[23] Op. cit. (footnote 8).
[ [24] The German word Kette has been translated as “circuit” throughout. Although the equivalence of these words is clear, for example, in Ohm’s work of 1826, the context in which Kette is sometimes used in 1820 and 1821 indicates that the concept of a “circuit,” in the sense of the wiring external to the source of electricity, has not been established. The wiring is regarded more as something incidental, used to “close” the cell, the cell being considered essentially the whole of the apparatus. This view underlies the many attempts to correlate the Oersted phenomena with cell materials and design, and with the use of such terms as “chemical magnetism” by Erman and others.
[25] The reference here is to the Oersted-type experiments described in two papers by authors other than Schweigger on pages 19 to 34 of the volume.
[26] Op. cit. (footnote 19), pp. 422-426.
[27] One “line” seems to have been about 1/12 inch.
[28] J. G. Poggendorf, “Physisch-chemische Untersuchungen zur näheren Kenntniss des Magnetismus der voltaischen Säule,” Isis von Oken (1821), vol. 8, pp. 687-710. Most of Poggendorf’s numerical data is also in C. H. Pfaff, Der Elektromagnetismus (Hamburg, 1824), along with some of Pfaff’s own work.
[29] Reported in Annales de Chimie et de Physique (1820), vol. 15, pp. 222-223.
[30] “On the Development of Electro-Magnetism by Heat,” Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society (1823), vol. 2, pp. 47-76.
[31] “Account of the New Galvano-Magnetic Condenser invented by M. Poggendorf of Berlin,” Edinburgh Philosophical Journal (July 1821), vol. 5, pp. 112-113.