Bull. Hist. Chem. 13 14 (1992-93) 29 reactions involving oxygen - perhaps a faint resonance of the voisier?) of the fact that the weight of the chemical reagents historical association of that principle with Lavoisier. before and after a reaction must be unchanged, but rather the Such silence is perhaps doubly surprising since not only had explicit enunciation of a particular principle and the kinds of Lavoisier enunciated the principle of the conservation of assumptions which finally made that enunciation reasonable in matter in 1789, but in Germany Immanuel Kant had laid down ways it hadn't been before. The parallel and explicit formula- a similar principle in his influential Metaphysical Foundations tion of both conservation principles as fundamental principles f Natural Science of 1786. For Kant, the first principle of of the sciences of chemistry and physics was in the first mechanics was that "in all changes in the corporeal world the instance the work of Robert Mayer. Lavoisier notwithstand- quantity of matter remains on the whole the same, unincreased ing, it appears to me that, for the larger scientific community, and undiminished." Yet Kant also assigned to matter primitive the general recognition of the principle of the conservation of attractive and repulsive forces, and the "dynamical" philoso- matter went hand in hand with, and was only made possible by phies of nature which were popular in early 19th-century the general acceptance of the principle of the conservation of Germany tended to eliminate matter entirely in favor of its energy during the second half of the 19th century. construction out of ontologically more primitive forces; hence there was no matter, let alone mass, to be conserved. e e e ces a o es The very notion of the conservation of matter was problem- atic because of the widespread lack of precision concerning the . e ai s a ou Maye s wo k ca e ou i my ook, Robert conception of matter as a distinct entity, especially as it related Mayer and the Conservation of Energy, i ce o U i e si y ess, to the nature of the so-called imponderables, i.e. heat, light, . a wo k a so co ai s a mo e u y ocume e e iew o e electricity, and magnetism, regarded as weightless fluids. c emica i e a u e e e e o e e. (Recall here that even Lavoisier listed caloric and light among 2. . W. a es a G. W. Mu cke, "Masse" a "Ma e ie," i the elements.) One prominent writer, Jacob Friedrich Fries, . W. a es e a ., Johann Samuel Traugott Gehler' s Physikal- interpreted ponderable matter and the so-called imponderables isches Wörterbuch, o s. i 20 s., ei ig, 82 4 , o . 6, . as merely different states of aggregation of the same underly- 2, 8 6, . 2 a 4 2, es ec i e y. ing substance (4). This was a notion which held out the implicit 3. G. amé, Cours de physique de l'Ecole polytechnique, s. possibility of the effective disappearance of ponderable matter i 2 o s., a is, 8 6 , o . , 8 6, . 428. and hence cut the ground from under the utility of a principle 4. . . ies, Lehrbuch der Naturlehre, e a, 826, . . of the conservation of matter. Heidelberg professor of physics . G. W. Mu cke, "Im o e a i ie [sic]," i e e e ce 2, o . Georg Wilhelm Muncke insisted that the alleged weightless- , . 2, 8 0, . 6 6 . ness of the imponderables had not been proven empirically, 6. . . . Au e ie , Handbuch der empirischen menschlichen and thus he held open the possibility that they were only Physiologie, o s., u i ge , 80 802, o . 2, 802, . 8 tenuous states of matter, again blurring the concept of ponder- 0. able matter and rendering its conservation less than obvious (5). As he observed, the imponderables would only have to be as light with respect to hydrogen as hydrogen is with respect to Kenneth Caneva is an Associate Professor in the Department platinum in order to escape detection by our most sensitive of History,UniversityUniversityofNorth Carolina at Greensboro ,Greens- balances. One of Mayer's professors of medicine at Tubingen, boro,NC 27412. He specializes in early 19th-century German the then-prominent Johann Heinrich Ferdinand Autenrieth, science, and has recently published a book on Robert Mayer concluded his discussion of phenomena of electricity, galva- and the conservation of energy. nism, magnetism, chemical reactions, heat, and light with the judgment that "imponderable substances" differ only in degree from "ordinary heavy bodies: They do not constitute a class of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE IN CHEMISTRY entities wholly different from the other material substances, and between the magnetic fluid and rigid flint there is an almost Chauvinism and the Pursuit of Science continuous transition" (6). In other words, it would be hard to insist on the conservation of matter as a principle if one's Alan J. Rocke, Case Western Reserve University conception of ponderable matter was such that there was nothing in principle to conserve. It took the clarification of the Imbued as they are with the ideal of scientific objectivity, concept of energy and the abandonment of the time-honored scientists and their historians can forget or neglect an important but vague notion of the imponderables before the concept of truism: scientists are just as susceptible as their fellow human matter was distinct enough to make its co se a io a mea beings to chauvinism, bigotry, greed, ambition, and all the i g u principle of science. other faults o w ic uma i y is ey. wo news articles At issue is not chemists' routine acceptance (after La- published in Science in 1989 are relevant to the first sin in my
0 u . is . C em. 4 ( 2 list. One article describes the concern of members of the chemistry section of the Nobel Prize Committee over the nearly invariable tendency of American chemists to nominate other Americans - in fact, "in the great majority of cases," members of their own departments. The 1988 winners, three Germans, together received nominations from ten countries, but not one from an American chemist (1). The other article concerns the outcry among French Cana- dians over a decision to change the name of the Parisian journal Annales de l' Institut Pasteur: Virology to Research in Virol- ogy. The director of the Institut Pasteur defended the decision by pointing out that while about half of their submissions in 1988 were from Francophone countries, nearly all were written in English. One Canadian is quoted as saying that "It is an Anglo-Saxon point of view to say that science is universal and that the language of scientific communication should be Eng- lish because of that." Another critic argues that the real tragedy is the loss of Pasteur's name from the title, for "Pasteur belongs to the world" (2). The introduction of Pasteur's name into the debate is ironic, for Pasteur himself, an ardent patriot, was involved in a nationalist contretemps. Awarded an honorary doctorate from the University of Bonn, he returned it in anger during the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71), saying that he no longer believed "that science has no country" (3). He who seeks examples of chauvinist fervor among 19th- century scientists finds a true embarrassment of riches (4). It is my intention here to examine this subject, with the goal of forming a judgment as to the extent to which such an assuredly widespread phenomenon may have been harmful to the suc- Augus Keku é cessful international pursuit of science. My focus here is not so much on specific international institutions, conventions, half year "Wanderjahre," divided among the countries of congresses, scientific societies, and formal or informal social France, Switzerland, and England, followed by a brief period networks, but rather on the question of how the social-psycho- in Heidelberg - all of this being but a prelude to nine years as logical phenomenon of shared prejudices in national groups a professor in French-speaking Belgium. By the time he was interacts with the cognitive phenomenon of the growth and called to Bonn he had spent 13 of the previous 16 years abroad; transformation of scientific ideas. My case study centers on he could speak English and French almost without accent, and German views of French chemistry in the 19th century, and fluent Italian as well. He was also principal organizer of the especially during the Franco-Prussian War. I will examine the first international chemical congress. Hofmann, for his part, opinions of August Kekulé, who has been accused of Prussian was likewise a product of Liebig 's Giessen laboratory; he then chauvinism (5); more space will be devoted to the views of spent 20 happy and productive years in England before return- Kekulé's teacher, Justus Liebig, and his chief tormentor and ing to Germany by accepting a sumptuous position at the rival, Hermann Kolbe. I will argue that the prevalence and University of Berlin. A suave sophisticate like Kekulé, intensity of chauvinist fervor does not necessarily interfere Hofmann's oral and written English was so masterly that he did with the rational and successful pursuit of science. not hesitate to correct the language of his English students. Henry Armstrong's thumbnail sketches were apt (6): Keku é, o ma , a Ko e Keku é was a o a is oc a i ma e . A i e ec ua o a ig August Kekulé, August Wilhelm Hofmann, and Hermann o e , ma y si e i is i e es s, e was oo c i ica a cy ica o e Kolbe, the three premier German chemists in the generation a ea e o me i e way a o ma was, oug e e su e io a e Liebig, form interesting contrasts, in their personal lives o im as a o a o h a ac e oug is c ea cu a e , is gi o as in their science. Kekulé was cosmopolitan and patrician in ecise s eec a is g ea comma o k ow e ge ... Ko e was style, and was much inclined toward i e a io a ism. A e equa y sim e [as a k a ], e e a ma o e wo , a goo is initial education at Liebig 's a s, he enjoyed a four and a ec u e a a a e e w i e u o a o a o : e es c emis o
Bull. Hist. Chem. 13 14 (1992-93) 31
em a . o ma a Keku é we e cosmo o i a s ... Ko e us e ea o Ge ma , aca emic e agogue o e ig es c ass: e e is o o e way o esc i i g im.
Indeed, Kolbe's was a very different character. With the single exception of Jacob Berzelius, whom he considered an honorary countryman, all of Kolbe's models were German - above all, the heroes of the classical period of the rise of German chemistry: Liebig, Friedrich Wöhler and Robert Bunsen. Educated at the hands of the theoretically conserva- tive experimental masters Wöhler and Bunsen, Kolbe served at the Universities of Marburg and Leipzig after a postdoctoral stint in England. He spent his entire career trying to develop and to preserve the radical theory and its electrochemical basis, in the face of the ultimately successful attacks by a French- English reform movement founded by Charles Gerhardt and Auguste Laurent and promoted by Alexander Williamson and Kekulé. Linguistically as well, Kolbe forms a contrast; al- though he learned a reasonable amount of English in the 18 months he spent in London, he soon forgot most of it, at least as far as oral communication is concerned (7). There is no evidence he ever mastered or even seriously studied any other foreign language. Apparently he could read French, although certainly he avoided doing so as much as possible. As for foreign travel, aside from his one postdoctoral period and a e ma Ko e
brief laboratory tour to England, a fishing vacation in Norway with his friend Eduard Vieweg, and his semiannual "cures" taken often in Swiss resorts, he never left the German Confed- eration or Empire. He particularly avoided the Catholic countries of Austria and France. Kolbe's first recorded derogation of the French dates from the period in 1848 just after the February revolution in Paris and the "March days" in Germany. Certain French chemists, he wrote in an encyclopedia article, had been "irresponsible" in proposing "imagined laws" based on "vague hypotheses" that purported to overturn the radical theory. Similar slurs are found in Kolbe 's long paper on radicals published in the fall of 1850 (8). But his language became much sharper when it appeared that the reformers might really carry the day. His concern and anger can be discerned in the first fascicle of his textbook, published in 1854. French chemists, he wrote, were only playing games with formulas, with "unbelievable self- deception." They opposed the (predominantly German) radi- cal theory out of chauvinist spite, since "it had not developed on French soil." There was much more here in a similar vein (9).
Liebig and Dumas
But Berzelius was not Kolbe's only model for ferocious Augus Wi e m o ma critiques; he also followed the pattern established by his other
2 u . is . C em. 4 ( 2
great hero, Liebig. Liebig's views of foreign chemistry are best exemplified by examining his relationship with his greatest rival, J. B. Dumas. During the 1830s Liebig and Dumas were contemporaries pursuing the same field of research in different countries, and had much in common - so it was perhaps inevitable that they would become rivals. Both men were demon workers with extraordinarily creative minds, cultivat- ing a field that had too many mysteries and too few facts. Both men had occasion to accuse the other, sometimes justly, of experimental work that was fast but sloppy and both had occasion to accuse the other, probably also sometimes with some truth, of poaching results. As violent as their disputes at times became, by 1840 they found themselves not very far apart - though neither man was then willing to admit this to the other. In his worst moments Liebig thought of Dumas as a true charlatan or "Schwindler," who was not above using question- able tactics or sleight of hand to achieve renown, and whose greatest concern was pursuit of effect, flourish, and the rhetori- cal turn of phrase, all for the sake of personal ambition. For his part, Dumas often viewed Liebig as a heavy-handed and us us o ie ig hotheaded chemical empire-builder. After a brief alliance at the end of 1837 and the beginning of 1838, Liebig became he was about to visit to help dedicate his new factory; he was dissatisfied with the pact he had made with Dumas, and in 1840 very much looking forward to the expectation of seeing Dumas made a "total break" from the Frenchman, the quarrel resulting there, as he was anxious to renew their old friendship (14): from substitution theories, and based upon some real issues along with some pure misunderstandings. Dumas was a ... si ce I a e a ways e y ig y es eeme e umas as o e o e "tightrope dancer," a "Jesuit," a "highwayman," and a "thief," mos ou s a i g a i ge ious me amo g e c emis s a scie like "nearly all Frenchmen" (10). To Berzelius he complained is s o ou ay. e a s mo e a a y o e c emis i Eu o e I i (11): myse i e osi io o u gi g a i i g e a ue o is wo k, si ce we e y eque y a e e cou e e eac o e i ou i es i ese e c me u y a e o ee i g o ue o o , o se se o ga io s, a a e cu i a e e same ie . us ice a ai ess, ey a e o ma y yea s ee occu yi g emse es wi eo e ica s ecu a io s a a e use ess o scie ce, Liebig 's hopes for the encounter were realized, as he wrote to a so e y o sa is y ei ow a i y a a oga ce ey a e Wöhler (15): isco e e a e wo a ica mus e a e a mus e su s i u e y e wo y e. is is e g ea es o ei isco e ies. We a a i e a e same ime, em ace eac o e , a e e y i g U o u a e y w e I s e o wa e e is i Ge ma y o y e y a was i e. umas was e eme y co ia , a ooke so you g a I weak ess, so I s a com e e y a o e, o o e w o as e oug owe a y ecog i e im. is wi e a aug e we e wi im, o se e o s a u o em su o s me. I s o , i is a a ime a I am e y as wi esses o e a s o e e ge a e a ewe . O u a y, a a e u e om ese mise a e ma e s o a ica W i su ay e ce e a io was s e i a me y, e e e e i g io s o c emis y o ysio ogy, w ic ow i e es s me eme a a que , o w ic e ci i a mi i a y ea e s o i e we e i i e . ous y. A e e o e a que umas s oo u , ga e a o g s eec , a e e me wi a ious u e y, a i a y ook a eco a io o e Unfortunately here too Liebig collided with Dumas, when egio o eu om is ocke , a a e i o me a o g wi e Liebig became convinced in 1842 that Dumas had stolen his e e i e ame o e esi e o e e c e u ic. I was original ideas on plant and animal nutrition, and the heat of u e a e a oug I wou ai u I ma age a s eec a discord only became more intense (12). ecei e a acco a e. us e e e ge imse o me. es i e a Even in the midst of some of these disputes, however, Liebig e as a mag i ice a u e. was able to recognize Dumas' merits and to concede when he had been in the wrong, and when the violence of his replies The following year Liebig dedicated a new edition of his sometimes had done nothing but damage (13). On 23 April Chemische Briefe to Dumas, and the two exchanged a number 1850 Liebig wrote his friend C. F. Kuhlmann in Lille, whom of warm letters until Liebig's death in 1873.
Bull. Hist. Chem. 13-14 (1992-93) 33
Kolbe certainly absorbed an extremely negative view of i y, a o i io o ee scie i ic esea c , e c. Wi e a e o Dumas from Liebig, who was one of his idols and models, and Kö igg ä a ew s a ose o e Ge ma y om is ay Ge ma y is whose diatribes were quite open and often published in the a u i ie a io . u e , ou o i ica , ma e ia , mo a a scie i ic scientific literature. Berzelius, and his former student Wöhler, e e o me wi ecei e a ew im e us. also had opinions of Dumas and other French chemists which were not much more positive than Liebig's. But Dumas had In short, Kolbe was convinced that "Prussia's victory signifies retreated around 1840 from a leading theoretical role, replaced freedom and free development in every direction." in the theoretical dialectic by such chemists as Laurent and Kolbe's long-simmering hatreds burst into thepublic domain Gerhardt, and in the 1850s by Adolphe Wurtz as well. Kolbe's at the time of the Franco-Prussian War. The decline of his relationships with Gerhardt and Wurtz paralleled Liebig's influence in theoretical chemistry, along with his general relations with Dumas, except for the lack of a final reconcili- isolation in the collegial community, must have increased ation. It was with Gerhardt and Wurtz that Kolbe felt the Kolbe's ill temper, and after January 1870 he had his own strongest sense of rivalry, enmity, hatred - and once in a while journal to express his unexpurgated opinions. The war, along even affinity, if not regard. with the uproar over Wurtz' opening of his recently published history of chemistry, proclaiming that "chemistry is a French Chemistry: A French or German Science? science," provided the occasion for his outbursts (18). In a polemical article "On the State of Chemistry in France" pub- Kolbe's prejudices against foreigners, especially the French, lished simultaneously with the French declaration of war (and were not necessarily tied to conservative political sentiments. obviously modeled on Liebig's identically-titled essays on Kolbe's general political orientation during his 30s was quite Prussian and Austrian chemistry), Kolbe lambasted the French typical of his class and time period, namely center to center- for their dissolute ways and their feeble scientific establish- right liberalism. During his years at Marburg he had nothing ment. There is n French university, he declared, that can but contempt for the reactionary regime governing the state of compare with n German university for chemical education Electoral Hesse. He vaguely distrusted Prussia but despised (19). Austria; feared republicans, extreme democrats, and socialists; As the war proceeded Kolbe was even further radicalized. and he hoped for German unification, presumably under Prus- He was delighted by the Prussian victories at Sedan and Metz, sian leadership but with constitutional guarantees. He looked but impatiently abided the long siege of Paris; he did not with deep suspicion on Bismarck's and King Wilhelm's struggles of the 1860s with the Prussian "Landtag." When in the spring of 1866 war with Austria threatened, Kolbe (with most fellow Germans) feared a catastrophe, for it was by no means clear that the Prussian army was sufficient to the task, and the Austrian yoke promised to be infinitely more onerous than that of Prussia. "Lieber Bismarckisch (so schlimm das auch ist)," commented Kolbe to Edward Frankland about the alternative outcomes of the approaching war, " l österreichisch-Jesuitischr Moreover, Saxony (where Kolbe had moved as a result of his call to the University of Leipzig) was ominously sandwiched between Prussia and Austria, and everyone expected the battle zone to be close to Leipzig (16). In the event, the decisive battle occurred at Sadowa (Königgrätz), 200 miles southeast of Leipzig, and was handily won by the Prussian army. Kolbe's sentiments, again like those of most of his countrymen, were profoundly altered by this military success and by the prospect of a unified German nation. "Say what you like against Bismarck," Kolbe wrote Frankland, "one cannot deny that he is a decisive, quietly reflective man, th pr r t t n f E r p " ( :
e si ua io is e a s e o owi g. a Aus ia wo e u e a a es oye ussia, Ge ma y wou e os a we wou a e Aus ia co i io s: ies, esui ism, co co a , sys ema ic co u io , ge e a mo a isi eg a io , es uc io o ma e ia os e ea a is e umas
4 u . is . C em. 4 ( 2
understand why Moltke held off on the bombardment for so both countries toward crisis had been essentially invisible to long (20). To Franz Varrentrapp he wrote (21): the German public, and the war propaganda was skillful. Even Kekulé was induced to denounce the "nation of scoundrels" e e c a e u y a a io o a c i e , a ma me . I a e they were fighting (27). a ee a e a co em o e e c , u I a e e Emotions began to cool, at least on the German side, after co si e e em so u ci i i e , a a ous a ase as we ow see peace was concluded, but Kolbe kept up the heat, continuing em o e. I e ie e a ce is ow i a a i ec i e, a wi e e his Francophobic polemics for more than two years. Having eco e ... e w o e a io u s o a ue a a o o o , o y o been elected, with Liebig, Wöhler, and Bunsen, a charter g oi e [sic]. honorary member of the German Chemical Society, Kolbe resigned in 1871 out of anger that the Society had not defended The sharpest contrast in this respect could be drawn between his critique of Wurtz's dictum when that critique had met the French and the Germans, Kolbe thought, as he wrote to public foreign opposition. Meanwhile Kekulé, together with Frankland (22): Jacob Volhard and Emil Erlenmeyer, successfully persuaded the Society to become less provincial; among other reforms e Ge ma s, w o seek ei g oi e [sic] i e a s o eace, a go suggested by this group, after 1872 the Society only named o wa o y as a as eso , wou e e sac i ice ei so s o e w im foreigners as Honorary Members. But _to Kolbe the Society o a yo e, e e i a a ow mi e , a a ica , e icose Ge ma had already been far too internationally oriented (28). em e o s ou o e ay acce e o e o e. I ou cou y e o y Hofmann, who very much wished to soothe the raw feelings ki o wa a wi e o u a a ossi e is o e a e e s e between the two countries, picked up the cue at this point, a e a . proposing Auguste Cahours as the first Frenchman to receive such an honorary membership after the war ended. This was Frankland ought therefore have no fear of future German the last straw for Kolbe, who protested loudly, both publicly aggression. Furthermore, Kolbe bristled at Frankland's senti- and privately (but without effect, partly because he had now ments in favor of a republic, for the example of the United resigned). In his journal he asserted that there were "dozens" States illustrates that a republic is no more than "a playground of more deserving Germans. "What a disgrace," he wrote for swindlers and adventurers, on which the insolent medioc- Varrentrapp, "again with Cahours; what is the purpose of this rity bring their influence to bear, a language in whose diction- international coquetting with France? Hofmann unfortunately ary the word 'gentleman' does not appear... My dear friend, for lost the fatherland in England" (29). heaven's sake no republic." The Germans, like the English, Kolbe' s tone became even harsher in his final years, after the Kolbe concluded, would rather have a German king than an death of his wife, when he became truly irrationally preoccu- emperor, and not one from Prussia; "aber die Nothwendigkeit pied with his various crusades. Ironically, the French were far hat eiseme Anne," and he and his compatriots were delighted less oriented toward structure theory than the Germans; Kolbe with their new situation (22). noticed this fact with alarm, for to him it indicated a surprising When the French Academy of Sciences neglected to remove source of French strength that was dangerous for the future from the wrapper of their Comptes rendus mention of the health of the German chemical community. "I know full well," Alsatian cities of Strasbourg and Mulhouse, and Metz in he wrote Volhard (30): Lorraine, after their transfer to Germany, Kolbe was enraged (23). He wrote Liebig (24): ... a i ussia co i ues o ui c emis y ... e ime wi soo e u w e , as i e seco eca e o is ce u y, Ge ma c emis s My co em o e w o e co em o a y e c c emica wo is wi go o a is o e uca e emse es i c emis y. As a a ime, egi i g mo e a mo e o u i o i y. E e e a isia w e e e yo e i Ge ma y was c a y a ou e a u i oso ie o Aca emy a ea s o a e o i ea ow i icu ous i a ea s o e ege a Sc e i g, is swi e ma e o ea way i a ce, a o sc o a y wo y is mise a e icke i g, o w ic e as eu a e y easo a ce was a su e io o us i scie ce, so o ay, wi co s i u e e e me . o gi e my e ec o a io . e e a io o e si g e e ce io o Wu , e c c emis s kee away om e is os a yi g a io some imes makes me a i e assio a e. a u i oso isc e swi e o e mo e s uc u a a o i g c emis y, a e e o e ey wi gai a ea s a o us o ce mo e. But Liebig's was a sympathetic ear. The French, Liebig complained, were displaying "insane arrogance," demonstrat- The irony was, as Kolbe well knew and loved to point out, that ing that they were a "dissolute race;" the "megalomania of this this same unscientific structural chemistry was a direct product unfortunate nation is certainly capable of anything" (25). of French chemistry - namely an outgrowth of the type theories "How terrible it must be for this vain and arrogant nation to of Dumas, Laurent, Gerhardt, and Wurtz. Kolbe thought this have achieved not a single advantage in battle" (26). Bis- was where Kekulé had gone wrong; he had followed not only marck's adroit behind-the-scenes manipulations maneuvering the bankrupt theories of the French, but also their larcenous
I A is . C em. 13-14 ( 2 behavior. The more highly Kelmlé's textbook was valued, the more Kolbe railed against the "tendentious forgeries" commit- ted by its author (31). Despite Kolbe' s quirkiness, he saw a number of points quite clearly. Kekulé was indeed an internationalist at heart, and he had been decisively influenced by the French chemists Dumas, Laurent, Gerhardt, and Wurtz. He and other (predominantly German and German-influenced) chemists - such as Erlen- meyer, Crum Brown, Frankland, Ladenburg, Butlerov, Baeyer, Fischer, Victor Meyer, Graebe, and Wislicenus - had devel- oped structural chemistry from that essentially French back- ground. Kolbe was also correct in viewing Kekulé and Wurtz as flawed historians, for the latter did have hidden agendas in mind, and neglected the very real contributions of those they disagreed with - especially Kolbe, Frankland, and Couper. Finally, Kolbe was right to see Wurtz as one of the few prominent representatives of structural chemistry in France. Indeed, Wurtz' isolation in France was sort of a mirror image of Kolbe's in Germany, placing the contretemps over his chauvinist historical comment in even sharper relief. Read with attention to the thematic orientation of the entire work, and placed in context with Wurtz' other interpretive, historical and polemical writings of the 1860s, the apparently gratuitous chauvinism of his opening motto is subject to a different, or at least additional interpretation. Wurtz had accepted essential parts of the Gerhardtian reform in 1853; by 1858 he was a full and enthusiastic convert. But continued opposition among his colleagues led him, rather isolated in France, to initiate a concerted campaign for the new chemistry, including struc- A o e Wu tural ideas. He started a new journal (Repertoire de chimie pure) and a new society (Société Chimique de Paris), became mere chauvinist puffery. But it was difficult for foreigners to a leader, with Kekulé, of the Karlsruhe Congress organizers, get past that first fearsome line. wrote a heavily subtexted éloge for Gerhardt and Laurent, Kekulé practiced the same technique. His 1859 history of presented invited historical lectures to the Société Chimique, chemical theory, prefacing his textbook, had a number of the College de France and the Chemical Society of London, significant omissions. As was the case with Wurtz, these were wrote a textbook, and finally published a full, formal history partly due to selfish priority interests, and chauvinism may prefacing a multi-volume dictionary. All were designed to have also played a role; but there was also a rational didactic propagate the new chemistry in a country still dominated by or rhetorical intent promoted by the distortions. He had a new older ideas. None was notably successful (32). theory to push, and needed to tell the history behind it in such I want to suggest, in short, that Wurtz' "chemistry is a a way as to make the theory appear rational, even inevitable. French science" has a thematic load heavier than mere chau- The work of Kolbe and Frankland in particular failed to fit into vinism. It was not so much Lavoisier and the first chemical the neat story Kekulé wanted to tell. This historical-didactic revolution that Wurtz wanted to promote, as Lavoisier's coun- technique was of course very old and well-attested (33). It had trymen Laurent and Gerhardt (not to mention of course Wurtz been practiced with particular skill by Lavoisier himself. himself, aided by foreign Francophiles such as Williamson and Somewhat devious and covert (or perhaps self-deluding) such Kekulé) who were the authors of the still incompletely con- a procedure may be - but chauvinism was only at best a summated "second" revolution. The work was directed inward secondary motive. rather than outward, its intended audience was Wurtz's fellow The historical work of Hermann Kopp, a close friend to Frenchmen. What better way to persuade them to join the new Kolbe, Hofmann, and Liebig, forms a sharp contrast to Kekulé's movement than to appeal to their patriotism by arguing for the and Wurtz' partisan histories. Despite having been commis- continued dominance of French chemistry in the international sioned to write a history of chemistry "in Germany," moreover arena? If I am right, we have here an example of nationalism just at the time of the Franco-Prussian War and in the immedi- put to rhetorical purposes, but for a cognitive goal - and not for ate aftermath of Wurtz' apparent chauvinism, Kopp's Ent-
6 u . is . C em. 13 14 ( 2 wickelung der Chemie in der neueren Zeit was aggressively Indeed, Liebig, like Kekulé, had begun his career as a and explicitly international in orientation. The case of Kopp is Francophile, showing nothing but contempt for his previous sufficient to show that chauvinist currents were by no means German teachers. He always revered his French mentors all-pervading, even during the most jingoistic of times (34). Arago, Dulong, Thenard, and above all Gay-Lussac. He subsequently formed an exceedingly close relation with J. T. Concluding Observations Pelouze and others, spoke and wrote French fluently, and until his death kept in close contact with the leading figures of the The somewhat optimistic interpretation to which such consid- Parisian establishment. In 1845 he wrote Wöhler: "Indeed, erations lead - that chauvinism in science is perhaps less Frenchmen have something exceptionally appealing and ami- damaging than has hitherto been thought - can be further able that is generally missing from the Germans" (39). As we supported by looking again at some of the characters we have have seen, he successfully reconciled with Dumas. Even already met. Liebig, for instance, exhibited prominent ele- Gerhardt, whom he accused publicly of being an assassin and ments of Francophilia as well as Francophobia, and not only a highwayman, eventually managed to elicitkind and generous because his first rigorous scientific education took place in comments from his former teacher, and became fully recon- Paris. His biographers emphasized his international outlook, ciled before his death in 1856. which was often in evidence (35). As the war with France Liebig concluded his speech (38): progressed, Liebig expressed compassion and concern for his French colleagues, some of whom were good friends. In A wa m sym a y o a a is o e a g ea a a u se is September 1870 Liebig wrote his brother-in-law, the army os i a i y a e amo g e i es ai s o e e c c a ac e ese physician Karl Thiersch, then with the Prussians in Versailles, ea u es wi e eki e a eac i a e o e eu a g ou o requesting (36): scie ce, o w ic e es mi s o e wo a io s mus mee i ei e ea o s owa e ig goa commo o o us wi e ... a e mig seek ou eg au a o e im is e . I wo e i e a ica e ee i g o o e oo g a ua y co i u e i e ie ow ou ie s i a is, umas, e igo , oussi gau , e c. a e o scie ce o soo e e i e ess a e ee y wou e e c oi g? I o y i we e ossi e o o some i g o em, u ey wi a io a i e ee s owa Ge ma y, as a esu o e wa w ic ey o e a owe ou o a is. e o e y ci y, w a su e i g s e aces o ce u o us.
Through Thiersch, Liebig succeeded in getting a letter to Partisan emotion was clearly showing through here, but we Deville in Paris from his wife, a refugee in Geneva. He sent 500 must grant that Liebig's heart was in the right place, and at a francs to L. C. Barreswil's wife in Boulogne, under the pre- difficult time for German as well as French hearts. sumption that she needed it; he considered the same charity for It may be noted parenthetically that Liebig's relations with Madame Deville (37). English chemists were also very close. Despite disparaging In the first meeting of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences comments on English dilettantism and their lack of attention to after cessation of hostilities, Liebig delivered a speech assess- pure science, and a public attack on the idol of English ing the causes of Prussian victory and French defeat. He experimentalism, Francis Bacon, Liebig's high regard for suggested that German superiority was an indirect but very real English chemists and his continuous collegial contact with consequence of wise governmental policies that, inter alia, them has prompted one prominent English Liebig scholar to gave sufficient support to academic research, which led in the refer to Liebig quite justly as "very much an honorary English- long term to efficacious "scientific" rather than mere rote man" (40). applications. He concluded with some comments that he In sum, there is no evidence that Liebig was prey to the sort intended as conciliatory ( 8 : of pathological national prejudice that might have chronically interfered with his appreciation of foreigners' work, and thus is is e a s e ace o e y o ack ow e ge, o e a o ou with his pursuit of science. None of this is to deny a certain hot- Aca emy, a acia a e e wee e Ge ma ic eo es a e headed and instinctual chauvinism at the heart of Liebig's oma ic cou ies oes o e is ... I is c a ac e is ic i e a u e character, but the judgment of one historian that "Liebig was o e Ge ma , wi is k ow e ge o a guages, is u e s a i g the undisputed champion of this growing and squalid German o o eig a io a i ies, a is cu u a is o ica s a oi , o e nationalism in scientific affairs" is quite unjust (41). us o o e eo es, o e o e oi o ei g u us o imse a Many would want to award such championship honors to so we ecog i e w a we owe o e g ea i oso e s, ma ema i Hermann Kolbe, and in truth it would be hard to find a better cia s, a scie is s o a ce, w o a e ee ou me o s a mo e s candidate. And yet, close examination of Kolbe's career i so ma y ie s. o y eig yea s ago I came o a is o s u y reveals an interesting irony. No one had more contempt for the c emis y ... my e i e ca ee was e e y e e mi e . French or their theories in the late 1840s and early 1850s than Kolbe. However, the striking new reactions and brilliant argu-
u . is . C em. 4 ( 2 ments by Gerhardt, Williamson, Wurtz, and Frankland during enforcing such dicta from above. Stalin's suppression of the early 1850s that convinced most of Kolbe's German genetics required wholesale murder; Hitler could drive many colleagues to accept the French-English theories were by no of the finest physicists from Germany, but even so his cam- means lost on Kolbe either. By 1857 he had developeda theory paign to purge German science of the "Jewish" theories of of his own that was strikingly similar to the Williamson- relativity and quantum mechanics was largely unsuccessful Gerhardt newer type theory, namely that all common organic (42). compounds could be regarded as substitution products of Returning to the field of chemistry, the reception of French carbonic acid. He retained this theory almost without modifi- antiphlogistic chemistry in the homeland of Stahl provides cation for the rest of his life. another interesting case. Karl Hufbauer has shown that during Colleagues, friends and rivals all pointed out, from the late this episode German chemists were strongly conditioned by 1850s until Kolbe's death, both publicly and privately, that the cultural nationalism then being promoted so ardently by Kolbe had become a de facto convert to Gerhardt's system. German romantic writers. Still, Hufbauer demonstrates that Kolbe denied it with all the energy at his command. There were Lavoisier's new chemistry conquered Germany nearly com- indeed some substantive distinctions between what Kolbe pletely, despite strenuous (and openly chauvinistic) initial called his own "real types" and the purely "formal types" of opposition, during the course of only four years, 1789-1793 - Gerhardt's theory, and between his hierarchical radical formu- moreover, just a few years after French chemists themselves las based on tetravalent carbon and the structural formulas of were converted (43). More recently, H. G. Schneider has the Kekulé school. But the similarities were striking, both to examined the same events; his emphasis on the outspoken Kolbe's contemporaries and to modem observers. In 1868, nationalism of the principals only underlines (to my mind) the two years before the war broke out, Kolbe even converted to irony of their relatively fast capitulation to the hated French modem atomic weight formulas, the last highly visible differ- chemistry. A similar course of events took place when the ence between him and the structuralists - a step that most chemical atomism of Dalton and Berzelius encountered Ger- French chemists did not take for another quarter century. man soil. Despite a romantic antimaterialist culture flirting To put the matter a bit simplistically, Kolbe's pathological with Naturphilosophie and other dynamical idealist notions, chauvinism had failed to prevent him from understanding and which one would think ought to have provided an inimical being persuaded by the hated French ideas; it had only operated climate of opinion, chemical atoms flourished in Germany as to prevent him from believing he had adopted them. Using his they had elsewhere (44). faux types during his most productive years in the 1860s, Similarly, and despite all of the examples of expressions of Kolbe practiced substantively and very successfully the same virulent German chauvinism given here, in the event the sort of theoretical chemistry being pursued simultaneously by Germans accepted the French-English chemical reforms of the the structuralists. In short, to the extent that he was an 1850s astonishingly rapidly. In fact, it is a striking irony that exceptionally good scientist - and there can be little doubt that these essentially French reforms were pursued much more he was - he was also an internationalist in spite of himself. It aggressively and enthusiastically in Germany than in France: would be wrong to suggest that Kolbe's bigotry did not damage by the 1860s structure theory had become a quintessentially the quality of his science, for I believe it is clear that it did, German field, while Wurtz felt his to be a voice in the French especially after 1870. But what is striking is that a man of such wilderness. violent and ineradicable prejudices against the very direction In sum, the prevalence of nationalist fervor provides much that we have come to know as modern chemistry was able less predictive guidance in explaining the growth, develop- essentially to become a modem chemist in spite of himself. ment, and differential national reception of scientific theories I would not want to push my argument too far, for there are than one might have expected. Chauvinism is powerful and well known instances where national feelings seriously dam- pervasive, but so is the strength of ideas and evidence as aged the free interplay of scientific ideas. Just as French pursued by conscientious (though very human) scientists. chauvinism played a role in delaying for half a century the reception of Newtonian mechanics in a Parisian context References and Notes dominated by Cartesian ideas, so English chauvinism influ- enced the retention in Cambridge and Oxford for more than a A th r t nd A n l d nt : A com a io iece o is century of the Newtonian calculus, in preference to the more essay is " i e a e u ice i C emis y: Ko e, o ma , a powerful Leibnizian version. Governmentally enforced pseu- Ge ma A isemi ism," o e u is e i Y. a ki a I. o i so , doscientific orthodoxies in the Soviet Union and in Nazi e s., h Int r t n f h nd S nt f C lt r . e a e Germany, based partly on chauvinist emotion, threatened was ac ua y ese e a e e ey es sc i sessio i 8 , a virtually to destroy certain branches of science deemed foreign o essays a e e ica e o O. . e ey. o io s o is essay a e and hence maleficent. And yet even here it is significant that a so a ea e i my ook, h Q t v l t n: r nn K lb nd e most powerful totalitarian states have great difficulty in th S n f Or n Ch tr , U i e si y o Ca i o ia ess,
8 u . is . C em. 13-14 ( 2
. o ei ki assis a ce a e missio o quo e om ocu r n n nd n ndt n Ch , o . , ieweg, au sc weig, me s i ei ossessio , I wis o a k e s a s o e A c i es o 848, . 4 8, o 6 i em, "O e C emica Co s i u io a e Aca émie es Scie ces, a is, e oya Socie y o C emis y, a u e o O ga ic a ica s," . Ch . S ., 8 0, , 6 40 , a o o , e aye isc e S aa s i io ek a e i a y o e 8 , 4, 4 , o 6. eu sc es Museum, Mu ic a so M . a M s. a e a a , . . Ko e, A führl h hrb h d r Or n h n Ch , ow e s o e a k a e e s ci e , a o esso Co i usse , o . , ieweg, au sc weig, 8 4, . , 40 4 . w ose mic o i m co ies I use a i a y, e o essio a s a o 0. ie ig o e e ius, 8 May 8 , 2 u y 8 2, a May e ieweg e ag a c i e, Wies a e . is esea c was ge e 84 , i . Ca iè e, e ., rz l nd b : Ihr r f v n 8 ous y su o e y e a io a E owme o e uma i ies, 84 , e ma , Mu ic , 8 8, . , 4, 2 0. g a 2080 88. . ie ig o e e ius, A i 84 , i i ., . 22 . . C. o e , "C au i ism i o e omi a io s," S n , 2. o a summa y o is is u e, see . . o mes, " us us 8 , 24 , 4 . ie ig," i C. Gi is ie, e ., t n r f S nt f r ph , o . 2. . ickso , " A ai as eu om s Ca a ia Ou c y," 8, Sc i e s, ew Yo k, , . 44, a i em, Cl d r S n , 8 , 244, 280 28 . n rd nd An l Ch tr , a a U i e si y ess, Cam i ge, . o iscussio s o is e e see G. Geiso , " ouis as eu ," 4, . 4 4 . i C. Gi is ie, e ., t n r f S nt f r ph , o . 0, . ie ig o e e ius, 0 May 8 , 4 Se em e 8 a Sc i e s, ew Yo k, 4, . 0 4 6 (o . 4 , a . Wo i ecem e 8 4, i e e e ce 0, . 62, , . " e mos ma e i g a S. u o sky, " ouis as eu , Augus Keku é, a e a co i g is," e w o e i e a e e e , "somew a u se y e o ami e ussia Wa ," . Ch . Ed ., 88, 6, 4 6. usi ess, i my a e o e co s i u io o e e I e mi e myse 4. A co e ie iscussio a gui e o e e is i g seco a y some e essio s o a e so a a u e agai s umas, w ic I s ou i e a u e o a io a ism a i e a io a ism i scie ce is o i e o a e o e ... e e i ake ese accu se a ai s." E e ea ie i wo a ic es y . Sc oe e Gu e us: "Scie ce, ec o ogy a (28 ecem e 8 , i i ., . 2 ie ig e esse g ea co i io o eig o icy," i I. S iege ösi g a . ice, d ., S n , o e a u is e c i ique o some wo k o 0. . Ku : "I wi w i e hn l nd S t : A Cr pl n r r p t v , Sage, o mo e c i iques as o g as I i e," e owe . o o , , . 4 06 a " a io a ism a I e a io a ism," 4. ie ig o [C. . Ku ma ], 2 A i 8 0, A c i es o e i . C. O y, G. . Ca o , . . . C is ie, a M. . S. o ge, e s., Aca émie es Scie ces, a is ( ossie ie ig i e o s umas . C p n n t th t r f M d rn S n , ou e ge, o o , .Ib d. (a i io a e e s om ie ig o umas e e e ce 0, 0, . 0 . o me io e y Sc oe e Gu e us is E. . 2 6 8 ie ig o Wö e , u e 8 0, i A. W. o ma , e ., C aw o , t n l nd Int rn t n l n S n , 880 , A t b nd r dr h Wöhl r r f h l n d n Cam i ge, 2, C a . 2 a o e o ic o c emis y i a icu hr n 82 8 , 2 o s., ieweg, au sc weig, 888, i o . , a , see a so C. Mei e , " a io a ismus u I ema io a ismus i e . 2 . C emie es . a u e s," i . i g, e ., r p t v n d r 6. Ko e o ieweg, 2 u y a ecem e 862, Oc o e h r z h ht , Aka emisc e uck u e ag sa s a , G a , 86 , ecem e 864, a 8 Ma c , a 6 May 866, ieweg 8 , . 22 4 . Mei e s a my ea me s o is ma e ia a e e ag a c i e, Wies a e , Ko e i e ( e ea e a e ia e " A" , esse ia y com eme a y Sc oe e Gu e us is mo e s o g y e e s um e e 84, 8 , 6, 2 , 242, 24 , a 24 . e assage i ue ce y e iew oi o e socia co s uc io o scie i ic quo e is om Ko e o a k a , 2 May 866, ame 0 .02. 8, k ow e ge a a e ei e Mei e o myse . a k a a c i e. . . Wo i a S. u o sky, " e U k ow Keku é," i . G. . Ko e o a k a , 2 u y 866, ame 0 .02. 0 , a k ay am, e ., E n th t r f Or n Ch tr , ouisi a a c i e Ko e e esse simi a se ime s i is e e s o a a S a e U i e si y, a o ouge, 8 , . 2 4 (o 0 . ieweg, a 22 u y 866, A 246 a 24 . 6. . E. A ms o g, " e oc i e o A omic a e cy," a u e, 8. A. Wu , " is oi e es oc i es c imiques depuis Lavoisier," 0, 2 , 80 0, o 808 . in A. Wurtz, ed., t nn r d h p r t ppl é , o s. i . E wa a k a ega o gi e Ko e E g is i e u o , ac e e, a is, 868 8, o ume , . i ci , o . i ( e u is e Ge ma esso s soo a e ei a i a i o o , a Ko e cou mo og a ica y i 86 . "soo s eak wi aci i y" ( a k a o e ma Os , 20 ecem e . . Ko e, "O e e us a e C emie i a k eic ," . 884, So e samm u ge es eu sc e Museums, Mu ic [ e ea pr t. Ch ., 8 0, 0, 8 . e a e ia e "SS M"], ocume um e 6 . owe e , y 20. Ko e o ie ig, 2 o em e 8 0 a 2 ecem e 8 0, 864 Ko e e o e o a k a a e a o go e so muc a aye isc e S aa s i io ek, Mu ic , ie igia a I , Ko e e e s e ee e o e a owe o s eak Ge ma i ese i g a ec u e o e os. 0 a . C emica Socie y (Ko e o a k a , 4 ecem e 864, mic o i m 2 . " ie a ose si oc wi k ic ei e a io o a ame um e 0 .04. , a k a a c i e, Mi o Key es, E g Ki e , a Wa si ige . Ic a e i mi ie e ass u a . e ec u e was e e gi e . e ac u g gege ie a ose ge a , a e ü so e ci i isi o 8. . Ko e, " o me , c emisc e," n nd ört rb h d r u gemei , wie ma sie e ke e ge e a , a e ic sie oc
u . is . C em. 4 ( 2
ic ge a e . Ic g au e, a k eic is s a k im U e ga ge eg i C emie u ui i e ... so wi a ie ei wie e ke e , wo, wie im e , u komm ie wie e au ei e g ü e weig ... E e a wei e a e ieses a u e s, ie eu sc e C emike , um ü e au ei e ga e a io kei e We , u g oi e." Ko e o sic i e C emie aus u i e , ac a is ge e . Wie ama s, wo a a e a , 26 e ua y 8 , A 26 . i eu sc a a es sic ü ege Sc e i gsc e a u i oso ie 22. Ko e o a k a , 26 ecem e 8 0, ame 0 .04.64 , egeis e e, iese Sc wi e i a k eic ga kei e o e a a k a a c i e. a k a a eg e e o see a " e e is a oo a a k eic e e a u c i e Wisse sc a u s we ü e ag e, muc Go es G a e i [Wi e m s] a u e," a e ic e a "i so a e sic auc e ie a ösisc e C emike , mi a ei ige o m & co s i u io e Ge ma es o ism wi e wo se a e Aus a me o Wu , o em a u i oso isc e Sc wi e e e c " s i , e oug a i e esu s o e wa " e es o e mo e e S uk u u i u gsc emie ei, u sie we e a u c wo wi e g ea y e e i e ... u ess i ee (w ic is o ike y ei e o s u g o u s gewi e ." Ko e o o a , u e 8 6, e Ge ma eo e, e ci e y ic o y, u o e a wa ike, i s ea o SS M 68 . a eace u eo e" ( a k a o Ko e, 2 ecem e 8 0, SS M . "... ie e e iöse ä sc u ge es Sac e a es, we c e 64 . Keku é i sei em u e ie oc a gese e e e uc , as i 2 . . Ko e, " a u g e a ise Aka emie e Wisse sc a e ," Wi k ic kei ei ie e ic es Mac we k o e U wa ei e u , pr . Ch ., 8 2, , 22 26 i em, "C emisc e ück ick au ewuss e E s e u ge is ..." Ko e o . ieweg, 6 o em e as a 8 2," b d., 8 , 4, 46 0. See a so Ko e s e e s o 882, A 482. a k a o 8 Ma c 8 2 ( a k a A c i e, ame 0 .02. 48 , 2. A. Wu , "E oge e au e e e Ge a ," M n t r a o ie ig o 4 A i 8 2 (see e o e . nt f , 862, 4, 482 (a so a o i se a a e " is oi e 24. "Mei e e ac u g gege ie ga e eu ige a ösisc e gé é a e es g yco s," i Socié é C imique e a is, ç n d h C emike we a g me u me a , sic i Mi ei e u e wa pr f é n 860, ac e e, a is, 86 , . 0 "O O i e o e . Auc ie a ise Akamie [sic] sc ei ga kei e A u g a o E y e e, Co si e e as a i k e wee O ga ic a Mi e a u a e , wie äc e ic sie sic o e Ge e e we u c iese C emis y," . Ch . S ., 862, , 8 406 ç n d h e ä m ic e a ke eie mac , wo u e as eu as e me pr f é n 86 , ac e e, a is, 864 i e ica o ç n d i e e. e ei e Sie mei e E ec o a io . as Ge a e iese ph l ph h , u . a a e C r d ph l ph e oge e u e o e e a io mac mic uwei e e was ei h , i a e y i e , a is, 864 ç n élé nt r d e sc a ic ." Ko e o ie ig, 4 A i 8 2, aye isc e S aa s i h d rn , Masso , a is, 86 68 t nn r d h io ek, ie igia a I , Ko e e e o. . o e a usio o p r t ppl é . as eu , see a o e, o e . . See . G a a , W. e e ies, a . Wei g a , e s., h 2 . ie ig o E ma Mus a , 2 Se em e 8 0, . E. oscoe n t n nd U f pl n r t r , ei e , o ec , Co ec io , oya Socie y o C emis y, o o (" ie a ose ei 8 . o e isci i e o c emis y, see a so . Weye , Ch i e wa si ige Ei e kei ..." wi su e y ose e wa ie ig o h ht hr b n v n W l b ( 0 b rt n t n ( 0 , Ge Wö e , 2 Se em e 8 0, i o ma , e e e ce , o . 2, . 2 s e e g, i es eim, 4 a C. A. usse , " u e a isg ace (" ie a ose a e sic a s ei so e o e es Gesc ec ge eig u egi i gs : A iew o is o y o C emis y om e i e ee ..." ie ig o Ko e, 2 Oc o e 8 0, SS M 6 4 (" e G össe Ce u y," r t. . t. S ., 88, 2 , 2 4, o . 288 4, w o as Wa si iese u g ück ic e a io is ei ic u a em a ig" . some a i io a a osi e e am es. 26. ie ig o Wö e , Augus 8 0, i o ma , e e e ce , o . 4. . Ko , Ent l n d r Ch n d r n r n t, 2, . 2 . O e ou g, Mu ic , 8 . e wo k was u is e n ee a s, 2 . " u e o k, iese a ose ," Keku é o a s u e , egi i g i 8 . A iscussio o is wo k i a Ko ea co e is u y 8 0, Augus Keku é Samm u g, I s i u ü O ga isc e C emie, my " e wee wo S oo s : Ko , Ko e, a e is o y o ec isc e oc sc u e, a ms a ci e i Wo i a u o sky, C emis y," ll. t. Ch ., 0, , 24. e e e ce , . 6, . . Wo i a u o sky use e ase "so s o . See, o e am e, . o a , t v n b , 2 o s., a , i c es" o a s a e e Ge ma " u e o k." e e ey a e ei ig, 0 , o . 2, . 4 8 22. commi e e commo e o o e e i g a mo e i e a o a co o 6. ie ig o Wö e , 0 Se em e 8 0, i o ma , a i e y mo e accu a e a s a io . I ac , " u e o k" is u ocu r f h l, e e e ce , o . 2, . 00. me e i e Ge ma a guage. " u e " is sim y a ega i e y . ie ig o Wö e , ecem e 8 0, i i i ., . 04. i e si yi g e i , a as o e o e co o a io s o o a i y a 8. ie ig, "E ö u gswo e ac em ie e ssc uss," 28 e E g is e essio "so o a i c " as. Ma c 8 , n d n nd Abh ndl n n, Wi e , ei ig a 28. . Ko e, "C emisc e ück ick," e e e ce 24, . 46 66. ei e e g, 8 4, . e ce e y o a , e e e ce 6, 2 . "We c e amage wie e mi Ca ou s, was so i u as 420 22. i e a io a e Coke i e mi a k eic ? o ma is ei e i . ie ig o Wö e , 24 May 84 , i o ma , r f h l, E g a as a e a a a e gekomme ." Ko e o a e a , e e e ce , o . , . 2 . 22 a ua y 8 , A 04. 40. W. . ock, " ie ig, Wö e , o ma : A E g is e s ec 0. "... ic e e e mi ic , ass we eusse so o ä , ie i e," i W. ewicki, e ., Wöhl r nd b : r f v n 82 8 ,
40 u . is . C em. 13-14 ( 2
C omm, Gö i ge , 82, . i iii ( is is a o og a ic o e Project have captured the lion's share of historians' attention. o ume e u ica io , wi ew o ma e , o o ma s e i io o I certainly would not dispute the importance of the Second e ie ig Wö e co es o e ce . World War in giving rise to Big Science, characterized by 4 . S. Ka oo , " ea a is e umas," i C. Gi is ie, e ., large-scale team research, close relations with industry, and t n r f S nt f r ph , o . 4, Sc i e s, ew Yo k, , heavy reliance upon government (especially military) funding. 242 48 (o . 24 . Nevertheless, I would like to suggest that insufficient attention 42. O w ic see . . G a am, S n nd h l ph n th has been paid to the importance of the First World War in terms S v t Un n, K o , ew Yo k, 2 a A. . eye c e , S n of its impact upon the scientific profession, particularly the t t Und r tl r: l t nd th h C n t n th h rd chemical profession. After all, chemistry played an extremely h, Ya e U i e si y ess, ew a e , . important role in the production of high explosives, poison gas, 4 . K. u aue , h r t n f th G r n Ch l C optical glass, synthetic coal-tar dyes and pharmaceuticals, and n t ( 20 , U i e si y o Ca i o ia ess, e ke ey, 82, other chemical products of direct or indirect military value. . 6 44. Although historians of science and technology are more or 44. . G. Sc ei e , " e a e a o C emis y: Ea y a less familiar with how chemistry changed the war, relatively io a is ic Cu e s i a e Eig ee Ce u y Ge ma C emis y," little is known about how the war changed chemistry (or, more Am i , 1989, 6, 4 2 A. . ocke, " e ece io o C emica precisely, the chemical profession), and it is the latter which A omism i Ge ma y," I , 1979, 0, 6. constitutes the subject of this paper. Even though the United States was involved in the Great War for only 18 months (from April 1917 to November 1918), I wish to argue that it affected the American chemical community in five important ways: Alan J. Rocke is Professor in the Program for the History of 1. Industrialization: The war greatly accelerated the Technology and Science, Case Western Reserve University, growth of the American chemical industry, thus enhancing the Cleveland, OH 44106. He is author of "Chemical Atomism in financial and ideological importance of industry to the chemi- the Nineteenth Century: From Dalton to Cannizzaro" and cal profession. "The Quiet Revolution: Hermann Kolbe and the Science of 2. Militarization: The war resulted in the development of Organic Chemistry." strong ties between the chemical profession and the military establishment. 3. Politicization: The war jolted chemists out of their ivory- tower, laissez-faire mentality and led them to engage in aggres- THE CHEMISTS' WAR sive political lobbying for the first time. 4. Nationalization: The war stimulated a surge of patriot- The Impact of World War I on the American Chemical ism in the chemical community which helped build morale and Profession pride in the achievements of American chemistry, but which at times degenerated into strident nationalism and nativism. David J. Rhees, The Bakken Library and Museum 5. Popularization: The war engendered a new self-con- sciousness among chemists and a new awareness of their World War I was one of those momentous and horrifying public image which led to a vigorous campaign to popularize events in American history that permanently reoriented, even chemistry. revolutionized, American society. Indeed, it is difficult for us Before I proceed to discuss these five trends, a few qualifi- today to imagine the profound shock experienced by Ameri- cations are in order. First, this analysis can only suggest the cans in general and chemists in particular upon the outbreak of broad lines of change and is intended to be suggestive rather the war with Germany - that most scientific of all nations - in than comprehensive. This is particularly true of my necessar- August 1914. Variously known as the European War, the ily brief discussion of the role of chemistry in the war, which, Kaiser's War, the Great War, the Great Crusade, and, of of course, is fundamental to any understanding of the impact of course, the Chemists' War, it was a major turning point in the war on chemistry. Secondly, I do not wish to overempha- Western civilization, marking the actual, if not the chronologi- size the importance of the war, for nearly all of the five trends cal divide between the Victorian world of the 19th century and I have identified had their origins in the prewar era. My point the modern world of the 20th - a divide, a fault line, that was is simply that the war dramatically and decisively accelerated simultaneously social, political, economic, cultural, and moral. the pace of these trends. And third, I do not wish to imply that In the standard accounts of the history of American science, other scientific disciplines played trivial roles in the war. The however, World War I is usually overshadowed by its even important work of American physicists on submarine detec- more destructive successor. Understandably, the development tion devices and of psychologists on Army "intelligence" tests, of radar, the synthetic rubber project, and the Manhattan to cite but two examples, are well known. Nonetheless, of all