No label defined (Q4335836)

See the article by Tobies for Clebsch [\textit{R. Tobies}, ibid., 117-130 (1996; Zbl 0907.01032)]. This is a well-organized presentation with three main points: mathematics in German Universities and Gymnasia in the 1870s; patterns of reception of mathematical advances; and the interplay between Victor Schlegel and Felix Klein. The early deaths of Grassmann's proponents Hermann Hankel and Arnold Clebsch in 1872/3 was followed by strife between narrow sectarians and zealous Grassmannian purists versus main stream establishment mathematicians. School teaching in Prussia was well-rewarded compared with the universities (not only in the 1870s! Georg Ohm took a severe pay cut to do research after leaving a school position in Cologne in 1826). But it was onerous, discipline always being a problem in the various vocation/trade schools and the gymnasia. Research was encouraged, and many people including Weierstrass published important results in the programs for school graduations and commencements: school teachers in the upper levels were close in activity and social standing and title ``Professor'' to University professors. University positions were difficult to train for, requiring means of support for four to seven years; there were few positions in mathematics and not all of the professorships were paid positions before the 1860s; they were not well paid compared with school teachers, medical and legal and Protestant theological professors; it was not the done thing to apply for an open position: one had to wait to be ``called'', which meant that one had to be noticed; many aspiring mathematicians took the teachers' examination as well as the Privatdozent's habilitation so that they had the chance of a job: Weierstrass and Kummer had come to Berlin this way, after being noticed by Dirichlet and others. The slow reception of Grassmann's work was the norm rather than the exception, particularly in Germany. Germany was still a decentralized country at the beginning of the Empire, there was but one journal for mathematical research, Crelle's Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Clebsch and Carl Neumann had just founded the Mathematische Annalen), and there were few meetings, the main annual gathering, the Versammlung der Deutschen Naturforscher und Aerzte, not being mathematically inclined. After the 1850s the trains did contribute to quick spread of mathematical ideas, as attested by the attendances of professors at Carl Weierstrass's lectures in Berlin in the 1860s, with half the class being working academics (anything from 20 to 50 such people!). From those who were interested, such as Hamilton in Ireland, the Italians, and Möbius in Leipzig, were interested only in their own concerns. Victor Schlegel made two attempts in 1872 and 1875 to stir up interest in Grassmann's work, with emphasis on Grassmann's concepts, particularly for teaching, and on the advantages of vector methods over coordinates. Felix Klein reviewed the first of these contributions, commenting on the need for development of Grassmann's work and comparison with other work rather than on Grassmann's work itself. For the entire collection see [Zbl 0853.00027].