- Phillips , Richard . 1834 . Additional Observations on the Use of Chemical Symbols . Philosophical Magazine , 4 : 246 – 251 . third series (p. 251). Phillips was an editor of the Magazine.
- Whewell , William . 1838 . On the Employment of Notation in Chemistry . Journal of the Royal Institution , 1 : 437 – 453 . (p. 438)
- The most thorough discussion of the British debate on notation between 1831 and 1836 occurs in Brock W.H. The British Association Committee on Chemical Symbols 1834: Edward Turner's Letter to British Chemists and a Reply by William Prout Ambix 1986 33 33 37 See also J. R. Partington, A History of Chemistry (New York, 1962), pp. 160–1 for a general survey. Maurice Crosland, in Historical Studies in the Language of Chemistry (London, 1962), pp. 256–81, provides a good summary of the issues leading up to the debate, but devotes only passing mention to the controversy itself. The debate as it took place in the BAAS receives notice in Arnold Thackray, John Dalton (Cambridge, Mass., 1972), pp. 115–24, and Jack Morrell and Arnold Thackray, Gentlemen of Science (Oxford, 1981), pp. 486–8. Although these two sources present valuable primary material, they both fail to distinguish adequately between Whewell's and Berzelius's positions. Robert Bud and Gerrylynn K. Roberts, in Science versus Practice: Chemistry in Victorian Britain (Manchester, 1984), pp. 36–45, do recognize the important rift between Whewell and Berzelius, but their attempt to place it in the relatively narrow context of Scottish versus metropolitan approaches to chemistry tends to simplify the overall debate over notation.
- Thackray , A. 1962 . Historical Studies in the Language of Chemistry 117 – 117 . London
- On the Cambridge Network, see Cannon Susan Faye Science in Culture New York and Folkestone 1978 29 63 The notion of a unified network at Cambridge is challenged by Lawrence Goldman in ‘The Origins of British “Social Science”: Political Economy, Natural Science and Statistics, 1830–1835’, Historical Journal, 26 (1983), 587–616.
- On Whewell's professional ties to Turner and Johnston, see e.g. his letter to William Vernon Harcourt, 1 September 1831, in Todhunter Isaac William Whewell London 1876 II 128 128 2 vols where he recommends Turner ‘as eminently well informed and candid’. Whewell later suggested that Johnston be selected to deliver the address to the BAAS on the progress of chemistry and mineralogy.
- Crosland , M. 1972 . John Dalton 256 – 264 . Cambridge, Mass.
- Thomson , Thomas . 1831 . A System of Chemistry of Inorganic Bodies , 7th ed. iv – iv . London cf. his declinist views in ‘History and Present State of Chemical Science’, Edinburgh Review, 50 (1829), 275–6. On the realism of Dalton and his immediate circle, see W. H. Brock and D. M. Knight, ‘The Atomic Debates’, Isis, 56 (1956), 5–7.
- Berzelius , Jacob . 1814 . Essay on the Cause of Chemical Proportions, and on some Circumstances relating to them: together with a short and easy Method of expressing them . Annals of Philosophy , 3 : 43 – 52 . (p. 51). M. Crosland (footnote 3), pp. 270–8. The acceptance of Berzelian notation on the continent is indicated by the list of German textbooks using his symbols provided by Bettina Haupt, Deutschsprachige Chemielehrbucher 1775–1850 (Stuttgart, 1987), p. 289.
- William Whewell to Herschel, 15 February 1829, in Todhunter I. William Whewell London 1876 II 98 98 2 vols
- Whewell to Richard Jones, February 1831, in Todhunter I. William Whewell London 1876 II 115 116 2 vols
- Whewell to Charles Lyell, 22 February 1831, in Todhunter I. William Whewell London 1876 II 114 114 2 vols
- Herschel , John F.W. 1830 . A Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy 135 – 138 . London reprinted Chicago, 1987 see also Herschel, ‘Whewell on the Inductive Sciences’, in Essays (London, 1857), p. 172; Whewell, ‘Modern Science—Inductive Philosophy’, Quarterly Review, 45 (1831), 374–407 (p. 391). Although W. H. Brock (footnote 3, p. 41) refers to a ‘Herschel-Whewell algebraic system’ of chemical notation, the extent to which this label applies to the events of the 1830s is not clear. Herschel only publicly advocated the application of algebra to chemistry in 1819, when he was still trying to reform the mathematics curriculum at Cambridge, and in 1858, by which time his relative interest in inductive philosophy had waned. He makes no reference to chemical notation in the Preliminary Discourse.
- Whewell , William . 1830 . Mathematical Exposition of some Doctrines of Political Economy . Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , 3 : 191 – 230 . (p. 191). For the context of this paper see Pietro Corsi, ‘The Heritage of Dugald Stewart: Oxford Philosophy and the Method of Political Economy’, Nuncius. Annali di Storia della Scienza, 2 (1987), 89–144.
- Whewell , William . 1831 . Cambridge Transactions—Science of the English Universities . British Critic , 9 : 71 – 90 . (p. 76)
- Whewell . 1838 . On the Employment of Notation in Chemistry . Journal of the Royal Institution , 1 : 437 – 439 .
- Whewell . 1838 . On the Employment of Notation in Chemistry . Journal of the Royal Institution , 1 : 437 – 437 . Although Berzelius shared Whewell's positivism regarding molecular constitution, he did not attempt to subordinate hypothetical combinations under more ‘certain’ mathematical laws. As far as Whewell's philosophy of science was concerned, therefore, Berzelius and his followers were practically as guilty of asserting the ‘reality’ of their hypotheses as were naive realists such as Dalton.
- Whewell . 1838 . On the Employment of Notation in Chemistry . Journal of the Royal Institution , 1 : 437 – 437 . 453
- Whewell . 1838 . On the Employment of Notation in Chemistry . Journal of the Royal Institution , 1 : 448 – 449 .
- Whewell . 1838 . On the Employment of Notation in Chemistry . Journal of the Royal Institution , 1 : 439 – 442 .
- Whewell . 1838 . On the Employment of Notation in Chemistry . Journal of the Royal Institution , 1 : 439 – 439 .
- Michael Faraday to Whewell, 21 February 1831, in Selected Correspondence Williams L. Pearce Cambridge 1971 1 150 150 2 vols On Faraday's response to Whewell see also Bud and Roberts (footnote 3), p. 40.
- Crosland , M. 1962 . Historical Studies in the Language of Chemistry 278 – 279 . London Philosophical Magazine, Third series, 2 (1833), 309–11. The other was John F. Daniell, Professor of Chemistry at King's College London, who sparingly used Whewellian symbols in his Introduction to the Study of Chemical Philosophy (1839). See Bud and Roberts (footnote 3), p. 40.
- Prideaux , John . 1831 . On Chemical Symbols and Notation . Philosophical Magazine , 10 : 104 – 109 . second series (p. 104)
- Prideaux , John . 1831 . On Chemical Symbols and Notation . Philosophical Magazine , 10 : 105 – 107 . second series
- Prideaux , John . 1831 . On Chemical Symbols and Notation . Philosophical Magazine , 10 : 107 – 107 . second series later in the article (p. 108) Prideaux stressed ‘the need of varying the structure of our symbols according to the occasion, when employed mathematically’.
- Warrington , R. 1832 . On the Establishment of some perfect System of Chemical Symbols . Philosophical Magazine , 1 : 181 – 186 . third series (p. 185)
- Bud and Roberts . 1984 . Science versus Practice: Chemistry in Victorian Britain 35 – 39 . Manchester On Whewell's offers of support to Turner and Johnston, see footnote 6 above.
- Christison , Robert . 1885 . The Life of Sir Robert Christison Vol. I , 131 – 131 . Edinburgh 2 vols Edward Turner, Dictionary of National Biography, XIX, 1262–3.
- Turner , Edward . 1833 . Elements of Chemistry , 4th edn vii – viii . London
- Turner , Edward . 1833 . Elements of Chemistry , 4th edn 509 – 509 . London although Turner codified this arrangement the following year when the Elements reached its fifth edition, in 1833 his division was only implicit and not always consistent.
- Turner , Edward . 1833 . Elements of Chemistry , 4th edn 399 – 399 . London 692
- Turner , Edward . 1833 . Elements of Chemistry , 4th edn 448 – 448 . London 649–91
- Johnston . 1832 . Report on the Recent Progress and Present State of Chemical Science . British Association Report , : 431 – 431 . and 436–9; 242
- Johnston . 1832 . Report on the Recent Progress and Present State of Chemical Science . British Association Report , : 445 – 446 .
- Translated and reprinted in Whewell Remarks on a recent Statement by Berzelius respecting the Use of Chemical Formulæ Philosophical Magazine 1834 4 9 10 Third series originally published in the Swedish Academy's Jahresberichte, 12 (1833), 168–70. Whewell italicized the word foreign in his translation.
- 1833 . British Association Report , : xx – xx . xii; On Whewell's plans for his History see his letter to Richard Jones, 21 August 1834, in Todhunter (footnote 6), II, pp. 186–8.
- 1833 . British Association Report , : xix – xix . Whewell, History of the Inductive Sciences, 3rd edn, 3 vols (London, 1857; reprinted London, 1967), III, Part one.
- Whewell . 1832 . Report on the Recent Progress and Present State of Chemical Science . British Association Report , : 9 – 10 . Communicated 21 November 1833.
- Whewell . 1832 . Report on the Recent Progress and Present State of Chemical Science . British Association Report , : 10 – 10 . Whewell here overlooked his own inconsistent use of the symbol q for water.
- Whewell . 1832 . Report on the Recent Progress and Present State of Chemical Science . British Association Report , : 10 – 10 .
- Bud and Roberts . 1984 . Science versus Practice: Chemistry in Victorian Britain 38 – 38 . Manchester J. B. Morrell, ‘Thomas Thomson: Professor of Chemistry and University reformer’, British Journal for the History of Science, 4 (1968–9), 245–65 (p. 249).
- Oxland , Robert . 1878 . President's Address . Annual Report and Transactions of the Plymouth Institution… , 7 : 28 – 29 . Prideaux's interest in practical chemistry continued after the notation debate; for many years he taught chemistry and mineralogy at the Cornwall Institution's mining school in Truro, where, Oxland reports, he ‘turned out young men who have since occupied very important positions as miners and metallurgists in all parts of the world’. Cf. the syllabus of his course reprinted in 21st Annual Report of the Royal Institution of Cornwall (1840), pp. 66–7.
- Phillips , Richard . 1833 . Observations on the Use of Chemical Symbols . Philosophical Magazine , 3 : 443 – 445 . Third series Phillips's examples of conflicting systems of notation included those of Graham, Whewell, Brande, Turner, Johnston, Prideaux, Warrington, two different versions by Berzelius himself, and Heinrich Rose. Rose presented his notation in his Handbuch der analytischen Chemie (Berlin, 1829–31), translated in Great Britain by the chemical supplier John Griffen as Manual of Analytical Chemistry (London, 1831).
- Graham , Thomas . 1834 . Reply to Mr. Phillips's Observations on the Use of Chemical Symbols . Philosophical Magazine , 4 : 106 – 107 . third series
- Prideaux , John . 1834 . Remarks on Mr. Phillips's Observations on the Use of Chemical Symbols . Philosophical Magazine , 4 : 41 – 43 . third series Whewell, it seems, would have concurred with Phillips that the co-existence of so many different systems was damaging to chemistry. Sensing this, Prideaux was careful to note that ‘the mathematical notation of Whewell and Brande can hardly be classed’ as translatable into the Berzelian system.
- Phillips , Richard . 1834 . Additional Observations on the Use of Chemical Symbols . Philosophical Magazine , 4 : 246 – 251 . Third series
- Turner died February 1837. His brother Wilton, together with Liebig and William Gregory, edited a sixth edition of the Elements 1842 in which went into another edition the same year. The eighth edition of the popular textbook, published in 1847, was edited by Liebig and Gregory
- Turner , Edward . 1835 . Elements of Chemistry , 5th American, from the 5th London edn 150 – 152 . Philadelphia Although the preface is dated November 1834, the publication date is 1835.
- Turner , Edward . 1835 . Elements of Chemistry , 5th American, from the 5th London edn 151 – 152 . Philadelphia
- On this point see Brock Knight The Atomic Debates Isis 1956 56 6 7
- Turner . 1885 . The Life of Sir Robert Christison Vol. I , 721 – 721 . Edinburgh 2 vols (footnote 46), p. 493 and passim in the section on organic chemistry.
- It is unclear whether Johnston or Turner was directly responsible for suggesting that a commitee be formed. Morrell Thackray Gentlemen of Science Oxford 1981 487 487 imply that it was Johnston's doing, while Brock (footnote 3), p. 34, writes that ‘Turner persuaded’ the Committee on Chemistry and Mineralogical Science to form a committee on notation. Brock's source, the British Association Report for 1834, does not indicate who made the suggestion. The other members of the committee were Thomas Charles Hope, William Hallowes Miller, Thomas Clark, John Christison, and James Cumming. It is likely that Christison supported the position of his close friend Turner. On Daniell, see footnote 23 above.
- Turner to Prout, 30 January 1835, reprinted in Brock Gentlemen of Science Oxford 1981 37 39 Turner wrote that algebraic notation was useful for ‘pointedly fixing the Students attention on all the elements concerned in a given change’. Prout's reply (reprinted in its draft form in Brock, pp. 39–41) indicated allegiance to Whewell's positivist position: ‘chemical notation … should in all instances express facts only and never hypotheses’.
- 1835 . British Association Report , : 207 – 207 . Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal, 19 (1835), 393.
- 1835 . British Association Report , : 207 – 207 . Proceedings of the Fifth Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Dublin, 1835, reprinted in Thackray (footnote 3), pp. 118–9. British Association Report (1836), pp. xxix–xxxi.
- 1835 . Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal , 19 : 393 – 393 .
- Reprinted in Thackray John Dalton Cambridge, Mass. 1972 118 118
- Whewell to Adolphe Quetelet, 2 October 1835 William Whewell Todhunter London 1876 II 228 228 in 2 vols Whewell to Robert Murchison, 2 Oxtober 1840, in Ibid., pp. 291–2.
- Morrell and Thackray . 1972 . John Dalton 513 – 517 . Cambridge, Mass.
- Graham , Thomas . 1838 . Elements of Chemistry 103 – 106 . London
Annals of Science
Volume 46, 1989 - Issue 5
![Supercharge Your Next Research Paper: Research and write your next paper with Jenni AI.]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/112444/Skyscraper-humanities.png"})