A look at power and the city with and without spectacles: Descriptions of Paris and London in 1698

Статья посвящена рассмотрению двух связанных между собой текстов – «Путешествия в Париж в 1698 году», составленного английским медиком и ученым, членом Лондонского королевского общества Мартином Листером на основе личных наблюдений в ходе поездки, и пародии на это сочинение, «Путешествия в Лондон в 1698 году» юриста, поэта и сатирика Уильяма Кинга. Анализ этих произведений показывает, как приложение к изучению города идеи ученого, на чьи наблюдения не должны влиять существующие авторитетные мнения, и который не должен обращать вни-мание лишь на то, что бросается в глаза, становится для Листера инструментом критики авторитарной власти Людовика XIV. С другой стороны, сатира Кинга демонст-рирует, что наблюдения, не соотнесенные с авторитетными мнениями, не позволяют отделить значимое от незначительного, что лишает создаваемый образ города его важнейшей характеристики – статуса столицы государства и центра власти. Он использует этот тезис как инструмент критики новой модели знания и науки, продвигаемой Лондонским королевским обществом. В обоих случаях независимость взгляда ученого-наблюдателя и стремление отказаться от признания авторитетов неизбежно коррелирует с непризнанием авторитета существующей политической власти. This article examines two related texts – Journey to Paris in 1698 by Martin Lister, an English physician and scholar and member of the Royal Society of London, based on personal observations during his travels, and a satire on this work, Journey to London in 1698 by the lawyer, poet and satirist William King. An analysis of these writings shows how the application of the idea of the scholar, whose observations should not be influenced by existing authoritative opinions and who should not succumb to paying attention only to what catches his eye, towards the study of the city becomes for Lister an instrument for the criticism of the authoritarian power of the French king Louis XIV. King's satire, on the other hand, shows that observation without reference to authoritative opinion fails to distinguish the significant from the inconsequential, which deprives the city's image of its most important characteristic: its status as the capital and centre of power. He uses this thesis as an instrument to criticize the new model of knowledge and science promoted by the Royal Society of London. In both cases, the independence of the scholar-observer's view and the tendency to refuse recognition of authoritative judgments inevitably correlate with a failure to recognise the authority of existing political power.

Philosophical Transactions: 350 years of publishing at the Royal Society

In Philosophical Transactions: 350 years of publishing at the Royal Society Eva Baranyiová briefly explores the Royal Society of London, its publication history, and a tribute to Henry Oldenburg.

The Two hundred and Fiftieth-anniversary Celebration of the Royal Society and The International Entomological Congress

This chapter describes how John Henry Comstock was asked to represent Cornell University at the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Royal Society of London in 1912. On the evening after the Comstocks' arrival in London, Henry went to the first informal meeting of the delegates to the Royal Society Celebration. On July 16, 1912, there was an impressive service in Westminster Abbey, which was attended by the delegates who were all in Academic dress. That evening, there was a great dinner in the Guild hall for the delegates. Eleven of the wives of delegates, including Anna Botsford Comstock, were entertained at dinner by Lady Bradford at her home in Manchester Square. The closing event of the celebration was the garden party at Windsor Castle. The delegates were received by their Majesties in the palace and were shown through it afterwards. Henry then attended the International Congress of Entomologists in Oxford in August of 1912.