FLORENCE E. WALL New York, New York
tion in the spelling of many familias names and of such components as Ebid for Abd, Ebn for Ibn, and El for Al. There is similar confusion in the transliteration of Chinese and Japanese ideographs. (3) A nationalistic tendeny of later writers to translate into their own language the names as well as the texts of early authors. This practice seems to be a lack of international courtesy, not to say an impertinence, which is surpassed only by the practice of translating the names of places on maps. The names of Platon and Aristoteles hsve been "Englished" as Pluto and Aristotle for so long that no one would think of reverting to the original Greek forms. And whoever thought of the nicknames, Pliny and Livy, for Gaius Plinius Secundus and Titus Livius, respectively, seems to have so labeled them for all time. French translators (1, 3) tend to soften everything, and Germans (4, 6) lop off final syllables abruptly. Both practices leave recognizable names; but they seem so unnecessary. Old Seneca, for example, becomes Gwrgius Agricola-Landmann (Bauer?) SdnAque in French; and one finds also Aristote, Herodote Jasephus Q u e r c e t m u ~ d uChhe Andreas Libavius-Libau Hippocrate, Themisle, Galien, Celse, and Jean de Otto Tachenius-Tacken Roquetaillade (de Rupescissa). Even Basil Valentine Robertus de Fluctihus--Fludd is auagrammed into B a d e Valatin. The Germans Guilielmus Carnifieis-Boucher (Bouchier) give us Herodot, Demokrit, Theophrast, and Olympiodor, Franciscus Sylvius-du Bois (a180 de le Boe) Bertholdus Nige-Berthold der Schwarz although the Latin (occasionally Greek) ending is kept Conradudus de Monte Puellarum-von Maidenburg (Mevden- for certain other names. They drop the n for both berg) BaconsRoger and Francis-(taking it for baco, baconis, Aegidius Carboliensis-Gilles de Corbeil maybe?). Such designations as Baco won Verulam, Dionysius Zaccht~rim-Denis Zeoaire Thomas won Apuino, and Vinzaz won Beauvais do not Vincehtius Bellovacensi-Vincent de Beauvais seem to be improvements over the original forms. A few leaned toward Greek, and appeared as : Some other choice examples are Wimandus de Ruffo Clipeo (literally the Italian for Rothschild); Guillaume PlocotomabBreitschneider dlAvisonne, for a Scotsman, William Davisson; AldoTrocheoneos-Kiiffner Melanchthon-Schww~erde brandino, for the English Hildebrand; and conversely, Aecolampedios-Hausschein the euphonious Bevelmqua (Italian), via Bmleou Xylander-Holzmann (French), into Drinkwater. Lycohos-Wolfgang Sarton (6) deplores all this translating of names, (2) Arbitrary transliteration into so-called Roman in the justifiable belief that a man'sname should identify type, of names originally in Arabic, Geek, Hebrew, his origin, not obscure it. Accordingly, he dislikes and other languages. There seems to be no good reason the accepted European names for Muslims, and after for changing the characteristic ending of Greek mascu- giving them once for identification, refers to all these lime names -0s to the corresponding Latin ending -us, writers by their Arabic, Persian, or other original names. yet it has been done repeatedly with the names of The three most famous ones, for instance, are called 8 n Aetios (of Amida), Theophrastos of Eresos, Paulos of Sina (Avicenna), ibn Zuhr (Avenzoar), and ibn Rushd Aegina, Oribasios, Synesios, Pedanios Dioskorides, (Averrues), lhese being the neatest to a family name in Olympiodoros, and many others. the (usually discouraging) polysyllabic descriptive The lack of vowels in Arabic, Persian, and Hebrew designation of each. The same authority also prefers has led to some variable interpretation of the dots Jewish names, characterized by ben, rather than Latinused to indicate them. Conseouentlv there is varia- ized or Greekish forms; e. g., Muses ben Maimm rather than Maimonides. I Presented at the 116th Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Atlmtic City, New Jersey, September, 1949. (4) Limited knowledge of foree'p languages, whoreby who does much research in the history of chemistry, especially in those branches that have descended from sources common to biology, medicine, and pharmacy, must soon become conscious of considerable confusion in the names of many prominent figures. Few names from the earliest times escape altogether, but the most baffling or annoying are those of more or less prominent figures in the alchemical and iatro-chemical periods. By the latter part of the sevententh century, when patronymics were generally established in Europe, the confusion was somewhat resolved. Some of the causes of trouble seem to be: (1) The use of Latin by early scholars, who Latinized their own names. Once one becomes conscious of this, there is genuine entertainment to be found in trying to ferret out the identity and significance of various m s de plume. For example: ANYONE
8I
FEBRUARY, 1953
researchers, not recognizing various forms of the same name, have listed the same person as different individuals. The names thus confused are not always those of lesser individuals. Albert the Great, for example, may be foundas Albertus Magnus, Albertus, Teutonieus, Albert von Bollstiidt, Alberto de Collonna, Albertus Grotus, and Albertus Ratisbonhis. Likewise, in the English translation of a French work, Paul(os) of Aegina was indexed as Aegynte, Paul, Egine, Paul d', and Paul d'Egine. Other names were similarly confused here, the error, in many instances, having been made in the original French book. The Majorcan, Ramon Llull, appears here and there as Raimundus Lullus or Lullius, Raymond Lully, Ramon Lull; Geber may be Jabir or Djabar; other examples abound. Searchers not versed in foreign languages or geography frequently designate individuals by their place of origin, as if it were a family name, not knowing that the man had only one name. Common examples of this are Guy de Chauliac, Henri de Mondeville, B a a r d de TrBves (confused with Bernardo da Treviso), Guido da Verona; and a well-known Hiermimus (or Jerome), whose town appears as Brunswick, Braunschweig, Brunschvig, or Brunsschwick. Family names are of comparatively recent origin. In the days when feudal lords could be readily identified by the names of their estates and the quartering of their arms, their dependents were usually known only by their given names, and identified otherwise by their occupation (e. g., tailor, gardener, miller); or by some physical characteristic (e. g., bald, bow-legged, squinteyed, hump-backed). Later many of these supplementary designations were adopted as permanent family names and patronymics. (It should not be too difficult a problem of this kind to ascertain which progenitor of that family so famous in chemical industry was the first to be identified by his residence at-r other association with-the bridge of Naours.) One of the best examples of utter confusion in a wellknown name is that of the famous iatro-chemist, Paracelsus. His full name, as given in most texts (including annotated publications of his own works) was Aureolus Philippus Theophrastus Bombast(us) urn (or ab) Hohenha'm. He adopted the Paracelsus. All passible misspellings of these various names have been found, and the most ingenious explanations of the man's name. His father's surname was Bomb&; yet the title page of one book (2) presents "The Life of Philippus Theophrastus,. Bombast of Hohenheim, Known by the Name Of Paracelsus." In ot,her sources it has been implied that the word bombastic was derived from the name of Paracelsus; and that Paracelsus, itself, is the Latin for Hohenheim. Many errors are made by careless researchers xvho
do not notice a difference in dates for two men of similar names; e. g., (Aurelius Cornelius) Celsus (7 B.c.-A.D. 53) and a Celsos (Kelsos) of late in the second century. Crito, an ancient Egyptian physician, may be confused with another Crito who was the physician of the Roman Emperor Trajan (A.D. 9&117). Albertus Magnus (1193-1280) has been mistaken for Albert of Saxony (1316-90); Berthollet (1748-1822) has been confused with Berthelot (1827-1907). Hoefer (5) and Kopp (4) have made many references to some of the odd, translated, and otherwise distorted, names mentioned here, and several others. Sarton (6) gives all ascertainable variants and aliases of every writer and other notables listed. All Greek names are given in the original, which places accents correctly, but all Arabic, Chinese, Indian, and other characters have been transliterated into Roman type. Unfortunately, this monumental work of reference takes u s only through the fourteenth century. In addition to all these earlier languages, a major current source of confusion is Russian. There should be some one best way to designate these early figures in the history of chemistry. The most logical would seem to be to keep the name in the language of its origin. Long usage however, would probably make it practically impossible to convert older researchers to any names but those to which they have become accustomed. If any project of reform of this kind is worth doing, how can it best be done? I t is suggested that a committee be appointed from the three Divisions of the American Chemical SocietyChemical Education, Chemical Literature, and History of Chemistry--that may be expected to benefit most from such a study. Possibly the findings could be published in a handy form similar to that of the official lists of abbreviations and nomenclature of chemical compounds. Then, if all we writing chemists could be induced to consult such a handbook faithfully, we might gradually familiarize future generations, a t least, with the correct identity of many illustrious fiwres in the historical background of this science in which me all are interested. LITERATURE CITED (1) BERTBELOT, M., "Introduction i I'etude de la Chirnie," Steinheil, Paris, 1889. (2) HARTMANN, F., "The Life of . . Paracelsus," Redway, London, 1887. (3) HOEFER, F., "HiBtoire de la Chirnie," Didot, Paris, 1869. (4) KOPP,H., "Gcschieht~der Chemie," Vieweg, Braunschweig, 184347. (5) MEYER,E., "A History of Chemistry"(trans1akd by GEORGE MCGOWAN), Mmmillen, Landon, 1891. (6) SARTON,G., "Introduction to the History of Science," ' Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, Vol. I, 1927; Val. 11, 1931; Vol. 111, 1947-8.
