Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Friday, March 30, 2007 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document Darwin 'was committed to publish'

by BBC

Thanks to Chris Jarvis for the link.

Reposted from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6500887.stm

darwinThe idea that Charles Darwin delayed publishing On the Origin of Species for 20 years for fear of ridicule is a myth, a new assessment claims.

A Cambridge historian with access to Darwin's papers says there is simply no evidence to show the naturalist held back his evolution theory.

Dr John van Wyhe says the scientist was just busy with other writings and also sporadically hindered by ill-health.

His analysis of events is published in a journal of the Royal Society.

"If you read his letters from the 'gap years', as I call them, there are many references to his friends and relatives about what he intends to do with his theory - and that is to publish once he has finished his other work," Dr van Wyhe told BBC News.

"The problem was that 'other work' took him far longer than he expected."

The other work in question included writing up the detailed descriptions of animals, plants and rocks he saw on his career-defining voyage to the Galapagos Islands on HMS Beagle.

In particular, it seems, he spent an inordinate amount of time describing new barnacles - a personal passion.

'Consistent' line

Charles Darwin's seminal work On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection was first published in 1859. In its opening pages, he refers to his realisation of its central ideas coming to him in 1837.

Various explanations have been offered for the 22-year wait to get into print.

Some say he prevaricated because he feared scorn from scientific colleagues, others that he was concerned about persecution by the church; some even that his ideas might have annoyed his religious wife, or reflected some deep inner psychological turmoil.

But Cambridge University's Dr van Wyhe is in a privileged position to judge Darwin's real motives.

The Cambridge academic has spent a career studying the naturalist and has gathered together huge numbers of notes, diaries and other documents for an online library.

Dr van Wyhe says close examination of these texts shows Darwin to be consistent in his determination to publish.

Slow burn

"Darwin was aware that his theories would be despised but that does not mean he was afraid of saying what he believed," the scholar added.

"His project was highly ambitious and of immense scope and he needed time to garner the necessary evidence. But he was also working on other projects - his Beagle-related works, then his work on barnacles - and these pushed back the date until he could start work on his species theory."

Dr van Wyhe says the "delay view" appears to have gathered pace in the 1940s, probably inherited from earlier writers who did not have access to all of Darwin's work.

He says the long gestation was typical of the way Darwin worked. The naturalist's book on orchids was not published until 30 years after that research began; he published his earthworms book 42 years after first conceiving the idea.

When On the Origin of Species did finally go to the printers it was supposed to have caused a sensation , although some now suspect the level of controversy, just like the significance of the gap years, has been exaggerated.

Darwin's observation that species evolve over the course of generations through the natural selection of favourable traits has become a central pillar of biological thinking and has influenced many other fields of scientific endeavour.

Dr van Wyhe details his arguments in the Notes and Records of the Royal Society.

Comments 1 - 9 of 9 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #28755 by MIND_REBEL on March 30, 2007 at 4:13 pm

 avatarInteresting, but it still doesn't prove that he didn't fear persecution from the church. The Church at the time was still burning witchs at the stake, so it's only logical that personal safety played a role.

Other Comments by MIND_REBEL

2. Comment #28762 by Russell Blackford on March 30, 2007 at 4:55 pm

^I think you'll find that the last supposed witch executed by any method in England was way back in the 17th century. I doubt that that was on his mind in the 1830s-1850s, whatever else was.

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

3. Comment #28765 by Heathen Dan on March 30, 2007 at 5:03 pm

 avatarI hope to read van Wyhe's paper if ever it goes online. While Darwin is indeed determined to publish his insight into transmutation, I do believe that there is some trepidation on Darwin's part due to the controversial nature of his theory.

For instance, he likens telling Joseph Hooker about his theory as "confessing a murder." And he gave his wife money to have his book published, after his death.

Could it be that Darwin pursued his other research projects because he is afraid of thinking too much about his transmutation theory?

Other Comments by Heathen Dan

4. Comment #28794 by DarwinsPitbull on March 30, 2007 at 11:33 pm

I could completely understand if Darwin was a little afraid of publishing his book. He came up with a theory that put a bullet into god's head. I would be afraid that his henchmen would come after me too.

Other Comments by DarwinsPitbull

5. Comment #28850 by antipodesman on March 31, 2007 at 8:29 am

Prevaricate is to deviate from the truth. Does he mean procrastinate?
There does not appear to be any discussion of the fact that the draft manuscript for the Origin sat wrapped up in a closet in Down House for many years with instructions to Emma for publication if anything happened to him. There are probably many reasons for his procrastination.

Other Comments by antipodesman

6. Comment #28859 by oeditor on March 31, 2007 at 10:16 am

Comment #28762 by Russell Blackford
"I think you'll find that the last supposed witch executed by any method in England was way back in the 17th century. I doubt that that was on his mind in the 1830s-1850s, whatever else was."
Maybe, but the last witchcraft trial in Britain came a hundered or so year later in 1944!
http://heritage.scotsman.com/myths.cfm?id=1597372006
The last witch burning in Europe seems to have been as recently as 1793, only 16 years before Darwin's birth http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/1000years.htm and elsewhere. Of course, if you travel outside Europe you can find places where such things are much more recent. like Congo in the closing years of the 20th century. "Children are being accused of sorcery and chucked onto the streets.
The unlucky ones are murdered by their own family members before they escape." and
"The sect - run by a free-thinking Congolese Bible teacher called Prophet Onokoko - has 230 children on its books. All are accused of witchcraft."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/575178.stm
Brian

Other Comments by oeditor

7. Comment #28870 by scottishgeologist on March 31, 2007 at 12:09 pm

 avatarAlthough witchcraft killings of people ended some time before, there is an incident which may be of interest:

The Great Auk in St Kilda:

In 1840, what is believed to have been the last Great Auk recorded in the British Isles, was killed by the islanders on Stac an Armin. It is said that they thought it had caused a violent storm, and they suspected it was a witch! The last Great Auks in the world were killed in Iceland in 1844.

(This was lifted off a web page about St Kilda, so I dont know if it is true or not. However I first learned of from a marine biologist who does a lot of research into Hebridean sea life - OK , I know that that is an "appeal to authority", but you get the drift.

If it is true, then it is very sad that a species shoul be be wiped out (in this country at any rate) due to superstitous ignorance.

Other Comments by scottishgeologist

8. Comment #28875 by cheshirecat on March 31, 2007 at 12:38 pm

No one in England has ever lawfully been burned at the stake for being a witch. This witchcraft buisness is rubbish.

Other Comments by cheshirecat

9. Comment #28940 by elvenearth on March 31, 2007 at 6:03 pm

Quote: "MIND_REBEL on March 30, 2007 at 4:13 pm
avatar: Interesting, but it still doesn't prove that he didn't fear persecution from the church. The Church at the time was still burning witchs at the stake, so it's only logical that personal safety played a role."

In general it was actually the secular authorities who were involved in the execution of accused witches across western and central Europe. King James 1st of England for example had certain of his enemies hanged for witchcraft.
It is true of course that the particular beliefs or motivations of these authorities were instrumental causes to such executions happening.
It should also be noted that individual churchmen, bishops and orders like the Dominicans were often heavily involved in inquisitions etc. However this did not mean that they had the direct approval of say "the Catholic church" (Such inquisitions were usually aimed at heresy and ended up covering witchcraft at some point). In the case of the Spanish Inquisition for example, the Pope actually tried to curb the excesses set in place by Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand (not successfully it must be said - he was mostly ignored).

In any case your idea that people were still being burned at the stake, in England or anywhere else in western Europe, for witchcraft at the time of Darwin is nonsense (an aside, but it is my understanding that hangings were the punishment for witchcraft in England). Besides how could Darwin's theory in any likely way have been linked to witchcraft?

Other Comments by elvenearth
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: