Woman in chemistry and physics

Women in Chemistry
and Physics
A Biobibliographic
Sourcebook
Edited by

Louise S. Grinstein, Rose K. Rose,
and

Miriam H. Rafailovich
Foreword by L illi S. Hornig

GREENWOOD PRESS
Westport, Connecticut • London


Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Women in chemistry and physics : a biobibliographic sourcebook /
edited by Louise S. Grinstein, Rose K. Rose, and Miriam H.
Rafailovich ; foreword by Lilli S. Homig.
p.
cm.
Includes index.
ISBN 0 - 3 1 3 -2 7 3 8 2 -0 (alk. paper)
1. Women chemists— Biography. 2. Women physicists— Biography.
I. Grinstein, Louise S. II. Rose, Rose K. III. Rafailovich, Miriam H.
QD21.W 62 1993
540'. 92'2— dc20
9 2 -40224
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available.
Copyright © 1993 by Louise S. Grinstein, Rose K. Rose, and Miriam H. Rafailovich

All rights reserved. No portion o f this book may be
reproduced, by any process or technique, without the
express written consent o f the publisher.
Library o f Congress Catalog Card Number: 92-40224
ISBN: 0 -3 1 3 -2 7 3 8 2 -0
First published in 1993
Greenwood Press, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881
An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
Printed in the United States o f America

The paper used in this book complies with the
Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National
Information Standards Organization (Z 39.48-1984).
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

This book is dedicated
to Jack Richman,
to Esther H. Rose, M.D.,
and
in memory of
Zitta Zipora Friedlander


CONTENTS

FOREWORD

Lilli S. Hornig

xiii

PREFACE

Louise S. Grinstein, Rose K. Rose, and
Miriam H. Rafailovich
Fay Ajzenberg-Selove (1926-

xvii

)

Victoria McLane

1

Gladys Amelia Anslow (1892-1969)

George Fleck

9

Hertha Marks Ayrton (1854-1923)

Marjorie Malley

18

Laura Maria Caterina Bassi (1711-1778)

Marilyn Bailey Ogilvie

24

Ruth Mary Rogan Benerito (1916-

)

Jane A. Miller

30

Ruth Erica Leroi Benesch (1925-

)

K. Thomas Finley and Patricia J. Siegel
Joan Berkowitz (1931-

42

)

Susan Klarreich

50

Marietta Blau (1894-1970)

Leopold Halpern

57

Katharine Burr Blodgett (1898-1979)

K. Thomas Finley and Patricia J. Siegel

65


viii

CONTENTS

Mary Lowe Good (1931-

Mary Letitia Caldwell (1890-1972)

Soraya Svoronos

72

Debra L. Banville

77

Marjorie Constance Beckett Caserio (1929-

)

Margaret A. Cavanaugh

218

85

)

Edward Hochberg
Anna Jane Harrison (1912-

)

Harold Goldwhite

230
)

Nina Matheny Roseher

237

Caroline Stuart Littlejohn Herzenberg (1932-

Renate Wiener Chasman (1932-1977)

Deborah Chasman and Ernest D. Courant

94

Lois Fischer Black

)

Barbara B. Mandula

243

Dorothy Mary Crowfoot Hodgkin (1910-

Gabrielle-Emilie Le Tonnelier de Breteuil, Marquise du Chatelet
(1706-1749)

)

Harold Goldwhite
101

253

Darleane Christian Hoffman (1926-

)

Glenn T. Seaborg

)

Leon Gortler

106

261

Hypatia (ca.370-ca.415)

Eda C. Kapsis

Gerty Theresa Radnitz Cori (1896-1957)

Jane A. Miller
Erika Cremer (1900-

ix

Jeanette Gecsy Grasselli (1928-

Emma Perry Carr (1880-1972)

Mildred Cohn (1913-

CONTENTS

120

273

Irene Joliot-Curie (1897-1956)

Paris Svoronos
)

Jane A. Miller

128

Marie Sklodowska Curie (1867-1934)

Soraya Svoronos

136

Marie Maynard Daly (1921-

)

Rose K. Rose

145

Cecile Andree Paule DeWitt-Morette (1922-

)

Bryce DeWitt
Helen Marie Dyer (1895-

150
)

Ariel Hollinshead

162

Gertrude Belle Elion (1918-

)
169

Gladys Ludwina Anderson Emerson (1903-1984)

Paris Svoronos

)

Nina Matheny Roscher

284

Joyce Jacobson Kaufman (1929-

)

Walter S. Koski

299

Marie Anne Pierrette Paulze Lavoisier (1758-1836)

Adriane P. Borgias

314

Leona Woods Marshall Libby (1919-1986)

Ruth H. Howes

320

Kathleen Yardley Lonsdale (1903-1971)

Maureen M. Julian

329

Rosalind Elsie Franklin (1920-1958)

Mary Clarke Miksic

Nina Matheny Roscher and Chinh K. Nguyen
Margaret A. Cavanaugh
Shirley W. Harrison
Ines Hochmuth Mandl (1917-

)
201

354
)

Edward Hochberg

361

Jane Haldimand Marcet (1769-1858)

)

Rose K. Rose and Donald L. Glusker

346

Margaret Eliza Maltby (1860-1944)
191

Raymond B. Seymour

337

Icie Gertrude Macy (1892-1984)
180

Jenny Pickworth Glusker (1931-

Isabella Helen Lugoski Karle (1921-

Pauline Gracia Beery Mack (1891-1974)

Miles Goodman

Helen Murray Free (1923-

277

207

M. Elizabeth Derrick

371


CONTENTS

Maria Gertrude Goeppert Mayer (1906-1972)

Trudy D. Rempel

CONTENTS

xi

Ellen Henrietta Swallow Richards (1842-1911)
375

Louise Sherwood McDowell (1876-1966)

Mary R. S. Creese andThomas M. Creese

515

Florence Barbara Seibert (1897-1991)

Janet B. Guernsey

382

Grace Medes (1886-1967)

Ariel Hollinshead

526

Mary Lura Sherrill (1888-1968)

Paris Svoronos

387

Lise Meitner (1878-1968)

Sallie A. Watkins

393

Marie Meurdrac (1600s)

Will S. DeLoach

403

Helen Cecilia DeSilver Abbott Michael (1857-1904)

K. Thomas Finley and Patricia J. Siegel
Helen Vaughn Michel (1932-

405

)

Frank Asaro

George Fleck

530

Maiy Fairfax Greig Somerville (1780-1872)

Geoffrey Sutton and Sung Kyu Kim
Giuliana Cavaglieri Tesoro (1921-

538

)

Raymond B. Seymour

547

Beatrice Muriel Hill Tinsley (1941-1981)

Gillian R. Knapp

553

410

Anne Barbara Underhill (1920-

420

Katharine Way (1903-

)

Theresa A. Nagy

562

Elizabeth Cavert Miller (1920-1987)

James A. Miller
Agnes Fay Morgan (1884-1968)

Margaret A. Cavanaugh

Elizabeth Amy Kreiser Weisburger (1924-

)

Adriane P. Borgias

449

Soraya Svoronos

455

Creese

461

George B. Kaujfman and Jean-Pierre Adloff

470

George Fleck

476
)

613
)
626

a p p e n d ix a

:

Chronological List of Biographees

641

a p p e n d ix b

:

Biographees by Place of Birth, Place of Work, and
Field of Scientific Interest

643

)
a p p e n d ix

c: References in Biographical Dictionaries and Other
Collections

649

502

)

Nancy M. Tooney

)

Carol A. Biermann and Ludwig Biermann

488

Agnes Pockels (1862-1935)
Sarah Ratner (1903-

605

Ruth H. Howes

495

M. Elizabeth Derrick

595

Pnina G. Abir-Am

Rosalyn Sussman Yalow (1921-

Mary Locke Petermann (1908-1975)

Lucy Weston Pickett (1904-

Elizabeth M. Cavicchi

Chien-Shiung Wu (1912-

Marguerite Catherine Perey (1909-1975)

Mary L. Moller

581

Dorothy Maud Wrinch (1894-1976)

Mary Engle Pennington (1872-1952)

Mary R. S. Creese and Thomas M.

)

Ann E. Kaplan
Frances Gertrude Wick (1875-1941)

Cecilia Helena Payne-Gaposchkin (1900-1979)

Francis T. Bonner

572

434

Dorothy Virginia Nightingale (1902-

Melba Newell Phillips (1907-

)

Murray J. Martin, Norwood B. Gove, Ruth M. Gove, and
Agda Artna-Cohen

508

a p p e n d ix d

:

Association and Organization Codes

653

a p p e n d ix e

:

Title Codes

659


xii

CONTENTS

a p p e n d ix f :
a p p e n d ix g

:

Periodical Codes

665

Publisher Codes

689

in d e x

699

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS

799

FOREWORD
Lilli S. Hornig

Biographies of women scientists are few and far between. Almost by definition
such women are unusual and therefore likely to be interesting. This lack of
information would be surprising were it not for the fact that the lives and works
of women in almost any field of endeavor have attracted relatively little literary
effort. Except for a handful of women leaders whose popular appeal derives
from power or the struggle to attain it—Elizabeth I, Eleanor of Aquitaine,
Catherine the Great, Lucrezia Borgia—the lives and works of women for the
most part have been cloaked in obscurity. Even those who have attained some
measure of fame are likely to have reached that state more through their rela­
tionships to or with men than through their achievements in the arts, the sciences,
or literature. Historians and biographers have preferred to define women in terms
of their love affairs or their intrigues, or even their marriages, rather than granting
them fully autonomous intellectual or artistic status. Emilie du Chatelet is much
better known for her long affair with Voltaire than for her mathematics; the

Duchess of Cavendish for unconventional behavior than for her redoubtable
intellect.
In the last two decades, with the reawakening of the women’s movement and
the contemporaneous flowering of social history in its various forms, that situation
has begun to change. Women in the arts and the humanities, seeking to discover
their own professional or creative roots, have turned to the examination of women
artists, writers, and political leaders in increasing numbers. Even so, women
scientists have found few chroniclers, with a few obvious exceptions; Marie
Curie remains interesting to the public, although even her unique achievements
have been somewhat obscured by time. A few years ago, when a male scientist
whose father had been a Nobel Prize winner himself became a Nobel laureate,
the science press hailed the unusual event as a first, with no mention whatsoever
of Irene Joliot-Curie. Rosalind Franklin’s central contribution to the determi­
nation of the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) eventually became known
to the world at large through Anne Sayer’s account of the events that James
Watson had gone to some trouble to distort in his self-aggrandizing Double


XIV

FOREWORD

Helix. Countless other women mathematicians and scientists remain unsung.
There are no easy ways to find biographical information about them beyond the
barest outlines in such publications as American Men and Women of Science or
World Who’s Who in Science. In particular, it is difficult for someone who is
not a specialist to learn about their work. Although modem technology makes
it easy to conduct literature searches, a mere compilation of titles is insufficient;
we need interpreters to guide us through the significance of work in disciplines
outside our own.

For the first time, this information gap in intellectual history will be bridged
by this book. As a comprehensive collection of biobibliographies of women in
the physical sciences over nearly three centuries, it opens to general view not
only the life stories of these women but also the significant contributions to their
disciplines that made them noteworthy. In particular, it should help to disabuse
the public, and especially students, of the popular notion that women scientists
are a rare breed, that they are somehow different from women who achieve
distinction in the arts or humanities or even in business.
The history of women’s participation in the sciences is one of unremitting
struggle to be allowed to study these fields in the first place, and then to be
allowed to work as full-fledged scientists rather than assistants to men. Women
have stmggled to have publications accepted and proposals funded, to gain
admission to professional societies and their several benefits, and finally to be
rewarded in the usual ways with recognition, election to honorary academies,
and prizes. Many women experienced difficulties in juggling work and home
life. Some chose not to marry; others had no children, and still others eventually
divorced.
In any case, the idea that there are hardly any women scientists remains firmly
entrenched in the minds of the public and of practicing scientists alike. This
stereotype itself delivers a mixed message: To a few hardy pioneers among
young women it signals opportunities for achieving distinction, but to the great
majority of people it suggests that there is indeed something about the sciences
that is unsuitable for women, or vice versa—that women really are not good
enough to do science. Without arguing the merits of the case either way, it must
be stressed that there are, in fact, tens of thousands of women scientists. At
advanced professional levels, the sciences attract far greater numbers of women
than do the much more conventionally suitable humanities. These women sci­
entists do work that is significant and of lasting importance. Furthermore, their
numbers have increased dramatically over the last two decades, largely as the
result of equal opportunity laws that made the exclusion or differential treatment

of women from any aspect of education and work illegal. Despite these gains,
however, the belief that science and women are somehow incompatible persists,
and women scientists remain somehow less visible than their achievements war­
rant.
Educating scientists is an expensive undertaking even at the undergraduate

FOREWORD

XV

level. Given that anything other than a uniform price per student would be
politically unwise and an administrative nightmare, coeducational institutions
long ago must have seen the advantage of steering women into the less expensive
departments, thus enabling them to subsidize the education of their brothers in
the sciences. Indeed, in Making Affirmative Action Work in Higher Education,
the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education observed just this phenomenon
in at least two traditionally all-male institutions, Williams and Princeton, when
they became coeducational. Historically, most if not all coeducational colleges
and universities restricted women’s access to science departments, either by
simple fiat, by requiring substantially higher qualifications of women, or by
ingenious regulations such as one at Cornell that allotted only a few “ female
beds’’ to the more expensive departments. All-female colleges, however, often
could not afford to offer any real science at all. Conversely, those wealthy enough
to do so found their women students quite amazingly interested in science. A
century ago, when Wellesley College was newly established, nearly 40 percent
of its graduating classes had majored in just two fields, chemistry and mathe­
matics.
Why, then, does the myth of women’s scarcity among scientists persist, even
among women themselves? For one thing, traditions die hard in education be­
cause they are so easily transmitted by both precept and example. The male

scientists who learned their science in an environment devoid of women in
professional roles, but peopled with female secretaries and research assistants,
have also internalized the notion that women are not real scientists but good
helpers. When the time comes for them to run the departments and make the
decisions about whom to admit and whom to hire, they will tend to shape their
environment in the image of the one they know. Women who aspire to careers
in science, on the other hand, also see that same environment but from a different
perspective, from the outside, and the message most of them read is that this
environment is unfriendly.
The women who are portrayed in these pages are the products of such a skewed
system, although clearly some escaped its influence by staying in women’s
colleges for most or all of their careers, some by working in industry, where
the yardstick of accomplishment is less who you are and more how much money
you can make for the company. Most of these women, however, simply relied
on sheer ability and dedication to transcend the limitations that a bigoted policy
tried to impose.
These essays illustrate not only the outstanding qualities of mind and character
displayed by these women scientists but the great variety of the backgrounds
and educational milieus that produced them, the human strengths and weaknesses
they developed, and the scope of the researches they undertook. Women such
as these enlarge our understanding of ourselves and give us reason to take pride
in the heritage they leave to us.


PREFACE
Louise S. Grinstein, Rose K. Rose,
and Miriam H. Rafailovich

The recent proliferation of women’s consciousness groups and women’s studies
programs has raised questions about women’s participation in chemistry and

physics. Histories of science, existing survey-type books devoted exclusively to
women in science, and general biographical dictionaries provide an extremely
limited picture of the role women have played in the growth and development
of these sciences. Only a handful of women are likely to be noted, such as the
Nobel laureates Gerty Cori, Marie Curie, Gertrude Elion, Dorothy Crowfoot
Hodgkin, Irene Joliot-Curie, and Rosalyn Yalow. This volume aims to present
a definitive archival collection of original essays on a larger group of individuals
featuring their work as well as their lives.
Seventy-five representative women were selected from different countries who
have gained recognition through (a) attainment of advanced degrees despite
extensive familial and societal pressures; (b) innovative research results in some
aspect of chemistry or physics; (c) influence exerted in teaching and guidance
of students both at the undergraduate and graduate levels; (d) active participation
and leadership in professional societies; (e) extensive scholarly publications; (f)
participation on journal editorial boards. A woman was deemed eligible for
inclusion if her work satisfied several of these criteria, even though in terms of
any one she may not have been particularly outstanding. To provide the volume
with a certain historical dimension, the scope was limited to those deceased or
else bom before 1933.
Entries are arranged in alphabetical order. Where a woman has been known
by more than one name, we have tried to use the name under which much of
her professional work has been published.
For purposes of stylistic uniformity and consistency in the volume as a whole,
contributors were asked to follow a set format. Each chapter has three sections—
biography, work, and bibliography. Cross-reference to other women discussed
in the volume is given by an asterisk following the first mention in a chapter of
the individual’s name. Since space limitations have forced us to shorten some
contributors’ essays, the reader is cautioned not to interpret the length of any

Women in Chemistry
and Physics


FAY AJZENBERG-SELOVE (1 9 2 6 -

)
Victoria McLane

BIOGRAPHY
Fay Ajzenberg was bom in Berlin on February 13, 1926, of Russian parents.
The family experienced a series of reversals of fortune. Her father, Mojzesz
(Misha) Ajzenberg was bom in Warsaw, which at that time was a part of Russia.
His family was poor, but he managed to obtain a full scholarship, a remarkable
accomplishment for a Jew. He graduated from the School of Mines in St. Pe­
tersburg and worked as a coal miner (part of his training) and mining engineer.
Her mother, Olga (Naiditch) Ajzenberg, who came from a wealthy family, had
studied piano and voice at the St. Petersburg Academy of Music. They were
married in 1910.
The Ajzenbergs and their first-bom daughter, Yvette, fled to Germany in 1919
to escape the revolution. Her father remained a lifelong anti-Communist. Her
mother refused to talk about her life in Russia and would only say that it was a
blessing that they were able to leave.
In Germany her father worked as an investment banker, owning his own
company, and the family became quite wealthy. However, during the Depression
he went bankrupt, so they made another move in 1930. Her father joined the
family sugar beet factory in France as a chemical engineer and partner, and
eventually the business acquired a number of factories and distilleries. The
Ajzenbergs once again prospered.
Fay Ajzenberg went to school at the Lycee Victor Duruy, and later at Le

College Sevigne in Paris. Her family believed in the education of women, and
they provided her with private tutors to study anything in which she was inter­
ested. She remembers that she was never given any dolls but was usually given
money to buy what she wanted and yet specifically discouraged from buying
dolls. The presents she does remember receiving are an erector set and huge
numbers of books.
The greatest influence in Ajzenberg’s early life was her father, whom she
adored. According to Ajzenberg-Selove, he was a totally honest man, somewhat
puritanical, quiet, and not at all demonstrative. Her father would help her with


2

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

problem assignments from school and would always encourage her to think of
more than one solution. This, she thought at the time, was highly unnecessary;
one solution was enough for her. Misha Ajzenberg felt it was important to be
well groomed and to dress well. She had no interest in the latter, and was
constantly being given money by him with the exhortation to buy some smart
clothes.
It is not her mother who was the next big influence on her life at this time,
but an aunt, a psychoanalyst. Her aunt persuaded her mother that she was
overprotecting her daughter. As a result, at the age of nine Fay Ajzenberg was
given the freedom to travel around Paris on her own.
Ajzenberg was preparing to follow in her father’s footsteps and study engi­
neering at the Ecole Centrale. However, in 1940 the German army was advancing
on France. Her father, in addition to being a Jew and a Pole, was on the blacklist
for having worked against German interests. Consequently the family had to flee
from Paris. They escaped along the coast of France and obtained transit visas

through Spain into Portugal.
After three months in Portugal, they received a transit visa through the United
States to the Dominican Republic. The Ajzenbergs spent six weeks in New York,
where they decided that they would like to settle. The family moved to Cuba
and applied for a reentry permit as resident aliens. In April 1941 they returned
to New York. There, her father worked as an electrical engineer, opening his
own company and manufacturing motor-generators for the military. Once again
business prospered, and eventually he was bought out by a conglomerate.
Fay Ajzenberg graduated from the Julia Richman High School in Manhattan
in 1943 and enrolled in the University of Michigan, majoring in engineering.
There she was the only woman in a class of 100. She received a B.S. degree
in engineering in 1946. After a disastrous year as a special student in the graduate
school at Columbia University, she decided to take a break and accepted a job
teaching mathematics and physics to returning veterans at the University of
.Illinois at Navy Pier. It was there she claims she finally learned freshman physics.
She returned to graduate school the following year at the University of Wisconsin.
Her studies did not go smoothly, but she was determined to become a physicist.
In her third year at Wisconsin, Ajzenberg solved an important problem, and
from then on she was confident that her decision was a good one.
In 1952 she obtained her Ph.D. degree in physics from the University of
Wisconsin. At the suggestion of her thesis advisor, Hugh Richards, that she
should look for a job teaching in a women’s college, Ajzenberg accepted an
appointment as a lecturer at Smith College. While teaching at Smith she obtained
a position as a visiting fellow at MIT, where she did research half time. The
summer before starting at Smith, she received a postdoctoral appointment at the
California Institute of Technology working with Thomas Lauritsen.
She was offered a job as an assistant professor in the physics department at
Boston University in 1953. Although the understanding was that she was to be
offered the standard salary for that position, the contract came through at 15

FAY AJZENBERG-SELOVE

3

percent lower; the dean had decided that a woman should receive less money.
Because she had been assured of a job at MIT, she declined to take the lower
amount and promptly received a new contract with the appropriate salary.
In 1954 Ajzenberg, on hearing from a friend that the lecturer was “ cool,”
attended a colloquium being given by Walter Selove, an assistant professor and
high-energy physicist at Harvard. She recalls that she did not hear most of the
talk because she “ fell in love” at once with the lecturer. Fay Ajzenberg and
Walter Selove were married in December 1955.
The Seloves were immediately faced with, in her words, “ the famous twobody problem which so many couples have,” the need to find positions in the
same area. The only reasonable offers they received were an associate profes­
sorship for Walter Selove at the University of Pennsylvania, and an associate
professorship for Fay Ajzenberg-Selove at Haverford College. At Haverford she
was promoted to professor and served as acting chair of the physics department
in 1960-61 and 1967-69. During this period she also had appointments as a
guest physicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory, as a consultant at the Tandem
Laboratory, UPa (1962-63), and as a J. Simon Guggenheim fellow at the Law­
rence Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley.
Ajzenberg-Selove left Haverford in 1970 to accept a position as research
professor in the physics department at UPa. In 1972 she applied for a transfer
to full professor with tenure. She was by now an internationally recognized
authority on nuclear structure and had been publishing an evaluation of nuclearlevel schemes of light nuclei used throughout the world. She also had to her
credit appointments to many professional committees in the APS, the AIP, and
others. In spite of these achievements, and her numerous publications, her ap­
plication was overwhelmingly rejected by the department. The reasons given
were that she was not active enough in the field, and that she was too old.
The next few years were a difficult time for Ajzenberg-Selove. She credits

her husband, whom she calls “ her love and her best friend” and her female
friends at the UPa with helping her to survive this period. There were no formal
grievance procedures at the university, so she filed a complaint with the equal
opportunity agencies of the federal and state governments. Since, by then, she
had been elected chair of the Nuclear Physics Section of the APS, and a law
had been passed barring discrimination because of age, she had no difficulty
proving her case. In 1973 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania found a prima
facie case of discrimination and ordered the university to grant her a full pro­
fessorship with tenure; the Department of Physics agreed. She still holds that
position and, in 1989, was appointed associate chair for undergraduate affairs.

WORK
While still in graduate school, Fay Ajzenberg solved two important problems.
The first was the fabrication of 6Li targets. Before this time the targets came in
the form of 6Li-sulphate, which was very difficult to work with. Ajzenberg found


4

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

a method, which had been described by L. Kahlenberg in 1899, for converting
the sulphate into a chloride and then electroplating it onto the targets.
In Ajzenberg’s third year of graduate school she began to look at excited states
in the 10B nucleus. She showed that the levels are not evenly spaced, thus
disproving a theory put forth by V. K. Rasmussen, W. F. Homyak, T. Lauritsen,
and C. Y. Chao, who had proposed that 10B was a harmonic oscillator. Ajzenberg
constructed a level scheme consistent with her work and with their observations.
Lauritsen was impressed and invited her to work with him at the California
Institute of Technology. It was there, with Lauritsen, that she began the work

for which she is best known.
In 1952 they published the fourth edition of Energy Levels of Light Nuclei,
an evaluation of nuclear structure and decay information on nuclei whose mass
is A<20. She and Lauritsen published the fifth edition in 1955, and since 1973
Ajzenberg-Selove has continued the publication on her own.
In addition, Ajzenberg-Selove has been very involved in experimental research
in nuclear spectroscopy and has collaborated with other experimentalists at the
major particle accelerators in the United States and in England to examine the
characteristics of light nuclei.
Her services to the science community have been numerous. She is a fellow
of the APS (as is her husband) and of the AAAS, and has served on many
committees for both organizations, as well as for the AIP, the NAS, and others.
Fay Ajzenberg-Selove loves working with young people and calls teaching
the second most important thing in her life (her husband is the first). She has
also been active in seeking to encourage other women to consider careers in
science, and to encourage those women who are starting their careers. AjzenbergSelove was chair and organizer in 1971 of the “ Women in Physics” panel of
the APS and a member of the Committee on Women in Physics, 1971-72.
She credits her patrons, among them Lauritsen, William Fowler at Caltech,
Heinz Barschall at Wisconsin, and Herman Feshbach at MIT, with having faith
in her potential and giving her the same chance to succeed as that given to
promising young males.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Works by Fay Ajzenberg-Selove
Scientific Works
Space does not permit the listing o f the complete works of Fay Ajzenberg-Selove. This
list includes all works by Ajzenberg-Selove with the exception of those cited in AjzenbergSelove and Fowler 1985. Also included are her dissertation and all references cited in
the text.
(translator) “ Cosmic Rays” by L. Leprince-Ringuet. PH, 1950 (as F. Ajzenberg).
(with W. H. Johnson and M .J.W . Laubenstein) “ Neutron spectrum for protons on Be9.”

PR 79 (1950): 187-188 (as F. Ajzenberg).

FAY AJZENBERG-SELOVE

5

“ Energy levels o f B 10. ” PR 82 (1951): 4 3 -4 7 (as F. Ajzenberg).
“ Low states of F17 and neutrons from O 16 + d .” PR 83 (1951): 693 (as F. Ajzenberg).
(with H. T. Richards, J. R. Johnson, et al.) “ Proton range-energy relation for Eastman
NTA em ulsions.” PR 83 (1951): 994-995 (as F. Ajzenberg).
“ Energy Levels o f Some Light Nuclei and Their Classification.” Ph.D. diss., University
o f Wisconsin-Madison, 1952 (as F. Ajzenberg).
“ Deuteron bombardment o f Be9 and classification o f levels B 10. ” PR 88 (1952): 2 9 8 304 (as F. Ajzenberg).
“ The preparation o f 6Li targets.” RSI 23 (1952): 648 (as F. Ajzenberg).
(with T. Lauritsen) “ Energy levels of light nuclei— IV .” RMP 24 (1952): 321-402 (as
F. Ajzenberg).
(with W. W. Buechner) “ Neutrons from the proton bombardment of Be9. ” PR 91 (1953):
674-675 (as F. Ajzenberg).
(with W. Franzen) “ Neutrons from the proton bombardment of N 14. ” PR 94 (1954):
409-411 (as F. Ajzenberg).
(---------- ) “ Neutrons from the proton bombardment of B 10. ” PR 95 (1954): 1531-1533
(as F. Ajzenberg).
(with T. Lauritsen) “ Energy levels o f light nuclei— V .” RMP 27 (1955): 77-166 (as F.
Ajzenberg).
(with A. Rubin and J. G. Likely) “ Neutrons from the proton bombardment o f S32 and
S34. ” PR 99 (1955): 654 (as F. Ajzenberg).
“ ‘Classical’ nuclear physics in the U SSR .” NC Suppl. 4 (1956): 2 -3 0 .
(with A. Rubin, G. D. Johnson, et al.) “ Neutrons from the proton bombardment of B u . ”
PR 103 (1956): 356-357.
(with A. Rubin and H. Mark) “ Energy levels o f Si28. ” PR 104 (1956): 727-730.

(with M. L. Bullock and E. Almqvist) “ Neutrons from He3 bombardment of B 10. ” PR
108 (1957): 1284-1288.
“ Gaps in data on light nuclei.” ProAC (Oct. 1958): A -6 -A -1 4 .
“ Report on the accelerator conference.” PT 12 (April 1959): 2 6 -2 8 .
(with (j. F. Osgood and C. P. Baker) “ Neutrons from the proton bombardment of Li6
and Li7. ” PR 116 (1959): 1521-1525.
“ A note on F 16. ” NN (Dec. 1960): 5 -6 .
(editor) “ Nuclear Spectroscopy,” pts. A and B. AP, 1960. Reprinted in 1966.
(with K. L. Dunning) “ Neutrons from the He3 bombardment of O16 and Mg24.” PR 119
(1960): 1681-1685.
(with P. H. Stelson) “ B e9 (a,n)C 12 reaction and the parameters o f the 7.66 Mev state of
C 12. ” PR 120 (1960): 500-504.
(with L. Cranberg and F. S. Dietrich) “ Energy levels of Na21 and Mg22. ” PR 124 (1961):
1548-1557.
“ Determination o f the Q-value for nuclear reactions” and “ Determination of nuclear
energy levels from reaction energies.” In Methods of Experimental Physics, vol.
5, pt. B, edited by C.-S. Wu and L.C.L. Yuan, 339-366. AP, 1963.
(with R. B. Brode, H. H. Barschall, et al.) “ Teaching physics in the four-year colleges.”
PT 17 (May 1964): 36-40.
(--------- ) “ Toward Excellence in Physics.” Pub. R -162. AIP, 1964.
(--------- ) “ Final Report o f COPFIC.” Pub. R -186. AIP, 1965.
(--------- ) “ Summary o f results o f the COPFIC study.” AJP 33 (1965): 774-775.
(--------- ) “ Toward Excellence in Physics.” Pub. R -183. AIP, 1965.


6

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

(with J. W. Watson and R. Middleton) “ Alpha particles from the triton bombardment

of Li7, C'2 and O16. ” PR 139 (1965): B 592-596.
(----------) “ A new excited state of Li8. ” PL 18 (1965): 302-304.
(with C. D. Zafiratos and F. S. Dietrich) “ N 14 (He3,n)F16 reaction.” PR 137 (1965)
B 1479-1484.
(with E. T. Hazzard and P. V. Hewka) “ Alphas from the deuteron bombardment o f Be9
and C12. ” NP 75 (1966): 592-598.
(with N. Mangelson, M. Reed, et al.) “ Excited states in 6Be and 10C .” NP 88 (1966):
137-144.
(----------) “ The masses and excited states of 24A1 and 28P .” PL 21 (1966): 661-663.
(with S. H. Maxman) “ States o f 97M o.” PR 150 (1966): 1011-1012.
(with J. L. Wiza) “ Energy levels o f S31. ” PR 143 (1966): 853-855.
(with C. D. Zafiratos and F. S. Dietrich) “ B'° (He3,n)N12 reaction.” NP 11 (1966): 8 1 91.
(with K. R. Evans) “ Excited states o f 81B r.” NP A102 (1967): 237-240.
(with J. D. Purvis and L. M. Polsky) “ Energy levels o f 10B .” PR 162 (1967): 10051008.
“ Nuclear Spectroscopy.” In Proceedings of the Conference on the Use of Small Accel­
erators for Teaching and Research, USAEC, DTI CONF 680411 (1968): 261—
277.
(with K. R. Evans and B. Rosner) “ States o f 98M o .” PR 165 (1968): 1327-1329.
(with R. D. Wardaski and R. Middleton) “ States in ’Be from 10B (t,a)9B e .” NP A116
(1968): 481-488.
(with S. Yen and B. Rosner) “ Excited states o f 93M o.” NP A l 11 (1968): 100-104.
(with G. Igo) “ The mass and energy levels o f 30A1.” PR 188 (1969): 1813-1814.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 3 -1 5 .” NP A152 (1970): 1-221.
(with G. Igo) “ A study o f triton induced reactions in 37C1 and 44C a.” NP A 142 (1970):
641-648.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 6 -1 7 .” NP A166 (1971): 1-140.
(with C. L. Busch) “ Nuclear Wallet Cards.” DNPAPS, Dec. 1971.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 8 -2 0 .” NP A190 (1972): 1-196.
(with R. F. Casten, O. Hansen, et al.) “ Levels of nBe from a study o f the 9Be(t,p)uBe
reaction.” PL 40B (1972): 205-207.

(with H. G. Bingham and J. D. Garrett) “ Energy levels o f 14C .” NP A202 (1973): 152—
160.
“ A guide to nuclear compilations.” In Nuclear Spectroscopy and Reactions, Part C,
edited by J. Cemy, 55 1 -5 5 9 . AP, 1974.
(with J. D. Garrett and H. G. Bingham) “ Levels o f 15C from a study o f the 9Be(7L i,p)15C
reaction.” PR CIO (1974): 1730-1738.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 1 -1 2 .” NP A248 (1975): 1-152.
(with E. R. Flynn, O. Hansen, et al.) “ (t,p) Reaction on 36 3840A r.” NP A246 (1975):
117-140.
(with R. Middleton and J. D. Garrett) “ Energy levels of 12B .” PR C12 (1975): 1868—
1872.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 3 -1 5 .” NP A268 (1976): 1-204.
(with R. R. Betts and D. J. Crozier) “ 10B (10B ,a )16O Reaction.” PR C14 (1976): 3 5 7 360.

FAY AJZENBERG-SELOVE

7

(with E. R. Flynn, O. Hansen, et al.) “ Energy levels of 62C o.” PR C14 (1976): 7 6 7 771.
(with C. F. Maguire, D. L. Hendrie, et al.) “ Energy levels of 12N .” PR C13 (1976):
9 33-936.
(---------- ) “ Long-lived states at high excitation energies in 8Be and 10B e .” PR C13 (1976):
4 6 -4 9 .
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 6 -1 7 .” NP A281 (1977): 1-148.
(with E. R. Flynn, S. Orbesen, et al.) “ States of 34P .” PR C15 (1977): 1-3.
(with E. R. Flynn and J. W. Sunier) “ States o f 54V and 58M n.” PR C15 (1977): 8 7 9 882.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 8 -2 0 .” NP A300 (1978): 1-224.
(with E. R. Flynn, D. L. Hanson, et al.) “ (t,p) Reactions on 4He, 6Li, 7Li, 9Be, 10B, UB
and 12C .” PR C17 (1978): 1283-1293.
(with E. R. Flynn, J. W. Sunier, et al.) “ States o f 122In and ,24In.” PR C17 (1978): 9 6 0 963.

(with G. J. KeKelis, M. S. Zisman, et al.) “ Masses of the unbound nuclei 16N e, 15F and
120 . ” PR C17 (1978): 1929-1939.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 5 - 1 0 .” NP A320 (1979): 1:224.
(with E. R. Flynn, D. L. Hanson, et al.) “ Levels in 78,80,82As from the 78,80,82Se(t,3He)
reactions.” PR C19 (1979): 1742-1746.
(---------- ) “ Mass and excited states o f 100N b .” PR C19 (1979): 2068-2069.
(with O ’Kelley, Parker, et al.) “ The 1978 Census o f Basic Nuclear Scientists in the
U S A .” NS AC to the NSF and DOE, May 1979.
(with C. L. Busch) “ Energy levels of light nuclei, A = 1 1 -1 2 .” NP A336 (1980): 1 154.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 3 -1 5 .” NP A360 (1981): 1-185.
(with L. G. Arnold, R. N. Boyd, et al.) “ The 6.53 MeV state o f 8L i.” PR C24 (1981):
2326-2330.
(with R. E. Brown, E. R. Flynn, et al.) “ States of 69C u.” PR C24 (1981): 1762-1764.
(with E. R. Flynn, R. E. Brown, et al.) “ Proton hole states in neutron rich nuclei near
A = 100.” PR C24 (1981): 902-910; PR C25 (1982): 2851-2852.
(---------- ) “ The 9294-97-98Mo(t,p) reactions at E, = 17 M eV .” PR C24 (1981): 2475-2498;
PR C25 (1982): 2850.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 6 -1 7 .” NP A375 (1982): 1-168.
(with Parker and J. Cemy) “ The 1980 Census o f Basic Nuclear Scientists in the United
States.” NSAC to the NSF and DOE, March 1982.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 8 -2 0 .” NP A392 (1983): 1-216.
(with E. R. Flynn, R. E. Brown, et al.) “ Proton hole states in neutron rich Pd nuclei.”
PR C21 (1983): 2587-2597.
(---------- ) “ Proton hole states in 95Y and 95 97 " N b .” PR C28 (1983): 575-586.
(with E. K. Warburton) “ Nuclear spectroscopy.” PT 36 (Nov. 1983): 26-32.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 5 - 1 0 .” NP A413 (1984): 1-214.
(with R. E. Brown, E. R. Flynn, et al.) “ Experimental location of Gamow-Teller strength
for astrophysical calculations in the region of A = 5 4 -5 8 .” PR C30 (1984):
1850-1854.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 1 -1 2 .” NP A433 (1985): 1-158.

(with R. E. Brown, E. R. Flynn, et al.) “ (t,3He) reactions on 56Fe, 58Fe, and 58N i.” PR
C31 (1985): 777-786.


8

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

(----------) “ (t,3He) reactions on 40>42-44Ca, 46>48’S0Ti, 54Cr and 54F e.” PR C32 (1985): 7 5 6 780.
(with W. A. Fowler) “ Thomas Lauritsen.” In Biographical Memoirs of the National
Academy of Sciences, vol. 55, 384-396. NAP, 1985.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 3 -1 5 .” NP A449 (1986): 1-186.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 6 -1 7 .” NP A460 (1986): 1-148.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 8 -2 0 .” NP A475 (1987): 1-198.
“ Recent Developments in the Light N uclei.” UPa Report PPP-2/87, 1987.
“ The Structure of the Light N uclei.” In Proceedings of the International School Seminar
on Heavy Ion Physics, Dubna, U.S.S.R., Sept. 1986, 341-349. JINR D 7 -8 7 -6 8
(1987).
“ O f DHW and the light nuclei.” In Proceedings of a Conference on Interactions and
Structures in Nuclei, Sussex, U.K., 181-189. AH, 1988.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 5 - 1 0 .” NP A490 (1988): 1-225.
“ The light nuclei.” In Energy in Physics, War and Peace, edited by H. Mark and L.
Wood, 3 9 -4 7 . KA, 1988.
‘ ‘The light nuclei: What is known and what is not. ’’ In Heavy Ions in Nuclear and Atomic
Physics, edited by Z. Wilhelmi and G. Szeflinska, 1-20. AH, 1989.
(with H. H. Barschall, eds.) A Physicist’s Desk Reference [Second Ed. Physics Vade
Mecum]. AIP, 1989.
“ Energy levels o f light nuclei, A = 1 1 -1 2 .” NP A506 (1990): 1-158.
“ Energy levels of light nuclei, A = 1 3 -1 5 ” (in press).
“ Nuclear spectra.” In McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, 7th ed.

vol. 12, 20 2 -2 0 5 . MGH, 1992.

Other References
Chao, C. Y ., T. Lauritsen, and V. K. Rasmussen. “ High energy gamma-radiation from
Be9 + D2. ” PR 76 (1949): 582-583.
Kahlenberg, L. “ Note on the preparation of metallic lithium.” JPC 3 (1899): 602-603.
Rasmussen, V. K ., W. F. Homyak, andT. Lauritsen. “ Gamma-radiation from deuteron
bombardment o f Be9. ” PR 76 (1949): 581-582.

GLADYS AMELIA ANSLOW (1892-1969)
George Fleck

BIOGRAPHY
Gladys Amelia Anslow—physicist, educator, administrator, and pioneer bio­
chemical spectroscopist—was the daughter of John and Ella (Leonard) Anslow.
Her life was centered around the Connecticut River towns of Enfield, Springfield,
Northampton, and Sunderland.
Her father was bom in 1853 in Kidderminster, England, the son of William
and Amelia Anslow. He was a textile colorist and a lay preacher. He married
his first wife, Elizabeth Jane Mathews, and their daughter, Rhoda P., was bom
in 1872. In 1880 the family came to Enfield, Connecticut. There John Anslow
became associated with the Hartford Carpet Company. A second daughter, Eva
Mae (later called Evelyn), was bom in 1880, and a third daughter, Vida, was
bom in 1885. Elizabeth Anslow died of cancer in 1888, at the age of 35.
Anslow’s second wife, Ella Iola Leonard, was bom in 1849 in Sunderland,
Massachusetts. Her mother, Sarah F. Cooley, was a descendant of Aaron Cooke,
a member of the Hartford colony who helped settle Northampton, Massachusetts.
Ella Leonard’s father, James LeRoy Leonard, was a construction engineer who
built railroads. In the late 1880s Ella Leonard lived in Springfield, where she
taught music and art. The family story is that John Anslow met her at the Enfield

Congregational Church, where she was organist. They were married in Springfield in 1889. Sarah Ella (later called Sally and Sadie) was bom in 1890, and
Gladys Amelia Anslow was bom May 22, 1892, both in Springfield. By 1892
John Anslow had become an insurance agent in Springfield.
As a child Gladys Anslow was encouraged to pursue her mother’s interests
in music, her father’s interests in color, and her grandfather’s interests in en­
gineering. Her mother foresaw for her a career as a concert pianist, and intensive
musical training continued into the high school years. She prepared for college
at Springfield Central High School.
In September 1909 she entered Smith College in Northampton, a women’s
residential college with 1,600 students. During Gladys Anslow’s second year at
college her mother became ill, dying of cancer in 1911, at the age of 61. Anslow


10

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

did not return to college for the second semester. Because her program was
composed mostly of year-long courses, she was obliged to wait until February
1912 to reenter Smith College.
In her second year she was required to take a science course, and she chose
physics taught by Prof. Frank Allan Waterman. She found physics exciting. In
her junior year she took laboratory physics from Sue Avis Blake, using a textbook
written by Waterman. As a senior she took semester courses in mechanics and
in electricity and magnetism from Waterman, and a year of chemistry from Prof.
John Tappan Stoddard.
Smith College awarded Anslow the A.B. degree in 1914. She then took a
summer position as assistant to the president of the Springfield Home Corre­
spondence School, where she was instructor in mathematics and science, as well
as supervisor of the office force.

In fall 1914 Anslow was hired by Smith College. She received successive
appointments as demonstrator in physics (1914-15) and assistant in physics
(1915-17). These positions provided teaching experience and financial support
while she took additional physics courses. One course was in spectroscopy,
taught by Janet T. Howell (later Janet Howell Clark). Howell had earlier con­
ducted spectroscopic research at Mount Wilson Observatory. On October 9,
1916, Anslow was accepted as a candidate for a master’s degree in physics, with
research under the supervision of Howell. Smith College had just acquired a
Rowland grating spectrograph with an electric arc source. Anslow used the new
spectrograph to obtain emission spectra of radium; she reported the experiments
in a thesis, “ Spectroscopic Evidence for the Electron Theory of Matter,” and
in a research paper (Howell and Anslow 1917). Official readers of her thesis
were Howell and Waterman from the physics department, and Mary Louise
Foster of the chemistry department. Anslow was awarded an A.M. degree in
physics from Smith College in 1917. Citing Vassar College’s interest in hiring
Anslow, Waterman persuaded Smith president Marion Burton to promote her to
instructor, replacing Howell, who resigned after one year in the department.
During the next three years, as a continuing graduate student, Anslow took three
more semesters of physics and three semesters of astronomy.
She moved to Northampton for the 1918-19 school year. Probably on the
recommendation of Foster, she took graduate courses during the summer of 1921
at the University of Chicago.
The Waterman family was an important influence in Anslow’s decision to
undertake a doctoral program at Yale University. Alan Tower Waterman, son
of Frank Waterman, was her contemporary. He was a physics student at Princeton
when she was taking courses at Smith from his father. He was appointed to the
Yale physics faculty in 1919, and Anslow began graduate work in that department
in 1922.
Smith College officially encouraged her to pursue a doctoral program, award­
ing her a fellowship for her support in New Haven. The college catalogue listed

her as a member of the physics department on leave. President William Allan

GLADYS AMELIA ANSLOW

11

Neilson wrote her on February 21, 1923, “ to indicate that in case Professor
Waterman recommends it in view of your success in your graduate study it is
my intention to recommend your reappointment with the rank of Assistant Pro­
fessor” (Neilson 1923).
Two people especially influenced her graduate research. She gave credit to
Alois Francis Kovarik and John Zeleney for help with her research on the
ionization of air by high-energy electrons. William Francis Gray Swann and his
student Ernest O. Lawrence (Nobel laureate, 1939) came to Yale as Anslow was
completing her graduate studies in the department. After writing his doctoral
dissertation, Lawrence joined the Yale faculty for four years before moving to
the University of California at Berkeley. Anslow received the Ph.D. degree in
physics from Yale in 1924 and returned to Smith College, where she received
the promotion promised by President Neilson.
With a position at Smith College that promised permanency, she invited her
father, then 72, and her sister Sadie to move in with her to establish a household.
In 1934 another sister, Evelyn (Anslow) McCourtie, with her husband, William,
and their son, Joseph, joined the household. William died in 1935. In 1942 her
sister Rhoda joined them. Her father died at 95 in 1948.
Gladys Anslow listed Christian Science as her religious preference when en­
tering college. In later life she was an active member of the Unitarian Society
of Northampton and advisor to Unitarian students at Smith College. Several of
her sisters were Episcopalians. She was a member of the Northampton Republican
City Committee.
An interviewer (Potter 1955) reported on the organization of the Anslow

household: “ When a particular bit of exciting research piques her imagination
and possible solutions monopolize her thoughts for days, her [three] understand­
ing sisters refrain from interrupting her research jag. .. . They relieve her com­
pletely of household duties.”
Her six years as an assistant professor were spent establishing herself as an
independent person in an environment that remained dominated by the strong
personalities of her youth. Having her father and sisters in her household, as
well as Waterman and Neilson on campus, provided Anslow with supportive
continuity. Chemist Foster sought her research collaboration. She maintained
her contacts with Lawrence and with the Yale physics department. In 1930 she
was promoted to associate professor.
At Yale Anslow had been elected to Sigma Xi, the scientific research society.
She and other Smith scientists began negotiations in the early 1930s for a chapter
at Smith College. On May 1, 1935, the first Sigma Xi chapter at a women’s
college was installed at Smith College, with Anslow as the first chapter president.
She was promoted to professor of physics in 1936. She served several terms
as chair of the physics department, the first beginning in 1933. Then in 1948
she was promoted to a chair professorship sponsored by the Gates Foundation.
In 1941 Anslow became director of graduate study at Smith College, an
important administrative post that she held until 1959. Her appointment as di­


12

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

rector of graduate study recognized her efficient administrative abilities and her
reputation as a fair and sympathetic person. It also recognized her involvement
in the Smith College graduate program as a research advisor. She was advisor
for the doctoral research of Nora M. Mohler (Ph.D. Smith 1934) and was research

advisor for 18 master’s students.
Anslow was elected a fellow of the AAArS, of the A AAS and of the APS.
She held offices in the New England Section of the APS and was a member of
the OS A. She was an associate editor and a member of the AAPT Executive
Board.
Smith College awarded Anslow an honorary D.Sc. degree at its seventy-fifth
anniversary celebration in 1950. Upon her retirement in 1960 she was appointed
research professor of physics and later was awarded a Sophia Smith Fellowship
by the college.
Throughout her career Anslow was consistently a person who quietly helped
other people. She had a sympathetic ear when students, particularly those from
other countries, wanted advice. During World War II she was especially sup­
portive of Asian students and faculty who felt vulnerable after the Pearl Harbor
attack. She provided wise counsel and reliable support for the younger faculty
in her department and in the other sciences (Hawkins 1990; Schalk 1990).
After a brief illness, Gladys Anslow died of cancer at Peter Bent Brigham
Hospital in Brookline, Massachusetts, on March 31, 1969.

WORK
Soon after her appointment as assistant professor, she and Foster undertook
a joint research program involving the chemistry and absorption spectra of amino
acids. They were coadvisors for the master’s research of Dorotea Barnes (A. M.
Smith 1930) and Charlotte Anne Klingler. Today most chemistry laboratories
have automated instrumentation that permits routine, almost effortless, deter­
mination of such spectra. However, in 1930 the data had to be accumulated by
a careful, patient, and resourceful person knowledgeable about optics. Special­
ized equipment was also needed. Some was borrowed from the NBS, courtesy
of Fred Loomis Mohler, physicist at NBS and brother of Nora Mohler, assistant
professor of physics at Smith. The Anslow-Foster collaboration resulted in four
publications from 1930 to 1933 in the Journal of Biological Chemistry and the

Physical Review.
After Foster’s retirement in 1933, Anslow’s research activity returned to the
high-energy physics that had been the subject of her graduate work at Yale.
Lawrence had established the world’s foremost laboratory in high-energy physics
at Berkeley, with unique opportunities for extending her experiments, and he
invited her to his laboratory as a research fellow during the first semester 1938—
39. She was the first woman to work with his 8-million-volt cyclotron. Her work
at Yale had involved ionization produced by electrons; at Berkeley she inves­

GLADYS AMELIA ANSLOW

13

tigated ionization produced by the recently discovered neutrons from the cyclo­
tron.
At Berkeley she also collaborated with biophysicist Paul C. Aebersold in
experiments on the treatment of cancer by neutron bombardment. She returned
to Berkeley to continue this research during the summer of 1939, when the first
tests of the new 225-ton cyclotron were made. In addition to participating in
physics, Anslow also learned a great deal at Berkeley about the advantages of
group research and about how funds could be obtained from both public and
private sources to support scientific research.
Anslow saw that the Berkeley plan of focused group research could be adapted
to create a stimulating research environment in the Smith College physics de­
partment. Robert Jemison Van de Graaff at MIT had developed an electrostatic
generator whose half-million volts of electricity could be used for “ atom-smash­
ing” research by several members of the Smith physics department. Douglas
Ewing, who had worked with a cyclotron at the University of Rochester; Nora
Mohler, who had been engaged in similar research at the Cavendish Laboratory

at Cambridge, England; and James F. Koehler, who had spent a sabbatical leave
at the California Institute of Technology identifying mesotrons in cosmic rays,
formed a research team with Anslow. An eight-foot-tall Van de Graaff generator,
the first in the Connecticut Valley and the first at any women’s college, was
built during the 1939-40 year. A flurry of activity in the department continued
during the following year as detection instruments and special equipment were
designed and built for this research group in high-energy physics. The equipment
and the research program were described and demonstrated at a meeting of the
New England section of the APS in Northampton on October 11, 1941 (“ Pro­
ceedings,” 1942).
World War II interrupted the planned group research. Ewing and Koehler
were among the first 50 research scientists to join the MIT Radiation Laboratory,
set up in 1940 under the National Defense Research Committee to develop
warfare devices of a defensive nature. Radar was developed there. After the
United States had declared war and all pretense was abandoned that the warfare
research was solely defensive, Mohler joined the MIT laboratory as technical
editor on radar.
World War II involved dramatic technological changes in warfare. Radar,
chemical bombs, flame throwers, rockets, and silent weapons, for example, were
developed under the auspices of the OSRD. When the new combat devices were
put to use in the field, particularly in Pacific jungle warfare, military commanders
needed the scientists who had developed the devices to be available to make
adjustments under field conditions. Alan Waterman, who had left Yale in 1942,
became chief of the Office of Field Service, OSRD. He saw an urgent need to
keep these scientists informed of the current status of their projects and to provide
whatever technical information they needed. Waterman called on Anslow to
serve as a special consultant to him from July 1944 to December 1945. She
became chief of the Communications and Information Section and was in charge

14

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

of supplying scientific and technical information to specialists throughout the
world. She spent three-fourths of her work week in Washington, commuting
weekly between Washington and Northampton by railway, while retaining her
Smith posts as director of graduate study and chair of the Department of Physics.
For her service in the OSRD, Anslow was awarded the Presidential Certificate
of Merit in 1948 by Harry Truman. Only one other woman received this award.
The dislocations of the war, and the massive federal investments on highenergy physics at just a few laboratories during the war years, made Anslow’s
1930s plan for Smith College to become a center for such research impractical.
She had a new plan. Her research collaboration with Foster had revealed that
significant chemical information could be obtained from absorption spectra. The
human resources required to obtain spectra in the early 1930s precluded an
extensive research program, but wartime research and development of electronic
instrumentation produced the technology that was to revolutionize spectroscopy.
The Perkin-Elmer Corporation at Norwalk, Connecticut, announced production
of an infrared recording spectrometer (Model 12) that was supposed to relegate
the tedium of obtaining spectral information to electronic components. Actually,
an operator of this first instrument needed to be a skilled experimental physicist.
Anslow decided to be a participant in this revolution and saw an opportunity to
organize a cutting-edge research program. Funding was needed.
Anslow played a significant role in fashioning increased institutional relation­
ships between the federal government and academic scientists. Anslow had the
insight and the information needed to organize a Smith College research program
to take advantage of the new federal support of scientific research. She brought
the first research grant to Smith College in 1948, a negotiated contract from the
ONR. As part of this contract, she was “ loaned” a Perkin-Elmer Model 12C,
an improved instrument whose commercial availability had just been announced.

This proved to be a permanent loan. Between 1948 and 1954 the ONR contributed
$74,702 to her research program in addition to the Model 12C loan.
The Model 12C spectrometer was modular. Perkin-Elmer constructed the
optics; the rest of the instrument was assembled as separate components made
by other instrument manufacturers. Because of this building-block design, the
instrument could be modified to meet the specialized needs of a particular research
project. Although the Model 12C was sold as a single-beam spectrometer, An­
slow was able to use it as one of the first double-beam instruments, greatly
increasing its versatility, its accuracy, and its ease of operation. Perkin-Elmer
incorporated such improvements into an instrument that could be used routinely
by chemists whose experimental expertise was outside the areas of electronics
and optics. This new Model 21 double-beam recording infrared spectrophotom­
eter became commercially available in 1950.
The latest in instrumentation was used to attack a fundamental problem in
biochemistry: the structure of proteins. Crystallographer Dorothy M. Wrinch,*
internationally known for her X-ray work on protein structure, had been appointed
visiting professor at Smith, Mount Holyoke, and Amherst colleges for the 1942-

GLADYS AMELIA ANSLOW

15

43 year. In 1943 she began a collaboration of more than two decades with
Anslow that focused on spectral investigations of the amino acid protein subunits,
small polymers of these amino acids, and finally the proteins hemoglobin and
insulin.
After World War II Anslow convinced the Smith College trustees to develop
detailed plans for a physical science building that would house physics, geology,
astronomy, and mathematics (Anslow 1947). Fund raising for the proposed
facility was disappointing, and as a result the project was severely curtailed.

Instead of a new building, Anslow got the basement of old Lilly Hall, which
was renovated into a five-room, temperature-controlled spectroscopy laboratory
(Anslow 1951).
This spectroscopy laboratory quickly became the center for vigorous research.
In the mid-1950s Phebe D. F. Collins joined the research team; she earned an
A.M. degree with Anslow in 1957 and remained as a research associate. Charles
L. Jourdian, the department machinist, spent most of his time modifying the
spectrometers and building new equipment for this research.
Anslow reported some of her research results at a meeting of the Faraday
Society at Cambridge University in September 1950 (Anslow 1950). Because
of that paper she was named the 1950 Woman in Science by Sigma Delta Epsilon
and was awarded a prize of $500. In 1958 Anslow received the first of three
NSF grants, totaling $81,700, that supported her research for the rest of her life.
Deciding that her dream of a physical science building had not been bold
enough, Anslow proposed a complex that would house all the sciences at Smith
College. Planning for such a science center was well along when she retired in
1960. The funds were raised and the facility was built.
Anslow devoted much of her life to interdisciplinary administration and col­
laborative research. In the 1960s she was pleased to see that spectroscopy was
contributing significantly to chemistry and biology, even though everyday spec­
troscopy (with expensive but easy-to-use instruments) was leaving physics lab­
oratories. She believed that science had much to contribute to the progress of
society, and she saw no reason to diminish that contribution by excessive compartmentalization of scientific research or teaching.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Works by Gladys Amelia Anslow
Scientific Works
“ Spectroscopic Evidence for the Electron Theory of Matter.” A. M. thesis, Smith Col­
lege, 1917.
(with J. T. Howell) “ The triplet series o f radium.” ProNAS 3 (1917): 409-412.

“ The logarithmic law connecting atomic number and frequency differences in spectral
series.” PR 13 (1919): 326-336.


16

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

“ The Total Ionization Product in Air by Electrons at Various Energies.’’ Ph.D. diss.,
Yale University, 1924; Sci 60 (1924): 423-433; PR 25 (1925): 484-500.
(with M. L. Foster and D. Barnes) “ A study o f some of the chemical characteristics and
the absorption spectrum of cystine.’’ JBC 89 (1930): 665-673.
(with M. L. Foster) “ The visible and ultra-violet absorption spectra o f certain amino
acids and their significance.” PR 37 (1931): 1708.
“ The dissociation o f the carboxyl group in amino acids and related substances produced
by absorption o f ultra-violet light.” PR 40 (1932): 115-116; erratum, PR 40
(1932): 639 -640.
(with M. L. Foster) “ The influence o f substituent groups on the visible and ultra-violet
absorption spectra o f amino acids and related substances.” JBC 97 (1932): 3 7 46.
(----------and C. Klingler) “ The absorption spectra of glycine solutions and their inter­
pretation.” JBC 103 (1933): 8 1 -92.
(with M. D. Watson) “ The total ionization of nitrogen by electron collisions.” PR 50
(1936): 162-169.
(with E. R. Lyman) “ Spectrophotometric study o f glutathione.” JOSA 31 (1941): 114—
117.
(with S. C. Nassar) “ The absorption of ultraviolet energy by the peptide linkage.” JOSA
31 (1941): 118-123.
“ Ultraviolet spectra o f biologically important molecules.” JAP 16 (1945): 4 1 -4 9 .
(with P. C. Aebersold) “ Fast neutron energy absorption in gases, walls, and tissue.” PR
69 (1946): 1-21.

(with O. Glaser) “ Copper and ascidian metamorphosis.” JEZ 111 (1949): 117-139.
(with Hsi-Teh Hsieh and R. C. Shea) “ Ultraviolet absorption by hydrogen-bridged mol­
ecules.” JCP 17 (1949): 4 2 6 -427.
“ Polymer types and specific absorptions in the ultra-violet by hydrogen-bridged amides
and alcohols with application to the protein structure problem.” DFS 9 (1950):
299-318.
“ The sites of the amino acid residues on a cyclol model o f insulin.” JCP 21 (1953):
2083-2084.

Other Works
“ Sigma Xi awards chapter to Smith.” SAQ (Feb. 1935): 157-158.
“ The scientific attitude.” SXQ 23 (1935): 170-173.
Presidential address upon installation of Smith Chapter.
“ An atom-smashing sabbatical.” SAQ (May 1939): 253-254.
“ Smith constructs an atom-smasher.” SAQ (May 1940): 261-262.
“ Smith scientists help win the war.” SAQ (Nov. 1945): 3 -5 .
“ Smith responds to national trends in science education and research.” SAQ (May 1947):
133-134.
“ Women in science.” EF 20 (2) (1949): 6 -1 2 .
“ Once a coalbin, now a spectroscopic laboratory.” SAQ (Nov. 1951): 6 -7 .
“ Whiting, Sarah Frances.” In Notable American Women, 1607-1950, edited by E. T.
James, vol. 3, 5 9 3 -595. BPHUP, 1971.

Works about Gladys Amelia Anslow
Gladys A. Anslow to Captain Dallas Dawson. Letter dated October 12, 1948.

GLADYS AMELIA ANSLOW

17

Anslow’s copy in Smith College Archives. Autobiographical sketch.
“ Gladys A. Anslow ‘14, Professor Emeritus o f Physics.” SAQ (April 1969): 62.
Obituary, with photograph.
Potter, D. “ Fruit of 7 years o f research.” DHG (Oct. 10, 1955): 16.
Interview with Gladys Anslow, with photograph.
“ Prof. Gladys Anslow, physics field leader, dies in 78th year.” DHG (April 1, 1969):

1- 2 .
Obituary, with photograph.

Other References
Hawkins, B. Professor of Physics, Smith College. Personal communication, 1990.
Neilson, W. A ., to Gladys Anslow. Letter dated Feb. 21, 1923.
Neilson’s copy in Smith College Archives.
“ Proceedings of the New England Section of the American Physical Society Meeting at
Northampton, October 11, 1941.” PR 61 (1942): 98-100.
Schalk, M. Professor Emeritus of Geology, Smith College. Personal communication,
1990.
“ Smith will be first woman’s college to have atom smasher.” DHG (April 6, 1940): 1,

12.


HERTHA MARKS AYRTON

HERTHA MARKS AYRTON (1854-1923)
Marjorie Malley

BIOGRAPHY
Hertha Ayrton, nee Phoebe Sarah Marks, was bom on April 28, 1854, in Portsea,

England, the third of eight children of Levi and Alice Theresa (Moss) Marks.
Levi Marks, an impecunious clockmaker and jeweler, had fled his native Poland
as a young man to escape anti-Semitic persecution. He died in 1861, leaving
the family in debt. Alice Marks struggled to support her large family through
income from needlework and managed to be active in civic and philanthropic
ventures as well. She was said to have always been “ at everybody’s beck and
c a ll. .. [and] never known to refuse an appeal for help” (Sharp 1926, 5).
At the age of nine, Marks went to London to live with her maternal aunt,
Marion Harzog. Marion and Alphonse Harzog owned a school, where they
educated her with their own children. The Cambridge-educated Numa Harzog
taught mathematics to his cousin Sarah, and Marcus Harzog influenced her
philosophical views and introduced her to some of the local intelligentsia. Young
Marks’s many friends and acquaintances included George Eliot.
While she was in her teens Sarah Marks adopted the name Hertha, after the
Teutonic earth goddess as eulogized by Swinburne in a popular poem that attacked
conventional religious views. This transformation coincided with Marks’s de­
parture from the Jewish religion, which greatly disappointed her devout mother.
Marks considered herself an agnostic for the rest of her life, but she always
remained proud of her Jewish heritage.
She supported herself by tutoring and embroidery work, sending much of her
earnings to her impoverished family. Her dream of a university education was
made financially possible largely through the efforts of Mme. Barbara LeighSmith Bodichon, one of the founders of Girton College. Mme. Bodichon, a
gifted and unconventional woman who had studied under the artist Camille Corot,
was passionately interested in promoting higher education for women. Marks
entered Girton in 1876 after having passed the Cambridge University Exami­
nation for Women in 1874 with honors in English and mathematics. Her progress
was impeded by repeated bouts of illness of uncertain origin and marred by

19

disappointing performances on examinations, which were a source of great stress
for her. She was coached by Richard T. Glazebrook and completed the Cambridge
Tripos in 1881. At that time women were not eligible for the university degree.
For several years Marks supported herself by teaching. In 1884 she patented
a line divider, an instrument for dividing a line into any number of equal parts.
It was of potential use for artists, architects, engineers, and surveyors. She had
always been interested in mechanical devices (perhaps reflecting her father’s
influence) and showed ability in mathematics. After this success, achieved with
partial financial backing from Mme. Bodichon, she began to consider seriously
a scientific career. The popular and technically promising field of electricity
caught her interest, and Mme. Bodichon again came to the rescue with funds.
Marks began studies at the Technical College, Finsbury, in 1884 under the
professor of physics and noted electrical engineer William Edward Ayrton.
A widower with a young daughter, Ayrton was very supportive of women’s
education and legal rights. The relationship between the professor and his student
deepened, and they were married on May 6, 1885.
Marks’s marriage relieved her of the continual pressure of monetary worries.
She pursued her chosen field for several years, lecturing to women on practical
electricity in 1888. However, the combination of poor health, the added domestic
and social responsibilities of her marriage, and the birth of their daughter Barbara
(named after Mme. Bodichon), left Ayrton little time for professional work during
the next few years. The death of Mme. Bodichon in 1891 deeply grieved Ayrton.
But Mme. Bodichon was a benefactor in death as well as in life, leaving Ayrton
a sum that enabled her to support her aging mother and to hire a housekeeper.
Ayrton resumed her work in 1893. First she took charge of some of Professor
Ayrton’s ongoing experiments on the electric arc while he traveled to an electrical
congress. Soon she became involved in her own investigations of the arc. A
lengthy series of papers followed, which Ayrton incorporated into a compre­
hensive book on the arc published in 1902.
The IEE awarded Hertha Ayrton a prize of £10 in 1899 for her paper on the

hissing arc and took the unusual step of permitting a woman to read her own
paper. In the same year the IEE elected Ayrton their first woman member.
With her professional reputation now established, doors began to open for
Ayrton. In 1899 she read a paper at the British Association meeting, demonstrated
the electric arc at the Royal Society’s evening Conversazione, and presided over
the science section of the International Congress of Women. The following year
she read a paper on the arc at the International Electrical Congress in Paris.
Ayrton was soon spending increasing amounts of time caring for her husband,
whose health was failing rapidly. She turned necessity to her advantage by
analyzing sand ripple patterns while he rested at the seashore in 1901. These
studies led to further work on hydrodynamics. She also performed a major portion
of the investigations of searchlight carbons commissioned from her husband by
the British Admiralty. William Ayrton died in 1908.
In 1906 the Royal Society awarded Ayrton the Hughes Medal for her exper­


20

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

imental investigations of the electric arc and also for her work on sand ripples.
In spite of this and other honors— she apparently was the first woman to read
her own paper to the Royal Society, in 1904— the society refused to elect her a
fellow, deciding that as a married woman she was not qualified for election.
Ayrton was vivacious, attractive, independent and outspoken, yet proper and
considerate of others. Though diminutive in stature, she made a strong impression
on people. Even a detractor attested to her “ considerable personal charm”
(Armstrong 1923), a quality that contributed to her successes. She had many
friends from whom she received much support and encouragement.
One friend for whom she felt a special kinship was Marie Curie,* who also

struggled to juggle family and career in a society that was not prepared to support
such an extraordinary combination. Both women were repeatedly accused of
riding on their husband’s scientific coattails. “ An error that ascribes to a man
what was actually the work of a woman has more lives than a cat,” wrote Ayrton
in Marie Curie’s defense (Sharp 1926, 117), but doubtlessly with her own
experiences in mind. During 1912 Ayrton provided a refuge for Curie and her
daughters, enabling the famous physicist to recuperate anonymously from stress
and illness.
Ayrton’s personal and social values were profoundly affected by her direct
experiences with poverty and discrimination, her identification with her Jewish
heritage, and her mother’s example of generosity and self-sufficiency. She was
active in charitable causes as well as in the suffrage movement. She claimed
that reading the story of Vashti in the Book of Esther as a child had made a
suffragette of her. Ayrton took part in the demonstrations of 1910, enduring the
physical and verbal abuse wrought upon the demonstrators as well as the dis­
approval of her more conservative acquaintances. She also nursed the move­
ment’s hunger strikers back to health under the shadow of constant police and
press surveillance.
In 1915 Ayrton invented a fan to dispel and clear poisonous gases from the
trenches at the front. The hand-operated device worked by creating air vortices
similar to the water vortices she had investigated earlier. Ayrton promoted it
with the zeal of a crusader. Unfortunately, the inexpensive wooden and canvas
fan appeared almost ludicrously simple. It required a specific beating technique
and was effective only in winds less than nine miles per hour (although in 1917
Ayrton developed a mechanically driven fan to use in high winds). Indifference
coupled with bureaucratic errors and delays prevented the Ayrton fan from being
widely used, a frustration that drained her emotionally and pained her deeply.
After the war Ayrton worked on modifications of the fan for municipal and
industrial purposes, as well as the theory of vortices. She joined the Labour
Party and became involved with the newly founded International Federation of

University Women and the National Union of Scientific Workers, both of which
appealed to her intemationalistic and democratic sentiments.
Ayrton died of septicemia at Sussex on August 26, 1923. She left the con­

HERTHA MARKS AYRTON

21

siderable sum of £8,160 to the IEE, the organization that had welcomed her
without prejudice and helped launch her career.

WORK
Ayrton made significant contributions to the technology of the electric arc.
The direct current arc was of substantial commercial and industrial importance
when she began her research in 1893, since it was widely used for lighting. The
main technical problem was to “ secure the maximum production of light from
a given expenditure of power in the generator” (Ayrton, The Electric Arc, 1902,
vii). Arc lamps were plagued with problems. They hissed, sputtered, hummed,
and rotated, producing unsteady illumination in a changing array of colors. Their
heat melted most materials, a challenge for those who wished to devise suitable
insulators. Since the arc electrodes were consumed during operation, the arc
length continually changed, which required adjustments to be made in the circuit
and in the mirror’s position in searchlights.
She contributed to a better understanding of this subject by determining the
relations among power supplied, potential across the arc, current, and arc length.
She found that the potential required to send a given current through an arc of
fixed length depended primarily on the nature of the surface of the depression
(crater) that forms on the tip of the positive carbon during operation. Her tour
deforce was her analysis of the hissing arc, whose instability presented a baffling
engineering problem. She found that this undesirable condition resulted from

oxidation of the positive carbon. (In the stable arc only vaporization of the carbon
occurred.) Ayrton showed that current practices in the manufacture of carbons
led to the formation of hissing arcs, and she recommended changes in their
design. “ The most efficient arc,” she concluded in her book, “ would be obtained
with infinitely thin carbons and an infinitely short arc” (Ayrton, The Electric
Arc, 1902, 389). The engineer must weigh this ideal case against the tendency
for thin carbons to produce hissing arcs and bum out rapidly.
Ayrton’s book on the arc was well received. She presented a comprehensive
description and analysis of the direct-current arc and showed that her theories
would account for the findings of other observers. The book also included a
useful historical survey and bibliographies.
Her work led to improvements in the size, shape, and positioning of searchlight
carbons. Upon her recommendation the British Admiralty shaped carbon elec­
trodes to the form they would acquire during steady burning, thus decreasing
the time required for this to occur. She also designed improved carbons and
lamp houses for cinema projectors. Ayrton took out eight patents between 1913
and 1918 (Mather 1923).
Ayrton made original contributions to hydrodynamics in her studies of wave
motion and water vortices. She applied these results to air vortices in her invention
of the Ayrton fan. Her work was firmly rooted in the engineering tradition. She


22

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS
HERTHA MARKS AYRTON

was not motivated or guided by theoretical physical models or by questions of
broad theoretical significance. Her education had not prepared her for such an
approach. Ayrton’s concrete approach and analytical style suited her interests

and was appropriate for an engineer of her time. Perhaps her most lasting con­
tribution was to be a role model for other women and to open professional doors
a little wider for them.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Works by H ertba M arks A yrton
Scientific Works
“ The uses o f a line-divider.” PM 19 (1885): 280-285 (as S. Marks).
“ The electric arc.” El 34 (1894-1895): 3 3 5 -339, 364-368, 399-401, 4 7 1 -4 7 5 , 541—
545, 610-616; 35 (1895): 4 1 8 -4 2 1 ,6 3 5 -6 3 9 , 743-748; 36 (1895-1896): 3 6 -3 9 ,
225-228, 53 9 -542.
“ On the relations between arc curves and crater ratios with cored positive carbons.”
RBAAS 67 (1897): 575-577.
“ The drop o f potential at the carbons o f the electric arc.” RBAAS 68 (1898): 805-807.
“ The hissing o f the electric arc.” ER 44 (1899): 526-528, 56 7 -5 6 8 , 6 1 4 -6 1 6 , 657-658.
“ The hissing o f the electric arc.” JIEE 28 (1899): 400-430; discussion on 4 3 1 -4 3 5 ,
438-450.
“ The reason for the hissing o f the electric arc.” Nat 60 (1899): 282-286, 302-305.
“ The light emitted by the continuous current arc.” El 45 (1900): 9 2 1 -924, 9 6 6 -967.
The Electric Arc. ElPub, 1902.
Review: W .W ., ETZ 24 (1903): 14.
“ The mechanism o f the electric arc.” PTRSL A 199 (1902): 299-336.
“ Note on electric charging and discharging at a distance.” Nat 65 (1902): 390.
“ On the non-periodic or residual motion of water moving in stationary w aves.” ProRSL
A 80 (1908): 2 5 2 -260.
“ The origin and growth o f ripple-mark.” ProRSL A 84 (1910): 285-310.
Originally read in 1904.
“ Local differences o f pressure near an obstacle in oscillating water.” ProRSL A 91
(1915): 405-4 1 0 .
“ On a new method o f driving off poisonous gases.” ProRSL A 96 (1919-20): 249-256.

“ Primary and secondary vortices in oscillating fluids: Their connection with skin friction. ”
ProRSL A 113 (1926): 4 4 -4 5 .

Works about H ertha M arks Ayrton
Armstrong, H. E. “ Mrs. Hertha Ayrton.” Nat 112 (1923): 800-801.
“ Death of Mrs. Hertha Ayrton. A distinguished woman scientist” ; and “ Mrs. Ayrton.”
El 91 (1923): 227; 211.
El 58 (1906): 278.

23

Presentation o f the Hughes Medal to Mrs. Ayrton.

El 91 (1923): 469.
Bequest of Mrs. Ayrton, listed under “ Personal Items.”
Mason, J. “ Hertha Ayrton (1854-1923) and the admission o f women to the Royal Society
o f London.” NRRSL 45 (2) (1991): 201-220.
Received while this volume was in press.
Mather, T. “ Mrs. Hertha Ayrton.” Nat 112 (1923): 939.
Nat 75 (1906): 36.
Presentation o f the Hughes Medal to Mrs. Ayrton.
Sharp, E. Hertha Ayrton. A m , 1926.
Trotter, A. P. “ Mrs. Ayrton’s work on the electric arc.” Nat 113 (1924): 4 8 -4 9 .

Other References
Swinburne, A. C. “ Hertha.” In Century Readings for a Course in English Literature,
edited by J. W. Cunliffe, 899-901. Cen, 1917.


LAURA MARIA CATERINA BASSI

LAURA MARIA CATERINA BASSI
(1711-1778)
Marilyn Bailey Ogilvie

BIOGRAPHY
Laura Maria Caterina Bassi, the only child of Doctor Giuseppe Bassi, a legal
specialist (giuris-consulto), and Rosa (Cesari) Bassi was bom on October 29,
1711, in Bologna. The well-to-do respected Bassi family was associated with
powerful Bolognese clerical, intellectual, and social interests. The house where
Laura Bassi lived from birth to her marriage in 1732 was a popular gathering
place for Bologna’s intelligentsia (Comelli 1907, 203).
An only child surrounded by appreciative relatives and family friends, Bassi
had educational opportunities denied to most early-eighteenth-century girls. A
priest cousin taught her rudiments of Italian grammar and was amazed at her
precocious mastery of the subject. He introduced her to Latin, which she absorbed
easily. The family physician, Gaetano Tacconi, became involved in her education
after he visited the Bassi home to treat her ill mother.
Tacconi challenged the young girl to transcribe his verbal description of her
mother’s symptoms and proposed treatment into Latin and French. When he
returned on the following day, he was sufficiently impressed by the transcriptions
to ask her parents’ permission to tutor her. Her parents were at first opposed to
his proposition, but they were persuaded (Magnani 1806, 18). Tacconi preferred
to develop her talents in secret, requesting that her parents not mention her
accomplishments until he was satisfied with her progress (Comelli 1907, 204).
Although Tacconi was not paid by the family, his educational experiment was
its own reward. After seven years of teaching Bassi, he invited his colleagues
to examine the intelligent young woman using the traditional scholastic disputational form. Her responses were admirable. Tacconi was praised as a fine
teacher, and Bassi became a well-known curiosity. She performed on demand,
discussing and debating philosophical questions. Originally private, the sessions

soon became semipublic. The semipublic displays of her knowledge, which also
involved scientific experiments, convinced the academic scientists at the Institute
of Science to admit her to the Academy of Science (March 20, 1732).
Cardinal Lambertini (later Pope Benedict XIV) was a Bassi family friend who

25

insisted that Laura Bassi’s talents be made public. He arranged for the public
disputation in the Hall of the Elders. The day after Bassi had triumphantly endured
her two and one-half hour public disputation (April 17, 1732), Cardinal Lam­
bertini arrived at her house to inform her that she would be eligible for a doctorate
degree and a professorship at the university. The formal degree examination
before the entire college of philosophers and doctors at the Hall of the Institute
occurred about two weeks later (May 12, 1732). After the successful exami­
nation, she joined a procession of 18 carriages to proceed to the City Hall, where
she was invested with the silver crown, ring, and mantle of the doctor. With
the doctorate, Bassi became eligible for a professorship (Comelli 1907, 206214).
After a third disputation Bassi was awarded a professorship in philosophy
with an honorarium of 100 scudi annually and a medal with her portrait and a
motto. The three collections of poems written in her honor indicate that many
academicians, gentlemen, and ladies idolized her.
Six years after her first public disputation in 1732, Bassi married a young
physician, Giuseppe Verati (February 6, 1738). By this time Bassi had become
a public figure, making it difficult for her to have a private life. Complete
strangers had opinions about her marriage. Some insisted she would make better
use of her talents unmarried, while others disapproved because the bridegroom,
though a doctor and a public lecturer, was not of “ illustrious origin, renowned
wealth,” or a well-known scientist. The individuals who approved, believed
married life would be more convenient for a woman frequently exposed to
students, curious people, and foreign admirers. In spite of outside interference,

the marriage was successful.
Several secondary sources refer to Bassi and Verati as having 12 children
(see, for example, Hurd-Mead 1938; Koppel 1985; and Mozans 1974). Bassi
herself and the most reliable biographical sources confirm that she had five
children. However, it is possible that she lost numerous children either through
spontaneous abortions or in early infancy. In her letters to Dr. Flaminio Scarselli
she referred to numerous illnesses, including a reference to a miscarriage in 1742
(Bassi 1836, 15). The five surviving children were Giovanni (1738-1800), Ciro
(1744-1827), Giacomo (1743-1818), Caterina (1750-1767), and Paolo (1753—
1831). Paolo was the only child who continued his mother’s interest in science,
becoming a professor of physics at Bologna (Comelli 1907, 199).
The Catholic Church was important in Laura Bassi’s life. Canons and cardinals
encouraged her in her career. Without the assistance of Cardinal Lambertini,
Bassi would probably not have been able to attain her degree or professorship.
The Church’s influence extended to her progeny, for two of her five children,
Giovanni and Giacomo, took holy orders, with Giovanni becoming a professor
of theology and sacred scripture. Throughout her letters she refers to the im­
portance of the Church to her career.
Bassi’s admirers stressed her ability to manage her home and family life
successfully while pursuing her academic interests. Her politically powerful


26

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

friend, Scarselli, published Bassi’s letters to him. Models of simplicity and
stylistic elegance, the letters illustrate how Bassi was able to separate her studies
of letters and philosophy from her cares as hardworking mother and wife. Bassi
herself, however, implies that the dual claims of family and profession were not

easy and may have been a strain on her health.
Bassi seems to have been in ill health during much of her life. Writing to
Scarselli, she referred to various “ domestic diseases” that did not allow her to
go out (see, for example, Bassi 1836, 20; 31; 34). The actual cause of her death
is not recorded. After she died at age 67, her statue was placed in the Institute
at Bologna.

WORK
Bassi the child prodigy became an adult polymath. Tacconi had trained her
in the philosophical tradition that had produced illustrious scholars in physical
science and medicine—both considered branches of philosophy—mathematics,
and letters. For the public disputation that resulted in her doctorate, Bassi debated
49 theses: 6 on logic, 16 on metaphysics, 18 on physics, and 9 on De anima
(Comelli 1907, 210). The form of the debate may have been Aristotelian, but
the subject and the method reflected both Cartesian and Newtonian ideas. One
of the questions raised during the debate elicited a very Newtonian answer.
Mathematician Gabriele Manfredi raised a question on an obscure point in the
theory of optical reflection of bodies. Bassi answered with a brief and well
thought out exposition of Newton’s theory on light and color (Comelli 1907

211).
Bassi’s broad training carried over to her teaching and research at the uni­
versity. Although the name Domina Laura Maria Caterina Bassi appears for the
first time in the 1732-33 yearbook of the University of Bologna, she was ex­
empted from her assigned lecture in universam philosophiam “ in respect to her
fair sex.” Her position was definitely different from that of her male colleagues.
Only if requested by high officials could she lecture publicly. On the rare oc­
casions where such a request was made, she appeared wearing her ermine doctoral
mantle. During a public disputation of February 13, 1734, she was asked to
argue against a lesson de oculo (on the eye) that was to be held by the anatomist

Domenico Gusmano Galeazzi, physicist Luigi Galvani’s future father-in-law.
The debate was well attended (Comelli 1907, 219).
Because of the hesitation of the Bolognese professors to allow a woman to
give lectures on a regular basis at the university and her own need to attend to
family responsibilities, most of Bassi’s teaching and research took place at her
house. Bassi’s own letters indicate that this arrangement was not entirely sat­
isfactory. She complained to Scarselli that when she had originally agreed to do
the lectures and experiments in her home, she had planned to work with only a
few young people. As word spread, her classes expanded so that she did not
have enough equipment for all her students. When she had only a few students,

LAURA MARIA CATERINA BASSI

27

she was able to use apparatus constructed by her husband and other donated
supplies; but as the numbers increased, she found that she had spent over 400
scudi of her own. Recognizing that she would be unable to continue her personal
outlay and that she probably would be unable to get financial support through
usual university channels, Bassi asked Scarselli to intervene with the Principe
supremo on her behalf (Bassi 1836, 40). We do not know if she was successful,
but her letters showed her ability to solicit help from friends when she was unable
to succeed through usual channels. Bassi also implied that the Institute at Bologna
lagged behind other universities in recognizing the importance of experimental
physics. Courses in experimental physics were not offered by anyone at the
institute, which was why she originally agreed to “ serve the public” by instituting
the courses in her house (Bassi 1836, 40).
Published material about her research from colleagues and two of her published
papers are available in the Commentaries of the Bologna Institute, providing
information about the kind of research in physics she was undertaking. Bassi’s

research encompassed both experimental and mathematical physics. A col­
league’s commentary discussed her experiments on atmospheric pressure per­
formed in order to confirm the ideal ratios proposed by Robert Boyle in his Jtube experiment. Bassi poured mercury into the tube, assuring that its level was
the same in both arms of the tube. She found that under differing conditions
(temperature, humidity, and barometric pressure) she had to add different
amounts of mercury to compress the air in the closed arm of the tube a given
amount. She did not find the relationship between pressure and volume expected
from Boyle’s law.
Bassi then embarked on a series of experiments to test the law. On a rainy
fall day when the temperature was warmer than usual and the barometer stood
at 27 inches plus 1 line (1 inch = 12 lines), she poured a “ double weight” of
mercury into the open arm of the tube. Apparently Bassi, like Boyle, doubled
the weight by doubling the height of the mercury, thus forcing the mercury
further up the closed arm of the tube. It should be noted, however, that probably
neither Bassi nor Boyle took into account the expansion of mercury or changes
in the barometric pressure with temperature changes. In this particular experi­
ment, she found that the double weight was not enough to compress the air by
half. In order to compress the air by half, she had to add 11 additional lines of
mercury. Later in the year she repeated the experiment on a more humid day,
when the temperature was only slightly above freezing. This time, in order to
compress the air by half she had to add an additional inch to the double weight.
A few days later she found she could only compress the air by half by adding
the double weight plus nine lines. On this day, the barometer stood at 28 inches
plus two lines. Although much smaller in this experiment than in the previous
trials, a deviation remained.
Bassi was disturbed that she had not observed experimentally the predicted
mathematical relationship. Again, it should be noted that since she never actually
weighed the mercury, she did not observe the change in its density with tern-

28

WOMEN IN CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS

perature. Each time she performed the experiment, she checked barometric pres­
sure, temperature, and humidity but did not consider their effects on the com­
pressibility of the air. Although she was unable to come up with the ‘‘correct’’
relationship, she refrained from saying that the “ physicists” were wrong. She
concluded that these other factors could confuse their measurements and mimic
the law they were trying to prove. She merely noted that her experimental
evidence did not support the theory (“ De aeris compressione,” 1745, 247-353).
Although in the J-tube problem Bassi proceeded as an experimental physicist,
her two published papers involved mathematical physics. In one case, she de­
termined the volume of water in vessels of different shapes through mathematical
rather than experimental methods (Bassi 1757, 61-73). In the second, she ap­
proached a mechanical problem—the location of the center of gravity—by geo­
metrical techniques. She represented the bodies by curved lines and was
concerned with the center of gravity of both a motionless object and an object
in motion (Bassi 1757, 74-79).
Much of Bassi’s teaching occurred at home, where she was able to attend to
her growing family when needed. She offered well-attended daily courses in
experimental physics. Two French visitors to Bologna, Joseph-Jerome Le Francaise de Lalande (1732-1807) and Charles de Brasses (1709-1777) described
their perceptions of the situation. Lalande explained that Bassi had filled her
professorial position with distinction. He went to her home to attend experiments
prepared for her courses in experimental physics.
De Brasses also attended Bassi’s classes and noted that occasionally she
presented public lectures wearing her robe and ermine mantle. These appearances
were uncommon, for “ it was not judged decent for a woman to show the hidden
things of nature every day to everyone who came” (Comelli 1907, 222). To
compensate for her lack of public appearances, periodic philosophical confer­

ences were held in the Bassi-Verati home. De Brasses attended one such meeting
and found that he had to resort to his old Latin to give a dissertation on the
magnet and on the attraction of electrical bodies.
Bassi occasionally appeared at the Academy of Science, where she twice
presented memoirs (“ De problemate quodam hydrometrico” and “ De problemate quodam mechanico” ). She received deferential letters from Francois-Marie
Arouet de Voltaire and visits from scientific and political dignitaries. She also
maintained scientific correspondence with many contemporary mathematicians,
physicists, and naturalists.
Some of Bassi’s letters to Scarselli indirectly indicate that not all of her
colleagues at the university were ecstatic over her presence. For example, she
noted that both she and her husband had missed a new organizational session
established by Benedictine academics. She speculated that even if she had been
able to attend, she might not have been allowed to vote. She appealed to Scarselli
to determine her status within the organization, asking him to write to the
anatomist Galeazzi and to “ proceed with caution” (Bassi 1836, 29). Scarselli

LAURA MARIA CATERINA BASSI

29

wrote to Galeazzi, who proceeded to “ enlighten” the minds of the academics
(Bassi 1836, 30).
In another example, Bassi indicated additional difficulties with colleagues.
Twenty pensionari were nominated each year to give dissertations. To be nom­
inated was an honor. Bassi knew that she had not been selected but hesitated to
apply pressure, for she knew that since only 20 people could be nominated, her
selection would have meant the exclusion of another nominee. However, she
proposed a diplomatic solution to Scarselli, suggesting that she, as a part of the
university, be selected as a supernumerary member (Bassi 1836, 30). Throughout
the letters, Bassi implied that she encountered numerous obstacles because of

gender. She dealt with these problems through diplomacy.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Works by Laura Maria Caterina Bassi
Scientific Works
“ De problemate quodam hydrometrico.” Bono 4 (1757): 6 1-73.
“ De problemate quodam mechanico.” Bono 4 (1757): 7 4 -7 9 .

Other Works
Alcune lettere di Laura Bassi Veratti al Dottor Flaminio Scarselli. Bologna: Tipi della
volpe al sassi, 1836.
Excellent primary source.

Works about Laura Maria Caterina Bassi
Comelli, G. B. “ Laura Bassi e il suo primo trionfo.” In Studi e memorie per la storia
dell’ Uneversita a di Bologna. UB, 1907.
The most reliable biographical source for Bassi.
“ De aeris compressione.” Bono 2 (1745): 347-353.
Description o f Bassi’s experiments on the compression o f the air by a contem­
porary. Author’s name is not given.
Hurd-Mead, K. C. A History of Women in Medicine: From the Earliest Times to the
Beginning of the Nineteenth Century. HP, 1938.
Includes biographical information, but often inaccurate.
Koppel, A. P. “ Frauen in der Naturwissenschaft.” FS 4 (May 1985): 118-119.
Magnani, A. Elogio di Laura Bassi Bolognese. StP, 1806.
Mozans, H. J. (pseudonym for John Augustine Zahm). Women in Science. AppCo, 1913.
Reprint. MITC, 1974.


RUTH MARY ROGAN BENERITO

RUTH MARY ROGAN BENERITO (1 9 1 6 -

)

Jane A. Miller

BIOGRAPHY
Ruth Mary Rogan was bom on January 12, 1916, in New Orleans, Louisiana,
the daughter of Bernadette (Elizardi) and John Edward Rogan. Her father was
a civil engineer and railroad official; her mother, an artist who was active in
civic and philanthropic projects. Both were college graduates. Rogan describes
her father as a “ pioneer in women’s liberation” with a great respect and ap­
preciation of the innate abilities of women; her mother as a truly liberated woman,
who allowed her children much freedom. Rogan was the third of six children,
John Edward, Jr., Bernadette, Elizabeth, Daniel, and William David.
Rogan received her education in the New Orleans Public Schools, graduating
from high school at 14 with an intense interest in science and mathematics.
Because of her age, Rogan waited a year before entering Sophie Newcomb
College, the women’s college of Tulane University. She chose to major in
chemistry, minoring in physics and mathematics. She graduated in 1935 with a
B.S. degree and spent one year of graduate study, on a scholarship, at Bryn
Mawr. She resented the compulsory dormitory environment and had difficulty
with the foreign language requirements.
In the midst of the Depression, there was no employment available in New
Orleans on her return, and for a year Rogan served as an unpaid laboratory
technician at the Charity Hospital, hoping to become a medical technician. She
then spent a year in social work, certifying people for the WPA, and was finally
hired by the Jefferson Parish Public Schools to teach science and mathematics
courses at the high school. Part of her responsibility was to teach safety and

driver’s education, which necessitated a crash course in learning to drive an
automobile.
After school each day Rogan studied with Rose Mooney, an outstanding
physicist and X-ray crystallographer, at Newcomb, and in 1938 she was awarded
an M.S. degree from Tulane University. From 1940 until 1943 she taught at
Randolph Macon Woman’s College. Returning to New Orleans in 1943, she
joined the faculty of Newcomb to teach physical chemistry. The women’s col­

31

leges provided generally excellent training as well as an academic home for
women scholars that was denied them at other institutions.
During the summers and a leave, Rogan studied at the University of Chicago,
receiving her Ph.D. degree in 1948 under Thomas F. Young. During these war
years most of the graduate students at Chicago were working on secret projects
at Argonne Laboratories. However, because of her teaching position in New
Orleans, Rogan chose to do research in physical chemistry.
She was promoted to assistant professor at Newcomb, and in 1950 she married
Frank H. Benerito, who was in the automobile business. She was widowed in
1970.
In 1953 Benerito left Newcomb College to go to the Southern Regional Re­
search Center of the USD A as a physical chemist in the Intravenous Fat Program
of the Oilseed Laboratory. The four USD A laboratories were founded in 1940
to do research on local products and to find additional uses for agricultural crops,
with the New Orleans laboratory concentrating on cotton. In 1955 she became
project leader in the Intravenous Fat Program; in 1958 she was promoted to
acting head of the Colloid Cotton Chemical Laboratory; and in 1959 she became
research leader of the Physical Chemistry Research Group of the Cotton Reaction
Laboratory.
In 1972 Benerito did postdoctoral research in biophysics at Tulane University

Medical School. She served as adjunct professor at Tulane University from 1960,
in the Graduate School and the Medical School, and as lecturer at the University
of New Orleans from 1981. In 1986 she retired from government service.
Benerito has received many honors and awards from the government and from
professional associations. In 1970 she received the Garvan Medal for the out­
standing woman chemist from the ACS. She also was given the ACS Southern
Chemist Award (1968) and the ACS Southwest Chemist Award (1971). She has
twice received the USDA Distinguished Service Award (1964, 1970) and was
selected as Outstanding Federal Employee in Greater New Orleans in the profes­
sional and scientific category. She was given the Federal Woman’s Award in
1968, which recognizes distinguished service by women in all branches of federal
service. She was elected to honorary membership in Delta Kappa Gamma, the
international teaching sorority, and to Iota Sigma Pi, the National Honor Society
for Women Chemists. She was also named by the Ladies Home Journal as one
of the 75 most important women in the United States, as well as honored as a
woman of achievement at the 1984 World’s Fair. In 1981 Tulane University
awarded Benerito an honorary D. Sc.

WORK
Benerito’s major contributions to chemistry were made at the Southern Re­
search Laboratory in the physical chemistry of surfaces and colloids and the
practical applications of these studies.
She first worked on a project to develop an intravenous fat emulsion for the