Abstracts
Stand: 27.09.2010

Vladimir Alekseevic Abašnik
Die Char'kover Universitätsmediziner und Emil Heinrich Du Bois-Reymond (1818-1896)

Im Mittelpunkt des Beitrages stehen die Einflüsse des deutschen Naturwissenschaftlers und Begründers der experimentellen Elektrophysiologie Emil Heinrich Du Bois-Reymond (1818-1896) auf die Char'kover Universitätsmediziner um 1900. Diese Einflüsse werden im Kontext der deutschen Einwirkungen auf die russisch-ukrainischen Mediziner und Naturwissenschaftler betrachtet und in drei Teilen vorgestellt.

Der erste Teil beschäftigt sich mit den praxisorientierten Forschungsaufenthalten der Char'kover Universitätsmediziner bei Du Bois-Reymond in Berlin. Dabei handelt es sich um den Ordinarius für chirurgische Pathologie Wilhelm Grube (1827-1898), den Ophthalmologen Leonard Hirschmann (1839-1921), den Professor für Nerven- und Seelenkrankheiten Isaak Oršanskij (1851-1923) und den Physiologen Ivan Šcelkov (1833-1909), der seinerseits Lehrer des künftigen Nobelpreisträgers Ilja Me c nikov (1845-1916) war. Außerdem wird hier auf die wissenschaftlichen Verbindungen dieser und anderer Char'kover Naturwissenschaftler zu Leipzig hingewiesen, und zwar auf die Forschungsaufenthalte bei dem Physiologen Carl F. W. Ludwig (1816-1895), bei dem Begründer der Experimentalpsychologie Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920), im landwirtschaftlich-physiologischen Institut Leipzig-Lindenau von Friedrich Stohmann (1832-1897) sowie in Wilhelm Ostwalds (1852-1932) Physikalisch-Chemischem Institut.

Der zweite Teil des Beitrags ist den literarischen Kontakten der Char'kover Naturwissenschaftler und Mediziner zu Du Bois-Reymond und zu Deutschland gewidmet. Hier handelt es sich um Publikationen (Monographien, Periodika, Studien- und Reiseberichte, Übersetzungen) und Briefe von Du Bois-Reymonds russisch-ukrainischen Hospitanten. Dabei werden auch die Publikationen der erwähnten Char'kover Naturwissenschaftler und Mediziner im ‚Archiv für Anatomie und Physiologie' von Du Bois-Reymond behandelt. Außerdem werden die Übersetzungen von Arbeiten Du Bois-Reymonds durch seine russischen und ukrainischen Schüler berücksichtigt, z. B. ‚Zur Lehre über den Willen' (St. Petersburg 1888) von I. Oršanskij.

Im dritten Teil des Beitrags werden die Grundzüge der Rezeption und Verbreitung der Lehre von Du Bois-Reymond durch diese Char'kover Universitätsmediziner im Russischen Reich, darunter in der Ukraine, bis ca. 1917 dargestellt. Grundsätzlich wird dabei auf die Besonderheiten der Durchsetzung des neuen Wissenschaftsparadigmas bzw. der neuen Ideen Du Bois-Reymonds hingewiesen, darunter auf die Vermittlung, Weiterentwicklung und Etablierung dieser Ideen an der Char'kover Universität sowie durch deren Absolventen in der Ukraine und dem ganzen Russischen Reich
zurück

Anna Ananieva
„Die Pflege der wissenschaftlichen Literatur ist die vornehmste Aufgabe des Buchhändlers“.
Die Beziehungen der Russischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu dem Verlagshaus Voß in Leipzig

Leopold Voß sieht nun programmatisch „die Pflege der wissenschaftlichen Litteratur […] als vornehmste Aufgabe des Buchhändlers“ an. Dieser Aufgabe geht er konsequent nach, indem er Monographien, preisgekrönte Arbeiten, Schriftenreihen, Jahrbücher und Zeitschriften der Russischen Akademie der Wissenschaften herausgibt; unter den Periodika befindet sich auch das ‚Chemische Zentralblatt. Vollständiges Repertorium für alle Zweige der reinen und angewandten Chemie'. Vor diesem Hintergrund soll im ersten Teil des Vortrages das Voßsche Verlagsprogramm skizziert werden, wobei das besondere Augenmerk auf medizinische und chemische Schriften zu richten sein wird.

Im Mittelpunkt des zweiten Teils steht eine Fallstudie aus dem buchhändlerischen und verlegerischen Tätigkeitsfeld von Leopold Voß: Sein noch unveröffentlichter Briefwechsel mit dem St. Petersburger Professor für Vergleichende Anatomie Karl Ernst von Baer (1792-1876) gibt einen Einblick in die praktischen Belange des Wissenstransfers zwischen St. Petersburg und Leipzig.

Dass die – zuerst geschäftliche, später sogar freundschaftliche – Verbindung zwischen Voß und von Baer besondere Aufmerksamkeit in Hinblick auf Transferfragen und eine Rekonstruktion der damit verbundenen Prozesse verdient, belegen drei Beobachtungen:
1. Der als Begründer der modernen Embryologie geltende Wissenschaftler leitet zwischen 1835 und 1862 die Außenabteilung der Bibliothek der Akademie der Wissenschaften in St. Petersburg und bestimmt maßgeblich die Buchankäufe der Institution.
2. Etwa zur gleichen Zeit ist von Baer als ordentlicher Professor für Vergleichende Anatomie und Physiologie an der St. Petersburger Medizinisch-Chirurgischen Akademie tätig, wobei er an seinen theoretischen Schriften zur Entwicklungsgeschichte und dem Wechselverhältnis von Natur und Naturwissenschaften arbeitet.
3. Schließlich organisiert von Baer zusammen mit Rudolf Wagner den ersten Anthropologen-Kongress; noch im gleichen Jahr erscheint der ‚Bericht über die Zusammenkunft einiger Anthropologen im September 1861 in Göttingen zum Zwecke gemeinsamer Besprechungen' ebenfalls bei Voß in Leipzig.
zurück

Daniela Angetter
The Exploration of the History of Medical Science and Pharmacy in Lviv (Austrian Period, 1784-1918)

The main subject of the common project of the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the Lviv National Medical Danylo-Halyzky-University is a detailed investigation into the history of the Lviv Medical University – including the identity of the professors, lecturers and doctors who were working and teaching at the university from the 18th until the 20th century. This survey is not only of great importance for the university itself and for the history of medicine in Lviv and in Ukraine in general, but also for the historical and cultural heritage of Austria. As a result, the 220-year-old history of medical and pharmaceutical science and higher education in Lviv will be outlined chronologically. The possibility to explore the history of the university in detail opened only recently: In the Soviet era, work in this field was not encouraged.

The history of Lviv Medical Faculty started in 1784. Already from 1772, Ukraine was integrated in the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. So the Medical Faculty can be considered as one of the first places of study that was established after the entry of Galicia into the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. The Austrian period was the longest in the existence of the university and lasted for 134 years. Unfortunately, many Lviv archives and especially the archives of Lviv Ivan Franko National University were lost during the wars, and some material disappeared during the Soviet era. Therefore, it is necessary to close the gaps by additional research based on external sources.

The professors and scientists from the Austrian period have been considered by now. Sources can be found e. g. in the Austrian National Library, at the Vienna Institute for the History of Medicine and in the Medical Libraries at the Universities of Vienna, Graz and Innsbruck, the Austrian State Archives, the University Archives, in Vienna's City and Regional Archives, in the Austrian Biographical Encyclopaedia and in the biographical documentary at the Academy of Sciences in Vienna. In Austria, data gaps could be closed and unknown data were found. The detailed biographical analysis shows that the professors of the inter-war period got both a fundamental training and preparation at home and a professional specialization at the best universities and hospitals in the world. Many of their achievements provided a basis still valid today.

Saulo de Freitas Araujo
Looking for a New Conception of Scientific Psychology: Vladimir Michailovic Bechterev's (1857-1927) Dispute about Wilhelm Wundt's (1832-1920) Psychology

With good reason, Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) has been recognized as one of the main advocates of modern scientific psychology arising in the 19th century. The decisive factor to his high renown was the establishment of the Laboratory for Experimental Psychology at Leipzig University in 1879, which in a short time became an international center for psychological research. A new generation of psychologists from all over the world wanted to acquaint themselves with the new model of scientific psychology, studied in Leipzig and were trained by Wundt. The Russian physiologist and psychiatrist Vladimir Bechterev (1857-1927) was one of Wundt's students in 1885, and after returning to Russia he continued enthusiastically his experimental research on mental phenomena. However, he gradually took distance to Wundt's psychological project and developed a new concept of psychology: the so-called Objective Psychology or Psychoreflexology (later on simply Reflexology). The paper targets at analyzing Bechterev's dispute over Wundt's psychology, underlining the different principles of both conceptions. Up to now this subject has not been considered in secondary literature, so an important aspect of the scientific relationships between Germany and Russia and of the history of science resp. history of ideas in general is still waiting for an explanation.
zurück

Natalia Beregoy
German Veterinarians in Russia in the 19th Century and the First Scientific Society of Veterinarians in St. Petersburg

Since the time of Peter I and even earlier there was a Russian tradition of recruiting veterinarians from abroad. Most of them served at the Tsar stable, but in the 19th century some of them were appointed to different positions in the Army and as civil veterinarians, which were very rare at the beginning of the century. By the 1840s, due to vast and disastrous epizootics (cattle plagues), the Government decided to re-organize the veterinarian part of the national economy. At the same time in St. Petersburg a few veterinarians decided to found a society of German resp. German-speaking practitioners. Their main concern was sharing experience and scientific knowledge between colleagues.

The first idea was given by Ludwig Filippovich Busse (1803-1874), a teacher of veterinary medicine at the Military school, who was born in Prussia and had got his qualification at the Veterinary Institute in Vienna. By November, 1st, 1845, Peter Petrovich Jessen (1800-1875), a German who had been trained at Copenhagen University, launched the call in German, containing the charter of a society of veterinary surgeons. The appeal was signed by three persons, E. I. Schitt, P. P. Jessen, and L. F. Busse, later joined by F. Heppel, F. Honigman, E. Langebacher, and O. S. Pashkevich. When gathering for the first time on February 18th, 1846, in Jessen's apartment, the Society of Veterinary Surgeons in St. Petersburg looked more like a “circle” than a society. This date was considered the starting day of each new fiscal year, but anniversaries proceeded from the official confirmation by the Minister of Internal Affairs on October 24th, 1846. In his keynote speech on the day of foundation, Jessen outlined the future activities of the new organization: Society members could exchange practical experience, and scientific journals and instruments too expensive for individuals would be purchased as common property. Secondly, he described the society's contribution to science: interesting case reports should be stored in the archive. Obviously at this time empirical knowledge served as a criterion both for reliability and for approval of the scientific character of research or practice.

Gisela Boeck
The Reception of the Periodic Table for School Instruction in Chemistry in Germany between 1880 and 1920

The periodic law was established by Dmitrij I. Mendeleev (1834-1907) and Lothar Meyer (1830-1895) and describes the dependence of the elements´ characteristics on their atomic weights – a great fundament for chemical systematization. Both Mendeleev and Meyer had searched for a system of element classification when writing textbooks on this topic. Already before 1869, systematical (in contrary to methodical) books had used classification models in a broad manner, but that systematization was based on material features. This tendency is clearly shown by an analysis of German textbooks of chemistry, published in the middle of the 19th century. The paper will show how and when the new system was used for school instruction.

About 100 volumes published after 1870, the ‘Journal for School Instructions in Mathematics and Natural Sciences' of the years 1870 to 1913 and the ‘Journal for School Instructions in Physics and Chemistry' of the years 1887 to 1918 were completely screened to detect a shift from material attributes to the atomic weight. The sources revealed unexpected findings (and similar results apply to other countries):

The classification based on physical and chemical characteristics remained dominant, sometimes upgraded by using valency. The periodic system was rarely mentioned, with short remarks on a few pages or in the addendum, sometimes it was displayed. Mendeleev and Meyer were reported as equal discoverers of the system. In spite of its didactic potential, the discussions in the pedagogical journals did not touch the periodic system, and a board for use in schools and a small one for students were offered as late as 1911.

Alisa. E. Borodina-Grabovskaya
C. J. Maximowicz's Collaboration with German Botanists in the Study of Far East Flora

Carl Johann Maximowicz (= CJM) (1827-1891), a Russian scientist and academician of German origin, worked at the St. Petersburg Academy of Science (Botanical Museum) and in St. Petersburg's botanical garden. After two expeditions (1854-1856 and 1859-1864) across the Russian Primorskij Kraj and Amur River Region, Manchuria and Japan, where he collected and studied the flora of these regions, CJM published his classical works, thus becoming the greatest expert and the most distinguished authority in East Asian flora. His herbarium set – collected as a base for his research – draws botanists' attention till now. CJM was appointed director of the Botanical Museum in August 1870; in 1869 the collection had been essentially enriched due to the purchase of the Japanese herbarium (and collections of drawings) from the German scientist Philipp Franz (Balthasar) von Siebold (1796-1866), one of the first descriptors of Japanese flora. During the 19th century an intensive exchange of collections took place, and CJM dispatched his gatherings in many herbariums of Europe, including Germany. Studying the flora of East Asia, he visited herbariums of Würzburg, Leipzig, Berlin etc. (1868-1869, 1888 etc.).

The correspondence between CJM and German scientists is kept in his personal fund (St. Petersburg Branch of the Archive RAS, Fund 82, List 2). Among the correspondents is Alexander Carl Heinrich Braun (1805-1877) (Nr. 8.1871, Berlin), an outstanding morphologist and author of one of the first phylogenetic systems, outlining its fragments in one of the letters; he also asks CJM's advice on the classification of walnuts. Braun was invited to review Edmund Russow's award-winning paper at the Academy of Science; the report had been read by CJM in February 1873.

A letter by Johann Christoph Döll concerns the final period of his work on Gramineae in Flora Brasiliensis (1802-1885) (Nr. 24.1875, Karlsruhe); there he asks for the herbarium of grasses. The author of German florae honourably mentions CJM's work. Emanuel von Purkyne (1832-1882) discusses systematic questions of conifers ( Pinus and Picea ) (Nr. 50.1877-1878, Weißwasser). The paleobotanist Hugo Wilhelm Conwentz (1855-1922) sends photos of fossile plants for comparison with modern plants (Nr. 36.1889); in preparing of his monograph (1890), he asks for definitions and details of Japanese conifers.

In the 1880s CJM was invited by Heinrich Gustav Adolf Engler (1844-1930) to specify the new collection by Döderlein and Tachiro from the southern Japanese islands. CJM's results (as well as other invited scientists') were included into Engler's article; some parts are in co-authorship with CJM, in other parts Engler refers to the opinion of CJM or cites his notes.

Evidence of fruitful scientific dialogue between CJM and German botanists in the field of botanical diversity is obvious. As for the future, I would like to express my hope to receive data on CJM's staying in Germany and to get an opportunity of studying his reciprocal letters to his German correspondents.
zurück

Anastasia A. Fedotova
Plant Geography in Russia: the German Basis and Making the Independence

In my presentation I'm going to discuss the making of plant geography in Russia as the separate area of scientific exploration which occurring simultaneously with formation of independence of the Russian botany. During three quarters of the 19 th century Russian botany was some kind of an appendage to the German one. Most botanists – both professionals and amateurs – came from German princedoms or Baltic provinces. Actually there existed neither a special Russian-language periodical, nor any keys for species in Russian. The Russian universities were aimed first of all on making the competent officials. They did not provide sufficient "self-reproduction" on their own natural-scientific chairs. New botanist directly brought from German university German works on plant geography, the aims, methods and programs for their research.

In the last quarter of the 19 th century the first research botanist groups united around Naturalist's Societies in Petersburg, Kazan, Moscow and Kiev Universities. Scholars who have graduate Russian universities occupied their botanical chairs. As before, Russian botanists read a lot of the German literature and aspires to be published in German periodicals. But Russian-language scientific periodical appeared. Plant geography (and the plant ecology which has grown from plant geography) strongly depend on object of studying. As soon as the plant geographer start to train in Russia, on “Russian material”, he has started to put before himself and his specialty the problems which were new to the West European plant geography. In the 20 th century for this phenomenon even a special term was coined – “ecology of ecologists”. Studying of the regularities of plant species and vegetation latitudinal distributions (which so is well reveal on extensive spaces of sparsely populated Russian plain and which cannot be observed in the Western and the Central Europe) was very characteristic among them.

New original problems gave the possibility to self-actualization for a young generation of Russian plant geographers. Thanking their energy the new research area, which received in Russia the term “geobotany”, has been created. In this process the circle of amateurs has been expanded, herbariums replenished, universities and scientific societies started to publish specialized periodicals, key to species, regional Florae etc.
zurück

Björn M. Felder
The Hygienist and Bacteriologist Evgenij Shepilevskij and the Beginning of Eugenics in Russia

On the beginning of the eugenic movement in Russia there is little research available yet. We have also small knowledge on how and when eugenic ideas were transferred from Western Europe and the USA to the czarist Russia. Evgenij Shepilevskij became professor for hygiene and bacteriology at the University of Dorpat (Jur'ev, Tartu) in 1903. In 1913 he published one of the first monographs on eugenics in Russia. There he recommended broad eugenic propaganda, the establishing of a Russian eugenic society and also the application of negative eugenics in Russia following the Western example of the USA and Great Britain. In the years before World War One he was probably the first professor in Russia who lectures eugenic issues to students but also to colleagues as for example at the Pirogov association of physicians in Dorpat. Shepilevskij was not only one of the first eugenicists in Russia. He is also an example for a scientist of the North-Eastern, Baltic region from Riga to St. Petersburg, that played a crucial role in the process of communication eugenic and other scientific theories and applications from West to East. This is specially the case with the University of Dorpat (Jur'ev/ Tartu).

Evgenij Shepilevskij graduated from the Medical War Academy in St. Petersburg in 1882. After that he worked as a physician in Riga, he finished his dissertation and became later lecturer at the Medical War Academy in St. Petersburg. Before he came to Dorpat he spent two years of studies in Germany. Already at this time he developed close contact to German scientist. Also at his time at Dorpat he continued his networks and international cooperation. He visited for example the international exhibition on hygiene in Dresden in 1911. In Dorpat he highly influenced the local debate on eugenics and became important in implementing eugenics in the region. Among his students were leading eugenicists of the later emerging Baltic States of Estonia and Latvia. The paper will examine the Shepilevskij's views of Eugenics, his role in transferring eugenics to Russia and his person as example in the networks and communication in the European North-East.
zurück

Marta Fischer
Das biobibliographische Lexikon zu den deutsch-russischen Wissenschaftsbeziehungen auf den Gebieten Chemie, Pharmazie und Medizin im 19. Jahrhundert

Innerhalb des seit 1.5.2007 begonnenen Akademie-Vorhabens „Wissenschaftsbeziehungen im 19. Jahrhundert zwischen Deutschland und Russland auf den Gebieten Chemie, Pharmazie und Medizin“ wird auch ein biobibliographisches Lexikon erarbeitet. Es wird Personen enthalten, die im sog. „langen“ 19. Jahrhundert die Wissenschaftsbeziehungen zwischen Deutschland und dem Russischen Zarenreich in diesen Fächern mitgestaltet, mitbefördert oder in verschiedenster Weise repräsentiert haben, also auch Persönlichkeiten, die bisher nicht im Vordergrund stehen oder in Speziallexika fehlen. Für das Lexikon wurde eine Konzeption erarbeitet und im ersten Band der Projekt-Reihe Relationes präsentier t . Die Zusammenstellung der Personenliste erfolgt nach festgelegten Kriterien und Gesichtspunkten . Berücksichtigt werden z. B. deutsche Professoren, die an Universitäten des Russischen Reichs berufen wurden, deutsche Mediziner, Chemiker und Apotheker, die nach ihrer Ausbildung eine Anstellung in Russland fanden, Gründer und Besitzer von Apotheken und sozialen Einrichtungen im Russischen Reich, kaiserliche und großfürstliche Leibärzte deutscher Herkunft, russische Gelehrte, die im deutschsprachigen Raum studierten oder dort zu Studienzwecken und Weiterbildung weilten, Mitglieder der Akademien, der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaften oder Vereine, d. h. Persönlichkeiten, die in einem der Länder gelebt bzw. gewirkt haben. Ein formales Kriterium sind die Lebensdaten mit dem Sterbejahr nach 1800 und dem Geburtsjahr bis ca. 1880.

Einen thematischen Block bildet die Kategorie „Leibärzte im Zarenreich“. Diese Biobibliographien, die vor allem die Ärzte der Romanov-Dynastie betreffen, werden 2010 als Band 4 der Projektreihe Relationes erscheinen.
zurück

Sergei I . Fokin
O. Bütschli´s (1848-1920) Heidelberg Scientific School and Russian Zoologists at the End of XIX – Beginning of XX Centuries

Johann Adam Otto Bütschli, the world-renowned zoologist-protistologist and an eminent cytologist, represents an epoch of investigation in unicellular organisms, first of all in Ciliophora studies. Undoubtedly, the most important work in this field were his three volumes of ‘Protozoa', published 1880-1889 in H. G. Bronn's serial ‘Klassen und Ordnungen des Thier-Reichs', thus having required more then 10 years of Bütschli's life. He was not only a great scientist, but also an excellent teacher. During 42 years of Bütschli's professorship at Heidelberg University (1878-1920), he brought up several generations of pupils and followers. Among them were such well-known German scientists as F. Blochmann, A. Schuberg, R. Goldschmidt, M. Hartmann, R. Lauterborn and K. Hamburger. The doors of Bütschli's Zoological Institute were open to students and scientists from all over Europe and, of course, from Russia. Their cordial reception was one of the reasons why Bütschli was elected a Honorary Member of St. Petersburg and Moscow universities on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of his professorship (1903); in 1895 he became a foreign Corresponding Member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburg (IAS). More than 30 Russian students and scientists attended his lectures and worked in Heidelberg between 1878 and 1914. Under Bütschli's supervision a number of Russians graduated from Heidelberg University:
- Prof. W. T. Sheviakov (1859-1930), zoologist-protistologist, St. Petersburg and Irkutsk universities, Imperial Women Pedagogical Institute, vice-minister of the Ministry of Public Education of Russia, a Correspondent Member of the IAS;
- N. N. Adelung (1857-1917), a senior zoologist of the Imperial Zoological Museum of the IAS;
- Prof. N. I. Ivanzov (1863-1927), zoologist, Tambov and Moscow universities;
- W. W. Redikortzev (1873-1942), a senior zoologist of the Imperial Zoological Museum of the IAS;
- Prof. M. M. Novikov (1876–1965), zoologist of vertebrates, rector of Moscow University, Karlov University of Prague and Bratislava, München and Regensburg universities;
- Prof. A. S. Shepot'iev (1879-1937), zoologist of invertebrates, Minsk University and Krasnodar Pedagogical Institute;
- Prof. W. W. Stanchinsky (1882-1942), zoologist of vertebrates and ecologist, Kharkov and Smolensk universities;
- S. S. Tchakhotin (1883-1973), biophysicist, senior scientific fellow of USSR AS.

In Bütschli's Institute worked scholars such as
- Prof. A. A. Tikhomirov (1850-1931), zoologist of invertebrates, rector of Moscow University;
- M. M. Davidov (1852–1933), zoologist, director and manager of the Russian Zoological Station at Villefranche-sur-Mer;
- Prof. J. N. Wagner (1865–1946), zoologist-entomologist, Polytechnical Institute of Kiev and Belgrade University;
- P. N. Spesivcev (1866-1936), zoologist-entomologist, member of St. Petersburg Forest Institute and Stockholm University;
- Prof. G. A. Nadson (1867-1940), microbiologist, academician, Women Medical Institute and director of Microbiological Institute of the USSR AS;
- Prof. S. I. Metalnikov (1870–1946), zoologist and immunologist, Higher Women Courses, member of the Pasteur Institute in Paris;
- Prof. N. K. Koltsov (1872-1940), zoologist and geneticist, Higher Women Courses of Moscow, director of Institute of Experimental Biology, Corresponding Member of the IAS;
- Prof. M. N. Rimsky-Korsakov (1873-1951), zoologist-entomologist, Petrograd University and Forest Academy of Leningrad;
- B. W. Sukachev (1874–1956?), zoologist of invertebrates;
- Prof. N. A. Kas'yanov, zoologist;
- Prof. S. V. Averinzev (1875-1957), zoologist-protistologist and ichtiologist, Pedagogical Institute of Moscow;
- V. N. Polovzeva (1877-1936), biochemist and philosopher, doctor of Bonn University;
- Prof. G. G. Doppelmair (1880-1951), zoologist, Forest Academy of Leningrad;
- Prof. I. I. Sokolov (1885-1972), zoologist-cytologist, Institute of Cytology of the USSR AS;
- Prof. A. A. Zavarzin (1885-1945), histologist, Military Medical Academy, Member of the USSR AS;
- Prof. I. I. Puzanov (1885-1971), zoologist, Odessa University.

Christoph Friedrich
The Influence of German Apothecaries on Russian Pharmacy in the 18th and 19th Centuries, as Reflected in German Historiography of Pharmacy

At the end of the 18 th century and the beginning of the 19 th century due to certain personalities like Johann Bartholomäus Trommsdorff (1770-1837) Pharmacy in Germany experienced a significant advancement. Pharmaceutical education, ways of publishing and scientific results reflect this development.

At the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century pharmacy in Germany experienced a significant advancement due to personalities as Johann Bartholomäus Trommsdorff (1770-1837). This development is reflected in pharmaceutical education, new ways of publishing and scientific results.

Susanne Guski-Leinwand
Alexander Nechayev and the Experimental Educational Psychology

Alexander Nechayev was a Russian psychologist, who spent most of his life time in St. Petersburg. He often attended the congresses for Experimental Psychology in Germany in the years 1904-1912 and afterwards 1929-1931, when he lived in Moskow. His activities were discussed in Germany during the first decades of the 20th century. Nechayev was interested in the contact between German and Russian psychologists. He published his studies in several German journals for psychology. In 1912 he was a participant at the exhibition of applied psychology during the 5th Congress for Experimental Psychology in Berlin.

Nechayev is relatively unknown nowadays. But in the first decade of the 20th century his investigations were recognized in the German scientific community. He was engaged in studies about memory and cognition and very interested in child psychology. His concern was to improve teaching methods and to enable pupils to learn efficiently. Experimental knowledge of psychology was integrated into his educational studies: Around 1900 he constructed two sorts of tachistoscopes, which are preserved in Italian psychological archives today. He interviewed pupils to find out how cognitive representation worked and he proclaimed categories of memory development.

In German publications, Nechayev´s name occurs mainly between 1900 and 1910, for the last time in 1931. He can be regarded as a pioneer of memory exploration, and perhaps his work influenced some extra-scientific discussions, like “Neuro-Linguistic Programming” (NLP).

Lutz Häfner
Sozialpolitik und Hygiene in der Provinz: Europäischer Wissenschaftstransfer am Beispiel der Saratover Ärztegesellschaft

Die 1877 gegründete Saratover Hygienegesellschaft bzw. Gesellschaft der Saratover Hygieneärzte [ Obš c estvo Saratovskich sanitarnych vra c ej ] kann als ein Paradigma der Rezeption und Vermittlung wissenschaftlichen Fortschritts in der Provinz des Zarenreichs betrachtet werden. Fernab universitären Lebens – die Saratover Universität wurde erst 1909 gegründet – konstituierte sich gleichwohl eine interessierte Öffentlichkeit aus Medizinern und Nichtmedizinern, die sich im Rahmen der Gesellschaft organisierte. Die Gesellschaft zählte zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts ca. 120 Mitglieder und engagierte sich an der Schnittstelle zwischen staatlicher Administration und den Organen der städtischen und ländlichen Selbstverwaltung ( zemstva ) in den unterschiedlichsten sozial(medizinisch)en Aufgabenfeldern und im Bereich des öffentlichen Gesundheitswesens, von der medizinischen Grundversorgung städtischer Unterschichten, der Bekämpfung von Epidemien, wie Typhus und Cholera, und der Medizinalstatistik über den umfangreichen Aufgabenkatalog der Städteassanierung (Errichtung eines städtischen Schlachthofes, Unterhalt von Nachtasylen oder einer bakteriologischen Station zur Kontrolle von Lebensmitteln und Trinkwasser etc.) bis hin zu einem breiten gesellschaftspolitischen Engagement, z.B. durch volksbildende Vorträge, die Gründung und den Unterhalt einer fel'dšer -Schule oder die Einrichtung des „Elberfelder Systems“ in der Wolgametropole.

Heiner Kaden
Zur Vorgeschichte des Projektes "Wissenschaftsbeziehungen im 19. Jahrhundert zwischen Deutschland und Russland auf den Gebieten Chemie, Pharmazie und Medizin"

Die Sächsische Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig kann auf eine weit zurückreichende Tradition auf dem Gebiet der Wissenschaftsgeschichte verweisen. Diese Tradition wird mit dem Projekt, das im Mittelpunkt der Tagung steht, fortgeführt.

Im Vortrag werden die Aspekte beleuchtet, die zur Einrichtung des Vorhabens im Jahr 2007 geführt haben. Nach der Herstellung der deutschen Einheit zeichnete sich eingangs der 1990er Jahre ab, dass ein angesehenes und bedeutendes Vorhaben der Sächsischen Akademie, J. C. Poggendorffs biographisch-literarisches Handwörterbuch der exakten Naturwissenschaften, nicht würde weitergeführt werden können. Die für die finanzielle Förderung zuständige Institution, die Union der deutschen Akademien der Wissenschaften, hatte beschlossen, dass die Bearbeitung des Vorhabens mit dem Jahr 2003 enden solle. Im Vortrag wird nochmals kurz auf die Bedeutung des „Poggendorff“, wie das Handwörterbuch in Fachkreisen genannt wird, eingegangen. Im Mittelpunkt wird aber stehen, welche Überlegungen zu einem Neuvorhaben geführt haben. Ein Gesichtspunkt war dabei, den verdienstvollen, erfahrenen Mitarbeitern des „Poggendorff“ möglichst ein neues Arbeitsfeld zu erschließen.

Galina Kichigina
Karl Johann von Seidlitz and the Rise of Russian Clinical Science

Karl von Seidlitz (1798-1885) was one of the most important figures in the Russian clinical and military medicine of the first half of the nineteenth century. He was adherent to the Paris pathologico-anatomical school of Rene Laënnec that laid the groundwork for modern clinical science and represented the prevailing trend in clinical medicine during the first half of the nineteenth century. A corresponding member of the French Académie des sciences, von Seidlitz was closely associated with the most famous Parisian clinicians, such as Pierre Louis, Gabriel Andral, and Jean Bouillaud. In the mid1830s, first in Russia, von Seidlitz applied anatomical diagnosis, microscopy, differential diagnosis, and physical methods of medical examination. At the St. Petersburg Medico-Surgical Academy, von Seidlitz and his colleague-professors K. E. Bayer, N. I. Pirogov, E. E. Eichwald, constituted a close, cohesive and eminent team.

A highly educated and cultured man, acquainted with nearly all French, Russian, and German celebrities of the time, von Seidlitz is a shining example of international scientific and cultural relations and knowledge transfer in the first half of the nineteenth century. More specifically, von Seidlitz's medical activities allow us to highlight Lucas Schönlein's similarly important contributions (he introduced physical methods of examination into the Berlin Charité hospital in the late 1830s) and to compare the ways new ideas were disseminated and adopted in new settings.

Eduard I. Kolchinsky
German Traces in Russian Evolutionism in the 19th Century

The specificity of the reception Charles Darwin's theory met in Russia is conventionally explained by social, political and ideological factors. However the traditions of Russian biology played no lesser role. The making of biology in Russia took place in the period when the limits of species variability were debated, and it was particularly influenced by German scholars (G. W. Steller, J. G. Gmelin, J. Koelreiter, K. F. Wolf, P. S. Pallas et al.). From Germany Russian biologists adopted a disposition for theoretical generalizations and natural philosophy. The paper demonstrates the ways in which scholarly works written in the German-speaking cultural area in the 18th–19th centuries influenced the transfer of evolutionary ideas to Russia and their reception by Russian science and culture.

On many occasions the arguments developed by P. S. Pallas (1780) against the transformation of species were used by critics of Darwinism, such as N. P. Wagner (1860), F. F. Brandt (1869), K. E. von Baer (1873) and N. Ya. Danilevsky (1885). Virtually every approach to evolutionary problems emerging in Germany (Neo-Darwinism, Mechano-Lamarckism, Orthogenesis, Saltationism and others) had its adherents in Russia, developping specific traits in this country. Significantly, the Imperial Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburg tended to bestow the title of its honorary member to the architects of non-Darwinian concepts from the German-speaking parts of Europe (E. Suess, R. A. von Koelliker, K. W. von Naegeli).

In Russia, as well as in Germany, many biologists who considered themselves as Darwin's followers developed ideas that were in fact very different from the theory of natural selection. Most of these scientists discovered Darwinism not in original English editions but in the German translation by G. Bronn (1860). Like their German colleagues, Russian biologists understood Darwin's “struggle for existence” not as a metaphor for all environmental interactions, including cooperation, but as a direct clash, a combat continued till extermination of one of the competitors. Early Russian biologists-evolutionists, K. M. Timiryazev among them, did not accept statistical determination of evolution, and spoke against Darwin's over-emphasizing the Malthusian model. This is the reason for K. F. Kessler's setting off the principle of mutual assistance against Darwinism. At the same time, in contrast to Germany, Social-Darwinism did not gain support in Russian society.

Many Russian biologists-evolutionists failed to see the difference between Darwin's ideas and those expressed by E. Haeckel. German traces can be distinguished in the studies on phylogenetics by A. O. and V. O. Kovalevky, I. I. Mechnikov, V. M. Shimkevich, A. N. Severtsov and others. Thus, the transfer of Darwin's ideas to Russia was mediated by social and intellectual networks that linked Russian and German biologists.
zurück

Florian Mildenberger
Emil Kraepelin (1856-1926) in Dorpat: Reform of Psychiatry and Panslavistic Endeavours

In the years between 1886 and 1890 the later nestor of modern German psychiatry, Emil Kraepelin, held the chair in the medical faculty of the Dorpat University. He developped a number of psychological models and concepts and he reorganised the languishing and ruinous clinic. But he also had to face the Russian unification policy and its consequences for Dorpat's German university. His German-speaking, but originary Baltic-German (noble) colleagues did not accept Kraepelin as a full member of the closed academic community. So he decided to leave Dorpat and he became director of Heidelberg psychiatric hospital in 1891.
zurück

Regine Pfrepper; Gerd Pfrepper
Gustav von Bunge (1844-1920) – Physiological Chemistry and Social Hygiene in Dorpat and Basel

2010 is the year of the 90th anniversary of Gustav von Bunge's death. After his studies of medicine and chemistry in Dorpat with visits in Leipzig and Strasbourg, he was a lecturer of physiological chemistry at the University of Dorpat for 11 years.

Within the medical and scientific community, Gustav von Bunge gained recognition for his articles about the absorption of iron in animals, the importance of salt as a nutrient, the composition of breast milk in mammals, breast feeding and infant nutrition and for his blood analyses in different species. He received calls to professorships from the Universities of Riga, Kiev, Santiago de Chile and Chicago, and finally accepted the chair in physiological chemistry at Basel University, which he held for 35 years.

His Lehrbuch der physiologischen und pathologischen Chemie in zwanzig Vorlesungen für Ärzte und Studirende (‘ Textbook of Physiological and Pathological Chemistry in 20 Lectures for Physicians and Students‘ ), published in Leipzig in 1887, was translated into Russian (1888) and into several other languages. His Lehrbuch der Physiologie des Menschen (‘ Textbook of Human Physiology' ) was translated into Russian by Ivan Romanovich Tarkhanov (1846-1908), a physiologist from St. Petersburg.

During his time in Dorpat, von Bunge started studying the effects of alcohol in humans. For all his life, he fought alcoholism as the worst social problem. His inaugural lecture at Basel University, titled Die Alkoholfrage (‘ About the Issue of Alcohol' ) , was printed in a circulation of one million and translated into 20 languages (e. g. O vrede p'janstva , Sankt-Peterburg 1897).

Elena Roussanova
Friedrich Konrad Beilstein´s (1838-1906) Contribution to the Communication between Germany and Russia in the Field of Chemistry

To this day, Friedrich Konrad Beilstein is world-renowned as the founder of the indispensable reference book Beilsteins Handbuch der Organischen Chemie (‘ Handbook of Organic Chemistry' ) . The book, written in German, turned into a large international project which transcended the borders and illustrates the scientific relationships between Germany and Russia. All of Beilstein's energies and works were expressed with an international spirit. His homeland of Russia, as well as Germany, where he studied and started his scientific career, played a crucial role in his work.

To some regards, Beilstein fostered the positive scientific relations between Germany and Russia in the field of chemistry, and this specifically applies to his competence in scientific literature, evident from his contributions to the Zeitschrift für Chemie und Pharmacie ( Heidelberg). In this publication organ, as well as in the following Zeitschrift für Chemie. Archiv für das gesammte Gebiet der Wissenschaft ( Göttingen), Beilstein supported the work of Russian chemists. He penned papers and book critiques and translated essays from Russian into German. In both of his places of work, Göttingen and St. Petersburg, Beilstein was responsible for the papers of Russian chemists.

His own essays and monographs were published in two languages. A good example is his textbook Anleitung zur qualitativen chemischen Analyse / Rukovodstvo k kacestvennomu chimiceskomu analisu (1867) that was published in two languages and was used both in Germany and Russia. Beilstein often took part in conferences, congresses and celebrations in Germany and sometimes acted as an official representative of Russia. These possibilities of exchanging information were taken seriously by Beilstein as a way of mediating in the scientific as well as in the political field.

Beilstein also used his holidays to work and to communicate information. His travels took him through Germany, where he visited chemical laboratories and met with his German colleagues. His relationships to colleagues in both countries were continued through letter-writing. In these letters, he not only dealt with scientific issues but also exchanged ideas about culture and general topics.

Beilstein also acted as a mediator for his school. He encouraged the promotion of Russian chemists in Göttingen as well as the publication of their results in German language. This contributed to the development of the scientific connections between the two countries.

Thomas Schmuck
Of Bones and Beasts: Christian Heinrich Pander (1794-1865) on Metamorphosis and Evolution

Mentioned by Charles Darwin in Origin of Species as a forerunner of evolution theory, the Baltic scientist Christian Heinrich Pander worked his full life on problems dealing with development. Born in Riga, he studied medicine at Dorpat (now Tartu, Estonia) together with Karl Ernst von Baer (1792-1876), came for further studies to Berlin and Würzburg, travelled through Europe and Middle Asia and settled afterwards in St. Petersburg and on his manor at Zarnikau (Latvia). Pander was interested specifically in problems of embryology, comparative anatomy and paleontology. In his thesis Dissertatio inauguralis sistens historiam metamorphoseos (1817), he outlined an accurate description of the development of the chicken within the egg. The thesis laid the foundation to the germ layer concept (Ecto-, Meso- and Entoderm) of modern embryology. Pander devoted the second half of his life to paleontological and geological research in the Russian Empire.

Together with Eduard d'Alton (1772-1840), Pander travelled through Western Europe to examine mammalian skeletons from scientific collections and to investigate anatomy and development of marine invertebrates (in particular cephalopods) from the shores of the Atlantic Ocean. An important achievement was the reconstruction of the extinct South American giant ground sloth ( Megatherium ) in comparison to recent forms. The outcome of this effort was the extensive Vergleichende Osteologie der Säugetiere (‘Comparative Osteology of Mammals', 1821-1838) in 14 volumes. Herein Pander's key concept was “metamorphosis”, a term borrowed from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832). Transformation of species occurs nearly without limits. Any metamorphosis is caused by an unspecified formative drive (“Bildungstrieb”). Entireness of nature in the sense of natural philosophy plays an integrating role in Pander's reflections.

Long before Darwin's Origin of Species , Pander turns out to be an inventive and profound thinker, who, in the context of transformist theories in the early 19 th century, deduced his theory of metamorphosis from paleontological material. Unlike most of his contemporaries and far from philosophical conjectures without any empirical ground, Pander thus was one of the first scientists to give empirical evidence to the idea of evolution.
zurück

Nadezhda V. Slepkova
“Russian” and “German” Party in the Imperial Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg of late XIX - early XX Century: Problems in the Development of the Zoological Museum

Confrontations of “German” and “Russian” parties at the Imperial Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg have already been examined for several times. In the field of zoology, a thorough analysis of the opponents and their arguments shows that some scientific antagonisms found their expression in inter-ethnic conflicts. “Germans” were associated with the old, and “Russians” with new directions of research. The “Germans” of the Zoological Museum (academicians A. A. Strauch and F. D. Pleske, specialist in theriology E. A. Buchner and their adherents) supported the systematic and faunistic research at the Museum, the questions of these scientific fields being far from their solution at the end of the 19th century. The “Russian” opponents tried to implement what was called “morphology” at that time. The rapid development of “morphology” (evolutionary comparative anatomy, evolutionary embryology and phylogenetics) was a reflection of the interest in verification of Darwinism, and the new directions competed successfully with classical systematics. Those essential changes in biological research appeared both in the universities and at the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg.

In the 19th century, the zoologists of the Academy of Sciences had been predominantly systematics and faunists (and Germans as well). First there were F. F. Brandt, A. F. Middendorff and L. I. Schrenck, then F. F. Brandt, L. I. Schrenck and A. A. Strauch, and later L. I. Schrenck, A. A. Strauch and F. D. Pleske. After 1890, A. O. Kovalevsky and V. V. Salensky were elected to the Academy – then N. V. Nasonov. All of them were typical representatives of a new morphological direction. After Pleske's resignation in 1896, no classical systematic was left in the Academy.

The confrontation of “systematics” and “morphologists” is reflected in a number of debates that took place around elections to the Academy. The first episode was a factional discussion around Pleske's nomination to the post of an adjunct in 1890. At that time, both Pleske and Kovalevsky were elected. The second episode was a controversy around Pleske's nomination for the post of an extraordinary academician (1893), which was objected by Kovalevsky. However, Pleske was elected and became director of the Museum. The next clash of Pleske and Kovalevsky was related to the succession to the director's office at the Anthropological museum after Schrenck's death (1895). Pleske's position was to elect a specialist in animal systematics, not an anthropologist. In 1896, after Pleske's resignation, the question was raised again in the discussion about filling the director's vacancy at the Zoological Museum. In this case, paleontologist F. B. Schmidt was Kovalevsky's key opponent.

The development of systematics implies organizational efforts and financial support. The Museum's achievements in these fields resulted from the activities of the Germans A. A. Strauch and Pleske and their adherents. Though classical taxonomists were not elected to the Academy at that time, systematic and faunistic research at the Museum had already been initiated. In 1895 the new manning table of the Zoological Museum was introduced, the Museum moved into a new building in 1896 and began to release a yearbook in systematology. All these elements contributed to the formation of the Zoological Museum into a leading and world-wide renowned centre of animal systematics.
zurück

Vladimir S. Sobolev
Preventive Measures and Treatment of Infectious Diseases in Naval Forces of Russia (Second Half of XIX Century)

By the end of the 19th century infectious diseases remained a serious problem of the public health service organization in the Russian Army. Among a total of 271210 diseased persons, a number registered in the Armed forces in 1899, 65590 cases were infectious diseases (24,1 %).

At that time the navy was the most advanced branch of the armed forces in Russia. Accordingly, the naval medical service was at a higher level as compared to the general conditions army-wide.

By the end of the 19th century, approximately 3.8 doctors were accounted for 1000 persons of fleet staff, whereas in the European part of the Russian Empire this number was approximately 0.1 doctors.

The radical reforms initiated in the 1860-s improved the situation of naval medicine significantly. In many respects that success became possible due to the vigorous activity of Charles Ottovich Rozenberger, chief of the fleet's medical service. Rozenberger was a graduate of Dorpat University, a close friend of the well-known surgeon N. I. Pirogov and one of the active members of Pirogov's “Ferane” in St. Petersburg.

As a result of the fleet reforms the number of infectious diseases was reduced. In 1854-1856 62 typhus patients were accounted for each 1000 persons, among which 19 persons died. After two decades, in 1876-1878 only 10 cases of typhus were registered on the fleet, while 2 persons died.

The paper is based on the study of documents in the Russian State Archive of the Navy. Material of great interest is stored in the archival fund 34 “Fleet administration of doctor's general staff”, which contains 2328 cases from 1827 to 1886.

We have studied these documents telling about fighting against infectious diseases on the fleet by:
•  statistical data on this issue;
•  elaboration and introduction of instructions and manuals for medical personnel;
•  taking quarantine measures;
•  organization of preventive measures and treatment of diseases (typhus, cholera, smallpox, malaria, etc.)

Marina Sorokina
Biographical Intersections: Germany and German Scientists in Life and Work of Vladimir Vernadsky (1863-1945)

The paper focuses on scientists' personal contacts as an instrument of creating enduring transnational scientific networks. It deals with the microanalysis of the individual destinies and the trajectories of the personal and scientific cooperation of the outstanding Russian scientist, biogeochemist, philosopher, historian of science, academician Vladimir Vernadsky (1863-1945) and his German colleagues and professors Paul H. von Groth (1843-1927), Hans Driesch (1867-1941) and others. The paper emphasizes the points of intersection of the intellectual and social dimensions of the Russian and German academics: joint projects, meetings, expeditions, publications and visits in the context of creating a new international / transnational scientific space and dialogue at the beginning of the 20th century.
zurück

Florian Steger
Max von Pettenkofer's (1818-1901) relations to Russian hygienists

Since the 19 th century mobility advanced, cities expanded and epidemics increasingly became a great danger to society. At the same time the natural scientific methodology developed at such a rate that from the second half of the 19th century medicine was nature scientifically oriented. Thus theory and practice were conditioned by a new paradigma. Together with these developments hygiene was recognised as a medical, political and a collective social challenge. Ludwig II. perceived the political impact of hygiene and therefore supported Max von Pettenkofer (1818-1901), who was chairholder for hygiene since 1865 at the medical school in Munich. Due to this patronage Pettenkofer succeeded in 1879 to found the Institute for Hygiene (Hygienisches Institut) in Munich, which acquired international reputation. During the following years Pettenkofer was able to exercise a significant influence on international hygiene and on public health. The Institute of Hygiene in Munich attracted many international visitors (among others from England, France, Poland, Russia and Japan) thus rapidly becoming an international center for training and research.

In this lecture I would like to focus on Pettenkofer's connections to Russia, which are most extensive documented. Based on the biography of some selected personalities my presentation is going to deliver insight into how Russian hygienists came to the Institute in Munich in order to learn from Pettenkofer. Thereby I intend to scrutinise at first what topics were taken up, secondly whether these topics had been further persecuted scientifically and finally to what extend those had been implemented in Russia theoretically and practically.
zurück

Erki Tammiksaar
The Weltanschauung of Karl Ernst von Baer

In the scientific community, the versatile naturalist Karl Ernst von Baer (1792-1876) is first of all known as the founder of modern embryology and the discoverer of the mammalian ovum. Von Baer lived through a time of change. When he was young, the prevalent theory in natural philosophy described humans as the only beings endowed with reason and the crown of nature. Von Baer accepted that up to the end of his days. Although von Baer was a scientist of great practical experience, he described the processes in nature using the time scale proposed by the Bible, while e. g. Charles Darwin used a considerably wider time horizon in his investigations in the adaptation of species. Due to the difference in the time scales, von Baer expected to find recordings of the adaptation of species as described by Darwin in the written heritage of man from the ancient times. But he did not find any, instead he found evidence that the survival of different animal and plant species directly depended on the activities of man. Von Baer studied that topic and was the first to prove, quite precisely in time, the extinction of one animal species (Steller's sea cow) as a consequence of man's activities. On the basis of this example, it was natural to suppose that man's activities caused the impoverishment of biodiversity in living nature. Thus von Baer concluded that man's role in the development of organic nature was more important than the adaptation of species proposed in Darwin's theory. Von Baer accepted the transformation of species in time, and he understood that man accelerated that process. In the period of 1830 to 1860, Baer also touched upon man's responsibility for nature in several speeches. He adopted Malthus's theory of ever growing need for food resources, so larger areas had to be cultivated and activities for providing food, for example fishing, had to be developed. That inevitably resulted in extinction of numerous species. For that reason von Baer was always active in the development of museums and collected different specimens: Since no one could know which species would become extinct next, at least in the museums information about destroyed species should be preserved for future generations.
zurück

Konstantyn. K . Vasylyev
The History of the Odessa Health-Resort and the Role of the Germans ( Pre-Soviet Period)

Favourable weather conditions and a beneficial surrounding area qualified the Odessa region for health resort business: the advantageous combination of sea and steppe climate, salt basins/estuaries with the curative mud/peloid to be used therapeutically (Kuyal'nyk, Khadzhybei, Shabolot, Klein-Liebental/Malodolyns'ke) and the seacoast of the comparatively warm Black Sea.

In a few decades, Odessa, founded in 1794 according to the rescript of Catherine II, turned into a huge city of the Empire, its population number being inferior only to St. Petersburg, Moscow and Warsaw at the beginning of World War I. Odessa was the central city of an important southern region of the Empire – Novorossiya (New Russia) – and simultaneously it came to be the cultural center of this region. A university was established and the second balneological society in the Russian Empire was founded there. Great scientists – physicians and naturalists – studied the natural resources of the region, which revealed therapeutic effects.

Odessa resorts proved to be health spas. The first health resort was Kuyal'nyk, where a spa opened in 1833, founded by Erast Stepanovich Andreevsky (1809-1872) – his mother Henrietta (born von Graefe) was the sister of the Berlin surgeon Professor Karl-Ferdinand von Graefe (1787-1840). Andreevsky was raised in Germany by his uncle and graduated at Berlin university. For a long time the Kuyal'nyk mud was named after Andreevsky and a monument was erected to him on the shore of the estuary in 1896. In 1843 a spa opened at the Khadzhybei estuary, where N. M. Diterichs (1854–1885) worked as a physician.

In 1853 a hydrotherapeutic spa was founded at the Klein-Liebental estuary. One of its part owners was Wilhelm Wagner (1836-?), son of Doctor Friedrich Wagner († January 1869, Odessa), who had graduated at Berlin and left Germany for Odessa at the beginning of the 1820s.

Step by step Odessa established itself as a climatic and seaside resort. A public lido was located, then private bath houses for taking sea water baths opened (the first in 1852 inspired by A. V. Link). Odessa's suburbs expanded and dachas (country houses) were built to be rented in summer both by tourists and patients. Mostly middle class people came here while the Russian aristocracy preferred the famous West European spas. The children's resort “White Flower” was founded by the Charitable Society for Curing Children Suffering from Tuberculosis, and other private sanatoriums were established close to the beach. Publications of that time (A. V. Link, 1871) witness Odessa's prosperous spa tourism.

The growing interest of the Odessa physicians in questions of the health spa business led to their formation of the Odessa Balneological Society in 1876, which made a great contribution to the study of the local therapeutic applications. The paper describes the activities of this society and the important function German doctors took in its development.
zurück

Elena A. Zaitseva Baum
I. S.Plotnikov – the Founder of the First Photochemical Laboratory in Russia. W. Ostwald and the Establishment of a Physico-chemical School at Moscow University

Wilhelm Ostwald and his physico-chemical school at Leipzig university (1887-1906) exerted a substantial influence on the development of research in kinetics and catalysis and on the formation of specialists in physical chemistry in Russia. At the verge of 19th-20th centuries, many Russian physicochemists, who became famous at a later time, worked there, such as A. V. Speranskii, I. A. Kablukov, V. A. Kistyakovskii, S. G. Krapivin, L. V. Pisarzhevksii, I. S. Plotnikov, A. A. Titov, S. M. Tanatar, I. S. Teletov and others. In Ostwald's laboratory many of them performed research that later became an appreciable contribution to the development of science. Scientific directions afterwards developed at motherland originate from there. There is no doubt that Ostwald as a pedagogue and a researcher, his methods of conducting experiments and the themes of his works formed the young generation of Russian scientists. “If to name the fact that I am proud of in my scientific activity, - Ostwald wrote, - then this will be a brilliant row of people whom I singled out at a young age and whom I helped in their free development”. In his works, he continually emphasized that each researcher should pass the baton to a next generation in a due time, so that his school could fruitfully develop and self-renew. In this respect, the establishment of physico-chemical schools in Russia is indicative. Having reached scientific maturity, Ostwald's disciples themselves founded new scientific schools dealing with specific issues, as kinetics and catalysis (schools of Moscow university – N. A. Shilov, E. I. Shpitalskii, I. S. Plotnikov, and A. V. Sapozhnikov from St. Petersburg), and also with general physico-chemical issues (schools of P. I. Walden, V. I. Kistyakovskii, L. V. Pisarzhevskii, including also Moscow university scientists – I. A. Kablukov, A. V. Rakovskii). Having left the teacher, in their correspondence they continously let him know their plans of research and asked for advice.

Zum Programm
Zur Startseite