MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

This is a simple bibliographic request that I have been unable to pin down. Max Dehn's solution to Hilbert's 3rd problem is:

Max Dehn, "Über den Rauminhalt." Mathematische Annalen 55 (190x), no. 3, pages 465–478.

It is variously cited as either 1901 or 1902 (but always volume 55; Hilbert's own footnote cites volume 55 "soon to appear"). E.g.,

I have been unsuccessful in finding the definitive year via the web, because of all the conflicting citations. The next step is to retrieve Mathematische Annalen volume 55, but perhaps someone can spare me that trouble...? Thanks!

share|cite|improve this question
The paper can be viewed though the Springer webpages The 55. volume of Math. Ann. has papers both from 1901 and 1902, which perhaps explains the confusion. Dehn's paper is in the number 3. issue, which is listed as 'September 1901'. – J.C. Ottem Aug 25 '11 at 19:13
Thanks to J.C., Andreas, and Carlo, all of whom explained the mystery! – Joseph O'Rourke Aug 25 '11 at 19:35
up vote 12 down vote accepted

the journal has been scanned and can be read here:

volume 55 has four issues, covering both years 1901 and 1902; that is where the confusion comes from; Dehn's article is from the third issue, published in September 1901.

you can read the table of contents here:

share|cite|improve this answer

Dehn, M.; Ueber den Rauminhalt. (German) Math. Ann. 55 (1901), no. 3, 465–478

according to MathSciNet and Springer confirms this here. But on the scanned original provided by the Göttingen Center for Digitalisation here, the bottom line of the first page shows 1902. However, this refers to all issues of Volume 55. Looking more closely, only issues 1-3 were published in 1901 and issue 4 was published in 1902.

I guess, this means that MathSciNet is correct. However, the confusion is somewhat understandable.

share|cite|improve this answer

Another point to consider is whether "Über den Rauminhalt" is in fact Dehn's first solution to Hilbert's 3rd Problem. I believe his first solution was in the paper "Über raumgleiche Polyeder" in the Nachrichten der Königliche Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen of 1900, pp. 345 -- 354.

share|cite|improve this answer
Yes, Hilbert refers to that in his own paper. Hilbert calls this a "note" and the other a "paper," which I took to suggest that the former was a type of preliminary version of the latter. – Joseph O'Rourke Aug 25 '11 at 23:04
Just for the record, here is Hilbert's footnote at the end of his 3rd problem description: "Since this was written Herr Dehn has succeeded in proving this impossibility. See his note: "Über raumgleiche Polyeder," in Nachrichten d. K. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. zu Göttingen, 1900, and a paper soon to appear in the Math. Annalen [vol. 55, pp. 465-478]." – Joseph O'Rourke Aug 26 '11 at 22:06

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.