Abstract

In this article, the authors examine the circumstances under which scholars can become effective figures of identification in medicine, after whom prizes or institutions are named – and under which circumstances scholars cannot or can no longer fulfill such a role. Trends and changes in professional cultural memory are examined, illustrated by the biographies and receptions of the human geneticist Hans Nachtsheim, the circulatory researcher Rudolf Thauer, the urologist Dora Teleky as well as the dentists Karl Häupl and Elsbeth von Schnizer. This study shows that the evaluation criteria themselves are historically changeable and that gender is an important influencing factor. While formal criteria (e. g., membership in parties and organizations) have traditionally been important evaluation criteria, the authors advocate that actions in research and clinical practice be given even greater attention in the future.