Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Nicolas Bourbaki
Nicolas Bourbaki
The atmosphere in the group can be illustrated by an anecdote told by Laurent Schwartz. Dieudonné
regularly and spectacularly threatened to resign unless topics were treated in their logical order, and after
a while others played on this for a joke. Godement's wife wanted to see Dieudonné announcing his
resignation, and so on one occasion while she was there Schwartz deliberately brought up again the
question of permuting the order in which measure theory and topological vector spaces were to be
handled, to precipitate a guaranteed crisis.
The name "Bourbaki" refers to a French general, Charles Denis Bourbaki;[4] it was adopted by the group
as a reference to a student anecdote about a hoax mathematical lecture, and also possibly to a statue. It is
said that Weil's wife Evelyne supplied Nicolas.[5] This is more or less confirmed by Robert Mainard.[2]
According to biographer Amir Aczel, the collective can be divided into generations.
Bourbaki was always a very small group of mathematicians, typically numbering about
twelve people. Its first generation was that of the founding fathers, those who created the
group in 1934: Weil, Cartan, Chevalley, Delsarte, de Possel, and Dieudonné. Others joined
the group, and others left its ranks, so that some years later there were about twelve
members, and that number remained roughly constant. Laurent Schwartz was the only
mathematician to join Bourbaki during the war, so his is considered an intermediate
generation. After the war, a number of members joined: Jean-Pierre Serre, Pierre Samuel,
Jean-Louis Kozul, Jacques Dixmier, Roger Godement, and Sammy Eilenberg. These people
constituted the second generation of Bourbaki. In the 1950s, the third generation of
mathematicians joined Bourbaki. These people included Alexandre Grothendieck, Francois
Bruhat, Serge Lang, the American mathematician John Tate, Pierre Cartier, and the Swiss
mathematician Armand Borel.[6]
Aczel also emphasized the importance of Bourbaki's influence on structuralism, a multidisciplinary
concept stressing the structural relationships between objects, the objects themselves being incidental.
Aczel further emphasized the influence of Bourbaki's work on anthropology via Weil's collaboration with
Claude Lévi-Strauss.
Pranks
The Bourbaki group released a few humorous hoaxes related to the fake life of Nicolas Bourbaki. For
example, the group released a wedding announcement, relating the marriage of Betti Bourbaki (daughter
of Nicolas) with a certain Hector Pétard (Hector Firecrackers in English). In November 1968, a mock
obituary of Nicolas Bourbaki was released during one of the seminars, containing a few mathematical
puns.[7] The group is however still active as of 2018, organizing seminars[8] and having released a book
in 2016.
Membership
As of 2000, the Bourbaki collective has had "about forty"[9] historical members. Bourbaki's members
have been described in terms of generations. The first generation of founders consisted of a core
membership of five, and six others who briefly participated. This was followed by a second generation of
another seven core members, and a third generation of another six core members. Roughly twenty later
members participated in the collective, not including its current membership. At its founding, Bourbaki's
size was limited to nine members. Throughout much of its history, the collective has had about twelve
members at any given point.
The group has a custom of keeping its current membership secret, a practice meant to ensure that its
output is presented as a collective, unified effort under the Bourbaki pseudonym, not attributable to any
one author (e.g. for purposes of copyright or royalty payment).[10] The group's secrecy is also intended as
a deterrent against unwanted distraction during its normal operation. However, the group's former
members freely discuss its culture and internal practices upon departure.
Prospective members are invited to conferences and styled as "guinea pigs", a process meant to vet the
prospective member's mathematical ability. In the event of mutual consent between the prospect and the
group, the prospect becomes a full member. Additionally, the group's conferences have regularly been
attended by friends, family members, and visiting mathematicians.
Former members of the Nicolas Bourbaki collective[11]:6, 8, 12, 17, 18[12]:87, 108, 109[13] [a]
Books by Bourbaki
Bourbaki's main work is the Elements of Mathematics (Éléments
de mathématique) series. This series aims to be a completely self-
contained treatment of the core areas of modern mathematics.
Assuming no special knowledge of mathematics, it takes up
mathematics from the very beginning, proceeds axiomatically
and gives complete proofs.
The dates indicated below are for the first edition of the first
chapter of each book. Most of the books were reedited several
times (with significant changes between editions), and the books
were released in several parts containing different chapters (e.g.
Book II, Algebra, was released in five parts, the first in 1942 with
chapters 1, 2, and 3, and the last in 1980 containing chapter 10).
Besides the Éléments de mathématique series, lectures from the Séminaire Bourbaki also have been
periodically published in monograph form since 1948.
Influence
Notations introduced by Bourbaki include the symbol Ø for the empty set and a dangerous bend symbol
☡, and the terms injective, surjective, and bijective.[22]
The emphasis on rigour may be seen as a reaction to the work of Henri Poincaré,[23] who stressed the
importance of free-flowing mathematical intuition, at a cost of completeness in presentation. The impact
of Bourbaki's work initially was great on many active research mathematicians worldwide. For example:
Our time is witnessing the creation of a monumental work: an exposition of the whole of
present day mathematics. Moreover this exposition is done in such a way that the common
bond between the various branches of mathematics become clearly visible, that the
framework which supports the whole structure is not apt to become obsolete in a very short
time, and that it can easily absorb new ideas.
It provoked some hostility, too, mostly on the side of classical analysts; they approved of rigour but not
of high abstraction. Around 1950, also, some parts of geometry were still not fully axiomatic — in less
prominent developments, one way or another, these were brought into line with the new foundational
standards, or quietly dropped. This led to a gulf with the way theoretical physics was practiced.[24]
Bourbaki's direct influence has decreased over time.[24] This is partly because certain concepts which are
now important, such as the machinery of category theory, are not covered in the treatise. The completely
uniform and essentially linear referential structure of the books became difficult to apply to areas closer
to current research than the already mature ones treated in the published books, and thus publishing
activity diminished significantly from the 1970s.[25] It also mattered that, while especially algebraic
structures can be naturally defined in Bourbaki's terms, there are areas where the Bourbaki approach was
less straightforward to apply.
On the other hand, the approach and rigour advocated by Bourbaki have permeated the current
mathematical practices to such extent that the task undertaken was completed.[26] This is particularly true
for the less applied parts of mathematics.
The Bourbaki seminar series founded in post-WWII Paris continues; it has been going on since 1948, and
contains more than 1000 items. It is an important source of survey articles, with sketches (or sometimes
improvements) of proofs. The topics range through all branches of mathematics, including sometimes
theoretical physics. The idea is that the presentation should be on the level of specialists, but should be
tailored to an audience which is not specialized in the particular field.
The following is a list of some of the criticisms commonly made of the Bourbaki approach. Pierre
Cartier, a Bourbaki member between 1955 and 1983, said that:[28]
essentially no analysis beyond the foundations: nothing about partial differential equations,
nothing about probability. There is also nothing about combinatorics, nothing about
algebraic topology, nothing about concrete geometry. And Bourbaki never seriously
considered logic. Dieudonné himself was very vocal against logic. Anything connected with
mathematical physics is totally absent from Bourbaki's text.
In addition, algorithms are considered off-topic and almost completely omitted.[29] Analysis is treated
'softly', without 'hard' estimates.[30] Measure theory is developed from a functional analytic perspective.
Taking the case of locally compact measure spaces as fundamental focuses the presentation on Radon
measures and leads to an approach to measurable functions that is cumbersome, especially from the
viewpoint of probability theory.[31] However, the last chapter of the book addresses limitations,
especially for use in probability theory, of the restriction to locally compact spaces. Logic is treated
minimally.[32][33]
Furthermore, Bourbaki makes only limited use of pictures in their presentation. Pierre Cartier is quoted
as later saying: "The Bourbaki were Puritans, and Puritans are strongly opposed to pictorial
representations of truths of their faith."[28] In general, Bourbaki has been criticized for reducing
geometry as a whole to abstract algebra and soft analysis.[34]
While several of Bourbaki's books have become standard references in their fields, some have felt that
the austere presentation makes them unsuitable as textbooks.[35] The books' influence may have been at
its strongest when few other graduate-level texts in current pure mathematics were available, between
1950 and 1960.[36]
In the longer term, the manifesto of Bourbaki has had a definite and deep influence. In secondary
education the new math movement corresponded to teachers influenced by Bourbaki. In France the
change was secured by the Lichnerowicz Commission.[37]
He also wrote extensively under his own name: nine volumes on analysis, perhaps in belated fulfillment
of the original project or pretext; and also on other topics mostly connected with algebraic geometry.
While Dieudonné could reasonably speak on Bourbaki's encyclopedic tendency and tradition, it may be
doubted—after innumerable frank tais-toi, Dieudonné! ("Hush, Dieudonné!") remarks at the meetings—
whether all others agreed with him about mathematical writing and research. In particular Serre has often
championed greater attention to problem-solving, within number theory especially, not an area treated in
the main Bourbaki texts.
Dieudonné stated the view that most workers in mathematics were doing ground-clearing work, in order
that a future Riemann could find the way ahead intuitively open. He pointed to the way the axiomatic
method can be used as a tool for problem-solving, for example by Alexander Grothendieck. Others found
him too close to Grothendieck to be an unbiased observer. Comments in Pál Turán's 1970 speech on the
award of a Fields Medal to Alan Baker about theory-building and problem-solving were a reply from the
traditionalist camp at the next opportunity,[38] Grothendieck having received the previous Fields Medal
in absentia in 1966.
See also
Bourbaki dangerous bend symbol
Bourbaki–Witt theorem
Jacobson–Bourbaki theorem
People
Arthur Besse
Blanche Descartes
John Rainwater
G. W. Peck
Notes
a. By custom, the group keeps its current membership secret. However, former members
regularly discuss their past experience with the collective.
b. Dates refer to entrance into the university, not graduation.
c. The collective's founding generation included a core group of five who led its activities and
established its norms, remaining active for several years. Another six minor members
participated on shorter-term bases during its earliest days, ranging from a few months to a
few years.
d. Aczel described Schwartz as an inter-generational member, the only one to join during the
Second World War. However Schwartz did not participate in the group's founding.
e. Most other members were born after the above three generations and were therefore active
in the group at later dates. However, two were born contemporaries of the founding
generation: Charles Pisot in 1909, and Claude Chabauty in 1910.
References
Luca Vercelloni, Filosofia delle strutture, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1989
Maurice Mashaal (2006). Bourbaki: A Secret Society of Mathematicians. American
Mathematical Society. ISBN 0-8218-3967-5.
Amir Aczel (2007). The Artist and the Mathematician: The Story of Nicolas Bourbaki, the
Genius Mathematician Who Never Existed. High Stakes Publishing, London. ISBN 1-84344-
034-2.
1. The minutes are in the Bourbaki archives — for a full description of the initial meeting
consult Liliane Beaulieu in the Mathematical Intelligencer.
2. Mainard, Robert (October 21, 2001). "Le Mouvement Bourbaki" (http://afb.31.free.fr/mathem
aticiens%20celebres/Bourbaki%20-%20Mainard.pdf) (PDF). afb.31.free.fr. Retrieved
October 29, 2018.
3. Aubin, David (1997). "The Withering Immortality of Nicolas Bourbaki: A Cultural Connector
at the Confluence of Mathematics, Structuralism, and the Oulipo in France" (https://www.ca
mbridge.org/core/journals/science-in-context/article/withering-immortality-of-nicolas-bourbak
i-a-cultural-connector-at-the-confluence-of-mathematics-structuralism-and-the-oulipo-in-fran
ce/BDEFB5A7E4908417C27696871651A7C2). Science in Context. Cambridge University
Press. 10 (2): 297–342. doi:10.1017/S0269889700002660 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS02
69889700002660).
4. Weil, André (1992). The Apprenticeship of a Mathematician. Birkhäuser Verlag. pp. 93–122.
ISBN 978-3764326500.
5. McCleary, John (December 10, 2004). "Bourbaki and Algebraic Topology" (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20061030215012/http://math.vassar.edu/faculty/McCleary/Bourbaki.pdf) (PDF).
math.vassar.edu. Archived from the original (http://www.math.vassar.edu/faculty/mccleary/B
ourbaki.pdf) (PDF) on October 30, 2006.
6. Aczel, 108-109.
7. "according to Groth. IV.22" (http://www.neverendingbooks.org/according-to-groth-iv-22).
Retrieved 2018-10-24.
8. "Association des collaborateurs de Nicolas Bourbaki" (http://www.bourbaki.ens.fr/).
www.bourbaki.ens.fr (in French). Retrieved 2018-10-29.
9. Mashaal, p. 18.
10. Mashaal, p. 14.
11. Mashaal, Maurice (2006). Bourbaki: a Secret Society of Mathematicians. American
Mathematical Society. ISBN 9780821839676.
12. Aczel, Amir D. (2006). The Artist and the Mathematician: the Story of Nicolas Bourbaki, the
Genius Mathematician Who Never Existed. Thunder's Mouth Press. ISBN 9781560259312.
13. Michon, Gérard P. "The Many Faces of Nicolas Bourbaki" (http://www.numericana.com/fam
e/bourbaki.htm). Numericana.
14. Bagemihl, F. (1958). "Review: Théorie des ensembles (Chapter III)" (http://www.ams.org/jou
rnals/bull/1958-64-06/S0002-9904-1958-10248-7/S0002-9904-1958-10248-7.pdf) (PDF).
Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 64 (6): 390–391. doi:10.1090/s0002-9904-1958-10248-7 (https://doi.
org/10.1090%2Fs0002-9904-1958-10248-7).
15. Artin, E. (1953). "Review: Éléments de mathématique, by N. Bourbaki, Book II, Algebra,
Chaps. I–VII" (http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1953-59-05/S0002-9904-1953-09725-7/S00
02-9904-1953-09725-7.pdf) (PDF). Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 59 (5): 474–479.
doi:10.1090/s0002-9904-1953-09725-7 (https://doi.org/10.1090%2Fs0002-9904-1953-0972
5-7).
16. Rosenberg, Alex (1960). "Review: Éléments de mathématiques by N. Bourbaki. Book II,
Algèbre. Chapter VIII, Modules et anneaux semi-simples" (http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/
1960-66-01/S0002-9904-1960-10371-0/S0002-9904-1960-10371-0.pdf) (PDF). Bull. Amer.
Math. Soc. 66 (1): 16–19. doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1960-10371-0 (https://doi.org/10.1090%
2FS0002-9904-1960-10371-0).
17. Kaplansky, Irving (1960). "Review: Formes sesquilinéairies et formes quadratiques by N.
Bourbaki, Éléments de mathématique I, Livre II" (http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1960-66-0
4/S0002-9904-1960-10461-2/S0002-9904-1960-10461-2.pdf) (PDF). Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.
66 (4): 266–267. doi:10.1090/s0002-9904-1960-10461-2 (https://doi.org/10.1090%2Fs0002-
9904-1960-10461-2).
18. Halmos, Paul (1953). "Review: Intégration (Chap. I-IV) by N. Bourbaki" (http://www.ams.org/
journals/bull/1953-59-03/S0002-9904-1953-09698-7/S0002-9904-1953-09698-7.pdf) (PDF).
Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 59 (3): 249–255. doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1953-09698-7 (https://doi.
org/10.1090%2FS0002-9904-1953-09698-7).
19. Munroe, M. E. (1958). "Review: Intégration (Chapter V) by N. Bourbaki" (http://www.ams.or
g/journals/bull/1958-64-03/S0002-9904-1958-10176-7/S0002-9904-1958-10176-7.pdf)
(PDF). Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 64 (3): 105–106. doi:10.1090/s0002-9904-1958-10176-7 (http
s://doi.org/10.1090%2Fs0002-9904-1958-10176-7).
20. Nagata, M. (1985). "Éléments de mathématique. Algèbre commutative, by N. Bourbaki,
Chapitres 8 et 9" (http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1985-12-01/S0273-0979-1985-15338-8/
S0273-0979-1985-15338-8.pdf) (PDF). Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.). 12 (1): 175–177.
doi:10.1090/s0273-0979-1985-15338-8 (https://doi.org/10.1090%2Fs0273-0979-1985-1533
8-8).
21. Bourbaki, Nicolas. "Topologie Algébrique, Chapitres 1 à 4" (https://www.springer.com/us/bo
ok/9783662493601). springer.com. Springer. Retrieved 2016-02-08.
22. Gunderman, David. "Nicolas Bourbaki: The greatest mathematician who never was" (http://t
heconversation.com/nicolas-bourbaki-the-greatest-mathematician-who-never-was-122845).
The Conversation. Retrieved 2019-12-14.
23. Bourbaki came to terms with Poincaré only after a long struggle. When I joined the group in
the fifties it was not the fashion to value Poincaré at all. He was old-fashioned. Pierre
Cartier interviewed by Marjorie Senechall. "The Continuing Silence of Bourbaki".
Mathematical Intelligencer. 19: 22–28. 1998. [1] (http://www.ega-math.narod.ru/Bbaki/Cartie
r.htm)
24. Stewart, Ian (November 1995). "Bye-Bye Bourbaki: Paradigm Shifts in Mathematics". The
Mathematical Gazette. The Mathematical Association. 79 (486): 496–498.
doi:10.2307/3618076 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3618076). JSTOR 3618076 (https://www.j
stor.org/stable/3618076).
25. Borel, Armand (March 1998). "Twenty-Five Years with Nicolas Bourbaki, (1949-1973)" (htt
p://www.ams.org/notices/199803/borel.pdf) (PDF). Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 45 (3): 373–
380.
26. Guedj, Denis (1985). "Nicholas Bourbaki, collective mathematician : An interview with
Claude Chevalley". Math. Intelligencer. 7 (2): 18–22. doi:10.1007/BF03024169 (https://doi.o
rg/10.1007%2FBF03024169).
27. Hector C. Sabelli, Louis H. Kauffman, BIOS (2005), p. 423.
28. "The Continuing Silence of Bourbaki" (http://ega-math.narod.ru/Bbaki/Cartier.htm). ega-
math.narod.ru. Retrieved 2018-10-29.
29. "Bourbaki Nicolas" (http://publimath.irem.univ-mrs.fr/glossaire/BO025.htm).
publimath.irem.univ-mrs.fr. Retrieved 2018-10-29.
30. Carleson, Lennart (August 2006). "Interview with Lennart Carleson" (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20060928042809/http://www.matematikkforeningen.no/INFOMAT/06/0608.pdf)
(PDF). matematikkforeningen.no. Archived from the original (http://www.matematikkforening
en.no/INFOMAT/06/0608.pdf) (PDF) on 2007-09-28.
31. König, Heinz. "Stochastic Processes on the Basis of New Measure Theory" (https://web.arc
hive.org/web/20070304000104/http://www.math.tu-dresden.de/~pos_iv/Abstracts/koenig_ab
stract/index.html). math.tu-dresden.de. Archived from the original (http://www.math.tu-dresd
en.de/~pos_iv/Abstracts/koenig_abstract/index.html) on 2007-03-04.
32. Mathias, Adrien (August 22, 1990). "The Ignorance of Bourbaki" (https://www.dpmms.cam.a
c.uk/~ardm/bourbaki.pdf) (PDF). dpmms.cam.ac.uk.
33. See also Mashaal (2006), p.120, "Lack of interest in foundations".
34. Gispert, Hélène (2000). "Pourquoi, pour qui enseigner les mathématiques ?" (https://www.a
pmep.fr/IMG/pdf/AAA02005.pdf) [Why, for whom, teach mathematics?] (PDF). apmep.fr (in
French). Retrieved 2018-10-29.
35. Hewitt, Edwin (1956). "Review: Espaces vectoriels topologiques". Bulletin of the American
Mathematical Society. 62 (5): 507–508. doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1956-10042-6 (https://doi.
org/10.1090%2FS0002-9904-1956-10042-6). [2] (http://www.ams.org/bull/1956-62-05/S000
2-9904-1956-10042-6/home.html)
36. http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/PrintHT/Bourbaki_2.html
37. Mashaal (2006) Ch.10: New Math in the Classroom
38. Church, Alonzo (1 January 1972). "Review of On the Work of ., Paul Turán; Effective
Methods in the Theory of Numbers., Alan Baker". 37 (3): 606–606. doi:10.2307/2272765 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.2307%2F2272765). JSTOR 2272765 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2272765).
External links
Official Website of L'Association des Collaborateurs de Nicolas Bourbaki (http://www.bourba
ki.ens.fr/) (in French)
Archives of the association (http://sites.mathdoc.fr/archives-bourbaki/) (in French)
Apology of Euclid (http://www.math.nsc.ru/LBRT/g2/english/ssk/euclid.html), by Semën
Samsonovich Kutateladze
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using
this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.