Abel, N. H. 1826. Untersuchungen über die Reihe 1 + (m/1)x + (m(m - 1)/2)x2 + ···. J. Reine Angew. Math., 1, 311–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Abel, N. H. 1965. Oeuvres complètes. New York: Johnson Reprint.Google Scholar

Acosta, D. J. 2003. Newton's rule of signs for imaginary roots. Amer. Math. Monthly, 110, 694–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ahlfors, L. V. 1982. Collected Papers. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Ahlgren, S., and Ono, K. 2001. Addition and counting: The arithmetic of partitions. Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 48, 978–984.Google Scholar

Alder, H. L. 1969. Partition identities – from Euler to the present. Amer. Math. Monthly, 76, 733–746.Google Scholar

Alexander, J. W. 1915. Functions which map the interior of the unit circle upon simple regions. Ann. Math., 17, 12–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allaire, P., and Bradley, R. E. 2004. Symbolical algebra as a foundation for calculus: D. F. Gregory's contribution. Historia Math., 29, 395–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Almkvist, G., and Berndt, B. 1988. Gauss, Landen, Ramanujan, the arithmetic-geometric mean, ellipses, π, and the Ladies Diary. Amer. Math. Monthly, 95, 585–607.Google Scholar

Altmann, S., and Ortiz, E. L. 2005. Olinde Rodrigues and His Times. Providence, R.I.: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Anderson, M., Katz, V., and Wilson, R. (eds). 2004. Sherlock Holmes in Babylon. Washington, D.C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, M., Katz, V., and Wilson, R. (eds). 2009. Who Gave You the Epsilon?Washington, D.C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andrews, G. E. 1981. Ramanujan's “lost” notebook. III. The Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction. Adv. Math., 41, 186–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andrews, G. E. 1986. q-Series: Their Development and Application in Analysis, Number Theory, Combinatorics, Physics, and Computer Algebra. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Andrews, G. E., and Garvan, F. G. 1988. Dyson's crank of a partition. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 18, 167–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andrews, G. E., Askey, R. A., Berndt, B. C., Ramanathan, K. G., and Rankin, R. A. (eds). 1988. Ramanujan Revisited. Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Andrews, G. E., Askey, R., and Roy, R. 1999. Special Functions. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arnold, V. I. 1990. Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke. Boston: Birkhäuser. Translated by E. J. F. Primrose.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arnold, V. I. 2007. Yesterday and Long Ago. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Artin, E. 1964. The Gamma Function. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston. Translated by Michael Butler.Google Scholar

Ash, J. M. 1976. Studies in Harmonic Analysis. Washington, D.C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.Google Scholar

Askey, R. 1975. Orthogonal polynomials and special functions. Philadelphia: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkin, A. O. L. 1968. Multiplicative congruence properties. Proc. London Math. Soc., 18, 563–576.

Atkin, A. O. L., and Swinnerton–Dyer, P. 1954. Some properities of partititons. Proc. London Math. Soc., 4, 84–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Babbage, C., and Herschel, J. 1813. Memoirs of the Analytical Society. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Bäcklund, R. 1918. Über die Nullstellen der Riemannschen Zetafunktion. Acta Math., 41, 345–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baernstein, A. 1986. The Bieberbach Conjecture. Providence, R.I.: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Bag, A. K. 1966. Trigonometrical series in the Karanapaddhati and the probable date of the text. Indian J. Hist. of Sci., 1, 98–106.Google Scholar

Baillaud, B., and Bourget, H. (eds). 1905. Correspondance d'Hermite et de Stieltjes. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Baker, A. 1988. New Advances in Transcendence Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, A., and Masser, D. W. 1977. Transcendence Theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Barnes, E. W. 1908. A new development of the theory of the hypergeometric function. Proc. London Math. Soc., 6(2), 141–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baron, M. E. 1987. The Origins of the Infinitesimal Calculus. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Barrow, I. 1735. Geometrical Lectures. London: Austen. Translated by E. Stone.Google Scholar

Bateman, H. 1907. The correspondence of Brook Taylor. Bibliotheca Math., 7, 367–371.Google Scholar

Bateman, P. T., and Diamond, H. G. 1996. A hundred years of prime numbers. Amer. Math. Monthly, 103(9), 729–741. Reprinted in Anderson, Katz, and Wilson (2009), pp. 328–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Becher, H. W. 1980. Woodhouse, Babbage, Peacock, and modern algebra. Historia Math., 7, 389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beery, J., and Stedall, J. 2009. Thomas Harriot's Doctrine of Triangular Numbers: The ‘Magisteria Magna’. Zürich: European Mathematical Society.Google Scholar

Berggren, L., Borwein, J., and Borwein, P. 1997. Pi: A Source Book. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berndt, B. C. 1985–1998. Ramanujan's Notebooks. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bernoulli, D. 1982–1996. Die Werke von Daniel Bernoulli. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Bernoulli, J. 1993–1999. Die Werke von Jakob Bernoulli. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Bernoulli, J. 2006. The Art of Conjecturing, Translation of Ars Conjectandi. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press. Translated by E. D. Sylla.Google Scholar

Bernoulli, Joh. 1968. Opera omnia. Hildesheim, Germany: G. Olms Verlag.Google Scholar

Bernoulli, N. 1738. Inquisitio in summam Seriei etc. Comment. Petropolitanae, 10, 19–21.Google Scholar

Bers, L. 1998. Selected Works of Lipman Bers. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Bézout, É. 2006. General Theory of Algebraic Equations. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press. Translated by E. Feron.Google Scholar

Bieberbach, L. 1916. Über die Koeffizienten derjenigen Potenzreihen. S.-B. Preuss Akad. Wiss., 138, 940–955.Google Scholar

Binet, J. 1839. Mémoire sur les intégrales définies Eulériennes. Journal de l'École Polytéchnique, 16, 123–340.Google Scholar

Bissell, C. C. 1989. Cartesian geometry: The Dutch contribution. Mathematical Intelligencer, 9(4), 38–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boas, R. P. 1954. Entire Functions. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Bogolyubov, N. N., Mikhailov, G. K., and Yushkevich, A. P. (eds). 2007. Euler and Modern Science. Washington, D.C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.Google Scholar

Bohr, H., and Mollerup, J. 1922. Laerebog i Matematisk Analyse. Copenhagen: Jul. Gjellerups Forlag.Google Scholar

Bolibruch, A. A., Osipov, Yu. S., and Sinai, Ya. G. (eds). 2006. Mathematical Events of the Twentieth Century. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bombieri, E., and Gubler, W. 2006. Heights in Diophantine Geometry. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Boole, G. 1841. Exposition of a general theory of linear transformations, Parts I and II. Cambridge Math. J., 3, 1–20, 106–111.Google Scholar

Boole, G. 1844a. Notes on linear transformations. Cambridge Math. J., 4, 167–71.Google Scholar

Boole, G. 1844b. On a general method in analysis. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 124, 225–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boole, G. 1847. The Mathematical Analysis of Logic. London: George Bell.Google Scholar

Boole, G. 1877. A Treatise on Differential Equations. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Borel, É. 1900. Leçons sur les fonctions entières. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Bornstein, M. 1997. Symbolic Integration. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boros, G., and Moll, V. 2004. Irresistible Integrals. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Borwein, J., Bailey, D., and Girgensohn, R. 2004. Experimentation in Mathematics: Computational Paths to Discovery. Natick, Mass.: A K Peters.Google Scholar

Bos, H. J. M. 1974. Differentials, higher-order differentials and the derivative in the Leibnizian calculus. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 14, 1–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bottazzini, U. 1986. The Higher Calculus. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Bourbaki, N. 1994. Elements of the History of Mathematics. New York: Springer-Verlag. Translated by J. Meldrum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boyer, C. B. 1943. Pascal's formula for the sums of the powers of integers. Scripta Math., 9, 237–244.Google Scholar

Boyer, C. B., and Merzbach, U. C. 1991. A History of Mathematics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Bradley, R. E., and Sandifer, C. E. (eds). 2007. Leonhard Euler: Life, Work and Legacy. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Bradley, R. E., and Sandifer, C. E. 2009. Cauchy's Cours d'analyse. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bressoud, D. 2002. Was calculus invented in India?College Math. J., 33(1), 2–13. Reprinted in Anderson, Katz, and Wilson (2004), 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bressoud, D. 2007. A Radical Approach to Real Analysis. 2nd edn. Washington, D.C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.Google Scholar

Bressoud, D. 2008. A Radical Approach to Lesbesgue's Theory of Integration. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Brezinski, C. 1991. History of Continued Fractions and Padé Approximations. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bronstein, M. 1997. Symbolic Integration. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Browder, F. E. (ed). 1976. Mathematical Developments Arising from Hilbert Problems. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

,Budan de Boislaurent, Ferdinand-François-Désiré. 1822. Nouvelle méthode pour la résolution des équations numérique…. Paris: Dondey-Dupré.Google Scholar

Bühler, W. K. 1981. Gauss: A Biographical Study. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burn, R. P. 2001. Alphose Antonio de Sarasa and logarithms. Historia Math., 28, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burnside, W. S., and Panton, A. W. 1960. The Theory of Equations. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Butzer, P. L., and Sz-Nagy, B. 1974. Linear Operators and Approximation II. Basel: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cahen, E. 1894. Sur la fonction ζ(s) de Riemann et sur des fonctions analogues. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup., 11, 75–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Campbell, G. 1728. A method of determining the number of impossible roots in affected aequations. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 35, 515–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Campbell, P. J. 1978. The origin of “Zorn's Lemma”. Historia Math., 5, 77–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cannon, J. T., and Dostrovsky, S. 1981. The Evolution of Dynamics: Vibration Theory from 1687 to 1742. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cantor, G. 1932. Gesammelte Abhandlungen. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cardano, G. 1993. Ars Magna or the Rules of Algebra. New York: Dover. Translated by T. R. Witmer.Google Scholar

Carleson, L. 1966. On convergence and growth of partial sums of Fourier series. Acta. Math., 116, 135–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cauchy, A.-L. 1823. Résumé des leçons donnés à l'École Royale Polytechnique sur le calcul infinitésimal. Paris: De Bure.Google Scholar

Cauchy, A.-L. 1829. Calcul différentiel. Paris: De Bure.Google Scholar

Cauchy, A.-L. 1843. Sur l'emploi légitime des séries divergentes. Compt. Rend., 17, 370–376.Google Scholar

Cauchy, A.-L. 1882–1974. Oeuvres complétes. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Cauchy, A.-L. 1989. Analyse algébrique. Paris: Jacques Gabay.Google Scholar

Cayley, A. 1889–1898. Collected Mathematical Papers. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Cayley, A. 1895. Elliptic Functions. London: Bell.Google Scholar

Cesàro, E. 1890. Sur la multiplication des séries. Bull. Sci. Math., 14, 114–20.Google Scholar

Chabert, J.-L. 1999. A History of Algorithms: From the Pebble to the Microchip. New York: Springer. Translated by C. Weeks.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chebyshev, P. L. 1899–1907. Oeuvres de P. L. Tchebychef. St. Petersburg: Académie Impériale des Sciences.Google Scholar

Cheney, E. (ed). 1980. Approximation Theory III. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Cherry, W., and Ye, Z. 2001. Nevanlinna Theory of Value Distribution. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Child, J. M. 1916. Geometrical Lectures of Isaac Barrow. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar

Child, J. M. 1920. The Early Mathematical Manuscripts of Leibniz. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar

Chudnovsky, D.V., and Chudnovsky, G. V. 1988. Approximations and complex multiplication according to Ramanujan. Pages 375–472 of: Andrews, G. E., Askey, R. A., Berndt, B. C., Ramanathan, K. G., and Rankin, R. A. (eds), Ramanujan Revisited: Proceedings of the Ramanujan Centenary Conference held at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, June 1Đ5, 1987. Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Clairaut, A.-C. 1739. Recherches générales sur le calcul intégral. Mémoires de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, 1, 425–436.Google Scholar

Clairaut, A.-C. 1740. Sur l'intégration ou la construction des équations différentielles du premier ordre. Mémoires de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, 2, 293–323.Google Scholar

Clarke, F. M. 1929. Thomas Simpson and his Times. Baltimore: Waverly Press.Google Scholar

Clausen, T. 1828. Ueber die Fälle, wenn die Reihe von der Form y = 1 + ··· etc. ein Quadrat von der Form z = 1 + ··· etc. hat. J. Reine Angew. Math., 3, 89–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, H. 2007. Number Theory, Volume II: Analytic and Modern Tools. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Cooke, R. 1984. The Mathematics of Sonya Kovalevskaya. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cooke, R. 1993. Uniqueness of trigonometric series and descriptive set theory 1870–1985. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 45, 281–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cooper, S. 2006. The quintuple product identity. Int. J. Number Theory, 2, 115–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corry, L. 2004. Modern Algebra and the Rise of Mathematical Structures. Basel: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cotes, R. 1722. Harmonia Mensurarum. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Cox, D. A. 1984. The arithmetic-geometric mean of Gauss. Lénseignement mathématique, 30, 275–330.Google Scholar

Cox, D. A. 2004. Galois Theory. Hoboken: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craik, A. D. D. 2000. James Ivory, F.R.S., mathematician: “The most unlucky person that ever existed”. Notes and Records Roy. Soc. London, 54, 223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craik, A. D. D. 2005. Prehistory of Faà di Bruno's formula. Amer. Math. Monthly, 112, 119–130.Google Scholar

Crilly, T. 2006. Arthur Cayley. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.Google Scholar

D'Alembert, J. 1761–1780. Opuscules mathématiques. Paris: David.Google Scholar

Dauben, J. 1979. Georg Cantor. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Davenport, H. 1980. Multiplicative Number Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davis, P. J. 1959. Leonhard Euler's Integral: A historical profile of the gamma function. Amer. Math. Monthly, 66, 849–869.Google Scholar

de Beaune, F., Girard, A., and Viète, F. 1986. The Early Theory of Equations: On Their Nature and Constitution. Annapolis, Md.: Golden Hind Press. Translated by Robert Smith.Google Scholar

De Branges, L. 1985. A proof of the Bieberbach conjecture. Acta Math., 157, 137–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Moivre, A. 1730a. Miscellanea analytica de seriebus et quadraturis. London: Tonson and Watts.Google Scholar

de Moivre, A. 1730b. Miscellaneis analyticis supplementum. London: Tonson and Watts.Google Scholar

de Moivre, A. 1967. The Doctrine of Chances. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Dedekind, R. 1930. Gesammelte Mathematische Werke. Braunschweig: F. Vieweg.Google Scholar

Dedekind, R. 1963. Essays on the Theory of Numbers. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Delone, B. N. 2005. The St. Petersburg School of Number Theory. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Descartes, R. 1954. La Géométrie. New York: Dover. Translated by D. E. Smith and M. L. Latham.Google Scholar

Dieudonné, J. 1981. History of Functional Analysis. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Dirichlet, P. G. L. 1862. Démonstration d'un théorème d'Abel. J. Math. Pures App., 7(2), 253–255. Also in Werke I, 305–306.Google Scholar

Dirichlet, P. G. L. 1969. Mathematische Werke. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Dirichlet, P. G. L., and Dedekind, R. 1999. Lectures on Number Theory. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc. Translated by John Stillwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dörrie, H. 1965. 100 Great Problems of Elementary Mathematics. New York: Dover. Translated by D. Antin.Google Scholar

Duke, W., and Tschinkel, Y. 2005. Analytic Number Theory: A Tribute to Gauss and Dirichlet. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Dunham, W. 1990. Journey Through Genius. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Dunnington, G. 2004. Gauss: Titan of Science. Washington, D.C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.Google Scholar

Duren, P. L. 1983. Univalent Functions. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Dutka, J. 1984. The early history of the hypergeometric series. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 31, 15–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dutka, J. 1991. The early history of the factorial function. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 43, 225–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Edwards, A. W. F. 2002. Pascal's Arithmetical Triangle. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Edwards, H. M. 1977. Fermat's Last Theorem. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Edwards, H. M. 1984. Galois Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Edwards, H. M. 2001. Riemann's Zeta Function. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Edwards, J. 1954. An Elementary Treatise on the Differential Calculus. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Edwards, J. 1954b. Treatise on Integral Calculus. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Eie, M. 2009. Topics In Number Theory. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar

Eisenstein, F. G. 1975. Mathematische Werke. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Elliott, E. B. 1964. An Introduction to the Algebra of Quantics. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Ellis, D. B., Ellis, R., and Nerurkar, M. 2000. The topological dynamics of semigroup actions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 353, 1279–1320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ellis, R. L. 1845. Memoir to D. F. Gregory. Cambridge and Dublin Math. J., 4, 145–152.Google Scholar

Engelsman, S. B. 1984. Families of Curves and the Origins of Partial Differentiation. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Enros, P. 1983. The analytical society (1812–1813). Historia Math., 10, 24–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erdős, P. 1932. Beweis eines Satz von Tschebyschef. Acta. Sci. Math., 5, 194–198.Google Scholar

Erman, A. 1852. Briefwechsel zwischen Olbers und Bessel. Leipzig: Avenarius and Mendelssohn.Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1911–2000. Leonhardi Euleri Opera omnia. Berlin: Teubner.Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1985. An essay on continued fractions. Math. Syst. Theory, 18, 295–328.Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1988. Introduction to Analysis of the Infinite. New York: Springer-Verlag. Translated by J. D. Blanton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Euler, L. 2000. Foundations of Differential Calculus. English Translation of First Part of Euler's Institutiones calculi differentialis. New York: Springer-Verlag. Translated by J. D. Blanton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fagnano, G. C. 1911. Opere matematiche. Rome: Albrighi.Google Scholar

Farkas, H. M., and Kra, I. 2001. Theta Constants, Riemann Surfaces and the Modular Group. Providence, R. I.: Amer. Math. Soc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fatou, P. 1906. Séries trigonométriques et séries de Taylor. Acta Math., 30, 335–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feigenbaum, L. 1981. Brook Taylor's “Methodus incrementorum”: A Translation with Mathematical and Historical Commentary. Ph.D. thesis, Yale University.

Feigenbaum, L. 1985. Taylor and the method of increments. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 34, 1–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feingold, M. 1990. Before Newton. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feingold, M. 1993. Newton, Leibniz and Barrow too. Isis, 84, 310–338.Google Scholar

Fejér, . 1970. Gesammelte Arbeiten. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Feldheim, E. 1941. Sur les polynomes généralisés de Legendre. Bull. Acad. Sci. URSS. Sér. Math. [Izvestia Adad. Nauk SSSR], 5, 241–254.Google Scholar

Ferraro, G. 2004. Differentials and differential coefficients in the Eulerian foundations of the calculus. Historia Math., 31, 34–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferreirós, J. 1993. On the relations between Georg Cantor and Richard Dedekind. Historia Math., 20, 343–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

FitzGerald, C. H. 1985. The Bieberbach conjecture: Retrospective. Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 32, 2–6.Google Scholar

Foata, D., and Han, G.-N. 2001. The triple, qunituple and sextuple product identities revisited. Pages 323–334 of: Foata, D., and Han, G.-N. (eds), The Andrews Festschrift: Seventeen Papers on Classical Number Theory and Combinatorics. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fomenko, O. M., and Kuzmina, G. V. 1986. The last 100 days of the Bieberbach conjecture. Mathematical Intelligencer, 8, 40–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Forrester, P. J., and Warnaar, S. O. 2008. The Importance of the Selberg Integral. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 45, 498–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fourier, J. 1955. The Analytical Theory of Heat. New York: Dover. Translated by A. Freeman.Google Scholar

Français, J. F. 1812–1813. Analise transcendante. Memoire tendant à démontrer la légitimité de la séparation des échelles de différentiation et d'intégration des fonctions qu'elles affectent. Annales de Gergonne, 3, 244–272.Google Scholar

Frei, G. 2007. The unpublished section eight: On the way to function fields over a finite field. Pages 159–198 of: Goldstein, C., Schappacher, N., and Schwermer, J. (eds), The Shaping of Arithmetic after C. F. Gauss's Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Friedelmeyer, J. P. 1994. Le calcul des dérivations d'Arbogast dans le projet d'algébrisation de l'analyse à fin du xviiie siècle. Nantes, France: Université de Nantes.Google Scholar

Frobenius, G. 1880. Ueber die Leibnizsche Reihe. J. Reine Ang. Math., 89, 262–264.Google Scholar

Fuss, P. H. 1968. Correspondance mathématique et physique. New York: Johnson Reprint.Google Scholar

Galois, E. 1897. Oeuvres mathématiques. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Gårding, L. 1994. Mathematics in Sweden before 1950. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Gauss, C. F. 1863–1927. Werke. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar

Gauss, C. F. 1966. Disquisitiones Arithmeticae (An English Translation). New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press. Translated by A. A. Clarke.Google Scholar

Gauss, C. F. 1981. Arithmetische Untersuchungen. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Gegenbauer, L. 1884. Zur Theorie der Functionen. Denkschriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Math. Naturwiss. Klasse, 48, 293–316.Google Scholar

Gelfand, I. M. 1988. Collected Papers. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Gelfand, I. M., Kapranov, M. M., and Zelevinsky, A. V. 1994. Discriminants, Resultants, and Multidimensional Determinants. Boston: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gelfond, A. O. 1960. Transcendental and Algebraic Numbers. New York: Dover. Translated by Leo F. Boron.Google Scholar

Gelfond, A. O., and Linnik, Yu., V. 1966. Elementary Methods in the Analytic Theory of Numbers. Cambridge: MIT Press. Translated by D. E. Brown.Google Scholar

Georgiadou, M. 2004. Constantine Carathéodory. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Glaisher, J. W. L. 1878. Series and products for π and powers of π. Messenger of Math., 7, 75–80.Google Scholar

Glaisher, J. W. L. 1883. A theorem in partitions. Messenger of Math., 12, 158–170.Google Scholar

Goldstein, C., Schappacher, N., and Schwermer, J. (eds). 2007. The Shaping of Arithmetic after C. F. Gauss's Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goldstein, L. J. 1973. A history of the prime number theorem. Amer. Math. Monthly, 80, 599–615. Correction, 1115. Reprinted in Anderson, Katz, and Wilson (2009), pp. 318–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goldstine, H. H. 1977. A History of Numerical Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Gong, S. 1999. The Bieberbach Conjecture. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gordon, B. 1961. A combinatorial generalization of the Rogers-Ramanujan identities. Amer. J. Math., 83, 393–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gouvêa, F. Q. 1994. A marvelous proof. Amer. Math. Monthly, 101, 203–222.Google Scholar

Gowing, R. 1983. Roger Cotes. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Grabiner, J. V. 1981. The Origins of Cauchy's Rigorous Calculus. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Grabiner, J. V. 1990. The Calculus as Algebra. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar

Grace, J. H., and Young, A. 1965. The Algebra of Invariants. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Graham, G., Rothschild, B. L., and Spencer, J. H. 1990. Ramsey Theory. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Grattan–Guinness, I. 1972. Joseph Fourier 1768–1830. New York: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Grattan–Guinness, I. 2005. Landmark Writings in Western Mathematics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Graves, R. P. 1885. Life of Sir William Rowan Hamilton. London: Longmans.Google Scholar

Gray, J. 1986. Linear Differential Equations and Group Theory from Riemann to Poincaré. Boston: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gray, J. 1994. On the history of the Riemann mapping theorem. Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, 34, 47–94. Series II, Supplemento 34.Google Scholar

Gray, J., and Parshall, K. H. (eds). 2007. Episodes in the History of Modern Algebra (1800–1950). Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Green, G. 1970. Mathematical Papers. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. L. 1995. The Problem of the Earth's Shape from Newton to Clairaut. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Gregory, D. F. 1865. The Mathematical Writings of Duncan Farquharson Gregory. Cambridge: Deighton, Bell, and Co. Edited by W. Walton.Google Scholar

Gronwall, T. H. 1914. Some remarks on conformal representation. Ann. Math., 16, 72–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grootendorst, A. W., and van Maanen, J. A. 1982. Van Heuraet's letter (1659) on the rectification of curves. Nieuw Archief Wiskunde, 30(3), 95–113.Google Scholar

Gucciardini, N. 1989. The Development of Newtonian Calculus in Britain 1700–1800. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gupta, R. C. 1977. Paramesvara's rule for the circumradius of a cyclic quadrilateral. Historia Math., 4, 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hadamard, J. 1898. Théorème sur séries entières. Acta Math., 22, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haimo, D. T. 1968. Orthogonal Expansions and Their Continuous Analogues. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Hald, A. 1990. A History of Probability and Statistics and Their Applications Before 1750. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamel, G. 1905. Eine basis aller Zahlen und die unstetiggen Lösungen der Funktionalgleichung: f(x + y) = f(x) + f(y). Math. Ann., 60, 459–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamilton, W. R. 1835. Theory of Conjugate Functions or Algebraic Couples. Dublin: Philip Dixon Hardy.Google Scholar

Hamilton, W. R. 1945. Quaternions. Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 50, 89–92.Google Scholar

Hardy, G. H. 1905. The Integration of Functions of a Single Variable. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Hardy, G. H. 1937. A Course in Pure Mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Hardy, G. H. 1949. Divergent Series. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Hardy, G. H. 1966–79. Collected Papers. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Hardy, G. H. 1978. Ramanujan. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Hardy, G. H., Littlewood, J., and Pólya, G. 1967. Inequalities. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Harkness, J., and Morley, F. 1898. Introduction to the Theory of Analytic Functions. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Hawking, S. 2005. God Created the Integers. Philadelphia: Running Press.Google Scholar

Hawkins, T. 1975. Lebesgue Theory. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Hayman, W. K. 1964. Meromorphic Functions. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Hayman, W. K. 1994. Multivalent Functions. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heine, E. 1847. Untersuchungen über die Reihe …. J. Reine Angew. Math., 34, 285–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hermite, C. 1873. Cours d'analyse. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Hermite, C. 1891. Cours de M. Hermite (rédigé en 1882 par M. Andoyer). Cornell Univ. Lib. Reprint.Google Scholar

Hermite, C. 1905–1917. Oeuvres. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Herschel, J. F. W. 1820. A Collection of Examples of the Applications of the Calculus of Finite Differences. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Hewitt, E., and Hewitt, R. E. 1980. The Gibbs-Wilbraham phenomenon. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 21, 129–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hilbert, D. 1970. Gesammelte Abhandlungen. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hilbert, D. 1978. Hilbert's Invariant Theory Papers. Brookline, Mass.: Math. Sci. Press.Google Scholar

Hilbert, D. 1993. Theory of Algebraic Invariants. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press. Translated by Reinhard C. Laubenbacher.Google Scholar

Hobson, E. W. 1957a. The Theory of Functions of a Real Variable. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Hobson, E. W. 1957b. A Treatise on Plane and Advanced Trigonometry. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Hoe, J. 2007. A Study of the Jade Mirror of the Four Unknowns. Christchurch, N. Z.: Mingming Bookroom.Google Scholar

Hofmann, J. E. 1974. Leibniz in Paris. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Hofmann, J. E. 1990. Ausgewählte Schriften. Zürich: Georg Olms Verlag.Google Scholar

Horiuchi, A. T. 1994. The Tetsujutsu sankei (1722), an 18th century treatise on the methods of investigation in mathematics. Pages 149–164 of: Sasaki, C., Sugiura, M., and Dauben, J. W. (eds), The Intersection of History and Mathematics. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Hua, L. K. 1981. Starting with the Unit Circle. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hutton, C. 1812. Tracts on mathematical and philosophical subjects. London: Rivington and Company.Google Scholar

Ireland, K., and Rosen, M. 1982. A Classical Introduction to Modern Number Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ivory, J. 1796. A new series for the rectification of the ellipses. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, 4, 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ivory, J. 1812. On the attractions of an extensive class of spheroids. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 102, 46–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ivory, J. 1824. On the figure requisite to maintain the equilibrium of a homogeneous fluid mass that revolves upon an axis. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 114, 85–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ivory, J., and Jacobi, C. G. J. 1837. Sur le développement de (1 - 2xz + z2)-½. J. Math. Pures App., 2, 105–106.Google Scholar

Jackson, F. H. 1910. On q-definite integrals. Quart. J. Pure App. Math., 41, 193–203.Google Scholar

Jacobi, C. G. J. 1969. Mathematische Werke. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Jahnke, H. N. 1993. Algebraic analysis in Germany, 1780–1849: Some mathematical and philosophical issues. Historia Math., 20, 265–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, I. M. 1999. History of Topology. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Jensen, J. L. W. V. 1899. Sur un nouvel et important théorèm de la théorie des fonctions. Acta Math., 22, 359–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jensen, J. L. W. V. 1906. Sur les fonctions convexes et les inégalités entre les valeurs moyennes. Acta Math., 30, 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, W. P. 2002. The curious history of Faà di Bruno's formula. Amer. Math. Monthly, 109, 217–234.Google Scholar

Johnson, W. P. 2007. The Pfaff/Cauchy derivative and Hurwitz type extensions. Ramanujan J. Math., 13, 167–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kac, M. 1979. Selected Papers. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kalman, D. 2009. Polynomia and Related Realms. Washington D. C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.Google Scholar

Karamata, J. 1930. Über die Hardy-Littlewoodschen Umkehrungen des Abelschen Stetigkeitssatzes. Math. Z., 32, 219–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katz, N. M. 1976. An overview of Deligne's proof of the Riemann hypothesis for varieties over finite fields. Pages 275–305 of: Browder, F. E. (ed), Mathematical Developments Arising from Hilbert Problems. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Katz, V. J. 1979. The history of Stokes' theorem. Math. Mag., 52, 146–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katz, V. J. 1982. Change of variables in multiple integrals: Euler to Cartan. Math. Mag., 55, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katz, V. J. 1985. Differential forms – Cartan to de Rham. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 33, 307–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katz, V. J. 1987. The calculus of the trigonometric functions. Historia Math., 14, 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katz, V. J. 1995. Ideas of calculus in Islam and India. Math. Mag., 3(3), 163–174. Reprinted in Anderson, Katz, and Wilson (2004), pp. 122–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katz, V. J. 1998. A History of Mathematics: An Introduction. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Khinchin, A. Y. 1998. Three Pearls of Number Theory. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Khrushchev, S. 2008. Orthogonal Polynomials and Continued Fractions. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kichenassamy, S. 2010. Brahmagupta's derivation of the area of a cyclic quadrilateral. Historia Math., 37(1), 28–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klein, F. 1911. Lectures on Mathematics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Klein, F. 1979. Development of Mathematics in the 19th Century. Brookline, Mass.: Math. Sci. Press. Translated by M. Ackerman.Google Scholar

Knoebel, A., Laubenbacher, R., Lodder, J., and Pengelley, D. 2007. Mathematical Masterpieces. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Knopp, K. 1990. Theory and Application of Infinite Series. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Knuth, D. 2003. Selected Papers. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI).Google Scholar

Kolmogorov, A. N. 1923. Une série de Fourier-Lebesgue divergente presque partout. Fund. Math., 4, 324–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kolmogorov, A. N., and Yushkevich, A. P. (eds). 1998. Mathematics of the 19th Century: Vol. III: Function Theory According to Chebyshev; Ordinary Differential Equations; Calculus of Variations; Theory of Finite Differences. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Koppelman, E. 1971. The calculus of operations and the rise of abstract algebra. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 8, 155–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Korevaar, J. 2004. Tauberian Theory. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kronecker, L. 1968. Mathematische Werke. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Kubota, K. K. 1977. Linear functional equations and algebraic independence. Pages 227–229 of: Baker, A., and Masser, D. W. (eds), Transcendence Theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Kummer, E. E. 1840. Über die Transcendenten, welche aus wiederholten Integrationen rationaler Formeln entstehen. J. Reine Angew. Math., 21, 74–90, 193–225, 328–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kummer, E. E. 1975. Collected Papers. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Kung, J. P. S. 1995. Gian-Carlo Rota on Combinatorics. Boston, Mass.: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Lacroix, S. F. 1819. Traité du calcul différentiel et du calcul intégral. Vol. 3. Paris: Courcier.Google Scholar

Lagrange, J. L. 1867–1892. Oeuvres. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Laguerre, E. 1972. Oeuvres. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Landau, E. 1904. Über eine Verallgemeinerung des Picardschen Satzes. S.-B. Preuss Akad. Wiss., 38, 1118–1133.Google Scholar

Landau, E. 1907. Über einen Konvergenzsatz. Göttinger Nachrichten, 8, 25–27.Google Scholar

Landen, J. 1758. A Discourse Concerning The Residual Analysis. London: Nourse.Google Scholar

Landen, J. 1760. A new method of computing the sums of certain series. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 51, 553–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lanzewizky, I. L. 1941. Über die orthogonalität der Fejér-Szegöschen polynome. D. R. Dokl. Acad. Sci. URSS, 31, 199–200.Google Scholar

Laplace, P. S. 1812. Théorie analytique des probabilités. Paris: Courcier.Google Scholar

Lascoux, A. 2003. Symmetric Functions and Combinatorial Operators on Polynomials. Providence R.I.: Amer. Math. Soc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laudal, O.A., and Piene, R. 2002. The Legacy of Niels Henrik Abel. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Laugwitz, D. 1999. Bernhard Riemann 1826–1866. Boston: Birkhäuser. Translated by A. Shenitzer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lebesgue, H. 1906. Leçons sur les séries trigonométriques. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Legendre, A.M. 1811–1817. Exercices de calcul intégral. Paris: Courcier.Google Scholar

Leibniz, G.W. 1971. Mathematische Schriften. Hildesheim, Germany: Georg Olms Verlag.Google Scholar

Lemmermeyer, F. 2000. Reciprocity Laws. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lewin, L. 1981. Polylogarithms and Associated Functions. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Lindelöf, E. 1902. Mémoire sur la théorie des fonctions entières de genre fini. Acta Soc. Sci. Fennicae, 31(1), 1–79.Google Scholar

Liouville, J. 1837a. Note sur le développement de (1–2xz+z2)-½. J. Math. Pures App., 2, 135–139.Google Scholar

Liouville, J. 1837b. Sur la sommation d'une série. J. Math. Pures Appl., 2, 107–108.Google Scholar

Liouville, J. 1851. Sur de classes très étendus de quantités dont la valeur n'est ni algébrique, ni même réductible à des irrationelles algébriques. J. Math. Pures Appl., 16, 133–142.Google Scholar

Liouville, J. 1880. Leçons sur les fonctions doublement périodiques. J. Reine Angew. Math., 88, 277–310.Google Scholar

Littlewood, J. E. 1982. Collected Papers. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Littlewood, J. E. 1986. Littlewood's Miscellany. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Loewner, C. 1988. Collected Papers. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Lusin, N. 1913. Sur la convergence des séries trigonométriques de Fourier. Compt. Rend., 156, 1655–1658.Google Scholar

Lützen, J. 1990. Joseph Liouville. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Maclaurin, C. 1729. A second letter to Martin Folkes, Esq.: Concerning the roots of equations, with the demonstration of other rules in algebra. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 36, 59–96.Google Scholar

Maclaurin, C. 1742. A Treatise of Fluxions. Edinburgh: Ruddimans.Google Scholar

Maclaurin, C. 1748. A Treatise of Algebra. London: Millar and Nourse.Google Scholar

MacMahon, P. A. 1978. Collected Papers. New York: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Mahoney, M. S. 1994. The Mathematical Career of Pierre de Fermat (1601–1665). Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Malet, A. 1993. James Gregorie on tangents and the Taylor rule. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci, 46, 97–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malmsten, C. J. 1849. De integralibus quibusdam definitis. J. Reine Angew. Math., 38, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Manders, K. 2006. Algebra in Roth, Faulhaber and Descartes. Historia Math., 33, 184–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Manning, K. R. 1975. The emergence of the Weierstrassian approach to complex analysis. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 14, 297–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maor, E. 1998. Tirgonometric Delights. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Martzloff, J. C. 1997. A History of Chinese Mathematics. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Masani, P.R. 1990. Norbert Wiener. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Maxwell, J. C. 1873. A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Maz'ya, V., and Shaposhnikova, T. 1998. Jacques Hadamard. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc. Translated by Peter Basarab-Horwath.Google Scholar

McClintock, E. 1881. On the remainder of Laplace's series. Amer. J. Math., 4, 96–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mertens, F. 1874a. Ein beitrag zur analytischen Zahlentheorie. J. Reine Angew. Math., 78, 46–62.Google Scholar

Mertens, F. 1874b. Ueber einige asymptotische Gesetze der Zahlentheorie. J. Reine Angew. Math., 77, 289–338.Google Scholar

Mertens, F. 1875. Über die Multiplicationsregel für zwei unendliche Reihen. J. Reine Angew. Math., 79, 182–184.Google Scholar

Mertens, F. 1895. Über das nichtverschwinden Dirichlet-Reihen mit reellen Gliedern. S.-B. Kais. Akad. Wissensch. Wien, 104(Abt. 2a), 1158–1166.Google Scholar

Meschkowski, H. 1964. Ways of Thought of Great Mathematicians. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar

Mikami, Y. 1974. The Development of Mathematics in China and Japan. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Mittag-Leffler, G. 1923. An introduction to the theory of elliptic functions. Ann. Math., 24, 271–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Miyake, K. 1994. The establishment of the Takagi-Artin class field theory. Pages 109–128 of: Sasaki, C., Sugiura, M., and Dauben, J. W. (eds), The Intersection of History and Mathematics. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Moll, V. 2002. The evaluation of integrals: A personal story. Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 311–317.Google Scholar

Monsky, P. 1994. Simplifying the proof of Dirichlet's theorem. Amer. Math. Monthly, 100, 861–862.Google Scholar

Montmort, P. R. de. 1717. De seriebus infinitis tractatus. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 30, 633–675.Google Scholar

Moore, G. H. 1982. Zermelo's Axiom of Choice. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morrison, P., and Morrison, E. 1961. Charles Babbage and His Calculating Engines: Selected Writings by Charles Babbage. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Muir, T. 1960. The Theory of Determinants in the Historical Order of Development. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Mukhopadhyaya, A. 1998. A Diary of Asutosh Mookerjee. Calcutta: Mitra and Ghosh Publ.Google Scholar

Murphy, R. 1833. On the inverse method of definite integrals, with physical applications. Trans. Cambridge Phil. Soc., 4, 353–408.Google Scholar

Murphy, R. 1835. Second memoir on the inverse method of definite integrals. Trans. Cambridge Phil. Soc., 5, 113–148.Google Scholar

Murphy, R. 1837. First memoir on the theory of analytic operations. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 127, 179–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Murphy, R. 1839. A Treatise on the Theory of Algebraical Equations. London: Society for Diffusion of Useful Knowledge.Google Scholar

Mustafy, A. K. 1966. A new representation of Riemann's zeta function and some of its consequences. Norske Vid. Selsk. Forh. (Trondheim), 39, 96–100.Google Scholar

Mustafy, A. K. 1972. On a criterion for a point to be a zero of the Riemann zeta function. J. London Math. Soc. (2), 5, 285–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Narasimhan, R. 1991. The coming of age of mathematics in India. Pages 235–258 of: Hilton, P., Hirzebruch, F., and Remmert, R. (eds), Miscellanea Mathematica. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Narkiewicz, W. 2000. The Development of Prime Number Theory. New York: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nesterenko, Yu., V. 2006. Hilbert's seventh problem. Pages 269–282 of: Bolibruch, A. A., Osipov, Yu., S., and Sinai, Ya., G. (eds), Mathematical Events of the Twentieth Century. Berlin: Springer. Translated by L. P. Kotova.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neuenschwander, E. 1978a. The Casorati-Weierstrass theorem. Historia Math., 5, 139–166.Google Scholar

Neuenschwander, E. 1978b. Der Nachlass von Casorati (1835–1890) in Pavia. Archive Hist. Exact Sci., 19, 1–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neumann, O. 2007a. Cyclotomy: From Euler through Vandermonde to Gauss. Pages 323–362 of: Bradley, R. E., and Sandifer, C. E. (eds), Leonhard Euler: Life, Work and Legacy. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neumann, O. 2007b. The Disquisitiones Arithmeticae and the theory of equations. Pages 107–128 of: Goldstein, C., Schappacher, N., and Schwermer, J. (eds), The Shaping of Arithmetic after C. F. Gauss's Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nevai, P. 1990. Orthogonal Polynomials: Theory and Practice. New York: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nevanlinna, R. 1974. Le théorème de Picard–Borel et la théorie des fonctions méromorphes. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Newman, F. W. 1848. On Г(a), Especially When a Is Negative. Cambridge and Dublin Math. J., 3, 57–63.Google Scholar

Newton, I. 1959–1960. The Correspondence of Isaac Newton. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. Edited by H.W., Turnbull.Google Scholar

Newton, I. 1964–1967. The Mathematical Works of Isaac Newton, Introduction By D. T. Whiteside. New York: Johnson Reprint.Google Scholar

Newton, I. 1967–1981. The Mathematical Papers of Isaac Newton. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. Edited by D. T., Whiteside.Google Scholar

Nicole, F. 1717. Traité du calcul des différences finies. Histoire de l'Academie Royale des Sciences, 7–21.Google Scholar

Nikolić, A. 2009. The story of majorizability as Karamata's condition of convergence for Abel summable series. Historia Math., 36, 405–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olver, P. J. 1999. Classical Invariant Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Oré, Ø. 1974. Niels Henrik Abel: Mathematician Extraordinary. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Ozhigova, E. P. 2007. The part played by the Petersburg Academy of Sciences (the Academy of Sciences of the USSR) in the publication of Euler's collected works. Pages 53–74 of: Bogolyubov, N. N., Mikhailov, G. K., and Yushkevich, A. P. (eds), Euler and Modern Science. Washington D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar

Parameswaran, S. 1983. Madhava of Sangamagramma. J. Kerala Studies, 10, 185–217.Google Scholar

Patterson, S. J. 2007. Gauss sums. Pages 505–528 of: Goldstein, C., Schappacher, N., and Schwermer, J. (eds), The Shaping of Arithmetic after C. F. Gauss's Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peano, G. 1973. Selected Works. London: George Allen and Unwin. Edited by H. C., Kennedy.Google Scholar

Petrovski, I. G. 1966. Ordinary Differential Equations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Translated by R. A. Silverman.Google Scholar

Picard, É. 1879. Sur une propriété des fonctions entières. Comptes Rendus, 88, 1024–1027.Google Scholar

Pick, G. 1915. Über eine Eigenschaft der konformen Abbildung kreisförmiger Bereiche. Math. Ann., 77, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pieper, H. 1998. Korrespondenz zwischen Legendre und Jacobi. Leipzig: Teubner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pieper, H. 2007. A network of scientific philanthropy: Humboldt's relations with number theorists. Pages 201–234 of: Goldstein, C., Schappacher, N., and Schwermer, J. (eds), The Shaping of Arithmetic after C. F. Gauss's Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pierpoint, W. S. 1997. Edward Stone (1702–1768) and Edmund Stone (1700–1768): Confused Identities Resolved. Notes and Records Roy. Soc. London, 51, 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pierpont, J. 2000. The history of mathematics in the nineteenth century. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 37, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pietsch, A. 2007. History of Banach Spaces and Linear Operators. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Pingree, D. 1970–1994. Census of the exact sciences in sanskrit. Amer. Phil. Soc., 81, 86, 111, 146, 213.Google Scholar

Plofker, K. 2009. Mathematics in India. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Poincaré, H. 1886. Sur les intégrales irrégulières des équations linéaires. Acta Math., 295–344.

Poincaré, H. 1985. Papers on Fuchsian Functions. New York: Springer-Verlag. Translated by John Stillwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Poisson, S. D. 1823. Suite du mémoire sur les intégrales définies et sur la sommation des séries. J. de l'École Polytechnique, 12, 404–509.Google Scholar

Poisson, S. D. 1826. Sur le calcul numérique des intégrales définies. Mémoire l'Académie des Sciences, 6, 571–602.Google Scholar

Polignac, A. de. 1857. Recherches sur les nombres premiers. Compt. Rend., 45, 575–580.Google Scholar

Pommerenke, C. 1985. The Bieberbach conjecture. Math. Intelligencer, 7(2), 23–25; 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Prasad, G. 1931. Six Lectures on the Mean-Value Theorem of the Differential Calculus. Calcutta: Calcutta Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Prasad, G. 1933. Some Great Mathematicians of the Nineteenth Century. Benares, India: Benares Mathematical Society.Google Scholar

Pringsheim, A. 1900. Zur Geschichte des Taylorschen Lehrsatzes. Bibliotheca Mathematica, 3, 433–479.Google Scholar

Rajagopal, C. T. 1949. A neglected chapter of Hindu mathematics. Scripta Math., 15, 201–209.Google Scholar

Rajagopal, C. T., and Rangachari, M. S. 1977. On the untapped source of medieval Keralese mathematics. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 18, 89–102.Google Scholar

Rajagopal, C. T., and Rangachari, M. S. 1986. On medieval Keralese mathematics. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 35, 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rajagopal, C. T., and Vedamurtha, Aiyar, T. V. 1951. On the Hindu proof of Gregory's series. Scripta Math., 17, 65–74.Google Scholar

Rajagopal, C. T., and Venkataraman, A. 1949. The sine and cosine power series in Hindu mathematics. J. Roy. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, Sci., 15, 1–13.Google Scholar

Ramanujan, S. 1988. The Lost Notebook and Other Unpublished Papers. Delhi: Narosa Publishing House.Google Scholar

Ramanujan, S. 2000. Collected Papers. Providence: AMS Chelsea.Google Scholar

Raussen, M., and Skau, C. 2010. Interview with Mikhail Gromov. Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 57, 391–403.Google Scholar

Remmert, R. 1991. Theory of Complex Functions. New York: Springer-Verlag. Translated by Robert Burckel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Remmert, R. 1996. Wielandt's theorem about the Г-function. Amer. Math. Monthly, 103, 214–220.Google Scholar

Remmert, R. 1998. Classical Topics in Complex Function Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag. Translated by Leslie Kay.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Riemann, B. 1990. Gesammelte Mathematische Werke. New York: Springer-Verlag. Edited by R., Dedekind, H., Weber, R., Narasimham, and E., Neuenschwander.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Riesz, F. 1913. Les systèmes d'équations linéaires a une infinité d'inconnues. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Riesz, F. 1960. Oeuvres complètes. Budapest: Académie des Sciences de Hongrie.Google Scholar

Riesz, M. 1928. Sur les fonctions conjugées. Math. Z., 27, 218–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rigaud, S. P. 1841. Correspondence of Scientific Men of the Seventeenth Century. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Rodrigues, O. 1816. Mémoire sur l'attraction des sphéroids. Correspondance sur l'École Polytechnique, 3, 361–385.Google Scholar

Rodrigues, O. 1839. Note sur les inversions, ou dérangements produits dans les permutations. J. Math. Pures Appl., 4, 236–240.Google Scholar

Rogers, L. J. 1893a. Note on the transformation of an Heinean series. Messenger of Math., 23, 28–31.Google Scholar

Rogers, L. J. 1893b. On a three-fold symmetry in the element's of Heine's series. Proc. London Math. Soc., 24, 171–179.Google Scholar

Rogers, L. J. 1893c. On the expansion of some infinite products. Proc. London Math. Soc., 24, 337–352.Google Scholar

Rogers, L. J. 1894. Second memoir on the expansion of certain infinite products. Proc. London Math. Soc., 25, 318–343.Google Scholar

Rogers, L. J. 1895. Third memoir on the expansion of certain infinite products. Proc. London Math. Soc., 26, 15–32.Google Scholar

Rogers, L. J. 1907. On function sum theorems connected with the series. Proc. London Math. Soc., 4, 169–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rogers, L. J. 1917. On two theorems of combinatory analysis and some allied identities. Proc. London Math. Soc., 16, 321–327.Google Scholar

Roquette, P. 2002. The Riemann hypothesis in characteristic p, its origin and development. Part I. The formation of the zeta-functions of Artin and of F. K. Schmidt. Mitt. Math. Ges. Hamburg, 21, 79–157.Google Scholar

Roquette, P. 2004. The Riemann hypothesis in characteristic p, its origin and development. Part II. The first steps by Davenport and Hasse. Mitt. Math. Ges. Hamburg, 23, 5–74.Google Scholar

Rosen, M. 2002. Number Theory in Function Fields. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rothe, H. A. 1811. Systematisches Lehrbuch der Arithmetik. Erlangen: Barth.Google Scholar

Rowe, D. E., and McCleary, J. 1989. The History of Modern Mathematics. Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Roy, R. 1990. The discovery of the series formula for π by Leibniz, Gregory and Nilakantha. Math. Mag., 63(5), 291–306. Reprinted in Anderson, Katz, and Wilson (2004), pp. 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ru, M. 2001. Nevanlinna Theory and its Relation to Diophantine Approximation. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sandifer, C. E. 2007. The Early Mathematics of Leonhard Euler. Washington, D. C.: Math. Assoc. Amer.Google Scholar

Sarma, K. V. 1972. A History Of The Kerala School Of Hindu Astronomy. Hoshiarpur, India: Punjab Univ.Google Scholar

Sarma, K. V. 1977. Tantrasangraha of Nilakantha Somayaji. Hoshiarpur, India: Panjab Univ.Google Scholar

Sarma, K. V. 2008. Ganita-Yukti-Bhasa of Jyesthadeva. Delhi: Hindustan Book Agency.Google Scholar

Sarma, K. V., and Hariharan, S. 1991. Yuktibhasa of Jyesthadeva. Indian J. Hist. Sci., 26(2), 185–207.Google Scholar

Sasaki, C. 1994. The adoption of Western mathematics in Meiji Japan, 1853–1903. Pages 165–186 of: Sasaki, C., Sugiura, M., and Dauben, J.W. (eds), The Intersection of History and Mathematics. Basel: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sasaki, C., Sugiura, M., and Dauben, J. W. (eds). 1994. The Intersection of History and Mathematics. Basel: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schellbach, K. 1854. Die einfachsten periodischen Functionen. J. Reine Angew. Math., 48, 207–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schlömilch, O. 1843. Eineges über die Eulerischen Integrale der zweiten Art. Archiv Math. Phys., 4, 167–174.Google Scholar

Schlömilch, O. 1847. Handbuch der Differenzial-und Integralrechnung. Greifswald, Germany: Otte.Google Scholar

Schneider, I. 1968. Der Mathematiker Abraham de Moivre (1667–1754). Arch. Hist. Exact Sci, 5, 177–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schneider, I. 1983. Potenzsummenformeln im 17. Jahrhundert. Historia Math., 10, 286–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schoenberg, I. J. 1988. Selected Papers. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Schwarz, H. A. 1893. Formeln und Lehrsätze zum Gebrauche der elliptischen Funktionen. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schwarz, H. A. 1972. Abhandlungen. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Scriba, C. J. 1964. The inverse method of tangents. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 2, 113–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Segal, S. L. 1978. Riemann's example of a continuous “nondifferentiable” function. Math. Intelligencer, 1, 81–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selberg, A. 1989. Collected Papers. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Sen Gupta, D. P. 2000. Sir Asutosh Mookerjee – educationist, leader and insitution-builder. Current Sci., 78, 1566–1573.Google Scholar

Shah, S. M. 1948. A note on uniqueness sets for entire functions. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., Sect. A, 28, 519–526.Google Scholar

Shidlovskii, A. B. 1989. Transcendental Numbers. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Translated by N. Koblitz.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shimura, G. 2007. Elementary Dirichlet Series and Modular Forms. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shimura, G. 2008. The Map of My Life. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Siegel, C. L. 1949. Transcendental Numbers. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Siegel, C. L. 1969. Topics In Complex Function Theory. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Simmons, G. F. 1992. Calculus Gems. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Simon, B. 2005. OPUC on One Foot. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 42, 431–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simpson, T. 1759. The invention of a general method for determining the sum of every second, third, fourth, or fifth, etc. term of a series, taken in order; the sum of the whole being known. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 50, 757–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simpson, T. 1800. A Treatise of Algebra. London: Wingrave.Google Scholar

Smith, D. E. 1959. A Source Book in Mathematics. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Smith, D. E., and Mikami, Y. 1914. A History of Japanese Mathematics. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar

Smith, H. J. S. 1965a. Collected Mathematical Papers. New York: Chelsea. Edited by J. W. L. Glaisher.Google Scholar

Smith, H. J. S. 1965b. Report on the Theory of Numbers. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Spence, W. 1819. Mathematical Essays. London: Whittaker. Edited by J. F. W. Herschel.Google Scholar

Srinivasiengar, C. N. 1967. The History of Ancient Indian Mathematics. Calcutta: World Press.Google Scholar

Stäckel, P., and Ahrens, W. 1908. Briefwechsel zwischen C. G. J. Jacobi und P. H. Fuss. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar

Stedall, J. A. 2000. Catching proteus: The collaborations of Wallis and Brouncker, I and II. Notes and Records Roy. Soc. London, 54, 293–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stedall, J. A. 2003. The Greate Invention of Algebra: Thomas Harriot's Treatise on Equations. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Steele, J. M. 2004. The Cauchy-Schwarz Master Class. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Steffens, K.-G. 2006. The History of Approximation Theory. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Stieltjes, T. J. 1886. Recherches sur quelques séries semi-convergentes. Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm., 3, 201–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stieltjes, T. J. 1993. Collected Papers. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Stirling, J. 1730. Methodus differentialis. London: Strahan.Google Scholar

Stirling, J. 2003. Methodus Differentialis. London: Springer. Translated by I. Tweddle.Google Scholar

Stone, E. 1730. The Method of Fluxions both Direct and Inverse. London: W. Innys.Google Scholar

Strichartz, R. S. 1995. The Way of Analysis. London: Jones and Bartlett.Google Scholar

Struik, D. J. 1969. A Source Book in Mathematics. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Stubhaug, A. 2000. Niels Henrik Abel and His Times. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sturm, C. 1829. Analyse d'un mémoire sur la résolution des équations numériques. Bulletin des Sciences de Férussac, 11, 419.Google Scholar

Sturmfels, B. 2008. Algorithms on Invariant Theory. Wien: Springer.Google Scholar

Sylvester, J. J. 1973. Mathematical Papers. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Szegő, G. 1982. The Collected Papers of Gabor Szegő. Boston: Birkhäuser. Edited by R. Askey.Google Scholar

Szekeres, G. 1968. A combinatorial interpretation of Ramanujan's continued fraction. Canadian Math. Bull., 11, 405–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Takagi, T. 1990. Collected Papers. Tokyo: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Takase, M. 1994. Three aspects of the theory of complex multiplication. Pages 91–108 of: Sasaki, C., Sugiura, M., and Dauben, J. W. (eds), The Intersection of History and Mathematics. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Thomson, W., and Tait, P. G. 1890. Treatise on Natural Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Tignol, J.-P. 1988. Galois' Theory of Algebraic Equations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Titchmarsh, E. C., and Heath-Brown, D. R. 1986. The Theory of the Riemann-Zeta Function. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Truesdell, C. 1960. The Rational Mechanics of Flexible or Elastic Bodies, 1638–1788. Introduction to Vols. 10 and 11, Second Series of Euler's Opera omnia. Zurich: Orell Füssli Turici.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Truesdell, C. 1984. An Idiot's Fugitive Essays on Science. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tucciarone, J. 1973. The development of the theory of summable divergent series from 1880 to 1925. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 10, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Turán, P. 1990. Collected Papers. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar

Turnbull, H. W. 1933. James Gregory: A study in the early history of interpolation. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc., 3, 151–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Turnbull, H. W. 1939. James Gregory Tercentenary Memorial Volume. London: Bell.Google Scholar

Tweddle, I. 1984. Approximating n! Historical origins and error analysis. Amer. J. Phys., 52, 487–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tweddle, I. 1988. James Stirling: “This About Series And Such Things”. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.Google Scholar

Tweddle, I. 2003. James Stirling's Methodus differentialis, An Annotated Translation of Stirling's Text. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tweedie, C. 1917–1918. Nicole's contributions to the foundations of the calculus of finite differences. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc., 36, 22–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tweedie, C. 1922. James Stirling: A Sketch of His Life and Works along with His Scientific Correspondence. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Valiron, G. 1949. Lectures on the General Theory of Integral Functions. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar

Van Brummelen, G. 2009. The Mathematics of the Heavens and the Earth. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Van Brummelen, G., and Kinyon, M. 2005. Mathematics and the Historian's Craft. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Maanen, J. A. 1984. Hendrick van Heuraet (1634–1660?): His life and work. Centaurus, 27, 218–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Varadarajan, V. S. 2006. Euler Through Time. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar

Viète, F. 1983. The Analytic Art. Kent, Ohio: Kent State Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Vladuţ, S. G. 1991. Kronecker's Jugendtraum and Modular Equations. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Wali, K. C. 1991. Chandra: A Biography of S. Chandrasekhar. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Wallis, J. 2004. The Arithmetic of Infinitesimals. New York: Springer. Translation of Arithmetica Infinitorum by J. A. Stedall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Waring, E. 1779. Problems concerning interpolations. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 69, 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Waring, E. 1991. Meditationes Algebraicae. Providence: Amer. Math. Soc. Translated by D. Weeks.Google Scholar

Watson, G. N. 1933. The marquis and the land-agent. Math. Gazette, 17, 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weber, H. 1895. Lehrbuch der Algebra. Braunschweig: Vieweg.Google Scholar

Weierstrass, K. 1894–1927. Mathematische Werke. Berlin: Mayer and Müller.Google Scholar

Weil, A. 1979. Collected Papers. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Weil, A. 1984. Number Theory: An Approach Through History from Hammurapi to Legendre. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Weil, A. 1989a. On Eisenstein's copy of the Disquisitiones. Adv. Studies Pure Math., 17, 463–469.Google Scholar

Weil, A. 1989b. Prehistory of the zeta function. Pages 1–9 of: Aubert, K. E., Bombieri, E., and Goldfeld, D. (eds), Number Theory, Trace Formulas, and Discrete Groups. Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Weil, A. 1992. The Apprenticeship of a Mathematician. Boston: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Whiteside, D. T. 1961. Patterns of mathematical thought in the later seventeenth century. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci., 1, 179–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Whittaker, E. T., and Watson, G. N. 1927. A Course of Modern Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar