1. Dalton and Hamer, Provincial Token-Coinage, vol. 1, numbers 688,787, 827, 829, 839–41, 1110, 1121. Several ‘Guy Vaux’ caricatures implicated Thomas Paine, and Richard Newton satirised George III holding up ‘The Combustible Breeches’.
2. Wollstonecraft, Vindication, p. 317, 89, 88.
3. Wollstonecraft, Vindication, p. 7 (couplet from the 1801 Anti-Jacobin Review and Magazine).
4. This account is indebted to Barrell, Birth of Pandora, pp. 145–220 (Thomas Cooke, translator of Hesiod, quoted on p. 148). Rogers, Troublesome Helpmate.
5. Quoted in Baldick, In Frankenstein’s Shadow, p. 22 (on the French Revolution).
6. Wollstonecraft, Vindication, p. 119.
7. Barry, Works, vol. 2, p. 383 (from his 1783 Account of the sixth picture in his series for the Royal Society of Arts).
8. Clarke, Johnson’s Women, p. 27 (from Piozzi’s Anecdotes).
9. Quoted in Bell, ‘“All clear sunshine”’, p. 524 (letter to Polly Stevenson of 1 May 1760).
10. Gentleman’s Magazine 8 (1738), 591 (reprinted from Universal Spectator of 25 November 1738).
1. Woolf, A Room of One’s Own, pp. 48–53.
2. Many books and articles now discuss women in science. In addition to bibliographic encyclopaedias, valuable guides to the literature and issues include: Abir-Am and Outram, Uneasy Careers; Benjamin, Science and Sensibility and Question of Identity; Gates and Shteir, Natural Eloquence; Jordanova, “Gender and historiography”; Hunter and Hutton, Women, Science and Medicine; Kohlstedt and Longino, Women, Gender, and Science (Osiris 12 (1997)); Pycior, Slack and Abir-Am, Creative Couples; Rossiter, Women Scientists in America to 1948; Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex? and Has Feminism Changed Science? For a comparable study of women historians, see Smith, Gender of History.
3. Makin, Essay to Revive Education, p. 35. Vickery, Gentleman’s Daughter, pp. 127–60, and Hutton, ‘Anne Conway, Margaret Cavendish’, pp. 231–2.
4. Martensen, ‘Transformation of Eve’; Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex?, pp. 160–244.
5. Miller, Humours of Oxford, p. 82. Discussions include Mullan, ‘Gendered knowledge, gendered minds’, and Reynolds, Learned Lady, pp. 373–419.
6. Centlivre, Basset-Table, p. 30.
7. Vickery, ‘Golden age’. Grant, Margaret the First, pp. 151–2 (this frontispiece illustrated a book of stories, not one of her weightier works on natural philosophy). Cahn, Industry of Devotion; Laurence, Women in England.
8. Kargon, Atomism, pp. 66–76; Jones, Glorious Fame; Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex?, pp. 47–59.
9. Hunter, ‘Sisters of the Royal Society’; Shapiro, ‘Princess Elizabeth and Descartes’; Walters, ‘Conversation pieces’.
10. Hunter, ‘Sisters of the Royal Society’, and Harris, ‘Living in the neighbourhood’.
11. Aubrey, Brief Lives, p. 33 (Mary Sidney, sister of Philip). Hannay, ‘“How I these studies prize”’.
12. Guest, Small Change, and Goodman, Republic of Letters. Fara, Newton, pp. 136–7.
13. Gascoigne, Banks, pp. 23–6.
14. Simon, ‘Mineralogy’, quotation on p. 132.
15. Harkness, ‘Managing an experimental household’.
16. Uglow, Lunar Men, pp. 313, 383.
17. Iliffe and Willmoth, ‘Astronomy and the domestic sphere’, pp. 244–57.
18. Lalande, Ladies Astronomy. Connor, ‘Mme Lepaute’; Poirier, Histoire des femmes de science, pp. 155–64.
19. Fara, Newton, pp. 89–97.
20. Uglow, Lunar Men, p. 86.
21. Uglow, Lunar Men, pp. 313, 320.
22. Gould, ‘Invisible woman’, pp. 27–8; Richmond, ‘Early history of genetics’, pp. 87–90. Henry, Prisoner of History, pp. 121–4.
23. Tomaselli, ‘Collecting women’. For eighteenth-century women’s biographical collections, see Guest, Small Change, pp. 49–50, 64–9, 168–72. Important examples of this genre for scientific women include: Alic, Hypatia’s Heritage; Mozans, Woman in Science (note the interesting singular!); Osen, Women in Mathematics; Rebière, Les femmes dans la science. Encyclopaedic reference books are their more scholarly successors. Particularly useful ones include: Creese, Ladies in the Laboratory; Kass-Simon and Farnes, Women of Science; Ogilvie and Harvey, Biographical Dictionary; Poirier, Histoire des femmes de science; Weisbard, History of Women.
24. Neeley, Somerville, pp. 11–44, 199–239. Tabor, Pioneer Women, exemplifies this bifurcated approach.
25. From Biography for Beginners by E. C. Bentley (the C stands for Clerihew). Wagner-Martin, Telling Women’s Lives (for Woolf and Eliot, see pp. 11, 32–8); Backscheider, Reflections on Biography, pp. 127–62 and Heilbrun, Writing a Woman’s Life. See also Richards, Angles of Reflection.
26. Pycior, ‘Pierre Curie and his “eminent collaborator”’.
27. See Shapin, Scientific Revolution, pp. 167–211 for a bibliographic essay on the enormous literature. Cunningham and Williams, ‘De-centring “the big picture”’.
28. Nye, ‘Masculine “fields of honor”’.
29. Carroll, ‘The politics of “originality”’. Pumfrey, ‘Who did the work?’; Shapin, ‘House of experiment’; Secord, ‘Science in the pub’. See also Anderson and Zinsser, History of Their Own.
30. Cooter and Pumfrey, ‘Separate spheres and public places’.
31. Charles Lyell quoted in Farrell, ‘Gentlewomen of science’, p. 153.
32. Fores’s quotations from Jordanova, Nature Displayed, pp. 23–5.
33. Jordanova, Nature Displayed, pp. 21–47; Porter, ‘Touch of danger’; Vickery, Gentleman’s Daughter, pp. 90–110; Wilson, Making of Man-Midwifery.
34. Darwin, Correspondence, vol. 4 , p. 147 (letter to Emma of 27–8 May 1848). Browne, Darwin, especially pp. 40, 76–7.
35. Browne, Darwin, especially pp. 146–7, 359–62.
36. Farrell, ‘Gentlewomen of science’, especially pp. 153–92 (quotation from a letter to her sister of 6 January 1854).
37. Hartman, Victorian Murderesses.
1. Joseph Glanvill, Plus Ultra: The Progress and Advancement of Knowledge Since the Days of Aristotle (1668). Hunter, Science and Society, pp. 8–31, pp. 194–7, quotation on p. 195 (John Beale). For a recent survey of relevant Baconian literature, see Iliffe, ‘Masculine birth of time’.
2. Hunter, Science and Society, pp. 194–7.
3. Bennett, ‘Mechanics’ philosophy’.
4. Sprat, History of the Royal-Society, pp. 63, 72.
5. Cavendish, Observations on Experimental Philosophy, pp. 43–4. Mintz, ‘Duchess of Newcastle’s visit’. For different interpretations of Cavendish, see: Grant, Margaret the First; Harris, ‘Living in the neighbourhood’; Hutton, ‘Anne Conway, Margaret Cavendish’; Jones, Glorious Fame; Schiebinger The Mind Has No Sex?, pp. 25–6, 47–59.
6. Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex?, pp. 119–59 (picture reproduced on p. 142). Beretta, ‘Source of western science’. Sprat, History of the Royal-Society, p. 327, 124. For female nature in this period, key studies include: Easlea, Witch-Hunting and Fathering the Unthinkable; Jordanova, Sexual Visions and Nature Displayed; Merchant, Death of Nature and ‘Isis’ consciousness’; Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex? and Nature’s Body.
7. Richardson, Iconology, vol. 1, pp. 61–6. This book was closely modelled on Cesare Ripa’s Iconologia, first printed with figures in 1603.
8. Turnbull, vol. 2, pp. 437, 441 (letters of 20 and 29 June 1686).
9. ‘To the Royal Society’, lines 5–7 of Abraham Cowley’s unpaginated poem in Sprat, History of the Royal-Society.
10. Boyle, Works, vol. 1, p. 310 (from Some Considerations Touching Experimental Essays, 1661).
11. Originally in Bacon’s Religious Meditations (‘Of heresies’). Sprat, History of the Royal-Society, p. 129.
12. Joseph Glanvill quoted in Merchant, ‘Isis’ consciousness’, p. 404. Rogers, Troublesome Helpmate.
13. Veldman and Luijten, Dutch and Flemish Etchings: Martin van Heemskerck, vol. 2, pp. 181–5. I am grateful to Anthony Snodgrass for this translation of the (contemporary) Latin, which was almost certainly specially composed by Hadrianus Junius, but does not entirely match the picture: ‘Just as the mother bird leads its feathered offspring out from their early nests into the sky with a fixed melody (rhythm?), urging them to follow and rise up on their little feathers; so Nature, the renewer of everything, providently leads the human race from its soft cradles and the pregnant womb of the parent towards toils and hard labour.’ Some versions have this French caption: ‘Nature au monde met l’homme pour travailler, / Ainsi qu’elle y produit tout oyseau à voller’ (Nature puts mankind into the world to work, just as she makes every bird to fly).
14. Glanvill, Vanity of Dogmatizing, pp. 118, 135. Golinski, ‘Care of the self’.
15. Bacon, Works, vol. 4, p. 296 (from ‘Of the dignity and advancement of learning’). For Bacon, science and gender, see: Hutton, ‘Riddle of the sphinx’; Iliffe, ‘Masculine birth of time’, pp. 441–5; Keller, Reflections on Gender and Science, pp. 33–65 and ‘Secrets of God, nature and life’.
16. Bacon, Works, vol. 4, pp. 20–1 (preface to The Great Instauration). Farrington, Philosophy of Bacon, p. 62 (from ‘The masculine birth of time’).
17. Farrington, Philosophy of Bacon, p. 72 (from ‘The masculine birth of time’).
18. Isaac Barrow quoted in Easlea, Witch-Hunting, p. 246. Edmond Halley, letter to Newton of 1687, Turnbull et al., Correspondence of Newton, vol. 2, p. 474.
19. Oldenburg, Correspondence, vol. 4, p. 77 (letter to Jean-Baptiste Denis of 23 December 1667 about blood transfusion). John Webster and John Evelyn quoted in Easlea, Witch-Hunting, p. 246.
20. 1767 letter quoted in Uglow, Lunar Men, p. 143.
21. Farington, Philosophy of Bacon, p. 129 (from ‘The refutation of philosophies’). Davy, Works, vol. 8, pp. 175–6 (1807 lecture on chemistry). Crookes quoted in Easlea, Fathering the Unthinkable, p. 59.
22. Jordanova, Sexual Visions, pp. 87–110; Reay, Watching Hannah, pp. 46–50.
23. Willard Libby quoted in Easlea, Fathering the Unthinkable, p. 170. Geologist (on the 1980 Mount St Helens eruption) quoted in Merchant, ‘Isis’ consciousness’, p. 405.
24. Two starting points for references to the literature are Kohlstedt and Longino, Women, Gender, and Science, and Schiebinger, Has Feminism Changed Science?
1. Merton, Shoulders of Giants.
2. Du Châtelet, Institutions de physique, p. 6 (‘Nous nous élevons à la connaissance de la vérité, comme ces Géans qui escaladoient les Cieux en montant sur les épaules les uns des autres’). For other interpretations of this image, see Harth, Cartesian Women, p. 198 n.48, and Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex?, pp. 130–31.
1. C. Descartes, ‘Mort de Descartes’, p. 131. Image originally drawn by Bernard Picart for a dissertation by Brillon de Jouy, and later plagiarised by an anonymous artist. Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, August 1707, pp. 232–5 (by Jacques Bernard). Discussed in Duportal, Picart, p. 369, and Saxl, ‘Veritas’, pp. 218–22.
2. My major sources of information on Christina are Åkerman, Queen Christina, pp. 44–69, 103–77, Brummer, ‘Minerva of the north’, and Vrooman, Descartes, pp. 212–48. For the importance of royal patronage, see Ashworth, ‘Habsburg circle’, Biagioli, Galileo Courtier, and Cormack, ‘Twisting the lion’s tail’.
3. C. Descartes, ‘Mort de Descartes’, pp. 131–2; see also Harth, Cartesian Women, pp. 95–8, and Sorbière, Sorberiana, p. 78 (on Descartes sleeping with naked nature). Gaukroger, Descartes, pp. 412–17.
4. Gaukroger, Descartes, pp. 1–14; this ‘intellectual biography’ is my major source of information about Descartes.
5. Bordo, ‘Cartesian masculisination of thought’; Harth, Cartesian Women, pp. 235–9.
6. The only substantial book-length biography of Elisabeth in English is Godfrey, Sister for Prince Rupert, which is almost a hundred years old. Other biographical accounts include Adam, Vie et œuvres de Descartes, pp. 401–31, Cohen, Écrivains, pp. 603–51, and Zedler, ‘Three princesses’, pp. 29–33. 1n my account of the relationship between Elisabeth and Descartes I have relied mainly on Harth, Cartesian Women, pp. 62–78, Néel, Descartes et Elisabeth, and Zedler, ‘Three princesses’, pp. 33–43; other analyses include: Mattern, ‘Descartes’s correspondence with Elizabeth’; Shapiro, ‘Princess Elisabeth and Descartes’; and Vrooman, Descartes, pp. 167–211. The correspondence between Descartes, Elisabeth, Christina and Chanut is conveniently gathered together in one volume, Descartes, Lettres sur la morale; this is an expanded version, in modernised French, of the publication in 1879 of Elisabeth’s letters after missing ones were rediscovered and transcribed by Alexandre Foucher de Careil. All translations from this source are my own. The 1989 edition of this correspondence by Jean-Marie and Michelle Beyssade is not easily obtainable in England.
7. Godfrey, Sister for Prince Rupert, pp. 74–5. Honthorst taught Elisabeth and her younger sister Louise, whose own pictures are sometimes attributed to him. It seems possible, therefore, that Louise may have painted this portrait. In 1714, when Sophie’s son George came to the English throne, the ‘Hanover pearls’ came to England.
8. Harth, Cartesian Women, p. 64. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, p. 5 (21 May 1643) (‘un corps si semblable à ceux que les peintres donnent aux anges’).
9. Sorbière, Sorberiana, pp. 85–6.
10. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, p. 5 (21 May 1643).
11. By Claude Clerselier, in 1657 (letters 3–31, plus others).
12. Samuel Sorbière dedicated his translation of Gassendi, and Constantijn Huyghens his own volume of poems. Rang, ‘“An exceptional mind”’.
13. Israel, Radical Enlightenment, especially pp. 23–58. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, p. 65 (letter from Elisabeth of 16 August 1645). Rang, ‘“An exceptional mind”’.
14. Harth, Cartesian Women, pp. 63–78. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, p. 114 (letter from Descartes to Elisabeth of 3 November 1645).
15. Gaukroger, Descartes, pp. 354–83, especially pp. 361–4.
16. Descartes, Principles of Philosophy, pp. xiv–xvi (originally written in Latin).
17. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 34–9 (Elisabeth’s letter of 1 August 1644 [‘Je crains que vous rétracterez, avec justice, l’opinion que vous eûtes de ma comprehension, quand vous saurel que je n’entends pas comment . . .’] and Descartes’s reply later in August [‘Je supplie très humblement Votre Altesse de me pardonneer, si je n’écris rien ice que fort confusément. Je n’ai point encore le livre . . . et je suis en un voyage continu’]).
18. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 3–9 (Elisabeth’s letter of 16 May 1643, and Descartes’s reply of 21 May 1643).
19. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 10–28 (Elisabeth’s letter of 20 June 1643, Descartes’s reply of 28 June 1643, her reply of 1 July 1643).
20. This definition of wisdom is in the 1647 preface to the French translation: Descartes, Principles of Philosophy, p. xvii. Shapin, ‘Descartes the doctor’ (quotation on p. 136).
21. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 44–5 (letter from Elisabeth to Descartes of 24 May 1645: ‘le corps . . . se ressent très facilement des afflictions de l’âdme); p. 190 (letter from Descartes to Elisabeth of July 1647: ‘l’âme, qui a sans doute beaucoup de force sur le corps, ainsi que montrent les grands changement [sic] que la colère, la crainte et les autres passions excitent en lui’); p. 159 (letter from Descartes to Elisabeth of November 1646: ‘lorsque l’esprit est plein de joie, cela sert beaucoup à faire que le corps se porte mieux’). Gaukroger, pp. 384–417, especially p. 388.
22. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 57–67 (Descartes’s letters of 21 July and 4 August 1645, and Elisabeth’s reply of 16 August 1645.
23. Golinski, ‘Care of the self’ (quotation on p. 131); Shapiro, ‘Princess Elisabeth and Descartes’, pp. 508–17.
24. Néel, Descartes et Elisabeth, pp. 60–102.
25. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, p. 87 (Elisabeth’s letter of 13 September 1645) and p. 115 (Descartes’s letter of 3 November 1645).
26. Gaukroger, Descartes, pp. 384–405.
27. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 163–6 (Elisabeth’s letter of 29 November 1646) and p. 238 (Descartes’s letter of 1 November 1646 to Chanut: ‘surpasser de beaucoup en érudition et en vertu les autres hommes’). Gaukroger, Descartes, pp. 412–16.
28. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 221–2 (Descartes’s letter to Elisabeth of 9 October 1649).
29. Descartes, Lettres sur la morale, pp. 223–4 (Elisabeth’s letter of 4 December 1649).
30. Gaukroger, Descartes, pp. 1–6. Vrooman, Descartes, pp. 249–61 (Descartes quoted on p. 257, Voltaire quoted on p. 258).
31. Åkerman, Queen Christina, pp. 44–69.
32. Sophia, Memoirs, pp. 41–3, 251–2; Godfrey, Sister for Prince Rupert, pp. 223–353.
33. Harth, Cartesian Women, especially pp. 66–7, 235–9.
1. Aiton, Leibniz.
2. Zedler, ‘Three princesses’, pp. 43–51. Sophie, Memoirs.
3. Gerhardt, Schriften, vol. 3, p. 367: letter to Damaris Masham of 10 July 1705(‘cette grande Princesse . . . se plaisoit à estre informée de mes speculations, elle les approfondissoit même’).
4. Schiebinger, ‘Winkelmann’, p. 195 (letter to Sophie Charlotte of November 1697) and The Mind Has No Sex?, p. 98.
5. Zedler, ‘Three princesses’, pp. 51–9, quotation on p. 59.
6. Berteloni Meli, ‘Caroline, Leibniz, and Clarke’.
7. Gerhardt, Schriften, vol. 3, pp. 336–75 (reference to Conway on p. 337). Frankel, ‘Damaris Cudworth Masham’.
8. My major sources for this account of Conway and her philosophy are: Conway, Principles of Philosophy, pp. vii–xxxiii; Duran, ‘Anne Viscountess Conway’; Merchant, ‘Vitalism of Anne Conway’; Nicolson and Sutton, Conway Letters.
9. Gerhardt, Schriften, vol. 3, p. 176: letter to Thomas Burnett of 17 March 1696 (‘Il a esté ami particulier de Mad. la Comtesse de Kennaway, et il me conta l’histoire de cette Dame extraordinaire’). Aiton, Leibniz, pp. 201–2.
10. Harris, ‘Living in the neighbourhood’ (quotation on p. 201).
11. More, Antidote against Atheism, p. 5 of unpaginated preface.
12. Nicolson and Hutton, Conway Letters, pp. 128–9 (letter from More to Conway of 7 January 1656).
13. Brusati, pp. 126, 201–17. Cust and Malloch, ‘Portraits’.
14. Laurence, Women in England, pp. 108–80. Vickery Gentleman’s Daughter, pp. 127–60. Hutton, ‘Anne Conway, Margaret Cavendish’, pp. 227–32. Hunter, ‘Sisters of the Royal Society’.
15. Popkin, ‘Spiritualistic cosmologies’.
16. Nicolson and Hutton, Conway Letters, pp. 91 (10 December 1653), 105 (5 September 1654).
17. Conway, Principles of Philosophy, p. 58.
18. Martensen, ‘Transformation of Eve’ (quotations on p. 117).
19. Golinski, ‘Care of the self’, pp. 131–3 (quotation on p. 132).
20. Gerhardt, Schriften, vol. 3, p. 217: letter to Thomas Burnett of 24 August 1697 (‘les miens en philosophie approchent un peu davantage de ceux de feu Mad. la Contesse do Conway, et tiennent le milieu entre Platon et Democrite . . . tout estant plein de vie et de perception’).
21. Conway, Principles of Philosophy, p. 20. Merchant, ‘Vitalism of Anne Conway’, exaggerates Conway’s influence.
22. Coudert, Leibniz and the Kabbalah, especially pp. 25–77.
23. Conway, Principles of Philosophy, p. 43. Hutton, ‘Of physic and philosophy’.
24. Conway, Principles of Philosophy, p. 3.
1. Voltaire quotations: letter to Frederick II of 15 October 1749: Voltaire, Correspondence, vol. 17, p. 188 (‘un grand homme qui n’avoit de défaut que d’être femme’), and Edwards, Divine Mistress, p. 48. Important revisionist articles about du Châtelet’s life and role include Terrall, ‘Du Châtelet and the gendering of science’, and also Zinsser, ‘Du Châtelet: genius, gender, and intellectual authority’ and ‘Entrepreneur of the “Republic of Letters”’. For discussions of her ideas, see Iltis, ‘Du Châtelet’s metaphysics and mechanics’, and Janik, ‘Du Châtelet’s Institutions de physique’. See also Harth, Cartesian Women, pp. 189–213. For her influence on Voltaire, see Wade, Voltaire and Madame du Châtelet, especially pp. 3–47, and Intellectual Development of Voltaire, pp. 251–570.
2. Voltaire, Élémens de Newton, p. 3 (‘vaste & puissant Génie, / Minerve de la France’). Walters, ‘Allegorical engravings’.
3. For Newton’s life and works, see Westfall, Never at Rest. For Pope and Newtonian myths, see Fara, Newton, pp. 39–58, pp. 192–230.
4. Voltaire, Letters on England, pp. 69, 71.
5. Brook Taylor (1718, to Rémond de Monmort), quoted in Fara, Newton, p. 128.
6. Letter of April 1736 to Francesco Algarotti: Besterman, Lettres, vol. 1, p. III. Voltaire’s preface to du Châtelet, Principes mathématiques, p. xi (‘C’étoit un avantage qu’elle eut sur Newton, d’unir à la profondeur de la Philosophie, le goût le plus vif & le plus délicat pour les Belles Lettres’). For Newton in France, see Fara, Newton, pp. 126–54. Book-length biographies of du Châtelet include: Badinter, Émilie, Émilie; Edwards, Divine Mistress; Ehrman, Mme du Châtelet; see also Poirier, Femmes de science, pp. 235–59.
7. Du Châtelet quoted in Edwards, Divine Mistress, p. 1 (from a letter to Frederick the Great). Letter to Pierre le Cornier de Cideville of 15 March 1739: Besterman, Lettres, vol. 1, p. 346.
8. Zinsser, ‘Du Châtelet: genius, gender, and intellectual authority’. Fara, ‘Elizabeth Tollet’.
9. Du Châtelet quoted in Edwards, Divine Mistress, p. 1 (from a letter to Frederick the Great). Voltaire, Élémens de Newton, p. 3 (‘vaste et puissant Génie, / Minerve de la France’). Walters, ‘Allegorical engravings’.
10. Letter of May 1738 to Maupertuis: Besterman, Lettres, vol. 1, p. 232 (‘M’avez-vous-reconnue dans l’estampe de la Luce?’); see also letter of April 1736 to Algarotti: Besterman, Lettres, vol. 1, p. III. My account is mainly based on Ehrman, Mme du Châtelet, Terrall, ‘Du Châtelet and the gendering of science’, and Zinsser, ‘Du Châtelet: genius, gender, and intellectual authority’.
11. Mme du Deffand, quoted in Poirier, Femmes de science, p. 235. (‘Représentez-vous une femme grande et sèche . . . le visage aigu, le nez pointu . . . le teint noir, rouge, échauffé . . .Voilà la fugure de la belle Emilie, figure don’t elle est si contente qu’elle n’épargne rien pour la fiaire valour: frisures, pompons, pierreries, verreries, tout est à profusion’)
12. From Discours sur le bonheur, quoted in Ehrman, Mme du Châtelet, p. 80.
13. Kant, ‘Observations on the beautiful and the sublime’, p. 62 (1764).
14. Madame du Deffand quoted in Poirier, Femmes de science, p. 237 (‘Emilie travaille avec tant de soin à paraître ce qu’elle ne’est pas, qu’on ne sait plus ce qu’ elle est en effet’).
15. Zinnser, ‘Entrepreneur of the “Republic of Letters”’, pp. 602–3.
16. Letter to Maupertuis of 21 June 1738: Besterman, Lettres, vol. 1, p. 236 (‘J’ai voulu essayer mes forces à l’abri de l’incognito’).
17. Voltaire’s Mémoires quoted in Edwards, Divine Mistress, p. 86. Findlen, ‘A forgotten Newtonian’ (Algarotti quoted on p. 315) and Mazzotti, ‘Maria Gaetana Agnesi’. See also Harth, Cartesian Women, pp. 199–205.
18. Besterman, Lettres, vol. 1, p. 255. Letter of September 1738 to Maupertuis (‘Son livre est frivole . . . il pourra réussir aux toilettes’).
19. Letter to Maupertuis of 18 July 1736: Besterman, Lettres, vol. 1, p. 121. Iliffe, ‘“Aplatisseur du monde”’.
20. Letter to Cideville quoted in Poirier, Femmes de science, p. 245 (‘Madame du Châtelet est dans tout cela mon guide et mon oracle’). Wade, Voltaire and du Châtelet, pp. 34–40. Letter to Prince Frederick of January 1737, quoted in Janik, ‘Searching for the metaphysics’, p. 88. Voltaire, Élémens de Newton, pp. 9–10 (‘L’étude solide que vous avez faite de plusieurs nouvelles vérités & le fruit d’un travail respectable sont ce que j’offre au Public pour votre gloire’), and pp. 7–8 (‘Puissai-je auprès de vous . . . Aux regards des Français montrer la Vérité’). See Voltaire, Correspondence, vol. 5, pp. 207, 208, 230, 236 and 264 (letters written in August and September 1736).
21. Voltaire quotation from the 1748 Epître dédicatoire, quoted in Wade, Voltaire and du Châtelet, p. 37 (‘je m’instruisais avec vous. Mais vous avez pris depuis un vol que je ne peux plus suivre’). For their comments on the book’s scope, see du Châtelet, Institutions de physique, p. 7, and Voltaire, Élémens de Newton, p. 11; discussed in Janik, ‘Searching for the metaphysics’, p. 88.
22. The following account is based on Iltis, ‘Du Châtelet’s metaphysics’, and Janik, ‘Searching for the metaphysics’.
23. Neeley, Mary Somerville, p. 76.
24. Zinsser, ‘Entrepreneur of the “Republic of Letters”’, especially p. 608. The following account is closely based on Zinsser, ‘Translating Newton’s Principia’.
25. Sørenson, ‘Méditation dans les ruines’.
26 Journal Encyclopédique 6 (September 1759), part 3, pp. 3–17, quotation on p. 5 (‘pour la rendre plus éclatante, en la faisant concourir avec le moment du triomphe de la philosophie’). See Schaffer, ‘Halley Deslisle, and the making of the comet’.
27. Evans, ‘Fraud and illusion’.
1. Martin, Young Gentlemen’s and Ladies Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 2.
2. Mullan, ‘Gendered knowledge, gendered minds’; Myers, ‘Science for women and children’; Walters, ‘Conversation pieces’. Carroll, ‘Politics of “originality”’.
3. Ferguson, Young Gentleman and Lady’s Astronomy, p. 2, 45. Walters, ‘Conversation pieces’, pp. 132–3.
4. Withering Correspondence, Royal Society of Medicine, ff. 66–94, 145–6 (quotations from f. 67, letter of 30 November 1784). See entry by Patricia Fara and Anne Secord in Ogilvie, Women in Science.
5. Wright and Knowles, both quoted on p. 354 of Uglow, Lunar Men.
6. Tollet, Poems, pp. 25–6 (from ‘To my Brother at St John’s College in Cambridge’). Fara, ‘Elizabeth Toilet’.
7. Iliffe and Willmoth, ‘Astronomy and the domestic sphere’, pp. 240–1. Bell, ‘“All clear sunshine”’; Heilbron, ‘Franklin’. Costa, ‘Ladies’ Diary’.
1. Martin, Young Gentlemen’s and Ladies Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 316. Sidrophel was the conjurer in Samuel Butler’s Hudibras (1663).
2. http://www.johndee.org/DEE.html, 8 February 2002. French, Dee, pp. 4–19.
3. Quoted in French, Dee, p. 110 (from A True & Faithful Relation of what passed for many Yeers Between Dr: John Dee . . . and Some Spirits). See Harkness, Dee’s Conversations with Angels.
4. Dee, ‘Preface’, cuts Aj and Aij. The most reliable general discussions of John Dee are French, Dee, and Clulee, Dee’s Natural Philosophy, although they barely mention Jane Fromond / Dee. For reconstructing Jane Dee’s life and experiences, this chapter relies heavily on Harkness, ‘Managing an experimental household’, a splendid article to which I am much indebted.
5. Harris, ‘Living in the neighbourhood of science’. Hunter, ‘Sisters of the Royal Society’.
6. Fenton, Diaries, p. 44 (6 May 1582, deleted together with words in Kelly’s hand). John Dee’s mother was also called Jane.
7. Cahn, Industry of Devotion (Heinrich Bullinger, The Christian State of Matrimony, quoted p. 89), and Laurence, Women in England.
8. Wilson, Midwifery.
9. Fenton, Diaries, pp. 174–5 (21 March 1585).
10. Fenton, Diaries, p. 36 (19 March 1582).
11. Fenton, Diaries, p. 218 (18 April 1587).
12. Fenton, Diaries, pp. 218 (18 April 1587), 223 (21 May 1587), 233 (28 February 1588).
13. Spectator, 12 March 1711.
14. Quoted from Poor Richard’s Almanac in Heilbron, ‘Franklin’, p. 198.
1. Edmond Halley, quoted in Winkler and van Helden, ‘Hevelius and visual language’, p. 97 n.2. My major sources for Elisabetha Hevelius’s biography are Cook, ‘Johann and Elizabeth Hevelius’, and MacPike, Hevelius, Flamsteed and Halley (account of their betrothal reproduced on pp. 4–5). In his Machina Cœlistis, there are three pictures of them observing together: facing pp. 222 and 254, and after p. 420.
2. Biagioli, Galileo Courtier; Ashworth, ‘Habsburg circle’.
3. Latin preface translated in MacPike, Hevelius, Flamsteed and Halley ,pp. 122–4 (quotations on p. 123).
4. My major source for discussing Johannes Hevelius is Winkler and van Helden, ‘Hevelius and visual language’.
5. Quoted in Cook, ‘Johann and Elizabeth Hevelius’, p. 10 (‘conjugam meam charissimam’; ‘Quippe ad observationis Mulieres aeque at Viri idoneæ’). For tables of labelled observations, see Cook, Halley, pp. 94–7.
6. MacPike, Hevelius, Flamsteed and Halley, pp. 75–102, quotation on p. 75; Cook, Halley, pp. 89–127.
7. Thomas Hearne, quoted in Cook, Halley, p. 102.
8. The following discussion closely follows Schiebinger, ‘Maria Winkelmann’ and The Mind Has No Sex?, pp. 66–101. For details of Winkelmann’s life, both of these rely on Vignoles, ‘Eloge de Madame Kirch’, especially pp. 168–83.
9. Iliffe and Willmoth, ‘Astronomy and the domestic sphere’, pp. 244–56.
10. Celsisus quoted in Mozans, Woman in Science, p. 174.
11. Millburn, Adams of Fleet Street.
12. Vignoles, ‘Eloge de Madame Kirch’, pp. 183 (‘on doit reconnoitre, en general, qu’il n’y a aucune espéce de Science, dont les Femmes ne soient capable’) and 181 (‘& auroient voulu la réduire à sa quenouille, & à son fuseau’).
13. Quoted in Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex?, p. 87.
14. Klopp, Werke von Leibniz, vol. 9, p. 295 (letter of January 1709: ‘Je ne crois pas que cette femme trouve facilement sa pareille dans la science où elle excelle . . . Elle observe comme pourroit faire le meilleur observateur’).
15. Johann Jablonski, quoted in Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex?, p. 92; Schiebinger, ‘Maria Kirch’.
16. Klopp, Werke von Leibniz, vol. 9, p. 295 (letter of January 1709: ‘une femme des plus savantes, qui peut passer pour une rareté . . . une des meilleures raretés de Berlin’).
17 Quoted in Schiebinger, The Mind Has No Sex?, p. 80 (from Eberti’s Eröffnetes Cabinet deβ gelehrten Frauen-Zimmers). For Cunitz’s life, see Vignoles, ‘Eloge de Madame Kirch’, pp. 163–8 (references to Eberti on p. 155, 165). For a brief discussion of Eberti and his Cabinet, see Daphnis 18 (1989), pp. 345–6.
1. South, ‘An address’, quotations from pp. 410–11. I have relied heavily on two book-length biographies for Caroline: Herschel, Memoir, and Lubbock, Herschel Chronicle; however, I have only given page references for quotations. Major articles include Iliffe and Willmoth, ‘Astronomy and the domestic sphere’, especially pp. 257–62, and Ogilvie, ‘Caroline Herschel’s contributions’. For the Herschels’ early years in Bath, see Turner, Science and Music. My two major sources for William Herschel’s astronomy are Bennett, ‘Power of penetrating’, and Schaffer, ‘Herschel in Bedlam’. My account is not strictly chronological, and leaves out some details: for instance, it does not describe how the Herschels moved between several houses in Bath. Caroline Herschel’s autobiographies have never been published in their entirety, but substantial sections are reproduced in her biographies. I am grateful to the Humanities Research Center of the University of Texas at Austin for allowing me to read microfilm copies of her original manuscripts, M0675–7.
2. Herschel, Memoir, p. 227. Mary Somerville was awarded honorary membership at the same time.
3. From ‘On first looking into Chapman’s Homer’.
4. Lalande, Ladies’ Astronomy, pp. x–xii, 93 (originally published in 1802). Barrett, Diary and Letters, vol. 2, p. 167 (21 August 1786).
5. Wallington, ‘Physical and intellectual capacities’, p. 557.
6. Herschel, Memoir, pp. ix, 37–8.
7. Barrett, Diary and Letters, vol. 4, pp. 25–6 (letter to Fanny Burney of 28 September 1797) and vol. 2, p. 409 (21 August 1787). Herschel, Memoir, p. 142 (John Herschel’s wife Mary). Tabor, Pioneer Women, vol. 4, p. 6.
8. Herschel, Memoir, pp. 21, 7.
9. Lubbock, Chronicle: undated letter (probably January 1761) to his brother Jacob quoted on p. 17, and p. 45.
10. John Herschel’s letter to R Wolf of 1866, quoted in Lubbock, Chronicle, p. 58.
11. Herschel, Memoir, p. 33.
12. Lubbock, Chronicle, p. 56.
13. Lubbock, Chronicle, p. 89.
14. Lubbock, Chronicle, p. 57.
15. Lubbock, Chronicle, pp. 78, 115 (letter of 3 June 1782).
16. Herschel, Memoir, p. 37.
17. Herschel, Memoir, p. 38. Letter to John Herschel of 1 February 1826: British Library Egerton Manuscripts 3761, f. 45r.
18. Lubbock, Chronicle, pp. 136, 138.
19. Lubbock, Chronicle, p. 150. For her telescopes, see Bullard, ‘My small Newtonian sweeper’, and Hoskins, ‘Caroline Herschel’s comet sweepers’. Letter to John Herschel of 1 February 1826: British Library Egerton Manuscripts 3761, f. 44r.
20. Faujas de Saint Fond, Journey through England, vol. 1, pp. 59–77 (quotation on p. 69).
21. Herschel, Memoir, p. 309.
22. Herschel, ‘Account of the discovery of a comet’, p. 1. Lubbock, Chronicle, pp. 153–6 (quotation from Alexander Aubert on p. 155).
23. Lubbock, Chronicle, p. 172.
24. British Library Egerton Manuscripts 3761, f. 26r (letter to Lady Herschel of 17 October 1824). Barrett, Diary and Letters, vol. 3, p. 45 (3 October 1788).
25. Letter to Edward Piggott of 6 December 1793 quoted in Hoskin, ‘Caroline Herschel’s comet sweepers’, p. 31. Letter to Joseph Banks of 8 November 1795 quoted in Herschel, Memoir, p. 94.
26. Seymour, Shelley, pp. 27, 83.
27. Letter of 18 December 1801: British Library Additional Manuscripts 37203, f. 9r (‘puisque c’est actuellement la chose qui interesse le plus les astronomes. nous en attendons quelques unes de vous’). Connor, ‘Mme Lepaute’. Schaffer, ‘Halley, Delisle, and the making of the comet’. Sir Harry Englefield and Joseph de Lalande: Lubbock, Chronicle, pp. 247, 251. Lalande, Ladies’ Astronomy, pp. xi-xii.
28. Iliffe and Willmoth, ‘Astronomy and the domestic sphere’.
29. Herschel, Memoir, p. 120.
30. Herschel, Memoir, pp. 126, 133.
31. British Library Egerton Manuscripts 3761, ff. 5r and 13V (letters of 12 November 1822 and 27 February 1823).
32. Herschel, Memoir, p. 231 (letter to John Herschel of 21 August 1828).
33. Letter of September 1798 to Nevil Maskelyne from Herschel, Memoir, p. 96.
34. Herschel, Memoir, p. ix; see also British Library Egerton Manuscripts 3761, ff. 31v–32r (letter to John Herschel of 14 January 1825).
35. Letter to Lalande of 3 March 1794: British Library Additional Manuscripts 37203, f. 6r. Letter to Lalande of 3 March 1794: British Library Additional Manuscripts 37203, f. 6r.
36. Letters to John Herschel of 24 June and 14 July 1823: British Library Egerton Manuscripts 3761, ff. 16v and 18r. Letter from Alexander Aubert to William Herschel of January 1822, quoted in Schaffer, ‘Herschel in Bedlam’, p. 211.
37. Wollstonecraft, Vindication, p. 179.
38. Letter of January 1800 to Nevil Maskelyne quoted in Herschel, Memoir, p. 102. Letter to John Herschel of 1 December 1839: British Library Egerton Manuscripts 3762, f. 48r.
39. Montagu, Letters, vol. 3, p. 22, and vol. 2, p. 5. British Library Additional Manuscripts 37203, f. 9 (letter of 18 December 1801).
40. Anna Knipping, quoted in Herschel, Memoir, p. 346.
1. My sources for analysing this portrait are Vidal, ‘David among the moderns’, and Beretta, Imaging a Career in Science, pp. 25–42. See also Brookner, David, p. 88; de Nanteuil, David, pp. 66–9; Poirier, Lavoisier, pp. 1–3; Schnapper, David, p. 84. The major biographies of Antoine Lavoisier that I have consulted, which also include substantial information about Paulze Lavoisier, are: Donovan, Lavoisier; McKie, Lavoisier; Poirier, Lavoisier. My main sources for this account of Paulze Lavoisier are Duveen, ‘Madame Lavoisier’ and Poirier, Lavoisier, especially pp. 94–6, 370–411. See also: Grimaux, Lavoisier, pp. 35–45, 330–6, 381–4; Hoffman, ‘Mme. Lavoisier’; Poirier, Femmes de science, pp. 281–325; Smeaton, ‘Monsieur and Madame Lavoisier’ and ‘Madame Lavoisier and du Pont de Nemours’.
2. Jean-François Ducis, quoted in Schnapper, David, p. 84 (‘Pour Lavoisier, soumis à vos lois / Vous remplissez les deux emplois / Et de muse et de sécretaire’).
3. Goodman, Republic of Letters (quotation on p. 7).
4. Vidal, ‘David among the moderns’.
5. Outram, ‘Before objectivity’. Rayner-Canham and Frenetter, ‘Some French women chemists’, pp. 176–7. Poirier, Femmes de science, pp. 263–80.
6. Du Pont de Nemours quoted in Poirier, Lavoisier, pp. 394 (23 October 1794), 126 (April 1815).
7. Rayner-Canham and Frenette, ‘French women chemists’, pp. 176–7; Combremont, Necker de Saussure, p. 58.
8. Gouverneur Morris quoted in Duveen, ‘Madame Lavoisier’, p. 17 (8 June 1789 to 7 November 1791).
9. Outram, ‘Before objectivity’, Franklin quoted on p. 23.
10. Letter of 1777, quoted in Duveen, ‘Madame Lavoisier’, p. 16 (‘me faire décliner et conjurer pour me faire plaisir et me rendre digne de mon mari’).
11. Poirier, Lavoisier, pp. 126–7 (François de Frénilly).
12. Young, Travels in France, p. 72.
13. Grimaux, Lavoisier, pp. 44–5 (‘C’était pour lui un jour de bonheur; quelques amis éclairés, quelques jeunes gens . . . se réunissaient dès le matin dans le laboratoire; c’était là que l’on déjeunait, que l’on dissertait, que l’on créait cette théorie qui a immortalisé son auteuf’). For the translation of the ambiguous ‘on’ as ‘we’, see Vidal, ‘David among the moderns’, p. 613.
14. Young, Travels in France, p. 72. Beretta, ‘Chemical imagery’. Duveen, ‘Madame Lavoisier’, pp. 17–19.
15. Beretta, Imaging a Career in Science, pp. 43–7.
16. Scheler, ‘Deux lettres’, p. 125 (letter to Guyon de Morveau of 16 September 1788) (‘deux minutes plus tard nous étions six personnes victimes’). Paper quoted in Poirier, Lavoisier, p. 225.
17. Quoted in Grimaux, Lavoisier, p. 266 (‘que ces sangsues publiques soient arrêtées, et que, si leurs comptes ne sont pas rendus dans un mois, la Convention les livre au glaive de la loi’).
18. Joseph Lagrange quoted in Poirier, Lavoisier, p. 382.
19. Quoted in Poirier, Lavoisier, p. 357.
20. Quoted in Poirier, Lavoisier, p. 391.
21. Quoted in Poirier, Lavoisier, p. 393.
22. Bensaude-Vincent, ‘Between history and memory’, pp. 493–9; Beretta, Imaging a Career in Science, pp. 53–9. Smeaton, ‘Madame Lavoisier and the publication of Lavoisier’s Mémoires de chimie’, (J. C. Delametherie quoted on p. 28). The preface is reproduced in Grimaux, Lavoisier, pp. 332–3.
23. Quoted in Duveen, ‘Madame Lavoisier’, p. 21.
24. Duveen, ‘Madame Lavoisier’, pp. 24, 26 (letters to his daughter of 24 October 1806 and 24 October 1810).
25. Guizot, ‘Madame de Rumford’, quotation on p. 83 (‘Il faut avoir vécu sous la machine pneumatique pour sentir tout le charme de respirer’).
1. Edgeworth, Letters for Literary Ladies, p. 3.
2. Uglow, Lunar Men, pp. 181–8, Day quoted on p. 185. See also Douthwaite, Wild Girl, pp. 138–41.
3. Uglow, Lunar Men.
4. Letters to Withering of 5 December 1787 and 30 November 1784: Withering letters, Royal Society of Medicine, London, ff. 92 v, 66r, 67v. See entry by Patricia Fara and Anne Secord in Ogilvie, Women in Science, vol. 2, p. 1404.
5. Darwin, Plan for Female Education, pp. 40–5. See King-Hele, Darwin.
6. Darwin, The Botanic Garden, p. v. Danchin, ‘Darwin’s scientific and poetic purpose’, Walpole quoted on p. 135.
7. Edgeworth, Letters for Literary Ladies, pp. 20–1.
8. Shelley, Frankenstein, p. 3 (by Percy Shelley).
1. Wordsworth (Grasmere Journal, 1800) quoted on p. 21 of Shteir, Cultivating Women, the major work on botanical women for this period.
2. Bermingham, Learning to Draw, pp. 202–24, Spectator quoted on p. 204.
3 Gentleman’s Magazine 71:1 (1801), 199–200.
4. This hand-written poem is on the endpapers of Joseph Banks’s copy of Darwin’s translation of Linnaeus’s A System of Vegetables (British Library press mark 447.c. 19). Ann Shteir suggests that the author was Anna Seward, which seems very likely. Extracts from ff. 2, 3, 5.
5. Thornton, The Temple of Flora, pp. 48–9.
6. By far the best biography of Linnaeus, on which this account is based, is Koerner, Linnaeus.
7. Koerner, ‘Women and utility’, Linnaeus quoted on p. 245 (a speech of 1772).
8. Amongst the substantial literature, I have drawn particularly from Bewell, ‘“Jacobin plants”’, Browne, ‘Botany for gentlemen’, and Schiebinger, Nature’s Body, pp. 11–39.
9. From Præludia sponsaliorum plantarum, quoted in Schiebinger, Nature’s Body, p. 22.
10. Charles Alston and Samuel Goodenough quoted in Bewell, ‘“Jacobin plants”’, p. 133.
11. Polwhele, Unsex’d Females, p. 8.
12. Quoted in Browne, ‘Gentlemen of botany’, p. 595 (from a letter). The Loves of the Plants was first published separately, and then as the second part of The Botanic Garden. The injunction to enlist imagination under the banner of science appeared in the double volume.
13. Darwin, The Botanic Garden, book 2 (The Loves of the Plants), pp. 4–5 (Canto I, 11.51–6).
14. Encyclopædia Britannica quoted in Thornton, The Temple of Flora, p. 9.
15. Polwhele, Unsex’d Females, pp. 7–8.
16. Browne, ‘Botany for gentlemen’; see also Danchin, ‘Darwin’s scientific and poetic purpose’.
17. Wakefield, ‘Journals’, 27 November 1798, 14 October 1799.
18. Wakefield, ‘Journals’, 14 October 1799. The main sources I have used for Wakefield’s life are: Chapman, ‘Wakefield’; Hill, ‘Wakefield’; Shteir, ‘Wakefield’s natural history books’ and Cultivating Women, pp. 81–9; Wakefield, Mental Improvement, pp. ix–xxi (Ann Shteir’s introduction).
19. Monthly Magazine, November 1800, pp. 300–1.
20. Quoted in Hill, ‘Wakefield’, p. 4 (from the unpublished introduction to Variety: Or Selections and Essays).
21. Hawkins, Letters on the Female Mind, vol. 1, p. 12.
22. Benjamin, ‘Elbow room’, especially pp. 38–41.
23. Mullan, ‘Gendered knowledge, gendered minds’; Myers, ‘Science for women and children’ and ‘Fictionality’; Walters, ‘Conversation pieces’.
24. Wakefield, ‘Journals’, 8 Apr 1799.
25. Wakefield, Introduction to Botany, p. 12.
26. Wakefield, Mental Improvement, p. 31.
27. Wakefield, Introduction to Botany, p. 17.
28. Wollstonecraft, Vindication, pp. 79, 154. Bewell, ‘“Jacobin plants”’.
29. Bermingham, Learning to Draw, pp. 202–27, George Brookshaw quoted on p. 206.
30. Ogilvie, ‘Obligatory amateurs’.
1. The differences between the 1818 edition (the one I discuss) and the 1831 revised edition are best presented (by Marilyn Butler) in Shelley, Frankenstein. The major secondary sources to which I am indebted are Butler, ‘Introduction’ and Mellor, Mary Shelley; the best biography is Seymour, Shelley. In future footnotes I shall refer only to quotations from these.
2. Edinburgh Magazine, quoted in Baldick, In Frankenstein’s Shadow, p. 57.
3. Baldick, In Frankenstein’s Shadow.
4. St Clair, Godwins and the Shelleys, p. 436 (from Pantheon).
5. For detailed studies of less familiar novels, see Douthwaite, Wild Girl.
6. Letter from William Godwin to William Cole of 1802, quoted in Mellor, Mary Shelley, pp. 9–10. Seymour, Shelley, p. 54. My discussion of Marcet is based on Bahar, ‘Jane Marcet’ and Myers, ‘Fictionality’.
7. Golinski, Science as Public Culture, pp. 188–235.
8. Coleridge quoted in Secord, Victorian Sensation, p. 46, n.11. Southey quoted in Myers, ‘Fictionality’, p. 48.
9. Armstrong, ‘Jane Marcet’, pp. 55–6. Farrell, ‘Gentlewomen of science’. Neeley, Mary Somerville.
10. Radcliffe, Female Advocate, p. 399.
11. Secord, Victorian Sensation, pp. 42–6, and ‘Scrapbook science’. Bermingham, Learning to Draw, pp. 145–64.
12. Hawkins, Letters on the Female Mind, vol. 1, p. 7. More, Strictures on Education, vol. 2, pp. 22–3. Benjamin, ‘Elbow room’.
13. William Beckford, quoted in Baldick, In Frankenstein’s Shadow, p. 56. Reviewer quoted in Hindle, ‘Introduction’, p. viii.
14. Jordanova, ‘Melancholy reflection’.
15. John Barrow (1818), quoted in Butler, ‘Introduction’, pp. xxxiv–v.
16. Davy, Works, vol. 2, p. 319 (1802 lecture on chemistry), and vol. 8, p. 282 (1808 lecture on electrochemical science).
17. Davy, Discourse, p. 9.
18. Davy, Discourse, p. 9. John Robison (1803), quoted in Douthwaite, Wild Girl, p. 213.
19. Shelley, Frankenstein, pp. 38–9.
20. Shelley, Frankenstein, p. 30.
21. Shelley, Frankenstein, pp. 180, 16. Lawrence, ‘Power and glory’.
22. Hindle, ‘Introduction’, p. xli.
23. Moers, ‘Victorian Gothic’. Secord, ‘Scrapbook science’. Bohls, Women Travel Writers, pp. 230–45.
24. Douthwaite, Wild Girl, especially pp. 211–22.
25. Barrell, Birth of Pandora, pp. 145–220, quotation on p. 148 from a standard translation of Hesiod.
26. Shelley, Frankenstein, p. 21.
27. In addition to previous sources, this discussion is based on Jordanova, ‘Melancholy reflection’, and Smith, ‘Frankenstein and natural magic’.
28. Shelley, Frankenstein, p. 49. Cohen, Fashioning Masculinity.
29. Wollstonecraft, Vindication, p. 93.
1. Bal, ‘Telling objects’.
2. Schiebinger, Nature’s Body, pp. 40–74. Originally an Asian goddess, the multi-breasted figure was associated with Artemis by the Greeks, and with Diana by the Romans.
3. Boccaccio, Famous Women, ‘Introduction’ and pp. 14–17 (quotation on p. 17).
4. Anderson and Zinsser, A History of Their Own, vol. 1, pp. 54–6, 349–50; McLeod, Order of the Rose. The correct way to refer to her is Christine (not de Pizan), but since it is currently seen as patronising to refer to a woman only by her first name, I have repeated the full form.
5. Tomaselli, ‘Collecting women’. For eighteenth-century England, see Guest, Small Change, pp. 49–50, 64–9, 168–72.