This paper introduces a group of three articles that bring together object stories relating to observatory history and networks. The three articles (‘Instrumental networks’, ‘Object itineraries’ and ‘Observatory audiences’) each bring together three object stories by different authors that contribute to the article theme. Here the genesis of the collection at the workshops of the Observatory Sites and Networks project is discussed, along with the approaches taken and the kind of insights that studies of material culture can shed on histories of observatories and the observatory sciences. The arrangement of the stories into three themes is outlined while common threads and recurring motifs that create connections and synergies across the thematic sections are highlighted. Together the collected papers make an argument for the use of objects in research, demonstrating the fruitfulness of investigating their histories and showing how they can expand our understanding of the networks of people, organisations and objects that were interested in or essential to the successful functioning of observatories. They also demonstrate the breadth and variety of interests and resources that were drawn into these networks, offering new ways of understanding and interpreting both observatory sites and museum objects.

This paper presents three pieces that use objects, or object types, to reveal the material, personal, institutional and commercial networks that surrounded the introduction and successful use of instruments, systems and techniques. The objects explored are: the Hourly Signal Relay, used within the time signal system of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, from the mid-nineteenth century; photographic glass plates from the British 1874 transit of Venus expeditions; and an electronic imaging tube, Lallemand’s camera, developed in Paris and used at the Lick Observatory in California in the 1960s. Each story uses examples of failure as a means of highlighting a lack of robustness in or effort required to maintain these networks. Once created, however, such networks could, as the second two stories note, go on to develop and support alternative approaches, helping to create success from apparent failure. Nevertheless, complexity, failure and fragility have also led to the underrepresentation or obscurity of these objects in museum collections, until given focused attention in these studies. The paper forms part of a collection of articles: Revealing observatory networks through object stories. The other papers in the collection are ‘Object itineraries’, and ‘Observatory audiences’ and the genesis of the collection is discussed in the ‘Introduction’.

Like the contributions to the other papers in this collection (‘Object itineraries’ and ‘Instrumental networks’), those in this final section explore instrumental networks and object itineraries in order to tell new histories of observatory sites and their associated networks. (For a discussion of the genesis and thinking behind the collection of papers see the ‘Introduction’). Here, however, they focus on object stories that highlight the opportunities for and importance of communicating with those outside the scientific community. They show, however, a wide range of potential and actual audiences to be mediated between, from closely associated scientific institutions and those holding the purse strings within government, to groups making up the local civic society and a wider and more diffuse audience for scientific outputs and achievements. The objects explored here are an 1850s model of electrically triggered time signals, associated with those at the Royal Observatory, Edinburgh; a late nineteenth-century astrographic telescope that, with approval of scientific and governmental audiences, brought the National Astronomical Observatory of Mexico into an international project and subsequently found new audiences through public display and artistic intervention; and a photoelectric relay that advertised the Yerkes Observatory to the Chicago and visiting public by forming part of a stunt, whereby the light of a distant star triggered the lighting of the 1933 Century of Progress Exposition.

In this paper, each contribution uses an object biography – or object itinerary – methodology, tracking their chosen objects from conception and purchase, across time and space, to today. The function of each object could change significantly over time, and these stories serve to remind us of the range of projects and activities that observatories might support or host, including overseas astronomical expeditions, a local time service, mathematical calculations, measurement of photographic plates, magnetic, meteorological and seismological observation, the hosting and dining of visitors, and the display and promotion of the observatory’s status. In each case, the object’s movements and location within particular spaces point the reader to consider a wide range of people, whether located within the observatory, beyond its walls, or within international scientific networks. The objects considered here are a London-made marine chronometer purchased by the Palermo Observatory, which was not used for navigation but was nevertheless well travelled; a large wooden table placed in the Octagon Room of the Royal Observatory Greenwich; and a British seismograph set up in at the Meteorological and Magnetic Observatory of the University of Coimbra. These itineraries also show how the value attached to objects changes over time: they shift from functional tools to obsolescence, then regain significance as their histories have been recovered and re-examined. This paper forms part of the collection ‘Revealing observatory networks through object stories’ where object stories are presented in three themed papers (with further papers being ‘Instrumental networks’ and ‘Observatory audiences’). The genesis of the collection is described in the ‘Introduction’.

Some historians of the ‘Special Loan Collection of Scientific Apparatus’ exhibited in 1876 interpret its principal significance as catalysing the eventual transformation of science collections in the (South) Kensington Museum into London’s present-day Science Museum. Debates about that nexus have not, however, noted that this exhibition was an international crowd-sourced venture in public science. Far from being collection-founding donations, most artefacts displayed were discretionary loans contributed by private citizens, learned societies, instrument makers, universities, engineering companies and state departments from across both the UK and Europe, with most displayed items later returned to their exhibitors. Our paper draws upon the art historiography literature of ‘loan exhibitions’ to consider the 1876 exhibit in (mostly) physical science as part of a growing democratic tradition of resource sharing. This exhibitor-focused approach is illustrated via case studies of two kinds of contributors that did not predominantly have their loans converted to donations: (male) instrument makers and women, especially widows. In that context, we can interpret apparatus lending in 1876 as forms of advertising, memorialising, and just occasionally offloading disused but historically important equipment. It is in such terms that we can better understand why only a small fraction of loaned 1876 apparatus become permanent parts of the South Kensington science collections via such means as state departments discarding obsolete technical equipment.