A brief history of systematic mineralogies.
In 1804, one of Scotland's most renowned mineralogists, Robert Jameson, published the first volume of the first edition of his System of Mineralogy. In the Preface to that volume he reviews the history of such efforts, going all the way back to Agricola, and gives his own critical commentary. That Preface, which does not appear in later editions, is reproduced here (with some new annotations).
The interested reader is also referred to the excellent work by Frank Dawson Adams: The Birth and Development of the Geological Sciences (1938). His Chapter VI, "The birth of modern mineralogy and its development from Agricola to Werner and Berzelius," covers the same time period, more or less, but is devoted primarily to brief biographies on Agricola, Gesner, Werner, Hauy and Berzelius. These famous authors are also discussed in The History of Mineral Collecting, 1530-1799 (Mineralogical Record, November-December 1994).
Robert Jameson was born in Leith, Scotland, and studied natural history under John Walker (1731-1804) at the University of Edinburgh. He traveled to London in 1793, the Shetland Islands in 1794, and the island of Arran in 1797, the latter trips resulting in his first published book, An Outline of the Mineralogy of the Shetland Islands and of the Island of Arran (1798). In 1800 he enrolled for two years of study at the Freiberg Mining Academy under the illustrious Werner, and was deeply impressed by Werner's theories on mineralogy and geology. Back in Scotland he continued to promote those theories, and in order to facilitate this he founded the Wernerian Natural History Society in 1808. Late in his life, he did finally admit that Hutton's theories on the origin of the earth's crust were probably closer to the truth than Werner's, but in mineralogy he remained committed to Werner's chemical classification.
Jameson's string of publications continued to grow, next with his Mineralogy of the Scottish Isles (1801), the three volumes of his System of Mineralogy (1804, 1805, 1808), his Treatise on the External Characters of Minerals (1805, with a second edition in 1816 and a third in 1817), his Mineralogical Description of the County of Dumfries (1805), the second (1816) and third (1820) editions of his System of Mineralogy, his Manual of Mineralogy (1821), his Mineralogy according to the Natural History System, forming the Article under that head in the seventh edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica (1837), and finally his Elements of Mineralogy (1840). He died unmarried in 1854, and his personal collection of minerals passed to the University in 1855.
Jameson's mineralogies mark a time when Werner's (chiefly chemical) approach to systematic mineralogy was popular and spreading throughout the scientific community, mostly through the influence of his students. Werner himself was loath to publish much, so the success of his system was in large part attributable to works such as those of Jameson.
Although the prospect was incomprehensible to Jameson, Werner's physiochemical system ultimately became merged with Hauy's crystallography to yield the crystallochemical approach to systematic mineralogy which is still in use today.
I shall employ a few pages in giving a very short historical account of the authors who have treated mineralogy, with the view of enabling the reader to appreciate more fully the merits of the Wernerian system on which the present work is founded.
The mineralogical writings of Pliny, Theophrastus and Dioscorides have made us acquainted with the luxury of the Romans and Grecians, and their fine works of art; but they contain nothing of system, and very little of tolerable description. The first systematic mineralogist was undoubtedly the celebrated Saxon miner George Agricola. He was also the first who investigated the external characters of minerals, determined them with any degree of accuracy, and used them with judgment in the description of fossils. In his system he divides minerals into those which are composed of homogeneous parts, and those composed of heterogeneous parts. The homogeneous, or simple minerals, he subdivides into four classes, which are entitled:
2. Succus concretus
3. Lapis, and
The heterogeneous are divided into compound and mixed minerals.
Nearly at the same time the famous Cardan wrote a treatise on minerals, which differs principally from that of Agricola in the saline being separated from the inflammable bodies.
Kentman's [Gesner's. Ed.] work De omni rerum Fossilium Genere, Gemmis, Lapidibus, Metallis, &c., published in 1565, is nearly a transcript of Agricola's de Natura Fossilium. He adds to it, however, a treatise on petrifactions, entitled Alcyonia, conchae, et alia, quae ex salso liquore maris et ex ejus spumae, cum tenuissimis sordibus permista concrescunt.
The justly celebrated botanist Caesalpinus published, in 1602, a work entitled De Rebus Metallicis, which contains little deserving of notice.
In 1609 Boetius Von Boot published a treatise on precious stones, in which we find described upwards of six hundred varieties, having all particular names, a proof of the attention paid to minerals at that early period.
At this time the first Spanish mineralogist, Alonzo Barba, a Mexican priest, published his work De los Metallos. It contains descriptions, and methods of working minerals. He was the first who treated of amalgamation.
The great compiler Aldrovandus, in his Museum Metallicum, delivered a system of mineralogy extracted from the writings of Agricola, Cardan, and Caesalpinus. He was the first who drew the attention of mineralogists to petrifactions. In this path he was followed by Johnstone in his Notitiae Regni Mineralis, published in 1667, and by the well known Jesuit Athanasius Kircher, in his Mundus Subterraneus, published at Amsterdam in 1678.
Some years afterwards Woodward published his Catalog of Minerals. He may be considered as the first English mineralogist of note.
Becher, in his Physica Subterranea published at Leipzig in 1708, endeavoured to arrange minerals according to their constituent parts. He was the first writer who proposed the opinion that the difference in composition of earths and stones might be employed in their arrangement and discrimination. He also first introduced the division of metals into perfect and imperfect.
Bromel in his Catalogus Generalis rerum curiosorum, published at Gothenburg in 1698, retained the Becherian division of metals into perfect and imperfect, and arranged sulphur and bituminous bodies in the same class.
In the beginning and towards the middle of the eighteenth century Beyer, Buttner, and Scheuchzer, employed themselves principally in the investigation of that highly interesting class of bodies, petrifactions; although their works are disfigured by many foolish speculations, and the individual species are but indifferently ascertained, yet from this period the attention of mineralogists was more directed to the examination of great rock masses than had formerly been the case. In this point of view the labours of these enquirers must be considered as of importance.
In 1730, Magnus Von Bromel, a scholar of Hjaerne and Boerhaave, published a system of mineralogy. He divides minerals into eight classes:
In 1739, Cramer published a system of mineralogy, which contains seven classes.
4. Inflammable substances
In 1736, the illustrious Linnaeus published the first sketch of his mineral system. He divides minerals into three classes, each consisting of three orders:
a. Vitrescentes b. Calcariae c. Apyrae
a. Salia b. Sulphuria c. Mercurialia
a. Concreta b. Petrifacta c. Terrae
This system is in many respects faulty, and its principal merit consists in having first drawn the attention of mineralogists to the study of the crystalline figures [shapes] of minerals. Although Linnaeus cannot be said to have contributed much to the progress of mineralogy, yet indirectly his labours in the other branches of natural history laid the foundation of that reformation which was afterwards effected by Werner. He was the first who established right ideas of system. He showed that its principal object was to assist the memory, and to enable naturalists to distinguish bodies from one another, and thus to ascertain if what they were investigating had been previously described by others. He also taught that no system could be of use that did not possess a uniformity in the basis of its classification and nomenclature, and a fixed and generally received language.
Nearly at the same time mineralogical chemistry was much advanced by the labours of Pott and Henckel; but of these Pott possessed the most extensive and correct chemical knowledge. He arranged earthy minerals according to their proportion of ingredients, and thus paved the way for many of the chemical systems of the present day. His four classes are the alkaline, siliceous, argillaceous, and gypseous. Death prevented this most indefatigable chymist from extending his enquiries to the metals.
In 1747, Wallerius, professor of mineralogy at Upsalla, and contemporary with Linnaeus, published a system of mineralogy. He divides all minerals into four classes, each containing four orders:
a. Macrae b. Pingues c. Minerales d. Arenaceae
a. Calcarii b. Vitrescentes c. Apyri d. Saxa
a. Salia b. Sulphura c. Semimetalla d. Metalla
a. Pori b. Petrifacta c. Figurata d. Calculi
In this system the external characters of the species were more accurately detailed than had been done by any other mineralogist, the terminology was improved, and the synonymies of preceding authors were elucidated.
Woltersdorf, a scholar of Pott, soon after wrote a system of mineralogy, which, however, added nothing to what was then known.
In 1758, the celebrated Cronstedt published a system of mineralogy. It is divided into four classes, viz. 1. Terrae, 2. Salia, 3. Phlogistica, and 4. Metalla.
The first class contains nine orders, 1. Calcareae, 2. Siliceae, 3. Granatinae, 4. Argillaceae, 5. Micaceae, 6. Fluores, 7. Asbestinae, 8. Zeolithicae, and 9. Magnesiae. The second class contains two orders, 1. Acida, 2. Alkalina. The third class contains but one order. The fourth has only two orders, 1. Perfecta, 2. Semimetalla. One of the most striking excellencies of this system is the strict adherence to a fixed principle as the basis of classification; it is throughout chemical, and the principles on which the orders and genera are founded are still pretty generally followed by chemical mineralogists.
The compound rocks and petrefactions which had been included in the mineral (oryctognostic(1)) system, by Linnaeus and others, were very judiciously described in an appendix by Cronstedt. The descriptions of the species, however, were, from want of attention to the external characters [physical properties], extremely imperfect, yet, as it was not so much Cronstedt's intention to write an oryctognostic system as one of chemical mineralogy, this defect must not be supposed to detract from the merit of his work.
Cronstedt was succeeded by Lehman and Vogel, but their oryctognostic labours were of little importance.
In 1768, Linnaeus published a second edition of his Systema Mineralogicum In it the classes are the same with those of the first edition, but the number of orders and genera is increased. He prefixed to it an account of the external characters(2) which he employed in the description of minerals. Respecting his system of characters, Werner observes:
There is only an arrangement of terminology which, because of the presentation, cannot be praised. The treatment is incomplete, with many gaps, and the definitions, being too brief, are for this reason obscure and incomprehensible. And finally, there is no utilization of examples in the explanations which would have contributed to an understanding of the descriptions.
Peithner, in 1778 published tables of the external characters of minerals; and Sir John Hill, in 1772, published a system of mineralogy, accompanied with tables of the external characters, resembling those of Peithner, but more extensive and determinate.
Wallerius, in the new edition of his Systema Mineralogicum, published at Stockholm in 1772, was the first to subject to a serious examination the principles on which mineralogists had hitherto arranged minerals. He rejected the characters drawn from use, value and geognostic(3) situation, and affirmed that classes, orders and genera should be arranged according to chemical constituents, but that species within those divisions should be arranged principally in conformity with their external characters. These principles he employed in the construction of his system, which proved the most complete and possessed the most determinate nomenclature of any that had hitherto appeared. By thus combining with the chemical characters those external characters that were then known, he enabled mineralogists to discriminate minerals with more certainty than they had been hitherto able to do. Still, however, the lack of a proper mineralogical language rendered all systems and descriptions imperfect and comparatively useless. The external characters employed by Agricola, Linnaeus, Wallerius, Hill and others were either undefined or so inaccurately explained that it was difficult to understand, or avoid confounding them with one another; besides, they were employed irregularly, and even frequently intermixed with chemical, physical and empyrical characters.
The illustrious Werner early saw the impossibility of mineralogy advancing steadily without a determinate language, he therefore made this the first object of his attention, and published the result of his observations in his classical work, Von den Kenzeichen der Fossilien. This admirable treatise laid the foundation of true oryctognosie, I may even say of mineralogy. In it Werner has collected together all the old and known characters; described many which he himself discovered by comparing minerals together; accurately defined every character then known; gave to each an appropriate and fixed denomination; and arranged the whole in systematic order. Since the publication of this treatise, he has discovered several more very important external characters, and has much improved the descriptions of many of those contained in his early work. The system of characters as now delivered by Werner may be placed with the Philosophia Botanica in its most finished state.
I should now proceed to mention the different oryctognostic publications of the Wernerian school, but I shall for a short time interrupt the regularity of this view by giving a short account of the writings of two French mineralogists whose labours have in France formed a kind of national mineralogy.
The first is the celebrated Rome d'Lisle, who published an excellent work on crystallization in 1783. In it minerals are divided into three classes: the first contains saline crystals, the second stoney crystals, and the third metallic and semi-metallic crystals. He was the first, after Werner, who particularly directed the attention of mineralogists to the primitive form of crystals, of which he enumerates the following species: 1. Tetrahedron. 2. Cube. 3. Octahedron. 4. Parallellepiped. 5. Rhomboidal octahedron, and 6. Dodecahedron, with triangular planes. He considered all minerals that agreed in crystallization, hardness and specific gravity as belonging to the same species.
The descriptions of the species were the most accurate and complete that had been delivered, and contributed more to the advancement of oryctognosy than the writings of all preceding mineralogists.
To him succeeded several other French mineralogists; of these the most remarkable and only one deserving of notice is the Abbe Hauy. This intelligent philosopher was long employed in crystallometrical researches, of which he gave an account in a treatise published some years ago. Since that period he has extended his investigations to the greater number of simple minerals; and in 1801 he published the result of his very laborious and ingenious observations and speculations in a work entitled Traite de Mineralogie. In it simple minerals are divided into four classes. The first comprehends the combinations of earths and alkalis with acids; it is subdivided into three orders: 1. Combinations of earths with acids. 2. Combinations of alkalis with acids. 3. Combinations of earths with acids and alkalis.
The second class contains those earthy substances into whose composition there sometimes enters a portion of alkali. This class has neither orders nor genera, but is only a series of species.
The third class consists of the combustible substances, with the exception of the metals. It is subdivided into two orders. 1. Simple combustibles. 2. Compound combustibles.
The fourth class includes all the different metallic minerals. It is subdivided into three orders. 1. Contains metals not oxydable by heat. 2. Those which are reducible and oxydable by heat. 3. Metals which are oxydable, but not reducible by heat.
These four classes are followed by three appendices. In the first appendix is contained all doubtful or unascertained minerals. The second includes all the compound rocks. It is subdivided into three orders: the first contains primitive rocks; the second, the secondary and tertiary rocks; the third, aggregates formed by the agglutination of fragments.
The third appendix is dedicated to volcanic productions. It is subdivided into six classes. 1. Contains lavas. 2. Thermantides. 3. Products of sublimation. 4. Altered lavas. 5. Volcanic tufas, and 6. Substances which have been formed in lava after their eruption, and cooling.
In this system the arrangement of simple minerals is almost strictly chemical; but the arrangement and description of the rocks and lavas is founded on certain fanciful ideas respecting their formation, and is extremely ill executed; but an examination of this part of the system of Hauy belongs properly to geognosy.
The species of simple minerals is determined from one character, which is called the "internal mollecule." Hauy defines the mineral species to be:
A collection of matter whose integrant molecules are all alike, and composed of the same elements united in the same proportion.
This integral mollecule or kernel is detected either by mechanical division or by measurement combined with calculation; and, when found, is asserted to afford an invariable essential character for the species. I cannot, however, subscribe to this opinion; on the contrary, I venture to affirm, that it is not, in any instance, the type of the species, and that it only makes us acquainted with peculiarities in the structure of a few crystallized minerals, peculiarities which may indeed be afterwards discovered in other specifically distinct minerals. That it affords no essential characters is evident because different species, such as diamond and spinelle, have the same integral mollecule; and other minerals, such as zeolite, that unquestionably belong to the same species, have different integral mollecules. That it makes us acquainted with peculiarities in the structure of but a few crystallized minerals is shown, 1. From the impossibility of detecting the integral mollecule by calculation combined with measurement, therefore all the species ascertained by this method are to be expunged from the system. 2. From many species having the same integral mollecule; and individuals of the same species have different mollecules. Thus it appears that its existence as a peculiarity, remains but to a few species. [Ed. note: Jameson was sadly incorrect here, for Hauy's "integrant molecule" concept was very close to the modern, accepted idea of the "unit cell" in crystallography. The difficulties Jameson lists were all subsequently explained.]
That even this peculiarity, which we find in a very few crystallized minerals may be discovered in others specifically different, is proved from the case of diamond, spinelle, &c.
It appears from this that the integral mollecule cannot in any instance be considered as the type of the species, therefore, the oryctognostic system of Hauy, which is built on this supposition, must fall to the ground.
Independent of the objections stated above, there is still another, and probably a more forcible one to be opposed to the system of Hauy; it is that the greater number of minerals are not crystallized, consequently, according to the definition of Hauy, have no discoverable integral mollecule, therefore are not species. Hauy indeed suspects that they are not species!!!
The various attempts that have been made to describe and to discriminate the mineral species by a few characters, as by the primitive form, integral mollecule, or the primitive form combined with hardness and specific gravity have all proved insufficient.
In amorphous minerals, the species are determined from the colour, shape, surface, lustre, fracture, distinct concretions, hardness, transparency, and specific gravity; each species presents a peculiar suite of characters that characterize and distinguish it from all others. Also in crystallized minerals the character of the species is to be taken from the crystallizations, combined with the other characters. If, on the contrary, we would attempt to describe the species from one or a few characters, we will undoubtedly confound species that are different, and subdivide those that are similar. This renders the use of the primitive form nearly equally objectionable with the integrant mollecule. We cannot too often bring to our recollection, that every mineral species is to be determined from the aggregate of all the characters, combined with the geognostic relations; a mode of investigation which, independent of the certainty it gives to our determination of the species, prepares us for the higher study of geognosie.
Werner was early aware of the insufficiency of such methods, and in his work on the external characters, published in 1774, he gave the first examples of the true method of describing species. In these descriptions all the characters presented by the species suite are detailed with a certain degree of minuteness, and in a determinate order, so that we have a complete picture of it, and are furnished with characters that distinguish it from all known species, and from every mineral that may hereafter be discovered.
In 1780 he published the first part of a translation of Cronstedt's mineralogy. It was in his annotations on this work that he gave the first sketch of his oryctognostic system, and published many descriptions in conformity with the method laid down in his treatise on the external characters. In this system we find earthy minerals (for this was the only part of the system then published) divided into four genera, viz. siliceous, argillaceous, talcaceous, and calcareous; and these genera subdivided into species, subspecies and kinds. The species, as already mentioned, are not described by a few, but by all the external characters.
In 1791, he published a catalog of the great mineral collection of the then deceased Pabst Von Ohain, a captain general of the Saxon mines. In this interesting work we have a tabular view of the whole oryctognostic system, in which the method of genus, species, subspecies, and kind is continued; several additions are made to the external characters, and the arrangement of the species is in some instances changed, owing to the examination of the more complete mineral suites.
Since that period his oryctognostic publications have been confined to a few, but very masterly memoirs, in the miner's journal, so that we have still to regret the want of his own exposition of his oryctognostic system. His numerous pupils, however, have made it known in every civilized country of Europe. In Germany it has been published by Widenman, Emmerling, Karsten, Estner, Reuss, and Lens; in Spain, De La Rio has published an account of the system of his great master; Napione has done the same in Italy; in Sweden and Denmark it is also followed and taught; it has been introduced into France by an able mineralogist M. Brochant; and Kirwan, one of the most illustrious of British philosophers was the first who made it known in England.
In 1800 Brunner published a treatise entitled Versuch eines Newen Systems der Mineralogie, &c. It is founded solely on the external characters. It is divided as usual into four classes, viz. earthly, saline, inflammable, and metallic. The first class is subdivided into seven orders: the first order contains all earthy minerals which "have an earthy fracture, and are dull and opaque." 2d, Having a fine scale fracture. 3d, Having a foliated fracture. 4th, Having a radiated fracture. 5th, Fibrous fracture. 6th, Fine grained foliated fracture. 7th, Distinct compact fracture. The second class contains eight orders: 1st, Having a sourish astringent taste. 2d, Sweetish astringent taste. 3d, A rather disagreeable saltish cooling taste. 4th, Pure saline taste. 5th, Pungent saline cooling taste. 6th, Bitter taste. 7th. Weak, soapy taste. 8th, Sharp alkaline taste. The third class contains three orders: 1st, Bituminous. 2d, Coaly. 3d, Sooty. The fourth class is subdivided into eight orders: 1st, Earthy fracture, dull, or faintly glimmering. 2d, Compact fracture, common, frequently a little metallic, lustre. 3d, Common lustre, and foliated fracture. 4th, Common lustre and radiated fracture. 5th, Common lustre and fibrous fracture. 6th, Metallic lustre and in loose scales. 7th, Metallic lustre and fluid. 8th, Metallic lustre and solid.
In his system the most dissimilar minerals are associated together; those that evidently belong to the same natural family are separated; and in no instance is there such a description of the species given as to enable us to distinguish them from one another. To exemplify this we may mention, 1st, That wood tin, fibrous malachite, red ore of antimony, cobalt bloom, and featherose antimony, are placed in the same order. 2d, Mica, selenite, potstone, hornblende, felspar, diamond spar, calc spar, heavy, spar are arranged together; and 3d, Of columnar heavy spar we have the following description: "Usually of bright white colour. Lustre pearly. Either translucent or translucent on the edges. soft; and its crystals are aggregated into columns." This is another striking instance of the insufficiency of all methods that do not embrace in the account of the species all its external characters, and in the arrangement of natural alliances.
Several of the works I have now mentioned were published when the Wernerian oryctognosie was far removed from its present state of perfection, and are consequently in many respects imperfect. The mineralogy of the intelligent M. Brochant, which may be considered the best account of the Wernerian oryctognostic system hitherto published, is unsatisfactory.
In the work I am now to lay before the public, I shall, in the two first volumes, deliver a system of oryctognostie, in which I shall follow the arrangement and method of description of Werner, and when I venture to deviate from the system of my illustrious master, I hope to be able to assign satisfactory reasons for the alterations I may propose.
The task which I have undertaken was to have been executed by my ever-to-be-regretted friend, Dr. Mitchell, whose long experience and consummate skill eminently qualified him for it. Unfortunately for mineralogy, this accomplished and most amiable man was removed from this transient scene before he was permitted to communicate to the world the results of his own profound observations and thoughts on a science in the knowledge of which he was only rivalled by its great founder Werner.
1 Oryctognosy: An 18th-century synonym for mineralogy, sometimes used in a more restricted sense to mean the science of mineral characterization and identification.
2 It is tempting for a modern editor to change this word to "characteristics," but the form as written is entrenched in the early literature and should be retained for historical accuracy.
3 Geognosy: An 18th-century term for the study of the origin, distribution and sequence of minerals and rocks in the earth's crust. It was later more or less replaced by the term geology as early ideas were abandoned.
Editor's Note: The following list of references is based on works mentioned or alluded to in the foregoing essay. In compiling these citations and annotations I have been aided primarily by (1) the catalog of the Mineralogical Record Library, (2) the catalog of the Herbert Obodda Library, (3) the Catalogue of the Library of the British Museum (Natural History) (1903), (4) the catalog of The Hoover Collection of Mining and Metallurgy (1980), and (5) especially Curtis P. Schuh's Bio-Bibliography of Mineralogy and Crystallography (1993).
AGRICOLA, G. (1546) De ortu & causis subterraneorum Lib. V; De natura eorum quae effluunt ex terra Lib. IIII; De natura fossilium Lib. X; De ueteribus & novis metallis Lib. II; Bermannus, sive De re metallica Dialogus; Interpretatio Germanica vocum rei metallicae, additio Indice foecundissimo. Froben, Basileae, 487 p. [See also De natura fossilium (Textbook of Mineralogy), translated from the first Latin edition of 1546 by Mark Chance Bandy and Jean A. Bandy. Geological Society of America Special Paper 63, November 1955, 240 p.]
ALDROVANDI, V. (1648) Ulyssis Aldrovandi Patricii Bononiensis Musaeum Metallicum in Libros IIII distributum a Bartholomaeus Ambrosinus compositum, edito Marco Antonio Bernia. Bologna, 996 p.
BARBA, A. A. (1640) Arte de los metales en que se ensena el verdadero beneficio de los de oro, y plata por acoque. El modo de fundir los todos, y como se han de refinar, y apartar unos de otros. En la imprenta del Reyno, Madrid, 124 p. [A partial English translation by the Earl of Sandwich was published in London (1674). German editions appeared in 1676 and 1739, and French editions in 1730, 1733 and 1751. There was also a second Spanish edition in 1729, a third in 1770 and a fourth in 1817.]
BECHER, J. J. (1669) Actorum laboratorii chymici monacensis, seu Physicae subterraneae libri duo . . . Zunneri, Francofurti, 657 p. [There was also an edition of 1708.]
BOETIUS de BOODT, A. (1609) Gemmarum et lapidum historia, qua non solum ortus, natura, vis & precium, sed etiam modus quo exiis, olea, salia, tincturae, essentiae, arcana & magisteria arte chymica . . . Typis Wechelianis apud C. Marnium & heredes J. Aubrii, Hanoviae, 330 p. [There was a second edition in 1636 and a third in 1647, plus a French edition in 1644.]
BROCHANT DE VILLIERS, A. J. M. (1801, 1803) Traite elementaire de Mineralogie suivant les principes du professeur Werner redige d'apres plusiers ouvrages Allemands, augmente des decouvertes les plys modernes et accompagne de notes pour accorder sa nomenclature avec cello des autres mineralogistes Francais et etrangers. Two vols., Paris. [There was also a second edition in 1808.]
BROMELL, M. von (1730) Mineralogia, eller inledning til nodig kunskap ar igenkianna och upfinna allahanda berg-arter, minerailer, metaller, samt fossilier, och hurn de mage til sin ratta nytta anvandus . . . Horrn, Stockholm, 95 p. [Second edition, 1739; German, 1740.]
BROMELL, O. (1698) Catalogus generalis rerum curiosarum. Gothoburg.
BRUNNER, J. (1800) Versuch eines neuen Systems der Mineralogie. Zur Erleichterung ihres Studiums fur Anfanger und Liebhaber, die sich selbst unterrichten wollen. Leipzig, 200 p. [Second edition, 1804.]
CARDANO, G. (1550) De subtilitate libri XXL. Johannes Petreius, Nuremberg, 371 p. [Many editions and languages.]
CESALPINO, A. (1596) De metallicis libri tres. Aloysii Zannetti, Rome, 230 p. [There was also a second edition in 1602.]
CRAMER, J. A. (1739) Elementa Artis Docimasticae Duobus Tomis comprehensa, quorum Prior Theoriam, Posterior Praxin, ex vera Fossilium indole deductas, atque indubirata experimentorum, summa cum accuratione institutorum, fide firmatas, ordine naturali & doctrina apertissima exhibet. Lugduni Batavorum. [There were also English editions of 1741 and 1764, a French edition of 1755, and German editions of 1746 and 1774.]
CRONSTEDT, A. F. (1758) Forsok til Mineralogie, eller Mineral-Rikets Upstaellning. Stockholm, 289 p. [There were numerous other editions, in English (1770, 1772, 1788) German (1760, 1770, 1780), etc.]
DEL RIO, A.M. (1795) Elementos de Orictognosia, o del conocimiento de los fosiles, dispuestos, segun los principios de A. G. Werner, para el uso del Real Seminario de Mineria Mexico. Zuniga y Ontiveros, Mexico City, 172 p.
DIOSCORIDES (1539) Anazarbei de medica materia. Latin translation by J. Ruellio. Basil. [There have been many editions, of which this is only one. For an English translation see the 1934 edition by R. T. Gunther: The Greek Herbal of Dioscorides. Hafner, New York, 701 p.]
EMMERLING, L. A. (1793-1797) Lehrbuch der Mineralogie. . . Three vols., Giesen. [There was also a second, enlarged edition in 1799-1802. The first edition was republished in a microcard reprint of 1969.]
ESTNER, F. J. A. (1790) Freymuthige Gedanken uber Herrn Inspector Werners Verbesserungen in der Mineralogie, nebst einigen Bemerkungen uber Herrn Assessor Karstens Beschreibung des vom sel. Leske hinterlassenen Mineral-Cabinetts. Wappler, Vienna, 64 p.
ESTNER, F. J. A. (1794-1797) Versuch einer Mineralogie fur Anfanger und Liebhaber nach des Herrn Bergcommissionsraths Werner's Methode. Two parts in three vols., Ohler, Vienna.
GESNER, C. (1565) De rerum fossilium, lapidum et gemmarum maxime, figuris & similitudinibus Liber: non solum Medicis, sed omnibus rerum Naturae ac Philologiae studiosis, utilis & jucundus futurus. Jacobus Gesnerus, Tiguri, 340 p.
HAUY, R. J. (1784) Essai d'une Theorie sur la Structure des Crystaux, appliquee a plusiers genres de substances crystallisees. Chez Gogue Mee de la Rochelle, Paris, 244 p. [His famous Traite de Cristallographie, in two vols. plus an atlas, appeared in 1822.]
HAUY, R. J. (1801) Traite de Mineralogie. Five vols., Chez Louis, Paris. [There was also a second French edition in 1822-1823, and a German edition in 1804-1810.]
HENCKEL, J. F. (1725) Pyritologia: oder, Kiess-Historie, als des vornehmsten Minerals, nach dessen Nahmen, Arten, Lagerstatten, Ursprung, Eisen, Kupfer, unmetallischer Erde, Schwefel, Arsenic, Silber, Gold, einfachen Theilgen, Vitriol und Schmelznutzung . . . Martini, Leipzig, 1084 p. + 12 plates. [There was also a second German edition in 1754, an English edition in 1757, and a French edition in 1760. Henckel wrote several other books on mineralogy, including his Idea generalis de Lapidum (1734), his Kleine mineralogische und chymische Schriften (1756, 1769, 1774), his Henckelius in Mineralogia redivivus (1747, 1759), and his Introduction a la Mineralogie (1756).]
HILL, J. (1748) History of Fossils. [Volume 1 of his 3-volume General Natural History.] Osborne, London, 660 p. + 12 plates.
HILL, J. (1771) Fossils arranged according to their Obvious Characters; with their History and Description; under the articles of Form, Hardness, Weight, Surface, Colour, and Qualities; the Place of their Production, their Uses, and distinctive English and Classical Latin Names. Baldwin Elmsly, London, 440 p.
HILL, J. (1772) Spatogenesia. The Origin and Nature of Spar, its Qualities and Uses: with a Description and History of Eighty-nine Species; Arranged, 1. in an Artificial and 2. in a Natural Method. A Specimen of a General Distribution of Fossils. P. Elmsley, London, 65 p. + 1 plate. [There was also a French edition of 1774.]
JAMESON, R. (1798) An Outline of the Mineralogy of the Shetland Islands and of the Island of Arran. Edinburgh and London, 218 p.
JAMESON, R. (1800) Mineralogy of the Scottish Isles, with Mineralogical Observations made in a Tour through different Parts of the Mainland of Scotland, and Dissertations upon Peat and Kelp. Two vols., B. White & Son, London, 567 p.
JAMESON, R. (1804-1808) System of Mineralogy, comprehending Oryctognosie, Geognosie, Mineralogical Chemistry, Mineralogical Geography, and Oeconomical Mineralogy. Three vols., Archibald Constable, Edinburgh. [There was also a second edition in 1816 and a third edition in 1820.]
JAMESON, R. (1805) A Mineralogical Description of the County of Dumfries. W. Blackwood, Edinburgh, 207 p.
JAMESON, R. (1805) A Treatise on the External Characters of Minerals. Archibald Constable, Edinburgh. [There was also a second edition in 1816, and a third edition in 1817.]
JAMESON, R. (1821) Manual of Mineralogy: Containing an Account of Simple Minerals, and also a Description and Arrangement of Mountain Rocks. Archibald Constable, Edinburgh, 547 p.
JAMESON, R. (1837) Mineralogy According to the Natural History System, forming the Article under that head in the seventh edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica. Adam and Charles Black, Edinburgh, 307 p.
KARSTEN, D. L. G. (1789) Des Herrn Nathanael Gottfried Leske hinterlassenes Mineralienkabinett, Systematisch Geordnet und Beschreiben, auch mit vielen Wissenschaftlichen Anmerkungen und mehreren aussern Beschreibungen der Fossilien. L. G. Mullerschen Buchhandlungen, Leipzig, two vols., with atlas of colored plates. [An English translation of the second volume only, and lacking the plates, was issued in the same year: A Description of the Minerals in the Leskean Museum . . . Translated by G. Mitchell, Mercier and Company, Dublin.]
KENTMANN, J. (1565) Nomenclature rerum fossilium, que in Misnia praecipue, & in alijs quoque regionibus inveniuntur. Jacobus Gesnerus, Tiguri, 197 p. [Jameson's reference to "Kentman" was probably intended to mean Conrad Gesner's work in the same volume.]
KIRCHER, A. (1664-1665) Mundus subterraneus in XII Libros digestus . . . Janssonium & Weyerstraten, Amsterdam, two vols. [There was also a second edition in 1678.]
KIRWAN, R. (1784) Elements of Mineralogy. P. Elmsley, London, 432 p. [There was also a two-volume second English edition in 1794-1796, and an unauthorized third English edition in 1810, in addition to editions in German (1785, 1796-1799), French (1785), Russian (1791) and Spanish (1789).]
LEHMANN, J. G. (1758) Kurzer Entwurf einer Mineralogie zum Gebr. b. Votles. Berlin. [There was a second edition published in 1760, and a third in 1769.]
LENZ, J. G. (1791) Mineralogisches Handbuch, durch weitere Ausfuhrung des Wernerschen Systems. Hanisch, Hildburghausen, 352 p.
LINNAEUS, C. (1735) Systema Naturae, sive, Regna tria Naturae systematice proposita per classes, ordines, genera & species. Th. Haak, Leiden, 12 p. [There have been many editions in various languages, including those of 1740, 1744, 1748, 1756, 1758 and 1768.]
LINNAEUS, C. (1777-1779) Vollstandiges Natursystem des Mineralreichs, nach der zwolfen lateinischen Ausgabe in einer freyen und vermehrten Uebersetzung von Johann Friederich Gmelin. Raspe, Nuremberg, four vols., 2,280 p. + 576 folded engraved plates.
PATRIN, E. M. L. (1801) Histoire Naturelle des Mineraux, Contenant leur description, celle de leur gite, la theorie de leur formation, leurs rapports avec la Geologie ou Historie de la Terre, le detail de leurs proprietes et de leurs usages, leur analyse chimique, etc. Chez Deterville, Paris, 5 vols., 1,750 p. + 49 plates.
PEITHNER, J. T. (1769) Mineralogle. Three vols., Prague.
PEITHNER, J. T. (1778) Erste Grunde der Bergwerks Wissenschaften. Zweite abhandlung uber die Mineralogie. Prague.
PLINY, C. (1489) Historia Naturalis. Bartholomaeus de Zanis, Venice. [There have been many important editions of Pliny's Natural History published since the author's death in 79 A.D. Among the most prominent following the above incunabulum is Philemon Holland's English edition of 1601: The Historie of the World: commonly called, The naturall historie of C. Plinius Secundus. Adam Islip, London; a second edition of this translation appeared in 1634.]
POTT, J. H. (1746) Chymische Untersuchungen welche fur nehmlich von der Lithogeognosia, oder Erkantniss und Bearbeitung der gemeinen einfacheren Steine und Erden ingleichen von Feuer und Licht handeln. Voss, Pottsdam, 96 p. [A second German edition appeared in 1751, and French edition in 1753.]
REUSS, F. A. (1801-1806) Lehrbuch der Mineralogie nach des Herrn O. B. R. Karstens Mineralogischen Tabellen ausgefuhrt. Four parts in eight volumes.
ROME de L'ISLE, J. B. L. (1783) Cristallographie, ou Description des formes propres a tousles corps du Regne Mineral, dans l'etat de Combinaison saline, pierreuse ou metallique. Second edition, four vols., Monsieur, Paris. [The first edition of 1772 was only a single volume; it also appeared in a German edition of 1777.]
SCHEUCHZER, J. J. (1718) Meteorologia et Oryctologia Helvetia, oder Beschreibung der Luftgeschichten, Steine, Metalle und andern Mineralien des Schweizerlandes. Vol. three of Naturgeschichte des Schweizerlandes. Zurich, 350 p. + 19 copper plates.
THEOPHRASTUS, E. (1746) Theophrastus's History of Stones. With an English version, and critical and philosophical notes, including the modern history of the gems, &c., described by that author, and of many other of the native fossils. By John Hill. C. Davis, London, 235 p. [John Hill was the first to translate all of Theophrastus's ancient commentary into English; he issued a second edition in 1774. In modern times the translations of D. E. Eichholz (Theophrastus, De Lapidibus, 1965, Clarendon Press, Oxford) and Caley and Richards (Theophrastus on Stones, 1956, Ohio State University, Columbus) have become available.]
VOGEL, R. A. (1762) Practisches Mineralsystem. Breitkopf, Leipzig, 528 p. [Second edition, 1776.]
WALLERIUS, J. G. (1747) Mineralogia, Eller Mineralriket, indelt och beskrifvit af Johan Gotschalk Wallerius. Stockholm, 515 p. [Wallerius's mineralogy appeared subsequently in many editions and languages, including German (1750, 1763), and French (1753, 1759).]
WALLERIUS, J. G. (1772-1775) Systema mineralogicum, quo corpora mineralia in classes, ordines, genera et species suis cum varietatibus diviae, describuntur, atque observationibus, experimentis et figuris aeneis illustrantur. L. Salvii, Stockholm, two vols. [There was also a second Latin edition of 1778, and a German edition of 1781-1783.]
WERNER, A. G. (1774) Von den ausserlichen Kennzeichen der Fossilien. Crusius, Leipzig, 304 p. + 8 folding tables. [There was also a German edition published in Vienna in 1785; French editions of 1790 and 1795; a Hungarian edition of 1784; and English editions of 1805, 1849-1850, and 1962.]
WERNER, A. G. (1791-1792) Ausfuhrliches und systematisches Verzeichnis des Mineralien-Kabinets des weiland kurfurstlich sachsischen Berghauptmanns Herrn Karl Eugen Pabst von Ohain. Craz, Freiberg and Annaberg, two vols., 693 p.
WIDENMANN, J. F. W. (1794) Handbuch des oryktognostischen Theils der Mineralogie. Crusius, Leipzig, 1,080 p. [There was also a Spanish edition published in Madrid in 1797-1798 (two vols.).]
WIDENMANN, J. F. W. (1800) Ubersicht der mineralogisch einfachen Fossilien, nach Werner's neuester Klassifikation, mit Angabe der Farbe und der Bestandtheile in tabellarischer Form. Gottingen.
WOLTERSDORF, F. J. L. (1748) System minerale, in quo regni mineralis producta omnia systematice per classes, ordines, genera et species proponuntur, das ist, Mineralsystem, worinnen alle zum Mineralreich gehorige Korper im ordentlichen Zusammenhange, nach ihren Classen, Ordnungen, Geschlechtern, und Arten vorgetragen werden. Berlin. [There was also a second German/Latin edition published in Ulm in 1755.]
WOODWARD, J. (1729) An Attempt towards a Natural History of the Fossils of England; in a Catalogue of the English Fossils in the Collection of J. Woodward . . . Fayram, London, two vols.
Jameson's review necessarily covers works only up to the time of his writing around 1800. Systematic mineralogy continued to develop after that date, through the publication of numerous important works in America and Europe.
The following annotated chronological bibliography, adapted in part from Robert Hazen's 1984 article, "Mineralogy: a historical review" (Journal of Geological Education, 32, 288-298) and Curtis Schuh's Bio-Bibliography of Mineralogy and Crystallography (1993), supplemented by works in the Mineralogical Record Library, covers some of these subsequent mineralogies which the book collector and student of history should know about.
DEL RIO, A. M. (1795-1805) Elementos de Orictognosia. Zuniga y Ontiveros, Mexico City. [Del Rio, Mexico's most famous mineralogist, founded a school of mines in Mexico City in 1795 and produced this book for his students. He was a proponent of Werner's system, having studied under him in Freiberg. A second, larger edition was published in Philadelphia in 1832, and later in Mexico City in 1846.]
LUCAS, J. A. H. (1803) Tableau methodique des Especes Minerales. Paris and Strasbourg. [Lucas extracted Hauy's (1801) system of classification, and in his two-vol. second edition of 1806-1813 he incorporates material from Hauy's Tableau Compartif (1809) as well.]
BRONGNIART, A. (1807) Traite elementaire de Mineralogie, avec des applications aux Arts. Two vols., l'Imprimerie Carpelet, Paris. [Brongniart's classification was based on a combination of physical properties, Hauy's crystallography, and the electro-negative elements present.]
BOURNON, J. L. (1808) Traite de Mineralogie, renfermant l'introduction a la mineralogie en generale, la theorie de la cristallisation, l'etude de la chaux carbonatee proprement dite et l'arragonite . . . Three vols., printed for William Phillips by G. Yard, London. [Although this work discussed primarily the structural relationship between calcite and aragonite, it helped promote Hauy's general contention that structure is more important than chemical composition in determining species.]
CHENEVIX, R. (1808) Suite des Reflexions sur quelques methodes mineralogiques. (Paris) Published in English translation (1811) as: Observations on Mineralogical Systems . . . to which are now added remarks by Mr. Chenevix on the reply of Mr. D'Aubuisson to the above observations. J. Johnson and Company, London. [Chenevix, a vocal critic of Werner's classification based on physical characteristics, followed Hauy's system.]
KIDD, J. (1809) Outlines of Mineralogy. Two vols. in one, printed by Bliss for J. Parker and R. Bliss, London. [Kidd's classification generally follows that of Kirwan while recognizing Hauy's morphological distinctions.]
BERZELIUS, J. J. (1814) An Attempt to Establish a Pure Scientific System of Mineralogy, by application of the Electro-Chemical Theory and the Chemical Proportions. Robert Baldwin and William Blackwood, Edinburgh. [This is the English edition of the Swedish original published in Stockholm that same year. It proposed a chemical classification based on the most electronegative element. It stands as the first proposal in English for calculating mineral compositions on the basis of atomic theory, and utilizes Berzelius's chemical symbols for composing formulae based on atomic proportions calculated according to atomic weights.]
PHILLIPS, W. (1815) An Outline of Mineralogy and Geology. London. [Phillips followed a modified version of Werner's physiochemical classification in all of the works published during his lifetime. These included a second London edition of Outline in 1816, an American edition that same year, a third London edition in 1818, and a fourth in 1826, and also his more detailed Elementary Introduction to the Knowledge of Mineralogy (1816), with a second edition in 1819, and a third in 1823; there was also an American edition in 1818. After Phillips' death in 1828, Robert Allen prepared an updated edition in 1837 (known as "Allen's Phillips") without substantive changes in the system. However, when Henry Brooke and William Miller undertook to create a new edition in 1852 (known as "Brooke and Miller's Phillips") they made extensive alterations in the arrangement, resulting in a system that appears to have inspired similar changes in Dana's fourth edition (1854), with a greatly expanded discussion of crystallography.]
CLEAVELAND, P. (1816) An Elementary Treatise on Mineralogy and Geology, Cummings and Hilliard, Boston. [This is the first American book on mineralogy. Cleaveland follows Brongniart in combining chemical composition and crystal morphology as a basis for classification of species. A second edition appeared in 1822.]
WERNER, A. G. (1817) Letztes Mineral-System. Freiberg and Vienna. [The final version of Werner's systematic arrangement of minerals, published posthumously by his students. A landmark in mineralogy, despite its slim size (58 p.).]
BREITHAUPT, J. F. A. (1820) Vollstandige Characteristik des Mineral-Systems. Arnoldischen Buchhandlung, Dresden. [This work, along with Breithaupt's Kurze Characteristik des Mineral-Systems published in the same year, promotes Werner's system but with some new Latin nomenclature. Later editions appeared in 1823 and 1832, persistently rejecting the crystallochemical classification after most other mineralogists had adopted it. His more important contribution was his work on mineral paragenesis: Die Paragenesis der Mineralien (1849).]
MOHS, F. (1822-1824) Grund-Riss der Mineralogie. Two vols., Arnoldischen Buchhandlung, Dresden. [Mohs extended S. C. Weiss's four crystal systems to six, and specified the system for each species in his natural-history-method of classification. Haidinger's expanded translation into English, Treatise on Mineralogy, or the Natural History of the Mineral Kingdom (1825), become the standard reference on the natural history method for the next 25 years.]
BEUDANT, F. S. (1824) Traite elementaire de Mineralogie. Chez Verdiere, Paris. [Beudant's mineralogy was highly regarded in its time as the most authoritative French treatise on mineralogy. Beudant's classification was primarily chemical, with determinative emphasis on volatility and the appearance of oxidized products. A second edition appeared in 1830-1832.]
EMMONS, E. (1826) Manual of Mineralogy and Geology. Webster and Skinner, Albany. [Emmons' Manual combines the systematic classification of Mobs with the crystallography of Brooke. Much shorter and more compact than Cleaveland's Mineralogy, it saw service as a well-used field guide, and consequently copies in good condition are rare. A second edition appeared in 1832.]
COMSTOCK, J. L. (1827) Elements of Mineralogy. S. G. Goodrich, Boston. [Comstock's Mineralogy follows that of Mohs, though not very competently (Comstock was self-taught). It went through a great many later editions and was a popular text in American universities. The second (1833) edition was published in Hartford and the third (1837) in New York.]
NORDENSKIOLD, N. G. (1827) Mineralsystem, Atomistisch-chemische Mineral System. [This work, listed by Hazen, must be extremely rare, as it is not found in the Schuh bibliography, the British Museum catalog, the Obodda library or the Sinkankas library. According to Hazen, it is "an ambitious chemical classification."]
NAUMANN, G. A. C. F. (1828) Lehrbuch der Mineralogie. Berlin. [Naumann's Lehrbuch and his Elemente der Mineralogie (1846) utilized a natural history classification based on that of Mohs, and very similar to that in the first two editions of Dana's System. Subsequent editions of Elemente der Mineralogie appeared in 1850, 1852, 1855, 1859, 1864, 1868, 1871, 1874, 1877, 1881, 1885, 1897-1898, 1901 and 1907.]
SHEPARD, C. U. (1832-1835) Treatise on Mineralogy. Two parts in three vols., H. Howe, New Haven. [Shepard's Mineralogy, based on a modification of Mohs' system, did not achieve the popularity of Dana's System in America but nevertheless went far in promoting the science of mineralogy. A second edition appeared in 1844, and a third in 1857.]
ALLAN R. (1834) A Manual of Mineralogy, Comprehending the Most Recent Discoveries in the Mineral Kingdom. Adam and Charles Black, London. [Allan followed Werner's system, devoting 42 pages to the explanation of physical characteristics and only one page to chemical composition. A German edition appeared in 1838.]
DANA, J. D. (1837) A System of Mineralogy, including an extended treatise on Crystallography. Durrie Noyes, New Haven. [The first and second (1844) editions utilized a natural history classification. In Dana's Manual of Mineralogy (1848) he begins to develop his chemical classification, which replaced the natural history scheme in the third (1850) edition of his System. A fourth edition appeared in 1854, a fifth in 1868, a sixth by his son Edward S. Dana in 1892 and a seventh (by Palache, Berman and Frondel) in 1944-1962. Many sub-editions exist.]
RAMMELSBERG, K. F. A. (1841) Handworterbuch des chemischen Theils der Mineralogie. Two vols., C. G. Luderitz Verlag, Berlin. [Rammelsberg's mineral dictionary became an instant classic in chemical mineralogy, and was not replaced as the standard work on the subject until 1912. The basic division of species follows Weiss's crystal classes, but is otherwise chemical.]
DUFRENOY, O. P. A. P. (1844-1847) Traite de Mineralogie. Three vols. plus atlas, Carilian-Soeury et Vor Dalmont, Paris. [Dufrenoy, writing two decades after the death of Hauy, uses a broad-based Mohs classification taking chemical, physical and crystallographic aspects into consideration while also incorporating recent research on thermal properties. A second edition, greatly enlarged (four vols. plus atlas) appeared in 1856-1859.]
ROSE, G. (1852) Das Krystallo-chemische Mineralsystem von Gustav Rose . . . Leipzig. [Rose advocated a crystallochemical classification modeled on that of Berzelius and resembling the system used in the third (1850) edition of Dana.
DOMEYKO, I. (1845) Elementos de Mineralojia. Serena. [Domeyko founded a school for chemistry and mineralogy in Chile, and produced this text for the use of his students. It gives emphasis to Chilean minerals, arranged chemically. A second edition was published in Santiago in 1860, and a third in 1879.]
RUTLEY, F. (1874) Elements of Mineralogy. London. [Rutley was an economic geologist, and so he designed his classification based on the most valuable essential elements. It proved to be a popular approach; the 26th edition was published in 1970.]
GOLDSCHMIDT, V. M. (1923-1937) Geochemische Verteilungsgesetz der Elemente. Ten vols. [Goldschmidt was a geochemist whose work brought mineral science into its quantitative, precision-oriented maturity. His ten-volume 600-page series on the geochemical laws governing the partitioning of elements in minerals constitutes the classic work on crystal chemistry.]
GREYSTONE, R. W. (1948) Crystal Structures. Greystone created an ambitious structural classification for minerals, based first on the format of the chemical formula (e.g. [A.sub.2][B.sub.3] or [ABO.sub.4]), and then on structure type.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||Mineral Books|
|Publication:||The Mineralogical Record|
|Date:||Jul 1, 1995|
|Previous Article:||Gem minerals in early Arabic literature.|
|Next Article:||Fabien Gautier d'Agoty and his 'Histoire Naturelle Regne Mineral' (1781).|