In recent years, historians have debated the prospect of offering new ‘transnational’ or ‘global’ perspectives in their studies. This paper introduces the reader to this special issue by analysing characteristics, merits and flaws of these approaches. It then considers how historians of science have practised transnational history without, however, paying sufficient attention to the theoretical foundations of this approach. Its final part illustrates what benefits may derive from the application of transnational history in the field. In particular, we suggest looking (...) at the construction of transnational networks in science, and discuss some of the methodological consequences of adopting this approach. (shrink)

It is argued that the major interpretations of tobacco mosaic virus which were suggested in the first half of the 20th century can be ordered into two conflicting approaches. It is shown that explaining the existence of these different approaches as views from different perspectives, is a mistaken metaphor. The different approaches resulted in the "construction" of different research objects as answers to the questions "What is a virus"? Although these different conceptions did exclude each other, they co-existed because of (...) the consensus concerning the existence of tobacco mosaic "disease". (shrink)

By 1910 the Cambridge University physiology department had become the kernel of British physiology. Between 1909 and 1914 an astonishing number of young and talented scientists passed through the laboratory. The University College department was also a stimulating place of study under the dynamic leadership of Ernest Starling.I have argued that the reasons for this metropolitan axis within British physiology lie with the social structure of late-Victorian and Edwardian higher education. Cambridge, Oxford, and University College London were national institutions attracting (...) students from all over England and Wales. In contrast, the provincial colleges drew their clientele from relatively narrow geographic radii. Generally, also, these institutions were regarded as socially inferior to the longer-established universities.A brief survey of the biographies of some British physiologists demonstrates how physiology, as an occupation, became, over the later decades of the century, socially elite. The scientists who achieved full-time posts in the 1870s generally came from somewhat marginal backgrounds. Foster, like his mentors T. H. Huxley and William Sharpey, came from a non-conformist family. Edward Schäfer was also a dissenter and, like Foster, began his professional career as a general practitioner.Physiologists of the succeeding generation, however, came from wealthy families with established intellectual traditions. John Scott Haldane, nephew of John Burdon Sanderson, was the brother of the politician R. B. Haldane and uncle of the historian A. R. B. Haldane.71 Joseph Barcroft was one of the most affluent of all physiologists.72 His family's wealth derived from linen manufacturing. He attended the Ley's School Cambridge, where his schoolmates included Henry Dale, later Director of the National Institute for Medical Research; F. A. Bainbridge, who eventually became Professor of Physiology at St. Bartholomew's Hospital; and the Cambridge historian J. H. Clapham. A. V. Hill, Professor of Physiology at Manchester and, subsequently, London, married Margaret Keynes, sister of John Maynard Keynes and niece of Sir Walter Langdon Brown, Professor of Physic at Cambridge. Margaret Keynes's younger brother, the surgeon Sir Geoffrey Keynes, married a granddaughter of Charles Darwin; their son Richard Keynes also became a physiologist at Cambridge.These families were part of a new class emerging during the late Victorian period, descendants of the great reforming radicals of the 1830s, who had begun to achieve power through positions in the universities, the professions, and the civil service. Their social prestige rested upon their intellectual expertise. Physiology was an appealing research discipline to these groups because of its clear dissociation from industry and commerce. And because physiology's “practical” face was medicine, its acceptability was reinforced by professional ties.The nature of the Physiological Society confirms this image of physiology as an elite science. By the turn of the century the Society had taken on some of the characteristics of a dining club. The scientific meetings were generally followed by dinner: if the Society met at Oxford, they were entertained at Burdon Sanderson's college, Magdalen.73 Through a “black ball” system, unwanted candidates could be excluded. In 1912, when the question of admitting foreigners was discussed, E. H. Starling wrote to Edward Schäfer: “the Society has very much in it the nature of a club, and a certain amount of personal knowledge of the candidate is always desirable.”74.The developing institutional structure of physiology in late Victorian Britain indicates, therefore, that we must look beyond the achievements of individuals and departments to understand why physiology flourished. The discipline became part of a new social order in which the professional middle classes assumed increasing power. These groups valued intellectual skill, especially in the pure scienes, as forces both for self-advancement and for progress within society. (shrink)

The decades of the 1920s to the 1960s were a period of transformation in chemical science. The era was marked by erosion of boundaries that had often been drawn between chemistry and other scientific disciplines. In particular, theories, instruments, and mathematical approaches associated with the new physics of X-rays, the electron particle, and the electron wave enabled chemists and other physical scientists to address unsolved chemical problems of structure and mechanism and to ask new questions that further expanded and transcended (...) disciplinary borders. In turn, the historiography of these developments reflects the pluralism of chemistry in historical narratives written by scientists, historians, philosophers, and sociologists. (shrink)

What makes any investigative field a scientific discipline? This article argues that disciplines are ever-changing frameworks within which scientific activity is organised. Moreover, disciplinarity is not a yes or no proposition: scientific activities may achieve degrees of identity development. Degree of consensus is the key, and consensus on many questions (conceptual, methodological, institutional, and social) varies among sciences. Lastly, disciplinary development is non-teleological. Disciplines pass through no regular stages on their way from immature to mature status, designations articulated within the (...) rhetoric of discipline formation. Scientists assemble disciplines using many elements: phenomena, methods, instruments, theories, analytical techniques, and institutional tools such as journals, government bureaus, and university positions. Scientists created geophysics during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries through such a combination. Whether geophysics became a discipline depends on how discipline is defined. (shrink)

The work of botanists, their writing, and herbal materials provide excellent examples to understand the creation of local working networks. The results of botanic work provide a satisfactory set of documents for the construction of “groups of collaborators”. Analysis of the indications they supply allow for a quite thorough understanding of the relationships among botanists, as well as interesting data on the sphere of collaborators of the investigated researcher. In the present study, we approach two concrete examples, both being mycologists: (...) Blas Lázaro Ibiza, first professor of descriptive botany at the Faculty of Pharmacy of the Central University of Madrid, and Augustine Luis M. Unamuno Irigoyen, director of the mycology section of the Royal Botanic Garden of Madrid. (shrink)

This paper provides a brief comparative overview of the development of the reproductive sciences especially in agriculture in the UK and the US. It begins with the establishment by F. H. A. Marshall in 1910 of the boundaries that framed the reproductive sciences as distinct from genetics and embryology. It then examines how and where the reproductive sciences were taken up in agricultural research settings, focusing on the differential development of US and UK institutions. The reproductive sciences were also pursued (...) in medical and biological settings, and I discuss how the intersections among all three allowed the circulation of both ideas and scientists’ careers. Across the twentieth century, scientific leadership in the reproductive sciences alternated between the UK and US, and these patterns are elucidated. I conclude with thoughts on future research that might emphasize the elaboration of industrialization processes in agriculture and new capacities to transform both reproductive processes and their products—life itself—as biopower comes to be more ambitiously understood as extending across all species. (shrink)

Jean Baptiste Dumas, an outstanding research chemist and teacher, laid the foundations of the science of organic chemistry. While doing so, he gathered around him some thirty students who participated in his research programmes and for the most part worked in his laboratory, thus forming a laboratory-based research school of chemists. Several of these in their turn influenced the development of the science. In Part I the social and institutional aspects of the school were considered. The discussion in Part II (...) centres on student participation in Dumas's five programmes of research, arguably the most important determinant of membership in his school. As a general conclusion to the article, an assessment is made of the relationship between Dumas and his students. (shrink)

During its centennial celebrations in 2008, the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology (MVZ) at the University of California, Berkeley paid homage to its founding director, Joseph Grinnell. Recognized as a leading scientific institution, the MVZ managed to grow throughout the twentieth century, a period often characterized by the decline of natural history. To understand how and why research flourished at the MVZ, this paper looks closely at Grinnell's undergraduate course, the Natural History of the Vertebrates (NHV). Taught by MVZ affiliates since (...) 1914, the NHV offers an important window on Grinnell's approach and legacy. This paper argues that the NHV contributed to the MVZ's long-term success by acting as, first, a gateway to natural history; second, a vector for the MVZ's research programme; and third, a shared faculty responsibility. Grinnell's significance in the history of science is understated, in part because his writing style de-emphasized the importance of his theoretical contributions, including his development of the niche concept, his emphasis on population thinking and geographic isolation in studies of evolution, and his effort to integrate speciation questions and genetics. Studying the NHV highlights these contributions because Grinnell freely communicated his ideas to his students. An analysis of Grinnell's course material shows that his theoretical and methodological approach pre-dated the evolutionary synthesis and inspired natural-history research throughout the past century. (shrink)

ArgumentKuhnian phases of paradigmatic development correspond to characteristic variations of citation measures. These correlations can in turn be predicted from a simple model of human information processing when applied to the common environments of scientists. By combining a scientometric and a human information processing approach to the history of scientific thought, structures of disciplinary development, and in particular paradigmatic cycles, can be more reliably assessed than before. Consequently, the quantitative historian of science is liberated to some extent from the vagaries (...) of qualitative judgment, as exemplified by traditional narrative type approaches to the history of science. (shrink)

Is it Possible to Experiment with Thought? Ernst Mach’s Notion of Thought Experiment and its Pedagogical Context around 1900. The article tries to establish the crucial importance of the pedagogical dimension of Ernst Mach’s ideas on experimenting with thought. The focus on contemporary pedagogics demonstrates, first, that Mach’s didactic approach to physics is part of a much broader stream of pedagogical writings that transcends national and disciplinary borders and comprises a diversity of authors, e.g. Wilhelm Jerusalem, William James or Alfred (...) N. Whitehead; second, that the much‐heralded controversy between Mach and the French philosopher of science Pierre Duhem about thought experiments does not only revolve around epistemological issues but rather stems from their antagonist vision of teaching physics; and finally, third, that G. Stanley Hall’s psychogenetic theory of pedagogics bears a strong resemblance with the evolutionary naturalism of Machian epistemology and helps explaining key tenets of Mach’s conception of thought experiment. By establishing a broad convergence between the work of all these authors despite their different academic upbringing, background and nationality the article argues for a complex and historically fine‐grained vision of the relations between natural, social and human sciences going beyond dichotomies like ‘Erklären’ and ‘Verstehen’ or the ‘Two Cultures’. (shrink)

From the 1950s to the 1970s, a group of physician–researchers forming the ‘Liverpool school’ made groundbreaking contributions in such diverse areas as the genetics of Lepidoptera and human medical genetics. The success of this group can be attributed to the several different, but interconnected, research partnerships that Liverpool physician Cyril Clarke established with Philip Sheppard, Victor McKusick at Johns Hopkins University, the Nuffield Foundation, and his wife Féo. Despite its notable successes, among them the discovery of the method to prevent (...) Rhesus haemolytic disease of the newborn, the Liverpool School began to lose prominence in the mid-1970s, just as the field of medical genetics that it had helped pioneer began to grow. This paper explores the role of partnerships in making possible the Liverpool school's scientific and medical achievements, and also in contributing to its decline. (shrink)

Summary This paper discusses the emergence of new medical experimental specialties at the Medical School of Surgery (Escola Médico-Cirúrgica) and the Faculty of Medicine of Lisbon University (Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa) between 1897 and 1946, as a result of the activities of Marck Athias's (1875?1946) histophysiology research school. In 1897, Marck Athias, a Portuguese physician who had graduated from the Faculty of Medicine in Paris, founded a research school in Lisbon along the lines of Michael Foster's physiology (...) research school in England and Franz Hofmeister's physiological chemistry school in Germany. His research programme was highly innovative in Portugal. Not only did it bring together many disciples and co-workers, but it branched out and created new medical specialties within Portuguese medical science. These new disciplinary areas grew out of the study of the histology of the nervous system but eventually expanded into normal and pathological histophysiology, physiological chemistry and experimental endocrinology. The esprit de corps that existed between research school members ensured the school's success and influence in various fields social and political as well as scientific. Athias's school was strongly influenced by positivist ideals and promoted a teaching and research style that sought inspiration in Humboldt's university model, thus helping to bring about a change in the dominant scientific ethos and to modernize scientific research in Portugal during the first half of the twentieth century. (shrink)

This paper compares and contrasts three groups that conducted biological research at Yale University during overlapping periods between 1910 and 1970. Yale University proved important as a site for this research. The leaders of these groups were Ross Granville Harrison, Grace E. Pickford, and G. Evelyn Hutchinson, and their members included both graduate students and more experienced scientists. All produced innovative research, including the opening of new subfields in embryology, endocrinology and ecology respectively, over a long period of time. Harrison's (...) is shown to have been a classic research school; Pickford's and Hutchinson's were not. Pickford's group was successful in spite of her lack of departmental or institutional position or power. Hutchinson and his graduate and post-graduate students were extremely productive but in diverse areas of ecology. His group did not have one focused area of research or use one set of research tools. The paper concludes that new models for research groups are needed, especially for those, like Hutchinson's, that included much field research. (shrink)

As the most famous woman scientist of the twentieth century, there has been no shortage of books and articles on the life and career of Marie Curie . Her role as a director of a laboratory-based research school in the new scientific field of radioactivity, a field which embraced both chemistry and physics, however, has never been examined. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the question of research schools, and Morrell, Ravetz, Geison, and Klosterman, amongst others, (...) have written on this subject. Using, in part, the methodology of Morrell, this paper investigates the role of Marie Curie as a school director in the Paris Faculty in the years 1907–14, examining the work and characteristics of her school and assessing her effectiveness as a director. (shrink)

Summary During the nineteenth century French chemistry was marked by an outstanding number of Alsation chemists whose scientific contributions cannot be ignored. Especially following the Franco-Prussian War, their regional origin was given a particular importance as a means of affirming their singularity on the French scientific scene. However, some questions may be raised: can we distinguish the Alsatians from other French chemists before 1870? Were they a homogeneous group sharing a common origin? The aim of this article therefore, is, to (...) show that by their theoretical options within chemistry, their personal and professional relationships, as well as by their participation in various common initiatives, they organized themselves both formally and informally within the Parisian scientific community. Amongst these forms of organization the research school of Charles Adolphe Wurtz (1817?84) emerges as the nucleus of what we may envisage as a network of Alsatian chemists working in Paris, in the second half of the nineteenth century. (shrink)

In the 1930s and 1940s a research school developed among scientists at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California. Although that was due in large part to Harald U. Sverdrup, a prominent Norwegian oceanographer who served as Scripps director from 1936 to 1948, this paper emphasizes the adaptive, evolving character of that research school. Conditions at Scripps prior to Sverdrup's arrival influenced his efforts in successfully organizing a group of scientists. Once at Scripps Sverdrup proved to be an (...) able leader, but he also had to adapt to the local scientific culture. Trained in a tradition that emphasized the study of physics, chemistry and meteorology, Sverdrup's emphasis on dynamical oceanography had a powerful impact on his new colleagues. But in the process his understanding of oceanography also evolved. He became more fully aware of the importance of biological and geological investigations, and it was only through close interaction with and reliance on a diverse group of scientists that there emerged an ecological understanding of the oceans that became a hallmark of Scripps oceanography. Emphasizing the importance of adaptation and interaction, and the work of other scientists in addition to a group leader, this paper offers new insights into the formation of research schools. (shrink)

In June 1930 the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research of the British Government awarded a modest research grant to J. E. Lennard-Jones, Professor of Theoretical Physics at the University of Bristol, in response to a proposal submitted under the title of ‘A theoretical investigation of the physical properties of the solid state of matter’. This initiative marked the first notable recognition by public funding bodies in Great Britain of the potential contribution to be made by the new theoretical ideas (...) in physics to a deeper understanding of the properties of industrially important materials, particularly metals and their alloys. The possible technological relevance of such a study was, indeed, a central factor in the decision to support it. The research arising out of this initial award provided the impetus for the first stage of Bristol theoretical research on the solid state of matter, an enterprise initially associated with the name of Lennard-Jones, and later with Nevili Mott who succeeded him as Professor of Theoretical Physics in 1933. (shrink)