Book review of "Masters of Theory: Cambridge and the Rise of Mathematical Physics by Andrew Warwick" done by Víctor Navarro Brotons.

1. Boscovich. James summarizes Boscovich’s ‘atom’ (a point
source of repulsive force) with a quotation from Henry
Cavendish. I recently heard a nuclear physicist refer to
the electron as being almost a ‘Boscovichean point’ and,
although James does not mention it, readers would quickly
recognize our present description of intermolecular forces in
Boscovich’s force–distance curve of 1760.
These remarkable physicists come from a wide variety of
backgrounds and display a multitude of temperaments.
What they share is a passion, and an outstanding ability
to identify key problems and concentrate intensely. In
several cases, such as Satyendranath Bose and Enrico
Fermi, there was an extraordinary ability to grapple with
advanced texts despite relatively inadequate training. In
Remarkable Physicists James has sensitively added
flesh to the bare bones with which we are familiar so that
‘Young’s Modulus’ or ‘Maxwell’s Demon’ have now a more
human touch to them; and he has given us a bit of gossip
as well.
0160-9327/$ - see front matter Q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.endeavour.2004.11.001
Making modern physicists
Masters of Theory: Cambridge and the Rise of Mathematical Physics by Andrew Warwick, The University of Chicago Press, 2003.
US$29.00 (xivC572 pages, paperback) ISBN 0226873757
Vı´ctor Navarro Brotons
Instituto de Historia de la Ciencia y Documentacio´ n ‘Lo´ pez Pin˜ ero’, Avda. De Blasco Iba´n˜ ez 15–17, 46010 Valencia, Spain
The teaching of science – in terms of
both conveyed content or subject
matter as well as the different methods,
evaluation procedures, materials,
teaching instruments, places available
for students and other related aspects
– is a theme that historians have spent
relatively little time working on until
recently. Among other reasons, this is
because the topic was considered
unrelated to the genesis and development of concepts,
methods and scientific theories that historians were trying
to account for. A good example of this developing area of
research in the history of science is Masters of Theory:
Cambridge and the Rise of Mathematical Physics. It is an
exemplary contribution to the study of the relationship
between learning and knowing, based around the Univer-
sity of Cambridge in the 19th century – one of the main
centres of both academic research in Europe and the
development of mathematical physics. Andrew Warwick
analyses the relevant changes in education that took place
in Cambridge since the final decades of the 18th century,
such as the introduction of written exams and the use of a
pen and paper to solve problems, which enabled questions
to be raised and a students’ knowledge to be compared to
that of their peers. Alongside this was physical education
– an indispensable partner in the discipline of study – and
the predominance of private education with its system of
tutors (who provided ‘coaching’). These factors eroded the
ideal of a liberal education and the qualities of civility,
gentility and public presence that it valued, while
superseding them with what Warwick describes as
‘competitiveness, individual coaching, solitary study and
the reproduction of the technical knowledge on paper’.
Other important novelties were the appearance of regular
publications containing complete collections of problems
and new textbooks, which enabled one to rapidly become
proficient with a substantial repertoire of techniques.
Moreover, these texts contributed to the spread of the
techniques and ideals of mathematical physics at
Cambridge to the schools and secondary education
institutions across Britain and its Empire. Warwick places
particular emphasis on the importance of private tutors,
and devotes special attention to describing the procedures
used by the greatest of all the Cambridge coaches: Edward
Routh. In Routh’s classes students learnt methods and
techniques, which would be useful to them in their
subsequent careers as researchers, and what were classed
in Cambridge as researchable problems, and how such
problems were to be solved.
To delve deeper into the relationship between teaching
and research, Warwick examines the Treatise on Electricity
and Magnetism by James Clerk Maxwell, and the reception
it received at Cambridge. Warwick argues that a principal
prerequisite for the emergence of the Maxwellian school at
Cambridge was the inclusion of the Treatise in the
pedagogical economy of the undergraduate and graduate
studies. It took almost a decade for the Treatise to be
assimilated into the Cambridge curriculum and among the
elements that played an important part in its development
were coaches such as Routh, and the intercollegiate classes
at Trinity College given by authors such as W.D. Niven. On
thewhole, theCambridgesystemwasexcellentwhenitcame
to producing mathematicians capable of applying Maxwell’s
equations to the problems of relevant research, but was
much less successful in the production of new problems,
owing to its dogmatic and conservative orientation.
The conservative character of the education system at
Cambridge helps to explain the complicated reception that
Albert Einstein’s work (the theory of relativity, special and
general) received. Between 1905 and 1920, Einstein’s
Corresponding author: Brotons, V.N. (victor.navarro@uv.es).
Available online 28 January 2005
Update Endeavour Vol.29 No.1 March 2005 5
www.sciencedirect.com

2. theories were ignored, reinterpreted, rejected and then
finally accepted and taught. When he makes reference to
this,Warwickunderlines thefactthat thetranslationofnew
theories between distant places is often a more complicated
problem – a fragile process – than most reception studies
recognize. Thus,the initial rejectionofEinstein’s theory was
due to physicists at Cambridge relying on a research
programme based on the electromagnetic theory of matter,
which led authors such as Ebenezer Cunningham to
conclude that Einstein’s theory was a powerful mathemat-
ical technique in electromagnetic theory. This opinion
changed thanks to the publication of Einstein’s general
theory and the powerful support that was given to it by the
astronomy professor A.S. Eddington. Eddington realized
that the general theory was a new, physical explanation of
gravitation, which expanded existing avenues of
research and made it feasible for astronomers to
make accurate predictions. The introduction of ques-
tions derived from Eddington’s course on relativity into
the annual examination papers heralded the accep-
tance of the relativity theory in Cambridge.
Masters of Theory offers a new account of the rise of
modern mathematical physics in a specific place – the
University of Cambridge – and is of special interest to the
historians of mathematical physics. However, it is also of
broad interest to those who follow science in general,
science philosophers, sociologists of scientific knowledge
and anyone who is interested in exploring the funda-
mental aspects of the scientific enterprise.
0160-9327/$ - see front matter Q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.endeavour.2004.12.002
The epic journey of human genetics
The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey by Spencer Wells, Princeton University Press, 2002. US$29.95 (224 pages, hardback)
ISBN 069111532X
Out of Eden: The Peopling of the World by Stephen Oppenheimer, Constable and Robinson, 2004. £8.99 (440 pages, paperback)
ISBN 1841198943
Hans-Ju¨ rgen Bandelt
FB Mathematik, Universita¨t Hamburg, Bundesstrasse 55, 20146 Hamburg, Germany
Modern molecular techniques have
offered an exciting perspective on the
human past: every gene, in principle, can
be traced back along a genealogical tree,
provided that recombination has not
affected it. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)
and the non-recombining portion of the
Y chromosome are ideal markers in this
respect, because they are passed down
along the matriline and patriline,
respectively. If each genetic locus had
been sequenced in thousands of individ-
uals around the world, then those indi-
viduals could position their genes in the
respective gene trees of descent. Each of
the parallel genealogies would then dis-
play a particular geographic distribution
of the gene variants – amenable to dating using the
molecular clock – that descended from each of the
ancestral genes. An individual could then book a virtual
flight back in time down the pathways of all the
genealogies to approximate points in time in order to
imagine where his or her own ancestral genes might have
thrived around that time.
In The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey and Out of
Eden: The Peopling of the World, Spencer Wells and
Stephen Oppenheimer, respectively, invite us on such a
journey to the past by following the tales of geneticists who
are tracing the evolution of the Y chromosome and
mtDNA. Both authors see compelling evidence for the
‘Out-of-Africa’ scenario, which posits that one or two
groups of modern humans left their cousins in Africa some
60 000–80 000 years ago and eventually replaced ancient
humans in Europe and Asia, meaning that the vast
majority of Eurasians can trace back their ancestry to a
rather small group from the time of the exodus.
This view might now seem almost commonplace among
geneticists (at least to those who are familiar with the latest
data), but this was certainly not the case 20 years ago when
classic (nuclear) genetic markers prevailed. The genetic
relationships between African, Asian and European popu-
lations were then interpreted in a variety of ways. In a
curious interlude in 1981, Doug Wallace and Luca Cavalli-
Sforza favoured an ‘Out-of-Southeast-Asia’ scenario to
explain the spread of modern humans, based on the analysis
of a single polymorphism in mtDNA. Genetic support for the
Out-of-Africa model began to take shape in 1986 through an
article by James Wainscoat et al. in Nature. Nonetheless,
opposing views continue to haunt us because anthropology
has its flat-earthers who adhere to variants of the old
multiregional theory ofFranzWeidenreichandhis followers
that predicted extensive admixture between archaic and
modern humans on all continents.
However, the ‘precisely when’ and ‘which way’ of the
journey out of Africa are much less clear. Whereas Wells,
being anchored in the Stanford tradition and Y chromosome
reading, opts for two migration routes and the later of the
two dates, Oppenheimer, who inhabits the world of mtDNA,
Corresponding author: Bandelt, H.-J. (bandelt@math.uni-hamburg.de).
Available online 1 February 2005
Update Endeavour Vol.29 No.1 March 20056
www.sciencedirect.com