How well-founded does not this remark sound to someone who is not familiar with the
basic foundations of chemistry. But what does a chemist say about this? Well, Mr Desaive
is presumably not a chemist; he might have heard the bell ringing, but does not know in
which church.
Scheele wrote that if Desavie only had taken a quick look in a table of affinities
(Chap. 20), he would easily have found that mercury has a stronger affinity for
hydrochloric acid than for sulphuric acid. Scheele disproved Desaive’s “unnecessary remark” by showing that the product was free from mercury(II) sulphate [8].
As Scheele published his reply in a Swedish journal, it is perhaps not likely that his
paper reached Desaive.
27.3 Emetic Tartar and Pulvis Algerothi
Bergman, being professor in chemistry and pharmacy, only presented a single
dissertation related to pharmacy, a study of potassium antimonyl tartrate (emetic
tartar) presented in 1773 [9]. Antimony compounds had been used to induce
vomiting since the days of Basil Valentine (Basilius Valentinus) and his book
Triumph Wagen Antimonii (Triumphant Chariot of Antimony), published in 1604.
4
There were several methods to prepare emetic tartar but unfortunately the strength
of the emetic depended on its mode of preparation. The aim of this thesis was to
find a reliable method to prepare an emetic of reproducible composition, or as
Bergman put it: “In prescribing medicines, or in composing dispensatories, nothing
is more necessary than that both the materials and method of preparation be so
chosen as to be exactly alike in all cases and situations” [10]. The traditional source
of antimony was antimony(III) sulphide, which was oxidised by ignition with
potassium nitrate (saltpetre). This was the operation that led Scheele to the discovery of nitrous acid in Malmö a few years earlier (Sect. 8.2). Bergman concluded
that the phlogiston content of the product was of crucial importance, that is, antimony had to be in its trivalent state. Not only did the ratio of Sb 2 S 3 to KNO 3 matter,
the method also affected the result. Either a mixture of the two substances could be
ignited or the mixture could be poured into a red-hot crucible; the latter method
gave the best result.
To find a suitable method, Bergman and his student Level treated several different antimony preparations with either tartaric acid, potassium tartrate (tartarised
tartar) or potassium hydrogen tartrate (cream of tartrar). They found that antimony
(III)oxychloride (SbOCl; Pulvis Algerothi) was the most uniform starting material,
and that the best method of preparing emetic tartar was to boil antimony(III)
oxychloride half an hour with either potassium tartrate or potassium hydrogen
tartrate. A few years later, Scheele would perfect the method by introducing a new
method of preparing Pulvis Algerothi [11].
4
In Sweden, potassium antimonyl tartrate was used as an emetic until the 1960s.
27.2 Mercurius Dulcis
369
basic foundations of chemistry. But what does a chemist say about this? Well, Mr Desaive
is presumably not a chemist; he might have heard the bell ringing, but does not know in
which church.
Scheele wrote that if Desavie only had taken a quick look in a table of affinities
(Chap. 20), he would easily have found that mercury has a stronger affinity for
hydrochloric acid than for sulphuric acid. Scheele disproved Desaive’s “unnecessary remark” by showing that the product was free from mercury(II) sulphate [8].
As Scheele published his reply in a Swedish journal, it is perhaps not likely that his
paper reached Desaive.
27.3 Emetic Tartar and Pulvis Algerothi
Bergman, being professor in chemistry and pharmacy, only presented a single
dissertation related to pharmacy, a study of potassium antimonyl tartrate (emetic
tartar) presented in 1773 [9]. Antimony compounds had been used to induce
vomiting since the days of Basil Valentine (Basilius Valentinus) and his book
Triumph Wagen Antimonii (Triumphant Chariot of Antimony), published in 1604.
4
There were several methods to prepare emetic tartar but unfortunately the strength
of the emetic depended on its mode of preparation. The aim of this thesis was to
find a reliable method to prepare an emetic of reproducible composition, or as
Bergman put it: “In prescribing medicines, or in composing dispensatories, nothing
is more necessary than that both the materials and method of preparation be so
chosen as to be exactly alike in all cases and situations” [10]. The traditional source
of antimony was antimony(III) sulphide, which was oxidised by ignition with
potassium nitrate (saltpetre). This was the operation that led Scheele to the discovery of nitrous acid in Malmö a few years earlier (Sect. 8.2). Bergman concluded
that the phlogiston content of the product was of crucial importance, that is, antimony had to be in its trivalent state. Not only did the ratio of Sb 2 S 3 to KNO 3 matter,
the method also affected the result. Either a mixture of the two substances could be
ignited or the mixture could be poured into a red-hot crucible; the latter method
gave the best result.
To find a suitable method, Bergman and his student Level treated several different antimony preparations with either tartaric acid, potassium tartrate (tartarised
tartar) or potassium hydrogen tartrate (cream of tartrar). They found that antimony
(III)oxychloride (SbOCl; Pulvis Algerothi) was the most uniform starting material,
and that the best method of preparing emetic tartar was to boil antimony(III)
oxychloride half an hour with either potassium tartrate or potassium hydrogen
tartrate. A few years later, Scheele would perfect the method by introducing a new
method of preparing Pulvis Algerothi [11].
4
In Sweden, potassium antimonyl tartrate was used as an emetic until the 1960s.
27.2 Mercurius Dulcis
369