contraction of muscle is characterized by the development of force and movement (mechanics) together with the generation of heat (metabolism). Heat represents that component of the enthalpy of ATP hydrolysis that is not captured by the microscopic machinery of the cell for the performance of work. It arises from two conceptually and temporally distinct sources: initial metabolism and recovery metabolism. Initial metabolism comprises the hydrolysis of ATP and its rapid regeneration by hydrolysis of phosphocreatine (PCr) in the processes underlying excitation-contraction coupling and subsequent cross-bridge cycling and sliding of the contractile filaments. Recovery metabolism describes those process, both aerobic (mitochondrial) and anaerobic (cytoplasmic), that produce ATP, thereby allowing the regeneration of PCr from its hydrolysis products. An equivalent partitioning of muscle heat production is often invoked by muscle physiologists. In this formulation, total enthalpy expenditure is separated into external mechanical work (W) and heat (Q). Heat is again partitioned into three conceptually distinct components: basal, activation, and force dependent. In the following mini-review, we trace the development of these ideas in parallel with the development of measurement techniques for separating the various thermal components.Microcalorimetry; muscle heat production; myothermy; thermopiles MUSCLE IS A MOLECULAR machine. It operates isothermally, isobarically, and isovolumetrically. At the microscopic level, it directly converts the Free Energy component of the enthalpy of ATP hydrolysis into cyclic attachment and detachment of actomyosin cross bridges, together with transportation of ions up their electrochemical potential gradients. At the macroscopic level, two consequences result: the generation of force and the evolution of heat. Of these two entities, heat is by far the more difficult to quantify and to interpret. In this brief review, we trace the development of techniques to measure muscle heat production from the mid-19th century to the present, providing parallel commentary on the progressive understanding of muscle function. We give particular consideration to the development of techniques of separating the metabolic cost of cross-bridge cycling from the purely "overhead" cost of its activation.