AMERICAN SCIENCE AND THE PURSUIT OF “USEFUL KNOWLEDGE” IN THE POLITE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY, 1750–1806 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Elizabeth E. Webster Christopher Hamlin, Director Graduate Program in History and Philosophy of Science Notre Dame, Indiana April 2010 © Copyright 2010 Elizabeth E. Webster AMERICAN SCIENCE AND THE PURSUIT OF “USEFUL KNOWLEDGE” IN THE POLITE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY, 1750–1806 Abstract by Elizabeth E. Webster In this thesis, I will examine the promotion of science, or “useful knowledge,” in the polite eighteenth century. Historians of England and America have identified the concept of “politeness” as a key component for understanding eighteenth-century culture. At the same time, the term “useful knowledge” is also acknowledged to be a central concept for understanding the development of the early American scientific community. My dissertation looks at how these two ideas, “useful knowledge” and “polite character,” informed each other. I explore the way Americans promoted “useful knowledge” in the formative years between 1775 and 1806 by drawing on and rejecting certain aspects of the ideal of politeness. Particularly, I explore the writings of three central figures in the early years of the American Philosophical Society, David Rittenhouse, Charles Willson Peale, and Benjamin Rush, to see how they variously used the language and ideals of politeness to argue for the promotion of useful knowledge in America. Then I turn to a New Englander, Thomas Green Fessenden, who identified and caricatured a certain type of man of science and satirized the late-eighteenth-century culture of useful knowledge. Elizabeth E. Webster He criticized what he saw as a certain culture of useful knowledge by turning to the polite ideals of benevolence and open conversation. For Timothy. ii CONTENTS Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................................v Chapter One: The History of “Useful Knowledge” in America 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................1 1.2 The Historiography of American Science and the Problem of “Useful Knowledge” ....................................................5 1.3 British “Politeness” and American “Usefulness” ............................................10 1.4 Chapter Overview ............................................................................................22 Chapter Two: David Rittenhouse’s Useful Astronomy 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................29 2.2 The Scientific Community in Philadelphia ......................................................32 2.3 David Rittenhouse: Revolutionary Astronomer ...............................................38 2.4 David Rittenhouse and the Transit of Venus ...................................................45 2.5 A “Useful” Orrery ............................................................................................52 2.6 Rittenhouse’s Vision for American Astronomy...............................................60 2.7 “Science David is Thy Line”: Problems for Useful Knowledge in America .............................................80 2.8 Conclusion .......................................................................................................89 Chapter Three: The Polite Patriotism of Charles Willson Peale 3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................92 3.2 The American Philosophical Society and the Demarcation of Useful Knowledge...............................................95 3.3 The Historiography of Charles Willson Peale’s Museum .............................104 3.4 Peale’s Portrait Painting and Radical Politics ................................................108 3.5 Peale’s Civic Self-Promotion .........................................................................119 3.6 Polite Patriotism on Display: Peale’s Natural History Museum ....................127 3.7 The Limits of Polite Patriotism: Peale’s Quest for Government Support ...................................................137 3.8 Conclusion .....................................................................................................144 Chapter Four: Benjamin Rush and the Republic of Knowledge and Virtue 4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................146 4.2 History and Historiography of Benjamin Rush..............................................148 4.3 Rush’s Pathological View of Humanity.........................................................154 iii 4.4 Anarchia: The Disease of the Body Politic ....................................................165 4.5 Rush’s Rejection of Common Sense..............................................................179 4.6 Conclusion .....................................................................................................195 Chapter Five: “Men of Real Science” and The Modern Philosopher 5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................198 5.2 Partisanship and Science in the Age of Jefferson ..........................................205 5.3 Quackery, Perkinism, and the Modern Philosopher ......................................215 5.4 The Modern Philosopher: Literary Context and Sketch ................................226 5.5 Fessenden’s Polite Critique of the Enlightenment Run Amok ......................240 5.6 Thomas Beddoes ............................................................................................241 5.7 Joseph Priestley ..............................................................................................247 5.8 James Hutton ..................................................................................................252 5.9 Erasmus Darwin .............................................................................................256 5.10 Conclusion ...................................................................................................263 Chapter Six: Science, Politeness, and the American Revolution 6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................265 6.2 Chapter Summary ..........................................................................................266 6.3 The Alienated Scientist and American Backwardness ..................................273 6.4 The Impolite Scientist ....................................................................................276 6.5 Conclusion .....................................................................................................281 Bibliography.....................................................................................................................283 iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge all the assistance I have received in the long years I have spent conceiving, researching, and writing this dissertation. First, I consider myself honored to have received a research grant from the American Philosophical Society to research in their library during the summer of 2004. Any student of early American history gains intangible benefits from spending time in this wonderful library. I am endlessly thankful for my unfailingly patient, encouraging, and insightful advisor, Christopher Hamlin. His support and comments on all of my work have benefited me immeasurably. Two members of my dissertation committee, Jim Turner and Gail Bederman, have been patient and offered very helpful commentary and criticism from the first to the last drafts. I have had the pleasure of participating in and listening to many discussions about history with them throughout my tenure as a graduate student and they are always enlightening, rewarding, and entertaining, to boot. Special thanks to Don Howard for coming onto the committee at a later time. As Director of Graduate Studies for the HPS program and in classes and private discussions, Don has been a constant and encouraging presence for me and I am grateful to have been able to work with him. I would also like to thank Thomas Slaughter for his commentary on an early draft. Discussions with David Waldstreicher during his time at Notre Dame and through early research for this dissertation were inspirational and invaluable. v All of the faculty at Notre Dame, both in the program in the History and Philosophy of Science and in other departments offered encouragement and intellectual stimulation. In particular, I would like to thank Michael Crowe, Phillip Sloan, Janet Kourany, Sophie White, Doris Bergen and David Harley for giving me support and encouragement at crucial times. I would not have enjoyed this long journey nearly as much without the company and conversation of my fellow graduate students. Ryan Macpherson and Keith Lafortune were my compatriots in studying the history of science in America. Margaret Abruzzo and Jonathan Den Hartog provided many wonderful hours of conversation about American political, social, and cultural history. Benjamin Cohen convinced me that I was not the only person who cared about obscure American scientific satire. J. P. Shortall and Daniel Gates were entertaining conversationalists in the Hesburgh Library. Lara Karpenko,