The chemical nomenclature of the pharmacopoeia : with suggestions for its revision / by Professor Attfield. Including opinions on the proposed system, by chemical, medical and pharmaceutical authorities, and additional remarks, by the author.
- John Attfield
- Date:
- [1871]
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: The chemical nomenclature of the pharmacopoeia : with suggestions for its revision / by Professor Attfield. Including opinions on the proposed system, by chemical, medical and pharmaceutical authorities, and additional remarks, by the author. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.
6/22 page 2
![[From Pjiahmaoeutioax Jovh^ml for April Bt/i, \5th and 2Wi, 1871.] 1 THE CHEMICAL NOMENCLATURE OF THE PHARMACOPOEIA. WITH SU&GESTIONS FOR ITS EEVISION* • BY PROFESSOR ATTFIELD. The vocabulary of technical terms, or nomen- clatiu'e, <\i a phaimacopoeia is chemical, botanical, zoologicaL and galenical. In the foUomng paper chemical nomenclatiu'e is alone considered. : Tntrod\ictory remarks.—The chemical nomencla- tiu'e of tie current Pharmacopoeias is mainly scien- tific, founded on theory, and therefore liable to dhange. ' Its one great fault, in relation to medicine and phannacy, is mutability. A fault, and a great fault, becaiise the life and health of people are largely dependent on the perfect understanding which shoiild always subsist between physician and Ijharraacist respecting names of medicines wliich the former prescribes and the latter prepares. But it is a fiult wliich cannot altogether be avoided. ^or a naine is seldom given haphazard; it is com- inonly designed to express ovu' ideas regarding a thing or; substance, and as those ideas are de- veloped and extended, our point of view or theoiy ij'especting them necessarily changes; the old name is no longer consistent mth oiu- knowledge, and must therefore be also changed. Moreover, there is i\ limit to the power of language, and desirable as may be a sj'stem of names for remedial agents wliich Shall be fixed, abiding, pennanent, the production of such a system in the present state of Imowledge is altogether impossible. What, then, are pharma- cists, medical practitioners and others to do when chemical names they have accepted on authority are, by tl le same authority, modified or abandoned'? Witliin the last few years the views liitlierto prc- 'i'ailing of the constitution of matter have under- gone rad:ical alteration, being no longer consistent with ascertained tinths, and the nomenclatiu-e or language embodying those views has, of course, !?liared tl le fate of the theories. Under these cu-- cumstanc es, by what principles are we to be guided adopti. ng for medicine, phamacy and the Phai-- raacopoeia i, such names as, on the one hand, shall be perfec ;tly explicit, readily understood, unambi- ffuous; a| nd, on the other, consistent, or at least larmonio; us with prevailing chemical theories as ex- ♦ Read a' t the Evening Meeting of the Pharmaceutical So- e'lety of Gr, eat Britain, April 6, 1871; G. W. Sandford, Esq., ^'resident, i n the chair. pressed ia the educational literature of the science ? For not only is it to be remembered that changes must be expected in phai-maeopceial names because we have ah'eady adopted and employ a nomencla- tui-e wliich, in the natm-e of tilings, is liable to change; but we must bear in mind tliat the succes- sors to men now in practice are learning cheinistrj' by aid of the new hypotheses, and then- progress is impeded by old forms of language and by the en-o- neous notions wliich that language imparts. Tliis state of things caimot contuiue; the march of science has ever been aided, never liindered b}' medicine or pllarmac3^ But what position are we to take in respect to tliis subject? The question is one that demands careful attention. I have endeavoiu'ed to answer it myself, and now venture to give to others the train of thought I have followed, and the con- clusions at wliich I have arrived. Outline of the j)cil)er.—I intend, firstly, to outline the liistory and present position of the chemical names ah'eady employed in Pharmacopoeias, espe- cially the British, and to glance at the causes of the recent revolution in chemical nomenclature; and to do so, not by way of aiding the followers of medicine to criticize matters pui-ely chemical, but to enable them to arrive at soimd conclusions respecting the application of modem chemical nomenclatui'e to pharmacy. I shall then shortly aUude to chemicnl notation, which is inseparably connected with my subject; mention disadvantages attending altera- tions in chemical names; state the functions and positive or negative qualities wliich names should possess; give a complete Ust of current pharma- copojial names, vn\h the names now proposed, and tlieii' scientific s^Tionynis; and finallj' refer to names requii'ing special or excejitional treatment. History and 2»'escnt position of the chemical names of the Pharmacopa:ia.—The sj'stem of nomenclature liitlierto accepted from chemists by pharmacists, practitioners in medicine and the pubUc, that which is employed in European and American pharma- copoeias, was mainl}' suggested hj Lavoisier, eighty- four years ago. The fundamental principle on which it was founded was, that the name of a salt should express its composition. The many animal and](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b22280376_0006.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
