Daniel Belteki’s research while affiliated with Kent State University and other places

When Augustus De Morgan died in 1871, he was described as ‘one of the profoundest mathematicians in the United Kingdom’ and even as ‘the greatest of our mathematicians’. But he was far more than just a mathematician. Because much of his voluminous written output on various subjects was scattered throughout journals and encyclopaedias, the breadth of his interests and contributions has been underappreciated by historians. Now, renewed interest in De Morgan’s life and work has coincided with the digitization of his extensive library, revealing the extent to which he pioneered and influenced the development of not merely mathematics but also logic, astronomy, the history of mathematics, education, and bibliography. This edited collection celebrates De Morgan as a polymath. Drawing together multiple elements of his activity from a range of publications and archives, its contributors re-assess his academic work, his place in his intellectual environment, and his legacy. The result offers new insight into De Morgan himself as well as the wider circles in which he moved, including his family life.

Meridian circles were tools of science, state and empire. Besides being used for astro-nomical observations, the by-products of observations made also had more utilitarian purposes applicable to commerce, transportation, industry and the expansion of em-pires. While meridian circles were created with the aim of producing spatial and tempo-ral uniformity, observatories adopted different assemblages and configurations for their instruments. This issue brings together for the first time a variety of contributions to explore the material and social history of meridian circles. It deploys the concept assem-blage to connect the different historical approaches together and to re-assemble the long history of the instrument.

Simon Newcomb argued that nineteenth century observatory practices were dominated by the German school of practical astronomy devised by Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel. A key tenet of this school was the mathematical correction of instrumental errors. This paper argues that this mathematical maintenance created an approach whereby instruments were seen as criminals always deviating from their ideal operations. The paper takes as its case study the Airy Transit Circle at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich to demonstrate how the mathematical maintenance worked in action. The paper further argues that such an approach numerically disassembles and reassembles transit circles, while at the same time extending its components to include even the air and the soil surrounding it.

In 1839 the working hours of the computers employed on the lunar and planetary reductions of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich were reduced from eleven hours to eight hours. Previous historians have explained this decrease by reference to the generally benevolent nature of the manager of the reductions, George Biddell Airy. By contrast, this article uses the letters and notes exchanged between Airy and the computers to demonstrate that the change in the working hours originated from the computers as a reaction to their poor working conditions. Through the exploration of these archival materials, the article shifts the focus of the analysis to the working experience of the computers, rather than to the administrative history of the project that inevitably tends to highlight Airy's actions. By doing so, the article shows how the computers were treated as a disposable low-skilled workforce, as opposed to aspiring astronomers with considerable mathematical talent. Through this reframing, the article takes a step towards a working history of the observatory.

Argument The Greenwich Prime Meridian is one of the iconic features of the Royal Museums Greenwich. Visitors to the Museum even queue up to pose with one leg on either side of the Line. Yet, the Airy Transit Circle, the instrument that defined the meridian, is almost always excluded from these photographs. This paper examines how the instrument has become hidden in plain sight within the stories of Greenwich Time and Greenwich Meridian, as well as within the public imagination, by providing an analysis of the instrument’s transformation from a working astronomical instrument to a museum object. The paper highlights the gradual decoupling of the instrument from narratives of Time and Longitude, which resulted in the Line’s popularity overshadowing the instrument that defined it. By doing so, the paper aims at showing the symbiotic relationship between the materiality of the instrument and the meridian line that it defined. Approaching the instrument through the lenses of object biographies, the paper raises the question of whether the life of the instrument came to an end once operations with it were terminated. The analysis of the Transit Circle’s life reveals that it reached its end multiple times, which shifts the emphasis away from a single and ultimate end of scientific objects to a process of gradual downfall, during which they can “end” several times. In addition, through the object biography approach, the Transit Circle no longer appears as a dead object reaching an afterlife within a museum setting. Instead, the approach demonstrates that, though the instrument can still be restored to an operational order, doubts about its accuracy, and its relevancy to today’s astronomical methods, have led the instrument to be considered obsolete, transforming it into a museum object on display.

The downfall of the Parramatta Observatory during the 1840s led the British Government to reconsider the funding it provided to observatories. George Biddell Airy—the Astronomer Royal at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich—recommended the establishment of a central Colonial Board of Visitors (based in London) to oversee the management of observatories within the British Empire. The recommendation ultimately never materialized, but it showcased the support of the astronomical community and the British Government for centralizing the management of the vast network of observatories. This centralized vision continued to influence the founding of new observatories and the organization of their work. The article examines Airy's vision of a centralized organization of division of labour among observatories through his involvement in the discussions about the Colonial Board of Visitors. It also examines how he continued supporting the same vision through articles about the work of observatories, and through written advice about establishing observatories. The article demonstrates how he envisioned the grand strategy of an observatory to encompass public utility while also fitting it within the general policy of observatories in relation to the division of astronomical labour.

During the early nineteenth century the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, significantly increased the number of individuals it employed. One of the new roles created was the position of First Assistant, who oversaw the management of astronomical labor at the observatory. This article examines the contribution of Robert Main, who was the first person employed in this role. It shows that, through Robert Main’s duties and tasks, the observatory appears as a hybrid site embodying aspects of the other institutions that formed part of its operational network. Moreover, it demonstrates that the transformation of the observatory during the nineteenth century was driven by his rigorous maintenance of discipline in relation to the daily operations of the site.

It is a cliché of self-help advice that there are no problems, only opportunities. The rationale and actions of the BSHS in creating its Global Digital History of Science Festival may be a rare genuine confirmation of this mantra. The global COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 meant that the society's usual annual conference – like everyone else's – had to be cancelled. Once the society decided to go digital, we had a hundred days to organize and deliver our first online festival. In the hope that this will help, inspire and warn colleagues around the world who are also trying to move online, we here detail the considerations, conversations and thinking behind the organizing team's decisions.

The Airy Transit Circle of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich is one of the most important instruments in the history of astronomy, navigation and time distribution. However, there has been very little research done on the history of the instrument. This article examines how the purchase of the object glass for the Airy Transit Circle involved active negotiations between George Biddell Airy and three different opticians: Georg Merz, Noel Paymal Lerebours, and William Simms. The article also shows the involvement of John Herschel and Richard Sheepshanks in Airy’s decision making process. By highlighting the presence of these individuals, the article shows how Airy’s trust and distrust in different instrument makers influenced his choice of supplier for the object glass of the Airy Transit Circle.

The Royal Observatory at Greenwich is best known for its association with the Greenwich Prime Meridian. Visitors on a daily basis venture to climb the hill of Greenwich Park upon which the Observatory rests, just to snap a photo of themselves ‘standing on both sides of the world’ at the same time. The line crossing the courtyard and marking the meridian serves not only as a material manifestation of a geographical coordinate system, but also embodies Britain’s historical relations to the world by being ‘the Line’ that aided the Empire’s maritime power throughout centuries.