One of the great pioneers in experimental petrology, Norman Levi Bowen bridged geology and physical chemistry. Trained at Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, where he received prizes in both mineralogy and chemistry, he then studied under Reginald A. Daly at MIT. On the advice of T. A. Jaggar and with the encouragement of C. H. Warren of MIT, he undertook an experimental thesis study on the nepheline-anorthite system at the Geophysical Laboratory on the suggestion of its director, A. L. Day. Bowen was the first Predoctoral Fellow of the Laboratory. The results were accepted by MIT as partial fulfillment of the Ph. D. degree in 1912, the third Ph. D. degree to be issued by their Department of Geology. By the end of 1912, Bowen had six field seasons and eight publications to his credit. Within the next three years he laid out the physicochemical methodology for the solution of problems in igneous petrology in "The later stages of the evolution of the igneous rocks." The greatness of Norman Levi Bowen stems from his clear exposition of physicochemical principles and their application to major complex geological field problems.
 

INTRODUCTION

TOP Introduction The Thesis Problem... Staff Member at GL.... The Quiet Man Acknowledgments References Endnotes

In the beginning, the tools used by geologists to solve field problems included a hammer, compass, hand lens, boots, and notebook (Fig. 1). In addition, they needed the skills of deductive reasoning, three-dimensional perception, imagination, and inventiveness only rarely demonstrated by other basic scientists infrequently exposed to the myriad of variables in natural geologic processes. At the end of the summer of 1909, however, a young man by the name of Norman Levi Bowen came out of the Canadian Bush (Fig. 2) destined to bring a new approach to the solution of petrological field problems.
 
 

Figure 1. Cover photograph of the paperback edition of "Memoirs of an unrepentant field geologist" by F. J. Pettijohn, a colleague of N. L. Bowen when he was at the University of Chicago. Published with permission of the University of Chicago Press and Prof Pettijohn.

Figure 2. Bowen (second from right) with geological field party in Ontario, Canada, 1907-1909.

Figure 3. Norman Levi Bowen, graduation photograph from Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada in 1909.

Bowen was trained in both geology and chemistry at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, his birth place [2] (Fig. 3). As the winner of an 1851 Exhibition Scholarship, he cast about for a place to do graduate studies. His eyes first turned abroad as was then the custom. Prof J. H. L. Vogt (1903) had produced in Norway, a few years before, the book "Die Silikatschmelzlosungen," which was an application of physicochemical principles developed in the investigations of slags to the problems of igneous differentiation.[3] Bowen was also pulled toward Norway by Dr. W. C. Brogger because of his physicochemical deductions from studies on the rocks of the Oslo Fjord region. Unfortunately, Vogt listed many reasons, including the language barrier, why Bowen should not come to Norway, and Brogger was too busy with his legislative duties in the Storthing (Bowen, 1942, p. 85). Bowen got the message that he was not wanted, and looked south for help from his fellow Canadian, the sparkling Reginald A. Daly at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It was from this inspiring teacher and while assisting him in the field, that Bowen received his title "Daly bred."

Others of great accomplishment at MIT also modeled Bowen's thinking: Warren, Shimer, Loughlin, Lindgren and Jaggar taught geology and Noyes, Lewis and Bray provided instruction for a minor in chemistry. It was probably Charles H. Warren (Shrock, 1982, pp. 514, 516, 527, 570) who imbued Bowen with the philosophical ground work for applying the principles of physical chemistry to mineralogical and petrological problems.

 Near the close of Bowen's first year at MIT, in April 1910, Prof. T. A. Jaggar, then Departmental Chairman, advised Bowen of an opening for a research student at the Geophysical Laboratory, established only a few years before in Washington, D. C. Bowen wrote to the Director, Dr. Arthur L. Day, of his interest in the position on 11 April 1910. Bowen said:

I would like to have some idea of the choice of subjects which you believe one with my lack of experience could attempt under your guidance. At present I can propose no problem of my own along the lines upon which you work, but it is possible that my field work this summer might suggest such a problem.[4]

Bowen replied on 23 April 1910 that he had studied the differentiation in some diabase sills in northern Ontario. Two papers were to be published in 1910 on the association of diabase and granophyre (Bowen, 1910a, b), an association that was to remain a major concern throughout the rest of his life's work. In addition, he had considerable experience in chemical analytical work, and had two years of undergraduate physics, in which he had measured some physical properties -- of which he said he "remembered very little of it now." His letter included statements regarding a "fair acquaintance" with microscopic petrography and a "fair amount" of physical chemistry, and added that he was currently attending a seminar on the Phase Rule. His letter closed with a request for a full understanding that he be allowed to use any results obtained at the Geophysical Laboratory as a thesis for his Ph.D. degree. Day responded that his "equipment appears to be well adapted" for the work they had in mind. Bowen thereby became the first predoctoral fellow of the Geophysical Laboratory.

The discussion of the problem to be investigated by Bowen was restricted by Day (Letter to Bowen, 2 May 1910) to the relations between a pair of minerals. The first suggestion of Day was enstatite-anorthite, but Day alluded to the fact that some difficult complications with diopside might arise.[5] He, therefore, offered a second suggestion -- one that may reasonably be completed in a year's time -- the system nepheline-anorthite. Incidentally, Iddings of CIPW (Cross-Iddings-Pirsson-Washington) fame, had been pressing the Laboratory to study the so-called "nephelite problem." With his thesis problem defined, Bowen arrived at the Laboratory on 1 October 1910 at the end of his field season with the Ontario Bureau of Mines.
 

THE THESIS PROBLEM: NEPHELINE-ANORTHITE

TOP Introduction The Thesis Problem... Staff Member at GL... The Quiet Man Acknowledgments References Endnotes

In 1910, most of the phase equilibria techniques used today were only then being devised. The electric furnaces were driven by a large number of wet battery cells and temperature control was achieved by a very large street-car-type set of resistor coils (Fig. 4), operated in a standing position in much the same way as a street-car motorman. An eight-hour run, needless to say, was a chore. The platinum thermocouple element was dipped directly in the charge and the EMF measured. The EMF calibration of the platinum-platinum 10% rhodium thermocouple had just been completed by L. H. Adams, published later in 1914, by comparison with the nitrogen-gas thermometer scale of Day, Sosman and Allen (1911). That absolute thermodynamic temperature scale is still used today at the Geophysical Laboratory. Bowen initially followed the heating curve method used by Day, Allen and Iddings (1905)[6] for determining the liquidus of the plagioclase system, but because of kinetic problems, only the general form of the diagram could be outlined. He turned, therefore, to the quenching method, just devised by Shepherd, Rankin and Wright (1909), in which a small packet of a mixture of the end members is held at constant temperature and then let fall into a dish of mercury below the vertically-oriented furnace. The abrupt chilling fixes the kind and composition of the phases grown at the high temperature. In this way, the limits for the stability fields of the phases could be worked out by making a series of runs at various temperatures for each mixture.

Figure 4. Laboratory of A. L. Day and R. B. Sosman at the Geophysical Laboratory in 1911. The bank of resistors for controlling the temperature of an electrical furnace is in the lower left-hand corner of the photograph.

The summary diagram of Bowen's 55 quenching experiments on 17 different mixtures of the endmembers is given in Fig. 5. The system has since been restudied by Schairer (unpublished data, 1940; 1957c, p. 232), Gummer (1943), and Goldsmith (1947), and the only change is the addition of a small field of beta-Al2O3, over the eutectic. Bowen had attributed its appearance to the volatization of Na from the charge at the high temperatures. The diagram was the first-found example in silicates of solid solution combined with enantiotropism, proposed on theoretical grounds by H. W. Bakhuis Roozeboom.

Figure 5. The system Na2Al2Si2O8 (nephelite, carnegieite)-CaAl2Si2O8 (anorthite) studied by Bowen at the Geophysical Laboratory and submitted as partial fulfillment of the Ph. D. degree from MIT in 1912.

Bowen presented his results to the Petrologist's Club members on 16 May 1911 in the customary meeting place, the home of Whitman Cross. Membership was restricted to 45 and it is amusing to note that Bowen's name[7] [7] on the roster of illustrious attendees appears as Normal S. Bowen. His nick name was actually "Ham," usually attributed to ham bone, but in reality derived from his father's Welsh pronunciation of the name "Harmon" that appeared on his Sunday School report card (Goldsmith, 1991).

In the summer of 1911, Bowen was off in the bush again as assistant to Prof. R. A. Daly surveying the Shuswap Sheet along the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway in British Columbia under the auspices of the Geological Survey of Canada. But his mind was apparently not wholly on the rocks because at the end of the field season he married Mary Lamont on 3 October 1911. It was indeed unusual at that time for young people to marry while one was still in school. A picture of the young couple (Fig. 6) was taken at a luncheon outing on the Fenway, Boston, Massachusetts. It was the custom for young ladies from Prince Edward Island to train as nurses in Boston, but Mary Lamont had set her sights higher and had gone on to get her Doctorate of Medicine on 7 June 1911 at the College of Physicians and Surgeons.[8]

Figure 6. Informal photograph of Bowen (far left) and Mary Lamont (far right) at the Fenway in Boston, MA, in 1911.

Bowen's thesis was written very quickly and a copy was sent to Dr. Day for critical review in February of 1912. With only the reprimand that he had not given sufficient detail to persuade the uninitiated, the paper received very high praise. He also managed to write up his ideas on "The order of crystallization in igneous rocks" for publication (1912) in the Journal of Geology, the prelude of important concepts to come. An anecdote of Bowen's defense of his thesis is recorded by R. E. Gibson (1984, p. 226). A distinguished geologist started the procedure by asking "Mr. Bowen, will you describe to us the origin of igneous rocks." Bowen replied looking the examiners in the eyes, "Gentlemen, do you wish me to give the answer I know you want, or do you wish me to give what I think is the right answer?" The oral examination thereafter became a monologue by Bowen. At the commencement exercises on 4 June 1912 Bowen (Fig. 7) received his diploma[9] from MIT. Bowen's thesis was quickly accepted for publication by the American Journal of Science (1912).

Figure 7. Diploma for the Ph. D. degree awarded Bowen by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on 4 June 1912.

STAFF MEMBER AT THE GEOPHYSICAL LABORATORY

TOP Introduction The Thesis Problem... Staff Member at GL... The Quiet Man Acknowledgments References Endnotes

Today most students usually have to hunt for a job after graduation, but in those days there were many opportunities for geologists. Daly proposed (letter from Daly to F. E. Wright, 10 March 1912) that Bowen serve as Jaggar's assistant at the Volcano Observatory in Hawaii; Lindgren thought he ought to take a post in economic geology at Tucson; and there were openings in the Geological Survey of Canada (Bowen, 1942, p. 86). But it was the opportunity as a staff member at the Geophysical Laboratory that fully satisfied his wish to do both geology and chemistry. The multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approach to geological problems, the high degree of cooperation among staff members, and the complete scientific freedom to follow his own interests, plus the full financial support for equipment and field work, could not be matched anywhere in the world. (That is not a commercial-just a statement of facts.) After another field season, now in charge of his own party in British Columbia, Bowen arrived at the Geophysical Laboratory on 1 September 1912 to continue his illustrious career.

The colleagues of Bowen at the Geophysical Laboratory were already well known to the geological community. In Figure 8, Bowen is shown at the far right with Drs. F. E. Wright and E. S. Shepherd who guided him through his thesis study.

Figure 8. Photograph of the staff of the Geophysical Laboratory taken in 1921. Bowen is seated on the far right. Standing to his left is E. S. Shepherd and seated to his right is F. E. Wright. Both sponsored Bowen's thesis study. Front row, left to right: H. E. Merwin, L. H. Adams, C. Fenner, W. P. White, R. B. Sosman, A. L. Day, H. S. Washington, E. T. Allen, F. E. Wright, N. L. Bowen. Back row, left to right: E. G. Zies, R. H. Lombard, G. W. Morey, R. W. G. Wyckoff, F. H. Smyth, E. Posnjak, M. Aurousseau, E. D. Williamson, H. S. Roberts, E. S. Shepherd.

Bowen's genius was recognized within the short time of three years with the publication of his 1915 article on "The later stages of the evolution of the igneous rocks." In it he argued that basalt was the primary magma, that most, if not all igneous rocks, were derived from basaltic magma by crystal differentiation, that assimilation as espoused by Daly was unimportant and produced compositions never found in an igneous series, that the Soret effect was quite negligible, and that the experimental evidence was against liquid immiscibility. In addition, he laid out the reasons for monomineralic rocks (e.g., anorthosites and dunites), explained the meaning of chilled border phases, listed the order of crystallization of phases, and advanced the role of volatiles in the generation of the alkaline rocks. There were additional important concepts-all laid out before the age of 28.

Because of the broad implication of Bowen's grand fractionation plan for igneous rocks, devastating to the then current model of eutectics for each rock type, his paper was the sole subject for discussion at the 41st meeting of the Petrologist's Club on 18 January 1916. Thirty-nine members were present and fortunately R. B. Sosman recorded notes[10] of the vigorous debate. Some members were willing to accept differentiation in small rock units, but hesitated to extend the explanation to the larger problem of igneous sequences. The volatile constituents were called upon by others to be the major factor. H. S. Washington pointed out the complete absence of any differentiation over long periods of eruption of siliceous volcanoes. J. P. Iddings thought most igneous rocks had arrived in place in a wholly liquid condition and therefore derivation by the separation of crystals was not possible. Furthermore, the prevailing rock in South America was andesite whereas basalt was of minor abundance. E. S. Bastin noted the complete absence of contemporaneous basalts with some granites of Maine. Others who challenged Bowen's proposals were described by Sosman as betraying "a certain conservatism and lack of imagination." C. N. Fenner, later Bowen's severest critic, was silent. On the other hand, Bowen did get some reinforcement from the field observations cited by B. S. Butler, G. F. Loughlin, and F. E. Wright. In short, Bowen's proposals for accounting for the diversity of igneous rocks did not meet with immediate enthusiastic approval by his peer group. Nevertheless, his views were accepted internationally in the following years, recorded in some forty papers later, especially after the presentation of his masterful set of summary lectures at Princeton published in 1928 under the title of "The evolution of the igneous rocks." (The Princeton University Press apparently thought it a risky venture and published only 550 copies!) Reviews of each chapter of his book fifty years later (Yoder, 1979) revealed the extent of his prejudice for crystal differentiation, but confirmed the soundness of his methodology in applying physicochemical theory to the formation of igneous rocks.
 

THE QUIET MAN

TOP Introduction The Thesis Problem... Staff Member at GL... The Quiet Man Acknowledgments References Endnotes

Most readers are no doubt well acquainted with Bowen's subsequent works and meteoric rise to fame (Schairer, 1957a, b; Tilley, 1957; Buddington, 1960; Schneer, 1980; Eugster, 1980), but the man himself was known intimately by only a few colleagues. He was held in such awe and great respect that few (e.g., J. F. Schairer and J. R. Goldsmith) ventured a close relationship. He was a quiet, gentle man of small stature (5 feet six inches, Bowen, 1951) with a droll sense of humor. His personal copy of his 1928 book is inscribed "To Dr. N. L. Bowen with the regards of N. L. Bowen." At the back of his copy are attached some 20 reviews. With Daly's review is included an advertisement for "Gypsy Rickwood's Fortune-Telling Book." On a few papers he appended "Bowen thinxit" as a play on the signature on the paintings of early masters (e.g., Rubens pinxit). Bowen told the story on one occasion of a friend, mindful of Bowen's reserved manner, who wanted to introduce him to an important official. His friend, Professor X, wanted to make the introductions just so he could witness the look of disappointment on the official's face.

After presenting a phase equilibria paper at the 1948 Spring meeting of the American Geophysical Union, he wrote the following letter to Prof. James Gilluly, under the official Geophysical Laboratory letterhead:

 Some readers may also recall the delightful discussion on the origin of granites in which Bowen described the metasomatizers as the "soaks" who had to have their liquor in lavish quantities whereas the pontiffs, the magmatists, handled their liquor like gentlemen, taking it or leaving it as the occasion indicates.

 Bowen was modest and retiring, preferring to sit in the back of the room with the young fellows rather than up front with the old duffers. He even sat at the foot of the luncheon table at the Laboratory when Dr. Day was present (Gibson, 1984, p. 150). He would rarely answer questions immediately. Several days might go by before he would appear and lay out a logical set of ideas with great clarity.

 Bowen resigned from the staff of the Geophysical Laboratory on 1 October 1937. According to Pettijohn (1984, p. 188), the reason Bowen gave for leaving[11] was "to introduce experimental petrology, especially the body of knowledge generated by the subject, into the universities." His lectures at the University of Chicago, where he taught for ten years (1937-1946), were prepared with great care. They were rehearsed in the very early morning hours in the hall prior to delivery without notes. The delivery was something else. Facing the blackboard, drawing the triangles and other geometric relations with difficulty and speaking in a low voice, he presented his few petrology students with a dilemma. By sitting at both ends of the front row and taking copious notes, the students managed to record the classics in petrology he generated (Statements of Yoder quoted in Anonymous, 1990, pp. 12-13).

 For two years, Bowen also served as head of department, but disliked the job immensely (personal communication from D. J. Fisher, 1963). Nevertheless, he was successful in extracting funds from the Administration for equipment long-sought by the staff (Fig. 9). His own laboratory was minimal, and consisted of two quenching furnaces and one making furnace (Fig. 10). The difficulty of obtaining additional funds for experimental research and the burdensome administrative duties essentially drove him back to the Geophysical Laboratory. There he was a happy man (Fig. 11) working mainly with the indefatigable J. F. Schairer and other colleagues. Five of the 20 most cited papers from earth-sciences journals covered in the 1945-1954 Science Citation Index were written by Bowen with his colleagues J. F. Schairer or O. F. Tuttle (Brush, 1990, p. 13). All in all, he spent 30 years on the staff of the Geophysical Laboratory.
 
 

Figure 9. Photograph of the staff of the Department of Geology, University of Chicago in 1941. Bowen, second from the right in the front row, became chairman of the department on the retirement of E. S. Bastin, to his right, in 1944. Front row, left to right: W. C. Krumbein, E. C. Olson, E. S. Bastin, N. L. Bowen, C. Croneis. Back row, left to right: F. J. Pettijohn, P. C. Miller, R. T. Chamberlin, J. H. Bretz, D. J. Fisher.

Figure 10. Photograph of Bowen's laboratory in Rosenwald Hall, University of Chicago, 1946.

Figure 11. Photograph of Bowen preparing a phase diagram at his drafting table in the Geophysical Laboratory taken on the day in 1949 he learned of his election to Foreign Membership in the Royal Society.

Figure 12. Dr. and Mrs. Bowen in front of the Azalea hedge (Kurume hybrids brought from Japan to the U.S. by A. L. Day about 1912) on the front lawn of the Geophysical Laboratory at the time of his retirement in 1952.

The mandatory retirement of Bowen in 1952 (Fig. 12) was a mistake, and one year in Clearwater, Florida, led to its correction.[12] With the encouragement of his colleagues, he returned as a Research Associate to the Geophysical Laboratory, but was depressed. The end came on 11 September 1956, and his ashes were strewn on the Laboratory's grounds near his favorite gum tree.

 At his memorial service Mrs. Bowen remarked that it was a shame he was not given his roses when he could smell them. Nothing could be further from the truth as his lists of medals, awards, honorary degrees, presidencies, honorary memberships, and book dedications attest (Table 1). He was indeed honored around the world.
 

• 1907 Medal in Chemistry, Queen's University
• 1907 Medal in Mineralogy, Queen's University
• 1910 1851 Exhibition Scholar, Queen's University
• 1031 Bigsby Medal, Geological Society of London
• 1941 Penrose Medal, Geological Society of America
• 1943 Miller Medal, Royal Society of Canada
• 1950 Roebling Medal, Mineralogical Society of America
• 1950 Wollaston Medal, Geological Society of London
• 1953 Hayden Medal, Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia
• 1954 Bakhuis Roozeboom Medal, Royal Netherlands Academy

• 1936 Sc. D., Harvard Tercentenary
• 1941 LL. D., Queen's University 1951 Sc. D., Yale University

• 1937 Mineralogical Society of America
• 1946 Geological Society of America

• 1921 American Academy of Arts and Sciences
• 1930 American Philosophical Society
• 1934 Indian Academy of Sciences
• 1935 National Academy of Sciences
• 1936 Akademie der Naturforscher, Halle
• 1937 Foreign Member, Geological Society of London
• 1937 Societe geologique de Belgique, Liege
• 1937 All-Russian Mineralogical Society, Leningrad
• 1947 Finland Academy of Sciences
• 1949 Foreign Member, Royal Society of Great Britain
• 1951 Academie Lincei of Rome

• 1952 Bowen Volume, American Journal of Science
• 1979 The Evolution of the Igneous Rocks; Fiftieth Anniversary Perspectives, Princeton Press

The greatness of Bowen arose from his clarity of presentation of simple physicochemical concepts and their application to complex geological field problems. If one may invert James Hutton's prophetic words of 1795, Bowen did "judge of the great operations of the mineral kingdom, from having kindled a fire, and looked into the bottom of a little crucible."

 The Queen's University Department of Geology (now Department of Geological Sciences) and the MIT Department of Geology (now Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences) can be justly proud of having guided and nurtured this great mind, and the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution of Washington may be congratulated for providing the opportunities for it to flourish.
 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

TOP Introduction The Thesis Problem... Staff Member at GL... The Quiet Man Acknowledgments References Endnotes

It is a pleasure to thank Profs. T. H. Jordan and T. L. Grove for the opportunity to present a paper on Bowen at the 100th Anniversary celebration of the Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences of MIT. Some of the photographs and diplomas were made available through the kindness of Mrs. Catherine Orne, daughter of N. L. Bowen. Prof. J. M. Dixon of Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, provided archival materials and confirmed the location of Bowen's birthplace. Prof. F. J. Pettijohn is thanked for providing the coverpiece from his book of memoirs (1984), and Prof. J. R. Goldsmith for a preprint of his recollections that included Bowen's days at the University of Chicago. The reviews of Professors J. R. Goldsmith, G. A. Good, R. R. Shrock, E. F. Osborn and Drs. F. Chayes, C. T. Prewitt, D. Rumble, and E. Yochelson were greatly appreciated.
 

REFERENCES

TOP Introduction The Thesis Problem... Staff Member at GL... The Quiet Man Acknowledgments References Endnotes

ANDERSON, O., 1915, The system anorthite-forsterite-silica: Amer. J. Sci., v. 39, pp. 407-454.
ANONYMOUS, 1990, Norman Bowen and the Geophysical Laboratory pathfinding tradition, in Carnegie Evening, 1990, Carnegie Instn. Washington Booklet, 16 p.
BECKER, GEORGE F., 1897a, Some queries on rock differentiation: Amer. J. Sci., v. 3, pp. 21-40.
BECKER, GEORGE F., 1897b, Fractional crystallization of rocks: Amer. J. Sci, v. 4, pp. 257-261.
BOWEN, G. T., 1822, Analysis of a variety of nephrite, from Smithfield, R. L: Amer. J. Sci., v. 5, 1st series, pp. 346-348.
BOWEN, N. L., 1910a, Diabase and aplite of the cobalt-silver area: J. Canadian Mining Inst., v. 12, pp. 517-528.
BOWEN, N. L., 1910b, Diabase and granophere of the Gowganda Lake District, Ontario: J. Geol., v. 18, pp. 658-674.
BOWEN, N. L., 1912, The binary system Na2Al2Si208 (nephelite, carnegieite)-CaAl2Si208 (anorthite): Amer. J. Sci., v. 33, pp. 551-573.
BOWEN, N. L., 1915, The later stages of the evolution of the igneous rocks: J. Geol., v. 23, Supplement, pp. 1-89.
Bowen, N. L., 1928, The evolution of the igneous rocks: 334 p. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
BOWEN, N. L., 1942, Presentation of the Penrose Medal to Norman Levi Bowen: Geological Society of America Annual Report for 1941, Proceedings, pp. 82-87.
BOWEN, N. L., 1951, Acceptance of the Roebling Medal of the Mineralogical Society of America: v. 36, pp. 295-296.
BRUSH, S. G., 1990, The most-cited physical-sciences publications in the 1945-1954 Science Citation Index. Part 3. Astronomy and earth sciences: Current Contents. v. 30, No. 43, pp. 7-16.
BUDDINGTON, A. F., 1960, Norman Levi Bowen (1887-1956): American Philosophical Society Year Book, pp. 113-118.
DAY, A. L., E. T. ALLEN, AND J. P. IDDINGS, 1905, The isomorphism and thermal properties of the feldspars: Carnegie Institution of Washington Publ. No. 31, 95 p.
DAY, A. L., R. B. SOSMAN, AND E. T. ALLEN, 1911, High temperature gas thermometry: Carnegie Institution of Washington Publ. No. 157, 129 p.
EUGSTER, H. P., 1980, Norman Levi Bowen, June 21, 1987-September 11, 1956: Biographical Memoirs, National Academy of Sciences, v. 52, pp. 35-79.
GIBSON, R. E., 1984, Reminiscences and reflections of R. E. Gibson, 301 p., privately printed.
GOLDSMITH, J. R., 1947, The system CaAI2Si208-Ca2Al2Si07-NaAlSi0,: J. Geol., v. 55, pp. 381-404.
GOLDSMITH, J. R., 1991, Some Chicago Georecollections: Ann. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., v. 19, pp. I-16.
GUMMER, W. K., 1943, The system CaSi03-CaA12Si208-NaAlSi04: J. Geol., v. 51, pp. 503-530.
HUTTON, J., 1795, Theory of the Earth, with Proofs and Illustrations: Edinburgh v. l and 2, London v. 3 (1899).
PETTUOHN, F. J., 1984, Memoirs of an Unrepentant Field Geologist: 260 p., University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
SCHAIRER, J. F., 1957a, Memorial to Norman Levi Bowen (18871956): Geological Society of America Annual Report for 1956, Proceedings, pp. 117-121.
SCHAIRER, J. F., 1957b, Memorial of Norman L. Bowen: Amer. Mineral., v. 42, pp. 242-248.
SCHAIRER, J. F., 1957c, Melting relations of the common rock-forming oxides: J. Amer. Ceram. Soc., v. 40, pp. 215-235.
SCHNEER, C. J., 1980, Bowen, Norman Levi (June 21, 1987-Sept. 11, 1956): Dictionary of American Biography, Supplement 6, pp. 70-72, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.
SHEPHERD, E. S., G. A. RANKIN, AND F. E. WRIGHT, 1909, The binary systems of alumina with silica, lime and magnesia: Amer. J. Sci., v. 28, 4th ser., pp. 293-333.
SHROCK, R. R., 1982, Geology at M.I.T. 1865-1965: v. 2, 762 p., The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA.
TEALL, J. J. H., 1901, The evolution of petrological ideas: Q. J. G. S., Proceedings, v. 57, pp. 62-86.
TILLEY, C. E., 1957, Norman Levi Bowen, 1887-1956: Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society: v. 3, pp. 7-22.
VOGT, J. H. L., 1903, Die Silikatschmelzlosungen mit besonderer Rucksicht auf die Mineralbildung and die Schmelzpunkt-Erniedrigung: Vidensk.-Selsk. Skrifter, Math.-natur v.-Klasse, v. I, No. 8, 162 p., v. 11, No. 1, 236 p., 1904.
YODER, H. S., 1979, The evolution of the igneous rocks: Fiftieth anniversary perspectives: 588 p., Princeton University Press, Princeton.

ENDNOTES

TOP Introduction The Thesis Problem... Staff Member at GL... The Quiet Man Acknowledgments References Endnotes

1. An expansion and documentation of an invited talk given at the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, on 9 June 1990. back

2. Norman Levi Bowen was born on 21 June 1887 (Birth Registration No. 127), younger son of William Alfred Bowen and Elizabeth McCormick Bowen who then lived at 25 Lower Cordon Street, Kingston (City Directory, 1887-1889). The street name has been changed to University Street, and the houses were razed for the construction of the Kingston General Hospital (personal communication from Prof. John M. Dixon, 1990). back

3. The concepts of magmatic differentiation and fractional crystallization were well established ideas by 1900. Becker (1897a, b) lists some of the early literature, even referring to Aristotle. Teall (1901) predicted that the next great advance in petrology would result from experiments on the physicochemical behavior of magmas. back

4. It was probably not necessary for the Director to "assign" a thesis topic to Bowen because it became evident immediately that Bowen was well aware of the principal problems in petrology. In this regard, Bowen no doubt would espouse the current philosophy that students should be sufficiently well trained to recognize and formulate their own critical problems for thesis study. (The most important stage of any research project is the delineation of the problem, identification of the relevant variables, and specification or appropriate tests of potential hypotheses or models.) Bowen was indeed fortunate that most of the techniques required were developed on the eve of his arrival at the Geophysical Laboratory. back

5. The anorthite-forsterite-SiO2 system, which includes enstatite-anorthite, was later studied successfully by Olaf Andersen (1915). The system was indeed complicated, not because of the appearance of diopside, but because of the incongruent melting of MgSiO3, (clinoenstatite) to forsterite and liquid. The projection of the binary system enstatite-anorthite was given in Andersen's paper as Fig. 12, p. 447. back

6. The paper by Day, Allen, and Iddings published in 1905 is listed as the first paper of the Geophysical Laboratory through the courtesy of the Director of the U. S. Geological Survey in recognition of the funding provided by the Carnegie Institution of Washington for completion of the work begun under the sponsorship of the Survey in 1901 at the instigation of George F. Becker. The Geophysical Laboratory was officially established by the Board of Trustees of the Carnegie Institution of Washington at its meeting on 12 December 1905. back

7. The mineral named "bowenite," an obsolete (?) name of antigorite, is not in honor of Norman L. Bowen but of George T. Bowen (1803-1825), an American chemist and mineralogist who made the first analyses (G. T. Bowen, 1822).

On the other hand, the "N. L. Bowen Award" of the Volcanology, Geochemistry, and Petrology Section of the American Geophysical Union is in honor of Norman Levi Bowen. The award was established at the spring meeting of 1981 by the Executive Committee of the Section and named the "VGP Award." The name was changed retroactively to the "N. L. Bowen Award" by the Executive Committee of the Section at the May 1988 meeting. A list of awardees may be found in the AGU Handbook, November 27, 1990, p. 28.

The term "Bowenology" was generated by Norman L. Bowen's students at the University of Chicago to describe his courses and researches in phase equilibria applied to mineral systems. back

8. The College of Physicians and Surgeons at 517 Shawmut Avenue in Boston was formed 10 November 1880, and dissolution was announced in 1946 and completed on 30 June 1949. She is listed among the graduates of 1911 in the Quarterly Announcements and Catalog of the College of Physicians and Surgeons, v. 32, No. 4. p. 29. Her diploma is in the Archives of the Geophysical Laboratory. back

9. The diploma is stored in the Archives of the Geophysical Laboratory. Bowen was the third person to receive a Ph. D. degree from the Department of Geology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology then located near Copley Square in Boston (Shrock, l 982). back

10. Journal of the Petrologist's Club stored in the Archives of the Geophysical Laboratory, v. 1, pp. 69-71. back

11. Some impetus for Bowen's leaving the Geophysical Laboratory may have resulted from the uncertainty of the Directorship of the Laboratory. At that time, Dr. L. H. Adams was serving as Acting Director, but there apparently was some concern that another staff member not wholly acceptable to Bowen might become Director. Adams, officially appointed Director on 1 January 1938, induced Bowen to return to the Laboratory temporarily for a period during World War II and finally on 1 January 1947. In the interim many students, including five successful Ph. D. candidates, benefited from his tuition. back

12. The President of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, Vannevar Bush, expressed his appreciation of Bowen's "long and productive relationship" in a letter dated 18 April 1952 referring to his formal retirement on 1 July 1952. Bush offered Bowen continued use of his office and laboratory, but added "as long as this can be done without depriving active members of the staff of needed space." "These you can use without any feeling of obligation whatever, without carrying even by implication any of the burden of an active intense laboratory program, and with the assurance that you will always be welcome whenever you care to come among us." Needless to say, Bowen took offense and revealed his feelings in a letter (11 June 1952) to his good friend the Director, L. H. Adams. Bowen could not understand why several other retired staff members continued to work at the Laboratory while his invitation was "so clouded" and "regarded as something exceptional." He found it difficult to believe that Bush intended him "to use these facilities only for pottering about at matters of no consequence and that in no circumstances was [he] to do anything of importance . . . ." Fortunately, Bowen was allowed to continue his work with O. F. Tuttle for another year and the remaining data were collected for their classic memoir on the origin of granite. After a year in Florida, Bowen returned to the Laboratory in 1954 as a Research Associate. back

Manuscript received January 14, 1991
Manuscript accepted February 20, 1991

. This article was originally printed in the journal of the History of the Earth Sciences Society, Earth Sciences History, 1992, v. 11, no. 1, p. 45-55. It has been reproduced here with permission.