On Ignored Global "scientific Revolutions"

27Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The categories that structure the study of early modern science are organized around the epistemological liberal regime of facts, objectivity, skepticism, print culture, the public sphere, and the Republic of Letters. The regime of early-modern science in the global Spanish Monarchy is not well known because it was forged in a very different system, one of rewards and legislation in which most activities were transacted through one-on-one epistolary correspondence and intimate transference of information in translation workshops. This global system, nevertheless, engendered ceaseless technical and scientific innovations. I study three cases: the extraction and transformation of silver ores in several spaces; the production of ships and new botanical resources that reorganized global dockyards; and the creation of local translation workshops to facilitate the circulation of knowledge within the global empire. "European" science, the "West," and instrumental reason have always been global co-creations. However, colonial and postcolonial Manichean dichotomous historiographical categories have made this truism hard to see.

References Powered by Scopus

Iberian science in the renaissance: Ignored how much longer?

95Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Discussion: The futures of global history

159Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Amerasia: European reflections of an emergent world, 1492-ca. 1700

10Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Creating hybrid scientific knowledge and practice: the Jesuit and Guaraní cultivation of yerba mate

9Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cañizares-Esguerra, J. (2017). On Ignored Global “scientific Revolutions.” Journal of Early Modern History. Brill Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700658-12342573

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 9

50%

Researcher 6

33%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

17%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Arts and Humanities 11

65%

Social Sciences 3

18%

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2

12%

Philosophy 1

6%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free