The essay re-examines the detailed arguments by Ludwik Antoni Birkenmajer (1855–1929) and Curtis Wilson (1921–2012) about how Copernicus’s rejection of Ptolemy’s solution to the problem of the non-uniform motions of the planets and the Moon led him to his first version of the heliocentric theory. The essay then acknowledges the speculative character of their reconstructions, the problem of anachronism in both accounts, and the mistakes that Copernicus himself made. By following their basic insights, however, readers can understand how the inconsistency in Ptolemy’s preservation of the axiom of uniform motion motivated Copernicus – first, to seek an alternative solution, and, second, to question eccentrics, which, in turn, led him to investigate epicycles. The concluding section complements their accounts, leading to an original interpretation of Copernicus’s reliance on medieval Polish developments in dialectical reasoning and on a comment in one of the books (now at Uppsala) that he annotated to develop his new vision and to construct the postulates near the beginning of Commentariolus (ca. 1510).

The work describes the discovery of lignite deposits by C.A. Pohlez in 1838 near Zielona Góra that initiated extraction of this mineral coal by several mines.

Exploitation of lignite in Zielona Góra and its neighbourhood was taking place in the years 1841–1948. The article describes only the first years of mining and creation of the Gewerkschaft “Consolidierte Grünberger Gruben”, which embraced almost all mines in the vicinity.

Extraction of lignite was conducted in the Wilkanowo and Słone villages near Zielona Góra, and also in the western part of the city. The text describes areas where particular mines belonging to the Gewrkschaft worked and presents well-known locations of the oldest mineshafts. It also presents available historical maps containing data on mining in the area of Zielona Góra and, on the basis of few preserved source materials and the 19th-century geological and mining literature, certain data concerning employment and the amount of extraction. The article introduces us also to the economic situation of the 19th-century Gewerkschaft.

Vienna University professor J.P. Frank and Berlin University professor Ch.W. Hufeland were pioneers of medical prophylaxis in Europe. Concepts created by them were based on the same ideological grounds (populationism, cameralism) and were in the mainstream of European clinical medicine modernization process. Both authors used the same pathology concept (humoral pathology) explaining diseases origination and their course in organisms. Most of their recommendations in line with prophylaxis were similar. However, there were also differences. J.P. Frank created his public medicine model of prophylaxis as an important factor in Austria where most of its citizens were illiterate at the end of 18^th century. He focused on state activities to ensure the efficiency and he recommended police surveillance over it. Ch.W. Hufeland created his prophylaxis concept for the Prussian state where the illiterates were in the minority. He could realistically consider implementation of lifestyle rationalization and personal self-control compliant to clinical medicine in the whole population, not only among the elites. The purpose of the paper is to show the basis of both prophylaxis programmes and context of their creation.

There were eight Turcologists in 1939 in Poland, including three professors: Właysław Kotwicz at the University of Lvov, Tadeusz Kowalski at the Jagiellonian University and Ananiasz Zajączkowski at the University of Warsaw. Muslim mufti in Poland Jakub Szynkiewicz and Marian Lewicki (University of Lvov) had a PhD in Oriental studies. Stanisław Szachno-Romanowicz, employee at the Main Archives in Warsaw, had an MA in Arabic studies and a PhD in Semitic studies. Master’s degrees in Oriental studies received: Ali Woronowicz (Lvov) and Turcologist Seraja Szapszał (St. Petersburg). A distinguished author and organiser of cultural life of the Karaites was Aleksander Mardkowicz (magazine “Karaj Awazy”) and of Tartars – Leon and Olgierd Kryczyński (magazine “Rocznik Tatarski”). Stanisław Kryczyński, with an MA in history, co-operated with the Tartars. Some of them were executed for political reasons,– Leon Kryczyński by the Germans (1939), Olgierd Kryczyński by the Soviet secret police NKVD (1942), Ali Woronowicz died in NKVD prison (1941); the last two for co-operation with the “Prometeusz” movement. Tadeusz Kowalski together with other Jagiellonian University professors was imprisoned in the Sachsenhausen camp (until 8.2.1940). Jobless and emaciated, the following died of natural causes: Stanisław Kryczyński (1941), Aleksander Mardkowicz (1944) and Władysław Kotwicz (1944). The following survived the war: Jakub Szynkiewicz (emigrated in 1944), Seraja Szapszał was detained in the Lithuanian Socialist Republic, Stanisław Szachno-Romanowicz, evacuated in 1939, remained as an expatriate in London. Doing odd jobs, the following survived the war: Tadeusz Kowalski, Ananiasz Zajączkowski, Marian Lewicki. After 1945 they took up scientific work.

The author reveals an essence of bureaucratic knowledge by means of which the nature of educational management (of schools and universities) in the Russian Empire in the 1830s was changed. The article shows the difference between bureaucratic and scientific knowledge. The author proves that the organization of regular and universal data collection (in the form of reports and references) has created a system of collective responsibility, general employment, vertical circulation of information. At the same time, the content of the created knowledge did not influence the decisions of the Ministry of Public Education. Disciplinary and representative aspects of this practice – humility of professors and teachers participating in it, timely implementation of the instructions coming from above, the consistency shown in tables and the text of digital indicators were much more important for bureaucrats. Collected data were used by the Ministry to showcase the efficiency of control it exercised.

A.F. Adamowicz, a veterinarian, botanist and science historian, became in 1866 a member of the SBF. This article presents the circumstances of his first and second travel to France. Written for the SBF Adamowicz’sHistoire de la Botanique en Lituanie was annotated and translated into Polish. The relationship of Adamowicz with the SBF and France has been analysed in regard to the context of liquidation of scientific institutions by the Russians in the occupied city of Vilnius.

The following work concerns three selected permanent oral forms of prescription medicines: Stomach lozenges (trochisci, pastilli), morsels (morsuli, tabellae) and rolls (rotulae, orbiculi).

They were recognised as so-called medical treats (cupedia or cupediae medicae), which were also described as: goodies, sweets, spices or drugstore delicacies.

The following handbooks have been analysed: Formulare czyli nauka o sztuczném przepisywaniu lekarstw (Warsaw, 1816) written by Jan Bogumir Freyer (1778–1828), Wykład farmakomorfiki i katagrafologii (Cracow, 1851) by Fryderyk Kazimierz Skobel (1806–1876), Receptura czyli nauka pisania recept i przyrządzania podług nich lekarstw (Warsaw, 1865) by Antoni Kryszka (1818–1912). Issues concerning prescription medicines are described in the above publications.

The work concentrates on terminology, characteristics and rules of preparing prescriptions, as well as methods of their realisation.

The article focuses on Sheila Fitzpatrick’s experience of the late 1960s in the Soviet Union. It was a time when the “scientific exchanges” between the USSR and western powers began as a part of cultural diplomacy. As a historian from capitalistic country, Fitzpatrick had the unique experience of working on the Soviet period in the Soviet archives. Western scholars were subject to the control of the Soviet authorities, which often accused westerns in ideological diversion and spying. The portrayal of Soviet journal “Novy Mir” depicted the intellectual trends and literary milieu in the USSR. Thus, A Spy in the Archives, is not only record of Fitzpatrick’s personal history, but of Soviet intellectual history as well.