TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 537 kingdom (Württemberg), they do point out the links between ad vancement of precision engineering, the development of the optical industry, and research and teaching at the Brunswick Institute of Technology, and the rise of new disciplines such as technical mechan ics, thermodynamics, aerodynamics, and the mathematical theory of elasticity and industrial development in the case of Stuttgart. At the end of the 19th century both institutes took the require ments of industry into consideration by founding technical laborato ries and facilities for testing materials. On the other hand, in Brunswick and Stuttgart as well as in other German institutes of technology, internal academic criteria in this period worked toward a standardization of the curriculum. In analyzing theory and practice of higher technical education in both institutes, one finds clearly that technology was generally regarded as more than applied science. Both studies end with the beginning of the 20th century, shortly after the first successful steps toward an academization of technology had been taken. Albrecht’s book is encyclopedic, with a wealth of detail that includes a lot of information already to be found in other works on German higher technical education. Parts of this book are better suited for reference purposes than to be read from beginning to end. Zweckbronner, thankfully, refrained from using the encyclo pedic approach by subjecting his treatment of Stuttgart to the leitmotiv of institutional and disciplinary development. Further information, for example on curricula, can be found in an appendix. Albrecht is to be thanked for providing us with interesting material seldom to be found in histories of technical education, especially on the student population and on the institute of technology as an economic factor in the duchy of Brunswick. Both books are a welcome addition to our knowledge on the development of higher technical education. Hans-Joachim Braun Dr. Braun is professor of modern social, economic, and technological history at the University of the Federal German Armed Forces. He has written on the social history of engineers and engineering organizations, technical innovations and technology transfer, and the history of power technology. Divide and Prosper: The Heirs of I. G. Farben under Allied Authority 1945—1951. By Raymond G. Stokes. Berkeley: University of Cali fornia Press, 1988. Pp. xiv + 290; tables, notes, bibliography, index. $40.00. When the Allied armies closed on Nazi Germany in the spring of 1945, the country was in chaos: the economy was shattered, the population starved and numb, and many factories in ruins. Surpris ingly, one entire industry, the chemical giant I. G. Farben, was nearly 538 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE intact, and its cooperative managers were standing by to serve their new occupiers. Britain, France, and the United States approached the Farben plants in their zones from three different points of view. The policies of each zone produced industrial giants in their own right, and within two brief decades, Bayer (British zone), Hoechst (U.S.), and BASF (French) ranked, respectively, second, third, and fourth in the international chemical industry. This impressive new book de scribes the forces that molded the three empires; its main theme is the business acumen and resilience of I. G. Farben and its ability to prosper in both peace and war. After the mid-19th century, and especially after the economic slump of the 1870s, Germany’s mining, machinery, metal, and chem ical industries, encouraged by aggressive banking practices, became increasingly concentrated and vertically integrated. By World War I, Germany had overtaken Britain as the leading European industrial power. Although the war saw some spectacular technical successes and even greater industrial consolidation, Germany’s industrial cartels faced a bleak future in defeat. They lost much of their foreign investment and traditional sources of supply, and by the Versailles Treaty were obligated to grant former enemies most-favored-nation status until January 1925. The chemical industry was in particular trouble, battered by volatile international markets and harnessed to a cartelized structure that bound members to bail out their weakest number without granting them the power to prevent others from becoming independent. The solution was to restructure, and in 1926 a new conglomerate was born, I. G. Farbenindustrie. The new...