It is outlined the third phase of the development of the journal Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU (Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). In June 2016 Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU 2015,  vol. XIV was issued. Following the legal decision with effect from 4 July 2016 the journal, while maintaining the continuity of its publication, has been renamed to Studia Historiae Scientiarum. Since June 2016 the journal has a new website with an editorial panel on the Scientific Journals Portal. At the same time it still uses the existing website on the PAUPortal. In November 2016 Studia Historiae Scientiarum 2016, vol. 15 was issued.

It is outlined the third phase of the development of the journal Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU (Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). In June 2016 Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU 2015, vol. XIV was issued. Following the legal decision with effect from 4 July 2016 the journal, while maintaining the continuity of its publication, has been renamed to Studia Historiae Scientiarum. Since June 2016 the journal has a new website with an editorial panel on the Scientific Journals Portal. At the same time it still uses the existing website on the PAU Portal. In November 2016 Studia Historiae Scientiarum 2016, vol. 15 was issued.

The article discusses the criteria and procedure for the parametric evaluation of scientific journals according to the Bill of 6 June 2016 of the “Directive of the Minister of Science and Higher Education, Republic of Poland, dated .................... 2016 concerning the process of granting academic categories to scientific institutions”. It indicates serious legislative flaws as well as flaws concerning the science of science (including bibliometrics) in the Bill and proposes significant amendments to the provisions of this Directive. It indicates serious flaws of this Bill regarding legislation, the science of science (including bibliometrics), and proposes significant amendments to the content of the provisions of this Directive.

Previously, an attempt was made to compile in a series of papers a complete bibliography of works related to physics at the University of Lviv. The period since the foundation of the University in 1661 until the division of the Chair of Physics in 1872 was discussed by Rovenchak (2014). Special attention was paid to the development of theoretical physics, starting from the first professor, Oskar Fabian (Rovenchak 2009), followed by the famous physicist Marian Smoluchowski (Rovenchak 2012), and finally the Interbellum (Rovenchak 2013). The history of astronomy at the University of Lviv, albeit without a special bibliographic section, is presented by Novosyadlyj (2011) and Apunevych et al. (2011). The development of the experimental physics since 1872 still awaits a detailed study.
The present paper will provide some additions to this bibliography: firstly with the descriptions of several missing early works from the 17th and 18th century and then, with a presentation of the activity of Wojciech Urbański. It is followed by a couple of works by Oskar Fabian and Marian Smoluchowski. Finally, minor complements to the bibliographic lists from the 1930s will be made, including popular newspaper articles. We strive to present the bibliographic description as completely as possible, in particular by avoiding abbreviations in names and titles, so that readers can extract any information of their interest. All items were examined de visu except for those marked with an asterisk (*) after the number.
Przedstawione materiały, dotyczące fizyki na Uniwersytecie Lwowskim na przestrzeni wieków od XVII do XX, będą przydatne dla dalszych badań historii fizyki i bibliografii nauk przyrodniczych w Europie Środkowej i Wschodniej.

In this work we focus on research contacts of Leonhard Euler with Polish scientists of his era, mainly with those from the city of Gdańsk (then Gedanum, Danzig). L. Euler was the most prolific mathematician of all times, the most outstanding mathematician of the 18th century, and one of the best ever. The complete edition of his manuscripts is still in process (Kleinert 2015; Kleinert, Mattmüller 2007).
Euler’s contacts with French, German, Russian, and Swiss scientists have been widely known, while relations with Poland, then one of the largest European countries, are still in oblivion. Euler visited Poland only once, in June of 1766, on his way back from Berlin to St. Petersburg. He was hosted for ten days in Warsaw by Stanisław II August Poniatowski, the last king of Poland. Many Polish scientists were introduced to Euler, not only from mathematical circles, but also astronomers and geographers. The correspondence of Euler with Gdańsk scientists and officials, including Carl L. Ehler, Heinrich Kühn and Nathanael M. von Wolf, originated already in the mid-1730s. We highlight the relations of L. Euler with H. Kühn, a professor of mathematics at the Danzig Academic Gymnasium and arguably the best Polish mathematician of his era. It was H. Kühn from whom Euler learned about the Königsberg Bridge Problem; hence one can argue that the beginning of the graph theory and topology of the plane originated in Gdańsk. In addition, H. Kühn was the first mathematician who proposed a geometric interpretation of complex numbers, the theme very much appreciated by Euler.
Findings included in this paper are either unknown or little known to a general mathematical community.

From June to November 1793 Grodno (now Belarus) was the place of the last session of Parliament of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with the participation of king Stanisław August Poniatowski, and it was where the second partition of Poland was approved.
In the days free of parliamentary debates, Grodno’s Dominicans prepared a series of physics experiments for the king. The course of the experiments and their subject matter is known from a press release (Pismo Peryodyczne Korrespondenta 2, January 9, 1794, pp. 35–42). It is a type of daily report informing about 18 meetings, each time indicating their subject matter.
This report was sufficient to recreate the course and the type of the experiments.
Three thematic groups presented by the Dominicans can be distinguished. The first is a presentation of the physics cabinet – the king was visited, among others, the Nooth’s apparatus to produce “carbonated water”, a geological collection and other items used in the later shows. The second series of demonstrations was devoted to issues related to electricity. The idea and nature of lightning was also demonstrated.
The third series of presentations concerned the properties of gases. In addition to other demonstrations, the Dominicans prepared an experiment which presented the process of producing water from oxygen and hydrogen. The experiment lasted all day, during which the reagents were measured: the volume of gases that were used and the mass of the water obtained.
The report brings a lot of important information, indicating the level of scientific knowledge and the experimental skills of the Dominicans. It is evidence of how modern physics was taught by the Dominicans with the use of appropriate instruments for this purpose. It is also a source of knowledge about school equipment in Poland.
Additionally, the report is so far one of the few well-documented public demonstrations prepared for the king. It also confirms the view that the king Stanislaus August was a broad-minded intellectual interested in science.
 

The main purpose of the article is to present the role of the Dr. Władysław Kretkowski Fund in the development of mathematics in Kraków. Kretkowski graduated in mathematics from Sorbonne (1867) and he received his PhD from the Jagiellonian University (1882). He was a private docent at the Polytechnic and University of Lvov. Kretkowski donated his huge fortune to mathematicians in Kraków. From 1911 to 1920 the Kretkowski Fund sponsored very modern mathematical lectures and seminars at the Jagiellonian University. Kretkowski also donated his extensive library for the use of the mathematical seminar in Kraków. This paper lists the lectures financed from the Kretkowski Fund as well as the research fellows of the Fund (with the time and place of studies). This is followed by a presentation of the state of the Kretkowski Library, now the property of the Institute of Mathematics of the Jagiellonian University. The article provides also a brief biography of Władysław Kretkowski (1840–1910).

Research in the field of applied geology (geology of deposits, engineering geology, hydrogeology) at the turn of the 20th century in Siberia, was conducted by the graduates of the Institute of Mining led by Karol Bohdanowicz. The team included, among others, Stefan Czarnocki and Stanisław Doktorowicz-Hrebnicki. Their activity in Siberia became a proof that the so-called “Bohdanowicz’s school” existed and the results of their research have earned their place in the science and have become the basis for developing the mining of mineral resources.

This paper provides a general characterization of the Kraków Learned Society (Towarzystwo Naukowe Krakowskie). It existed in the period 1815–1872 and during that time changed its name several times. The Academy of Arts and Sciences (Akademia Umiejętności – AU) was founded in 1872, as a result of the transformation of the Krakow Learned Society. Additionally, this paper presents mathematical publications in the Annals of the Kraków Learned Society.

A centenary of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity brings forward some questions with regard to the impact of Einstein’s theory on philosophy. This theory, and the chronologically earlier Special Theory of Relativity, have had many important philosophical implications. In Poland they provoked interesting philosophical discussions before WWII. The history of those discussions reveals numerous noteworthy facts concerning the relationships between mathematics, physics and philosophy.
A case study of the reception of the Special and General Theory of Relativity in Kraków and Lwów before 1925 focuses on the peculiar specificity of exact sciences and philosophy in Polish Galicia. The concept of “philosophy in science” coined by Michael Heller is particularly suitable for describing this specificity.
The article begins with a short overview of the early reception of the Special Theory of Relativity in Kraków. Next, it shows how the discussions during the 10th and 11th Congresses of Polish Physicians and Natural Scientists (Lwów 1907, Kraków 1911) influenced the reception of the STR. What is also discussed are the roots of the specificity of the reception in Lwów, i.e. the influence of the considerations about the foundations of mechanics and a public philosophical debate around Einstein’s theories. In order to demonstrate how different the reception of these theories was in Kraków, a description is provided of a methodological debate between S. Zaremba and T. Banachiewicz. Some notes are also added about the concurrent styles of philosophy of science (philosophy of nature). The article ends with conclusions about the specificity of Kraków’s and Lwów’s styles of philosophy in science.
This study reveals that in this period Einstein’s theories significantly stimulated philosophical considerations in Poland. These considerations have become an important supplement to the scientific activity in Kraków and Lwów.

This paper is a synthetic biography of Tadeusz Banachiewicz (1882–1954), which takes into account his most important scientific achievements. Its aim is to present the achievements of this Polish scientist to the foreign reader.

The university in Vilna (Lithuanian: Vilnius), now Vilniaus universitetas, founded in 1579 by Stefan Batory (Stephen Báthory), King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania, was a centre of Polish botany in 1780-1832 and 1919-1939. The Botanic Garden established by Jean-Emmanuel Gilibert (1741–1814) in 1781 (or, actually, from 1782) survived the loss of independence by Poland (1795), and a later closure of the University (1832), and it continued to function until 1842, when it was shut down by Russian authorities. After Poland had regained independence and the University was reopened as the Stefan Batory University (SBU), its Botanic Garden was established on a new location (1919, active since 1920). It survived as a Polish institution until 1939. After the Second World War, as a result of changed borders, it found itself in the Soviet Union, and from 1990 – in the Republic of Lithuania.
A multidisciplinary research project has been recently launched with the aim to create a publication on the history of science at the Stefan Batory University. The botanical part of the project includes, among others, drafting the history of the Botanic Garden. Obtaining electronic copies of archival documents, e.g. annual reports written by the directors, enabled a more thorough analysis of the Garden’s history.
Piotr Wiśniewski (1884–1971), a plant physiologist, nominated as Professor in the Department of General Botany on 1 June 1920, was the organiser and the first director of the Garden. He resigned from his post in October 1923, due to financial problems of the Garden. From October 1923 to April 1924, the management was run by the acting director, Edward Bekier (1883–1945), Professor in the Department of Physical Chemistry, Dean of the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. For 13 subsequent years, i.e. from 1 May 1924 to 30 April 1937, the directorship of the Garden was held by Józef Trzebiński (1867–1941), a mycologist and one of the pioneers of phytopathology in Poland, Head of the Department of Botany II (Agricultural Botany), renamed in 1926 as the Department of Plant Taxonomy, and in 1937 – the Department of Taxonomy and Geography of Plants.
From May 1937 to 1939, his successor as director was Franciszek Ksawery Skupieński (1888–1962), a researcher of slime moulds.
Great credit for the development of the Garden is due to the Inspector, i.e. Chief Gardener, Konstanty Prószyński (Proszyński) (1859–1936) working there from 1919, through his official nomination in 1920, until his death. He was an amateur-naturalist, a former landowner, who had lost his property. Apart from the work on establishing and maintaining the Garden’s collection, as well as readying seeds for exchange, he published one mycological paper, and prepared a manuscript on fungi, illustrated by himself, containing descriptions of the new species. Unfortunately, this work was not published for lack of funds, and the prepared material was scattered. Some other illustrations of flowering plants drawn by Prószyński survived. There were some obstacles to the further development of the institution, namely substantially inadequate funds as well as too few members of the personnel (1–3 gardeners, and 1–3 seasonal workers).
The area of the Garden, covering approx. 2 hectares was situated on the left bank of the Neris river (Polish: Wilia). It was located on sandy soils of a floodplain, and thus liable to flooding. These were the reasons for the decision taken in June 1939 to move the Garden to a new site but the outbreak of the Second World War stood in the way. Despite these disadvantageous conditions, the management succeeded in setting up sections of plants analogous to these established in other botanical gardens in Poland and throughout the world, i.e. general taxonomy (1922), native flora (1922), psammophilous plants (1922), cultivated plants (1924/1925), plant ecology (1927/1928), alpinarium (1927–1929), high-bog plants (1927–1929), and, additionally – in the 1920s – the arboretum, as well as sections of aquatic and bog plants. A glasshouse was erected in 1926–1929 to provide room for plants of warm and tropical zones. The groups representing the various types of vegetation illustrated the progress in ecology and phytosociology in the science of the period (e.g. in the ecology section, the Raunkiaer’s life forms were presented). The number of species grown increased over time, from 1,347 in 1923/1924 to approx. 2,800 in 1936/1937. Difficult weather conditions – the severe winter of 1928 as well as the snowless winter and the dry summer of 1933/34 contributed to the reduction of the collections. The ground collections, destroyed by flood in spring of 1931, were restored in subsequent years. Initially, the source of plant material was the wild plant species collected during field trips. Many specimens were also obtained from other botanical gardens, such as Warsaw and Cracow (Kraków). Beginning from 1923, printed catalogues of seeds offered for exchange were published (cf. the list on p. ... ). Owing to that, the Garden began to participate in the national and international plant exchange networks. From its inception, the collection of the Garden was used for teaching purposes, primarily to the students of the University, as well as for the botanical education of schoolchildren and the general public, particularly of the residents of Vilna. Scientific experiments on phytopathology were conducted on the Garden’s plots.
After Vilna was incorporated into Lithuania in October 1939, the Lithuanian authorities shut down the Stefan Batory University, thus ending the history of the Polish Botanic Garden. Its area is now one of the sections of the Vilnius University Botanic Garden (“Vingis” section – Vilniaus universiteto botanikos sodas). In 1964, its area was extended to 7.35 hectares. In 1974, after establishing the new Botanic Garden in Kairenai to the east of Vilnius, the old Garden lost its significance. Nevertheless, it still serves the students and townspeople of Vilnius, and its collections of flowering plants are often used to decorate and grace the university halls during celebrations.

This article presents a discussion of two monographs reporting on their merits and shortcomings: Modi memorandi: Leksykon kultury pamięci by M. Saryusz-Wolska (2014), and Deutsch-Polnische Erinnerungsorte, vols 1–5 (2012–2015) / Polsko-niemieckie miejsca pamięci, vols 1–4 (2013–2015).

This article presents a peer review of the book by Władysław Marek Kolasa on the historiography of the Polish press. It regards the methodology of historiography, the science of science and its sub-disciplines: scientometrics and bibliometrics.

This article presents a discussion of the monograph by A. Rafalska-Łasocha dedicated mainly to the contacts of Maria Skłodowska-Curie with the Krakow scientific community.

The author gave to print the report of the scientific “Andrzej Gawroński (1885–1927) - a linguist and scholar.” It was organized by the Society of Friends of Science in Przemyśl, Juliusz Słowacki High School No. 1 in Przemyśl as well as the Podkarpackie Center for Teacher Education Przemysl Chapter on April 1, 2016. The meeting was devoted to different aspects of life and scientific work of one of the world's most famous linguists - professor of oriental philology Krakow and Lviv universities, also briefly lived in Przemysl. Materials from the session will be published in The Przemyśl Yearbook issue Literature and Language.

The author submittedto print the report of the scientific conference which had been organized on the occasion of the 200th anniversary of the foundation of the Kraków Learned Society. The session was held in December 9–10, 2015 as a result of cooperation between the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Jagiellonian University as well as the Scientific Archives of the Polish Academy of Sciences and the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in Kraków. It brought an international group of speakers together to discuss in their deliberations the various aspects of the Cracow Learned Society. The outcome of the meeting is the publication Towarzystwo Naukowe Krakowskie w 200-lecie założenia (1815–2015). Materiały konferencji naukowej 9–10 grudnia 2015, edited by Wanda Lohman (Kraków, 2016).

This is a subsequent (third) part of the polemic on the facts from the life of Jan Czochralski and the difference in the presentation of these facts by amateur and professional historians. The main source of controversy is Jan Czochralski’s voluminous biography entitled Powrót. Rzecz o Janie Czochralskim(2012), English edition: Jan Czochralski restored (2013).

The author replies to the letter of Dr. Paweł E. Tomaszewski, which is a subsequent (third) stage of the controversy regarding the facts of life of Jan Czochralski and the differences in the way they are presented by an amateur researcher and a professional historian. The source of the controversy is the biography Powrót. Rzecz o Janie Czochralskim (2012), the English edition: Jan Czochralski restored (2013).

In the opinion of the author, a professional historian of science may have some reservations regarding the sometimes too popular a style of the publications of Dr. Tomaszewski. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that so far this amateur [i.e. enthusiast] of historical research has done much more regarding the biography and achievements of Jan Czochralski than professional historians and historians of science.

This reply concludes the exchange of polemics.

What is special about sciences in Central and Eastern Europe? What are the obstacles for writing histories of science production beyond metropoles? Is this science different then science in the centers and what makes it such? How imperial are sciences made by representatives of the dominant nations and of non-dominant nations? These are some of the questions touched upon in the interview of Michael Gordin, leading historian of science from Princeton University.

What is special about sciences in Central and Eastern Europe? What are the obstacles for writing histories of science done beyond metropoles? Is this science different than the science in the centers and what makes it so? How imperial are sciences made by representatives of dominant nations compared to non-dominant nations? These are some of the questions touched upon in the interview with Michael Gordin, a leading historian of science from Princeton University.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2015/2016. It presents the lists of: scientific meeting, administrative-election meetings, new members, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2015/2016. It presents the lists of: scientific meeting, administrative-election meetings, new members, and new publications.