Comments on: Prospero’s America Book Review

By: Some Random Dude

Some Random Dude — Wed, 22 Mar 2023 20:00:14 +0000

I really enjoyed the third paragraph of your review — I think it does a good job of addressing why someone as connected as Winthrop didn’t spend way more time at the epicenter of an emerging empire, instead understanding the role of a “frontier environment” and practical experimentation in driving innovation. I was surprised to learn that colonial thinkers were so tightly integrated into elite scientific networks (e.g. the Royal Society). The drive for autonomy, and the reasons for emigration and establishment of the early British colonies, must have been paramount in Winthrop’s mind as he resisted imperial intelligence-gathering attempts. I would have liked to see Woodward dive into this “state-sponsored natural history” aspect a bit more. One wonders what Winthrop and contemporaries could have accomplished with more resources from Whitehall, had they not been so wary of being dominated from afar.

By: William Dunn

William Dunn — Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:53:58 +0000

Puritan alchemists in New England seem an unpromising source for this cultural study of colonial Connecticut. But Woodward uses the junior Winthrop and his associates to explore the contributions of Hellenistic gods, Swiss philosophers, and separatist Protestant entrepreneurs to the culture of early New England. Because Winthrop was prominent in the NE colonies, a moderate Puritan, and interested in alchemy and alchemical (Paracelsian) medicine, he is an effective exemplar of the multiple cultural strands that formed NE society. Kevin and Alex have given us a workable guide to Woodward’s complicated, and lengthy, story. Thank you.

By: Kerry Reed

Kerry Reed — Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:52:34 +0000

Hi Kevin, nice review! I appreciated your inclusion of the transatlantic scope of the work. It is interesting to me what knowledge traditions are carried over in colonization, it never occurred to me that alchemical knowledge would count among said transfer. I thoroughly enjoyed reading about the inclusion alchemy in the corpus of science during this period. I think some of the works we have read so far for the class have treated alchemy as a somewhat esoteric aspect of the colonial centuries, Poison Trials being one that comes to mind. It seems that the discipline of science in our modern times has strived to thoroughly divorce itself from its mystic origins, which is a shame because, as we can see in Woodward’s work, magic and mysticism were integral to early modern scientific thought. While I agree with you that the book circumscribes any easy historiographical classification, parts of the book may have benefitted from closer analysis, particularly when we consider the challenge of firmly placing this work into a subdiscipline of history. If this is a cultural history, why not include more analysis about the cultural diffusion in alchemical practices between indigenous and European bodies of knowledge. If this is a public history, then the link between neoplatonism, New England culture, and English culture could have used more analysis (at least in my opinion). Overall, I think Woodward did an excellent job of placing alchemical science within the context of formative New England culture.

By: Katie Kania

Katie Kania — Tue, 21 Mar 2023 19:15:57 +0000

Hi Kevin, I enjoyed reading your review of Prospero’s America. I thought the book was an interesting look at the religious, scientific, economic, and political landscape of colonial New England. In particular, I enjoyed reading about the wide “networks of knowledge,” that we have discussed in previous classes, and which influenced alchemical practices and knowledge in the British American colonies. One thing I would like to discuss more in class is the relationship between the colonies and the “mother country,” and the consistent exchange of knowledge across the Atlantic. One sentence that stood out to me in your review was the summary that, “Winthrop features more as a vehicle for understanding the culture of the period rather than being the absolute focus of the work.” I thought that this was an interesting point, and I preferred the way it was written because it wasn’t bogged down with biographical information. Rather, the biographical information was supplementary and moved the book forward, which helped me understand the context of alchemy and its contributions to the growth of colonial New England better. Lastly, I’m sure we’re going to discuss the concept of Christian alchemy in class since it is a central theme of the book, but I wanted to say that I would like to discuss this link between scientific knowledge and religion – especially in (the notoriously strict) Puritan New England. It was interesting to read about Puritan contributions to science because I hadn’t heard much, if anything, about it before. Nice review!

By: Alexa Shipes

Alexa Shipes — Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:50:28 +0000

I really liked your review. The author’s point about John Winthrop Jr. being extremely tolerant was a pleasant surprise, especially given the time period in question. I wonder if the belief in things like alchemy (i.e. the belief that anything is possible) ultimately led to a more tolerant society. The providential knowledge that Winthrop and his contemporaries sought might have played a role in jumpstarting the Age of Enlightenment and all of its musings on freedom and democracy. The belief that anything is possible led men like Winthrop to look for lead deposits in Massachusetts and attempt to treat a well-known pastor’s father for (what we know as) ALS. It also led Sir Francis Bacon to publish Novum Organum, which laid out the scientific method still followed today, and drove Thomas Harriot to improve navigational methods to such a degree that the Apollo 13 astronauts used them to return to Earth.