[Re:] More on Hennig and Rosa

[Thomas Schlemmermeyer]

Hola Amigos, a modest German guy is going to throw in a few, not certified
cents in defense of Hennig.

1.) In 1956, Hennig probably was not aware of the broad theoretical impact of
his own work. He was only (!?) a dipteran systematist and probably pretty much
involved with his heavy routine taxonomic and systematic work.

2.) By the way: Had the "Caracas Guy" any international impact as far back as
1956?

3.) I do not know, when this broad internationalization of science actually
started, i.e. this way of reviewing everything that already had been published
in English. In 1956, as far as I know, the horizon of scientists still was a
pretty national one, i.e. in first place the scientist worked with stuff
published in his own language.
(Although already as far back as the last century, the German Fritz Müller
cultivated an intense dialogue with Charles Darwin.)

   Cheers,  Thomas



On (         Thu, 29 Jul 1999 03:07:10 -0400
),         John Grehan <jrg13 at PSU.EDU> wrote:


>Some further English translation on Hennig and Rosa from Croizat (1976) for
>those who are interested in such matters. The fact that Hennig has not
>cited Croizat while knowing about
>the work at least provides a parallel to the possibility that he treated
>Rosa the same way -
>the lack of direct evidence notwithstanding.
>
>Page 609
>
>Haré, antes de deponer la pluma, un último reparo. Hennig no cita a autores
>quienes no convengan a sus fines. Es palmarion que su obra mucho debe a la
>influencia de Rosa y su Ologenesi (1918; ver Fig. 164 A, 165, 166); mas de
>Rosa Hennig no cita sino un viejo artículo, 1899-1903, vertido del italiano
>al alemán. Colesi en una reseña titulada Filogenesi e Sistematica (1956)
>subraya en forma del todo amistosa para Hennig la coincidencia de ciertas
>ideas entre Rosa y Hennig (op. cit. p. 797, 815, 822), y ventila materias
>de indudable interés mayor para el autor de una "Sistemática Filogenética",
>1966-1968; mas Hennig no le menciona. Kiriakoff - quien cita Hennig por lo
>menos una vez - capta de inmediato el nexo entre la (pan)biogeografía de
>Croizat y la filogenía; mas Hennig no cita en absoluto a Croizat, ya que
>que - por que lo quien esto escribe oyó de fuente autorizada - Hennig no
>tuvo !lástima! el tiempo de leer ni una de las miles de páginas divulgadas
>en inglés y francés po el "Tío de Caracas".
>
>I will do, before I put down the ink pen, a last objection. Hennig does not
>cite authors that do not convey his final goals. It is clear that that his
>work is in great debt to the influence of Rosa and his Ologenesis (1918;
>see Fig.164A, 165, 166); but Hennig does not cite of Rosa except for an old
>paper, 1899-1903, translated from Italian to German. Colesi in a review
>titled Filogenesi e Sistematica (1956) underlines in a totally friendly way
>for Hennig the coincidence of certain ideas between Rosa and Hennig
>(op.cit.p.797,815,822), and discusses or airs subjects of undoubtably major
>interest for the author of a "Sistemática Filogenética", 1966-1968; but
>Hennig does not mention him. Kiriakoff - who cites Hennig at least once -
>realizes inmediately the link between the Croizat´s (pan)biogeografica and
>phylogeny; but Hennig does not cite Croizat at all, because - who writes
>this heard from an authorized source - Hennig did not have (pity!) time to
>read not even one of the thousand pages in English and French by the
>"Caracas guy".
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Schlemmermeyer
Museu de Zoologia, Universidade de São Paulo
Caixa Postal 42694
CEP 04299-970
São Paulo, SP, Brasil
----------------------------------------------------------------