The relationship between the family of Benedetto Croce and that of Anton Dohrn were always characterized by cordiality and mutual respect. Both houses were international meeting places of artists, intellectuals and scientists. The narrowest and most lasting relationship was that between the philosopher and Reinhard Dohrn, from 1909 to 1965 director of the Zoological Station, a long period, marked, among other things, by the two World Wars. Both events caused major problems in the life of the institution. Starting in the (...) twenties, their relationship continued until 1952, the year of Croce’s death. In the years immediately following World War I Croce strove, with his prestige and authority, to preserve the Zoological Station’s nature as a private entity, directed by Dohrn. As Minister of Education, on 30 September, 1920, he issued a decree-law which repealed that of 26 May, 1918, which had aimed at the ‘Italianisation’ of the Zoological Station. Croce instead transformed the Station into a “non-profit organization under the supervision of the Ministry of Education”. The new decree sparked a lively debate in the Parliament and in the press, between supporters and opponents of the measure. On 9 December, a major discussion took place in the Senate, published in the same year under the title On the Zoological Station in Naples. The discussion revolved around two fundamental political concepts: is it legitimate to take, for reasons of culture, civilization and the law of war, possession of the “the fruit of the talent of others”? is it legitimate “to replace with a state organization” what had been created as a private activity and was the result of the enthusiasm and interest of individuals? Croce’s victory, however, was not lasting. During the Fascist era, with the decree of 21 October 1923, the Zoological Station was again transformed into an Italian state body. (shrink)

The second half of the nineteenth century in Italy bore witness to a number of scientific projects of great cultural importance that were unique on the European landscape. The correspondence between Govi and Boncompagni testifies to a scientific partnership throughout the twenty years’ life of the «Bullettino di Bibliografia e di Storia delle Scienze Matematiche e Fisiche». Both these scientists, as scholars of historical studies, bibliophiles and collectors, contributed to the spread of scientific literature and history. Nevertheless they did not (...) agree about the editorial style of the scientific works. (shrink)