Internationaler Workshop »Charlatans«

Bio

Oreste Trabucco (1967) is lecturer in History of Science at “Suor Orsola Benincasa” Uni-versity in Naples. Among his publications are «L‘opere stupende dell‘arti più ingegnose». La recezione degli Pneumatiká di Erone Alessandrino nella cultura italiana del Cinquecento (Flor-ence, 2010) and the critical editions of Giovani Battista della Porta, Pneumaticorum libri tres (Naples, 2009).

Abstract

As is well known, a recent historiographical trend in the history of medicine has shown that charlatans were an important part of the early modern medical world. My talk will focus on a famous Italian physician, who was reputed as a charlatan: Leo-nardo Fioravanti. Leonardo Fioravanti (1517-1588[?]) was some sort of Italian Paracelsus; as a fierce anti-Galenist, he was a surgeon, an apothecary as well as an alchemist; throughout his life, he was impelled by “the intention of going traveling throughout the world in order to gain knowledge of natural philosophy”. While vilified by the medical establishment, Fioravanti, wandering through Italy, declared: “I will show how to make many new medicines, as well for wounds, as for the other sorts of sores, which have not been used neither of old doctors, nor of new; the which remedies are of such virtue and strength, that the world will wonder at them for their notable quick working”. Fioravanti was one of the wonders of his age; he was already well known inside and out-side of Italy while during his lifetime: the English physician John Ester, who translated an abridged edition of his Cirugia in 1580, called him “the worthy and famous Capitaine Si-gnor Leonardo Fioravanti of Bologna”.

Bio

Koen Vermeir is Associate Research Professor at the Centre National de la Recherche Sci-entifique (CNRS), and is member of the laboratory SPHERE (Paris). As a historian and philosopher, he has contributed to a wide array of fields. His main interests are in the his-tory of the early modern imagination, in the interaction between religious and technical practices, and in the intersection between early modern magic an

Abstract

In the early modern period, charlatans were usually itinerant vendors of medicines puffing their drugs and deceiving the public. During the 17th century, the meaning of "charlatan" changed, however, and came to stand metaphorically for everyone who exploited the cre-dulity of the public by trickery and deceit, like dowsers who became identified with charla-tans at the end of the 17th century. In this talk, I will study one crucial episode of this con-ceptual enlargement and show how the accusation of "charlatanism" had to compete with other explanations. In this period, four models were available for explaining wondrous phenomena, events or skills: these wonders could be caused by God, by the devil, by na-ture or by human artifice. The tension between the four competing claims usually re-mained unresolved, because there was no fireproof final procedure that could decide be-tween them: On the one hand, one could never be sure that it was not a trick: both natural philosophy and theology were intrinsically grounded on trust and belief (in witnesses, in reason, in experiences, in tradition, etc.), and this trust could always be exploited by a charlatan. On the other hand, one could never be sure that it was a trick: even confessions by charlatans were not to be trusted. Perceptive scholars were aware that confessions were often given by deluded but innocent persons; or confessions could be extorted by promises or torture. This talk will not only explore how a late 17th century controversy about charlatanry spread from France over the whole of Europe, but will highlight the historiographical chal-lenges presented by the study of purported charlatans. In conclusion, I will show how in the figure of the divining rod different cultural meanings of the rod merged, including medicine (Asclepios' rod), commerce and deceit (Hermes' rod), and magic (the rod of bibli-cal magicians). In the divining rod controversy, the rod not only came to stand for charla-tans and credulous natural philosophers, but it also became a political commentary, en-dangering the state.

Bio

Francesco Paolo de Ceglia teaches History of Science at the University of Bari (Italy). He published many books and articles on science history in its connections with art and reli-gious history. He has just edited a 700-page book on the History of the Definition of Death (in press). Actually he is working on the miracle of Saint Januarius and the European Sci-ence.

Abstract

Since 1389, an event that the Catholic Church has long considered a miracle has been oc-curring in Naples, with impressive punctuality: the liquefaction, on particular dates, from one to three times a year, of the solidified blood of Saint Januarius, a Christian martyr who lived between the 3rd and 4th centuries. The phenomenon has been the subject of theologi-cal, philosophical and scientific criticism, but, starting in the 18th century, actual shows were held throughout Europe in which, in the presence of tens, hundreds and sometimes even thousands of spectators, substances were displayed which, in particular conditions, had a very similar behavior to that of the Neapolitan blood. This paper aims to reconstruct the history of these shows in the major European countries (Germany, England, France, and, only at the beginning of the 20th century, in Italy), ana-lyzing the scientific arguments put forward and the rhetorical strategies employed, which of course varied greatly depending on the particular audiences. The purpose of this paper is to identify: 1) the evolution of and the common elements in the scientific experiments, in the language and techniques of persuasion adopted by those who sought to challenge the miracle; and 2) how these experiences, this language and these persuasion techniques were influenced by and, in turn, influenced the Catholic apol-ogetics which they opposed.

Bio

Alan Bates is a consultant and Coroner's pathologist in London, and honorary senior lec-turer in pathology at UCL. He is the author of Emblematic Monsters (Amsterdam/Atlanta, 2005) and The Anatomy of Robert Knox (Brighton, 2010).

Abstract

Public anatomy shows briefly flourished in mid-nineteenth century England. Popularized by the murder for dissection scandals in Edinburgh and London, they used models and other representations of the body – rejected by most medical schools – to attract a curious public. Proprietors claimed that these public museums, with their accompanying lectures and literature, supplied self-knowledge that enabled people of all sorts to assume responsi-bility for their health and interact intelligently with their physicians. However, main-stream medical practitioners were critical of anatomy shows as sensationalist attractions, and regarded those associated with them as quacks who relied upon advertising, exagger-ation and secret remedies. After the 1858 Medical Act museum doctors were among the first practitioners to be excluded from the medical register. Anatomy shows became syn-onymous with quackery that they were forced to close by opposition from the newly uni-fied medical profession. This study investigates the use of itinerant public anatomy shows as advertisements for practitioners on the fringes of medical orthodoxy. Their methods were often those of the charlatan, and their cures questionable, but their museums brought the latest theories – on topics such as species change, embryonic development and reproductive health – within the reach of casual visitors. Registered practitioners successfully argued in the courts that public display of anatomical material was inappropriate, and the shows were suppressed, leaving anatomy as an ambiguous science whose private study formed an essential part of medical training, but whose public display was characterized as a demoralizing spectacle.

Bio

Professor of Modern (19th century) History, Université du Maine, Le Mans Fran-ce. Member of the CERHIO (Centre de recherches historiques de l'Ouest) CNRS research team. Her work deals with the history of human and social sciences in 19th century France and Europe. She has recently published Hippolyte Taine, Histoire, psychologie, littérature (Paris, Garnier, 2013) and together with Jacqueline Carroy and François Vatin (eds.) L'homme des sciences de l'homme. Une histoire transdisciplinaire, Nanterre, Presses universitaires de Paris (Ouest, 2013). More on: http://univ-lemans.academia.edu/NathalieRichard/CurriculumVitae

Bio

Daniel Gethmann is Assistant Professor at the Institute of Architectural Theory, History of Art and Cultural Studies at Graz University of Technology. He is the Executive Editor of the Architecture Magazine GAM. After completing his PhD at the Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (cf. bibliography), Daniel Gethmann was a lecturer at the Department of Film and Television Studies at the Ruhr-Universität Bochum from 1998 to 2002. From 2002 to 2003, he worked as a Research Associate at the Department of Media Studies at the Ruhr-Universität Bochum. In 2003 he was a stand-in for the professorship for „Media Technology and Media Philosophy“ at the Ruhr University Bochum. From 2004 to 2011, he was a Research Associate at the Institute of Architectural Theory, History of Art and Cultural Studies at Graz University of Technology, where he was appointed deputy head of the Institute in 2008.

Bio

Katharina Rein studied Cultural History and Theory, Philosophy and Ancient History at Humboldt-University Berlin, where she currently works on her doctoral dissertation concerning stage magic. She works as a researcher and lecturer at the IKKM, Bauhaus-University Weimar. Her research interests encompass the history of magic, horror studies as well as media and cultural history. More information on: http://katharina-rein.blogspot.de

Abstract

Among others, French magician Jean-Eugène Robert-Houdin claimed to have originated the Second Sight (or Double Vue) illusion, which he first performed in 1846: The assistant, his son Emile, sat on a chair onstage, blindfolded, while the magician walked around in the auditorium and collected random items which his son was able to describe. This feat was widely duplicated throughout Europe as well as the United States, and presented in numerous variations. All of them involve the notion of direct thought transmission from the magician who holds the item, to his blindfolded assistant, and most of them are based on a speaking code. An interesting variation was presented by the British magician and inventor Charles Morritt: although he said nothing but “Thank you” to the spectators giv-ing him the objects, his blindfolded assistant was able to describe every item in question. His colleague Robert Heller went one step further, using both the silent and the speaking version of the feat interchangeably. In his silent version, he seems to have employed elec-tric signals to communicate with his assistant, who was seated on a sofa onstage. This paper examines the Second Sight’s evolution as correlating with cultural and media history: Its development from a speaking to a silent code to a silent one to electric signals reflects the advent and spreading of commercial electric telegraphy, the first modern tech-nology for personal mass communication, which introduced the translation of language to a binary code. The popularity of an illusion suggesting the ability to “see” with other means than the eyes further correlates to the phenomena of “spirit rappings” and the emergence of spiritualism, which developed at the same and used technological metaphors to describe the spiritualist mediums’ means of direct communication with the dead.

Bio

Irina Podgorny is a Permanent Research Scholar at the CONICET (Consejo Nacional de In-vestigaciones Científicas y Técnicas) as well as Director of the Archivo Histórico y Foto-gráfico at the Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo of the Universidad Nacional de la Plata. Her research focuses on the history of archaeology and paleontology. She also does research on the history of collections and museums

Abstract

By tackling the case of the “Comisión médico-científica quirúrgica italiana”, an association of charlatans traveling through Argentina, Paraguay, and Bolivia in the 1870s, this paper explores the nature of communication in nineteenth-century South America. In particular, it points to the remarkable conditions of a time and a region that permitted the sort of self-reconstitution that this commission repeatedly engaged in – and yet, not insignificantly, it contributed to certain knowledge bases in the process. From Buenos Aires to Guatemala, they traveled all across South America for fourteen years. They arrived in cities with no history, except for the stories they told and their talent and skills to interact with the local societies. If there were scandals at the previous stop, they never reached the following. These territories were, however, not completely disconnected: there were roads and means to travel. The Italian commission is in itself an evidence of the circulation of things, people, letters, international news, commodities, and knowledge. Local news, however, did not trespass the limits of the city where the reported events had occurred. Helped by the re-gional fragmentation – created in part by the local press –, the Italian commission reinven-ted itself at every stop of its journeys, mounting – and dismounting – museums and natu-ral history collections, gathering information, photographs, and objects for writing South American ancient history, rediscovering local ailments, proposing new roads, and trading in facts and artifacts all along their routes.

Bio

Professor of Modern (19th century) History, Université du Maine, Le Mans Fran-ce. Member of the CERHIO (Centre de recherches historiques de l'Ouest) CNRS research team. Her work deals with the history of human and social sciences in 19th century France and Europe. She has recently published Hippolyte Taine, Histoire, psychologie, littérature (Paris, Garnier, 2013) and together with Jacqueline Carroy and François Vatin (eds.) L'homme des sciences de l'homme. Une histoire transdisciplinaire, Nanterre, Presses universitaires de Paris (Ouest, 2013). More on: http://univ-lemans.academia.edu/NathalieRichard/CurriculumVitae