Hi,
For a scholarly discussion of Cathryn Prince's book which covers many of the
topics below, go to www.meteoritemanuscripts.blogspot.com for a more focused
discussion.
Also see Prince's comment at the end of my blog by clicking on the pencil
icon at the end of the post.
As I mentioned in my blog, Greene and Burke's work is highly recommended.
Thanks!
Mark
Mark Grossman
Meteorite Manuscripts
Briarcliff Manor, NY
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shawn Alan" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:48 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Weston meteorite fall 1807 .... Silliman
andWoodhouse, RIVALRY or BAD SCIENCE????
Hello Listers,
Over the course of a few days I had done some research on the Weston
meteorite fall and read up on Silliman's role and it could be summed up to
these few quotes....
"His scientific work, which was extensive, began with the examination in
1807 of the meteor that fell near Weston, Conn. He procured fragments, of
which he made a chemical analysis, and he wrote the earliest and best
authenticated account' of the fall of a meteor in America."
Cited from: APPLETONS' CYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN BIOGRAPHY
VOL V. PICKERING-SUMTER 1888
Source
http://books.google.com/books?id=K6koAAAAYAAJ&dq=weston%20meteorite%201807%20woodhouse&pg=PA528#v=onepage&q&f=false
"SILLIMAN, Benjamin, scientist, was born in North Stratford, Conn., Aug.
8, 1779 : son of Gold Selleck Silliman (q.v.) and Mary Fish (Noyes)
Silliman. He was graduated at Yale, A.B., 1796, A.M., 1799.... In 1805, he
went abroad to study a year at Edinburgh and to buy books and apparatus.
On his return, he studied the geology of New Haven, and in 1807 he
examined the meteor that fell near Weston, Conn., making a chemical
analysis of fragments, this report being the first scientific account of
any American meteor."
Cited from: THE TWENTIETH CENTURY BIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY OF NOTABLE
AMERICANS I904
And lastly, a quote taken from James Woodhouse biography written by Edgar
Fahs Smith stating Silliman's account of the Weston meteorite fall to
be......
"An elaborate account of this meteor has been published by Messrs.
Silliman and Kingsley, of Yale College, Connecticut."
Source
http://books.google.com/books?id=4JMEAAAAYAAJ&dq=weston%20meteorite%201807%20woodhouse&pg=PA274#v=onepage&q&f=false
But what caught my interest was the dynamic roles that played with
Silliman and Woodhouse and that some believed Woodhouse role with the
Weston meteorite fall to be "loose and not depended on". Take a look at
the link below and start at the top of the page. From what I can gather,
Silliman and Woodhouse seemed to have a rivalry and few scholars felt the
same way about Woodhouse work with the Weston meteorite being bad science.
Source
http://books.google.com/books?id=BUsLAAAAIAAJ&lpg=PA285&dq=Philadelphia%20Medical%20Museum%2C%205%2C%202%20(1808)%20woodhouse&pg=PA285#v=onepage&q=Philadelphia%20Medical%20Museum,%205,%202%20(1808)%20woodhouse&f=false
Now from my understanding Silliman and Kingsley arrived in Weston December
21 1807, a week after the Weston meteorite fall. During those few days
Silliman and Kingsley interviewed witnesses and acquired fragments from
various sites in Weston. Here is an excerpt from a letter detailing their
accounts in Weston....
"Yale College, December 26, 1807.
Messrs. Steele, & Co.,
As imperfect and erroneous accounts of the late phenomenon at Weston are
finding their way into the public prints, we take the 1U berty of
enclosing for your paper the result of an investigation into the
circumstances and evidence of the event referred to, which we have made on
the ground where it happened. That we may not interrupt our narration by
repeating the observation wherever it is applicable, we may remark, once
for all, that we visited and carefully examined every spot where the
stones had been ascertained to have fallen, and several places where they
had beeu only suspected, without any discovery; that we obtained specimens
of every stone; conversed with all the principal original witnesses ;
spent several days in the investigation, and were, at the time, the only
persons who had explored the whole ground.
We are, gentlemen, your obedient servants,
BENJAMIN SILLIMAN.
JAMES L. KINGSLEY.
Cited from: THE AMERICAN REGISTER OR GENERAL REPOSITORY OF
HISTORY, POLITICS, AND SCIENCE. PART II FOR 1807.
Source
http://books.google.com/books?id=SlrQAAAAMAAJ&dq=weston%20meteorite%201807%20woodhouse&pg=PA267#v=onepage&q&f=false
After Sillimans and Kingsley return from Weston, on December 29, 1807
Silliman and Kingsley sent a preliminary description of the fall phenomena
and the stones to The Connecticut Herald, in New Haven, making the report
one of the first published report on the Weston meteorite fall.( Marvin
B47 2007, The origins of modern meteorite research) A day later, December
30, 1807 Dr Benjamin Rush handed over some specimens from the Weston
meteorite to James Woodhouse for analysis.
Cited from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=SlrQAAAAMAAJ&dq=weston%20meteorite%201807%20woodhouse&pg=PA267#v=onepage&q&f=false
And now this is where the dilemma lays with Silliman and Woodhouse and the
rivalry between the two could have started. Stated earlier, in January
1808 Silliman's manuscript accounts the analysis of the Weston fall and at
that time Woodhouse's analysis had been unpublished and to some felt his
work to be unsound and loose.
"On 1808 March 4, the memoir by Silliman and Kingsley
was read to the American Philosophical Society and assigned
to referees Woodhouse, Hare, and Cloud, who were so
favorably impressed that they recommended publication in
the forthcoming volume of the society’s Transactions
(Marvin 1979), which, however, would not appear until the
following year. Meanwhile, their work became widely known
in Europe when Silliman submitted their paper to various
European editors with high hopes of reaching a readership
knowledgeable about meteorites and their chemistry. His
hopes were quickly fulfilled. During 1808, excerpts or
abstracts appeared in several well-known European journals,
including the Philosophical Magazine, Bibliothèque
Britannique, Annalen der Physik, Journal de Physique, de
Chemie, et d’Histoire Naturelle, and Journal des Mines. A
copy was read to the Royal Society in London, and a
newspaper article on it had been translated into French and
read to the National Institute in Paris before a rapt audience
including Fourcroy, Vauquelin, Berthollet, Laplace,
Lagrange, and Biot (Brown 1989:236). All of this attention
served not only to raise Silliman, who was at the very
beginning of his career, into the ranks of internationally
known scientists, but also to elevate the status of Yale
University and, indeed, of American science, itself—even
before the publication of the memoir in the Transactions of
the American Philosophical Society in 1809."
(Marvin B47 2007, The origins of modern meteorite research)
Now is the rivalry between Silliman and Woodhouse on who published the
analysis first or is it seeded deeper between the two individauls on the
greatest meteorite fall in American HISTORY? One can concluded that
Silliman and Kingsley went to Weston. Stilliman's preliminary description
of the meteorite fall was published on December 29th 1807. In March 1808
Silliman and Kingsley read their memoir of the Weston meteorite fall and
analysis in front of the American Philosophical Society and to further
their analysis and research had numerous excerpts and abstractions
published in Europe in 1808. In addition, many sources had concluded that
"Silliman's scientific work, which was extensive, began with the
examination in 1807 of the meteor that fell near Weston, Conn. He procured
fragments, of which he made a chemical analysis, and he wrote the earliest
and best authenticated account' of the fall of a meteor in America."
As for Woodhouse is concerd, his reputation as a chemist and mineralogist
was not high and to some, seen as being loose and not being dependable
with analysis of stones. Now does the rivalry lay in the lack of evidence
that one might present in an argument of why Woodhouse deserves
accreditation or is the rivalry a mere conflict bewteen student/teacher, a
delemma that presented its self at the time of meteoritic science was at
the for front in America, the race for notoriety of the first American to
have a well documented account with the first American meteorite fall, THE
WESTON meteorite.
Thank you
Shawn Alan
IMCA 1633
eBaystore
http://shop.ebay.com/photophlow/m.html
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
