Preliminary Programme

At the turn of the 19th century, Spain and the Italian States contributed to the European scientific research in botany and agricultural science. On the one hand they looked at the experiences of France, Great Britain, Sweden, and the Germanic area. On the other hand they proposed original initiatives, both participating in the European debate and discussing with each other.
For example, the Madrid Botanical Garden became internationally important in the study of plants and in the organization of botanical expeditions in Latin America. In addition, the Crown promoted societies to strengthen agriculture, manufacturing, teaching, and specialized journals. A setback of these projects happened during the brief rule of Joseph Bonaparte (1808-13), who nonetheless entrusted important administrative positions to renowned scientists.
For their part, the Italian States strengthened their botanical and agrarian knowledge in the second half of the 18th century, albeit in an uneven way due to the geopolitical fragmentation of the peninsula. A good example is given by the scientific initiatives of the Habsburgs in Lombardy, which increased experimentation and teaching in Pavia, Milan, and Mantua since the 1770s. Later, Napoleon gave greater uniformity to Italian geopolitics and favoured the circulation of scientific knowledge. In botany and agriculture, it is worth mentioning the peculiar situation of the Italian Republic (1802-05) then Kingdom of Italy (1805-14), which came to encompass a large part of central and northern Italy. There was a network of agricultural societies, chairs, educational gardens, and journals.
I will deal with the exchange of scientific knowledge between the Spanish botanical and agricultural community and the more fragmented Italian one. I will highlight their collaboration, mutual influence, and contribution to European science. In particular, to better understand the dynamics of the circulation of scientific knowledge on such a varied background, I will consider the contacts between three representatives of the botanical and agricultural fields in Spain and Italy (Show less)

Using the extant casebooks of a pre-eminent Irish surgeon, Peter Johnstone Freyer, in Edwardian London, this paper demonstrates the terms upon which recurrent social connections between a surgeon and his peers contributed to the creation of particular specialities in medicine and surgery. Using data gathered through collaborations in social network analysis conducted at the Moore Institute in NUI Galway, the paper recreates the many types of social networks created and occupied by Freyer throughout his surgical career in London. These included referrals networks, through which he sourced patients; technical networks, which underpinned the efficacy of his operative techniques; and social networks, which were important for his building and maintaining a widespread public reputation as a surgeon who could be trusted. The application of digital techniques to relate histories of surgical specialisation is novel, as most pre-existing accounts rely on themes such as the relationship between medicine, the military, or civil society, or widespread changes in the organisation of the medical profession. However, by applying social network analysis techniques, we can gain an organic sense of how a surgeon innovated and tailored his social connections over time. If successful, this paper will be the first public presentation of collaborations between historians, data scientists and data visualization specialists at NUI Galway. (Show less)

Following the emergence of the Journal of the Viennese Medical Society in 1838, the Medical Faculty at Prague University established its own publication space in 1844. The Bohemian Quarterly for Practical Medicine („Vierteljahrschrift für die praktische Heilkunde“) certainly contributed to the public perception of Prague as the second largest and one of the most academically influential medical schools in the Habsburg monarchy. The Quarterly comprised original contributions in all medical sub-disciplines, an extensive review section dedicated to the discussion of recently published works, and a news section, focusing on medical legislation, administrative issues as well as information on medical personnel (promotions, moves, deaths, etc.). As the name already indicates, the editors wanted to provide not only communication space for the relatively small group of researchers and university teachers but further learning opportunities for the large group of physicians practicing all across the country. Therefore, especially the review section received special attention, giving an overview of the most recent and innovative aspects of medical knowledge in each issue. Thus, the review section constitutes a perfect source for the investigation of the processes of knowledge dissemination on various topics of medical and science historical research.
On the basis of a network-oriented approach this paper investigates the dissemination of (pre)antiseptic knowledge in the field of obstetrics. Practices of cleanliness had always played an important role in the prevention of puerperal fever, however, the 1840s to 1880s saw changing perceptions of prophylactic measures. The aim of this paper is to reconstruct basic questions as to who discussed antiseptic measures when and to which extent in the Bohemian Quarterly for Practical Medicine. In this way the paper wants to scrutinise the widely claimed rejection of Ignaz Semmelweis’ ideas on puerperal prophylaxis throughout the 1850s, evaluate the influence of British obstetrics (especially James Young Simpson) on cleanliness and the impact and adoption speed of Lord Lister’s antiseptic system in the field of obstetrics throughout the 1870s. This sample study also enables a contextualised evaluation of the scope and innovation potential of an influential medical journal of the 19th century. (Show less)