Academic literature on the topic '1707-1754'

AbstractThe contracts drawn up in the 18th century between European captains and Ottoman charterers state precisely the currency to be used for payment. The exploitation, on this point, of 1719 contracts, written in both Maghrib and Machrek Ottoman harbours, has concerned three periods, 1686-1707, 1754-1767 and 1791-1794. It reveals a secular evolution characterized by the simultaneous and successive circulation of numerous ottoman and european currencies and the persistency of two distinguished areas of use, the Maghrib and the Levant, which expresses the diversity and the upholding of these areas, long after they joined the Ottoman empire.

A lo largo de toda la trayectoria del poeta madrileño José Joaquín Benegasi y Luján (1707-1770), se aprecia el desarrollo de una serie de estrategias literarias y editoriales orientadas a la autopromoción de su propia obra, que parecen seguir de cerca el referente vital y literario de Lope de Vega. Estas revelan una temprana autoconcepción de profesionalidad literaria que permite hablar de un comportamiento propio del autor moderno. Sin embargo, es en la etapa última de su trayectoria en la que se aprecia un mayor número de síntomas que apuntan a la utilización premeditada de estas estrategias comerciales. Así lo vemos en la Fama póstuma de fray Juan de la Concepción (1754), la Descripción festiva de las reales funciones… (1770) y Papel nuevo: Benegasi contra Benegasi (1770). Asimismo, el hecho de que encargara un retrato propio para estampar en una de las reediciones de sus célebres vidas de santos también puede leerse bajo estos parámetros.

Introduction: In a 1754 publication, Discussion plus particulière de diverses manières d’elever de l’eau par le moyen des pompes avec le plus grand avantage (Very detailed explanation of the different methods of raising water through pumps with the greatest effectiveness), Leonhard Euler (1707–1783) made extensive use of the concept of mechanical power in estimates of the power needed to raise waters with piston pumps, by means of natural forces such as human and horse force, running waters, and windmills. Purpose of the study: We aimed to revisit this publication to show to the modern reader Euler’s pioneering approach in providing rational calculations of the power of natural forces needed to drive different machines to raise waters with piston pumps. Methods: After a brief historical review on the use of natural forces to drive machines and the evolution of the concept of mechanical power, the method employed was the examination and an annotated reproduction of the main formulation using Euler’s original notation and ways of scientific writing of the time. Discussion: We address the evolution of hydropower and wind power, particularly for the generation of electricity, and also show that despite of its much lower attractiveness, there have been some attempts in the use of human and animal power in developing countries, particularly in applications that do not require large and constant amounts of power inputs.

The Scottish physician Sir John Pringle (1707–1782) was known as the father of modern military medicine. This was due to his 1752 book, Observations on the Diseases of the Army in Camp and Garrison, which arose out of his experience as physician-general to the forces in Flanders during the 1740s, where he made significant advances to medical practice. After moving to London, he had also published, in 1750, an influential work on fevers in hospitals and in prisons. Pringle was friends with several significant people beyond the medical world, including Benjamin Franklin and the Scottish Law Lord James Burnett, Lord Monboddo. Above all, Pringle was regarded as a mentor and father figure by James Boswell, who looked to him for advice on matters of health and on personal issues like his career, relations with his father, and even the choice of a wife. In April 1752, Pringle married Charlotte, daughter of Bath physician William Oliver. She died in December 1753. In 1754, Oliver wrote a poem, Myra: A Pastoral Dialogue, in which a shepherd, ‘Philemon’, is grieving for the loss of his daughter. He tells of the marriage he promoted for her to ‘a cruel spoiler’ whose ‘native fierceness’ caused her death in the face of the ‘Northern Blast’. Charlotte and Pringle had indeed separated in May 1753, with Charlotte writing her husband out of her will. Quite clearly, Oliver regarded his fellow physician as effectively murdering his daughter. This essay develops these issues: medicine, mentoring and (suspected) manslaughter.

Johann Jacob QuandT’S ACADEMIC ACCOUNT: THE LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE SEMINAR AT THE KÖNIGSBERG UNIVERSITY IN 1724 S u m m a r y The article introduces a document found in the Secret State Archives Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation (Germ. Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz; GStA PK: I. HAGR, Rep. 7 Preußen, Nr. 187 [1716–1729]) in Berlin that sheds new light on the seminar of the Lithuanian language – the first centre for teaching Lithuanian – that was founded at the Faculty of Theology of the Königsberg University in late 1720s. It is an academic account by Johann Jacob Quandt (1686–1772), the chief preacher of the court and the then dean of the Faculty of Theology of the Königsberg University and the fourth professor of theology in ordinary, who ran the seminar of the Lithuanian language between 1723 and 1727. This account provides insights into the early activities of the seminar that have not been documented in much detail so far. Neither the account nor any of its three appendices – lists of students attending Quandt’s courses – are dated. Based on other documents in the same archive file and the Christian holidays to which the account refers, Quandt’s account has been dated between 28 December 1724 and 11 January 1725, and the data that it contains cover the first half of the 1724–1725 winter semester: October–December of 1724. Quandt’s account shows that during the winter semester of 1724–1725, the seminar of theLithuanian language at the Königsberg University was attended by thirty theological students. Theology and language was taught twice daily between 10 and 11 AM and between 3 and 4 PM . The seminar under Quandt’s management continued to apply the so-called collegium privatissimum, the teaching method of its first supervisor, Heinrich Lysius (1670–1731). The names of the seminar attendees from that period are documented in the second appendix to Quandt’s account titled ‘Beyl. B. Auditores Seminarii Lithvanici’: these were Peter Gottlieb Mielcke (1695–1753), who was in his second year as a teacher, Gottfried Boeckel (?–after 1724), Samuel Boeckel (?–after 1724), Alexander Deutschmann (?–after 1724), Michael Sigismund Engel (1700–1758), Carl Julius Fleischmann (1704–1778), Christophor Daniel Franck?–after 1724), Georg Friedrich Gehrke (?–after 1724), Heinrich Grabau (Grabovius, ?–after 1724), Friedrich Wilhelm Haack (1707–1754), Georg Ernst Klemm (1701–1774), Johann Friedrich Leo (1696–1759), Christophorus (Georg) Liebe (1705–1764), Joachim Friedrich Mey (?–after 1724), Johann Friedrich Mülner (?–after 1724), Jacob Friedrich Naugardt (1694–1751), Friedrich Gottlieb Perbandt (?–after 1724), Adam Heinrich Pilgrim (1702–1757), Heinrich Preuss (?–after 1728), Christoph Rabe (?–after 1724), Heinrich Ernst Rabe (1707/1708–1744), Gottlieb Richter (1707–1775), Johann Richter (1705–1754), Friedrich Rosenberg (?–1727), Adam Friedrich Schimmelpfennig (1699–1763), Ernst Gottfried Schimmelpfennig (1704–1768), Martin Schimmelpfennig (1706–1778), Gottfried Schumacher (1704–1786), Friedrich Sigismund Schuster (1703–after 1732), Johann Trentovius (Trentowski, 1700–1765). Seven of them attended the seminar back in the winter semester of 1723–1724 and were among the first attendees of the seminar of the Lithuanian language under Quandt after it had been reinstated in 1723. Peter Gottlieb Mielcke was the first teacher at the reinstated seminar. During the winter semester of 1724–1725, the age of the theological students attending the seminar of the Lithuanian language at the Königsberg University was between 17 and 30. Most of them were from Prussian Lithuania. After finishing their studies, at least 19 of the attendees were ordained priests and served in Lithuanian parishes. Out of the thirty students who signed the second appendix to Quandt’s account, at least one-half have not been known as attendees of the seminar of the Lithuanian language yet. Even though the Pietist Georg Friedrich Rogall was very critical towards the seminar of the Lithuanian language under the orthodox Lutheran Quandt in his 1725 letter to August Hermann Francke (1663–1727), professor of theology at the Halle University, it is beyond any dispute that the seminar had brought up a new generation of authors of Lithuanian writings. Six of the theological students who attended the seminar in the winter semester of 1724–1725 had become involved in Lithuanistic activity, albeit from the camps of two protestant movements – the orthodox Lutherans and the Pietists. Three of them – Peter Gottlieb Mielcke, Adam Heinrich Pilgrim, and Adam Friedrich Schimmelpfennig – were actively involved in Johann Jacob Quandt’s project that aimed to renew and enhance the repertoire of religious Lithuanian literature. Three others – Johann Richter, Friedrich Wilhelm Haack (by the way, he became involved in Lithuanistic activity with his proof-reading of the 1727 New Testament published by Quandt in Lithuanian), and Martin Schimmelpfennig – later went to Halle, the centre of Pietism, where they became teachers at the seminar of the Lithuanian language that was founded there in 1727 and drafted Lithuanian books. Quandt’s pupils made a significant contribution to the breakthrough in Lithuanian writings between the 1730s and 1760s.

Geungjae (兢齋) Kim Deuk-shin (金得臣, 1754-1822) is known as one of the three genre painters along with Kim Hong-do (金弘道, 1745-1806?) and Shin Yun-bok (申潤福, 1758-1817 afterwards) or only as a painter who had been largely influenced by Kim Hong-do. In fact, he was a 44-year veteran Dohwaseo painter who had participated in important national art projects. Aside from his famous genre paintings, his extraordinary talent in portraits, landscapes, birds and animals, and flowers and animals established him as one of the best painters during the period. Especially, his results in Nokchwijae (祿取才: the state examination for court painters) demonstrates his ability in landscape painting among other themes as well as how much recognition he received at the time; some of these works are currently available. Kim Deuk-shin’s landscape paintings carry two styles of landscape painting in Late Joseon Dynasty: literati landscape painting of the ideal and conceptual landscape and true-view landscape painting that painted mountains and rivers in Korea. This allows better understanding of his diverse works, as well as the variety of trends and transformations of the landscape painting in the Late Joseon Dynasty. In addition, compared to other themes such as genre, figure painting of Taoism and Buddhism, birds and animals, and flowers and animals that had been apparently influenced by Kim Hong-do’s style, his landscape painting has a different pattern due to being directly and indirectly influenced by a number of preceding painters including Jeong Seon (鄭敾, 1676-1759), Sim Sajeong (沈師正, 1707-1769), Kim Eung-hwan (金應煥, 1742?-1789), and Kim Hong-dothat were largely established in the area of landscape painting At the same time, it is also possible to observe the Gaeseong Kim family’s painting style from Kim Deuk-shin’s landscape paintings as they show association with those of his uncle Kim Eung-hwan, brother Kim Seok-shin (金碩臣, 1958-?) and Kim Ha-jong (金夏鍾, 1793-1875 afterwards). Kim Deuk-shin’s landscape painting style may have been passed on to Kim Seok-shinand Kim Ha-jong through secondary influence from Kim Eung-hwan, who was influenced by Jeong Seon and Sim Sajeong. Based on this, his landscape painting style appears to have had a significant influence on the establishment of the painting style within the Gaeseong Kim family and on later generations of court painters.

Kim Seok-shin (⾦碩⾂, 1958~?) was born into a major family of painters during the Late Joseon Dynasty, Kaesung Kim family (開城⾦⽒), and was a painter of the court under the reign of Jeongjo and Sunjo. Although he was overshadowed by the fame of his uncle Kim Eung-hwan(⾦應煥, 1742?~1789) and brother Kim Deuk-shin (⾦得⾂, 1754~1822), he indeed was a capable painter with substantial talent in landscape painting. There are five pieces of true-view landscape paintings by Kim Seok-shin depicting the real landscape of suburbs of Seoul. Of these, Dobongdo (道峰圖), as its title suggests, appears to have been produced by Kim Deuk-shin upon the request of Dobongsan sightseeing by Criminal Judge Lee Jae-hak(李在學, 1745~1806) and Left Uijeong Seo Yong-bo(徐⿓輔, 1757~1824) in 1805 (Sunjo Year 5). Other paintings are also determined to have been painted at the same time as they depict scenic places around Seoul and the sizes and strokes are all similar. These paintings by Kim Seok-shin express popular spots of the Han River as realistically as possible and in an original way under direct and indirect influence by senior painters including Jung Seon (鄭敾, 1676~1759), Sim Sa-jung (沈師正, 1707~1769), Kim Eung-hwan, and Kim Hong-do (⾦弘道, 1745~1806?). Especially, apart from Kim Deuk-shin who was greatly influenced by Kim Hong-do, directly succeeding Kim Eung-hwan’s style, who had been influenced by Jung Seon and Sim Sa-jung, his style is more apparent in demonstrating Kaesung Kim family’s style, as well as the variety and process of change of landscape paintings during the Late Joseon Dynasty. Furthermore, his descendants continued to work as painters of the court as family business, lading to a conclusion that his painting style may have provided certain impact on establishing Kaesung Kim family’s style. In conclusion, Kim Seok-shin appears to have played a pivotal role in establishing Kaesung Kim family as a prestigious painters family, and substantially impacted the court painting style during the Postand Late Joseon Dynasty.

This thesis, entitled "Too Fond to Be Here Related": Ironic Didacticism and the Moral Analogy in Henry Fielding's "Amelia" (1751), opens by exploring the current and historical critical reception of Fielding's final extended work of fiction. In an effort to explain Amelia's "failure"---the prevailing assessment among even its more sympathetic critics---I then argue that this experimental novel offers an innovative engagement with David Hume's moral philosophy. The emerging analogy provides a fascinating but previously neglected departure from Samuel Richardson's means of providing moral instruction through a sentimental appeal to upholding a specific social contract; Fielding's unsteady narrator and provocative paradoxical treatment of the novel's protagonists invite us to appreciate the link between Amelia and the progressive social protest novels of the later eighteenth century.

This study is an examination of Henry Fielding's attitude toward the uses and abuses of language in the four newspapers which he edited: The Champion (1739-40), The True Patriot (1745-46), The Jacobite's Journal (1747-48), The Covent Garden Journal (1752). This exploration begins with a consideration of Fielding's attitude toward the corrupting and corruptible word and the relationship which he saw between the corruption and decline in language and the corruption and decline in ethics and morality. It focuses on these four journals largely neglected by previous Fielding critics, searching them for references to language uses and abuses and for the social theory underlying these remarks. This study moreover traces and investigates Fielding's seventeenth-century philosophical forerunners-Thomas Hobbes, Bernard de Mandeville, Anthony Ashley Cooper Third Earl of Shaftesbury, John Locke--and their profound effect on Fielding's ethos and ethics in particular and on those of the eighteenth century in general. Locke is discussed in most detail because he directly shaped Fielding's attitude toward language.Because language is a major tool of certain learned professions, three chapters examine Fielding's position in his journals on the uses and abuses of language as related to three groups of professionals: the clergy, writers and critics, and lawyers and doctors.This study suggests further areas needing investigation: (1) critical editions of The Champion and The Covent Garden Journal, (2) a comparative study of Fielding's journalistic efforts with those of Addison, Steele, Defoe, and especially Swift, (3) an examination of Fielding's attitude toward women in the four journals, (4) an exploration of the philosophical relationship between Fielding and Locke, (5) a comparison of Fielding's theories of language and society with those of two modern linguistphilosophers--George Orwell and Walter Ong.Fielding attempted in his four journals to restore a language that he saw as fallen into corruption and abuse. Language, he thought, often becomes corrupt first; then the corruptions in society follow. Fielding's four journals provide particularly useful indications of how seriously he took language, how prevalent he found its abuses in the professions of mid-eighteenth-century England, and how he hoped through purifying language to reform society itself in his own time.
Department of English

Cette étude porte sur les discours théoriques et les dispositifs rhétoriques auxquels la fiction de langue anglaise a recours pour se légitimer, dans un contexte de ferme condamnation morale et de mépris de la part des doctes. Ces discours et ces dispositifs se déploient dans des titres, des préfaces et au coeur même des récits. Les auteurs les mobilisent pour affirmer que leur récit contient une vérité morale ou, le plus souvent, pour présenter ce dernier comme un compte-rendu factuel. Cette revendication de l'historicité fait intervenir la figure du narrateur témoin, garant de la véracité des faits relatés, ainsi que celle de l'éditeur de manuscrit, qui s'impose à partir des années 1700. Avec la parution de Joseph Andrews (1742) de Henry Fielding la fiction se met à exhiber sa propre fonctionnalité : elle devient autoréflexive
This dissertation explores the theoretical discourses and rhetorical devices used by writers to legitimate fiction at a time when it was considered immoral by moralists and despised by scholars. The use of such discourses and devices is found in titles, prefaces and throughout the narratives themselves ; they are employed to assert that the narratives contain moral truths or to assert their status as fact, thus rendering the narratives acceptable to the readership. The claim to authenticity is asserted by the figure of the narrator-as-witness, who guarantees the veracity of the facts relayed, and, from 1700 onwards, by that of the manuscript editor. Following the publication of Henry Fielding's Joseph Andrews in 1742, the fiction of the period begins to flaunt its own fictionality, marking the emergence of self-reflexive fiction

This thesis examines representations of trust in selected British sentimental novels of the eighteenth century. It focuses principally on the manner in which sentimental prose fiction reflects and participates in the shift from premodern to modern formations of trust. Commenting on the nature of modern trust, Anthony Giddens claims that, with the move to modernity, trust relations in the intimate sphere become increasingly dependent on emotional mutuality, while trust in institutions becomes increasingly impersonal and disengaged from assessments of moral character.
My work explores this dual shift in three sentimental novels. It first analyzes Samuel Richardson's Pamela (1740) and contends that Richardson denies the concept of honor its epistemological role in practical deliberations. The denial of the epistemology of honor uncouples the mechanism of personal trust from assessments of role and role performance and thus makes the trust in persons in the intimate sphere less dependent on institutional forms of trust. To replace honor's role in the formation of trust, Richardson proposes that the sentiments can provide reliable grounds for trust in the intimate sphere. However, he denies the sentiments a role in the formation of an encompassing social trust among strangers and mere acquaintances. The thesis proceeds to read Henry Fielding's Amelia (1751). In order to argue that Fielding envisioned divergent grounds for trust relations, it maintains that Fielding considers trust relations in the intimate sphere and trust relations in public life as based on the sentiments and fair distribution respectively. To conclude, the thesis investigates Oliver Goldsmith's The Vicar of Wakefield (1766) to uncover the manner in which Goldsmith distinguishes personal trust in the intimate sphere from general system trust, which Goldsmith ultimately envisions as an ontological trust in providence.

Cette thèse propose d'étudier la fiction anglaise de la première moitié du dix-huitième siècle en regard de la médecine populaire de la même époque. Daniel Defoe, Samuel Richardson, Henry Fielding, Tobias Smollett and Laurence Sterne utilisent certains éléments du discours médical afin de justifier leur entreprise littéraire. Selon eux, la fiction peut prévenir le lecteur contre le vice (c'est l'époque de l'inoculation), ou même le guérir de ses maux. En suivant les trois étapes de la démarche médicale—décrire, prescrire, guérir— cette étude interdisciplinaire examine autour de quelles représentations de l'individu les discours fictionnels et médicaux se rejoignent, s'opposent, ou plus simplement se répondent. La description du vivant, essentielle à la médecine, devient l'intérêt de la fiction réaliste, qui se réfère métaphoriquement à certains schémas médicaux comme celui de la circulation sanguine. Les auteurs de fiction, comme ceux la médecine populaire et didactique, développent de nombreuses stratégies prescriptives : la lecture est alors censée aider le lecteur à organiser sa vie quotidienne, et guide la façon dont il doit s'occuper de son corps. Enfin, la fiction comme la médecine promettent de guérir le lecteur par le mouvement de l'exercice et de la purge, de la pensée et du rire. La satire opère un traitement plus corrosif que les écrivains justifient par la violence que le traitement médical inflige au corps souffrant
This study of Eighteenth-Century fiction and medicine (1719-1771) aims at presenting an interdisciplinary analysis of both discourses. Daniel Defoe, Samuel Richardson, Henry Fielding, Tobias Smollett and Laurence Sterne use some elements of the medical discourse to justify their literary enterprise. They tend to argue that fiction can prevent the reader against vice, or even cure him. To study how medical and fictional discourse interact with each other, this analysis follows the tree steps of the medical process—description, prescription and treatment. The description of life—so essential to the medical thought—is becoming the vital concern of realistic fiction, which assimilates some medical principles such as circulation. Many prescriptive strategies are enacted by authors of fiction and medical doctors who write about domestic life, suggesting some proper ways of dealing with one's body. Finally, both fiction and medicine offer to cure through movement, by exercising and purging, thinking and laughing. Corrosive satirical laughs are assimilated to a certain healing violence often associated with the medical treatment