Jiří Procháska (1749–1820): Part 1: A Significant Czech Anatomist,Physiologist and Neuroscientist of the Eighteenth Century

Ji?í (George) Procháska (1749–1820), a Czech anatomist, physiologist, and neuroscientist of the eighteenth century, ranks among the major figures of Czech and European cultural history. The works of Ji?í Procháska, due to historical circumstances, were published mostly in Latin and only some in German. However, given that only one treatise was partially translated into English, the results of his extensive research activities are currently unavailable to the international scientific community. The achievements of Ji?í Procháska undoubtedly belong to the major intellectual heritage of European science and certainly deserve attention as such, although his research reflected the time in which he lived and therefore has been reevaluated by later researchers. Undoubtedly, it is our duty not only to remember the work and legacy of Ji?í Procháska, which significantly influenced the development of our knowledge, but also to try to critically assess his contribution in terms of today. This article surveys the important biographical events of Ji?í Procháska’s life, taking into account the significance of his research.     

19世纪中国外销油画的白色颜料研究——以《上海外滩》油画为例

外销油画（export oil painting）作为中国早期油画遗存,不仅呈现了中国南方沿岸城市的地理风貌和风土民俗,而且蕴藏着中国早期本土油画的制作技艺。本研究采用X射线荧光光谱、扫描电子显微镜-能谱,并结合傅里叶变换显微红外光谱和拉曼光谱调查了一幅19世纪中国外销油画《上海外滩》中所用白色颜料的种类及其使用方法。研究结果表明：该幅清代油画画作底子所使用的白色颜料主要为白垩（CaCO₃）和石英（SiO₂）;在颜料层中发现含锌颜料与油性媒介发生化学反应的产物羧酸锌（金属皂）。本研究为中国早期外销油画的材料与技法研究及修复保护提供了参考依据。     

The Case for Francesco Rosselli as the Engraver of Berlinghieri's Geographia

The Florentine Francesco Berlinghieri (1440–1501) published his Geographia, a version of Ptolemy's Cosmographia in Italian terza rima, comprising 123 folios of text and 31 engraved maps, in 1482. As early as 1938 Arthur M. Hind, Keeper of Prints and Drawings at the British Museum, hinted that the engravings might have been made by Francesco Rosselli (1448–before 1527), the principal engraver in Florence in the 1480s and 1490s. Subsequently, this possibility was rejected by Roberto Almagià, R. A. Skelton and Tony Campbell. In the author's view, however, both stylistic and circumstantial evidence argues that Francesco was indeed the engraver, and that this first major commission launched the career that eventually made him known to his contemporaries as ‘Franciscus rosellus florentinus Cosmographus’.

Le Florentin Francesco Berlinghieri (1440–1501) publia en 1482 sa Geographia, une version de la Cosmographia de Ptolémée en terza rima italienne, comprenant 123 feuillets de texte et 31 cartes gravées. Dès 1938, Arthur M. Hind, conservateur des estampes et dessins au British Museum, suggéra que les gravures pouvaient être l'?uvre de Francesco Rosselli (1448–avant 1527), le principal graveur florentin dans les années 1480 et 1490. Ultérieurement, cette éventualité fut rejetée par Roberto Almagià, R. A. Skelton, et Tony Campbell. De l'avis de l'auteur, cependant, des preuves stylistiques et circonstancielles démontrent clairement que Francesco Rosselli était en effet le graveur, et que cette première commande importante lança la carrière qui allait finalement le faire connaître par ses contemporains comme ‘Franciscus rosellus florentinus Cosmographus’.

1482 veröffentlichte der Florentiner Francesco Berlinghieri (1440–1501) seine Geographia, eine Version der Cosmographia des Ptolemäus, in italienischen terza rima. Sie umfasst 123 Folioseiten Text und 31 gestochene Karten. Schon 1938 deutete Arthur M. Hind, Direktor der Grafikabteilung am British Museum, an, dass der Stich von Francesco Rosselli (1448–vor 1527) besorgt worden sein könnte. Während den Jahren 1480s und 1490s, war Rosselli der hauptsächliche Florentinische Stecher. Diese Möglichkeit wurde in weiterer Folge jedoch von Roberto Almagià, R. A. Skelton und Tony Campbell verworfen. Nach der Meinung der Autorin sprechen aber sowohl der stilistische Befund als auch die näheren Entstehungszusammenhänge sehr für Francesco Rosselli als Stecher und auch dafür, dass dieser erste größere Auftrag ihm eine Karriere eröffnete, die ihn letztendlich bei seinen Zeitgenossen als ‘Franciscus rosellus florentinus Cosmographus’ bekannt machte.

El florentino Francesco Berlinghieri (1440–1501) publicó en 1482 su Geographia, una version de la Cosmographia de Ptolomeo en terza rima italiana, que comprendía 123 folios de texto y 31 mapas grabados. En 1938 Arthur M. Hind, conservador de Impresos y Grabados del British Museum sugirió que los grabados podían haber sido hechos por Francesco Rosselli (1448–antes de 1527), el principal grabador de Florencia en los años de 1480 a 1490. Posteriormente esta posibilidad fue rechazada por Roberto Almagià, R. A. Skelton y Tony Campbell. Sin embargo, en opinión de la autora del artículo, las evidencias estilísticas y cincunstanciales indican con seguridad que Francesco Rosselli fue en efecto el grabador, y que este importante encargo dio comienzo a una carrera que finalmente le hizo ser conocido por sus contemporáneos como “Franciscus rosellus florentinus Cosmographus”.     

1. INTRODUCTION: MULTIPLE TIMES AND THE WORK OF SYNCHRONIZATION

In this essay, which introduces the History and Theory forum on Multiple Temporalities, I want to discuss how the existence of a plurality or a multiplicity of times has been conceptualized in the historiographical tradition, partly by entering into a dialogue with recent writers, historians, philosophers, sociologists, anthropologists, and literary scholars, partly by returning to the eighteenth century, to the origin of “the modern regime of historicity” (Hartog). In these theoretical and historical investigations I aim to do two things: on the one hand, to explore and discuss different ways of conceptualizing multiple times, in terms of nonsynchronicities, layers of time, or natural and historical times; on the other hand, to trace how these multiple times have been compared, unified, and adapted by means of elaborate conceptual and material practices that I here call “practices of synchronization.” From the eighteenth century onward, these synchronizing practices, inspired by, but by no means reducible to, chronology have given rise to homogeneous, linear, and teleological time, often identified as modern time per se, or simply referred to as “progress.” In focusing on the practices of synchronization, however, I want to show how this regime of temporality during its entire existence, but especially at the moment of its emergence in the eighteenth century and at the present moment of its possible collapse, has been challenged by other times, other temporalities, slower, faster, with other rhythms, other successions of events, other narratives, and so on.