Abstract
The Origin of Species was the culmination of Darwin’s theorizing of the previous twenty years. Its unique role in delineating the subsequent debates over all aspects of evolution accounts for an enduring interest in the construction of the Origin and in the intellectual and social factors that helped shape its final form.1 Of especial theoretical importance are the dynamical explanations that Darwin advanced in the Origin. These can be traced back at least to January 1839, when, in his fourth notebook on the transmutation of species, the E notebook, Darwin expressed a view of dynamics based on his notion that nature’s dynamical equilibrium maximizes the amount of life per unit area and that diversity is a way of accomplishing such maximization. One of the sources of this approach was the literature on scientific agriculture, which for the social scientists of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries formed an important part of or adjunct to the subject of political economy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Silvan S. Schweber, “The Origin of the Origin Revisited”, Journal of the History of Biology, 1977, 10: 229–316; “The Genesis of Natural Selection — 1838: Some Further Insights”, BioScience, 1978, 28: 321–326; “The Young Darwin”, Journal of the History of Biology, 1979, 12: 175–192; “Early Victorian Science: Science in Culture”, Journal of the History of Biology, 1980, 13: 121–140; “Darwin and the Political Economists: Divergence of Character”, Journal of the History of Biology, 1980, 13: 195–289; “Demons, Angels, and Probability: Some Aspects of British Science in the Nineteenth Century”, pp. 319–363 of Abner Shimony & Laszlo Tisza (eds.); Physics as Natural Philosophy: Essays in Honor of Laszlo Tisza on His Seventy-Fifth Birthday (Cambridge/London: The MIT Press, 1982); “Facteurs idéologiques et intellectuels dans la genèse de la théorie de la sélection naturelle”, pp. 123–142 of Yvette Conry (ed.): De Darwin au Darwinisme: science et idéologie [Congrès International pour le Centenaire de la Mort de Darwin, Paris-Chantilly, 13–16 septembre 1982] (Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1983); “The Wider British Context in Darwin’s Theorizing”, pp. 35–69 of David Kohn (ed.): The Darwinian Heritage. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985).
A cause is a “vera causa” if it can be shown (1) to be real, that is, to exist in phenomena other than the one under consideration, (2) to be competent to effect the consequences attributed to it, and (3) to be responsible for these effects.
Incidentally, Darwin’s comments in the transmutation notebooks indicate that he already appreciated the social components in the characterization of an explanation as a scientific one: What constitutes an acceptable theory is determined by a scientific community, whose religious and political beliefs are reflected in the criteria. From Herschel, as quoted in Babbage’s (1938) “Ninth Bridgewater Treatise,” Darwin had concluded that a scientific community whose religious outlook was theistic could accept a putative dynamical theory to account for the origin of species in which the Deity is conceived of as operating through secondary laws. The model of astronomy was the constant referent.
E 95–97; Sir Gavin de Beer (ed.): “Darwin’s Notebooks on Transmutation of Species, Part IV: Fourth Notebook (October 1838–10 July 1839”, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series, 1960, 2: 169–170.
I have interpreted “beings” as individuals. It is also possible in the context of the entry to understand by “beings” not “individuals” but “kinds”, a reading which follows from the remark “(all fishes to the state of the Ammocoetus…).’ Darwin in a famous section of the notebook — ”Organized beings represent tree, irregularly branched“ — had proposed the splitting of species into branches as a phenomenological fact. B21–23; Sir Gavin de Beer, (ed.), ”Darwin’s Notebooks on Transmutation of Species, Part I: First Notebook (July 1837—February 1838)“. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series, 1960, 2:. The reading of ”beings“ as ”kinds“ here would suggest that Darwin is postulating a Malthusian multiplication mechanism for species and would constitute an interesting illustration of Darwin’s use of analogies in his theoretical models. See in this connection Howard E. Gruber, Darwin on Man: A Psychological Study of Scientific Creativity, together with Darwin’s Early and Unpublished Notebooks, transcr. and annotated by Paul H. Barrett (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1974, 129–149, and Gruber (1978).
Robert C. Stauffer (ed.): Charles Darwin’s Natural Selection; being the second part of his big species book written from 1856 to 1858 (Cambridge/London: Cambridge University Press 1975), p. 234.
Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology (London: John Murray, 1830–1833), vol. 2, p. 134. In Natural Selection (see n. 6 above), during his discussion of the struggle of existence, Darwin refers to Sir C. Lyell’s “equilibrium in the number of species” with the caveat that “it expresses far too much quiescence” (p. 187).
C146; Sir Gavin de Beer (ed.): “Darwin’s Notebooks on Transmutation of Species, Part II: Second Notebook (February to July 1838)”, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History Historical Series), 1960, 2: 98.
C147e; Sir Gavin de Beer, M.J. Rowlands, & B.M. Skramovsky (eds.): “Darwin’s Notebooks on Transmutation of Species, Part VI: Pages Excised by Darwin”, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series, 1967, 3: 149.
The Charles Darwin Archives in Cambridge University Library, Cambridge, England.
I have elsewhere (“The Origin of the Origin Revisited”; see n. 1 supra) referred to other possible sources for such an approach, namely, the philosophical writings of Hume, Smith, and Bentham: that is, the philosophical tradition which based ethics on a pleasure-pain calculus. For this approach in the Scottish circles see Adam Smith; Essays on Philosophical Subjects, (ed.) W.P.D. Wightman & J.C. Bryce [with Dugald Stewart: Account of Adam Smith, ed. I.S. Ross] (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980 — The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 3), and the essays introducing the texts.
Dugald Stewart, Lectures on Political Economy, ed. Sir William Hamilton The Collected Works of Dugald Stewart, vols. 8 and 9 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1877).
Incidentally, Stewart’s Lectures on Political Economy are a rich source for a historical overview of demography, agricultural practices, and agricultural economics during the eighteenth century. See also C.A. Browne’s A Source Book of Agricultural Chemistry (1944). [full biographical reference needed]
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8, p. 11.
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8, p. 12.
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8, p. 103 ff.
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8, p. 107.
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8, p. 108.
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8, p. 127.
“To begin, then, with that science, which in the judgment of the most enlightened politicians, is the most essential of all to human happiness, — I mean the Science of Agriculture; ow various and important are the subjects which belong exclusively to its province! The general principles of vegetation; the chemical analysis of soils; the theory of manures; the principles which regulate the rotation of crops, and which modify the rotation, according to the diversities of soil and climate; the implements of agriculture, both mechanical and animal; — and a thousand other topics of a similar description” (Stewart, n. 12 supra), vol. 8, p. 128. It is interesting to note that Stewart then suggested that “In general, it should seem, that in proportion as Agriculture advances, the size of farms should be reduced; or rather, that farms should divide themselves in proportion as the task of superintendence became more difficult.” The mechanization of farms had not yet begun in 1800!
C. Darwin, Autobiography, ed. N. Barlow (London: Collins 1958).
Barbara and Hensleigh Wedgwood The Wedgwood Circle 1730–1897 Four Generations of a Family and their Friends (London: Studio Vista 1980).
Sir Gavin de Beer (ed.): “Darwin’s Journal”, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History, Historical Series, 1959, 2: 8.
M108; Gruber and Barrett (n. 5 supra), pp. 286, 302 (n. 84).
M155; Gruber and Barrett, pp. 296, 305 (n. 127).
C267; Bulletin (n. 8 supra), vol. 2, p. 114. Not only “lives” but also “works” are mentioned here.
E.g., pp. 17–20; Gruber and Barrett (n. 5 supra), pp. 386–388, 408 (nn. 41, 43, 44, 45); see also pp. 403, 412 (n. 92).
Erasmus Darwin, Phytologia; or the philosophy of agriculture and gardening (London: J. Johnson, 1800).
Sir Gavin de Beer (ed.): “Darwin’s Notebooks on Transmutation of Species”, First Notebook 1837–8; also E. Krause, Erasmus Darwin (London: 1879).
Elements of Agricultural Chemistry, ed. John Davy, in The Collected Works of Sir Humphrey Davy, vols. 7, 8 (London: Smith, Elder, 1840) vol. 8, pp. 80–81.
Elements of Agricultural Chemistry, ed. John Davy, in The Collected Works of Sir Humphrey Davy, vols. 7, 8 (London: Smith, Elder, 1840) vol. 8, p. 89.
Elements of Agricultural Chemistry, ed. John Davy, in The Collected Works of Sir Humphrey Davy, vols. 7, 8 (London: Smith, Elder, 1840) vol. 8, pp. 28, 77–79.
His “global philosophy” was outlined in his introductory lecture and deserves to be quoted for his views on the balance of nature: “… all the varieties of material substances may be resolved into a comparatively small number of bodies, which, as they are not capable of being decompounded, are considered in the present state of chemical knowledge as elements…. The chemical elements acted upon by attractive powers combine in different aggregates. In their simpler combinations, they produce various crystalline substances, distinguished by the regularity of their forms. In more complicated arrangements, they constitute the varieties of vegetable and animal substances, bear the higher character of organization, and are rendered subservient to the purposes of life. And by the influence of heat, light, and electrical powers, there is a constant series of changes; matter assumes new forms, the destruction of one order of being tends to the conservation of another; solution and consolidation, decay and renovation, are connected; and whilst the parts of the system continue in a state of fluctuation and change, the order and harmony of the whole remain unalterable” (ibid., vol. 7, pp. 181–182).
London: Taylor and Walton. Other editions bear varying titles. For a valuable assessment of Liebig and the emergence of agricultural science see M.W. Rossiter: The Emergence of Agricultural Science: Justus Liebig and the Americans 1840–1880 (New Haven: Yale University Press 1975); J. Liebig: Chemistry in its application to agriculture and physiology, ed. L. Playfair (London: Taylor and Walton, 1840); also W. Krohn & W. Schafner: “The Origin and Structure of agricultural Chemistry”, pp. 27–52 of G. Lemaine et al. (eds.): Perspectives on the Emergence of Scientific Disciplines (The Hague, Paris: Mouton 1976). In his Chemistry Liebig defined “The GENERAL object of agriculture” as “to produce in the most advantageous manner certain qualities, of a maximum size, in certain parts or organs of particular plants…. The rules of a rational system of agriculture should enable us, therefore, to give each plant that which it specially requires for the attainment of the object in view”. As his reading lists indicate, Darwin read extensively in the literature of scientific agriculture in the period between 1840 and 1846; see Peter J. Vorzimmer (ed.): “The Darwin Reading Notebooks (1838–1860)”, Journal of the History of Biology, 1977, 10: 107–153.
J. Liebig: Organic Chemistry in its Applications to Agriculture and Physiology (London: Taylor and Walton, 1840), pp. vi-vii.
J. Liebig: Animal Chemistry or organic chemistry in its application to physiology and pathology, ed. W. Gregory (London: Taylor and Walton, 1842) pp. 129–130.
Vorzimmer (n. 35 supra), p. 128.
Vorzimmer “The Darwin Reading Notebooks”; see entry for Nov. 20 1844 and that for 14 Oct. 1851.
Justus Liebig: Familiar Letters on Chemistry, and its Relation to Commerce, Physiology, and Agriculture, ed. John Gardner (New York: D. Appleton; Philadelphia: George S. Appleton, 1843), pp. 107–108.
S.S. Schweber, “Darwin and the Political Economists” and “Facteurs idéologiques et intellectuels” (n. 1 supra). [reference to C. Limoges?]
Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. Edwin Cannan (New York: Modern Library 1937), p. 423.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schweber, S.S. (1994). Darwin and the Agronomists: An Influence of Political Economy on Scientific Thought. In: Cohen, I.B. (eds) The Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 150. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3391-5_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3391-5_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4258-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3391-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive