1775 (Sect. 11.1). In the preface, Bergman gives the impression that Alströmer had
turned to him with the manuscript, but one cannot avoid suspecting that Bergman
played a more active role and, at least partly, published the text in order to deprive
von Engeström of his secret. In December 1770, Gahn wrote to Bergman: “Baron
Hermelin have given me a rejection regarding Dir. Scheffer’s papers. If I wanted to
use them these days in Stockholm, it was fine, but then he wanted to take them
with him…” [113]. It seems that Bergman was actively searching for copies of
Scheffer’s lectures.
Bergman had to spend a lot of time adding comments to Scheffer’s text, and the
question is how much time Bergman actually saved compared to writing his own
book. According to Bergman, von Engeström saw the publication as a declaration
of war [111]. It was probably not only economic reasons and the competition for
students that drove Bergman to the publication of Scheffer’s lectures. As an
enlightenment era scientist, Bergman also found it unacceptable to keep knowledge
secret [114]. For the chemistry students, Bergman’s action must have been more
than welcome. Not only did they no longer have to hand-copy the manuscript, the
price also dropped from 3,000 copper dalers to 13 copper dalers and 16 öre [115].
According to Bergman, von Engeström constantly tried to discredit him; for
instance, he told the students that came from Uppsala to Laboratorium chymicum that
they had to forget everything that Bergman had taught them [114]. Wargentin wished
to put an end to the fight by asking Rinman to talk to the two, but Rinman was wise
enough not to get involved [114]. Bergman thought less of von Engeström and
Wallerius, as they had no interest in theoretical chemistry. In 1777, for example, he
wrote a preface to Scheele’s book on air and fire (Sect. 21.3), and he wrote to Gahn:
I have on request written a small preface to the work [i.e. Scheele’s book], dealing primarily
with chemistry’s, in particular the finer chemistry’s [i.e. theoretical and analytical chemistry
in contrast to applied chemistry] usefulness. The latter is despised by a W., a v. E. [i.e.
Wallerius and von Engeström] and others who do not understand it. [116]
The same year, 1777, Bergman gave a lecture in front of the Royal Swedish
Academy of Sciences (see Sect. 19.5), as he handed over the presidency that he had
upheld for three months. The topic of the lecture was “On the Latest Progress of
Chemistry”. The topic was very well chosen by Bergman. The King was in the
audience, and in his lecture, Bergman argued for the importance of basic chemical
research and talked about the amazing discoveries made by chemists in recent
years. Thus, Bergman assured that invested tax money was used to for the benefit of
Sweden and Swedish people. The topic also distanced Bergman from Wallerius’
school, who did not believe in new discoveries.
von Engeström and Wallerius also held the president position (preses) of the
Academy; von Engeström in 1774 and 1782 and Wallerius in 1783. The lectures they
delivered are very different from Bergman’s lecture of 1777. When von Engeström
handed over the presidency in 1774, he spoke of The Obstacles and Progress of
Mineralogy During the Last Years [117]. A large portion of the lecture was used to
establish Cronstedt’s priority for the development of the chemical mineralogy system
(Sect. 25.7). He said that chemistry is the only correct ground for mineralogy, but also
9.6 Bergman’s Relations with Wallerius and von Engeström
141
turned to him with the manuscript, but one cannot avoid suspecting that Bergman
played a more active role and, at least partly, published the text in order to deprive
von Engeström of his secret. In December 1770, Gahn wrote to Bergman: “Baron
Hermelin have given me a rejection regarding Dir. Scheffer’s papers. If I wanted to
use them these days in Stockholm, it was fine, but then he wanted to take them
with him…” [113]. It seems that Bergman was actively searching for copies of
Scheffer’s lectures.
Bergman had to spend a lot of time adding comments to Scheffer’s text, and the
question is how much time Bergman actually saved compared to writing his own
book. According to Bergman, von Engeström saw the publication as a declaration
of war [111]. It was probably not only economic reasons and the competition for
students that drove Bergman to the publication of Scheffer’s lectures. As an
enlightenment era scientist, Bergman also found it unacceptable to keep knowledge
secret [114]. For the chemistry students, Bergman’s action must have been more
than welcome. Not only did they no longer have to hand-copy the manuscript, the
price also dropped from 3,000 copper dalers to 13 copper dalers and 16 öre [115].
According to Bergman, von Engeström constantly tried to discredit him; for
instance, he told the students that came from Uppsala to Laboratorium chymicum that
they had to forget everything that Bergman had taught them [114]. Wargentin wished
to put an end to the fight by asking Rinman to talk to the two, but Rinman was wise
enough not to get involved [114]. Bergman thought less of von Engeström and
Wallerius, as they had no interest in theoretical chemistry. In 1777, for example, he
wrote a preface to Scheele’s book on air and fire (Sect. 21.3), and he wrote to Gahn:
I have on request written a small preface to the work [i.e. Scheele’s book], dealing primarily
with chemistry’s, in particular the finer chemistry’s [i.e. theoretical and analytical chemistry
in contrast to applied chemistry] usefulness. The latter is despised by a W., a v. E. [i.e.
Wallerius and von Engeström] and others who do not understand it. [116]
The same year, 1777, Bergman gave a lecture in front of the Royal Swedish
Academy of Sciences (see Sect. 19.5), as he handed over the presidency that he had
upheld for three months. The topic of the lecture was “On the Latest Progress of
Chemistry”. The topic was very well chosen by Bergman. The King was in the
audience, and in his lecture, Bergman argued for the importance of basic chemical
research and talked about the amazing discoveries made by chemists in recent
years. Thus, Bergman assured that invested tax money was used to for the benefit of
Sweden and Swedish people. The topic also distanced Bergman from Wallerius’
school, who did not believe in new discoveries.
von Engeström and Wallerius also held the president position (preses) of the
Academy; von Engeström in 1774 and 1782 and Wallerius in 1783. The lectures they
delivered are very different from Bergman’s lecture of 1777. When von Engeström
handed over the presidency in 1774, he spoke of The Obstacles and Progress of
Mineralogy During the Last Years [117]. A large portion of the lecture was used to
establish Cronstedt’s priority for the development of the chemical mineralogy system
(Sect. 25.7). He said that chemistry is the only correct ground for mineralogy, but also
9.6 Bergman’s Relations with Wallerius and von Engeström
141