Chemical Nomenclature of Berzelius. 249 
are accustomed, and to give such reasons for them as he has record- 
ed in the pages of his work. 
Essay of Berzelius on the Nomenclature of Chemistry. 
This article on the nomenclature of Chemistry by which my Ele- 
ments are prefaced, is addressed to those who have made some pro- 
gress in the science and are therefore more or less accustomed to a 
different system. Beginners will become acquainted with the nom- 
enclature as they advance in their course. 
Every science requires a systematic nomenclature. That this is 
especially the case in relation to Chemistry, has been fully proved 
by the confusion which prevailed before the adoption of the happy 
idea of De Morveau. The nomenclature which has been in use 
since 1780 is the fruit of the labors of De Morveau, directed and 
aided by Lavoisier, Berthollet, and Fourcroy. The great advan- 
tage of this system is to be found in the fact, that as soon as we are 
made acquainted with the composition of a body we can tell its 
name without having had previously any knowledge of it: thus the 
memory is not burthened with names. A systematic nomenclature 
is, moreover, the expression of a theory; so that while theory as- 
signs a name, the name expresses the theory. ‘To this connection 
of nomenclature and theory the objection has been urged that the 
nomenclature must undergo changes whenever theories change, which 
would not be the case if names were arbitrary. Since, however, all 
changes of theory tend towards greater simplicity, such a change of 
nomenclature facilitates, instead of retarding the advance of science. 
In general nothing which tends to render any of the parts of a sci- 
ence stationary can be beneficial to it; all its parts should advance 
as discovery and information multiply. Changes have been made 
from time to time, in the nomenclature of Guyton De Morveau, not 
in accordance with its fundamental principles, and additions have 
been made to it which do not harmonize with the rest of the system. 
Authors have adopted names accidentally given to new substances, 
and as a consequence the nomenclature of Chemistry has by de- 
grees become unwieldy and ill adapted to express many new and 
even some well known compounds. In order, therefore, to convey 
my ideas, it was necessary to devise a nomenclature which should 
be appropriate and at the same time sufficiently analogous to that 
now used in France, to be easily understood by those accustomed to 
that system. ‘This nomenclature I shall explain as briefly as possible. 
