Having defined food science and food technology, and referred to the essential features involved and implied, we can look for the origins of food technology, in the period before those features existed. However, not necessarily before any of them existed, but before enough of them existed to a sufficient extent to constitute at any rate the basis of a coherent and systematic body of knowledge and understanding. This directs our attention to the middle of the nineteenth century.

The Industrial Revolution had divorced large numbers of the population from the land, whence they had previously derived much of their food, and simultaneously created, for the first time, the problem of feeding large urban populations. Thus the general trend of industrialization, and the creation of a large ‘captive’ consuming public conveniently concentrated, had a double impact on food manufacture. Furthermore, ignorance and unscrupulousness, and the absence of any restraining force, combined to result in the widespread adulteration of food; deliberate and fraudulent adulteration as a very lucrative procedure; and the use, in ignorance, of dangerously toxic substances, such as the colouring of cheese with red lead.

The steel roller mill revolutionized flour-milling, but resulted in vitamin deficiencies in flour and bread, which were, of course, not realized because vitamins were unknown.

Microbiology was unknown in the field of food manufacture and distribution and in wider terms of public health. Foods, including milk and water, were vehicles for poisoning and disease, which were widespread.

The importance of these circumstances lies mainly in the reaction they evoked during the period 1820-60 and the consequences which followed. Two separate but immensely significant advances had been taking place during the same period. Liebig and his school had been applying classical methods of analytical chemistry to foods, showing that foods were composed of identifiable and measurable chemical substances, thus laying the basis for food chemistry.

Simultaneously, Pasteur was carrying out his work which was firmly to establish the science of microbiology in general, and food microbiology in particular.

Food legislation

The period 1820-60 had seen mounting efforts by analytical chemists like Frederick Accum and John Mitchell, and a number of doctors, especially Dr A. H. Hassall, through his microscopy and his notable series of articles in the Lancet, to expose the nature and extent of adulteration which called for reform and legislation. This movement eventually led to the Adulteration Act of 1860, a weak piece of permissive legislation. It permitted the appointment of Public Analysts, but only seven were appointed, of whom only one, Dr Cameron of Dublin, was in any sense effective (Burnett, 1960).

It was not until the much more effective Adulteration Act of 1872, and then the Sale of Food and Drugs Act of 1875, that Public Analysts became well enough established —and in sufficient numbers —to be an effective force.

The entry of scientists into the food industry

The introduction of analytical chemists into the food industry was a direct reaction. For any food manufacturer of consequence, it would be an obvious form of insurance and self-protection, to employ someone (whether as a consultant or as an actual employee) who could examine samples in the same way as the Public Analyst, and, equally important, 'talk the same language’ as the Public Analyst on level terms of knowledge, ability and standing. But, like the payment of insurance premiums, this would be regarded as a necessary evil and an unproductive charge on industry.

It is, however, one thing to conjure up spirits, but another thing entirely to confine their activities to those the conjurer had in mind! So it proved when analysts were brought into food manufacture. They were initially ignorant of the empirical craft and techniques used in the manufacture of the particular products with which they were concerned. Furthermore, in general they were narrow specialists. But they were men with analytical minds, scientific curiosity, and trained in the scientific method.

Initially, they would concern themselves with sampling techniques, examination of samples, and dealing with matters raised by Public Analysts. Before long, however, in the course of their work they would become aware of variations, inconsistencies, anomalies, quality defects, and various kinds of deterioration after manufacture, and would be self-impelled to try and discover the reasons and the influence of various factors. They would note that different batches of raw material gave finished products of markedly different characteristics, and would try to establish what factors were responsible; and, having done so, would try to establish what kind of raw material gave the ‘best’ finished product. Likewise, noting product variations coincident with fortuitous variations in processing, they would seek to determine optimum processing conditions.

Thus they were going far beyond their terms of reference, and were incidentally putting to the test of properly designed scientific experiment various traditional, long-cherished and time-hallowed ‘principles’.

The evolving pattern

As they gradually gained fundamental knowledge of factors affecting product quality and stability and processing efficiency, they would seek to have this knowledge applied. No doubt this was far from easy. One can picture the analyst being told by his Victorian employer to stay in his laboratory, and leave production matters to the ‘practical men who know all about them’.

Nevertheless, a developing pattern began to emerge, in which we can discern several significant strands.

Firstly, the newly-gained knowledge did become applied, with consequent improvements in the rational control of food manufacture and the quality and consistency of its products.

Secondly, the industry slowly began to realize that science could play a valuable part far beyond the confines of dealing with Public Analysts.

Thirdly, an influx of larger numbers of scientists occurred, still mainly analytical chemists, but accompanied as time went on by organic chemists, physical chemists, biochemists, chemical engineers, physicists, microbiologists and nutritionists.

Fourthly, an increasing body of knowledge and understanding was being established to form the basis of a food science. This was to be greatly added to as a result of governmental interest and government-sponsored research, stimulated by two world wars and the twin problems of feeding armed forces and feeding an island population in wartime.

Fifthly, developments in other technologies were opening-up new possibilities in the way of materials, processes, processing equipment, instrumentation and packaging. The impact of these depended in turn on the presence, in the food industry, of people capable of appreciating their potentialities and developing their effective utilization.

Sixthly, there was a process of change taking place in the scientists in the industry, who found themselves increasingly evolving from narrow specialists into technological experts applying scientific method and an increasing body of scientific knowledge and understanding to every aspect of food.

Out of the intricate interweaving of these six main strands has evolved food science and technology, and the modern food technologist in the industry. But evolution is, of course, a continuing process. New tasks, or new forms of old tasks, and new attitudes in recent years add further strands to the pattern.

New attitudes, new tasks

In the highly industrialized countries, the affluent society has resulted in an emphasis on new products, on products with improved quality and improved keeping properties, and on greater consumer convenience.

At the same time, primarily centred on the work of the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization and, more recently, the joint FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission, there are world-wide efforts to ensure sufficient supplies of adequately nutritious food to large sections of the world’s population that have always gone short; and to establish world-wide food standards to give greater protection and information to consumers, while facilitating and promoting international trade in food.

In all these connections, food science and technology has important tasks to perform. It has to establish a much closer unity with the sources and production of its raw materials. It has to supply the expertise required for the furthering of the work of the international bodies already mentioned. It has, as always, to discover new knowledge and new understanding. It has to develop new and more efficient applications of new and existing knowledge. Finally, it has to ensure that science pervades the outlook and activities of the food industry and those responsible for its direction and management.

In carrying out these tasks, alongside the injection and assimilation into industry of the products of the new trends in food technological education, and alongside the further building-up of the profession and its professional institute, the achievements can be far-reaching, and the evolution of the food technologist will be carried an important stage further.

In conclusion, while the profession of food technologist can only in recent years be said to have come of age, it has been in the process of so doing for the past century. Not a long time, but long enough to claim that as a profession it is not entirely without roots or tradition. The evolutionary forefathers of the modern food technologists, the analytical chemists who entered the food industry a century ago, represented, as it were, the foot of science in the door of the food industry. If today it is possible to see much farther than they did, and view much wider prospects and perspectives, it is because, in an historical sense, the modern technologist is standing on the shoulders of his predecessors who achieved so much.

Reference

Burnett, J. (1960) Fd Manuf. 35, 479.

Historical footnotes, written 34 years later and still valid 41 years later

1. This paper was given in February 1966 by the author, while Founder-Chairman of the first Regional Branch of IFST, the North of England Branch, at the first of the now-traditional joint meetings of the Branch with the Procter Society – the student food science society at University of Leeds.
2. This is an abridged version of the paper, which was published in the IFST Proceedings section of the very first issue of the Journal of Food Technology (the forerunner of today’s International Journal of Food Science and Technology),
3. The definitions of ‘food science’ and ‘food technology’ it contains, now widely accepted and used, were "polished" versions of those propounded by the author in 1965 for evening class students at Salford Technical College, and first publicly aired by him in a correspondence in Food Technology (1965), 19 (11),1622 in response to a letter deploring the non-existence of concise definitions. In the early 1970s, owing to an erroneous statement in a textbook (subsequently corrected) the ‘food science’ definition became widely attributed to E C Bate-Smith. He, however, wrote to the author "I would not be averse to being credited with its invention. But I willingly allow that it is yours and not mine".
4. The early historical developments contained were written from a UK perspective.
5. The paper is very much a product of its time, and should be read with that in mind.. Yet the section New attitudes, new tasks is interesting having regard to its period, and particularly the foreshadowing of today’s "farm to fork" philosophy.
6. The final sentence of the paper as delivered ended:

   " ... it is because, in an historical sense, the modern technologist is standing on the shoulders of giants."

   The Editor in his wisdom decided that giants were out of place in a scientific journal!