Women’sSludieslnt. Forum, Vol. 13. No. 5, pp. 415-432. 1990 0277-5395190 $3.00 + .OO Printed in the USA. 0 1990 Pergamon Press plc

MILEVA EINSTEIN-MARIC The Woman Who Did Einstein’s Mathematics

SENTA ~OEMEL-PLOETZ Franklin and Marshall College, Department of German and Russian, P.O. Box 3003, Lancaster, PA 17604-3003, U.S.A., and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bonn, Germany

Synopsis-At the ETH in Zurich, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, it is common knowl- edge that Einstein said about the mathematical side of his work: “My wife solves all my mathemati- cal problems.” There is no hint of that in the Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. I (Princeton University Press, 1987) which covers the time to 1902. We can be fairly certain that there won’t be a hint in the second volume, which will cover the most crucial time of Mileva Einstein-MariC’s cooperation with her husband, the time of “his creative outburst,” when the papers were written for which he would win the Nobel Prize. I want to take a close look at the only existing biography of Mileva Einstein-MariC, written by a Yugoslav mathematician and physicist, which appeared in German translation in 1983. I want to show some of the mechanisms at work in the lives of the two people who met as students at the ETH, studied and worked together, got married, had children, and then followed each their own life path: The man became famous and is numbered among the great; the woman became invisible, unknown, and unheard of. The man achieved; the woman worked to support herself and their children. We see in the two life stories the familiar patterns that lead to the construction of success for men and the deconstruction of success for women. It is not surprising that the editors of the Collecfed Papers of Albert Einstein have nothing more to say about Mileva Einstein-MariC than: “Her personal and intellectual relationships (sic!) with the young Einstein played an important role in his development.” I also want to show, to the extent to which it is possible from the biography of Mileva Einstein- MariC and from the correspondence in the Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. I, what is the scientific contribution of Einstein-MariC to her husband’s work. If it were not for the cultural imperialism of the U.S. academic establishment, it might be known in Princeton what is known in Novi Sad-Einstein-MariC was the scientific collaborator of her husband

The fourth edition of a book has just ap- KruSevac. Its author is Desanka TrbuhoviC- peared in German whose content deserves to GjuriC (1897-1983), a Serbian mathemati- be known more widely than the prohibitive cian and physicist who taught at the Institute price of the hardbound Swiss edition would of Technology and the University of Bel- allow. grade. After she retired, she researched and The book, Im Schatten Albert Einsteins: wrote the biography of Mileva Einstein- Das Tragische Leben der Mileva Einstein- MariC, the first wife of Albert Einstein. Be- Mar2 (1988) (In the Shadow of Albert Ein- cause the book appeared in Serbian, its con- stein: The Tragic Life of Mileva Einstein- tent remained totally unknown in Western MariC), was published by Paul Haupt in Europe and the United States, even to per- Bern, Switzerland. This edition took quite a sons who were interested in Einstein’s life. while to appear, probably because of the de- The 1983 German edition was intended to letions and additions to which the male edi- redress this situation, but I have never met a tor subjected the earlier edition. mathematician or physicist, not even at the The original appeared in 1969, published ETH, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technol- by Bagdala, a Yugoslav publishing firm in ogy, Einstein’s alma mater, who knew the book or cared about its content. But at least Einstein’s admission, “My wife does my For invaluable help with stylistic revisions, I am in- debted to Mark Harman; for patient and expert typing mathematics,” is general knowledge at the of the manuscript, I thank Vera Gmuca. ETH in Zurich, although it serves only as a

415 416 SENTA TROEMEL-PLOETZ

starter for jokes along the same lines and hovic-GjuriC writes that Mileva Einstein- never as a starter for serious questioning Mar? supported him: about this mathematician. Who was she? Why do we not know anything about her and with her infinite love which allowed her to her work? Why was she not offered academic believe in him and fully understand him. positions in Prague, Berlin, Princeton, or She was the source of his hope and of his Pasadena? How did it happen that she only confidence in his own ideas. She was the got the money from the Nobel Prize and was only one who stood by him not only emo- not named winner together with Einstein? tionally but by virtue of her scientific un- What was her life like? What became of derstanding, in which she was his equal. her? This support was stronger than all hostile The Yugoslav author answers some of forces in the world. She also helped him to these questions. She gives an account of a fight against his own nature, for he made life and fate that is moving to everyone and decisions quickly but changed them just that touches a deep chord of recognition in as quickly. Her decisions took time to ma- readers who know about the silencing of ture but then they were irrevocable. Truth- women’s voices and the annihilation of wom- fulness and integrity of word and deed en’s work. Ever since I first read this book, it were part of her harmonious character. has haunted me. I haven’t been able to put it (Trbuhovic-Gjuric, 1983, pp. 58-59)3 aside. I just had to reread it; I just had to talk about it again and again in private conversa- The editor takes issue with what he de- tions and in public lectures. fines as “the provocative core of that charac- Its author is now dead; I should have liked terization,” the equal scientific understand- to talk with her. I do not trust the German ing, and notes that: version of the book, which states no trans- lator but admits to “redaktionelle Bear- whatever may have been the case regard- beitung” (editorial reworking) by the same ing her being his scientific equal, Einstein person who has now in the fourth edition felt the same way at the time he made his advanced to become “the editor” and who fundamental discoveries and expressed it has changed the original book not only by with these words that have now come to unmarked’ and marked2 additions, but also light: “How happy I am to have found in by a deletion of over three pages and the you an equal creature who is equally substitution of a 17-page text of his own. strong and independent as I am.” (Trbu- How are we to know what changes he made hovic-GjuriC, 1988, p. 213)4 through his first “editorial re-working” on the German translation-Trbuhovic-GjuriC But rather than taking Albert Einstein’s own may have translated her book herself into statement as evidence for Trbuhovic-Gjuric’s German-or, if he was also the translator, by hypothesis, he did not let her description of his very translation? Mileva Einstein-Marie stand, but simply The editor justifies his changes by refer- eradicated it. Still he concludes in a truly hy- ence to new material that has come to light, pocritical manner (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1988, p. especially in The Collected Papers of Albert 213): Einstein, I/o/. I (1987). However, he may have unintentionally given away the real mo- One cannot imagine a more beautiful tivation in an addition to his postscript (un- coincidence: the fact that there is an marked). There he quotes a passage by Trbu- agreement in the idea and the choice of hovic-GjuriC (which he had deleted from the expressions used by Einstein and Trbuhov- text of the new edition) in which the author ic-GjuriC speaks very well of the book as described Mileva Einstein-Marie as support- the author has left it. ing Albert Einstein at a time when none of his professors wanted to do anything for This is nicely ambiguous: does he mean him, and when he was being turned down the Serbian original, which we cannot read, repeatedly when applying for jobs. Trbu- or the edited version he is now offering us Mileva Einstein-Mad 417

and for which, due to his deletion, the agree- kind of empathy a man could not have mus- ment no longer can be claimed? It is a superb tered. She wanted to rescue Mileva Einstein- example of irony that he is acclaiming a book MariC from oblivion and write her into Ser- he could not leave untouched, acclaiming an bian and scientific history. She knew that no author whose words he did not approve of man would do that job for Mileva Einstein- and had to tamper with while he is forcing on MariC, whose own husband failed to give her us a version of the book the author did not the public recognition she deserved. leave us! She was interested in Mileva Einstein- Since the original is not accessible to me Marie as a mathematician and a woman and the fourth edition does not have the whose life had taken a different route from credibility of the book I originally read, I that of most women, leading to a university will now stay with the second edition of 1983 career. I am sure Trbuhovic-GjuriC was aware which, by the way, is listed as a biographical of the impediments facing women in this ca- source in The Collected Papers of Albert reer, of the mechanisms militating against Einstein, Vol. 1. women’s contributions to the areas of mathe- Desanka Trbuhovic-GjuriC writes in her matics and physics. As a mathematician and foreword, dated Fall 1982, that she attempt- physicist, she knew that without the funda- ed to collect memories, details, and small mental contribution of Mileva Einstein- events in the life of Mileva Einstein-MariC, MariC, the theory of relativity would not ex- about which she learned from people who ist, yet this contribution had never even knew her - relatives, friends, acquain- entered the history of the field. It was imme- tances-or from letters, diaries, documents, diately eradicated. She must have pondered to form “a mosaic of the life from the still again and again the following issue: Why did existing pebbles.” This was certainly not an the relationship between Mileva Einstein- easy task, especially because, as she said, the MariC and Albert Einstein secure world fame literature contained only few observations for the man and not even a university teach- about Mileva Einstein-MariC and those con- ing job for Mileva Einstein-MariC? Why was tradicted each other and were possibly ten- that relationship fatal for Mileva Einstein- dentious to her disadvantage. But also, in MariC? Had she not met, had she especially contrast to Albert Einstein, Mileva Einstein- not married Einstein, would we know of her MariC was, like her mother, taciturn about as a prominent mathematician? Had she at her life and her experience to the point where least not had children, could she have had she asked people to not talk about her. her own professional life and recognition, Trbuhovic-Gjuric’s motivation was to fo- would her marriage have endured? cus on the unknown, unacknowledged, and I am sure the author, born only 25 years on what was “unjustly put aside into oblivion later than Mileva Einstein-Marie, compared . . . without disputing the indubitable merits her own life with that of Mileva Einstein- of the other side” (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, MariC; I am sure she thought of the many p. 5). The reader is left to draw her or his women mathematicians and their life condi- own conclusions. tions which keep them from gaining recogni- Throughout the book she carefully sticks tion. She did not blame patriarchy, the sys- to this objectivity-she never evaluates, com- tem which bestows privilege on men, she did ments on, or judges Albert Einstein’s behav- not even blame Einstein himself-she only ior. She only wants to make Mileva Einstein- points to the modesty of Mileva Einstein- Mar& life visible by collecting facts about it MariC, who asked for no recognition but was and she wants to make her scientific contri- happy for, and content with, Albert Ein- bution known. She is uniquely qualified for stein’s successes. Her explanation of Mileva this endeavor through her own biography, as Einstein-Marib’s fate ends there because she a Serb with similar upbringing and identical does not want to cast aspersions on the char- fields, as a mathematician and physicist, and acter of Albert Einstein. She wrote the book as a person with ties to Zurich. But, especial- when she was close to 70; it appeared in 1969 ly, she brings her female perspective to the when she was 72. Her deep interest in Mileva task and the result is a book written with the Einstein-MariC and her aim in writing the 418 SENTA ‘~OEMEL-PLOETZ

book would be termed feminist today. Only mathematical problems for me” (Trbuhovic- we would not stop where she did. We cannot Gjuric, 1983, p. 75). but see universal connections and patterns in Of course we know that women’s names the female condition when we read the book as authors and co-authors, as givers of ideas, today. ,In the meantime, we have uncovered, as collaborators often disappear or take sec- and become clear about, the mechanisms ond place; their work is simply appropriated that suppress the contributions of women, by men5 at most -if they are fortunate- and we cannot help seeing them at work in a their names may appear in the dedication. particularly shocking way in the careers of I am not sure of this, but I think it unlike- both Einsteins. We cannot be content with ly that Albert Einstein even so much as dedi- “Mileva Einstein-MariC’s modesty, her will- cated a book to Mileva Einstein-MariC. But ingness to sacrifice, her kindness, her fear of let us look at how her name was dropped in publicity and avoidance of personal recogni- the two incidents I have mentioned. tion, the unconditional devotion to the work In the middle of 1902, Albert Einstein, of her genius husband and to her family” as through the connections of the father of a an explanation of why Mileva Einstein-MariC friend of his, Marcel Grossmann, got his is not known today, as the fourth edition sug- first regular position in the Swiss Patent Of- gests in its rather Christian blurb. For us, the fice in Bern. On January 6, 1903, Mileva mere fact that Mileva Einstein-MariC did not MariC and Albert Einstein were married. To- want to talk about her own merits, and her gether with friends (the brothers Habicht, mathematical work for Albert Einstein, does Maurice Solovine, Angelo Besso, and his not relieve Albert Einstein of the responsibil- wife), they met regularly to read philosophi- ity for his silence in this matter. He could cal and scientific works which they discussed have talked about it, but he did not. and studied. They called their group Aca- What kept him from giving her full name demia Olympia. Mileva Einstein-Mar? con- when he published a patent which appeared tinued to collaborate with Albert Einstein as under the name Einstein-Habicht? they had been doing since they first studied Why did he not immediately insist on a together, and she was also responsible for correction when Mileva Einstein-MariC’s the household chores. Desanka Trbuhovic- name was dropped as an author of the arti- GjuriC writes (1983, p. 65): cles that appeared in 1905 in the Leipzig An- nalen der Physik? Later on he received the Together with Paul Habicht she worked at Nobel Prize for one of those articles. the construction of a machine for measur- Why did he not acknowledge in public ing small electrical currents by way of that it was she who came up with the idea to multiplication. It took a long time, not investigate ether and its importance (Trbu- only because she had so much to do [Ein- hovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 69)? stein’s mathematical problems, ST-P], but Why did his recognition of her work re- also because of her thoroughness and per- main private, for example, he told Mileva fectionism. She had already distinguished Einstein-MariC’s father (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, herself in the physics lab in Zurich. When 1983, p. 76): both she and Habicht were satisfied with their results, they left it to Albert Einstein, I didn’t marry your daughter because of as a patent expert, to describe the appara- the money but because I love her, because tus. I need her, because we are both one. Ev- erything I have done and accomplished I Albert Einstein published an article about owe to Mileva. She is my genial source of it in his own name: It appeared in the Anna- inspiration, my protective angel against len der Physik in 1907, under the title “Eine sins in life and even more so in science. neue elektrostatische Methode zur Messung Without her I would not have started my kleiner Elektrizitatsmengen,” and then he work let alone finished it. gave a detailed description of this method in an article, again using his name only, in the He told a group of Serbian intellectuals in Physikalische Zeitschrift, No. 7, 1908. And 1905: “I need my wife. She solves all the he had the apparatus patented under the Mileva Einstein-Mar2 419

name Einstein-Habicht (Patent No. 35693). XVII of Annalen der Physik were written in Trbuhovic-GjuriC comments (1983, p. 65): Bern while Albert Einstein was at the Swiss Patent Office and were written together with When one of the Habicht brothers asked his wife. He later received the Nobel Prize Mileva Einstein-MariC why she had not for ‘Einen die Erzeugung und Verwandlung given her own name in the application for des Lichtes betreffenden heuristischen Ge- the patent, she answered: What for, we are sichtspunkt.’ “Elektrodynamik bewegter both only ONE STONE (=Einstein). Then K&per” contains the special theory of rela- Paul Habicht also decided to give only his tivity. Abram F. Joffe, the famous Russian last name. physicist who was then an assistant to Rontgen (a member of the editorial team Not giving the full name, however, had that examined the articles sent to Annalen different results for the woman and the man der Physik for publication) wrote in his Erin- because a last name is usually associated nerungen an Albert Einstein (Joffe, 1960) with a man. Mileva Einstein-MariC lost her that the original manuscripts for these two authorship entirely and it was automatically and also for a third paper were signed Ein- bestowed on her husband. Therefore, the stein-MariC (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 97). question why she didn’t give her own name Would the male editors have dropped the instead of her full name was correctly formu- name of a male co-author, or that of a wom- lated: Einstein in Einstein-Habicht meant an who was not the author’s wife? Would not Albert Einstein. Soon after they were mar- a male co-author have protested against his ried, Einstein profited from the Swiss law name being dropped in the publication and about names which forced women to put would he not have asked for some form of their husband’s name first in their double reparation? The manuscripts, together with names and which, incidentally, was only all the notes for these three papers, are no changed in 1988. longer extant. The New York Times of Feb- It was the patent under the name Ein- ruary 15, 1944, wrote about the manuscript stein-Habicht, plus the absence of any pro- of the theory of relativity that Albert Ein- test about the misrepresentation of author- stein “had destroyed the original after the ship, which made it easy for Einstein to theory had been published in 1905. An publish two articles on the method in his $11,500,000 reward was promised to the per- name, and thus appropriate for himself all of son who could bring the original manuscript the work his wife had done. to the Library of Congress” (Trbuhovic- Much more disastrous and devastating, GjuriC, 1983, p. 72). It is perhaps impossible however, is what happened to the five articles now to show the extent of Mileva Einstein- that appeared in 1905 in the Leipzig Annalen MariC’s contribution and that of Albert Ein- der Physik. Two of them, including his 21- stein. But there are voices and countervoices: page dissertation, were written in Zurich. It’s Desanka Trbuhovic-GjuriC (1983, p. 158) an open question how much Mileva Einstein- quotes Albert Einstein’s friend, David Rei- MariC contributed to them. I will talk later chenstein: “It is strange how fruitful that about Albert Einstein’s evaluation of himself short period of his life was. Not only his and that of his professors and only mention special theory of relativity but a lot of other here that during their common student years basic papers bear the date 1905.” his own view of Mileva Einstein-MariC was Leopold Infeld, one of his biographers, that she would make a better physicist than remarked on “the irony of fate and the exter- many men (Trbuhovic-Gjurid, 1983, p. 41); nal contradictions” in Albert Einstein’s life also the friends of Mileva Einstein-Marie felt (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 158): “His most that Albert Einstein was exploiting her too important scientific work he wrote as a little much (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 55). This civil servant in the Patent Office in Bern.” was between 1899 and 1901, the time when Peter Michelmore, who had much infor- he wrote his thesis (Diplomarbeit) and his mation from Albert Einstein, said (Trbu- dissertation (submitted in Fall 1901, later ap- hovid-GjuriC, 1983, p. 72): “Mileva helped parently withdrawn, degree received 1905). him solve certain mathematical problems. The other three articles published in Vol. She was with him in Bern and helped him 420 SENTA T~OEMEL-PLOETZ

when he was having such a hard time with ideas about the extension of Planck’s the theory of relativity.” quantum theory and about the special Hermann Minkowsky, a great mathemati- theory of relativity . . . Mileva Einstein- cian and a former professor of Albert Ein- MariC was the first person to tell Albert stein, who knew him well and was his friend, Einstein after the completion of his paper: is said to have remarked to Max Born: “This this is a great, very great and beautiful was a big surprise to me because Einstein was work, whereupon he sent it to the journal quite a lazybones and wasn’t at all interested Annafen der Physik in Leipzig. in mathematics” (Trbuhovic-Gjuric, 1983, p. 74). When Albert Einstein received the Nobel Bogdanovich, a mathematician in the Prize in 1922, he had been separated from his Ministry of Education in Belgrade who was wife, and living with another woman in well acquainted with Mileva Einstein-Maric, Berlin for eight years; he had been divorced is reported to have said that she had always and remarried for three years. However, he known that Mileva Einstein-MariC had travelled to Zurich and gave the full financial helped her husband a great deal, especially award, which came with the Nobel Prize, to with the mathematical foundation of his the- his first wife. ory, but Mileva Einstein-Marie had always Many interpretations are possible, of avoided talking about it (Trbuhovic-Gjuric, course. People say he turned over the Nobel 1983, p. 164). Prize to his wife. This is simply a harmoniz- Mileva Einstein-MariC told her father dur- ing euphemism. He was the one who received ing a visit by Albert Einstein and herself in the prize with all the honors, he did not re- 1905: “A short while ago we finished a very nounce it in her favor, and it was he who gave important work which will make my hus- the lecture in Gdteborg at the congress of band world-famous” (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, Nobel Prize winners. Perhaps he only gave 1983, p. 75). the money to his first wife because for eight And the author, Trbuhovic-GjuriC herself, years he had hardly supported her and the said the following about the paper (1983, p. two children at all financially. 71): The Collected Papers of Einstein, Vol. I, suggest a different reason. I was amazed to It’s so pure, so unbelievably simple and read there that Mileva Einstein-MariC was elegant in its mathematical formulation - given the Nobel Prize money in accordance of all the revolutionary progress physics with the divorce agreement (Collected Pa- has made in this century, this work is the pers, Vol. 1, 1987, p. 381). I asked myself greatest achievement. whether the divorce agreement of 1919 antic- Even today when reading these yellow- ipated Einstein’s Nobel Prize of 1922. But let ing pages printed almost 80 years ago, one us assume that he was giving her private rec- feels respect and cannot but be proud that ognition for her contribution which he had our great Serbian Mileva Einstein-MariC not given her publicly. By then, he must have participated in the discovery and helped been aware of how much he owed her mathe- edit them. Her intellect lives in those lines. matical genius; his own genius was on the In their simplicity, the equations show al- decline and he did not achieve anything most beyond a doubt the personal style comparable after what is defined as his “cre- she always demonstrated in mathematics ative outburst of 1905.” Again and again and in life in general. Her manner was people remarked on the fact that none of his always devoid of unnecessary complica- later work, after the age of 26, surpassed or tions and of pathos. even reached the same level of his earlier research. and (p. 72): Since his second wife was chosen for dif- ferent reasons, (“I’m glad my second wife In her work, she was not the co-creator of doesn’t understand anything about science his ideas, something no one else could because my first wife did”), he needed at var- have been, but she did examine all his ious points someone “to solve his mathemati- ideas, then discussed them with him and cal problems.” He chose students or friends: gave mathematical expression to his “I encountered mathematical difficulties Mileva Einstein-Mad 421

which I cannot conquer. I beg for your help, A former student of Einstein recalls that as I am apparently going crazy” (Trbuhovic- Albert Einstein got stuck in the middle of a GjuriC, 1983, p. 96) he wrote to his friend lecture missing a “silly mathematical trans- Marcel Grossmann, who then helped him. formation” which he couldn’t figure out. In 1920, he wrote to Paul Ehrenfest as Since none of the students could either, he follows (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 155): told them to leave half a page empty and “ . . . I did not make any progress in the gen- gave them the result. Ten minutes later he eral theory of relativity. . . . Also on the discovered a small piece of paper and put the question of electrons I didn’t come up with transformation on the blackboard, remark- anything. Is it my hardened brain or is the ing: “The main thing is the result not the breakthrough really that far off.” mathematics, for with mathematics you can Whatever the case may have been, to prove anything” (Trbuhovic-Gjuric, 1983, p. quote the editor of the fourth edition who 88). doubted the intellectual equality of Mileva He did not have to worry about the proofs Einstein-MariC to the “century genius” Al- because Mileva Einstein-MariC was doing bert Einstein, it is interesting to look at some them. So perhaps it was not so funny when self-evaluations of Albert Einstein before he he joked at a congress: “Ever since the math- had to play the role of genius of the century. ematicians have taken up my theory of rela- He said of himself that his intuition in tivity, I don’t understand it any more myself” mathematics was not strong enough to dif- (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 88). ferentiate the essentially important from the The only person who believed in him and more or less superfluous (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, in his great talent was Mileva Einstein-MariC. 1983, p. 44). Besides infinitesimal geometry, She believed in him more than he did himself and so he went his way, studying physics, higher mathematics didn’t interest me in getting through exams, producing papers. He my years of studying. I wrongly assumed had her support and he had her opinion and that this was such a wide area that one judgment, which was more important to him could easily waste one’s energy in a far-off than his own. Moreover, he had her financial province. Also, I thought in my innocence help when he did not earn enough, he had that it was sufficient for the physicist to the physical comfort provided by her in a have clearly understood the elementary home which she kept up, later on he had mathematical concepts and to have them children whom he did not have to take care ready for application while the rest con- of and could simply enjoy. As to his work, he sisted of unfruitful subtleties for the phys- had her companionship, her diligence, her icist, an error which I noticed only later. endurance, her mathematical genius, and her My mathematical ability was apparently mathematical devotion. He had someone he not sufficient to enable me to differentiate needed, as he had told her father, someone the central and fundamental concepts who gave herself up to working only for his from those that were peripheral and unim- success, someone who was only interested in portant. (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 47) developing his abilities and who was content with his success. She was the ideal female Others agreed with his evaluation. An partner for the years of his greatest creativity, ETH professor, Jean Pernet, advised him to from about 1900 to 1910. This is abbreviated study something else other than physics by the male editors of Volume 1 of the Col- (Trbuhovic-Gjuric, 1983, p. 46): “Studying lected Papers in the following way: “Her in- physics is very difficult. You don’t lack dili- tellectual and personal relationships (sic!) gence and good will but simply knowledge. with the young Einstein played an important Why don’t you study medicine, law, or litera- role in his development” (Collected Papers, ture instead?” Vol. I, 1987, p. 381). Professor Weber, another physicist and I will talk now about Mileva Einstein- ETH professor, for whom he did his thesis MariC’s life as it is depicted in Desanka Trbu- for the diploma, refused categorically to give hovic-Gjuric’s book. Albert Einstein an assistant post while giving Mileva Einstein-MariC was a highly gifted all his co-students assistantships after their woman who came to study at the ETH, then exam. Polytechnikum, in Zurich, the fifth woman 422 SENTA T~OEMEL-PLOETZ who had ever studied in the Department VI no positive expectations for them in the A: Mathematics and Physics, and the only heads of their male professors and they are woman in her year. not promoted and mentored as the young She was born in 1875, in what is now Yu- bright male students are, who immediately goslavia, to a mother who is characterized by become members of the male institution and Trbuhovic-GjuriC as modest, quiet, and very begin to profit from their privilege. I am sure serious, who came from a wealthy family, none of her professors gave as much as a and to a father who was an autodidact, em- thought to the possibility she might succeed ployed in the Austrian-Hungarian military and pursue an academic career to the same and the civil service. Although her father point they had reached themselves. They tol- supported her strongly from the beginning erated her at best; she had to look out for when he realized her exceptional talent, her herself. I do not believe that even the physics family could not provide the intellectual cli- professor, Weber, for whom she wrote her mate and stimulating environment into Diplomarbeit, which she wanted to extend which, for example, Sonja Kovalevskaja, into a doctoral dissertation, thought about Sophie Germain, Marie Curie, and other taking her on as his assistant. women were born. People around Mileva In a letter to a friend, Mileva Einstein- Einstein-MariC reacted to her with astonish- MariC wrote that Professor Weber was very ment and resistance and she had to go her satisfied with her topic and that she was own solitary way. looking forward to her research. She also She attended several secondary schools in mentions that Albert Einstein had chosen a Yugoslavia, all of them with exceptional suc- very interesting topic. Later on, Albert Ein- cess, and was then admitted as a private stu- stein said that both their Diplomarbeiten dent to an all-male Obergymnasium in Za- were on the topic of thermoconduction, and greb. After her first year there, she was were of no interest to him. It is interesting permitted to enter the physics class of that that he received a better grade, namely, 4.5 elite school. At the age of 19, she decided to for something which did not interest him in leave home for a country that allowed wom- the least, while Mileva Einstein-Marie re- en to attend university. She went to Zurich to ceived a 4 for something she was excited prepare in a girls’ school for her Matura, the about (grades ranged from 1 to 6, 6 being the exam which qualifies students to enter uni- highest). But it does not disagree with what versity. She studied medicine for one term we know today about the way women and and then changed to mathematics and phys- men are evaluated. ics. To enter the ETH she had to do an addi- “It is a prevalent finding,” write Gruber tional entrance examination in mathematics. and Gaebelein (1979, p. 299) “that men and Today we cannot imagine how lonely Mi- women are not evaluated equally (Ro- leva Einstein-Marie must have felt during all senkrantz et al., 1968; Elman, Press, & Ro- her schooling. Not only was she alone from sencrantz, 1970) even when they produce ob- the beginning because of her unusual gifted- jectively the same results (Goldberg, 1968; ness, because of her academic interests and Pheterson, Kiesler, & Goldberg, 1971; Mis- determination, but she was also alone as the chel, 1974; Starer & Denmark, 1974).” It be- only girl in the elitist male Gymnasium and gins very early. Condry and Condry (1976) the only woman in the mathematics and showed that the same baby’s behavior was physics department of the elitist male ETH. perceived differently when it had been given Even today the ETH, with its one female full a girl’s name from when it had a boy’s name. professor hired not too long ago, is not a The difference was in the eye of the beholder. hospitable place for women students. There Identical texts were evaluated more negative- are hardly any women studying mathematics ly when they carried the name of a female and physics, and even fewer becoming assis- author (Goldberg, 1968). What is in a name? tants. We cannot imagine what the atmos- Everything seems to be in a name. Evalua- phere must have been like for Mileva Ein- tion of identical scholarly work apparently stein-MariC when she arrived to study there changes if the sex or race of the authors devi- in 1896. The general attitude was, and is, ate from the norm, that is, white male, pref- that women do not belong there, so there are erably of Anglo Saxon, Protestant back- Mileva Einstein-Mad 423 ground.6 The 19th-century writers-George from all over Europe to study in Zurich and Eliot, George Sand, Anne, Charlotte, and then returned to their own countries to open Emily Bronte - who wrote under male pseu- the first medical practices run by women, or donyms knew that the expectations of, reac- to found the first medical and law schools tions to, and evaluations of women’s writing for women. I wonder how much the attitude were not neutral and were not advantageous that they did not belong to the university was to them. Evaluation of content and of source reflected in their evaluations, male profes- are inseparably interwoven. Our perception sors confirming their own prejudice against and evaluation is different for women and women by giving them the corresponding men (Nieva & Gutek, 1980; Geis, Carter, & grades. It is only very recently that a tenden- Butler-Thompson, 1982). Why else would it cy has been reported-unfortunately, only in have been necessary to change the practice of women-that negative evaluation of women evaluating abstracts for conference participa- is changing. Some women, it seems, are be- tion and articles for publication together ginning to accept women’s work and may with authors’ names? Deleting the names of judge it as equal to a man’s (Chabot & Gold- the authors had as an interesting conse- berg, 1974; Mischel, 1974; Levenson et al., quence that more women and minority au- 1975). thors are now participating in conferences It is amazing that we still fail to apply the and more of their work is now being pub- knowledge we have, knowledge about the un- lished in professional journals. But even to- fair evaluation of women, knowledge about day, professional women cannot expect to be discriminatory mechanisms in academia, to granted the same credibility and authority the women we read about in the history of when they speak. Women news readers espe- science or literature or to the live women we cially are faced with the problem (Whitaker see as our colleagues or students. & Meade, 1967). The reasons for the disas- If I apply some of these findings, and trous experience of the first BBC women some of what I know about the Swiss univer- news readers (Kramarae, 1984) are still work- sity system then and today, to what I read ing against women today (Kramarae, 1988; about Mileva Einstein-MariC, I am not sur- Mills, 1988; Sanders & Rock, 1988). prised that she did not receive either a Di- Many researchers show that the attention plom or a doctorate. and interaction of teachers in the classroom The Swiss university before the turn of the focuses on boys (Thorne, Kramarae, & Hen- century, and that means the Swiss academic ley, 1983; Spender, 1982); these results must men, let their first woman lawyer, who had hold all the more for college and university the highest qualifications for an academic teaching because the sex-role expectations career, starve rather than give her a profes- are stronger for adult women than for little sorship. Dr jur. Emilie Kempin-Spyri (1853- girls. Treichler and Kramarae (1983) attribute 1901) was the first woman in the world to the chilly atmosphere in the college class- study law. She received her doctorate, sum- room experienced by many women today to ma cum laude, in 1887, from the University typical male patterns of interaction. Addi- of Zurich. After that, she found that she tionally, we have research on the general bias could not practice law because it was bound against competent women (Hagen & Kahn, to active citizenship. She went to court and 1975; Piacente et al., 1974; Seyfried & Hen- was told that her interpretation of “Every dricks, 1973) and the specific bias against Swiss is equal before the law” to mean every women in the academy (Farley, 1982; Spen- Swiss man and every Swiss woman was just cer, Kehoe, & Speece, 1982; Rossi & Calder- as new as it was daring. The only route left wood, 1973; Abramson, 1975; Howe, 1975; was an academic career. She tried Habilita- DeSole & Hoffman, 1961; Haber, 1981). tion, but it was refused by all the university The consequences of such bias severely in- authorities and by the state (1888). She emi- fluence the evaluation of women as students grated to the United States where she found- today. How much harder must the first wom- ed the First Woman Law College, but since en to enter university have been bombarded her family was not happy in the United by prejudice against them. I wonder what States, she returned to Switzerland and made grades the first women received who came a new attempt at Habilitation. This time, the 424 SENTA T~OEMEL-PLOETZ

faculty agreed, the senate voted no but was requiem for a woman by an Austrian com- overruled by the state educational commit- poser, performed at the Donaueschingen Fes- tee, and she received the venia legendi for tival for Avantgarde Music and honored with Roman, Anglo-Saxon, and American Law the Karl Sczuka Prize. If we looked at the (1891). However, she was not taken seriously lives of women studying at that time, per- by colleagues or students: her lectures were haps almost every woman having studied not attended enough and she did not receive then would deserve a requiem. a professorship. Her family did not have As for Swiss universities today, suffice it to enough money to live since her husband’s ca- say that in 1983 Switzerland could count 40 reer as a journalist did not flourish. The women full professors (compared with over family moved to Berlin where she opened a 2,000 men full professors), which is certainly consulting office for international law. Her an achievement in the 150 years since the first husband left her-a familiar pattern - and woman appeared as auditors at the university. she had to take care of herself and their two At this rate, Swiss universities may actually children. She worked herself to death, but reach 10% in another 600 years. could not make a living and incurred debts. But going back to Mileva Einstein-Marie, In 1899, she was admitted to a psychiatric there is another factor which we should con- institution in Base1 with a nervous break- sider (and which not surprisingly is also at down; friends had to pay for the expenses. play in Emilie Kempin-Spyri’s life). Mileva When she felt better, she applied for a posi- Einstein-MariC most certainly would have tion as a household help (Woodtli, 1975, p. gotten both her Diplom and her doctorate 98): had she not met Albert Einstein. When she fell in love, she worked together with him. Or In spite of my studying, I have not forgot- rather, when they worked together, she fell in ten the abilities of a housewife; . . . I only love with him. Once she was committed to began to study at a later age when I al- him, however, she worked for him instead of ready had children, then three and four for herself-out of love. She may not even years old. Therefore I can also cook, have noticed the difference at first because sweep, sew, especially make new clothes she kept working more than ever, but her love from old ones; I love all children and like did change her very strong dedication to her to be with them, and I am willing to do studies in that she no longer pursued them in any work whatsoever, including doing the the interest of her own career, but rather of dishes and cleaning the house. I will also his. At that time, as a matter of course, the take care of the garden if you desire me to. other women at the Swiss institutions of higher learning immediately dropped their She then writes that she is extremely mod- scientific interests and their work once they est in what she wants and needs for herself, got married, so as to take up their duties as that because of her financial situation, she housewives and mothers. They had come as will suffer anything willingly. She would be the most brilliant and gifted women from all satisfied with a monthly pay of 10 Swiss over Europe, they had gained access to the francs, but would not insist on it. If they Swiss universities as auditors because they wanted to hire her by trial and without pay were deemed harmless enough, then as regu- for a month, this would be fine. Signed: Dr. lar students with the help of some German Emilie Kempin.’ Fortunately, she died of male professors, expatriates from the Ger- cancer before she could accept the position man university for political reasons, thus as a maid- the first woman lawyer in the opening for Swiss women students the way to world literally starving for recognition of her the university. All of them willingly gave up achievement, not left a morsel of success by, their academic inclination once their “real I do not know how many, mediocre and bad calling” began. Those who wanted to com- male lawyers in Switzerland and Germany, bine their academic life with a family were dying in a psychiatric institution at the age of literally destroyed, like Kempin-Spyri and 48. Mileva Einstein-MariC. Women today still A requiem based on her letter was com- have to choose and do choose between chil- posed recently by Patricia Jtinger, the first dren and professional life in Switzerland, Mileva Einstein-Marie 425

and in Germany as well8 And even in the ber, got his Diplomarbeit (which he was not United States today, a scientific career and interested in) graded better than hers, he got marriage cannot be combined completely un- his degree (Diplom), he even started his doc- problematically. Reskin (1978, p. 17) states: toral dissertation with Weber and when that did not work out, someone else (Kleiner) was Possibly the best situation for a female found with whom he continued. Even when scientist is marriage to a professional in Kleiner refused it or advised him to withdraw another discipline. Her marital status in 1901, it did not keep him from getting his would facilitate her social and profession- doctorate four years later. al integration, and the disciplinary differ- Mileva Einstein-MariC ended up without ence would reduce the chance of her hus- any degree whatsoever, although Albert Ein- band’s receiving credit for her research stein had envisaged her as a PhD when he contributions. would still be “ein ganz gewohnlicher Mensch” (“a totally ordinary human being”) From Trbuhovic-Gjuric’s book, it seems (Collected Papers, Vol. I, 1987, p. 260). that Mileva Einstein-MariC jeopardized her While she was working on her dissertation promising collaborative relationship with and preparing for her exam, she also had Professor Weber because she fought for Al- other duties. Mileva Einstein-Maric’s friends bert Einstein when he, as the only student thought that Albert Einstein was exploiting out of four, did not receive an assistantship her too much. This was said just at the time after the Diplom examination at the ETH. when both of them were writing their Diplo- Weber had categorically declared that he did marbeiten and before the final oral examina- not want Albert Einstein as an assistant. I do tions. After the exam, from the middle of not know whether one of the three men stu- 1900 to the middle of 1902, a very difficult dents also fought for Albert Einstein and by time began for both of them. Albert Einstein doing so risked his relationship with Weber. could not get any position he applied for, One of them, Albert Einstein’s friend Marcel although he tried again and again. Mileva Grossmann, at least later on, got his father Einstein-MariC was pregnant with a child by to use his connections and get Albert Ein- Albert Einstein, gave birth to it in 1902, out stein his first full-time position (at the Swiss of wedlock, and evidently had to give it up Patent Office, Bern). Mileva Einstein-Marie, for adoption. Albert Einstein’s parents ob- in any case, had conflicts with Weber be- jected to Mileva Einstein-Marie as a person, cause she wanted him to see his unfairness to and to the planned marriage. Mileva Ein- Albert Einstein who, in his final exam, had stein-MariC stuck with him, struggling an average quite a bit below that of the other against the external world, be it Weber or three men candidates. Did she ever give any Albert Einstein’s parents, supporting him thought to the possibility of fighting for an when he got rejected and, above all, working assistantship for herself? Did any one of her with him (Collected Papers, Vol. I, 1987, p. fellow students fight for her? Would Albert 275): “Wir leben und arbeiten immer noch Einstein, had he been in her position, have wie frtiher (we are living and working the fought for her at the expense of his career? I way we did earlier, meaning: as students). think we can answer the last question be- This collaboration is reflected also in Al- cause Albert Einstein did not do anything for bert Einstein’s letters: her, never mind any fighting for her, even In September 1900, almost immediately when it would no longer have harmed his after his exam, Albert Einstein writes to Mi- career. leva Einstein-MariC: “Ich freue mich such Trbuhovic-GjuriC writes (1983, p. 59): sehr auf unsere neuen Arbeiten” (I am also “She went so far to eventually withdraw her looking forward very much to our new pa- excellent Diplomarbeit, stopped her research pers) (Collected Papers, Vol. I, 1987, p. with him [=Weber, ST-P], and in August, 260). 1901, left the Polytechnikum for good.” In a letter of October 1900, the letter in Again, the consequences for the woman were which he calls her his equal, he again refers different from those for the man. Albert Ein- to common work on capillarity, which they stein, who had the primary conflict with We- will send to the Anna/en if it should turn out 426 SENTA ROEMEL-PLOETZ

to be successful (Collected Papers, Vol. 1, Things changed slightly when their first 1987, p. 267). child (in wedlock) was born in May 1904. In a letter of March 1901, Albert Einstein Mileva Einstein-MariC’s work increased, but writes to Mileva Einstein-Marie: “How hap- she still supported, and worked with, Albert py and proud I will be when both of us to- Einstein. When her brother studied in gether will have brought our work on relative Zurich, he became her helper, babysitting for motion to a successful end” (Collected Pa- the child, and this allowed her time to check pers, Vol. I, 1987, p. 282). her husband’s computations. In a letter of April 1901, he is talking In 1909, Albert Einstein received a profes- about “our research” and “our papers,” refer- sorship at the University of Zurich. His in- ring to what was published under only his come was better than in Bern but, to give him name as “Folgerungen aus den Capillaritat- more financial independence, Mileva Ein- serscheinungen” in Annalen der Physik 4 stein-MariC took in student lodgers who lived (1901) (Collected Papers, Vol. I, 1987, p. and ate with them. Mileva Einstein-MariC 286). strained her physical limits. A student of Al- In a letter of May 1901, he is referring to bert Einstein reports coming to his apart- the same paper again by “our paper” and ment (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 87): “The says, “If only we had a chance soon to con- door was open, the steps and the hallway tinue together on that beautiful road” (Col- were wet from cleaning, and his wife, after lected Papers, Vol. I, 1987, p. 300). all this work, was standing in the kitchen In a later letter of the same month he cooking the midday meal with her sleeves writes: “Think how beautiful it will be when rolled up .” we are able again to work together without A mathematician of the University of Za- any disturbance and interference from out- greb recalled that Albert Einstein every now side! Your present sorrows will be brilliantly and then helped his wife doing the household replaced by sheer pleasure and our days will chores because he felt sorry that after her pass quietly without any hectic” (Collected housework was done, she had to do his Papers, Vol. I, 1987, p. 304). mathematical problems till way past mid- Albert Einstein’s wish would come true night (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 87). even though the time was not so quiet and But Mileva Einstein-Marie did not tire and unhectic for Mileva Einstein-MariC. Their was happy about her husband’s success. She collaboration became even more intensive wrote to her friend Helene on September 3, beginning in 1903, when they got married. 1909 (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 87): Whereas before, they had to spend some time apart, they now had uninterrupted time My husband is at a congress of German together. natural scientists in Salzburg at the mo- Trbuhovic-GjuriC writes (1983, p. 68): ment where he is to give a talk. He is con- sidered among the first German speaking The marriage of these two very different, physicists now. I am very happy about his highly gifted people was very happy at successes because he really deserves them. that time. She was happy with him-con- tent to work for him and around him. She The birth of their second son, July 1910, carried the full burden of everyday life; he meant even more work. She had already giv- could spend his time on his work and she en up all her personal interests. Her health helped him not only with her knowledge was deteriorating. A doctor predicted she but also with her confidence in him, and was ruining her health and suggested that Al- her stimulating energy. She was overjoyed bert Einstein should earn a bit more mon- that he valued and loved her for these ey. From then on, Mileva Einstein-MariC’s characteristics which distinguished her contribution to the mathematical work of from other women. She made it possible her husband diminished (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, for him to have a quiet, ordered life, free 1983, p. 89). Albert Einstein began to ask of worry. The congenial sides of her per- advanced students and friends for help. sonality caused resonances of harmony in In 1911, they moved to Prague where Al- him. bert Einstein had been offered a professor- Mileva Einstein-Mad 427 ship in theoretical physics. Their marriage dren alone. She finally asked a friend, who was no longer happy. In 1912 they returned had to promise utter discretion, for a loan. to Zurich; this time the ETH offered Albert When Albert Einstein eventually sent money, Einstein a professorship. The hopes that Mi- she could rent an apartment. He promised to leva Einstein-MariC might have had for re- take care of his family. She started to give pairing their marriage in the city where they private lessons in mathematics and Italian. had studied together and fallen in love, after She sent birthday gifts to Albert Einstein in Albert Einstein’s wish to teach at his alma Berlin. One year after she had left Berlin, mater had been fulfilled, did not materialize. Albert Einstein came to Zurich. He gave no Her health became worse. She writes her answers to his wife’s and his older son’s ques- friend Helene Kaufler on March 17, 1913, tions about his plans for the future of the that her husband did not have time for his family. When back in Berlin, he again sent family any more. Albert Einstein tells Max money irregularly and, due to devaluation, it Born about his interest in going to Berlin; was worth less and less. Mileva Einstein- half a year later, Max Planck comes to talk Marie refused help from friends. She heard with him about the specific conditions of the that Albert Einstein had moved in with his position. They are so good that Albert Ein- cousin, who loved luxury and fame, and fit- stein cannot resist. By the end of the year, he ted his present stage of life as a famous phys- is a member of the Prussian Academy of Sci- icist. Mileva Einstein-MariC still hoped for ence and has accepted the offer to become his return. Common friends of the Einsteins director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for in Zurich stood by her side, advised him Physics. Mileva Einstein-MariC did not un- against a divorce and reminded him of his derstand why they should move to Berlin. responsibility to the family he had founded, Although they became more and more es- his responsibility as a father. He asked his tranged, she did not want to be an impedi- wife for a divorce, not without promising her ment to him, and so they moved to Berlin in that “he would remain faithful to her in his April 1914. Mileva Einstein-Marie had no way.” She kept that letter. Trbuhovic-GjuriC friends there and disliked Germany. Albert writes that when Albert Einstein failed to be Einstein, however, had close relatives with moved at all by the suffering of his wife, whom he kept in close contact. Mileva Ein- Mileva Einstein-Marie knew that the separa- stein-Marie had no access to these circles, tion was final, that she had lost for good the they did not acknowledge their marriage and man to whom she had subordinated all her objected to her. In July, Mileva Einstein- abilities, dreams, and aspirations (Trbu- MariC left with both children for the summer hovic-Gjuric, 1983, p. 119). holidays in Zurich; Albert Einstein stayed in Mileva Einstein-MariC became sick, had Berlin. The First World War started. Albert to give the children to her friend Helene, had Einstein advised his wife to stay in Switzer- heart attacks and was admitted and readmit- land; he refused to join them, saying that the ted to three hospitals. The younger child, war had no influence on his work. Mileva Eduard, aged 7, stayed with her in one hospi- Einstein-Marie thought his work was the on- tal, the other with Professor Zangger, who ly reason keeping him in Berlin -in reality, tried to get a position for Albert Einstein he had found another woman, a second again at the University of Zurich. Finally, cousin and an appropriate partner for him her sister came from Yugoslavia to take care now, and he quickly moved in with her. Mi- of her. leva Einstein-MariC had to take care of the The divorce was on February 14, 1919. two children (now 4 and 10) by herself. She That year brought Albert Einstein a stomach had no regular income. Albert Einstein did ulcer and his first heart attack. It also not send money regularly or in sufficient brought him a return to the University of amounts. She was too proud to ask her fami- Zurich to teach one class, visits with his fam- ly for help. Also, her children were not sup- ily, trips with his sons, and when he got mar- posed to know that there was no money to ried to his cousin, the turning away from him pay for the lodging house or for their by his older son who was 15 years old. clothes. She went hungry. She wanted to give In the following years, Einstein kept visit- music lessons but could not leave the chil- ing Zurich and his family, but he could not 428 SENTA TFCOEMEL-PLOETZ

take care of his family in Zurich financially letter of his responsibility and asked him to because of the devaluation of the German send money. Mileva Einstein-Marie visited mark. Eduard in the Burgholzli, in walking across In 1929, the younger son, Eduard, now town in snow and ice, she broke her leg, had 19, became psychotic. From then on, Mileva to stay in hospital and felt death coming on. Einstein-MariC had to take care of him, tak- She worried about what would become of ing him to doctors, paying for the enormous Eduard, by himself, with his father and psychiatric expenses because he was in and brother far off in the United States. On Jan- out of the Burghdlzli, a psychiatric hospital uary 3, 1948, she was notified that she would in Zurich, and especially dealing with the have to leave her apartment in the house she outbursts in which he destroyed furniture, had once owned. She had thought she had tried to strangle her, wrote of his hate to his the right to live there until she died. father whose fault it was, so he thought, that In May 1948, Eduard had another schizo- he had lost his mind. phrenic attack. Mileva Einstein-MariC broke In Albert Einstein’s family, there was cer- down and was taken to a clinic. She was tainty that he had inherited this disease from paralyzed on the left side of her body. She his mother’s side. wanted to visit her son in the Burgholzli and Albert Einstein stopped talking about his kept ringing the bell. The bell was turned off. first marriage. His money came irregularly. She lost consciousness. Her son visited her Mileva Einstein-MariC taught physics in a daily before her death. The day before her secondary school. Eduard needed a constant death, she regained full consciousness. She male caretaker. He complained about con- died on August 4, 1948, at the age of 73. stant ear aches. He had bouts of schizophre- Around that time, Albert Einstein uttered nia. Mileva Einstein-MariC could not help the much quoted sentence: “Only a life lived him. Having him at home took all of her for others is worth living.” remaining strength. The fate of her family in After Mileva Einstein-Mar? had died, her Yugoslavia brought her additional suffering: son lived more than 17 years alone in the her gifted brother never returned from Rus- Burgholzli, fulfilling her deepest fears. In the sian military imprisonment; her younger sis- announcement of his death, his mother’s ter slowly became mentally ill; her father name is not mentioned; he is simply the son died of heartbreak; her mother died at 88; of Professor Albert Einstein, a father who her sister died young in 1938. Mileva Ein- had not lived with him since he was four stein-MariC had remained attached to her years old and who did not take care of him or homeland throughout her life, and loved the even come to see him when he was ill. BaEka. Her son, Hans Albert, had done the Trbuhovic-GjuriC speaks of the immense static computations for a bridge over the self-denial in Mileva Einstein-MariC’s life. Danube, built in 1929. During her last visit Although she did not start out altruistically, to Novi Sad, after her sister’s death, she she gave up all her dreams for herself when asked to be taken to the bridge, part of the she met Albert Einstein. Her love, and his reparations paid by Germany after WWI. love for her, changed her life. Her love made She was very moved when she saw it, but did her accept all sacrifices as meaningful be- not say a word. For her, writes Trbuhovic- cause they served her husband’s career. But GjuriC, this bridge was more than a means of Albert Einstein enjoyed the fruits of this connecting the wide banks of the Danube, it fame with another woman. Mileva Einstein- brought to realization an idea of her son in Marie died lonely, worried by the sorrow her motherland. She was not to see that son about her son. “She died an impoverished again, and the bridge was destroyed in WWII old woman, pushed aside even by the clinic (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 171). personnel” (Trbuhovic-Gjuric, 1983, pp. Mileva Einstein-MariC’s health deteriorat- 178, 180). ed further, and so now, at times, she lifted We can see so many patterns in this life the veil of her proud silence and talked with story: friends about the fact that Albert Einstein l Men who take the beauty, youth, and did not care about his sick son. A friend, Dr. health of women and leave when these are Ada Broth, reminded Albert Einstein in a gone. Mileva Einstein-MariC 429

l Men who take the intelligence and energy better grades as students than their hus- of women and make them work: they ex- bands, and find themselves not advancing pect women to do the household chores in their career with the same speed as their and all the other everyday work that is husbands. needed; they expect them to take care of l Women who find it difficult to keep up the children; they expect them to create a their work, who have worse working condi- home atmosphere free of worries; they tions, usually working at night, who final- expect to be free for their work; they ex- ly, overburdened, give up their creative pect them to do their work, type for work altogether.

them, do their correspondence, go to l Women whose ideas and work is appro- the library, etc.; they expect them to give priated by men, their husbands, profes- them ideas, stimulate them, advise them, sors, fellow students, and published under comfort them, support them, be their mus- the men’s names. es, hostesses, companions, nurses, and We know these patterns, but we do not therapists. apply them yet, think by them, write by l Men who leave their first wife when chil- them, judge by them when we are dealing dren come, leave her to do all the work with a woman’s life. So it comes as no sur- with small children on her own. prise that the editors of Volume 1 of the Col- l Men who do not care for their children, lected Papers of Albert Einstein, which cov- other than verbally repeating their commit- ers, however, only the time before his ment. marriage, cannot find any evidence that Mi- l Men who do not even feel financially re- leva Einstein-MariC’s role was more than “a sponsible for their children and shirk ali- sounding board for Einstein’s ideas.” I would mony payment. (In West Germany today, not be surprised if not even the next volume, 50% of men do not pay alimony for their which is to cover the crucial period before children; in the United States, the figure is and after 1905, would discover any trace of said to be higher.) Mileva Einstein-MariC’s part in their joint l Men who quickly find new, usually young- work. The Collected Papers are firmly er companions for a second marriage; grounded in the tradition of constructing mostly these companions are well in sight man’s success and deconstructing woman’s before they leave their first wife. contributions. They are themselves a beauti- l Women who change their life once they fall ful example of how it is done. in love and whose life is changed, whether The most important requirement is to ask they want it or not, once they marry and few questions about the woman, and many, have children. but not all, questions about the man. Follow- l Women who feel responsibility toward ing this rule, every one of the seven letters by their children and take it as their natural Mileva Einstein-Marie to her friend Helene duty to do the work for society of bringing Kaufler-SaviC that are reprinted have parts up the next generation without getting any deleted, even parts that are needed and re- recognition or help for it. ferred to later. For example, one letter (docu- l Women who do not quickly find a second, ment 64) has three deletions. An editorial younger, and energetic husband who will footnote indicates that one deletion concerns help them bring up the children. Mileva Einstein-MariC’s Diplomarbeit which l Women who have no leisure time to pursue she wrote that she had completed (Collected their academic, artistic, or other interests Papers, Vol. I, 1987, p. 245). We have to once they have children. trust this statement. Another editorial foot- l Women who have to fight for survival be- note (footnote 5 of document 75) to a later cause their husbands do not support letter from Albert Einstein to Mileva Ein- them. stein-Mar2 refers exactly to the deleted por- l Women who, having come from wealthy tion of document 64, this time quoting an backgrounds or having taken care of them- incomplete sentence from it, from which the selves independently, end up in poverty af- predicate is missing: “eine grijaere Arbeit- ter divorce.9 . die ich mir als Diplom- und wahrschein- l Women, who started out as promising, got iich such als Doktorarbeit ausgewahlt, 430 SENTA~OEMEL-PLOETZ

. . . ” (a larger work . . . which I chose as We can expect that none of the books by my thesis for my diploma, probably also for male authors will give credit to the woman my doctorate . . . ) (Collected Papers, Vol. for her scientific contributions,ll they will 1, 1987, p. 260). From this excerpt we cannot not even give her credit for giving him the deduce what she is saying about the topic freedom to work by doing the housework which she has chosen. Is she that unimport- and child care for him. Albert Einstein him- ant that only bits and pieces of her letter are self did not give credit to his wife for either put into a later footnote? Is what she says of these two contributions to his success. about her Diplomarbeit (which, as we know, Nor can we expect many books by male au- has disappeared) that unimportant? Instead thors and editors to point out that Albert of presenting document 64 fully, footnote 5 Einstein forgot his wife and his children even of document 75, with its fragment of a sen- when they were much in need of his help tence, is referred to again and again in fur- because he had adopted a new family fitting ther editorial footnotes. Good editorial prac- his new life situation. tice? Certainly not, but good editorial The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein is practice is apparently not required when it an enormous endeavor, funded by numerous comes to women. foundations and by the wealth of private per- Following this rule also, we do not hear sons. If only one-hundredth of the resources anything in the Collected Papers, Vol. 1, were expended on Mileva Einstein-Marie and about why Mileva Einstein-Marie failed other women physicists and mathematicians twice. In the first exam, which she appar- of our time, we could answer all our ently took with Albert Einstein, we can see questions. her grades and the statement of her failure in Trbuhovic-Gjuric had no financial sup- document 67. In the second case, we have to port to do the research for her book. She did take the editor’s word in another footnote for it out of her own retirement income and on the fact (note 1 to document 121), therefore her time. Her book, falling out of the tradi- we do not know whether she failed by de- tion of producing male success, must be fault, that is, by withdrawing her Diplomar- unique among all the books on Albert beit, as Trbuhovic-GjuriC suggests. Einstein. But not only are the leads in Trbuhovic- It is, to my knowledge, the only book GjuriC’s book not followed up, there are also written on his first wife. It is written by a no questions asked about the numerous ref- woman. It is the only book bringing a wom- erences to Mileva Einstein-Maric’s doctoral an’s perspective to bear on Albert Einstein’s dissertation by Albert Einstein himself. life, touching upon questions that are not What happened to this doctoral dissertation? usually asked and, if they are, quickly Do we know its title? Is it still in existence? brushed aside: questions about his responsi- Are parts of it reconstructible from letters or bility toward his wife and his children, about documents? his gratitude to his wife, about his financial Of course, this is not a biography of Mi- support for his children and his wife, his fi- leva Einstein-MariC, and there must be a lim- nancial arrangement with the house from it to asking questions about her in the Col- which she was turned out just before her lected Papers of Albert Einstein. death (Trbuhovic-Gjuric, 1983, pp. 160, But what about Albert Einstein’s single 174), and especially about her scientific con- authorship of Einstein in 19Ol?‘O Would not tributions. Trbuhovic-GjuriC does not ask that be a question belonging in the legitimate these questions maliciously, but in the hope sphere of interest, especially since Albert that later documents will turn up and provide Einstein refers to this paper again and again answers. as “our paper”? Apparently not, but this is in The two books that have been announced accordance with the second part of my rule by the Zurich publisher Origo, one, a book that you ask many, but by no means all, of memoirs by a woman named Julia Niggli, questions about the man. The result of these who talks a lot about the Einsteins, and an- practices is that the success of the man can other one, the letters of Mileva Einstein- remain untouched and the woman’s contri- MariC and Albert Einstein between 1897 and bution is played down. 1938, might still appear and answer some Mileva Einstein-MariC 431

questions. So far “legal impediments” have Language of Oppression,which deals with the language hindered their appearance (Trbuhovic- of white racism and sexism, as well as with the language of anti-Semitism, Indian derision, and war. GjuriC, 1983, p. 80). The letters are kept in- 7. Cf: Woodtli (1975, pp. 93-98). accessible in the Estate of Albert Einstein in 8. For some of the concrete conditions of combining New York (Trbuhovic-GjuriC, 1983, p. 173) the care of school-age children with a profession in both or in the Einstein Family Correspondence countries, cf. Troemel-Ploetz (1990). 9. Cf. the New Jersey Reports on Women in the Trust, Los Angeles. They might still be pub- Courts with the finding that the distribution of income lished at some point in the future. After all, and property after divorce, no matter what social class a Einstein has been dead for 34 years. couple belong to, is unfair to the women. See also Mich- But far off in Novi Sad in today’s Yugosla- inan Bar Journal. 63(6), June 1984 and Crites. Laura L., via, people apparently have a different sensi- & Hepperle, Wmfred L. (Eds.). (1987). Women, the courts and equality. Newbury Park: Sage. bility for the matter, a different sense of time 10. Einstein, Albert. (1901). Folgerungen aus den and possibly some evidence the men of Capillaritatserscheinungen. Annulen der Physik, 4, Princeton do not possess: on the 100th birth- 513-523. day of Mileva Einstein-MariC they revealed a 11. However, some men are beginning to ask ques- tions, e.g., Harris Walker, in a letter to Physics Today, plaque on the MariC family residence which February 1989, called “Did Einstein espouse his spouse’s reads: “In this house Albert Einstein the cre- ideas?” ator of the relativity theory and his scientific collaborator and wife stayed in 1905 and REFERENCES 1907.” Abramson, Joan. (1975). The invisible woman: discrim- ENDNOTES ination in the academic profession. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 1. Addition of two letters, pp. 139-140 and pp. 196- Bosmajian, Haig. (1974). The language of oppression. 197; one excerpt of a letter p. 202; addition of text in Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press. editor’s postscript, pp. 212-213. Chabot, Donna S., & Goldberg, Philip. (1974). Preju- 2. In three places a Nachtrag (afterthought, addi- dice against women: a replication and extension. tion) is added; pp. 48-52, pp. 59-78, and pp. 161-162. Psychological Reports, 35,478. 3. This quotation and all the other excerpts from Condrv. John. & Condrv. Sandra. (1976). Sex differ- German texts were translated by the author of this en&s: a study of the eye of the beholder. Child De- article. velopment, 47, 812-819. 4. This quotation is from Albert Einstein’s letter to Crites, Laura L., & Hepperle, Winfred L. (Eds.). (1961). Mileva Einstein-MariC dated Oct. 3, 1900 (CoNecfedPu- Women, the courts and equality. Newbury Park: pers, Vol. I, 1987, p. 267). Sage. 5. A more recent case in the history of science is Lise DeSole, Gloria, & Hoffman, Leonore. (Eds.). (1961). Meitner, who was said to be the head of the Strapmann- Rocking the boat: academic women and academic Hahn team, who had worked with Hahn for three dec- processes. New York: Modern Language Association ades, giving her ideas (e.g., the term fission is due to of America. her) and especially giving the exact physical interpreta- Elman, Judith B., Press, Ann, & Rosenkrantz, Paul S. tions to the common experiments before she was ex- (1970, August). Sex roles and self concepts: real and pelled as a Jew and as a woman from Nazi Germany and ideal. Paper presented at the meeting of the Ameri- its universities. Hahn and Strapmann stayed and pub- can Psychological Association, Miami. lished the paper on uranium fission without her name, Farley, Jennie. (1982). Academic women and employ- later receiving the Nobel Prize for the publication ment discriminations: a critical annotated bibliogra- (Krafft, 1978). phy. Ithaca, NY Cornell University Press. It is interesting to note that at least one other woman Geis, Florence, Carter, Mae R., & Butler-Thompsom, was disregarded by the two men. Immediately after their Dore. (1982). Research on seeing and evaluatingpeo- publication in the journal Nuturwissenschaften, a chem- pie. Newark, DE: University of Delaware. ist, Eda Noddacks, wrote a letter to that journal, dated Goldberg, Philip. (1968). Are women prejudiced against March 10, 1939, saying that Hahn and Strapmann had women? Tram-Action, 5, 28-30. persistently ignored her conjecture, first made in 1934, Gruber, Kenneth J., & Gaebelein, Jacquelyn. (1979). Sex that the nucleus of the uranium atom might break differences in listening comprehension. Sex Roles, through radiation with neutrons. 5(3), 299-3 10. The editors of Naturwissenschaften answered that Haber B. (1981). Why not the best and the brightest? “the gentlemen Hahn and Strapmann had neither time Equal opportunity or academic freedom. Forum, nor did they feel like answering to the letter . . they are January, 15-25. leaving it to their colleagues to judge the matter” (cf: Hagen, Randi L., & Kahn, Arnold. (1975). Discrimina- Ignoranz in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Dec. 7, tion against competent women. Journal of Applied 1988.) Social Psychology, 5, 362-376. 6. A brilliant analysis of the politics of naming and Howe, Florence. (Ed.). (1975). Women and the power to defining is given by Bosmajian (1974) in his book The change. New York: McGraw Hill. 432 SENTA~OEMEL-PLOETZ

Joffe, Abram F. (1960). Meetings with physicists: my lege students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical reminiscences of foreign physicists. Moscow: State Psychology, 32,287-295. Publishing House of Physics and Mathematics Rossi, Alice S., & Calderwood, Ann. (Eds.). (1973). Ac- Literature. ademic women on the move. New York: Russell Sage Krafft, Fritz. (1978). Lise Meitner: her life and times. Foundation. On the centenary of the great scientist’s birth. Sanders, Marlene, & Rock, Marsha. (1988). Waiting for Angew. Chemie, Int. Ed., Engl., 17, 826-842. prime time: the women of television news. Urbana, Kramarae, Cheris. (1984). Nachrichten zu sprechen ges- IL: University of Illinois Press. tatte ich der Frau nicht. In Senta Troemel-Ploetz Seyfried, B. A., & Hendricks, Clyde. (1973). When do (Ed.), Gewalt durch Sprache. Frankfurt: Fischer opposites attract? When they are opposite in sex and Verlag. sex role attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Kramarae, Cheris. (Ed.). (1988). Technology and wom- Psychology, 25, 5-20. en’s voices: keeping in touch. New York: Routledge Spencer, Mary L., Kehoe, Monika, & Speece, Karen. and Kegan Paul. (Eds.). (1982). Handbook for women scholars: strate- Levenson, Hanna, Burford, Brent, Bonno, Bobbie, & gies for success. San Francisco: Center for Women Davis, Loren. (1975). Are women still prejudiced Scholars, American Behavioral Research Corporation. against women? A replication and extension of Spender, Dale. (1982). Invisible women: the schooling Goldberg’s study. Journal of Psychology, 89, 67- scandal. London: Writers and Readers Cooperative 71. Society, Ltd. Mills, Kay. (1988). A place in the news: from the wom- Stachel, John. (Ed.). (1987). The collected papers of en’s pages to the front page. New York: Dodd, Albert Einstein, Vol. 1. The early years, 1879-1902. Mead. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Mischel, Harriet N. (1974). Sex bias in the evaluation of Starer, Ruana M., & Denmark, Florence L. (1974). Dis- professional achievements. Journal of Educational crimination against aspiring women. International Psychology, 66, 157-166. Journal of Group Tensions, 4, 65-70. New Jersey Supreme Court Task Force on Women in the Thorne, Barrie, Kramarae, Cheris, & Henley, Nancy. Courts. (1984, 1986). Women in the courts. Reports (Eds.). (1983). Language, gender and society. Row- I and Il. Brunswick, NJ: New Jersey Supreme ley, MA: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Court. Trbuhovic-GjuriC, Desanka. (1983). Im Schatten Albert Nieva, Veronica F., & Gutek, Barbara A. (1980). Sex Einsteins: Das tragische Leben der Mileva Einstein- effects on evaluation. Academy of Management Re- MariC. Bern: Paul Haupt. view, 5(2), 267-276. Treichler, Paula, & Kramarae, Cheris. (1983). Women’s Pheterson, Gail I., Kiesler, Sara B., & Goldberg, Philip. talk in the ivory tower. Communication Quarterly, (1971). Evaluation of performance of women as 31(2), 118-132. function of their sex, achievement and personal his- Troemel-Ploetz, Senta. (Ed.). (1984). Gewalt durch tory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Sprache: Die Vergewaltigung von Frauen in Gespra- 19, 114-118. then. Frankfurt: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag. Piacente, Beth S., Penner, Louisa, Hawkins, Harold L., Troemel-Ploetz, Senta. (1990). Vater und Schule: Warum & Cohen, Stephen L. (1974). Evaluation of the per- die deutsche Schule so ausbeuterisch bleibt wie sie ist. formance of the experimenters as a function of their In Uta Enders-Dragasser & Claudia Fuchs (Eds.), sex and competence. Journal of Applied Social Psy- Frauensache Schule. Frankfurt: Fischer Taschenbuch chology, 4,321-329. Verlag. Reskin, Barbara F. (1978). Sex differentiation and the Whitaker, James O., & Meade, Robert D. (1967). Sex of social organization of science. Sociological Inquiry, the communicator as a variable in source credibility. 48, 3-4, 6-37. Journal of Social Psychology, 72, 27734. Rosenkrantz, Paul S., Vogel, Susan R., Bee, Helen, Woodtli, Susanna. (1975). Gleichberechtigung: Der Broverman, Inge K., & Broverman, Donald R. Kampf urn die politischen Rechte der Frau in der (1968). Sex-role stereotypes and self concepts in col- Schweiz. Frauenfeld: Huber.