Timeline of World History TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 
 

TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 

Loading
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
     
     
 
1800 - 1899
 
 
1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99
1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890
1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891
1802 1812 1822 1832 1842 1852 1862 1872 1882 1892
1803 1813 1823 1833 1843 1853 1863 1873 1883 1893
1804 1814 1824 1834 1844 1854 1864 1874 1884 1894
1805 1815 1825 1835 1845 1855 1865 1875 1885 1895
1806 1816 1826 1836 1846 1856 1866 1876 1886 1896
1807 1817 1827 1837 1847 1857 1867 1877 1887 1897
1808 1818 1828 1838 1848 1858 1868 1878 1888 1898
1809 1819 1829 1839 1849 1859 1869 1879 1889 1899
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1822 Part I NEXT-1823 Part I    
 
 
     
1820 - 1829
YEAR BY YEAR:
1820-1829
History at a Glance
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1820 Part I
Ferdinand VII
Trienio Liberal
Caroline of Brunswick
Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry
Henri, Count of Chambord
Cato Street Conspiracy
"Missouri Compromise"
Congress of Troppau
Liberal Revolution in Portugal
Ecuadorian War of Independence
Sucre Antonio Jose
Engels Friedrich
Erskine Thomas
Gorres Joseph
Spencer Herbert
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1820 Part II
Keats: "Ode to a Nightingale"
Pushkin: "Ruslan and Ludmila"
Fet Afanasy
Scott: "Ivanhoe"
Shelley: "Prometheus Unbound"
William Blake: The Book of Job
Tenniel John
Discovery of the Venus de Milo
Fromentin Eugene
Vieuxtemps Henri
Henri Vieuxtemps - Elegy for Viola and Piano Op.30
Henri Vieuxtemps
Moffat Robert
Florence Nightingale
Anthony Susan Brownell
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1821 Part I
Congress of Laibach
Victor Emmanuel I
Felix Charle
Battle of Novara
Greek War of Independence
Greek Revolution Timeline
Battle of Alamana
Battle of Carabobo
Missouri
Independence of Brazil
Ecole Nationale des Chartes
Concordats with individual states of Germany
Baker Eddy Mary
Grote George
Hegel: "Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts"
Mill James
Champollion Jean-François
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1821 Part II
Baudelaire Charles
Charles Baudelaire
"The Flowers of Evil"
Fenimore Cooper: "The Spy"
Dostoevsky Fyodor
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
"The Idiot"
Flaubert Gustave
Gustave Flaubert
"
Madame Bovary
Goethe: "Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre"
William Hazlitt: "Table-Talk"
Quincey Thomas
Thomas de Quincey: "Confessions of an English Opium Eater"
Thomas De Quincey 
"Confessions of an English Opium-Eater"
Shelley: "Adonais"
Nekrasov Nekolay
Brown Ford Madox
Ford Madox Brown
Weber: "Der Freischutz"
Helmholtz Hermann
Seebeck Thomas Johann
Virchow Rudolf
Wheatstone Charles
"The Guardian"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1822 Part I
Chios Massacre
Battle of Dervenakia
Grant Ulysses
Iturbide Augustin
Congress of Verona
Colebrooke Henry Thomas
Fourier Joseph
Poncelet Jean-Victor
Goncourt Edmond
Nodier Charles
Vigny Alfred-Victor
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1822 Part II
Delacroix: "Dante and Virgil Crossing the Styx"
Martin John
John Martin
Franck Cesar
Cesar Franck - Prelude, Chorale and Fugue
Cesar Franck
Royal Academy of Music, London
Schubert: Symphony No. 8 ("The Unfinished")
Mendel Gregor
Pasteur Louis
Schliemann Heinrich
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1823 Part I
Federal Republic of Central America
Monroe Doctrine
Leo XII
Renan Ernest
Ernest Renan
"The Life of Jesus"
Fenimore Cooper: "The Pioneers"
Ostrovski Alexander
Petofi Sandor
Yonge Charlotte Mary
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1823 Part II
Ferdinand Waldmuller: "Portrait of Beethoven"
Beethoven: "Missa Solemnis"
Bishop Henry Rowley
Bishop "Home! Sweet Home!"
Schubert: "Rosamunde"
Weber: "Euryanthe"
Babbage Charles
Macintosh Charles
Navigation of the Niger
Oudney Walter
Denham Dixon
Clapperton Bain Hugh
"The Lancet"
Royal Thames Yacht Club
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1824 Part I
First Anglo-Burmese War (1824–1826)
Russo-American Treaty of 1824
First Siege of Missolonghi
Constitution of Mexico
Battle of Ayacucho
Bockh August
Botta Carlo Giuseppe Guglielmo
Dumas Alexandre, fils
Landor Walter Savage
Walter Scott: "Redgauntlet"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1824 Part II
Delacroix: "The Massacre at Chios"
John Flaxman: "Pastoral Apollo"
Ingres: "Vow of Louis XIII"
Israels Joseph
Joseph Israels
Overbeck: "Christ's entry into Jerusalem"
Gerome Jean-Leon
Jean-Leon Gerome
Boulanger Gustave
Gustave Boulanger
Girodet Anne-Louis
Anne-Louis Girodet-Trioson
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1824 Part III
Beethoven: Symphony No. 9
Bruckner Anton
Anton Bruckner - Locus Iste
Anton Bruckner
Smetana Bedrich
Smetana - Die Moldau
Bedrich Smetana
Aspdin Joseph
Carnot Sadi
Thomson William
The Hume and Hovell expedition
Hume Hamilton
Hovell William Hilton
Athenaeum Club, London
"Le Globe"
Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1825 Part I
Ferdinand IV of Naples
Francis I of the Two Sicilies
Third Siege of Missolonghi
Treaty of Saint Petersburg of 1825
Uruguay became independent of Brazil (1825)
Kruger Paul
Maximilian I
Ludwig I of Bavaria
Nicholas I
Decembrist revolt in Russia
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1825 Part II
Lasalle Ferdinand
William Hazlitt: "The Spirit of the Age"
Manzoni: "The Betrothed"
Meyer Conrad Ferdinand
Pepys Samuel: "The Diaries of Samuel Pepys"
Pushkin: "Boris Godunov"
Tegner Esaias
Esaias Tegner: "Frithjofs Saga"
Constable: "Leaping Horse"
Collinson James
James Collinson
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1825 Part III
Boieldieu: "La Dame blanche"
Strauss II Johann , the "Waltz King"
Johan Strauss - Blue Danube Waltz
Johann Strauss II, the "Waltz King"
Charcot Jean Martin
Gurney Goldsworthy
Stockton and Darlington Railway
The Desert
Caillie Rene-Auguste
Laing Alexander Gordon
John Franklin Canadian and Arctic expedition
Horse-bus
Trade Union
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1826 Part I
The Sortie of Missolonghi
Ottoman–Egyptian Invasion of Mani
Treaty of Yandabo
Pedro I
Maria II, Queen of Portugal
Akkerman Convention
Congress of Panama
Russo-Persian War of 1826-1828
Zollverein
Khan Dost Mohammad
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1826 Part II
Liebknecht Wilhelm
Ruan Yuan
Fenimore Cooper: "The Last of the Mohicans"
Benjamin Disraeli: "Vivian Grey"
Scheffel Josef Viktor
Scott: "Woodstock"
Moreau Gustave
Gustave Moreau
Weber: "Oberon"
Nobili Leopoldo
Unverdorben Otto
Raffles Stamford
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1827 Part I
Battle of Phaleron
Kapodistrias Ioannis Antonios
Siege of the Acropolis (1826–27)
Treaty of London
Battle of Navarino
Mahmud II
Russo-Persian War - Campaign of 1827
Coster Charles
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1827 Part II
Bocklin Arnold
Arnold Bocklin
Constable: "The Cornfield"
Hunt William Holman
William Holman Hunt
Audubon John James
Audubon: "Birds of North America"
Baer Karl Ernst
Bright Richard
Lister Joseph
Niepce Nicephore
Ohm Georg Simon
Ressel Joseph
Simpson James
Wohler Friedrich
Timbuktu
Baedeker Karl
"London Evening Standard"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1828 Part I
Ypsilantis Alexander
Michael
Russo-Turkish War of 1828–1829
"Tariff of Abominations"
Treaty of Montevideo
Guerrero Vicente
Lange Friedrich Albert
Muller Karl Otfried
Taine Hippolyte Adolphe
Noah Webster "American Dictionary of the English Language"
About Edmond
Alexandre Dumas pere: "Les Trois Mousquetaires"
Ibsen Henrik
Meredith George
George Meredith 
"The Egoist"
Oliphant Margaret
Tolstoy Leo
Leo Tolstoy
"The Kreutzer Sonata"
Verne Jules
Jules Verne
"Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea."
"The Children of Captain Grant"
"The Mysterious Island"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1828 Part II
Bonington Richard Parkes
Richard Parkes Bonington
Rossetti Dante Gabriel
Dante Gabriel Rossetti
Stevens Alfred
Alfred Stevens
Stuart Gilbert
Gilbert Stuart
Auber: "La Muette de Portici"
Marschner: "Der Vampire"
Abel Niels Henrik
Burdon-Sanderson John
Cohn Ferdinand
De Vinne Theodore
Stewart Balfour
Swan Joseph
Dunant Henri
Hauser Kaspar
Working Men's Party
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1829 Part I
Schurz Carl
Biddle Nicholas
Metropolitan Police Act 1829
First Hellenic Republic
Treaty of Adrianople
Attwood Thomas
Bustamante Anastasio
O’Connell Daniel
Gran Colombia–Peru War (1828-1829)
Benson Edward White
Roman Catholic Emancipation Act
Gardiner Samuel Rawson
Pius VIII
Balzac: "Les Chouans"
Goethe: "Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre"
Jefferson Joseph  
Edgar Allan Poe: "Al Araaf"
Salvini Tommaso
Scott: "Anne of Geierstein"
Timrod Henry
Warner Charles Dudley
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1829 Part II
Feuerbach Anselm
Anselm Feuerbach
Millais John Everett
John Everett Millais
Gottschalk Louis
Louis Moreau Gottschalk - Grande Tarantelle
Louis Gottschalk
Rossini: "William Tell"
Rubinstein Anton
Rubinstein - Piano Concerto No. 1
Anton Rubinstein
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1829 Part III
Cantor Moritz Benedikt
Dobereiner Johann Wolfgang
Dreyse Nikolaus
Henry Joseph
Priessnitz Vincenz
Hydropathy, Hydrotherapy
Kekule August
Mitchell Silas Weir
Smithson James
Booth William
Salvation Army
Shillibeer George
Flong
Suttee
 
 
 

Delacroix "Dante and Virgil Crossing the Styx"
 
 
 
 
 HISTORY, RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY, ART, LITERATURE, MUSIC, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, DAILY LIFE
 
 
 
 
YEAR BY YEAR:  1800 - 1899
 
 
 
1822 Part II
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Canova Antonio Ital. sculptor, d. (b. 1757)
 
 

Antonio Canova. Annunciazione, 1821-22
 
 
 
     
 
Antonio Canova
     
 
 
     
  Neoclassicism and Romanticism
Realism, Impressionism and
Post-Impressionism
Symbolism
     
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Delacroix: "Dante and Virgil Crossing the Styx"
 
 

Delacroix Eugene. "Dante and Virgil Crossing the Styx"
 
 

Delacroix Eugene. "Dante and Virgil Crossing the Styx" (detail)
 
 
 
     
 
Eugene Delacroix
     
 
 
     
  Neoclassicism and Romanticism
Realism, Impressionism and
Post-Impressionism
Symbolism
     
 
 
 
1822
 
 
John Martin: "Destruction of Herculaneum"
 
 
Martin John
 

John Martin (19 July 1789 – 17 February 1854) was an English Romantic painter, engraver and illustrator.

 

John Martin
  English painter and printmaker. Known as ‘Mad Martin’, he was one of England’s most significant 19th-century painters of sublimely Romantic themes.

Many of his canvases are extremely large in scale, which enhances their tremendous visual impact.

He often made prints, notably mezzotints, from his paintings.
 
 
John Martin: "Destruction of Herculaneum"
 
 

Destruction of Herculaneum
1822
 
 

Destruction of Herculaneum (detail)
 
 

Destruction of Herculaneum (detail)
 
 
 
     
 
John Martin
     
 
 
     
  Neoclassicism and Romanticism
Realism, Impressionism and
Post-Impressionism
Symbolism
     
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Franck Cesar
 
Cesar Franck, in full César-auguste Franck (born Dec. 10, 1822, Liège, Neth.—died Nov. 8, 1890, Paris, France), Belgian-French Romantic composer and organist who was the chief figure in a movement to give French music an emotional engagement, technical solidity, and seriousness comparable to that of German composers.
 

Cesar Franck, photographed by Pierre Petit
  Franck was born of a Walloon father and a mother of German descent. He showed unmistakable musical gifts that enabled him to enter the Liège conservatory at the age of eight, and his progress as a pianist was so astonishing that in 1834 his father took him on tour and a year later dispatched him to Paris, where he worked with the Bohemian composer Anton Reicha, then professor at the Paris Conservatory. In 1836 the whole family, including the younger son Joseph, who played the violin, moved to Paris, and in 1837 César Franck entered the Paris Conservatory.
Within a year he had won a Grand Prix d’Honneur by a feat of transposition in the sight-reading test, and this honour was followed by a first prize for fugue (1840) and second prize for organ (1841). Although the boy should now normally have prepared to compete for the Prix de Rome, a prize offered yearly in Paris for study in Rome, his father was determined on a virtuoso’s career for him and his violinist brother, with whom he gave concerts, and therefore removed him prematurely from the conservatory.

In order to please his father and earn much-needed money, Franck gave concerts, the programs of which were largely devoted to performing his own showy fantasias and operatic potpourris, popular at that time. After 1840, when he turned his attention increasingly to the organ, his compositions became noticeably more serious, and three trios written at this time were to impress favourably the Hungarian composer Franz Liszt.

 
 
A more ambitious work was the cantata Ruth, which had its first performance at the conservatory on Jan. 4, 1846.
Unwilling concert giving, a number of bad press notices, and the teaching needed to supplement his income took a physical toll of his powers. Only when he had finally asserted himself against what amounted to the unscrupulous exploitation of his gifts by his father could he achieve maturity and peace of mind. Franck fell in love with an actress with the professional name of Desmousseaux, whose real name was Félicité Saillot, but because both her parents also worked in the theatre, the family was regarded as unsuitable by the elder Franck, and his son was obliged to leave home some time before marrying her in 1848. After his marriage Franck’s way of life changed little for his remaining 42 years. He earned his livelihood as an organist and teacher and led a simple, almost ascetic life.

In 1851 he was appointed organist to the Church of Saint-Jean-Saint-François and in 1858 to that of Sainte-Clotilde, where he was already choirmaster. From the organ loft of Sainte-Clotilde came the improvisations for which he was to become famous and also their elaboration in organ and choral works. This music is all marked by the taste of the day, which was for a facile tenderness and saccharine sweetness in ecclesiastical music.

 
 

César Franck at the console, painting by Jeanne Rongier, 1885
  More important to Franck’s career as a composer was his appointment as organ professor at the Paris Conservatory in 1872, which came to him as a surprise because he had indulged in none of the preliminary intrigue customary in such cases. His open-heartedness and lack of sophistication were to make him enemies among his colleagues as well as friends among his pupils. This enmity was increased by the fact that his organ classes soon became classes of composition, and his pupils not infrequently proved superior to those of the conventional composition professors.

The nucleus of a school of disciples had already begun to form around Franck, but only after the founding of the National Society of Music (Feb. 25, 1871) was a real future assured for the type of music that he was interested in writing and communicating to his pupils.

When Vincent d’Indy, a French composer, joined the group of Franck’s pupils in 1872, he brought an enthusiasm, a propagandist zeal, and an exclusive personal devotion that played a large place in restoring Franck’s confidence in his powers. With Ernest Chausson, Pierre de Bréville, Charles Bordes, and Guy Ropartz the Franck circle was complete in the early ’80s, and subsequently d’Indy’s very high claims (in his biography, César Franck, 1906) led for a time to the suspicion that Franck was “a creation of his own pupils.”

 
 
The music that he went on to write makes it clear that this is not true. As a composer Franck fulfilled his potential only in the last 10 years (1880–90) of his life. His Symphony in D Minor (1888), Variations symphoniques (1885), Piano Quintet in F Minor (1879), String Quartet in D Major (1889), Sonata in A Major for Violin and Piano (1886), and several organ pieces mark him as one of the most powerful French composers in the second half of the 19th century. His music is marked by soaring, almost improvisatory melodic flights.

Certainly his early years as performer and composer of virtuoso music left an indelible mark on his musical taste, as can be heard unmistakably in the last movement of the Prélude, aria et final for piano (completed 1887) and even momentarily in the Variations symphoniques for piano and orchestra. On the other hand, some of his weaker music represents an almost excessive reaction against superficiality and aspires to emotional intensity at all costs, drawing for the purpose on the examples of Franz Liszt, Richard Wagner, and, more remotely, Beethoven.

Franck died, partly as the result of a street accident, in 1890. The new seriousness of French music in the last quarter of the 19th century derived entirely from Franck and his pupils. Much has been made of his angelic sweetness and simplicity of character, his selflessness and innocence in the ways of the world. These traits are reflected in a blandness of manner, and they proved a handicap when Franck was faced with the necessity of producing strongly contrasting musical ideas, as in the oratorio Les Béatitudes (written during the 1870s and performed posthumously) and the symphonic poems Le Chasseur maudit (1882; The Accursed Hunter) and Les Djinns (1884). On the other hand, the Sonata in A Major for Violin and Piano and the Variations symphoniques remain as all but perfect monuments of a warm and noble musical nature and a strong, thorough craftsmanship that have survived all changes of taste and emotional attitudes.

Martin Du Pré Cooper

Encyclopædia Britannica
 
 
 
 
Cesar Franck - Prelude, Chorale and Fugue
 
- Composer: César-Auguste-Jean-Guillaume-Hubert Franck (10 December 1822 -- 8 November 1890)
- Performer: Alfred Cortot
- Year of recording: 1929 (remastered)

Prelude, Chorale and Fugue {Prélude, Choral et Fugue} for piano, M. 21, written in 1884.

Not until the spring of 1884 did Franck come to grips, in an era contentiously preoccupied with Wagner and just beginning to appreciate Beethoven's later works, with the task of reviving the forms which had moved Bach. Accordingly, a searchingly ruminative prélude and the swiftly running fugue -- beginning with angst-laden drama to conclude in triumphantly incandescent peals -- were composed together. Only then did the lack of something expressively and architecturally linking become apparent, prompting the composition of the great harped chorale, resounding across the keyboard and requiring the left hand to reach over into the treble to chime the theme. The upshot is an elaborately figured, chromatically inflected, and texturally rich essay in which doubt and faith, darkness and light, oscillate until a final ecstatic resolution. Mlle Poitevin, to whom the Prélude, Choral et Fugue is dedicated, gave the work its premiere at the Salle Pleyel, under the auspices of the Société National de Musique on 24 January 1885. It was published in the same year by Enoch.

The interconnectedness and thematic relationships (particularly the cyclic recall of the prelude and chorale in the fugue) make this an unorthodox example of double-function form. It uses a Chromatic fourth motif in the Chorale and the Fugue, and the work itself is an exemplar of Franck's distinctive use of cyclic form.

 
 
 
 
 
     
 
Cesar Franck
     
 
 
     
  Classical Music Timeline

Instruments Through the Ages

Classical Music History - Composers and Masterworks
     
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Liszt Franz (at 11) makes his debut as pianist in Vienna
 
 
 
     
 
Franz Liszt
     
 
 
     
  Classical Music Timeline

Instruments Through the Ages

Classical Music History - Composers and Masterworks
     
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Royal Academy of Music, London
 

The Royal Academy of Music is a conservatoire in London, England and a constituent college of the University of London. It was founded in 1822 and is Britain's oldest degree-granting music school. It received a Royal Charter in 1830. It is a registered charity under English law.

 

The facade of the Royal Academy of Music
 
 
History
The Academy was founded by Lord Burghersh in 1822 with the help and ideas of the French harpist and composer Nicolas Bochsa. The Academy was granted a Royal Charter by King George IV in 1830.

The Academy's first building was in Tenterden Street, Hanover Square and in 1911 the institution moved to the current premises (which include the 450-seat Duke's Hall), built at a cost of £51,000 on the site of an orphanage. In 1976 the Academy acquired the houses situated on the north side and built between them a new opera theatre donated by the philanthropist Sir Jack Lyons and named after him and two new recital spaces, a recording studio, an electronic music studio, several practice rooms and office space.

The Academy again expanded its facilities in the late 1990s, with the addition of 1-5 York Gate, designed by John Nash in 1822, to house the new museum, a musical theatre studio and several teaching and practice rooms. To link the main building and 1-5 York Gate a new underground passage and the underground barrel-vaulted 150-seat David Josefowitz recital hall were built on the courtyard between the mentioned structures.

 
 
 
1822
 
 
Schubert: Symphony No. 8 ("The Unfinished")
 

Franz Schubert's (Schubert Franz) Symphony No. 8 in B minor, D.759 (sometimes renumbered as Symphony No. 7, in accordance with the revised Deutsch catalogue and the Neue Schubert-Ausgabe), commonly known as the "Unfinished Symphony" (German: Unvollendete), was started in 1822 but left with only two movements known to be complete, even though Schubert would live for another six years. A scherzo, nearly completed in piano score but with only two pages orchestrated, also survives. It has long been theorized that Schubert may have sketched a finale which instead became the big B minor entr'acte from his incidental music to Rosamunde, but all the evidence for this is circumstantial. One possible reason for Schubert's leaving the symphony incomplete is the predominance of the same meter (triple meter). The first movement is in 3/4, the second in 3/8 and the third (an incomplete scherzo) also in 3/4. Three consecutive movements in basically the same meter rarely occur in symphonies, sonatas or chamber works of the most important Viennese composers.

 
Schubert's eighth symphony is sometimes called the first Romantic symphony due to its emphasis on expressive melody, vivid harmony and creative combinations of orchestral tone color despite the architecturally imposing Classical structures of its two completed movements highlighted by the dramatically climactic development section of the first movement based solely on its quietly sinister opening theme.

To this day, musicologists still disagree as to why Schubert failed to complete the symphony. Some have speculated that he stopped working on it in the middle of the scherzo in the fall of 1822 because it was associated in his mind with the initial outbreak of syphilis, or simply that he was distracted by the inspiration for his Wanderer Fantasy for solo piano which occupied his time and energy immediately afterward; or perhaps a combination of both factors.

 
 

Schubert, Symphony No. 8, third movement, first page, facsimile, 1885, in J. R. von Herbeck's biography
 
 
Early history
In 1823, the Graz Music Society gave Schubert an honorary diploma. He felt obliged to dedicate a symphony to them in return, and sent his friend Anselm Hüttenbrenner, a leading member of the Society, an orchestral score he had written in 1822 consisting of the two completed movements of the Unfinished plus at least the first two pages of the start of a scherzo. This much is known.

What is not known, and will almost certainly never be known, is how much of the symphony Schubert actually wrote, and how much of what he did write he gave to Hüttenbrenner. The following exists: the first two movements complete in full score, the first two pages of a scherzo in full score. The rest of the scherzo (except for the missing second strain of the trio) existed in a separate manuscript in short score (not sent to Hüttenbrenner but found among Schubert's copious manuscripts after his death which were carefully preserved by his devoted schoolteacher brother Ferdinand), but nothing of any fourth movement. A fourth movement finale in the home key (B minor) would have been the norm for any symphony written at that time, but there is no direct evidence that Schubert ever started work on it.

It has, however, been surmised that the most extended Entr'acte from Rosamunde (also in B minor, in the same style of the first movement and with the same instrumentation as the symphony) was indeed that fourth movement, which Schubert recycled by inserting it into his Rosamunde incidental music composed in early 1823 just after the Wanderer Fantasy. The Schubert scholar Brian Newbould, who harmonized, orchestrated and conjecturally completed the piano sketch of the scherzo, believed this to be true; but not all scholars agree. Pages appear to have been torn out after the beginning of the scherzo in the full score sent to Hüttenbrenner, in any event.

  The fact that Hüttenbrenner neither had the work performed nor made the society aware he even had the manuscript, is curious and has led to various theories. Was he given an incomplete score by Schubert and was waiting for the remainder to arrive before saying anything? If so, he waited in vain throughout the six remaining years of Schubert's life. After Schubert's premature death in 1828 (of typhus as a complication of syphilis), why didn't Hüttenbrenner then make the existence of the manuscript known? Do the torn pages suggest he had somehow damaged the piece and managed to lose, or even inadvertently destroy, the last two movements? Was guilt therefore the reason he kept silent about the work's existence for 37 years after Schubert died? Could personality factors like introvertedness or jealousy have been at play here? Old age and approaching death seem to have influenced Hüttenbrenner to reveal the work to an important and gracious visitor at long last (in 1865, when he was 76 and had only three more years to live). This was the conductor Johann von Herbeck, who premiered the extant two movements on 17 December 1865 in Vienna, adding the brilliantly busy but expressively lightweight perpetual-motion last movement of Schubert's 3rd Symphony in D major, as an inadequate finale, expressively quite incompatible with the monumental first two movements of the Unfinished. The performance was nevertheless received with great enthusiasm by the audience. The score of those two movements was not published before 1867.

The Unfinished Symphony has been called No. 7 (recently, for example, in the New Schubert Edition) instead of No. 8 as it usually is, since the other work sometimes referred to as Schubert's 7th (in E major, completed by Felix Weingartner) was also left incomplete but in a different way, with at least fragments of all four of its movements in Schubert's hand.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
 
Schubert: Symphony No. 8 in В minor ("The Unfinished")
 
Unfinished/Unvollendet/Befejezetlen
Symphony in b minor, No.8, D.759
Staatskapelle Dresden
Wolfgang Sawallisch (conductor)
1967

00:00 1st movement: Allegro moderato - Part1: exposition
03:26 1st movement: Allegro moderato - Part1: exposition-reprise
06:50 1st movement: Allegro moderato - Part2: dev., recap.
14:51 2nd movement-Andante con moto

 
 
 
 
 
     
 
Franz Schubert
     
 
 
     
  Classical Music Timeline

Instruments Through the Ages

Classical Music History - Composers and Masterworks
     
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Daguerre Louis  and Bouton invent the diorama, paintings illuminated in dark room to give illusion of reality
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Fresnel Augustin-Jean perfects lenses for lighthouses
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Sir Herschel William, Eng. astronomer, d. (b. 1738)
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Mendel Gregor
 

Gregor Mendel, in full Gregor Johann Mendel, original name (until 1843) Johann Mendel (born July 22, 1822, Heinzendorf, Austria [now Hynčice, Czech Republic]—died January 6, 1884, Brünn, Austria-Hungary [now Brno, Czech Republic]), Austrian botanist, teacher, and Augustinian prelate, the first to lay the mathematical foundation of the science of genetics, in what came to be called Mendelism.

 

Gregor Mendel
  Education and early career
Born to a family with limited means in German-speaking Silesia, Mendel was raised in a rural setting. His academic abilities were recognized by the local priest, who persuaded his parents to send him away to school at the age of 11. His Gymnasium (grammar school) studies completed in 1840, Mendel entered a two-year program in philosophy at the Philosophical Institute of the University of Olmütz (Olomouc, Czech Republic), where he excelled in physics and mathematics, completing his studies in 1843. His initial years away from home were hard, because his family could not sufficiently support him. He tutored other students to make ends meet, and twice he suffered serious depression and had to return home to recover. As his father’s only son, Mendel was expected to take over the small family farm, but he preferred a different solution to his predicament, choosing to enter the Altbrünn monastery as a novitiate of the Augustinian order, where he was given the name Gregor.

The move to the monastery took him to Brünn, the capital of Moravia, where for the first time he was freed from the harsh struggle of former years. He was also introduced to a diverse and intellectual community. As a priest, Mendel found his parish duty to visit the sick and dying so distressing that he again became ill. Abbot Cyril Napp found him a substitute-teaching position at Znaim (Znojmo, Czech Republic), where he proved very successful.

 
 
However, in 1850 Mendel failed an exam—introduced through new legislation for teacher certification—and was sent to the University of Vienna for two years to benefit from a new program of scientific instruction. As at Olmütz, Mendel devoted his time at Vienna to physics and mathematics, working under Austrian physicist Christian Doppler and mathematical physicist Andreas von Ettinghausen. He also studied the anatomy and physiology of plants and the use of the microscope under botanist Franz Unger, an enthusiast for the cell theory and a supporter of the developmentalist (pre-Darwinian) view of the evolution of life. Unger’s writings on the latter made him a target for attack by the Roman Catholic press of Vienna shortly before and during Mendel’s time there.

In the summer of 1853, Mendel returned to the monastery in Brünn, and in the following year he was again given a teaching position, this time at the Brünn Realschule (secondary school), where he remained until elected abbot 14 years later. He attempted the teacher exam again in 1856, although the event caused a nervous breakdown and a second failure. However, these years were his greatest in terms of success both as teacher and as consummate experimentalist. Once abbot, his administrative duties came to occupy the majority of his time. Moreover, Mendel’s refusal to permit the monastery to pay the state’s new taxes for a religious fund led to his involvement in a long and bitter dispute with the authorities. Convinced that this tax was unconstitutional, he continued his opposition, refusing to comply even when the state took over the administration of some of the monastery’s estates and directed the profits to the religious fund.

 
 
Experimental period
In 1854 Abbot Cyril Napp permitted Mendel to plan a major experimental program in hybridization at the monastery. The aim of this program was to trace the transmission of hereditary characters in successive generations of hybrid progeny. Previous authorities had observed that progeny of fertile hybrids tended to revert to the originating species, and they had therefore concluded that hybridization could not be a mechanism used by nature to multiply species—though in exceptional cases some fertile hybrids did appear not to revert (the so-called “constant hybrids”). On the other hand, plant and animal breeders had long shown that crossbreeding could indeed produce a multitude of new forms. The latter point was of particular interest to landowners, including the abbot of the monastery, who was concerned about the monastery’s future profits from the wool of its Merino sheep, owing to competing wool being supplied from Australia.

Mendel chose to conduct his studies with the edible pea (Pisum sativum) because of the numerous distinct varieties, the ease of culture and control of pollination, and the high proportion of successful seed germinations. From 1854 to 1856 he tested 34 varieties for constancy of their traits. In order to trace the transmission of characters, he chose seven traits that were expressed in a distinctive manner, such as plant height (short or tall) and seed colour (green or yellow). He referred to these alternatives as contrasted characters, or character-pairs. He crossed varieties that differed in one trait—for instance, tall crossed with short. The first generation of hybrids (F1) displayed the character of one variety but not that of the other. In Mendel’s terms, one character was dominant and the other recessive. In the numerous progeny that he raised from these hybrids (the second generation, F2), however, the recessive character reappeared, and the proportion of offspring bearing the dominant to offspring bearing the recessive was very close to a 3 to 1 ratio. Study of the descendants (F3) of the dominant group showed that one-third of them were true-breeding and two-thirds were of hybrid constitution. The 3:1 ratio could hence be rewritten as 1:2:1, meaning that 50 percent of the F2 generation were true-breeding and 50 percent were still hybrid. This was Mendel’s major discovery, and it was unlikely to have been made by his predecessors, since they did not grow statistically significant populations, nor did they follow the individual characters separately to establish their statistical relations.

Mendel’s approach to experimentation came from his training in physics and mathematics, especially combinatorial mathematics. The latter served him ideally to represent his result. If A represents the dominant characteristic and a the recessive, then the 1:2:1 ratio recalls the terms in the expansion of the binomial equation:
(A + a)2 = A2 + 2Aa + a2

Mendel realized further that he could test his expectation that the seven traits are transmitted independently of one another. Crosses involving first two and then three of his seven traits yielded categories of offspring in proportions following the terms produced from combining two binomial equations, indicating that their transmission was independent of one another.
Mendel’s successors have called this conclusion the law of independent assortment.

  Theoretical interpretation
Mendel went on to relate his results to the cell theory of fertilization, according to which a new organism is generated from the fusion of two cells. In order for pure breeding forms of both the dominant and the recessive type to be brought into the hybrid, there had to be some temporary accommodation of the two differing characters in the hybrid as well as a separation process in the formation of the pollen cells and the egg cells. In other words, the hybrid must form germ cells bearing the potential to yield either the one characteristic or the other. This has since been described as the law of segregation, or the doctrine of the purity of the germ cells. Since one pollen cell fuses with one egg cell, all possible combinations of the differing pollen and egg cells would yield just the results suggested by Mendel’s combinatorial theory.

Mendel first presented his results in two separate lectures in 1865 to the Natural Science Society in Brünn. His paper “Experiments on Plant Hybrids” was published in the society’s journal, Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereines in Brünn, the following year. It attracted little attention, although many libraries received it and reprints were sent out. The tendency of those who read it was to conclude that Mendel had simply demonstrated more accurately what was already widely assumed—namely, that hybrid progeny revert to their originating forms. They overlooked the potential for variability and the evolutionary implications that his demonstration of the recombination of traits made possible. Most notably, Swiss botanist Karl Wilhelm von Nägeli actually corresponded with Mendel, despite remaining skeptical as to the significance of his results and doubting that the germ cells in hybrids could be pure.

Latter years
Mendel appears to have made no effort to publicize his work, and it is not known how many reprints of his paper he distributed. He had ordered 40 reprints, the whereabouts of only eight of which are known. Other than the journal that published his paper, 15 sources are known from the 19th century in which Mendel is mentioned in the context of plant hybridization. Few of these provide a clear picture of his achievement, and most are very brief.

By 1871 Mendel had only enough time to continue his meteorological and apicultural work. He traveled little, and his only visit to England was to see the Industrial Exhibition in 1862. Bright disease made his last years painful, and he died at the age of 62. Mendel’s funeral was attended by many mourners and proceeded from the monastery to the monastery’s burial plot in the town’s central cemetery, where his grave can be seen today. He was survived by two sisters and three nephews.

Rediscovery
In 1900 Dutch botanist and geneticist Hugo de Vries, German botanist and geneticist Carl Erich Correns, and Austrian botanist Erich Tschermak von Seysenegg independently reported results of hybridization experiments similar to Mendel’s, though each later claimed not to have known of Mendel’s work while doing their own experiments. However, both de Vries and Correns had read Mendel earlier—Correns even made detailed notes on the subject—but had forgotten. De Vries had a diversity of results in 1899, but it was not until he reread Mendel in 1900 that he was able to select and organize his data into a rational system.

 
 
Tschermak had not read Mendel before obtaining his results, and his first account of his data offers an interpretation in terms of hereditary potency. He described the 3:1 ratio as an “unequal valancy” (Wertigkeit). In subsequent papers he incorporated the Mendelian theory of segregation and the purity of the germ cells into his text.

In Great Britain, biologist William Bateson became the leading proponent of Mendel’s theory. Around him gathered an enthusiastic band of followers. However, Darwinian evolution was assumed to be based chiefly on the selection of small, blending variations, whereas Mendel worked with clearly nonblending variations. Bateson soon found that championing Mendel aroused opposition from Darwinians. He and his supporters were called Mendelians, and their work was considered irrelevant to evolution. It took some three decades before the Mendelian theory was sufficiently developed to find its rightful place in evolutionary theory.

 
 

Gregor Mendel 1884
  The distinction between a characteristic and its determinant was not consistently made by Mendel or by his successors, the early Mendelians. In 1909 Danish botanist and geneticist Wilhelm Johannsen clarified this point and named the determinants genes. Four years later American zoologist and geneticist Thomas Hunt Morgan located the genes on the chromosomes, and the popular picture of them as beads on a string emerged. This discovery had implications for Mendel’s claim of an independent transmission of traits, for genes close together on the same chromosome are not transmitted independently. Moreover, as genetic studies pushed the analysis down to smaller and smaller dimensions, the Mendelian gene appeared to fragment.

Molecular genetics has thus challenged any attempts to achieve a unified conception of the gene as the elementary unit of heredity. Today the gene is defined in several ways, depending upon the nature of the investigation. Genetic material can be synthesized, manipulated, and hybridized with genetic material from other species, but to fully understand its functions in the whole organism, an understanding of Mendelian inheritance is necessary. As the architect of genetic experimental and statistical analysis, Mendel remains the acknowledged father of genetics.

Robert Olby

Encyclopædia Britannica
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Pasteur Louis
 
Louis Pasteur, (born December 27, 1822, Dole, France—died September 28, 1895, Saint-Cloud), French chemist and microbiologist who was one of the most important founders of medical microbiology. Pasteur’s contributions to science, technology, and medicine are nearly without precedent. He pioneered the study of molecular asymmetry; discovered that microorganisms cause fermentation and disease; originated the process of pasteurization; saved the beer, wine, and silk industries in France; and developed vaccines against anthrax and rabies.
 
Pasteur’s academic positions were numerous, and his scientific accomplishments earned him France’s highest decoration, the Legion of Honour, as well as election to the Académie des Sciences and many other distinctions. Today there are some 30 institutes and an impressive number of hospitals, schools, buildings, and streets that bear his name—a set of honours bestowed on few scientists.
 
 


Louis Pasteur

  Early education
Pasteur’s father, Jean-Joseph Pasteur, was a tanner and a sergeant major decorated with the Legion of Honour during the Napoleonic Wars. This fact probably instilled in the younger Pasteur the strong patriotism that later was a defining element of his character. Louis Pasteur was an average student in his early years, but he was gifted in drawing and painting. His pastels and portraits of his parents and friends, made when he was 15, were later kept in the museum of the Pasteur Institute in Paris. After attending primary school in Arbois, where his family had moved, and secondary school in nearby Besançon, he earned his bachelor of arts degree (1840) and bachelor of science degree (1842) at the Royal College of Besançon.

Research career
In 1843 Pasteur was admitted to the École Normale Supérieure (a teachers’ college in Paris), where he attended lectures by French chemist Jean-Baptiste-André Dumas and became Dumas’s teaching assistant. Pasteur obtained his master of science degree in 1845 and then acquired an advanced degree in physical sciences. He later earned his doctorate in sciences in 1847. Pasteur was appointed professor of physics at the Dijon Lycée (secondary school) in 1848 but shortly thereafter accepted a position as professor of chemistry at the University of Strasbourg. On May 29, 1849, he married Marie Laurent, the daughter of the rector of the university. The couple had five children; however, only two survived childhood.

 
 
Molecular asymmetry
Soon after graduating from the École Normale Supérieure, Pasteur became puzzled by the discovery of the German chemist Eilhardt Mitscherlich, who had shown that tartrates and paratartrates behaved differently toward polarized light: tartrates rotated the plane of polarized light, whereas paratartrates did not. This was unusual because the compounds displayed identical chemical properties. Pasteur noted that the tartrate crystals exhibited asymmetric forms that corresponded to their optical asymmetry. He made the surprising observation that crystalline paratartrate consisted of a mixture of crystals in a right-handed configuration. However, when these crystals were separated manually, he found that they exhibited right and left asymmetry. In other words, a balanced mixture of both right and left crystals was optically inactive. Thus, Pasteur discovered the existence of molecular asymmetry, the foundation of stereochemistry, as it was revealed by optical activity. Over the course of the next 10 years, Pasteur further investigated the ability of organic substances to rotate the plane of polarized light. He also studied the relationship that existed between crystal structure and molecular configuration. His studies convinced him that asymmetry was one of the fundamental characteristics of living matter.
 
 

Louis Pasteur. Photograph by Nadar
  Germ theory of fermentation
In 1854 Pasteur was appointed professor of chemistry and dean of the science faculty at the University of Lille. While working at Lille, he was asked to help solve problems related to alcohol production at a local distillery, and thus he began a series of studies on alcoholic fermentation. His work on these problems led to his involvement in tackling a variety of other practical and economic problems involving fermentation. His efforts proved successful in unraveling most of these problems, and new theoretical implications emerged from his work. Pasteur investigated a broad range of aspects of fermentation, including the production of compounds such as lactic acid that are responsible for the souring of milk. He also studied butyric acid fermentation. In 1857 Pasteur left Lille and returned to Paris, having been appointed manager and director of scientific studies at the École Normale Supérieure. That same year he presented experimental evidence for the participation of living organisms in all fermentative processes and showed that a specific organism was associated with each particular fermentation. This evidence gave rise to the germ theory of fermentation.

Pasteur effect
The realization that specific organisms were involved in fermentation was further supported by Pasteur’s studies of butyric acid fermentation. These studies led Pasteur to the unexpected discovery that the fermentation process could be arrested by passing air (that is, oxygen) through the fermenting fluid, a process known today as the Pasteur effect. He concluded that this was due to the presence of a life-form that could function only in the absence of oxygen. This led to his introduction of the terms aerobic and anaerobic to designate organisms that live in the presence or absence of oxygen, respectively. He further proposed that the phenomena occurring during putrefaction were due to specific germs that function under anaerobic conditions.

 
 

Pasteurization
Pasteur readily applied his knowledge of microbes and fermentation to the wine and beer industries in France, effectively saving the industries from collapse due to problems associated with production and with contamination that occurred during export. In 1863, at the request of the emperor of France, Napoleon III, Pasteur studied wine contamination and showed it to be caused by microbes. To prevent contamination, Pasteur used a simple procedure: he heated the wine to 50–60 °C (120–140 °F), a process now known universally as pasteurization. Today pasteurization is seldom used for wines that benefit from aging, since it kills the organisms that contribute to the aging process, but it is applied to many foods and beverages, particularly milk.

Following Pasteur’s success with wine, he focused his studies on beer. By developing practical techniques for the control of beer fermentation, he was able to provide a rational methodology for the brewing industry. He also devised a method for the manufacturing of beer that prevented deterioration of the product during long periods of transport on ships.

 
 

Louis Pasteur in his laboratory, painting by A. Edelfeldt in 1885
  Spontaneous generation
Fermentation and putrefaction were often perceived as being spontaneous phenomena, a perception stemming from the ancient belief that life could generate spontaneously. During the 18th century the debate was pursued by the English naturalist and Roman Catholic divine John Turberville Needham and the French naturalist Georges-Louis Leclerc, count de Buffon. While both supported the idea of spontaneous generation, Italian abbot and physiologist Lazzaro Spallanzani maintained that life could never spontaneously generate from dead matter. In 1859, the year English naturalist Charles Darwin published his On the Origin of Species, Pasteur decided to settle this dispute. He was convinced that his germ theory could not be firmly substantiated as long as belief in spontaneous generation persisted. Pasteur attacked the problem by using a simple experimental procedure. He showed that beef broth could be sterilized by boiling it in a “swan-neck” flask, which has a long bending neck that traps dust particles and other contaminants before they reach the body of the flask. However, if the broth was boiled and the neck of the flask was broken off following boiling, the broth, being reexposed to air, eventually became cloudy, indicating microbial contamination. These experiments proved that there was no spontaneous generation, since the boiled broth, if never reexposed to air, remained sterile. This not only settled the philosophical problem of the origin of life at the time but also placed on solid ground the new science of bacteriology, which relied on proven techniques of sterilization and aseptic manipulation.
 
 
Work with silkworms
In 1862 Pasteur was elected to the Académie des Sciences, and the following year he was appointed professor of geology, physics, and chemistry at the École des Beaux-Arts (School of Fine Arts). Shortly after this, Pasteur turned his attention to France’s silkworm crisis. In the middle of the 19th century, a mysterious disease had attacked French silkworm nurseries. Silkworm eggs could no longer be produced in France, and they could not be imported from other countries, since the disease had spread all over Europe and had invaded the Caucasus region of Eurasia, as well as China and Japan. By 1865 the silkworm industry was almost completely ruined in France and, to a lesser extent, in the rest of western Europe. Pasteur knew virtually nothing about silkworms, but, upon the request of his former mentor Dumas, Pasteur took charge of the problem, accepting the challenge and seizing the opportunity to learn more about infectious diseases. He soon became an expert silkworm breeder and identified the organisms that caused the silkworm disease. After five years of research, he succeeded in saving the silk industry through a method that enabled the preservation of healthy silkworm eggs and prevented their contamination by the disease-causing organisms. Within a couple of years, this method was recognized throughout Europe; it is still used today in silk-producing countries.

In 1867 Pasteur resigned from his administrative duties at the École Normale Supérieure and was appointed professor of chemistry at the Sorbonne, a university in Paris. Although he was partially paralyzed (left hemiplegia) in 1868, he continued his research. For Pasteur, the study of silkworms constituted an initiation into the problem of infectious diseases, and it was then that he first became aware of the complexities of infectious processes.

Accustomed as he was to the constancy and accuracy of laboratory procedures, he was puzzled by the variability of animal life, which he had come to recognize through his observation that individual silkworms differed in their response to disease depending on physiological and environmental factors. By investigating these problems, Pasteur developed certain practices of epidemiology that served him well a few years later when he dealt with animal and human diseases.

  Vaccine development
In the early 1870s Pasteur had already acquired considerable renown and respect in France, and in 1873 he was elected as an associate member of the Académie de Médecine. Nonetheless, the medical establishment was reluctant to accept his germ theory of disease, primarily because it originated from a chemist. However, during the next decade, Pasteur developed the overall principle of vaccination and contributed to the foundation of immunology.

Pasteur’s first important discovery in the study of vaccination came in 1879 and concerned a disease called chicken cholera. (Today the bacteria that cause the disease are classified in the genus Pasteurella.) Pasteur said, “Chance only favours the prepared mind,” and it was chance observation through which he discovered that cultures of chicken cholera lost their pathogenicity and retained “attenuated” pathogenic characteristics over the course of many generations. He inoculated chickens with the attenuated form and demonstrated that the chickens were resistant to the fully virulent strain. From then on, Pasteur directed all his experimental work toward the problem of immunization and applied this principle to many other diseases.

Pasteur began investigating anthrax in 1879. At that time an anthrax epidemic in France and in some other parts of Europe had killed a large number of sheep, and the disease was attacking humans as well. German physician Robert Koch announced the isolation of the anthrax bacillus, which Pasteur confirmed. Koch and Pasteur independently provided definitive experimental evidence that the anthrax bacillus was indeed responsible for the infection. This firmly established the germ theory of disease, which then emerged as the fundamental concept underlying medical microbiology.

Pasteur wanted to apply the principle of vaccination to anthrax. He prepared attenuated cultures of the bacillus after determining the conditions that led to the organism’s loss of virulence. In the spring of 1881 he obtained financial support, mostly from farmers, to conduct a large-scale public experiment of anthrax immunization. The experiment took place in Pouilly-le-Fort, located on the southern outskirts of Paris. Pasteur immunized 70 farm animals, and the experiment was a complete success.

 
 
The vaccination procedure involved two inoculations at intervals of 12 days with vaccines of different potencies. One vaccine, from a low-virulence culture, was given to half the sheep and was followed by a second vaccine from a more virulent culture than the first. Two weeks after these initial inoculations, both the vaccinated and control sheep were inoculated with a virulent strain of anthrax. Within a few days all the control sheep died, whereas all the vaccinated animals survived. This convinced many people that Pasteur’s work was indeed valid.

Following the success of the anthrax vaccination experiment, Pasteur focused on the microbial origins of disease. His investigations of animals infected by pathogenic microbes and his studies of the microbial mechanisms that cause harmful physiological effects in animals made him a pioneer in the field of infectious pathology. It is often said that English surgeon Edward Jenner discovered vaccination and that Pasteur invented vaccines. Indeed, almost 90 years after Jenner initiated immunization against smallpox, Pasteur developed another vaccine—the first vaccine against rabies. He had decided to attack the problem of rabies in 1882, the year of his acceptance into the Académie Française. Rabies was a dreaded and horrible disease that had fascinated popular imagination for centuries because of its mysterious origin and the fear it generated. Conquering it would be Pasteur’s final endeavour.

Pasteur suspected that the agent that caused rabies was a microbe (the agent was later discovered to be a virus, a nonliving entity). It was too small to be seen under Pasteur’s microscope, and so experimentation with the disease demanded the development of entirely new methodologies. Pasteur chose to conduct his experiments using rabbits and transmitted the infectious agent from animal to animal by intracerebral inoculations until he obtained a stable preparation. In order to attenuate the invisible agent, he desiccated the spinal cords of infected animals until the preparation became almost nonvirulent. He realized later that, instead of creating an attenuated form of the agent, his treatment had actually neutralized it. (Pasteur perceived the neutralizing effect as a killing effect on the agent, since he suspected that the agent was a living organism.) Thus, rather unknowingly, he had produced, instead of attenuated live microorganisms, a neutralized agent and opened the way for the development of a second class of vaccines, known as inactivated vaccines.

On July 6, 1885, Pasteur vaccinated Joseph Meister, a nine-year-old boy who had been bitten by a rabid dog. The vaccine was so successful that it brought immediate glory and fame to Pasteur. Hundreds of other bite victims throughout the world were subsequently saved by Pasteur’s vaccine, and the era of preventive medicine had begun. An international fund-raising campaign was launched to build the Pasteur Institute in Paris, the inauguration of which took place on November 14, 1888.

 
 

Pasteur experimenting in his laboratory
  Implications of Pasteur’s work
The theoretical implications and practical importance of Pasteur’s work were immense. Pasteur once said, “There are no such things as pure and applied science; there are only science and the application of science.” Thus, once he established the theoretical basis of a given process, he investigated ways to further develop industrial applications. (As a result, he deposited a number of patents.) However, Pasteur did not have enough time to explore all the practical aspects of his numerous theories. One of the most important theoretical implications of his later research, which emerged from his attenuation procedure for vaccines, is the concept that virulence is not a constant attribute but a variable property—a property that can be lost and later recovered. Virulence could be decreased, but Pasteur suspected that it could be increased as well. He believed that increased virulence was what gave rise to epidemics. In Louis Pasteur, Free Lance of Science (1950), American microbiologist René Dubos quoted Pasteur:

Thus, virulence appears in a new light which may be disturbing for the future of humanity unless nature, in its long evolution, has already had the occasions to produce all possible contagious diseases—a very unlikely assumption.
 
 
What is a microorganism that is innocuous to man or to a given animal species? It is a living being which does not possess the capacity to multiply in our body or in the body of the animal. But nothing proves that if the same microorganism should chance to come into contact with some other of the thousands of animal species in the Creation, it might invade it and render it sick. Its virulence might increase by repeated passages through that species, and might eventually affect man or domesticated animals. Thus might be brought about a new virulence and new contagions. I am much inclined to believe that such mechanisms would explain how smallpox, syphilis, plague, yellow fever, etc. have come about in the course of time, and how certain great epidemics appear once in a while.

Pasteur was the first to recognize variability in virulence. Today this concept remains relevant to the study of infectious disease, especially with regard to understanding the emergence of diseases such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).

After Pasteur’s 70th birthday, which was acknowledged by a large but solemn celebration at the Sorbonne that was attended by several prominent scientists, including British surgeon Joseph Lister, Pasteur’s health continued to deteriorate. His paralysis worsened, and he died on September 28, 1895. He was buried in the cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris, but his remains were transferred to a Neo-Byzantine crypt at the Pasteur Institute in 1896.

During Pasteur’s career, he touched on many problems, but a simple description of his achievements does not do justice to the intensity and fullness of his life. He never accepted defeat, and he always tried to convince skeptics, though his impatience and intolerance were notorious when he believed that truth was on his side. Throughout his life he was an immensely effective observer and readily integrated relevant observations into conceptual schemes.

Agnes Ullmann

Encyclopædia Britannica

 
 
 
1822
 
 
Schliemann Heinrich
 

Heinrich Schliemann, (born Jan. 6, 1822, Neubukow, Mecklenburg-Schwerin—died Dec. 26, 1890, Naples), German archaeologist and excavator of Troy, Mycenae, and Tiryns; he is often considered to be the modern discoverer of prehistoric Greece.

 

Heinrich Schliemann
  Youth and early career
Schliemann was the son of a poor pastor. A picture of Troy in flames in a history book his father had given him when he was seven years old remained in his memory throughout his life and sustained his fervent belief in the historical foundations of the Homeric poems. At the age of 14 he was apprenticed to a grocer, and it was in the grocer’s shop that he heard Homer declaimed in the original Greek. After several years in the shop, ill health forced him to leave, and he became a cabin boy on a ship bound from Hamburg to Venezuela.

After the vessel was wrecked off the Dutch coast, he became office boy and then bookkeeper for a trading firm in Amsterdam. He had a passion and a flair for languages, as well as a remarkable memory; these factors, combined with great energy and determination, enabled him to learn to read and write fluently between 8 and 13 languages—accounts vary, but his competence certainly included Russian and both ancient and modern Greek.

In 1846 his firm sent him to St. Petersburg as an agent. There he founded a business on his own and embarked, among other things, on the indigo trade. In 1852 he married Ekaterina Lyschin. He made a fortune at the time of the Crimean War, mainly as a military contractor. In the 1850s he was in the United States and became a U.S. citizen, retaining this nationality for the rest of his life. Returning to Russia he retired from business at the age of 36 and began to devote his energies and money to the study of prehistoric archaeology, particularly the problem of identifying the site of Homeric Troy.

 
 

To train himself, he travelled extensively in Greece, Italy, Scandinavia, Germany, and Syria and then went around the world, visiting India, China, and Japan (he wrote a book about the last two countries). He also studied archaeology in Paris.

In 1868 Schliemann took his large fortune to Greece, visiting Homeric sites there and in Asia Minor, and the following year he published his first book, Ithaka, der Peloponnes und Troja (“Ithaca, the Peloponnese, and Troy”). In this work he argued that Hisarlık, in Asia Minor, and not Bunarbashi, a short distance south of it, was the site of Troy and that the graves of the Greek commander Agamemnon and his wife, Clytemnestra, at Mycenae, described by the Greek geographer Pausanias, were not the tholoi (vaulted tombs) outside the citadel walls but lay inside the citadel. He was able to prove both theories by excavation in the course of the next few years. He had divorced his Russian wife, Ekaterina, and married in 1869 a young Greek schoolgirl named Sophia Engastromenos, whom he had selected through a marriage bureau.

 
 

Heinrich Schliemann
  Discovery of Troy
Although some isolated discoveries had been made before he began digging, Schliemann has rightly been called the creator of prehistoric Greek archaeology. The French geologist Ferdinand Fouqué dug at Santorin in 1862 and found fresco-covered walls of houses and painted pottery beneath 26 feet (8 metres) of pumice, the result of the great eruption that divided the original island into Thera (modern Thira) and Therasis (modern Thirasia). Geologists at that time dated the Santorin eruption to 2000 bc, which suggested a great antiquity for Fouqué’s finds and the existence of prehistoric cultures hitherto unknown in the Aegean.

The English archaeologist Frederick Calvert had dug at Hisarlık, and in 1871 Schliemann took up his work at this large man-made mound. He believed that the Homeric Troy must be in the lowest level of the mound, and he dug uncritically through the upper levels. In 1873 he uncovered fortifications and the remains of a city of great antiquity, and he discovered a treasure of gold jewelry, which he smuggled out of Turkey. He believed the city he had found was Homeric Troy and identified the treasure as that of Priam.
His discoveries and theories, first published in Trojanische Altertümer (1874; “Trojan Antiquity”), were received skeptically by many scholars, but others, including the prime minister of England, William Ewart Gladstone, himself a classical scholar, and a wide public, accepted his identification.
 
 

When he proposed to resume work at Hisarlık in February 1874, he was delayed by a lawsuit with the Ottoman government about the division of his spoils, particularly the gold treasure, and it was not until April 1876 that he obtained permission to resume work. In 1874–76 Schliemann dug instead at the site of the Treasury of Minyas, at Orchomenus in Boeotia, but found little except the remains of a beautiful ceiling. During this delay he also published Troja und seine Ruinen (1875; “Troy and Its Ruins”) and began excavation at Mycenae. In August 1876, he began work in the tholoi, digging by the Lion Gate and then inside the citadel walls, where he found a double ring of slabs and, within that ring, five shaft graves (a sixth was found immediately after his departure). Buried with 16 bodies in this circle of shaft graves was a large treasure of gold, silver, bronze, and ivory objects. Schliemann had hoped to find—and believed he had found—the tombs of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra, and he published his finds in his Mykenä (1878; “Mycenae”).

 
 

The 'Mask of Agamemnon', discovered by Heinrich Schliemann in 1876 at Mycenae
now exhibited at the National Archaeological Museum of Athens.
 
 

After an unsuccessful excavation in Ithaca in 1878, he resumed work at Hisarlık the same year. He conducted a third excavation at Troy in 1882–83 and a fourth from 1888 until his death. In his first season he had worked alone with his wife, Sophia. In 1879 he was assisted by Emile Burnouf, a classical archaeologist, and by Rudolf Virchow, the famous German pathologist, who was also the founder of the German Society for Anthropology, Ethnology, and Prehistory. In his last two seasons Schliemann had the expert assistance of Wilhelm Dörpfeld, who was a practical architect and had worked at the German excavations at Olympia. Dörpfeld brought to Troy the new system and efficiency of the German classical archaeologists working in Greece, and he was able to expose the stratigraphy at Troy more clearly than before and to revolutionize Schliemann’s techniques. In 1884, Schliemann, together with Dörpfeld, excavated the great fortified site of Tiryns near Mycenae.

Toward the end of his life, Schliemann suffered greatly with ear trouble and travelled in Europe, visiting specialists and hoping for a cure. None was forthcoming. In great pain and alone, on Dec. 25, 1890, while walking across a square in Naples, he collapsed; he died the next day.

 
 
Assessment
Schliemann’s work of discovery in archaeology is easy to assess. He discovered Homeric Troy as well as a city that existed long before Homer—a prehistoric Bronze Age civilization in Turkey; this was also what he discovered at Mycenae. Hitherto, ancient historians had thought of four empires: Greece, Rome, Egypt, and Babylon-Assyria; Schliemann discovered two new civilizations and enormously lengthened the perspective of history. He nearly discovered a third, namely that of prehistoric Crete.

He had long thought that there must have existed in the Mediterranean a civilization earlier than Mycenae and Bronze Age Hisarlık, and he guessed that it might be in Crete. At one time he contemplated excavation in Crete, but he could not agree to the price asked for the land; thus, the discovery of the pre-Mycenean civilization of Minoan Crete was left to Sir Arthur Evans 10 years after Schliemann’s death.

Schliemann was one of the first popularizers of archaeology. With his books and his dispatches to The Times, the Daily Telegraph, and other papers he kept the world informed and excited by his archaeological discoveries as no one previously had been able to do. It has been said that “every person of culture and education lived through the drama of discovering Troy.” Schliemann became a symbol not only of the new archaeological scholarship of the second half of the 19th century but also of the romance and excitement of archaeology. Scholars and the public were inspired by him, and when he died Sir John Myres, Camden Professor of Ancient History at the University of Oxford, said that to many it seemed that “the spring had gone out of the year.”

 
Sophia Schliemann (née Engastromenos) wearing treasures recovered at Hisarlik.
 
 

When Schliemann began excavating, no corpus of accepted practice existed for archaeological fieldwork. Like Sir Flinders Petrie and Augustus Pitt-Rivers, he was a pioneer. Stratigraphy had been observed and understood in the Danish peat bogs, the Jutland barrows, and the prehistoric Swiss lake dwellings, but Hisarlık was the first large dry-land man-made mound to be dug. It is not surprising that Schliemann was at first puzzled by what he found, but, eventually, with the assistance of Dörpfeld, he was able to untangle the stratigraphy. There is a wide variation in the assessment of his technique as an excavator. He did extremely well for someone starting to dig in the 1870s, yet he is often unfairly criticized by those who are excavating similar mounds in the Middle East 100 years later.

Glyn Edmund Daniel

Encyclopædia Britannica
 
 
 
1822
 
 
Voyages to the Antarctic: Weddell James 1822-1824
 
 
 
 
see also: First Sightings of the Antarctic Continent
 
 
 
1822
 
 
World's first iron railroad bridge built by Stephenson George for Stockton - Darlington line
 
 

Stephenson's iron bridge across the Gaunless
 
 
 

 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1822 Part I NEXT-1823 Part I