4.2.1. The invention of dynamite by Nobel or the archetype of serendipity?

Innovation economists are roughly divided into two groups, on the one hand those who, like Joseph Schumpeter [SCH 35, SCH 79], focus on a particular economic actor, the entrepreneur, who innovates in multiple ways to achieve a monopoly position, and those who follow Karl Marx’s example [MAR 76], who favor a systemic approach, emphasizing mechanisms that condition the behavior of individuals, practically independently of their own will. In the 20th Century, evolutionary economists [NEL 82, FRE 82] tended to favor a systemic analysis. It is not easy to understand what is in the black box of invention [ROS 82] and it is well recognized that technological progress is the result of a process endogenous to the economic system [ART 93]. On the other hand, since the 1970s, industrial economists [GAL 68] have favored the idea that innovation was planned thanks to the financial and human resources invested by firms precisely to innovate. Under these conditions, technological progress is basically programmed in the framework of a close relationship with research centers and universities, generally in close relationship with the governments concerned [CAR 12, ETZ 17]. Innovation also comes from practice [ARR 62] in an institutional context where everything has been anticipated so that it is possible [LAN 10]. Yet for some years now, researchers in the human and social sciences [CAT 14] have been led to emphasize chance to explain the ins and outs of scientific and technological evolution.

The role of chance in the process of scientific and technological discovery has thus been highlighted by “serendipity theory”. This term [ASC 08, GAU 12] was created from the word “Serendib”, the name of the island of Ceylon in 1754 by Horace Walpole, an English writer and contemporary of Voltaire, to designate the fact of finding something that one does not expect.

Until the 1930s [CHA 06], the term “serendipity” remained in the literary field, but the situation changed rapidly. Between 1958 and 2001, the term serendipity appeared in the titles of 57 books, was used 13,000 times in newspapers during the 1990s, and it was found in 636,000 Internet documents in 2001 [NAM 13]. The explanation would reside [MER 04] in the emergence, followed by the development, of the industrial society, marked by an unprecedented expansion of science and technology. This may seem a priori contradictory with the idea that innovation is programmed and whereby many institutions (schools, research centers, universities) have been developed to facilitate the emergence of new scientific and technical knowledge to meet business needs.

As early as the 1940s, one of the pioneers of this evolution for the humanities and social sciences, the American sociologist Robert Merton [MER 65] began to introduce the concept of the “serendipity pattern” that proposed to think beyond the dichotomy between empirical work and scientific work. The proposed idea was to reflect on this relationship between items. This “serendipity pattern” would consist of analyzing the influence of “unanticipated”, “anomalous” and “strategic” data for the development of a theory. Data is unanticipated when, oriented towards the verification of a hypothesis, it leads to an unsuspected observation, which comes from theories foreign to the research in progress. Data is anomalous when it questions or tests a consensus theory or established facts [NAM 13]. Serendipity accounts for “socio-cognitive environments” [MER 04] in the production of knowledge that leads to considering the researcher’s subjectivity and minimizing the impact of the historical context in which the researcher is inserted and which, in one way or another, directs his or her investigations. The emphasis is therefore placed on chance, which makes discovery possible; the most famous example being Archimedes’ famous “Eureka” [GAU 12]. But what lies behind “Eureka”? Scientific progress is achieved through a combination of slow and steady progress with sudden breaks. Researchers prepare their tests, perform them and interpret the results meticulously. Theorists develop their evidence and describe models. They can also have flashes of inspiration, those moments when an unusual measurement or equation of an unexpected kind suddenly acquires meaning. This illumination triggers a new series of long and laborious tasks and the cycle repeats itself. Sometimes these sudden flashes arise directly from the fertile ground prepared by routine, but sometimes a spark or chance occurrence creates an intense instant clarity that can bring about a radical change. Nevertheless, this process marked by errors and unexpected results is part of the work of the researcher who must constantly check their results.

Richard Gaughan [GAU 12] presented, in chronological form, the portrait of about 40 serendipity scientists from antiquity to present day, among whom we count a robot (NASA’s Spirit rover that discovered water on Mars in 2005), four entrepreneurs (including Alfred Nobel), two entrepreneurial researchers including Louis Pasteur (who was more a researcher than an entrepreneur, but he filed patents and founded the Pasteur Institute to develop vaccine production), as well as nine researchers working for large companies (notably DuPont de Nemours). The rest is composed of scientists (numerous Nobel Prize winners). Entrepreneurs, in the strict sense of the term, therefore represent only a tiny fraction of the individuals who invented by chance. The other entrepreneur who shares this prestige with Alfred Nobel is Charles Goodyear who invented the rubber vulcanization process. He too was faced with enormous financial difficulties and had many failures before the completion of his project. All these individuals, according to Richard Gaughan [GAU 12], thus benefited from a combination of circumstances that they had not planned. All were hard workers for whom reputation, even fortune, was at stake. They had to succeed and had mobilized their forces in this direction. For those who were researchers in large companies, the pressure was no less than that of the banker for the entrepreneur.

4.2.2. Alfred Nobel between the company and the laboratory¹

Alfred Nobel was born in Stockholm, Sweden in 1833 and died in San Remo, Italy in 1896. The Nobel family is an old Swedish family, descended from Olof Rudbeck (1630–1702), one of the most important Swedish medical scientists of the 17th Century.

Born into a family of industrialists, Alfred Nobel, like many historical entrepreneurs, [BOU 06, BOU 17] was born into the corporate world where he learned the professions of both chemist and entrepreneur. His father Immanuel Nobel was an engineer, entrepreneur and inventor in the explosives industry, who experienced periods of prosperity and intense difficulties, partly due to the chaotic geopolitical context of 19th-Century Europe. His mother, Andriette Ahlsell, came from a large Swedish family. The Nobel family had four sons, Alfred was the third. All (except one who died prematurely in Alfred’s factory explosion) became entrepreneurs.

Weapons production depends largely on political context, such as conflict and war, as well as on the alliances that the industrialist is able to forge with governments to sell their military equipment. Immanuel Nobel did not benefit from a long technical education at the institutional level. He studied between 1822 and 1825 at the Royal Swedish Academy of Agricultural Engineering. During his schooling, he won several design awards and he knew how to combine theory and practice. At the age of 27, he filed patents for three inventions in the weapon industry. He acquired self-taught knowledge in armament, explosives and construction – the three activities on which he founded his businesses. He had many inventions to his credit. He developed torpedoes that were used for the first time during the Crimean War. He went bankrupt several times. When his son Alfred was born, he went bankrupt and the family was in a situation of great poverty. This led him to Russia to set up another company to develop explosives for war, although he first tried to interest the Swedish military authorities in his project – without success. On the contrary, he was well received in Russia by Nicholas I, but the Russian company went bankrupt following the Crimean War (which Russia lost to a coalition composed of the Ottoman Empire, France, the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Sardinia). The Nobel family returned to Sweden, with a professional life to rebuild.

Immanuel Nobel was a man with a very assertive character; he was always ready to take risks and take up new challenges. It was certainly the difficulties of his father’s business that helped to forge Alfred Nobel’s obstinate and independent character, especially due to the fact that he was confronted on numerous occasions with financial, legal (in terms of intellectual property) and major technical difficulties. Immanuel Nobel was an industrialist who never gave up. Whatever the difficulties he faced, he sought solutions, either by moving from Sweden to Russia, for example, or by inventing new products (particularly in the field of armaments). To ensure stable and important markets, he sought public markets by turning to the governments to convince them of the reliability of its products.

The young Alfred received a rather peculiar education, not so much because he was initially mainly educated at home, but because he acquired a large part of his technical knowledge (particularly in chemistry) at the family’s company. His health was fragile and he could only go to school starting from the age of 8. Then, during his first stay in Saint Petersburg, Russia, he benefited from an education at home (because of the restrictions which Russia placed on foreigners): chemistry, languages, history and literature. He learned easily and showed a great thirst for learning. He also showed a keen interest in the literature (especially Shelley, Byron and the English Romantics), to the great despair of his father who did not encourage him in this direction. In his father’s factory, he was trained as a chemical engineer and proved himself to be a hard worker, like his two beloved brothers, Robert and Ludvig, who were ahead of him in this field. All Nobel children were thus bathed in a particular context where children were both encouraged to undertake and to be creative in the industrial field. In the middle of the 19th Century, when Europe was marked by a strong surge of industrialization, Immanuel Nobel trained his sons so that they could take advantage of the new opportunities that followed [DOC 17]. Rather than examining long theoretical studies, Immanuel Nobel emphasized learning by doing following the course of his own experience. Considering that nothing beats learning by doing and traveling, at 18, Alfred went to the United States to study chemistry for four years. He worked for a short period with the Swedish-born American engineer John Ericsson (locomotive, engine). In 1859, the management of his father’s company was left to his brother Ludvig Nobel (1831–1888), who later founded the Machine-Building Factory Ludvig Nobel and Branobel in Russia and became one of the richest and most powerful men in Russia.

Alfred Nobel, a Lutheran free thinker, also believed in the contributions of science. He studied the positivism of Auguste Comte. He read and commented on many scientists, such as Aristotle, Descartes and Newton. The laboratory was where he experimented with new ideas, and therefore held an important place in his life from a very young age. Alfred conducted chemical experiments in the laboratory of his father’s factory and showed real talent as an inventor ever since he filed his first patent at the age of 24 in 1857 (improvement made to gas meters). After the Crimean War, his father’s company went bankrupt and the family returned to Sweden in 1859. Nobel factories produced weapons and steam engines for the first propeller ships of the Russian army which was defeated. The end of the war was catastrophic for the Nobel family. A new government had taken control in Russia and it no longer needed so many mines, guns and rifles. The Nobel factory had been designed for massive production and had invested heavily to meet military requirements for the Crimean War. The workers were laid off. His father converted his factory by supplying about 20 machines and creating the first steamboat service on the Volga and the Caspian Sea, but he went bankrupt again. His father decided to return to Sweden while his three sons remained in St. Petersburg to run the factory. During this period, Alfred was still involved in mechanical and chemical experiments.

During his early years, Alfred Nobel traveled extensively, which he continued to do throughout his life to manage his subsidiary companies in many business locations around the world. His father did not want to enroll him at university [RUD 97], but instead sent him to the United States, England, France, Italy, Germany, to learn through practice, just like Jean-Baptiste Say’s entrepreneurial father sent him to work in England for two years to learn the English language and management methods of the first world economy of the time [TIR 14]. For three years, he traveled to Germany (where he stayed for two years), France, Italy and North America. Thus, Alfred learned to master many languages perfectly: in addition to his Swedish mother tongue, he spoke Russian, French, English and German.

In 1852, at the age of 19, Alfred Nobel was in Russia with his father’s company, the “Nobel & Son Foundries and Mechanical Workshops”. Still combining travel with technical and scientific training, Alfred was in France in 1850. He stayed in Paris with the French chemist Pelouze (1807–1867) who informed him of the existence of nitroglycerin discovered in 1847 by one of his students, the Italian Ascanio Sobrero (1812–1888). Ascanio Sobrero had the idea of mixing sulfuric acid, nitric acid and glycerin to obtain an “explosive oil”, the famous “piroglicerina”.

In 1846, Ascanio Sobrero therefore played a major role in discovering the explosive properties of nitroglycerin. The main disadvantage of “piroglicerina”, however, was that it was extremely explosive when exposed to thermal and mechanical shock. In 1847, Ascanio Sobrero described his experience to the Royal Academy of Sciences in Turin. He carried out several experiments to understand the value of his invention. He realized that it was both an explosive and a violent poison, but he did not see the use of it. In fact, Alfred Nobel’s biographers stressed that he was disappointed by Alfred Nobel’s use of his invention. Sobrero had the idea to look for therapeutic uses. He thus found a remedy against heart diseases, “trinitrine”. According to de Rudder (1997), Alfred Nobel stole Ascanio Sobrero’s invention by discovering its other applications, but according to Niedercorn [NIE 14], it was Alfred Nobel’s father who, having heard about the destructive power of this explosive, decided with his son (then aged 26) to make this new explosive usable. Finally, according to Fant [FAN 93], Alfred Nobel did not hide Ascanio Sobrero’s role in the invention of nitroglycerin. Whatever Alfred Nobel’s contribution to this invention, the outcome of his inventive process is indisputable. He developed an ignition system using a primer and a small powder charge to control the explosion.

Ascanio Sobrero’s discovery led Alfred Nobel to develop a process to produce nitroglycerin on an industrial scale, but the project involved serious dangers because of the extremely explosive nature of nitroglycerin. Initially, to control the nitroglycerin market, Alfred Nobel filed a patent in all countries to control the market. However, this did not prevent many industrial property disputes, particularly in the United States, where regulations were more flexible than in Europe.

Initially, Alfred Nobel produced nitroglycerin experimentally in his factories for use in explosive mines. For a long time, the results were inconclusive. Explosions were a continual danger and he had experienced significant financial difficulties and had trouble convincing financers to invest in him. In 1861, Alfred Nobel returned to Paris to find financing. There, he met the Pereire brothers, who were the Saint-Simonian bankers. With the support of Napoleon III, Alfred Nobel obtained an advance from the Pereire brothers, which enabled him to build an explosive factory [BEZ 08]. In 1862, Alfred Nobel developed a process for the large-scale manufacture of nitroglycerin [GAU 12]. On September 3, 1864, the Nobel factory in Heleneborg, Sweden (near Stockholm) exploded, killing his younger brother and four factory workers. Other accidents of the same type occurred, to such an extent that governments regulated or even prohibited the manufacture of nitroglycerin. In Sweden [CHA 12], the public authorities refused him permission to rebuild the workshop built 2 years earlier on his family’s property grounds. However, they tolerated the temporary facility that was set up on a barge anchored on a lake outside Stockholm. Due to the fact that nitroglycerin does not explode reliably with the detonators used for gunpowder, Alfred Nobel invented an appropriate method to detonate it; first called an “initiator”, and then known as a “primer” [GAU 12].

Despite (or because of) the explosion at Heleneborg’s factory and the death of his brother, Alfred Nobel continued his research. He discovered the possibility of starting the detonation of nitroglycerin with mercury fulminate. In 1864, he invented the “delay” detonator, which controlled the firing process and was a decisive step towards controlling the explosion. In 1865, he opened the world’s first nitroglycerin manufacturing company in Vinterviken, near Stockholm. However, the product remained very explosive; he still did not manage to control the explosion. After multiple efforts in research and experimentation, financial difficulties and industrial property trials (first in the United States), Alfred Nobel became a powerful and extremely rich industrialist. He was the head of a multinational company. The multiplication of production sites thus led to a kind of international trust that he controlled (he traveled constantly). In 1875, he opened a technical consulting office in Paris for all production units. Then, based in San Remo, he continued his research, particularly on military applications.

4.3.1. A favorable economic and institutional context

The description of the various stages of the invention of dynamite by Alfred Nobel clearly shows the role of a combination of favorable technical, industrial (railway construction and major public works in general) and geopolitical (power relations between the major world governments) circumstances [HOB 94]. To invent dynamite, Alfred Nobel performed several experiments before finding the right substance. If the explanation aimed at putting the emphasis on chance is attractive and entirely relevant, it must, however, be extended to take into account other parameters: the historical context in which this invention fell, the history of explosives since the invention of black powder, the intellectual and professional career of Alfred Nobel, and the economic pressure which pushed him to impose himself on a world market where competition is fierce. Finally, it was Alfred Nobel’s own method of work that combined laboratory work and field expertise.

4.3.2. The invention of dynamite: chance and necessity

The invention of dynamite in 1867 and that of gelignite (blasting gelatin) in 1875 by Alfred Nobel are two examples of invention that would be due to chance. In both cases, it was through a combination of circumstances that he found the solution, his objective being to facilitate the use of nitroglycerin by finding a substance to control the explosion. We will analyze Alfred Nobel’s journey through the major stages of his intellectual and professional life. One important fact must be emphasized, namely the important role that practice and experimentation had played during his existence. Alfred Nobel was on the ground when problems arose (explosions in particular). Like Pasteur, whose process that led him to extraordinary scientific results was very finely analyzed by Bruno Latour [LAT 84], he did not hesitate to go into the field when technical problems arose. In his laboratory, Alfred Nobel constantly experimented and verified his experiments, tests, ideas and intuitions. “The laboratory is the scientist’s weapon in battle” [LAT 84, p. 122]. However, according to Louis Pasteur, “Chance favors only the prepared mind”². Indeed, if a problem arises a priori by chance, it is necessary to be able to face it with all the knowledge necessary to be able to identify what precisely poses a problem, and also to know the chemical or biological process which led to its realization.

In 1866, Alfred Nobel was in the United States to demonstrate the safety of nitroglycerin when properly handled. He learned that an explosion occurred in Germany in his Krümmel factory demonstrating at the same time the great danger of handling nitroglycerin, even when handled by his own trained employees. The highly explosive character of nitroglycerin increased Alfred Nobel’s financial problems, which led him to take on a lot of debt [CHA 12]. He had taken out a loan to finance the exclusive operating license for nitroglycerin, which was very expensive. His then very old father was unable to help him, despite his considerable knowledge in the field of explosives. The risk of bankruptcy was high. However, with the support of a Swedish railway company which was interested in his product, Alfred was granted the right to resume operations, while his process was also utilized in Germany and Norway. On the strength of this success, he continued his research [BEZ 08].

However, new accidents occurred: a ship loaded with dynamite bound for Peru exploded, as well as warehouses in the United States and Australia. Paradoxically, these disasters ensured Alfred Nobel’s notoriety by demonstrating the “effectiveness” of his explosive, indispensable for the development of the railways and the major works linked to them. After a period of resistance from the authorities, dynamite manufacturing companies were created in the United States, Germany, England, France, South Africa, Japan and Canada. Alfred Nobel [CHA 12] conducted several experiments over a period of months to find the right substance. His first idea was to dissolve nitroglycerin in methyl alcohol, but this method was abandoned because if stabilization was well obtained, reuse of the product would prove to be complicated.

The invention of dynamite followed three major stages. First, in his laboratory, Alfred Nobel dropped a bottle of nitroglycerin, which did not explode. The bottle fell into the sawdust that covered the laboratory floor. He picked up the mixture from the ground and tested its explosive power. The detonation was weak, but achievable. He thought he was on the right track. From this event, he worked on this mixture and tried out multiple components: coal, chalk, paper and brick dust. None of these substances were satisfactory because the resulting substances had too little explosive power. But luck again manifested itself in the shipping room where he copied the safety instructions to avoid another tragedy. Important precautions were taken when handling nitroglycerin during transport. No one was now allowed to enter the shipping room without permission. Tin cans containing nitroglycerin were tied in packages, and then carefully stored in large wooden crates lined with “infusorial earth” on the inside [CHA 12, p. 12]. The nitroglycerin vials were transported in crates placed on sawdust. If a vial leaked, the liquid could be absorbed by the sawdust. Alfred Nobel noted that the nitroglycerin mixed with the sawdust remained stable and that it was possible to make it explode using a primer. He then launched a program to identify a neutral absorbent material which, mixed with nitroglycerin, would offer the conditions of control and safety.

This fine, very porous white powder is of fossil origin. It absorbs shocks. However, tin cans are not always waterproof. That was what he noted when he was preparing the expedition. Inside the box, he discovered a kind of porridge made of nitroglycerin escaped from the boxes and a paste called kieselguhr. This paste was easy to mix. Its explosive strength was weaker than that of pure nitroglycerin. This new mixture was an ideal explosive because it could be controlled with a detonator. Alfred Nobel discovered that the land around the Krümmel factory was perfectly suitable. He analyzed it and found that it consisted of diatoms (a form of phytoplankton, tiny algae whose skeletons are made of silica, like beach sand). These algae form a sedimentary rock, kieselguhr. However, this soil was very absorbent, and mixed with nitroglycerin, it produced a thick and manipulable putty without risk and which retained its explosive power. He obtained a much more malleable and much less dangerous explosive mixture which he called “dynamite powder” and which he patented in Sweden, Great Britain and the United States in 1867.

Continuing his experimental work, Alfred Nobel discovered that with only 25% kieselguhr, nitroglycerin became safe to use, needing a detonator to detonate it. In 1875, Alfred Nobel worked to replace the kieselguhr with an inert product offering the same stability but brought more power. He carried out a large number of experiments to find the product in question, and it is still by chance that he discovered the substance he was looking for [NIE, 14]: after injuring his finger, he healed the wound with medicinal collodion. He awoke during the night because of the pain. He realized that he may have found the solution to his problem by incorporating a little of this product with nitroglycerin. At four in the morning, he rushed into his laboratory. When his assistant arrived a few hours later, he presented the formula of the gelignite (blasting gelatin), which would later be called “plastic” because it comes in the form of a soft and malleable paste and can be packaged in the form of a cardboard tube. It is therefore a variety of dynamite whose consistency is close to that of rubber. It is a very powerful explosive, which is much less sensitive to shocks than nitroglycerin and which retains its explosive properties in water. In 1887, he invented “ballistite”, an almost smoke-free powder, which consists of a mixture of nitroglycerin and nitrocellulose with a little camphor.