The Early Royal Society and Visual Culture Sachiko Kusukawa1 › download › pdf ›...

1

TheEarlyRoyalSocietyandVisualCulture

SachikoKusukawa1

TrinityCollege,Cambridge

[Abstract]Recentstudieshavefruitfullyexaminedtheintersectionbetweenearly

modernscienceandvisualculturebyelucidatingthefunctionsofimagesin

shapinganddisseminatingscientificknowledge.Givenitsricharchivalsources,it

ispossibletoextendthislineofresearchinthecaseoftheRoyalSocietytoan

examinationofattitudestowardsimagesasartefacts–manufacturedobjects

worthcommissioning,collectingandstudying.Drawingonexistingscholarship

andmaterialfromtheRoyalSocietyArchives,IdiscussFellows’interestsinprints,

drawings,varnishes,colorants,imagesmadeoutofunusualmaterials,and

methodsofidentifyingthepainterfromapainting.Knowledgeofproduction

processesofimageswasimportanttomembersoftheRoyalSociety,notonlyas

connoisseursandcollectors,butalsoasthoseinterestedinaBaconianmasteryof

materialprocesses,includinga“historyoftrades”.Theirantiquarianinterestsled

todiscussionofpainters’styles,andtheygraduallydevelopedavisualmemorial

toaninstitutionthroughportraitsandothervisualrecords.

Introduction

IntheRoyalSocietyLibrarythereisamanuscript(MS/136)entitled

“MiniaturaortheArtofLymning”2byEdwardNorgate(1581-1650),whowas

keeperoftheKing’smusicalinstruments,WindsorHerald,andanartagentfor

“thecollectorEarl”,ThomasHoward,EarlofArundel(1586-1646)(Norgate1997,

pp.1-9).TwoversionsexistofNorgate’s“Miniatura”,thefirstofwhichwas

2

writtenforhisfriend,SirTheodoreTurquetdeMayerne(1573-1655),anda

second,expandedtreatisewasdedicatedtohispatron’sson,HenryFrederick

Howard,thethirdEarlofArundel(1608-1652),alsoanartconnoisseur.The

Society’smanuscriptdated19July1657isacopyofthesecondversion,andwas

partofasubstantialbequesttotheSocietyin1673byHenryFrederick’sson,

Henry,thenEarlMarshalandlaterDukeofNorfolk,attheencouragementofJohn

Evelyn(Peck1998).ThoughNorgatehadattendedJohnPell’sinaugurallecturein

Breda(Pell2005,pp.125-27),hisinterestinscientificmattersappeartohave

beenlimited.AmanuscriptondrawingandlimningbyacourtierofthelateKing

mightsuggestonlyatangentialrelevancetotheRoyalSocietydedicatedto

improvingnaturalknowledge.Yet,Norgate’streatisewasownedinmanuscript

formbyFellowsoftheRoyalSocietysuchasNehemiahGrew,EliasAshmole,

RalphThoresby,andThomasKirke(Norgate1997,pp.217-21;Kusukawa2012),

evenafterpartof“Miniatura”becamewidelyavailablethroughWilliam

Sanderson’sunacknowledgeduseofitinhisGraphice(1658).TheRoyalSociety’s

copywaslikelythesourceforthesectionondrawinginJohnEvelyn’sSculptura

(1662)(Norgate1997,p.18).Norgate’sdiscussionofpigmentswasofinterestto

chymicallyinclinedconnoisseurslikeMayerne(Norgate1997,pp.256-58;Keller

2018),andwasasourceabouttechniquefortheSociety’shistoryoftrades

(Norgate1997,pp.18-19).ThepresenceofNorgate’smanuscriptintheRoyal

SocietyLibraryisausefulreminder,therefore,ofitsmembers’interestsinthe

processofandmaterialforcreatingimages.

Recentscholarshiphasdrawnattentiontotheroleofimagesinthe

scientificinvestigationandcommunicationoftheRoyalSocietybyfocusingon

3

thosememberswhoweregraphicallyproficientorwerewell-knownconnoisseurs

ofthevisualarts.Forexample,RobertHookeknewtheminiaturepainterJohn

Hoskins,learneddrawingfromanotherminiaturistSamuelCooper,andhad

apprenticedwiththeportraitistPeterLely(Aubrey2015,1:96-97).Hisworkhas

naturallyattractedtheattentionofarthistorians:MeghanDoherty(2012)has

arguedhowprintcultureprovidedthevisualvocabularyforHooke’s

Micrographia,andMatthewHunter(2013)hasdrawnattentiontotheartisticand

material“intelligence”whichinformedHooke’sempiricalmethodsinscience.

AlthoughChristopherWrenlaterreliedonagroupofdraughtsmenforhis

architecturalwork(Geraghty2007,pp.8-14),hemadenoveluseofthegraphic

conventionsofpracticalgeometrywhenencodinghisownhypothesisofthe

motionofacometintoadiagram(Johnston2010),andhemayhaveuseda

perspectiveinstrumentdesignedbyhimself(Bennett1982,pp.74-76)todraw

directlyontocopperplates(Flis2012)thepartsofthebraindissectedbyThomas

Willis(1664).Inaddition,RichardWaller,alesswell-knownFellowwhowas

likelytrainedbyhisminiaturistmother,andtheSociety’soperatorHenryHunt

whowastrainedbyHooke,havebeenidentifiedaskeyindividualswhogenerated

drawingsfortheSociety’smeetingsandpublications(Kusukawa2011;Kusukawa

2014a,Reinhart2019).JohnEvelyn,acollectorofprintsandpaintingswhocould

alsoetch(Griffiths1993),helpedestablishtheearliestvisualprofilesofthe

Society:hewasinvolvedindesigningtheSociety’scoatofarms(Hunter1989,pp.

17,41-2),andre-purposingNicolasChaperon’sprintintoasymbolicimageofthe

RoyalSocietywhicheventuallyadornedThomasSprat’sapologyforthe

institution(1667)(HunterandBennett2017).3

4

NotallFellowsoftheSocietycoulddraw,however.ThephysicianEdwardTyson

reliedonHooke,HuntandWaller,aswellasonWilliamFaithornetheElder,who

madesomepasteldrawingsofhisanatomicalstudies(Montague1943,pp.136-

44,152-57,216-24;Kusukawa2014a).WalterCharletonwasofferedHooke’shelp

indrawinganatomicalobjects(Birch1756-1757,1:287,404).WilliamLodge,an

amateuretcheranddraughtsman(Griffiths2004c;Pierce2016)andhisfriend

FrancisPlace(Tyler1971)didsomeofthedrawingsforMartinLister’spapers

submittedtotheRoyalSociety(Roos2011b,pp.175-78,275-76),whileLister’s

owndaughtersdreworengravedimagesforhisstudyofshells(Woodley1994;

Roos2011a).KatherineMolyneux,wifeoftheFellowThomasMolyneux,and

sisterofHughHoward,theIrishportraitpainter,collectorandalsoaFellow

(Lauze2004),madedrawingsaccompanyingherhusband’spapersthatweresent

totheRoyalSociety(Hoppen2008,1:266n6,314n11)[Fig.1.Fig.1.Drawingof

basaltcolumnsfromtheGiant'sCausewayinIreland,withascale,signedinthe

bottomrightcorner,“MrsK[atherine]M[olyneux]del[ineavit].”1698.Inkand

washonpaper202x317mm.Thisdrawingisacopyofasectionofthe

watercolourdrawingdonebyEdwinSandys(d.1708)oftheGiant’sCausewayat

thebehestoftheDublinPhilosophicalSociety(1697).EL/M1/105/017,RSA.

(photo:RoyalSociety)].FossilsforEdwardLhuyd’sstudyweredrawnandsigned

byoneWilliamJonesin1698[Fig.2:Drawingof“figuredstones”signedatthe

bottomright,“Gul[ilemus]Jonesdel:[ineavit]”.Ink,greywash,andredpencilon

paper,306x189mm.ThiswasprintedinPhilosophicalTransactionsvol.20no.

243(1698).Cl.P/9i/52/005,RSA.(photo:RoyalSociety)],butJones’snamedid

notappearontheillustrationofthepaperprintedinPhilosophicalTransactions,

5

whereLhuydreferredtohis“designer”withoutnaminghimasonewhohad

“neverpracticedbeforehisjourney,butseemstoimprovedaily”(Lhuyd1698,p.

280).4

Several,thoughnotall,drawingsthatsurvivetodayintheRoyalSociety

ArchiveswereprintedinPhilosophicalTransactions.5Thejournal’srelationship

withtheinstitutionwasneitherclear-cutnorstablewhileitsfinancial

responsibilityrestedwiththeSociety’ssecretary(Moxham2015),butitsreaders

begantoassociatethejournalwiththeinstitutionitself.Itwasthesecretarywho

madeeditorialdecisions,butwestillknowverylittleaboutwhowasinvolvedin

re-drawing[Fig.3.Drawingofpiecesofboneextractedfromtheheartofthe

CharlesLindsay(1650-1662),thesecondEarlofBalcarres,byRobertHooke,

1663.Inkandgrey-washandgreybodycolouronapieceofpaper,350x230mm,

gluedontothepageoftheSociety’sRegisterBook.RBO/2i/290,RSA.(photo:

RoyalSociety).]andtransferringtheoriginalsketchesforengraving,who

engravedorcorrectedtheplates,andhowmuchtheillustrationscostfor

PhilosophicalTransactions.Despitethefactthatitwasmoreexpensivethan

woodcuts,engravingwasthepreferredmediumforthejournal,whichmayalso

havebeenduetothefactthat“thePlaguesweptawayallthosethatcutttolerably

inwood”,asthemathematicianJohnCollinsremarked(Newton1959-1977,1:55-

56).AfterthefirstsignedengravingbyFaithorneofthemapoftheCanalduMidi

in1670,noneoftheplatesinPhilosophicalTransactionsweresigneduntilthe

yearsundertheeditorshipofFrancisAston(Gunther1939,pp.13-127),whenthe

illustrationswereproducedinOxford.SeveraloftheseweresignedbyMichael

Burghers,thefutureengravertotheUniversity,andbyJohnSavage,mostlikely

6

Burgher’sapprentice(Griffiths2004aand2004d,FeolaandMandelbrote2013,p.

335).Fortheillustrationsofthefinanciallyill-fatedHistoriaPiscium(Bluhm1958,

pp.98-100),theSocietypaidsundryengraversactiveinLondonatthetime

(Kusukawa2000).AlthoughtheSocietyhadtherighttoappointitsownengraver

or“chalcographer”(FosterandRücker1897,pp.28,41),itneverdidsoinitsearly

years,6probablybecauseLondonhadareadysupplyofcraftsmenasitdidof

instrumentmakerswhocouldprovideinvaluableservicestotheSocietyifand

whentheywererequired(Iliffe1995).Throughthejournalwithwhichitwas

closelyassociated,andapublicationinwhichitwasdirectlyinvolved,theRoyal

Societythusofferedoccasionalgainfulemploymenttoengravers.Thisroleofthe

Societywassomewhatstretchedin1674whenWilliamPettynominatedthe

painterandetcherFrancisBarlowasanagentfortheSocietytogatherFellows’

arrears(Birch1756-1757,3:142,175).PettyhadnamedBarlowearliertodraw

the“schemes”forhishistoryofclothing(Birch1756-1757,1:16),andBarlowwas

certainlyknowntootherFellowssuchasEvelyn,7JohnRayandFrancisWillughby

(Flis2015),butcollectinglatesubscriptionshardlydemandedBarlow’sskillas

“picture-drawer”.ThisneverthelessindicatesaFellow’swillingnesstosupporta

strugglingpainterthroughtheRoyalSociety.

Imagesweredeemedparticularlyusefulforscientificknowledgebecause

oftheirabilitytodocumentandsubstituteforobjectsofinvestigation(Daston

2015).ThiswascertainlythecaseattheRoyalSociety,especiallyofdrawingsof

objectsthatwereexotic,ephemeralorcomplex,suchasfloraandfaunafromJava

MajororChina(Birch1756-1757,2:314);oddlyshapedhail(Birch1756-1757,2:

162);oraninstrumentclaimingtosquarethecircle.8Drawingswerealsomadeof

7

objectswhichtheirownersdidnotwishtopartwith,forinstancethepiecesof

boneextractedfromtheheartofCharlesLindsay(1650-1662),EarlofBalcarres

(Birch1756-1757,1:292,294)9[Fig.4.DiagramingraphiteshowingDenis

Papin’sdesignofHessianbellowspreparedforPhilosophicalTransactionsvol.24

no.300(1705),inwhichthelettersinscribedininkhavebeenreversed.

Draughtsmanunknown.Thisisanintermediatedrawingusedtotraceontothe

copperplatesothattheletterswillprintinthecorrectorientation.Paper,110x

190mm.MS/131/187,RSA.(photo:RoyalSociety)]oratoothtakenoutofthe

ovaryofawoman(Grew1681,p.8).Afocusontheobjectdepictedisalso

characteristicofthereferenceswefindintheRoyalSociety’srecordstopaintings

orprints.PlotmentionedapaintinginthelibraryofBrasenoseCollege,Oxford,

whichshowedthe“giantchild”fromHale(Birch1756-1757,4:425)forexample,

andaprintofTrajan’scolumnwasbroughtintotheSocietyasevidenceforthe

structureofanancientgalleyship.10

Atthemeetingof24March1686,Pettypresentedapaperabout

navigation,afterwhichJohnAubreymentioned“asetofdraughtsofsixsheets,

representingthemannerofseveralseafights,donebyMrHollar”,whichwere

orderedtobeprocuredfortheSociety(Birch1756-1757,4:468).Hereagain,it

appearsthatWenceslausHollar’sprintswerecitedforwhattheyportrayed–the

seafights–ratherthanforthecompositionorexecutionoftheprint.Butthefact

thattheyhadbeendrawnbyPrinceRupertwholedthebattle(andwhowasalso

FellowoftheSociety)andthenetchedbyagentleman-artistfavouredbyEvelyn

musthavemadetheprintsparticularlyworthyofattentionandtrustbythe

membersoftheRoyalSociety.11Aubreyhadnotedthatbecauseofhispoor

8

eyesight,Hollarusedamagnifyingglassforhisworkandthat“thecuriosityofhis

workeisnottobejudgedwithoutamagnifyingglass”(Hollar2009-12,9:xl;Flis

2012,p.155),butthereisnorecordthatmembersoftheSocietysubsequently

sawHollar’sprintsofthenavalbattlesorthattheyusedamagnifyingglassto

studythem.Thisisarare,documentedcasewhereaprintcarriedweightbecause

ofitsmaker,whereasthereliabilityofimageswasoftensubsumedunderthe

moregeneralconcernaboutthereliabilityofreportsofobjectsoreventswhich

membersoftheSocietyhadnotthechancetoobserveorverifydirectly(Lyon

2017).Itisinfactrelativelyraretoseedraughtsmenorengraversinvokedas

witnessesattheRoyalSociety,exceptinthecaseofLeeuwenhoek,whichmay

havetodohisperceptionofhisstatusandthedistancefromLondon(Fransen

2019).

TherewasanothersenseinwhichimageswereimportanttotheRoyal

Society,namelyasartefacts,orobjectswhosemateriality,manufacturingprocess,

ormakerswereofinteresttotheSociety’smembers.Thiswillbethefocusofthis

paper.Inaperiodwhereartandarchitecturegainedrenewedcentralityatthe

court,cityandcountry(Harris1979;Cowan1998;Ormrod1998;Gibson-Wood

2002cf.Stephens2016;Hallettetal.2016),itisnotsurprisingthatseveral

FellowsoftheRoyalSocietywerecollectorsaswellascommentatorsonart

(Salerno1951,pp.246-48,251;Hanson2009).Indeed,Cowan(2004)has

suggestedthatintheabsenceofaRoyalAcademyofArtinEngland,theRoyal

Societybecametheinstitutionalplatformforconnoisseurialconsiderationsofart

oftheperiod.WhileavirtuosolikeEvelynmaywellhaveharbouredhopesthat

theRoyalSocietyfunctionliketheRoyalAcademyofPaintersandSculpturesin

9

Paris(HunterandBennett2017,p.50),notallofhisvirtuosicinterests(Hunter

andHarris2003)foundoutletattheRoyalSociety.Thusacasewillneedtobe

madeineachinstanceastowhetherviewsofindividualmembersoftheSociety

canbeimputedtotheSocietyitself(Hunter2011).ThetwoEnglish“translations”

ofCharlesAlphonseduFresnoy’sLatinpoemDeartegraphicabyWilliam

AglionbyandbyJohnDrydenareacaseinpoint.Aglionbypublishedhis

translation,PaintingIllustrated(Hanson2009,pp.94-108),withadedicationto

theEarlofDevonshire,WilliamCavendish,whowasalsoanoriginalFellowofthe

RoyalSociety.YetCavendishwasbarelyactiveasFellowandwasexpelledfrom

theSocietyforfailuretopaysubscriptionfeesin1685(Hunter[1982]1994,pp.

140-41),theyearAglionbypublishedhisbook.Itisthusnotobviousthatthis

bookrepresentstheirsharedinterestaboutpaintingsasFellowsoftheRoyal

Society.Moreover,althoughDryden’stranslationofDeartegraphica(1695)has

beencreditedwithsupplyingJohnson’sdictionarywithEnglishexpressionsof

beauty(Wimsatt1951;Levine1999,pp.101-104),thereislittledirectevidenceto

connectthispublicationtotheactivitiesoftheRoyalSociety,ofwhichDrydenwas

onlybrieflyamember(1662-1666)(Hunter[1982]1994,pp.110,158-59).12

Yet,individualsandtheinstitutionwerenotquiteseparable.AsIwillbe

pointingoutbelow,interestsandbackgroundsofFellowswerereflectedinthe

topicsthatwerediscussedandpursuedintheSociety’sweeklymeetings,the

committeestowhichtheywereassigned,andthepapersprintedinPhilosophical

Transactions.ThoughtheextenttowhichthecharacteroftheearlyRoyalSociety

maybecreditedtoFrancisBaconalonemustbecarefullyassessed(Anstey2012,

Lynch2016),itcertainlyexhibitedakeeninterestinBacon’snaturalhistory

10

(Hunter2007),anditshistoryoftradestobenefitKingandCountrywasindebted

toprogrammaticstatementsbyBacon(Houghton1941;Ochs1985).ForBacon,

historyoftradeswaspartofhistoryofnature“wrought”,whichwouldradically

transformnaturalphilosophyforthebenefitofhumanity(Houghton1941,p.

35).13ThisembodiedBacon’sviewofknowledgeasatoncegeneraland

operative.14Knowledgeofthe“true”formofagivennature(suchasayellow

colourorheat)wasidenticaltotheabilityto“superinduce”itonanygivenbody

(Novumorganum,book2,aphorisms,3-5,Bacon2004,pp.200-205),andbring

abouteffectsthathave“neverbeendonebefore”.Itisinthesecontextsthat

attitudesofthemembersoftheRoyalSocietytowardsimagesasartefactsshould

beassessed,ratherthanbyanyaestheticstandardoffineartsofalaterperiod

(Gibson-Wood1997;Sloan2015,pp.381-85).

DrawingonexistingscholarshipandonmaterialfromtheRoyalSociety’s

archives,thisessayoffersanoverviewoftherangeofattitudestowardsimagesas

artefacts.IfirstdiscusstheworksofJohnEvelyn,theearliestandmostvocal

advocateoftheimportanceofthevisualintheformofprints,drawingsand

paintings.Hisexampleshowshowknowledgeoftheprocessofproducingimages

wasimportantforthecollectoraswellasfortheprojectofhistoryoftrades.

ThomasPovey,anotherartenthusiast,wastheimpetusbehindahistoryoftheart

ofpaintingattheRoyalSociety,andthoughtheprojectdidnotcometofruition,

hiswasoneofseveralexamples,asIwilldiscussinthesecondsection,ofinterest

inthematerialaspectsofmakingimagesamongmembersoftheSociety.The

thirdsectiondrawsattentiontoanotherstrandofinterest–palaeography–which

resultedinHumfreyWanley’sdiscussionofmethodsforidentifyingpainters’

11

hands.AswithmosttopicstackledatthemeetingsoftheRoyalSociety,these

developmentsreflectedindividualinterestsandinitiatives.Inthecaseofone

groupofimages,however,whatbeganasindividualactsofdonatingportraits

cametoservetheSocietyasawhole,aswillbediscussedinthefinalsection.

1.Evelynonprints,drawingsandpaintings

Asiswellknown,Evelynbuilthisvirtuosocollectionofprints,paintings,

andotherthingsduringhisContinentalTourandyearsofexileinFrance(Chaney

2003).Hewasalsopartofthecircleofthecollector,ThomasHoward,Earlof

Arundel(Howarth1985),whocommissionedfromhislibrarian,FrancisJunius,a

bookonthePaintingsoftheAncients(Weststeijn2015,Junius1991).Onreturning

toEnglandin1652,EvelyncamewithinSamuelHartlib’sambit,andthroughthe

encouragementofRobertBoyle,begantobeinterestedinthehistoryoftrades

(Hunter1995,pp.74-81).15Evelynsubmittedhis“historyofartsilliberaland

mechanic”totheRoyalSocietyinearly1661(Birch1756-1757,1:10,12),16which

groupedvariousskillsandcraftsintoahierarchyrangingfrom“mean”or“servile”

tradestothe“politeandmoreliberal”or“curious”arts,and“exoticandveryrare

secrets”.17Engravingandetchingwerelistedunderthe“curious”artsandPrince

Rupert’s“newwayofengraving”(mezzotint)underthemostrefinedcategoryof

“exoticandveryraresecrets”(Hunter1995,pp.66-98).

Evelyn’sSculptura(1662),dedicatedtoBoyle,andpresentedtotheRoyal

Societyon11June1662(Birch1756-1757,1:85)isthefirsttractonthehistoryof

printmaking(Griffiths2003,p.107)andcontainsthefirstdescriptioninprint

(albeitbrief)ofthemezzotinttechniquecreditedinEnglandtoPrinceRupert

12

(Thomas2010).Evelyn’sowncollectionofprintsservedasthebasisofhiswork:

hisemphasisonaprint’sedifyingsubject-matterratherthanthefameoftheprint-

makerreflectedthearrangementofhisowncollectionofprints(Griffiths2003,

pp.109-12;Cowan2004,pp.160-63,170-71).EvelynintendedhisSculpturato

includeasectiononthetechniquesofprint-makingbasedonAbrahamBosse’s

Traictédesmanieresdegraverentailledoucesurl'airinparlemoyendeseaux

fortes,&desvernixdurs&mols(1645),whichwasabandonedbecausehe

discoveredthattheengraverWilliamFaithornetheElder(Griffiths2004b)was

alreadyworkingonatranslation,TheArtofGraveingandEtching(1662)(Birch

1756-1757,1:15;Stijnman2012,pp.419-20,452-3).Inspirit,SculpturaandThe

ArtofGraveingwenttogether–Evelynshelvedthemsidebysideinhislibrary,

andothersboundthemtogether(Griffiths2003,p.106).Thoughthesectionon

print-makingtechniqueswasthusomittedfromSculptura,Evelynarguedthat

knowledgeofsuchtechniqueshelpedthecollectordistinguishbetweenprintsand

theircopies,sinceitwasimpossibletoimitateeveryhatchortheexact

dimensionsofeachstroke,andflawsintheplateandthecompositionoftheaqua

fortiscouldnotbereplicatedexactly(Evelyn1662,p.129).Asacollector,he

collectedprintsindifferentstatesintheknowledgethattheoneswithoutthe

letteringweretheearliestandthusthebestimpressions(Griffiths2003,p.100).

Knowledgeoftheprint-makingprocesswasthusdoublyusefulforaFellowwho

wasinterestedinthehistoryoftradesandwhowasalsoadiscerningcollector.

Sculpturaalsoincludedasectionontheartofdrawingasafoundationfor

engraving.“Designing”,accordingtoEvelyn,was“theverylife”ofengraving

(Evelyn1662,100;Norgate1997,p.203n282).Itsnobilitywasconfirmedbya

13

commentbyThomasHoward:“onewhocouldnotdesignealittle,wouldnever

makeanhonestman”(Evelyn1662,p.103).18ThoughEvelynacknowledgedthe

distinctionbetweendesignas“thingsnotyetappearing,butthepictureofideas

only”,anddrawingasrelatedtocopyingandto“thingsalreadyextant”(Evelyn

1662,p.118),19hetendedtousethewordsinterchangeably,andextolledthe

valueofdrawingsascollectableobjects.Theabilitytodrawwasapraiseworthy

virtueforauthorsofscientificsubjectsalso,asEvelyncitedtheexamplesofJohn

Blagrave(inMathematicalJewel,1585)andJohannesHevelius(inSelenographia,

1647)asbothhavingdrawnandcutthediagramsintheirworks(Evelyn1662,p.

133).

Inhisexplanationofthesignificanceofdrawing,EvelyndrewonNorgate.

Inthesecondversionof“Miniatura”,Norgatehadaddedthatthedirectstudyof

naturewasnecessaryalongsidethepainter’s“fancy”whenpaintinglandscapes

(Norgate1997,p.169).20Thekeyfeatureofanaccomplishedlandscape,

accordingtoNorgate,wasnothingotherthan“deceptiovisus”,akindof“cousning

andcheatingyourowneyesbyyourownconsent”withanappropriate

accommodationofcolour,lightandshadow(Norgate1997,p.87).Onviewinga

life-sizeperspectivalpictureoftheArchofConstantineinCardinalRichelieu’s

garden,Evelynhadusedasimilarexpressiontodescribehisexperience:an

“agreeablecheate”(27February1644,Evelyn[1955]2000,2:110;Houghton

1942,p.210).Norgatehaddescribedtheabilityofdrawingtoproducesuchan

effectthus:

ForthePenIpreferreditbeforeallotherswhatsoevertheendofall

drawingbeingnothingelsebutsoetodeceavetheEyes,bythedeceiptfull

14

judgingandwitchcraftoflightandshadowes,thatroundembost,andsollid

bodyesinNature,mayseemeroundembostandsollidinPlano(Norgate

1997,pp.105-6).

InSculptura,Evelynwrote:

Thepenisthereforeboththefirstandbestinstructive…whenitso

deceivestheeyebytheMagicandinnocentwitch-craftoflightsandshades

thatelevatedandsolidbodiesinNature,mayseemswelling,andtobe

embossedinPlanobyArt’(Evelyn1662,p.107).

Evelyn’sglossoftheword“witchcraft”with“innocent”(Norgate1997,p.

204n286)suggeststhatheregardedtheeffectofmodellingwiththepenas

somethingpositive.21Mimeticqualitiesofanimagethatcould“deceive”aviewer

goesback,throughtheRenaissance,totheclassicallegendsofZeuxisand

Parrhasius(McHam2013;Kusukawa2014b;Batchelor2016,pp.340-41).Itisan

experiencethatPepystoowouldrecordinstrikingtermsinhisdiarywhenhesaw

apaintingbyanewlyarrivedDutchpainter,SimonVerelst,who

didshowusalittleflower-pottofhisdoing,thefinestthingthateverI

thinkIsawinmylife–thedropsofDewhangingontheleaves,soasIwas

forcedagainandagain,toputmyfingertoit,tofeelwhethermyeyeswere

deceivedorno(11April1669,Pepys1970-1983,9:515,Liedtke1991,p.

230;Batchelor2016,p.335).

Inordertocreatesuchaneffectofmodeling,or“thesensationofRelievoor

extancies”Evelynsuggestedusinganinstrumentfor“constantandregular

certitude”(Evelyn1662,pp.118-19).Thiswasaframewithstretchedparallel

cordsthatwouldcastshadowsonanobjectalongthecontoursoftheobject.

15

Tracingthoselineswouldhelpcreatetheimpressionofreliefonpaperoraplate

(Evelyn1662,pp.118-24).Thismethod,dubbed“perspectiveparallelism”

(Evelyn1662,p.123)byEvelyn,hadbeendevelopedbyRobertNanteuil(from

whomEvelynhadcommissionedhisportraitwhileinParis),andpublicizedin

Bosse’sdiscussionoftechniquesinMoyenuniverseldepratiquerlaperspectivesur

lestableauxetsurfacesirrégulières(1653)(Thomas2012,pp.31-32).Thisfurther

confirmsEvelyn’sattentivenesstotheprocessofdrawing.

EvelynendedSculpturabyextollingtheusefulnessofimagesforchildren’s

educationbypointingtoseveralpublishedworkswhichadvocatedthesame

point:LouisCouvay’sMethodenouvelleettres-exactepourenseigneretapprendre

lapremierepartiedeDespautaire(1649),asetofimagesengravedbyLouis’s

relativeJeanCouvay,designedtoteachJohannesdeSpater’sgrammar;22Eilhard

Lubin’slettertoPhilipII,DukeofPommern–Stettin,whichrecommendedtheuse

ofimagestoteachLatinandGermantochildren,printedbyHartlibinTrueand

readiewaytolearntheLatintongue(1654);andJohannesAmosComenius’Orbis

sensualiumpictus,thoughEvelyncriticizedtheengravingsaspoorintheedition

withCharlesHoole’stranslation(Comenius1659;Evelyn1662,p.139).23A

picturewas“akindofUniversalLanguage”,accordingtoEvelyn,andcould

expressataglancethingsthatwordscouldnot,suchasplants,birds,beasts,

fishes,buildings,andmonuments(Evelyn1662,p.140;Norgate1997,p.

216n327).Suchadidacticuseofprintscouldbeextendedtocreateavisual

archiveofknowledge.EvelyncitedthecollectionofprintsbyMicheldeMarolles,

AbbotofVeilleloin,as“akindofEncyclopediaofallintelligibleandmemorable

thingsthateitherare,orhaveeverbeeninrerumNatura”(Evelyn1662,p.141).

16

AlthoughtheRoyalSocietyappearstohavecompileda“bookofdrawings”

(Kusukawa2011,p.286),avisual“encyclopedia”formedoutofprintswasnot

somethingthatcametofruition.24

In1668,EvelynpublishedatranslationofRolandFréart’sIdéedela

perfectiondelapeinture(1662),dedicatedtoHenryHoward.AccordingtoFréart,

principlesofbeautyweretobestudied(Thomas2012,p.29)throughthe

individualexamplesofpaintings,whichhecalled“oculardemonstrations”25

(Evelyn1668,pp.118-19),anditwasassumedthatreaderswouldhaveprintsof

well-knownpaintingssuchasRaphael’sAcademyoftheAthenianPhilosophers

(Thomas2012,p.29).Fréarthaddividedthefiveelementsofpaintingestablished

byJuniusintothe“morespiritualandrefined”partinvolvinginventionand

expression,andthe“moremechanical”partofproportion,colouring,and

perspective.Anauthorandcollectorbutnotapractitioner,Fréartsoughtto

elevatetheartofpaintingtoaliberalprofessionbyemphasisingtheparts

involvingtheintellectualfacultiesofthepainterattheexpenseandnearexclusion

oftheworkofgraphicartisans,or“mechanics”(Posner1993,pp.583-84,Thomas

2012,p.29).TheprintingofEvelyn’sAnideaoftheperfectionhadbeensupervised

bytheSociety’ssecretary,HenryOldenburg,whoalsoreviewedit(Hunterand

Bennett2017,p.50)inPhilosophicalTransactions,andrecommendeditto“a

PhilosophicalTraveller,anArchitect,andeveryingeniousMechanician”

(Oldenburg1668,p.785),namelythosekeentoexercisetheirintellectual

faculties.YetEvelyn’stranslationwasnotalwaysfaithfultoFréart’stext,ashe

decidedtocorrectthelatter’sinterpretationofasinglevanishingpointin

Raphael’spaintingbyincorporatingBosse’scriticisminhisLePeintreconvertyaux

17

précisesetuniversellesreglesdesonart(1667),whichemphasisedtheimportance

ofpracticalexperienceinmakingpicturestotheconnoisseur(Posner1993,p.

592).Evelynasatranslatorwillingtocorrectatheoristwithapractitioner’s

insightisconsistentwiththeattentivenesstothepracticalsideofprint-makinghe

hadshowninSculptura.

ItmusthavebeenunderEvelyn’sinfluencethatOldenburgfurther

reportedonFrenchworksonpaintingsinPhilosophicalTransactions.Oldenburg

(1666)offeredasummaryofAndréFélibien’sEntretienssurlesviesetsurles

ouvragesdesplusexcellenspeintres,AnciensetModernes,andtranslated(1669)an

accountfromtheJournaldesSçavans(18March1669:13-17)ofFélibien’s

Conferencesdel’academieRoyaledepeintureetdesculpture.LikeFréart,Félibien

emphasisedtheintellectualaspectsofpainting,deemingthebrushworkofa

painterasnomoresignificantthanwritingsinwhichphilosophicalideaswere

expressed(Posner1993,583n3).Oldenburgalsointroducedtheworkofanother

memberoftheRoyalAcademyofArt,GregoireHuret’sOptiquedeportraitureet

peinture(1670)ashelpfulfordinstinguishingtheproperrulesofperspectivefrom

the“falseandimperfectones”(Oldenburg1672,5048).Huret’stractwasinfacta

criticismofthecraft-orientatedworkofBosse,whohadbeenejectedfromthe

AcademiebyCharlesLeBrunandotherswhowereintentonelevatingthestatus

ofpainting(McTighe1998).

EvelynhimselfdidnotslavishlyfollowtheFrenchAcademicians,ashisuse

ofBosse’sworkssuggests.TheconnoisseurialcollectorwasalsoaFellowofthe

RoyalSociety.Adiscerningcollectorneededtoknowtheprocessofproductionin

ordertoknowwhattocollect,distinguishacopyfromtheoriginal,andbuild

18

knowledgeempiricallyofahistoryofprintsandoftheprinciplesofpainting.A

FellowoftheRoyalSocietyengagedinahistoryoftradesneededtounderstand

themanufacturingtechniquesofartisansandcraftsmen.Inthisrespect,

connoisseurialexpertiseandBaconianknowledgecoalescedintheircommon

focusonunderstandingproductionprocesses.Thisisatraitthatcanbedetected

furtheramongotherFellowsoftheRoyalSocietyinrelationtotheirinterestsin

varnishes,colourantsandunusualimages.

2.MaterialAspectsofImages

TheartofpaintingwasrecognizedbybothEvelynandPettyasoneofthe

artstobeconsideredunderthe“HistoryofTrades”,whichinturnwasoneofthe

eightareasinwhichcommitteesweresetupbytheSocietytoencouragecollective

research(Hunter1989,pp.73-121).Acallfor“ahistoryoftheartofpainting”

camefromThomasPovey,whowasnotoneofthethirty-fiveFellowsappointedto

thecommitteeon“HistoryofTrades”,buthewasakeencollectorofpaintings

(Murison2004).26Althoughthisepisodehasbeennotedbyseveralscholars

already(Hanson2009,p.92;Hunter2013,pp.98-101;HunterandBennett2017,

p.50;),itisworthrehearsingsomeofthedetailstoindicatetheconvergenceof

interestsamongFellowswithdifferentbackgrounds.

Povey,aroyaladministratorandentrepreneurincolonialtrade,isknown

tohavebeenoneoftheearliestpatronsofSamuelvanHoogstraten(Brusati1995,

pp.92-93,201;Batchelor2016,pp.345-46);healsoownedatleastonelandscape

byRobertStreater,SerjeantPaintertotheKing(Thackray2004),andanotherby

HendrikDanckerts(BirdandClayton2017,pp.112,204-5).Theirpaintingsat

19

Povey’shouseinLincolns-Inn-FieldsimpressedvisitorssuchasEvelynand

Pepys.27EitherathishomeoratStreater’sstudio,Poveynoticedhowthepainter

hadmixedcuttingsfromafigtreewitheggstocreateamediumforhispainting.

WhenhementionedthisinpassingatameetingoftheRoyalSocietyinApril1666,

memberspresentseemeddubiousofthisprocedure,andthusPoveysuggesteda

visittoStreater(Birch1756-1757,2:84).OnthemorningofAugust8,1666,a

groupcomprisedofLordWilliamBrouncker(thepresident),SirRobertMoray,

HenrySlingsby,WalterCharleton,RobertHookeandPovey,dulyvisitedStreater’s

house(Birch1756-1757,2:107).There,RobertMoraybrokeeggsintotwosmall

vesselsandtwosmallpiecesofafigtreeweremixedintoonevessel.Thepresence

ofthetwovesselssuggestsacontrolledexperiment,toconfirmthatthechangeof

texturewastheresultofthemixingofthefig.Atsomepointitmusthavebeen

establishedbyaskingthepainterthatanypartofthefigtreewouldhavethesame

effect:thefigreducedtheeggstoan“oily”substancewithout“ropiness”,yetwas

ductile“likeoil”,andwhenmixedwithanycolour,itlostitsowncolour,which

wasanimportantpropertyforamedium.Theadvantageofthismediumwasthat

itdidnotcreateaglarewhenlookedatdirectly,oryellowovertime.Asproofof

itseffect,thepartywenttoPovey’shouseandviewedachimneypieceofa

landscapebyDanckerts.Thatafternoon,Brounckerreportedonthemorning’s

proceedings.28Streater’srecipehadbeensubjectedtoanapproachfamiliarto

membersoftheRoyalSociety:controlexperiment(twovessels),generalisation

(allpartsofthefigtree),andconfirmationofresult(Danckert’spaintingwhichdid

notcreateaglare),observedbyagroupofpeopleandthenreportedtothe

Society.Poveynaturallyfeltvindicated,andsuggestedtwoweekslaterthat

20

Streater,Lely,andCoopermay“notbeunwilling”tocommunicate“several

curiositiesandvarietiesofpainting”(Birch1756-1757,2:111).Althoughthelist

ofpaintingsdrawnuptowardstheendofhislifedoesnotnametheirmakers,

PoveymusthavehadextensivecontactswithpaintersinLondonwhocouldoffer

portraits,stilllives,landscapesandhistorypaintings.29

InDecember1667,PoveyrecountedtotheSocietythevisittoStreater’s

studio,withafullerdescriptionofthefigrecipe(Birch1756-1757,2:227-30).By

thenhehadnoticedthattherecipewasprobably“asancientastheemperors”and

addedthatDanckertshadseenthetechniqueusedona“largecabinetinthe

pope’spalace”inItaly(Birch1756-1757,2:228;Hunter2013,p.99).Yet,Povey

extolledthevalueofthismediumbyclaimingthatsomepaintingsbyAntonioda

Correggiofinishedinthismannerwereconsidered“jewels”inthe“richcollection

hislateMajestyhadofthatbestpaintings”(Birch1756-1757,2:228).30Hethen

suggestedthedesirabilityofan“entirehistory”ofthe“severalusesofcoloursand

themediumsbywhichtheyareapplicable”(Birch1756-1757,2:229).Sucha

work,Poveynoted,hadnotyetbeenundertaken,becausewhathadbeenwritten

bypainters“shewthattheirpenhathnotbeensogoodastheirpencil(brush)”

andwhathadbeenundertakenbythosewhothoughtaboutthemhadnot

consultedthosepractitionerswhowere“competentlyandaptlylearnedandmore

adequatetotheworkofassistingandinforming”(Birch1756-1757,2:230).He

proposedahistoryoftheartsofpaintingcollectedfrom“theseveralpersonsof

ingenuity,whohaveparticularlystudied,practicedandexperimentedthem”,

whichwouldthenbe“re-examinedandattested”bytheSociety(Birch1756-1757,

2:230).Apainter’srecipewhichpiquedtheinterestofacollectorhadthus

21

triggeredafull-scaleproposalforaBaconianinvestigationintotheartofpainting

whichrequiredFellowstoconsultsuitablepractitioners.

TheSocietyappointedPovey,Evelyn,Hooke,ThomasHenshaw,Sir

TheodoredeVaux,WilliamCroone,EdmundWylde,JohnHoskyns,andSirPhilip

Carterettopursuesuchascheme(ibid).ApartfromCarteretanddeVauxwho

hadbeenelectedlaterandPoveywhobelongedtoanothercommitteee,therestof

theFellowsassignedtothetaskwerealsomembersoftheCommitteeforthe

“HistoryofTrades”(Birch1756-1757,1:407).Wehavelittleinformationabout

Carteret’spersonalviews(Hunter[1982]1994,pp.170-71;Hunter1989,pp.163,

171),buttherestofthecommitteemembershadrelevantinterests.Wehave

alreadynotedHooke’sgraphicbackgroundandEvelyn’sconnoisseurialinterests

inthevisualarts.Evelyn’stravellingcompanion,ThomasHenshaw,sharedhis

friend’sinterestinpaintings(Griffiths1992),andwasalsointerestedinchemical

matters(Dickson1997,Agnew2012).ThatHenshawhadmorethanapassing

interestinpaintingsisshownbythefactthatwhenin1694,theSocietyacquireda

copyofJunius’sDepicturisveterum,Henshawborroweditandreportedthatthe

bookwas“amostexcellentcollectionofallthingsextantinanyauthorrelatingto

thepaintingoftheAncients.”31EdmundWylde,Aubrey’spatronwithwide-

ranginginterests(Aubrey2015,2:1688-94),explainedhowavarnishcouldspoil

apaintedsarsenet,andbroughtinanothertypeofvarnishforHooketouseon

paintedtaffeta(Birch1756-1757,2:412,469).Hewasalsoacollector,ashis

residenceatBloomsburycontained“paintings”,“pictures”,“enamelledpictures”,

“cupsandvesselsofcrystalorofstoneofanysortofstone”,and“shellsofall

sorts.”32JohnHoskynswaschairmanofboththelegalcommitteeandthe

22

committeetocollectnaturalphenomena(Hunter1989,pp.104-5),andanactive

contributortotheSociety’sactivities.HegavestonesandorestotheSociety’s

repository(Grew1681,pp.314,318-19,330-31),whichmaysuggestsome

familiaritywithpigments,sincehealsonotedtheuseof“mineral”coloursfor

glasspainting(Birch1756-1757,4:458).33

Physicians,byprofession,hadinterestinpigments,sincematerialfor

medicinecouldalsobeusedaspigments.34Thus,thephysicianWilliamCroone

reportedonan“alkermes”,anexcrescencefromthewoodorleavesoftheshrub

“Ilexbacciferaaquifolia”,usedatMontpellierasbothmedicineandpigment

(Croone1666).Healsoofferedtobringinrecipesformakingverdigrisand

whiteningwax(Birch1756-1757,2:116).Physicianswerealsotraditionallyart

enthusiastsandcollectors,whichhelpedthemmoveamongnoblecollectorsand

culturaleliteswhowerepotentialclients(Landolt1972;Hanson2009).35Sir

TheodoredeVaux,physiciantoCharlesII,appearstohavebeenacollector,ashis

willmentionedchimneypieces,paintingsinthediningroomandin“thegallery”,

watercoloursofCharlesII,theDukeofNorfolk,LordandLadyNottingham,the

DukeofMommouth,theDuchessofPortsmouth,deVaux’smother,ofhimselfafter

aportraitbyKneller,andasmallpictureofhisniece.36Moresignificantly,as

TheodoredeMayerne’sgodson(Trevor-Roper2006,p.365),deVauxhadaccess

toMayerne’smanuscripts,severalofwhichpertainedtomedicalandchemical

topicsandwereintroducedtotheRoyalSociety(Keller2018).Amonthafter

Poveyhadfirstmentionedthefig-juicedistemper,deVauxproducedMayerne’s

papersondyeingpracticesinEnglandandHolland,andacommitteewassetupto

translatethem(Henderson2013,p.108),withaviewtocompilingahistoryof

23

dyeing.DeVauxalsopromisedtofindoutabouttheartofenamelingbyJean

Petitot,patronizedbyCharlesIandMayerne(Chaney1980;Trevor-Roper1993,

pp.274-76).MostofthosenominatedtoPovey’scommitteeonthehistoryof

paintingthushadrelevantandcontinuinginterestsintheartofpainting,

pigmentsanddyes.

Thefateofthe“historyoftheartsofpainting”wasanticipatedinareplyto

Povey’srequestforinformation,bythegentlemangardenerandpainter,

AlexanderMarshal(Leith-RossandMcBurney2000;Iliffe2012,p.112),who

politelyrefusedtodivulgehismannerofpainting:“Thetruthis,theyarepretty

secrets,butknown,theyarenothing.Severalhavebeenatmetoknow,how;asif

theywerebuttrifles,andnotworthsecrecy.TopartwiththemasyetIdesireto

beexcused”(Birch1756-1757,2:231).37Theletterhighlightstheproblem

inherentintheRoyalSociety’s“HistoryofTrades”project:theunwillingnesson

thepartofpractitionerstodivulgetheirtradesecrets,eveninthenameof

improvementforKingandCountry.38Aswithmanyawell-meantprojectofthis

kind,includingdeVaux’sprojectofdyes(Birch1756-1757,2:93,97,199),the

“historyoftheartsofpainting”wasnevercompleted(Ochs1985andHunter

1989,pp.96-101).ButPoveyremainedproudofhavingreportedthedistemper

recipetotheRoyalSociety,ashementioneditagainin1693whenthedurability

ofpaintingsatHamptonCourtwasdiscussed.39

Ifageneralhistoryoftheartofpaintingwasnottomaterialize,other

discussionsaboutpigmentsandcolorantscontinuedtotakeplaceintheSociety.

RichardWaller,inapaperinPhilosophicalTransactions(1686)madeanattempt

tocodifycolournomenclaturebyafixedcombinationofpigments(Kusukawa

24

2015),drawingontheworkofotherFellowssuchasWalterCharleton,Francis

GlissonandRobertPlot.PlothimselfsenttotheSocietypigmentsandearthsfrom

AleppoandFrance(Birch1756-1757,4:179).40NehemiahGrew,furthermore,

discussedthechemicalprinciplesofcoloursproducedbyplants(Birch1756-

1757,3:338-39),whichinformedhislaterideasabouthowindigenousdyesmight

beimprovedinordertosubstituteexpensiveimports,soastoincreaseEngland’s

wealth(Grew2012).

Anotherconsiderationofthematerialdimensionofimages,whichalso

developedoutofthehistoryoftrades,wasthetechniqueofpaintingonmarble.

OldenburghadnotedarecipeforsinkingcolourintomarbleinAthanasius

Kircher’sMundusSubterraneus(1665),whichhereportedinPhilosophical

Transactions,withtheexampleof“MrBird”,astone-cutterinOxford,whoknew

thetechniqueandwhosemarblehadbeenbrokeninfrontoftheKingtoshow

howthecolourshadsunkinsidethemarble(Oldenburg1665,p.127).41In1673,

ageneralcallwasplacedinthejournalforinformationonstonesandmarbles,

amongwhichwastheitem,“ToadvancetheArtofting[e]ingwhiteMarbles,soas

tomakethetincturepenetrateandcolourthemataconsiderabledepth;andto

endeavourtobringthiswayofcolouringtoasgreatperfection,asEnamellingis,

byPaintingfacesandstories,andallkindofLandskipsandPerspectivesupon

whiteMarblewithcoloursnotdeliblebyanything,thatdoesnotdestroythe

marble”(Oldenburg1673,p.6011).In1676,PrinceRupertsentin“apaintingof

boysandtrees”onapieceofmarble.Themeetingnotedthatallits“out-lines”

were“exactlydefinedwithoutanyflowingofthecoloursabroad,andthecolours

fixedbythefire,andafterwardssopolished,thattheywouldbepermanent,and

25

lastaslongasthemarble”.Thetechnique,theFellowsremarked,wasnotentirely

unknown,astheyrecalledthestone-cutterofOxford,butperhapsindeferenceto

thePrince,itwasjudgedasan“improvement”inhowthecoloursweresunkand

fixed(Birch1756-1757,3:280).Stainingmarblewasclearlyapointofcontinued

interest,asHenriJustelsentin1685adescriptionoftheportraitoftheFrench

Kingon“twelve-feet-squaremarbletabletop,whichwasaninchthick,andwhere

thecoloursappearedtohavebeensunkintothemarble”(Birch1756-1757,4:

426).ThepursuitofatechniquetopaintonmarblecanbeconsideredaBaconian

attempttoimproveknowledgeofcolorantssothattheycouldbesuperinducedon

materialthathadhithertobeenassumedtobeimpossibletotingeorpaintupon.

Thethreepaintingsonstone–twowithalandscapeandoneofaprayingwoman

–keptintheSociety’srepository(Grew1681,p.375)furtherconfirmtheSociety’s

interestinplacingcolouronsmoothandhardsurfaces.42

Furthermore,imagesmadeofunusualmaterialorinanunusualwaywere

examinedoftenattheSociety.In1702,themeetingexaminedpicturesoftwo

facesmadefrombutterflywingscollectedby“agentlewomaninDevonshire”,and

in1703apictureoftheVirginMaryfromMexicomadeoffeatherswas

presented.43PhilosophicalTransactionsreportedthatoneElizabethPybergatthe

Haguewasrenownedformakingpaper-cuttownscapesaswellasportraitsof

WilliamandMary(Ellis1703,p.1418).Picturescutoutofpaperwereknownto

theSocietyearlier,sincetheRepositoryhadapictureofahouseattheendofthe

forestwithalion,unicorn,boar,camelandstagcutoutofathree-inchsquare

paper(Grew1681,pp.378-79;Sloan2000,pp.64-67).TheRoyalSociety’s

interestinunusualimagesmusthavebeenknowntothoseoutsidetheinstitution,

26

sinceavisitor,oneChristianElers,showedaportraitonapea-sizedagate.44He

claimedthattheagateononesideshowedafigureofpopeAlexanderVII,

comparingitwithhisfeaturesonacoin,andthattheothersideshowedthefaceof

EmperorLeopold“iftheagatewereheldinoneway,butanotherfaceheldin

anotherway”.TheFellowscouldnot,however,discernthefaces“imaginedbythe

owner”(Birch1756-1757,3:111).

In1682,aNurembergastronomerAndreasArnoldpresentedtotheSociety

throughHookeanimageofacometbyhisfriendGeorgChristophEimmart,done

on“bluepaperwiththeheighteningofthelightsofitbyawhitelaidon,aswas

supposed,withapencil”,aprintbytheengraverSusannaMariaJacobivon

Sandrart(1658-1716)madeafterapaintingbyPietrodaCortona(Paas1995),

andaviewoftheinsideofachurchinNurembergbeingrebuilt,byJohann

AndreasGraff(1636-1701),painterandengraveratNuremberg(Birch1756-

1757,4:131).ThesegiftsmaywellreflectArnold’sownartisticinterests,ashe

wasacquaintedwithSandrartandGraff,aswellasGodfreyKnellerandhis

brotherJohannZacharias(Blom1981,p.34,149n61).AtleastArnolddidnot

consideritinappropriatetogivetotheSocietyarangeofimages–ofartisticor

scientificcontentindifferentmedia.In1685,“MrJohnsonofCanterbury”attended

ameetingtoshow“acurious(i.e.carefullypainted)prospectofacathedralofthat

citydrawnbyhimselfinoil-colours;asalsoseveralviewsofthecountryadjacent”

(Birch1756-1757,4:399).ThistoosuggestsattheveryleastthatJohnson

believedthattheSocietywouldbeinterestedinhispainting.

Fellowswithdifferentpreoccupationshadexpressedinterestatvarious

timesinthematerialaspectsofpainting(tempera,varnish,pigments,dyes,

27

stainingtechniques),aswellasimagesmadefromunusualmaterial.Such

discussionswerepertinenttothehistoryoftrades,andtoaBaconianinterestin

masteringthematerialprocessofmakingimageswithandonvariousmaterial.

TheperceptionofthoseoutsidetheSocietyseemstoconfirmthepointthatthe

Societywasnotjustinterestedinimagesthatconveyedscientificcontentbutalso

inimagesthatdemonstratedsomekindofmasteryoftechniquesaswellasof

materials.

3.Identifyingpainters’hands

Anothercontributiontothestudyofpaintingsarosefromascholarof

historicalmanuscripts,HumfreyWanley,whowouldbecomeFellowoftheRoyal

Societyin1706(Heyworth2004).Thoughprimarilyascholarofmanuscriptswith

ambitionstocarryoutasystematicstudyofEnglishdiplomatic,Wanleydeclared

thathehad“alwayshadagreatloveandaffection”forpaintingaswellasfor

music(Wanley1989,p.178).WhileanassistantattheBodleianLibrary,hecast

aroundfordonationsofpaintings,lamentingthefactthatitspicturegallerycould

takethousandsofpaintings,andyethadonlyadozen“good”pictures,somedone

by“pitifulMasters”,andno“Histories”or“Landskips”.45Hehimselfcollected

drawingsandpaintings.Heowned,forexample,adrawingofa“head”ofRubens,

andaportraitofSirRobertCotton,whichhejudgedtohavebeenpaintedby

WilliamDobsonratherthanbyAnthonyVanDyck.46ActingasHansSloane’s

amanuensis,WanleyalsocopiedoutamedievalmanuscriptatCambridge,

Theophilus’sDediversisartibus,ahandbookonpaintingwhichSloanehopedto

haveprinted.47

28

In1701,inaletternolongerextant,NarcissusMarsh,Archbishopof

Dublin,bibliophile,andorientalscholar,appearedtohaveaskedWanleywhether

itwaspossibletodistinguishbetweenanoriginalmanuscriptanditscopy,and

determinethemanuscript’sagebyobservingonlytheshapeandfigureofthe

letters,andfurthermorewhetheritwaspossiblefromsuchobservationsto

identifyworksthatwerenowelsewhereanddidnotbeartheauthor’sname.48

MarshseemstohaveaskedWanleywhethersuchamethodofattendingcloselyto

thevisualqualitiesofscriptinordertomakeinferencesaboutitswritercouldbe

extendedtopaintings.InhisreplypresentedtotheRoyalSocietyandprintedin

PhilosophicalTransactions,Wanleystatedthatitcouldn’tbemuchmoredifficult

forsomebodytoimitateadrawingorapicturethantocopyhandwriting(Wanley

1989,p.173).Painterscouldchoosetheirwayofpaintingandcompositionatwill,

sothatapainterlikeIsaacFullercouldproduceapaintingwhichevenPeterLely

mightmistakeas“amostincomparablepictureofMichelangelo”,butWanleyalso

pointedoutthatapersongenerallypractisedwhatwasmostagreeableto“his

owngenius”sothatonceapainter’shandwasfixed,hismannerofdrawing

becamelimited(Wanley1989,p.178).Thusitwaspossiblefora“curious”person

toenteragalleryandidentifypaintingsasbythehandsofRiley,Kneller,Van

Dyck,Dobson,orTintoretto,aswellasspotcopiesdoneafterRubens,Giorgione,

SalvatorRosa,AnnibaleCaracciorPietrodaCortona(ibid).

Tothequestionwhetheritwaspossibletodetermineatwhatagethe

painterhadmadethepainting.Wanleyrepliedthatheneededto“experiment”

withallthedatedworksofa“greatpainter”.HenotedthatMichelangelo,Dürer,or

Titianpaintednoworselaterintheirlivesthantheydidearlier,butthatAntonio

29

Verriowasreputedtohavedrawnbetterinoldageaccordingtohimself,ashewas

“almostashamedofhisownworksinWindsorCastlepaintedinthetimeof

CharlesII”.49Yet,Wanleydidnotbelievetherewasawaytodeterminetheageofa

painter,norofamusician,poet,oratororauthorfromtheirfinishedworks

(Wanley1989,pp.178-79).

Marshalsoappearstohaveaskedwhetherapaintingcouldbemistakenfor

amovingorlivingthing,towhichWanleyreplied:

AstothePaintersPaintingaLivingorMovingthing,sothatoneshall

almostdiscerntheMotion,andseetheBirdFlying,ortheHorseorHound

Running,etc.thatismoreeasie,especiallywhenassistedbythefriendly

andpregnantfancyoftheCharm’dSpectator.IntheStilllifeindeed,theEye

isquicklydeceiv’dandthotheyare,asIbelieveseveralMastersnowliving

moreExcellentatitthaneverZeuxisandParrhasiuswere;yetstill,withall

theirArt,’tisverydifficulttoimposeuponamanso,astomakehimbelieve

’tisnotaPicture,buttheveryLifethatheseesbeforethem.(Wanley1989,

p.175)

Here,aswithNorgateandwithEvelyn,theactiveparticipationofthespectator

wasacknowledgedforappreciatingthevividnessofpainting.Themimeticquality

ofpaintingsthuscontinuedtobehighlyvalued,asstilllifepaintingsbecame

popularaftertheRestoration(Batchelor2016).

ApartfromreferencestoHollar,Streater,LelyandMarshalnotedabove,

recordsoftheRoyalSocietyrarelymentionindividualpaintersbytheirname.

Discussionofapainter’sidentityinrelationtohismannerorstyleofpainting

arose,notfromtheinterestinthematerialaspectsofimages,butfromantiquarian

30

scholarship,atopicofcontinuinginterestintheRoyalSociety.Wanleybroughthis

experienceofworkingwithmanuscriptstobearonthestudyofpainters’hands,at

leastintheory.ItwasatopicthatwasdeemedworthprintinginPhilosophical

Transactions.

Portraits Whilethestudyofthematerialandtechnicalaspectsofproducingimages

developedattheinitiativeofmemberswithawiderangeofbackgrounds,one

groupofimagescametoservesymbolicallytheinstitutionoftheRoyalSocietyas

awhole.Thesewereportraits,themostpopulargenreofpaintingsinEngland.

CollectingFellows’portraitswasnotsomethingthatwasstarteddeliberatelyfrom

thebeginningoftheSociety,whichmayaccountforwhysomeoftheearly

donationswerenotformallyrecordedintheminutes.Theideaofaportrait

galleryofworthyindividualsforcommemorationhadalongtraditionsincethe

Renaissance(Aleci1998).JohnEvelynhadadvisedEdwardHyde,LordClarendon,

onaseriesofhalf-lengthportraitsofcontemporarywitsforhismansionin

Piccadilly(Knight2004,pp.151-53).50James,DukeofYork,commissioned

thirteenportraitsfromLelyin1666andtwelvepaintingsin1675fromWillem

vandeVelde,fatherandson,tocommemoratenavalvictoriesduringthesecond

andthirdAnglo-DutchWars(BirdandClayton2017,pp.140-43).AttheGuildhall,

JohnMichaelWright(Thomson2004)hadcompletedaseriesofportraitsofFire

Judgesby1675(Knight2004;Evelyn[1955]2000,4:17).InspiredbyEvelyn,

Pepyscommissionedhisownseriesofportraitsofcontemporary“worthies”

(Waals1984;Liedtke1991).

31

Itisonlyfromthe1680sthattheSociety’sarchivesrecordcommissions

anddonationsofportraits,butthepracticeofportrait-givingcanbedatedbackto

1672,justbeforetheSocietywasinvitedbacktoGreshamCollege,whichhadbeen

requisitionedbytheCityaftertheGreatFire.51AccordingtoHooke’s

memorandum,theSocietymetonOctober25,1672,whenJonathanGoddard

presentedapictureofEdmundGunter(1581-1626),afterwhichthePresident

WilliamBrouncker,DanielColwall,andGoddardhimselfpromisedtodonatetheir

ownportraits(Hooke1935,p.11).52ThedonationofaportraitofGunter,one-

timeProfessorofastronomyatGreshamCollege,bytheGreshamprofessorof

physic,Goddard,mightsuggestthatthismighthavebeenrelatedtotheSociety’s

imminentreturntotheCollege.ItmaybethatGoddard,whowasalsoaFellowof

theRoyalCollegeofPhysicians,whichhadoncedisplayedportraitsofmembersor

noblemenfor£10(Wolstenholmeetal.1964-77,1:459)andwhichwasdestroyed

intheGreatFire,keenlyfelttheneedforinstitutionstobuildtheirownvisual

memorial.Goddarddiedin1675withoutfulfillinghispromise,whileBrouncker

donatedhisportraitbyPeterLelyatthemeetingonMarch18,1675,accordingto

Hooke(Hooke1935,p.153).TheSocietymetonthatday,buttheminutesare

againsilentaboutthisgift,indicatingthatperhapsatthispointthesignificanceof

thepresentationfortheSocietyhadnotquitesunkin.Wedonotknowforcertain

whenMaryBeale’sportraitofJohnWilkinswasgiventotheSociety,butitwas

hangingintheRoyalSocietyby1677,whenHenryHuntwasorderedtomakea

copyofit(Birch1756-1757,3:331).

WiththeLibraryandtheRepositoryinstalledinthewestgalleryof

GreshamCollegebetween1676and1677,perhapsamorepermanentsenseofthe

32

physicalspacewasdawningupontheFellowship(Hunter1989,pp.140,142).53

Afteradonationin1680byJohnHoughtonfromhisuncle,thearmspainter

SilvanusMorgan(Cust2004),ofaportraitofthefirstDukeofNorfolk(John

Howard)incolours“nealedonglass”(Grew1681,p.380),togetherwiththe

Howardfamily’sgenealogy,theSocietyseemstohavewokenuptothepossibility

ofcommemoratingitsdonorswithportraits.Itrequestedaportraitfromthe

currentDuke,HenryHoward,whohadlentArundelHouseasatemporaryhome

totheSocietyaftertheGreatFireandhaddonatedbooksandmanuscriptstothe

Society’sLibrary.Atthesametime,theSocietyaskedforaportraitfromDaniel

Colwall,amerchantwhohadgiven£100totheSocietyfortheRepository(Hunter

1989,pp.123-55).Colwallonlyagreed“withmuchmodestreluctancy”(Birch

1756-1757,4:16),whichwasperhapsthereasonwhyhehadnotsentinapicture

earlier,afterhehadpromisedtodosoin1672.

In1680,HookeaskedaforeignmemberoftheSociety,MarcelloMalpighi,

whosestudiesonplantshadbeenprintedinLondonundertheauspicesofthe

Society,tosendaportraitwithaviewtohavingitengraved(Malpighi1975,2:

831-33).Malpighiobliged(Malpighi1975,2:849-51),andhisportraitwas

receivedinLondononJanuary26,1681andaframeforitwasordered(Birch

1756-1757,4:67-68).HookewasaskedtoarrangeDavidLogganorFaithorneto

makeanengravingaftertheportrait.Hookewasanaturalchoicetomakesuch

arrangements,givenhisearlierexperiencesupervisinganengravingofhisformer

patronRobertBoylebyFaithorne(Maddison1959,pp.154-56),buttheMalpighi

portraitdidnotmaterialise.ItmayalsobeatHooke’sinstigationthatin1681,the

newlyelectedRichardWallerdonatedapictureofGoddard“donefrommemory”

33

(Birch1756-1757,4:100-101).Thustheportraitspromisedin1672werenowall

intheRoyalSociety.Waller’sportraitofGoddard,mostlikelyawatercolour,was

orderedtobe“carefullykeptwiththeotherpicturesofthefellowsofthesociety”

(ibid).Thistantalizingreferenceto“otherpicturesofthefellows”hintsthatsome

effortwasalreadyunderwaytocollectportraitsoffellowsinsmallerformats,

eitherdrawn,orpossiblyasprints,tobekepttogether,thoughnosuchalbumhas

survivedintactattheRoyalSociety.InthecaseofamezzotintofRobertBoyle,

however,whenitwasgivenin1690byanotherFellowSirEdmundKing,itwas

notstoredwiththeportraitsoftheotherfellows,butframedandhungupinthe

Society’smeetingroom,attestingtotherespecthecommandedamongthe

fellowship.54ThismezzotintwasprobablytheonemadeafterJohann

Kerseboom’sportrait,forwhichKing,whowasalsoBoyle’sphysician,had

persuadedBoyletositin1689,andwhichwasgiventotheSocietyafterhisdeath,

in1692.55

DonationofportraitssoonbecamearecognizableactivityattheSociety.In

1684,SirJosephWilliamson(1633-1701)whohadservedasPresidentfrom1677

to1680presentedhisportraitbyGodfreyKneller(Birch1756-1757,4:345).

AnotherportraitbyKnellerwaspresentedbySirRobertSouthwellofhimselfat

theendofhistenureasPresidentin1695.56SirJohnHoskyns,asVicePresident

sentinanengravingofhimselfin1703,afterwhichhewasaskedforanother

portrait“inoil”.57HoskynshadbeenPresidentfrom1682to1683,andperhaps

therewasanexpectationthatapresident’sportraitoughtbeinoil,butHoskynsin

theenddidnotpresentsuchaportrait.Theseexamplesintheearlyyearsofthe

RoyalSocietysuggestthatdonationsofportraitsbyFellowswerevoluntary,and

34

thekindofportraittobegivenwasuptotheFellowhimself.Portraitsoffellows

couldalsobepresentedbyanotherfellow,asinthecaseofFederickSlare’sgiftof

aportraitofTheodoreHaak,soonafterthelatter’sdeathin1690.58More

commonly,familymembersgaveportraitsofFellowsposthumously:JohnWallis’s

portraitwasgivenbyhissonin1704andJohnEvelyn’sbyhiswidowin1708.59

Asarule,theseweredonationsforwhichtheSocietydidnotpay,except

occasionallyfortheframes.

TheSocietyalsohungportraitsofthosewhowerenotmembersofthe

Society.OnFebruary27,1684,Haakpresentedaportraitofacorrespondentof

theSociety,JohannChristophSturm(1635–1703)ofAltdorf,andJohnMapletofta

portraitofWilliamHarvey,bothofwhichwereorderedtobehunginthemeeting

room(Birch1756-1757,4:261;Keynes2006).Harvey(1578–1657)had

posthumouslybecomeasignificanthero(Jordanova2018,pp.36-41)forthe

Society,whoseworkoncirculationwasextendedtotransfusionexperiments.By

1690,theSocietyalsohadaportraitofThomasHobbes,givenbyJohnAubrey.60

Thismaybesomewhatsurprising,giventheill-tempereddisputeHobbeshadwith

FellowssuchasJohnWallis.InJanuary1696,anotherportraitofHarveywas

presentedbyPoveyalongwithoneofGeorgeBuchanan(1506-1582),theScottish

historian.61ThesewereoriginallyincludedinPovey’ssaleofpaintingstohis

nephew,WilliamBlathwayt,buteitherBlathwaytdidnotwantthemorPoveyhad

secondthoughtsabouttheirappropriatehome.62Poveyinadditionpresentedan

engravingofBuchanan,whichheaskedtobegluedontotothebackofBuchanan’s

portrait.ThiswasprobablytheengravingdonebyRobertWhitein1690which

carriedtheinscriptionthatitwasmadeafterthe“trueimage(veraeffigies)”in

35

Povey’smuseum.63Thoughtheprintisnolongerpresent,havingitgluedontothe

backoftheportraitwouldhaveensuredthatitmarkedthedonor.This

anticipatedthesentimentexpressedintheSociety’sorderslateronthatthe

namesofthesitter,donor,andpaintershouldberecordedonthepaintings,lest

theybe“forgotten”.64In1703,aportraitoftheantiquarianHenrySpelman(1562-

1641)wasgivenbyoneofhisdescendantstotheSocietythroughJohnvande

Bemde.65BothBuchananandSpelmanbelongedtoagenerationwellbeforethe

foundationoftheSociety,butwereconsideredimportantEnglishauthoritiesin

thefieldofhistoryandofantiquariesrespectively(Evelyn1697,p.260).Such

additionsofportraitsofnon-Fellows,whichcontinuedaftertheSociety’smoveto

CraneCourt,suggestsawidersenseofanintellectualgenealogyratherthanjustof

theSocietyitself.Furthermore,avisitingdignitary,theVenetianambassador

Cornaro,gaveamezzotintprintofhimselftomarkhisvisitin1708.Theprintwas

dulyorderedtobeframed,andwashunginthemeetingroom.66

ThewallsofthemeetingroomatGreshamCollegemusthavebeen

crowdedbeforetheSociety’smovein1710,astherehunghalf-lengthcanvases(c.

50x40inches)ofWilkins,Brouncker,Williamson,andBoyle;three-quarter

formatportraits(c.30x25inches)ofHarvey,EvelynandHaak;smallerportraits

ofSturm,BuchananandSpelman;andframedmezzotintsofBoyleandofCornaro.

Infact,by1708,theSocietyhadreceivedtwomoreportraitswhosedonations

werenotformallyrecorded,namelythoseofEdmundHalleyandofSamuelPepys

(Hatton1708,2:666).Theseportraitswereflankedbyotheritemswhichhad

beenorderedtobeputuponthewall,suchasWaller’scolourchartin1687(Birch

1756-1757,4:459),Hooke’sbarometerin1695,adrawingoftheGiantsCauseway

36

in1697,amapofHalley’svoyagesin1701,Wren’sground-planofStPaul’sin

1703,andapictureofa“urus”sentbyGottfriedWilhelmLeibnizin1705.67Itis

possiblethatitwasalsointhemeetingroomthattheprintoftheRoyalExchange,

forwhichHookewaspaid10shillings,washung.68

ThedisplayofportraitsofFellowsandotherpastandpresent“worthies”

alongsideimagesexaminedatthemeetingsoftheRoyalSocietyhelpedtocreatea

visualmemorialforaninstitutionwhichhadfromitsbeginningworriedaboutits

permanence,andwantednottobe“forgotten”.69Notallpaintingsandhangings

havesurvived(Moore2013),butthecumulativeeffectofindividualdonationswas

theemergenceofatradition,tobuildavisualidentityoftheinstitution.70

Conclusion

ThomasKirke,aFellowoftheRoyalSocietywhoownedacopyofNorgate’s

“Miniatura”,learnedtodrawbycopyingprints,andheturnsouttohavebeen

fairlycompetentatit,whenhecopiedoutanillustrationfromPhilosophical

Transactions(fig.5.ThomasKirke’scopyinpenandinkoftheengravingforissue

170ofPhilosophicalTransactions(1685),signedbottomleft“TKdelin[eavit].

1695”,TrinityCollegeLibrary,Cambridge.Inkonpaper,193x300mm(frame).

©BykindpermissionoftheMasterandFellowsoftheRoyalSociety.).Kirke

furtherhopedto“betterhisjudgement”oncollectableprintsbyaccompanying

WilliamLodgearoundLondon’sprintsellers(Hake1922,p.62).Similarexamples

maybefoundwithotherfellows:SirKenelmDigbylearnedaboutmixingcolours

fromRubensandVanDyck(Leonhard2017);thepainterJohnHayls(Hearn2004)

tookPepysaroundtheWhitehallgalleries,showinghimhowto“distinguishand

37

observetheworkmanship”inpaintings,whichresultedinPepys’srealisationthat

somepaintingswerenotasgoodashehadpreviouslythought,andhelpedhim

appreciateHayls’spaintingsas“verygood”(Pepys1970-1983,7:97).Engravers

andpaintersthusguidedthevisualtrainingofmembersoftheSocietywhowere

alsoaspiringcollectors.Infact,theyhadmuchmoretoofferthantheedification

andtrainingoftheirclients’eyes.WehavealreadyseenhowStreater’sstudio

becameanimpromptusiteforexperimentingwithdistemper.Painters’studios

werealsoimportantmeetingplaces.ItwasbecausePettywasproficientin

drawing,accordingtoAubrey,thathebecameacquaintedwiththeminiaturist

SamuelCooper,andthroughCooper,cametoknowHobbes(Aubrey20152:

763).71Quiteafewpainters,includingLely(Detholff2002)andWright(Evelyn

[1955]2000,3:372)werealsocollectors,andpainters’proximitytothepowerful

becauseoftheircommissionsmadethemusefulsocialcontacts.72Justas

coffeehousesandprintshopshavebeennotedasrelevantsocialcontextsforthe

communicationandconductofexperimentalnaturalphilosophyattheRoyal

Society(Johns2006),painters’studiostooshouldbeacknowledgedamongthe

networksthroughwhichmembersoftheRoyalSocietymoved(Archer2000).

Itisalsoworthrecallingthatthefirst(andlast)publicationinwhichthe

RoyalSocietywasfinanciallyinvolvedinitsfirstfiftyyearswasalavishly

illustratedbookonthenaturalhistoryoffishes,Historiapiscium(1686).Itwasa

collaborativeprojectinthattheincompleteandimage-lessnotesleftbyFrancis

Willughbyonhisdeathhadtobecompletedandedited,imageshadtobesourced

andengraved,andpaperandprintinghadtobeorganisedbyFellowssuchas

MartinLister,JohnRay,PhilipSkippon,andFrancisAston(Kusukawa2000).The

38

mainsourceofimagesforHistoriapisciumwasHippolitoSalviani’sAquatilium

animaliumhistoriaeliberprimus(1554)(Kusukawa2014).Thischoicemaywell

havebeenduetothefactthatSkippon,travellingwithWillughbyandRay,had

seenin1665atthefamedmuseumofCassianodalPozzo“Salvianus’sfishesdone

tothelifeinminiature”(McBurneyetal.2017,2:485-6).Pepys,whowas

PresidentoftheRoyalSocietyatthetimeofthepublication,madethelargest

individualcontributiontothesubscriptionofillustrations.Hemayhavefeltthat

givenhispositionandtheincreasingfinancialburdenoftheprojectontheSociety,

heshouldleadbyexample,butitmayalsohavebeenapersonalendorsementofa

large,lavishlyillustratedbook,becauseofhiskeeninterestasacollectorand

patronofartworks.

BeingabletoappreciateagoodprintorpaintingandbeingaFellowofthe

RoyalSocietyrequiredknowledgeandappreciationoftheprocessesofmaking

images.Avarietyofunusualimageswereexaminedfortheirmaterialtechniques

andmanufacturingprocessatthemeetingsoftheRoyalSociety.Aninterestin

palaeographyledtomusingsaboutpainters’identitythroughtheirhandiwork.

Thegentleman-etcher,Hollar,washighlyregarded,andKnellerwasafavoured

painterbywhomFellowscouldleaveavisuallegacyoftheirmembershipatthe

RoyalSociety.ThoseoutsidetheRoyalSocietyhadtheimpressionthatits

memberscaredabout,oratleastwereinterestedinimages.Itwouldbe

misleadingtostatethattherewasacoherentsetofvisualvaluesuniqueand

observableineverymemberoftheearlyRoyalSociety,justasitwouldbe

misleadingtoclaimthattheywerewhollyuninterestedinimages.Such

heterogeneityshouldnotsurpriseus,givenhowvariedtheactivitiesand

39

publicationsoftheRoyalSocietywereinitsearlyyears.Suchheterogeneityis

evidence,infact,ofthemultiplewaysinwhichFellowsoftheRoyalSociety

engagedwithvisualculture.

40

References

Manuscripts

TheBritishLibrary

AddMS4459

GloucestershireArchives

D1799/E247-E248

TheNationalArchives

PROB/11/435(EdmundWylde)

PROB/11/421(SirTheodoredeVaux)

TheRoyalSocietyArchives,London[RSA]

AB/1/1/3(1683-1722)

Cl.P/2

Cl.P/3i

Cl/P/9i

EL/M1

CMO/4

EL/L5

JBC/7

JBC/8

JBC/9

JBO/9

41

JBO/10

JBO/11

MM/20

MS/131

MS/136

RBO/2i

RBO/3

PrintedWorks

Aglionby,William.1685.Paintingillustratedinthreediallogues:containingsome

choiceobservationsupontheart:togetherwiththelivesofthemosteminent

painters,fromCimabue,tothetimeofRaphael.London:J.Gainfortheauthor.

Agnew,Jean,ed.2012.TheWhirlpoolofMisadventures:LettersofRobertPaston,

FirstEarlofYarmouth,1663-1679.Norfolk:NorfolkRecordSociety.

Aleci,LindaKlinger.1998."Imagesofidentity:Italianportraitcollectionsofthe

fifteenthandsixteenthcenturies."Pp.67-79inTheImageoftheIndividual:

portraitsintheRenaissance.EditedbyNicholasMannandLukeSyson.London:

BritishMuseumPress.

Anstey,Peter.2012."FrancisBaconandtheClassificationofNaturalHistory."

EarlyScienceandMedicine17(1-2):11-31.

Archer,Ian.W.2000."SocialNetworksinRestorationLondon:theEvidenceof

SamuelPepys'sDiary."Pp.76-94inCommunitiesinEarlyModernEngland:

42

Networks,PlaceandRhetoric.EditedbyAlexandraShepardandPhilWithington.

ManchesterandNewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress.

Aubrey,John.1898.JohnAubrey,'Brieflives,'chieflyofcontemporaries.Editedby

AndrewClark.Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Aubrey,John.2015.Brieflives:with,AnapparatusforthelivesofourEnglish

mathematicalwriters.EditedbyK.Bennett.2vols.Oxford:OxfordUniversity

Press.

Bacon,Francis.2004.TheInstauratiomagnaPartII:Novumorganumand

AssociatedTexts.EditedbyGrahamReesandMariaWakeley.Oxford:Clarendon

Press.

Baker,Tawrin,Dupré,Sven,Kusukawa,SachikoandLeonhard,Karin,eds.2015.

EarlyModernColorWorlds.Leiden:Brill.

Batchelor,Tim.2016."‘Deceivesinanacceptable,amusingandpraiseworthy

fashion’:Stilllife,Illusion,andDeception."Pp.335-52inCourt,Country,City:

BritishArtandArchitecture,1660-1735.EditedbyMarkHallett,N.Llewlynand

MartinMyrone,.NewHavenandLondon:YaleUniversityPress.

Baxandall,Michael.1990."EnglishDisegno."Pp.203-214inEnglandandthe

ContinentalRenaissance:EssaysinHonorofJ.B.Trapp.EditedbyEdwardChaney

andPeterMack.London:Boydell.

Bennett,J.A.1982.ThemathematicalscienceofChristopherWren.Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversityPress.

Birch,Thomas.1756-1757.ThehistoryoftheRoyalSocietyofLondonforimproving

ofnaturalknowledge.4vols.London:A.Millar.

43

Bird,Rufus,andMartinClayton,eds.2017.CharlesII:Art&Power.London:Royal

CollectionTrust.

Blom,Frans.1981.ChristophandAndreasArnoldandEngland:TheTravelsand

Book-CollectionsofTwoSeventeenth-CenturyNuremburgers.Nijmegen:Katholieke

UniversiteitteNijmegen.

Bluhm,R.K.1958."RemarksontheRoyalSociety'sfinances1660-1768."Notes

andRecordsoftheRoyalSocietyofLondon13:82-108.

Bosse,Abraham.1653.Moyenuniverseldepratiquerlaperspectivesurlestableaux

etsurfacesirrégulières.Paris:A.Bosse.

Bosse,Abraham.1645.Traictédesmanieresdegraverentailledoucesurl'airinpar

lemoyendeseauxsfortes,&desvernixdurs&mols.Paris:A.Bosse.

Bosse,Abraham.1667.LePeintreconvertyauxprécisesetuniversellesreglesdeson

art.Paris:A.Bosse.

Bredekamp,Horst.2007."Leibniz'sTheaterofNatureandArtandtheIdeaofa

UniversalPictureAtlas."Pp.211-23inTheartificialandthenatural:anevolving

polarity.EditedbyBernadetteBensaude-VincentandWilliamR.Newman.

Cambridge,MA:MITPress.

Brett,Cécile.2009/10."AntonioVerrio(c1636-1707):Hiscareerandsurviving

work."BritishArtJournal10(3):4-17.

Brusati,Celeste.1995.Artificeandillusion:theartandwritingofSamuelvan

Hoogstraten.Chicago;London:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Bushart,Magdalena,andFriedrichSteinle,eds.2015.ColourHistories.Science,art,

andtechnologyinthe17thand18thcenturies.Berlin:W.deGruyter.

44

Chaney,Edward.1980."VanDyck,JohnHoskins,JeanPetitotandtheEx-Votoof

QueenHenriettaMaria."BurlingtonMagazine122(933):837-838.

Chaney,Edward.2003.TheevolutionofEnglishcollecting:thereceptionofItalian

artintheTudorandStuartperiods.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress.

Comenius,JohannAmos.1659.Orbissensualiumpictus,hocest,Omnium

fundamentaliuminmundorerum,&invitaactionum,pictura&

nomenclatura…Commenius'sVisibleworld,or,Apictureandnomenclatureofallthe

chiefthingsthatareintheworld,andofmensemploymentstherein.Translatedby

CharlesHoole.London:J.Kirton.

Cowan,Brian.1998."ArenasofConnoisseurship:AuctioningArtInLaterStuart

England."Pp.153-66inAuctioningArtinLaterStuartEngland.EditedbyMichael

NorthandDavidOrmrod.Aldershot:Ashgate.

Cowan,Brian.2004."Anopenelite:thepeculiaritiesofconnoisseurshipinearly

modernEngland."ModernIntellectualHistory1(2):151-183.

Croone,William.1666.“AnAccomptoftheUseoftheGrainofKermesfor

Coloration”PhilosophicalTransactions1(20):362-363.

Cust,L.H.rev.C.Lee.2004."Morgan,Sylvanus(1620–1693)."InOxfordDictionary

ofNationalBiography.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Daston,Lorraine.2015."EpistemicImages."InVisionanditsinstruments:art,

scienceandtechnologyinearlymodernEurope,editedbyA.Payne,13-35.

Philadelphia:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress.

Detholff,Diana.2002."PeterLelyasacollectorofprintsanddrawings."InArtists’s

CollectionsofPrintsandDrawings,editedbyElamBaker,55-63.Aldershot:

Ashgate.

45

Dickson,DonaldR.1997."ThomasHenshawandSirRobertPaston'spursuitofthe

redelixir:AnearlycollaborationbetweenfellowsofTheRoyalSociety."Notesand

RecordsoftheRoyalSociety51(1):57-76

Doherty,Meghan.2012."Discoveringthe‘trueform:’Hooke'sMicrographiaand

thevisualvocabularyofengravedportraits."NotesandRecordsoftheRoyal

Society66(3):211-234.

Dufresnoy,Charles-Alphonse.1695.Deartegraphica.Theartofpainting.

TranslatedbyJohnDryden.London:PrintedbyJ.HeptinstallforW.Rogers.

Ellis,Charles.1703.‘AnextractofalettertoDrEdwardTysonfromtheRev.Mr

CharlesEllis.”PhilosophicalTransactionsvol.23no.286:1416-1418.

Evelyn,John.1662.Sculptura:orThehistory,andartofchalcographyand

engravingincopper.London:J.CottrellforG.Beedle,T.Collins,J.Crook

Evelyn,John.1664.Aparalleloftheancientarchitecturewiththemodern.London:

T.RoycroftforJ.Place.

Evelyn,John.1668.Anideaoftheperfectionofpainting:demonstratedfromthe

principlesofart,andbyexamplesconformabletotheobservations,whichPlinyand

Quintilianhavemadeuponthemostcelebratedpiecesoftheantientpainters,

paralled'dwithsomeworksofthemostfamousmodernpainters,LeonardodaVinci,

Raphael,JulioRomano,andN.Poussin.London:HenryHerringman.

Evelyn,John.1697.Numismata,adiscourseofmedals,ancientandmodern.

London:B.Tooke.

Evelyn,John.1870.MemoirsofJohnEvelyn:comprisinghisdiary,from1641-1705-

6,andaselectionofhisfamiliarletters.EditedbyWilliamBray.London:A.Murray.

46

Evelyn,John.(1955)2000.ThediaryofJohnEvelyn:nowprintedinfullfromthe

manuscriptsbelongingtoMr.JohnEvelyn.6vols.EditedbyEsmondSamuelDe

Beer.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Faithorne,William.1662.Theartofgraveingandetching:whereinisexprestthe

truewayofgraueingincopper:allsothemanner&methodofthatfamousCallot&

Mr.Bosseintheirseuerallwaysofetching.London:W.Faithorne.

Feeser,Andrea,MaureenDalyGoggin,andBethFowkesTobin.eds.2012.The

materialityofcolor:theproduction,circulation,andapplicationofdyesand

pigments,1400-1800.Farnham:Ashgate.

Feingold,Mordechai.1998."Ofrecordsandgrandeur:thearchiveoftheRoyal

Society."InArchivesofthescientificrevolution:theformationandexchangeofideas

inseventeenth-centuryEurope,editedbyMichaelHunter,171-184.Woodbridge:

Boydell.

Félibien,André.1666.Entretienssurlesviesetsurlesouvragesdesplusexcellens

peintres,AnciensetModernes.Paris:P.Petit.

Félibien,André.1669.Conferencesdel’academieRoyaledepeintureetdesculpture,

pendentl’anée1667.Paris:F.Leonhard.

Feola,Vittoria,andScottMandelbrote.2013."Thelearnedpress:geography,

scienceandmathematics."Pp.308-49InTheHistoryofOxfordUniversityPress,

editedbyIanGadd,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Flis,Nathan.2012."Drawing,Etching,andExperimentinChristopherWren’s

FigureoftheBrain."InterdisciplinaryScienceReviews37(2):145-160.

Flis,Nathan.2015."FrancisBarlow,theKing’sBirds,andtheOrnithologyof

FrancisWillughbyandJohnRay."HuntingtonLibraryQuarterly78(2):263-300.

47

Foster,M.andA.W.Rücker.eds.1897.TheRecordoftheRoyalSocietyofLondon.

London:HarrisonandSons.

Fransen,Sietske.2019.“AntonivanLeeuwenhoek,HisImages,andDraughtsmen”.

PerspectivesonScience.

Fréart,Roland.1662.Idéedelaperfectiondelapeinture:demonstrâeeparles

principesdel'art,etpardesexemples.AuMans:del'impr.deI.Ysambart.

Geraghty,Anthony.2007.ThearchitecturalDrawingsofSirChristopherWrenatAll

SoulsCollege,Oxford:ACompleteCatalogue.Aldershot:Ashgate.

Gibson-Wood,Carol.1997."ClassificationandValueinaSeventeenth-Century

Museum."Journalofthehistoryofcollections9(1):61-77.

Gibson-Wood,Carol.2002."PictureconsumptioninLondonattheendofthe

seventeenthcentury."ArtBulletin84(3):491-500.

Gibson-Wood,Carol.2003."Susannaandherelders:JohnEvelyn'sartistic

daughter."InJohnEvelynandhismilieu,editedbyM.HunterandF.Harris,233-

254.London:BritishLibrary.

Greengrass,Mark.2004."Comenius,JohannAmos(1592–1670)."InOxford

DictionaryofNationalBiography.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Grew,Nehemiah.1681.MusæumRegalisSocietatis.Oracatalogue&descriptionof

thenaturalandartificialraritiesbelongingtotheRoyalSocietyandpreservedat

GreshamColledge.London:W.Rawlins.

Grew,Nehemiah.2012.NehemiahGrewandEngland'sEconomicDevelopment:the

meansofamostampleincreaseofthewealthandstrengthofEngland1706-7.

EditedbyJulianHoppit.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

48

Griffiths,Antony.1992.“TheArchofTitusbyCarloMalatti.”NationalArt

CollectionsFundAnnualReview:35-37.

Griffiths,Antony.1993."TheetchingsofJohnEvelyn."Pp.51-67inArtand

patronageintheCarolinecourts:EssaysinhonourofSirOliverMillar,editedby

DavidHowarth,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Griffiths,Antony.2003."JohnEvelynandthePrint."InJohnEvelynandhismilieu,

editedbyM.HunterandF.Harris,95-113.London:BritishLibrary.

Griffiths,Antony.2004a."Burghers,Michael(1647/6-1727)."InOxfordDictionary


Griffiths,Antony.2004b."Faithorne,William(c.1620-1691).”InOxfordDictionary


Griffiths,Antony.2004c."Lodge,William(1649–1689).”InOxfordDictionaryof

NationalBiography.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Griffiths,Antony.2004d."Savage,John(fl.1683–1701)."InOxfordDictionaryof


Griffiths,Antony.2004e."White,Robert(1645–1703)."InOxfordDictionaryof


Gunther,RobertT.1939.EarlyScienceinOxford.Vol.XIIDrPlotandthe

CorrespondenceofthePhilosophicalSocietyofOxford.Oxford:R.T.Gunther.

Gunther,RobertT.1945.EarlyScienceinOxford.Vol.XIV.Lifeandlettersof

EdwardLhwyd,secondkeeperoftheMusaeumAshmoleanum.Oxford:R.T.

Gunther.

49

Hake,HenryM.,ed.1922.SomecontemporaryrecordsrelatingtoFrancisPlace,

withacatalogueofhisengravedwork.Vol.10,TheWalpoleSocietyPublications.

London:TheWalpoleSociety.

Hallett,Mark,N.Llewlyn,andMartinMyrone,eds.2016.Court,Country,City:

BritishArtandArchitecture,1660-1735.NewHavenandLondon:YaleUniversity

Press.

Hanson,CraigAshley.2009.TheEnglishVirtuoso:Art,medicine,and

antiquarianismintheageofempiricism.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Harris,John.1979.TheArtistandtheCountryHouse:AHistoryofCountryHouse

andGardenViewPaintinginBritain1540-1870.London:SothebyParkBernet.

Hartlib,Samuel.1654.ThetrueandreadiewaytolearnetheLatinetongueattested

bythreeexcelentlylearnedandapprovedauthoursofthreenations,London:R.and

W.Laybourn.

Hatton,Edward.1708.AnewviewofLondon;or,Anampleaccountofthatcity:in

twovolumes,oreightsections.2vols.London:R.Chiswell,A.andJ.Churchill,T.

Horne,J.Nicholson,andR.Knaplock.

Hearn,Karen.2004."Hayls,John(d.1679)."InOxfordDictionaryofNational

Biography.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Henderson,Felicity.2013."Faithfulinterpreters?TranslationTheoryandPractice

attheEarlyRoyalSociety."NotesandRecordsoftheRoyalSociety67:101-122.

Henderson,Felicity.2019.“RobertHookeandthevisualworldoftheearlyRoyal

Society”.PerspectivesonScience.

Heyworth,Peter.2004."Wanley,Humfrey(1672-1726)."InOxfordDictionaryof


50

Hiscock,W.G.1937.DavidGregory,IsaacNewtonandtheircircle:extractsfrom

DavidGregory'smemoranda1677-1708.Oxford:Printedfortheeditor.

Hobbes,Thomas.1994.Thecorrespondence.2vols.EditedbyN.Malcolm.Oxford:

ClarendonPress.

Hollar,Wenceslaus.2009-2012.WenceslausHollar1607-1677.9vols.Editedby

SimonTurnerandGiuliaBartrum.OuderkerkaandenIJsselSound&Visionand

theBritishMuseum.

Hooke,Robert.1665.Micrographia,or,Somephysiologicaldescriptionsofminute

bodiesmadebymagnifyingglasses.London:J.Martyn,andJ.Allestry.

Hooke,Robert.1935.ThediaryofRobertHookeF.R.S.,1672-1680:transcribedfrom

theoriginalinthepossessionoftheCorporationoftheCityofLondon(Guildhall

Library).EditedbyHenryW.RobinsonandWalterAdams.London:Taylorand

Francis.

Hoppen,K.Theodore,ed.2008.PapersoftheDublinPhilosophicalSociety1683-

1709.Dublin:IrishManuscriptsCommission.

Horace.1978.Satires.Epistles.TheArtofPoetry.TranslatedbyH.Rushton

Fairclough.Cambridge,MA.:HarvardUniversityPress.

Houghton,WalterE.Jr.1941."TheHistoryofTrades:ItsRelationtoSeventeenth-

CenturyThought:AsSeeninBacon,Petty,Evelyn,andBoyle."Journalofthe

HistoryofIdeas2(1):33-60.

Howarth,David,ed.1993.ArtandpatronageintheCarolinecourts:Essaysin

honourofSirOliverMillar.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Howarth,David.1985.LordArundelandhiscircle.NewHaven:YaleUniversity

Press.

51

Hunter,MatthewC.2013.WickedIntelligence:VisualArtandtheScienceof

ExperimentinRestorationLondon.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Hunter,Michael,andFrancisHarris,eds.2003.JohnEvelynandhismilieu.London:

BritishLibrary.

Hunter,Michael,andJ.A.Bennett.2017.TheImageofRestorationScience:the

FrontispiecetoThomasSprat'sHistoryoftheRoyalSociety(1667).London;New

York:Routledge.

Hunter,Michael.(1982)1994.TheRoyalSocietyanditsFellows1660-1700:The

morphologyofanearlyscientificinstitution.ChalfontSt.Giles,Bucks:British

SocietyfortheHistoryofScience.

Hunter,Michael.1989.EstablishingtheNewScience:theExperienceoftheEarly

RoyalSociety.Woodbridge:Boydell.

Hunter,Michael.1995.Scienceandtheshapeoforthodoxy:intellectualchangein

lateseventeenth-centuryBritain.Woodbridge:Boydell.

Hunter,Michael.2007."RobertBoyleandtheearlyRoyalSociety:areciprocal

exchangeinthemakingofBaconianScience."BritishJournalforHistoryofScience

40(1):1-23.

Hunter,Michael.2009.Boyle:betweenGodandScience.NewHaven,Conn.;

London:YaleUniversityPress.

Hunter,Michael.2011."TheRoyalSocietyandtheDeclineofMagic."Notesand

RecordsoftheRoyalSociety65:103-119.

Iliffe,R.1995."Materialdoubts:Hooke,artisancultureandtheexchangeof

informationin1670sLondon."TheBritishjournalforthehistoryofscience28

(3):285-318.

52

Iliffe,R.2012."Hartlib'sworld."InLondonandbeyond:essaysinhonourofDerek

Keene.,editedbyMatthewP.DaviesandJamesA.Galloway.London:Instituteof

HistoricalResearch.

Johns,A.2006."CoffeehousesandPrintShops."InTheCambridgeHistoryof

Science,editedbyK.ParkandL.Daston,320-340.Cambridge:Cambridge

UniversityPress.

Johnston,Stephen.2010."Wren,Hookeandgraphicalpractice."Journalofthe

HistoryofAstronomy41:381-92.

Jordanova,Ludmilla.2018.PhysiciansandTheirImages.London:RoyalCollegeof

Physicians.

Junius,Franciscus.1991.ThePaintingoftheAncients(Depicturaveterum)2vols.

EditedbyKeithAldrich,PhilippP.Fehl,andRainaFehl.Berkeley:Universityof

CaliforniaPress.

Kaye,I.1951."UnrecordedearlymeetingsoftheRoyalSociety."Notesand

RecordsoftheRoyalSociety8:149-166.

Keller,Vera.2018."ScarletLetters:SirTheodoredeMayerneandtheEarlyStuart

ColorWorldintheRoyalSociety."Pp.72-119inArchivalAfterlives:Life,Death,and

Knowledge-MakinginEarlyModernBritishScientificandMedicalArchives.Edited

byVeraKeller,AnnaMarieRoosandElizabethYale.Leiden:Brill.

Kemp,Wolfgang.1974."Disegno:BeiträgezurGeschichtedesBegriffszwischen

1547und1607"MarburgerJahrbuchfürKunstwissenschaft19:219-40.

Keynes,Milo.2006."ThePortraitofDr.WilliamHarveyintheRoyalSocietysince

1683"NotesandRecordsoftheRoyalSociety60(3):249-52.

53

Knight,Vivien.2004."FirstartcommissionforGuildhall:'...picturesbetakenbya

skilfulhand&keptinsomepubliqueplaceofthecity...'."Pp.145-58inCity

MerchantsandtheArts1670-1720.EditedbyMireilleGalinou.London:Oblongfor

theCorporationofLondon.

Kusukawa,S.2000."TheHistoriaPiscium(1686)."NotesandRecordsoftheRoyal

Society54(2):179-197.

Kusukawa,S.2011."PicturingknowledgeintheearlyRoyalSociety:theexamples

ofRichardWallerandHenryHunt."NotesandRecordsoftheRoyalSociety65(3):

273-94.

Kusukawa,S.2012."ThomasKirke'scopyofPhilosophicalTransactions."

SpontaneousGenerations6(1):8-14.

Kusukawa,S.2013."ThefossildrawingsbyRobertHookeandRichardWaller."

NotesandRecordsoftheRoyalSociety67(2):123-138.

Kusukawa,S.2014a."AligningobservationsinEdwardTyson's"LumbricusLatus"

(1684)."Historiascientiarum23(3):167-190

Kusukawa,S.2014b."ConradGessneronan"advivum"image."Pp.330-356in

WaysofMakingandKnowing:thematerialcultureofempiricalknowledge.Edited

byPamelaH.Smith,H.J.CookandAmyR.W.Meyers.AnnArbor:TheUniversityof

MichiganPress.

Kusukawa,S.2015."RichardWaller’sColourChart(1686)."Pp.3-21inColour

Histories.Science,art,andtechnologyinthe17thand18thcenturies,editedby

FriedrichSteinleandMagdalenaBushart.Berlin:W.deGruyter.

Landolt,E.1972."MaterialenzuFelixPlatteralsSammlerundKunstfreund."

BaslerZeitschriftfürGeschichteundAltertumskunde72:245-306.

54

Lauze,Emma.2004."Howard,Hugh(1675–1738)."InOxfordDictionaryof


Leith-Ross,Prudence,andHenriettaMcBurney.2000.TheFlorilegiumofAlexander

Marshal:inthecollectionofHerMajestyTheQueenatWindsorCastle.London:

RoyalCollection.

Leonhard,Karin.2017."'Thevariousnaturesofmiddlingcolourswemaylearneof

painters":SirKenelmDigbylooksatRubensandVanDyck."Pp.163-185in

KnowledgeandDiscernmentintheEarlyModernArts.EditedbySvenDupréand

ChristineGöttler.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.

Levine,JosephM.1999.BetweentheAncientsandtheModerns:BaroqueCulturein

RestorationEngland.NewHaven;London:YaleUniversityPress

Lhuyd,Edward.1698.“Concerningseveralregularlyfiguredstoneslatelyfound.”

PhilosophicalTransactionsoftheRoyalSocietyvol.20no.243(August1698):279-

80.

Liedtke,W.1991.“PepysandthePictorialArts.”Apollo133:227–37.

Lynch,WilliamT.(2016).“AsocietyofBaconians?Thecollectivedevelopmentof

Bacon'smethodintheRoyalSocietyofLondon”.Pp.173-202inFrancisBaconand

therefiguringofearlymodernthought.EditedbyJulieRobinSolomonand

CatherineGimelliMartin.LondonandNewYork,2016.

Lyon,Harriet.2017."TheFishertonmonster:science,providence,andpoliticsin

earlyRestorationEngland."HistoricalJournal60(2):333-362.

Maddison,R.E.W.1959."ThePortraitureoftheHonourableRobertBoyle."Annals

ofScience15:141-214.

55

Malpighi,Marcello.1975.ThecorrespondenceofMarcelloMalpighi.Editedby

HowardBAdelmann.5vols.IthacaN.Y.:CornellUniversityPress.

Marr,Alexander.2016."Knowingimages."RenaissanceQuarterly69:1000-1013

McHam,SarahBlake.2013.PlinyandtheArtisticCultureoftheItalianRenaissance:

TheLegacyoftheNaturalHistory.NewHavenandLondon:YaleUniversityPress.

McBurney,Henrietta,IanRolfe,CaterinaNapoleone,andPaulaFindlen,eds.2017.

Birds,otheranimalsandnaturalcuriosities,ThePaperMuseumofCassianodal

Pozzo.2vols.London:RoyalCollectionTrustinassociationwithHarveyMiller

Publishers.

McTighe,Sheila.1998."AbrahamBosseandtheLanguageofArtisans:Genreand

PerspectiveintheAcademieroyaledepeintureetdesculpture,1648-1670."

OxfordArtJournal21(1):3-26.

Melion,WalterS.1991.ShapingtheNetherlandishCanon:KarelvanMander's

Schilder-boeck.Chicago;London:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Montague,M.F.Ashley.1943.EdwardTyson,MD,FRS1650-1708:andtheriseof

humanandcomparativeanatomyinEngland:astudyinthehistoryofscience.

Philadelphia:TheAmericanPhilosophicalSociety.

Moore,Keith.2013."TheRoyalSociety'sLostSeventeenth-CenturyPortraits"

NotesandRecordsoftheRoyalSociety67:173-178.

Moxham,Noah.2015."Fitforprint:developinganinstitutionalmodelofscientific

periodicalpublishinginEngland,1665-ca.1714."NotesandRecordsoftheRoyal

Society69(3):241-260.

Murison,BarbaraC.2004."Povey,Thomas(1613/4-1705)."InOxfordDictionary


56

Newman,WilliamR.1998."AlchemicalandBaconianViewsoftheArt-Nature

Division."InReadingtheBookofNature:theothersideofthescientificrevolution,

editedbyAllenG.DebusandMichaelT.Walton.Kirksville,MO:SixteenthCentury

JournalPublishers.

Newton,Isaac.1959-77.ThecorrespondenceofIsaacNewton.EditedbyH.W.

Turnbull.7vols.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Norgate,Edward.1997.MiniaturaortheArtofLimning.EditedbyJeffreyM.

MullerandJimMurrell.NewHavenandLondon:PaulMellonCentreforBritishArt

byYaleUniversityPress.

Ochs,Kathleen.1985."TheRoyalSocietyofLondon'sHistoryofTrades

Programme:AnEarlyEpisodeinAppliedScience."NotesandRecordsoftheRoyal

Society39(2):129-58.

Oldenburg,Henry.1665.“AnExperimentofaWayofPreparingaLiquor,That

ShallSinkinto,andColourtheWholeBodyofMarble,CausingaPicture,Drawnon

aSurface,toAppearAlsointheInmostPartsoftheStone.”Philosophical

Transactions1(5):125-127.

Oldenburg,Henry.1666.ReviewofFélibien,Entretienssurlesviesetsurles

ouvragesdesplusexcellenspeintres.PhilosophicalTransactions1(21):383-84.

Oldenburg,Henry.1668.ReviewofEvelyn,Anideaoftheperfectionofpainting.

PhilosophicalTransactions2(39):784-85.

Oldenburg,Henry.1669.Revi

The Early Royal Society and Visual Culture Sachiko Kusukawa1 › download › pdf ›...

Documents

Transcript of The Early Royal Society and Visual Culture Sachiko Kusukawa1 › download › pdf ›...