Somewhat unfortunately, J. Newton Friend’s vitriolic remarks about the choice of the name “masurium” were only partly cited in ref 1 and the primary source was not given. Friend’s verdict in fact originates from the year 1941 (4) and thus should to some extent be judged as a result of wartime emotions. Such harsh and inequitable comments clearly became more frequent as an aftermath of World War II, but they should not be considered as commonplace—least of all in earlier years. They cannot be found in preceding comparable reviews (5–8) and were even absent in a contemporaneous one (9). Particularly impressive is the comparison of Friend’s extreme criticism with the subtle reservation at the end of ref 5.

It might be noted in passing that the review by Weeks (8) contains a factual error [also committed elsewhere (10)]. The names masurium and rhenium cannot be associated with any territories lost by Germany as a result of World War I.

In any case, the diverse attempts to associate the element names masurium and rhenium with World War I events should always be contrasted with the far more prosaic version (1, 11, 12) that these names were chosen according to the respective regions where Walter Noddack’s and Ida Tacke’s families originated from. That rhenium had been named for her home region at the Lower Rhine was, incidentally, already pointed out by Ida Noddack-Tacke herself (13). A minor error in ref 1 concerning these matters should also be corrected. Walter Noddack indeed was of East Prussian ancestry, but his birthplace was Berlin (14).

Another comment regards the anecdote about the Noddacks’ use of the symbol “Ma” for masurium on a wall chart of the periodic system. As it may not be completely obvious from ref 1, it seems advisable to point out that the symbol “Ma” was quite firmly established in the chemical literature of the 1940s. To give some arbitrarily chosen examples from English-speaking countries, see ref 9, 15, 16, or the 1941 periodic chart reproduced in ref 17. F. A. Paneth strongly dissented from this widespread practice and held the Noddacks’ adherence to their results responsible for it. It was this context in which he introduced the above-mentioned anecdote (18). It is also apparent from ref 18 that personal animosities may have played a certain role.

A final remark is concerned with the Noddacks’ political standpoint. While it is surely legitimate to characterize it as a decidedly national one, the straightforward allegation of positive attitudes toward National Socialism should be regarded as a matter of dispute. It was, in particular, forcefully rebutted by H.-J. Eichhoff, who had worked together with the Noddacks from 1936 (11). As is so often the case, the truth most probably lies somewhere in-between these antagonistic positions. Some additional material about this controversial issue can be found in ref 12.

Literature Cited

1. Zingales, R. J. Chem. Educ. 2005, 82, 221–227.
2. Noddack, W.; Tacke, I.; Berg, O. Naturwiss. 1925, 13, 567–574; Sitzungsber. Preuß. Akad. Wiss. Phys.-Math. Kl. 1925, 400–409.
3. de Laeter, J. R.; Böhlke, J. K.; De Bièvre, P.; Hidaka, H.; Peiser, H. S.; Rosman, K. J. R.; Taylor, P. D. P. Pure Appl. Chem. 2003, 75, 683–800; p 763.
4. Friend, J. N. Chem. Ind. 1941, 691–695.
5. Nature 1925, 116, 54–55.
6. Bligh, N. M. Sci. Progress 1926, 21, 109–114.
7. Druce, J. G. F. Sci. Progress 1933, 27, 687–689.
8. Weeks, M. E. J. Chem. Educ. 1933, 10, 161–170.
9. Druce, J. G. F. Chem. Ind. 1941, 729–730.
10. Smith, D. D. J. Chem. Educ. 1978, 55, 49. This note is extremely error-ridden. The word “masurium” is misspelled throughout and element 75 (rhenium) is completely confused with element 72 (hafnium).
11. Van Assche, P. Nuclear Europe 1988, Issue 6–7, 24–25.
12. Sime, R. L. Lise Meitner: A Life in Physics; University of California Press: Berkeley, Los Angeles, 1996; p 465 (see also p 273). Particularly noteworthy is the quotation of E. Segrè’s grotesquely exaggerated version of J. N. Friend’s criticism.
13. Noddack-Tacke, I. In Sto let periodicheskogo zakona khimicheskikh elementov; Izdatelstvo “Nauka”: Moscow, 1969; pp 99–102.
14. Engel, M. In Neue Deutsche Biographie, Vol. 19; Duncker & Humblot: Berlin, 1999; pp 307–308.
15. Moelwyn-Hughes, E. A. Physical Chemistry; University Press: Cambridge, 1947; p 230.
16. Glasstone, S. Textbook of Physical Chemistry, 2nd ed. (British reissue); Macmillan: London, 1948; p 89.
17. Trimble, R. F. J. Chem. Educ. 1975, 52, 585.
18. Paneth, F. A. Nature 1947, 159, 8–10.