs the Earth, 1797
    CAVENDISH WEIGHS THE EARTH Newton's law of gravitation tells us that any two bodies attract each other{not just the Earth and an apple, or the Earth and the Moon, but also two apples! We don't feel the attraction between two apples if we hold one in each hand, as we do the attraction of two magnets, but according to Newton's law, the two apples should attract each other. If that is really true, it might perhaps be possible to directly observe the force of attraction between two objects in a laboratory. The \great moment" when that was done came on August 5, 1797, in a garden shed in suburban London. The experimenter was Lord Henry Cavendish. Cavendish had inherited a fortune, and was therefore free to follow his inclinations, which turned out to be scientific. In addition to the famous experiment described here, he was also the discoverer of “inflammable air", now known as hydrogen. In those days, science in England was often pursued by private citizens of means, who communicated through the Royal Society. Although Cavendish studied at Cambridge for three years, the universities were not yet centers of scientific research. Let us turn now to a calculation. How much should the force of gravity between two apples actually amount to? Since the attraction between two objects is proportional to the product of their masses, the attraction between the apples should be the weight of an apple times the ratio of the mass of an apple to the mass of the Earth. The weight of an apple is, according to Newton, the force of attraction between the apple and the Earth: GMm W = R2 where G is the \gravitational constant", M the mass of the Earth, m the mass of an apple, and R the radius of the Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Former Fellows Biographical Index Part
    Former Fellows of The Royal Society of Edinburgh 1783 – 2002 Biographical Index Part Two ISBN 0 902198 84 X Published July 2006 © The Royal Society of Edinburgh 22-26 George Street, Edinburgh, EH2 2PQ BIOGRAPHICAL INDEX OF FORMER FELLOWS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF EDINBURGH 1783 – 2002 PART II K-Z C D Waterston and A Macmillan Shearer This is a print-out of the biographical index of over 4000 former Fellows of the Royal Society of Edinburgh as held on the Society’s computer system in October 2005. It lists former Fellows from the foundation of the Society in 1783 to October 2002. Most are deceased Fellows up to and including the list given in the RSE Directory 2003 (Session 2002-3) but some former Fellows who left the Society by resignation or were removed from the roll are still living. HISTORY OF THE PROJECT Information on the Fellowship has been kept by the Society in many ways – unpublished sources include Council and Committee Minutes, Card Indices, and correspondence; published sources such as Transactions, Proceedings, Year Books, Billets, Candidates Lists, etc. All have been examined by the compilers, who have found the Minutes, particularly Committee Minutes, to be of variable quality, and it is to be regretted that the Society’s holdings of published billets and candidates lists are incomplete. The late Professor Neil Campbell prepared from these sources a loose-leaf list of some 1500 Ordinary Fellows elected during the Society’s first hundred years. He listed name and forenames, title where applicable and national honours, profession or discipline, position held, some information on membership of the other societies, dates of birth, election to the Society and death or resignation from the Society and reference to a printed biography.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Isoseismal Map for the Santa Cruz (Loma Prieta), California, Earthquake of October 18,1989 UTC
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Preliminary isoseismal map for the Santa Cruz (Loma Prieta), California, earthquake of October 18,1989 UTC Open-File Report 90-18 by Carl W. Stover, B. Glen Reagor, Francis W. Baldwin, and Lindie R. Brewer National Earthquake Information Center U.S. Geological Survey Denver, Colorado This report has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial stan­ dards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Introduction The Santa Cruz (Loma Prieta) earthquake, occurred on October 18, 1989 UTC (October 17, 1989 PST). This major earthquake was felt over a contiguous land area of approximately 170,000 km2; this includes most of central California and a portion of western Nevada (fig. 1). The hypocen- ter parameters computed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are: Origin time: 00 04 15.2 UTC Location: 37.036°N., 121.883°W. Depth: 19km Magnitude: 6.6mb,7.1Ms. The University of California, Berkeley assigned the earthquake a local magnitude of 7.0ML. The earthquake caused at least 62 deaths, 3,757 injuries, and over $6 billion in property damage (Plafker and Galloway, 1989). The earthquake was the most damaging in the San Francisco Bay area since April 18,1906. A major arterial traffic link, the double-decked San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, was closed because a single fifty foot span of the upper deck collapsed onto the lower deck. In addition, the approaches to the bridge were damaged in Oakland and in San Francisco. Other se­ vere earthquake damage was mapped at San Francisco, Oakland, Los Gatos, Santa Cruz, Hollister, Watsonville, Moss Landing, and in the smaller communities in the Santa Cruz Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Friedman-Zimmermann-Transcript.Pdf
    Date of Speech: September 1958 Speaker: William F. Friedman Location of Speech: NSA, Friedman Auditorium, Fort George G. Meade, MD Introduction: Dr. Abraham Sinkov Note: Friedman‟s Lecture on the Zimmermann Telegram at the Semiannual Meeting of Crypto-Mathematics Institute, September 1958. Sinkov: Ladies and gentlemen the Crypto-Mathematics Institute is now a half year old. As you will have seen from your program notices, we have planned a special semiannual meeting. As the main item of this meeting we have especially good fortune to have a talk by Mr. Friedman. Mr. Friedman certainly needs no introduction to this audience. He has been a highly important part of the U.S. cryptologic effort for over 40 years. In fact, during a good portion of that period, he personally was the U.S. cryptologic effort. ((Audience chuckles.)) He retired from full time association with the National Security Agency about two years ago, but has continued quite active. In particular, he and Mrs. Friedman recently published a scholarly study of the various attempts made to prove, by cipher methods, that the Shakespearean plays had been written by other people than William Shakespeare. The book has gained for the Friedmans world wide acclaim. The subject that Mr. Friedman has chosen for today‟s talk was announced as the “Zimmermann Telegram.” When I saw Mr. Friedman last, a few days ago, he expressed to me some regret that we had made any announcement of a subject title. The reason, I gathered, was that he has a rather interesting turn to the manner in which he is going to announce the subject of his talk.
    [Show full text]
  • Elizabeth F. Lewis Phd Thesis
    PETER GUTHRIE TAIT NEW INSIGHTS INTO ASPECTS OF HIS LIFE AND WORK; AND ASSOCIATED TOPICS IN THE HISTORY OF MATHEMATICS Elizabeth Faith Lewis A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 2015 Full metadata for this item is available in St Andrews Research Repository at: http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/6330 This item is protected by original copyright PETER GUTHRIE TAIT NEW INSIGHTS INTO ASPECTS OF HIS LIFE AND WORK; AND ASSOCIATED TOPICS IN THE HISTORY OF MATHEMATICS ELIZABETH FAITH LEWIS This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of Ph.D. at the University of St Andrews. 2014 1. Candidate's declarations: I, Elizabeth Faith Lewis, hereby certify that this thesis, which is approximately 59,000 words in length, has been written by me, and that it is the record of work carried out by me, or principally by myself in collaboration with others as acknowledged, and that it has not been submitted in any previous application for a higher degree. I was admitted as a research student in September 2010 and as a candidate for the degree of Ph.D. in September 2010; the higher study for which this is a record was carried out in the University of St Andrews between 2010 and 2014. Signature of candidate ...................................... Date .................... 2. Supervisor's declaration: I hereby certify that the candidate has fulfilled the conditions of the Resolution and Regulations appropriate for the degree of Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • James Short and John Harrison: Personal Genius and Public Knowledge
    Science Museum Group Journal James Short and John Harrison: personal genius and public knowledge Journal ISSN number: 2054-5770 This article was written by Jim Bennett 10-09-2014 Cite as 10.15180; 140209 Research James Short and John Harrison: personal genius and public knowledge Published in Autumn 2014, Issue 02 Article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/140209 Abstract The instrument maker James Short, whose output was exclusively reflecting telescopes, was a sustained and consistent supporter of the clock and watch maker John Harrison. Short’s specialism placed his work in a tradition that derived from Newton’s Opticks, where the natural philosopher or mathematician might engage in the mechanical process of making mirrors, and a number of prominent astronomers followed this example in the eighteenth century. However, it proved difficult, if not impossible, to capture and communicate in words the manual skills they had acquired. Harrison’s biography has similarities with Short’s but, although he was well received and encouraged in London, unlike Short his mechanical practice did not place him at the centre of the astronomers’ agenda. Harrison became a small part of the growing public interest in experimental demonstration and display, and his timekeepers became objects of exhibition and resort. Lacking formal training, he himself came to be seen as a naive or intuitive mechanic, possessed of an individual and natural ‘genius’ for his work – an idea likely to be favoured by Short and his circle, and appropriate to Short’s intellectual roots in Edinburgh. The problem of capturing and communicating Harrison’s skill became acute once he was a serious candidate for a longitude award and was the burden of the specially appointed ‘Commissioners for the Discovery of Mr Harrison’s Watch’, whose members included Short.
    [Show full text]
  • Ore Bin / Oregon Geology Magazine / Journal
    The ORE BIN Volume 25, No.4 April, 1963 INVESTIGATIONS OF THE EARTHQUAKE OF NOVEMBER 5, 1962, NORTH OF PORTLAND By P. Dehlingerl, R. G. Bowen2, E. F. Chiburis1, and W. H. Westphal3 Introduction Earthquakes are one of the most destructive of the earth·s natural phenom­ ena. The larger earthquakes provide the bulk of our information about the interior of the earth, smaller quakes much of the information on nearby crustal and subcrustal structures. Seismograms {recordings} of the November 5, 1962, Portland earthquake and later shocks in the Northwest written at different seismic stations are being analyzed to provide information on these earthquakes and on the local crustal structures in the Northwest. These analyses concern locating earthquake epicenters and determination of their origin times, depths of foci, mechanisms of faulting at the source, and the nature and configuration of the crust and subcrustal material. The Portland earthquake was the largest shock to occur in Oregon since the recent installations of the several new seismic stations in the Pa­ cific Northwest. Although damage resulting from this shock was minor, as indicated in a preliminary report (Dehlinger and Berg, 1962), the shock is of considerable seismological importance. Because it was large enough to be recorded at the newly installed as well as at many of the older seismic stations, and because its epicentral location was known approximately from the felt area and from on-site recordings of aftershocks, this earthquake has provided the first significant data to be used for constructing travel-time curves for Oregon. The seismograms also provided data for a better under­ standing of the source mechanism associated with the Portland shock.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 DISCOVERY of PASTS
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. Chapter 1 DISCOVERY OF PASTS Morse in Japan remains what he has been all his life—a man locked in a silent struggle with time, one whose days are filled with a pursuit of practical truths that can be shared with a world hungry to understand itself. —Robert A. Rosenstone (1998) We are quite familiar with the Meiji period as one of considerable transfor- mation of all aspects of life on the archipelago. But its characterization as a move from old to new—as simply exiting from its self-incurred immaturity—ob- scures the historicity of modernity, that process described above by Rosenstone: a “pursuit of practical truths” for a “world hungry to understand itself.” Several steps are necessary to begin that process: first, the idea of immaturity suggests that one’s present society is incomplete and living in the past. In other words, there is a recognition of a progressive time and a separation of pasts from pres- ent. Second, one must recognize that the world of inadequacy is man-made, not because of a degeneration from some originary ideal, but because of the artifi- cial constructions posed by such primitive ideas and institutions. And third, any attempt to explain this level is dependent upon a different configuration of the whole, a “struggle with time.” Now, inherited ideas and men that were the sub- ject of chronicles became the past, which reflected recognition that the aristo- cratic system is not natural or endowed but anachronistic.
    [Show full text]