BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRYacshist.scs.illinois.edu/bulletin_open_access/FullIssues/vol36-2.pdf · The First Miracle Drugs: How the Sulfa Drugs Transformed Medicine 103

BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRY

Division of the History of Chemistry of the American Chemical Society

VOLUME 36 Number 2 2011

Who does write better books in history of chemistry?

BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRY

VOLUME 36, CONTENTS

NUMBER 1CHAIRS’ LETTER 1EDITOR’S LETTER 2“NOTITIA CŒRULEI BEROLINENSIS NUPER INVENTI” 3Alexander Kraft

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY BEFORE OSTWALD 10William B. Jensen

BENJAMIN SILLIMAN JR.’S 1874 PAPERS 22Martin D. Saltzman

THE RISE AND FALL OF DOMESTIC CHEMISTRY 35Marelene Rayner-Canham and Geoff Rayner-Canham

DENISON-HACKH STRUCTURE SYMBOLS 43William B. Jensen

LETTER: Vedic Hinduism and the Four Elements 51

BOOK REVIEWS 52

NUMBER 2EDITOR’S LETTER 60DO HISTORIANS OR CHEMISTS WRITE BETTER HISTORY OF CHEMISTRY? 61Seymour H. Mauskopf, Duke University

CHEMISTRY IN ENGLISH ACADEMIC GIRLS’ SCHOOLS, 1880-1930 68Marelene Rayner-Canham and Geoffrey Rayner-Canham, Grenfell Campus, Memorial University

HOW AN ANGLO-AMERICAN METHODOLOGY TOOK ROOT IN FRANCE 75Pierre Laszlo, École polytechnique, Palaiseau, France, and University of Liège

CELEBRATING OUR DIVERSITY. THE EDUCATION OF SOME PIONEERING AFRICAN AMERICAN CHEMISTS IN OHIO 82Sibrina N. Collins, College of Wooster

INTRODUCTION TO THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF “A CONTRIBUTION TO CHEMICAL STATICS” BY LEOPOLD PFAUNDLER: A Forgotten Classic of Chemical Kinetics 85William B. Jensen and Julia Kuhlmann, University of Cincinnati

PRIMARY DOCUMENTS “A CONTRIBUTION TO CHEMICAL STATICS” 87Leopold Pfaundler, Annalen der Physik und Chemie, 1867

BOOK REVIEWS Nuclear Reactions 99Radioactive: Marie & Pierre Curie, A Tale of Love and Fallout 101Nothing Less Than an Adventure: Ellen Gleditsch and Her Life in Science 102The First Miracle Drugs: How the Sulfa Drugs Transformed Medicine 103Boyle: Between God and Science 105Atoms in Chemistry: From Dalton’s Predecessors to Complex Atoms and Beyond 106Reaction! Chemistry in the Movies 108Periodic Tales: A Cultural History of the Elements from Arsenic to Zinc 109

60 Bull.Hist.Chem.,VOLUME 36, Number2 (2011)

EDITOR’S LETTER

DearReaders,

IwishtodrawyourattentiontothreearticlesandtworeviewsinthisissuethatIconsidertobeslightlyoutsidethemainfareofthejournal,namelyscholarlyarticlesandbookreviewsinthehistoryofchemistry.

Thearticlesinquestionareallfromdistinguishedcontributors,and,Ihopeyouwillagree,exhibithighqualityandinterestingmaterial.SeymourMauskopfconsidersthequestion“DoHistoriansorChemistsWriteBetterHistoryofChemistry?”inaninformativehistoriographicessay.PierreLaszlocombinesfirst-handobservationsandopinionswithscholarlyresearchtodescribe“HowanAnglo-AmericanMethodologyTookRootinFrance”inmid-20th-centuryphysicalorganicchemistry.WilliamJensenandJuliaKuhlmannpresentatranslationofLeopoldPfaundler’s1867paper,“AContributiontoChemicalStatics.”Publishingtranslationsofprimaryhistoricaldocuments,including“for-gottenclassics,”isoneofthefunctionsoriginallyenvisionedfortheBulletin.Prof.Jensen’smostrecentcontributionalongtheselines,atranslationofan1873paperbyAugustHorstmann,appearedinthisjournaltwoyearsago(1).AcompanionarticleonPfaundler’sworkwillappearinthenextissue.Historiographyofchemistry,representedbyProf.Mauskopf’scontribution,isanothersubjectthathasgracedthepagesofthisjournalfromtimetotime,onewhichiscertainlyrelevanttothemissionoftheBulletin.OfthethreearticlesI’vementioned,Prof.Laszlo’sisclosesttothestandardscholarlyarticleinhistoryofchemistry,butitisabitunusualinthatitsstyleandcontentincludesomeaspectsofmemoir.

ThereviewstowhichIdrawyourattentionareofmediathataresomewhatdifferentfromtheusualtextsonhistoryofchemistryforscholarlyorgeneralaudiences.TheodorBenfeydrewmyattentiontoaradioplay,Nuclear Reactions,byAdamGanz,basedontheFarmHalltranscriptsofGermannuclearscientistsimmediatelyaftertheSecondWorldWar.Hisreviewincludesacoupleofhisownreminiscencesofthatperiodofhistory,informationonhowtoaccesstheplay,and,ofcourse,adescriptionoftheplay.Fromitstitlealone,LaurenRedniss’sbook,Radioactive: Marie & Pierre Curie, A Tale of Love and Fallout,mightseemtobeanordinarybiographicaltextorperhapsanovel.Butonecanjudgefromitscoverthatitisanextraordinaryilluminatedbook.ReadTamiSpector’sreviewtofindoutmore.

AsIcontinuetolearnthejobofeditor,IremainopentosuggestionsonhowbesttofulfillthemissionoftheBul-letintoattractanddisseminatehigh-qualityarticlesandreviewsinthefieldofhistoryofchemistry.Inmyfirstyear,mymainjobhasbeentotrytodonoharmtowhatWilliamJensenandPaulJonesbuilt.Inthefuture,IlookforwardtoexploringadditionalwaysfortheBulletintoserveitsreadersandauthors.Pleasestaytuned.

CarmenGiunta,[email protected]

1. W.B.Jensen,“IntroductiontotheEnglishtranslationof‘TheTheoryofDissociation,’aForgottenClassicofChemicalThermodynamics,”Bull. Hist. Chem.,2009,34,73-75;A.Horstmann,“TheTheoryofDissociation,”W.B.Jensen,Trans.,Bull. Hist. Chem.,2009,34,76-82.

Bull.Hist.Chem.,VOLUME 36, Number2(2011) 61

Thispaperwastheresponsetoachallengesetmeastheseniorhistorianofchemistry(inage)servingontheACSNationalHistoricChemicalLandmarksCommittee.Thechallengewastoreflectonthehistoryofchemistryintermsofthequestionposedinthepaper’stitle.Althoughthereisa“tongueincheek”qualitytothequestion,italsohasitsserioussideanditchallengedme.Ihavetosaythat,untiltwoweeksbeforemytalk,IhadnoideahowIwouldrespond.ThenIhadmyepiphanyandtheresultisthefollowinghistoriographicalreflection.

Letme state at the outset that I amprimarily anhistorian rather than a chemist.Although Iwas onlyonecreditshyofcompletinganundergraduatemajorinchemistryatCornell,infact,Iwasgraduatedwithanof-ficialmajorinhistoryandreceived“highesthonors”foraseniorthesisontwelfth-andthirteenth-centurycanonlaw!ButIdidencounterHenryGuerlacintwocoursesandsubsequentlydidmygraduatestudyinthehistoryofscienceatPrinceton(1960-1964)underCharlesCoulstonGillispie,withafieldinthehistoryofchemistryandadissertation that combined history of late eighteenth-century–earlynineteenth-centurychemistrywithrelatedareasinthehistoryofphysics.Inmygraduatestudiesinthehistoryofchemistry,Ididmyfirstreflectivesurveyofthefieldasithaddevelopeddowntoabout1960.Ihadnotdoneasequeluntilthischallengewasposed.

Inretrospect,IseethattheprincipalobstacleIfacedwasdefinitional.IthinkIknowhowtodefinea“chemist-historian” (i.e., a chemistwho researches andwritesthehistoryofchemistry)butIwaslesssureregardingan“historian of chemistry.”Becauseofthetechnicalnatureofthefield,virtuallyallofuswhodohistoryofchemistryhavesomebackground inchemistry,asmyownexampleillustrates.Somehaveconsiderablymore

DO HISTORIANS OR CHEMISTS WRITE BETTER HISTORY OF CHEMISTRY? (1)Seymour H. Mauskopf, Duke University, [email protected]

thanIhave.AlanRocke,forexample,didgraduateworkinchemistry.ArnoldThackrayworkedasachemicalen-gineer.LawrencePrincipehasajointappointmentinthehistoryofscienceandinchemistryandteacheschemistry.Doesthismakethemchemistsdoinghistoryofscienceorhistoriansofsciencedoinghistoryofchemistry?

Myepiphanywastherealizationofthefollowingdefinition:an“historian of chemistry”isan“historianofscience”doingthehistoryofchemistry.By“historianofscience,”Imeansomeonewhohas(a)receivedtraininginthehistoryofscienceand(b)holdssomefull-timepo-sitionrelatedtothehistoryofscience—beitanacademicpositionoroneinsomeinstitutionpromotinghistoryofscience(e.g.,amuseum).

Thisimmediatelyprovidesastructuretomyhisto-riographicalreflection.Untilthemid-twentiethcentury,virtuallyallthepeoplewritinghistoryofchemistrywerechemists(onegiganticexception—HélèneMetzger),forthesimplereasonthattherewerevirtuallynotrainedhis-toriansofscience(moreonthisandonMetzgerbelow).By,say,1960,historyofscienceprogramswereemergingandtraininghistoriansofchemistry,amongotherfields.Thesescholars(theThackrays,Rockes,Principes—andMauskopfs)becamethenormalthoughsomechemistscontinuedtodisplayanactiveandabidinginterestinthehistoryofchemistryaswitnessedbytheDexter-EdelsteinAward tradition,activitiesof theACSDivisionof theHistoryofChemistry(HIST),andtheNationalHistoricChemicalLandmarksCommittee.

Ishalldiscusstheworkofasomewhatidiosyncraticgroupofchemist-historians—idiosyncraticinbeingofpersonalinterest.ThenIshallturntothedevelopmentofthehistoryofscienceasadisciplinaryfieldinmid-twentiethcenturyandoffersomeconclusions.


Chemists and the History of Chemistry

Thenineteenthcenturywasalreadyrepletewithhistoricalactivitiesofchemists.WhenIwasingraduateschoolintheearly1960s,themostcomprehensivestandardhis-toricalreferenceworkforchemistrywasstillHermannKopp’sGeschichte der Chemie(2).Icanstillrememberwaitingwithbatedbreadthfor thefirstpublishedvol-umeofJ.R.Partington’sA History of Chemistry(3)toseewhetheritwouldreallysupplantKopp.(Itdid,butprimarilyasanimmensereferenceworkinmyview.)Kopp’shistoryofchemistryismerelythemostpromi-nentofhistoricalproductionsbychemistsincludingsuchnotableproductionsasThomasThomson’sTheHistory of Chemistry (4),Albert Ladenburg’sVorträge über die Entwicklungsgeschichte der Chemie in den letzten hundert Jahren(5),JeanBaptisteDumas’editionoftheworksofLavoisier(firstfourvolumes,followedbytheremainingtwoeditedbyEduardGrimaux)(6),andtheworksofMarcellinBerthelotonmedievalchemistryandalchemy(7)tonameafew.SinceImentionBerthelot,Ioughtforthesakeofequitymentionhisopponent,PierreDuhem’sLe mixte et la combinaison chimique: Essai sur l’évolution d’une idée(8),aworkwhichIconsultedwithgreatprofitafewyearsagowhilewritingonthehistoricalbackgroundtoProust’slawofdefiniteproportions.

In connectionwithmywork onProust, Iwouldalso like tomention an historical studyby a chemistthatIcameuponasagraduatestudentandfoundbothquiteamazingandinspirational.IrefertoIdaFreund’sThe Study of Chemical Composition: An Account of Its Method and Historical Development(9).Freund(1863-1914)hadanextremelyinterestinglifeandcareer—insomerespectscomparableaspioneerwomanscientisttohermorefamouscontemporary,MarieCurie.BorninAustria,Freundwasbothorphanedandseriouslyinjuredatayoungage(losingaleginabicycleaccident).Ini-tiallyeducatedinVienna,shewastakentoEnglandbyanuncle(amemberoftheJoachimstringquartet)whereshewasabletoenterGirtonCollege,Cambridge,in1882and take the natural sciences tripos, obtaining afirstclassdegreewithaspecialtyinchemistry.ShespenttherestofherlifeteachingchemistryanddoingresearchatNewnhamCollege.ThebasisforThe Study of Chemical CompositionwasathirdyearlecturecoursethatFreunddevisedforherwomenstudentsreadingchemistry(10).

Therewereactivehistorically-mindedchemistsintheUnitedStatesataboutthetimeDuhemandFreundwere publishing their pioneeringhistorical studies onchemical composition.One famous onewas EdgarFahsSmith,chemist,historian,and,bestknowntoday

forthemagnificenthistoricalcollectioninchemistryattheUniversty of Pennsylvania. Probably less knownis hisTarheel contemporary, FrancisPrestonVenable(1856-1934).SonofaprofessorofmathematicsattheUniversityofVirgina(andaide-de-camptoRobertE.LeeintheCivilWar),VenablewastrainedinchemistryattheUniversityofVirginiaandhewasofferedthechairinchemistryattheUniversityofNorthCarolinaatChapelHillin1880.Goingoverseasforadvancedtraining,heearnedadoctorateat theUniversityofGöttingenandthenreturnedtoUNCtocarryoutimportantchemicalresearch.Mostnotablewashisidentificationofcalciumcarbide.In1893hereceivedtheMaryAnnSmithPro-fessorship,thefirstendowedchairatUNC.In1899heservedasVicePresidentoftheChemistrysectionoftheAAASandin1905PresidentoftheACS.From1900to1914,hewasPresidentofUNC(11).

Despiteabusyschedule—toputitmildly—Venablehadtimebothtocollecthistoricallyimportantworksinchemistry(whichnowconstitutethecoreoftheVenableCollection atUNC) and to carry outwritings in thehistoryofchemistry.Hepublishedtwomajorhistoricalstudies(orthree,dependingonhowyoucount):A Short History of Chemistry (1894 and subsequent editions),The Development of the Periodic Law (1896),andanexpandedversionof theShort History under the titleHistory of Chemistry (1922).(12)

Theprefacestothesebooksareinterestingingiv-ingsomeclueastowhyaTarheelchemistwouldbesoastonishinglypioneering in historical studies.That ofhis Short History of ChemistrygivesacontextororiginsimilartothatofFreund’sbookandevenprefiguresthemotivationbehindtheHarvard Case Histories in Experi-mental Scienceofmorethanfiftyyearsinthefuture.IquotefromVenable’spreface:

ThisHistoryhasbeenwrittenbecauseofaconvic-tion,frommyownexperienceandexperiencewithstudents, thatoneof thebestaids toan intelligentcomprehension of the science of chemistry is thestudy of the long struggle, the failures, and thetriumphs of themenwhohavemade this scienceforus.TheworkisbaseduponacourseoflecturesdeliveredforseveralyearspasttomyclassesintheUniversityofNorthCarolina.The effort hasbeenmadetosystematizeanddigestthematerialonhandsoastorenderitavailableforthosedesiringageneralknowledgeofthesubject.(13)

Venablewasveryfamiliarwiththeliteratureinthehis-toryofchemistrythathadbuiltupinthecourseofthenineteenthcentury.


Iwould like toknowa lotmore than I do aboutthedetailsofthesuccessofthisbook—whoboughtitandhowitwasused—forShort Historywentthroughanumberofeditions.Venablewrote in theprefaceofthesequelof1922that,althoughtheShort History“hadpassedthroughanumberofeditions,therehasbeennoattempttobringituptodatenortoreviseitinanyway:”

Ithasnowbeenentirelyrewrittenonachangedplanofarrangementandmadetocoverthegreatprogressin the sciencewhichhas takenplace since it firstappeared.(14)

ThePrefatorySketch toThe Development of the Periodic LawisalsointerestinginthatVenableprovidedaphilosophicalratherthanpedagogicalmotiveforwrit-ingthebook:

The reproach that chemistry is not, in the fullestsense,asciencewillcontinuejustsolongaschemistscontentthemselveswithtakingtogetherthestrawsoffacts,gleanersmanyoftheminaharvestedfield,andneglectthe‘weightiermattersofthelaw.’Thegatheringoffactsisgood,gleaningisgood,butcon-tentmentwithsuchgainsmeansstagnation.Thetaskhasbeenundertakeninthehopeofarousinginterestinthismatterandofaidinginthefurtherdevelopmentofthestillincompletesystem.(15)

TheresultwasVenable’smostambitioushistoricalmono-graph,runningtoalmostthreehundredpagesoftext.

ItiscleartomethatFrancisVenablewasachemist-historianwhomeritsmorestudy.

Activityofchemist-historiansdidnotslackeninthefirsthalfofthetwentiethcentury.Oneofthemostusefulre-sultsofsuchactivity,inmyopinion,isTennyL.Davis’The Chemistry of Powder and Explosives(1943),withitswealthofhistoricalmaterial(16).This,too,Ibelieve,wasthefruitofacourseonthesubjectthatDavistaughtatMIT.ThesedecadesalsowitnessedthefirsthistoricalpublicationsofJ.R.PartingtonandthecompleteoeuvreofHélèneMetzger (1889-1944),who died tragicallyin aNazi concentration camp (17).Metzger, trainedasacrystallographerbutunabletoobtainanacademicposition and able to support herself privately, treatedhistoryofchemistryasaspeciesofintellectualhistoryverymuchaspartofthemilieuofFrenchhistoricalandphilosophicalstudiesbeingcarriedoutbyhercontempo-rariessuchasGastonBachelard,ÉmileMeyerson,andAlexandreKoyré.

Whattheydid—particularlyMetzgerandKoyré—wastohistoricizetheirsubjectmatter.RatherthantheorientationofVenableon“thelongstruggle,thefailures,

andthetriumphsofthemenwhohavemadethisscienceforus,”Metzgerattemptedtogetinthemindsetsofherseventeenth-andeighteenth-centuryprotagonistswithas little referenceaspossibleas towhether theywereultimately“right.”Itissignificantthat,earlyoninThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions,ThomasKuhncitesMetzger(alongwithMeyersonandKoyré),ashavingshownhim“whatitwasliketothinkscientificallyinaperiodwhenthecanonsofscientificthoughtwereverydifferentfromthosecurrenttoday(18).”

Emergence of History of Science as an Academic Discipline

Alloftheabovebelongstothe“archaic”periodofthehistoryofscienceasanacademicdiscipline.Duringthefirsthalfofthetwentiethcentury,thehistoryofsciencebegan to emerge as an academic discipline but onlyslowly.Therewerefewjournalsinthefieldbeforethe1940s (Isis, 1913;Annals of Science, 1936;Archives internationals d’histoire des sciences, 1947) and fewacademicpositions.GeorgeSarton, forexample,whowastheprogenitorofthefieldintheU.S.,neverhadaregularpositionatHarvardalthoughhespenthisentireAmericancareerthere.Rather,hewasaResearchAssoci-ateintheHarvardDepartmentofHistory,hisfinancialsupportcomingfromtheCarnegieInstitution(19).ThefirstAmericantoreceiveaPh.D.inthehistoryofsciencewas I.B.Cohen,who receivedhisdegreeatHarvardin1947 in theProgramin theHistoryofScienceandLearninginstitutedbyJamesBryantConantin1936(20).

MentionofConantsuggeststhatchemists—andthehistoryofchemistry—wereimportantinthegenesisofthehistoryofscienceasanacademicdiscipline.ThenexthistoryofscienceprogramtobeofficiallyinstitutedwasattheUniversityofWisconsinin1941andtheyoungscholar,HenryGuerlac,wasinvitedtoformitup(21).GuerlachadmajoredinchemistryatCornellanddonegraduateworkthereandatHarvardinchemistrybeforeswitchingtoearnaPh.D.inEuropeanhistory.Althoughnot technically an alumnusof theHarvard history ofscienceprogram,hehaddonecourseworkwithGeorgeSarton and a dissertation on science and themilitaryschoolatMézieresintheancien régime.

Guerlacstartedupthedepartmentandthenleftin1943.Hedidnotreturnafterthewarbut,instead,washiredbyhisalmamater,Cornell,tobeginhistoryofsci-encethere.Bythelate1950s,Cornellhadaflourishingprogramandbythe1960s,hisgraduatestudentswerepursuingresearchonthesubjectonwhichhehadcome


tofocusinhisownresearch:LavoisierandtheChemi-calRevolution.

AtWisconsin,thehistoryofscienceprogramwasresumedafterthewar.Atthesametime,ayoungchemist,AaronIhde,returnedtohisalmamater,Wisconsin,toac-ceptatenure-trackpositioninthechemistrydepartment.In1946,Ihdewasabletomanifesthisinterestinthehis-toryofchemistrybyinstituting(orbetterresurrecting)anundergraduatecourse.Bytheendofthe1940s,Ihdewasplayingacentralroleindevelopinganundergradu-ateliberalartseducationatWisconsinandemphasizingthehistoryofscience.

Ihdestrengthenedhisconnectionwiththehistoryofscience (andhistoryofchemistry)byspending theyear1951-52atHarvardteachinginacourseConanthadinstitutedon“casehistoriesinexperimentalscience”co-taughtwiththechemist,LeonardK.Nash,andThomasKuhn.Althoughheapparentlywasnotformallyaddedthefacultyofthehistoryofscienceprogramuntil1957,heinfactwasthementorforthefirstPh.D.completedin thatprogram;RobertSiegfried receivedhisdegreewithadissertation,appropriatelyenoughinthehistoryofchemistry,in1953.Ofcourse,ithasalsotobementionedthatWisconsinwasconcurrentlydevelopingtheleadingprograminthenationinthehistoryofpharmacy.

So the 1950s canwith a gooddeal of justice beconsidered the first decadewhen history of scienceemergedasanacademicdiscipline.Itwasalso,ofcourse,thedecadewhentheDexterAwardsbegan.Idoubtthatanyonethenwasconsciousofaconnectionbutwecancertainlymakeonenow: thedevelopmentof theaca-demicdisciplineofthehistoryofsciencewasheavilyinfluencedby,indebtedto,andfocusedonthehistoryofchemistry.Thetraditionofchemist-historianscontinuedandwouldbejoinedbythefirstgroupofhistoriansofsciencewithafocusinthehistoryofchemistry.Bytheearly1960s,Cornell,underthetutelageofHenryGuerlac,andtheUniversityofWisconsin,undertheleadershipofAaronIhde,emergedascentersfortraining“historiansofchemistry.”Bytheearly1970s,theseuniversitieshadbeenjoinedbytheUniversityofPennsylvania’sDepart-mentoftheHistoryandSociologyofSciencefoundedbyArnoldThackray. I shouldmention that a paralleldevelopmentwastakingplaceinEngland,particularlyatUniversityCollegeLondon,whereDouglasMcKiejoinedthenascentDepartmentintheHistoryandMethodofSciencein1925,remainingoneofonlytwopermanentdepartmentmembersuntil1946.McKie’sbiographyofLavoisierappearedin1935andmonographsofsomeof

hisstudentsontopics ineighteenth-centurychemistryalsowerepublishedalreadyinthe1930s(22).

1950s and 1960s: “Heroic Age” of the History of Chemistry.

In the1950s and1960s, the influenceofprofessionalhistoryofsciencebegantobecomeevidentinthehis-toryofchemistry.Ishalldiscussanumberofseminalpublicationsofthesedecades.

The Historical Background of Chemistrybythebiochem-ist,HenryM.Leicester(1956)(23).Inmyterminology,Leicesterwasachemist-historian.

Looking over this book now, in relationship toVenable’s venerableHistory of Chemistry, there areinterestingparallelsanddifferences.Themajorparallelisthetopicandperiodcovered,whichareroughlythesamedespitetheoverfiftyyearsthatseparatedthetwohistories.Bothworks,moreover, givemuchmore at-tentiontothedevelopmentofinorganicchemistrythanorganic,eveninthenineteenthcentury.

But therearesignificantdifferences,whichcomeoutinLeicester’spreface.Firstly,althoughachemist-historian,Leicesterrecognizedtheprofessionalchangesthentakingplace,Leicesternaturallyemployedtheterm,“historiansofscience.”Moreover,hisstorywasnolongerprimarilyoneof“failures”and“triumphs”ofindividualmen,asitwasforVenablebutrather:

It isclear that thefullstoryofsuchdevelopmentsinvolves not only the personalities and intellectsofthescientiststhemselves,butalsothesocialandeconomic conditionswhich surrounded them andthephilosophicalideastowhichtheyareexposed.

He noted that such a comprehensive historywouldinvolveamassiveprojectbutalso,“Asyet,suchavol-ume is lacking in thehistoryof chemistry.”Leicesterdidnotproposetocarryouttheprojectinthisworkbutrather“thedevelopmentand interrelationofchemicalconcepts.”(24)

A goodmarker of their differences in historicalperspectivesisfoundintheirtreatmentofthephlogistontheory.Venableratherirritablydismissesit(25):“Sincethe theorywas false, it obscuredor twisted facts andnecessarily retardedprogress.”Leicester, by contrast,givesamuchmorenuancedandpositiveaccount(26):“Inthisfield[combustion],thephlogistontheorysup-pliedanexcellentexplanationfortheknownfacts.”(27)


Harvard Case Histories in Experimental Science,JamesBryantConant,GeneralEditor,LeonardK.Nash,Associ-ateEditor(1957)(28).ConantandNashwerechemist-historians.

This two volume set the fruit of the course thatConanthadinstitutedandwithwhichIhdehadbeenas-sociatedintheearly1950s.Inaim,thepublicationisnotunlikeVenable’s:toenlightenthesciencestudentandthegeneralpublicaboutthenatureofscience.

ButthisworkdeeplyreflectedthenewperspectivesofthehistoryofscienceinmuchthewaysthatLeicester’sbookhad.Ageneralconceptualstructurewasestablishedattheoutset,which,whileholdingtoanempiricistandprogressivist view of scientific change, neverthelesstook full cognizance of the complexities involved intheoriginsandascendancyofnewscientificconcepts.Moreover,eachcasestudywasheavilyinterlardedwithquotationsandsometimeslongexcerptsfromoriginalsourcestogivethereaderarealhistoricalflavorofthenarrative.

Notsurprisinglygiventhetwoeditors,fouroftheeightcasestudiescanbesaidtofall inthedomainofthehistoryofchemistry(29).Atleasttwo(“OverthrowofthePhlogistonTheory”and“TheAtomic-MolecularTheory”) still regularly showup inhistoryof sciencecourse syllabi, and the “Overthrowof thePhlogistonTheory” became the basis for the treatment of theChemicalRevolutioninThomasKuhn’sThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

Lavoisier—the Crucial Year: The Background and Origin of his First Experiments on Combustion(1961)byHenryGuerlac(30),historian of chemistry

Although therewere other important LavoisierscholarsbeforeGuerlacandcontemporaneouswithhim(McKie,MauriceDaumas),thisbookwasadefiningoneinthedevelopmentofthehistoryofsciencegenerallybecauseitrepresentedthearchival-based,detailedstudiesofsciencethatcametodominatethehistoryofscienceinthe1960s.Moreover,itwasaninterrogationof“origins;”scientific“advance”couldnolongerbeassumedtobenaturalorinevitablebut,likeallhistoricalevents,hadtobethoroughlyexplained.Guerlac,throughhisstudents,dominated the history of chemistry in the 1960s and1970s,withthefocusbeingonLavoisierandhiswork.

The Development of Modern Chemistry(1964)byAaronIhde(31),chemist-historian (?) historian of chemistry (?)

It is difficult to know how to categorizeAaronIhde—asachemist-historianorasprimarilyanhistorianofchemistry.Inhispreface,hearticulatessomethinglikeLeicester’svisionofwhatthehistoryofchemistryshouldbe,emphasizingespeciallyitsrelationshiptoindustry:

I have sought to give proper attention to the partplayedbyindividualswithoutmakingtheaccountaseriesofbiographicalsketches.AtthesametimeIhaveattemptedtoplacechemistryintheframeworkofthetimes.Ithasinfluencedhumanlifeinmajorways, particularly in the nature of industrial andagriculturalactivity.Atthesametime,thegrowthofchemistryhasbeeninfluencedbyhumanaffairs—political,economic,andsocial.TheseinteractionsIhavesoughttoreveal.(32)

Moreover,incontrasttoLeicester,Ihdecarriedhishistoricalnarrativedownwellintothetwentiethcentury.Inthetwentieth-centurysections,Ihdecoverednotonlythesubstanceofchemistrybutindustrialandagriculturalchemistry aswell.Moreover, indicativeofwhat soonwouldberisingenvironmentalconcerns,Ihdeconcludedhismassivehistorywithasectiontitled“NonprofessionalProblemsCreated byChemistry.”Here, he discussedvariouskindsofenvironmentalproblemsandhazardscreatedbychemicalactivities:nuclearwaste,industrialwasteandhazards,environmentalchemicalhazards.Hebeganthissectionwitheloquentandpropheticwords:

These problems demand the bestwisdom of theworld’sleaders,andtheywillberesolvedonlyverygradually,evenwherethereisgoodwillandasinceredesirefortheirsolution.Chemistscanhelpintheirsolutionbutwillneedthecollaborationofthebestmindsinmanyotherfields.Perhapschemistscanbeofgreatestserviceiftheywillbecomemoreconsciousoftheresultsoftheiractivitiesandusetheirinflu-encetodelaytheintroductionofnewproductsandnewprocessesuntiltheycanbesuretheadvantagesoutweighthedisadvantages.(33)

The Development of Modern Chemistrywas,inanimportantway, Janus-faced.Alongwith Partington’smulti-volumeset,itwasthelastandmostambitiousofthesynopticnarrativesofhistoryofchemistry.Yetitdidrepresentthebeginningsofadifferentkindofhistoryofchemistry.Althoughitscorewasthehistoryofchemi-caltheories,therewerenowconsiderationsofchemicaleducation,industrialchemistry,andenvironmentalandecologicalproblems.


Conclusion

Althoughonlyoneofthesefiveauthorswasclearlyanhistorian of chemistry,alltheothersplayedimportantrolesinthedevelopmentofthehistoryofscience.Giventhecomprehensiveinfluenceofthehistoryofscienceonallofthem,andtheobviousblurringofmycategoriesformostofthem,Imightnowwanttodeclaretheques-tion,“Dohistoriansorchemistswritebetterhistoryofchemistry?”tobeirrelevantandnon-informative.

WhatIcansayasanhistorian—andanhistorianofscience—isthatGuerlac’sLavoisier—the Crucial Yearbecameparadigmaticofthenatureandstylethatmono-graphsinthehistoryofscienceweretoassume,andthisincludedthoseinthehistoryofchemistry.

By contrast,Leicester’s and Ihde’s histories rep-resent the last andpossibly the greatest exemplars ofa genre of historicalwriting practiced by chemist-historians: thegeneralnarrativeof thehistoryof thisscientificdiscipline(34).

Thedecadeswhentheseworkswerepublished(andperhapsthe1970saswell)markedthehighpointintheproductionsofworks in thehistoryof chemistry—bybothchemist-historiansandhistorians of chemistryasIhavedefinedthem.ParticularlyinthehistoryofsciencecommunityinAmerica,whichIknowbest,historyofchemistrymovedfromcentralityinthe1960stoamuchmoremarginalpositionbythe1980s,andmanyoftheactorsoftheearlierdecadesmovedontoresearchinotherfields.Itisdifficulttosaywhy.Possibilitiesincludethenegativeimagethatchemistryborebythe1970s,thefactthatincreasingnumbersofyoungscholarsenteringthehistoryofsciencelackedthetechnicalknowledgeoftheirforebears(necessaryinpursuinghistoryofchemistry),andperhapsthefactthatchemistrydidnotdealwiththeincreasinglyfashionable“existential”issuesofourori-gins,destiny,andpurposeasdidbiology(andgeology),physics,andpsychology.Butthesearespeculations.

Among the small but intrepid cadre ofchemist-historiansinHIST,interestinthehistoryofchemistrywasmaintainedand,withtheappearanceoftheBeckmanCenterfortheHistoryofchemistryanditssuccessor,theChemicalHeritageFoundation,thehistoryofchemistryhasatlastfoundaninstitutionalhome.

Inrecentyears,therehasbeenaresurgenceofinter-estinthehistoryofchemistrybutthefociofresearcharesomewhatdifferentfromearlierdecades.Firstly,thereisnowaninterestinveryrecentdevelopments,suchasmolecularbiologyandgenomics.Secondly,attheother

temporalend,therehasbeenarealincrease[was“takeup”]inthestudyofalchemyor“chymisty”ofthesix-teenthandseventeenthcenturies.Thirdly,thereisagooddealofinterestinthehistoryofthedevelopmentofindus-trialresearchinchemistryandchemicalindustry.Finally,andmoregenerally,scholarsareinterestedinchemistryas“materialculture:”thepursuitofchemically-relatedcraftssuchaspharmacy,metallurgy,andthemakingofproductssuchasperfumes.

Allofthesefociinonewayoranotheremphasizea feature of chemistry that oftenwas underplayed inearlierwritingbothofchemist-historiansandhistoriansofchemistry:chemistryhasalwaysbeenasmuchaboutthemakingofproductsasithasbeenaboutdiscoveringandscientificallyexplainingnaturalknowledge.Ithasalwayscontainedbothcraftandscientificcomponents.Incontemporaryresearchinthehistoryofchemistry,thescienceofchemistryisbeingrecognizedinitsfullextent.

References and Notes1. Presentedatthe233rdNationalMeetingoftheAmerican

ChemicalSociety,Chicago,IL,March27,2007,HIST29.

2. H.Kopp,Geschichte der Chemie,4Vols.,F.ViewegundSohn,Braunschweig,1843-1847.

3. J.R.Partington,A History of Chemistry,4Vols.,Macmil-lan,London,1961-1970.

4. T.Thomson,The History of Chemistry,2Vols.,HenryColburnandRichardBentley,London,1830-1831.

5. A.Ladenburg,Vorträge über die Entwicklungsgeschichte der Chemie in den letzten hundert Jahren,F.ViewegundSohn,Braunschweig,1869.

6. J.-B.DumasandE.Grimaux,Oeuvres de Lavoisier,6Vols.,Imprimerieimperial,Paris,1862-1893.

7. M.Berthelot,Les origines de l’alchimie,G.Steinheil,Paris,1885,isoneexample.

8. P.-M.-M.Duhem,Le mixte et la combinaison chimique: Essai sur l’évolution d’une idée,C.Naud,Paris,1902.

9. I.Freund,The Study of Chemical Composition: An Ac-count of Its Method and Historical Development,Cam-bridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,England,1904.

10. M.B.Ogilvie, “Freund, Ida (1863-1914), chemist,”OxfordDictionaryofNationalBiography,http://www.oxforddnb.com/index/101048490/Ida-Freund.TherehasrecentlybeenanuptakeofinterestinFreund.SeeB.Palmer,“IdaFreund:Teacher,Educator,Feminist,andChemistryTextbookWriter,”IPSI BgD Transactions on Internet Research,2007,3,49-54,http://www.internet-journals.net/journals/tir/2007/July/Paper%2012.pdf;M.Hill andA.Dronsfield, “IdaFreund, theFirstWomanChemistryLecturer,”Roy. Soc. Chem. Historical Group Newsletter,January2011,http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/rschg/Newsletter/NL1101.pdf.


11. M.Bursey,Francis Preston Venable of the University of North Carolina,ChapelHillHistoricalSociety,ChapelHill,NorthCarolina,1989.

12. F.P.Venable,A Short History of Chemistry,D.C.Heath,Boston,1894[1901];The Development of the Periodic Law,ChemicalPublishingCompany,Easton,Pennsyl-vania,1896;History of Chemistry,D.C.Heath,Boston,1922.

13. Venable,“Preface,”A Short History of Chemistry(1901),nopagination.TheprefaceisdatedinthetextasJune,1894.

14. Venable,“Preface,”History of Chemistry,nopagination.TheprefaceisdatedinthetextasJune,1922.IusedtheLondonedition(samedateandpublisher).

15. Venable, “PrefatorySketch,”The Development of the Periodic Law,1.

16. T.L.Davis,The Chemistry of Powder and Explosives,Wiley,NewYork,1943.

17. Hermajorworks in thehistoryofchemistrywere:La genèse de la science des cristaux,Alcan,Paris, 1918;Les doctrines chimiques en France du début du XVIIe à la fin du XVIIIe siècle,PressesUniversitairesdeFrance,Paris, 1923;Newton, Stahl, Boerhaave et la doctrine chimique,Alcan,Paris,1930.Forrecentscholarship,seeG.Freudenthal,Ed., Études sur Hélène Metzger,Brill,Leiden,1990.

18. T.S.Kuhn,“Preface,”The Structure of Scientific Revolu-tions,3rdedition,UniversityofChicagoPress,Chicago,1996,viii.

19. ForathoughtfularticleonSartonandhisroleindevelop-ingthehistoryofscienceasaprofessionalfield,seeA.ThackrayandR.K.Merton,“OnDisciplineBuilding:TheParadoxesofGeorgeSarton,”Isis,1972,63,472-495.ForanentireissueofIsisdevotedtoSartonandthedevelop-mentofthehistoryofscienceintheUnitedStates,see:“Sarton,Science,andHistory,”Isis,1984,75,1-240.

20. J.Dauben,M.L.Gleason,G.E.Smith,“SevenDecadesofHistoryofScience: I.BernardCohen (1914-2003),SecondEditorofIsis,”Isis,2009,100,4-35.

21. The history of the inception and development of theWisconsinprogramisbasedonV.L.Hilts,“HistoryofScienceattheUniversityofWisconsin,”Isis,1984,75,63-94.Before1940,EdwardKremers(1864-1941)hadpromoted the teachingof thehistoryofpharmacyandprofessionalactivitiesinthehistoryofsciencegenerally.ForHenryGuerlac, seeM.BoasHall, “Eloge:HenryGuerlac, 10 June1910-29May1985,” Isis,1986,77,504-506.

22. W.A.Smeaton,“HistoryofScienceatUniversityCollegeLondon,1919-1947,”Brit. J. Hist. Sci.,1997,30,25-28.

23. H.M.Leicester,The Historical Background of Chemistry,ScienceEditions,Wiley,NewYork,1965[firstedition,1956].

24. Leicester,“Preface,”Historical Background,v.25. Venable,History of Chemistry,34.26. Leicester,Historical Background,123.

27. I have not treated J.R. Partington in this article butIwillmake a comparative reference to hisA Short History of Chemistry here.Thiswork has the virtueof attention to primary sources, quoted extensively. Iwould judge itsevaluationof thephlogiston theory tobemid-way between that ofVenable andLeicester:“Stahlinvertedthetruetheoryofcombustionandcalcina-tion….Heneglectedthequantitativeaspectsofchemicalchange,disregardedwhatwasknownofgases,andpaidlittle attention to atomic theory.On the other hand,…histheorylinkedtogetheralargenumberoffactsintoacoherentbodyoffalsedoctrine,suggestednewexperi-ments,andledtodiscoveries.”J.R.Partington,A Short History of Chemistry, 3rd ed.,Macmillan, 1957 [1965reprint],London,88.

28. J.B.ConantandL.K.Nash.Eds., Harvard Case Histo-ries in Experimental Science,2vols.,HarvardUniversityPress,Cambridge,MA,1957.

29. Case 2: “TheOverthrow of the PhlogistonTheory”(Conant); Case 4: “TheAtomic-MolecularTheory”(Nash);Case 5: “Plants and theAtmosphere” (Nash);Case6:“Pasteur’sStudyofFermentation”(Conant).

30. H.Guerlac,Lavoisier—the Crucial Year: The Background and Origin of his First Experiments on Combustion,CornellUniversityPress,Ithaca1961.

31. A.J.Ihde,The Development of Modern Chemistry,Harper&Row,NewYork,1964.

32. Ihde,Development,xi.33. Ihde,Development,733.34. Notquitethelast;amajorgeneralnarrativeofthehis-

toryofchemistry,writtenbyadistinguishedhistorianofchemistry,appearedin1992:W.H.Brock,The Fontana History of Chemistry,FontanaPress,London,1992,pub-lishedintheUSasThe Norton History of Chemistry,W.W.Norton&Co.,NewYork,1993.

About the Author

SeymourMauskopf received hisB.A. fromCornellUniversityandhisPh.D.fromPrincetonUniversityinthe history of science.His fields of research interestarethehistoryofchemistry[Crystals and Compounds,1976,Chemical Sciences in the Modern World,1993]and the history ofmarginal science (parapsychology)[The Elusive Science,withMichaelR.McVaugh,1980].In1998,hereceivedtheDexterAwardforOutstandingContributions to theHistory ofChemistry from theAmericanChemicalSociety.HetaughthistoryofscienceatDukeUniversity since1964 (receiving theAlumniDistinguishedUndergraduateTeachingAwardin2006)andretiredattheendof2010.Currently,heisworkingonabookonAlfredNobel’s interactionswithBritishmunitionsscientistsinthelatenineteenthcentury.


Introduction

AccountsofcurriculainEnglishgirls’schoolsinthelatenineteenthandearly twentiethcentury rarelymentionscience,particularlychemistry.Scienceisnotaddressedin either ofKamm’s books:Hope Deferred: Girls’ Education in English History(1)andIndicative Past: A Hundred Years of the Girls’ Public Day School Trust(2).InTurner’sEquality for Some: The Story of Girls’ Educa-tion,heremarks(3):“Eveninschoolswheresciencewastaught,itwasunusualforapupiltoacquireanadequategroundingforadvancedstudy.”InAvery’sThe Best Type of Girl: A History of Girls’ Independent Schools(4),thecommentismade:“Intheprivatelyownedschoolstherewasonthewholeamarkedabsenceofsciencebeforethe1950s,”whilesubsequentdiscussioninthebooksup-portedthatthesis.Thusthereisaclearimplicationthatscience(includingchemistry),wasofmarginalrelevancetoEnglishgirls’schoolsuntilthemid-twentiethcentury.

An exception to this viewpoint was given byManthorpe in a chapter inWalford’sPrivate School-ing of Girls: Past and Present.Her focuswason thesocio-historicalperspective,ratherthanonthescience.However,intheconcludingpoints,Manthorpenotes(5):

TheNorthLondonCollegiateSchoolforGirlsactedasamodelformanyofthosenewschools.Fromthebeginning, science educationwas included in thecurriculumoftheseschools,andmostoftenoneormorebranchesofthephysicalsciencesweretaughtaswellasmathematics.

CHEMISTRY IN ENGLISH ACADEMIC GIRLS’ SCHOOLS, 1880-1930Marelene Rayner-Canham and Geoffrey Rayner-Canham, Grenfell Campus, Memorial University, [email protected]

Thewidely-accepted viewof a lack of grade-schoolscienceeducationforgirlswasalsoatvariancewiththebackgroundsandlife-storiesofearly-twentiethcenturyBritishwomenchemistsinourownresearch(6).

Methodology of the Study

Toconfirmourcontentions,wehaveextendedourstud-ies and reporthereonour research. The timeperiodwhichwe exploredwas approximately 1880 to 1930.Our starting pointwas the published histories of theindividualacademically-orientedschools.Thoughmostschoolsmadenomorethanapassingreferencetosci-encefacilities,afew,suchasthetwohistoriesofKingEdwardVIHighSchoolforGirls,Birmingham,andthatofSt.Swithun’sSchool,madeespecialnoteofscienceteachingattherespectiveschools.Asecondsourceofin-formationwasthecontemporarymagazine,Girl’s Realm,whichpublishedaseriesofarticlestitled“FamousGirl’sSchools”andthese,too,notedthesciencefacilitiesatsomeoftheschools(accessedattheBritishLibrary).Athirdsourcewasthatofcontemporaryeducationjournals,in particular,Journal of Education andSchool World(accessedattheUniversityofCambridgeMainLibrary).

Thefourth,andmostinteresting,sourcewasthatofhighschoolstudentmagazines.Theseweretypesetandoftenpublishedfromtheschool’sinception.Fromoursearches, thesemagazinesarenotgenerallyavailable,thesolesurvivingsetofissuesoftenbeingheldinthe


specificschool.Overtheperiodofinterest(1880-1930),suchmagazinestendedtobevery“academic”withclubandsocietyreportsandstudents’accountsoftheirlives,travels,andexperiences.(Insubsequentdecades,suchmagazinesbecameliterary-orientedwithfiction,poems,andsoon.)

InouranalysisofwomenwhobecameanAssociateorFellowoftheRoyalInstituteofChemistryoraFel-lowoftheChemicalSociety(6),anotableproportioncamefromcertainhighschools.Oftheschoolswhichproducedthemostwomenchemiststo-be,weascertainedthatsixhadarchivescontainingacompletesetoftheirstudentmagazinesforourperiodofstudy.Thesewere:KingEdwardVIHighSchool forGirls,Birmingham(The Phœnix);NorthLondonCollegiate(Our Magazine: North London Collegiate School for Girls);CheltenhamLadiesCollege(Cheltenham Ladies’ College Magazine);ManchesterHighSchool forGirls (The Magazine of the Manchester High School);CroydonHighSchoolforGirls(Croydon High School Magazine);andMaryDatchelorSchool,EastLondon(Datchelor School Maga-zine).Wearegrateful toeachof thefirstfiveschoolsforaccesstotheirarchivesandalsototheClothmakersGuild,foraccesstothearchivesofthelong-closedMaryDatchelorSchool.

The Science Education of Girls

Itwasin1869thatthefeministeducator,LydiaBecker,madethecasefortheeducationofmiddle-classgirlsinscience(7):

...many [marriedmiddle-class]womenmight besavedfromtheevilofthelifeofintellectualvacuity,towhichtheirpresentpositionrendersthemsopecu-liarlyliable,iftheyhadathoroughtraininginsomebranchofscience,andtheopportunityofcarryingitonasaseriouspursuit.

Bythe1880sand1890s,chemistrywasbeingdiscussedasaspecificcomponentofamiddle-classEnglishgirl’sliberaleducation.Asanexample,inan1884articleonscienceteachingingirls’schoolspublishedintheJournal of Education,theanonymousauthorstated(8):

Withasmallamountofmaterial,andwithnomorespacethanisaffordedbyanordinaryschool-room,muchmaybedonetomakeChemistry,asitshouldbe,thebasisofallNaturalScienceteaching.Whereachemicallaboratory,howeversmallcanbeobtained,itbecomespossible,aswellasdesirable,thatChemistry should be taughtmore thoroughlyandpractically.

Take,forinstance,suchacourseofChemistryasthatprescribedfortheLondonMatriculationExamina-tion.The facts and phenomena should be taughtfirst by the aid of experiments performed by theteacher.Thisshould thenbe followedbypracticallessons,inwhichthepupilsthemselvesperformtheexperiments.Thesimplegases–Oxygen,Nitrogen,Hydrogen,&c.–canbepreparedbyaclassofpupilswithoutdifficultyinamoderatelysizedlaboratory,andstudentswhohavethemselvesactuallyperformedsuchexperimentsacquireaknowledgeofthelawsofchemicalreaction,andofthepropertiesandconstitu-tionofmatterwhichwouldbe impossiblewithoutsuchmeans.

Inadefinitivestudyofeducationforgirlspublishedin1898,therewasachapteronThe Teaching of Chemis-trybythewomanchemist,ClaredeBreretonEvans(9).Inthatchapter,Evansarguedthatjunior,aswellassenior,girlsneededexposuretopracticalchemistry:

Forsuccessinexaminationsitisnownecessarytohave a certain amount of practical knowledge ofchemistryandexaminationclassesarethereforegivensomepracticaltraining,butthisreformstillremainsto be extended universally to the junior classes,whichneedevenmorethanthesenioronesthattheteachingshouldbeobjective:achildmaylearnandrepeatcorrectlyadozentimesthatwateriscomposedofoxygenandhydrogen,andthethirteenthtimeshewillassureyouthatitsconstituentsareoxygenandnitrogen;butlethermakethegasesherself,testthemandgettoknowthemasindividuals,andmistakesofthiskindwillbecomeimpossible.

Queen’sCollege,HarleyStreet, founded in1847(10),seemstohaveplayedapivotalrole,directlyandindirectly, in thewider acceptance of science as partofagirl’seducation.Thoughtheinitialfocuswasonthesecondaryeducationofgovernesses,theaimsgrewrapidly broader as the nineteenth century progressed.Inparticular,theQueen’sCollegecurriculafrom1848to1868(11)containedacourseonNaturalPhilosophywhichincludedachemistrysectioncoveringthefactsandclassificationsofchemistry,illustratedbyexperimentsperformedbyaUniversitychemistrylecturer.

One of themanyQueen’sCollege graduates toattainfamewastheeducatorFrancesBuss(12).ItwasarguablyherexperienceatQueen’sCollegethatledhertoincludeaverystrongscienceprogramwhenshesub-sequentlyfoundedtheNorthLondonCollegiateSchool.Bussincludedchemistryinthecurriculum,aswasnotedbyWatson,theschool’sbiographer(13):

RobertBuss[FrancesBuss’sfather]madeamemo-rablescience teacherasAnnieMartinelli,anearly


pupil later remembered: ‘His talentswere simplywonderful.HisChemistry serieswasmarvellous,especiallyforsmellsandexplosions.’

TheturningpointforthewiderpopulationwastheReportoftheSchoolsInquiryCommission(theTauntonCommission)of1868(14)whichprovided,ingeneral,a damning indictment of girls’ education inEngland.In theReport,ProfessorT.H.Green,AssistantCom-missioner forBirmingham,recommended thatagirls’schoolwasneededontheoutskirtsofeveryconsiderabletownwhichwouldgivegirlsaneducationsimilartothatprovidedinthebestboys’grammarschools.Respondingtothisproposal,theShirreffsisters(15)organizedthe“NationalUnionfortheImprovementoftheEducationofWomenofAllClasses”whichledtotheorganizationof theGirls’PublicDaySchoolsCompany(GPDSC).UndertheauspicesoftheGPDSC,girls’schoolswerefoundedacrossEnglandduringthe1870-1890period,withthemajoritybeinginthegreater-Londonarea.TheseschoolsweremodeledontheNorthLondonCollegiateSchoolandhenceincorporatedscienceaspartofthecur-riculum.Otherindependentgirls’schoolsalsointroducedstrongscienceprograms(16),includingManchesterHighSchoolforGirlsandKingEdwardVIHighSchoolforGirls,Birmingham.

Chemistry Teachers

WecontendthatitwasagenerationofpowerfulHead-mistresses(17)whopromotedscienceattheirschoolsand,intheprocess,hiredsomehighlyqualifiedwomenchemistryteachers.Forexample,BusshiredGraceHeath(18)asthescienceteacheratNorthLondonCollegiateSchoolin1888.Heathhadbeenthefirstwomanchem-istry studentwith the famousBritish chemist,HenryArmstrong,attheCentralTechnicalCollege(laterpartof Imperial College,University of London). Sadly,Heathdiedin1895beforeshewas30yearsold.Buss’ssuccessor asHeadmistress, Sophia (Sophie)Willcock(Mrs.Bryant),wasdeterminedtomaintaintheSchool’sscience reputation.Willcock hiredRose Stern (19).SternhadbeeneducatedatKingEdwardVISchooland,whilethere,hadbeenelectedasthefirstwomanStudentMemberoftheInstituteofChemistry.

AtKingEdwardVI School, the firstHeadwasEdithElizabethMariaCreak.TheSchool biographer,WinifredVardy,noted(20):“ToMissCreakbelongsthehonourofbeingapioneerintheteachingofsciencetogirls.Thoughherowntraining[atNewnhamCollege,CambridgeUniversity]hadbeenmathematicalandclas-

sical,sheseemstohaveforeseenthevalueofscientificknowledgeforwomen.”Creakhiredtwodedicatedandenthusiasticsciencestaff,LizzieDavisonandAliceCeliaSlater,upontheSchool’sopeningin1883.LikeCreak,theywere bothNewnhamgraduates.AnotherSchoolbiographer,RachelWaterhouse,commented(21):

MissDavidsonandMissSlatertookchargeofsci-ence,eachstayedforthirty-oneyearsattheSchool,andtothembelongsalmostallthecreditforthegreatscientificsuccessesachievedbyEdwardiansduringthewholeofthatperiod.

WhileVardyquotedaformerstudent(20):MissDavisonalsousedtotaketheXIIthClass,littlegirlsof8to10,intheprincipalgases.“Shedidallthedemonstrations,whichaccordingtomodernideaswasbad,”writesapupil,“butshemadeitsointerest-ingthatIusedtobeimpelledtotellmysmallbrotherallaboutiteachweek,andwhatshetaughtussticks.”

Buss’slong-timefriend,DorotheaBeale(22),alsoagraduateofQueen’sCollege,becamethesecondPrin-cipal ofCheltenhamLadies’College.Bealemade anequallyinspiredchoiceofhiringMillicentTaylor(23).TaylorhadbeenastudentatCheltenhamLadies’Col-lege,returningaschemistryteacheruponcompletingherB.Sc.inchemistryatUniversityCollege,Bristol(latertheUniversityofBristol).CroydonHighSchoollikewisehiredoneofitsownoutstandingformerstudents,Kath-leenMaryLeeds(24).LeedshadbeenoneofthefirstwomenchemistrygraduatesfromtheprestigiousRoyalCollegeofScience(alsolaterpartofImperialCollege,UniversityofLondon)but,likeHeath,Leedsdiedyoung,in1921atage26.

Itwas the secondPrincipal ofManchesterHighSchool,SaraBurstall,whoemphasisedscienceatthatschool.Burstallcommentedthatbythe1920s(25):“Wehad…fourspecialistteachersonthestaff,allfirstclasshonoursgraduatesinchemistry,physics,botanyandzo-ology,andmanyOldGirlswerestudentsinuniversitiesorsciencegraduates”.

AtLeedsGirls’HighSchool, thefirstHeadMis-tress,CatherineKennedy,wassokeenforhergirlstotakechemistrythatshearrangedin1876totakethemtotheYorkshireCollegeofScience(later theUniversityofLeeds)wheretheyweretaughtbyProfessorEdwardThorpe(26).Oneofthesixgirlsthatyearwonaprize,andotherswereequallysuccessfulinsubsequentyears.The arrangement continued until science laboratorieswereaddedtotheschoolin1883.


Asignificantnumberofgirlswerestudyingchem-istry at these science-active schools. For example, atMaryDatchelorSchoolinEastLondon,anissueoftheDatchelor School Magazineof1901proudlyreproducedtheReportofthechemistrysectionofthehighschoolexamination administered byCambridgeUniversity(27):“IntheUpperVI.[class]thesectiononPhysicalChemistrystudiedhadbeenthoroughlymastered,andalargenumberofgirlsscoredover90percentofthemarks.”Someofthesestudentsproceededtouniversitytostudychemistry.Forexample,in1908,twostudentsfromMaryDatchelor School entered the (women’s)RoyalHollowayCollegeoftheUniversityofLondon,tostudychemistry(28):“...She[EdithHancock]isenteringforanHonoursDegreeinScience,takingChemistryasherspecialsubject.Phœbe[Routh]isalsoreadingforHonoursinChemistry...”

School Chemistry and Science Clubs

Wefoundthatsomeofthescience-activeschoolshadstudentchemistryclubsorscienceclubswithchemistrysections.NorthLondonCollegiateSchool(NLCS)hadaChemistryClubfromtheearlypartof thetwentiethcentury.TheSchoolhadahand-writtenmagazine,illus-tratedwithglued-inphotographs.CalledThe Searchlight: NLCS Student Magazine for Science,itgavearecordofChemistryClubactivities.Thesocialeventswerealsoreportedinthe(printed)schoolmagazine,Our Maga-zine: North London Collegiate School for Girls,suchas(29):“OnThursday,July11th[1912],MissStern,MissDrummond[juniorchemistryteacher]andtheScienceSixthgaveapartyintheOldLaboratory.Wedrankteaoutofbeakers,andstirreditwithlongglasswands....”

We knowmore about the ScienceClub atKingEdwardVISchool,whichwasnot formeduntil 1923andsurvivedthroughtheremainderofthe1920s.Ithadastrongchemistryfocus,withthefirstmeetinginvolv-ingthereadingofpapersonthefamousearlychemists,Priestley, Scheele,Cavendish, andLavoisier (30).Atameeting in1928,studentsgavepresentationson thetopicsof“ChemistryintheServiceofMan,”“IndustrialChemistry,”“FlameandFuel,”and“SyntheticChemis-try”(31).Whilein1929,twostudentsgave“ChemicalMagic” demonstrations. The studentmagazine,The Phœnix,reported(32):

They succeeded, amongother things, in ‘Turningwaterintowine,’producingaminiaturesnow-storm,andcharmingabeautifulserpentoutofanordinarycrucible.Judgingbytheinquiriesafterwardsasto

howtheydidit,thislastfeatseemstohavebeentheirgreatesttriumph.

School Chemistry Laboratories

Theconstructionofachemistrylaboratorywasamarkthat the girls’ schoolwas serious about the subject.Severalofthearticlesonfamousgirls’schoolsinGirls’ Realmhighlightedthechemistrylaboratory,oftenwithaphotograph,andusuallyshowingsophisticatedglassdistillationapparatusandearnest-lookinggirlsperform-ingchemicalanalysis.Forexample,inareportonMaryDatchelorSchool,Whyte,aregularcontributortoGirls’ Realm,wrotein1901(33):“Upstairstwowell-equippedlaboratories for chemistry and physics are includedamongsttheclass-rooms.”

Othercontemporaryreviewersofprominentgirls’schoolswereequallysuretomentionthechemistrylabo-ratories.InanarticleinGirls’ Realmin1900onNorthLondonCollegiateSchool,Hillreported(34):“Beyondisachemicallaboratorywellfittedupandlargeenoughfor twenty-four girls towork together at one time.”TheconstructionofsciencelaboratoriesatCheltenhamLadies’CollegewasoneofBeale’spriorities.Thiswasaccomplished as noted in a description of the schoolinan1899issueofGirl’s Realm(35):“intheScienceDepartmentthereisalaboratoryforphysicsandtwoforchemistry...”whileanewSciencewingwasaddedin1904.AreportinSchool World(36)onthenewlabora-toriesdescribedindetailthededicatedchemistrylectureroomwith a fully-equipped demonstration bench, anelementarychemistrylaboratory,anadvancedchemistrylaboratory,achemicalpreparationroom,twostoreroomsforchemicalsandequipment,andachemistrystudyroom(thoughitshouldbenotedtheseextensivefacilitieswerealsoused for an externalB.Sc.(London) in chemistryofferedattheCollege).

St.Swithun’sSchoolacquiredachemistrylabora-toryin1895,followingatourbytheAdministrativeCom-mitteeduringwhichstudentsdeliberatelyleftanopenflaskreleasingchlorinegasinaclassroomtohighlighttheirlackoffacilities.Thehazardsofpracticalchemistryseemtohavebeentakenasanintegralpartofthework.AtSt.Swithun’s,oneofthestudentstakingthechemistrypracticalexaminationin1897reminisced(37):

Inthosedaysa‘don’wasinchargeincapandgown.Anenterprisingexaminerhadgivenredphosphorusastheunknownsubstance.Abouttenminutesafterwe had commenced a nervous candidate droppedaglowingmatchonthe‘unknown’—result,awild


flareandweall‘knew’.Hardlyhadtheinvigilatorextinguishedthiswhenitwasdiscoveredthatapileofdusterswasonfire;thisinturnwasextinguished.Thensuddenlythebottomcameoutofamedicinebottleimprovisedtocontainsodiumhydrate,devas-tatingavarnishedtableandallthecandidates’papers.Wearilyourfriendcameforathirdtimetotherescue,remarking,‘Mylifeisinsured–Ionlyhopeyoursare!’

WhileinherreportforGirl’s Realmin1901onBedfordHighSchool,Whyteimpliedthattheinherentdangersofpracticalchemistrywereavaluablepartoftheedu-cationalexperience(38):

Practicalchemistryisamongthebestmodernedu-cational improvements. It teaches thingswhichgomuchdeeperintoourconsciousnessthanmerewordscouldevergo.Itteachesconsequences—thestern,certainconsequencesofdoingquitetherightorthewrongthing.Itnevermakesamistake,orslursoveralittlebitofcarelessness,orpretendseverythingisrightwheneverythingisquitethereverse.Andforgirlswhohavetogothroughwithlife,itisnotabadthingtolearnwhenyoungtoexpectthenaturalcon-sequencesofanaction,eventothecorrectorincorrecttestingofacompoundorsimpleliquid.

Someof the school chemistry laboratories seemtohavebeenofhighquality.AgroupofstudentsattheManchesterSchoolforGirlsvisitedCambridgeUniver-sityin1901andpronounced(39):

TheNewnhamChemistryLaboratorywasinspectedonMondaymorning,butwasagreedtocompareveryunfavourablywiththeChemicalLaboratoryoftheManchesterHighSchool,whateverthestandardofworkmightbe.

The End of an Era

Thefirsttwodecadesofthetwentiethcenturywasmarkedbyadebatewhether“real”scienceordomesticsciencewasmore appropriate for a girls education (40).Theacademically-orientedindependentgirls’schools,suchastheGPDSCschools,seemedtohavebeenimmunetotheissue.Thisriseofdomesticscienceseemstohavebeenmoreofaninfluenceonstateschools,particularlythoseteachinggirlsfromthe“lowerclasses.”Neverthe-less,thefervorforscienceeducationforgirlsseemstohaveabatedbythe1930s.

Asearlyas1912,theHeadmistressofSacredHeartSchool,Hammersmith,describedhowtheeducationalreformsofthelaterdecadesofthenineteenthcenturyhademphasizedtheteachingofnaturalscience.Nevertheless,inherview, theenthusiasmfor laboratoryscience forgirlswascomingtoanend.Sheadded(41):

Solaboratorieswerefittedupatgreatexpense,andteacherswithuniversitydegreesweresoughtafter.Theheightofthetideseemedtobereachedin1904and1905...Thendisillusionseemstohavesetinandthetidebegantoebb.Itappearedthattheresultsweresmallandpoorinproportiontoexpectationandtotheoutlayonlaboratories.…Thelinksbetweenthisteachingandafterlifedidnotseemtobesatisfactorilyestablished.

Yetthisexplanationhastobeconsideredincontext.Bythe1930s,attitudestowomeninsciencehadchanged(42).Those charismaticpioneerHeadmistresses,firedwith the fervor of theneed tomatchor exceedboys’schoolsandtoprovideaspringboardtouniversity,hadretiredordied(43).AsHunthascommented(44):

Inthe1920sand1930sitwasfashionabletoaccusegirls’secondaryschoolsofneglectingthe‘feminine’side of their pupils’ development.TheVictorianpioneers(andMissBussandMissBealewerefre-quentlycitedontheseoccasions)weresupposedtohaveadoptedamodelof‘liberaleducation’andindoingsohad‘assimilated’the‘boys’curriculum’andignoredtheneedsoffemininityintheirschools.Theresult, said the accusers,was that girls’ educationwasa‘slavishimitation’ofboys’(andbydefinition,therefore,inappropriateforgirls).

To the newpragmatic generation ofHeadmistresses,chemistry and its associated laboratoryworkwas nolongerthehigh-priorityitemthatithadoncebeen.Itisthereforenowonderthatwefoundthatthelate1920s-early 1930speriod also coincidedwith thedemise ofmostofthescienceandchemistryclubsatgirls’schools.

Commentary

Wehaveendeavoredtoprovideevidencethatchemistrywasasignificantcomponentofthecurriculumatsomeacademicallyhigh-achievingEnglishgirls’schoolsinthelate19thandearly20thcenturies.Inourview,theimpetuscamefromforcefulHeadmistresseswhosawscience,andchemistryinparticular,asbeingcrucialtotheirgoaloftheschools’recognitionforacademicexcellence.Tothisend,theyhiredsomeoftheearliest–andmostoutstand-ing–womenchemistrygraduates.Someoftheschoolspossessedmodernchemistrylaboratoriesandatseveralschools,enthusiasticstudentsfoundedchemistryclubsorscienceclubswithchemistrysectionstopursuetheirinterests.Asdescribedabove,theenthusiasmdeclinedbythelate1920sandchemistryatgirls’schoolsappearstohavewaned.


References1. J.Kamm,Hope Deferred: Girls’ Education in English

History,Methuen&Co.,London,1965.2. J.Kamm,Indicative Past: A Hundred Years of the Girls’

Public Day School Trust,GeorgeAllen&Unwin,Lon-don,1971.

3. B.Turner,Equality for Some: the Story of Girls’ Educa-tion,WardLockEducational,London,1974.

4. G.Avery,The Best Type of Girl: A History of Girls’ In-dependent Schools,AndréDeutsch,London,1991,254.

5. C.Manthorpe,“ScienceEducationforthePublicSchoolsforGirlsintheLateNineteenthCentury,”inG.Walford,Ed.,The Private Schooling of Girls: Past and Present,WoburnPress,Portland,OR,1993,56-78.

6. M.F.Rayner-CanhamandG.W.Rayner-Canham,Chem-istry Was Their Life: Pioneer British Women Chemists, 1880-1949,ImperialCollegePress,Singapore,2008.

7. L.E.Becker, “On theStudy ofScience byWomen,”Contemporary Rev.,1869,10,386-404.

8. “ScienceTeachinginourPublicSchools,IX.Girl’sHighSchools,”J. Educ.,1884,6(newseries),352-353.

9. C.deBreretonEvans,“TheTeachingofChemistry,”inD.Beale,L.H.M.Soulsby,andJ.F.Dove,Eds.,Work and Play in Girls’ Schools by Three Head Mistresses,Longmans,Green,andCo.,London,1898,310.

10. R.G.Grylls,Queen’s College 1848-1948,Routledge&Sons,London,1948,16.

11. S.C.Gordon,“StudiesatQueen’sCollege,HarleyStreet,1848-1868,”Brit. J. Educ. Studies,1955,3(2),144-154.

12. J.Kamm,How Different from Us: a Biography of Miss Buss and Miss Beale,BodleyHead,London,1958,237.

13. N.Watson,And Their Works do Follow Them: the Story of North London Collegiate School, JamesandJames,London,2000,16.

14. S.Fletcher,Feminists and Bureaucrats: a Study in the Development of Girls’ Education in the Nineteenth Cen-tury,CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,1980,19.

15. E.W.Ellsworth,Liberators of the Female Mind: the Shirreff Sisters, Educational Reform and the Women’s Movement,GreenwoodPress,Westport,CT,1979.

16. J.Howarth,“PublicSchools,Safety-NetsandEducationalLadders:theClassificationofGirls’SecondarySchools,1880-1914,”Oxford Rev. Educ.,1985,11(1),59-71.

17. N.GlendayandM.Price,Reluctant Revolutionaries: A Century of Headmistresses 1874-1974,PitmanPublish-ing,London,1974.

18. “InMemoriam:GraceHeath,”Our Magazine: North London Collegiate School for Girls,1895(20July),60.

19. “Death,”North London Collegiate School Magazine,1954,3,43.

20. W.I.Vardy,King Edward VI High School for Girls Bir-mingham 1883-1925,ErnestBenn,London,1928,26.

21. R.Waterhouse,King Edward VI High School for Girls 1883-1983,nopub.,1983,23.

22. E.Raikes,Dorothea Beale of Cheltenham,ArchibaldConstable&Co.,London,1908.

23. W.Baker,“MillicentTaylor1871-1960,”Proc. Chem. Soc. (London), 1962, 94; and ‘D.T.,’ “InMemoriam:MillicentTaylor,D.Sc.,”Cheltenham Ladies’ College Magazine,1961,144.

24. ‘E.M.L.’ andothers, “InMemoriam:KathleenMaryLeeds,”Croydon High School Magazine, 1921 (July),(32),1.

25. S.A.Burstall,Retrospect and Prospect: Sixty Years of Women’s Education,Longmans,Green,andCo.,London,1933.

26. H.M. Jewell,A School of Unusual Excellence: Leeds Girls’ High School 1876-1976,LeedsGirls’HighSchool,Leeds,1976,47.

27. “Headmistress’s Summary ofExaminationReports,”Datchelor School Magazine,1901,13(1),16.

28. ‘C.E.R.,’“ALookinatHollowayCollege,”Datchelor School Magazine,1908,22(3),5.

29. ‘Notes byOneWhoWasThere,’ “ScienceTea,”Our Magazine: North London Collegiate School for Girls, 1912 (December),89.

30. M.W.Richards, “ScienceClub,”The Phœnix,1923,Winter(31),24.

31. J.Forsyth,“ScienceClubReport,”The Phœnix,1928,Summer(40),22.

32. M.W.Richards, “ScienceClubReport,”The Phœnix,1929,Summer(42),29.

33. C.G.Whyte,“FamousGirls’Schools.XII–TheMaryDatchelorSchool,”Girls’ Realm,1901-02,4, 268.

34. E.M.Hill, “TheFrancesMaryBuss’Schools,”Girl’s Realm,1899-1900,2,595.

35. E.Raikes, “TheLadies’College,Cheltenham,”Girl’s Realm,1899-1900,2,121.

36. M.Taylor,“TheNewScienceWing,theLadies’College,Cheltenham,”School World,1905,7,222.

37. P.Bain,St. Swithun’s: A Centenary History,Phillimore,Chichester,1984,10.

38. C.G.Whyte,“FamousGirls’Schools.IX–TheBedfordHighSchool,”Girls’ Realm,1900-01,3,868.

39. M.McNicol,“ASchoolJourneytoCambridge,”Maga-zine of the Manchester High School,1901,July,48.

40. C.Manthorpe, “Science orDomestic Science?TheStruggletoDefineanAppropriateScienceEducationforGirlsinEarly20thCenturyEngland,”Hist. Educ.,1986,15,195-213.

41. J.E.Stuart,The Education of Catholic Girls,Longmans,GreenandCo.,London,1914,120.

42. M.F.Rayner-CanhamandG.W.Rayner-Canham,“Wom-eninchemistry:participationduringtheearlytwentiethcentury,”J. Chem. Educ.,1996,73,203-205.

43. J.S.Pedersen,“SchoolmistressesandHeadmistresses:ElitesandEducation inNineteenthCenturyEngland,”J. Brit. Studies,1975,15(1),135-162.

44. F.Hunt,“DividedAims:TheEducationalImplicationsofOpposingIdeologiesinGirls’SecondarySchooling,1850-1940,”inF.Hunt,Ed., Lessons for Life: the School-ing of Girls and Women,1850-1950, Blackwell,Oxford,1987,1.


About the Authors

GeoffRayner-CanhamisaProfessorofChemistryattheGrenfellCampus,MemorialUniversity,CornerBrook,Newfoundland, Canada,A2H 6P9,whileMareleneRayner-Canham is a retiredLaboratory Instructor inPhysicsfromthesameinstitution.Forseveraldecadestheyhavebeen researching the lifeandworkofearlywomenscientists. Their latestbook isChemistry was Their Life: Pioneer British Women Chemists, 1880-1949.


Abstract

FrenchorganicchemistryhadastrongnationalisticbentintheimmediateaftermathtoWorldWarII.Itcontinuedtobaskintheglowofthepre-WorldWarINobelprizeawarded jointly in 1912 toVictorGrignard andPaulSabatier.Inaddition,theinfluenceofthetwomandarinstheninpower,CharlesPrévostattheSorbonneandAlbertKirrmann,aDean inStrasbourgwhowouldbecalleduponasvice-directorattheÉcolenormalesupérieureinParis,sawtoitthattheonlytheoryoforganicreactions,admissibleintheclassroomandinthelaboratory,wasPrévost’s.AsMaryJoNyehasshown,awallwaserectedagainstpenetrationoftheideasoftheBritishschoolofIngoldandHughes.Mechanisticchemistry,aswasbeingvigorouslystudiedbythecontemporaryAnglo-Americanphysical organic chemists,waspersona non grata inFrance.PublicationbyBiancaTchoubar,in1960,ofLes mécanismes réactionnels en chimie organiqueopenedabreach.TheironywasforDr.Tchoubar,amilitantmem-beroftheCommunistPartyandaladyoffierceopinions,tohavebecomeapropagandistfortheAnglo-Americanschoolofmechanisticstudies.Truthforheroverruledpoliticalpropaganda.Herlittlebookwasrevolutionaryin theFrench context of the times.Togetherwith theGECO(Groupe d’étude de chimie organique)summerconferencespioneeredbyGuyOurissonafterhisreturnfromHarvard,itusheredinthenewideas.

Thishistoricalessay,basedonanin-depthstudyofTchoubar’sbook,willincludeaportraitofthisremark-

HOW AN ANGLO-AMERICAN METHODOLOGY TOOK ROOT IN FRANCEPierre Laszlo, École polytechnique, Palaiseau, France, and University of Liège, Belgium, [email protected]

ablewomanscientist.ItwilldelveatsomelengthintotherenewalofFrenchscienceinitiatedbyDeGaulle’sgovernmentafterhisreturntopowerin1958.Theten-sionintheFrenchscientificestablishmentofthesixtiesreflectedtwoopposedversionsofnationalism,theoneconservative,Malthusian, inner-directed, the otherforward-looking,eagerfortherecoveryofnationalstatus,seeingastrongFrenchscienceasameansforassertingnationalidentityandindependencefromthetwoworldpowerblocs.

Introduction

AsIstartedmyscientificcareerasanorganicchemistin1961,IlearnedbywordofmouththatIurgentlyneededtogetmyselfacopyofalittlebook.Whywasthatbookthusadvertisedinsomewhathushedandconspiratorialtones?Whatwasitabout?Whowroteit?Whatpurposediditfulfill?Myhistoricalstudyaimsatansweringthesequestions.

French Science and its Insularity

MystoryisframedwithinFrenchacademicscienceatthebeginningofthe1960s.Tosomeextentthestudentrevolt in 1968 aimed at casting off the straightjacketthatFrenchuniversitiesworeagainstchange,andthatstudentsweredeterminedtodestroy.AfterWorldWarIIand for thenext twodecades,universityprofessorshadattemptedtomaintaintheirhegemonyoverFrenchscience.Itremainedinsulartotheextreme.


AndréWeil,aleadingmathematicianinthetwenti-ethcenturywhospentmostofhiscareerattheInstituteforAdvancedStudyinPrinceton,in1955publishedalittlepamphlet,entitled“Sciencefrançaise?”denounc-ingtheisolationandbadhabitsofFrenchscience(1).EachscientificdisciplinewasruledbyafewprofessorsinParis.Thesemandarinsenjoyedbaronialprivileges.Theysawtoitthattheirformergraduatestudentswereappointed to professorships in the provinces.Theywereintent,notatallinbeingpartoftheinternationalcommunity of scholars, but inmaintainingwhat theyfelttobeessentialFrenchnessintheuniversities.Theirteachingwas extremely conservative.Not onlywereEnglish-languagetextbookstotallyruledout,textbookswerenotthenorm.Theircostwasanexcuse.Likewise,mostlibrarieslackedthefundingtosubscribetoforeignperiodicalsandpurchasescholarlybooks.Tosomeex-tent,theinsularitywasenforcedbypoverty.Professorssuppliedmimeographedlecturenotesforrotelearningbythestudents.Themimeographedwordsderivedinturnfromasinglesacredtext,Grignard’sTraité de chimie organique,whichdatedback to1935(2).Grignard,aNobelPrizewinner,hadsaintlystatus.

French Opposition to the Anglo-Saxon World

BeforeIturntothetopicofthelittlebookwhichprovedtobehighlyinfluential,letmebrieflydescribethepoliticalcontext.ItcanbegiventhegenerallabelofhostilitytoAnglo-Saxondominance(3).SuchnegativefeelingshadbeenstokedduringWorldWarII,aswellastheyearsofcollaborationofthePétain-ledFrenchStatewithNaziGermany,byanti-Englishandanti-AmericanpropagandawithinFrance(4).WiththereturnofDeGaulletopowerin1958,hispushforFrenchindependencefromtheColdWarAmericanforeignpolicy(5)tosomeextentrefreshedthatpublicmood(6).

Inbetween,aftertheLiberationofFrancepredomi-nantlybyAnglo-Americanforces,thereweretheyearsoftheMarshallPlanandofaccruingbenefitstoFrenchscience,suchasFulbrightFellowshipswhichbeganin1948.Thereisquiteabitoftruthinthesayingthatnogooddeedgoesunpunished!

Hostility by theFrench toward theAnglo-Saxonworld(7)wasneitheruniversalnoruniform.Forinstance,themonthlymagazineeditedbyJean-PaulSartre,Les Temps Modernes, showed a fascination forAmericanculturallife,forjazzasanartformandforwriterssuchas JohnDos Passos (8).However, it also embracedwholeheartedly theconceptofnégritude, asproposed

by the twogreatBlackpoetsof theFrench language,AiméCésaireandLéopoldSedarSenghor:segregationwastheunforgivablesininwhichtheUnitedStateswasmired(9).

Eventhoughjazz,moviesandpopularmusiccreatedconsiderableinterestintheUS,veryfewFrenchpeoplehadtraveledthere.Thetwomaindrawbackswerethecost,sinceairtravelhadnotyetturnedtomasstransporta-tion,andlanguage,sinceonlyasmallpercentageoftheFrenchwereconversantinEnglish.However,therewasintensecuriosityabouttheUS,asshown,amongotherculturalartifacts,by thesuccessesofamoviesuchasFrançoisReichenbach’sL’Amérique insolite(1960)andofbookssuchasClaudeJulien’sLe Nouveau Nouveau Monde(1960)(10).

Lastbutnotleast,Frenchchauvinismwasanele-mentinthetaleIamrecounting,thatofasuddenbreak-throughwhenthedamgatesburstandFrenchorganicchemistry receivedan infusionofnew ideas fromtheAnglo-Saxonworld.

Professors Prévost and Kirrmann

Back to organic chemistry as itwas being taught inFrenchuniversitiesandpursuedintheirpoorlyequippedlaboratories.In1960,withintheFrenchuniversitysys-tem,highlyhierarchical, just like thecountry itself, agoodapproximationtoabsolutepowerwaswieldedbytwomenwho,inaddition,wereclosepersonalfriends,CharlesPrévost(1899-1983)(11)andAlbertKirrmann(1900-1974).They had been classmates at theÉcolenormalesupérieure(12).

Prévosthadheldaprofessorshipat theSorbonnesince 1937.During the 1930s, he andKirrmann hadbothrecognizedtheimportanceofreactionmechanismsandofphysicalmethodsfortheadvancementoforganicchemistry.Prévost,influencedbytautomerismandallylicrearrangements,focusedontheinterventionofionicspe-ciesinorganicreactions.Hecameupwithatheoryofmechanismsinorganicchemistry,andhecoinedtermssuchassynionieandmétaionieforsomeoftherelevantphenomena(13).KirrmannhadpioneereduseofRamanspectraforthecharacterizationoforganicmolecules.

DuringWorldWarII,Kirrmannwasdeportedandspentthreeyearsinaconcentrationcamp.Intermsofhisscientificdrive,hecamebackabrokenman.Atthebeginningofthewar,hewasaprofessoronthefacultyattheUniversityofStrasbourg.AftertheLiberation,Kir-rmannresumedhispositioninStrasbourg,whereshortly


afterwardshewaselectedDeanoftheFacultyofSci-ences.In1955,ProfessorKirrmannreceivedacallfromhisalma mater,theÉcolenormalesupérieure,asheadofthechemistrylaboratoriesandastheassistantdirectorofthewholeinstitution,bothadministrativeposts.Duringhistenure(1955-1970),KirrmannencouragedresearchonGrignard reagents. Suchworkwas outside of themainstreamof international organic chemistry at thattime,butKirrmannsawitasapatrioticdutytocontinueminingtheveinwhichGrignardhaddiscoveredatthebeginningofthecentury.

Withrespecttoreactionmechanisms,PrévostandKirrmannweredisappointedbythetotallackofimpactofPrévost’stheoreticalideasintheinternationallitera-ture.Accordingly,theysawtoitthatthewholecorpusofmechanisticworkinitiatedbyIngoldandHughesintheUKduring the 1930swas totally absent from theFrenchcurriculuminorganicchemistry.Sinceboththeseprofessorsheldswayoverappointmentsoforganicchem-istsinFrenchuniversities,theirembargoonthe“new”Anglo-Saxontheoriesoforganicchemistrywasnearlytotal.WhenMichelineCharpentier-Morizereferredtothepossibleexistenceofapi-complextoexplainreactivity,duringherdoctoralexamination,Prévosthadthiscom-ment:“Madame,ifIhaveonereproachforyou,itisthatyouknowthemoderntheoriestoowell.”(14)

French Backwaters

WhatIhavejustdescribedfororganicchemistrycanbegeneralized in other sub-disciplineswithin chemistry.QuantumchemistrywaspracticedbyasmallteamaroundRaymondDaudel.TheemphasiswasincelebratingthecultofLouisdeBroglieandhismécanique ondulatoire.Until the early sixties, therewas little penetration inFranceofeitherPauling’svalencebondtheoryorMul-liken’smolecularorbitaltheory.

Polymerchemistrywaslikewisestifled.ItwasruledbyGeorgesChampetier, a professor at theSorbonne.CharlesSadron,apolymerchemistfromtheUniversityofStrasbourg,wasintentuponbuildingaresearchinstituteonpolymers,intheAmericanmanner,andthussoughtanappointmentinParis,eitherattheSorbonneorattheCollègedeFrance.Champetierrepeatedlyblockedthoseattempts.He did notwant to accept competition andwantedtocontinuetoholdFrenchpolymerchemistryhostage.

Tojudgebychemistry,Frenchscienceatmid-twen-tiethcenturywashobbledbyitsinsularity,bysomeigno-

ranceofnot-so-recentdevelopmentsintheAnglo-Saxonworld,andalsobythepositivisticrelianceonfactsaloneandthesteadfastrefusaltoindulgeininterpretationsrely-inguponelectronicandquantum-mechanicaltheories.

Forces for Change

Howdidthebadly-neededrenewalcomeabout?Fromthefringesandtheperiphery.Fromtheprovinces.Fromabroad.Fromboththewrittenandthespokenword.

In1950,MaxMousseron,aprofessorinMontpel-lier,organizedaninternationalcolloquiumonmolecularrearrangementsandtheso-calledWaldeninversion,andithadsomeimpactontheFrenchparticipants.TheParisianprofessorsthough,frowneduponitbecausetheinitiativehadnotcomefromthem.Itremainedmoreorlessstill-born,inspiteofpublicationofthevariouscontributionsintheBulletin de la Société Chimique de France(15).

In 1946,Marc Julia, the scion of a prestigiousscientificfamily,aftergraduatingfromÉcolenormalesupérieure,departedforLondonandtheImperialCol-legeofScienceandTechnology.HeworkedthereinthelaboratoryofSirIanHeilbronandin1948obtainedaPh.D.inphysics.AfterhisreturntoFranceandadoc-torateinchemistry,heobtainedacademicappointmentsinParis.In1959,hepublishedasmallbook,inFrench,Mécanismes électroniques en chimie organique(16).

Another alumnus fromÉcole normale supérieurewhoalsowentabroad forgraduatestudywasconsid-erablymore influential in launching aRenaissance inFrenchorganicchemistry.In1950,GuyOurissonwenttoHarvardUniversityandworkedinthelaboratoryofLouisFieser.HeobtainedhisPh.D.in1952,inonlytwoyears.In1959,theyearofthepublicationbyMarcJuliaofhislittlebook,OurissonsetabouttoestablishyearlymeetingsinFranceonthemodeloftheGordonResearchConferenceswhichhehadattendedintheUS.Thefirstsuchmeeting,knownasGECO,shortforGroupe d’étude de chimie organique,washeldinthesummerof1960.Theseyearlymeetings,whichservedthepurposeofasummerschool,wereanextremelyefficientmeansfordisseminatingthe“new”ideasonreactionmechanismsandtheirimportance,withintheFrenchorganicchemicalcommunity(17).

Bianka Tchoubar (1910-1990)

ButthemainactoroftherenewalmaywellhavebeenMademoiselleBiankaTchoubar(18).OfRussianJew-


ishorigin,fromasmallsectpersecutedbyfellowJewsaswell (theKaraitswhohadoriginated inBabylon),shehademigratedtoParis,whereshespenttherestofher life. Shenevermarried.She started her scientificcareerinMarcTiffeneau’slaboratoryattheSchoolofMedicineinParis,underthesupervisionofJeanneLévyafterTiffeneaudiedin1945.AfterherDiplômed’étudessupérieures(1932),shehadobtainedherdoctorate(1937)andimmediatelystartedrunningherownresearchgroup.DuringWorldWar II, shewas a fearlessResistant.ShefoundalaboratorytohosthercontinuedcareerinchemistryattheInstitutdebiologiephysico-chimique,whereEdgarLedererinvitedheraftershegaveaseriesofseminarsin1957-58abouttheelectronictheoriesoforganicchemistry.ShethenfollowedhimwhenhewasappointeddirectorofthenewlybuiltInstitutdechimiedessubstancesnaturelles,inGif-sur-Yvette,in1961.

BiankaTchoubarwasmemorable,acharacteralmostoutofacartoon.Notonlydidshelookindomitable,shegaveanimpressionofbeingbelligerenttowardsanyandall.Shewasunkempt,obviouslynotgivingadamnaboutherphysicalappearance.Achainsmoker,shewentevery-wherewithacigaretteheldbetweenhernicotine-stainedfingersandwasthusanaccidentwaitingtohappenwithherhabitofwalkingwithalitcigaretteintoalaboratorywithitshighlyflammablesolvents.

Shewas likewise totally innocent of riskwhendrivingacar,asmallCitroënDeux-Chevaux.Therearenumerousstories.OneofthemwaswitnessedbyMichelVilkas, anotherFrenchorganic chemist.Hewasoncesummonedtocourtforcausinganaccident.Hearrivedafewminutesearlyandheardthejudgesaytothepersoninfrontofhim,“You,onceagain,MademoiselleTchoubar!Butyouareapublicdanger!”

Forlunch,shewouldeatasandwichatherdesk,andwashitdownwithglassafterglassfromanearby,highlyvisiblebottleofredwine.TherewouldalsobeonherdeskacopyoftheissueforthatdayofL’Humanité,thenewspaperoftheFrenchCommunistParty,ofwhichshewasadevoutmilitant.

Morelikelythannot,wheneveryouwantedtoputaquestiontoTchoubar,asshewasuniversallyknown,youwouldfind her engaged in a scientific argumentwithoneofhercoworkers.Ittooktheformofashoutingmatch,inwhichscholarlyreferenceswerehurledasiftheywereinsults.Ihavetoengageinsomesubtletyhere:Tchoubarconstantlydemonstratedinactionthatsciencethrivesondiscussion.Shewouldneverattempttowinanargumentbyassertingherauthoritybybeingagroup

leader,orevenfromscientificexperience.Yet,shehatedlosinganyargumentandsherelishedthem.Shewasaformidablewomanofscience.

The audience for Tchoubar’s little book

What about the groupof peoplewho,withinFrance,were likely tobeattracted toachemistry renewedbymechanistic ideas ofAnglo-Saxonprovenance?Theywere predominantly fromoutside the university sys-temdominatedbyProfessorsPrévostandKirrmannorChampetier.TheyoftenbelongedtoCentrenationaldelarecherchescientifique(CNRS).

CNRSwasfoundedinthelate1930s.Afterthewaryears,itstartedtogrow,bothwiththebuildingofvariousInstitutesandwiththehiringofresearchpersonnel.TheadministrationofCNRSwasconsiderablymoreflexiblethanthatofFrenchuniversities.TherewasmuchlessofaninsistencethatapersonjoiningtheranksshouldshowFrenchdegreesforbothsecondaryandhighereducation.

Accordingly,duringtheaftermathofWorldWarII,CNRSlaboratoriesbecameahavenforrefugees,typi-callywell-educatedJewshavingsurvivedtheHolocaustandanti-SemitisminEasternEurope.BiankaTchoubarwasfromanearliergenerationthathadsurvivedtheCom-munistrevolutioninRussiaandthesubsequentcivilwar.

Inaddition toCNRS, therewereothercentersofactivescientificresearchoutsidetheuniversitysystem.ThePasteur Institute inPariswasone, aswell as thenuclearenergyresearchcenters,withintheCommissariatàl’énergieatomique(CEA).CEAhadtwomajorresearchfacilities,acentraloneinSaclay,southofParis,andan-otherintheprovinces,inGrenoble,theCentred’étudesnucléairesdeGrenoble(CENG).AndréRassat,aformerco-workerofGuyOurisson,andDidierGagnaire,alsoanalumnusofÉcolenormalesupérieure,startedajointlaboratoryatCENGin1961,inthefieldofmechanisticorganicchemistry(19).

Wasthereconsciousnesswithinthesevarioussub-groupsofsharingadistasteforacademicchemistry,asitwasbeingtaughtandpursuedintheuniversities?Wasthereconsciousnessofaneedforreformandrevitaliza-tion?Youbet.

TheGECOsummerschoolwasoneoftheprovidersofsuchhopeandofsomeeducationinthenewmecha-nisticideas.AnotherwasprovidedbyattendanceofAlainHoreau’slecturesattheCollègedeFranceinParis.AlainHoreau,apharmacistbytraining,wasappointedin1956


toachairinorganicchemistryattheCollègedeFrance.HescheduledhislecturesonSaturdaymornings,whichmadeattendanceeasierforallthoseofuswhohadregularjobsonweekdays.

Asmalllecturehall,holdingabout60people,wasjammed—Iamtemptedtosaywith“groupies”—everySaturdaymorning.Whatwastheattraction?ProfessorHoreauspentconsiderabletimepreparinghislecturesandtheyweremeticulous.WhereastheruleforaprofessoratCollègedeFranceistopresenthisownresearch,AlainHoreaugaveitaflexibleinterpretation.Eachlecturewasdevotedtoaseparatechapteronorganicstereochemis-try.Horeausawtoitthatitwastotallyup-to-date,withrespect to international research progress; and that itwasnourishedwith a comprehensivebibliographyontheentiretopic.Thehandoutssummarizedthevariousparts in each lecture and also provided an extremelyusefulbibliography.

SuchinformalgatheringsofavidmindsasIhavedescribed,withbothGECOandtheattendeesofHoreau’slecture,werethefertilegroundinwhichtosowtheseedsofchange.IwillturnnowtoTchoubar’slittlebookandtoitsreception.

Claim

BiankaTchoubar’s little book (20) brought reactionmechanisms in organic chemistry to the fore.Hence-forth,organicchemistryinFrancebecameuptodateinitsconcernsandmethodology.Establishinga reactionmechanismbecamethenewparadigm,overturningtheformerparadigmofonlyaddingtothecatalogofexist-ingcompoundsusingstandardreactionpathwaysfromthebooks(21).

Her bookwasnear-ideal for this purpose. Itwasveryclearlywrittenanditwasshort.Thisformatmadeitpossibletoinsertthebookinthepocketofalabora-torycoat—aseveryonewaswearingatthetime.Thus,aworkeratthebench,watchingatransformationandwait-ingforittobecompleted,couldreadorreadagainsomeparagraphsandthusbecomegraduallyinitiatedintothenewlanguage,withitscurvedarrowssignifyingmotionofchemicalbondsbetweenatoms,aselectronicpairs.

Anessentialfeatureofthisguidewasitsbrevity.Itisjustalittleover200pagesbut,asmentionedalready,inasmallformat,41/4×61/2in(10.8×16.2cm).

Theshortbibliographyattheendenabledreaderstocomplementitwithotherreadings,someofwhichweretranslationsintoFrenchofkeytextbooks.

Counterclaim

Tchoubar’s littlebookwasonly aminor factor in thechanges that finally overtookFrench science, Frenchchemistry inparticular, at thebeginningof the1960s(22).Itwaspartandparcelofamuchmoregeneraltrend.Orthodoxieswerebeingquestionedtheworldover.PopeJohnXXIII(AngeloRoncalli)startedtheaggiornamentoof theCatholicChurchwith theVaticanIICouncil in1962.EvenCommunistChinawentthroughanupheavalduringthoseyearswiththeCulturalRevolutionthatMaobeganin1964.

ToreturntoFrance,modernizationbeganineverysector.Politically,theshort-livedgovernmentbyPierreMendès-Francein1954putanendtothecolonialwarinIndo-ChinaandwastheportentforretreatbyFrancefromitscolonialempireoverseas(23).Culturally,Frenchlifeunderwentseismicchanges.Inmusic,PierreBoulez,inthesameyear1954,launchedtheDomaine Musicalconcertswhich initiatedFrench ears to contemporarymusicofvariouskinds,fromtheDodecaphonictocon-crete and electronic compositions. In themovies, theNewWaveofdirectorssuchasFrançoisTruffaut,Jean-LucGodard,EricRohmer,AgnèsVarda,JeanEustache,JacquesRivette,ClaudeChabrol, totally changed thestyle.Allthesechangesbeganattheturnofthesixties.In the humanities, the teaching of literaturewas alsoupended,thenewcriticismlaunchedwiththepublicationoftheessaybyRolandBarthes,Sur Racine,in1963.Asan alternative toMarxist andFreudian interpretationsof cultural phenomena in general, structuralist theorybecame the neworthodoxy, in the sameperiod fromthe late 1950s into the early 1980s.Launchedby theanthropologistClaudeLévy-StraussasarediscoveryofthecontributionoflinguistsfromthePragueCirclesuchasRomanJakobson,itengulfedotherinfluentialParisianintellectualssuchasthepoliticalthinkerLouisAlthusser,thepsychoanalystJacquesLacanandphilosopherssuchasJacquesDerridaandJeanPiaget,forexample.

TofocusonceagainonFrenchscienceanditsformerisolationfromtheAnglo-Saxonworld,italsounderwentseismicchangesduringtheearlysixties.YoungFrenchscientistswentabroad,totheUnitedStatesinparticular,forpostdoctoralstayswheretheywereinitiatedintothenew,post-WorldWarIIscience:solid-statephysics,nu-clearmagneticresonance,massspectrometry,and,withinchemistry, topics suchasconformationalanalysisandmodernstereochemistry,bio-organicchemistry,organo-metallicchemistry,quantumchemistry,etc.Conversely,lecturesbyBritishandAmericanchemistsbecamevery


frequentinlocationssuchasLederer’sNaturalProductsInstituteinGif-sur-Yvette,or theInstitutdechimieinStrasbourg.Lateron,duringthe1970s,therewereeven,asaratherearthshakingdevelopment,appointmentsofforeign,English-speakingscientistswithin theFrenchsystem.Aftersomestillbornattemptstobringsuchsci-entists toFrance—BernardBelleauorMartinKarplus(1972and1974),intheParisarea—laterdecadessawforexampleEnricoClementiin1991andMartinKarplusmoving to theUniversityofStrasbourg in1996, and,evenmoresignificantly,theBritishNobelPrizewinnerDerekBartontakingoverin1978fromEdgarLedererthedirectorshipoftheInstituteinGif-sur-Yvette.

A process of acculturationIs it legitimate to frame this episode into, more generally, a history of acculturation? Indeed, it shares defining features

with other kinds of acculturation, political or religious.

Perceptionofconflictinggoalsisonefeature.Werealized,intheearlysixties,wehadachoicebetweenconformityifenrolledamonggraduatestudentsofPro-fessorsPrévost,Kirrmann,oranotheroftheirilk,withthepromiseofauniversitypositionlateron;orperform-ingoriginalresearchoutsidetheorthodoxywithoutanyhopeofsuchajobafterwards(ajaundicedviewwhichformanyofusturnedouttobeundulypessimistic).

Anotherperceptiongoeswiththeonsetofaccultura-tion, that of a feelingof inferiority andoutdatedness.AmongFrenchorganicchemistsintheearlysixties,weknewthatwelackedbothknowledgeandcompetenceregarding themechanisms of chemical reactions.Wealsoknewwhere to look forwhatweneeded—in thepublishedworkofBritishandAmericancolleagues.

Anessentialfeatureofacculturation,whateveritskind,isaplaceofworship,sotospeak.ThoselocaleswereprovidedtousbyattendanceofaGECOmeetinginthesummerandbyProfessorHoreau’slecturehallinthewinter.Inotherwords,thenewreligionwasimpartedtothosewhowerealreadyconvertsandonlytothose.

Acculturationmeansinadditionassimilatinganewknowledge. It consistedof, as alreadymentioned, thewhole bodyofmechanistic resultswhichBritish andAmericanchemistshadamassed.BiankaTchoubar’slittlebookservedasafineintroductiontothisnewknowledge.

Beyondthat,wewereencouragedintoacquiringacompetence,thatofdiggingoutsuchmechanisticinfor-mationourselves:itentailedcarefulstudyoftheaccuratekineticsofachemicaltransformation,exactingifrather

tediousexperimentalworkwhichwehadtolearnhowtocarryout.Thisisalsopartandparcelofanyacculturation.

Acculturationneedsmediators,specialpeopletrad-ingintheimpartingofthenewknowledgeandcompe-tence;peoplewhomonemaywishtocall“brokers”inthattheydonotowntheirstockintrade,merelydistributeit.Thatwas,typically,BiankaTchoubar’sfunction.

ThelastfeatureofacculturationIwishtomentionisbestconveyedbyquotingI.Prothero’sbookArtisans and Politics in Early Nineteenth-Century London,“…whathistoriansmeanwhentheyspeakof‘theriseoftheworkingclass’isartisansbecomingpoliticallyactive.”(24)Inourcase,suchadivisionintosocialgroupsappliedtogroup leadersasdistinguishedfromtherank-and-file.Theformer,notthelatter,werethesubjectsoftheac-culturationIhavedescribed.

Is this theendof thestory,astereotypicalhappyending?Anglo-SaxonideashenceforthpermeatedFrenchchemistrywhich becameup to date and regained itsfootingwithinworldwide science. I cannot deny theexistenceofsuchconventionalwisdom.Ialsobelieveittobeundulyoptimisticandlargelymistaken.

Intruth,theacculturationIhavedealtwithunfor-tunately did not includementalities and institutionalaspects.Over the years,CNRS assumedmost of theunfortunate characteristics ofFrenchuniversities: pa-tronage, a view of knowledge as compartmentalizedinlikemannertoplotsoflandsownedbyindividuals,avoidanceofcompetition,insufficientfunding,lifelongappointmentsinfactifnotinprinciple.Butthatisanotherstory:oneshouldneverunderestimatetheabilityofanyconservativesocialsystemforself-preservation.

Conclusion

Ihavesetdownthisaccountmoreaspersonalmemoirthanashistory.Atake-homelessonistheveryunpredict-abilityofthisstory,theirony,thenecessityperhapsalso,of a bigger-than-life immigrant fromRussia bringingAmericanandBritishideastotheFrench.

Acknowledgments

IamverygratefultotherefereeformosthelpfulremarksandcorrectionsinmyEnglish.


References1. A.Weil, “Science française?”Nouvelle Revue Fran-

çaise,1955,3(25),97-109.Itisalsopublished,togetherwithacommentaryofmine,ontheBibNumsite:http://www.bibnum.education.fr/scienceshumainesetsociales/histoire-de-lenseignement/science-francaise

2. V.Grignard,Traité de chimie organique,Masson,Paris,1935.

3. C.Bismut, “LesAnglo-Saxonsont-ils tort?”Politique étrangère,1996,61(2),397-406.

4. R.O.Paxton,Vichy France: Old Guard and New Order, 1940-1944,ColumbiaUniversityPress,NewYork,2001;A.TascaandD.Peschanski,Ed.,Vichy 1940-1944: Qua-Qua-derni e documenti inediti di Angelo Tasca,EditionsduCNRSandFeltrinelli,Paris,1986.

5. I.Wall,“FranceintheColdWar,”J. European Studies,2008,38(2),121-139.

6. Thatmood is still verymuch alive. See for instanceP.Chaillou, “L’américanisationde la justice. Présentécommemoderne, le système accusatoire serait unerégressionpour laFrance,où l’accèsaudroit estdéjàinégalitaire,”Libération,2mai2003,nottomentionaflurry of newspaper andmagazine articles, followingDominiqueStrauss-Kahn’sarrest inNewYork,duringthelatespringof2011.

7. A.Sauvy,“LeMalthusianismeAnglo-Saxon.”Popula-tion,1947,2(2),221-242;P.Roger,“Cassandra’sPolicies:FrenchPropheciesofanAmericanEmpirefromtheCivilWartotheColdWar,”J. European Studies, 2008,38(2),101-120.

8. J.-F.Sirinelli,“Pasdeclercsdanslesiècle?SurSartre,Camus et quelques autres,”Vingtième Siècle. Revue d’histoire,1987,13(13),127-134.

9. J.Flower,“TheAmericanDream—orNightmare.ViewsfromtheFrenchLeft,1945–1965.”French Cultural Stud-ies,2009,20(1),47-64.

10. C.Julien,Le Nouveau Nouveau Monde,Julliard,Paris,1960.

11. M.Blondel-Mégrelis,“CharlesPrévost(1899-1983),”inL.Lestel,Ed.,Itinéraires de chimistes: 1857-2007, 150 Ans de chimie en France avec les présidents de la SFC,SociétéfrançaisedechimieetEDPSciences,Paris,2008,pp.445-448.

12. M. J.Nye,From Chemical Philosophy to Theoreti-cal Chemistry: Dynamics of Matter and Dynamics of Disciplines, 1800-1950,UniversityofCaliforniaPress,BerkeleyandLosAngeles,1993.

13. C.PrévostandA.Kirrmann,“Essaid’unethéorieioniquedes réactionsorganiques. I.”Bull. Soc. Chim. France,1931,49,194-243;C.PrévostandA.Kirrmann.“Essaid’unethéorieélectroniquedelachimieorganique.II.”Bull. Soc. Chim. France,1931,49,1309-68;A.KirrmannandC.Prévost,“Tautomérieanneau-chaineetlanotiondesynionie,”Bull. Soc. Chim. France,1933,53,253-260.

14. M.J.Nye,“NationalStyles?FrenchandEnglishChem-istryintheNineteenthandEarlyTwentiethCenturies,”Osiris,1993,8,30-49.

15. Forinstance,M.J.S.Dewar,“AReviewofΠComplexTheory.”Bull. Soc. Chim. France,1951,18,C71-79.SeeJ.A.Berson,“AMissedTurningPointforTheoryinOrganicChemistry:MolecularOrbitalsatMontpellierin1950,”J. Phys. Org. Chem.2005,18(7),572-577.

16. M.Julia,Mécanismes électroniques en chimie organique,Gauthier-Villars,Paris,1959.

17. J.-M.Lehn,“Noticesurlavieetl’œuvredeGuyOurisson,lueparJean-MarieLehnlorsdelaséancestatutaireenrégiondel’AcadémiedesSciencesàStrasbourgles27et28mai2008,“AcadémiedesSciences,2008,http://www.academie-sciences.fr/activite/conf/seance_270508_Lehn.pdf.

18. J. Jacques, “BiankaTchoubar (1910-1990),”New J. Chem.,1992,16,7-10.

19. M.Soutif,“Laconnivenceentrephysiciens(àGrenoble)de1950à1975,”Revue pour l’histoire du CNRS, 2000,2,16,http://histoire-cnrs.revues.org/1439.

20. B.Tchoubar,Les mécanismes réactionnels en chimie organique,Dunod,Paris,1960.

21. M.Charpentier-Morize,“Perrin,pèredel’atomeetdé-tracteurdelachimiemoderne.”Recherche,1997,295,94-99.

22. P. Lelong, “Le général deGaulle et la recherche enFrance,”Revue pour l’histoire du CNRS, 1999,1,http://histoire-cnrs.revues.org/481.

23. A.ChatriotandV.Duclert,Le Gouvernement de la re-cherché: histoire d’un engagement politique, de Pierre Mendès France à Charles de Gaulle (1953-1969),LaDécouverte,Paris,2006.

24. I.J.Prothero,Artisans and Politics in Early Nineteenth-Century London: John Gast and His Times, Dawson,Folkestone,UK,1979.

About the Author

PierreLaszlo,whowas born inAlgiers in 1938, is aFrench physical organic chemist.After obtaining hisPh.D.withEdgarLederer,hewasapost-docatPrincetonUniversitywithPaul vonRaguéSchleyer (1962-63).AfterhisD.Sc.(1965),hereturnedtoPrincetonasanassistantprofessor(1966),acceptingin1970acallfromtheUniversity ofLiège,Belgiumas a full professor.Hetaughtthereuntil1999,but,startingin1986,heldajointappointmentattheEcole polytechnique,inParis,also until 1999.Taking early retirement in that year,hehasremainedactivesinceasasciencewriter(Salt, Grain of Life,2001;Citrus, A History,2007)andsci-encehistorian.


ThomasNelsonBakerJr.maynotbeahouseholdname,butheclearlyrepresentsthemanyAfricanAmericansthathaveachievedgreatsuccessinhighereducationduringavolatile racial period inourhistory (1).AnativeofPittsfield,Massachusetts,BakerbeganhisundergraduatestudiesatOberlinCollege(Oberlin,Ohio)andearnedhisB.A.andM.A.inchemistryin1929and1930,respec-tively.BakercompletedhisM.A.thesisentitled,“SomeEstersofAnthranilicAcid”under thedirectionofhisresearchadvisor,Prof.AlfredP.Lothrop.

In1931,BakerbegangraduateworkatTheOhioStateUniversity (OSU,Columbus,Ohio)where hestudiedorganicchemistry.ProfessorMelvilleWolfrom,awell-knowncarbohydratechemist,servedasBaker’sgraduateadvisorduringhistenureatOSU.Inordertosupporthimselfandhisfamily,BakertaughtatvariousHistoricallyBlackCollegesandUniversities(HBCUs),

CELEBRATING OUR DIVERSITY. THE EDUCATION OF SOME PIONEERING AFRICAN AMERICAN CHEMISTS IN OHIOSibrina N. Collins, College of Wooster, [email protected]

namelyTougalooCollege (Mississippi), TalladegaCollege (Alabama) andVirginia StateCollege (nowknownasVirginiaStateUniversity),wherehe taughtfrom1932-1972.

According to the acknowledgment section ofBaker’sdissertation,hereceivedtwofellowshipawardstocompletehisgraduateeducation(2).BakerreceivedafellowshipfromtheGeneralEducationBoard(1937-38)andaUniversityFellowshipfromOSU(1938-39).Es-tablishedin1902byJohnD.RockefellerandFrederickT.Gates, theGeneralEducationBoardwasaphilan-thropicefforttosupporthighereducationandHBCUs(3).BakerearnedhisPh.D.inchemistryin1941fromOSUwithadissertationentitled,“TheMolecularSizeofGlycogenandofMannanAbytheMercaptalationMethod(4).”ItisbelievedthatBakermaybethefirstAfricanAmericantohaveearnedaPh.D.inchemistryfromTheOhioStateUniversity.BakerlaterbecameafullprofessoratVirginiaStateCollegein1944andheservedaschairof thedepartmentuntilhis retirementin1972.Inadditiontoteachingresponsibilities,Bakersanginthechoirandplayedtheoboe.HediedonApril27,1977.

Although Baker’s academic and professionalachievements are quite fascinating, his family back-ground clearly emphasizes the importance of highereducation.His three siblingsEdith,Ruth, andHarryalsoattendedOberlinCollegeandlaterpursuedteachingcareersinmusicandEnglish.Hisfather,ThomasNelson

Figure 1. Thomas Nelson Baker Jr. Photo Courtesy of the Oberlin College Archives.


BakerSr.,bornaslavein1860inVirginiabecamethefirstAfricanAmericantoearnaPh.D.inPhilosophy(1903,YaleUniversity).BakerSr.alsoattendedYaleDivinitySchoolandlaterservedasaministerinPittsfield,Mas-sachusetts.Unfortunately,hediedayearbeforehissoncompletedhisgraduate studiesatOSU(5).Hisdeathnotice reads, “TheRev.Dr.ThomasNelsonBaker, aNegroborninslaveryuponwhomYaleUniversitycon-ferredaPh.D.degreein1903,diedFeb.24afterbeingovercomebyfumesinhishomeinPittsfield,Mass.Hewas80yearsold.”(6)

In1997,GeorgeYancypublishedafascinatingar-ticleonthebackgroundandinfluenceofBakerSr.duringthe20thcentury(5).Yancyconcludes,“ThereisstillagreatdealthatremainsunexploredthatisofimportanceinthelifeandphilosophicalworldviewofThomasN.Baker.Forexample,asachild,forBaker,whatwasitlikegrowingupinNorthhamptonCounty,Virginia?Howdidhisparentshelphim todealwith racism?Havingbeenbornenslavedandhavinginheritedthecultureofracist ideology,what impactdid thishaveonBaker’sself-esteemandself-conceptualization?WhatwasitinthenatureofBaker’scharacterthatprovidedhimwithsuchaninexhaustibledesiretolearn?”

TheachievementsofBakerSr. surelyhadapro-found impact on the success of his four children andfuturegenerations—grandsonThomasNelsonBakerIIIearnedhisPh.D.inchemistryfromCornellUniversityin1963andlaterworkedinthepetroleumindustry.In1936,ThomasNelsonBakerJr.marriedRuthModenaTaylor,whowasanAssistantProfessorofEnglishatVir-giniaStateCollege.Theyhadtwosons,ThomasNelsonBakerIIIandNewmanTaylorBaker.Afterhisfirstwifediedin1961,helatermarriedGenevaJ.Bakerin1964.GenevaBakerwasanAssociateProfessorofAppliedArtatVirginiaState.

However,ThomasNelsonBakerJr.isnottheonlyfirst fromOSU.In1933,RuthEllaMoore,anativeofColumbus,Ohio, became the firstAfricanAmericanwomantoearnaPh.D.inbacteriology(4,7).MoorealsoearnedherB.A.andM.A.atOSU,in1926and1927,re-spectively.ShewouldlaterhaveaverysuccessfulcareerintheDepartmentofBacteriologyatHowardUniversity,anHBCUinWashington,DC.In1965,RobertHenryLawrenceJr.,aflightinstructorintheUnitedStatesAirForceandthefirstAfricanAmericanastronautearnedhisPh.D.inchemistryfromOSU.Lawrencediedinatragicflighttrainingaccidentin1967.InJanuary2000,a roomdedicationceremonywasheld inhishonoratOSU(8).LawrenceearnedhisPh.D.during theCivil

RightsMovementanddedicatedhisdissertation(9)totheon-goingstruggleforhumanrights:

ThisworkisdedicatedtothoseAmericanNegroeswho have spent their lives in the performance ofmenialtasksstrugglingtoovercomebothnaturalandman-madeproblemsofsurvival.Tosuchmenandwomenscientificinvestigationwouldseemagrandabstraction.However, it has been their endeavorswhichhavesuppliedboththewherewithalandmo-tivationthatinitiatedandhelpedsustainthiseffort.

Historically,aftercompletingdoctoralstudiesfromamajorityinstitution,themostcommonemployersforAfricanAmericanPh.D.scientistswereHBCUs(4,10).Obviously,employmentopportunitiesforAfricanAmeri-canchemistryprofessorshasimprovedovertheyears,butrecentreportscontinuetosuggestlowparticipationofAfricanAmericanswithinthechemicalsciences(11-13).

TherearemanyquestionsthatremainaboutThomasNelsonBakerJr.Whydidheandhisthreesiblingsat-tendOberlinCollegeinsteadofHamptonInstitute(nowknownasHamptonUniversity)liketheirparentsRev.Dr.Baker andElizabeth (Lizzie)BaytopBaker?TheselectionofOberlinCollegewaslikelyalogicalchoiceconsideringthatatonetimeOberlinwasknownasan“activespot”fortheUndergroundRailroad(14).More-over,OberlinCollegealsohadwell-documentedhistoryregardingAfricanAmericanspursuinghighereducation.In1862,MaryJanePattersonbecamethefirstAfricanAmericanwomantoearnanundergraduatedegreeintheUnitedStates(15).Thus,itisreasonabletoassumethattheBakersknewtheirchildrenwouldreceiveaqualityeducationatOberlinCollege.

ThomasNelsonBakerJr.likelydecidedtopursueaPh.D.atTheOhioStateUniversityduetotheencourage-mentofProfessorAlfredP.Lothrop,whoservedashisresearchmentoratOberlinCollege.Inhisbook,Negroes in Science,JayindicatesthatOSUwasoneoftheleadingproducersofAfricanAmericanPh.D.scientists(10).Ac-cordingtoBaker’scollegerecords,onlyonecopyofhistranscriptwassenttoOhioStateinMay1930.Hedidn’tapplyforgraduateadmissionatotherinstitutionssuchasIowaStateUniversity(16), WayneStateUniversity,ortheUniversityofChicago,whichwerealsoknowntopro-duceAfricanAmericanPh.D.scientistsduringBaker’stime. It isalsounknown ifBakerandMooreactuallykneweachotherbecausetheywouldhaveoverlappedintheearly1930satOSUduringtheirgraduatestudies.

Insummary,Baker,Moore,andLawrencerepresentthemany heroes of sciencewhose achievements are


seldomrecognizedandcelebratedinscienceclassesortextbooks.TheirachievementsduringavolatiletimeinU.S.historyareremarkable.Theyaresignificantbecauseoftheircontributionstothefieldofscience.However,theyalsorepresenttheproudhistoryandlegacyofgradu-atesfrominstitutionsinthestateofOhio.

Acknowledgements

TheauthorwouldliketothankMr.KenGrossi,OberlinCollegeArchives,forhiscontributionstothismanuscript.

References and Notes1. C.V.Woodward,The Strange Career of Jim Crow,3rd

ed.,Oxford,NewYork,1999[firstedition1955].2. T.N.Baker,“TheMolecularSizeofGlycogenandof

MannanAbytheMercaptalationMethod,”Ph.D.diss.,TheOhioStateUniversity,1941.

3. TheRockefellerArchiveCenter –GeneralEducationBoard, http://www.rockarch.org/collections/rockorgs/geb.php

4. H.W.Greene,Holders of Doctorates among American Negroes,Meador,Boston,1946.

5. G.Yancy, “ThomasNelsonBaker:TheFirstAfrican-AmericantoReceivethePh.D.inPhilosophy,”Western J. Black Studies,1997,21,253-260.

6. “Deaths:ThomasN.Baker,”Advance,April1,1941.[TheauthorviewedanewspaperclippingatOberlinCollegeArchives.Nofurtherbibliographicinformationaboutthenewspaperwasavailable.]

7. M.C.Brown,TheFacesofScience:AfricanAmericansintheSciences:RuthEllaMoore:Bacteriologist,https://webfiles.uci.edu/mcbrown/display/ruth_moore.html.

8. D.Lore,“OSUCeremonyWillHonorNation’sFirstBlackAstronaut,”Columbus Dispatch,January21,2000.

9. R.H.Lawrence,“TheMechanismoftheTritiumBeta-rayInducedExchangeReactionsofDeuteriumwithMethaneandEthaneintheGasPhase.”Ph.D.diss.,TheOhioStateUniversity,1965.

10. J.M.Jay,Negroes in Science: Natural Science Doctor-ates, 1876-1969,Balamp,Detroit,1971.

11. D.J.Nelson,ANationalAnalysisofDiversity inSci-enceandEngineeringFacultiesatResearchUniversities,http://chem.ou.edu/~djn/diversity/briefings/Diversity%20Report%20Final.pdf.

12. W.PearsonJr.,Beyond Small Numbers: Voices of African American PhD Chemists,ElsevierJAI,Boston,2005).

13. S.N.Collins,“AfricanAmericansandScience,”Chem. Eng.News,87(43),Oct.26,2009,p.3.

14. OberlinCollegeHeritageCenter,http://www.oberlinher-itage.org.

15. EOGElectronicOberlinGroup,Mary JanePatterson,http://www.oberlin.edu/external/EOG/OYTT-images/MJPatterson.html.

16. S.N.Collins,“TheGilmanPipeline.AHistoricalPer-spective ofAfricanAmerican Ph.D. Chemists fromOhioState,”inP.A.Thiel,Ed.,Chemistry at Iowa State University: Some Historical Accounts ofthe Early Years,IowaStateUniversity,Ames,IA,2006,126-148.

About the Author

SibrinaNichelleCollinsisanAssistantProfessorintheDepartmentofChemistryatTheCollegeofWoosterinWooster,Ohio.


ThecentralimportanceofLeopoldPfaundler’spioneer-ing1867paperontheapplicationofthekinetictheoryof heat to chemical reactions and the desirability ofa long-overdueEnglish translation of the same havealreadybeencommentedonintheintroductiontotherecentlypublishedEnglishtranslationofAugustHorst-mann’s equally important paper of 1873dealingwiththefirstapplicationofthesecondlawofthermodynam-icstothetheoryofchemicalequilibrium(1).Sincethissame introduction also reviewed the current status ofEnglish-languagetranslationsofclassicchemicalpapersingeneral, andapaperdealingwithbothPfaundler’slife and thecontextofhis contributionwill appear inthenext issueof theBulletin (2), all that remains forthisintroductionistodealwiththetechnicalitiesofthetranslationprocessitself.

Aswith the earlier translation of theHorstmannpaper,Dr.Kuhlmann,whoisanativeGermanspeaker,first produced a literal translation,whichDr. JensenthenextensivelyrevisedandeditedinordertomakethephrasingandsentencestructuresmoreacceptabletotheEnglishreader.Asalways,heprefersaloosertranslationwhichplacesmoreemphasisonclaritythanonliteralac-curacy,andanydefectsinthefinaltranslationresultingfromthisprocessshouldbecreditedtoDr.Jensenalone.

Atfirstwe thought that the translationwouldbesimpleandstraightforward,sincePfaundler’sGerman

INTRODUCTION TO THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF “A CONTRIBUTION TO CHEMICAL STATICS” BY LEOPOLD PFAUNDLER

A Forgotten Classic of Chemical KineticsWilliam B. Jensen and Julia Kuhlmann, Department of Chemistry, University of Cincinnati, [email protected]

isquiteeasytoreadintheoriginal.However,thisex-pectationsoonprovedunfounded,sincethesimplicityofPfaundler’sGermanwasdependentonconventionsunique to theGerman languagewhich,when literallytranslatedintoEnglish,resultedinanightmareofpro-nounambiguity.Inordertoavoidtheresultingconfu-sion,wehave found it necessary to convertmanyofPfaundler’spronounsintothecorrespondingnounsandtomakemanyof his impliedmeanings explicit.Thelarger of these interpolations are indicatedwithin thebodythetranslationbyenclosingtheamplificationsinsquarebrackets,thoughmanysinglewordclarificationshavebeenleftunmarkedasthesewouldhavegeneratedtoomucheditorialclutterwithinthetext.

InyetothercasesweencounteredambiguitiesduetoPfaundler’swordchoices.Afrequentexamplewashisuseofthephrase“quantity(Menge)ofmolecules,”whenitisobviousthathemeantthe“numberofmolecules,”and indeed sometimes even explicitly stated this in alaterclausewithinthesamesentence,orhisuseoftheadjective“maximum”whenhemeantthresholdorup-perlimit.Also,likeClausius,Pfaundlerdoesnotusetheterm“kineticenergy”inhispaper,butratherreferstothelebendig Kraftofthemovingmolecules.SinceadirectEnglishtranslationofthistermas“livingforce”seemsawkwardtotheearoftheEnglishreader,wehaveinsteadchosentousetheoriginalLatintermforthisconcept—vis viva—whichishowit isnormallyreferred to inmost


historiesofmechanics.Similarly,wehavemodernizedPfaundler’schemicalnomenclatureandhavetranslatedkohlensauren KalkesandKohlensäureascalciumcarbon-ateandcarbondioxiderespectively.

Inadditiontothesetranslationproblems,therearealsosomesevereorganizationalproblemswithPfaun-dler’spaper.Asoriginallyconceived,thepaperwasex-plicitlydividedintothreeparts,inadditiontoaseparateintroductory paragraph and an unmarked conclusion.However,aftercompletingtheinitialdraftofhispaper,PfaundlerencounteredarecentlypublishedpaperbyH.W.SchrödervanderKolkcriticizingHenriSainte-ClaireDeville’swork on dissociationwhich Pfaundler feltcompelledtocommenton,notleastbecausehefeltthathisowntheoryofdissociationbothclarifiedandrefutedmostofSchrödervanderKolk’sobjections.Butratherthanattachthesecommentsasanaddendumtotheendofhispaper,PfaundlerchosetoinsertthemasaseparatesectionattheendofPartI,therebyinterruptingtheflowandorganizationofhisoriginalmanuscript.YetfurtherconfusionresultedfromPfaundler’sdecisiontoinsertalengthyaddendumtotheaddendumasafootnote,placednotattheendoftheoriginaladdendum,butattheveryendoftheentirepaper.OtherminorproblemsresultfromPfaundler’sfootnotingandreferencingprocedures.Mostoftheseareplacedatthebottomofthepagesinques-tion,butareseparatelynumberedforeachpage,whereasothersareembeddedwithinthebodyofthetextitself.Inaddition,thecitationstyleforagivenjournaloftenvariesfrompagetopage.

Sinceourgoalistomakethetranslationasacces-sibletothemodernreaderaspossible,wehavechoseninthetranslationtocorrecttheseorganizationalproblemsbytransferringtheaddendum(whichisofonlyminorinteresttothemodernreader)totheendofthepaperandbyalsotransferringallofthereferencesandnotes(boththosewithin the textandat thebottomof thevariouspages) to theendof thepaper,where theyhavebeen

standardized and renumbered sequentially.Lastly, thevarioussectionsresultingfromtheserearrangements,aswellastheoriginalunmarkedconclusion,havealsobeenlabelledandrenumberedsequentially.WehavefurthertakenthelibertyofmergingmostofPfaundler’ssingle-sentence“island”paragraphswitheithertheprecedingorsucceedingparagraphs,wheretheywouldhavenormallybeenplacedbymostmodernwriters.

One final problem involves Pfaundler’s use ofchemical equations. InParts I and II of his paper, hewritesthem,aswedotoday,usinglinearcompositionalformulasforthevariousreactantsandproducts.However,inPartIIIhesuddenlyrevertstowritingthemusingtypeformulasforthereactantsandproducts.Sincethesein-volvecurlybracketsandplacementofonesymbolaboveanother,theycreateseverelayoutproblemsforthemod-erncomputer.SincemanyofthetypeformulasinPartIIIalsoappearaslinearformulasinPartsIandIIanditisobviousthatPfaundlerclearlyunderstoodtheequiva-lencyofthesetwonotations,wehavechosen,forreasonsofbothconsistencyandtypographicalconvenience,touselinearcompositionalformulasthroughout.TheonlyplacewherethischangeresultsinalossofclarityisinPfaundler’sdiscussionofhispostulatedcollisioncom-plex,ABCD,foradoubledecompositionreaction,wherethetypeformulamoreclearlyindicatesthefeasibilityofalternativemodesofdecompositionthandoesthelinearformula.Forthisreason,areproductionofPfaundler’soriginaltypeformulaforthiscomplexwillappearinthecommentarywhichwillbepublishedinthenextissueoftheBulletin (2).

References and Notes1. W.B.Jensen,“IntroductiontotheEnglishTranslationof

‘TheTheoryofDissociation’byAugustHorstmann:AForgottenClassicofChemicalThermodynamics,”Bull. Hist. Chem.,2009,34(2),73-75.

2. W.B.JensenandJ.Kuhlmann,“LeopoldPfaundlerandtheOriginsoftheKineticTheoryofChemicalReactions,”Bull. Hist. Chem.,2012,37,tobepublished.


Itseemstomethatthetheory,whichIshalldevelopinthispaper, isable toprovideanexplanation forsomechemicalfactsforwhichnosuitablehypothesishasyetbeen found.Among these factsare thephenomenaofdissociation,theso-calledmass-actioneffect,reciprocalandpredisposingaffinity,theequilibriumstatebetweenopposingreactions,andseveralotherrelatedphenomena.

I. Theory of Dissociation Phenomena

The observation of certain exceptions to the law ofvapordensitiesinitiallyresultedinthehypothesisthatthosecompounds,whichshowedtheseexceptions,de-composeinthevaporphase.ThenumerousexperimentsofSainte-ClaireDeville, Pebal,Würtz,Wanklyn, andofRobinsonandThanhaveconfirmed thehypothesisproposedbyHermannKopp,CannizzaroandKekulé.Furthermore,theyalsoprovethatthisdecompositionisoftenincomplete—infact,thatitisonlypartialoverawiderangeoftemperatures,suchthat,withinthisrange,eachdegreeof the temperature [scale]correlateswitha different degree of decomposition.Themajority ofchemistsviewthispartialdecompositionasanentirelyadequate explanation of the [observed] irregularitiesinthevapordensities.However, it does not explain the partial decomposition itself.

Inmyopinion,thefollowingtwoessentiallydiffer-entideascanbeformedconcerningthestateofacom-pound,AB,whosevaporhasbeguntodecompose.EitheralloftheABmoleculesexperiencethesamechange(a

PRIMARYDOCUMENTS

“A CONTRIBUTION TO CHEMICAL STATICS”Leopold Pfaundler Annalen der Physik und Chemie,1867,131,55-85

looseningoftheirbonds[and]anincreaseinthedistanceseparatingtheircomponents),andthereforepassintoastatewhichisintermediatebetweentheiroriginalstateandthatofcompletedecomposition;orthischangeim-pactstheindividualmoleculesunequally,suchthat,forexample,onlyaportionofthemarecompletelydecom-posed,whereastheremainderremainundecomposed.

Atfirst glance, the former, rather than the latter,assumption seems to have a higher probability, eventhoughitisinconsistentwiththeresultsoftheexperi-mentsofDeville,PebalandWürtz.Evenifitwerepos-sibletoexplaintheincreaseinthevolumeofthevaporasaconsequenceoftheresultingrelaxationofthecon-nectionbetweencomponentsAandB,itwouldstillnotbepossibletounderstandhowsomethingotherthanacompleteregenerationoftheoriginalcompoundcouldoccuraftercooling.Norwouldcleavagebydiffusionbeunderstandableinthiscase.Eventually,evenwiththisprocess,thefinaltemperature-inducedtransitionfromthestateofhighestrelaxationtothestateofcompletesepa-rationwouldhavetooccurinasinglebound,whereasexperienceshowsthatthechangeinthevapordensitiesiscontinuous.

Thesecondassumptionexplainstheobservedfactscompletely,butinvolvessomethingwhichisdifficulttoimagine.Onecannotquiteconceivewhy,at thesametemperature, a certain number of evidently identicalmoleculeswilldecompose,whiletheremainderremainintact. If it is the temperaturewhichdetermines their


degreeofdecomposition,andthisisthesameforall,thenallofthemmustsufferthesamechange,sinceidenticalcausesmustproduceidenticaleffects.Iwillnowtrytoresolvethisdifficulty.Itwillbeshownthatitisnotthecorrectnessoftheconclusionsthatisatfault,butratherthatofthepremises.

Devillehasalreadyemphasizedtheanalogy(1)whichexistsbetweenthepartialdecompositionofcompoundsbelow the actual decomposition temperature and theevaporationof liquids below theboiling temperature.ThisverysameconceptoccurredtomewhilereadingClausius’spaper,“On theFormofMotionWhichWeCallHeat” (2), and ledme to investigatewhether, asa consequence of the similarity between these phe-nomena, an hypothesis, like that usedbyClausius toexplainevaporation,mightalsobeusefulinexplainingdissociation.Ifoundthathishypothesiswasreadilyap-plicabletoacertainclassofdissociationprocesses.Bywayofcontrast,itwasnotasdirectlyapplicabletothedissociationofvapors,thoughitiseasyenough,usingthesamefundamentalideas,toconstructanalternativehypothesis,which,inmyopinion,completelyexplainsthisphenomenonaswell.

Letusfirstlookattheprocessofvaporizationanditsexplanation,asgivenbyClausius.Ifoneheatsaliquidinaclosedspace,aportionofitevaporates—thatis,acertainnumberofmoleculesonitssurfacearetransferredtothespaceaboveuntilitcontainsacertaincharacteristicnumber.As longas the temperature remainsconstant,thisnumberremainsunchanged.Atthispointonemightaskwhyallofthemoleculesatthesurfaceoftheliquiddonotchangeintovapor,sincetheirtemperatureisthesameasthosethatarealreadyinthevapor.Thispointiscrucialfortheanalogy.Thosewhoarecontentwiththeexplanationthatfurtherevaporationisinhibitedbythepartialpressureofthevapor,mightalsobesatisfied,whenitcomestothedissociationofacompound,withtheexplanationthatthepartialpressuresofthevaporsoftheseparatedcomponentsinhibitfurtherdecomposi-tionofthecompoundaslongasthetemperatureremainsconstant.Ifthisisincreasedbyacertainamount,afurthernumberofmoleculeswilldecomposeuntiltheincreaseinthepartialpressureofthereleasedcomponentsisinequilibriumwiththeforceofdecomposition.

Ithinkthisexplanationisstillinsufficient,since—apartfromthefactthatitstillremainstobeinvestigatedwhetheronecantalkofapartialpressureinthissituationsimilartothatpresentinevaporationandwhetherthiswouldhaveasimilarimpactwithrespecttoinhibitingthe

separationofchemicallybondedmoleculesasithaswithrespecttothoseboundbycohesion—thedifferenceinthebehavioroftheindividualmoleculesisstillunexplained.Onehastolookfurtherintothismatterandconsiderthenatureof partial pressure itself.ThishasbeendonebyClausius.Accordingtohistheory,theequilibriumwhichensueswhenthevaporpressurehasreacheditsmaximumisduetothefactthatanequalnumberofmoleculesarenowleavingthesurfaceoftheliquidforthespaceaboveitasaresimultaneouslyreturningfromthevaportotheliquidsurface.

Asrepresentativeofthegeneraldissociationphe-nomenatowhichthishypothesismaybeimmediatelyapplied,Ichoosethedecompositionof[solid]calciumcarbonate.Whenheatedinaclosedspace,thisundergoesadissociation,beginningatacertainfixedtemperature,whichmeansthatanumberofitsmolecules,whoseinter-nalmotionshaveexceeded[theallowed]maximum,de-compose.Themoleculesofliberatedcarbondioxidegasaremovinginthespace[abovethesolid]inarectilinearfashionandwillincreaseuntilthenumberreabsorbedperunittimeisasgreatasthenumberexpelledperunittime.Ifthetemperatureisslightlydecreased,thenthenumberofmoleculesthatrecombinewillexceedthenumberbe-ingexpelledandthematerialwillabsorb carbondioxide.Ifthecarbondioxidemoleculesinthespace[abovethesolid]arenowdisplacedbyair(orsomeotherindifferentgas),theexpulsionofthemoleculesofcarbondioxidedoesnotstop,becauseitscausehasnotbeeneliminated,buttheabsorptionofthemoleculesdoes,sincetheyarebeingremoved[bytheairflow].Thereforethecalciumcarbonateevolves carbondioxide in the air streamatthe same temperature as it absorbs carbondioxide initsabsence.Thecalciumcarbonateandcarbondioxidebehaveintheairstreaminamannersimilartothatofahydratedsubstancethatisbeingdried(3).

Iwillnowpasstoanexplanationofthedissociation of vapors and,forthatpurpose,willhypothesizethat,inthevaporofapartiallydecomposed[gaseous]compoundatconstant temperature,as many molecules are being cleaved as are being recombined by the [molecular] mo-tions.Thismannerofexplanationnecessarilyimpliesthatnot all of the moleculessimultaneously experience the same state of motion,justastheexplanationofevapora-tionbyClausiuspostulatesthatthestatesofmotionofthemoleculesonthesurfaceoftheliquidareunequal.According to themechanical theory of heat, such aninequalityishighlyprobable.


TheprocessofdecompositionforacompoundAB maythereforebethoughtofinthefollowingfashion:Aslongasthecompoundhasnotyetdecomposed,allofthemoleculeswillhavethecompositionAB.Theywillmoveinarectilinearfashion.Furthermore,thecomponentsofthesemoleculeswillalsomoverelative toeachother.However,thismovementofthecomponents(aswellastherectilinearmotion)isnotofequalmagnitudeforeverymoleculebecause,eveniftheyweremomentarilyequal,theywouldnotremainsoasaresultoftheir[mutual]collisionsandtheircollisionswiththewall[ofthecon-tainer].Onlytheaveragevis viva [i.e.kineticenergy]ofthesemotionsremainsunchangedatconstanttemperatureandinacertainratiotothevis viva oftherectilinearmo-tionofthemolecules.Butintheindividualmoleculesitwillsometimesbelargerandsometimessmaller.

If the temperature is now increased, the vis vivaofboth[kindsof]motionincreases.Asaresult,itmayhappenthattheincreaseintheinternalmotionofthosemolecules,forwhich,atthisinstant,the[internal]mo-tionalreadyhappenstobequitelarge,willthenbecomesolargethatitwillresultinacompleteseparationofthecomponentsAandB. It is impossible for this separa-tiontohappentoallofthemoleculesatthesametime.Ratheritmustoccurfirstforthosewhoseinternalmo-tionhappenstobelargerthantherest.Theseseparatedcomponents,whicharenowfreemoleculesthemselves,nowpossess rectilinearmotion aswell.Meanwhile anewselectionofpreviouslyundecomposedmoleculeswillattaintheupperlimitfortheirinternalmotions,andwill,inturn,alsodecompose.Thiswillhappentoequalnumbers per unit time and continuously increase thenumberofdissociatedmolecules.However,thesewill,inpart,collidewithoneanother.Notallofthesecollisionswillresultinthedissociatedmoleculesrecombining,butratheronlythosewhosestatesofmotionaresuchthat,whenthedissociatedcompoundisreformed,theresultingcombinedmotionsofitscomponentsarenogreaterthanthatrequiredfortheoriginalseparation.Hence,itneces-sarilyfollowsthat,atagivenconstanttemperature,thefreemolecularfragmentswillcontinuetoincreaseuntilthenumberofreunitingmoleculesperunittimebecomesasgreat as thoseproducedperunit timebycleavage.Fromthispointonanequilibrium betweendecomposi-tionandrecombinationwilldominate,providedthatthetemperatureremainsconstant.Butifthisincreases,thenumber of dissociatingmoleculesmust also increase,while thenumberof reunitingmoleculeswill initiallydecrease.The equilibriumcanonly be restoredwhenthenumberofmolecules,AandB, intheunboundstateislargeenoughthatasmanyrecombineasdecompose.

Ifthetemperaturecontinuestoincrease,onewillfinallyreachthepointwhereallofthemoleculesdecomposewithoutbeingabletorecombine.Atthisjuncturethedis-sociationphasewillfinallyterminateinoneofcompletedecomposition.

Ifduringthedissociationphase,anopeningismadeinthewallofthecontainer,orthewallsareporous,boththeundecomposedanddecomposedmoleculeswillpassthroughinarectilinearfashion,butsincetheirspeedsareinverselyrelatedtothesquarerootoftheirmasses(4),thedissociationfragmentswilldiffusefasterthantheun-dissociatedmoleculesand,amongtheformer,thelighterfasterthantheheavier.Basedonthis,theexperimentsofPebalandDevillemaybeexplainedanditalsoleadstotheconclusionthatitshouldbepossibletousediffusiontograduallyincreasethe[degreeof]dissociationoftheremainingmaterialinthecontainerwithoutincreasingthetemperature(5).Thesameresultcouldbeobtainedusingachemicalmediumtoabsorbbothofthecomponents,or only one ofthem.(Thereforeananalysisofthegasmixture isnot feasiblewithout a chemical interactionbetween the absorbingmaterial and the compound.)The fact thatdecompositioncanonlyoccurgraduallyseemstometoprovidethecorrectexplanationforwhymanyreactionsrequireacertainperiodoftime fortheircompletion.

Ifonecoolsdownapartiallyorcompletelydecom-posedvaporouscompound,theprocess[ofdecomposi-tion]willgenerallybereversed.However,itisconceiv-able, especiallywith rapid cooling, that the separatedcomponentswillpassoverintoastateinwhichtheycannolongerrecombinebeforetheyhavehadtimetoreunite.ThisexplanationhasalreadybeenemployedbyDeville.

II. Theory of States of Equilibrium Between Reciprocal Reactions, Explanation of Mass

Action, etc.

It has been frequently observed that a compoundAB isdecomposedbymaterialCat thesametemperatureascompoundBC isdecomposedbyA.Likewise,it isaknownfactthatreactionsoftheformAB+CD=AD+BC maybecomereciprocalatthesametemperature,whetheronedecreasestheamountsofthecompoundstotheleftoftheequalsignorincreasesthosetotheright.Asamatteroffact,theaffinityofamaterialisafunc-tionofitsmass.

Atthatperiodwhentheprincipleofdefinitepropor-tionswasnotascertainasitistoday,thisandsimilar


factsprovidedagreatdealofsupportforthetheoryofBerthollet.Theystillformadarkchapterinthetheoryofaffinity.Theargumentswhichonecandeducefromtheminoppositiontopresentlyacceptedtheoriesare,itseemstome,perhapssilencedby theoverwhelmingnumberofsupportingarguments,butnotaltogethereliminated.

Thecorrelationofthesefactswiththoseofdisso-ciationandthegeneralityofthisphenomenonwerefirstspecificallyremarkedonbyAdolfLiebeninhispaper:“OntheVaporDensitiesKnownasAbnormal”(6).Therehecitesthesameexampleofcalciumcarbonate,whichIusedearlier;thenthefactsconcerningthedecomposi-tionofwater,whichweowetoDeville;and,finally,theresultsofthebeautifulexperimentsofBerthelotandPéandeSaint-Gillesconcerningtheformationanddecomposi-tionofcompoundethers[i.e.,esters],whichare,withoutdoubt,ofgreatestimportanceforthesubjectunderdis-cussion.RelatedtothisaretherecentlypublishedandequallyinterestingdiscoveriesofBerthelotconcerningtheequilibriumbetweentheopposingreactionsforthesynthesis and decomposition of hydrocarbons,whichBerthelotalsocomparestodissociation.

All of these facts allow for a single explanationformulatedwiththehelpofanhypothesisbaseduponClausius’theoryofthe[three]statesofmatterandwhichconsequently replicateshis theoryofevaporation.Letusassumethereareequalnumbersofthemoleculesofthreegases,A,B andC, inaclosedspace.Furthermore,atroomtemperature,thegasesA andB arecombinedintheformofthegaseouscompoundAB.Initiallytwokindsofmoleculesaremovinginthisspace:AB andC. Now,ifthetemperatureisprogressivelyincreased,anumberofABmoleculescan,asshownearlier,decompose,whichmeansthatthecompoundAB willenterintoastateofdissociation.Then the separatedmolecules,A andB, will,liketheothers,moveinastraightlinewithinthe[available] space andwill occasionally encounter themoleculesofC.LetusassumethatsubstanceB hasanaffinityforC—thusthemoleculesofB andC cancom-bineoncollidingprovidedthatthesumoftheirmotionsdoesnotresultinastateofmotionwhichmakestheirattachmentimpossible.

However,inthiscasethefollowingprocessislikely:EvenbeforethetemperaturehasreachedalevelsufficienttoinducethedissociationofAB,thesameresultcanbeinitiatedbytheinfluenceofmoleculeC.LetusexamineamoleculeofthesubstanceAB,which,becauseofthehigh temperature, has already acquired sufficientmo-tionofitscomponentsthatitisclosetodecomposition,

andwhichnowencountersamoleculeC.Theexternalmotionofbothmoleculesisnowcompletelyorpartiallyconvertedintointernalmotionbytheimpact.Theresultnowdependsonwhethertheaffinityisorisnotstrongenough,giventhisenhancedinternalmotion,tokeepallthreebodies together. Ifnot, then thecomponentsarerepelledagain,whichmeansapartoftheinternalmotionisonceagainconvertedtoexternalmotion.Apparentlythemodeofseparationnowdependsonhowtheinternalmotionisdistributedamongtheindividualparts.IftheinternalmotionoftheoriginalABmoleculewas alreadyvery large prior to impact, andwas further increasedbytheimpact,thenthecleavageofthetransientABCmolecule toformA andBC ismorelikelythantoformAB andC.Therefore,acertaindefiniteportionoftheABmoleculeswhichcollidewiththeCmoleculeswillreactaccordingtotheequationAB+C=A+BC.Herewehaveadissociationprocesswhichisdifferentfrompuredissociation;butalsoequallydifferentfromacompletechemicaldecompositioninwhichallofthemoleculesaredecomposedatonce.Thepeculiarityofourprocessconsistsinthenecessityofonlypartial decomposition.

BesidesABandC molecules,wenowhavethoseofAandBC.Providedthateventhemostfavorablecombi-nationofmotionsfailstocreateanetmotioncapableofdecomposingBC,thereactionwillnow,inthecourseoftime,proceedtocompletionwithoutafurtherincreaseintemperature(i.e.,untilallofthemoleculesofABhave encounteredmoleculesofC underconditionsfavorablefordecomposition)andwillterminateinthecompletionoftheequationAB+C=A+BC. Ifthisisnotthecase,butratheratsomeothertemperaturethemotionofthecomponentswithinevenafewBCmoleculesincreasestothepointthat(withthesimultaneousassistanceoftheaffinityofAforB)itcausestheirdecomposition,thenthe processmust stop at a certain composition of themixture,providedthatthetemperatureisheldconstant.Indeed,decompositionsstillconstantlyoccur,buttheywillnowbecompensatedbyanequalnumberofrecom-binations.Withinacertaintemperaturerange,changesintemperaturewillonlyaffectthereciprocalproportionofthedifferentmoleculesandacertain[compositionofthe]mixturewillcorrespondtoacertaindegreeoftempera-ture.Itmatterswhichofthecombinedmoleculesismostaffectedbytheincreaseintemperatureandapproachestheupperlimitforitsinternalmotionsfaster.

Nowwewanttoinvestigatehowtheprocesshastoproceedifoneadds,withoutanincreaseintemperature,moreofgasAB toagaseousmixtureofAB,BC,A andC.Therebytheequilibriumbetweenrecombinationand


decompositionmustbedisturbed,sincethenumberofdecomposingAB molecules increasesinamannerpro-portionaltotheamountpresent.Asaresultofthis,thenumberoffreemoleculesofC likewisedecreases.MoremoleculesofBC areformed,butmorethanbeforearedecomposedaswell.EquilibriumisonlypossibleatadifferentcompositionwhichcontainsfewermoleculesofC.The larger the amount of gasAB becomes, thesmallerthatofgasC willbebecome.Thisreactionwouldalsobepromotedby the removalof themoleculesofA,as thatwouldhave the result that theaccumulatedmoleculesofBC arenolongerdecomposedbythemol-eculesofAandhencethemoleculesofC willnolongerregenerate.Therefore,ifweimplementbothmethodsatonce—supplyofgasAB andremovalofgasA—gasCwillcompletelydisappearwithouttheneedofahighertemperature,asrequiredpreviouslywhenanequilibriumbetweendecompositionandrecombinationdominated.

Thereverseresultwilloccurwhen,inthemixtureofAB,BC,AandC, we decreasethenumberofABmol-ecules,orincreasethemoleculesofA,orbothsimultane-ously.ThedecreaseinAB willresultinadecreaseinthedecompositionsofAB andtheformationofBC;hencemorefreemoleculesofCwill remain.AnincreaseinthemoleculesA willcauseanincreaseinthedecompositionsofmoleculeBC,wherebymoleculesofC arereleased.Therefore,thisreactioncanonlyendwiththecompleteisolationofgasC.

Ifthethreesubstances,A,BandC, andtheircom-poundsaregases,asassumedsofar,itisperhapseasytoaddarbitraryamountsofeachindividually,butnottoremove each individually, if one cannotuse chemicalmethods.Therefore,onewillrarely,ifever,succeedinbringingareactiontocompletionsolelybychangingtheproportions.However,onecanapproachcompletiontoanarbitrarydegreethroughadditionoftheappropriategas.

Itisdifferentwhenoneofthesubstancesisaliquidorasolid.Oneexampleofthiscasewouldbethereactionofcopper,watervaporandhydrogen(7).Ifonedirectswatervapor(AB)overglowingcopper(C),hydrogen(A)andcopperoxide (BC)are formed. Ifonedirectshydrogen(A)overcopperoxideatthesametemperature,watervapor(AB)andcopper(C)areformed.Herewatervapor,inthefirstcase,andhydrogen,inthesecondcase,wereaddedinexcesstoalimitedamountofcopperorcopperoxide,and theemerging(by)productsweresi-multaneouslyremovedasgases.Butifalimitedamountofwatervaporisheatedinaclosedtubewithalimitedamountofcopper,onlyapartofthewaterisgoingtobedecomposedandapartofthecopperisgoingtobe

oxidizedand,foreachdegreeoftemperature,therehastobeacertainratiobetweentheamountofwatervapor,hydrogen,copperandcopperoxide,atwhichthereisanequilibriumbetweentheoxidationsandthereductions.Thesameoccursifonedirectshydrogenoverironoxideand,conversely,watervaporoveriron.Zinc,tin,cobalt,nickel,uraniumandcadmiumbehavesimilarly(8).

Ifonedirectshydrogenchloridegasoverglowingsilver,silverchlorideandhydrogenform—converselysilver chloride is reducedbyhydrogen.Zinc, tin andironbehavesimilarlytowardscarbondioxideandcar-bonmonoxidegas.Thesereciprocalreactionsoccuratthe same temperature,asshownbyspeciallydesignedexperiments,(Gay-Lussac,Regnault).

Alsorelatedistheobservationthatmanysubstances,formedbyreactionwithagas,canonlybedistilledorstored in an atmosphere of the samegas (e.g., sulfurchloride in chlorine gas).Conversely, the escape ofhydrogenbromidefacilitatestheactionofbromineonorganic substances in sealed tubes.Cases of predis-posing affinity alsobelonghere and are satisfactorilyexplainedinasimilarway.Iwouldbeabletomultiplymyexamplesindefinitely,butIbelievethatthosegivensofararesufficienttoillustratetheproposedhypothesisandfacilitateitsapplication.Itisapplicablewheneverapartialdecompositionoccurs.Moreover,thepresenceofthelatterisrevealedbyanumberofcharacteristics,amongwhichare:theinfluenceoftimeontheprogressofareaction;theincompletenessofareactionwhenoc-curringinaclosedspace;reversibility;thenecessityofexcessreactants;theaccelerationofareactionbyremovalofproducts,etc.

III. The Relation of Williamson’s Theory of Exchanges to the Proposed Hypothesis and

Its Application to the Case of Double Elective Affinity

AlreadysomesixteenyearsagoAlexanderWilliamsonproposedanhypothesisconcerningthenatureofdecom-positioninhispaperonthe“TheoryofEtherification,”whichistosomeextentrelatedtotheonejustpresented.Therehedeveloped theview that“inanaggregateofmolecules of every compound, there is an exchangeconstantly going on between the elementswhich arecontained in it.”Williamson’s hypothesis has little todowiththetheoryofdissociationphenomenawhichIhavedevelopedinSectionI,butisrelatedtomymethodofexplainingmassactionandreciprocalaffinity.This


explanationisbasedontheassumptionofthesimulta-neousoccurrenceofopposingreactionsinkeepingwith[theoperationof]simpleanddoubleelectiveaffinities.These reactionsmayalsobeinterpretedasexchanges,whencethesimilarityofbothhypotheses.However,theyalsodiffersubstantiallyonseveralpoints:

Firstly Idonotassumethatevery compoundunder-goesapartialdecomposition(exchange),butratheronlysomecompounds—thoughperhapsagreatmany—andtheseonlyaboveacertaintemperaturelimit(which,ofcourse,inmanycasesmaybesolowthatweareonlyawareof thecompoundwhen ina stateofpartialde-composition).

Secondly myhypothesisincludestheessentialas-sumptionthat,withincertaintemperaturelimits,not all moleculesaresubject todecomposition (exchange)at the same time.

Thirdly Idonotbasemyopinionsentirelyonthe“motionofatoms,”butratherondifferencesinthemo-mentary states of motionof individual molecules andviewthisasthebasisforthepossibilityofsimultaneouslyopposingreactions.

FourthlyIwouldliketoassignthemeritofgreateruniversalitytomyhypothesissinceallpartialdecompo-sitions—eventhosewhichoccurbyheatalonewithouttheinterventionofanotherbody(dissociation)—maybeexplainedfromtheverysamepointofview,whereasIwillnowdemonstratethatWilliamson’shypothesiscan-notexplainthislattermodeofdecompositionandwasneverintendedtodoso.

Iwillreviewthesepointsinreverseorderandwillbeginwiththefourthone,which,itseemstome,mosteasilyillustratestherelationbetweenbothviewpoints.

Thefollowingschemesgiveanoverviewofthreegroupsofreaction,alongwith theircounterreactions,onwhose simultaneousoccurrence the phenomena tobeexplainedarebased(9):

I.Partial decompositionbymeansof heat alone (dis-sociation):

AB=A+BandA+B=AB

II.Partialdecompositionbymeansofso-calledsimpleelectiveaffinity:

AB+C=CB+AandCB+A=AB+C.

III.Partialdecompositionbymeansofso-calleddoubleelectiveaffinity(10):

AB+CD=AD+CBandAD+CB=AB+CD

Williamson’shypothesisisrestrictedtotheexpla-nationofreactionsIIandIIIanddoessobythesimpleassumption that atoms (or groups of atoms)A andCconstantlychangeplaces.Theensuingstateofequilib-riumisasimpleresultofthenumberofexchangesofAwithBbeingequaltothenumberofexchangesofB[sic.C]withA.IfwenowtrytoapplythissamemannerofexplanationtocaseI,itseemstoworkthereaswell.OnesimplyneedstoassumethattheAwithinthecompoundisconstantlyinterchangedwiththeAfoundinthefreestate.Thestateofequilibriumistherebyexplained.

Ifthehypothesisissupposedtobecorrectforallthreecases, itmustnotonlyexplain thephenomenonofequilibrium,butalsothosephenomenawhichoccurwhentheequilibriumisdisturbed.Thesedisturbancesoccurwhen:

1) One ormore products of the reaction are re-moved.

2) Thetemperatureischanged.

Experienceshowsthat,whentheequilibriumisdis-turbedbytheremovaloftheproducts,thepartialreactionchanges into a complete [reaction] and the reciprocalreactionceasestofunction.InthecaseofschemesIIandIII,thisagreeswithWilliamson’shypothesis;asmaybeseenifweconsiderschemeII:

AB+C=CB+A

IfweremoveallofthefreeAorCBthatisformedorboth,thenthereverseexchangeofA inplaceofC isnolongerpossible,thoughtheexchangeofC inplaceofAinABcanstilloccurandmustleadtocompletionofthereaction.Conversely,theremovalofABorC orbothresultsincompletionofthereciprocalreaction.Aswiththeabove,soWilliamson’shypothesisalsocom-pletelyworksforthereactionsinschemeIII.But it no longer works asanexplanation for thedisturbanceoftheequilibriuminschemeI,for,ifthisequilibriumalsodependedonlyonexchange,itwouldnotbeclearhowjusttheremovalofAorB orbothwouldgivetheresultsthatare,infact,observed.Wehavethescheme:

AB=A+B,A+B=AB

If,forexample,wenowremoveallofthefreeA,theexchangewiththeboundA willstop.ThesameistrueforB.Itsremovalcouldonlyresultinacessationofthereactionandnotinitscompletion,whichis,however,whatactuallyoccurs,asshownbyexperience.


ThissituationclearlyoccursinthespecificexamplethatIusedearliertoillustratethephenomenonofdis-sociation.Weheatcalciumcarbonateinaclosedtube.Carbondioxideisformed.Ifwekeepthetemperaturefixedataconstantvalue,theamountofcarbondioxidewill also stay constant.This state of equilibrium cannowbeexplainedbybothhypotheses.Accordingtothehypothesisofexchange,freecarbondioxidemoleculesconstantlyswitchpositionwithboundmolecules,whichare,inturn,setfree.Accordingtotheotherhypothesis,itisassumedthatthenumberofreleasedcarbondioxidemoleculesisequaltothenumbertakenupbythequick-limeperunittime,although the absorbed [molecules] do not necessarily substitute for the released [molecules].Therefore,accordingtothefirsthypothesis,everysinglerelease is necessarily coupled to an uptake,whereas,accordingtothesecondhypothesis,eachreleaseisinde-pendentofanygivenuptake,thoughthetotalnumberofbothisconstrainedbytherequirementofequality.Thisdistinction seems to be negligible, but it immediatelybecomescrucialwhenwelookatthefollowingprocess.Wedirectair(orsomeotherinertgas)throughthetubeanddisplacethecarbondioxide.Instantlyfreshcarbondioxideisreleased.Nowthefirsthypothesisisnolongersufficientbecause,inthatcase,onewouldneedtoassumethat the air switches positionswith the bound carbondioxide,whichisnotthecase.Incontrast, thesecondhypothesiscorrespondscompletely[tothefacts],since,according to it, the combinations anddecompositionsareindependentofoneanother[and]thefirstareeasilyreducedoreliminatedbyremovalofthecarbondioxide,whilethelattercontinue.

Ifonehadcausedthegenerationofcarbondioxideusing [another]gas,capableofchemicallycombiningwith the chalk, then the difference between the twohypotheseswouldhaveremainedundetected.Onlythecircumstance that the generation [of carbon dioxide]isalsopossibleusinganinertgasprovesthatonlythesecondhypothesiscanbecorrect.

Onewouldreachthesameconclusionontryingtoexplain the disturbance of the equilibrium caused bya change in temperature.According to the exchangehypothesis(11),theexchangesincasesIIandIIIwouldbecomemorefrequentinonedirectionthanintheop-posite, until, as a result, the relative numbers of thedifferentmoleculeshadchangedtosuchanextentthat,onceagain,equalnumbersofopposingexchangesareproduced. From this point on, equilibriumwould beestablishedoncemore.[Forthesecases]theexchangehypothesisissufficient.ForcaseIitisnotsufficient,as

onemaybeconvincedafterbriefconsideration.Thismayagainbedemonstratedusingthepreviousexample.Thefactthatcalciumcarbonatereleasesmorecarbondioxideuponincreasingthetemperatureofaclosedspacecanonlybeexplainedbytheassumptionthatthenumberofdetachedmoleculesbecomesgreater than thenumberwhicharesimultaneouslyabsorbed.Thisisnotpossibleusingasimpleexchange.Ifonewishedtomaintainthis[mechanism],onewouldhavetoconsidertwoprocessessidebyside—theexchangeandthedecomposition.How-ever,itissimplertoassumethattheindividualcombina-tionsanddecompositionsare,ingeneral,independentofeachother.Thustheconceptofanexchangerequiringapairwisecouplingofbothprocessesmaybeabandoned.

OnecouldrestricttheexchangehypothesistocasesIIandIII,forwhichtheyweredevisedbyWilliamson,andusethesecondhypothesistoexplaincaseI.However,itseemstomemoreexpedienttoextendthesehypoth-esesuntiltheyapplyequallytoallthreecases,andthisismosteasilyaccomplishedifonereplacesthenarrowconceptionofexchangewiththebroaderconceptionofsimultaneousindividualandindependentdecompositionsandcombinations.

Moreimportantthanthedifferencediscussedaboveistheonefoundinpoint three.Williamsonassumesanalternatingtransferofthemolecules[sic.atoms]inop-positedirections,andhenceanoppositemovementofthesame,withoutstatingacauseforhowtheseoppositeeffectsarebroughtabout.Ifindthiscause,asalreadystatedmanytimes,inthemomentarydifferencesinthestatesofmotionofindividualmolecules,asassumedinthehypothesisofClausius.IhavealreadyexplainedthereactionsfoundinschemesIandII,nowIwillattempttoexplainthetransferfoundinschemeIII.

WehavemoleculesofABandCDinagivenvolume.Dependingonwhethertheyaregaseousorliquid,theymovethroughoutthisvolumeinalinearoranirregular,but progressive, direction (externalmotion). Further-more,theircomponentsmoverelativetoeachother,butareboundtoacommoncenterofgravity(internalmo-tion).Ifonedoesnotchangethetemperature,thesumofthevis vivaofbothmotionswillremainconstant.Eventhesumofthevis vivaoftheexternalmotionalone,likethatfortheinternalmotion,willremainconstant,sinceClausiushasproventhattheymustbeinaconstantratiotooneanother.However,theexternalmotion,aswellastheinternal,mustbeveryunevenlydistributedamongtheindividualmolecules.Thereforewehavethefollowinglimitingcases:


1) Molecules possessing themaximumexternalandinternalmotion.

2) Moleculespossessingtheminimumexternalandinternalmotion.

3) Moleculespossessingtheminimumexternalandmaximuminternalmotion.

4) Moleculespossessingthemaximumexternalandminimuminternalmotion.

Between these limiting cases, there exists, ofcourse,allpossibleintermediatecases.Themaximumfortheinternalmotionisdeterminedbythemagnitudeoftheaffinity.Wedonotknowhowthemagnitudefortheexternalmotionsislimited—indeed,itseemstomethattheexistenceofsuchamaximumisnotyetproven.However,thisdoesnotaffectourmethodofexplanation.

Uponthecollisionoftwodifferentmolecules,theexternalmotionscanbeincreasedatexpenseofthein-ternal,ortheinternalatexpenseoftheexternal,or,asalimitingcase,bothmayremainunchanged.Amongthediverseresultsofsuchacollision,thefollowingcasesshouldbestressed:

1)Twomolecules,whose external and internalmotionsareverylarge,meetinsuchafashionthat,inthenextmoment,theexternalmotionsarecompletely,or for themost part, converted into internalmotionswhichexceedtheupperlimitsinbothmolecules.Asaconsequence,aseparationintofourparts,A,B,CandD,occurs.

2)Twomolecules,whose external and internalmotionsareverysmall,collide.Hereitispossiblethattheresultinginternalmotionsarenotonlytoosmalltosplitbothoftheoriginalmolecules,butalsotopreventtheir permanent combination.An aggregatedABCDmoleculeresults.

3)Twomolecules collide under such conditionsthat the resulting internalmotion is too small to splitthemolecules,butlargeenoughtopreventapermanentconnection.HencetheyflyapartlikeelasticspheresandABandCDremainasABandCD

4)Themoleculescollideundersuchconditionsthattheinterplayoftheinternalmotionsofthecomponentsofthetransientdouble-moleculeinduceitssplittinginadifferentdirection.ABandCDcollideandmomentarilyformABCD.Iftheimpactwas—aswewishtoassumeinthesimplestcase,—linearandcentral,thewholesystemwillcontinueto initiallymoveinaccordancewiththe

redistributionofvariousquantitiesofmotion, the lostexternalmotionhavingbeentransformedintointernalmotion.Nowitdependsonthemagnitudeoftheaffin-ityofA,B,CandDforoneanotherand,atthesametime,onthepreviouslyexistinginternalmotionsofthecomponentsofABandCD,astowhetherthesplitduetotheincreasedinternalmotionsoccursinthedirectionofAB/CDorindirectionofAC/BD.Thelargertheinternalmotionsofthemoleculespriortocollision,thegreaterthepreparationfortheseparationofA,B,CandDandtheeasieritisforasplitinthedirectionAB/CDtooccur.Onecanseethat,ingeneral,thebestconditions[foradoubledecomposition]areinthosegivenearlierunderlimitingcase4.

In this manner it becomes obvious that, in addition to the affinities, the mode of decomposition further depends on the state of motion, and that, consequently, even those reactions that are apparently opposed by affinity may occur (reciprocal reactions).

Thefirsttwoofthefourcaseslistedearlierrequirea largerdifference in thestatesofmotionof the indi-vidualmoleculesthandocasesthreeandfour.Henceitishighlylikelythatthesearenotfullyachievedinmanyprocessesforwhichthedifferenceisnotlargeenough.Thisassumptionmaybemadeforallthosereactionsforwhichthereisnobasisforassumingthepresenceofthe[product]moleculesABCD,A,B,CorDinadditiontothemoleculesAB,AD,BCandCD.Butitisalsopossiblethatonewillfindexampleswhoseexplanationmakesthisassumptionnecessary(12).

NowIcometothedifferencebetweenthetwohy-pothesesindicatedinpoint2.Itisself-evidentfromtheabove.Althoughthecollisionofthemoleculesisrandom,theymust,accordingtotheprinciplesofprobability,re-sultinregularitywhenthenumberofimpactsbecomesextremelylarge,suchthatthenumberofimpactsresult-ing indecompositionalwayscorresponds to thesamefractionofthe[total]numberofimpactsunderthesamecircumstances.Therefore,inadditiontothosemoleculesthataredecomposed(whosepartsareexchanged),therewillalwaysbethosethatreboundwithoutdecomposi-tion,whichmeans,asIstatedinpoint3,thatnot all of the molecules are being decomposed at the same time.

Finally,inpoint1,Ihavedescribedasessentialtomyhypothesistheassumptionthatapartialdecomposi-tion (exchange) does not occur at every temperature.Whenoneconsidersthat,accordingtothetheoryofheat,absolutelynomotionofthemoleculesexistsat–273°C,it is also apparent that for a considerable number of


degrees[abovezero]themotionmaybesosmallthatitdoesnotexceedtheupperlimitforinternalmotionandsoinducesnodecomposition.Forthisreasontheremustbe an upper temperature limit atwhich the reactionsunderconsiderationfirstbegin.If,foracompound,thisissituatedhigherthanthetemperatureatwhichweareabletoexamineit,wewillnotbeabletoobserveanyhintofadecomposition(exchange),andinthis sense IwishittobeknownthatWilliamson’sassumptionthat“inanaggregateofmoleculesofeverycompound,thereisanexchangeconstantlygoingonbetweentheelementswhicharecontained in it,” is restricted in themannerjustdescribed.

This also agreeswith experience.As evidence, IwillcitethesameexamplewhichledWilliamsontothediscovery of his hypothesis, namely the formationofether.Thisprocessdividesintotworeactions,eachofwhichmaybereversed.Thefirstisgivenbytheequation:

C2H5OH+H2SO4=(C2H5)HSO4+H2OAlcohol+sulfuricacid=ethylsulfuricacid+water

andthesecondby:

C2H5OH + (C2H5)HSO4 = H2SO4 + (C2H5)2OAlcohol+ethylsulfuricacid=sulfuricacid+ether

Bothreactionsshowfeaturesthatcorrespondtopar-tialdecomposition.Inparticular,bothremainincompleteifonedoesnotremovetheproductsandtheymayalsobereversed.Amixtureofsulfuricacidandalcoholneverformssomuchethylsulfuricacidthatsomeportion,notonlyofthealcoholbutalsoofthesulfuricacid,doesnotremainunreacted.Thisisbecausetheproductsformed—ethyl sulfuric acid andwater—continuously give risetotheoppositereaction.Thesereciprocalreactionscanbecomedominantiftheproportionsarefavorable.Itisknownthatethylsulfuricacidchangesbacktosulfuricacidandalcoholwhenboiledwithwater.Thislastreac-tion is reducedbyremovalofwater (orethylsulfuricacid)(13)—hence,thelesswateradded,themoreethylsulfuricacidisformedinitially.

By continuous removal ofwater and addition ofalcoholthe[first]reactionmustgotocompletioninonedirection.Byadditionofwaterandremovalofalcoholitwillgo[tocompletion]intheotherdirection.Atacertainratiooftheinitialreagents,[thequestionof]whethertheequilibriumbetween the opposing reactionswill cor-respondtoagreaterorlesserdegreeofdecompositionwilldependonthetemperature.Hencetheremustbeatemperaturevalueatwhichthereactionofthesulfuric

acidwith thealcoholhasnotyetbegun,atwhich theinternalmotionsofthemolecules—eventhoseinwhichitisatamaximum—isinsufficient,evenwithsupportfromaffinity,tocauseareaction.Itisstillunknownjusthowlowthistemperaturevalueis,butthecircumstancethatdilutesulfuricacidonlyformsethylsulfuricaciduponheating,suggeststhatitcannotbeverylow.

For the second reactionbetween the alcohol andtheethylsulfuricacidthesamerelationshipoccurs.Onreversal,etherandsulfuricacidresultinethylsulfuricacidandalcohol.Henceevenhere,iftheethercannotberemoved,thedegreeofconversionmustremainfixedatequilibrium,wherebothopposingreactionsoccursidebysidewiththesamefrequency.

Now,ifthewateraswellastheetherarecontinuous-lyremovedbydistillationduringproductionofthelatter,bothprocesseswillgotocompletioninonedirection,asinboththereactionfavoringetherformationoutweighsthe reverse reaction. If bothprocesses occurred at alltemperatures,etherwouldformatalltemperaturessuf-ficienttoremovetheetherandwaterbydistillation.Butthisdoesnothappenbecauseonlythealcoholdistillsoffbelow126°C[atwhichtemperature]thesecondreaction,atleast,cannothaveyetbegun.Thissingleexamplewillserveformanyadditionalexamplesthatcouldbequotedinsupportofthestatementthat(partial)decomposition(exchange) is correlatedwith a certain temperaturevalue.IbelievethatIhavenowsufficientlydiscussedthe relationshipbetweenmyproposedhypothesisandtheexchangehypothesisofWilliamson.

IV. Summary and Conclusions

The assumption that atoms are in a state of restwasfirstchallengedbyphysicists.However,forquitesometimetheirworkattractedlittleattentionandwasnearlyforgotten.As far as I know,Williamsonwas thefirstchemistwho—independentofphysicalargumentsandbasedonchemicalfactsalone—rejectedtheassumptionofstaticatoms.Hisinspiredtheoryofetherformationwasaccepted,buthissimultaneous,andmoreimportant,presentationofhistheoryofthecontinuousexchangeofelementsremainedalmostunnoticed.

Theepoch-makingpapersbyKrönig,andespeciallythoseofClausius,abolishedtheassumptionofstaticat-omsforever.Soonerorlaterthetriumphantprogressofthemechanicaltheoryofheathadtoattracttheattentionofchemistsandinviteattemptstoapplythehighlyfruitfulassumptionsofthisnewtheorytotheexplicationofasyet


unexplainedchemicalphenomena.Thepresentworkissuchanattempt.StartingwiththetheoryofevaporationproposedbyClausius,Ifirstattemptedanexplanationofdissociation.Generalizationofthisapproachallowedatransitiontoreciprocalreactionsandthemassactioneffect.The results ofmy approach clearly show thatthe theoryofgasesasgivenbyKrönig is insufficientandthatthemoreelaboratetheoryofClausiusisquiteindispensable.

Itwasofgreatinteresttomethatvolume101ofthisjournalcontainedapaperbyClausius[entitled]:“OntheElectricalConductivity ofElectrolytes,” inwhich thefactthatverysmallcurrentscancausedecompositionisexplainedbypostulatingthatthepartshavepreviouslybeeninpartialconversion.HereClausiusreferstoWil-liamson’spaper. It nowseems tome thatmymethodof explanation agrees even betterwith the theory ofelectrolysis.Theincreaseintheconductivityofliquidswithtemperaturemayberelatedtotheirincreasingdis-sociation.Thosethatdonotconductareunaffectedbydissociation at the temperature in question.However,these aremere assumptions. In thenear future, Iwillamplifythiscommunicationwithsomeideasconcern-ingtheconstitutionofmixturesandsolutions,whicharerelatedtotheabovetopic.

V. Addendum (14)

OnlyaftercompletionofthiscontributiondidIdiscoverthecritiqueofDeville’stheoryofdissociationbyDr.H.W.SchrödervanderKolk(15).AlthoughInowbelievethatthemostimportantobjectionswhichitraisedhavebeenrefutedbytheabovearguments,inordertoensureacompleteresolutionofthisinterestingandimportantmatter,Iwillallowmyself,evenattheriskofrepetition,toaddthefollowing[remarks].

IcompletelyagreewithSchrödervanderKolkthattheextensivemeasurementsofflame temperaturesbyDevilleareopentoseveralobjections.Likewise,Ithinkhisopinionthatthetemperatureoftheflame—evenwith-outtheassumptionofdissociation—shouldbelowerthanthecalculatedvaluesisreasonable.Thusoneargumentinfavorofthetheoryofdissociationisnolongerapplicable.

However,inspiteofthisobjection,Ihavetoretaintheassumptionofdissociationandthebeliefthatthereisaprofoundanalogybetweenthisandevaporation.Iwasledtothisopinionindependentlyandwithoutknow-ingthatDevillehadalreadymentioneditearlier,forthereasonsdiscussedabove.

It appears tome that the disagreements betweenSchrödervanderKolk,ontheonehand,andDevilleandmyself,ontheother,arefocusedonthefollowingpoint:Accordingtotheformer,itissolelytheabsorptionofheatfromthedecompositionoftheinitialmoleculeswhichservesto“cool”(16)theneighboringmoleculesandthusaccountsforthedelay in thedecompositionofall of the molecules(andwhich,forlackoftime,alsopreventsit).

According to the opposing view, this retardinginfluence is certainly present and is sufficient as anexplanationformanypartialdecompositions;butinad-ditiontothisretardinginfluencethereis,forcompoundsundergoingdissociation,yetanothercause,which,withincertaintemperaturelimits,notonlydelaysthecomplete decompositionbutaltogetherpreventsit,howeverlongthe temperature ismaintained. In opposition to thisSchröder van derKolk then raises amost importantargument,whichIwilldirectlyquote,while retainingonlythemostimportantparts:

Itseemstomethatthistheoryappearstocontainaninnercontradiction.Watervapor isdecomposedat[temperature]Tthroughsimpleheating.Thisdecom-positiongraduallyprogressesandwillbecompleteatconstanttemperatureTprovidedthatasufficientamountofheatissupplied.ThistemperatureTmaychangewiththepressure,but,inanycase,isalwaysthesameatthesamepressure.Atalowertemperaturedecompositionapparentlycannothappen,otherwiseitwouldnotbeT,butalowerdecompositiontem-perature[thatwouldcorrespondtothedissociationtemperature].Indeed,theauthor(Deville)saysthatinthiscasethedecompositionisonlypartial;but if it occurs partially, then it must also be possible for it to become total as soon as the decomposition is viewed as a function of only the temperature, asisthecasewithDeville.

ThisistheverysamedifficultywhichIpointedoutatthebeginningofmycontributionandwhichIthinkIhaveeliminatedbythenecessaryassumptionofunequalstatesofmotionfortheindividualmolecules.

According to themechanical theory of heat, thetemperatureisproportionaltotheaveragevis viva ofthemolecules.Ifonetransfersthisconceptoftemperaturetoindividualmolecules,onecouldarguethatthetempera-tureoftheindividualmoleculesisunequal,althoughthepartsofthebodytowhichtheybelonghaveattainedamutualequilibriumoftemperature.Thetemperatureofthebodyistheaveragetemperatureofallitsmolecules.

The decomposition is now a result (function) oftemperature,andhence it isnowpossible that,within


certainlimitsoftheaveragetemperatureofthebody,itextendsonlytothatportionofthemoleculeswhichhaveexceededacertaintemperaturelimit.Thecircumstancethattheinitialdecompositionofamoleculedependsonlyonitsinternal motionsrequires,inturn,thatonedistin-guishbetweentheinternalandexternaltemperatureoftheindividualmolecules.Thishasledmetonotemploythisextensionoftheterm“temperature,”notleastbecausethe phrase “internal and externalmotions” expressesthemeaningmuchbetterthanthephrase“internalandexternaltemperature.”

Inresolvingthisinternal contradictionofthetheoryofdissociation,itseemstousofgreaterimportancetoprove by experiment that partial dissociation, even attemperatures produced by sufficient heat input overlongperiods,doesnotproceedtocompletedissociation(exceptinthecasespresentedbyme,e.g.bydiffusion).Likewise,Iconsiderthisevidenceasalreadyprovidedbytheoftenmentionedexperimentwithcalciumcarbon-ate,andhenceitseemsunnecessaryformetoexploreadditionalreasonsforpartialdissociation.Anotherproofaretheso-calledabnormalvapordensities(17)measuredusingthemethodofGay-Lussac,which,asIhavecon-vincedmyselfbyexperiment,resultinconstantnumberswithprolongedheatingsolongasthetemperatureofthevaporremainsconstant.

In the endSchröder van derKolk expresses theview(page507)that,basedonthemoleculartheoryofchemicalcompounds,itshouldbepossibletodevelopa[theoryof]partialdecompositionrelatedtomassaction.IwouldbedelightedifIhavesucceededinthispaperinmakingacontributiontothefoundationsofsuchatheory.

VI. References and Notes1. Itakethisfromtheabstractofhispaper“OnDissociation

inHomogeneousFlames”inChem. Centralblatt, 1865, p.662,sincetheoriginalpaperisnotavailabletome.

2. Thisjournal,Vol.100,p.353.3. IntimeIwillshowthatsulfuricacidmaybedriedwith

airjustasoneisaccustomedtodryingairwithsulfuricacid.

4. Krönigalreadyderivedtheprincipleofdiffusionfromhistheoryofgases(thisjournal,Vol.99,p.320).IbrieflymentionthisbecauseinthewidelyknownmonographofPaulBeisonThe Nature of Heat,page150,itiserrone-ouslystatedthatKrönigdidnotstatethiscorrelation.

5. Twothingsfollowfromthis:Firstly,thatthetwometh-odsofvapordensitydeterminationbyGay-LussacandbyDumasshouldshowdifferentresultsunderthesamecircumstances, since diffusion is impossiblewith thefirst,butpossiblewith thesecond.Secondly, thatwith

thesecondmethod,theresultingvalueswouldnotonlybedependentonthetemperature,butalsoonthedurationoftheexperiment.(Seenote14).

6. Bull. soc. chim.,1865 p. 90.The remark in questionreads:“Infactonefrequentlyfindsthatitappearstobethegeneralstateofaffairsthat,whenabodyisdecom-posed,thepresenceoftheproductsofthedecompositionexercisesan influenceon theprogressof the reaction.Thereisatendencytoestablishachemicalequilibriumbetween certain proportions of the original products[i.e.reactants]andtheproductsoftheirdecomposition.Wheninthecourseoftimeequilibriumisattained,thedecompositionisarrested,etc...Aresultwhichonemayexpressingeneraltermsusingthespecificcaseofam-moniumchloride,etc...”

7. However,Iwilllatershowthat,technicallyspeaking,thisexample belongs to the case of double decompositiondiscussedlater.

8. Gmelin,Vol.I,p.118.9. But it shouldnotbesaid that thisscheme includesall

reactions requiring a similar explanation. If anything,morecomplicatedonescanexist.Thethreecaseslistedaresufficient,sincethemorecomplicatedonesmaybereferredbacktothem.

10. ThefollowingreactionscouldbeconsideredasspecialinstancesofcaseIII:

IIIaAB+CC=AC+CBandAC+CB=AB+CC IIIbAA+BB=AB+ABandAB+AB=AA+BB SchemeIIIawillbeassumedtobe thecorrectonefor

manyreactions,forwhichschemeIIappearstooccur.ThesamegoesforschemeIIIb,whichcanbeassumedinplaceoftheoftenoccurringschemeI.Forexample,theinstancescitedbymeinPartI[ofthispaper]asspecialexamplesofcaseIIwouldcomeunderIIIa,since,freehydrogenisconsideredtobeHHratherthanH.

11. Williamsondidnotmentiontheinfluenceoftemperatureontherateofexchange.However,itshouldbehaveasindicated.

12. For example, thedevelopmentof so-called condensedcompoundsathightemperatures.Thisjournal,Vol.131.

13. Liebenassumedthat,inordertoremovethedisturbinginfluenceoftheproductsofareactiononitsprogress,onehadtoremoveallof the resultingproducts.Accordingtotheproposedhypothesis,theremovalofonlyoneisnecessary,asthisissufficienttomakethereversereactionimpossible.Thisisinkeepingwithexperience.

14. Supplementtotheaddendum.Sincethemoleculesofgas-eousbodiesunderincreasedpressureareclosertogether,theywillcollidemoreoften.Asaresultofthis,reactionsbasedonpartialdecompositionreachanequilibriumorendfasterthanunderotherwiseidenticalconditions.Itseemstomethatthedissociationofvapors canprogressfurther,beforeequilibriumisreached,atlowerpressuresthanathigher[pressures],becausethenumberofdecom-positions,whichdecreasesforcompoundsinthefirstcaseandincreasesinthesecond,remainequallygreat.Hence,whendetermining the vapor density according to [the


methodof]Gay-Lussac,onewillincrease(althoughlessseverely)the[degreeof]dissociation(andhencetheerrorinthemolecular[weight]determination)byadecreaseinpressure,aswellasbyanincreaseintemperature,ifthevaporisalreadyinastateofdissociation,Onlybydecreasingthepressureatatemperaturelowenoughthatdissociationhasnot yet occurred,canonecanavoiderrorwhendeterminingthedensity.

15. Thisjournal,Vol.129p.481.16. Iwouldsubstitute“hindersgreaterheating.”17. Inparticular,thoseleadingtovaluesthatdonotexhibit

asimplerelationtothosethatarecalculated.


BOOK REVIEWS

Nuclear Reactions.ByAdamGanz.A45-minuteradiodramabasedontheFarmHallTranscripts.Performedon theBBCRadioAfternoonTheater 15 June 2010.ProducerEoinO.Callaghan.©AdamGanz.TheplaymaybestreamedordownloadedfromtheURL*http://www.rhul.ac.uk/mediaarts/news/nuclearreactions.aspx

Wellbefore the endofWorldWar II, oneofourlecturersatUniversityCollege,London,wasteachingusaboutnuclearchemistryandmentionednuclearfission,afactthathadbeendiscoveredbyOttoHahnandLiseMeitner inGermany in 1939butwasquicklyhusheduponcewarhadbeendeclared.Itbecameclearthatthefissionproducedmoreneutronsthanthenumberneededtocauseit,andthatthereforeachainreactioncouldbestartedwhichalsowouldproduceasignificantamountof energy. If, the lecturer commented, such a systemcouldbeincorporatedinabomb,anexplosiveofvastlygreaterenergycouldbeharnessedthananythingknownuntilthen.Atthemomenthementionedit,apowerfuldetonationcausedbyaminewentoffattheendofthepier inAberystwyth,Wales, a seaside resort towhichUCL’schemistrydepartmenthadbeenevacuatedforthedurationofthewar.

InAugust 1945nuclear bombswere droppedonHiroshima andNagasaki killing tens of thousands ofJapanesecivilians.PresidentHarryTrumanannouncedit to theworld. Iwandered thestreetsofLondoninadaze,wonderingifIwantedtospendtherestofmylifepursuingadisciplinethatcouldbeusedtocausesuchvastsuffering.

We soon learned that theAmerican “ManhattanProject,”asitbecameknown,hadbeeninitiatedthroughalettersignedbyAlbertEinsteinin1939andcarriedbyhisfriendstoPresidentRooseveltinforminghimofthelikelihood thatNaziGermanywasdeveloping such aweaponandthatitwasimperativethattheAlliescreateitfirst.Nuclear Reactionsbeginswithadifferentdocument,onedraftedbyOttoRobertFrischandRudolfPeierlsinEnglanda fewmonths laterwhichcalculated that the“criticalmass”couldbequitesmallandcouldbedeliv-eredbyplaneratherthanhavingtobeofthemammothsizeassumeduntilthen.

How close didGermany come to producing anuclearweapon?Didsomeofitsnuclearscientiststrytoslowdowntheeffort?IfHitlerhadthebombwouldhehaveusedit—onLondon?

AsWorldWarIIwasending,theAlliesaskedtheDutch-AmericanphysicistSamuelGoudsmittoheadasearchwhichhasbecomeknownasAlsos(HellenicforGrove,thenameofthemilitaryheadLeslieM.GroveoftheManhattanProject)forthekeyGermanscientistswhomighthavebeeninvolvedintheGermannuclearproject,inordertointernthem.Itisgenerallybelievedthatoneconcernwas toprevent them from falling intoSoviethands.AtleasttenwerefoundandweretakentoFarmHallnearCambridge,England,wheretheyweretreatedverywell—andwerebugged.BritishIntelligenceofficerslistenedtoandrecordedtheirconversations,amongthemthefatherofAdamGanz,wholastyearcreatedaBBC


radioplayNuclear ReactionswhichwasairedonJune15,2010.GanzisafilmmakeronthefacultyofRoyalHolloway,UniversityofLondon.Hisfather,aphilologist,wasroundedupandputinaconcentrationcampafterthe 1938Kristallnacht, butmanaged tofleeGermanybeforethewarstartedandafterthewarbecameaprofes-soratOxfordandanauthorityonJacobGrimm.DuringthewarhewasbrieflyinternedbytheBritishbutthenrecruitedforBritishIntelligence.AmongtheFarmHallinhabitants,fromJuly1945toJanuary1946,wereWernerHeisenberg,CarlFriedrichvonWeizsäcker,OttoHahn,WaltherGerlach,MaxvonLaue,andKurtDiebner.MostoftherecordedconversationswereinGerman.Theyweremadepublicandtranslatedbutwedonotknowifotherpartswerewithheld.Hereisanexcerpt:

Diebner: Iwonderwhether therearemicrophonesinstalledhere.Heisenberg:Microphonesinstalled?(laughing)Ohno,they’renotascuteasallthat.Idon’tthinktheyknow the realGestapomethods; they’re a bit oldfashionedinthatrespect.

Intheplaythetwosecretlistenersareofoppositesex,thewomanacharmingyoungpersonwhosaysshehadbeenastudentinGöttingenbeforethewar.InrealitybothlistenersweremalebutitwassuggestedtoGanzthatthechangewouldmakeiteasiertofollowtheconversations.Atonepointsheasksiftorturewouldbeusedbutwastold theBritishwouldn’t resort to that,andtheywereconfidentsufficientinformationwouldbegainedwith-out.DuringtheirinternmenttheywereattimesvisitedbyBritishscientists,amongthemP.M.S.Blackettwithwhomsomeofthemhadhadcordialrelationsbeforethewar.OnequestiontheyaskedhimwaswhetheritwastruethatFaradaywasconfrontedwiththepossibleuseofpoisongasessuchaschlorineasaweaponofwar.

Von Weizsäcker:IsittruewhattheysayaboutFaradayandpoisongas?Blackett:Yes it’s absolutely true.Hewasasked ifitwouldbepossibletodeveloppoisongasfortheBritishintheCrimeanWar.Hesaiditwasperfectlypossible,buthewasdamnedifhewasgoingtodoit.Hemeantitliterallyofcourse;hewasn’tthetypetoswear.Veryreligiousman.

Theplaybegins in theplanecarrying the internees toEnglandandtherealreadytheworryabouttheirpersonalfuture(whethertheywouldbeconsideredwarcriminals)andthefutureofGermany(whetheragrarianorallowedtore-industrialize)surfaces.

The play records theBBCannouncement of thedropping of theHiroshima bombon 6August 1945,

an event that caused considerable surprise among theGermans.Theyhadnotexpecteditforseveralyearsandfound it hard to fathom that theAllieshadmobilized180,000individualsforthebomb’sdevelopment.TheydecidedthatHitlerwouldneverhaveagreedtoaprojectofsuchmagnitudewhensuccesswasbynomeanscer-tainandhewaslookingforquickresults.Inretrospectit isalmostamusing to think thatPresidentRooseveltagreedtolaunchtheManhattanProjectbecausehewasconvincedbyEinsteinandothersoftheimminenceofaGermannuclearweapon.

InNovember 1945,The SwedishAcademy an-nouncedtheawardofthe1944chemistryNobelPrizetoOttoHahn.Notknowinghiswhereaboutstheycouldnotcongratulatehim.Helearnedaboutitfromthean-nouncementintheBritishpress.HisfellowFarmHallinmates, as can be heard in the play, celebrated theoccasionwith speeches, toasts, and song, andhewasencouragedtowritetotheAcademythatheacceptedtheawardbutcouldnotattendthefestivities.HereceivedtheawardfromtheSwedishKingin1946.LiseMeitnerismentioned.SheworkedwithHahninBerlinonbom-bardinguraniumwithneutronsinthehopeofcreatingtransuranicelementsbuthadtoleave—firsttoHollandandthenSweden—becauseofherAustrianJewishback-ground.Hahnwrotetoherthathehadfoundbariumintheexperimentandshe(togetherwithFrisch)wasthefirstcorrectlytointerprettheresultasduetofission,thesplittingoftheuraniumatombehavingasaliquiddrop.TherehasbeenmuchcriticismthatshedidnotshareintheNobelPrize—orreceiveherown.

NeitherHahnnorvonLauehadanythingtodowiththeNazi atomicweaponproject.VonLaue,whohadreceivedthephysicsNobelPrizein1914forhisworkonX-raydiffractionbycrystals,hadmadehisanti-Naziviewsknownduringthewarbutwasleftaloneperhapsbecauseofhisfame.ItisreportedthatthecreationanduseofthenuclearweapondepressedHahngreatly.Butitseemsherecoveredhissenseofhumor.Hecollectedsomecartoonsrelatingtothenuclearannouncement—bothEnglishandGerman—andAdamGanzsentacopyofthesettothisreviewer.Herearedescriptionsoffiveofthem:

-Thefirstshowstwoverydisappointedlittleboysinashopsellingchemistrysets.Bigsign:SorryNOuranium.

-Amothertoherlittlegirlwhojustheardaboutthebombontheradio:“It’sanewkindofbomb,darling,forthebenefitofmankind.”


-Wifetoherlazyhusbandloungingonthesofa:“Nowifsciencecouldonlyfindawaytosplityouandreleaseyourenergy.”

-Thebeginningsofnuclearsplitting:AdamintheGardenofEdentryingtocrackacoconutbetweentworocks.

-GermannuclearscientistafterHiroshima:“I’dfeelbet-terifIhadtakenoverdad’sherringshop.”

In January 1946 the FarmHall residentswereallowed to resume civilian life inGermany.SomeofthemlatermademajorcontributionstotherebuildingofGermanscienceandtoitsreintegrationintotheworldscientificcommunity.

Thisplaynodoubtwillbeofintenseinteresttothosewhorememberthatperiodandthenewsatthetimeof

theFarmHall internments.Given therecentJapaneseFukushima-Daiichitriplecatastrophe,thepromiseandhazardsofnuclearenergyhaveonceagainbecomeofcur-rentinterest,andIimaginethatapresentationofsomeoftheearliestbeginningsofthehumannuclearexperimentwillbewidelywelcomed.

Theodor Benfey, [email protected]* Should this prove difficult and youwould like aCD

mailedtoyoufromLondon,[email protected],withNuclearReactionsCDintheheading;orwriteDepartmentofMediaArts(NuclearReactionsCD),RoyalHollowayUniversityofLondonTW200EX,UK.Besuretosendyourmailingaddressincludingyourcountry.

Radioactive: Marie & Pierre Curie, A Tale of Love and Fallout,LaurenRedniss,ItBooks(HarperCollins),NewYork,2010,208pp,ISBN978-0-06-135132-7,$29.99.

EvenbeforeopeningRadioactive: Marie & Pierre Curie, A Tale of Love and Falloutitstitleandcovertellyou that you are about to engagewith a unique text.ThewordsRadioactiveandFalloutviscerallyevokethedangersofthenuclearagethatbegan,inpart,withtheCuries’discoveries,whilemetaphoricallyencapsulatingthemystiqueandpassionofthelifethattheyhadtogether.Thecoverart foretells thevisualnatureof the text tocome—aluminescent,almosttactile,graphicbiography.

Openingthebookconfirmstheinklingsofintriguepromisedbythecover.FromtheredghostlinessoftheflyleafandthebluechemicalwashofthetitlepagesitbecomesimmediatelyapparentthatLaurenRednisshasindividuallycraftedeachpagetoevocativelyreiteratethebook’s“radioactive”themes;thematicsthatincludetheCuries’discoveryofradioactiveelements,theirandtheirculture’sfascinationwiththeseelement’sextraordinaryproperties,thecurativeanddestructivenatureofnuclearradiation,aswellastheCuries’personalandprofessionallovesandlosses.Yet,evenbeforereadinganyofthetext,it calls out to be looked at—perused, like a beautifulcoffee-tablebook.Oneparticularlystrikingvisualaspect

ofthebookistheuseofcyanotypeprinting,amethodsome readerswillbe familiarwith fromgrade-schoolprojectsusingblue“sunlight”paper.AsRednissexplainsattheendofthebook,usingthischemicalprocesshasmultipleresonanceswiththetext’snarrative.Itcaptures“whatMarieCuriecalledradium’sspontaneousluminos-ity,”mimicsthe“photographicimagingthatwascentraltothediscoveryofX-raysandradioactivity,”and,initsproductionofPrussianblueuponexposureofthepapertosunlight,yieldsacompoundthatisa“safeandeffec-tivetreatmentforinternalcontaminationbyradioactivecesiumandradioactivethallium”(pg.199).

ThestoryofMarieCurie’slifehasbeentoldmanytimesbefore,soitisnotthetelling,butthewayitistoldthatmatters.UnlikeBarbaraGoldsmith’sObsessive Ge-nius,whichseekstorevealthetruthbehindthemythofMadameCurie,RednissrevelsintheimaginativespacegeneratedbyMarieandPierre’slivesandwork.Linkingtogetherscience,spiritualism,desireanddeath,Redniss’shistoryof theCuriesisabookunlikeanyotherthatIhaveread;fragmentary,associative,andcompressed,shecreatesalyricallycombustivewhole.ThisisanartisticrenderingoftheCurie’slivesandnotacomprehensivebiography.Thenarrative,althoughchronological,isheldtogetherinaloosewebofinformation,quotes,imagesandasidesthatreinforcethevisualandculturalpower


of thebook:page thirty-eightcontainsonly the state-ment,“TwoyearsandtwomonthsintotheirmarriageMariegavebirthtoasix-poundbabygirl.TheynamedherIrene;”pageforty-three,areproductionofanX-rayimageofWilhemRöntgen’swife’sfingersandwrist;andpageeighty-three,abriefbutdevastatingrecountingofthebombingofHiroshimafromsurvivorSadaeKasa-oka.Eventhechaptertitlesplayapartinweavingthemetaphorical interconnectionsRednissseeks tomake,highlighting theway inwhich scientific language en-capsulatesandcreatesmeaningswithinandbeyondtheboundariesofscience.Thefirstchapter“Symmetry,”akeyconceptualframeworkunderlyingmuchofmodernphysics,islaidoutsothatthestoryofPierreandMarie’searly lives, in theformofbiographicalfragmentsandquotesfromtheircollectivepapers,mirroroneanotheron eachof the facingpages of the chapter,while thelastchapter,“DaughterElements,”atermedborrowedfromthevocabularyofnuclearphysics,tellsthestoryofMarie’sdeathandthecarryingonofherworkbyherdaughterIreneJoliot-Curie.

Onemightimaginethatsuchafragmentedbiograph-icalnarrativemightbedifficulttofollow,butsomehowRedniss isable tostripbare thedetailsanddistill theessentialmoments of theCuries’ passionate personaland scientific lifewhile simultaneously providing anabbreviated,yetexhilaratinghistoryofradioactivityinthetwentiethcentury.Shecaptureshowserendipity,hardwork,andgeniuscoalescedintheirscientificwork,howmagicalradioactivityseemedatthetimeoftheirdiscov-eries,andhowshockinglydangerous,inretrospect,theexperimentstheycarriedoutwere.Radioactivereverber-ateswithenergyandcapturesthecataclysmicculturalchanges—nuclearenergy,warandmedicine—wroughtbytheir(andother’s)groundbreakingscience;apowerfulanduniquebook,forhistorians,andnon-historiansalike.

Tami I. Spector, University of San Francisco, [email protected]

Nothing Less Than an Adventure: Ellen Gleditsch and Her Life in Science.Anne-MarieWeidlerKubanek,CrossfieldPublishing,Montreal,Canada,2010,185pp,ISBN1452842132,$19

InthecelebrationoftheoutstandingcontributionsofMarieCurie,itiswidelyoverlookedthattherewereotherwomenactiveinthefieldofradioactivityduringthatpe-riod.EllenGleditschwasoneofthoseforgottenwomenradiochemists.ThisdefinitivebookbyKubanekfinallybringsrecognitionofthecontributionsofGleditschtotheEnglish-speakingworld.Inadditiontoresearchingcor-respondenceofGleditschwithcontemporaryscientists,Kubanekpainstakingly trackeddownand interviewedsurviving relatives, friends, and former students ofGleditsch.Kubanekhaswoventheircommentariesintothisfascinatingbiographicalstudy.

Gleditschwasbornin1879atMandalinsouthernNorway.Havingafascinationwithsciencefromanearlyage, she excelled in school, particularlymathematics.Hadshebeenaboy,Gleditschwouldhaveprogressedtouniversity:instead,herfatherfoundherapositionas

apharmacyassistant.Afterqualifyingasapharmacist,Gleditschtriedtoobtainauniversityeducationand,inthisquest,shewasaidedbyachemistryprofessorattheUniversityofOslo,Dr.EyvindBødtker.BødtkerhiredherasalaboratoryassistantandheencouragedGleditschtopublishherresearch.BødtkervisitedParisandpesteredMarieCurie to acceptGleditsch intoCurie’s researchgroup.Initiallyveryreluctant,Gleditsch’spublicationintheBulletin de la Société ChimiqueplusapromisebyBødtkerthatGleditschwassotinythatshewouldnottakeupanysignificantroominthelab,persuadedCurietoaccepther.

ArrivinginParisin1907,Gleditschwasgiventhetaskofrecrystallizingthemixtureofbariumandradiumsaltsinordertoconcentratetheradium.Inaddition,CurieaskedhertochecktheclaimbySirWilliamRamsaythatcopper,inthepresenceofradiation,wastransformedintolithium.Gleditschshowedthat the lithiumcamefromcontaminationofthereactionvessel,andnotfromanyelementtransmutation.

LeavingParisin1912,Gleditschappliedin1913toworkforayearwithBertramBoltwoodatYale.Boltwood


sentadiscouragingreplytoGleditsch,butbythattime,GleditschhadalreadyembarkedonashipfortheUnitedStates.UponherarrivalatYale,BoltwoodagreedtohaveGleditschworkwithhim,andsubsequentlytheybecamegoodfriends.WhileatYale,Gleditschestablishedapre-cisevalueforthehalf-lifeofradium.Shealsoworkedontheatomicmassoflead,whichhadbeenshowntodifferfromonemineralsourcetoanother.Asmeticulousaseverinhermeasurements,Gleditsch’sresultsprovidedkeyevidenceforSoddy’sdiscoveryofisotopes.

Returning toNorway,Gleditsch obtained poor-paying,low-statuspositionsattheUniversityofOslo.InJuneof1916,CurierequestedGleditschtoreturntoParistoworkattheradiumextractionfactory.GleditschundertooktheperilouswartimecrossingfromNorway,firsttoEnglandwhereErnestRutherfordhadobtainedasecuritypassforher,andthencetoFrance.GleditschworkedatthefactoryuntilChristmasbeforereturningtoNorway.AftertheWar,in1920,Curieaskedhertoreturn toParis to run the research centrewhileCuriewasonatourtoBrazil.Thefriendshipandcontactsbe-tweenGleditschandCuriecontinuedfortheremainderofCurie’slife.

AttheUniversityinOslo,Gleditch’steachingcom-mitmentsmountedwhile she endeavored to continueresearch.Finally,in1929,againstconsiderableopposi-tion,GleditschwasappointedProfessorofChemistry.

Inthe1930s,asthepoliticalsituationdeterioratedinEurope,Gleditschofferedhaventoasmanyfleeingscientistsasshecould.ThoughLiseMeitnerhadfledtonearbyStockholm,Kubanekpointsoutthat,surprisingly,GleditschhadlittlecontactwithMeitner,eventhoughGleditsch visited Stockholm periodically to see herlong-timefriendandcolleagueinradiochemistry,EvaRamstedt.ThroughouttheSecondWorldWar,GleditschwasactivewiththeNorwegianresistancemovement.

Afterformalretirement,Gleditschcontinuedwithlectureandlaboratorywork,whileexpandingherdiverseotherinterests.Despitehavingbeenexposedtosomuchradiationandsufferingfromperiodicboutsofanemia,Gleditschlivedanactivelifeuntilherdeathin1968atage88.

ThisshortreviewhasfocuseduponGleditsch’sac-tivitieswithinradiochemistry.Kubanek’sbookhasgonebeyondthis,givingatruesenseofGleditsch’slifeinthecontextofawomanscientistinearlytwentieth-centuryacademia.Inaddition,thereareinterestinginsightsintotheworkingsoftheCurielaboratory.Kubanekshouldbecongratulatedforhavingfilledamissingpieceintheearlyhistoryofradioactivity.

Marelene Rayner-Canham & Geoff Rayner-Canham, Grenfell Campus, Memorial University, Corner Brook, Newfoundland, Canada; [email protected]

The First Miracle Drugs: How the Sulfa Drugs Trans-formed Medicine, JohnE.Lesch,OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford&NewYork,2007,xii+364pp,ISBN0-19-518775-X,$29.95

JohnLeschaccomplishesagreatdealwiththisex-haustivelyresearchedandwell-writtennarrativeaboutachapterinthehistoryofscienceandmedicinethathasreceivedsurprisinglylittleattention.The First Miracle Drugs superbly explores the historical importance ofsulfadrugs,persuasivelyshowinghowtheysparkedanexpansionofpharmaceutical researchandproduction,and“atthesametimeeffectedasignificantchangeinthedirectionofmedicine.”(p.7)

Developedinthe1930s,andusedextensivelyuntilthemid1940stotreatcommonbacterialinfections(and

particularlyeffectiveagainststreptococcal infections),sulfadrugsratherquicklywereovershadowedbypenicil-linandotherantibiotics.WhatLeschreveals,however,is how sulfa drug research, application, and chemicaltheorieswere instrumental to advances in twentieth-centurybiomedicine.

First,sulfadrugsdemonstratedthepowerofchemo-therapeuticagents,initiallydevelopedbyPaulEhrlichduringhisquestforananti-syphiliticagentintheearly1900s.Based on the proposition of chemotherapy—namely that chemical compounds introduced into thehostorganismcoulddestroydisease-causingmicroorgan-isms—sulfadrugsrepresentedasuccessfulanddramaticstepforwardinoneofthemostimportantpathwaysinmedicaltherapeutics.OnChristmasDay1932,theGer-


manI.G.FarbencompanyappliedforapatentforPron-tosil,unveilingabreakthroughdrugthatopeneda“newerainthechemicaltreatmentofbacterialinfection.”(p.61)LeschaddsfreshmaterialandanalysistothepivotalbiographyofGerhardDomagk,whowasawardedtheNobelprizein1939(althoughtheNazispreventedhimfromreceiving itat that time) for thedevelopmentofProntosil,thefirstsulfonamideazocompound.

Second,sulfadrugsfueledexpansionofpharmaceu-ticalindustriesinWesternEuropeandtheUnitedStates,andseededgrowinginternationalnetworksofscientists,physicians,andresearchers.Leschadroitlyanalyzesthecomplexitiesofpharmaceutical researchanddevelop-mentinthecontextofNaziGermany,carefullyconsid-eringtheactivitiesandstancesofI.G.Farben’sresearchmanager,HeinrichHorlein.Afterlookingcloselyatthehistoricalrecord,LeschconcludesthatHorlein,whowastriedandacquittedforwarcrimesatNurembergalongwith several high-level I.G. Farben executives, onlyjoinedtheNationalSocialistpartyfor“tacticalaccom-modationratherthanideologicalconviction,”andcitesseveralinstancesofactionsHorleintooktoprotectGer-mansciencefromNaziinfluence(p.109).Furthermore,Leschtracestheuptakeofsulfadrugs,andthedynamicsoftheireventualdevelopmentinFrance,Britain,andtheUnitedStates.Forexample,theUnitedStateswasthelasttoembracesulfadrugs.Itwasnotuntil1936thattwoJohnsHopkinsUniversitymedicalresearchersattendedtheSecondInternationalCongressonMicrobiologyinLondon in 1936 and learned about Prontosil and thesecondgenerationProntylin,whichtheythentestedinexperimentalandclinicaltrialsacrosstheAtlantic.

Finally,Lesch illuminates thecompressedyet in-tenseyearsfromthemid1930stotheearly1940swhenseveral types of sulfa drugswere themost effectivetherapiesagainstanarrayofinfectiousdiseasesincludingpneumonia,gonorrhea,meningitis,bacillarydysentery,hemolytic streptococcal infections, andwounds and

burns.Althoughtheirefficacywasuneven,andparticu-larlyweakforwoundinfections,sulfadrugs“carriedthemainburdenoftreatmentandplayedanimportantroleinpreventionthroughoutWorldWarII.”(p.249)YetoncepenicillinenteredthebattlefieldinJanuary1943,prov-ingitseffectivenessforallconditionsexceptforbacil-larydysentery,penicillinandsubsequentgenerationsofantibioticssooneclipsedsulfadrugs.Theirresoundingsuccesshelpedtoeraseawarenessofthesignificantroleof sulfadrugs incombatingwhatuntil the1930shadbeenhumans’greatestbacterialthreats.

The First Miracle Drugs isasignificantachieve-ment.Notonlydoesitrestoretheoft-forgottenroleofsulfadrugs,italsoprovidesinsightintothemodus ope-randiofprominentpharmaceuticalindustriesduringthepivotaldecadesofthe1930sand1940s.Withnochiponhisshoulder,Leschevaluatesthestrengthsandlimitsofkeyplayersinvolvedintheresearch,development,andclinicalapplicationofsulfadrugs.Furthermore,inthebook’sconcludingchapters,Leschshowshowattemptstoexplainthelimitsofsulfadrugs,namelytheWoods-FildesTheory,helpedtogeneratethecontemporaryan-timetaboliteconcept,whichguidedinnovativeresearchinmedicinalchemistry(aboveall,fortuberculosisandleukemia)inthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury.

Insum,Lesch’sbookismodelscholarshipforthehistoryofscience.Heweavestogethersufficientscien-tificmasteryofchemistrywithanabilitytoexplainthesignificanceofseeminglysmalldetailsatthelaboratorybench,thusdemonstratingthelargersignificanceofthestoryofsulfadrugstobiomedicine,scientificknowledgenetworks, and the politics ofwar and disease duringtheWorldWarIIera.OnehopesthatThe First Miracle Drugs willreceivealargereadershipdespitethefactitispublishedonlyinclothandattimesrequiressomebasicknowledgeofchemistry.

Alexandra Minna Stern, Ph.D., University of Michigan, [email protected]


Boyle: Between God and Science,MichaelHunter,YaleUniversityPress,NewHaven,2009(paperback2010),400pp,ISBN9780300123814,$28.

Asreadersofthisjournalwillknowwell,RobertBoylehasneverbeenfarfromthecenterofstudiesofthescientificrevolutioninEngland.Butinthepastcoupleofdecadestherehadbeenaremarkableamountofnewinformationabouthimandhisworldbroughttolight,aswellasgreatnumberofnewinterpretationsofhimandhiswork.MichaelHunterhasbeenclosetotheheartofthisrevivalofBoylestudies,sincehehasnotonlycontributedtotheinterpretativeliteraturebuthasbeeninstrumentalineditingandpublishingsomepreviouslyunknownworksofBoyle,aneweditionofallhisworks,aneditionofhis correspondence, and the catalogue and electroniceditionofhispapers(calledthe“work-diaries,”atwww.livesandletters.ac.uk/wd/index.html).Theachievementsareenormous,andmake itpossible to reconstruct thewayBoyleputtogetherhiswrittenworksinwaysthatwouldneverbeforehavebeenthoughtpossible.InmanyoftheseendeavorsHunterhasalsohadexpertassistancefromcollaborators,manyofwhomhavethemselvesalsocontributedsubstantiallytotherecentflowofbooksandarticles.Clearly, nooneknows the historical remainsofBoyle andhis associates, and the arguments aboutthem,betterthanHunter.Hissummaryinacompactandreadablebiographyisthereforemostwelcome.Itwillbeundoubtedlyremaintheauthoritative“LifeandWorks”ofBoylefortheforeseeablefuture.

Hunter’s life ofBoyle is structured according tothecommonbiographicalapproach,fromfamilyhistoryandbirth, toproductiveyears,death, and legacy.Thechaptersarenotonlychronologicalbutthematic,sinceHunterorganizeseacharounda topic thathebelievesbestcharacterizesBoyle’sdoingsandwritingsforeachperiodofhis life.A“BibliographicalEssay”arrangedaccordingtothethemesofthechapters,andcontainingagooddealofguidancetosecondarysourcesnotmen-tionedinthenotes,follows,asdoesarecordof“Boyle’sWhereabouts,1627-1691;”theindexissubstantial.Whileno singlebiography cando justice to all aspects of alifeandworks,thescrupulosityofHunter’srecordwillprovideanopenandaccurateguideforanyonelookingforfurtherillumination.

ButtheinterestoftheworkgoesbeyondHunter’smainagendaofgivinganhonestandcarefulaccountingof amajorfigure. For it isBoyle’s own scrupulositythatorganizesHunter’sjudgmentsabouthim.WhetherHunterwasdrawntoBoylebecausehesawakindredspiritinhim,orwhethertheyearsofworkontheBoyle

papers had their effect onHunter, a deep sympathybetween author and subject is evident. It is the adultBoyle’spre-occupationwithcasuistry(theexaminationofconscience,onwhichHunterhaspreviouslywrittenauthoritatively),which he places at the center of hisassessment,withBoyle’sinterestinexperimentalismakindofrelatedcarefulandexactingexaminationofGod’screation—hencethetitleofthebook.HunternotestheyoungBoyle’s reports of his frequentmomentswhenheallowedhisself-describedmelancholicimaginationfree reign (which he called his “raving” and “rovingwildness”), althoughHunterwonders notwhether hewas a day-dreamer but “mildly autistic” (p 35).HealsomentionsBoyle’senthusiasmforthenewromanticliterature coming fromFrance, and later on the timespentwithwittyandfashionablemenandwomen;healsoremarksthatitwasDescartes’Passions of the Soul(1649)thatwastheonlyworkofthefamousphilosopherthathereadmorethanonce(p106).Boyle’srefusaltomarryistouchedongently,butwhetherthiswasduetothedeathofhismotherwhenhewasthreeyearsoldoradomineeringfather,sexualdislikes,uncertainties,ormodesty—asaboy,hewastakenonatourofthebrothelsofFlorencebutlatersaidhehadnotindulgedtheflesh—abrokenheart,deepaffectionfortwoofhissisters,areligiousorphilosophicalcommitmenttocelibacy,thelackofnecessityofayoungerbrother tocarryon thefamily,or theself-consciouspreferencefor remainingfree of entanglements, or all of the above, is left anopenquestion.So,too,Boyle’sapparentdeepinterestinwitchcraftanddemonology,aswellasintransmutationalalchemyandothermysticalattachments,andthevariouspersonalcontactsheseemstohavehadwithadepts,arealso touchedon.But sincemuchofBoyle’s notes onsuchtopicsweredestroyedbypreviousbiographersasanembarrassment,Hunterhas littleevidence toworkwith.Partsof the life, andevenperhapsof thework,therefore,remainshroudedinsilence.AlthoughHuntersaysmorethanoncethatitisunfortunatethatsolittleaboutthesematterscanbesaid,andthatheismakinghisbestefforttomovebeyondBoyletheexperimentalnaturalphilosopher,hestickscloselytotheevidenceandrefuses to speculate.Despitehisbest intentions, then,Hunter’s biography remains that of theBoyle knowntothehistoryofscience.Hedoesnotgivevoicetotheabsencesorattemptareappraisal.Boyle’srelationshipswithhisfamilyandestates,colonialandproselytizingprojects, and even laboratory assistants are carefullydrawn,butneverdominatethelifeofthemindengagedinexposingnaturetoview.Giventheenormousamountofpaperworkonthatlattersubjectwhichremains,one


canwellimaginethatmostofBoyle’senergiesmusthavebeengiventothatpursuit.Weheardistinctvoicesfromtheself-consciousremainsoftheBoylearchive,catchingonlydistantechoesofafewothers.

Hunter’sBoylewill therefore be open to furtherinterpretation.Forexample,IthinkitwouldbepossibletobringBoyle’smedical interestscloser to thecenterof the life.Hunter shows thatBoyle’s later personalaccountdatedhisearlyinterestinnaturalphilosophyto1640,whenhewasinGenevaonhisGrandTourandreadSeneca’sNatural Questions(pp49-50).ButHunteralsoshowsthatthework-diariesindicatethathestartedexperimentingonlyin1649,mentoredbyanumberofmedicalpractitionerswhotookaninterestinchemistry.His lastworkswerealsodevoted tomedicine, and inbetweenhelearnedanatomyandphysiologybydissect-ingwithWilliamPettyinDublinin1653or1654,while(asHuntershowsclearly)hismostfamousearlywork,theUsefulnesse of Experimental Naturall Philosophy(1663)wasorganizedaccordingtothegenreofmedi-caltextbooksknownastheInstitutes.Duringthe1660sand1670sBoylewasoften linked to theapothecariesand chemistswhowerefighting their publicwars of

liberation against certain older traditions ofmedicalphysic,while in thisperiod, too, the famous“EnglishHippocrates,”ThomasSydenham, associatedhis ownworkwithBoyle’s.ButgivenHunter’scaretosticktothestatedevidenceoftheBoylepapersratherthantopursueotherhints,speculationabouttheseandotherassociationswhichmightilluminatesomepartsofBoyle’spoliticalandintellectualagendaisdeclined.

Hunter’sBoyle therefore remains a rather aloof,exactingandindustriouscorpuscularian,theinvestigatorofnatureforitsownsake,orratherforhowitmightsup-portbeliefinthetrueGodinthefaceofbothdoubtandsectarianism.OnewillfindnoBoyleianhiddenagendasorconspiracytheorieshere,onlyanintelligent,earnest,open and non-doctrinairemember of theAnglo-Irishestablishment.WhileitwillnotbethelastinterpretationofBoyle,then,Hunter’sversionofhisLifeandWorkscanbecountedonforitsfullandscrupuloustreatmentoftheevidenceaswehaveit.Hunter’sownintegrityanddiscretiongives theworkanenduringstrength.Boylehimselfwouldsurelyhavebeenpleasedwithit.

Harold J. Cook, Brown University, [email protected]

Atoms in Chemistry: From Dalton’s Predecessors to Complex Atoms and Beyond.CarmenJ.Giunta,Ed.,ACSSymposiumSeries1044,AmericanChemicalSociety,Washington,DC,2010,vii+116pp,ISBN978-0-8412-2557-2,$150.

Anniversariesaredifficulttopinpoint,sincediscov-eryandpublicationmaybeseparatedbyseveralyears,andthehistoryofchemistryisrichinmultiplediscov-eries.Whodiscoveredthecompositionofwater?Whodiscoveredoxygen?Thesediscoverieswerecontestedoriginally,thenbygenerationsofchemistsandhistorians.Butthereisnoquestionthatthechemicalatomictheory,accordingtowhicheachelementwasindecomposable,andcharacterizedbyatomicweight,wastheinventionordiscoveryofJohnDalton,andmadesenseofhislawsofmultipleanddefiniteproportions.Thereismorethanonepossibleanswertothequestionofwhenheinventedhisatomictheory,buthefirstpublishedhisowndetailed

statementoftheatomictheoryin1808,and2008sawtheACSSymposiumcelebratingthebicentenaryofthatpublication,followedin2010bythepublicationofthisslendervolume.

CarmenGiunta’s introduction notes that unlikeDalton’s atoms, today’s chemical atoms are divisible;thatatomsof the sameelementmayexistas isotopeshavingdifferentweights;thatsomeelementsarefarfrompermanent,thankstoradioactivedecay;butDalton,werehealivetoday,couldstilltakecomfortfromthefactthatouratoms,likehis,arediscrete.

Scanning probemicroscopy andmanipulationenableusto“see”andtoplaceindividualatoms.Thisvolumedoesn’t extend to nanotechnology, but it stillcoversahugerange.AsWilliamB.Jensenpointsout,atomismwasseepingintochemicalthoughtforalmosttwocenturiesbeforeDalton.Onecouldargueforalongerpedigree,lookingatmedievalnotionsofleastparticles.


GravimetricatomismwasDalton’sinvention,buttherewere problems in its application, resolved followingCannizzaro’ssolutionattheKarlsruheconference.Jensennotesthatatomspriortothe20thcenturywereassumedtobespherical,whereasonceelectricalatomismwasde-veloped,theshapeofatomsandelectronorbitalsbecameimportantforanunderstandingofbonding.

LeopoldMaylooksatatomismbeforeDalton, inIndia, ancientGreece,Arabic alchemy, andmedievalEurope.Hegallopsthroughtheperiodfromthe16thtothe18thcentury,whichisfairenoughsinceJensencov-ersthatperiod.Thereis,however,muchrecentliteraturethatMaydoesn’tmention,includingstudiesofmedievalatomism(WilliamNewman’scontributionshereareno-table),andmoregenerallyofatomismwithinalchemyandearlychemistryorchymistry.

DavidLewislooksatacenturyandahalfoforganicstructures.Kekulé,CouperandButlerovalldistinguishedthephysicalstructureofmolecules,whichtheyregardedasunknowable,fromchemicalstructurededucedfrombondingaffinities.Therearesomeniceinsightsinthischapter, including the observation thatCouper brokeranksfromthetheoryoftypes,andthathisexcellenceasanexperimentalchemistgaveammunitiontocriticswhoforyears,ignoringhisdetailedinstructions,failedtoreproducesomeofhiskeyresults.Chemicalstructurebecamephysicalstructureonlyafter1874andtheworkofLeBelandvan’tHoff.

WilliamBrock’s chapter, revisiting the atomicdebates, isalsoadelight.Henotes thatchemistsmayhavebeenagnosticaboutphysicalatoms,butthatcon-ventional atomismcharacterized andwas essential totheirchemistry.Henotes,withAlanRocke,thatphysi-calandchemicalatomismincreasinglyprovidedmutualsupportbyconsilience.BenjaminBrodie’scalculusofchemicaloperationswas,asKekulépointedout,basedupon initial assumptions,which, if altered, produceddifferentresults.Itwasthereforearbitraryinawaythat

chemicalatomismwasnot.KekuléalsoobjectedtoBro-die’sapproachbecauseitledtounnecessarilycomplexconsequences.Chemists learned theirchemistryusingtheatomictheory,andtheytendedtoignorethosewho,likeOstwald,opposedthattheory.EvenOstwald,withhisdynamictheory,madeuseofchemicalatoms;andafter thediscoveryofBrownianmotion,heconfessedtheerrorofhisways,andadoptedchemicalatomism.

CarmenGiuntalooksattheperiodfromthe1890stotheearly1930s,inwhichthecompoundnatureofatomswaselaboratedandtheelectron,proton,andneutronwereidentifiedexperimentally,andradioactivityandisotopeswerefirstunderstood.Herewereanswerstoproblemsthathadbotheredchemistsformanydecades.Atomicweightscameclosetointegralvaluesinapatternthatdemandedexplanation;butsomeatoms,likechlorine,hadfarfromintegralweights.J.J.Thomsonworkedwithcathoderays,anddeterminedthechargeandthemassoftheelectron.RutherfordandGeigerexploredthescatter-ingofαparticles,andin1911Rutherfordpublishedanaccountofthescatteringofαandβparticles,alongwithanaccountofthestructureofatoms.Protons,asGiuntanotes,were observed long before theywere named,whereastheoppositewastrueoftheneutron.

GaryPattersonlooksatthephysicalevidenceforatoms,fromthekinetictheoryofgasesandvanderWaalsforces;fromspectroscopy(FaradaytoGeissler),leadingtoanunderstandingofinternalvibrations;cathoderays(Crookes);scattering(Becquerel,Rutherford,andPer-rin);X-raydiffraction;atomicspectroscopy;radioactivedecay;andmassspectrometry.Eachexperimentaltech-niquenotonlyreinforcedasenseoftherealityofatoms,butalsodeepenedunderstandingofthenatureofatoms.WehavecomealongwayfromDalton.

Thefinalchapteroffers“ASelectionofPhotosfromSitesImportanttotheHistoryofAtoms.”JimandJennyMarshallofferanengagingtravelogue.

Trevor Levere, University of Toronto, [email protected]


Reaction! Chemistry in the Movies, MarkGriep&Mar-jorieMikasen,OxfordUniversityPress,NewYork,2009,x+340pp,ISBN978-0-19-532692-5,$49.95

MarkGriepisachemistryprofessorattheUniver-sityofNebraska-Lincoln,wherehehasreceivedaCol-legeDistinguishedTeachingAward.MarjorieMikasen,hiswife,isanartist,withworksinprivateandpubliccollections.Theyhavealso“enjoyedwatchingmoviesforaslongasweremember.”WiththeaidofanAlfredP.SloanFoundationPublicUnderstandingofScienceandTechnologygrant theyhaveproducedan informative,entertaining,andpotentiallyusefulbookontheportrayalofchemistryandchemistsinmotionpictures.

Theorganizationofthebookistopicalandhistori-cal.Therearefivechaptersonwhattheycallthe“darkside”ofchemistry.ThethemesexploredareJekyllandHyde, invisibility, chemicalweapons, bad companies,andaddictions.Thesearefollowedbyfivechaptersonthe“brightside,”whosethemesareinventors,forensics,chemistryclassrooms,goodresearchers,anddrugdiscov-ery.Eachchapterbeginswithananalysisofthechemistryinthethemeandthensummarizesanumberofmoviesdealingwiththetheme,includingonethatischosenasthe“archetype.”Themovies(over100withplotdescrip-tions,another50orsodealtwithmorebriefly)rangeinagefromThe Invisible Thiefof1909toUnited 93, a2006reconstructionofthestoryofthehijackedplanebroughtdownbyitspassengersonSeptember11,2001.

Thebookisafinehistoricalsurveyof themovieindustry’suseofchemistryandchemists;thereareindi-cesnotonlyofmovietitles,butalsoofactors,directors,screenwriters, and “special chemical effects.”But theauthorshaveaimedatmuchmorethanthis.Thereisrealchemistryineverychapter,insomecasesquitealot.The

discussionof invisibility-producing concoctions startswiththeimaginaryingredient“monocaine”from1933’sThe Invisible Man,movestoadiscussionof–caineasasuffixsignifyingalocalanesthetic,andfromtheretoadetaileddiscussionofcocaineincludingitschemistry,its production, and its addictive properties.The “badcompanies” chapter discusses hexavalent chromium(Erin Brockovich, 2000)andmethyl isocyanate (Bho-pal Express,2001)aswellasDDTandthebookSilent Spring.Inthe“brightside”chapteroninventorsthereismaterialonpolymerizationreactionsofvarioustypes(The Man in the White Suit,1951;The Absent-Minded Professor,1961,anditsremake,Flubber, 1997).Thereisalsomentionofaverybriefclipfrom1897showingMr. Edison at Work in his Chemical Laboratory.Thechapter on forensics discusses possible structures fortheimaginarytoxinsandotherreagentsinitsmovies,butalsoincludesfactualmaterialonthelimitsofdetec-tionofsubstances.BiographicalfilmsonrealchemistsincludingDr. Ehrlich’s Magic Bullet (1940),Madame Curie (1943),andEdison, the Man(1940)areincludedinthe“brightside”chapters.

Theauthorsdesignedthisbooktobearesourceforhighschoolandcollegechemistryteachers.Thereisanappendix,“HowtoUseThisMaterialintheClassroom;”the “References” section includes hundreds of booksandresearchpapers.Butthebookisalsojustplainfun,andaworthwhilereadforanyoneinterestedinmovies,howchemistsareperceivedbythegeneralpublic,orthebroaderareaofscienceandsociety.

Ben B. Chastain, Emeritus Professor of Chemistry, Samford University. [email protected]


Periodic Tales: A Cultural History of the Elements from Arsenic to Zinc,HughAldersey-Williams,Ecco(HarperCollins),NewYork,2011,xvii+428pp,ISBN978-0-06-182472-2,$29.99.

Periodic Talesisanengagingbookabouttheusesandimagesofmanychemicalelementsinthewiderworldoutsidethechemicallaboratory.Assuch,itisrelevanttochemistsofallspecialtiesinterestedinhowchemistryand its buildingblocks construct thematerials of art,craft,andpower,andhowtheusesofthesematerialsareassociatedwithvariouselements.

It isnot, however, a cultural history of the ele-ments—despiteitssubtitle.Itisneithersoscholarlynorsosystematicasthesubtitlesuggests.Surely,theBul-letinoughttoreviewaculturalhistoryoftheelements;however, itmightwell choose not to review a bookentitledPeriodic Tales: The Curious Lives of the Ele-ments,whichisthenameofthesameworkpublishedintheUnitedKingdombyPenguin’sVikingimprint.Theauthor’sprologuegivesamoreaccuratepictureofthebook’scontentthandoesitssubtitle,namelyanimpres-sionisticandidiosyncraticcollectionofstoriesabouthowselectedinhabitantsoftheperiodictableareseenoutsidetheworldofchemistry.

Thebookisaimedatanaudienceofreaderswhohavesomeinterestinchemistrybutwhoneednothavetechnical expertise in it.Most ofAldersey-Williams’stalesdescribepropertiesofthefeaturedelementtogiveajumping-offpointformusingsontheelement’sreputationorculturalmeaning.Forexample,gold’scolor, luster,density,softness,andrelativeinertnessarerelatedtoitsusesasornamentandmoney(butnottoolsorweapons)anditsassociationswithroyaltyandthesun.Arsenic’sreputationasapoison,intentional(“inheritancepowder”)orotherwise,ofcourse,isduetoitstoxicity.Cadmium,mercury,andleadarealsohighlytoxic,buttheauthorfocusedonotherpropertiesandotherresonancesfortheseelements.Cadmiumisdiscussedasabaseofpigmentswidelyusedbypainters;mercuryasaliquidmirrorthatmysteriously combinesfluiditywith the properties ofmetals;andleadasheavy,dull,grey,andplodding.

The author begins his prologue by describing a“periodictable”whoseboxescontainartists,filmstars,and astronomical objects.He notes that the periodictablehasbecomeaculturaliconthattranscendschem-istry.Towardtheendoftheprologue,heexchangesthechemists’organizationalschemeforonehedescribesasanthropological:hetreatsindividualelementsunderthefivegeneralheadingsofpower,fire,craft,beauty,and

earth.Eachcategory,fairlybroadlyconstrued,includessomeunsurprisingentriesandsomeseeminglyarbitraryones.For example,gold, iron, carbon, andplutoniumare categorizedunder power, andfittingly enough, asthey illustrateeconomic,mechanical, thermodynamic,andmilitary power.Examples of elements that couldbe included undermore than one of these categoriesincludesilver(treatedundercraft,notpower(economic)orbeauty)andcarbon(whichcouldjustaseasilyhavebeentreatedunderfire,particularlyconsideringthatthecarbonessaydevotesconsiderable space tocharcoal).Hydrogenwouldalsobeeasytoincludeunderpowerorfire,butitisnottreatedatall.Thalliumwouldbedifficulttofitunderanyofthecategories,sofireseemsnomorearbitrarythananyother.

The chapter entitled “NightglowofDystopia” isanexcellentexampleofhowengaging,wide-ranging,and idiosyncratic are the tales collected in this book.Thechapterbeginswithsodium’syellowlight,andhowseveralauthorsdescribesodiumstreetlampsasadetailinurbandystopiansettings.Itmovesontohowsodiumwasdiscovered,notbecauseofitscharacteristicglowbutasaresultofHumphryDavy’selectrochemicalexperiments.AfterafewparagraphsonDavy,includingamentionofhistalentasapoet,Aldersey-Williamsmovestosomealkalimetalsthatwerediscoveredbecauseoftheirchar-acteristiclightemission,namelycesiumandrubidium.Manyoftheelementsmentionedsofarinthechapterareusedinfireworks.AftermentioningtheelaboratedisplayinLondon forwhichHandelwrotemusic anddepic-tionsoffireworksinworksofDickensandThackeray,theauthordescribeshisvisittoBritain’slastremainingmanufacturer of displayfireworks.Aldersey-WilliamsandthemanagingdirectorlamentthatBritain’sbiggestdayforfireworksfallsindankNovember(GuyFawkesnight) and that “control of big displays” as passed to“peoplewhohatefireworks.”Still, to thespectator inthepropermood,thesights,sounds,andevensmellsoffireworkscanbemagical.

Theauthorwritesquiteengaginglywhendescribingproperties,uses,reputations,andresonancesofelementsortheircompounds.Butheisevenmoreengagingwhenhe steps into the story as a participant or an explicitobserver. For example, he describedhis unsuccessfulattempttoreproducetheisolationofphosphorusfromurineandhissuccessfulisolationofiodinefromseaweed.Inthesecases,orwhenhemusesonhisownencounterswiththeelementinquestion,hisessaysvergeonmemoir.

Superficially, then, onemight see a resemblancebetweenPeriodic TalesandPrimoLevi’sThe Periodic


Table(Il Sistema Periodico),bothofwhichinvokeele-mentsandtheperiodictableasaspringboardforidio-syncraticstory-telling.Buttheresemblanceendsthere:inthisbook,theaspectofmemoirislikefrosting,atreatwhereitappears,butnotthemaincourse;theelementscomefirst.Amore apt comparison is toSamKean’srecentbook,The Disappearing Spoon and Other True Tales of Madness, Love, and the History of the World from the Periodic Table of the Elements.Botharecol-lectionsofvignettesabouttheelementsintendedfora

generalreadershipwhohavesomeinterestinchemistry.Periodic Talesisaboutimages,uses,andreputationsofelements—abroadtopic,tobesure,butmorefocusedthanKean’sbook.Inaddition,theglimpsesAldersey-WilliamsprovidesofhimselfdifferentiateshisbookfromThe Disappearing Spoon,whichhasnohintofmemoir.

Carmen J. Giunta, Le Moyne College, [email protected]

BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRYWilliam B. Jensen, Founding Editor Paul R. Jones, Editor (1995-2010)

Dr. Mary Ellen BowdenChemical Heritage Foundation315 Chestnut StreetPhiladelphia, PA [email protected]

HIST OFFICERS, 2011

The BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRY (ISSN 1053-4385) is published biannually (February & September) by the History of Chemistry Division of the American Chemical Society. All matters relating to manuscripts, book reviews, and letters should be sent to Dr. Carmen J. Giunta, Editor. Subscription changes, changes of address, and claims for missing issues, as well as new memberships, are handled by the Sec./Treas.

Dr. Carmen J. GiuntaDepartment of Chemistry and PhysicsLe Moyne CollegeSyracuse, NY [email protected]

ASSOCIATE EDITORS

Dr. Leo B. Slater, HistorianNaval Research Laboratory4555 Overlook Avenue, SWWashington, DC [email protected]

EDITOR

Dr. E. Thomas Strom, ChairUniversity of Texas at Arlington1134 Medalist DriveDallas, TX [email protected]

Dr. Ned D. Heindel, Chair-ElectLehigh UniversityDepartment of ChemistrySeeley G. Mudd LabBethlehem, PA. [email protected]

Dr. Vera V. Mainz, Sec/Treas2709 Holcomb Drive Urbana, IL 61802 [email protected]

Dr. Seth C. Rasmussen, Program ChairDept. Chemistry and BiochemistryNorth Dakota State UniversityFargo, ND [email protected]

Dr. Mary Virginia Orna, Councilor16 Hemlock Place New Rochelle, NY [email protected]

Dr. Roger A. Egolf, CouncilorPennsylvania State University - Lehigh Valley8380 Mohr LaneFogelsville, PA [email protected]

Dr. Arthur Greenberg, Alternate CouncilorDepartment of ChemistryUniversity of New Hampshire - Parsons HallDurham, New Hampshire [email protected]

Dr. Joe Jeffers, Alternate CouncilorDepartment of ChemistryOuachita Baptist University410 Ouachita Street, Box 3786Arkadelphia, AR [email protected]

Dr. Gary Patterson, HistorianProfessor of Chemistry, Carnegie Mellon University400 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA [email protected]

Dr. John B. Sharkey, ArchivistDept. Chemistry & Physical SciencesPace University1 Pace Plaza, New York, NY [email protected]

BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRYSubscription and Membership Application

____ ACS Member at $20/year (includes HIST Division membership)____ Associates: $25/year____ Associates outside North America: $30/year____ Annual Library Subscription: $36/domestic; $40/foreign

Begin subscription with the year 20 __

Name _________________________________________________________Address _________________________________________________________Signature _________________________________________________________

Return to Dr. Vera V. Mainz, HIST Secretary/Treasurer, 2709 Holcomb Drive. Urbana, IL 61802. Checks should be made payable to the Division of the History of Chemistry, American Chemical Society.

BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRYDr. Carmen J. Giunta, EditorLe Moyne CollegeDepartment of Chemistry & Physics1419 Salt Springs Rd.Syracuse, NY 13214-1301

Non-Profit OrgU.S. Postage

PAIDPermit No. 2471

Syracuse, NY

Documents

BULLETIN FOR THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRYacshist.scs.illinois.edu/bulletin_open_access/FullIssues/vol36-2.pdf · The First Miracle Drugs: How the Sulfa Drugs Transformed Medicine 103