OCR Text |
Show 88 nineteenth century.^ Yet, Bodmer simply reproduced on paper the same experience of wonder and mystery that Maximilian himself had described in his journal. How is it possible that Maximilian, the same man who had insisted on objective documentation throughout the expedition, when confronted with an optical illusion, could fall so readily into "romantic fantasy"? Maximilian was a product of a scientific movement that, during the early nineteenth century, was still formative and in flux; scientific disciplines were still more "art" than "science," utilizing the relatively new method of objective observation, but still subject to personal and emotional interpretation. In theory, all of the newly emerging scientific disciplines were based upon Baconian empiricism, which limited all valid speculation to precise and finite conclusions drawn from factual observation.10 Naturalists of the preceding two centuries, the forerunners of today's anthropologists, compiled lists of races, theories about how peoples had transmitted their cultures, thereby categorizing and ranking cultures according to various objective and subjective criteria. Although in principle the method used by these early scientists was based upon objective observation, often the analysis of the gathered material was not. Tainted by preconceived theories and prejudices rooted in the notion of European superiority, the conclusions drawn from the accumulation of observable facts were often fantastic, culturally biased, and emotionally charged.11 Yet science in the early nineteenth century was on the threshold of change. A new way of seeing the natural world was slowing emerging. Maximilian was representative of a new breed of scientists sensitive to the |