1 Introduction
âIt is certain a great Advantage may be made of this Insect, which the Publick has always lookâd on as troublesome and dangerous, on account of its Venom,â wrote the French president of the Court of Auditors of Montpellier, François Xavier Bon de Saint Hilaire in 1710.1 Bon himself was enthusiastic about spiders as potentially useful animals but his statement shows that a negative view of spiders was prevalent. Another early modern observer to think favorably of spiders was Carl von Linné, who in a speech in 1739 admired âthe skillful web of the spider, his residence in the middle of it, so that he can feel even the smallest fly touching its smallest string, just as you would imagine the soul, in the brain of a body, feels where the nerves converge.â2 While Bon focused on the usefulness of the spider and Linné admired it without instrumental motives, both ventured that spiders merited more appreciation than they received.3
This chapter investigates knowledge about spiders in early modern Europe, with some focus on Sweden. The study is based on natural-historical works on insects and spiders from the first part of the eighteenth century. The theoretical inspiration derives from the history of knowledge and the understanding that natural-historical knowledge is created in multispecies knowledge networks, and that these networks can be vulnerable.6 Knowledge is understood to be formed in interactive processes where human and non-human actors are seen as co-constructors of knowledge in multispecies networks. A distinction is made between various forms of knowledge: intellectual, traditional, and useful or practical knowledge. Intellectual knowledge was made by and circulated among scholars, natural historians, and learned societies while traditional knowledge is here understood as âa cumulative body of knowledge and beliefs handed down through the generations by cultural transmission.â7 Useful knowledge is knowledge that can be applied in everyday life. The forms
The networks operate on two levels: both as wider scholarly networks in Europe, and as local knowledge networks consisting of humans and spiders, and, in some cases, other species and devices.8 Rather than traveling from center to periphery, from âprofessionalâ natural historians to amateurs, knowledge is understood to be constructed at various points of networks consisting of natural historians, animals, assistants, correspondents, and texts, as well as instruments and tools. While enabling the formation and circulation of knowledge, knowledge networks were, as suggested by Dániel Margócsy, fragile, in the sense that each part of the network was vulnerable to breakdowns.9 As the chapter shows, the vulnerable part in the network was often the spider, or rather the relationship between humans and spiders which was marked by human ignorance of how to cooperate with the spider in a successful way. Hence, while the objective is to examine the formation of knowledge about spiders, the aim is also to bring the spiders into the study, not simply as objects of knowledge, but as crucial parts of knowledge networks.
The first section of the chapter considers how collecting, scientific observation, classification, and nomenclature contributed to the formation of scholarly knowledge about spiders by studying works on natural history and early modern developments in entomology and arachnology. In the second section traditional knowledge about spiders is studied through the example of
2 Intellectual Knowledge: Authorities, Experiments, and Instruments
According to Aristotle, spiders, scorpions, and centipedes belonged to the category of insects, a classification which continued up to the nineteenth century. Pre Linnaean taxonomic thinking in the early modern period was influenced by a hierarchical view of the creations, summed up in the concept of the Great Chain of Being.10 In this hierarchical chain everything, from the lowest forms of life up to the spheres of angels and God, had its own proper place.11 The idea of the Great Chain begins with Plato and Aristotle, continues in late antiquity, was prevalent in the Middle Ages and continued to characterize thinking in early modern times, although the tradition was challenged by new empirical knowledge which led to the development of new taxonomies.
What was the place of spiders in the Great Chain of Being? Animals were classed from the highest to the lowest. The lion was considered as the noblest of animals while eagles ranked highest among birds. Besides noble qualities, the usefulness of animals determined their position in the chain so that the snake was found at the bottom of the scale since it was both potentially poisonous, while also symbolizing evil in the Christian imagination. A further principle for the categorization of animals had to do with their reproductive ability: live birth was considered more valuable than egg-laying, while warm-blooded mammals and birds ranked higher than bloodless invertebrates.12 Above the serpent, but in the lowest sphere of the animal world, were the insects, including spiders. Insects were ranked so that beneficial insects such as bees, or insects with favorable properties such as ants, were higher on the scale than beetles and mosquitos. Although the case of spiders in the Great Chain is not specifically addressed in the sources, it can be speculated that spiders, characterized by industriousness and remarkable skills, might be classed
Renaissance knowledge of nature was literary and anthropocentric â in addition to the benefits and harms of animals in relation to humans, earlier descriptions and anecdotes were included in the descriptions. A prominent representative of the ideal is Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522â1605), a professor in Bologna and author of several works of natural history, among them De Animalibus Insectis (1602) which formed a part of a larger work on animals. Like Aristotle, Aldrovandi maintained that insects had neither nerves nor stomach, a view later refuted by the Italian Marcello Malpighi and Dutch Jan Swammerdam.13 Seventeenth-century natural historians continued to refer to Aristotle in their works. The history of arachnology continues with zoologists such as Robert Hooke, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, John Ray, and Swammerdam; the latter identified four orders of insects according to their metamorphosis where the first consisted of spiders, mites, lice, fleas, woodlice, worms, scorpions, leeches, centipedes, and snails. In the eighteenth century the study of invertebrates developed into a more systematic endeavor. Thanks to the development of microscopes, it became easier to investigate insects with greater precision. The early modern period saw a variety of competing taxonomic systems, but eventually Carl von Linné introduced the binomial naming system.
The Swede Carl Clerck (1709â1765) was the first to use the binomial system for spiders in Svenska Spindlar (Swedish Spiders) published in 1756 and preceding Carl von Linnéâs classification in the second edition of Systema Naturae by a year.14 Carl Clerck can be characterized as an amateur â even though he enrolled at the University of Uppsala in 1726, he could not afford the studies and had to earn his living in government service as a tax collector. Clerck was inspired to devote himself to natural history, particularly butterflies and spiders, after hearing von Linnéâs lecture on insects in Stockholm in 1739.15 Eventually, Clerck became part of the learned circle around the Swedish Academy of Science. Some of the scientific names proposed by Clerck were adopted by Linné in his Systema Naturae in 1758 with only minor modifications. Clerckâs
I have been looking for a Spider for several years, one which can only be seen during a short period, only in spring, after a night of severe frost when the morning is calm and the sun shines warm, moving about when no shadow appears and scares him. I have observed him in cracks in logs and planks, but have not yet been able to catch him. He has sat outside warming himself in the sun, but at the slightest glimpse [â¦] ran into the crack, from where I have not been able to induce him to come out; and when forcibly taken out, only a few crushed pieces of him remained.23
When addressing his audience, Clerck acknowledged the significance of his learned colleagues, the network of the learned community, stating that his collection would have remained useless had it not been for the diligence of the academy in bringing his knowledge to light.24 Hence Clerckâs example aptly shows the various stages of knowledge-making and circulation: the inspiration and motivation, the practices and tools, the collecting and ordering, the importance of networks and publicity. It also shows how, in some cases, the crucial part of the network, the spider itself, could be elusive and fragile. At least some degree of cooperation from the spiders was required and this often posed a challenge.
3 Traditional Knowledge: Physicotheology, Medicine and Poison
According to a long tradition of Occidental thought, prevalent in the eighteenth century, nothing was created in vain, but all beings were useful in one manner or another. Physico-theology was a way of thinking according to which divine purpose and design lay behind all creation, while maintaining that science could be seen as compatible with Christian beliefs in the providence and benevolence of God. Maxima in minimis, the great in the small, is one of the underlying ideas of the physicotheologians; by studying the smallest of creatures in nature, it was thought possible to acquire knowledge about Godâs
One proponent of the connection between the usefulness of insects for humans and the omnipotence of God was the German theologist Friedrich Christian Lesser, who treats the natural history of insects and their uses in Insecto-theologia, published in 1738.26 Lesser was convinced that Godâs power and benevolence were manifest even in the tiniest insects. A long section deals with the use of insects as medicine; both spiders themselves and their webs are mentioned among the remedies.27 The spider Araneus diadematus was considered useful for curing fever: according to the instructions, the spider was to be placed in a nutshell and worn in a band around the neck or placed on the pulse. The spider amulet is an example of traditional knowledge circulating in natural-historical works from antiquity to early modern times. The amulet was thought to prevent ague, as the spider and its oil were believed to be remarkably efficacious in curing fevers.28 Spider webs could also be used on wounds to stop bleeding, a method often mentioned in connection with folk medicine.29
However, the spiders were also understood to be the cause of ill health. The perception of spiders as causes of illness derives from the fact that some of the approximately 50,300 species of spiders are venomous. Although none of the European spiders are dangerous to humans, the beliefs concerning their harmfulness led to medical discussions about tarantism in southern Europe in the seventeenth century.30 The negative view of spiders is likely to derive from
4 Useful Knowledge: Spiders as Animals of Production
While spider webs, according to traditional knowledge, were understood to be useful for healing wounds resourceful naturalists developed new ways of using spider thread. Eighteenth-century natural historians were inspired by the Enlightenment ethos which said that useful knowledge should benefit individuals and society.35 Prominent natural historians all over Europe were interested in the practical uses of plants and animals, particularly as substitutes for imported goods. As Edward D. Melillo has noted, Europe found itself
All spider species, with the exception of Palystes (huntsman) spiders, produce silk. The silk passes through spinnerets and the spider extrudes it through its spigots. The spiders use their silk to weave webs for catching prey, but it also plays a role in reproduction, where the male weaves a small sperm web on which to deposit its sperm.38 In his work on Swedish spiders, Carl Clerck remarks on the superior qualities of the spider web â the thread did not melt in water, did not burn in fire, and maintained a sticky, gluelike character.39 The ambition to use spiders for the production of silk is an example of the entanglement of intellectual and practical knowledge.
A Swedish natural historian and entomologist who took a strong interest in the practical knowledge and usefulness of insects and arachnids was Charles De Geer, a wealthy merchant and owner of the ironworks at Löfsta manor on the Swedish east coast. De Geerâs main work, Mémoires pour servir à lâhistoire des insects (1752â78), the title of which can be seen as an homage to René Antoine Ferchault de Réaumur (1683â1756), is a comprehensive work on entomology but his views on the practical use of spiders are to be found in a speech he gave at the Academy of Science in Stockholm a decade earlier.40 De Geer concentrated on the practical uses of insects in the speech which discusses the âuse the insects and their study bestows on us.â As an entomologist and a merchant, he had a keen interest in the national economy and was enthusiastic about the possibilities of finding a substitute for the silk made from the silk moth Bombyx mori. De Geer had learned about spider silk from Réaumur and Bon, both of whom experimented with the production of spider silk.
Two or three pairs of gloves and stockings were made up and presented to the Académie Royale des Sciences in Paris while the natural historian Hans Sloane at The Royal Society of London received one pair.44 The results attracted much attention as they promised to make an important contribution to the French silk industry. Thus, in 1709 the French government asked the naturalist René-Antoine Ferschault de Réaumur to assess Bonâs experiment and to find out if silk made from spiders could be lucrative on a larger scale. Réaumur was by this time a well-established natural historian and a member of the Académie des Sciences. In his paper Examen de la soie des Araignées from 1710 Réaumur describes how he collected egg sacs from spiders and had them
Réaumur found the process to be difficult and time consuming. One of his objections had to do with the ferocity and unsociability of the spiders: in captivity they began exhibiting cannibalistic behavior, the larger spiders eating the smaller and weaker individuals.46 Some spiders are cannibals, consuming each other for food while for other species, such as the black widow and the redback, itâs a part of the mating process where the female devours the smaller male after mating.47 Réamurâs view of spiders as unsociable concurs with early modern understandings of the relationship between humans and the rest of creation. Domestic animals were seen as links between humans and wild animals,48 and since the reclusive and cannibalistic spiders were difficult to domesticate, they could be perceived as wild and uncivilized. Hence, the spiders had to be kept in separate cells, and to obtain the silk they had to be immobilized. Réaumurâs estimate was that 55,296 spiders were necessary to produce 500 grams of silk, compared to approximately 2,500 silkworms. His conclusion was that spider silk was more expensive, laborious to produce, and of inferior quality compared to silk produced by the Bombyx mori silk moth. The opinion of Réaumur, a celebrated and well-connected natural historian, was likely to have been more valued than that of Bon who can be considered an amateur when it comes to natural history, and whose position in the knowledge networks was not as central as that of Réaumur.
One difficulty with spider silk had to do with the demanding and potentially expensive breeding process, since spiders had to be kept in isolation. The catching of the spiders, by contrast, appears to have been found easy. Natural historians were used to catching and feeding single spiders but breeding them as domestic animals was difficult when compared to silk moths.49 In contrast to spiders, the silk moth was domesticated around 3,500 BCE, and
Some of these problems were addressed by the Spanish Jesuit priest Raimondo Maria de Termeyer (1740â1814?). Termeyer published a treatise, originally in Italian, on spider silk based on experiments he had made in America and Italy. He set out to systematically refute Réaumurâs objections to the successful production of spider silk on a larger scale, although he admits that â[t]he great authority of the French entomologist is certainly of great weight.â51
Termeyer found the species Linnaeus diadema particularly suitable for the enterprise. These spiders produced five or six cocoons a year, resulting in 1,200 eggs, each of which in their turn would generate 4,000 young spiders annually. Hence, twelve spiders would eventually produce 50,000 eggs. Of particular interest is Termeyerâs opinion that spiders were not as voracious and cruel by nature as Réaumur maintained, but that their aggressiveness may have been due to scant feeding and âthe narrowness of their prison.â Instead of individual cells, Termeyer recommended rearing spiders in a room or even outside, and to provide them with lots of flies and worms, some of which they could catch themselves. But although the rearing of the spiders may have been more charitable than in Bonâs and Réaumurâs experiments, the method of extracting the thread was cruel. Termeyer devised a contrivance to hinder the spider from touching the extremities of its abdomen and thereby cutting the best quality thread. The device was made from cork, a sheet of iron and iron pins, and the spider was placed on it so that the sheet of iron fell between the corslet and the abdomen of the animal, holding it in place with a half moon-shaped aperture. The spider lay on its back and the thread was drawn out onto a reel as the silk was taken directly out of the spiderâs body. This device kept the spider firmly in place, prevented it from extending its legs, and forced it to keep on spinning strong, high-quality thread.52 The device where the spider was kept alive and forced to
The spiderâs position as an animal of production in the knowledge network involving the spider, Termeyer himself, possible assistants, flies, worms, and the device, was active in the sense that it produced a product. If considered as a commodity however, its role was passive.54 In both interpretations, this view of the spider is very different from the one expressed in Carl von Linnéâs verse, cited at the beginning here, which describes the soul, the brain, and nerves of a spider (although Linné would probably have approved of the spider silk venture).55 The calculations made by both Bon, Réaumur and Termeyer show that spiders were considered as mere numbers in a production apparatus.
5 Spiders in Knowledge Networks
An investigation into knowledge networks including spiders offers a case which shows how knowledge was formed, on the one hand, in networks where natural historians, assistants, correspondents, specimens, texts and illustrations circulated among the learned community in Europe, and on the other hand, in networks consisting of actors such as humans, spiders, and other species, as well as instruments and devices. The knowledge about spiders was cumulative in the sense that it was built on and grew out of previously existing works and traditions. Intellectual and traditional knowledge about spiders circulated via earlier authorities from antiquity and the Renaissance period, conveyed by earlier literary works on natural history. In early modern times, new forms of scholarly knowledge emerged, both continuing and breaking with older traditions circulating in knowledge networks.
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries fieldwork, experiments, and closer observation, together with new tools and technology, contributed to increasing exploration, ordering and exploitation of the natural world in Europe. The Swedish amateur natural historian Carl Clerck was part of a knowledge network in which he engaged in the formation of scholarly and empirical
The position of spiders in networks where traditional and medical knowledge was formed was instrumental when it came to using spiders as medicine, as in the case of wearing an amulet containing pulverized spider, for which the spider had to be killed, dried, and crushed. The spider thread used for wounds, by contrast, was a product that could be collected without killing the spider. Traditional knowledge about the use of spiders in medicine can be characterized as useful knowledge in the sense that it was perceived as beneficial.
Another form of useful or practical knowledge about spiders concerned not only their usefulness to individuals but also to the nation and its economy. François Xavier Bon de Saint Hilaire, Réaumur, and Raimondo Maria de Termeyer developed their respective methods for breeding spiders with a view to the production of silk. Descriptions of the experiments and results circulated in the learned circles of Europe, and were conveyed to, among others, the Swedish natural historian Charles De Geer. The endeavor necessitated breeding spiders on a large scale as well as arriving at technical solutions, developed with a view to the problems posed by spidersâ unwillingness to cooperate in knowledge networks. These difficulties prompted the development of new techniques aimed at controlling the bodies of the spiders which can be observed in the formation of scholarly knowledge and practical, or âusefulâ knowledge.
The vulnerable part in the network was the spider; or rather the relationship between humans and spiders, which was marked by human ignorance concerning how to keep spiders alive. The networks within which intellectual, empirical, traditional, and useful knowledge was formed were fragile because the main element, or actor, the spider, was a wild animal who had to be caught, bred, and fed â in the cases where it was not simply killed. Taming a spider so that it could be bred as a domestic animal proved to be difficult or impossible. Hence, the fragility of spider life resulted in breaks in knowledge networks. The skillful weaver could not be made great advantage of, as Bon had hoped, without a great deal of effort and high costs which may have exceeded the profit that could be made. This was not because spiders posed a danger to humans, but because of they were wild, untamed creatures who would not cooperate.
Berkes, Fikret. âBiodiversity, Religion Traditions.â In Encyclopedia of Biodiversity, edited by Samuel M. Scheiner, 18â29. Elsevier: Academic Press (2024).
Blattner, Charlotte. âShould Animals Have a Right to Work? Promises and Pitfalls.â Animal Studies Journal 9, no. 1 (2020): 32â92.
Bon de Saint Hilaire, François Xavier. âA Discourse Upon the Usefulness of the Silk of Spiders.â Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 27, no. 325â336 (1710): 2â16. https://www.jstor.org/stable/103101.
Bonnell, Jennifer. âOccupational Hazards: Honeybee Labour as an Interpretive Device in Animal History.â In Traces of the Animal Past: Methodological Challenges in Animal History, edited by Jennifer Bonnell and Sean Kheraj, 49â72. Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2022.
Bonnet, Charles. Traité dâinsectologie. Vol. 1. Chez Durand, libraire, 1745.
Cavell, Megan. âArachnophobia and Early English Literature.â New Medieval Literatures 18 (2018): 1â43.
Clerck, Carl. Svenska Spindlar: uti sina hufvud-slägter indelte samt under några och sextio särskildte arter; beskrefne och med illuminerade figurer uplyste. Stockholm: Lars Salvius, 1757.
Clerck, Carl. Om spindlars fångande och födande. Kgl. Vetenskapsakademiens handlingar, 1761. Holding Institution: University of Alberta Library. doi:.
Clerck, Carl. Tal, innehållande några anmärkningar om insecterne, hållet för Kongl. Vetensk. Academien, den 7 Martii 1764, etc. Stockholm: Lars Salvius, 1764.
Daston, Lorraine. âThe History of Science and the History of Knowledge.â Know. A Journal on the Formation of Knowledge 1 (2017).
Dear, Peter. âWhat is the History of Science the History Of? Early Modern Roots of the Ideology of Modern Science.â Isis 96, no. 3 (2005): 390â406.
Dioscorides. De Materia Medica. Johannesburg: Ibidis Press, 2000.
Findlen, Paula. Empires of Knowledge. Scientific Networks in the Early Modern World. Oxford: Routledge, 2018.
Geer, Charles De. Tal om nyttan, som Insecterne och deras skärskådande, tilskynda oss. Stockholm: Lars Salvius, 1744.
Geer, Charles De. Mémoires pour servir à lâhistoire des insectes. Stockholm: Grefing & Hesselberg, 1752â1778.
Glacken, Clarence. Traces on the Rhodian Shore. Nature and Culture in Western Thought from Ancient Times to the End of the Eighteenth Century. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1967.
Heise, Ursula K. âMultispecies Futures and the Study of Culture.â In Futures of the Study of Culture: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Global Challenges, edited by Doris Bachmann-Medick, Jens Kugele and Ansgar Nünning, 274â287. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, 2020.
Hribal, Jason. ââAnimals Are Part of the Working Classâ: A Challenge to Labor History.â Labor History 44, no. 4 (2003): 435â453.
Jorink, Eric. âInsects, Philosophy and the Microscope.â In Worlds of Natural History, edited by H. Curry, N. Jardine, J. Secord and E. Spary, 131â148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
Koerner, Lisbet. Nature and Nation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.
Kralj-FiÅ¡er, Simona and Matjaž GregoriÄ. âSpider Welfare.â In The Welfare of Invertebrate Animals, edited by Claudio Carere and Jennifer Mather, 105â122. Vol. 18. Cham: Springer, 2019.
Kronestedt, Torbjörn. âCarl Clercks âSvenska spindlarâ 250 Ã¥r [Carl Clerckâs âSvenska spindlarâ 250 years].â Fauna och Flora 102 (2007): 6â14.
Kronestedt, Torbjörn. âCarl Clerck and What Became of His Spiders and Their Names.â European Arachnology 2008 1 (2010): 105â117.
Latour, Bruno. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Lecocq, Thomas. âInsects: The Disregarded Domestication Histories.â In Animal Domestication, edited by Fabrice Teletchea. IntechOpen, 2019. doi:.
Lesne, Pierre, Marie Trabalon and Raphaël Jeanson. âCannibalism in Spiderlings Is Not Only about Starvation.â Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70, no. 10 (2016): 1669â1678. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44857119.
Lesser, Friedrich Christian. Insecto-Theology: Or a Demonstration of the Being and Perfections of God, From a Consideration of the Structure and Economy of Insects. Edinburgh, 1799. https://archive.org/details/insectotheology00lyongoog/page/n234/mode/2up.
Lewis, Ricki. âUnraveling the Weave of Spider Silk.â BioScience 46, no. 9 (1996): 636â638. doi:.
Linné, Carl von. Märkwärdigheter uti insecterne. Stockholm, 1739.
Linné, Carl von. A General System of Nature: Through the Three Grand Kingdoms of Animals, Vegetables and Mineral ⦠London: printed by Voss and Morris for Lackington, Allen and Co., 1800â1804.
Lorimer, Jamie. âNonhuman Charisma.â Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 25, no. 5 (2007): 911â932.
Lovejoy, Arthur O. The Great Chain of Being. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976/1936.
Mason, Jennifer, Civilized Creatures: Urban Animals, Sentimental Culture, and American Literature, 1850â1900. Baltimore, MD: JHU Press, 2005.
Margócsy, Dániel. âA Long History of Breakdowns: A Historiographical Review.â Social Studies of Science 47, no. 3 (2017): 307â325. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44652509.
Melillo, Edward D. âGlobal Entomologies: Insects, Empires and the âSynthetic Ageâ in World History.â Past and Present 223 (2014): 233â270.
Michalski, Katarzyna and Sergiusz Michalski. Spider. London: Reaktion Books, 2010.
Mokyr, Joel. The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002.
Morgan, Eleanor. âSticky Layers and Shimmering Weaves: A Study of Two Human Uses of Spider Silk.â Journal of Design History 29, no. 1 (2016): 8â23. doi: .
Newman, James and Catherine Newman. âOh What a Tangled Web: The Medicinal Uses of Spider Silk.â International Journal of Dermatology 34, no. 4 (1995): 290â292.
Ogilvie, Brian W. âOrder of Insects: Insect Species and Metamorphosis between Renaissance and Enlightenment.â In The Life Sciences in Early Modern Philosophy, edited by Ohad Nachtomy and Justin E.H. Smith, 222â245. Online edition, Oxford Academic, 2014. Accessed March 17, 2023. doi:.
Ogilvie, Brian W. âMaxima in Minimis Animalibus. Insects in Natural Theology and Physico-theology.â In Physico-theology: Religion and Science in Europe, 1650â1750, edited by Ann Blair and Kaspar von Greyerz. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020.
Réaumur, René Antoine Ferchault. âExamen de la soie des araignées.â Mémoire de lâAcadémie royale des sciences (1710). Imprimé en 1732. 386â408.
Réaumur, René Antoine Ferchault. Mémoires pour servir à lâ histoire des insects. Paris, 1734â1742.
Ritvo, Harriet. 2005), 8â10; Harriet Ritvo, The Platypus and the Mermaid, and Other Figments of the Classifying Imagination. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.
Russell, Jean Fogo. âTarantism.â Medical History 23, no. 4 (1979): 404â259.
Scholten, Koen. âPierre Lyonetâs (1706â1789) Study of Insects: Displaying Virtue and Gaining Social Status through Natural History.â Studium: Tijdschrift voor Wetenschapsen Universiteitsgeschiedenis 11, no. 4 (2018): 245â259.
Scott, Catherine E., Alissa G. Anderson and Maydianne C.B. Andrade. âA Review of the Mechanisms and Functional Roles of Male Silk Use in Spider Courtship and Mating.â The Journal of Arachnology 46, no. 2 (2018): 173â206.
Spary, Emma. âBotanical Networks Revisited.â In Wissen im Netz: Botanik und Pflanzentransfer in europäischen Korrespondenznetzen des 18. Jahrhunderts, edited by Regina Dauser, Stefan Hächler, Michael Kempe, Franz Mauelshagen and Martin Stuber. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2008.
Termeyer, Raimondo Maria de. Researches and Experiments Upon Silk from Spiders, and Upon Their Reproduction. Essex Institute, 1866.
Terrall, Mary. âFollowing Insects Around: Tools and Techniques of Eighteenth-Century Natural History.â British Journal for the History of Science 43, no. 4 (2010): 573â588.
Terrall, Mary. Catching Nature in the Act: Réaumur and the Practice of Natural History in the Eighteenth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014.
Ulicsni, Viktor, Ingvar Svanberg, and Zsolt Molnár. âFolk Knowledge of Invertebrates in Central Europe-Folk Taxonomy, Nomenclature, Medicinal and Other Uses, Folklore, and Nature Conservation.â Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 12 (2016): 1â40.
Xiang, Hui, Xiaojing Liu, Muwang Li, Yaânan Zhu, Lizhi Wang, Yong Cui, Liyuan Liu et al. âThe Evolutionary Road from Wild Moth to Domestic Silkworm.â Nature Ecology & Evolution 2 (2018): 1268â1279. doi:.
Ãstling, Johan, David Larsson Heidenblad, Erling Sandmo, Anna Nilsson Hammar and Kari H. Nordberg. âThe History of Knowledge and the Circulation of Knowledge.â In Circulation of Knowledge: Explorations in the History of Knowledge, edited by Johan Ãstling, Erling Sandmo, David Larsson Heidenblad, Anna Nilsson Hammar and Kari H. Nordberg, 9â33. Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2018.
François Xavier Bon de Saint Hilaire, âA Discourse Upon the Usefulness of the Silk of Spiders,â Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 27, 325â36 (1710): 14, https://www.jstor.org/stable/103101.
Linné marvels at the spiderâs sensitivity and its web in a speech on insects that he gave at the Royal Academy of Science in Stockholm in 1739. See Carl von Linné, Märkwärdigheter uti insecterne (Stockholm, 1739). Linné uses the masculine pronoun for the spider: âSe pÃ¥ Spinnelens konstiga nät, dess Residence i nätets medelpunct, at han mÃ¥ känna den minsta fluga, som rörer dess minsta sträng, liksom man föreställer sig själen uti en krops hjärna känna där nerverne gÃ¥ tilsammans,â trans. L.H.
Both Bonâs characterization and the title of Linnéâs speech show that spiders at the time were considered to be insects, a classification which lasted up until the early nineteenth century when Jean-Baptiste Lamarck separated the arachnids, mollusks, and crustaceans each into a class of their own. The word âinsectâ is used instead of arachnids in the text where sources are paraphrased.
On charismatic animals, see Jamie Lorimer, âNonhuman Charisma,â Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 25, no. 5 (2007).
Katarzyna Michalski and Sergiusz Michalski, Spider (London: Reaktion Books, 2010), chapters 3 and 7.
Lorraine Daston, âThe History of Science and the History of Knowledge,â Know. A Journal on the Formation of Knowledge 1 (2017); Johan Ãstling et al., âThe History of Knowledge and the Circulation of Knowledge,â in Circulation of Knowledge: Explorations in the History of Knowledge, ed. Johan Ãstling et al. (Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2018).
Fikret Berkes, âBiodiversity, Religion Traditionsâ, in Encyclopedia of Biodiversity, ed. Samuel M. Scheiner (Elsevier, Academic Press, 2024); Viktor Ulicsni, Ingvar Svanberg, and Zsolt Molnár, âFolk Knowledge of Invertebrates in Central Europe - Folk Taxonomy, Nomenclature, Medicinal and Other Uses, Folklore, and Nature Conservation,â Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 12 (2016).
Knowledge about the natural world circulated through networks in various parts of the âempires of knowledge,â as described by Paula Findlen in Empires of Knowledge. Scientific Networks in the Early Modern World (Oxford: Routledge, 2018). See also Emma Spary, âBotanical Networks Revisited,â in Wissen im Netz: Botanik und Pflanzentransfer in europäischen Korrespondenznetzen des 18. Jahrhunderts, ed. Regina Dauser et al. (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2008). For social networks in the study of insects, see Koen Scholten, âPierre Lyonetâs (1706â1789) Study of Insects: Displaying Virtue and Gaining Social Status through Natural History,â Studium: Tijdschrift voor Wetenschapsen Universiteitsgeschiedenis 11, no. 4 (2018). On multispecies networks, see Bruno Latour, Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007); Ursula K. Heise, âMultispecies Futures and the Study of Culture,â in Futures of the Study of Culture: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Global Challenges, ed. Doris Bachmann-Medick, Jens Kugele and Ansgar Nünning (Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, 2020).
Dániel Margócsy, âA Long History of Breakdowns: A Historiographical Review,â Social Studies of Science 47, no. 3 (2017), http://www.jstor.org/stable/44652509.
In addition to scholarly ideas, ethnobiological classifications and popular taxonomies were prevalent.
Arthur O. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976/1936); Clarence Glacken, Traces on the Rhodian Shore. Nature and Culture in Western Thought from Ancient Times to the End of the Eighteenth Century (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1967).
See e.g. Charles Bonnet, Traité dâinsectologie, vol. 1 (Chez Durand, libraire, 1745).
Brian W. Ogilvie, âOrder of Insects: Insect Species and Metamorphosis between Renaissance and Enlightenment,â in The Life Sciences in Early Modern Philosophy, ed. Ohad Nachtomy and Justin E.H. Smith, online edn. (Oxford Academic, 2014), accessed March 17, 2023, doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199987313.003.0012.
Torbjörn Kronestedt, âCarl Clerck and What Became of His Spiders and Their Names,â European Arachnology 2008 1 (2010).
Torbjörn Kronestedt, âCarl Clercks âSvenska spindlarâ 250 Ã¥r [Carl Clerckâs âSvenska spindlarâ 250 years],â Fauna och Flora 102 (2007).
The English translation of the work is entitled Aranei, or a natural history of spiders: including the principal parts of the well-known work on English spiders by Eleazar Albin, as also the whole of the celebrated publication on Swedish spiders by Charles Clerck.
Kronestedt, âCarl Clercks âSvenska spindlarââ.
Mary Terrall, Catching Nature in the Act: Réaumur and the Practice of Natural History in the Eighteenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014), 20.
Carl Clerck, Om spindlars fångande och födande (Kgl. Vetenskapsakademiens handlingar, 1761), 243, doi:10.5962/t.173032.
On collecting, see Mary Terrall, âFollowing Insects Around: Tools and Techniques of Eighteenth-Century Natural History,â British Journal for the History of Science 43, no. 4 (2010); Mary Terrall, Catching Nature in the Act, 79.
Kronestedt, âCarl Clercks âSvenska spindlarââ.
Carl Clerck, Tal, innehållande några anmärkningar om insecterne, hållet för Kongl. Vetensk. Academien, den 7 Martii 1764, etc. (Stockholm: Lars Salvius, 1764), 5, 101.
Clerck, Tal, 8, trans. L.H.
Clerck, Tal, 8, trans. L.H.
Brian Ogilvie, âMaxima in Miminis Animalibus. Insects in Natural Theology and Physico-theology,â in Physico-theology: Religion and Science in Europe, 1650â1750, ed. Ann Blair and Kaspar von Greyerz (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020).
Here, the English translation is used. Friedrich Christian Lesser, Inseco-theology: Or a Demonstration of the Being and Perfections of God, From a Consideration of the Structure and Economy of Insects (Edinburgh, 1799), https://archive.org/details/insectotheology00lyongoog/page/n234/mode/2up.
Lesser, Inseco-theology, 203.
James Newman and Catherine Newman, âOh What a Tangled Web: The Medicinal Uses of Spider Silk,â International Journal of Dermatology 34, no. 4 (1995); see e.g. Dioscorides, De Materia Medica (Johannesburg: Ibidis Press), 205.
Newman and Newman, âOh What a Tangled Webâ.
Tarantism is a form of hysterical behavior with roots in Italy, believed to result from the bite of the wolf spider Lycosa tarantula. See Jean Fogo Russell, âTarantism,â Medical History 23, no. 4 (1979).
Megan Cavell, âArachnophobia and Early English Literature,â New Medieval Literatures 18 (2018).
Bon de Saint Hilaire, âA Discourse,â 14.
Clerck, Svenska Spindlar, 6.
Lesser, Insecto-theology.
Useful knowledge as both propositional and prescriptive, see Joel Mokyr, The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 2002); Peter Dear, âWhat is the History of Science the History Of? Early Modern Roots of the Ideology of Modern Science,â Isis 96, no. 3 (2005).
Edward D. Melillo, âGlobal Entomologies: Insects, Empires, and the âSynthetic Ageâ in World History,â Past and Present 223 (2014).
Lisbet Koerner, Nature and Nation (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), 133.
Ricki Lewis, âUnraveling the Weave of Spider Silk,â BioScience 46, no. 9 (1996), doi:10.2307/1312891; Catherine E. Scott, Alissa G. Anderson and Maydianne C.B. Andrade, âA Review of the Mechanisms and Functional Roles of Male Silk Use in Spider Courtship and Mating,â The Journal of Arachnology 46, no. 2 (2018).
Clerck, Svenska Spindlar, 9.
Charles De Geer, Mémoires pour servir à lâhistoire des insectes (Stockholm: Grefing & Hesselberg, 1752â1778). The title alludes to René Antoine Ferchault Réaumurâs Mémoires pour servir à lâ histoire des insects (Paris, 1734â1742); Charles De Geer, Tal om nyttan, som Insecterne och deras skärskÃ¥dande, tilskynda oss (Stockholm: Lars Salvius, 1744).
Bon de Saint Hilaire, âA Discourse,â 14.
Bon de Saint Hilaire, âA Discourse,â 11â12.
Bon de Saint Hilaire, âA Discourse,â 13.
Eleanor Morgan, âSticky Layers and Shimmering Weaves: A Study of Two Human Uses of Spider Silk,â Journal of Design History 29, no. 1 (2016): 8, 23, doi:10.1093/jdh/epv019.
René Antoine Ferchault Réaumur, âExamen de la soie des araignées,â in Mémoire de lâAcadémie royale des sciences (1710), imprimé en 1732.
Réaumur, âExamen,â 392.
Pierre Lesne, Marie Trabalon, and Raphaël Jeanson, âCannibalism in Spiderlings Is Not Only about Starvation,â Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70, no. 10 (2016), http://www.jstor.org/stable/44857119.
Jennifer Mason, Civilized Creatures: Urban Animals, Sentimental Culture, and American Literature, 1850â1900 (Baltimore, MD: JHU Press, 2005), 8â10; Harriet Ritvo, The Platypus and the Mermaid, and Other Figments of the Classifying Imagination (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), 40.
Thomas Lecocq, âInsects: The Disregarded Domestication Histories,â in Animal Domestication, ed. Fabrice Teletchea (IntechOpen, 2019), doi:10.5772/intechopen.81834.
Hui Xiang et al., âThe Evolutionary Road from Wild Moth to Domestic Silkworm,â Nature Ecology & Evolution 2 (2018), doi:10.1038/s41559-018-0593-4.
Raimondo Maria de Termeyer, Researches and Experiments Upon Silk from Spiders, and Upon Their Reproduction (Essex Institute, 1866), 53.
Termeyer, Researches and Experiments, 66â67.
Jason Hribal, ââAnimals Are Part of the Working Classâ: a Challenge to Labor History,â Labor History 44, no. 4 (2003): 449. On insects as workers, see Jennifer Bonnell, âOccupational Hazards: Honeybee Labour as an Interpretive Device in Animal History,â in Traces of the Animal Past: Methodological Challenges in Animal History, ed. Jennifer Bonnell and Sean Kheraj (Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2022).
On the discussion of animals as a passive commodity or active workers, see Charlotte Blattner, âShould Animals Have a Right to Work? Promises and Pitfalls,â Animal Studies Journal 9, no. 1 (2020): 44.
Carl von Linné, Märkwärdigheter uti insecterne.