I enjoy articles like this which trace the development of familiar concepts with unfamiliar origins. I find they&#x27;re a strong aid to understanding, and interesting pieces of conversation in themselves. However, I take issue with the author&#x27;s depiction of Gauss as possibly appropriating some credit from where it was due and the emphasis placed on the conflict with Legendre. The history of science is filled with such incidents where a discovery was made independently by two or more scientists close in time, and the usual convention is that the first demonstration is credited as the discovery in textbooks (even if the concept has gone on to bear the other scientist&#x27;s name). Regardless, this is one kind of content I like to find online.