Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16DOI 10.1007/s13137-012-0031-8

ORIGINAL PAPER

Visualising geomagnetic data by meansof corresponding observationsAlexander von Humboldt, Carl Friedrich Gauß und AdolphTheodor Kupffer [Part 1]

Karin Reich · Elena Roussanova

Received: 5 February 2012 / Accepted: 10 February 2012 / Published online: 1 March 2012© Springer-Verlag 2012

Abstract Geomagnetic observation data was already being depicted (visualised) inthe form of isolines on maps and globes back in the eighteenth century. Correspond-ing, synchronous observations had already been made in certain astronomical andmeteorological areas, but this method yielded singular results in the field of geomag-netism. The observation results were consequently made generally available. It wasAlexander von Humboldt who took the first critical steps in establishing this methodof corresponding observations in geomagnetic research; Russia was the first cooper-ative partner. However, the future of geomagnetic research belonged to Gauss, whoimproved observation methods and instruments as well as making this informationavailable to a wider public in the journal “Resultate aus den Beobachtungen des mag-netischen Vereins”. He published the results of corresponding observations in formof pictorial illustrations; this clearly showed who led the field in his day. It was leftto Gauss’ pupil Adolph Theodor Kupffer, born in the Baltic area, to make Gauss’results known in Russia and to promote them; this was particularly important in a timein which Göttingen had already relinquished its status as the centre of geomagneticresearch. Russia became the site of the world’s first geomagnetic research institution,i.e. the main geophysical observatory founded in 1849, which still exists today.

Keywords Geomagnetism · Corresponding observations · Maps with declinationlines · Globes with declination lines · A. v. Humboldt · C. F. Gauss · A. Th. Kupffer

Mathematics Subject Classification (2000) 01-02 Research exposition (surveyarticles) · 86-03 Historical (must also be assigned at least one classification numberfrom Section 01)

K. Reich · E. Roussanova (B)Department Mathematik-ST, Universität Hamburg, Bundesstraße 55 (Geomatikum),20146 Hamburg, Germanye-mail: Elena.Roussanova@uni-hamburg.de

123

2 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

1 Introduction

Research into the phenomenon of geomagnetism goes back a long way. One essentialrequirement was the use of the compass, which was mainly used by sailors for naviga-tion purposes. With the compass one could measure more or less exactly the deviationof the magnetic needle (=declination), which varied according to the location. In hiswork “De Magnete” of 1600, William Gilbert (1544–1603) tackled the subjects notonly of declination but also of inclination, thereby obtaining ground-breaking results.He not only developed a theory relating to the inclination of magnetic needles, butalso described an instrument with the help of which the inclination measured could betransformed into the latitude of the corresponding location (Sonar 2002, 2007); thiswas particularly important for seafarers. The third important component of geomag-netism—intensity—was not recognised as such until the natural scientist Alexandervon Humboldt discovered it at the beginning of the nineteenth century.

2 Early visualisations of geomagnetic data

All three parameters—declination, inclination and intensity—can be obtained by tak-ing direct measurements on site. These measurements were first recorded as lists ofdata. Once a larger quantity of observation data had been collected from the earth, thenext logical step was to work out a way of depicting it visually. The obvious idea wasto show the parameters as lines in a system of coordinates, i.e. to draw them geometri-cally on the surface of the earth. These lines joined all the points on the surface of theearth with the same declination, inclination and intensity value. Maps were createdshowing these lines, and corresponding globes were also developed, although theseonly showed declination lines. Two of the three geomagnetic parameters were alreadybeing illustrated in this way at the beginning of the eighteenth century, i.e. in the formof lines on maps. Maps with lines of equal intensity then appeared in the early decadesof the nineteenth century.

2.1 Maps

Maps with declination lines are visual representations of declination. The course fol-lowed by these lines can be seen at a glance, and the agonic lines, i.e. lines without dec-lination, can easily be identified. These have always been a matter of special interest.

One of the first maps to show declination lines, albeit only at sea, was the “TabulaNautica”. It was published by the English scientist Edmond Halley (1656–1742) in1701. Halley later became the second Astronomer Royal at Greenwich Observatory,a position of tremendous importance among the leading maritime nations of his day.This map became the basis of a whole series of other maps depicting declination lineson the sea, for example those published by William Mountaine (ca. 1700–1779) andJames Dodson (ca. 1705–1757), both from England, in 1758 and 1794 respectively.However, Halley’s successors came not only from England. The map published byJohan Gustav Zegollström (1724–1787) of Sweden in 1755 and the map published byJacques Nicolas Bellin (1703–1772) in France in 1765 were both based on the Halleys“Tabula Nautica” (Hellmann 1895, p. 10, 21f).

123

Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16 3

Maps showing only the declination lines on the oceans were typical of the mar-itime nations. These maps were used almost solely for nautical purposes. However,geomagnetic measurements were made on the earth at the same time; in fact, expedi-tions were fitted out with the aim of obtaining corresponding measurement data fromthe continents. We have Johann Heinrich Lambert (1728–1777) to thank for one of thefirst maps showing the declination lines on the continents as well as on the oceans; thismap appeared in 1777 in Berlin. Russia was particularly active in terms of expeditions.Many of these set out to explore Siberia in all directions and taking geomagnetic mea-surements while doing so. On the map published by Christian Amadeus Kratzenstein(1723–1795) in 1793 in St. Petersburg, the declination lines are drawn in on all thecontinents known at that time (Roussanova 2011, p. 65f).

With the help of a compass needle set vertically, an inclinometer, it was possible tomeasure the magnetic angle of inclination and join places with the same inclination bydrawing lines on a map. One of the earliest maps of this type was published in 1721 byWilliam Whiston (1667–1752), a compatriot of Halley’s (Hellmann 1895, p. 5–13).

The term “intensity” was created by Alexander von Humboldt. He obtained thesefigures of intensity by allowing a magnetic inclination needle to oscillate in the mag-netic meridian under the influence of geomagnetism. He measured the number ofoscillations during a fixed period of time; for him this was 10 min. His law of intensityis the fruit of a journey to America between 1799 and 1804. In Paris, the magneticneedle oscillated 245 times in 10 min; in Marseilles it was 240 times, in Valencia only235 oscillations and in the northern latitudes of South America even fewer, while thenumber of oscillations increased again as he proceeded further south. Humboldt haddiscovered that intensity varies at different geographical latitudes. It increases whentravelling from the magnetic equator to the magnetic poles. Together with Jean BaptisteBiot (1774–1862), Humboldt published his results for the first time in 1804. This workwas accompanied by a map depicting four zones of approximately the same intensity(Reich 2011, p. 36f). This is the first map to depict zones of equal intensity, albeit notthe lines. However, the Norwegian astronomer Christopher Hansteen (1784–1873) cre-ated numerous detailed maps with lines of equal intensity; these were greatly admiredin his day. He published one of the earliest such maps in a Norwegian journal in 1823,and again in the “Annalen der Physik und Chemie” in 1825 (Hellmann 1895, p. 14f).

Over the course of the nineteenth century, the term “isogonic lines” became stan-dard use for lines of equal declination, “isoclinic lines” for lines of equal inclination,“isodynamic lines” for lines of equal intensity.

2.2 Globes with declination lines

Obviously globes showing these lines on their surfaces were created as well as mapswith declination lines. The location of the magnetic poles was naturally of particularinterest. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1717) had already implemented the idea ofmanufacturing a globe with declination lines. Unfortunately, it is not known whetherany examples of his work still exist. Alexander von Humboldt saw this Leibnizianglobe in Hanover in around 1829, but afterwards all traces of it vanished (Roussanova2011, p. 57–59).

123

4 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

In Sweden, the two globe makers Anders Åkerman (ca. 1721–1778) and FredrikAkrel (1748–1804) also created globes showing declination lines, examples being onespecial pair of globes made in 1766. These were based on the map published by JohanGustav Zegollström in 1755, as described above (Bratt 1968, p. 136–149). Globeswith declination lines were also manufactured at a later date; some of these can stillbe admired today in Uppsala.

Other globe manufacturers also made globes of this type; one special example wascreated in England in 1845. This globe was based on the map published by PeterBarlow (1776–1862) in 1833 in the “Transactions of the Royal Society” (Dekker et al.1999, p. 405–407).

No doubt numerous other globes with declination lines still exist, but these haveyet to be tracked down.

3 Early corresponding observations in the fields of astronomy, meteorologyand geomagnetism

Corresponding observations had already been made by natural scientists in the eigh-teenth century, for example by astronomers researching the Venus transits 1761 und1769 and by scientists determining the longitudinal difference between a referencelocation and a location for which they wanted to calculate the longitude (Brosche2009).

The method of determining altitude from an object moving in the sky by tracking itsimultaneously from two points on the earth located as far apart as possible was firstdescribed by Gotthelf Abraham Kästner (1719–1800) in his work “De objecti e duobuslocis dissitis visi, inuenienda distantia a superficie terrae” (Kästner 1784). WilhelmBrandes (1777–1834) and Johann Friedrich Benzenberg (1777–1846) used Kästner’spurely theoretical description to calculate the altitude of meteors; the places of obser-vation were Clausberg and Ellershausen (Benzenberg and Brandes 1800). Their workwas discussed by Kästner in the “Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen” (Kästner 1800).1

Corresponding observations or synoptic observations were also used in meteorol-ogy. This was probably carried out for the first time by the “Societas MeteorologicaPalatina” founded in 1780, which was based in Mannheim. Here an internationalnetwork was set up under the direction of Johann Jacob Hemmer (1733–1790). Theobservation data was collected in Mannheim and published under the title “Ephemer-ides Societatis Meteorologicae Palatinae” (Cappel 1980). This network, a historicalfirst, comprised 39 observation stations, not only in Europe (including Russia) butalso in North America and Greenland. In all, 12 volumes of observation data werepublished for the years from 1781 to 1792 (Ephemerides 1781–1792).

However, this “Societas Meteorologica Palatina” was also interested in declinationmeasurements. For this reason, all of the stations involved were equipped with magne-tometers of the same or similar construction (Ephemerides 1781–1792: 1 (1781/83),p. 78–80). The “Ephemerides” consequently contained not only meteorological data,but also included a column with declination measurements.

1 We owe the reference to Kästner and Benzenberg to Wolfgang Lange (Hamburg).

123

Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16 5

4 Alexander von Humboldt

Humboldt had been interested in magnetism since his student days. His first workwas devoted to the magnetic properties of serpentinite and was published in 1796.On almost all his journeys, he took instruments which allowed him to make observa-tions at any time, being particularly interested in collecting astronomical, geodetic andgeomagnetic data. This was also the case on his great journeys to America (1799–1804)and Russia (1829), as well as on many others. On some of his journeys, he pursuedjust one goal, the observation of geomagnetic quantities. Humboldt hoped that thiswealth of geomagnetic data would help him confirm his theories. He probably tookhis final geomagnetic observation from the Berlin observatory in 1837.

Humboldt always used an instrument developed by Gambey to take his observa-tions. Humboldt himself never attempted to improve his instruments; neither did heacquire any of the more modern equipment designed for example by Gauss and Weber.

During the nineteenth century, the corresponding observations were mainly of helpin distinguishing local magnetic anomalies, disruptions, perturbations from the globalphenomenon. There were indeed anomalies which could be measured worldwide andothers which only occurred locally. Investigations were carried out into the distribu-tion of magnetic forces throughout the earth and the way in which they fluctuate.In his “Kosmos”, Humboldt described the situation as follows: “When the ordinaryhorary movement of the needle is interrupted by a magnetic storm, the perturbationmanifests itself, often simultaneously in the strictest sense of the word, over land andsea, over hundreds and thousands of miles; or propagates itself gradually, in shortintervals of time, in every direction over the surface of the earth.”2 In the accompa-nying note, he explains: “There are also perturbations which do not extend to suchgreat distances, and of which the causes are more local, and are seated, perhaps, atless depth”3 (Humboldt 1845–1862: 1, p. 185). In the fourth volume, he describedthe “absolute permeability” of matter attributed to both magnetic force and gravity.However, it was difficult to imagine obstacles which would keep anomalies confinedto a certain location (Humboldt 1845–1862: 4, p. 133).

If corresponding observations are only described using tables or lists, an extremelyimportant element is left out, i.e. the parallelism of the phenomena. However, theseimmediately attract the attention if depicted visually.

4.1 Humboldt’s first corresponding observations

The idea of taking these corresponding geomagnetic observations was mainly prop-agated by Alexander von Humboldt. He was perhaps already thinking about corre-sponding observations in the years 1806/1807, which he spent in Berlin. He later

2 In the original German: „Wenn die ruhige, stündliche Bewegung der Nadel durch ein magnetischesUngewitter gestört ist, so offenbart sich die Perturbation oftmals über Meer und Land, auf Hunderte undTausende von Meilen im strengsten Sinne des Worts gleichzeitig, oder sie pflanzt sich in kurzen Zeiträumenallmälig in jeglicher Richtung über die Oberfläche der Erde fort.“3 In the original German: „Es gibt Perturbationen, die sich nicht weit fortpflanzen, mehr local sind,vielleicht, einen weniger tiefen Sitz haben.“

123

6 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

wrote: “Even then, I expressed a deep desire to see similar apparatus being set up inthe east and west of Berlin in order to distinguish major tellurian phenomena fromthose caused by local disturbances in the interior of the irregularly warmed earth (andin the atmosphere formed by the clouds), but my departure for Paris and the politicalunrest in western Europe hindered the fulfilment of my wishes”4 (Dove 1830, p. 358).

Humboldt returned to Paris in 1807; in 1809, he began an intensive collaborationwith the astronomer François Arago (1786–1853), who became one of his closestfriends. In 1823, the Paris observatory had a small magnetic building which becamethe world’s first magnetic observatory. That same year, Humboldt and Arago wel-comed visitors from Russia, the physicist and mineralogist Adolph Theodor Kupffer(1799–1865) and the astronomer Ivan Michailovic Simonov (1794–1855), both ofwhom were deeply interested in researching geomagnetism. The idea of taking corre-sponding observations consequently began to take shape in Paris. At that time, the twoRussian scientists worked at the university in Kazan, Europe’s easternmost university,which was founded in 1804. It was therefore only natural that the cities of Paris andKazan should be chosen for the first corresponding observations. As the scientistsin Paris were working with instruments developed by Gambey, similar instrumentswere also procured for Kazan (Roussanova 2011, p. 73). When Kupffer and Simonovreturned to Kazan, they lost no time in beginning to build a magnetic observatory,which was finished in 1828. Geomagnetic observations began in 1825.

Kupffer published the observation data collected from the beginning of September1825 to the end of May 1826 in “Archiv für die gesammte Naturlehre” under the title“Neue Thatsachen zur Kenntnis des Magnetismus (des Nordlichtes und der Gewitter)”;this journal was edited by the chemist Karl Wilhelm Gottlob Kastner (1783–1857)(Kupffer 1827b, p. 283–290). In this work, Kupffer pointed out that their observa-tions showed the same geomagnetic anomalies in the presence of northern lights, eventhough it was not actually possible to see these phenomena in Kazan. “Since the lasttime I requested you [Kastner] to send me news of the northern lights, I have had theopportunity to compare the data relating to the northern lights in Leith with my owndata, and occasionally I have found a marvellous correlation. Whenever a northernlight was observed in Leith in Schottland by Cordsream and Foggo, my needle madethe most irregular movements even though no trace of the northern lights could beseen here in Kazan”5 (Kupffer 1827b, p. 292f). Kupffer discussed his observations inrather more detail in his essay “Untersuchungen über die Variationen in der mittlerenDauer der horizontalen Schwingung der Magnetnadel zu Kasan und über verschie-dene andere Punkte des Erdmagnetismus” published in “Annalen der Physik”, also

4 In the original German: „Ich äußerte damals schon den lebhaften Wunsch, ähnliche Apparate in Ostenund Westen von Berlin aufgestellt zu sehen, um große tellurische Phänomene von dem unterscheiden zukönnen, was localen Störungen im Innern des ungleich erwärmten Erdkörpers (und in der Wolken bilden-den Atmosphäre) zugehört, aber meine Abreise nach Paris und die politischen Verwirrungen im westlichenEuropa hinderten die Erfüllung dieses Wunsches.“5 In the original German: „Seit ich Sie [Kastner] das letzte Mal bat, mir Nachrichten von Nordlichternzu geben, habe ich Gelegenheit gehabt, die Data der in Leith in Schottland von Cordsream und Foggobeobachteten Nordlichter mit den meinigen zu vergleichen, und hin und wieder eine wunderbare Ueb-ereinstimmung gefunden. Wenn in Leith ein Nordlicht beobachtet wurde, so machte meine Nadel dieunregelmäßigsten Bewegungen, obgleich hier in Kasan keine Spur vom Nordlicht zu sehen war.“

123

Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16 7

in 1827 (Kupffer 1827a, p. 558–561). Here he concluded: “These observations showus that there is a close relationship between the cause of the northern lights and thatof the irregular movements of the horizontal magnetic needle. This cause must bevery extensive, as it influences the needles in both Paris and Kazan simultaneously”6

(Kupffer 1827a, p. 561). Gustav Rose (1798–1873), Humboldt’s travelling compan-ion in Siberia in 1829, later noted: “Here I must remark that the first results showingsimultaneous perturbations in the daily course of the needle were obtained from cor-responding observations by Messrs Arago and Kupffer in Paris and Kazan; since1828, this has brought about the construction of many magnetic houses in Europe andnorthern Asia on the instigation of Mr. von Humboldt”7 (Rose 1837, p. 106f).

In “Kosmos”, Humboldt informed his readers: “As Arago had recognised that themagnetic perturbations owing to polar light are diffused over districts in which the phe-nomena of light which accompany magnetic storms have not been seen, he devised aplan by which he was enabled to carry on simultaneous horary observations (in 1823)with our common friend Kupffer, at Kazan, which lies almost 47◦ east of Paris”8

(Humboldt 1845–1862: 4, p. 173).Initially, the corresponding observations were only recorded in tables. Humboldt

returned to Berlin in 1827, and from autumn 1828 he had a magnetic observatory of hisown in the garden of the Mendelssohn family at Leipziger Strasse 3. Before his journeyto Russia, Humboldt suggested to Arago on 25 February 1829 that they take simul-taneous observations in Berlin, Paris and Freiberg, to study the nightly fluctuationsin declination: “Ne crois-tu pas, mon cher ami, qu’il seroit bien curieux d’examinerl’isochronisme de ces perturbations à Paris, Berlin et Freyberg? Les chances de coin-cidence sont bien plus grandes, si l’on observe pendant 24 heures, d’heure en heure,dans ces 4 endroits” (Correspondance Humboldt-Arago, p. 52). However, these planswere never realised, and Paris ceased to play a role in the years following.9 Even beforeHumboldt received a reply from Arago, he proposed corresponding observations inBerlin and Freiberg, to take place on 24, 25 and 26 March 1829 (Honigmann 1984,p. 71). At that time, Ferdinand Reich (1799–1882) was working at the Bergakademiein Freiberg, having been appointed professor of physics there in 1827. Humboldt hada special relationship with Freiberg, as he had studied there as a young man from 14June 1791 to 26 February 1792. It was in Freiberg that he had first became acquaintedwith geomagnetism (Reich 2011, p. 36).

6 In the original German: „Diese Beobachtungen zeigen uns, daß eine innige Beziehung zwischen derUrsache der Nordlichter und der der unregelmäßigen Ausweichungen der horizontalen Magnetnadel daist. Diese Ursache muß sich sehr weit erstrecken, weil sie zugleich auf die Nadeln in Paris und in Kasaneinwirkt.“7 In the original German: „Ich bemerke hierbei, dass die ersten Resultate gleichzeitiger Perturbationen destäglichen Ganges der Magnetnadel durch correspondirende Beobachtungen der Herren Arago und Kupfferin Paris und Kasan erlangt wurden, und zu der Erbauung so vieler magnetischen Häuser Veranlassung gege-ben haben, welche auf Veranlassung des Hrn. v. Humboldt seit 1828 in Europa und Nord-Asien gegründetworden sind.“8 In the original German: „Als Arago erkannt hatte, daß die durch Polarlicht bewirkten magnetischenPerturbationen sich über Erdstrecken verbreiten, wo die Lichterscheinungen des magnetischen Ungewittersnicht gesehen wird, verabredete er gleichzeitige stündliche Beobachtungen 1823 mit unserem gemein-schaftlichen Freund Kupffer in Kasan, fast 47◦ östlich von Paris.“9 Possible reasons are mentioned by Honigmann (1984), p. 76f.

123

8 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

4.2 Humboldt’s magnetischer Verein (magnetic union): 1829–1834

4.2.1 Humboldt’s journey to Russia: 1829

Humboldt’s journey, which took place between April and December 1829, strength-ened cooperation with the Russian scientists even further. In 1828, Kupffer beganworking in St. Petersburg, where geomagnetical observations also commenced at thefirst opportunity. Kupffer had ensured that geomagnetical observations would be takenin Nikolaev. Simonov was still working in Kazan, where he was taking geomagneticalobservations in the newly-built pavilion. Simonov had already taken hourly observa-tions on 5/6 August 1829 using the method prescribed by Humboldt. On 5/17 August1829, Simonov commented on them as follows: “These are the observations match-ing those which are sure to have been made in Berlin, Paris and Freiberg accordingto your proposal. I have already sent them to Mr. Arago and Mr. Encke. I feel itis my duty to inform you that these observations were taken in a pavilion erectedspecifically for such exercises using the instrument designed by Gambey which youhave seen. [. . .] Dear Sir, I will not neglect to observe the horary fluctuations inmagnetic declination on other days to be fixed by Your Excellency using the samemethod”10 (Briefwechsel Humboldt and Russland 1829, p. 173f). Unfortunately, thelist of observations enclosed with this letter has been lost. At the end of Humboldt’sjourney through Russia, Simonov informed him: “I had the honour of writing to you inSt. Petersburg and sending you the second set of my magnetic observations: this letterwill be given to you by Mr. Kupffer, who also participated in the relevant observa-tions; these were taken in Paris, Berlin, Freiberg, St. Petersburg, Nikolaev and Kazanaccording to your instructions. Mr. Encke kindly informed me of the observationsmade in Berlin and Freiberg on 5 and 6 August and on 1 and 2 October”11 (ibid,p. 208–210). On both observation occasions, Simonov sent the observation data toHumboldt in the form of tables (two pages per date); however, these have not yetbeen published. The originals are kept at Schloss Tegel (Tegel castle); copies can beviewed at the Alexander-von-Humboldt-Forschungsstelle (Alexander von HumboldtResearch Centre) under the shelf mark “Observations magnétiques” (folio 109r andv, folio 110r and v). Folio 110r also shows handwritten notes in Humboldt’s writing(Fig. 1).

Humboldt uttered the following memorable words during a speech on 16/28 Novem-ber 1829 he gave at a special meeting at the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg.

10 In the original French: „[Ce] sont les observations correspondantes à celles qu’on a certainement faitesà Berlin à Paris et à Freiberg, selon Votre proposition. Je les ai déjà communiquées à Mr. Arago et à Mr.Encke. Je compte pour mon devoir Vous faire part que ces observations sont faites dans un pavillon, construitexprès pour ces sortes d’observations, et avec l’instrument de Gambey que Vous avez vu chez nous [...].Je ne manquerai pas, Monsieur, d’observer, de la même manière, les variations horaires de la déclinaisonmagnitique dans d’autres jours, fixés par Votre Excellence.“11 In the original French: „J’ai eu l’honneur de Vous écrir[e] aussi à St. Pétersbourg et de Vous communi-quer la seconde série de mes observations magnitiques: Cette lettre Vous sera remise par Mr. Kupffer, quia aussi pris part à nos observations correspondantes; ainsi ces observations, entreprises par Votre ordre ontété faites à Paris, à Berlin, à Freiberg[,] à St. Pétersbourg, à Nikolaeff et à Casan. Mr. Encke a eu la bontéde me communiquer les observations de Berlin et de Freiberg, faites le 5–6 Août et le 1–2 Octobre.“

123

Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16 9

Fig. 1 Casan Variat[ions] hor[aires] Observations des variations de la declinaison magnetique faites àCasan par Mr Ivan Simonoff (in italics: Humboldt’s handwriting) Source: “Observations magnétiques”,Alexander von Humboldt-Forschungsstelle, Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, copyof fol. 110r. Original in Tegel castle, by the courtesy of the owner

“When one considers the comparative precision of the observations made at sea andon land with the aid of the instruments designed by Borda, Bessel and Gambey, one iseasily convinced that Russia, thanks to its location, could bring about major advancesin the theory of magnetism within a period of twenty years. In making these remarks,sirs, I am merely interpreting your own wishes, so to speak. The alacrity with whichyou responded to the request I sent you 7 months ago with regard to observations of thehorary fluctuations made in Paris, in Berlin, from a mine in Freiberg and in Kazan bythe learned and industrious astronomer Simonov has proved that the Imperial Acad-emy must render worthy support to Europe’s other academies in the arduous yet

123

10 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

useful research into the periodic nature of all magnetic phenomena”12 (BriefwechselHumboldt and Russland 1829, p. 279).

4.2.2 Initial pictorial depictions in 1830

The first corresponding observations, some of which were also published as visualrepresentations, were taken during the years 1829/1830. Humboldt described the ini-tial situation as follows: “We are already almost in a position to say that our lineof magnetic stations now extends from South America across Europe to Peking.13

- At my request, Boussingault took observations in the tropical region of Colombia,where the declination is eastward, using an instrument designed by Gambey. In autumn1828, I presented a magnetic house constructed in Berlin in the garden of council-lor Mendelssohn-Bartholdy. Not one part of it is made of iron; the hasps, nails andlocks are made of red copper. Observations are being taken in Freiberg, in the Erzmountains of Saxony. [. . .] At my request, the Imperial Academy of Sciences in St.Petersburg has had a magnetic house built for the respected physicist Prof. Kupffer.Similar constructions are located in Kazan and Nikolaev”14 (Dove 1830, p. 359f).

Full of enthusiasm, Wilhelm Dove (1803–1879) described the situation as follows:“This marvellous plan has been implemented by Mr. von Humboldt. The observationsavailable to us, taken simultaneously in Europe, on the Asian frontier and in America,answer many of the most interesting questions we have about geomagnetic conditionson the earth, and we may hope that if this venture is pursued with the same alacrity asit began, the gaps in our current report may still be filled. Observations were taken atBerlin, Freiberg, Petersburg, Kazan, Nikolaev, Marmato in Colombia”15 (Dove 1830,p. 362).

12 In the original German: „Wenn man über die vergleichende Genauigkeit der Beobachtungen nachdenkt,die auf dem Meer und an Land mit Hilfe der Instrumente von Borda, Bessel und Gambey gemacht wurden,ist man leicht davon überzeugt, dass Russland durch seine Lage in einem Zeitraum von zwanzig Jahrendie Theorie des Magnetismus gewaltige Fortschritte machen lassen könnte. Indem ich diese Betrachtungenanstelle, bin ich sozusagen nur der Interpret ihrer eigenen Wünsche, meine Herren. Die Zügigkeit, mit demSie meine Bitte aufgenommen haben, die ich Ihnen vor sieben Monaten hinsichtlich Beobachtungen derstündlichen Schwankungen, welche in Paris, Berlin, in einem Bergwerk in Freiberg und in Kazan’ von demgelehrten und eifrigen Astronomen Simonov gemacht wurden, hat bewiesen, dass die kaiserliche Akademiedie andern Akademien Europas würdig in der mühseligen, aber nützlichen Erforschung der Periodizität allermagnetischen Erscheinungen unterstützen muss.“13 In Beijing there was a Russian orthodox cloister; in this building geomagnetical observations were takenthat were initiated in St. Petersburg.14 In the original German: „Fast dürfen wir schon sagen, daß unsere Linie magnetischer Stationen sichjetzt von Südamerika quer durch Europa bis Peking erstreckt.– Boussingault beobachtet auf meine Bitte miteinem Instrumente von Gambey in der tropischen Region von Columbia, wo die Abweichung östlich ist. ImHerbste 1828 habe ich zu Berlin in dem Garten des Stadtraths Mendelsohn – Bartholdy ein magnetischesHaus aufführen lassen, ohne alles Eisen, mit Häspen, Nägeln und Schlössern von rothem Kupfer. In Frei-berg auf dem sächsischen Erzgebirge wird [. . .] beobachtet. [. . .] Auf meinen Antrag hat die Kaiserl[iche]Academie der Wissenschaften zu St. Petersburg ein magnetisches Haus für den trefflichen Physiker Hrn.Prof. Kupffer bauen lassen. Aehnliche Anstalten sind in Kasan und Nicolajew getroffen.“15 In the original German: „Dieser großartige Plan ist durch Hrn. von Humboldt verwirklicht worden. Dieuns vorliegenden, in Europa, an der Grenze von Asien und in Amerika gleichzeitig angestellten Beobacht-ungen beantworten viele der interessantesten Fragen, die wir über die magnetischen Verhältnisse der Erdethun können, und wir dürfen hoffen, daß wenn das Unternehmen mit demselben Eifer fortgesetzt wird, als

123

Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16 11

Dove soon became a member of the observation group led by Humboldt in Berlin.They had first met in September 1828 at the Conference of German Natural Sci-entists and Physicians in Berlin. Humboldt made sure that Dove, who had beenappointed Associate Professor at the Königsberg University in 1828, was able to moveto Berlin as early as autumn 1829. He initially worked as a teacher at the Friedrichs-Gymnasium (grammar school) while holding a post as associate professor of physicsat the Friedrich Wilhelm University. Dove’s first observations in Berlin were devotedto meteorology; these records were made in May, June, July and August. Remarkably,he illustrated and supplemented these observations with a graph showing barometerand thermometer fluctuations in Berlin in June 1829; these were drawn on millime-tre graph paper (Dove 1829). It was by no means unusual among meteorologists toillustrate data with the help of graphs drawn on millimetre paper.16

As Humboldt had planned, geomagnetic data was recorded at each station at fixedtimes and then sent to Berlin. The first corresponding observations in Berlin, Freibergand Kazan, taken from April 1829 to December 1829, were published in volume 17of “Annalen der Physik und Chemie” on unpaginated fold-out tables attached to thejournal (Korrespondierende Beobachtungen 1829). It was left to Dove to coordinateand explain these observations; these results were then published in volume 19 of“Annalen der Physik und Chemie”. Dove began with the regular daily changes in dec-lination observed in Freiberg (Dove 1830, p. 364–374). The next step was to comparethem: “Daily variations of declination in Freiberg, compared with the correspondingobservations in Berlin, St. Petersburg, Kazan and Nikolaev”17 (ibid., p. 375–386).The observation data was initially reproduced in tabular form, e.g. compilations ofthe average oscillations over ten corresponding days “mittleren Oscillationen von 10correspondirenden Tagen”, before being analysed in detail (ibid., p. 377–385). Atthe same time, Dove noticed numerous disturbances (ibid., p. 386–391). He investi-gated two examples in depth, i.e. the observations taken on 19 and 20 December 1829(Fig. 2), and those taken on 4 and 5 May 1830 (Fig. 3) with northern lights being seenin St. Petersburg on the May dates. Kupffer in particular had seen this phenomenon inSt. Petersburg and compared it with observations in Nikolaev and Kazan. He publishedhis results in volume 18 of “Annalen der Physik und Chemie” (Kupffer 1830). Dove’spublication appeared in volume 19 of the same journal. Dove therefore had access toKupffer’s results. However, unlike Kupffer, Dove had also recorded the disturbancescaused by the northern lights in the form of an illustration, while Kupffer merelypresented his results in a table.

As one of the earliest subjects of his illustrations, Dove chose the changes whichhad been observed on 1 and 2 October 1829. For the first time, he recorded thesechanges in the form of five lines drawn on millimetre paper (Fig. 4).

Footnote 15 continuedes begonnen hat, die Lücken ergänzt werden, die unser jetziger Bericht noch enthält. Die Orte an welchenbeobachtet wurde, waren: Berlin, Freiberg, Petersburg, Kasan, Nicolajew, Marmato in Columbien.“16 Johann Heinrich Mädler (1794–1874) for example had also chosen such a presentation for the weatherin July 1829 in Berlin (Eelsalu and Herrmann 1985, fig. 6).17 In the original German: „Tägliche Veränderungen der Declination in Freiberg, verglichen mit dencorrespondirenden Beobachtungen von Berlin, Petersburg, Casan und Nicolajew.“

123

12 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

Fig. 2 Regular oscillations observed on 1 and 2 October 1829, in Berlin, Freiberg, St. Petersburg, Kazanand Nikolaev. Source: Dove (1830), chart II, fig. 2; also in: Honigmann (1984), p. 66

Fig. 3 Irregular oscillations observed on 19 and 20 December 1829, in Berlin, Freiberg, St. Petersburg,Kazan and Nikolaev. Source: Dove (1830), chart II, fig 1; also in: Honigmann (1984), p. 66

Fig. 4 Observations from 4 and 5 May 1830 during northern lights in St. Petersburg, in Freiberg,St. Petersburg, Kazan and Nikolaev. Source: Dove (1830), chart III, fig. 1

123

Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16 13

The parallelism of the curves was immediately apparent. Dove spoke of “the com-plete parallelism of the curves recorded in Berlin and Freiberg”18 (Dove 1830, p. 376),and continued: “The same parallelism is now also visible in the other curves, from theGulf of Bothnia to the Black Sea, from the Asian frontier to the centre of Germany –the same phenomenon everywhere”19 (ibid., p. 377). Dove published the disturbancesrecorded on 19 and 20 December in the form of a pictorial illustration (Fig. 2).20

Again there was a striking “parallelism between the curves”, proving that “everydisturbance occurred at the same time over an extensive area”21 (Dove 1830, p. 387).Moreover, Dove noted that the December dates and the severe magnetic disturbanceswere accompanied by the onset of an unusual lengthy cold spell (ibid., p. 390).

This work by Dove, which includes a foreword by Alexander von Humboldt, waspublished in “Annalen der Physik und Chemie”, as already mentioned. Humboldt hadreached an agreement with Johann Christian Poggendorff (1796–1877), the editor ofthis journal, that all corresponding observations would continue to be sent to Berlinfor publication in the “Annalen” (Dove 1830, p. 361).

On 7 June 1830, Humboldt spoke about his journey to Russia at the ParisAcadémie, with special emphasis on the geomagnetical results obtained there(Humboldt 1830). He also mentioned the observations taken by Arago and Kupffer:“C’est M. Arago aussi qui a pu tirer des conséquences importantes de plusieurs obser-vations de M. Kupfer, qui étaient correspondantes aux siennes, sans qu’il eût eu aucuneconvention antérieure entre ces deus physiciens” (ibid., p. 238). Afterwards, Humboldtpresented all the stations which had requested to take part in the corresponding observa-tions, i.e. Berlin, Freiberg, Petersburg, Kazan, Nikolaev and Marmato, and expressed adesire that further observation stations should be set up (ibid., p. 239–241). Humboldtnoted the result in his “Kosmos”: “In the simultaneous observations of declinationwhich were instituted by Arago and myself in 1829 at Berlin, Paris, Freiberg, St.Petersburg, Kazan and Nikolaev with the same Gambey’s instruments, individual per-turbations of a marked character were not transmitted from Berlin as far as Paris, andnot on any one occasion to the mine at Freiberg, where Reich was making a seriesof subterranean observations on the magnet”22 (Humboldt 1845–1862: 4, p. 132f).Humboldt assumed that the cause of these disturbances, which were not transmittedover a lengthy distance, may not have been located at a reasonable depth (Humboldt1845–1862: 1, p. 427f).

18 „Der vollkommene Parallelismus der Curven von Berlin und Freiberg.“19 In the original German: „Derselbe Parallelismus zeigt sich nun auch bei den übrigen Curven, vombotnischen Meerbusen bis zum schwarzen Meere, von der asiatischen Grenze bis in die Mitte Deutschlandsüberall dieselbe Erscheinung.“20 Chart II, fig. 1 and the observations from 4 and 5 May see chart III, fig. 1, both in form of graphs.21 In the original German: „Der Parallelismus der Curven [. . .] beweist, daß jene Störungen gleichzeitigund allgemein wirkten.“22 In the original German: „Bei den gleichzeitigen Declinations-Beobachtungen, die wir, Arago und ich,1829 in Berlin, Paris, Freiberg, St. Petersburg, Kasan und Nikolajew mit denselben Gambey’schen Instru-menten angestellt, hatten sich einzelne starke Perturbationen von Berlin nicht bis Paris, ja nicht einmal bisin eine Freiberger Grube, wo Reich seine unterirdischen Magnet-Beobachtungen machte fortgepflanzt.“

123

14 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

4.2.3 The later years of the Magnetic Union: 1831–1834

Over the following years, the Russian stations continued to take corresponding obser-vations on the observation dates set by Humboldt, but the data was not sent to Berlin;starting in 1837, they were published in Russia instead (Honigmann 1984, p. 78–80).

Honigmann consequently concluded: “The centralisation of evaluations in Berlinenvisioned by Humboldt only really took place in the first year”23 (ibid., p. 78f). Dove’swork, published in 1830, remained the only result (Dove 1830). Humboldt himself didnot take part in any magnetic observations during the period from September 1830 toMarch 1834 (Honigmann 1984, p. 80f). Not until 1834 were observations again pub-lished in the form of a pictorial illustration. Dove was again the author. This was hiswork on the daily changes in magnetic declination in Freiberg “Ueber die täglichenVeränderungen der magnetischen Abweichung in Freiberg”. Here he discussed thebenefits of simultaneous observations, but only presents the Freiberg observations inpictorial form (averages calculated in the morning, at noon, in the evening and at mid-night on fixed dates). Comparisons with observations taken in Berlin were to follow;other locations were left out “as the observations were in many cases disrupted by thegradual spread of cholera throughout Europe, this inspiring dialogue was long inter-rupted by this general restriction, with the result that we now only have two continuingobservation journals for comparison, those from Freiberg and Berlin”24 (Dove 1834,p. 97, see also Honigmann 1984, p. 79f).

However, the cholera cannot have caused a total disruption in the exchange of obser-vations, as numerous observations taken by Kupffer during the period from 1831 to1836 appeared in “Annalen der Physik und Chemie”. These included a letter fromKupffer to Humboldt, in which Kupffer reported on geomagnetic observations madeby Ferdinand von Wrangel (1796/1797–1870) (Kupffer 1834).

To be continued.

References

Alexander von Humboldt. Briefe aus Russland 1829. Hrsg. von Eberhard Knobloch, Ingo Schwarz undChristian Suckow. Mit einem einleitenden Essay von Ottmar Ette (= Beiträge zur Alexander-von-Humboldt-Forschung; 30). Akademie, Berlin (2009)

Benzenberg, J.F., Brandes H.W.: Versuche die Entfernung, die Geschwindigkeit und die Bahnen der Stern-schnuppen zu bestimmen. Perthes, Hamburg (1800)

Bratt, E.: En krönika om svenska glober. Almquist & Wiksell, London (1968)Brosche, P.: Korrespondierende Beobachtungen. Wissenschaftskommunikation in Europa im 18. und 19.

Jahrhundert. In: Beiträge der Tagung vom 5. und 6. Dezember 2008 an der Akademie gemeinnützigerWissenschaften zu Erfurt. (= Europäische Wissenschaftsbeziehungen; 1), pp. 95–99. Shaker, Aachen(2009)

23 In the original German: „Eine Zentralisierung der Auswertung in Berlin, so wie sie Humboldt vor-geschwebt hatte, gab es praktisch nur während des ersten Jahres.“24 In the original German: „[. . .] da die Beobachtungen durch die allmäliche Ausbreitung der Cholera überEuropa selbst mannigfach gestört, der anregende Austausch lange Zeit durch diese allgemeine Hemmungunterbrochen wurde, so daß uns jetzt nur zwei bis jetzt fortgesetzte Beobachtungsjournale, das von Freibergund von Berlin zur Vergleichung vorliegen.“

123

Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16 15

Cappel, A.: Societas Meteorologica Palatina (1780–1795). Symposium anläßlich der 200. Wiederkehr desGründungsjahres der Societas Meteorologica Palatina. Mannheim, 13.–15. Oktober 1980. (=Annalender Meteorologie, Neue Folge; 16). Offenbach am Main, pp. 10–27 (1980)

Correspondance d’Alexandre de Humboldt avec François Arago (1809–1853). Par E. T. Hamy. Guilmoto,Paris (1908)

Dekker, E., et al.: Globes at Greenwich: a catalogue of the globes and armillary spheres in the NationalMuseum, Greenwich. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)

Dove, W.H.: Meteorologische Beobachtungen, angestellt in Berlin. Mai, Juni, Juli und August 1829. Ann-alen der Physik und Chemie 16 (1829) (after p. 624, and a chart)

Dove, H.W.: Correspondirende Beobachtungen über die regelmäßigen stündlichen Veränderungen und überdie Perturbationen der magnetischen Abweichung im mittleren und östlichen Europa; gesammelt undverglichen von H.W. Dove, mit einem Vorwort von Alexander von Humboldt. Annalen der Physikund Chemie 19, 357–391 (1830)

Dove, H.W.: Über die täglichen Veränderungen der magnetischen Abweichung in Freiberg. Annalen derPhysik und Chemie 31, 97–108 (1834)

Eelsalu, H., Herrmann, D.B.: Johann Heinrich Mädler (1794–1874). Eine dokumentarische Biographie.(= Veröffentlichungen des Forschungsbereichs Geo- und Kosmoswissenschaften; 12, Mitteilungender Archenhold-Sternwarte; 159). Akademie, Berlin (1985)

Ephemerides Societatis Meteorologicae Palatinae. 12 Bde, Mannheim (1781–1792)Hellmann, G.: Die ältesten Karten der Isogonen, Isoklinen, Isodynamen. In: Halley, E., Whiston, W., Wilcke,

J.C., von Humboldt, A., Hansteen, C.: Asher, Berlin (1895) (Reprint Nendeln/Liechtenstein 1969)Honigmann, P.: Entstehung und Schicksal von Humboldts Magnetischen ,Verein’ (1829–1834) im Zusam-

menhang mit seiner Rußlandreise. Annals of Science 41, 57–86 (1984)Humboldt, A. von: De l’Inclinaison de l’aiguille aimantée dans le nord de l’Asie, et les observations cor-

respondantes des variations horaires faites en différentes parties de la terre. Annales de chimie et dephysique 44, 231–243 (1830)

Humboldt, A. von: Kosmos. Entwurf einer physischen Weltbeschreibung. 5 Bde. Stuttgart (1845, 1847,1840, 1858, 1862) (Reprint by Ottmar Ette and Oliver Lubrich. Frankfurt am Main 2004, cited accord-ing to the original pagination)

Kästner, A.G.: De objecti e duobus locis dissitis visi, inuenienda distantia a superficie terrae. Acta Acade-miae electorialis Moguntiae scientiarum utilium quae Erfurti est ad ann. MDLXXXII et MDLXXXIII.Erfurt, pp. 3–11 (1784)

Kästner, A.G., Besprechung von J.F. Benzenberg, H.W., Brandes: Versuch, die Entfernung die Ges-chwindigkeit und die Bahnen der Sternschnuppen zu bestimmen. Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen(1800) (24. May, 83. Stück), pp. 829–830

Korrespondierende Beobachtungen in Berlin, Freiberg und Kasan, April bis Dezember 1829. Annalen derPhysik und Chemie 17 (1829) (after p. 610, 4 pages without pagination)

Kupffer, A.T.: Recherches sur les variations de la durée moyenne des oscillations horizontales de l’aiguilleaimantée, et sur divers autres points du magnétisme terrestre. Annales de chimie et de physique35, 225–241 (1827) [Untersuchungen über die Variationen in der mittleren Dauer der horizontalenSchwingung der Magnetnadel zu Kasan und über verschiedene andere Punkte des Erdmagnetismus.Annalen der Physik und Chemie 10, 545–562 (1827) (the German version is cited)]

Kupffer A.T.: Neue Thatsachen zur Kenntniß des Magnetismus (des Nordlichtes und der Gewitter). Archivfür die gesammte Naturlehre 12, 277–293 (1827)

Kupffer, A.T.: Notiz über ein in St. Petersburg in der Nacht vom 5. auf den 6. Mai 1830 beobachtetesNordlicht. Annalen der Physik und Chemie 18, 611–616 (1830)

Kupffer, A.T.: F. v. Wrangel’s Beobachtungen der stündlichen Variationen der Abweichung zu Sitka, auf derNordwestküste Amerika’s. Aus einem Schreiben des Hrn. Kupffer an Hrn. A. v. Humboldt. Annalender Physik und Chemie 31, 193–198 (1834)

Reich, K.: Alexander von Humboldt und Carl Friedrich Gauß als Wegbereiter der neuen Disziplin Erd-magnetismus. HiN—Alexander von Humboldt im Netz 22, 35–55 (2011) (Online-Ressource: http://www.uni-potsdam.de/u/romanistik/humboldt/hin/hin22/reich.htm)

Rose, G.: Reise nach dem nördlichen Ural und dem Altai. Bd. 1. In: Mineralogisch-geognostische Reisenach dem Ural, dem Altai und dem Kaspischen Meere. Berlin (1837)

Roussanova, E.: Russland ist seit jeher das gelobte Land für den Magnetismus gewesen: Alexandervon Humboldt, Carl Friedrich Gauß und die Erforschung des Erdmagnetismus in Russland. HiN—

123

16 Int J Geomath (2012) 3:1–16

Alexander von Humboldt im Netz 22, 56–83 (2011) (Online-Ressource: http://www.uni-potsdam.de/u/romanistik/humboldt/hin/hin22/roussanova.htm)

Sonar, T.: William Gilberts Neigungsinstrument. Teil I: Geschichte und Theorie der magnetischen Nei-gung. Teil II: Die Berechnung einer Neigungstabelle. Mitteilungen der Mathematischen Gesellschaftin Hamburg 21/2, 45–68, 69–78 (2002)

Sonar, T.: William Gilbert und der Erdmagnetismus. In: Vorwärts in die Vergangenheit. Was bedeutet uns-erer Gesellschaft noch die mathematische Wissenschaft. Braunschweiger Museumsvorträge 7 und 8,pp. 39–49 (2007)

123