‘simple uncomplicated philosophy of life’, his was a calm character, able to
accommodate both triumph and disaster alike. Haber on the other hand, was
the eldest child in his family and unlike Robert he suffered tragedy at the
earliest possible time, his mother dying just three weeks after his difficult
birth. Young Fritz was precocious, characterised by restlessness, creativity, an
enthusiasm for all things new and a burning ambition to do well. But he was
also sensitive to personal criticism and failure, made manifest through
physical illnesses. To some, it seems the specious notion of the ‘attraction of
opposites’ may have been at play here.
To concentrate on the differences between these two men is easy but what
they had in common helped bind them. Both were from ‘old families’,
comfortable with the values such a provenance provides. Neither showed any
‘spectacular’ early academic promise but both became professional physical
chemists via organic chemistry, each eventually developing an interest in
chemical technology. The two were also complementary characters; Fritz
disliked the minutia of experimentation
1
—his personality was ill suited—but
for Robert, the laboratory was ‘king’. Both men also felt that they came to
Karlsruhe entirely by chance and they remained friends until Haber’s death in
1934. But don’t be fooled, this partnership was eventually ‘consummated’
not by common provenance, nor the attraction of opposites … but by mutual
respect, and the prospect of money.
Only through an understanding the life of Fritz Haber are we able to
properly interpret Robert Le Rossignol’s contribution to the fixation of
nitrogen, but the world so nearly lost Haber’s story. Because of his role in the
first European war, Haber—judged by the standards of the time—was condemned as a social and scientific outcast. His last months were characterised
by wanderings across Europe. With no permanent home to contain the story
of his life and because of the catastrophe of the second European war, his
family, friends and the documents that defined him were scattered across the
continent or simply lost through the gas chambers and the destruction of the
German archives. The detail of his life could therefore have easily disappeared
and much of Le Rossignol’s along with it. A number of friends and colleagues
of Haber published short accounts his life, J. E. Coates,
1 Richard Willstätter
2
and Rudolf Stern
3 being foremost amongst these. But one of Haber’s students
—Johannes Jaenicke
4
—attempted a biography assembling a total of 2290
items relating to Haber’s life. Jaenicke began his work in 1954 and spent the
next thirty years tracking down friends and family, copying letters and
38
D. Sheppard
accommodate both triumph and disaster alike. Haber on the other hand, was
the eldest child in his family and unlike Robert he suffered tragedy at the
earliest possible time, his mother dying just three weeks after his difficult
birth. Young Fritz was precocious, characterised by restlessness, creativity, an
enthusiasm for all things new and a burning ambition to do well. But he was
also sensitive to personal criticism and failure, made manifest through
physical illnesses. To some, it seems the specious notion of the ‘attraction of
opposites’ may have been at play here.
To concentrate on the differences between these two men is easy but what
they had in common helped bind them. Both were from ‘old families’,
comfortable with the values such a provenance provides. Neither showed any
‘spectacular’ early academic promise but both became professional physical
chemists via organic chemistry, each eventually developing an interest in
chemical technology. The two were also complementary characters; Fritz
disliked the minutia of experimentation
1
—his personality was ill suited—but
for Robert, the laboratory was ‘king’. Both men also felt that they came to
Karlsruhe entirely by chance and they remained friends until Haber’s death in
1934. But don’t be fooled, this partnership was eventually ‘consummated’
not by common provenance, nor the attraction of opposites … but by mutual
respect, and the prospect of money.
Only through an understanding the life of Fritz Haber are we able to
properly interpret Robert Le Rossignol’s contribution to the fixation of
nitrogen, but the world so nearly lost Haber’s story. Because of his role in the
first European war, Haber—judged by the standards of the time—was condemned as a social and scientific outcast. His last months were characterised
by wanderings across Europe. With no permanent home to contain the story
of his life and because of the catastrophe of the second European war, his
family, friends and the documents that defined him were scattered across the
continent or simply lost through the gas chambers and the destruction of the
German archives. The detail of his life could therefore have easily disappeared
and much of Le Rossignol’s along with it. A number of friends and colleagues
of Haber published short accounts his life, J. E. Coates,
1 Richard Willstätter
2
and Rudolf Stern
3 being foremost amongst these. But one of Haber’s students
—Johannes Jaenicke
4
—attempted a biography assembling a total of 2290
items relating to Haber’s life. Jaenicke began his work in 1954 and spent the
next thirty years tracking down friends and family, copying letters and
38
D. Sheppard