In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Science and Technology beyond the Barricades
  • Theresa Levitt (bio)
Robert Fox, The Savant and The State.
John Tresch, The Romantic Machine.

The history of nineteenth-century French science after Napoleon has long labored under a cloud of decline. For too long, the question "What went wrong?" has crowded out other inquiry, and the standard answer—an overcautious positivism that refused to speak of anything other than observable facts—has made the period look sterile and uninteresting. But France at the time was one of the most vibrant and high-stakes battlegrounds of the forces of modernity, and science was at the center of the fight. "The capital of the nineteenth century" was Walter Benjamin's phrase for Paris, and two recent books have recovered that sense of drama and importance to the science being done there. Robert Fox's The Savant and The State: Science and Cultural Politics in Nineteenth-Century France (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012. Pp. 408. $60) and John Tresch's The Romantic Machine: Utopian Science and Technology after Napoleon (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012. Pp. 472. $40), while entirely different in tone and purpose, both establish beyond doubt the centrality of science and technology to the pressing issues of the French public during the tumultuous years following Napoleon's fall.

Fox has published widely on the history of science and technology in France, and his work has already done much to establish our current understanding of the important role of patronage, institutions, and state support for science and industry. This is his first monograph devoted to the subject, and its great strengths are the sweep and coherence of the narrative, which stretches from 1814 to 1914. Its central object of inquiry is what he calls the "public face of science" (p. 1) or the role science played in the [End Page 377] major political, economic, and military debates of the day. Although Fox modestly denies that the coverage is exhaustive, for historians of nineteenth-century French science, it is as close as we could hope for.

He offers several themes to guide us through a troubled and complex history: over the course of the century, science grew in prominence; it became more closely integrated with the bureaucracy of the state; it was increasingly recognized for its role in the national interest and drawn on for ideological positions. But his true interest is in what he calls the "fine structure of science" (p. 2), where he shows that none of these developments happened easily. All were the products of substantial political conflict, negotiation, and reversal. Every public lecture, ministerial appointment, and academy election was an opportunity for a culture clash, and Fox lays out in full detail the stakes in each contest.

Much of the focus is on state institutions. The educational system is foremost among these, and we learn much about the successive regimes at the Ministry of Public Instruction, although the Observatoire, Muséum d'histoire naturelle, and other sites are covered as well. Although Fox rarely completely overturns the reigning stereotype (for instance, that the Second Empire privileged Catholic interests over science instruction, while the Third Republic drafted science into an ideology of secularism), his detailed accounts provide nuance, texture, and some surprises. Fox details, for example, both the failure of the minister of Public Instruction's efforts to tailor science education to industry in the Second Empire and the proliferation of vocational instruction under other auspices, such as the Ministry of Commerce. Overarching historical trends like centralization are given depth and focus by Fox's attention to such figures as Arcisse de Caumont, who devoted his life to supporting provisional science journals and congresses. Although tension between Paris and the provinces runs throughout French history, Caumont's particular story reveals the important role of his legitimist politics and Catholic faith in his efforts to build a scientific culture geared toward consensus, one that avoided the rancorous debates of Paris.

With his focus on the public arena, Fox is not primarily interested in moments of scientific discovery or the development of particular theories. But he does not ignore the content of science, especially when it enters into public debates. One interesting section...

pdf

Share