Scientific Research as an Occupation in Eighteenth-Century Paris

R O G E R H A H N

SCIENTIFIC research has in the last few centuries been transformed from an avocation to a profession. We know a good deal about the pace-setting amateur work of seventeenth-century enthusiasts and something about modern-day professional research workers in industry and the univer- sities, Yet there has been little concentrated attention paid to the long and uneven process which has brought us from the days of the virtuosi to our present condition.

The French experience in this transition is particularly illuminating. It was in the century preceding the French Revolution that a tradition of high standards for the advancement of science was forged in Paris and tha t F rench science came to be envied by scientists all over the world. The political upheavals following 1789, whatever their other consequences, did little to diminish the high reputation of the French scientific com- munity. Indeed the creation of new schools and research institutions in the wake of the Revolution provided additional institutional models for others seeking to establish science as a significant new occupation in the modern state. Looked at superficially, it seems as if the so-called "second scientific revolution" 1 which eventually professionalised the scientific occupation began in France during the ancien rdgime, continuing without significant interruption until the early decades of the nineteenth century. But because a careful analysis of the occupational arrangements of eighteenth-century Parisian scientists has yet to be made, we should be wary of jumping to conclusions.

It is generally assumed--and correctly in my opinion--that the scien- tific successes registered in France during the ancien rJgime were in large part. conditioned by the existence of a set of governmentally supported institutions, notably the Acad6mie des sciences, the Coll~ge Royal, the Observatoire de Paris, the/~cole militaire du g6nie at M6zi~res, and the Jardin du Roi. ~ I wish first to explore some of the mechanisms which induced the growth of science, paying particular attention to the trans- formations of the Careers of scientists. When I set out to investigate this

1 Mendelsohn, Everett, " The Context of Nineteenth-Century Science "~ in Jones, B.Z. (ed.)~ T h e Golden Age of Science (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1966), p. xvii.

2 :For.: bibliography on French science before the Revolution, see Taton, Ken6 (ed.), Enseignement et diffusion des sciences en France au X V I I l e si~cle (Paris: Her- mann, !964); Chapin; Seymour L., " The Academy of Sciences during the Eighteenth Century: An Astronomical Appraisal ", French Historical Studies, V, 4 (Fall 1968), pp. 37t-4047 Crosland, Maurice P., "The~ History of French Science: Recent Publications and :Perspectives " , F r e n c h Historical Studies, VIII, 1 (Spring 1973), pp. 157-171; and Taton, Ren6, " S u r Quelques ouvrages ~r6cents concernant~l'histoire d e la science franqaise ", Revue d'histoiredes sciences, X X V I , 1 (January 1973), pp. 69-90.

502 Roger Hahn

topic, I expected to elaborate on some notions set forth in my book on the Acad6mie des scienceff 8 concerning the disappearance of amateur science in the wake Of the professionalism' displayed i n the Acad6mie, and the establishment of a well-defined community of scientists whose expression was found in the activities of that Acad6mie.

The hypothesis derived from previous research was relatively simple. I t was meant to run as follows: between the time of Louis X I V a n d t h e ~French Revolution, institutions were created or refurbished by thestate, thus providing visible evidence of the public support, of scientific activities, and offering the prospect of established scientific careers in well-paid positions. The existence o f such: opportunities, at the time unequalled anywhere in the world, drew scores of gifted men into the orbit of scien- tific research, increased the available pool of inventive talent on which progress always depends, and created salutary pressures on :both the quality and the size of the scientific community. Thus both for innovation

'and for critical discussion, France profited greatly from governmental sponsorship of scientific institutions. To put it another way, the:leading sector of the scientific economy was propelled b~r institutionalisation and professionalisation--two critical processes often seen as important for the study of the economy of developing societies, but not generally con- sidered in the realm of science. It seemed to be the case for French science that creativity and productivity were spurred on b y these two social processes.

If the assumptions were valid, it would be necessary to concentrate on the mechanism by which these factors acted and to understand the motives which lay behind both the strengthening of institutions of science and the transformation of an informal community of scientists into a coherent social group, My research would involve uncovering the motives behind the increasing state support of science, examining the govern- ment's response to calls for assistance from individual scientists, and ferreting out the reasons for the government's preference for organised and centralised institutions to supervise scientific activities. 4 It would also require a description of the gradual emergence of a new social class or occupational group, to measure its Size over a period of time; to examine its integration into the national life, and to analyse expressions of its outlook. My expectations were .that the eighteenth century was a critical period for this kind of social transformation in France.

a Hahn, Roger, The Anatomy oJ a Scientific Institution: The Paris Academy of Sciences, 1666-1803 (Berkeley: University of California P r e s s , 1971); a n d the critical reviews: by Crosland, Maurice P., in Isis, LXIII, 218-(September 1972), pp: 405-407; Baker, Keith M., in Minerva, X , 3 (July 1972), pp. 502=508 ; Brown, Harcourt, in Ahnals oJ Science, XXIX, 3 -(October 1972), :pp. 313-316; and Ben-David, Joseph; in ]ournald[ Modern History, XLIV, 4 (December 1972), pp. 589-592.

Rappaport, Rhoda, ', Government Patronage ~of .Science in:Eighteenth~eentury France ", History o] Science, VIII {1969),' p p . 119:136; and Chapin, .Seymour L . , " Scientific Profit from ~he Profit Motive: T h e Case of the L a "P6rouse Expedition '~, Actes du X l l e congrbs international d'histoire dez sciences~ Paris 1968; XI; pp. 45-49. ~

Scientific Research as an Occupation in Eighteenth-Century Paris 503

What :was a "Sc ien t i s t " in the AncJen R6gime ?

Having-worked a good deal on institutions, I decided to concentrate at first o n scientists, and to look at manifestations o f them as a class: At the 0utset, some Very troublesome problems occurred, which I now judge to be symptomatic of a deeper-issue. The word "scientist " i n FreiaChl uns?ientifique, used as a substantive, does not occur commonly until the twentieth century: The translation into French of the: term "na tu ra l philosopher ", used so much inEng land during the eighteenth century, yields a' notion closer to the German Naturphilosoph than desired, leading us away from the idea: of a professional specialist. The most congenial contemporary term is savant, which often overlaps with drudit, implying a person of great knowledge. 5 In the eighteenth century, and in common parlance today, this appellation encompassed historians, antiquarians, numismatists, archaeologists and others, but not all the persons we would wish to have considered as scientists. For example, the creator of auto- matons, Vaucanson, an important scientist by most definitions, would never have been called a savant. ~ It seems as if t h a t term does not coincide with ourno t ion of unscientifique.

But even if savant is adopted in order to avoid glaring anachronisms, a major problem still remains. The category of savant refers to an intellec- tual activity, at times to a type of social behaviour, but scarcely to a social or occupational class. When looking at a series of notarial archives, as I have done recently--at marriage contracts, property sales, succes- sions, or at tax records and payrolls--where one finds occupational labels of all sorts, the word savant itself never appears. Most often the individual we know to have been a scientist is listed as a member of a learned society, as a professor, as a physician, as an army officer, or as a clergyman. Occasionally the term homme de lettres or gens de lettres is used, especially for those who published text books and dictionaries, or who edited journals. 7

This linguistic difficulty is disturbing to the would-be quantitative social historian who needs well-defined categories in order to make some respect- able and valid enumerations. It also troubles the general historian who might reasonably expect a close association between the emergence of science as a serious and concerted activity in the late seventeenth century and the establishment of a recognisable social group devoted to its pursuit, The absence of a single, unequivocal term to describe this group is an

5: For ,the period up to 1700, see Ricken, Ulrich, " Gelehrter " und , Wissenscha# ,' irn FranzSsischen: BeitrSge zu ihrer Bezeichnungsgeschichte vorn 12.-17. lahrhundert (Berlin: Akademie Ver!ag, 1961); and Ross , Sydney, " Scientist: The Story o f a Word ", Annals:o[ Science, XVI!I, 2 (June 1962), pp. 65-85.

6 Doyon, Andr6 and Izialgre, Lucien, lacques Vaucanson, mdcaniCien de gdnie (PariS: Presses Universitaires de France, 1966). . �9

r B~nichou, Paul, in Le sacre d e l'dcrivain 1750-1830 (Paris: Corti, 1973), pp. 23-77 , discusses the analogous problem of the self,image of the French writer during the ancien rdgime. See a'lso~ Gaulln, Michel; " L e Concept d 'homme de lettres, en France, ~L l'6poque de l'Encyclop6die ", Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1972.

504 Roger Hahn

indication of a great complexity in the social situatioa. The likelihood that such terminological confusion reigned in France well into the present century--in a country which prides itself upon attention to its language --is even more alarming for the historian seeking generalisations about the social evolution of the life of science.

How then should one proceed ? I took as my field of study the more than 300 working members of the Acad6mie until the Revolution, and au empted to determine to what extent they could be said to be part of the class of scientists. Ideally, one would want to know what values they shared, what their self-image was, how they made a living, the degree of social cohesion they displayed, and the careers their biographies revealed. I want to offer here some partial results of this inquiry.

Scientists as a Coherent Social Group

While academicians formed a scientific community in the intellectual sense that is, they shared values about the use of reason, observation, experimentation and objectivity progressively to uncover natural reality

and while they communicated with each other, sought and accepted review by peers, and agreed to ac t as public arbiters of science in France, they did not constitute a cohesive class? If we knew with more assurance their social origins , we would have one element explaining this lack of cohesion. But more importantly for our purposes, nothing in their professional lives as academicians forced them into a single mould. Entrance to the community was based on merit rather than social origin, although in fact the lower orders were excluded. Illiteracy was a bar, but a s long as it could be surmounted, it mattered little before the Revo- lution if the academician had been self-taught, apprenticed, or formally educated. There was no religious test as such peculiar to academicians, the only restriction being that members of regular religious orders were ineligible for full pensions2 This did not exclude several clergymen who acted as full-time scientists: the abb~s Nollet, La Caille, and Haiiy, to name only the most famous. But the bond of these ordained priests to the religious life was weaker than that of Jesuits or Oratorians. Nor were members of guilds excluded because of their affiliations. Many academi- cians remained pharmacists or surgeons. The one notable exception to the rule was the clock-maker Jean-Baptiste Le Roy who deliberately left

8 Despite their allegiance to the Acad6mie, they did not form a recognisable class of academicians either. The membership of the three major royal academies in Paris Acad6mie f r a n c a l s e . Acad6mie des inscriptions et belles-lettres' and Acad6mie des sciences---cohered even less than scientists. Only a few Fontenelle, Buffon, ~l'Alemberti Bailly; :Condorcet~looked upon the position of " academician " as a career to be sought, and they were exceptional individuals who displayed a strong setentistic bent. S e e also Roche, Daniel, " Sciences et pouvoirs darts la France du XVII Ie si~cle (1666-1803)" Annales: ~conomies, Socidtds, Civilisations, XXIX, 3 (May-June 1974), pp. 746-748.

9 See article X I I o f the 1699 regulations of the Academic, modified by the 1716 letters- patent, in: Aucoc; L ~ o n (ed.), L'lnstitUt de France: Lois,' s tatuts et r~gtements concernant les anciennes acaddtnies et :'l'ln.~titut de 1635 ?t 1889 (i~firis~.. Imprimerie: Nationale, 1889), pp. Ixxxvi, xcifi.

Scientific Research as an Occupation in Eighteenth-Century Paris 505

his occupation upon election. 1~ In his case, I suspect the motive behind his offer to withdraw from clock-making was the fear that he would be suspect when acting as a judge of technical inventions brought before the Acad6mie. The purpose of his withdrawal was similar to the semi- exclusion of members of the regular religious orders: to avoid double aliegiances which would conflict�9 a scrupulous adherence to the ideal of impartiality. In general, there was n o intrinsic social contradiction between being an academician and practising a craft, operating a business, or holding a benefice. We even have on record the bankruptcy of one entrepreneur-academician, Quatrem6re d'Isjonval.1

The collective life of the academicians was not a source of much cohesion either. Outside the bi-weekly meetings lasting for two hours each, occasional committee gatherings, a yearly mass celebrated at the Oratoire, and two public assemblies, there were no collegial activities to bind them together. So far as is known, they did not act as a large group socially. On the contrary, the annals of the Acad6mie are replete with evidence of bitter cleavages. Factionalism was rampant and mani- fested itself ferociously on the occasion o f elections, and this divisiveness was further aggravated by political differences as the Revolution broke out~ There were cliques and schools, often based on specialties within science or on conflicting approaches to scientific questions, and.these sub-groups were generally reinforced by ties of patronage. Indeed, there seems to have been greater social cohesion within disciplines than across science as a whole.

I was also struck in my search through notarial records by the relative rarity of marriages between academicians' kinsmen, and how seldom academicians were witnesses to each other's weddings. A few well-known dynasties of scientists existed--the Cassinis, the Geoffroys, the Delisles, the Jussieus, and the Le Monniers--but family connexions had less to do with the life of the Acad6mie than with the practice of handing down certain non-academic offices from one generation to the next, as was common in the ancien r6gime. To finish the list of centrifugal forces in the Acad6mie, one should add the wide disparity of social class within the membership. Some had modest origins--Ant0ine Petit or GasPard Monge--others were from the administrative orparliamentary miiiettx--- Fantet de Lagny, Grandjean de Fouchy, Mignot de Montigny and Dionis du S6jour--while certain academicians were or became nobles---Cassini, Quesnay, Courtivron, Chabert and Perronet.12

10 Undated letter o f Le Roy to Mairan (shortly before 18 August , 1751), in Archives de rAcad6mie des sciences, dossier Le Roy, Jean-Baptiste, reprinted in part by Bertrand, JOseph Lou i s Francois, L'Aead#mie des sciences et les acad#miclens de 1666 ~ 1793 :(Paris'i Hetzel, 1869), pp. 74 -75.

1i Arch ives de Paris; D 4B 6 107 (7585). 12 There is no available study of the social composition of academicians. Series D C 6

~it t h e Arehlves: de: Paris indicates that in aadition; to t he fiobles listed, Bouvart ; Porial and Tiller were ennobled while already academicians.

506 Roger, Hahn

Gaining a Livelihood through Membership in the Acad6mie

It is reasonable to expect that improving financial opportunities in science would have counteracted these centrifugal tendencies by creating an occupational class of full-time scientists. In view of the professionalism displayed in the Acad6mie, it would be natural to expect academicians to have been the first to fit into or even to create this occupational group. They were singularly devoted to high standards in science which set them apart f rom laymen or amateurs; they were generally self-motivated and self-regulated; and they performed specialised tasks in French culture which were recognised and sanctioned by the state.l~ Another step towards the full professionalisation of scientists could easily have been taken had salaries been assigned to academicians, thereby offering a Clearly-defined and desirable career through membership in the Acad6mie. 14 But here too, there seem to have been some complications which prevented the establishment o f a fully recognisable social group of scientists. The finan- cial arrangements in the Acad6mie were such that, on the eve of the Revolution, a young scientist could not expect to make a living directly from belonging to the learned society. TO understand this peculiar situation requires a close look at the financial support of the Acad6mie.

In the seventeenth Century, Louis:XIV's ministers paid individual academicians directly. Most received an annual sum of around 1,500 to 2,000 livres from the Crown, while some foreigners like Huygens and Cassini received considerably the larger sums 6,000 to 9,000 Iivres-- which were necessary to attract them to France and keep them there. The budget for all these scientists which I have anachronistically extracted from payrolls for all kinds of employees 15--hovered around 30,000 livres in the 1670s. A century later, academic salaries, now handled through the institution, totalled some 50;000 livres annually, 6,000 for each Of the six academic classes, 3,000 each for the secretary and trea- surer, and 8,000 for the miscellaneous petites pensions. 16 In the meantime, the membership eligible for such payments had jumped from approxi- mately 20 tO 50, and some inflation had further reduced the value of average academic salaries. On the average, academicians fared better financially

12 These features are generally included in the characterisation of " professionals", particularly scientific professionals. See Ben-David, Joseph, " The 'Profession of Science and.i ts Powers "., Minerva , X, 3 (July 1972), pp. 362-383, and Hall, Richard H., " Pro- fessionalization and Bureaucratization ", American Sociological Review, ~ XXXIII , 1 (February 1968), pp. 92-104. See also Reingold, N~/than, " Definitions rand Speculations: The Professionalization of Science in America in .the Nineteenth Century ", read before the American Academy of Arts and Sciences Conference on the Early History of Societies for the Promotion of Knowledge in the United States, held in summer, 1973 (forthcoming).

.la. MacLeod, Roy M., " Resources' of Science-in-Victorian England: The Endowment ~f Science Movement; t868:-1900.", ~M!nerva, IX, 2 (April 4971), pp. 197-230, reprinted in Mathias, Peter (ed.), Science" and Society. 1600=1900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), pp. 111-166.

15 Guiffrey, Jules Joseph (ed.), Comptes des bggffrnentS du roi: sous le.rbgne de .Louis X1V (Paris: Imprimerie.Nationale, 1881-1901).. :

16 ~'; Journal du ' Tr6sor .de- l'Acad6mie, ~1792-t7937':, foL 3, Manusc~ipl~ t t4- i Cornelt University.

Scientific Research as an Occupation in Eighteenth-Century Paris .507

under the Sun.King than under his two royal successors, despite the increasing budget, for science.

From the point of view of an interest in scientific careers, there is an even more serious issue residing in the distribution Of funds: theywere in fact more like old-age pensions than salaries. For most of the eighteenth century, the Acad6mie was divided into six classes according to scientific discipline--g~omdtrie, astronornie, m~canique, anatomie, ' chimie, botanique; within each there were three ranks--two ~lOves or adioints, three assoei~s, and three pensionnaires. Because promotion was a matter of seniority, and generally within the same class, a newly-elected acade- mician had to wait. until five of his elders passed on before becoming a pensionnaire and sharing in the stipends set aside for his specialty. And since these pensions were graduated, with the elder receiving 3,000 livres annually, while his two "younger " colleagues received 1,800 and: :I,200 livres each, only at a ripe old age could a scientist expect to earn a livelihood directly and solely from being a member: of the Acad6mie. 17 The mathematician Etienne B6zout waited 24 years before receiving his meagre stipend of 1,200 livres, and he died of old age the year after. Legentil waited 32 years, until he was 60, before being on the academic payroll.

A serious gap existed between what historians refer to proudly as the generous, governmentally-financed sponsorship of French science, and the life o f the individual scientist. Talented young persons could not have been attracted into science for pecuniary reasons, as was the case in: the United States after the Second World War. Indeed, if they read eulogies written by the Acad6mie secretaries, they would have been forewarned. Fontenelle, in speaking of Michel Rolle's career says bluntly that " there is between science and wealth an old and irreconcilable distinction ".1~ Condorcet, in explaining why B6zout's family was reluctant to allow him to pursue his scholarly vocation, indicates that " a father . . . . knows that education and enlightenment lead neither to honour nor to fo r tune"? ~ Another secretary, Grandjean de Fouchy, insists more explicitly that the function of eulogies is in part to display for the public by example all the sacrifices required for those having dared to make a career in science:

The history of the Acad6mie . . . teaches how one can overcome difficulties in the study of science itself, but those who have the courage to enter this laborious career meet with obstacles of another kind as well, they must be ready to ~ Surmourit hurdles placed in their way, even by those closest to them.

lr I estimate that one could live modestly in mid-eighteenth century Paris with an annual income, of 5,000 livi'es. Thi s eoi'responds to a little over s in contemporary British currency. See Lough, John, An Introduction to Eighteenth Century France (London: Long- marls, 1960), p. ~/i. , . . . .

!:a Fontendle, Bernard de; Oeuvres(Paris: Salmon, 1825), vol. II, p. 25~. �9 ~9 Condorcetr Nlarie-J'ean-Antoine-Nicolas Caritat de, Oeuvres (Paris : Didot, 1847-49), vol. III, p. 43.

508 :Roger Hahn

The Acad6mie requires qualities of will as well as of mind; and both must be worked at. There is no better way to instruct the young, wanting to cultivate science than by recounting the lives of late academicians, giving a summary of their life, work, and the way which they turned their ditficulties. Not only is this a way to pay them the tribute they deserve, but also to Offer for those Who may one day pursue this type of occupation an example of the honours :they may expect at the end of their career, and a model of ways to overcome the obstaclesthey would likely encounter. 2~

The picture o f the self-sacrificing scientist as a struggling hero is not mere ly a rhetorical device used to good effect. Fouchy, like F0ntenelle and Condorcet, is also evoking the tensions involved and contradictions between the values derived from a commitment to a scientific career and the low material rewards which flowed from it. In F r a n c e , research, satisfying as it might have been for the soul, did not lead directly to wealth or even social esteem. To a large extent that statement still applies.

All this helps to explain why academicians did not constitute an occupa- tional class, but it leaves unanswered the question of how those few courageous enough to engage in scientific activities made ends meet, and what the implications of such a situation might be.

Thus far I have referred only to earnings directly dependent upon membership in the Acad6mie. The prestige of belonging to the learned society and the contacts made by academicians in the line of duty were of capital importance for gaining what was in fact their major source of income. We might be tempted, therefore, to include these earnings in our calculation of the benefits deriving from membership. The connection undoubtedly existed, but to lump all sources of income together would mask the issue to be discussed later, whether the various academic "b y - p roduc t s " reinforced or interfered with the furtherance of careers in science. Before turning to that issue, let us classify the types of positions outside the Acad6mie where we might find our academicians earning a decent living.

Occupations of Scientists outside the Acad6mie

Teaching constituted the most frequent and congenial employment held by academicians. They dominated in two institutions older than the Acad6mie, the Coll~ge Royal and the Jardin du Roi. In the former, one finds ~ mostly mathematicians, astronomers, and medical men: 21 At the Jardin du Roi, naturalists able to profess their science to students of medicine, pharmacy and surgery also tended to be academicians, or used

zo Grandjean de Fouchy, Jean.Paul, Eloges des acaddmiciens de l'Acaddmie royale des sciences, morts depuis Fan 1744 (Paris: Brunet, 1761), vol. I, pp. iv-v.

21 S6dillot, Louis Am61ie, Les professeurs de mathdmatiques et de physique g~ndrale au Coll~ge de France (Rome: Imprimerie ~des Sciences Math6matiques ~ ct Physiques, 1869); Lefranc, Abel, Histoire du Coll~ge de France depuis ses origines jusqu'~ la /in du Premier Empire (Paris: Hachette, 1893).

Scientific Research as an Occupation in Eighteenth-Century Paris 509

the posts as stepping stones to join its ranks. -~ There were also accredited professors at the Facult6 de' m6deeine and the Coll6ges de pharmacie and de chirurgieY 3 Mathematicians found military schools, the civil engineer- ing corps, and the architectural and surveying professions interested in their special knowledge. When student examiners' posts were created, they were often awarded to qualified mathematicians."" In addition, Paris abounded with occasional public courses or demonstration-lectures which brought money from their auditors. Success for these enterprises, however, depended more on eloquence and popularity than upon the professional competence which was the mark of academicians. Some like Nollet, Rouelle, and Fourcroy were nonetheless very successful financially in this popular role. Quieter scientists preferred employment as tutors in ~ rich families or at Court.

A second category of employment was the direction of royal scientific establishments, or as scientists to the Court. Chirac, Dufay and Buffon each ~earned a good income from being intendant of the Jardin du Roi; the Cassini dynasty ran the Observatoire, and found some money to employ a number of their colleagues as research workers. La Peyronie a n d Quesnay directed the Acad6mie de chirurgie, while Lassone and Vicq d'Azyr lorded over the Soci6t6 de m6decine, all with good stipends, The King, Queen, and members of the royal family each had several physicians, apothecaries and surgeons, many of whom were members of the Acad6mie.~ There was a post as royal geographer, a keeper of natural history collections for the Duc d'Orl6ans, and also an impressive list of secretaries, tutors and health specialists in the households of King Louis XVI's brothers.

We find academicians in a third and related sector, namely on military payrolls. In addition to the professors and examiners of officers' candidate schools, the navy had a section for maps and charts, and another for naval engineering, which were run by academicians. The Connaissance des temps wa s entrusted to astronomers from the Acad6mie. Duhamel du Monceau, Le Monnier, Lalande, Deparcieux and Rochon, among others, are to be found on naval payrolls as well. 2~ On the army side, improving fortifications and making maps were activities which yielded stipends for

22 Contant, Jean-Paul, L'enseignement de la chimie au Jardin royal des pIantes de Paris (Cahors: Coueslant, 1952); Crestois, Paul, L'Enseignement de la botanique au lardin Royal des Plantes de Paris (Cahors: Coueslant, 1953).

23 Delaunay, Paul, Le monde mddical parisien au dix-huiti~me sibcle (Paris: Rousset, 1906); Huard, Pierre, L'.4caddmie royale de chirurgie (Paris: Palais de la D6couverte, 1967); Caz6, Michel , Le Coll~ge de pharmacie de Paris (1777-1796) (Fontenay-aux-Roses: Bellenand, 1943).

24 Duveen, Denis I. and Hahn, Roger, " Laplace's Succession to B6zout's Post of Examinateur des l~l~ves de l 'Artillerie " , Isis, XLVIII, 4 (December 1957), pp. 416-427.

25 Rules of the Academic prevented scientists living in Versailles-from holding regular academic posts without special dispensation. See Aucoe, L., op. cit., pp. Ixxxiv-lxxxv, and examples of dispensations in Manuscript Ashburnham 1700, Biblioteca Medicea-Lauren- ziana, Florence, pp. 32-33.

2~ For details, see C250-51 of the Fonds anciens de la Marine, Archives Nationales.

510 Roger Hahn

scientists.27 Moreover, the Academie had several~ prominent: officers 4rI its ~anks~ who drew regular salaries from the military: Belidor and the Chevalier d,Arcy~ Deschiens de Ressons and Valli~re in the artillery; Fourcroy de Ramecourt, Coulomb and Meusnier in the engineering corps; andLa:Galissonni~re, Borda and Bory in the navy. The list is surely incomplete.

The fourth and most novel Category, both in its character and significance for academicians who were neither mathematicians nor in the healing arts; ::was that of government consultant in an enterprise in which techn01ogy was heavily involved. 28 Tiller, d'Arcet and C0ndorcet, following Newton's footsteps, Were at the Mint; Reaumu1", HelIot; Morand, Duhamel and Sage foUnd places in mining and metallurgy; otheCs were consultants for the Gobelins tapestry works or at the S~vres porcelain factory; I both governmental enterprises: Lalande, d'Alembert and Bossut advised the s t a t e 0 n inland navigation. 29 And there were numerous inspectors of commerce and industry, including Dufay, HeUot, Montigny; ~Macquer,. Vaucanson, Desmarest, Jars, LeRoy, Vandermonde and Berthollet~ 3~ Some even engaged in industrial espionage for the administration, fo r which they were probably paid handsomely from secret funds. Finally, the government used academicians to censor books in t h e scientific and technical domains.

One must not forget ~ academicians who were engaged in activities quite distant from their scientific specialties, like Lavoisier who was a tax collector. ~1 Mignot de Montigny was treasurer of France; Fantet de Lagny wasas~istant director of a government bank; d'Onsenbray was postmaster 7 general; and Dionis du Sejour a prominent legal counsellor. A few academicians who had inherited their wealth attended to their land and investments, though they Were rarer than one might expect. Among the most 'significant of the acti~ve scientists were the Duc de Chaulnes and the Marquis de Courti,r

This: :account, incomplete as it is, gives the impression of a vast and

27 Bettlxaut, H e n r i Marie Auguste, Les ing~nieurs gdographes mil~taires 1624-1831 (Paris :. Imprimerie du Service Geographique de l 'Armee, 1902), :

z8 Guerlac, Henry , " Some French Antecedents of the Chemical Revolution ", Chymia, V (1959), pp. 72-112.

29 Hem:y, Charles (ed:), Correspondance inddite de .Condorcet et de Turgot t770,1779 (Paris: Charavay, 1882), pp.,, 260ff . discusse~ the establishment of anon-sa lar ied committee on inland navigation. The scientists were ' rewarded in other ,ways, as discussed in Hahn , Rogers ," The Chair o f Hydrodynamics in Paris; I775-1791: A Creation o f Turgot ", Acres ,du X e congrbs international d'histoire des sciences, l thaea :1962, II~ pp. 751-754, : z0 Bacquie , ,Franc , " Les Inspecteurs des Manufactures sous l 'Ancien Regime, 1669- 1791 ", Mdmoires et documents pour servir ~ l'hi.~toire du commerce et de l , industrie.r France, XII (1927), pp. 19139, i '~ :

zl The t ens ions caused by Lavoisier~s occupation and his scientific interests:are ,discussed, by~u Marguerite, in " Un Savant pendant la,R6volution ", Cahier~ internationaux desooiologie; XVII (July-December 1954), pp, 123-139 A ~recent. article by Scheler, Lucien, , "Lavois ier et l a Regie-des Poudres ", Revue d'histoire des .xcicnces, X X V I , 3, (July 1973), pp. 194-222, nonetheless underscores that his well-paid-government post in., the powder-manufac ture was closely connected with his chemical actiVities.

Scientific Research as an Occupation, in Eighteenth-Century Paris 51t

et~rborate structure of occupations in which the ancien rdgime supported in:a r,easonable way those engaged in scientific pursuits, permitted lthem to live, often with some comfort, and to leave a comfortable inheritance for. their Children. While it helped individuals and their families, can we also say it supported the pursuit of science as a research activity? The answer :is complex and difficult, because it requires us to think carefully about what we mean by science.

On the positive side, especially when compared to the situation of scientists in other countries, the French academician was quite, fortunate: The miscellaneous posts listed above brought m varying amounts of money, ranging from 1,800 livres annually as a professor at the I~cole royale militaire in Paris to 6,000 livres as examiner for naval schools. ,For some budding scientists, like Laplace for example, it meant" the difference between taking holy orders, thusentering a tried and tested career, and following an inclination to be a scientist. Once embarked on this novel line.of work, it was rare to see a promising and talented young man revert to a more conventional occupation.

But there were drawbacks as well. Since these scientific activities existed only marginally in the occupational structure of the ancien rdgime, a n d were at the mercy of individuals whose commitments were not to science, and since the availability of funds and posts was known only privately, the whole network was extremely fragile. Changes in policy based on political preferences could upset the entire system. Moreover, scientists were put in a position of having repeatedly to plead their case to higher authorities who might be ignorant of the content- of science and its practitioners' aspirations. Fortunately for men living in the age of the Enlightenment, the public image of science was positive. The same could not be said for the following century.

There was an even greater problem. Most of the positions mentioned above involved teaching the elements of science, or applying knowledge of nature to practical problems. They did not generally encourage the scientists' desire for the advancement of science, and rarely provided the time or. means~to extend the frontiers of scientific: knowledge. In a few Cases,: .the occupation stimulated some significant new research in the S6vres factory, in the preparation of nautical almanacs, or on experiments with .the shape of ships' hulls, Most often, however, academicians were employed to use the by-products of their scientific excellence, to be useful to society. But between research and utility,, there could be, and were, c0n.flictSl O f time, of interest,, eVen of method. D'Alembert recommended a teaching post to Laplace,. saying that it required giving classes only in' the m0rning s, leaving 'the rest of. the time; it was understood, for' real science !.3z Mignot d e Montigny, who' spent his whole career applying

a2 Letter o f ~ d'Alembbrlf to L e C a n u da~ed 25: August; 1769, Collection historique, In'stitUt p6dagogique, Paris.

512 Roger Hahn

science~ to practical issues, publishing only one research paper, felt suffi- ciently unhappy about the matter to leave a I2-page explanation of his conduct as an appendix to his last testament? 3 Macquer, in a letter to his wife, recounts how uncomfortable he was waiting for his administrative masters to emerge from their councils, yet recognising it was necessary to waste his time paying court to them. 34 Other examples could be cited.

One thing seems clear, and requires emphasis. The spirit of research for the furtherance of the rational understanding of nature--which is my definition of scientific activity--neither coincided completely with 'the needs of the society of the ancien r@ime, nor was it encouraged on the scale required to create a professional class of scientists. Even in the Acad6mie, which fostered the purest kind of research, there was a demand on the members to act as governmental consultants which diverted them from the pursuit of the scientific ideal. The financial necessities of scientists pulled them in different directions, and turned them away from the calling of science. They acted out roles as teachers of laymen, consult- ants and administrators which did not reinforce their roles as research workers. Thus, instead of the crystallisation of scientific research as an acceptable and autonomous occupation, the eighteenth-century academician was subjected to centrifugal forces which tempted him in other directions. For some, science may only have been a way-station on the road to fame or power. 35 If, despite the advances made in the French Revolution in the institutionalisation of certain scientific roles, nineteenth-century scientists experienced serious difficulties which shook their will to advance the limits of our understanding, it was to a large extent because the career of scientific research failed to emerge clearly during the age of academies. The modern scientist was still in the making.

What about the period after 1789? The community was at first dis- oriented by the destruction of the Acad6mie in 1793. 33 When faced with the threat of the displacement of science in favour of more practical and patriotic activities, some of the more courageous and astute scientists pressed for new institutional arrangements which offered them security with a modicum of professional freedom. The post-revolutionary scientist took advantage of his usefulness to the war effort and for the training of technologists. He created a permanent niche for himself as a governmental consultant or a salaried teacher of talented youth. As Professor Crosland has recently pointed out, this new situation encouraged gifted individuals

33 6 May, 1782, l~tude XCIX, liasse 669, Minutier central des archives notariales, Paris. 34 Letter dated 19 October, 1775, Manuscrit ft. 9134, fol. 102, Biblloth~que Nationale,

Cabinet des Manuscrits. 35 The career of Lacep~de is a case in point. See Hahn, Roger, " Sur les d6buts de la

carri~re scientifique de Lacep~de ", Revue d'histoire des sciences, XXVII, 4 (October, 1974), pp. 347-353; and " L'autobiographie de Lacep~de retrouv6e ", Dix-huitidme si~cle, no. 7 (1975), pp. 49-85.

3s Hahn, Roger, " The Problems of the French Scientific Community, 1793-1795 ", Actes du XHe congr~s international d'histotre des sciences, Paris 1968, tome IIIB, pp. 37--40;

Scientific Research as an Occupation in Eighteenth-Century Paris 513

to seek out careers in science and established a pattern for entrance into the occupation by creating several stages of paid apprenticeship. He believes that these changes constitute " a crucial phase in the establish- ment of science as a profession ".27

Our examination of tile difficulties experienced by French academicians during the ancien r~gime suggests that the picture is more complicated. Professionalisation also requires techniques of self-regulation and a sense of autonomy which insulates practitioners from extraneous pressures. The revolutionary situation offered substantial gains in professionalisation, but li~ttle as far as attitudes were concerned, as Those who welcomed new roles as consultants and teachers Who threw in their lot with the govern- mental bureaucracy may well have been tempted to forget a nascent devotion to scientific research for its own sake. For Fontenelle, Grandjean de Fouchy and Condorcet, the struggle to overcome familial and financial obstacles provided an existentialist definition of the scientist in an era before a secure career existed. The new institutional arrangements follow- mg the revolutionary upheavals furthered professionalisation, but how much did they stimulate the growth of the ideal of scientific research as a whole?

The question is of some historical significance for the development of the occupation and for its progress as an intellectual activity. Much of the discussion abou~ the relative decline of French science in the nine- teenth century has assumed that institutional crystallisation was conducive to scientific creativity. In view of the already conservative character of the French university system in the nineteenth century and the scientists' stake in higher education, this assumption would repay close examination. For the progress of science elsewhere, it is fortunate that other countries, while using the French case as an argument for more public support of

science, did not slavishly copy French patterns of professionalisation. Professionalisation in the "French manner" was by 1800 incomplete and moulded by political and cultural considerations peculiar to France. Despite the advances registered there, the full professionalisation of science had to await further ir~tetlectua~ developments and the demonstrable successes of the German-speaking world of science.29

3r Cr0sland, Maurice P., " T h e Development of a Professional Career in Science in France ", Minerva, Xil I , 1 (Spring 1975), p. 38.

,8 Wilensky, Harold L., " The Professionalization of Everyone?" American lournal o] Sociology, LXX, 2 (September 1964), pp. 137-158; and Hall, R. H., op. cir.

a9 Ben-David, J0seph, " The Rise a n d Decline of Frarice as a Scientific Centre ", Minerva, VIII, 2 (April ~970), pp. 160-179.