PUBLISHING SOUTH AFRICAN SCHOLARSHIP IN THE GLOBAL ACADEMIC COMMUNITY

South Africa's academic publishing history has been profoundly influenced by its colonial heritage. This is reflected in the publication of Transactions of the South African Philosophical Society (later, the Royal Society of South Africa) from 1878. Although the Society and journal sought to promote original research about South Africa, it was modelled after the Royal Society in London and formed part of an imperial scientific community. As the local higher education institutions grew more independent and research-focused, local scholarly publishing developed as well, with university presses playing an increasingly important role. The University of South Africa (Unisa) Press started publishing departmental journals in the 1950s, with a focus on journals that 'speak to the student', and it is today the only South African university press with an active journals publishing programme. As external funding declined and the country became intellectually isolated in the high apartheid period, the Press managed to attract journals that could no longer be subsidized by learned societies and other universities. More recently, new co-publishing arrangements have brought South African journals back into an international intellectual community. Although some argue that this constitutes a re-colonization of South African knowledge production, it is also an innovative strategy for positioning local research in a global context.

CONSERVATIVE ATTITUDES TO OLD-ESTABLISHED ORGANS: OLIVER LODGE AND PHILOSOPHICAL MAGAZINE

In 1921 Oliver Lodge defended Philosophical Magazine against charges of mismanagement from the National Union of Scientific Workers. They alleged that its editors performed little editorial work, the bulk being done by the publishers, Taylor & Francis. Lodge reassured Nature's readers that the journal did consult its editors, and suggested 'a conservative attitude towards old-established organs is wise; and that it is possible to over-organise things into lifelessness.' The paper explores Lodge's response by considering the editorial arrangements at Philosophical Magazine. Founded in 1798, it remained remarkably unchanged and so appeared old-fashioned when compared with its closest rivals, Proceedings of the Royal Society and Proceedings of the Physical Society. We argue that for Lodge the management of Philosophical Magazine gave it the flexibility and independence required to sustain the kind of physics, also open to accusations of obsolescence, in which he believed.

Making Kew Observatory: the Royal Society, the British Association and the politics of early Victorian science

Built in 1769 as a private observatory for King George III, Kew Observatory was taken over in 1842 by the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS). It was then quickly transformed into what some claimed to be a 'physical observatory' of the sort proposed by John Herschel - an observatory that gathered data in a wide range of physical sciences, including geomagnetism and meteorology, rather than just astronomy. Yet this article argues that the institution which emerged in the 1840s was different in many ways from that envisaged by Herschel. It uses a chronological framework to show how, at every stage, the geophysicist and Royal Artillery officer Edward Sabine manipulated the project towards his own agenda: an independent observatory through which he could control the geomagnetic and meteorological research, including the ongoing 'Magnetic Crusade'. The political machinations surrounding Kew Observatory, within the Royal Society and the BAAS, may help to illuminate the complex politics of science in early Victorian Britain, particularly the role of 'scientific servicemen' such as Sabine. Both the diversity of activities at Kew and the complexity of the observatory's origins make its study important in the context of the growing field of the 'observatory sciences'.

A controversial idea as a cultural resource: The Lysenko controversy and discussions of genetics as a 'democratic' science in postwar Japan

The Japanese discussion of the theory of Soviet agronomist Trofim D. Lysenko began in the postwar years under the American occupation. Leftists introduced Lysenko's theory immediately after the war as part of a postwar scientists' movement. Unlike many American geneticists, who sharply criticized the theory, Japanese geneticists initially participated in the discussion in an even-handed way; their scientific interests in the roles of cytoplasm and the environment in heredity shaped their initial sympathetic reaction. As the Cold War divide deepened, however, Japanese scientists began expressing sharp anti-Lysenko criticisms that resembled the American criticisms. Interestingly, throughout the period, Japanese geneticists' overall aim in the discussion remained largely unchanged: to effectively reconstruct their discipline and maintain its proper image and authority. However, the shift in their reaction occurred due to an evolving sociopolitical context, especially the shift in the meaning of 'democratic' science from a science that employed democratic processes to a science of a liberal-democratic state. Regarding Lysenko's idea as a cultural resource could help to explain how and why it was treated differently in different places, and why a controversy emerged in certain contexts but not in others.

The transnational circulation of scientific ideas: importing behavioralism in European political science (1950-1970)

This article aims to deepen our understanding of the transatlantic circulation of scientific ideas during the Cold War by looking at the importation of behavioralism in European political science. It analyses the social, institutional, and intellectual dynamics that led to the creation, in 1970, of a transnational organization that aimed to promote behavioralism in Europe: the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR). Using qualitative material drawn from archives and interviews, the study shows that the creation of the ECPR was the joint product of academic, scientific, and political rivalries. It argues that the founding of the organization served a purpose for several agents (chiefly, academic entrepreneurs and philanthropic foundations) who pursued different strategies in different social fields in the context of the Cold War. More broadly, it suggests that the postwar development of the social sciences and the circulation of scientific ideas are best accounted for by mapping sociological interactions between scientific fields and neighboring social spheres.

[THE PROFESSORS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY AND THE SOCIETY OF THE FRIENDS OF THE SCIENCES OF WARSAW (1800-1832)]

The National Museum of Natural History played a crucial role in the formation of Polish scientific elites in the 19th century. Many Polish students were attending in Paris natural history, botany, zoology, chemistry and mineralogy courses. The Warsaw Society of Friends of Learning was the largest scientific society and one of the most important scientific institutions in Poland. It had also an impact on the political and cultural life of the country, occupied and deprived of freedom at that time. Amongst its founders and members, could be found listeners to the lectures of Lamarck, Haüy, Vauquelin, Desfontaines, Jussieu. Moreover, seven professors of the National Museum of Natural History were elected foreign members of the Warsaw Society of Friends of Learning: Cuvier, Desfontaines, Haüy, Jussieu, Latreille, Mirbel, Vauquelin. The article analyses this choice and underlines the relationship between these scientists and Warsaw's scientists. The results of this research allow to confirm that the National Museum of Natural History was the most important foreign institution in the 19th century for Polish science, and more specifically natural sciences.

[The Continuity Between World War II and the Postwar Period: Grant Distribution by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science and the Subsidiary Fund for Scientific Research]

This paper analyzes the distribution of the Subsidiary Fund for Scientific Research, a predecessor to the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI), which operated in Japan from the 1930s to 1950s. It reveals that the Japanese government maintained this wide-ranging promotion system since its establishment during the war until well into the postwar period. Previous studies insist that, at the end of the war, the Japanese government generally only funded the research that it considered immediately and practically useful. In contrast to this general perception, my analysis illustrates that both before and after the war, funding was allotted to four research areas: natural science, engineering, agriculture, and medicine. In order to illuminate this continuity, I compare the Subsidiary Fund with another research fund existing from 1933 to 1947: the Grant of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). The comparison demonstrates that the JSPS received externally raised capital from the military and munitions companies. However, while this group focused upon engineering and military-related research as the war dragged on, the Subsidiary Fund has consistently entrusted scientists with the authority to decide the allocation of financial support.

FORTIETH ANNIVERSARY ISSUE OF THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OROFACIAL MYOLOGY (IJOM): THE FACE OF THE IAOM

This article presents an historical account of the International Journal of Orofacial Myology from its inception to the present. Highlights from individuals involved and perspectives are included.