  As the History of Science Society, which is based in America, holds its
annual meeting in Utrecht, one of the key academic centers on the European
continent, one may surmise that the field has returned home. Yet, this hardly
reflects how today's world of scholarship is constituted: in the historiography
of science, 'provincializing Europe' has become an important theme, while the
field itself, as is the case across the world of academia, is centered around a
predominantly American literature. At the same time, ever since historians of
science have emancipated themselves from the sciences a long time ago, they
often have appeared, in the public eye, to question rather than to seek to
bolster the authority of the sciences. How has this situation come about, and
what does it tell us about the world we live in today? What insight is sought
and what public benefit is gained by the historical study of science? As we try
to answer these questions, we will follow a number of key mid-twentieth century
historians--Eduard Dijksterhuis, Thomas Kuhn and Martin Klein--in their
Atlantic crossings. Their answers to debates on the constitution of the early
modern scientific revolution or the novelty of the work of Max Planck will
illustrate how notions of 'center' and 'periphery' have shifted--and what that
may tell us about being 'in Europe' today.
