List of figures and tables

Figure 1: D’Alembert, ‘Eloge de M. le président de Montesquieu’, in Encyclopédie, ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers, etc., ARTFL Encyclopédie Project, ed. Robert Morrissey and Glenn Roe (autumn 2017 edition), https://encyclopedie.uchicago.edu (last accessed 2 January 2020), vol.5, p.viii-ix.

Figure 2: Letter from Voltaire to Queen Caroline of England (University Library of Erlangen-Nürnberg).

Figure 3: ‘Les routes exactes des postes du royaume de France’ (private collection).

Figure 4: Arrival and departure times of the post in Narbonne, 1750 (Narbonne, Musée d’art et d’histoire).

Figure 5: ‘Les routes exactes des postes du royaume de France’, detail (private collection).

Figure 6: Electronic Enlightenment correspondence visualization (2009).

Figure 7: Comparison of John Locke’s and Voltaire’s correspondence networks. Electronic Enlightenment correspondence visualization (2009).

Figure 8: Voltaire’s correspondence network, visualized in Palladio. Source: http://republicofletters.stanford.edu/publications/voltaire/letters/ (last accessed 6 January 2020).

Figure 9: Société typographique de Neuchâtel sales of Candide, 1769-1794.

Figure 10: A screenshot from RofLViz showing Voltaire’s correspondence with year bound from 1760 to 1778.

Figure 11: A screenshot from Corrispondenza showing Voltaire’s correspondence with year bound from 1760 to 1778.

Figure 12: Screenshot of the Priestley time chart showing visits to Rome.

Figure 13: Three partial screen captures (minus the map) in Ink, each step showing different dimensions displayed on the histogram.

Figure 14: The distinguishing words related to topic 1 and topic 2 in their stemmed form.

Figure 15: Selections from sample letters associated with topic 1 and topic 2.

Figure 16: The proportion of all letters associated with each of the twenty topics.

Figure 17: Expected proportion of letters on topic 1, 1785-1789.

Figure 18: Expected proportion of letters on topic 2, 1785-1789.

Figure 19: The distinguishing words related to topic 12, topic 19 and topic 18 in their stemmed form.

Figure 20: Expected proportion of letters on topic 12, 1785-1789.

Figure 21: Expected proportion of letters on topic 19, 1785-1789.

Figure 22: Expected proportion of letters on topic 18, 1785-1789.

Figure 23: The change in likelihood that a letter on a given topic was written by an author in the legal profession compared to all professions.

Figure 24: The change in likelihood that a letter on a given topic was written by an author in the medical profession compared to all professions.

Figure 25: The change in likelihood that a letter on a given topic was written by an author in a government office compared to all professions.

Figure 26: The change in likelihood that a letter on a given topic was written by an author in the clergy compared to all professions.

Figure 27: The change in likelihood that a letter on a given topic was written by an author who was a corresponding secretary to a learned society or académie, compared to all professions.

Figure 28: The change in likelihood that a letter on a given topic was a letter reprinted from another periodical, compared to all letters published.

Figure 29: Screenshot of a query in the FBTEE database (http://fbtee.uws.edu.au/stn/interface/) for sales destinations of books published in Amsterdam.

Figure 30: Workflow example for early modern geographical reference sources.

Figure 31: Screenshot of GeoViz. String match returns 168 Geonames record locations for ‘Asa’.

Figure 32: Screenshot of GeoViz. String match returns one correct match for ‘Aderno’.

Figure 33: Detail of GeoViz. String match returns several results.

Figure 34: Screenshot of search for Paris when annotating Jaucourt’s Encyclopédie article ‘Paris’.

Figure 35: Screenshot of Diderot’s Encyclopédie article ‘Anaplyste’ uploaded to Recogito.

Figure 36: Screenshot of NER output for La Condamine’s Encyclopédie article ‘Guayaquil’.

Figure 37: Screenshot of output file after toponym resolution process for ‘Guayaquil’ article.

Figure 38: Letter B, in ‘Répertoire des livres prohibés’, Paris, BnF, ms.fr. 21928, f.7, recto.

Figure 39: Fig. 3 ‘De Villeneuve 116 C.D.V.’ Cross-referencing shipping numbers and booksellers’ names across custom and confiscation registers. ‘Journal des livres suspendus depuis le 4 janvier 1771 jusqu’au 11 janvier 1791’, Paris, BnF, ms.fr. 21933, f.47; ‘Registre de la douane’, Paris, BnF, ms.fr. 21915, f.140.

Figure 40: ‘Bernard 158/185 B.’ Dyscalculia? ‘Journal des livres suspendus depuis le 4 janvier 1771 jusqu’au 11 janvier 1791’, Paris, BnF, ms.fr. 21934, f.83; ‘Registre des ouvrages entrés par la Chambre [syndicale] commencé le 14 avril 1778’, Paris, BnF, ms.fr. 21935, f.80.

Figure 41: Social networks and the letters network in eighteenth-century French salons.

Figure 42: Women and their networks in eighteenth-century French salons.

Figure 43: Academic affiliations of members of eighteenth-century French salons.

Figure 44: Correspondence networks in eighteenth-century French salons.

Figure 45: Flowchart of matching algorithm.

Figure 46: Time graph for reuses of Lucretian passage ‘tuisque ex, inclute, chartis’ (http://commonplacecultures.uchicago.edu/nav/ecco/passage/51, last accessed 16 January 2020).

Figure 47: Works that reuse Lucretian passage ‘tuisque ex, inclute, chartis’ (http://commonplacecultures.uchicago.edu/nav/ecco/passage/51, last accessed 16 January 2020).

Figure 48: Stillingfleet’s and Ferriar’s citations of Lucretian passage ‘nec poterant quibus id fieret cognoscere causis’ (http://commonplacecultures.uchicago.edu/nav/ecco/passage/34556, last accessed 16 January 2020).

Table 1: Occupational/social status of known library owners.

Table 2: Comparison between FRBR and SciPer/FBTEE conceptual models.

Table 3: Salons project gatherings and salon networks, 1700-1800.

Table 4: Documented members of eighteenth-century French salons and their networks.

Table 5: Knowledge networks in eighteenth-century French salons.