Physics in Oxford, 1839-1939: Laboratories, Learning, and College Life

Jun 19, 04:38 AM

Current Headlines: By Stanley, Matthew

ROBKRT Fox and GRAKMK GOODAY (eds.), Physics in Oxford, 1839- 1939: Laboratories, Learning, and College Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Pp. vii + 363. ISBN 0-19-856792-8. Pounds 60.00 (hardback), doi : 10.1017/S0007087407009661

This essay collection on physics at Oxford University from 1839 to the second World War seeks to reappraise the way historians think about both that site in particular and the history of physics in general. The contributors challenge the secondary literature's assumption that Oxford was a backwater of physics compared to the spectacular success of Cambridge. In the introductory overview Robert Fox, Graeme Gooday and Tony Simcock argue that the historiography of physics to date has made three incorrect assumptions that artificially depress the significance of the work at Oxford: that physics was necessarily a prestigious part of university life, that physics occupied a disciplinary territory common to all universities and that physics institutions should be characterized by a priority given to research rather than teaching. The contrary themes provide a largely successful unifying structure to this volume, which argues strongly for judging Oxford physics on its own terms.

Robert Clifton and the Clarendon Laboratory receive rehabilitation via Oxford's local contexts in Fox's and Gooday's chapters. They particularly emphasize Clifton's intent to focus on teaching and training rather than research, and thus argue that he should not be judged solely by research productivity. Simcock's two essays look at the importance of the decentralized structure of the university as well as the relationship between physics and engineering there. Benoit Lelong discusses John Townsend's work, which provides a useful illustration of the difficulty of transplanting Cavendish scientific culture to Oxford. Jack Morell's chapter looks at Lindemann's regeneration of the Clarendon hetween the world wars. Jeff Hughes provides an insightful essay placing Oxford physics in the context of British experimental physics as a whole, which helps tie together the other chapters into one strong historiographie argument for considering British physics as a diverse body of practitioners and institutions that did not necessarily advocate the reductionistic and 'pure' research values of the Cavendish. An epilogue by Fox and Gooday closes the volume. Both the bibliography and the index are quite thorough - the latter is especially appreciated given the sheer number of historical actors who appear.

All of the contributions to this book are well researched and amply documented, and most of the historiographie reassessments and suggestions are well taken. The authors surely make a compelling argument for the importance of local culture in understanding what counts as 'physics', for how its various practitioners should be evaluated, and for understanding Oxford physics on its own terms. There are occasional tensions where a contributor seems to want to defend Oxford as a research institution while also arguing against research as the sine qua non for good physics. Similarly, the contingency of the ways physics developed at Cambridge and Oxford is used to question the common assumption that physics at the former was more successful, but it seems to this reviewer that showing how contingent success at Cambridge was does not undermine the view that Cambridge physics was more successful.

These are not particularly substantial problems, however, and overall the book holds together thematically quite well. Exhibiting excellent scholarship throughout, Physics in Oxford, 18.39-19.39 is essential for any historian interested in physics or British science in the period. It may also be of interest to those interested in the history of Oxbridge, education reform in Britain or the influence of local culture on science. Its historiographie re-evaluations are valuable and should be looked at closely. This is an important contribution to the history of British physics, both through careful consideration of an underexplored topic and as an example of the value of looking at local context in a detailed, rigorous manner.

MATTHEW STANLEY

Iowa State Unive

Copyright Cambridge University Press, Publishing Division Jun 2007

(c) 2007 British Journal for the History of Science. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.