Where does the word protein come from? From a letter, and that still amazes me: on 10 July 1838, the Swedish chemist Berzelius suggested to his Dutch colleague Gerrit Mulder this name drawn from the Greek “prôteios”, “of the first rank”, and Mulder was the first to publish it the same year, for a theory that would turn out to be wrong. At Biovie, we wanted to settle the contradictions about the origin of the word protein that circulate on the web, relying on Hartley's 1951 note in Nature and on a cultural history of protein published in 2022.
“Where do you get your protein?” If you eat plant-based like me, and you do the school run, you have probably been asked that more often than your fair share. People argue about quantities, they argue about the plate. About the word itself, almost never.
Wait, this word has a birthday? Yes, and even a godfather. I knew the days when you found information in the library and in journals, with no computer, and I kept a rather blunt sentence from that time, which I apply to myself first: today, ignorance is a choice. So let's go and look.
As an ISTOM engineer, I like going back to the sources, and this one tells a story I love: a letter, a false theory, and a name that outlives the theory. If you are mostly interested in the practical side right now, I have gathered elsewhere what we really know about plant proteins. Here, we take the time to understand where the word protein comes from, and why it weighs so much in our conversations at the table.
Before the word: a glue in the flour
Son of a baker, I was raised on gluten all through my childhood. That elastic stuff that holds a dough together in your hands, that stretches without tearing, I have known it forever. And yet it is with gluten that the story of proteins begins, long before they had a name, at a time when chemists were already spotting “special” materials, in plants as in animals.
First character: Jacopo Bartolomeo Beccari (1682-1766), a scholar from Bologna. He discovers the gluten of wheat flour, work presented in 1728 at the Academy of Sciences of Bologna and published in 1745 (University of Bologna). Almost a generation between the two dates: science back then took its time. What strikes Beccari is that this material drawn from wheat has characteristics that were thought to be reserved for animal substances.
I find this point delicious (pun intended): the first of these “special” materials to enter our story comes out of a sack of flour. Not from a carcass, not from an egg. From a sack of flour, like the ones in any bakery.
On the animal side, we have to wait for the end of the century. Around 1789, the French chemist Fourcroy puts some order into it and distinguishes three kinds of animal materials: albumin, fibrin and gelatin (Tanford and Reynolds, 2001). At the same time, at least two comparable plant materials are also known, and all this little world is often filed under the name “albumins”, after egg white. In short, the materials are there, on the lab bench. What is missing is the word.
Mulder and the idea of a single substance
The second character is Dutch, like my mother. Gerrit Mulder (1802-1880) is a chemist (Vignais, Encyclopædia Universalis), and he sifts through the elemental composition of fibrin, gelatin, egg albumin and plant substances that resemble them. All of them contain nitrogen, carbon, oxygen and hydrogen (Blaxter and Garnett, 2022).
And above all, the proportions look alike, uncannily so. Only small amounts of phosphorus and sulfur set them apart, and Mulder concludes that there is a single compound, a “radical”, passed along the food chain. The word radical is impressive. Yet it describes a simple idea: a group of atoms that can exist on its own, or inside a larger whole.
Picture a carpenter who finds the same plank, in the same size, in a table and in a wardrobe: he would deduce that the whole workshop revolves around it. That is exactly Mulder's reasoning: a single basic brick, present everywhere, from plant to animal. He even thinks he can remove the phosphorus and the sulfur to obtain this “pure” substance. The idea is beautiful. It is wrong, but nobody knows it yet.
He publishes his results in 1838 in an article titled “Sur la composition de quelques substances animales” (“On the composition of some animal substances”), which appeared in the Bulletin des sciences physiques et naturelles en Néerlande (Merriam-Webster). This work exists in a French version, then in a German version, which explains the two dates, 1838 and 1839, that you read on the web about the origin of the word protein. No mystery in that, just a translation. One contradiction fewer.
Who invented the word protein? The letter of 10 July 1838
The word protein was suggested by the Swedish chemist Berzelius, in a letter sent to Gerrit Mulder on 10 July 1838, from the Greek “prôteios”, “of the first rank”. Mulder is the first to print it, the same year. And if we know it today, it is thanks to a note by Hartley published in Nature in 1951.
In this letter, Berzelius suggests the name to stress the essential role of the nitrogen-containing core that Mulder believes he has found (Vignais, Encyclopædia Universalis). I do not quote the letter itself, as I could not find a reliable English translation of it, and I would rather say so than embroider. In his article, Mulder thanks Berzelius, but without saying that the name comes from him, and this origin was only established in the 20th century (Merriam-Webster). A thank-you, but no signature: the godfather stays in the shadows.
It is Harold Hartley who sets the record straight, in a short note in Nature in 1951 (Hartley, 1951), after talking about it in Stockholm, as a historical note by Vickery published the year before mentions (Vickery, 1950). More than a century of silence on the true godfather of the word! Goes to show that even in science, the small story sometimes waits a long time for its turn.
Then there is the protein proteios meaning, which is debated too, because several Greek words look alike, like cousins (Blaxter and Garnett, 2022):
- πρώτειος (prôteios), “of first quality”, the one Berzelius seems to have had in mind;
- πρωτεῖον (prôteion), “first prize”;
- πρῶτος (prôtos), quite simply “first”.
Mulder, for his part, explained the name by the Latin “primarius”, “of the first order”. And the god Proteus, that figure of mythology who changes shape at will? The image is tempting, I grant you, but according to these sources it has nothing to do with the matter. The serious lead is the Greek adjective meaning “first”. The resemblance is deceptive.
Liebig, from enthusiasm to divorce
Enter another chemist, Liebig, and he arrives full of enthusiasm. He first says he has reproduced Mulder's results (Blaxter and Garnett, 2022). In his book Animal Chemistry, published in 1842, he presents the theory as settled: a single “protein”, made by plants, then passed along the food chain.
I pause on this detail, because it will speak to readers who eat plant-based: in the chemistry of 1842, it is the plant that makes, and the animal that receives. I note it as a curiosity of the history of science, without drawing any nutritional argument from it: that would be cheating with history. For the very current question of protein or carbohydrates in plant foods, it is better to look at today's data, as part of a varied and balanced diet and a healthy lifestyle.
Then the wind turns. Liebig's students fail to purify albumin, fibrin and casein, and the master changes sides without ceremony. In 1847, in Researches on the Chemistry of Food, Liebig writes that Mulder's theory is false and that his protein does not exist (“proteine does not exist”). He adds, in passing, that Mulder misled him. Quite the atmosphere.
Less than ten years after its birth, the word thus loses the substance it was meant to name. Never mind, it does not disappear for all that. I do not take sides in this quarrel between scholars, because each of them did chemistry with the instruments of his time, and it is often by being wrong out loud that science moves forward. For some thirty years, English-language authors mostly talk about “albuminoids” or “nitrogenous substances”, the span of a whole generation.
What are proteins really? Chains of amino acids
What follows takes place in September 1902, at a congress in Karlsbad. Franz Hofmeister, a pharmacologist at the University of Prague, and Emil Fischer each describe, on their own, the bond that joins two amino acids: the peptide bond (Vignais, Encyclopædia Universalis). I like these coincidences: they say that an idea was ripe. It is the key that Mulder was missing: proteins are chains of amino acids, and that chain differs from one protein to the next.
Fischer also proposes words for these chains: dipeptide for two linked amino acids, polypeptide for a long chain. In 1907, he himself synthesizes a chain of more than a dozen amino acids. A short bracelet, in short, next to the very long necklaces that proteins are.
Keep this image of the necklace, it is worth more than a long speech. Each bead is an amino acid, and the clasp that links two beads is the peptide bond. A protein is a very long necklace, folded on itself the way you would drop it in a heap in the hollow of your hand, and the order of the beads changes everything. Thread the same beads in a different order, and you get a different piece of jewelry.
There you go, that is the whole difference between amino acid, peptide and protein: the bead, a piece of necklace, the whole necklace. What remained was to accept that a molecule could be that big. Hermann Staudinger defends, in the early 1920s, the idea of giant molecules made of long chains, the macromolecules, and he receives the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1953 “for his discoveries in the field of macromolecular chemistry” (Nobelprize.org). The peptide bond goes to Hofmeister and Fischer; Staudinger's contribution is to have made the idea of giant molecules credible.
Origin of the word protein: key dates in one table
To get the origin of the word protein straight without getting lost in the contradictory dates of the web, the simplest way is to lay everything out flat, with, for each line, the date given by a verified source. Nothing more, nothing less. Only one line breaks the chronological order: Hartley's, which reveals in 1951 what had happened in 1838.
| Date | Who | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| 1728 (presented), 1745 (published) | Beccari | Discovery of the gluten of wheat flour |
| Around 1789 | Fourcroy | Three animal materials distinguished: albumin, fibrin, gelatin |
| 1838 | Mulder | Analyses, idea of a common radical, first publication of the word |
| 10 July 1838 | Berzelius | Suggests the name in a letter to Mulder |
| 1842 | Liebig | Adopts the theory in Animal Chemistry |
| 1847 | Liebig | Declares that Mulder's protein does not exist |
| 1902 | Hofmeister and Fischer | Description of the peptide bond |
| Early 1920s | Staudinger | Defends the idea of macromolecules (Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1953) |
| 1951 | Hartley | Publishes the origin of the word in Nature |
The word is born in 1838, its true definition in 1902. In between, a lot of groping around, and a name that holds on.
What the name left behind
Let's take stock, honestly. Mulder's single formula was wrong, but his intuition of a central molecule for living things was right. Proteins are indeed everywhere in living things, but many, each with its own sequence of amino acids. Mulder had seen the forest, he was missing the trees.
The word, for its part, has kept a halo. Since the 19th century it has carried an idea of primacy, almost of supremacy (Blaxter and Garnett, 2022): as early as 1854, an author named Wilson sees in it a primary substance, from which many others would be born. The name means “of the first rank”, but that is a chemist's choice from 1838, not a measure of how important proteins are on the plate.
It reminds me of the little fable of the roast whose two ends were cut off because Mother did it, and Grandmother before her, when Grandmother simply had too small a pot. Our food culture is full of these inherited habits that we no longer even question. The “first rank” attached to the word protein is one of them.
So of course, you cannot blame Berzelius for wanting an impressive name: he was trying to stress the essential role of the nitrogen-containing core that Mulder thought he had found, and he could not guess the career this word would have in our kitchens and our conversations. The name is not to blame.
And that is where I keep hope. Understanding the origin of the word protein helps you stop fearing it: it is a chemist's word, dated and signed, with its youthful mistakes. As part of a varied and balanced diet and a healthy lifestyle, everyone can then look at their plate at their own pace, without being impressed by a label. To go further, on the plate side: the proteins in nori and a baby's protein needs.
One riddle remains, which I am keeping for the next article in this series: the name said “first”, so how did that “first” end up sticking to meat? If you have your own idea about it, write to me!
Frequently asked questions
Who invented the word protein?
The Swedish chemist Berzelius suggested the word protein in a letter to Gerrit Mulder on 10 July 1838. Mulder was the first to publish it, the same year, thanking Berzelius without specifying that the name came from him. This origin was only made public in 1951, by Hartley, in the journal Nature.
What does “protein” mean?
Protein comes from the Greek “prôteios”, which means “of the first rank” or “of first quality”, and Gerrit Mulder, who published the word in 1838, explained it by the Latin “primarius”, “of the first order”. This meaning reflects the choice of a 19th-century chemist and says nothing about the place of proteins on the plate.
What is the difference between protein, peptide and amino acid?
The amino acid is the brick. Two linked amino acids form a dipeptide, a long chain a polypeptide, two words coined by Emil Fischer. A protein is a long chain folded on itself. As part of a varied and balanced diet and a healthy lifestyle, plant foods provide proteins too.
Are all proteins identical?
No, proteins are not all identical. That was the hypothesis of the chemist Gerrit Mulder in 1838, who saw a single basic compound everywhere, but it was abandoned as early as 1847. Since 1902, with Hofmeister and Fischer, we know that they differ by the sequence of their amino acids.
Why did people first believe in a single molecule?
Because Gerrit Mulder's analyses gave almost identical proportions of nitrogen, carbon, oxygen and hydrogen for very different materials, of animal as well as plant origin. He concluded, in 1838, that there was a single basic compound passed along the food chain, an idea that Liebig first took up, then rejected in 1847.
Does the word protein come from the god Proteus?
No: historical sources link the word protein to the Greek adjective “prôteios”, “of the first rank”. Berzelius, who suggested the name in 1838, seems to have had this adjective in mind, and Mulder explained it by the Latin “primarius”. The god Proteus has, according to these sources, nothing to do with this name.
References
- Vickery H.B. (1950). The origin of the word protein. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 22(5), 387-393.
- Hartley H. (1951). Origin of the Word 'Protein'. Nature, 168(4267), 244.
- Tanford C., Reynolds J. (2001). Nature's Robots: A History of Proteins, chapter “The naming”. Oxford University Press.
- Blaxter T., Garnett T. (2022). Primed for power: a short cultural history of protein. TABLE (University of Oxford, SLU, Wageningen University & Research).
- Vignais P. Protéines (histoire de la notion). Encyclopædia Universalis, accessed 2 November 2026.
- University of Bologna. Jacopo Bartolomeo Beccari. unibo.it, accessed 2 November 2026.
- Merriam-Webster. protein (etymology note). Merriam-Webster Dictionary, accessed 2 November 2026.
- Nobel Prize Outreach. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1953: Hermann Staudinger, facts. Nobelprize.org, accessed 2 November 2026.
Updated: November 2026. Article written and validated by Éric Viard, founder of Biovie since 2007 and ISTOM engineer, co-author of “Algues au quotidien” (Gallimard, 2024), Best Cookbook in the World, Gourmand Cookbook Awards 2025, and Best Cookbook in France, Académie Nationale de Cuisine 2025.
The information presented in this article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a healthcare professional before changing your diet or supplementation.