4 2 6 D O C U M E N T S 4 2 8 , 4 2 9 J A N U A R Y 1 9 2 5
428. To Robert Eisler[1]
[Berlin,] 31 January 1925
Esteemed Dr. Eisler,
Thank you very much for your letter and your publications. The little book about
money appealed to me particularly for its erudition, intelligence, and
sentiment.[2]
You do not need to come and see me at all, because this information suffices for
me. I am persuaded that you are a very worthy candidate; and you can be sure that
I would most warmly support you, if a possibility of your obtaining the post arose
at
all.[3]
What a pity that you let yourself be baptized. If I had not heard such favor-
able things about your character elsewhere, this would have given me pause. It gen-
erally bespeaks the predominance of egoism over the community spirit.
In great respect, yours,
A. Einstein.
429. From Otto Blumenthal
Aachen, 31 January 1925
Dear Mr. Einstein,
The affair of inviting Painlevé and other French mathematicians is extraordinari-
ly
complicated.[1]
To the intrinsic problems are added in a most unpleasant manner
chance occurrences. The first is that Brouwer did not receive Carathéodory’s letter
at all, in which the latter argued his reconciliatory
standpoint.[2]
The second hap-
penstance occurred between the two of us. It comprises that the purpose of my first
letter to you was not that you now invite French mathematicians to some step, rath-
er only to obtain your view on whether we could do something in France without
Painlevé. I then wanted, as is also expressed in the
letter,[3]
on the basis of your an-
swer, to solicit
Hilbert’s[4]
view before anything should be decided. Upon rereading
my letter, however, it became clear to me that you could well have been misled
about the intent. Thus I take my part of the blame upon myself for your misunder-
standing, the more so, as I did not give the necessary attention to the closing remark
of your letter, that you would write to
Langevin.[5]
In this regard I would like to say
that the particular idea of mediation by the exceptional Langevin was quite to my
liking and still is. The enclosed correspondence in transcription will inform you
about the current general situation. The “rabid” letter that you received from Mu-
nich stems from
Dyck.[6]
I consider, just like you, the views presented in this letter