The History of Science and Technology in the United States: A Critical and SelectiveBibliography by Marc RothenbergReview by: Clark A. ElliottIsis, Vol. 75, No. 1, Sarton, Science, and History (Mar., 1984), pp. 208-209Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/232375 .

Accessed: 08/05/2014 20:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press and The History of Science Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Isis.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 20:25:27 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS-ISIS, 75 : 1: 276 (1984) BOOK REVIEWS-ISIS, 75 : 1: 276 (1984)

fundamental to the workings of modern mathematics and science deserves a his- tory of its own.

Robin Rider's new Bibliography of Early Modern Algebra, 1500-1800 is certainly not an attempt to write such a history, but it may be regarded as a necessary foundation for it, demonstrating that algebra did exist as an independent discipline and listing the literature that must be examined when any such history does come to be written. Its declared aim is to identify all texts or ac- counts of algebra printed from 1494 to 1799 (i.e., from Pacioli to Ruffini), with algebra defined as the theory of equations and their methods of solution, excluding the con- struction of equations and Diophantine analysis. The bibliography includes not only textbooks and monographs devoted entirely to algebra, but also journal articles and mathematical compendia that treat al- gebra only in sections.

The author makes no claim to be com- plete, and the more than 1450 items in- cluded made it impossible for her to ex- amine all of the entries personally. One unfortunate result is the inclusion of a number of works that do not contain any algebra, such as Tartaglia's Nova scientia (1537), Schreiber's Ayn new kunstlich Buech (1518), Feliciano's Libro di arith- metica (1526), and Forcadel's L'arithme- tique (1577). In another peculiar error, Ra- mus's 1560 Arithmetica is listed in place of his Algebra of the same year (published anonymously), and no distinction is made between those later editions of the Arith- metica that include the algebra and those that do not.

Perhaps more serious is the omission of a number of works that are particularly im- portant for the history of algebra. While the original edition of Viete's Isagoge is in- cluded, the author misses the first editions of his Zetetics, De numerosa resolutione, and Notae priores. Adrian van Roomen's famous 45th-degree equation of 1593 is likewise omitted, as is Viete's solution of the following year. Instead, the author lists Viete's "Expostulation against Clavius," a three-page invective over the calendar re- form that has nothing whatsoever to do with algebra.

All this from the period I know best, be- fore 1650; the author certainly does better in the period for which she is more expert, the eighteenth century, which also ac- counts for more than two thirds of the en-

fundamental to the workings of modern mathematics and science deserves a his- tory of its own.

Robin Rider's new Bibliography of Early Modern Algebra, 1500-1800 is certainly not an attempt to write such a history, but it may be regarded as a necessary foundation for it, demonstrating that algebra did exist as an independent discipline and listing the literature that must be examined when any such history does come to be written. Its declared aim is to identify all texts or ac- counts of algebra printed from 1494 to 1799 (i.e., from Pacioli to Ruffini), with algebra defined as the theory of equations and their methods of solution, excluding the con- struction of equations and Diophantine analysis. The bibliography includes not only textbooks and monographs devoted entirely to algebra, but also journal articles and mathematical compendia that treat al- gebra only in sections.

The author makes no claim to be com- plete, and the more than 1450 items in- cluded made it impossible for her to ex- amine all of the entries personally. One unfortunate result is the inclusion of a number of works that do not contain any algebra, such as Tartaglia's Nova scientia (1537), Schreiber's Ayn new kunstlich Buech (1518), Feliciano's Libro di arith- metica (1526), and Forcadel's L'arithme- tique (1577). In another peculiar error, Ra- mus's 1560 Arithmetica is listed in place of his Algebra of the same year (published anonymously), and no distinction is made between those later editions of the Arith- metica that include the algebra and those that do not.

Perhaps more serious is the omission of a number of works that are particularly im- portant for the history of algebra. While the original edition of Viete's Isagoge is in- cluded, the author misses the first editions of his Zetetics, De numerosa resolutione, and Notae priores. Adrian van Roomen's famous 45th-degree equation of 1593 is likewise omitted, as is Viete's solution of the following year. Instead, the author lists Viete's "Expostulation against Clavius," a three-page invective over the calendar re- form that has nothing whatsoever to do with algebra.

All this from the period I know best, be- fore 1650; the author certainly does better in the period for which she is more expert, the eighteenth century, which also ac- counts for more than two thirds of the en-

tries, although I did find two later editions of Wolffs Elementa that were not listed.

The identification of the listed items is minimal; giving only the author's name (in modern vernacular form), short title, city, and date, with cross-references to any other editions. Perhaps this was necessary to hold the book to a reasonable size, but one could have hoped for more, such as more complete titles, cross-references from the Latin names (which are often quite dif- ferent from the vernacular forms), length, or keys to the author's sources. And one does note an excessive amount of white space.

The primary list is organized chronolog- ically, each subsequent edition appearing under its respective year with a reference to the year of the first edition. This makes it useful for visualizing the numerical growth of the literature over time, but I ex- pect the author index at the back will be the most used.

I also found the fifteen-page introduction to be especially readable and valuable for its synopsis of the principal trends and pat- terns in eighteenth-century algebra, one that reveals a thorough grasp of the liter- ature for this period. Rider's outline of themes and movements will surely set the pattern for studying the history of algebra in this century.

Bibliographies are always imperfect, but the long list of names and titles, the useful introduction, combined with the absence of any comparable work, will surely make this a necessary and useful reference for any scholar interested in the history of al- gebra as a discipline.

WARREN VAN EGMOND

Marc Rothenberg. The History of Science and Technology in the United States: A Critical and Selective Bibliography. (Bib- liographies of the History of Science and Technology, 2.) (Garland Reference Li- brary of the Humanities, 308.) xviii + 242 pp., index. New York / London: Garland Publishing, 1982. $35.

This classified bibliography lists 832 works, most of which were published 1940-1980. Included are English-language books, articles, and dissertations. Intended primarily for newcomers to the field, an oc- casional title is included to warn of its weaknesses, but most are basic readings.

The author includes an introductory

tries, although I did find two later editions of Wolffs Elementa that were not listed.

The identification of the listed items is minimal; giving only the author's name (in modern vernacular form), short title, city, and date, with cross-references to any other editions. Perhaps this was necessary to hold the book to a reasonable size, but one could have hoped for more, such as more complete titles, cross-references from the Latin names (which are often quite dif- ferent from the vernacular forms), length, or keys to the author's sources. And one does note an excessive amount of white space.

The primary list is organized chronolog- ically, each subsequent edition appearing under its respective year with a reference to the year of the first edition. This makes it useful for visualizing the numerical growth of the literature over time, but I ex- pect the author index at the back will be the most used.

I also found the fifteen-page introduction to be especially readable and valuable for its synopsis of the principal trends and pat- terns in eighteenth-century algebra, one that reveals a thorough grasp of the liter- ature for this period. Rider's outline of themes and movements will surely set the pattern for studying the history of algebra in this century.

Bibliographies are always imperfect, but the long list of names and titles, the useful introduction, combined with the absence of any comparable work, will surely make this a necessary and useful reference for any scholar interested in the history of al- gebra as a discipline.

WARREN VAN EGMOND

Marc Rothenberg. The History of Science and Technology in the United States: A Critical and Selective Bibliography. (Bib- liographies of the History of Science and Technology, 2.) (Garland Reference Li- brary of the Humanities, 308.) xviii + 242 pp., index. New York / London: Garland Publishing, 1982. $35.

This classified bibliography lists 832 works, most of which were published 1940-1980. Included are English-language books, articles, and dissertations. Intended primarily for newcomers to the field, an oc- casional title is included to warn of its weaknesses, but most are basic readings.

The author includes an introductory

208 208

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 20:25:27 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS-ISIS, 75 : 1: 276 (1984) BOOK REVIEWS-ISIS, 75 : 1: 276 (1984)

essay that comments on the strengths and weaknesses of the general literature of the field. He deliberately separates science and technology in this consideration. The ab- sence of great names in much of the history of American science has led Americanists to take a broad view of their subject. During the last two decades biographical studies have been in apparent decline. The history of instrumentation is another ne- glected area, as is the history of the social sciences. I was struck by the inclusion of only fifteen works on education, compared to ninety-one for governmental relations. Other areas of apparent neglect can be gauged by users of the bibliography, al- though it has to be considered whether they reflect Rothenberg's selective criteria. Rothenberg is particularly critical of the lit- erature on the history of the social sci- ences, which he identifies as resulting chiefly from the efforts of practitioners, not of professional historians.

The history of technology brings to- gether the efforts and interests of social and economic historians, and historians of technological objects. In previous years laudatory works were written about "great" inventors. The field now is begin- ning to correct that situation by writing new and critical biographies, as well as other works.

The titles in the bibliography are listed under forty-two headings that range from general studies to special themes such as Funding, Pollution, Popularization, Profes- sionalization, Religion, Women, and the history of individual disciplines. Works on technology are listed under topics such as Instruments and Instrument-makers, In- dustrial Research, Agriculture, Engineer- ing, and various industries. The bibliogra- phy does not include medicine, sociology of science, or policy studies. There is an author and a subject index.

The strength of this bibliography is its annotations, which generally are descrip- tive, although sometimes evaluative. They, in effect, summarize the major themes or conclusions of the works. I could not help wondering, however, whether this would not have been more effective as a biblio- grapical essay. As it stands, it shows the strengths and weaknesses of bibliography as an integrative tool for a field of study. In spite of the masterly annotations and the subject arrangement and index, it is diffi- cult to see the field for the trees. One par-

essay that comments on the strengths and weaknesses of the general literature of the field. He deliberately separates science and technology in this consideration. The ab- sence of great names in much of the history of American science has led Americanists to take a broad view of their subject. During the last two decades biographical studies have been in apparent decline. The history of instrumentation is another ne- glected area, as is the history of the social sciences. I was struck by the inclusion of only fifteen works on education, compared to ninety-one for governmental relations. Other areas of apparent neglect can be gauged by users of the bibliography, al- though it has to be considered whether they reflect Rothenberg's selective criteria. Rothenberg is particularly critical of the lit- erature on the history of the social sci- ences, which he identifies as resulting chiefly from the efforts of practitioners, not of professional historians.

The history of technology brings to- gether the efforts and interests of social and economic historians, and historians of technological objects. In previous years laudatory works were written about "great" inventors. The field now is begin- ning to correct that situation by writing new and critical biographies, as well as other works.

The titles in the bibliography are listed under forty-two headings that range from general studies to special themes such as Funding, Pollution, Popularization, Profes- sionalization, Religion, Women, and the history of individual disciplines. Works on technology are listed under topics such as Instruments and Instrument-makers, In- dustrial Research, Agriculture, Engineer- ing, and various industries. The bibliogra- phy does not include medicine, sociology of science, or policy studies. There is an author and a subject index.

The strength of this bibliography is its annotations, which generally are descrip- tive, although sometimes evaluative. They, in effect, summarize the major themes or conclusions of the works. I could not help wondering, however, whether this would not have been more effective as a biblio- grapical essay. As it stands, it shows the strengths and weaknesses of bibliography as an integrative tool for a field of study. In spite of the masterly annotations and the subject arrangement and index, it is diffi- cult to see the field for the trees. One par-

tial solution might have been a chronolog- ical subarrangement or index. The book now presents 350 years of history with no time divisions.

That this field has emerged as a viable subspecialty is itself endorsed by the pub- lication of this bibliography. Rothenberg has made an important and permanent con- tribution, but he lists not more than five percent of the total literature from all pe- riods. What are needed now are in-depth bibliographies of special areas of study. The degree of annotation that Rothenberg includes is not recommended for bibliog- raphies intended for advanced scholars.

CLARK A. ELLIOTT

The Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts. The Manuscript Papers of British Scientists, 1600-1940. (Guides to Sources for British History, 2.) vii + 109 pp. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Of- fice, 1982. ?3.95.

The Royal Commisssion on Historical Manuscripts locates, reports on, and pub- lishes manuscripts of all kinds in Britain, except public records. It possesses exten- sive unpublished information in the form of its National Register of Archives. The volume under review is the second of a series of guides to sources for British his- tory to be published by the commission. It describes the main surviving manuscript papers of 635 British scientists who were deemed by the commission to be notable for their scientific discoveries or inven- tions. Some entries carry useful references to unpublished lists of papers of which the National Register of Archives holds copies. Unfortunately, some of these references do not make it clear that the commission itself has helped to compile lengthy reports on some collections. For instance, the Whe- well papers at Trinity College, Cambridge, were catalogued in detail by Trinity and the catalogue (192 pp.) reproduced by the com- mission; yet the reference NRA 8804 un- der Whewell in this guide gives no clue that such a valuable catalogue exists. It is also unfortunate that some exemplary published indexes and lists of papers are not men- tioned under the appropriate entries: wit- ness the cases of the James David Forbes correspondence at St. Andrews University and that of Lyon Playfair at Imperial Col- lege.

It is tempting but pointless for the re-

tial solution might have been a chronolog- ical subarrangement or index. The book now presents 350 years of history with no time divisions.

That this field has emerged as a viable subspecialty is itself endorsed by the pub- lication of this bibliography. Rothenberg has made an important and permanent con- tribution, but he lists not more than five percent of the total literature from all pe- riods. What are needed now are in-depth bibliographies of special areas of study. The degree of annotation that Rothenberg includes is not recommended for bibliog- raphies intended for advanced scholars.

CLARK A. ELLIOTT

The Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts. The Manuscript Papers of British Scientists, 1600-1940. (Guides to Sources for British History, 2.) vii + 109 pp. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Of- fice, 1982. ?3.95.

The Royal Commisssion on Historical Manuscripts locates, reports on, and pub- lishes manuscripts of all kinds in Britain, except public records. It possesses exten- sive unpublished information in the form of its National Register of Archives. The volume under review is the second of a series of guides to sources for British his- tory to be published by the commission. It describes the main surviving manuscript papers of 635 British scientists who were deemed by the commission to be notable for their scientific discoveries or inven- tions. Some entries carry useful references to unpublished lists of papers of which the National Register of Archives holds copies. Unfortunately, some of these references do not make it clear that the commission itself has helped to compile lengthy reports on some collections. For instance, the Whe- well papers at Trinity College, Cambridge, were catalogued in detail by Trinity and the catalogue (192 pp.) reproduced by the com- mission; yet the reference NRA 8804 un- der Whewell in this guide gives no clue that such a valuable catalogue exists. It is also unfortunate that some exemplary published indexes and lists of papers are not men- tioned under the appropriate entries: wit- ness the cases of the James David Forbes correspondence at St. Andrews University and that of Lyon Playfair at Imperial Col- lege.

It is tempting but pointless for the re-

209 209

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 20:25:27 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions