Abstract
This chapter considers the Christian tradition, the influence of which deeply penetrated nineteenth-century’s social and political life as well as impinging upon the nineteenth-century animal protection movement. Instead of focusing on the major theologians and canonical texts, as in the conventional history of ideas, I examine the initiatives taken by laity and clergy within the animal protection movement itself in relation to the Christian tradition. I present the Christian faith as the central source of identification, justification, and inspiration for the majority of the people in the anti-cruelty and anti-vivisection movements and illustrate how these people actively drew upon the resources in the Christian tradition to meet their various mobilizing tasks and objectives. By appropriating theological concepts such as Creationism, human dominion over animals, the benevolence of God, the sacrificial spirit of Christ, as well as anti-science rhetoric and critiques that were current in the wider controversies concerning religion and science in society, animal protectionists not only turned Christianity into a central cultural force in the movement, but also recreated a positive Christian sub-tradition of humanity toward animals in nineteenth-century Britain.
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 subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The following story was quoted in “Facts and Scraps: The Force of Religion,” The Voice of Humanity 3 (1832): 75. It was also either quoted or mentioned in Drummond , Humanity to Animals the Christian’s Duty , 45; The Pleasures of Benevolence; Preece and Li eds., William Drummond’s The Rights of Animals (1838), 223; Smith, A Scriptural and Moral Catechism, 62–63; Macaulay, Essay on Cruelty to Animals, 132–133.
- 2.
See, e.g., White , “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis”; Singer , Animal Liberation, 189–212; Wise , Rattling the Cage, 10–22; Linzey , Animal Rights; Linzey, Christianity and the Rights of Animals. For a work that challenged this widely held view, see Preece , Animals and Nature: Culture Myths, Culture Realities. Observing the limitations of this view, scholars increasingly turned to Christianity for resources and insights on which to construct positive theologies for animals. See, e.g., Linzey, Animal Theology; Linzey and Yamamoto eds., Animals on the Agenda; Linzey and Cohn-Sherbok, After Noah; Webb, On God and Dogs; Cough, On Animals: Volume 1 Systematic Theology; Cough, On Animals: Volume 2 Theological Ethics; Waldau and Patton eds., A Communion of Subjects.
- 3.
In this work, I use the term “animal protection movement” or “animal defense movement” to encompass both the general movement for animals and the anti-vivisection movement. In order to faithfully reflect the terms and categories used by historical actors, throughout this book, I also do not avoid such terms as “animal creation,” “brute creation,” “dumb creation,” or “animals,” as used by people in the historical period covered. However, when not particularly referring to the views of the historical subjects, I still adopt the less clumsy, though deeply problematic term of “animals,” to refer to animals other than humans.
- 4.
Englander, “The Word and the World,” 18.
- 5.
See, e.g., Owen, The Place of Enchantment, 1–16; Green, Religion in the Age of Decline, 1–30; deVries and Morgan eds., Women, Gender and Religious Cultures in Britain 1800–1940; Skinner , “Religion.”
- 6.
See Report of the Society for Preventing Wanton Cruelty to Brute Animals.
- 7.
The APRHAC published a quarterly journal, The Voice of Humanity, had at least four local branches by 1832, and merged with the SPCA in 1832.
- 8.
There is another animal society founded in 1910 with the same name, so the two societies will be hereafter abbreviated as AFS1 and AFS2 . The AFS1 published The Animals’ Friend, or Progress of Humanity. The latter title is used in this book to distinguish it from another journal called The Animals’ Friend, which had been published since 1894.
- 9.
The number of cases dealt with by the (R)SPCA increased from 100 in its first year to an average of 5000 by the end of the nineteenth century. See Harrison , Peaceable Kingdom, 82–122.
- 10.
On evangelicalism and its influence on Victorian society, see Hilton, The Age of Atonement; Wolffe, God and Greater Britain, 20–30; Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain.
- 11.
For more on the national reformation of manners and the moral reform tradition, see Innes, “Politics and Morals”; Hunt, Governing Morals; Roberts, Making English Morals.
- 12.
Fairholme and Pain , A Century of Work for Animals, 55.
- 13.
A Report of the Proceedings at the Annual Meeting, 16.
- 14.
An Address to the Public from the Society for the Suppression of Vice, 91. Cruelty to animals, however, constituted a small part of the Society’s prosecution work. Among the 678 convictions that the Society procured in its first year, over 600 were for Sabbath-breaking, and only four were for cruelty to animals.
- 15.
Herald of Humanity, March 1844, 2; “Bartholomew Fair,” Voice of Humanity 1 (1830): 54.
- 16.
A Report of the Proceedings at the Annual Meeting, 13. See also SPCA Annual Report, 1832, 13.
- 17.
Report of an Extra Meeting of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 4.
- 18.
Greenwood , “On National Cruelty,” 146–147.
- 19.
See “Appendix to the Prospectus of the Animals’ Friend Society,” Progress of Humanity, no. 1 (1833): 20–21; Progress of Humanity, no. 1 (1833): 7–9.
- 20.
A Report of the Proceedings at the Annual Meeting, 13.
- 21.
For example, for some time, while the SPCA ’s work was still largely confined to the Metropolis, the AFS1 already had ten branches by 1841, spreading as far as Dover, Canterbury, Gravesend, Birmingham, Walsall, Bristol, Yarmouth, Brighton, Norwich, and Manchester. The AFS1 was also more consistent in condemning cruelty by all social classes.
- 22.
See The Herald of Humanity, March 31, 1844, 1–2, 16.
- 23.
RSPCA Annual Report, 1835, 39.
- 24.
For example, the APRHAC with its heavy presence of Anglican ministers was managed under the secretaryship of J. W. Green, sub-editor of the Wesleyan-Methodist weekly newspaper, Christian Advocate.
- 25.
See Gompertz , Objects and Address of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 6.
- 26.
Gompertz , while still Secretary of the SPCA, sued John Ludd Fenner of the APRHAC for misappropriating donations that had been intended for the SPCA to the APRHAC . See Remarks of the Proceedings of the Voice of Humanity and the Association for Promoting Rational Humanity to the Animal Creation, 2–5.
- 27.
Progress of Humanity, no. 1 (1833): 6; Gompertz , Fragments in Defence of Animals, 109.
- 28.
See Best, “Evangelicalism and the Victorians,” 38.
- 29.
RSPCA Annual Report, 1838, 55.
- 30.
For sermons that preached on this text, see, e.g., Granger , An Apology for the Brute Creation, 5; On Cruelty to Animals, 4; Dent, Bull Baiting! A Sermon on Barbarity to God’s Dumb Creation; Moore, The Sin and Folly of Cruelty to Brute Animals, 1.
- 31.
Greenwood , “The Existing and Predicted State of the Inferior Creatures,” 149.
- 32.
Preece and Li eds., William Drummond’s The Rights of Animals , 27–28.
- 33.
Ibid., 28.
- 34.
Fairholme and Pain , A Century of Work for Animals, 10. Primatt’s work was republished in 1822, 1823 and 1834.
- 35.
Primatt , The Duty of Mercy and the Sin of Cruelty to Brute Animals, 29.
- 36.
Hunt, The Relation Between Man and the Brute Creation, 6.
- 37.
See, e.g., Young , The Sin and Folly of Cruelty to Brute Animals, 6; Primatt , The Duty of Mercy, Chapter 3.
- 38.
The RSPCA ’s medal, designed in 1883 to be worn at the Band of Mercy conference, was, for example, inscribed “Be Merciful After Thy Power.” See Band of Mercy, May 1883, 35.
- 39.
Leaflet circulated by the SPCA, “On the Folly of Supposing Dumb Animals to Have No Feeling,” in RSPCA Annual Report, 1837, 104–105; Short Stories No. 3. On Cruelty to Animals, 1.
- 40.
The last line of an anonymous poem “A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast” (Proverbs 12: 10) that was frequently quoted in anti-cruelty literature in the early half of the nineteenth century. See, e.g., RSPCA Annual Report, 1832, 5; Crowe, Animadversions on Cruelty to the Brute Creation, title page.
- 41.
Leaflet circulated by the SPCA, “An Address to the Drivers of Omnibuses and Other Public Carriages,” in RSPCA Annual Report, 1837, 113–114, at 114.
- 42.
See, e.g., Anon, Short Stories. Awful Instances of God’s Immediate Judgement for Cruelty to Brute Creation.
- 43.
Smith, Scriptural and Moral Catechism Designed to Inculcate the Love and Practice of Mercy, 59–60.
- 44.
Short Stories No. 3. On Cruelty to Animals, 1.
- 45.
On the development of Christian eschatology and evangelical theology over the course of the nineteenth century, see Rowell, Hell and the Victorians; Hilton, The Age of Atonement.
- 46.
The evangelicals, for example, were far from unanimous in their attitude toward the different modalities of natural theology; many were careful to point out the inadequacies of the study of nature for addressing the central aspects of evangelical faith such as atonement and salvation, and most did not employ it to prove the existence of God. See Fyfe, Science and Salvation, 7–8; Topham, “Science, Natural Theology, and Evangelicalism in Early Nineteenth-Century Scotland.”
- 47.
Styles , Animal Creation, 71, 109, 112.
- 48.
Sharp , An Essay in Condemnation of Cruelty to Animals, 1.
- 49.
“Late Royal Patronage of Educational Measures for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,” The Animal World, September 1872, 195.
- 50.
Ibid.
- 51.
RSPCA Annual Report, 1851, 24.
- 52.
On the concept of imperial trusteeship, see Eldridge, England’s Mission.
- 53.
Charlton, Toilers and Toll at the Outposts of Empire, 2.
- 54.
For a perceptive analysis of the relationship between the colonial animal societies and the British imperial apparatus in India, see Davis , The Gospel of Kindness, 160–167.
- 55.
RSPCA Annual Report, 1918, 158.
- 56.
Ibid., 1885, 84.
- 57.
See ibid., 1907, 51–73.
- 58.
For how the Queen’s jubilees could be seen as imperial occasions, see Cannadine, Ornamentalism, Chapter 8.
- 59.
“The Lamented Decease of the Queen,” The Animal World, February 1901, 18.
- 60.
For more on the anti-vivisection controversy, see, e.g., Stevenson, “Religious Elements in the Background of the British Anti-Vivisection Movement”; French , Anti-Vivisection and Medical Science in Victorian Society; Lansbury , The Old Brown Dog; Rupke ed., Vivisection in Historical Perspective. For more on the development of experimental physiology and medicine in nineteenth-century Britain , see Geison, Michael Foster and the Cambridge School of Physiology; Cunningham and Williams eds., The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine; Bynum, Science and the Practice of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century; Worboys, The Transformation of Medicine and the Medical Profession in Britain 1860–1900.
- 61.
For a comparison of these two draft bills and their relations with the Act that was eventually passed, see French , Antivivisection and Medical Science, 112–159; Hamilton, “Introduction,” xxiv–xxx; Feller, “Dog Fight.”
- 62.
Lord Shaftesbury’s speech in the Lords on the 1876 Cruelty to Animals Bill, Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, July 15, 1879, 426.
- 63.
In a survey conducted by the VSS in 1881 on the attitude of the prevention of cruelty to animal societies toward the vivisection question, of the 69 societies that replied, over half took a definite stand against vivisection, some were divided, and only one adopted an unofficial pro-vivisection stance. See “Prevention of Cruelty Societies and Vivisection,” Zoophilist, January 1882, 169–171.
- 64.
On the connection between anti-vaccination and anti-vivisection and the working-class fear of human experimentation, see Durbach, Bodily Matters; Miller , “Vivisection, Force-Feeding, and Scientific Medicine.”
- 65.
Prochaska, Women and Philanthropy in Nineteenth-Century England, 243.
- 66.
French , Antivivisection and Medical Science, 239.
- 67.
For more on the participation of women in the anti-vivisection movement, see Elston, “Women and Anti-Vivisection in Victorian England, 1870–1900”; Donald , Women Against Cruelty.
- 68.
Bynum, Science and the Practice of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century, 114.
- 69.
Verschoyle, “The True Party of Progress,” 232.
- 70.
Houghton, The Victorian Frame of Mind, 1830–1870, 67.
- 71.
Words of Maurice Mandelbaum, quoted in Moore, “Theodicy and Society,” 154.
- 72.
See Altholz, “The Warfare of Conscience with Theology.”
- 73.
Parry , Democracy and Religion , 5. On the centrality of religion to politics in the nineteenth century, see also Hilton, The Age of Atonement.
- 74.
Cobbe’s letter to the editor, Home Chronicler , September 16, 1876, 201.
- 75.
Hansard’s, May 22, 1876, 1021.
- 76.
Ibid., July 15, 1879, 434.
- 77.
Zoophilist, March 1896, 322.
- 78.
Ibid., March 1896, 328.
- 79.
Ibid., April 1897, 212.
- 80.
Ibid., March 1899, 219.
- 81.
Against Vivisection: Verbatim Report of the Speeches at the Great Public Demonstration, 26.
- 82.
Cobbe , “Miss Frances Power Cobbe on ‘Lesser Measures,’” 171.
- 83.
“Our Cause and the Moral Law,” Abolitionist, July 15, 1902, 39–41, at 40.
- 84.
See Hilton, Age of Atonement.
- 85.
See Collini , Public Moralists, 60–90; Harrison , Late Victorian Britain 1875–1901, 120–130.
- 86.
Oxenham , Moral and Religious Vivisection of Vivisection, 13.
- 87.
“The Pulpit: Vivisection and Christianity,” Abolitionist, April 1902, 51.
- 88.
Man’s Relation to the Lower Animals, Viewed from the Christian Standpoint, 12.
- 89.
See, e.g., Morris , The Cowardly Cruelty of the Experiments on Animals; Ouida , “The Culture of Cowardice,” Humane Review 1 (1900–1901): 110–119.
- 90.
See Collini , Public Moralists, 60–90.
- 91.
“The British Institute at Chelsea,” Zoophilist, August 1898, 72.
- 92.
Barrett, “May a Christian Tolerate Cruelty?” 11.
- 93.
Adams , The Coward Science, 196, 228–229.
- 94.
Hansard’s, July 15, 1879, 430.
- 95.
Cobbe , “Mr. Lowe and the Vivisection Act,” 347.
- 96.
Quoted in Berdoe , An Address on the Attitude of the Christian Church towards Vivisection, 5.
- 97.
Zoophilist, June 1901, 10.
- 98.
Hilton, The Age of Atonement, 5–6.
- 99.
Harrison , Late Victorian Britain, 126.
- 100.
“Annual Meeting of the LAVS,” Animals’ Guardian, June 1893, 150–164, at 156.
- 101.
Coleridge, “The Nineteenth Century Defenders of Vivisection,” 236.
- 102.
“Our Cause in the Pulpit,” Zoophilist, June 1891, 27. For the Quaker anti-vivisectionists’ adoption of the same mode of questioning, see Glaholt, “Vivisection as War,” 162–163.
- 103.
“From the Battlefield,” Animals’ Friend, September 1894, 40–42, at 42.
- 104.
See Donald , Picturing Animals in Britain, 1750–1850.
- 105.
“Christ in the Laboratory,” Animals’ Guardian, May 1902, 57.
- 106.
Buchanan , “The City without God,” 66–67.
- 107.
Wilcox , “Christ Crucified,” 108. For two other poems dwelling on the same theme of Christ and the tortured animals, see Animal Guardian, June 1909, 105.
- 108.
Oxenham , Moral and Religious Estimate, 11.
- 109.
For more on scientific naturalism , see Turner , Between Science and Religion ; Turner , Contesting Cultural Authority; Lightman , Evolutionary Naturalism in Victorian Britain; Dawson and Lightman eds., Victorian Scientific Naturalism; Lightman and Reidy eds., The Age of Scientific Naturalism.
- 110.
See Turner , Contesting Cultural Authority, 197–198, 201–228; Barton, “Huxley , Lubbock , and Half a Dozen Others.”
- 111.
See Bernard Lightman , “Science and Culture.”
- 112.
For more on the anti-vivisection movement’s critique of the advancing science, the medical profession, and the accompanying ideology of scientific naturalism , see French , Antivivisection and Medical Science, 220–372.
- 113.
See, e.g., Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies; Brooke, Science and Religion ; Lightman, “Victorian Sciences and Religion: Discordant Harmonies”; Livingstone, Hart, and Noll eds., Evangelicals and Science in Historical Perspective.
- 114.
“The Twentieth Annual Report of the Victorian Street Society,” Zoophilist, July 1895, 205.
- 115.
“Professor F. W. Newman ‘On Cruelty,’ in ‘Fraser’s Magazine,’ April, 1876,” Home Chronicler , July 29, 1876, 90–91, at 90; quoted also in Oxenham , Moral and Religious Estimate, 19.
- 116.
“Vivisection Meeting at Shrewsbury,” Home Chronicler , October 27, 1877, 1130–1132, at 1130.
- 117.
Galton, English Men of Science, 259–260.
- 118.
Zoophilist and Animals’ Defender, June 1902, 34.
- 119.
See, e.g., Anna Kingsford ’s vivid use of the metaphor in Hart ed., Anna Kingsford, 261, and “Professor Michael Foster on Vivisection,” Verulam Review, October 1894, 303–307.
- 120.
“London: Church Anti-Vivisection League,” Zoophilist, July 1901, 84.
- 121.
Cobbe’s letter to the editor, Home Chronicler , September 16, 1801.
- 122.
Cobbe , “The New Morality,” 65.
- 123.
Osborn, Colonel Osborn on Christianity and Modern Science, 2
- 124.
Coleridge, Great Testimony against Scientific Cruelty, vi.
- 125.
Cobbe , “Magnanimous Atheism,” 50–51.
- 126.
Coleridge, The Idolatry of Science, 7, 93.
- 127.
“A Portrait,” Zoophilist, February 1882, 179–181, at 179.
- 128.
Cobbe , The Scientific Spirit of the Age, 12.
- 129.
Zoophilist, August 1902, 93.
- 130.
The Place of Pasteur in Medicine, 8, in “Pamphlets 1876–1927,” U DBV/25/3, BUAV Archives, University of Hull. See also The Scientist at the Bedside (written by an M. D). For more on the patient-as-a-person movement, Porter ed., The Cambridge History of Medicine, 123–126.
- 131.
Cobbe , “Hygeiolatry,” 78.
- 132.
Zoophilist, June 1902, 34.
- 133.
Lumsden, An Address given at the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Scottish Branch of the National Anti-Vivisection Society, 6.
- 134.
Zoophilist, June 1896, 20.
- 135.
Barton, “Evolution: The Whitworth Gun in Huxley’s War,” 262.
- 136.
See Chapter 5.
- 137.
Egerton, “Prospectus of the Late Association for Promoting Rational Humanity towards the Animal Creation”; RSPCA First Minute Book, 1824–1832, 113; Voice of Humanity 2 (1831): 149.
- 138.
Greenwood , “The Existing and Predicted State of the Inferior Creatures,” 149.
- 139.
Granger , An Apology for the Brute Creation, 28.
- 140.
Voice of Humanity 2 (1831): 21.
- 141.
RSPCA Annual Report, 1896, 125.
- 142.
Ibid., 1897, 126.
- 143.
The statistics are based on “Appendix IV. Branches and office bearers,” RSPCA Annual Report, 1889, lv–lxx.
- 144.
“Kindness to Animals,” Times, July 4, 1898, 11.
- 145.
Ibid., July 7, 1903, 15.
- 146.
RSPCA Annual Report, 1892, 139.
- 147.
Zoophilist, November 1897, 130.
- 148.
Ibid., April 1896, 333.
- 149.
Cobbe , Life of Frances Power Cobbe as Told by Herself, 675.
- 150.
Cobbe , The Churches and Moral Questions, 5.
- 151.
Dunkley ed., The Official Report of the Church Congress , 440.
- 152.
See, e.g., “The Church Congress ,” Times, October 7, 1892, 6; “Experiments Upon Living Animals,” Times, October 25, 1892, 2.
- 153.
See Turner, “The Victorian Crisis of Faith and the Faith That Was Lost,” 13–17.
- 154.
Coleridge, “The Nineteenth Century Defenders of Vivisection,” 236.
- 155.
“Vivisection Denounced,” Zoophilist, May 1913, 10.
- 156.
Ibid.
- 157.
See, e.g., “A Bishop on Vivisection,” Zoophilist, March 1911, 174; Berdoe , “Progressive Morality”; Coleridge, “Dr. Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury,” Zoophilist, October 1912, 94.
- 158.
Trist, De Profundis, 13–14.
- 159.
The difference between the two camps is more properly defined as one of gradualists vs. immediatists, as regards working policy. Even the NAVS and the ADAVS , which worked for the revision of the 1876 Act rather than an immediate ban on vivisection, never abandoned the ultimate goal of total abolition as their fundamental objective. The image on the cover of this book taken from the ADAVS’s The Anti-Vivisection Review therefore expresses the aims of most anti-vivisection societies at this time, despite the split between them. For more on the split and the controversy surrounding it, see Coleridge, “The Aim and Policy of the National Anti-Vivisection Society ,” 138–139; Cobbe , The Fallacy of Restriction Applied to Vivisection; V. W., “Half a Loaf.”
- 160.
Cobbe , “Cobbe on ‘Lesser Measures,’” 171.
- 161.
[editorial] “Abolition and Christian Duty,” Abolitionist, April 1899, 6–8, at 8.
- 162.
Clark , The Making of Victorian England, 20.
- 163.
Collini , Matthew Arnold , 93.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Archival Sources
Blue Cross Archives, Burford, Oxfordshire.
BUAV Archives, University of Hull, Hull.
RSPB Archives, Sandy, Bedfordshire.
RSPCA Archives, Horsham, West Sussex.
Official Publications
Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, London.
Periodicals
The Abolitionist.
The Animals’ Friend.
The Contemporary Review.
The Edinburgh Review.
The Fortnightly Review.
The Herald of Humanity.
The Home Chronicler.
The Humane Review.
The Monthly Record and Animals’ Guardian.
Progress of Humanity.
The Voice of Humanity.
The Times.
Verulam Review.
The Zoophilist.
The Zoophilist and Animals’ Defender.
Other Printed Primary and Secondary Works
Adams, C. The Coward Science: Our Answer to Prof. Owen. London: Hatchards, 1882.
An Address to the Public from the Society for the Suppression of Vice, Part the Second. London: SSV, 1803.
Against Vivisection: Verbatim Report of the Speeches at the Great Public Demonstration. London: LAVS, 1899.
Altholz, J. L. “The Warfare of Conscience with Theology.” In Religion in Victorian Britain, Volume IV Interpretations, edited by Gerald Parsons, 150–169. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988.
Anon. Short Stories. Awful Instances of God’s Immediate Judgement for Cruelty to Brute Creation. London: SPCA, 1837.
Barrett, R. “May a Christian Tolerate Cruelty?” Home Chronicler, July 6, 1878, 11.
Barton, Ruth. “Evolution: The Whitworth Gun in Huxley’s War for the Liberation of Science from Theology.” In The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Theory, edited by David Oldroyd and Ian Lanham, 261–287. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel, 1983.
_____. “Huxley, Lubbock, and Half a Dozen Others: Professional and Gentlemen in the Formation of the X Club, 1851–1864.” Isis 89, no. 3 (1998): 410–444.
Bebbington, D. W. Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s. London: Unwin Hyman, 1989.
Berdoe, Edward. An Address on the Attitude of the Christian Church Towards Vivisection. London: VSS, 1891.
———. “Progressive Morality.” Zoophilist, January 1914, 140–141.
Best, Geoffrey. “Evangelicalism and the Victorians.” In The Victorian Crisis of Faith, edited by Anthony Symondson, 37–56. London: SPCK, 1970.
Brooke, J. H. Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Buchanan, Robert. The City of Dream: An Epic Poem. London: Chatto & Windus, 1888.
———. “The City Without God.” The Monthly Record and Animals’ Guardian, June 1901, 66–67.
Bynum, W. E. Science and the Practice of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Cannadine, David. Ornamentalism: How the British Saw Their Empire. London: Penguin, 2001.
Charlton [Hon. Mrs.]. Toilers and Toll at the Outposts of Empire. London: RSPCA, 1911.
Clark, G. Kitson. The Making of Victorian England. London: Routledge, 1962.
Cobbe, F. P. The Churches and Moral Questions. London: VSS, 1889.
———. The Fallacy of Restriction Applied to Vivisection. London: VSS, n.d.
———. Life of Frances Power Cobbe as Told by Herself. London: S. Sonnenschein, 1904.
———. “Magnanimous Atheism.” In The Peak in Darien, 9–74. Boston: Geo. H. Ellism, 1882.
———. “Miss Frances Power Cobbe on ‘Lesser Measures.’” Zoophilist, February 1898, 171–172.
———. “Mr. Lowe and the Vivisection Act.” Contemporary Review 29 (1876–1877): 335–347.
———. “The New Morality.” In The Modern Rack: Papers on Vivisection, 65–69. London: Swan Sonnenschein, 1889.
———. The Nine Circles of the Hell of the Innocent: Described from the Reports of the Presiding Spirits. London: Sonnenschein & Co., 1892.
———. The Scientific Spirit of the Age, and Other Pleas and Discussions. Boston: G.H. Ellis, 1888.
Coleridge, J. D. “The Nineteenth Century Defenders of Vivisection.” The Fortnightly Review 31, no. 1 (1882): 225–236.
Coleridge, Stephen. “The Aim and Policy of the National Anti-Vivisection Society.” Zoophilist, October 1900, 138–139.
———. “Dr. Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury.” Zoophilist, October 1912, 94.
———. Great Testimony against Scientific Cruelty. London: Bodley Head, 1918.
———. The Idolatry of Science. London: John Lane, 1920.
Collini, Stefan. Matthew Arnold: A Critical Portrait. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2008.
———. Public Moralists: Political Thought and Intellectual Life in Britain. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.
Colonel Osborn. Colonel Osborn on Christianity and Modern Science. London: VSS, 1891(?).
Cough, David L. On Animals: Volume 1 Systematic Theology. London: T&T Clark, 2012.
———. On Animals: Volume 2 Theological Ethics. London: T&T Clark, 2017.
Crowe, Henry. Animadversions on Cruelty to the Brute Creation, Addressed Chiefly to the Lower Classes. Bath: J. Browne, 1825.
Cunningham, Andrew and Perry Williams, eds. The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Davis, Janet M. The Gospel of Kindness: Animal Welfare & the Making of Modern America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
Dawson, Gowan and Bernard Lightman, eds. Victorian Scientific Naturalism: Community, Identity and Continuity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014.
Dent, John. Bull Baiting! A Sermon on Barbarity to God’s Dumb Creation. Reading: Smart and Cowslade, 1801.
———. The Pleasures of Benevolence; A Poem. London: Hunter, 1835.
De Vries, Jacqueline and Sue Morgan, eds. Women, Gender and Religious Cultures in Britain, 1800–1940. London: Routledge, 2010.
Donald, Diana. Picturing Animals in Britain 1750–1850. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007.
———. Women Against Cruelty: Animal Protection in Nineteenth-Century Britain. Manchester: Manchester University Press, forthcoming in 2019.
Drummond, William H. Humanity to Animals the Christian’s Duty; A Discourse. London: Hunter, 1830.
Dunkley, C. ed. The Official Report of the Church Congress, Held at Folkestone, 1892. London: Bemrose & Sons, 1892.
Durbach, Nadja. Bodily Matters: The Anti-Vaccination Movement in England, 1853–1907. Durham: Duke University Press, 2005.
Eldridge, C. C. England’s Mission: The Imperial Idea in the Age of Gladstone and Disraeli 1865–1880. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 1973.
Elston, Mary Ann. “Women and Anti-vivisection in Victorian England, 1870–1900.” In Vivisection in Historical Perspective, edited by N. A. Rupke, 259–294. London: Routledge, 1987.
Englander, David. “The Word and the World: Evangelicalism in the Victorian City.” In Religion in Victorian Britain, Vol. 2, Controversies, edited by Gerald Parsons, 14–38. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988.
Fairholme, E. G. and W. Pain. A Century of Work for Animals: The History of the R.S.P.C.A., 1824–1924. London: John Murray, 1924.
Feller, David Allan. “Dog Fight: Darwin as Animal Advocate in the Antivivisection Controversy of 1875.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 40, no. 3. (2009): 265–271.
French, Richard D. Anti-Vivisection and Medical Science in Victorian Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975.
Fyfe, Aileen. Science and Salvation: Evangelical Popular Science Publishing in Victorian Britain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
Galton, Francis. English Men of Science: Their Nature and Nurture. London: Macmillan, 1874.
Geison, Gerald L. Michael Foster and the Cambridge School of Physiology: The Scientific Enterprise in Late Victorian Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978.
Glaholt, Halye Rose. “Vivisection as War: The ‘Moral Disease’ of Animal Experimentation and Slavery in British Victorian Quaker Pacifist Ethics.” Society and Animals 20 (2012): 154–172.
Gompertz, Lewis. Fragments in Defence of Animals. London: W. Horsell, 1852.
_____. Objects and Address of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. London: William Molineux, 1829.
Granger, James. An Apology for the Brute Creation. London: T. Davies, 1772.
Green, S. J. D. Religion in the Age of Decline: Organisation and Experience in Industrial Yorkshire, 1870–1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Greenwood, Thomas. “The Existing and Predicted State of the Inferior Creatures, A Sermon.” The Voice of Humanity 2 (1831): 148–158.
———. “On National Cruelty.” The Voice of Humanity 1 (1830): 141–147.
Hamilton, Susan. “Introduction.” In Anima Welfare & Anti-Vivisection 1870–1910, Vol. 1, edited by Susan Hamilton, xiv–xlvii. London: Routledge, 2004.
Harrison, Brian. Peaceable Kingdom: Stability and Change in Modern Britain. Oxford: Clarendon, 1982.
Harrison, J. F. C. Late Victorian Britain 1875–1901. London: Fontana, 1990.
Hart, Samuel Hopgood, ed. Anna Kingsford: Her Life, Letters, Diary and Work. By Her Collaborator Edward Maitland, Vol. I, 3rd ed. London: J.M. Watkins, 1913.
Helmstadter, Richard J. and Bernard Lightman. Victorian Faith in Crisis: Essays on Continuity and Change in Nineteenth-Century Religious Belief. London: Macmillan, 1990.
Hilton, Boyd. The Age of Atonement: The Influence of Evangelicalism on Social and Economic Thought, 1785–1865. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.
Houghton, Walter E. The Victorian Frame of Mind, 1830–1870. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957.
Hunt, Alan. Governing Morals: A Social History of Moral Regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Hunt, John. The Relation Between Man and the Brute Creation: A Sermon. London: Whittaker and Co., 1865.
Innes, Joanna. “Politics and Morals: the Reformation of Manners Movement in Later Eighteenth-Century England.” In Inferior Politics: Social Problems and Social Policies in Eighteenth-Century Britain, 179–226. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Linzey, Andrew. Animal Rights: A Christian Assessment of Man’s Treatment of Animals. London: SCM Press, 1976.
———. Animal Theology. London: SCM Press, 1994.
———. Christianity and the Rights of Animals. London: SPCK, 1987.
Linzey, Andrew and Dan Cohn-Sherbok. After Noah: Animals and the Liberation of Theology. London: Mowbray, 1997.
Linzey, Andrew and Dorothy Yamamoto, eds. Animals on the Agenda: Questions About Animals for Theology and Ethics. London: SCM Press, 1998.
Lansbury, Carol. The Old Brown Dog: Women, Workers, and Vivisection in Edwardian England. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.
Lightman, Bernard. Evolutionary Naturalism in Victorian Britain: The “Darwinians” and Their Critics. Farnham: Ashgate, 2009.
———. “Science and Culture.” In The Cambridge Companion to Victorian Culture, edited by Francis O’ Gorman, 12–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
———. “Victorian Sciences and Religion: Discordant Harmonies.” Osiris 16 (2001): 343–366.
Lightman, Bernard and Michael S. Reidy, eds. The Age of Scientific Naturalism: Tyndall and His Contemporaries. London: Pickering & Chatto, 2014.
Livingstone, D. N., D. G. Hart and M. A. Noll, eds. Evangelicals and Science in Historical Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Lumsden, L. I. An Address Given at the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Scottish Branch of the National Anti-Vivisection Society. London: NAVS, n.d.
Macaulay, James. Essay on Cruelty to Animals. Edinburgh: John Johnstone, 1839.
Man’s Relation to the Lower Animals, Viewed from the Christian Standpoint: A Lecture. London: CAVL, n.d.
Miller, Ian. “Necessary Torture? Vivisection, Suffragette Force-Feeding, and Responses to Scientific Medicine in Britain c. 1870–1920.” Journal of the History of Medicine 64, no. 3 (2009): 333–372.
Morris, F. O. The Cowardly Cruelty of the Experiments on Animals. London: n.p., 1890.
Moore, James R. Post-Darwinian Controversies: A Study of the Protestant Struggle to Come to Terms with Darwin in Great Britain and America, 1870–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
———. “Theodicy and Society: The Crisis of the Intelligentsia.” In Victorian Faith in Crisis: Essays on Continuity and Change in Nineteenth-Century Religious Belief, edited by Richard J. Helmstadter and Bernard Lightman, 153–186. London: Macmillan, 1990.
Moore, Thomas. The Sin and Folly of Cruelty to Brute Animals: A Sermon. Birmingham: J. Belcher and Son, 1810.
On Cruelty to Animals. London: Tract Association of the Society of Friends, 1856.
Ouida. “The Culture of Cowardice.” The Humane Review 1 (1900): 110–119.
———. “Our Cause in the Pulpit,” Zoophilist, June 1891, 27.
Owen, Alex. The Place of Enchantment: British Occultism and the Culture of the Modern. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
Oxenham, H. N. Moral and Religious Estimate of Vivisection. London: John Hodges, 1878.
Parry, Jonathan. Democracy and Religion: Gladstone and the Liberal Party, 1867–1875. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
Porter, Roy, ed. The Cambridge History of Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Preece, Rod. Animals and Nature: Culture Myths, Culture Realities. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1999.
Preece, Rod and Chien-hui Li, eds. William Drummond’s The Rights of Animals and Man’s Obligation to Treat Them with Humanity (1838). Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 2005.
Primatt, Humphrey. The Duty of Mercy and the Sin of Cruelty to Brute Animals. Fontwell, Sussex: Centaur, 1992 [1776].
Prochaska, F. K. Women and Philanthropy in Nineteenth-Century England. Oxford: Clarendon, 1980.
Remarks of the Proceedings of the Voice of Humanity and the Association for Promoting Rational Humanity to the Animal Creation. London: AFS, n.d.
Report of an Extra Meeting of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. London: SPCA, 1832.
A Report of the Proceedings at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Promoting Rational Humanity Towards the Animal Creation. London: APRHAC, 1832.
Report of the Society for Preventing Wanton Cruelty to Brute Animals. Liverpool: Egerton Smith & Co., 1809.
Ritvo, Harriet. “Animals in Nineteenth-Century Britain: Complicated Attitudes and Competing Categories.” In Animals and Human Society: Changing Perspectives, edited by Aubrey Manning and James Serpell, 106–126. London: Routledge, 1994.
Roberts, M. J. D. Making English Morals: Voluntary Association and Moral Reform in England, 1787–1886. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Rowell, Geoffrey. Hell and the Victorians: A Study of the Nineteenth-Century Theological Controversies Concerning Eternal Punishment and the Future Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974.
Rupke, N. A. ed. Vivisection in Historical Perspective. London: Routledge, 1987.
The Scientist at the Bedside. London: VSS, 1887.
Sharp, Samuel. An Essay in Condemnation of Cruelty to Animals. London: Messrs. Simpkin, Marshall and Co., 1851.
Short Stories No. 3. On Cruelty to Animals. London: SPCA, 1837.
Singer, Peter. Animal Liberation, 2nd ed. London: Pimlico, 1995.
Skinner, Simon. “Religion.” In Languages of Politics in Nineteenth-Century Britain, edited by David Craig and James Thompson, 93–117. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
Smith, Abraham. A Scriptural and Moral Catechism Designed to Inculcate the Love and Practice of Mercy, and to Expose the Exceeding Sinfulness of Cruelty to the Dumb Creation. London: SPCA, 1839.
Smith, Egerton. “Prospectus of the Late Association for Promoting Rational Humanity Towards the Animal Creation.” In Elysium of Animals: A Dream, 1. London: J. Nisbet, 1836.
SPCA. Report of an Extra Meeting of the Society for the Protection of Animals. London: SPCA, 1832.
Stevenson, L. G. “Religious Elements in the Background of the British Anti-Vivisection Movement.” Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 29 (1956): 125–157.
Styles, John. The Animal Creation: Its Claims on Our Humanity Stated and Enforced. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1997 [1839].
Topham, Jonathan R. “Science, Natural Theology, and Evangelicalism in Early Nineteenth-Century Scotland.” In Evangelical and Science in Historical Perspective, edited by David N. Livingstone, D. G. Hart, and Mark A. Noll, 142–174. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Turner, Frank. Between Science and Religion: The Reaction to Scientific Naturalism in Late Victorian England. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974.
———. Contesting Cultural Authority: Essays in Victorian Intellectual Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
———. “The Victorian Crisis of Faith and the Faith That Was Lost.” In Victorian Faith in Crisis, edited by R. J. Helmstadter and B. Lightman, 3–98. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1990.
Trist, Sidney. De Profundis: An Open Letter. London: LAVS, 1911.
Verschoyle, J. “The True Party of Progress.” Zoophilist, January 1884, 232–233.
V. W., “Half a Loaf.” Zoophilist, August 1902, 70.
Waldau, Paul and Kimberley Patton, eds. A Communion of Subjects: Animals in Religion, Science & Ethics. New York: Columbia University Press, 2006.
Webb, S. H. On God and Dogs: A Christian Theology of Compassion for Animals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
White, Lynn. “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis.” Science 155, no. 3767 (1967): 1203–1207.
Wilcox, Ella Wheeler. “Christ Crucified.” In Poems by Ella Wheeler Wilcox, 106–108. London: Gay & Hancock, 1913.
Wise, Steven M. Rattling the Cage: Towards Legal Rights for Animals. London: Profile Books, 2001.
Wolffe, J. God and Greater Britain: Religion and National Life in Britain and Ireland 1843–1945. London: Routledge, 1994.
Worboys, M. The Transformation of Medicine and the Medical Profession in Britain 1860–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Li, Ch. (2019). Mobilizing the Christian Tradition: True Patriots and the Sacrificial Spirit of Christ. In: Mobilizing Traditions in the First Wave of the British Animal Defense Movement. The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52651-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52651-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-52650-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-52651-9
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)