TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 321 and coherent Fabric of Life remains at the 1991 level of discussion and responds neither to these important new contributions nor to the double development of her own thesis found in them. Christoph Lüthy Dr. LOthy, whose dissertation was titled “Matter and Microscopes in the Seven teenth Century” (Harvard, 1995), is working at the University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Arrhenius: From Ionic Theory to the GreenhouseEffect. By Elisabeth Craw ford. Canton, Mass.: Science History Publications, 1996. Pp. xiii+320; illustrations, notes, bibliography, index. $49.95 (cloth). Svante Arrhenius was one of Sweden’s greatest scientists. Despite his thoroughly Swedish background, in his scientific life he was inter- or transnational and had especially close ties with German, English, American, Danish, and Norwegian scientists. Arrhenius is probably best known as a pioneer ofphysical chemistry—any student of chemistry knows about his ionic theory of dissociation—but he considered himself a physicist and worked in truly interdisciplinary fashion in areas ranging from immunology to cosmology. A contro versialist by nature, he was constantly engaged in disputes, not only over purely scientific questions but also in the realms of science pol icy. His efforts to influence the course of science through political means, especially the Nobel Prize system, made him an important figure in the world of international science. In short, the life and work of Arrhenius make excellent material for the contextual histo rian of science. Fortunately, we now finally have a good biography accessible to an international audience. Elisabeth Crawford’s work is not, as she admits, a full scientific biography. She has chosen to focus on three of Arrhenius’s major scientific projects, namely, his early work in ionic dissociation; his cosmic physics (including climatology, volcanoes, and the northern lights); and his work in immunochemistry. This restriction makes the book better focused and is, on the whole, justified. However, it also means that some of Arrhenius’s minor scientific interests are ignored or given scant attention. I find it regrettable that Crawford does not address his cosmological views, which could easily have been discussed within the category of cosmic physics. Similarly, Ar rhenius’s important equation for the temperature dependence of the rate constants of chemical reactions is not discussed, apparently because it is “outside the ionic theory proper” (p. 48). Crawford fully delves into Arrhenius’s chemical contributions to immunol ogy—immunochemistry, as Arrhenius called it—and his conflict with Paul Ehrlich. Her account is highly interesting and gives a vivid impression of the relationship between chemistry and biology in the 328 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE early twentieth century. Yet I wonder why the subject is treated in more detail than Arrhenius’s work in physical chemistry, which, after all, is generally recognized as his most important contribution to science. It is not quite clear what criteria Crawford has used to assign priority to the many fields of research cultivated by Arrhenius. How ever, for the greenhouse effect (whose basic theory Arrhenius devel oped in 1895) the reason is clear enough, namely, the great political and scientific interest that this effect has attracted during the last decades. The renewed interest in Arrhenius’s old work may be seen as a case of presentism, but Crawford’s account is no less valuable for that. Crawford’s biography, largely based on the rich archival sources located in Sweden, is skillfully researched and documented. Arrheni us’s scientific work is competently discussed, if in words only (there are places where a few simple equations might have helped). In spite of its scholarly merits and wealth of detail, the book makes no heavy reading but can be read almost as a novel, full of life and drama. Crawford is a specialist in fin-de-siecle social history of science and a pioneer in the use of the Nobel archives. I found particularly inter esting her insightful account of Arrhenius’s deep engagement in science policy, his tireless work as a missionary for his own ideas, and, not least, his political activity within the complex world of the Nobel system. The qualities of Crawford’s book are undeniable, and it deserves a wide readership. Because of Arrhenius...