“Hegemony” and the amateur tradition in british science

Journal of Social History

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 1975, Pages 30-50

  Berman, Morris ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925889702     PISSN: 00224529     EISSN: 15271897     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/jsh/8.2.30     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Frank E. Manuel, Portrait of Isaac Newton (Cambridge, Mass., 1968).
2. CtowiheTs Social Relations of Science (London, 1941)
3. B. Bernal’s Science and Industry in the Nineteenth Century (London, 1953).
4. B. Bernal, Crowther, British Scientists of the Nineteenth Century (London, reprint 1962), 314.
5. Thomas S. Kuhn, “Energy Conservation as an Example of Simultaneous Discovery,” in Marshall Clagett, ed., Critical Problems in the History of Science (Madison, 1969), 321-56.
6. D. S. L. Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England (London, 1957; revised edition, 1972).
7. D. S. L. Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England (London, 1957; revised edition, 1972), 187.
8. A. E. Musson and Eric Robinson, Science and Technology in the Industrial Revolution (Toronto, 1969).
9. Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, 1962; 2nd ed. 1970). 1.
10. L. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge, 1970).
11. M. D. King’s excellent essay, “Reason, Tradition, and the Progressiveness of Science,” in History and Theory, X (1971), 1-32
12. Philippe Daryl, Public Life in England, trans. Henry Frith (rev. ed.; London, 1884), 111
13. John M. Cammett, Antonio Gramsci and the Origins of Italian Communism (Standford, 1967)
14. Giuseppe Fiori, Antonio Gramsci, trans. Tom Nairn (London, 1970).
15. P. Pozzolini, Antonio Gramsci, trans. A. F. Showstack (London, 1970).
16. G. Gramsci’s The Modern Prince and Other Writings, trans. Louis Marks (London, 1957)
17. Quintin Hoare and G. N. Smith, eds. and trans., Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (London, 1971).
18. Cf. Eric Hobsbawm’s review of the latter in The New York Review of Books, 4 April 1974,39-44.
19. Gwyn A. Williams, ‘The Concept of ‘Egemonia’ in the Thought of Antonio Gramsci: Some Notes on Interpretation,” Journal of the History of Ideas, XXI (1960), 587.
20. Mr S. J. Cagney of Rutgers University for the long and interesting discussions we had about the concept of “hegemony” and Gramscf s modification of the dialectic.
21. Eugene D. Genovese has called “hegemony” Gramscf s most important contribution to Marxism (cf. his review of Cammett in Studies on the Left, VII (1967)), 83-107
22. Gwyn Williams and Alberto Martinelli, “In Defense of the Dialectic: Antonio Gramscf sTheory of Revolution,” Berkeley Journal of Sociology, XIII (1968), 1-27.
23. W. L. Guttsman in The British Political Elite (London, 1963), 72.
24. Perry Anderson, “Origins of the Present Crisis,” in Perry Anderson et. al, eds., Towards Socialism (London, 1965), 11-52;
25. Tom Nairn’s reviews inAtew Left Review, No. 20 (1963), 116-19, and No. 23 (1964), 19-25;
26. E. P. Thompson, ‘The Peculiarities of the English,” The Socialist Register (1965), 311-62;
27. Perry Anderson’s reply to Thompson, “Socialism and Pseudo-Empiricism,” New Left Review, No. 35 (1966), 2-42.
28. Hugh Trevor-Roper, ‘The Landed Interest,” New Statesman, 24 May 1963, 795;
29. David Spring, “English Landowners and Nineteenth-Century Industrialism.
30. J. T. Ward and R. G. Wilson, eds., Land and Industry (Newton Abbot, Devon, 1971), 16-17.
31. R. K. Webb, ModemEngland (New York, 1971), 205-14;
32. Peter N. Stearns, ed., A Century for Debate (New York, 1971), 18-88 and 135-43;
33. Asa Briggs, The Making of Modem England (New York, 1965), 251-68;
34. G. Guttsman, British Political Elite, 77, 82, and 91.
35. G. Guttsman, British Political Elite, 60.
36. W. L. Guttsman, ed., The English Ruling Class (London, 1969), 31-32.
37. S. Shaw, Wells, J. M. Barrie and Frank Harris also commented on the middle-class idolization of the aristocracy.
38. W. E. Houghton, The Victorian Frame of Mind (New Haven, 1957), 271;
39. Paul G. Spitzer, Joseph John Thomson: A n Unfinished Social and Intellectual Biography, (Ph. D. disseration, The John Hopkins University, 1970), 94.
40. Anthony Arblaster, “Liberal Values and Socialist Values,” in The Socialist Register (1972), 93.
41. T. B. Bottomore, Elites and Society (Harmondsworth, 1966), 48.
42. Erving Goffman, “Role Distance,” in Encounters (Harmondsworth, 1972), 124.
43. G. Goffman continues, “was to exert high skill diffidently, a shark got up in bumbler’s clothing.”
44. Margaret 'Espinasse, ‘The Decline and Fall of Restoration Science,” Past and Present, XIV (1958), 76;
45. R. L. Edgeworth, Essays on Professional Education (London, printed for J. Johnson, 1809), 275.
46. George Basalla et. al., eds., Victorian Science (Garden City, N.Y., 1970) 10.
47. Michael Polanyf s discussion in Persona! Knowledge (New York, 1964), 174-84.
48. M. Carr-Saunders and P. A. Wilson, The Professions (Oxford, 1933).
49. profession,” and Geoffrey Millerson, in The Qualifying Associations (London, 1964), 5
50. Robert K. Merton’s statistics in Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth-Century England (New York, 1970 reprint), 46-47 and 204-06.
51. Henry Lyons, The Royal Society 1660-1940 Cambridge, (1944);
52. Charles R. Weld, A History of the Royal Society, (2 vols., London, 1848);
53. Thomas Thomson, History of the Royal Society (London, printed for Robert Baldwin, 1812);
54. Margery Purver, The Royal Society: Concept and Creation (London, 1967);
55. popular Scientists and Amateurs (London, 1949)
56. Dorothy Stimson. Joan Evans, A History of the Society of Antiquaries (Oxford, 1956), 83.
57. Dr. Roy MacLeod for providing me with this information
58. Of Medals and Men: A Reward System in Victorian Science,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, XXVI (June, 1971), 81-105.
59. Joseph Agassi, Faraday as a Natural Philosopher (Chicago, 1971), 17.
60. W. H. Mallock, ed. Letters, Remains, and Memoirs of Edward Adolphus Seymour (London, 1893), 265.
61. Charles Babbage, The Exposition of 1851 (London, 1851), 189.
62. Cf. Musson and Robinson. C. C. Gillispie, ‘The Natural History of Industry,” Isis, XLVIII (1957),398-407.
63. Paul Mantoux, The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century, trans. Marjorie Vernon (new and rev. ed., London, 1961), 334 n.
64. Pauline B. Granville, ed., Autobiography of A. B. Granville (2 vols., London, 1874) II, 48.
65. “Education of the Poor in France,” The Edinburgh Review, XXXIII (1820), 508.
66. J. W. Hudson, The History of Adult Education (London, 1851), 167.
67. Cf. Mildred Archer, “India and Natural History; the Role of the East India Company 1785-1858,” History Today, IX (1959) 736-43.
68. W. J. Reader, Professional Men (London, 1966), 59-60
69. Robert Merton's Nicholas Hans’ study, New Trends in Education in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1951).
70. L Pearce Williams, “The Royal Society and the Founding of the British Association,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, XVI (1961), 221-33.
71. The Lancet, 18 May 1833, voL 2, 245-46.
72. W. V. Harcourt’s address to the first meeting of the British Association, reprinted in Basalla, p. 40.
73. John Fowles The French Lieutenant’s Woman (New York, 1969)
74. Charles Smithson, and defines himself to his future bride as a scientist: “you forget that I’m a scientist,” he tells her at one point; “I have written a monograph, so I must be” (pp. 12-13). Spitzer, 70-71. Howarth, 282ff.
75. L. Pearce Williams, ed., The Selected Correspondence of Michael Faraday, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1971), I, 430.
76. C. Cardwell, 35 and 108. On University College
77. H. Hale Bellot, University College, London, 1826-1926 (London, 1929). Reader, 138.
78. H. Hale Bellot, University College, London, 1826-1926 (London, 1929). Reader., 108n and 165.
79. Philip Elliott, The Sociology of the Professions (London, 1972), 51-52.
80. R. M. Pike, The Growth of Scientific Institutions and Employment of Natural Science Graduates in Britain 1900-1960 (M.Sc. thesis. University of London, 1961).
81. Sheldon Rothblatt’s figure of £200 as the average annual salary of a Cambridge engineer in 1910 who occupied a subordinate position in a manufacturing firm (The Revolution of the Dons [London, 1968]), 285.
82. H. A. Roberts, Careers for University Men [Cambridge, 1914].
83. W. D. Niven, ed., The Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell, (2 vols., Cambridge, 1890), II, 250.
84. W. D. Niven, ed., The Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell, (2 vols., Cambridge, 1890), II, 250., 130.
85. Report of the BAA.S., 1892, 628.
86. Charles Babbage, Reflections Upon the Decline of Science in England, and on some if its causes (London, 1830), 10;
87. National Traits in Science,” Nature,-25 October 1883, 615.
88. Spitzer. H. G. Wells, A Modem Utopia (Lincoln, 1967 reprint), 85-86.
89. Lord Kelvin, “public service that some thought it not quite consistent with the habits of a scientific man to be concerned in a patent.” (quoted in W. F. Cooke, The Electric Telegraph: was it invented by Professor Wheatstone [London, 1857], Part II, 29).
90. A. L. Levine, in Industrial Retardation in Britain 1880-1914 (London, 1967), argues that “deification of amateurism” was indeed responsible (68-72 and 145-46).
91. J. Ben-David and A. Zloczower, “The Growth of Institutionalized Science in Germany,” in Barry Barnes, ed., Sociology of Science (Harmondsworth, 1972), 45-59.
92. A. J. Taylor’s Laissez-faire and State Intervention in Nineteenth-Century Britain (“Studies in Economic History;” London, 1972) provides a good survey and an excellent bibliography.
93. H. D. Clokie and J. W. Robinson, Royal Commissions of Inquiry (Standford, 1937).
94. Philip Abrams, The Origins of British Sociology 1834-1914 (Chicago, 1968), as well as the Annals of the Royal Statistical Society 1834-1934 (London, 1934).
95. Louis Cazamian’s Social Novel in England 1830-1850, New Statesman, 2 February 1973. On the technical activity of the Royal Institution see my introductions to the sixth and seventh volumes of the Minutes of the Managers' Meetings (Menston, Yorkshire, 1975).
96. Pierre Duhem’s Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, trans. Philip P. Wiener (New York, 1962 reprint).