Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.22.020.15986
Marcin Krasnodębski
Solvay’s Centre de Recherches d’Aubervilliers (CRA) is one of the oldest active private-sector research centers in industrial chemistry in France. During the seventy years of its existence it collaborated with some of the most significant French and European chemical companies. Established in 1953, the center’s research and development organization around huge discipline-oriented laboratories proved itself remarkably resilient. Not merely reflecting the R&D policy of the company that owned it at a given moment, the evolution of the center’s research organization followed its own particular path. The research priorities in any given moment were always a place of encounter between top-down requirements of the company’s directorship, and bottom-up thematic trajectories. The CRA’s organizational history gives us unique insights into broader tendencies in chemical research in the second half of the 20th century, such as specialization of laboratories, introduction of market-driven research as well as decentralization and multiplication of hierarchies. The case study can be of interest to historians of science, due to the fact that the history of private research centers remains largely understudied, and to science policy scholars who want to understand the interconnectedness of factors that influence the organization of R&D structures in an institution.
{"title":"Rethinking Research in the Chemical Industry: Organizational History of Centre de Recherches d’Aubervilliers (1953‒2020)","authors":"Marcin Krasnodębski","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.22.020.15986","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.22.020.15986","url":null,"abstract":"Solvay’s Centre de Recherches d’Aubervilliers (CRA) is one of the oldest active private-sector research centers in industrial chemistry in France. During the seventy years of its existence it collaborated with some of the most significant French and European chemical companies. Established in 1953, the center’s research and development organization around huge discipline-oriented laboratories proved itself remarkably resilient. Not merely reflecting the R&D policy of the company that owned it at a given moment, the evolution of the center’s research organization followed its own particular path. The research priorities in any given moment were always a place of encounter between top-down requirements of the company’s directorship, and bottom-up thematic trajectories. The CRA’s organizational history gives us unique insights into broader tendencies in chemical research in the second half of the 20th century, such as specialization of laboratories, introduction of market-driven research as well as decentralization and multiplication of hierarchies. The case study can be of interest to historians of science, due to the fact that the history of private research centers remains largely understudied, and to science policy scholars who want to understand the interconnectedness of factors that influence the organization of R&D structures in an institution.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70996722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.028.14059
M. Kokowski
Omówiona została działalność Komisji Historii Nauki PAU w roku 2020/2021. Przedstawiono spisy: posiedzeń naukowych, konferencji, sesji i seminariów naukowych, nowych członków Komisji oraz nowych publikacji
{"title":"Sprawozdanie Komisji Historii Nauki PAU w roku 2020/2021","authors":"M. Kokowski","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.028.14059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.028.14059","url":null,"abstract":"Omówiona została działalność Komisji Historii Nauki PAU w roku 2020/2021. Przedstawiono spisy: posiedzeń naukowych, konferencji, sesji i seminariów naukowych, nowych członków Komisji oraz nowych publikacji","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48395080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.015.14046
M. Kokowski
Władysław Natanson i Alfred Landé, a prawo Plancka, statystyka Boltzmanna-Plancka-Natansona oraz statystyka Bosego Artykuł opisuje kontekst i treść przeoczonej dotąd przez historyków fizyki korespondencji z listopada 1925 roku na temat prawa Plancka i statystyki Bosego pomiędzy Władysławem Natansonem, a Alfredem Landé i konsekwencje tej korespondencji. W artykule publikowane są po raz pierwszy transkrypcje dwóch oryginalnych listów w języku niemieckim i ich tłumaczenia na język angielski.
{"title":"Władysław Natanson i Alfred Landé a prawo Plancka, statystyka Boltzmanna-Plancka-Natansona oraz statystyka Bosego","authors":"M. Kokowski","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.015.14046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.015.14046","url":null,"abstract":"Władysław Natanson i Alfred Landé, a prawo Plancka, statystyka Boltzmanna-Plancka-Natansona oraz statystyka Bosego\u0000\u0000Artykuł opisuje kontekst i treść przeoczonej dotąd przez historyków fizyki korespondencji z listopada 1925 roku na temat prawa Plancka i statystyki Bosego pomiędzy Władysławem Natansonem, a Alfredem Landé i konsekwencje tej korespondencji.\u0000\u0000W artykule publikowane są po raz pierwszy transkrypcje dwóch oryginalnych listów w języku niemieckim i ich tłumaczenia na język angielski.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48213594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.007.14038
P. Köhler
Władysław Szafer (1886–1970) was one of the notable Polish botanists of the first half of the 20th c., palaeobotany being one of his main fields of interest, cultivated for over 60 years. Initially, he studied Quaternary floras and later on he expanded his interests to the Tertiary (Neogene) floras at the end of the 1930s. He published at least 80 different books and papers on palaeobotany, many of which still having scientific, not only historical, value. His organizational, teaching and editing activities in the field of palaeobotany were also remarkable, and influenced strongly the science in Poland. He contributed to the fast development of this field of knowledge in Poland, both in terms of research and in terms of staff number. 50 years after his death, we summarize the results of Władysław Szafer’s activity in palaeobotany.
Władysław Szafer(1886-1970)是20世纪上半叶著名的波兰植物学家之一，古植物学是他感兴趣的主要领域之一，耕耘了60多年。最初，他研究第四纪植物区系，后来在20世纪30年代末，他将兴趣扩展到第三纪(新近纪)植物区系。他发表了至少80本不同的关于古植物学的书籍和论文，其中许多不仅具有历史价值，而且具有科学价值。他在古植物学领域的组织、教学和编辑活动也很引人注目，对波兰的科学产生了很大的影响。他为波兰这一知识领域的快速发展做出了贡献，无论是在研究方面还是在工作人员数量方面。在他去世50年后，我们总结Władysław Szafer在古植物学方面的研究成果。
{"title":"Władysław Szafer as a palaeobotanist","authors":"P. Köhler","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.007.14038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.007.14038","url":null,"abstract":"Władysław Szafer (1886–1970) was one of the notable Polish botanists of the first half of the 20th c., palaeobotany being one of his main fields of interest, cultivated for over 60 years. Initially, he studied Quaternary floras and later on he expanded his interests to the Tertiary (Neogene) floras at the end of the 1930s. He published at least 80 different books and papers on palaeobotany, many of which still having scientific, not only historical, value. His organizational, teaching and editing activities in the field of palaeobotany were also remarkable, and influenced strongly the science in Poland. He contributed to the fast development of this field of knowledge in Poland, both in terms of research and in terms of staff number. 50 years after his death, we summarize the results of Władysław Szafer’s activity in palaeobotany.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48151922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.013.14044
George Borski, M. Kokowski
A methodology of historical or higher criticism and of stylometry/stylochronometry known from Biblical and literary studies is applied to the examination of Nicolaus Copernicus’s writings. In particular, his early work Commentariolus is compared at the level of the Latin language with his later ones (Meditata, Letter against Werner and De revolutionibus) as well as the texts of some other authors. A number of striking stylistic dissimilarities between these works have been identified and interpreted in the light of stylometry/stylochronometry, historical criticism and the history of Copernican research. The conducted research allowed to draw some plausible conclusions about the Sitz im Leben (historical context), the dating of Commentariolus and related matters.
从《圣经》和文学研究中了解到的历史或更高层次的批评方法论以及风格计量学/风格计量学方法论被应用于对尼古拉斯·哥白尼作品的审查。特别是，他的早期作品《评论》在拉丁语层面上与他后来的作品（Meditata、Letter against Werner和De revolutionibus）以及其他一些作者的文本进行了比较。这些作品之间有许多引人注目的风格差异，已经从风格学/风格计量学、历史批评和哥白尼研究史的角度进行了识别和解释。所进行的研究使我们能够得出一些关于Sitz im Leben（历史背景）、Commentariolus的年代测定和相关事项的合理结论。
{"title":"Copernicus, his Latin style and comments to Commentariolus","authors":"George Borski, M. Kokowski","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.013.14044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.013.14044","url":null,"abstract":"A methodology of historical or higher criticism and of stylometry/stylochronometry known from Biblical and literary studies is applied to the examination of Nicolaus Copernicus’s writings. In particular, his early work Commentariolus is compared at the level of the Latin language with his later ones (Meditata, Letter against Werner and De revolutionibus) as well as the texts of some other authors. A number of striking stylistic dissimilarities between these works have been identified and interpreted in the light of stylometry/stylochronometry, historical criticism and the history of Copernican research. The conducted research allowed to draw some plausible conclusions about the Sitz im Leben (historical context), the dating of Commentariolus and related matters.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47927209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.022.14053
R. Kremer, A. Maas
This paper examines the role of book reviews in the discipline of the history of science by comparing their appearance in two periodicals, Isis, the flagship journal of the discipline that was founded in 1913, and the Journal for the History of Astronomy, founded in 1970 to serve a newly emerging, specialized subfield within the broader discipline. Our analysis of the reviews published in selected slices of time finds differing norms and reviewing practices within the two journals. Despite important changes during the past century in the conceptualization of the history of science and its research methods, reviewing practices in Isis remained remarkably consistent over time, with reviewers generally defending a fixed set of norms for “good” scholarship. More change appears in reviews of the Journal for the History of Astronomy, as its audience shifted from a mix of the laity, working astronomers, and historians to a specialized group of professional historians of astronomy. Scholarly norms, reflected in the reviews, shifted with these changes in readership. We conclude that book reviews offer rich sources for analyzing the evolution of scholarly disciplines and norms.
本文通过比较书评在两种期刊上的出现，考察了书评在科学史学科中的作用。这两种期刊分别是创立于1913年的《伊希斯》(Isis)和创立于1970年的《天文学史杂志》(journal for the history of Astronomy)，前者是该学科的旗舰期刊，后者服务于更广泛的学科中一个新兴的专业子领域。我们对在选定的时间片段中发表的评论进行分析，发现两种期刊的规范和评论实践不同。尽管在过去的一个世纪里，科学史的概念及其研究方法发生了重大变化，但Isis的审查实践一直保持着显著的一致性，审稿人通常捍卫一套固定的“优秀”学术标准。《天文学史杂志》的评论出现了更多的变化，因为它的读者从外行人、工作的天文学家和历史学家的混合，变成了一个由专业天文学历史学家组成的专门群体。评论中反映的学术规范随着读者的变化而变化。我们的结论是，书评为分析学术学科和规范的演变提供了丰富的资源。
{"title":"A tale of reviews in two history of science journals","authors":"R. Kremer, A. Maas","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.022.14053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.022.14053","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the role of book reviews in the discipline of the history of science by comparing their appearance in two periodicals, Isis, the flagship journal of the discipline that was founded in 1913, and the Journal for the History of Astronomy, founded in 1970 to serve a newly emerging, specialized subfield within the broader discipline.\u0000\u0000Our analysis of the reviews published in selected slices of time finds differing norms and reviewing practices within the two journals. Despite important changes during the past century in the conceptualization of the history of science and its research methods, reviewing practices in Isis remained remarkably consistent over time, with reviewers generally defending a fixed set of norms for “good” scholarship. More change appears in reviews of the Journal for the History of Astronomy, as its audience shifted from a mix of the laity, working astronomers, and historians to a specialized group of professional historians of astronomy. Scholarly norms, reflected in the reviews, shifted with these changes in readership.\u0000\u0000We conclude that book reviews offer rich sources for analyzing the evolution of scholarly disciplines and norms.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41866944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.017.14048
A. Zemanek, B. Zemanek, T. Głuszak, M. Nobis
Józef Warszewicz (1812–1866) – traveler and naturalist, the main horticulturist (inspector) of the Botanic Garden of theJagiellonian University in Kraków, was one of the first plant collectors in the tropical regions of Central and South America. From his travels (1844–1850, 1850–1853) he sent and brought to Europe hundreds of previously unknown plants, primarily orchids, in addition to representatives of other families. One of the collected species was Warszewiczia coccinea (red warszewiczia in English, warszewiczia czerwona in Polish), described by Johann F. Klotzsch and named after the collector. It is a small tree or shrub with large, red inflorescences, growing wild in the American tropics and often cultivated as an ornamental. It plays a significant role in the culture of the island country of Trinidad and Tobago in the Little Antilles archipelago, where it is considered a “national plant”. The aim of this article is to highlight one of the chapters in the history of systematics (taxonomy) relating to Józef Warszewicz and the plants described on the basis of his collections, especially red warszewiczia. Many of the so-called “Warszewicz species” have survived in the taxonomy to this day. His unique collection is stored in the Herbarium of the Jagiellonian University – Herbarium Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis – KRA. There are specimens important to the science – lectotypes (model representations) of the species Warszewiczia pulcherrima (= W. coccinea).
Józef Warszewicz（1812–1866），旅行家和博物学家，克拉科夫贾吉隆大学植物园的主要园艺师（检查员），是中南美洲热带地区最早的植物收藏家之一。在他的旅行中（1844年至1850年、1850年至1853年），除了其他家族的代表外，他还将数百种以前不为人知的植物，主要是兰花，带到了欧洲。其中一个被收集的物种是Warszewiczia coccina（英语为红色Warszewitzia，波兰语为Warszewidzia czerwina），由Johann F.Klotzsch描述，并以这位收藏家的名字命名。它是一种小乔木或灌木，有大的红色花序，生长在美国热带地区的野生地区，经常作为观赏植物种植。它在小安的列斯群岛的特立尼达和多巴哥岛国的文化中发挥着重要作用，在那里它被认为是“国家植物”。本文的目的是强调系统学（分类学）史上与Józef Warszewicz和根据其收藏描述的植物有关的一章，尤其是红Warszewitzia。许多所谓的“Warszewicz物种”在分类学中存活至今。他独特的藏品存放在贾吉隆大学植物标本馆——克拉科维尼斯植物标本馆。有一些对科学很重要的标本——Warszewiczia pulcherrima（=W.coccinea）物种的选型（模型表示）。
{"title":"Józef Warszewicz (1812–1866) and taxonomical history of Warszewiczia coccinea (Vahl) Klotzsch","authors":"A. Zemanek, B. Zemanek, T. Głuszak, M. Nobis","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.017.14048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.017.14048","url":null,"abstract":"Józef Warszewicz (1812–1866) – traveler and naturalist, the main horticulturist (inspector) of the Botanic Garden of theJagiellonian University in Kraków, was one of the first plant collectors in the tropical regions of Central and South America. From his travels (1844–1850, 1850–1853) he sent and brought to Europe hundreds of previously unknown plants, primarily orchids, in addition to representatives of other families.\u0000\u0000One of the collected species was Warszewiczia coccinea (red warszewiczia in English, warszewiczia czerwona in Polish), described by Johann F. Klotzsch and named after the collector. It is a small tree or shrub with large, red inflorescences, growing wild in the American tropics and often cultivated as an ornamental. It plays a significant role in the culture of the island country of Trinidad and Tobago in the Little Antilles archipelago, where it is considered a “national plant”.\u0000\u0000The aim of this article is to highlight one of the chapters in the history of systematics (taxonomy) relating to Józef Warszewicz and the plants described on the basis of his collections, especially red warszewiczia.\u0000\u0000Many of the so-called “Warszewicz species” have survived in the taxonomy to this day. His unique collection is stored in the Herbarium of the Jagiellonian University – Herbarium Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis – KRA. There are specimens important to the science – lectotypes (model representations) of the species Warszewiczia pulcherrima (= W. coccinea).","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45408101","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.014.14045
M. Kokowski
The article describes the context and content of the November 1925 correspondence – so far overlooked by historians of physics – between Władysław (Ladislas) Natanson and Alfred Landé on Planck’s law and Bose statistics, and the effects of this interaction. The article publishes for the first time the transcription of two original letters in German and their translations into English.
{"title":"Ladislas Natanson and Alfred Landé versus Planck’s law, the Boltzmann-Planck-Natanson statistics and the Bose statistics","authors":"M. Kokowski","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.014.14045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.014.14045","url":null,"abstract":"The article describes the context and content of the November 1925 correspondence – so far overlooked by historians of physics – between Władysław (Ladislas) Natanson and Alfred Landé on Planck’s law and Bose statistics, and the effects of this interaction.\u0000\u0000The article publishes for the first time the transcription of two original letters in German and their translations into English.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49479706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.018.14049
A. Pleshkov, J. Surman
Academic reviewing, one of the communal academic practices, is a vital genre, in which epistemic virtues have been cultivated. In our article, we discuss reviews as a form of institutionalized critique, which historians could use to trace the changing epistemic virtues within humanities. We propose to use them analogously to Lorraine Daston’s and Peter Galison’s treatment of atlases in their seminal work Objectivity as a marker of changing epistemic virtues in natural sciences and medicine. Based on Aristotle’s virtue theory and its neo-Aristotelian interpretation in the second half of the 20th century, as well as on its most recent applications in the field of history and philosophy of science, we propose a general conceptual framework for analyzing reviews in their historical dimension. Besides, we contend that the analysis of reviews should be carried out taking into account their historical context of social, political, cultural and media-environment. Otherwise, one may risks presupposing the existence of an autonomous, disconnected community of scholars.
{"title":"Book reviews in the history of knowledge","authors":"A. Pleshkov, J. Surman","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.018.14049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.018.14049","url":null,"abstract":"Academic reviewing, one of the communal academic practices, is a vital genre, in which epistemic virtues have been cultivated. In our article, we discuss reviews as a form of institutionalized critique, which historians could use to trace the changing epistemic virtues within humanities. We propose to use them analogously to Lorraine Daston’s and Peter Galison’s treatment of atlases in their seminal work Objectivity as a marker of changing epistemic virtues in natural sciences and medicine.\u0000\u0000Based on Aristotle’s virtue theory and its neo-Aristotelian interpretation in the second half of the 20th century, as well as on its most recent applications in the field of history and philosophy of science, we propose a general conceptual framework for analyzing reviews in their historical dimension. Besides, we contend that the analysis of reviews should be carried out taking into account their historical context of social, political, cultural and media-environment. Otherwise, one may risks presupposing the existence of an autonomous, disconnected community of scholars.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43173460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.4467/2543702xshs.21.005.14036
Mariusz Chrostek
Celem artykułu jest pokazanie wyjątkowych zasług polskich literaturoznawców związanych ze Lwowem w badaniach romantyzmu na tle osiągnięć uczonych z innych polskich uniwersytetów. Analizowany problem obejmuje okres do roku 1939, ponieważ dotąd funkcjonował we Lwowie polski uniwersytet. Zainteresowanie rodzimym romantyzmem, zwłaszcza trójcą wieszczów: Adamem Mickiewiczem, Juliuszem Słowackim i Zygmuntem Krasińskim, dominowało w pracach naukowych filologów epoki pozytywizmu, Młodej Polski i dwudziestolecia międzywojennego. Porównanie dorobku Lwowa z „resztą Polski” obejmuje monografie największych pisarzy i ich ocenę, rozprawy i artykuły oraz stosowaną w badaniach metodologię. W czasach zaborów (do 1918 r.) poloniści lwowscy konkurowali głównie z krakowskimi (UJ) i kilkoma z Warszawy. W Krakowie powstało najwięcej monografii trzech wieszczów, ale to we Lwowie Juliusz Kleiner napisał najlepszą (o Krasińskim). Filolodzy krakowscy stosowali przestarzałą metodologię (oceniali literaturę ze względu na poglądy ideologiczne pisarzy, nie interpretowali samych dzieł). We Lwowie badano głównie teksty utworów literackich, ich wartość artystyczną. Przed rokiem 1914 Juliusz Kleiner stworzył nowoczesną metodologię (dzieło literackie w centrum zainteresowań). Sformułował też pojęcie epoki romantyzmu, które przyswoili potem inni uczeni. Poglądy Kleinera stały się podstawą w badaniach literatury w dwudziestoleciu międzywojennym. W wolnej Polsce w latach 1919–1939 działało sześć uniwersytetów: we Lwowie, Krakowie, Warszawie, Wilnie, Lublinie i Poznaniu. Polonistyka we Lwowie przeżywała wtedy okres największej świetności. To kolejne zasługi wybitnego Juliusza Kleinera, uznawane za najlepsze w Polsce i ponadczasowe: dwie ogromne monografie – Słowackiego i Mickiewicza, znakomicie opracowane Dzieła wszystkie Słowackiego (większość tomów), historia literatury polskiej po polsku i niemiecku i inne. We Lwowie pracował Eugeniusz Kucharski – najlepszy w Polsce znawca Aleksandra Fredry; Konstanty Wojciechowski i Zygmunt Szweykowski – najwybitniejsi specjaliści od polskiej powieści. We Lwowie działało od 1886 r. Towarzystwo Literackie im. Adama Mickiewicza (w innych miastach po roku 1919 jego filie). Tam też ukazywał się „Pamiętnik Literacki” – najbardziej zasłużone czasopismo badaczy literatury. W porównaniu z pozostałymi miastami we Lwowie najliczniejsza grupa uczonych badała polski romantyzm i poświęciła mu najwięcej publikacji.
{"title":"Przełomowe osiągnięcia lwowskich filologów w badaniach polskiego romantyzmu do roku 1939","authors":"Mariusz Chrostek","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.005.14036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.005.14036","url":null,"abstract":"Celem artykułu jest pokazanie wyjątkowych zasług polskich literaturoznawców związanych ze Lwowem w badaniach romantyzmu na tle osiągnięć uczonych z innych polskich uniwersytetów. Analizowany problem obejmuje okres do roku 1939, ponieważ dotąd funkcjonował we Lwowie polski uniwersytet. Zainteresowanie rodzimym romantyzmem, zwłaszcza trójcą wieszczów: Adamem Mickiewiczem, Juliuszem Słowackim i Zygmuntem Krasińskim, dominowało w pracach naukowych filologów epoki pozytywizmu, Młodej Polski i dwudziestolecia międzywojennego. Porównanie dorobku Lwowa z „resztą Polski” obejmuje monografie największych pisarzy i ich ocenę, rozprawy i artykuły oraz stosowaną w badaniach metodologię. W czasach zaborów (do 1918 r.) poloniści lwowscy konkurowali głównie z krakowskimi (UJ) i kilkoma z Warszawy. W Krakowie powstało najwięcej monografii trzech wieszczów, ale to we Lwowie Juliusz Kleiner napisał najlepszą (o Krasińskim). Filolodzy krakowscy stosowali przestarzałą metodologię (oceniali literaturę ze względu na poglądy ideologiczne pisarzy, nie interpretowali samych dzieł). We Lwowie badano głównie teksty utworów literackich, ich wartość artystyczną. Przed rokiem 1914 Juliusz Kleiner stworzył nowoczesną metodologię (dzieło literackie w centrum zainteresowań). Sformułował też pojęcie epoki romantyzmu, które przyswoili potem inni uczeni. Poglądy Kleinera stały się podstawą w badaniach literatury w dwudziestoleciu międzywojennym.\u0000\u0000W wolnej Polsce w latach 1919–1939 działało sześć uniwersytetów: we Lwowie, Krakowie, Warszawie, Wilnie, Lublinie i Poznaniu. Polonistyka we Lwowie przeżywała wtedy okres największej świetności. To kolejne zasługi wybitnego Juliusza Kleinera, uznawane za najlepsze w Polsce i ponadczasowe: dwie ogromne monografie – Słowackiego i Mickiewicza, znakomicie opracowane Dzieła wszystkie Słowackiego (większość tomów), historia literatury polskiej po polsku i niemiecku i inne. We Lwowie pracował Eugeniusz Kucharski – najlepszy w Polsce znawca Aleksandra Fredry; Konstanty Wojciechowski i Zygmunt Szweykowski – najwybitniejsi specjaliści od polskiej powieści. We Lwowie działało od 1886 r. Towarzystwo Literackie im. Adama Mickiewicza (w innych miastach po roku 1919 jego filie). Tam też ukazywał się „Pamiętnik Literacki” – najbardziej zasłużone czasopismo badaczy literatury. W porównaniu z pozostałymi miastami we Lwowie najliczniejsza grupa uczonych badała polski romantyzm i poświęciła mu najwięcej publikacji.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43574529","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：