Essay Review: An Attempt to Establish the First Principles of the History of Chemistry: History of Analytical Chemistry

Williams L. P. , History of Science, i (1962) 9. Incidental accounts have, of course, appeared in a number of histories of chemistry. The most detailed, together with four important monographs, are grouped here for convenience: Berry A. J. , From classical to modern chemistry (Cambridge, 1954), ch. 6; Campbell W. A. Mallen C. E. , “The development of qualitative analysis from 1750 to 1850”, Part I, Proceedings of the University of Durham Philosophical Society, xiiiA (1957–63; 1958) 108–18; idem. Part II, “Mineral water analysis”, ibid. (1960) 168–73 (the series is to be continued); M. Dennstedt, “Die Entwicklung der organischen Elementaranalyse”, [Ahrens] Sammlung Chemischer und chemischtechnischer Vorträge, Bd. 4 (Stuttgart, 1899) 1–114; Greenaway F. , “The early development of analytical chemistry”. Endeavour, xxi (1962) 91–7; Ihde A. J. , The development of modern chemistry (London, 1964), chs. 11, 21 (also contains excellent bibliography); von Meyer E. , History of chemistry (2nd ed., London, 1898) 141–5, 384–99; Rancke-Madsen E. , The development of titrimetric analysis till 1806 (Copenhagen, 1958).

Az analitikai kémia módszereinek kialakulása (Budapest, 1960).

Geschichte der analytischen Chemie, trans. Kerstein Günther (Braunschweig, 1966). The copy examined, at University College, London, is bound up without the final chapter, sig. 25, pp. 385–96. I do not know whether the whole edition was imperfect.

E.g. “weight-rates” for “proportions” (p. vii), “second extract” for “secondary source” (p. 10), “kinetic quantum” for “vis viva” (p. 91), “theologist” for “monadologist” (p. 112), “valency of acids” for “basicity” (p. 293).

The following deserve mention: Modern chemical symbols were not derived from alchemical ones (p. 28); “oxidised” is anachronistic in the translation on p. 50; the charicature (sic.) of Cavendish was not a self-portrait (p. 65); the Jahresberichte never appeared in English (p. 137); “Thomas” is “Thomson” (p. 160); the William Lewis mentioned was the first, who lived from 1708–81 (p. 202); the Griffin referred to (p. 246), and in the index, is the same J. J. Griffin cited elsewhere in the book; Bischof's criticisms were levelled at Prout's apparatus of 1820, whereas that described dates from 1827 (p. 290); Grotthus's theory of electrolysis should be dated 1805, not 1819 (p. 351); the dates given for William Cruikshank (without a terminal “s”) are those of his confusing namesake (p. 316), and should read (?—1810/11).

Metzger H. , La chimie (Paris, 1930) (Tome XIII, IVe partie of Cavaignac M. E. (ed.), Histoire du Monde.

Caldin E. F. , The structure of chemistry (London, 1961) 5; Pirie N. W. , “Concepts out of context”, British journal for the philosophy of science, ii (1951–52) 273–7.

This has been emphasised most strongly by Greenaway , op. cit., and his “The historical continuity of the tradition of assaying”, Actes du X^me Congrés Internationale d'Histoire des Sciences, Ithaca 1962 (Paris, 1964) ii, 819–23.

Chevreul M. E. , Considérations générales sur l'analyse organique et sur ses applications (Paris, 1824). This thoughtful essay is not used by Szabadváry.

Costa A. B. , Michel Eugene Chevreul (Madison, 1962) 26.

Ihde , op. cit., p. 277. Contrast Campbell and Mallen , op. cit., p. 108.

Faraday M. , Chemical manipulation (London, 1827). (a) p. iii (b) p. viii.

Multhauf R. P. , “The significance of distillation in Renaissance medical chemistry”, Bulletin of the history of medicine, xxx (1956) 329–46; idem, The origins of chemistry (London, 1967); Debus A. G. , “Solution analysis prior to Robert Boyle”, Chymia, viii (1962) 41–60.

Campbell Mallen , op. cit., Part II. Cf. the reports of Section B of the British Association for the Advancement of Science during its early years.

Kapoor S. C. , “Berthollet, Proust, and proportions”, Chymia, x (1965) 53–110.

Multhauf R. P. , “On the use of the balance in chemistry”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, cvi (1962) 210–18.

Greenaway F. , John Dalton and the atom (London, 1966) 53–4.

A restricted beginning was made by Child E. , The tools of the chemist, their ancestry and American evolution (N.Y., 1940). See also Ferchl F. Süssenguth A , A pictorial history of chemistry (London, 1939). F. Greenaway is preparing a modern catalogue of the chemistry collection at the Science Museum, London.

Griffin J. J. , Chemical recreations (8th ed., Glasgow, 1838) 75.

Museum of History of Science, Oxford, Brodie papers, MS Museum 73.

Sebelien J. , Beitrage zur Geschichte der Atomgewichte (Braunschweig, 1884) is not strictly historical. A more useful contribution was the Stas Memorial Lecture of Mallet J. W. , Memorial Lectures of the Chemical Society (1893–1901) (London, 1901).

Ure A. , “On the ultimate analysis of vegetable and animal substances”, Philosophical transactions, cxii (1822) 460; Annalen der Pharmacie, xxxvi (1838) 193n (Liebig's editorial note to a paper by Hess).

Nierenstein M. , “A missing chapter in the history of organic chemistry: The link between elementary analysis by dry-distillation and combustion”, Isis, xxi (1934) 123–30; Hiebert E. N. , “The problem of organic analysis”, L'Aventure de la science. Mélanges Alexandre Koyré (Paris, 1964) i, 303–25. See also the invaluable article, Holmes F. L. , “Elementary analysis and the origins of physiological chemistry”, Isis, liv (1963) 50–81. Dennstedt's review, op. cit., still remains the most comprehensive account of the history of elementary organic analysis.

Berzelius J. J. , “General views of the composition of animal fluids”, Medical chirurgical transactions, iii (1812) 198–276 contains only proximate analyses.

E.g. Daniell J. F. , An introduction to the study of chemical philosophy (2nd ed. London, 1843) 607–609.

Prout W. , “On the ultimate composition of simple alimentary substances”, Philosophical transactions, cxvii (1827) 360. Significantly, Prout rejected Liebig's technique on the grounds that it was not accurate enough, On the nature and treatment of stomach and urinary diseases (3rd ed., London, 1840) XCII; (4th ed., 1843) 556.