The History of Chemistry, Volume 2 (of 2)Thomson, Thomas
History
The History of Chemistry, Volume 2 (of 2)
Thomson, Thomas
Chemistry -- History
"This discovery, which I confirmed by experiments which I regard as
decisive, led me to think that what is observed in the combustion of
sulphur and phosphorus, might likewise take place with respect to all
the bodies which augment in weight by combustion and calcination;
and I was persuaded that the augmentation of weight in the calces of
metals proceeded from the same cause. The experiment fully confirmed my
conjectures. I operated the reduction of litharge in close vessels with
Hales's apparatus, and I observed, that at the moment of the passage
of the calx into the metallic state, there was a disengagement of air
in considerable quantity, and that this air formed a volume at least
one thousand times greater than that of the litharge employed. As this
discovery appears to me one of the most interesting which has been made
since Stahl, I thought it expedient to secure to myself the property,
by depositing the present note in the hands of the secretary of the
academy, to remain secret till the period when I shall publish my
experiments.
"LAVOISIER.
"_Paris, November 11, 1772._"
This note leaves no doubt that Lavoisier had conceived his theory, and
confirmed it by experiment, at least as early as November, 1772. But at
that time the nature of air and the existence of oxygen were unknown.
The theory, therefore, as he understood it at that time, was precisely
the same as that of John Rey. It was not till the end of 1774 that his
views became more precise, and that he was aware that oxygen is the
portion of the air which unites with bodies during combustion, and
calcination.
Nothing can be more evident from the whole history of the academy,
and of the French chemists during this eventful period, for the
progress of the science, that none of them participated in the views
of Lavoisier, or had the least intention of giving up the phlogistic
theory. It was not till 1785, after his experiments had been almost all
published, and after all the difficulties had been removed by the two
great discoveries of Mr. Cavendish, that Berthollet declared himself a
convert to the Lavoisierian opinions. This was soon followed by others,
and within a very few years almost all the chemists and men of science
in France enlisted themselves on the same side. Lavoisier's objection,
then, to the phrase _La Chimie Française_, is not without reason, the
term _Lavoisierian Chemistry_ should undoubtedly be substituted for
it. This term, _La Chimie Française_ was introduced by Fourcroy. Was
Fourcroy anxious to clothe himself with the reputation of Lavoisier,
and had this any connexion with the violent death of that illustrious
man?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account