Randnotizen als Lebensspuren?

IF 0.1 Q4 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
U. Enke
{"title":"Randnotizen als Lebensspuren?","authors":"U. Enke","doi":"10.25162/medhist-2017-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Are marginal notes marginal? Backed by a book from the private library of Emil von Behring the paper reflects whether annotations are peripheral sources or whether they can give some hints concerning biographical details. Behring’s traces of reading are exposed and discussed by using the example of Otto Roth’s Arzneimittel der heutigen Medicin (1877). The marginal notes demonstrate Behring’s intensive work on hypnotics, sedativs, and analgetics which were possibly used for the therapy of others or himself. The findings will be compared to other sources of Behring’s personal papers.","PeriodicalId":40892,"journal":{"name":"Medizinhistorisches Journal","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medizinhistorisches Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25162/medhist-2017-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Are marginal notes marginal? Backed by a book from the private library of Emil von Behring the paper reflects whether annotations are peripheral sources or whether they can give some hints concerning biographical details. Behring’s traces of reading are exposed and discussed by using the example of Otto Roth’s Arzneimittel der heutigen Medicin (1877). The marginal notes demonstrate Behring’s intensive work on hypnotics, sedativs, and analgetics which were possibly used for the therapy of others or himself. The findings will be compared to other sources of Behring’s personal papers.
写下去?
旁注是旁注吗?这篇论文以埃米尔·冯·贝林私人图书馆的一本书为依据,反映了注释是外围来源,还是可以提供一些关于传记细节的提示。贝林的阅读痕迹是通过使用奥托·罗斯(Otto Roth)的Arzneimittel der heutigen Medicin(1877)的例子来暴露和讨论的。书的旁注表明,贝林在催眠药、镇静剂和镇痛药方面做了大量工作,这些药物可能用于治疗他人或他自己。这些发现将与贝林个人文件的其他来源进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medizinhistorisches Journal
Medizinhistorisches Journal HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信