by Vladislav VOLKOV, Dr. Sc. (Geol. & Mineral.), Vernadsky Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry, RAS (Moscow)

The diaries of great natural scientist Vladimir Vernadsky (1863-1945), kept in the Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences, represent a unique written monument of national culture. The future famous scientist started making notes of his life events at the age of 14 and kept them till his last day. The notes comprised 3 revolutions, the Civil and two world wars.

DIARIES: STYLE AND STRUCTURE

The diaries of the 1920s-1930s, which he kept at the peak of his scientific career, have no analogs in epistolary heritage of scientists perhaps excepting diaries of Sergei Vavilov (1891-1951), physicist and President of the USSR Academy of Sciences (from 1945), which were published first in 2004. On the initiative of Alexander Yanshin (1911-1999), Vice-President of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1982-1988), publication of Vernadsky's diaries, covering a period from 1921 till his death, started in 1998 in the series The Library of Academician Vernadsky's Works (Nauka Publishers). The diaries of 1917-1921, whose considerable part is kept now in the archives of Ukraine, were published earlier, in 1994 and 1997.

Nowadays preparation of the last volume of diaries (1943-1944) is almost completed, materials of which provided a basis for this publication. The volume has natural chronological limits, from his arrival in Moscow from evacuation (early September of 1943) to the last note dictated to a typist on December 24, 1944, a day before a stroke.

The style and structure of the diaries are mainly similar. On the one side, he wrote notes for himself, and, on the other side, they served as a preparatory material for a book of memoirs, which remained unrealized. The notes are absolutely frank and sometimes contain very negative appraisals of scientists, some personal characteristics and behavior of his friends and relatives, but, first of all, they serve as an aperture to a creative laboratory of the author-an evidence of the conception, development and realization of his scientific thought and his appraisal of a socio-political situation in the most critical moments of national history. But we shall dwell only on a natural-scientific component of dairy texts.

EVACUATION PERIOD (1941-1943)

More than two-year evacuation period in Borovoye settlement (northern Kazakhstan) became a time of Vernadsky's colossal creative rise. There he finished his "book of life", i.e. a monograph Chemical Structure of the Earth Biosphere and Its Environment. Summing up the first year of his life in Borovoye he wrote: "It is clear for me that my creative scientific thought came to an end <...>. But then my Chronology expanded imperceptibly. My notes covered more and more material. It is feasible for me to write Recollections against the background of my personality and family." From January of 1944 Vernadsky intended to end his days amid his children Georgi, Nina

and granddaughter Tanya, who lived for a long time in emigration in the USA. By that time his main book was almost completed except for Chapter 21 about noosphere, and his laboratory was in safe hands of the already elected successor and future academician Alexander Vinogradov (1895-1975).

On January 25, 1944, he made a note: "I look for ways of going to my children in the USA, but I want to go and remain a Soviet citizen. I want to die in my family, in Massachusetts at Nina's house, <there is> my only granddaughter Tanya there. <...> If I go to America, I shall stay there." But it was rather distant perspective, while with every new spent day, despite indisposition and sudden weakness of memory for dates and names, he continued his scientific work. The next note was made 4 days later: "Yesterday Anya < his assistant Anna Shakhovska-ya > read-the last reading-Problems of Biogeochemis-try < issue > III. On space states in geological phenomena of the Earth. Against the background of science growth in the 20th century. I dedicated it to Natasha < his wife >. I believe that it is the most I could do." Fortunately, Ver-nadsky did not know that this "synthesis of my whole 60-year scientific work", according to his own characteristic, would come off the press only in 1980, as the book ready for printing was in conflict with the so-called "only true" philosophy of dialectical materialism of the USSR.

Vernadsky continued work on the unfinished chapter on noosphere in contradistinction to the elaborated theory of biosphere based on a great amount of empirical facts, there were only general considerations on the transition of biosphere to a radically new state. There was belief in noosphere but there was no mechanism of transition. On December 30, 1943, after a long talk with the well-known paleontologist Academician Alexei Borissiak (1872-1944), he wrote: "Now I am engrossed in noosphere and use a scientifically empirical approach to real anticipation of new scientific discoveries-mankind's future-during one or two generations."

Vladimir Vernadsky was convinced that his belief in noosphere could serve as a kind of ideological weapon for politicians and not only as a basis for his personal optimism. Not without reason he sent his article "A Few Words About Noosphere" to Stalin and the Pravda newspaper with an accompanying cable: "<...> I point to a natural spontaneous process, which will ensure our ultimate victory in this world war". The article with the cable were sent from Borovoye on July 27, 1943, but no answer followed. It was not published in Pravda, however it was printed in a small journal Advances of Modern Biology in his lifetime. In the 1930s, he was called "bourgeois idealist." We shall never know Stalin's reaction to Vernadsky's text.

The scientist's thoughts turned to noosphere all the time, but he probably no longer worked on the text of the unfinished chapter for "the book of life". There are no relevant notes in his diaries after February of 1944. We find only one such remark in a letter to his son Georgi, dated from April 11, 1944: "<...> it is obvious that noosphere is a planetary phenomenon, and a historical process, taken on a planetary scale, is also a geological phenomenon." Unfortunately, such aspect in the problem of noosphere failed to develop in the scientist's lifetime.

THE ABIOGENESIS PROBLEM

The spring of 1944 was marked with an important event in Vernadsky's comprehension of one of the key problems of natural science, i.e. the origin of life. The last wording of the text, in which differences between a living substance and an inert matter are formulated, was dated from December 15, 1943. It was an article "Biosphere and Noosphere", which was published in English due to the support of his son in the American Scientist journal. In this paper the author defended, as usual, the thesis on an insuperable borderline between the living and the inert, and, as a consequence, a fundamental impossibility of abio-genesis.

Nonetheless, after studies of the results of research of soil microorganisms received from his old friend, Ukrainian microbiologist Nikolai Kholodny (1882-1953), Ver-nadsky departed from his categorical denial of abiogen-esis. In his diary note of April 29, 1944, he wrote: "To my surprise, when writing a paper on Kholodny's works for the Soil Science journal, I saw it proper <that> I should have admitted one of the forms of abiogenesis for a bio-inert substance. I could not expect it. I succeeded in writing this short paper. <...> After all, I believe that I said all I wanted." Kholodny's discovery consisted in revealing of soil bacteria, able to use hydrocarbons for nutrition. It induced Vernadsky to think that in bio-inert objects (bitumens, oils, silts, etc.) "it is unlikely to separate quantitatively living and bio-inert structures" and a priori "it is impossible in this case to deny a potential abiogenesis". It is characteristic that in this paper the author mentioned for the first time the book of an ardent supporter of abiogenesis Academician (from 1946) Alexander Oparin (1894-1980). Therefore, we can state the following: this is a brilliant example to show how new experimental facts enabled Vernadsky to introduce clarifications and even revise partly the conclusions, which he considered long final. Even in his old age he did not lose the main properties of intellect, i.e. ability of critical assessment of personal stand and perception of new facts and ideas.

The abiogenesis problem is still topical, and many biologists theoretically leave room for synthesis of a living matter by means of complex organic "protomolecules" of DNA, RNA and ATP types under the action of cosmic radiations, electrical discharges, etc. and try to carry out a similar synthesis by experiment. For the time being the problem is far from being solved.

According to the diary, Vernadsky contributed most of the time to preparation of his recollections after his return to Moscow (late August of 1943), but he returned unintentionally to his encyclopedic interests in natural sciences and made plans for probable future studies. On December 31, 1943, he made an emotional entry in his diary: "Yesterday a daring thought came to my mind, i.e. to prepare a revised edition of my Crystallography. It is attributed to an idea on vibrating tuning-fork crystallization, which was mentioned (plan of experiments) in my notes made in 1898, i.e. 45 years ago." Vernadsky disclosed the news to his friend Academician Alexander Fersman on January 4, 1944, and his youngest student Kirill Florensky (1915-1982) in his letter to the front on March 16, 1944, hoping to carry out with him proper

experiments after the war, as, according to Vernadsky, Kirill was "an experimenter by the grace of God". As we know, these dreams did not come true, but scientists have been long elaborating the problem of external influence on crystal growth in experimental crystallography. Starting from the 1930s specialists studied the effect of acoustic vibrations but we failed to find any references to experiments on crystallization on turning-forks. Perhaps, it was another Vernadsky's insight into the future.

Vernadsky's hypothesis on kaolin ring in crystalline structures of alushtites* was one of his remarkable forecasts. The famous French chemist Henry Louis Le Chat-elier (1850-1936), in whose laboratory Vernadsky worked in 1889, called this idea "a stroke of genius". Kaolin ring of Al₂Si₂O₇ was in essence prediction of a quaternary surrounding of aluminum and silicon by oxygen atoms, which was confirmed 40 years (!) later after the X-ray-structural analysis was mastered by crystallographers. Thereafter, amendments were made in the concept of kaolin ring, in particular, belonging of kaolinite** to alu-mosilicic acids was revised.

Proceeding from the kaolin ring theory, Vernadsky in the later days of his life decided to return to problem of alushtite coloring, he was interested in for a long time. In his diary of September 1, 1944, he wrote: "Academician Nametkin <...> had an interesting conversation with me about silicate structure with reference to Butlerov's theory which until now is the basis for all structural concepts of organic chemistry <...> We should return to the subject and run experiments with colored silicate paints. My dreams of 1889-1891." This thought developed further: in his notes of November 13 and 16, 1944, we read: "Now emphasis should be put on silicates and get acquainted with criticism of (Academician.-Ed.) Alexander Zava-

*Alushtites are a group of natural and synthetic silicates, whose complex anions contain silicon and aluminum.-Ed.

** Kaolinite is a clayey mineral of the alushtite group.-Ed.

ritsky (1884-1952) <...> 1 want to work in mineralogy and geochemistry <...> I shall try to get an assistant-specialist in organic chemistry <...> Perhaps I shall have time to carry out basic experiments."

As the first stage of work with alushtites Vernadsky wanted to conduct experiments on synthesis of minerals of the sodalite-cancrinite* group, whose structures contain sulphur, chlorine, carbon (carbonate ion) and water, besides every mineral species is characterized by coloring inherent only in it. He was interested in the nature of coloring of these minerals already in early 1930s. He assumed that combination of the kaolin ring with radicals of the NaCI, Na₂S, etc. type could determine different coloring of sodalites and related mineral species.

According to modern concepts the nature of coloring of these tectosilicates is explained by the following. Due to the effect of natural radioactive radiation, there takes place a distortion of a crystalline structure, and the so-called electron-hole centers (vacancies in construction of any structural arrangement) appear, which are filled with molecular ion-radicals ([S^2-], [CO^-₃], etc.). It is just these radicals, which are responsible for mineral coloring. For example, the study of respective absorption spectra has proved that violet coloring of hackmanite depends on anions of sulfide sulphur ([S^2-], [S^2-₂], blue color of lazur-ite depends on [S₃^-] and [S₂^-], blue cancrinite contains a radical [CO₃^-], etc.

Here Vernadsky's remarkable scientific insight revealed itself once again, i.e. he admitted existence of instant connection between introduction of "additional anions" into mineral structure and its color. However, his hypothesis that the kaolin ring can act as chromophore has not been confirmed. It appears that another mechanism acts here, which is revealed only by modern methods of studies, but the search direction for the solution of the problem was correct. As to the attempt to apply Butlerov's organic compound structure theory to the structural chemical classification of minerals, it has remained as an idea and has not found its successor as yet.

METEORITICS

Meteoritics was one of the focal points in Vernadsky's scientific work in the last years of his life.

On June 12, 1944, he discussed space life with the Orientalist Academician (from 1921) Ignaty Krachkovsky (1883-1951) and made the following assumption: "I believe that we are facing a profound turning-point in understanding of a living substance. A lot of biologists are not aware of it." On July 11, after his talk on the forms of

* Sodalite is a rock-forming mineral, carcass silicate subclass; cancrinite is a rock-forming mineral of magmatic origin of the carcass alushtite subclass. It was first found in the Urals in 1839 and named by Gustav Rose after the Russian Minister of Finance count Kankrin (1774-l845).--Ed.

ancient life with the paleontologist, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences Alexander Volog-din (1896-1971), Vernadsky put forward a project of comparative studies of iron meteorites (pallasites) of Siberia and Byelorussia.

As Vernadsky discussed possible studies of meteorites with the specialist in ancient fauna Alexander Vologdin, we can assume that he had in mind to obtain special data on life traces in a meteorite substance. At all events, in his report "Some Considerations Regarding Problems of Meteoritics", presented in 1938, he noted that: "<...> the problem of water existence in meteorites and <...> the problem of the nature of organic substances-carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and perhaps oxygen compounds, which are met in large quantities in some meteorites and are completely ignored by organic chemists <...>. They are connected with a number of problems of vital importance, which involve both the history of our planet and also the history of life on the planet."

Besides, in the last decade of the 20th century it was established that meteorites of the SNC type (stone meteorites found in the Antarctic Continent ice), containing hydrocarbons and exotic inclusions of carbonate composition, originated from drawing into the gravitational field of the Earth of rock fragments "knocked out" from the Mars surface during impact processes. They were studied by methods of precision analysis* of gaseous phase in microinclusions, 50,000 magnification electron microscopy, isotopic geochemical methods, etc. It has been found that the composition of meteorite ALH84001 includes polycyclic hydrocarbons (about 10^-4 percent),

* Precision is recurrence rate and reproducibility.-Ed.

nanoinclusions containing calcium and magnesium carbonates, ferrous sulphides and oxides. The authors of this discovery believe that the mere fact of the presence of these organic compounds in combination with a specific morphology of carbonate inclusions can be interpreted as a discovery of relics of the Martian fossil biota. Although it should be noted that a great number of specialists in astrochemistry hold a conservative position now and consider the proofs of finding of vital activity traces in the Martian meteorite unconvincing.

Starting in the 1930s, Vernadsky, as one of the founders of national studies of frozen soil conditions, constantly held in his field of vision studies of anabiosis, i.e. ability of organisms to preserve viability in extreme conditions. In the autumn of 1944 he discussed experiments run by Pyotr Kapterev on protozoa reviving from permafrost layers. These organisms were analyzed by Vernadsky's staff member Ye. Boychenko together with researchers from the Vinogradsky Institute of Microbiology of the USSR AS (Moscow) headed by the leading microbiologist of our country Academician Boris Isachenko (1876-1948).

On September 5, 1944, Vernadsky wrote: "Kapterev addressed a meeting in our laboratory <in 1936.-Auth.> and demonstrated the revived algae, wheel animalcules, etc. Vinogradov told me today that he had never seen animation <...>. I must ask Boychenko. Until now I had no doubts in my recollections!"

The doubts of Alexander Vinogradov, a geochemist, organizer and director of the Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry, USSR AS, founder and head of the first chair of geochemistry at the Moscow State University, Vice-President, member of the USSR Academy of

Sciences (from 1953) and foreign member of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (from 1974) about correctness of experiments of Pyotr Kapterev were perhaps based on the failure of "animation" of microflora from the mammoth's dead body recovered from permafrost in Yakutia in 1941. However, the further developments confirmed preservation of viability of organisms in extreme low-temperature conditions. For example, in 1975 protozoa were regenerated from the Antarctic Continent ice, and their existence in the state of anabiosis was estimated at 8-13 thous. years. The wide-scale research in space medicine started in early 1960s proved that bacteria and viruses could exist in the state of anabiosis in outer space. These facts serve as a weighty argument in favor of the panspermia hypothesis, i.e. possible transfer of life forms in the Solar system and outside of it.

But, as it is well-known, Vernadsky supported the panspermia hypothesis, which was fully in line with his thesis on eternal life.

His last scientific report "Manifestation of Mineralogy in Outer Space" was delivered on his request by Olga Shubnikova (1884-1955) at a meeting of the Department of Geological and Geographical Sciences of the USSR Academy of Sciences on October 31, 1944. The report was focused on the problems of meteorite origin and necessity for comparative studies of the chemical composition of meteorites, asteroids and space dust. Vernadsky stressed correctness of the assertion suggested at that time by the German-American astronomer Rupert Wildt (1905-1976) and now generally accepted separation of the Solar system planets from the geochemical point of view into planets of the terrestrial group of silicate composition and giant planets formed by ices of volatile compounds.

On October 29, 1944, he made a sad assertion: "The report will be my swan-song-a link with Outer space-with planets of the Solar system, but not with meteorites, which represent more grandiose phenomena and maybe even more intricate, but Galactic and not Solar in their mass."

Yet it turned out that Vernadsky was wrong, and subsequent studies of meteorites have shown they have originated from Solar system bodies-aphelia* of most meteorite orbits are within the limits of the asteroid belt. Development of isotopic geochemistry made it possible to determine the age of meteorite bodies within 4.4-4.7 bln years, which coincides with the Solar system age and serves as a proof of the simultaneous origin of planets and parent bodies of meteorites.

Meanwhile, the outstanding expert in minerals Vernadsky continued consulting his colleagues on intricate matters of mineralogy. Here is his note of August 28, 1944: "Uranium ore has been discovered-from poorly studied minerals-brannerite from uranotitanates-entirely unknown to me." In fact, this mineral was found and described by American mineralogists and information was published in 1920, at the height of the Civil War in Russia (1918-1922).

Probably Vernadsky, who attentively kept up with literature, could not fill all bibliographical gaps arising in library funds at that time and missed the corresponding reference. As regards brannerite, shortly after the Soviet mineralogist Yakov Gotman (1904-1970) described a new variety of brannerite called lodochnikite. In those days in the conditions of national uranium raw material shortage (1944) any discovery of uranium mineral attracted special attention. But it proved later that neither brannerite nor lodochnikite possessed independent industrial value.

In mid-December of 1944 Vernadsky was twice visited for consultations by the chemist and corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1946) Konstantin Nenadkevich (1880-1963), geologist-mineralogist and discoverer of deposits: Apatite Circus, Rasvumchorr and Yukspor in the Khibiny Mountains, Alexander Labuntsov (1884-1963), Cand. Sc. (Geol. & Mineral.) and Yevgeny Yanishevsky (1904-1981). All of them participated in a meeting of the secret Advisory Board of Mineralogy under the All-Russia Institute of Mineral Resources; Vernadsky was its member too, but due to his ill health did not attend

* Aphelia (apohelion) and perihelion mean respectively apocenter and pericenter in orbits of bodies moving around the Sun (for example, planets, asteroids and comets).-Ed.

the meeting. They discussed perspectives of the search for and prospecting of radioactive ores. Notes on these discussions with mineralogists make up Vernadsky's diary comments of December 12 and 13, 1943 and January 1, 1944. Soon after that meeting, Alexander Labuntsov suggested to start immediately search works for uranium and thorium in the vicinity of lead and tin deposits near Ak-Tyuz village of the Keminsk District, Chuysk Region (Kirghizia). The minutes of this meeting are now published.

Vernadsky's diaries reflect also his persistent activity in the field of organization of teaching of geological subjects at a higher school.

It is well-known that in 1930 teaching of geological specialities were cancelled and respective chairs were abolished at Soviet universities. This happened after reorganization of the Moscow Mining Academy*, founded in 1918, and now divided into 5 newly established higher technical institutions, including the Moscow Geological Exploration Institute, where the best specialists were concentrated. During the whole pre-war decade Vernadsky was engaged in a vain battle for restoration of geological chairs at universities. In the Izyestiya newspaper of June 18, 1936, he wrote: "Can a school, in which geological sciences are excluded from teaching of natural science, be considered a higher school in the 20th century? <...> I am not at all against practical geological prospecting institutions of a lower level, but I believe that they can be useful for a long time and not for one or two years only in the presence of a real higher school in the country."

Two years after this publication, a geological and soil department and 9 chairs including those of geology and soil science were established at the Moscow State University. In 1949, a geological faculty and chairs of crystallography, mineralogy and petrography were created on the basis of the geological department. A decision to organize a chair of geochemistry was adopted only on November 25, 1952, and it was headed by Alexander Vinogradov, Vernadsky's successor.

It should be noted that in Vernadsky's opinion, a higher school in the USSR did not meet the assigned mission. In his diary of March 19, 1944, he wrote: "We face a dramatic step backwards in our higher school as compared with a splendid rise <at the time> of my youth. The higher school is on the decline reminding the time of tsar Nicholas I. <...> Our higher school deteriorated in the Soviet time. Fear of the free thought."

It is interesting that in the same period in his letter to his son Georgi in the USA Vernadsky touched the problem of a higher school taken in a broad historical context in a different perspective: "Perhaps it would be appropriate if you see a new Russia in the near future. I think that if we

* Moscow Mining Academy is a higher educational establishment founded by the Soviet leadership for training of engineers of mining specialities such as geologists, geophysicists, oil-industry workers and miners. It was housed in the building of the Moscow State Mining University. In 1930, the Moscow Mining Academy was reorganized to form new autonomous institutes.-Ed.

had a tsar, German invasion would end otherwise. The Germans would have another fate. Tremendous change. Not only secondary but also higher education-really to everybody. All are literate, higher school to all interested. It is true that it deteriorated but this is temporal."

In the autumn and winter of 1944, Vernadsky had regular meetings with the head of mineralogical department of the Karpinsky Geological Museum in Leningrad and his colleague from the 1910s, the mineralogist Vladimir Kry-zhanovsky (1881-1947). Vernadsky played a decisive role in the creation of an independent Mineralogical Museum in Moscow, which today bears the name of Vice-President of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1926-1929) Alexander Fersman and in working out of a related museum concept. On August 27, 1944, he wrote: "Kryzhanovsky visited me on my initiative <...> His plan was not too successful. The museum must be on a par <with> large mineralogical <collections> of the 1st category. He made up a <plan>-all minerals, which are available in the country. I think that a museum in our country should strive to be on a par with British, North American, French and German museums. It seems I have convinced him."

Vernadsky was greatly dissatisfied with a text of the guidebook for the museum: "Tomorrow <12.10.1944> I shall talk with Fersman-about the guidebook for the Mineralogical Museum of the Academy of Sciences, which should be withdrawn as evidently fantastic." Unfortunately, his diary does not disclose the essence of his claims to the text. Therefore, it only remains to undermine the very fact of Vernadsky's discontent. It should be mentioned that the first display of minerals at the museum was based on Vernadsky's classification, who referred natural compounds of any aggregate state (gases, water, etc.) to minerals. Such system failed to meet with support of mineralogists and became an episode in the history of science. At present, the Fersman Mineralogical Museum of the Russian Academy of Sciences makes use of a chemical classification modified by Georgi Barsanov and Alexander Godovikov. As regards the guidebook, it was published (sent to press on 11.06.1945, already after Vernadsky's death. Now it appears impossible to establish to what extent its text is identical with that criticized by Vernadsky.

The nature and style of Vernadsky's diary notes preserved till the last day of his life. In the morning of December 24, 1945, he dictated his last note to the geologist Anna Shakhovskaya (1889-1959) as the next morning he had a fatal stroke.