Memoirs of Dr. Joseph Priestley — Reading Companion

A Life in Three Acts

The book's tripartite structure mirrors Priestley's own division of his life into phases: his early years and education, his scientific career in England, and his final decade in America after the Birmingham riots. The son's continuation picks up the narrative seamlessly, noting that Priestley abandoned even the idea of a temporary return to England due to the political climate there. The appendices then step back to evaluate the whole career, with Cooper focusing on chemistry and natural philosophy, and Christie on metaphysics and theology.

This arrangement allows the reader to trace how Priestley himself shaped his story, then see how his son reframed it for a posthumous audience, and finally encounter two contemporary critics who assess his legacy from different disciplinary angles. The result is a polyphonic biography that resists a single authoritative interpretation.

Recurring Images: The Diary and the Plan

One of the most striking details in the son's continuation is the description of Priestley's lifelong practice of keeping a diary. From his time at the academy until within three or four days of his death, he recorded daily occurrences, reading (with exact page counts), and any hints suggested by his studies. He also began each year by arranging a plan of study and ended it by reviewing his progress. The son notes that this practice was "a source of great satisfaction" and was initially adopted to regulate his studies, then continued from pleasure.

This image of systematic self-accounting recurs throughout the memoir: Priestley is portrayed as a man who apportioned his time strictly, adhered to a regular plan of alternate study and relaxation, and never materially deviated from it. The diaries themselves, mostly destroyed in the Birmingham riots, become a symbol of both the orderliness of his mind and the violence that disrupted his life.

Movement Between Scenes: England and America

The narrative moves between two geographical poles: England, where Priestley achieved his scientific reputation and suffered the destruction of his library and apparatus, and America, where he found "peace" and "ease in his circumstances" at Northumberland. The son's account explicitly contrasts the two: in England, Priestley's discoveries added to the credit of the nation; in America, he was not obliged to withdraw his name from the Philosophical Society, and he was "suffered to live in peace."

This spatial contrast is not merely descriptive but evaluative. The son argues that the American system, placing all religious sects on the same footing, "effectually secured the peace of the community" and promoted truth and virtue. The movement from Birmingham to Northumberland thus becomes a movement from persecution to tolerance, from disruption to productivity. The text notes that Priestley did little at Hackney compared to what he achieved in Birmingham or America, because his time was "very much broken in upon by company"—a telling detail about the social pressures of his English life.

The Critical Appendices: Cooper and Christie

The final sections of the volume shift from narrative to analysis. Thomas Cooper's appendix provides an account of Priestley's discoveries in chemistry and his writings on scientific subjects, while William Christie's covers his metaphysical writings. These are not mere summaries but evaluative essays that engage with Priestley's ideas and their reception. Cooper, a judge and political figure, brings a legal precision to his assessment of Priestley's scientific method; Christie, a clergyman, examines the theological implications of his materialism.

Together, these appendices serve as a contemporary critical response, offering readers of the 1806 edition a framework for understanding Priestley's intellectual legacy. They also reflect the collaborative nature of the volume: the memoir is not a single author's work but a collective project involving family and friends, each contributing from their own expertise.

Readers approaching this edition should be aware that it offers not one but several portraits of Priestley: his own, his son's, and those of two sympathetic but critical contemporaries. The shifts in voice and perspective reward careful attention, as do the recurring motifs of order, diary-keeping, and geographical movement. The appendices, often overlooked, provide essential context for understanding how Priestley's work was received in the early nineteenth century and how his reputation was shaped by those closest to him.

Reading Priestley’s quiet account of his own life, I thought of old letters my grandfather kept—half-finished sentences, voices layering on top of each other. That same feeling came once from The Memoirs of Jacques Casanova de Seingalt, 1725-1798. Volume 03: Military Career — A Reader’s Guide, where a man’s self-description wobbles between truth and self-forgiveness, just as Priestley’s does. Both books felt less like history, more like eavesdropping on a private apology.