BOB'S BITS

[Stanley]

Stop beating yourself up! I didn't see it as a blunder just a different viewpoint.
I think the general view amongst historians is that colonisation was possibly inevitable as Western nations developed and some benefits like modernisation were conferred there was also a lot of injustice and exploitation of indigenous people and this is to be regretted.

[Stanley]

X OR Y?

Miss Stevens’s work is characterized by its precision and by a caution that seldom ventures far from the immediate observation. Her contributions are models of brevity—a brevity amounting at times to meagerness. Thomas Hunt Morgan, 1912.

So wrote Professor Morgan in a Science obituary of Nettie Stevens, who had died at only 51, of breast cancer. Morgan was himself an eminent cytologist and would in 1933 win a Nobel Prize for his work on genetic transmission in fruit flies (Drosophila). Some say it was Stevens herself that recommended Drosophila to him, and that could be true. Certainly they had worked closely together at Bryn Mawr, where Morgan was professor of biology and Stevens, at first, a PhD candidate. For Nettie Stevens it was a move ‘back east’, for she’d been born in Cavendish, Vermont, on July 7, 1861. Her father was a carpenter turned builder and property owner with enough money and enough sense to encourage his very bright daughter in her studies. But it took her a long while to find her feet. First a private school, Westfield Academy, then 15 years of school teaching in whatever subjects were assigned to her (English and Latin as well as science) and then finally, financing herself, at Stanford, a new university out west that thought women could be scientists. She did well enough there (bachelor’s and master’s degrees) to win a PhD scholarship to Bryn Mawr, where at first Morgan thought her too cautious, too meager, more interested in lab technique than in ‘real’ science. Stevens studied the animal cell, with particular emphasis on the mystery of sex. Why did some fertilized eggs turn female, others male? Leading theories at the time (following folk wisdom, perhaps?) thought it happened because of this or that external circumstance. Stevens proved otherwise. Working with aphids, a species good at producing new generations quickly, and working with precision and caution, she it was who discovered the great game between what came to be known as the ‘X’ and ‘Y’ chromosomes. Sex was generated internally, inside the embryo, and it seemed certain that the same was true of larger, more complicated embryos, like those of humans and hippos. Her discovery (in 1905) was made nearly simultaneously with that of Edmund Wilson, at Columbia University. Indeed his paper on the subject was already in press when he read her results. In the end, which for Nettie Stevens came with tragic speed, Edmund Wilson and Thomas Hunt Morgan recognized her work as fundamental and conceded her priority. But both were slow to do so. Sex determination in aphids might proceed by the flip of a chromosome, but sex discrimination in the human profession of biological science was more deeply rooted, a problem that would take more time to address and solve. Nettie Stevens’s ‘caution’ and ‘precision’ had been environmentally determined. ©

[Stanley]

BRITANNIA

Rule, Britannia, Britannia rule the waves,

Britons never never never shall be slaves.

“Rule Britannia” was first performed in 1740, part of a masque produced for Frederick, Prince of Wales, at Cliveden House, his country place in Berkshire. Great hopes were placed with Prince Frederick, who might have become the first Hanover king comfortable with English and was certainly a hale fellow, a patron of the arts, and a dabbler in opposition politics. Meanwhile, Britain itself was becoming the European imperial power. The court masque underlined these potentials by celebrating the Saxon king Alfred the Great. And, perfectly, the words of “Rule, Britannia” were supplied by a Scottish poet, James Thomson, then set to music by an Englishmen, Thomas Arne: perhaps even poetically, for Frederick himself had been born in 1707, the very year of the Act of Union. Frederick himself was to die young, leaving the field to George III, but “Rule, Britannia” has lived on to become a favored song of the patriotic Briton. Meanwhile, the goddess Britannia herself has been made a central figure in British iconography. Usually she’s majestic, in statuary and on the currency: a symbol, like Athena in ancient Greece, of strength, beauty, and wisdom. But in classical Roman coinage and medals, Britannia made her first appearance in defeat, seized by her hair (by the emperor Claudius, no less) and about to be skewered. Before the end of Roman rule (circa 410CE) Britannia had recovered her dignity, at least in imperial coinage. But as a symbol of the island she slept for centuries (during which there was no “Britain” to represent), then to be revived during the long reign of the great queen, Elizabeth I, in the 16th century. The reviver was John Dee, alchemist and astrologer. In my time, Britannia was used, or misused, as a Margaret Thatcher figure, and then comically at the summer Proms concerts, during the singing of “Rule, Britannia.” Young enthusiasts, not all of them female, dressed the part and sang and swayed along with the music. The goddess was even used to symbolize Britain’s membership in the European Union, before Brexit made her incompatible. But why bring her up on July 8? Well, Britannia’s modern images have, since the 1670s, been based on one of King Charles II’s mistresses, Frances Stewart, who was born in Paris on July 8, 1647. She came to London in 1663 as lady-in-waiting to Charles’s queen. Samuel Pepys thought her the greatest beauty of the age. The French ambassador thought her brainless. The queen cannot have approved. But, goddess-like, Frances Stewart conquered the merry monarch. Unfaithful to her lawful husband, the Duke of Richmond and Lennox, the duchess became (via her portraits) the modern model for Britannia. ©.