Image and Poster insert here - CRASSH · The official conference hashtag of this event is #NatPhilCrossroads. If you do tweet, please use this hashtag in all tweets. Please follow

ImageandPosterinserthere

GuidelinesforTwitteratCrossroadsofKnowledge:EarlyModernLiteratureandNaturalPhilosophy

Theofficialconferencehashtagofthiseventis#NatPhilCrossroads.Ifyoudotweet,pleaseusethishashtaginalltweets.PleasefollowthesebasicprinciplesforusingTwitterat#NatPhilCrossroadsConsent:Anyspeakerhastherightto‘optout’andtorequestthattheirworkandcommentsnotbetweeted.ProfessionalTone:Becivil,professional,andpoliteinyourtweets.FairQuotation:Attributealltweetswithaspeaker’sTwitterhandleorsurname.QueriesabouttwitteratCrossroadsofKnowledge:EarlyModernLiteratureandNaturalPhilosophyshouldbedirectedtoRachelE.Holmes([email protected],@Rachel_E_Holmes).MembersoftheCrossroadsteamwillbelivetweeting,andareonTwitteras:@EMCrossroads@Rachel_E_Holmes@tim_s_buttle@LizzieSwann1@BeckyTomlin

Acknowledgements:

SupportedbytheCentreforResearchintheArts,HumanitiesandSocialSciences(CRASSH)andtheEuropeanResearchCouncil(ERC)undertheSeventhFrameworkProgramme(FP7/2007-2013)/ERC

grantagreementnoEC617849

CoverImage: DetailfromCelestialmapfromthe17thcentury,bytheDutchcartographerFrederikdeWitviaWikicommons

CentreforResearchintheArts,SocialSciencesandHumanities(CRASSH)|AlisonRichardBuilding

|7WestRoad|CambridgeCB39DT|UK|www.crassh.cam.ac.uk

CrossroadsofKnowledge:EarlyModernLiteratureandNaturalPhilosophy

Friday3MarchandSaturday4March2017

RoomSG1,AlisonRichardBuilding,7WestRoad,CambridgeCB39DTConvenorsSubhaMukherjiRachelE.HolmesTimStuart-ButtleElizabethL.SwannRebeccaTomlinColloquiumsummaryThisconferenceexplorestheintersectionsbetweennaturalphilosophyandliteratureandispartoftheresearchproject,CrossroadsofKnowledgeinEarlyModernEngland:thePlaceofLiterature,afive-yearERC-fundedprojectbasedattheFacultyofEnglishandCRASSH,UniversityofCambridge.Forfurtherinformationontheresearchprojectpleaseseehttp://www.crassh.cam.ac.uk/programmes/crossroads

@EMCrossroadsemailaddress:[email protected]

CentreforResearchintheArts,SocialSciencesandHumanities(CRASSH)

Conferenceprogramme–Day1,Friday3March2017

09.00–09.40 Registrationandcoffee09.40–10.00 WELCOME

SubhaMukherji(PrincipalInvestigator,Cambridge)10.00–11.45 Chair:SubhaMukherji(Cambridge)

MichaelWitmore(FolgerLibrary)SpontaneityandKnowledgeinEarlyModernEnglandLorraineDaston:(MPIHistoryofScience)PremodernRules:TheHistoryofanEpistemicCategory

11.45–12.00 COFFEEBREAK12.00–13.00 Chair:SarahHowe(UCL)

SachikoKusukawa(Cambridge)UsesofimagesinsomeearlymoderncommentariesonAristotle’s‘Deanima’

13.00–14.00 LUNCH

14.00–15.45 Chair:JenniferRampling(Princeton)

RichardSerjeantson(Cambridge)FrancisBaconattheCrossroadsofKnowledge:‘OurPhilosophy’encountersa‘NewLogic’RhodriLewis(Oxford)MoreThingsinHeavenandEarth?HamletasNaturalPhilosopher

15.45–16.00 COFFEEBREAK16.00–17.45 Chair:TimStuart-Buttle(Cambridge)

HenryS.Turner(Rutgers)FrancisBacon’sArtofThinking;or,LetUsAllBegintoGeneralizeFelixC.H.Sprang(Siegen)ThePlainStyle,GreatCircleSailingandtheParadoxofDisinterestedness

18.00–18.45 DRINKSRECEPTIONAtrium,AlisonRichardBuilding


Conferenceprogramme–Day2,Saturday4March2017

09.00–09.30 Coffee09.30–11.15 Chair:SietskeFransen(Cambridge)

ElizabethL.Swann(Cambridge)‘VermiculateQuestions’:ConfrontingMortalityintheEarlyRoyalSociety

JanePartner(Cambridge)ReadingtheEarlyModernBody

11.15–11.30 COFFEEBREAK11.30–12.30 Chair:RachelE.Holmes(Cambridge)

KathrynMurphy(Oxford)ArticulateVoices:TheSpeakingWorldintheWorksofFrancisBacon

12.30–13.30 LUNCH13.30–15.15 Chair:DavidParry(Cambridge)

CassieGorman(ARU)HesterPulter’sAtomWorlds’

TorranceKirby(McGill)The‘CosmographicMystery’:JohannesKepler’sconversionofastronomy

15.15–15.30 COFFEEBREAK15.30–17.15 Chair:RebeccaTomlin(Cambridge)

MaryFloyd-Wilson(UNCChapelHill)‘Neverhungpoisononafoulertoad:ContagiousEvilinEarlyModernEngland

AyeshaMukherjee(Exeter)‘Manurethyself’:Dearth,Knowledge-making,andtheBiblicalPoeticsofFertilisationinEarlyModernEngland

17.15–18.00 ROUNDTABLE

Chair:RichardOosterhoff(Cambridge)


Abstracts

SpontaneityandKnowledgeinEarlyModernEnglandMichaelWitmore(FolgerLibrary)

Wethinkoftheseventeenthcenturyasaperiodofdeepthinkingaboutmethod,particularlywhereknowledgeclaimsareconcerned.Inthistalk,thispaperwilldiscussearlymoderneffortstoenrollchanceorspontaneouseventsintotheprocessofdiscovery,askingwhetherearlymodernssawthecreationofknowledgeasawhollydeliberateprocess.Thetalkwilltouchonearlymodernlotteriesandlotterybooks,Bacon'stheoryofexperiment,andtwolotteriesconductedinShakespeare'splays.

PremodernRules:TheHistoryofanEpistemicCategoryLorraineDaston(MaxPlanckInstitute)

Rules–intheformofeverythingfromtrafficregulationsandgovernmentdirectivestoetiquettemanualsandparliamentaryprocedures−structurealmosteveryhumaninteraction.Increasinguseofcomputershasintensifiedatrendthatbeganintheeighteenthcenturyofevermore,evermorestringentrulesforevermoredomainsofpublicandprivatelife.Wemodernscannotlivewithoutrules.Butwealsocannotlivewiththem,atleastnotcomfortably.Wechafeattheircomplexity,theirinflexibility,theirinefficiency,theirsheerprolixity.Manyofthefaultlinesthatrunthroughthelandscapeofmodernthoughtopposerulestosomeotherelusivedesideratum,suchasinterpretation,judgment,creativity,discretion,orsimplecommonsense.Thesearecharacteristicallymodernoppositions.Premodernrules,fortheovertwomillenniaspanningGreco-RomanAntiquitythroughtheEuropeanEnlightenment,builtexperienceanddiscretionintorules;wordsfor‘rule’and‘pattern’(or‘paradigm’)wereusedassynonymsinseveralmajorEuropeanlanguages.Reconstructingthehistoryofthepremodernrulecanhelpexplaintheparadoxesgeneratedbymodernrules.


UsesofimagesinsomeearlymoderncommentariesonAristotle’s‘Deanima’SachikoKusukawa(Cambridge)

EarlymoderncommentatorsregardedAristotle’sDeanimaasoneofthecentraltextsofnaturalphilosophythatintersectedwithbothmedicalandtheologicalliterature.Thispaperfocusesonthewaysinwhichdifferentkindsofimageswereusedtoshowlocalizationoffunctionsofthesensitivesoulaswellasthehumansoul’srelationtotheworldandGod.Thesewerevisualizationsofinvisiblefunctionsofthesoul,whichinturnhighlightthevariouswaysinwhichearlymoderncommentatorsengagedwiththeAristoteliantradition.

Francis Bacon at the Crossroads of Knowledge: ‘Our Philosophy’encountersa‘NewLogic’RichardSerjeantson(Cambridge)

FrancisBacon,acontemporaryofBartholomausKeckermann,publishedhisvariousmaturephilosophicalworksatthesamehistoricalmomentatwhichaReformedneo-AristotelianphilosophywasgatheringfreshimpetusintheUniversitiesandGymnasiaofProtestantnorthernEurope.Thesetwointellectualcultures,ofBaconianismandofProtestantscholasticism,arenotoftenconsideredalongsideeachother.Yettheyintersectedfruitfully,andsometimescritically,invariousplacesacrossthe1620sand1630s,inEnglandandelsewhereinEurope.Thegoalofthispaperwillbetoexploreanumberoftheseencounters-somewellknown,othersunsuspected-andtodevelopsomeoftheimplicationsofthisparticularcrossroadofknowledge.

MoreThingsinHeavenandEarth?HamletasNaturalPhilosopherRhodriLewis(Oxford)

Fortheearlymoderns,naturalphilosophywasthebranchofspeculativephilosophyconcernedwithunderstandingthecreatedworld,includingtheplaceofhumankind(andofthehumansoul)withinit.Itwas,furthermore,afundamentallytextualratherthanexperimentalenterprise.Inthecourseofthispaper,IusethefigureofHamlettoshowthatShakespearewasdissatisfiedwiththisstateof


affairs.AlthoughHamletiswidelytakentobeShakespeare'sintellectual,inreadinghisnaturalphilosophicalspeechalongsidethediscoursesofearlymodernnaturalphilosophy,Iarguethatheemerges-asheissupposedto-asathinkerofunrelentingsuperficialityandconfusion.ButgiventheworldinwhichHamletisconfined,thiscouldnotbeotherthanitis:ShakespearewantsusnotsomuchtojudgeHamletastolookbeyondsuchjudgmentstotheshortcomingsofnaturalphilosophyastheearlymodernsunderstood,taught,andoccasionallysoughttoreformit.IbeginwithHamlet'sexchangewithHoratioafterhisinitialencounterwiththeGhost,andthenmoveontothelengthierdiscussionwithRosencrantzandGuildensterninAct2.IconcludebybrieflytracingHamlet'sotherstrugglestounderstandhimselfandtheworldaroundhim.‘Morethingsinheavenandearth’?Perhaps,butnobodyintheplaycandescribeordefinewhatthese‘things’mightbe.FrancisBacon’sArtofThinking;or,LetUsAllBegintoGeneralizeHenryS.Turner(RutgersUniversity)Apaperaboutthenotionof‘art’inBacon’swork,takingupthenatureofpragmatismasamethodforgeneratingideasandothermodesofabstractionthataretypicalofliteraryandscientificthinking.Whatkindsofknowledgeareweabletoobtainthrough‘art,’understandingthisterminitspre-modern,pre-aestheticsenseasamodeofpracticaloperationandpracticalknowledge,ahabitofthoughtaboutwhichwemaygiveaprovisionallyreasonableaccountbutwhichneverrisestotheleveloftheoreticalstatement?Whatarethevirtuesofgeneralizationasaspeciesofcreativethinking?ThepaperusesexamplesfromBacon,Sidney,andotherstoexploreanotionof‘art’asaprocedureofgeneralizingwithformsandmaterialsinwaysthataresometimesopposedtothepowerofnatureandsometimescomparedtoit.ItconcludeswithsomediscussionofhowBacon’s‘artofthinking’comparestomorerecentaccountsofaestheticsasaphilosophyofformandsensibility.


ThePlainStyle,GreatCircleSailingandtheParadoxofDisinterestednessFelixC.H.Sprang(UniversityofSiegen)Acommonunderstandingisthattheplainstyleisarhetoricalandself-conscioustechniqueemployedinearlymodernnaturalphilosophyinordertoprobeintotherelationbetweenlanguageandmatter.(Aughterson;HalloranandWhitburn)Hence,thereligiousunderpinningsaswellastheaestheticandepistemicdiscoursepertainingtotheplainstylehavebeenscrutinizedcarefully.Ishouldliketofocusontheimplicationsofagesture,identifiedbyMaryPooveyamongothersasastrategyto‘makewritingtransparentinsteadofperformative,’foranemergingconceptof‘disinterestedness’.Iwillexaminetheuseoftheplainstyleintextbooksonnavigationthatteach‘greatcirclesailing’inordertoreflectontheconnectionbetweentheplainstyleand‘disinterestedknowledge’.MyaimistodemonstratehowandexplainwhytextbookssuchasHood’sMarrinersGuide(1592)orDavis’sTheSeaman’sSecret(1595)propagatedaconceptofscientificknowledgethatwasplaininthesenseofdisinterested. 'VermiculateQuestions’:ConfrontingMortalityintheEarlyRoyalSocietyElizabethL.Swann(Cambridge)Earlymodernideasaboutandexperiencesofdeathhaveoftenbeenexploredinliterary,artistic,andspiritualcontexts.Literature,thevisualarts,andtheologyaretakenastheproperspheresbothfortheelaborationofaphilosophyofdeath,andforeffortstoaccommodatethestarkfactofitsinevitability.Incontrast,inthispaper,Iaskwhatearlyexperimentalphilosophyofferedtoreplacetheconsolationsofhumanisticlearningandreligiouspietyforindividualsstrugglingtoaccepttheirownmortality.Inthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturies,Iargue,theprospectofdeathisnotonlyanaffectiveproblem,managed(successfullyorotherwise)byreligion,philosophy,andthearts;itisalsoanepistemologicalprovocation,fosteringthedevelopmentofnewformsofknowledge.Inparticular,adesiretopalliatetheterrorsofdeathiscentraltothedevelopmentoftheformsofobservational,experimental,andinductiveknowledge-productionassociatedwiththeworksofFrancisBaconandhischampionsinthe


fledglingRoyalSociety.FocusingontheworksofRobertBoyle,IproposethatearlyRoyalSocietyresearchintotheprocessesofdeathcanbeunderstoodinethicalandaffectiveterms,notasdisinterestedeffortstounderstanditsphysicalreality,butratherasferventandurgentattemptstocometotermswithitsappallingimminence.ReadingtheEarlyModernBodyJanePartner(Cambridge)Thispaperformspartofalargerprojectconcerningthewaysinwhichtheearlymodernbodywasfashionedandinterpretedasatext–aparadigmthatwaswidelyusedinnaturalphilosophicaldiscourse,aswellasinmedicinal,legalanddevotionalpractice,andinadiverserangeofliterarytexts.Inalltheseareas,theideaofthelegibility(andsometimesstubbornillegibility)ofthehumanformfunctionedasameanstoarticulatethequestforknowledgeandtheproblemsofinterpretation,raisingquestionsaboutthedifferentiationofappearanceandreality,andreflectinguponthedesiretousevisiblebodilysurfacestogainknowledgeaboutthehiddenortranscendentpartsofman.Inthispaper,Iexplorethewaysinwhichtheconceptionofthecreatedworldasthedivinelyinscribed‘BookofNature’underpinnedtheunderstandingofthebodyasamicrocosmicbooktobeopenedandread.Examiningthedoctrineofsignaturesandtheoriesofthebodilymanifestationofthepassions,Iconsiderthewaysinwhichthesetextualmodelsforunderstandingthebodywereplayedoutinliterature,andImakeparticularreferencetothewaysthatdramatistslikeMarloweandJonsonlinkedthemesofcorporealtextualitytoformalideasaboutthelegibilityofthebodyonthestage. ArticulateVoices:TheSpeakingWorldintheWorksofFrancisBacon-KathrynMurphy(Oxford)Experiment236ofFrancisBacon’sSylvaSylvarumconsiders‘aThingstrangeinNature’:‘HowChildren,andsomeBirds,learnetoimitateSpeech’.Inexperiment200,hediscusses‘aSimilitude,betweenetheSoundthatismadebyInanimateBodies,orbyAnimateBodies,thathauenoVoiceArticulate;anddiuersLettersofArticulateVoices’.Amonghisexamplesarethe‘TremblingofWater[which]hath


ResemblancewiththeLetterL’,whilethe‘VoiceofCats’correspondsto‘theDypthongEu’.Byworkingoutthemechanismsatwork,Baconsuggests,‘aMan(forCuriosity,orStrange-nessesake)[could]makeaPuppet,orotherDeadBody,topronounceaWord’.Thoughtheseexperimentsarepresentedaswondersandcuriosities,thispaperarguesthattheirassertionofanequivalencebetweenhumanlanguageandthemotionsofthenaturalworldrunsthroughoutBacon’sworks,fromhisnaturalphilosophytohisessaysandhishistoricalwritings.Theidentificationofspeech,letters,andimitatiobeyondthehumansphereextendslanguagetoaconditionofnature,suggestingnotonlythatBaconwasnottheanti-rhetoricianofcliché,northathereliedonthecommonmetaphorofworldastext,butthathissenseofthecommonliteracyofmanandnaturebrokedowntheboundariesbetweenthedisciplinesofnaturalphilosophy,literature,andhistory.HesterPulter’sAtomWorldsCassieGorman(AngliaRuskin)Inthemid-1990s,amanuscriptofmorethan130poems-includingwhatisthoughttobethefirstcollectionoforiginal‘Emblems’writtenbyanEnglishwoman-wasdiscoveredtobebytheobscureRoyalistHesterPulter(1605-78).ThereisnoevidencetosuggestthatPulterwasknownbyanybeyondherfamilyasawriterinhertime,orthatshesoughttomakehercompositionspublic.Strikingly,forafemalewriterwhospentmuchofherlifeinruralisolation,Pulter'spoliticalanddevotionalwritings-manyofwhichwerewrittenduringperiodsofchildbirthandsickness-arecharacterisedbystrong,informedinterestsinalchemyandatomism.Shefindspositivespiritualworthincontemporaryatomictheories,dwellingnotontheassociationsbetweenatomismandmatterinchaos,butontheprincipleofatomicindivisibility.ThispaperaddressesthewaysinwhichPulterexploresatomicindivisibilityasameanstotrustinginthedivinepromiseofresurrection.ForPulter,atomicdissolutionliberatesherpoeticspaces:itistothebenefitofindividuals-humanbeings,ideasandbodies-thattheyarefragmentary,imperfectlyformed,orliabletochange.Inpoeticformsthatareanalogoustotheseunfixedstatesofbeing,shediscoversthelibertyoffaith,expressionandcreativepotentialinthatwhichcanbe


doneandundone.Pulterwas,moreover,noanomaly:thispaperwillconcludebydrawingcomparisonswithothertheologicalwritersfromtheperiodwithpositiveatomicinterests,andwillraiseimportantquestionsabouttheprominent,spiritualisedrolesof‘atoms’-oftendistinctfrom‘atomism’-inseventeenth-centurydevotionalwritings. The‘CosmographicMystery’:JohannesKepler’sconversionofastronomyTorranceKirby(McGill)In1616theHolyCongregationfortheIndexprohibitedtheprintingandreadingofCopernicus’sOntheRevolutionsoftheHeavenlySpheres(1542)onthegroundsthathelio-centrismcontradictedtheHolyScriptures.AccordingtoJohannesKepler,‘TostudytheheavensistoknowGodascreator.’Moreover,‘SinceweastronomersarepriestsofthehighestGodinregardtothebookofnature,itbefitsustobethoughtful,notofthegloryofourminds,butrather,aboveelse,ofthegloryofGod.’ThereissomeprecedentforsuchclaimsinJohnCalvin’sconceptionofthecreationasa‘TheatreofGod’sglory’withitscorollaryoftheso-called‘twobooks’.Kepler’sdefenceofCopernicanhelio-centrismreliesuponthedistinctionbetweentheBookofNaturefromtheBookofScripture.BuildinguponthesoteriologicalfoundationslaidbyMartinLuther,Keplertheastronomer-theologianalsoseekstosharpenthedistinctionbetweena‘visible’andan‘invisible’heaven,withsignificantconsequencesforastronomicalphysics.Thenewastronomyisprofoundlyimplicatedinsixteenth-centurytheologicalcontroversies. ‘Neverhungpoisononafoulertoad’:ContagiousEvilinEarlyModernEnglandMaryFloyd-Wilson(UNCatChapelHill)InTheTerrorsoftheNight(1594),ThomasNashecompares‘theslimeanddurtinastandingpuddle,[which]engenderstoadsandfrogs,andmanyothervnsightlycreatures’totheslimie‘melancholyhumorstillthickningasitstandsstill,[which]engendrethmanymishapenobiectsinourimaginations.’Thisanalogy,andotherslikeit,suggestsaliteralorphysicalcorrespondencebetweenthehumanbodyandtheenvironmentmuchnotedbyscholarswritingaboutaffectand


embodiment.Butfilthypuddlesandtheirmonstroustoadsdidmorethanmirrortheuglyputrefactionofman’simbalancedbody:theywerealsothoughttoinfectthosehumansmost‘apt’toreceivetheirpoisonousair.Asearlymodernplaguewritersargued,internalcorruptionattractsexternalinfections.Butthisunderstandingofsympatheticcontagionalsoshapes,andisshapedby,EnglishProtestantdiscourseonsinandtemptation,whichconceivedofthedevilasasubtleandinvasivematerialspiritwhoplantedthoughts,stirredemotions,andinducedailments.NotonlydidProtestantwritersremindedtheiraudiencesthathumansare‘damnedbynature,asatodeisatodebynature,’buttheyalsoinsistedthatthecorruptionofman’soriginalsinisthesame‘matterwithin’thatboththedevilanddiseases‘workupon.’Thisessaywilltracehownaturalphilosophyandreligiousdiscourseinvokesimilartheoriesofcontagion,miasma,poison,andspontaneousgenerationtosuggestthatearlymodernProtestantthinkersperceivedeviltobebothspirituallyandphysicallycontagious.Inthiscontext,IwillconsiderShakespeare’sRichardIII’smaterialaffinitieswiththe‘poisonousbunchback'dtoad.’ ‘Manurethyself’:Dearth,Knowledge-making,andtheBiblicalPoeticsofFertilisationinEarlyModernEnglandAyeshaMukherjee(Exeter)WhenJohnDonnewrote,‘Manurethyselfthen,tothyselfbeimproved;/Andwithvainoutwardthingsbenomoremoved’(c.1597),hewasironicallycombiningruralandbiblicaltropeswhichunderlinedcontemporaryanxietiesaboutdearthandfertility.Thispaperwillarguethat,inthecontextofthenotoriousdearthyearsofthe1590s,thereemergedanorganicrelationshipbetweenthepoeticising,theorising,andpracticeoffertilisationinearlymodernEnglishculture.Thisrelationshipwasexpressedthroughtwofundamentallinesofrhetoricalstrategy–thatofruralpoetics,andofbiblicalpoeticsandhermeneutics.Focussingonthesecondaspect,thepaperwillillustratehowthepoeticsofmanureinsermonsattheturnofthesixteenthcenturycomplicatedthebiblicallanguageofdominion,andreorientedfamiliarprovidentialargumentsaboutGod’swillandauthority.TheselectedpreachersRobertAbbot,ThomasAdams,andPeterBarker,


usedCalvinistdoctrinewithvaryingemphasis,butallthreeofthemmanipulatedCalvin’sownuseof tropesoffertilisationtocommentontheirtimesofdearth.Iwilllinktheirrhetoricalpracticetopragmaticdevelopmentsinthecontemporaryknowledgeoffertilising,anddrawattentiontotheirsocio-economiccritique.Thesermonsutilisedideasofcirculation,flow,andwastetoarticulatetheirvisionofhumanlabourandresponsibility.ThoughCalvinisttheologyisoftenseenasreinforcingimprovement,individualism,capitalism,andtheriseofscienceintheearlymodernperiod,itisintriguingtofindmotifswithinitsdeterministstructurethatrenderedtheseimpulsesambivalent.


Convenors

SubhaMukherji UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected]

SpeakersandChairs

LorraineDaston MaxPlanckInstitutefortheHistoryofScience

[email protected]

MaryFloyd-Wilson TheUniversityofNorthCarolinaatChapelHill

[email protected]

SietskeFransen UniversityofCambridge [email protected]

CassieGorman AngliaRuskinUniversity [email protected]

SarahHowe UniversityCollegeLondon

[email protected]

TorranceKirby McGillUniversity [email protected]

SachikoKusukawa UniversityofCambridge [email protected]

RhodriLewis UniversityofOxford [email protected]

AyeshaMukherjee UniversityofExeter [email protected]

KathrynMurphy UniversityofOxford [email protected]

RichardOosterhoff UniversityofCambridge [email protected]

DavidParry UniversityofCambridge [email protected]

JanePartner UniversityofCambridge n/a

JenniferRampling PrincetonUniversity [email protected]

RichardSerjeantson UniversityofCambridge [email protected]

FelixSprang UniversityofSiegen [email protected]

HenryS.Turner Rutgers,TheStateUniversityofNewJersey

[email protected]

MichaelWitmore FolgerShakespeareLibrary

n/a


Delegates

RuthAbbott UniversityofCambridge [email protected] MaxPlanckInstitutefor

[email protected]

VladimirBrljak UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] QueenMary,Universityof

[email protected]

YangGao TheWarburgInstitute [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofExeter [email protected] QueenMary,Universityof

LondonN/A

ShiruLim UniversityCollegeLondon [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected]

UniversityofCambridge N/A

JoséRamónMarcaida UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofOxford [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityCollegeLondon N/AJuleWeber UniversityofCambridge N/AKathrynWoods UniversityofWarwick [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCambridge [email protected] UniversityofCalifornia-

[email protected]

Image and Poster insert here - CRASSH · The official conference hashtag of this event is #NatPhilCrossroads. If you do tweet, please use this hashtag in all tweets. Please follow

Documents