Science Museum Group Journal Lyon Playfair: chemist and commissioner, 1818–1858 Journal ISSN number: 2054-5770 This article was written by Ian Blatchford 05-04-2021 Cite as 10.15180; 211504 Research Lyon Playfair: chemist and commissioner, 1818–1858 Published in Spring 2021, Issue 15 Article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/211504 Abstract Lyon Playfair was a multi-talented man: a scientist, administrator and politician whose life and influence deserve further research. This article concentrates on the period between 1818 and 1858, from Playfair’s birth to his appointment as Professor of Chemistry at the University of Edinburgh. His biographer (Sir Thomas Wemyss Reid) described his life as a ‘story not of adventure, but work’ and yet his record was one of energetic enterprise that had considerable impact. He was a rising star in the then fashionable world of chemistry, a favoured student of the founder of organic chemistry, Justus Liebig, and a central figure in the promotion of new ideas in agricultural science.[1] A career in science and the state saw him connected to the leading figures of both, and he played a crucial role in the conceptual and financial success of the Great Exhibition, and its legacy. His brilliance has been overshadowed by the extrovert Henry Cole, and yet Playfair was essential to the major educational reforms of their time. Component DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/211504/001 Keywords Lyon Playfair, chemistry, politics, biography, University of Edinburgh, Justus Liebig, Great Exhibition Introduction [2] Playfair was a versatile man: scientist, administrator and politician. This article concentrates on the period between 1818 and 1858, from his birth to his appointment as Professor of Chemistry at Edinburgh. His biographer (Sir Thomas Wemyss Reid) described his life as ‘a story not of adventure, but work’ and yet this restrained sketch hardly does justice to an early life which was one of energetic enterprise that had considerable impact (Reid, 1899). A rising star in the ascendant field of chemistry, and connected to its leading figures, Playfair played a vital role in the success of the Great Exhibition and it legacy. His brilliance has been overshadowed by the extrovert Henry Cole, about whom much has been written.[3] However, Playfair was just as essential in ensuring the legacy of the Great Exhibition and the major educational events of their time. Despite such a rich contribution to national life, there is only one biographical work, which was published in 1899, and it is an uncertain compound of sketchy autobiographical notes and biographical commentary. It was undertaken by Reid at the invitation of Edith, Playfair’s third wife, who put at Reid’s disposal her husband’s correspondence and an incomplete essay in autobiography, written by Playfair ostensibly for his family (Armstrong, 1976).[4] It comprises Playfair’s own notes which are then duly marshalled into ‘chapters’ with introductory or concluding commentaries (not always with a clear logic to their form) from Reid. Furthermore, Playfair’s own notes are patchy in their chronology and completeness. The work might also be considered problematic in its perspectives. In particular, it has been argued that Playfair is consistently characterised as useful rather than great, suggesting certain underlying assumptions of the biographer. For Reid, Gladstone was the measure of greatness and against such a benchmark it would be scarcely possible to perceive Playfair’s full importance. Indeed, the biographer was unlikely to appreciate the lasting contribution of Playfair in the organisation of science, and its legacy into the twentieth century (Crowther, 1865). Playfair was only 40 when he left London for an academic life at Edinburgh University, although he did not withdraw from abiding interests in cultural educational reform. However, this transitional moment in his career does offer an opportunity of considering a surprising visual impression as well, because if Playfair comes to mind today at all, the image is of a grand statesman photographed in pompous and be-whiskered pose; and yet the man in this account is brimming with youthful vitality and has the air of a Romantic poet or composer. Figure 1 © National Portrait Gallery, London Lyon Playfair, 1st Baron Playfair; Playfair as a rising star DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/211504/014 Figure 2 © Science Museum/Science & Society Picture Library Playfair as forbidding elder statesman DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/211504/015 It would be fair to say that Henry Cole has some dominance in the narrative of the Great Exhibition, and the formation of the cultural institutions that followed. Cole was most certainly the ‘Great Exhibitor’ and yet his alliance with Playfair, for all its stresses and strains, was a partnership of equals in the 1850s. There was both friendship and jockeying for position in the realisation of the Great Exhibition and its legacies (Bonython and Burton, 2003). Each man brought their own strengths, and I will argue here that for all of Cole’s flair as an impresario, the Great Exhibition might well have been a diminished affair, indeed possibly a failure, without Playfair’s charm and diligence. In seeking to rebalance the Great Exhibition narrative it may be hard to avoid the perils of any ‘corrective’ biography. In his recently published biography of Viscount Haldane, John Campbell declares his motivation for writing thus: Haldane has largely been forgotten today, lost behind a range of his contemporaries whose personalities are more instantly accessible and whose deeds are more easily amplified – individuals such as Lloyd George and Churchill (Campbell, 2020). In seeking ‘equivalence’ between such contrasting figures there is risk that biography, despite a range of good intentions and fascinating material, can almost inevitably slip into hagiography. In considering Playfair, a different objective might be to present him simply as an inherent subject of interest because ‘biographies can contribute to the construction of a critical and historically informed constellation of public opinion’ (Renders and Harmsma, 2017). In this case, it could be suggested that any biography of a scientist places science in the foreground of an historical and cultural landscape replete with political and artistic lives. In this vein, examining Playfair might play a part in a ‘science as culture’ campaign. Furthermore, examining Playfair offers much more than a competition with Cole. A hallmark of Playfair’s career was spirited lecturing on education, industry and the prestige of chemistry itself. Prince Albert encouraged the Royal Society of Arts to host a series of lectures in 1852 in which leading figures of the day reflected on the lessons to be drawn from the Great Exhibition. With confident partisanship, Playfair would not resist the temptation to praise his beloved science because: It is one of the last of sciences which, as a branch of systematised knowledge, has offered its services to man, yet during its existence as a separate science, it has increased human resources and enjoyment to a greater extent than any of its elder sisters (Reid, 1852). A bold claim indeed, but I hope to show that Playfair’s early career laid the foundation of his central role in the rising prominence, and perceived economic utility, of chemistry. Figure 3 © Wellcome Collection Playfair giving a lecture on the chemistry, manufacture and uses of glass at the Museum of Practical Geology DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/211504/016 Finally, in considering the influence of Cole and Playfair, the narrative must also take account of a third and dominant player, Prince Albert. Playfair and the Prince were of an age, having been born in 1818 and 1819 respectively, and thus both a decade younger than Cole. Here I argue that the high degree of mutual sympathy between the two men was only partly about age, and more the product of Playfair’s intense pragmatism and, significantly, his fluency in the German language and cultural framework. A child of Scotland and India When Playfair was ennobled in 1892, he adopted the title of Lord Playfair of St Andrews, and that university city certainly played a central role in the ancestral identity of the Playfair family, with his grandfather James being appointed Principal of the university in 1800. In fact, Playfair was born far from his spiritual Scottish home, in Chunar in Upper Bengal (now Uttar Pradesh) in 1818, the second child of George and Jessie Playfair. His father was a surgeon in the service of the East India Company and later became Inspector-General for hospitals in Bengal. His uncles William and Hugh were officers in the Indian Army, and Uncle James was a Glasgow merchant. The latter was to play an early, but uncontented, role in Playfair’s career. Figure 4 © The British Library Birthplace in Chunar, India DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/211504/017 Playfair was sent to Scotland, with his mother and elder brother George, in 1820 and raised in St Andrews in the household of his widowed aunt Janet Macdonald. His Memoirs brim with sentiment about his childhood (Reid, 1899). He reserves special affection for his Aunt ‘Jessie’ and her warm encouragement of curiosity and study. She was a keen naturalist and Playfair claims that she was credited with describing several new species of marine animals. His education was guided by two governesses, and then the parish school and local grammar. Figure 5 © University of St Andrews Libraries and Museums Playfair’s Aunt ‘Jessie’ Macdonald DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15180/211504/018 At only 14 years of age (Reid, 1899, p 33), Playfair was enrolled as a bejant (first year student) at the University of St Andrews where he complained of the impenetrable ‘slough of despond’ in the mathematics lectures of Professor Duncan and endured his ‘absolute ignorance’ in Greek and similar imperfections in Latin.[5] Surprisingly, given his later career, he was not enrolled in Chemistry or Natural Philosophy although he recollected stealing into lectures, nonetheless.