a satire on the royal society, dated 1743, attributed to henry fielding

A Satire on the Royal Society, Dated 1743, Attributed to Henry FieldingAuthor(s): Nellie B. EalesSource: Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jun., 1968), pp. 65-67Published by: The Royal SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/530852 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 16:44

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Royal Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Notes and Records ofthe Royal Society of London.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:44:59 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rsl

http://www.jstor.org/stable/530852?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


A SATIRE ON THE ROYAL SOCIETY, DATED 1743, ATTRIBUTED TO HENRY FIELDING

By NELLIE B. EALES

University of Reading

[Plates 13 and 141

N the Cole Library, University of Reading, there is a small pamphlet entitled Some Papers Proper to be Read before the R . . . L SOCIETY,

Concerning the Terrestrial CHRYSIPUS, GOLDEN-FOOT or GUINEA; An INSECT, or VEGETABLE, resembling the POLYPUS, which hath this

surprising Property, That being cut into several Pieces, each Piece becomes a perfect Animal, or Vegetable, as complete as that of which it was originally only a Part. COLLECTED by PETRUS GUALTERUS, But not Published till after His Death. London, Printed for J. Roberts . . 743. [Price Sixpence]

Page 3 is a facsimile of the title page of the Philosophical Transactions for the year 1743 (see figure 2). The fact that no paper by Gualterus

appeared in the Transactions led me to suspect that the paper was a hoax. Professor Cole had catalogued it under the heading 'Satire on the Royal Society', but had not pursued the subject further regarding its authorship.

The Preface consists of 'Part of a Letter from the Heer Rottenscrach in

Germany' recording the death of Gualterus, and the statement that 'the Accounts of the Chrysipi, as well as the Collection itself, were found in the Cabinet of the above-mentioned Petrus, after his Death'. Now the name Rottenscrach is not of German form, and is the second point of evidence that the paper is not genuine.

Page 7 figures the Chrysipus, which will be described later. There is also a statement that the article is translated from the French. If Gaulterus was a German, why should he write in French and not German? There is also a reference to mention of this 'terrestrial Vegetable or Insect' made in the

Philosophical Transactions for several years, 'as may be seen in No. ooo Art. oooo and No. oo Art. 002, and No. - Art. I8'. No such mention occurred. The figure of the Terrestrial Chrysipus sticking to a finger is that of a round

object, within which are four arms, alternating with tubular orifices. In the centre is the mouth, opening into a blind stomach. Inspection of the arms, which Gualterus does not describe, shows that each contains a coat of arms, surmounted by a crown, edged with cilia-like structures resembling the ciliary



66

crown of a Rotifer (see figure 4). Examination of the coats of arms reveals that these are made up of the lion, harp and fleur-de-lis from the Royal Standard! Male and female reproductive organs are described, with quotations from Aristotle, Virgil and Galen, in order to appear authentic.

The author now quotes at length from Abraham Trembley's article in the Philosophical Transactions (I), giving a full description of Trembley's 'schystic or divisive experiments on Hydra, the Polypus, and its remarkable

powers of regeneration'. Trembley's name is not mentioned until near the end of the quotations. The author ridicules Hydra, of which to his mind 'not one single virtue' is recorded.

It is obvious that the author has a second axe to grind. The Chrysipus, Golden-foot or Guinea is money. There are two species, the whole Chrysipus and the Hemi-Chrysipus.

A Chrysipus of the larger kind may be divided into one and twenty Substances ... These may again be subdivided, each of them into twenty four; and what is very remarkable, every one of these Parts is heavier, and rather larger than the first Chrysipus. The only Difference in this

Change, is that of the Colour; for the first Sort are yellow, the second white, and the third resemble the Complexion and Substance of many human Faces.

The best Method of preserving them is, I believe, in Bags or Chests ... The Chrysipus is to be look'd for in Scutores (cupboards) and behind Wainscotes in old Houses.

What hath principally dissuaded me from an Opinion of its being an Animal is, that I could never observe any Symptoms of voluntary Motion: But indeed the same may be said of an Oyster, which I think is not yet settled by the Learned to be absolutely a Vegetable . Yet it is very easy to communicate a Motion to it. Indeed some Persons have made them

fly all over the Town with great Velocity. He concluded by assessing the Virtues of Chrysipus, how it will make

men talk or keep silence, make them blind or deaf, turn black into white or white into black, attract the sexes to one another, no matter how worthless, ugly or decrepit the male partner may be. It is a medicine which the physicians 'are so fond of taking themselves, that few of them care to visit a Patient, without swallowing a Dose of it'.

Who then was the author of this double-edged calumny? The British Museum Catalogue states that it was written by the novelist and playwright, Henry Fielding (1707-I754). Dr Homes Dudden, in his life of Fielding (2) gives more information on Fielding's warped attitude towards science. For



Figure I. Title page of the paper on Hydra by Abraham

Trembley Figure 2. Title page of the paper on Chrysipus by Petrus

Gualterus



Figure 3. Page iii of Trembley's paper, showing his

figure of Hydra Figure 4. Page 7 of Gualterus's paper, showing his

figure of Chrysipus



67

some years Fielding had been friendly with that other satirist 'Dr.' John Hill (3), but had later quarrelled with him. Both scorned the Royal Society; the former did not understand scientific thought and work, the latter was bitter because he had not been elected a Fellow. 'Fielding', wrote Dudden, 'knew nothing of science, and openly expressed a rash contempt for all curious scientific researches which were not evidently directed to the achievement of utilitarian ends . . . He had already ridiculed the Society in his plays and books' (4). The appearance of Trembley's paper in the Philo-

sophical Transactions gave him the idea. Comparison between the title page of

Trembley's paper with that of the article by Gualterus, and of the first page of

Trembley's on Hydra with that of Chrysipus shows how closely Gualterus had

copied from Trembley (figures I and 2, 3 and 4). Note 'Translated from the French by P.H.Z. F.R.S.' in Trembley, and 'Translated from the French by P.H.I.Z. C.G.S.' in Gualterus, who does not explain what C.G.S. means. Does it perhaps stand for Chrysipus Guinea Society?

Petrus Gualterus was based on a real person. He had already figured as Mr Peter Pounce in Fielding's play Joseph Andrews. His name was Peter Walter and he was an attorney and miser-usurer of Stalbridge Park, Dorset.

Fielding's family came from the neighbourhood; they had a farm at East Stour. It is said that this farm came eventually into the hands of Walter, whose acquisitive nature and dubious transactions enabled him to amass a

large fortune. He died in I745, so that he was still alive when Fielding published his satire.

NOTES

(I) Trembley, Abraham. Some Papers . . . concerning the Fresh-water Polypus, an Insect, which hath this surprising Property, That being cut into several Pieces, each Piece becomes a perfect Animal, as complete as that of which it was originally only a Part. Phil. Trans. 42, No. 467, pp. i-xvii, Jan. 1742/3.

(2) Dudden, Frederick Homes. Henry Fielding: his life, works and times. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press (I952).

(3) Hill, John. Lucina sine Concubitu. A Letter humbly addressed to the Royal Society. London

(I750). A Dissertation on Royal Societies. In three Letters ... Containing an Account of an Assembly of a Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, a Description of a Meeting of a Royal Society in London, and a Coffee-House Conversation. London (I750). A review of the Works of the Royal Society of London; containing Animadversions on such

of the Papers as deserve particular Observation. London (I75I). (4) e.g. The Mock Doctor, Tom Jones, etc.



a satire on the royal society, dated 1743, attributed to henry fielding

Documents