- Mendeleev D.I. Periodicheskii zakon: Osnovnye stat'i 8th edition Moscow 1958 314 315 reprinted from Chapter 15 of Osnovy khimii
- 1869 . Zhurnal russkago fiziko-khimicheskago obshchestva , 1 : 60 – 77 . Mendeleev, Periodicheskii zakon, p. 314.
- It should be acknowledged that at approximately the time of Mendeleev's discovery several other chemists—A. E. Béguyer de Chancourtois, J. A. R. Newlands, William Odling, Gustavus Hinrichs, and Lothar Meyer—were working independently on systems of classification involving periodicity. Although these men exhibited considerable originality and insight, none of them seems to have recognized the significance of the principle toward which his investigation was leading as completely as did Mendeleev. In any case, it is not my purpose to argue the question of precedence in the discovery of the Periodic Law nor to diminish the importance of Mendeleev's contemporaries, but to explain the process of Mendeleev's own investigation. Since Mendeleev was unacquainted with the work of these men at the time of his discovery, I have limited the present study to chemists who contributed to the particular context in which Mendeleev pursued his inquiry, that is, Gladstone, Kremers, Lenssen, Dumas, and Pettenkofer. For the most recent studies on the general question of contributors to chemical classification and the particular question of precedence, see van Spronson J.W. The Periodic System of Chemical Elements: A History of the First Hundred Years Amsterdam 1969 and Heinz Cassebaum and George B. Kauffman, ‘The Periodic System of Chemical Elements: The Search for Its Discoverer’, Isis, 1971, 62, 314–327.
- 1817 . Ann. der Phys. (Gilbert) , 56 : 331 – 334 .
- 1829 . Ann. der Phys. und Chemie (Poggendorff) , 15 : 301 – 307 . Döbereiner's occasional doubling of equivalent weights, e.g. lithium-sodium-potassium, reflects the uncertainty over chemical combination still extant among chemists at this time.
- 1853 . Phil. Mag. and Jour. Sci. , 5 : 314 – 320 . (Ser 4)
- 1856 . Ann. der Phys. und Chem. (Poggendorff) , 99 : 58 – 63 .
- 1857 . Ann. der Phys. und Chem. (Poggendorff) , 100 : 261 – 270 .
- 1857 . Ann. der Chem. und Pharm. , 103 : 121 – 131 .
- 1857 . Comptes Rendus , 45 : 709 – 731 . expanded and somewhat modified by Dumas in Ann. de chem. et de phys., 1859, 105, 129–210.
- 1858 . Ann. der Chem. und Pharm. , 105 : 187 – 202 .
- Mendeleev D.I. Sochineniia Leningrad-Moscow 1934–1956 25 6 6 vol. xiv Volumes 13 and 14 are reprints of Parts I and II of Osnovy khimii.
- 1860 . Bull. Acad. sci. lettres et beaux-arts de Belgique (Classe des sciences) , 10 : 208 – 336 .
- 1866 . Ann. de chem. et de phys. , 9 : 215 – 243 .
- Mendeleev . Sochineniia , xiv 245 – 245 .
- Mendeleev . Sochineniia , xiii 758 – 758 . vol. xiv, p. 53. Later, in his article announcing his discovery of the Periodic Law, Mendeleev commented that one of the major flaws in Lenssen's system resulted from his attempt to establish triads, the result being the artificiality of the system. Zhurnal russkago fiziko-khimicheskago obshchestva, 1869, 1, 60–77.
- Mendeleev . Periodicheskii zakon , 621 – 624 .
- Mendeleev . Periodicheskii zakon , 646 – 650 .
- 1856–1859 . Mélanges physiques et chimiques tirés du Bulletin de l'Académie impériale des sciences de St.-Petersbourg , 3 : 402 – 428 .
- Mendeleev . Periodicheskii zakon , 663 – 665 .
- Kedrov , B.M. 1958 . Den' odnogo velikogo otkrytiia 341 – 341 . Moscow Kedrov dates the list as 1867 or 1868, but this is probably too late, because Mendeleev included no weight that had been established or revised after 1865, whereas he did use values that had not been established until 1864. For example, he listed indium as 37, the weight its discoverers, Ferdinand Reich and Theodor Richter, reported in Journal für praktische Chemie in 1864; however, in an article in this journal in 1865, Clemens Winkler revised the weight to 35·9 and in 1867 to 37·8. Mendeleev evidently was familiar with these changes, because he used the 1867 value for his Periodic Table (actually he doubled this equivalent weight to its atomic weight of 75·6). Similarly, for other elements—yttrium, erbium and niobium—Mendeleev did not use weights reported after 1864 or 1865 in his lecture list.
- Mendeleev Sochineniia xiii 342 342 In this list Mendeleev did state the weight of carbon as 6—its equivalent weight—but this apparently was an oversight, because on the following page he calculated the weight of Na2CO3 as 106, which required carbon to be 12, its atomic weight.
- 1869 . Zhurnal russkago fiziko-khimicheskago obshchestva , 1 : 60 – 77 .
- 1930 . Collection of Czechoslovak Chemical Communications , 2 : 225 – 225 . The Russian chemist, V. Ia. Kurbatov, also briefly relates in his memoirs that Mendeleev once told him how he wrote the properties of the elements on cards, arranged them according to these properties, and arrived at a table. A. A. Makarenia and I. N. Filimonova (eds.), D. I. Mendeleev v vospominaniiakh sovremennikov, Moscow, 1969, 107.
- Kedrov . 1958 . Den' odnogo velikogo otkrytiia 42 – 42 . Moscow
- It is difficult to know which element Mendeleev intended by the figure ‘7’: lithium, whose atomic/equivalent weight had been established at that value, or beryllium, whose equivalent weight had not yet been decided as 4·7 (if its oxide was BeO) or 7·0 (if Be2O3). See Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der Chemie 1868 xxxi xxxi One might well conjecture that Mendeleev hastily chose Be = 7, even though this meant that Be must be trivalent and would not correspond to the bivalent Mg-Zn-Cd. That he might have erred in this respect is indicated by the fact that in the rudimentary tables following these initial calculations (see Figures 1 and 2), Mendeleev was undecided about Be, both in regard to its weight and valency. Furthermore, since he eventually placed Be with Mg-Zn-Cd (see Figures 3 and 4), albeit as a bivalent element having the atomic weight of 9·4 (that is, 2 × 4·7), he probably had this association in mind in the initial calculations. In any event, the the significance of the figure ‘7’ is not the key to the significance of these calculations, as explained in the discussion below.
- 1869 . Zhurnal russkago fiziko-khimicheskago obshchestva , 1 : 60 – 77 . See the discussion of Kremer's investigation above.
- 1868 . Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der Chemie , : xxxi – xxxi .
- Kedrov . 1958 . Den' odnogo velikogo otkrytiia 49 – 49 . Moscow In regard to these tables, I tend to agree with Kedrov's analysis and follow a line of reasoning similar to his.
- Arthur Koestler's term in The Act of Creation London 1964 656 660
- Mendeleev . Periodicheskii zakon 8 – 8 .
- Mendeleev . Periodicheskii zakon , 8 – 8 .
- Mendeleev Periodicheskii zakon 8th edition 323 323 from Osnovy khimii
- Mendeleev Periodicheskii zakon 8th edition 150 153 from Osnovy khimii reprint of Russian draft of an article in Annalen der Chemie und Pharmacie, 1871, Supplement VIII, 133–229.
- When Lecoq de Boisbaudran announced the discovery of gallium, he reported its density as 4·7, considerably lower than Mendeleev's prediction of 5·9. More accurate measurement proved Mendeleev correct. Comptes Rendus 1875 81 969 972 1876, 82, 1036–1039
- Mendeleev Periodicheskii zakon 8th edition 323 324 from Osnovy khimii In his 1871 article, Mendeleev also suggested the possibility of eka-caesium [175], dvi-caesium [220], eka-niobium [146], eka-tantalium [235], eka-manganese [100], and tri-manganese [190]. His prediction of eka-manganese approximated technetium [99], discovered in 1939; but his other predictions proved inaccurate, primarily because he could not foresee that eventually the lanthanide and actinide series would become a part of the system of elements.
Annals of Science
Volume 31, 1974 - Issue 3