Maria Rentetzi
Women in Physics
Women Physicists in the Institute for
Radium Research in Vienna,
1920-1938: A Statistical Report. *
The
Institute for Radium Research in Vienna from 1920 to 1938 constituted a
paradoxical exception in the world of physics since it employed an
extraordinary number of women physicists. In what follows, based on the
participation of women in this site, I aim to dismantle the stereotypical image
of the “patient” women in physics.
“I
should expect to go further in influence and get more for my expenditure if in
introducing young blood into a department of physics I picked one or two of the
most outstanding younger men rather than if I filled one of my openings with a
woman.”[1] This is what Robert Millikan wrote in 1936,
questioning the decision of W. Few, the President of Duke University, to
appoint Hertha Sponer, a German physicists, to a full professorship. Millikan
was convinced that the presence of women in a physics department lowered its
prestige. As Margaret Rossiter argues, between the 1920s and the 1930s the
efforts of established physicists such as Millikan and his colleagues to
promote research opportunities for scientists were restricted to men.[2] Cases like
Millikan’s enforce and support the stereotype that women were excluded from
physics especially in the beginning of the 20th century, when the
academic mentality was particularly misogynist and discriminatory.
Nevertheless, the Institute for Radium Research in Vienna (Institut für Radiumforschung)[3] from 1920 to 1938 constitutes a paradoxical exception in the world of physics. It was one of the three most important European research centers on radioactivity from the early 1910s to the beginning of the Second World War, and it employed an extraordinary number of female physicists who participated actively in scientific research and administration. An interesting puzzle lurks behind the case of the Viennese institute. Not only did the Institute employ a large number of women physicists, but, in addition, the research of those women was comparable to that of their male colleagues, breaking with the stereotype of women as “patient” calculators and technicians. Focusing on the participation of women in the Radium Institute I aim to debunk and dismantle the stereotypical image of the “patient and meticulous” women. These women scientists were not merely technicians. They were not only relegated to limited jobs – e.g. carrying out calculations, using the scintillation counters or preparing the experimental settings for their male colleagues. Rather, they played a central role in the work of the Institute and the formation of their discipline. Most of all they were capable scientists and this is how their male colleagues conceived of them.[4]
The Radium Institute in Vienna
The
Radium Institute in Vienna, flourished under the leadership of Stefan Meyer, an
Austrian physicist, who worked on radioactivity since the early years of the
Institute.[5] Meyer
studied under Franz Exner a close friend of Wilhelm Roentgen who introduced x-ray
research in Vienna.[6]
In 1907 Meyer became Exner’s assistant. Both of them worked for the development
of the new discipline of radioactivity and in 1910 they succeeded in
establishing an Institute devoted especially to radium research. Exner was
named director of the Institute, but Meyer was in charge of the supervision of
planning and handled the administration from the beginning.
The Institute was recognized as one of the three main research centers for radioactivity in the world, with close connections to the other two centers - the Curies’ Radium Institute in France and Rutherford’s laboratory in Cambridge University. Because the Vienna Institute had access to the radium resources of the Bohemian mines in St. Joachimsthal, not only did it become the main radium supplier for the other two institutes but it also afforded its scientists exceptional opportunities to conduct their own research.
Meyer
was officially named director of the Institute after Exner’s retirement in
1920. He remained the director until the Anschluss
in 1938 when, being part Jewish, he was one of the firsts to be dismissed of
the University.[7]
Up to that time a remarkable number of women scientists were involved in
studies of radioactivity at the Institute. Meyer’s pleasant personality and his
encouragement played a major role in this exceptional constellation of women.
Some of them were attracted by Hans Pettersson’s and Gerhard Kirsch’s work on
artificial disintegration.[8] Some
others worked on the border zone between radiophysics and medicine. Most of
them were fluent in the major European languages and moved easily from Vienna
to the Curies’ or Rutherford’s laboratories for short periods of research.
Women physicists participated as full colleagues in the work of the Radium Institute
and played an important role in the broader scientific community.
Statistical Findings
As Galison points out, there is no doubt that the Institute became a “mecca for women exploring the complex of fields surrounding nuclear physics, radiochemistry and radiophysics.”[9] Proposed explanations for the disproportionate role of women in radioactivity research and especially for the case of the Radium Institute have focused on the painstaking and repetitive character of the work that makes it especially appropriate to patient female researchers.[10] As Rossiter argues, women are usually willing to enter unpromising fields and accept strenuous and difficult work conditions.[11] However, the image of women as tolerant assistants performing auxiliary tasks rests on the stereotype of their technological ineptitude and their patient nature. A close look at the Radium Institute reveals that there was an extraordinary constellation of women who worked as highly productive researchers. Most prominent among them were Berta Karlik, Marietta Blau, Elizabeth Rona, Hertha Wambacher, Hilda Fonovitz-Smereker and Elisabeth Kara-Michailova.[12]
A survey of the Almanac of the Academy of Sciences from 1920 to 1938 reveals that the percentage of women working at the Institute was exceptionally high, close to 36%. Out of 153 scientists who used the facilities of the institute or were actually employed by it, 55 were women.[13] Additionally, a closer look at the Mitteilungen, the annual bulletin of the Institute, for the same period uncovers a surprising element. The female scientists were not meticulous assistants preparing the experimental settings for their male colleagues and they did not merely count flashes on scintillation screens.[14] The list of publications from 1920 to 1938 indicates that women performed their own research and published on their own projects. The Mitteilungen were devoted exclusively to the publications of the physicists working in the Institute. In total there were 139 authors, 47 of whom were women, a percentage of 34%. This distribution remained fairly constant over the years.[15] An analysis of the number of publications per year from 1920 to 1938 demonstrates that women made consistent and steady contributions to the work of the Institute and were as scientifically productive as their male colleagues.
Chart 1:
|
|
x publishing n papers |
% of x publishing n papers |
||||
|
number of publications |
men |
women |
authors in general |
men |
women |
authors in general |
|
1 |
62 |
33 |
95 |
67.4 |
70.2 |
68.4 |
|
2 |
12 |
6 |
18 |
13 |
12.8 |
12.9 |
|
3-9 |
7 |
3 |
10 |
7.6 |
6.4 |
7.2 |
|
> 10 |
11 |
5 |
16 |
12.0 |
10.6 |
11.5 |
total
|
92 |
47 |
139 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
As
the chart 1 shows, there is very little divergence in the percentage of
publications between men and women in all four categories. Most of the women
published either one or two papers but the same holds for men. 10.6% of women
published more than ten papers, a percentage that is impressively close to 12%
for men. This indicates that the most productive core of scientific researchers
in the Institute was comprised of just 16 people, one third of whom were women.
The main collaborations occurred within this core. Moreover, 30% of the total
collaborations were between men and women while 13% were between women only.
Most interesting is the fact that women who worked with men were as prestigious
and well published as their male colleagues. For example both Elisabeth
KaraMichailova and Berta Karlik collaborated extensively with Karl Przibram,
assistant at the Institute and the most published of the physicists in the Mitteilungen. KaraMichailova worked with
Hans Pettersson as well, who was second in the number of publications.
Further
analysis of these collaborations leads to the identification of the different
scientific teams. Women seem to thrive in all of them. I distinguish four:
a)
The group of Gerhard Kirsch and Hans Pettersson working on artificial
disintegration between 1923 and 1927. Among the women who joined the group were
Elisabeth Rona, Marietta Blau, Berta
Karlik, Dagmar Pettersson and Elisabeth KaraMichailova.
b)
Around the beginning of the ‘20s Przibram worked mainly with KaraMichailova on
radiophotoluminescence. After 1933 he worked on the fluorescence of fluorides
with Karlik and Rona. However, a number of other female scientists such as
Maria Belar, Berta Zecker, Louisa Groeger, Elfride Eysnak and Irmbera Leitner
worked with Przibram and published along the same lines.
c)
From 1932 to 1938 Blau and Hertha Wambacher worked together on photographic
emulsions, a method for trapping and counting charged nuclear particles.[16]
d)
In the 30’s one more important research direction was Rona’s work on the
preparation of polonium sources. She co-authored papers with Margarete Hoffer
and worked further on the artificial radioactivity with Elisabeth Neuninger and
Hertha Scheichenberger.
The
characteristic of the Vienna group working on radioactivity is that the main
researchers, for example Meyer and Przibram, did not act as authoritative
leaders but more like intermediaries to young researchers without any
discrimination against women.[17] As Rona
recollects “The atmosphere at the institute was most pleasant. We were all
members of one family. Each took an interest in the research of the others,
offering help in the experiments and ready to exchange ideas. Friendships
developed that have lasted to the present day. The personality of Meyer and
that of the associate director, Karl Przibram, had much to do with creating
that pleasant atmosphere.”[18]
Contrary
to the standard view in the literature, most of these women were paid. Some of
them such as Rona, KaraMichailova, Blau and Karlik had paychecks delivered
either every month or every two months and some for the particular tasks they
performed. The same holds for a few of their male colleagues too. In the Institutverrechnung, a notebook
recording monthly financial revenues and expenses, one finds detailed reports on the amounts paid to the researchers.
A few Bestaetigungen, receipts signed
by women scientists, confirm that they were paid for chemical and photographic
tasks they performed as well for the preparation of radioactive sources.
Last,
besides their active participation in radioactivity research, women physicists
occupied important positions in the administration of the Institute. It is
worth noticing that between 1919 and 1922 Hilda Fonovits-Smereker was one of
the two assistants at the Institute. KaraMichailova worked as Wissenschaftliche Hilfskraft from 1928
to 1934 when Karlik succeeded her. For a short period Marietta Blau deputized
for Karlik when the latter visited Pettersson’s oceanographic institute in
Gotenborg for a few months in 1935.
Such
being the case it is surprising that for the same period data for the United
States show that women physicists faced severe discrimination in their
professional careers.[19] Almost
all of them were working in women’s colleges and had difficulties in being
promoted to higher academic positions. However, as my research indicates, women
in the Radium Institute from 1920 to 1938 were extremely productive and
participated actively in the research and administration of the Institute.
Proposed explanations focus on and overemphasize the role of the director Meyer
and his supportive attitude towards women. Curie’s fame and her role as an
exemplar for women in science and especially in radioactivity is used to
explain why women were attracted in the field. Women’s meticulous nature and
willingness to perform difficult and usually dangerous tasks in radium research
are added in the list of explanations. Nevertheless, personal dispositions and
stereotypical images about women’s work in science are not enough to clarify
the case of the Radium Institute. The interweaving of cultural matters and
political upheavals characteristic of the early 20th century Vienna
in relation to the strong scientific tradition of the time and the position of
women in the Viennese society could elucidate another side of the same story. A
closer look at the actual work performed at the institute and further research
is definitely needed. At this point the above case study poses a question and
reveals a possible historical flaw: is the Radium Institute just a paradoxical
exception or the stereotype of “patient” women influences our method of writing
the history of science in such a way that we missed similar cases elsewhere?
The data from the Radium Institute are not enough to answer such a question but
they are enough to raise suspicion about the current historiography.
Notes:
Bibliography:
Bischof, Brigitte.
2000. Frauen am Wiener Institute fuer
Radiumforschung, (Diplomarbeit, Universitaet Wien).
Galison,
Peter. 1997. “Marietta Blau: Between Nazis and Nuclei” Physics Today, November, pp. 42-48.
Galison,
Peter.1997. Image and Logic.
(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
Halpern,
Leopold. 1993. “Marietta Blau (1894-1970)” in Grinstein, Louise (ed.) Women in Chemistry: A Bibliographic
Sourcebook. (Greenwood Press).
Halpern,
Leopold. 1997. “Marietta Blau: Discoverer of the Cosmic Ray ‘Stars’” in
Rayner-Canham M.F & G.W. (eds.) A
Devotion to Their Sciences: Pioneer Women to Radioactivity. (Montreal:
McGill-Queen’s University Press) pp. 196-204.
Przibram, Karl. 1950.
“1920 bis 1938,” in Festschrift des
Institutes für Radiumforschung, Anlässlich seines 40jährigen Bestandes
(1910-1950), (Wien: Adolf Holzhausens), pp. 27-34.
Rayner-Canham
M.F & G.W. (eds.) 1997. A Devotion to
Their Sciences: Pioneer Women to Radioactivity. (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s
University Press).
Reiter, Wolfgang. 2001. “Stefan Meyer: Pioneer in
Radioactivity” in Physics in Perspective,
3(1), pp. 106-127.
Reiter, Wolfgang. 1988. “Österreichische
Wissenschaftsemigration am Beispiel des Instituts für Radiumforschung der
Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,” in Stadler, Friedrich (ed)
Vertriebene Vernuft II: Emigration und Exil Oesterreichischer Wissenschaft.
Internationales Symposion 19 bis 23 October 1987 in Wien (Jugend und Volk Wien
Müenchen).
Rona,
Elizabeth. 1978. How it Came About:
Radioactivity, Nuclear Physics, Atomic Energy. (Oak Ridge: Oak Ridge
Associated Universities).
Rossiter, Margaret. 1984. Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940, Vol. I. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press).
Sime,
Ruth L. 1996. Lise Meitner: A Life in
Physics. (Berkley: University of California Press).
Stuewer,
Roger. 1985. “Artificial Disintegration and the Cambridge-Vienna Controversy in
(ed.) Achinstein, Peter and Hannaway Owen. Observation,
Experiment and Hypothesis in Modern Physical Science. (Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The MIT Press).
Rentetzi, Maria
Studied physics in the Aristotelian
University of Thessaloniki, Greece. MA in History and Philosophy of Science and
Technology, National Technical University of Athens, Greece. PhD student in
Science and Technology Studies program at Virginia Tech, USA. Current fellow at
the Institute for Advanced Studies on Science, Technology and Society, Graz,
Austria.
Email: mrentetz@vt.edu
m
