Abstract
A SOMEWHAT novel view of “The Place of Lavoisier in the History of Chemistry” is put forward in a paper contributed by A. Mieli to the April number of Scientia. This question has formed the subject of prolonged controversy, and has called forth the most diverse and contrary opinions. Some, with Wurtz, have boldly acclaimed the fact that “Chemistry is a French science. Its founder is Lavoisier, of immortal memory.” Others have written him down as a mere plagiarist, who purloined from Priestley, the discovery of oxygen, and from Cavendish the discovery of the composition of water, and thus built up a great reputation on the unacknowledged work of his English colleagues. The Italian writer asserts that these claims and counterclaims are based upon a misconception. Lavoisier's true place is not at the beginning of the period to which the atomic and molecular theories belong, but at the close of an earlier period in which the chief problems were the nature of combustion, and the composition of air and water. This period opens'with Jean Rey and Boyle; John Mayow had practically reached a true solution of the main problems in 1674; but Becher and Stahl intervened, and it was only by the work of Black, Priestley, Cavendish, and Lavoisier that all difficulties and doubts were finally cleared away. Lavoisier's position in the historical sequence enabled him to use all the information and experience that had been gathered during the preceding 150 years, and it was right that he should do so, though his acknowledgments to Priestley and to Cavendish might well have been more generous.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
L., T. The Place of Lavoisier in the History of Chemistry . Nature 95, 356 (1915). https://doi.org/10.1038/095356a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/095356a0