Textbook Author

Kolbe's poor research productivity during his early years in Marburg had several causes: the paucity of advanced students; the poor condition of the lab and its inadequate budget; the labor of preparing lectures for the first time; and the various difficulties, both personal and health-related, that he and his wife suffered. In addition, his work for Vieweg on the Handwörterbuch der reinen und angewandten Chemie continued through his early years in Marburg. This work provided some much-needed income, but consumed a great deal of his valuable time in an activity that was not very useful for his scholarly reputation. With the press of other business in the first six years of his professorship, Kolbe was increasingly dilatory with his editorial tasks. In the summer of 1857, Vieweg suggested—partly at the suggestion of Liebig, who was then unhappy with Kolbe's polemics and one-sided approach^[88] —that he turn over many of his responsibilities to Hermann von Fehling, professor in Stuttgart. Kolbe agreed.^[89] Kolbe had completed the editing of volumes three through six (letters F through R) and a supplement volume. Fehling took over from volume seven and completed the entire work in nine volumes by 1864; he also immediately began a second edition. In 1871, a Neues Handwörterbuch der Chemie , which was published until well into the twentieth century, continued the work. Kolbe was very distressed to see these later editions adopt structure-theoretical ideas.

It was not difficult for Vieweg to persuade Kolbe to give up control over his beloved Handwörterbuch , partly because a new brainchild had been displacing it: his textbook of organic chemistry. Recall that at the end of 1847 he had accepted the assignment to write the organic part of the third Graham-Otto edition, but five years later he had apparently not been able to proceed very far in his task. However, in a

letter to Vieweg of 24 January 1853 he reported being hard at work and was optimistic at making sufficient progress to allow the printing to start by the first of May.

There are, of course, many reasons to write textbooks, and Kolbe was doubtless sensitive to the various opportunities. Organic chemistry around 1850 was obviously theoretically labile, and no full modern texts existed. This meant that the first to enter the field with a satisfactory treatment would sell well. The competitor texts, which were some of the first textbooks of organic chemistry, were either out of date (Liebig and Löwig) or too short (Schlossberger and Strecker); he did not then know about Gerhardt's Traité , which was on the verge of appearing.^[90] Perhaps even more important, the lability of the field meant that the first successful textbook author had a real chance to establish his theoretical views as the pedagogical standard for the discipline, in the manner that Berzelius had done a quarter century earlier.

In addition to these pecuniary and programmatic motivations, a third factor may have been present. Kolbe had not yet worked out all of the details of his incipient system; the inconsistencies that we observed in his 1850 theoretical paper indicate as much. Writing a textbook can provide an author with the opportunity to view the entire discipline from the ground up, and working through all the details can materially assist in developing a finely articulated theoretical system. Whether or not Kolbe consciously intended his endeavor to serve this function, we will see that in writing the first volume, he followed a meandering journey through a theoretically rich chemical landscape, finally ending up in a position that gave him a powerful tool for exploring unknown scientific territory.

In January 1853 Kolbe projected his Lehrbuch at two volumes totaling about 1300 pages, and he wanted to produce them quickly, presumably within a couple of years.^[91] His estimates of size and schedule proved hopelessly unrealistic—it would be a quarter century and over 3300 pages of text in four volumes before the first edition was completed. In February he wrote with satisfaction: "The Organic is flourishing and growing. There is no lack of heat and fire from my side." But in March he reported difficulties. He was having to rewrite various sections of the manuscript begun in Braunschweig due to various newly published theories based on recent discoveries. He thought that the two years of teaching he had completed in Marburg had been necessary preparation for this task, and his own ideas had thereby evolved. May came and went, as did the entire summer, without Vieweg receiving manuscript to begin the printing, though Kolbe continued to emphasize the need for his work to appear as soon as possible.^[92]

Finally, in the middle of October Kolbe was able to send manuscript for the first two or three sheets, though not enough for the first fascicle. (Like many publishers of his day, Vieweg put out longer works in parts or fascicles, often consisting of six printer's sheets or ninety-six pages each, which were retailed separately and eventually bound by booksellers or by customers.) By then, unfortunately, the field was beginning to get crowded. In September Vieweg had sent Kolbe the first published fascicle of a new organic chemistry, Theodor Gerding's edition of William Gregory's text.^[93] Kolbe was able to calm his and Vieweg's fears about this book—it was outdated and poorly translated, and would not sell.

Not from that side is competition for my Organic to be feared, but rather from the German edition of Gerhardt's new chemistry. Probably in order to recommend himself in Germany, since as I understand he is seeking a position at a German university, partly also no doubt for the money, Gerhardt has with this work undertaken a continuation of Berzelius' chemistry (what Berzelius wrote about organic chemistry in his last edition is null and void), and, with incomprehensible—I would call it Jewish—self-abnegation, has disregarded his own views as defended in his chemical papers, in preference to the diametrically contrary principles of Berzelius, and has cozied up to Berzelius' thoughts and conceptions, as far as this is still possible now.^[94]

Kolbe was principally referring to the fact that in his Traité , Gerhardt had used the older conventional equivalents, though in his preface still professing loyalty to his new atomic weights. To Kolbe, this was an insidious and cunning trick that just might work, by blinding and seducing readers.

Even worse from the competitive angle, Gerhardt's Traité appeared, to Kolbe's surprise, to be "a good book." Hence, it now became vital to get the first fascicle of his text out as soon as possible. Because his duties as editor of the Handwörterbuch were still quite burdensome, he asked for a reprieve until he could finish the manuscript for the first fascicle. Moreover, the writing on the textbook was no longer easy for Kolbe. "I've had a hard time with it," he wrote Vieweg. "You see, research by several chemists of the very greatest scientific importance, especially by Gerhardt and Williamson, has appeared in recent months, which threatens to destroy the entire existing structure of currently accepted doctrines in chemistry." Kolbe reported having spent most of August and September studying these papers and devising responses; he had had to revise much of the already written manuscript in light of the new work. Otto had expressed a fear that Kolbe's

volume would end up being too Gerhardtian to fit properly with the Berzelian inorganic portion of the Graham-Otto project, but Kolbe reassured Vieweg on that point.

The result of my multi-week, if I might call it philosophical investigation at my writing desk, is this, that I believe I have found the strongest proofs against Gerhardt's theories, though many parts of the latter must essentially influence the writing of an organic chemistry. Accordingly, I hope that Otto will be satisfied with my views and you with my work.^[95]

Kolbe continued to work away at the all-important introductory portion. He revealed to Vieweg one source of his distress at Gerhardt's pretensions to be continuing Berzelius when he confessed that he, too, wished to be viewed in precisely that sense. "Don't make fun of the juxtaposition," he wrote, "when I say that it is unfortunate that Berzelius is no longer here to stand up to the extravagances of foreigners in theoretical chemistry; that is why I have undertaken to become a critic."^[96] On 1 March 1854, Kolbe reported additional progress in his struggle, namely, his recent formulation of a "fundamental proof of the untenability of the newest French-English hypotheses on the constitution of the most important organic compounds." He said he was fortunate to have had time to incorporate it into the existing manuscript. He and Vieweg agreed on a double fascicle of 11 sheets (176 pages) as the first published installment; it appeared in bookstores in June 1854.^[97]

In early April he sent Vieweg a draft of the foreword. He there declared his intention of following the Berzelian model, disclaimed any connection (other than the rubric under which he wrote) with Graham's organic chemistry, then concluded with some polemics. With a few significant exceptions, he wrote, it had been the French chemists who, on the basis of a few isolated observations and no true scientific foundation, had propounded flimsy hypotheses with an air of infallibility, all to destroy the existing theoretical structure of chemistry. By contrast, "I declare myself as an adherent of the conservative party of our science," which demands critical examination of new theories before allowing them entrance. He ended with a sarcastic taunt:

A certain self-discipline is necessary in the writing of a textbook not to give preference to hypotheses that one believes to be probably correct, but which still require further confirmation. I have striven not to fall into this error; but likewise I have not been able to bring myself, as in a recent work, to place in the foreground views which are considered false even by the author himself.^[98]

Vieweg rightly pointed out that this reproach was by no means clearly aimed, and he did not know to whom it referred. It could even be taken to refer to Liebig himself, since within the last decade he, too, had altered his atomic weights and retreated from various theoretical positions!

Kolbe responded that he intended to single out Gerhardt, who he thought had adopted Berzelian coloration only to make money in Germany, thereby committing "perfidy against himself and risking his entire scientific reputation."^[99] He still hesitated to name Gerhardt openly for fear of being seen as slamming a competitor. But neither Vieweg nor Bunsen had objections to that idea, so he eventually decided to insert Gerhardt's name into the last sentence just cited. Upon further thought, he decided he need not fear competition, for the book proved not to be as Berzelian as he had feared and would not fool the German public.^[100]

As Kolbe continued to receive installments of the German edition of Gerhardt's book, his estimation of it, already surprisingly positive, continued to rise. His favorable opinion is surprising not only because Gerhardt was a competitor whose theories he considered incorrect, but because the man was also both French and Jewish. We have already noted a few Francophobic slurs published by Kolbe as early as 1848 and an unfavorable reference to Gerhardt's religious background to a private correspondent. After 1870, Kolbe's prejudices intensified greatly and were expressed in an increasingly public fashion; his tirades eventually affected the course of his career. We will return to this subject later.

As far as Gerhardt's Traité was concerned in the context of 1854, Kolbe still despised the theories, the style, and the "truly French" organization ("pretentious and absurd"), but he admired the detail and care with which the work was written, and Gerhardt's enormous productivity.

To be sure I cannot work half as fast as Gerhardt, whose capacity for work I cannot believe. . . . I could imagine an author capable of working with such steam power, if the work were hasty and superficial. But one cannot accuse Gerhardt of this fault. . . . Gerhardt's citations are strikingly accurate, as in general the book is written with exceptional diligence.^[101]

From the start, he found much there that he could use for his own text.^[102] One letter to Vieweg suggests that he followed Gerhardt's treatment very closely indeed; he quickly added that when doing so, he was careful always to check Gerhardt's literature references, for he did

not want to experience the "Spectakel" Gerhardt would make were he ever to carry an error over from Gerhardt's book into his own.^[103] He was very open to Vieweg in admitting his new respect for Gerhardt;^[104] a quarter century later he even opined that this was the only good book to have come out of France in the last thirty years.^[105]

The first installment of Kolbe's textbook, consisting largely of introductory and critical matters, got mixed reviews. Erdmann was furious at some Kolbean criticism directed at him (Erdmann had been drifting in a Gerhardtian direction), and he wrote Kolbe an angry letter. Liebig also wrote Kolbe, mixing compliments with the complaint that there were too many polemics in it; in a letter to Vieweg shortly thereafter, Liebig characterized Kolbe as "one-sided."^[106] Vieweg's letters to Kolbe have not survived, but it appears that Vieweg also tried to exert a moderating influence on Kolbe's fiery prose, for Kolbe appears somewhat defensive and conciliatory in subsequent letters on the question of polemics. But a man of Kolbe's self-confidence, conviction, and emotion could not be reined in indefinitely.