these names were criticised since the names potasse and soude had previously been
used for impure commercial alkali carbonates.
The names of salts were derived from the name of the acid. An exception was
chlorides which were defined by the name muriate although he preferred the name
acide marin for hydrochloric acid. The other most common salts were vitriol
(sulphate), nitre (nitrate), méphites (carbonate), arseniate (arsenate), borax (borate),
phosphate (phosphate), fluor (fluoride), acète (acetate), tartre (tartrate) and formiate
(formate). Interestingly, he included the name régalte for the salts of acide régalte
(Aqua regia) although, of course, Aqua regia forms no unique salts. As he strived to
form words compatible with French he was, compared with Bergman who used
Latin, not very successful in forming a uniform system [33]. Compared with
Bergman, de Morveau changed the order of the acid and the base in his names, and
wrote vitriol de fer and nitre alumineux, a style that survived in English well into
the nineteenth century and in French to the present day. The nomenclature of de
Morveau gained important support from Macquer, Buffon
1 and from Mongez,
2 who
translated Bergman’s Sciagraphia to French and used de Morveau’s terms in his
translation [34].
26.8 Bergman’s Revised Nomenclature
According to the traditional description of the development of Bergman’s
nomenclature[35], it would have taken Bergman 2 years to respond to Morveau’s
paper. In fact, he responded the same year. It is true that the paper Meditationes de
Systemate Fossilium Naturali [36] was published in the fourth volume of Nova Acta
Reg Scient Upsaliensis in 1784, but it appears that Bergman was prepared for a
delayed publication (compare the publication of the third volume in Sect. 21.3) and
a preprint of Bergman’s paper appeared in 1782, 2 years earlier than commonly
stated [37].
This paper, essentially an expanded version of his Sciagraphia, features a
21-page-long discussion on nomenclature, De fossilibus denominandis (Of Giving
Names to Fossils).
3 Compared with Sciagraphia, this essay was intended to be
more general, and thus also include organic acids not encountered in the mineral
kingdom.
Bergman found the state of the chemical language remarkable: “Surely, it is
highly improper that the noblest science, which constitutes, as it were, the very
essence of natural philosophy, should deliver truths of the greatest importance in the
most absurd of all languages” [38]. He welcomed the initiative of de Morveau:
1
Georges-ouis Leclerc, Compte de Buffon (1707–1788). Influential naturalist and director of Jardin
de Roi.
2
Jean-André Mongez (1750–1788). French mineralogist.
3
With Fossil, Bergman means mineral.
26.7 The Contributions of de Morveau 1780–1782
361
used for impure commercial alkali carbonates.
The names of salts were derived from the name of the acid. An exception was
chlorides which were defined by the name muriate although he preferred the name
acide marin for hydrochloric acid. The other most common salts were vitriol
(sulphate), nitre (nitrate), méphites (carbonate), arseniate (arsenate), borax (borate),
phosphate (phosphate), fluor (fluoride), acète (acetate), tartre (tartrate) and formiate
(formate). Interestingly, he included the name régalte for the salts of acide régalte
(Aqua regia) although, of course, Aqua regia forms no unique salts. As he strived to
form words compatible with French he was, compared with Bergman who used
Latin, not very successful in forming a uniform system [33]. Compared with
Bergman, de Morveau changed the order of the acid and the base in his names, and
wrote vitriol de fer and nitre alumineux, a style that survived in English well into
the nineteenth century and in French to the present day. The nomenclature of de
Morveau gained important support from Macquer, Buffon
1 and from Mongez,
2 who
translated Bergman’s Sciagraphia to French and used de Morveau’s terms in his
translation [34].
26.8 Bergman’s Revised Nomenclature
According to the traditional description of the development of Bergman’s
nomenclature[35], it would have taken Bergman 2 years to respond to Morveau’s
paper. In fact, he responded the same year. It is true that the paper Meditationes de
Systemate Fossilium Naturali [36] was published in the fourth volume of Nova Acta
Reg Scient Upsaliensis in 1784, but it appears that Bergman was prepared for a
delayed publication (compare the publication of the third volume in Sect. 21.3) and
a preprint of Bergman’s paper appeared in 1782, 2 years earlier than commonly
stated [37].
This paper, essentially an expanded version of his Sciagraphia, features a
21-page-long discussion on nomenclature, De fossilibus denominandis (Of Giving
Names to Fossils).
3 Compared with Sciagraphia, this essay was intended to be
more general, and thus also include organic acids not encountered in the mineral
kingdom.
Bergman found the state of the chemical language remarkable: “Surely, it is
highly improper that the noblest science, which constitutes, as it were, the very
essence of natural philosophy, should deliver truths of the greatest importance in the
most absurd of all languages” [38]. He welcomed the initiative of de Morveau:
1
Georges-ouis Leclerc, Compte de Buffon (1707–1788). Influential naturalist and director of Jardin
de Roi.
2
Jean-André Mongez (1750–1788). French mineralogist.
3
With Fossil, Bergman means mineral.
26.7 The Contributions of de Morveau 1780–1782
361