Scientific Biography

Ich schwamm in ein Meer aus dem hallischen kleinen Gewässer ." Mit diesem Satz hat der fast 77-jährige Alexander Conze 1 in seiner Autobiographie von 1908 seinen Respekt vor der neuen Stelle als Universitätsprofessor in der Kaiserstadt Wien vierzig Jahre später verdichtet 2. 1868 berufen, hat er sie vom Sommersemester 1869 bis zu dem von 1877 ausgefüllt 3. Conze war ein Kind der Romantik und des Biedermeier. Als er 1831 in Hannover geboren wurde, hat Goethe noch gelebt, waren Beethoven und Schubert erst wenige Jahre zuvor verstorben. Conzes Lebenszeitraum deckt sich fast komplett mit dem des österreichischen Kaisers Franz Joseph. Alexander Christian Leopold war ein Einzelkind; sein Vater, studierter Jurist und Kavallerie-Offizier, der 1815 auf englischer Seite an der Schlacht bei Waterloo teilgenommen hatte, hat sich mit 40 das Leben genommen. Alexander, Alex, Lexel, auch Lexchen, wie man ihn später rief, war ein Jahr alt; seine Mutter 24. "Mein Vater war, wie es hieß, auf einer Reise gestorben. Erst als Student habe ich erfahren, daß er infolge von Differenzen in seinem Offizierkorps sich das Leben genommen hat, als ich noch in der Wiege lag. Ich habe dem nie weiter nachgeforscht." 4 ungewöhnlich für einen Mann, der es sonst immer ganz genau wissen wollte. Aufgewachsen ist Alexander zunächst im urgroßväterlichen Haus in Hannover gemeinsam mit Mutter und Großmutter. Das Haus war voller Kunstwerke aus dem Nachlass der Vorfahren-Gemälden, einer großen Kupferstichsammlung, Handzeichnungen. "Das beschäftigte mich im Anschauen immer mehr und mehr, als ich älter wurde." 5 Conzes lebenslange Affinität zu Kunst und Kunstgeschichte hat wohl da ihre Wurzeln. Wir stellen uns den kleinen, in sich gekehrten Alexander vor, wie er in der Stube der Großmutter unermüdlich sein Lieblingsbuch studiert, "ein Orbis pictus des Amos Comenius vom Jahre 1723" 6. Das war auch sein erster Kontakt mit dem Latein, das ihm später, bei Dissertation und Promotion, "über das mäßige von der Schule her gebliebene hinaus nicht geläufig" 7 war. Conze konnte also, wie er zugibt, nicht gut Latein. In einem Guckkasten konnte er von seinem Urgroßvater Daniel Ramberg gemalte antike Ruinen betrachten. Das Werk des Großonkels Johann Heinrich Ramberg, Hofmaler zu Hannover, war ihm gut bekannt. All das habe ihn "gewiß mit der Zeit zum Archäologen präpariert" 8 , wie er sich ausdrückt. Als älterer Schüler ging er in Kunstausstellungen. Später, auch auf seinen Reisen, hatte er viel Kontakt zu bildenden Künstlern. Es sei natürlich, schreibt er, dass er auch zu zeichnen anfing und es darinmit professionellem Privatunterrichtzu einiger Fertigkeit brachte. Das zeigen seine Notiz-und Reisetagebücher, in denen viele Zeichnungen enthalten sindvon Menschen, Tieren, Pflanzen, Gebäuden, Landschaften, allerlei Reiseskizzen, hauptsächlich aber von Archäologischem. Auf der 1 Szemethy 2012 a. Der Text dieses Beitrags wurde gegenüber dem auf der Jubiläumsveranstaltung vorgetragenen nur geringfügig verändert. Für eine Korrekturlesung danke ich Hubert Szemethy.

Es.: CALORI, Paolo CALORIA, Caio CALORI STREMITI, Giovanni Paolo. Dopo il neretto, la discriminante grafica è rappresentata dal maiuscoletto, indipendentemente da qualsiasi particella prepositiva che possa unire i due elementi. Si avrà la seguente successione: nome, nome + toponimo o soprannome; cognome, nome. Es.: CORRADO, marchese di Monferrato CORRADO Confalonieri, santo CORRADO di Marlenheim CORRADO, Corradino. All'interno di una serie di omonimi il criterio della successione è rappresentato dall'ordine cronologico. Es.: ABBATI, Pietro Paolo, il Vecchio ABBATI, Pietro Paolo, il Giovane. All'interno di una serie di omonimi, costituiti da un solo esponente, potranno darsi casi del tipo seguente: BENEDETTO... BENEDETTO I, papa. Con l'aggiunta dell'ordinale le serie dei papi non vengono interrotte e si facilita la ricerca.

Besides its historical intent, this work stems from my profound admiration for the cartographer as a human agent and from my innate interest in cartography and for every representation of the environment, filtered and enlivened by the human mind. I was a draftsman and map compiler like many others; my interest in cartographic drafting preceded that of writing, and unexplained factors have led me in recent years to deepen my interest in the historical aspects of cartography.
With this compilation, I pay a debt of gratitude-which we all have-toward a neglected and forgotten band of graphic artists, seldom praised then as now, and forgotten by the official history of great events and historical figures. Topographers, makers of ephemeral images, continually overcome by human actions, never rose to the fame of artists or scientists, except in the rarest cases. And yet these men constructed the image of our country; we have used and abused their maps to modify the environment in which we live.
Maps, like the air we breathe or the water we drink, seem to belong to that category of objects whose existence is not even discussed; we appreciate their importance only when they are missing, and we tend to forget that men and institutions have
been heavily involved in their production for time immemorial.
Mapping is like Penelope' s tapestry or the rock of Sisyphus. It is never completed; as the completion nears it becomes apparent that little has been achieved because everything has to be redone.
The information revolution is at the door, and before making the ultimate step to abandon the analogue image for the digitaI image, let us stop for a moment to acknowledge those who have preceded us.

Emil du Bois-Reymond is the most important forgotten intellectual of the nineteenth century. In his own time (1818–1896) du Bois-Reymond grew famous in his native Germany and beyond for his groundbreaking research in neuroscience and his provocative addresses on politics and culture. My biography draws on personal papers, published writings, and contemporary responses to tell the story of this eminent physiologist. Du Bois-Reymond’s discovery of the electrical transmission of nerve signals, his innovations in laboratory instrumentation, and his reductionist methodology all helped lay the foundations of modern neuroscience.

In addition to describing the pioneering experiments that earned du Bois-Reymond a seat in the Prussian Academy of Sciences and a professorship at the University of Berlin, my book also recounts du Bois-Reymond’s family origins, private life, public service, and lasting influence. Du Bois-Reymond’s lectures made him a celebrity. In talks that touched on science, philosophy, history, and literature, he introduced Darwin to German students (triggering two days of debate in the Prussian parliament), asked on the eve of the Franco-Prussian War whether France had forfeited its right to exist, and proclaimed the mystery of consciousness, heralding the age of doubt. The first modern biography in any language, "Emil du Bois-Reymond" recovers an important chapter in the history of science, the history of ideas, and the history of Germany.

Hardcover
ISBN 978-0-262-01950-7
384 pages, 7 x 9 in, 15 b/w illustrations

Endorsements

“One of the intellectual children of Johannes Müller, along with Hermann von Helmholtz, Emil du Bois-Reymond pioneered electrophysiology, advanced a materialistic analysis of life, and rose to prominence as a political force in German science. He became an advocate of Darwinian theory, yet cautioned his colleagues: there were limitations to scientific knowledge, especially explanations of consciousness. Gabriel Finkelstein, utilizing many untapped archival sources, has reconstructed the accomplishments of du Bois-Reymond in fine and fluid detail. He places this extraordinary scientist and cultural arbiter within the context of the blistering disputes among German mandarins. Finkelstein has composed a model intellectual and cultural history of the last half of the nineteenth century.”

—Robert J. Richards, Morris Fishbein Distinguished Service Professor, University of Chicago

“Gabriel Finkelstein presents us with a beautifully written and thoroughly researched scholarly biography; a comprehensive account of the life, times, and impact of the great neurophysiologist Emil du Bois-Reymond. It fills a major gap in the historiography of late-nineteenth century biomedical science. The chapter on Goethe and Darwin shows the broad scope not only of Du Bois-Reymond’s intellectual abilities, but also Finkelstein’s.”

—Nicolaas Rupke, Johnson Professor of History, Washington and Lee University

“In writing this insightful, thoroughly researched biography of Emil du Bois-Reymond, Gabriel Finkelstein has done an immense service not just to historians of science but to anyone interested in nineteenth-century European culture. A first-rate historian and engaging storyteller, Finkelstein recreates the world of a brilliant, witty intellectual whose innovative experiments made modern neurophysiology possible. Finkelstein takes the reader through every aspect of du Bois-Reymond’s science: his self-designed instruments, his political battles, and his obstreperous frogs. In doing so, Finkelstein shows how politics (both national and academic) and the arts permeate science, and how science drives culture as an intellectual endeavor.”

—Laura Otis, Emory University

“In this wonderful biography of Emil du Bois-Reymond, among the most important if least heralded scientists of the nineteenth century, Gabriel Finkelstein evokes a past when science and public life went hand in hand and one man could create a scientific field. Bold, carefully etched, full of telling details rendered against a rich contextual background, Finkelstein’s beautifully written book makes compelling reading.”

—Helmut Walser Smith, Martha Rivers Ingram Professor of History, Vanderbilt University

Following discussions on scientific biography carried out over the past few decades, this book proposes a kaleidoscopic survey of the uses of biography as a tool to understand science and its context. It offers food for thought on the role played by the gender of the biographer and the biographee in the process of writing. To provide orientation in such a challenging field, some of the authors have accepted to write about their own professional experience while reflecting on the case studies they have been working on. Focusing on (auto)biography may help us to build bridges between different approaches to men and women’s lives in science. The authors belong to a variety of academic and professional fields, including the history of science, anthropology, literary studies, and science journalism. The period covered spans from 1732, when Laura Bassi was the first woman to get a tenured professorship of physics, to 2009, when Elizabeth H. Blackburn and Carol W. Greider were the first women’s team to have won a Nobel Prize in science.
Eds. P.Govoni, Z.A. Franceschi. Authors: Paola Govoni; Evelyn Fox Keller, Londa Schiebinger, Georgina Ferry, Marta Cavazza, Paula Findlen, Massimo Mazzotti, Vita Fortunati, Pnina G. Abir-Am, Zelda A. Franceschi.

A perception of “Christian bioethics” developed by the American philosopher Hugo Tristram Engelhardt in Russia requires a systematic interdisciplinary analysis. This is due to the realities of medical practice,
as well as cultural and historical differences between the Russian and American societies. In Russia, there are certain difficulties in the open discussion of ethical issues in the public sphere. However, the recently growing participation of the Orthodox Church in public debates on the issues of medicine and biotechnology produce a basis for a reception of Engelhardt’s Christian bioethics. This article presents an analysis of how Engelhardt’s academic carrier was connected to his personal transformation, and how a “logical positivist” and physician interested in genetics, through his studies of continental philosophy, history of medicine, Catholicism and bioethics, came up finally as an founder of Christian bioethics based on Eastern Christian Orthodoxy. This analysis is purposed to expand the theoretical discussion of moral dilemmas posed at the intersection of medicine, religion and philosophy within the Russian academic discourse.

Probably no other psychologist has aroused such contrary reactions from the public and from the scientific community as Hans Eysenck. To the public, he was some kind of noble "IQ warrior" or that disgraceful "race and IQ guy." However, Britain's most prominent post-war psychologist had a different but equally divisive reputation amongst his scientific peers. Here was an intellectual leader in personality psychology who was greatly admired by a host of sympathetic colleagues, yet repeatedly dismissed by his many critics as a self-serving show-pony and widely suspected of being economical with the truth. Hans Eysenck played it like a game and he played to win. In the process, he made many who crossed swords with him feel like losers. Though, while bold and innovative, Eysenck made his share of mistakes and embraced causes and collaborators that no one else would. Not since Sir Cyril Burt - Eysenck's mentor - has a UK-based psychologist left a legacy that will be so fiercely debated.

Playing with Fire is a full-length biography of Eysenck's career. It looks to explain the contradictions in Eysenck's public and professional image, and how one fed the other. It documents his boyhood in Berlin and the origin of his key ideas about personality, learning and the biogenetics of behaviour. It looks at the many clashes he had with any number of opponents - psychoanalysts, liberal social psychologists and the anti-tobacco public health lobby, to name a few.

This is a provocative book about a provocative man. It combines years of assiduous research and important insights from science and technology studies in a very readable, accessible narrative. Always comparing the self-constructed legend with historical reality, it charts the story of an inveterate controversialist - the man they loved to hate.

The article endeavours to contribute to a better understanding of the literary contexts of early biographies of scientists written during the Scientific Revolution. To what extent are these biographies influenced by stereotypes that are an inadequate fit for modern history of science? Its claim is that there was, indeed, a literary model for biographies of scientists, and that this model had deep roots in Biblical and classical literature. While the model was similar to that used in Renaissance biographies of artists, it did not fully emerge until as late as the seventeenth century.

The Handbook of the Historiography of Biology is intended to foster a conversation about the historiographic traditions that have informed the history of biology. Explicit historiographical reflections by leading scholars in the history of biology will highlight important trends and innovations in the continuous stream of original research that has created this field. This will make it easier for new scholars to join the field and make their own original contributions. The German-born American historian Fritz Stern pronounced that "the historian must serve two masters-the past and the present," and reminded us that "perhaps no one has changed the course of history as much as the historians" (Stern 1973). In his classic book, What Is History? the English historian E.H. Carr was even more blunt: "Study the historian before you study the facts" (Carr 1962), he admonished. Clearly, history never stands on its own. It is always constructed, filtered, placed within the context of what those who came before believed and wrote. With time, history becomes a palimpsest. To understand how successive generations have remembered the past, one must drill down, layer by layer. As a study of the science of history, historiography attempts to understand how historians work, how they frame their questions, how they use sources, and how historical scholarship reflects its different contexts. If history is a sign of its times,

Danuta Urbaniak-Zając (UniversiĘ ot Ł6dż) Andrzej P. Wejland (UniversĘ of Ł6dź) {< The 'Biographical Perspectives' book series is a meeting place for representatives of the humanities and social sciences who situate their research practices in the auto/biographical paradigm horizon in its various guises.

My goal in this text is to display multi-level relationships existing between the real world and the fictional world. The keystone of these considerations I made an idiom “true fabrication” that appears in the works of a Polish postwar writer, Marek Hłasko.
The text begins with the disclosure of a paradox lying in a field of the semantic phrase “true fabrication.” Using this phrase I highlight the ambivalence which I encountered during my own field investigations, stretched between real presence and the presence mediated by thought and writing. In the subsequent parts of the essay, I combine―in accordance with the rule of the preliminary diagnosis―the level of experiencing “being in the field” with the level of experiencing literature. Throughout this process I am accompanied by Paul Auster―cognate to Marek Hłasko in his “true false” intuitions. Reporting to the Reader my reading of Oracle Night (built on the “true false” concept―this is an equivalent of Hłasko’s “true fabrication” in Austerian nomenclature), I take up the challenge of the “game of narration” (a term coined by Jacques Lacan), which enables extending the interpretation horizon with what does not entirely fit within the “truth” or within the “fiction”, occupying a roomy space “between” them.
Apart from Auster, Hłasko and Lacan, for such intellectual-experiential journey I am also taking Virginia Woolf, Paul Ricoeur, Rasmus R. Simonsen and Javier Marías.

Abstract: The suggestion that Darwin delayed publishing his species theory has long occupied a central part of his biographical storyline. The notion of a fretful delay reached a melodramatic apogee in Adrian Desmond and James Moore’s best-selling 1991 biography. Janet Browne’s acclaimed work downplayed the pathos but depicted a somewhat hesitant Darwin. In 2007 John van Wyhe upended this tableau, arguing that there was no evidence to support a secretive, fear-based delay. Contrary to van Wyhe, this essay suggests that Darwin was only selectively and strategically open about his belief in transmutation prior to his barnacle project. The 1844 appearance of the anonymously published Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation was one in a series of blows that prompted Darwin to reappraise the evidential requirements of his species theory. Nonetheless, much depends on how one interprets the barnacle project. Darwin’s decision to take on the whole group guaranteed its lengthy duration and effectively delayed his species work. The barnacle project could not be considered a necessary preparation, since it was not undertaken to address species theory problems. The evidence and insights Darwin gained from it were largely incidental and came after his decision to tackle the whole group. However, the credentialing motivations behind it were driven by field-generated self-doubts that are difficult to separate from fear. Darwin gained much-needed confidence from it and was far more open about his species theorizing afterward. The project helped Darwin become the authoritative figure he needed to be.

Our article, written in the convention of a discussion, is the second part of the reflection inspired by Jerzy Kmita’s "Humanists’ Sorceries." In this part we talk about his program of humanities and ask what would have happened if we had finished with sorceries in humanities. In our opinion, there is no way out of the common sense, we always, one way or the other, fall into its traps, because nothing in culture is transparent for itself. The only thing we, as humanists, can do is deconstructing as much of our natural/silent shared believes as we are able to. That is the lesson to be drawn from Jerzy Kmita’s works. In the end of our article, we discuss the history of Polish humanities thinking. In our interpretation, we are members and eye-witnesses of pivotal turns in Polish humanities: we face a return to the non-nostalgic history of our schools and to the way of thinking which is basic for our identity both as researchers and human beings.

In 1869, the young Swiss biochemist Friedrich Miescher discovered the molecule we now refer to as DNA, developing techniques for its extraction. In this paper we explain why his name is all but forgotten, and his role in the history of genetics is mostly overlooked. We focus on the role of national rivalries and disciplinary turf wars in shaping historical memory, and on how the story we tell shapes our understanding of the science. We highlight that Miescher could just as correctly be portrayed as the person who understood the chemical nature of chromatin (before the term existed), and the first to suggest how stereochemistry might serve as the basis for the transmission of hereditary variation.

All science communication, even the most formal research paper, is ultimately communication about persons (at the very least, the projected persona of the writer). This paper draws insights from philosophy, sociology, and literary studies to explore what is at stake in communication about persons in science, and to articulate some general ethical principles.

In 1783, Captain Samuel Turner, surveyor Samuel Davis, and
surgeon Robert Saunders journeyed from India on an embassy
through Bhutan and into Tibet. Saunders, of the Bengal
Medical Service, reported his medical observations in the
Proceedings of the Royal Society, the leading science journal of
its time. In his observations, Saunders provides glimpses into
both Bhutanese and British medical practices of the late
eighteenth century. Saunders’ description and observations of
goiter became widely quoted, helping to forge a path to the
elimination of the condition, and his explanation for the causes
of snow blindness were confirmed in laboratory experiments
more than 100 years later. Saunders not only sought to
observe and to teach, but also to learn from the local healers
he encountered. His writings show a respect for the Bhutanese
and Tibetan peoples and their medical knowledge that is rare
in colonial writings.

In this volume, the wording ‘professional’ and ‘non-professional’ is central to our discussion of concepts, since these notions reflect well the weighty aspect of the tension appearing at the junction of the private sphere of our life and the scientific one. Personal experience of each of us (the ‘non-professional’ part of our biography) continuously—consciously or unconsciously—gets imprinted in everything that is located in the area of ‘professional’ actions; from the choice of research areas to the ways of their theoretical and methodological conceptualization.

Zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts hatte die Erforschung von Stoffen wie Blut und Metallen Hochkonjunktur. Katrin Steffen zeichnet in einer Doppelbiographie, wie der Serologe Ludwik Hirszfeld (1884-1954) und der Metallurge Jan Czochralski (1885-1953) als international anerkannte Spitzenforscher maßgeblich dazu beitrugen und ganz neue Wege der Forschung beschritten. WALLSTEIN VERLAG Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

The majority of analyses investigating the professionalisation of scientific domains tend to assume the linear and general features of this transformation. These studies focus on the shift from a non-professionalised state to a professionalised state. This dual approach, however, crucially lacks some other aspects of the process of professionalisation. This issue is discussed within the context of the growth of prehistoric archaeology in France from the 1940s, by observing scientific societies, national research organisations and their social networks. Looking at the scale of Georges Laplace's career and that of his research group, which studied the typologie analytique method, this article demonstrates the benefits of a ternary model which also encompasses the modes of refusal of professionalisation.

The article – focused on the exploration of the meanings of transgenerational scientific biographies – is a form of a dialogic conversation carried on by the two members of the society of Łódź pedagogues. He – emerged in the society as a newcomer arriving from the world of anthropology and ethnography. She – a social pedagogue – made her way there from the circle of the family social work field. In spite of having different disciplinary origins, carrying on dialogue gives them a chance to recognize the paths indicating the existence of their common intellectual and experience connections. Using these common links, they work together on the interpretation and gradual detection of the signs of unacknowledged past, where ethnography and social pedagogy meets the foundations set by Helena Radlińska and Kazimiera Zawistowicz-Adamska.

The mathematician, physicist and philosopher W. J. ’s Gravesande is particularly known for his adherence to ‘Newtonian philosophy’. Currently, it is widely held that ’s Gravesande got his main inspiration for his scholarly calling from Newton himself, whom he met in 1715 during a first career as a lawyer; and that it was mainly Newton’s own intervention that ensured the appointment of the unqualified ’s Gravesande at Leiden University. I challenge these views by bringing together all currently known information about ’s Gravesande, including a number of as yet unused documents. I show that ’s Gravesande’s appointment resulted from a very carefully built up reputation in scholarly circles rather than from accidental meetings and patronage. ’s Gravesande had written several innovative papers and was in contact with both leading mathematicians and local political and patrician figures already before 1715. This article therefore explains the rationale behind his appointment in Leiden.

Résumé: Au milieu des années 1920, la revue Nauka Polska (La Science Polonaise), éditée par l’Institut d’encouragement aux travaux scientifiques, a invité plusieurs chercheurs réputés à rédiger des essais autobiographiques dans le but de jeter une lumière sur la genèse et le développement de la créativité scientifique. Les textes devaient être publiés sous le couvert de l’anonymat, afin de favoriser la sincérité de confessions destinées, selon les initiateurs de ce projet, à aborder tous les aspects de la vie scientifique, y compris les plus intimes. En 1928, dans le numéro IX de cette revue, parut l’article intitulé « Biographie II ». Nous savons aujourd’hui que le cryptonyme « X.Y. » dont il était signé dissimulait Kazimierz Moszyński (1887-1959), éminent ethnologue et folkloriste, l’un des fondateurs de l’anthropologie polonaise au début du XXe siècle. Moszyński a laissé une œuvre considérable, restée au cœur du cursus universitaire en Pologne jusque dans les années 1980. Pourtant, les jeunes générations d’ethnologues polonais finirent par s’en détourner, jugeant les travaux de Moszyński non seulement théoriquement désuets, mais surtout excessivement positivistes, trop centrés sur une exubérante et stérile classification de faits culturels. La « Biographie II » permet de découvrir l’homme derrière cette œuvre positiviste. Et l’homme n’eut rien d’un positiviste. Esprit exalté et insatiable, il vint à l’ethnologie après avoir étudié et pratiqué la biologie, la philosophie, la peinture, la poésie et le roman. À l’origine de sa vocation ethnologique fut une sorte d’illumination mystique, et la signification qu’il donnait à ses recherches, positivistes par la méthode et par la forme de leur divulgation, en restait profondément marquée. Le travail scientifique et l’organisation de la vie vouée à ce travail faisaient chez Moszyński partie intégrante d’un système philosophico-mystique, à forte connotation théologique, bien qu’idiosyncratique, autonome par rapport aux doctrines des religions institutionnalisées. Le sujet de la « Biographie II » fut construit selon le modèle du personnage faustien, emprunté, sciemment ou non, à Goethe. L’article décrit cette stratégie biographique, tout en proposant une réflexion sur une mystique du travail scientifique dont la pratique, dans le cas de Moszyński, restait néanmoins conforme aux rigueurs de la démarche positiviste.

Este artigo buscar explorar as possibilidades de interlocução entre a biografia científica e a história transnacional para a história das ciências, tendo como estudo de caso a participação do físico russo-italiano Gleb Wataghin na cooperação ítalo-soviética. A análise de trajetórias individuais tem se mostrado uma ferramenta a ser considerada na análise da construção de redes transnacionais. Entre os resultados, argumento sobre a possibilidade de que esses contatos tenham sido fruto de parte da expressão do habitus do físico, constituído em seu período brasileiro, quando trabalhou pela internacionalização da ciência, em acordo com as relações diplomáticas estabelecidas entre os países.

The world leader, the international leader, the mentor of mankind, the great sun-Fangruida (Kyle. Ross/Carl
) May 14, 2019 2019v.1.4 / 2021 v2.3 re-revised version 2021 modified version
To the great sun
Commemorate the 70th birthday of Fang Ruida, a great scientist, cosmologist, philosopher, thinker, world leader, and international leader
Kyle. Ross/Carl

В статье дается характеристика предметов из фондов Саратовского областного музея краеведения, имеющих отношение к известному саратовскому историку А.А. Гераклитову (1867-1933). Рукописи, фотографии, книги и предметы быта предстают как источники, реконструирующие отдельные события из жизни ученого. Некоторые предметы впервые вводятся в научный оборот.
Ключевые слова: научная биография; источники; краеведение; СУАК; личные фонды; фотографии; индивидуальный переплет; предметы быта; Саратовский областной музей краеведения.

Abstract
This article dedicated to characterize items in funds of Saratov Regional Museum of Local Core related to a well-known Saratov historian A.A. Geraklitov. Manuscripts, photographs, books and houseware appear as sources reconstructing individual events from the life of the scientist. Some subjects are firstly introduced into scientific circulation.

The contribution to Pietro Riccardi to the history of geodesy is here presented and stressed for the first time.
A parallel life between Riccardi and Matteo Fiorini is also undertaken due to the similarity of experience which go far beyond the close field of History of science embracing History in alla its complexity.