Search

Commercial excavators often find that their way back to the past rum through relatively recent structures. What should we do with them? Intellectually sensitive modern excavators, like our authors, are beginning to convince us that these recent constructions not only matter in themselves, but may have interesting links to what lies beneath. Here they introduce us to the foundations of an early telescope, a monument that takes its context both from the much-investigated lands of West Cambridge, and the more abstract landscape of early science. Forcing archaeology to ask fresh questions and make ambitious connections is only proper in a place heavy with the aroma of investigative scholarship. Keywords: England, Cambridge, Iron Age, nineteenth century, telescope, Newall, science, monument, Introduction Anticipating new construction, the winter of 2008 saw the Cambridge Archaeological Unit (CAU) excavating within the grounds of the Cambridge University Observatory. The c. 200[m.sup.2] site lay relatively high, [...]

The marvelous logic of the mad ... seems to mock that of the logicians because it resembles it so exactly, or rather because it is exactly the same, and because [...]

A re-creation of Wittgenstein's Ph.D. viva at Cambridge University in June 1929 is presented, with Bertrand Russell and G.E. Moore questioning Wittgenstein about the 'Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus,' which Wittgenstein submitted as his doctoral thesis. It is suggested that the dissertation would have failed if it had been judged by the normal standards of originality and quality of argumentation.

Bertrand Russell's initial interest in philosophy was motivated by a desire to arrive at real or well-grounded knowledge. Although he did not succeed in that endeavor, he was the founder of analytical philosophy. Russell's philosophical career began with work on the foundations of geometry, and he later saw philosophy as a means of resolving contradictions in mathematics and science. He became disillusioned with logical demonstration and turned to physical and psychological science.

John Grote (1813-1866) had a significant effect on Cambridge philosophy. Grote began a club for specialist philosophical gatherings and influenced the distinctive style and spirit of Cambridge philosophy. His distrust of publishing meant that much of his influence was indirect. His written work is eclectic, conversational and reveals a preference for usages of ordinary language. The content of his work contributed to Cambridge philosophy through its intentions, character, epistemology, language and ethics.

Writer Lytton Strachey and economist John Maynard in the decade before the Great War exchanged some letters discussing their vision of a 'new monastic age.' Through their affiliation with the Brotherhood of the Conversazione Society, better known as the Cambridge Apostles, they represented a new age of sexuality and masculinity in that they renounced religion and politics, proclaimed that God is dead, and declared that 'love is the only reality.' These men did not expect mass conversion to sodomy, but they did wish for widespread toleration of it.

Research into examination papers, correspondence, autobiographies and memoirs at the University of Cambridge has revealed no evidence to suggest that William Paley's 'Natural Theology' was a set text at the college. It is argued that while the official mathematics curriculum was all-encompassing, including theology, classics and moral philosophy, in practice it was limited to mathematics.

The idea promoted by Charles Babbage, John Herschel and the Analytical Society that late Georgian Cambridge was a sleepy institution in the area of mathematics is disputed. The controversy over the distribution of Bibles without the inclusion of Anglican Church commentary evolved into a philosophical issue in the early 1800s, which was debated by Cambridge professors. The use of natural philosophy in religious questions is also discussed.

A group of young mathematicians in 1811 attempted to reform the mathematics curriculum taught at Cambridge as a response to the new theoretical approaches being adopted in France after the French Revolution. The leaders of the Analytical Society, which included Charles Babbage, John Herschel and George Peacock, were also radical in the way they tried to transform the examination system for advancing undergraduates, and received much opposition since they were not from the dominant aristocracy. The society was only able to effect changes through compromises with the Cambridge dons, and traditional methods continued to be taught at the university.

Experimenters at Cambridge University made two uses of Albert Einstein's theory of relativity between 1905 and 1911. One group, exemplified by Ebenezer Cunningham, used the theory to investigate the electromagnetic ether theory. Another group, exemplified by Norman Campbell, used the theory as a measurement principle to overthrow the electromagnetic ether theory. These two uses show the attitudes towards theory that researchers had in the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge.

George Mursell Garrett was the University Organist for Cambridge University from 1873 until 1897, and his letters to his daughter Ada from 1890 to 1896 uniquely reflect that time and place. They refer extensively to family and friends, not all of whom have been identified. The article consists almost entirely of these letters, 22 in all.

Interest in Sigmund Freud's work increased at Cambridge during the 1920s, a phenomenon attributed in part to Lionel Penrose, who later researched human genetics, and to philosopher and mathematician Frank Ramsey. The influence of this interest on psychoanalysis in Cambridge then and today is assessed.

The medieval universities of Oxford and Cambridge owed an enormous debt to the generosity of a plurality of benefactors of diverse social origins. Given their limited incomes, the universities could not have functioned at a successful level without the substantial material aid of benefactors. Although the English monarchy made a valuable contribution to several areas of university and collegiate life, it nevertheless appears that this monarchical beneficence was less extensive than might have been supposed. The English male nobility gave the occasional gift of property and made donations to loan-chests but before 1500 only one nobleman was a principal founder of a secular academic college. This opened the way for queens consort and female members of the greater aristocracy to emerge as significant benefactresses in both the university and collegiate spheres. Indeed, it could be argued that women from the upper echelons of society came to rank in importance as university and college benefactors with lesser ecclesiastics, knights, burgesses, merchants, current and former members of colleges and university servants. However, taking the donations of the episcopate in the round, it is probably true to say that the English bishops made the most decisive contribution towards university and collegiate development of any grouping in society.

Doctor F.R. Leavis is strongly critical of the poets, critics and authors originating from the University of Cambridge. He feels that atmosphere at Cambridge was too near that of Bloomsbury group, and that academics there had no editorial integrity and who were too rooted in the establishment, despite their supposedly innovative ideas. Leavis' thoughts on Russian literature, criticism in general and academe are provided.

C.S. Lewis (1898-1963) is usually associated with Oxford, although he spent his last nine years at Cambridge as Chair of Medieval and Renaissance Literature. Biographical, institutional and intellectual themes are involved in the story of Lewis's relationship to Cambridge. For one thing, Lewis favored the Oxford approach over the Cambridge approach to English literary studies. The opposition between Lewis and F.R. Leavis was key.