Introduction
Even though there have already been many studies of the reception of scientific discoveries and theories, only a few discoveries have been systematically examined from a comparative perspective, in particular Darwin’s theory of evolution in biology and Einstein’s relativity theory in physics. In the field of chemistry, the periodic system of the elements is a good candidate for such comparative reception studies. Although the discovery of the periodic system and its later history have generated numerous inquiries, its reception has received only partial or scanty attention. In his noted paper published in 1996, the American historian of science Stephen G. Brush explored the role that successful predictions and accommodation of known facts played in persuading scientists to accept scientific discoveries. He systematically examined textbooks and comprehensive chemistry reference works, observing that, “[the] number of explicit references to the periodic law to be found in late nineteenth-century chemistry journals is small and fluctuates irregularly.” Relying on a survey of textbooks and reference works written between 1871 and 1890 and existing in American libraries, he concluded that the periodic law had been generally accepted in the United States and Britain by 1890. In a footnote to the same paper, he suggested the need to extend this study of texts to other countries, especially Germany and France. In fact, two years before Brush’s paper was published, Ludmilla Nekoval-Chikhaoui had completed her dissertation on the diffusion of Mendeleev’s periodic classification in France. She studied this subject as part of a project on the diffusion of scientific knowledge from the second half of the nineteenth century to the early twentieth century. Basing her examination on scientific journals and chemistry books, Nekoval-Chikhaoui analyzed the diffusion of the periodic system in the French scientific community. She also surveyed the introduction of periodic classification in higher and secondary education based on an analysis of chemistry textbooks, higher education courses, and public education programs. At the end of her dissertation, she called to conduct a comparative analysis of the diffusion of Mendeleev’s discovery in different European countries.