Abstract
This chapter argues that, despite modern animal activists’ enthusiastic belief in the potential uses of Darwin’s evolutionary theory to elevate animals’ status, the process whereby nineteenth-century activists came to deploy evolutionary ideas was neither inevitable nor straightforward. Factors such as the animal protection movement’s preexisting beliefs, the popular association of Darwinism with the “survival of the fittest,” the pro-vivisection party’s mobilization of evolutionary ideas in their defense of vivisection, and indeed Darwin’s own position in the controversy, all complicated the movement’s appropriation of evolutionary ideas for the animal cause. It was not until the late nineteenth century, with the growing mood of reconciliation between religion and science, and then the availability of a rich repertoire of evolutionary theories during Darwinism’s subsequent “eclipse,” that a growing section of the animal protection movement began to embrace various evolutionary theories. Through an active process of interpretation, appropriation and dissemination, such theories became key intellectual sources in support of the movement’s heterogeneous visions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Singer , A Darwinian Left, 17; Singer, Animal Liberation, 207.
- 2.
Wise , Rattling the Cage, 21–22. See, e.g., J. Rachels, Created from Animals; Mark Gold, Animal Century, 3–4.
- 3.
Kean , Animal Rights, 70–72; Beers, For the Prevention of Cruelty, 29–30.
- 4.
Preece , “Thoughts Out of Season on the History of Animal Ethics,” 365. See also Preece, “Darwinism, Christianity, and the Great Vivisection Debate”; Preece, Brute Souls, Happy Beasts, and Evolution. More recently, Preece has begun to explore Darwinism’s positive roles in animal ethics; see, e.g., his “The Role of Evolutionary Thought in Animal Ethics,” 67–78.
- 5.
Boddice , A History of Attitudes and Behaviours Towards Animals in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Britain, Chapter 7. Boddice, in fact, focused more on the pre-Darwinian kinship idea’s workings on people’s attitudes toward animals and where he directly assessed the ideas of Darwin or the people in the animal protection movement, it was often from the critical high ground of a philosophical “rights” or “non-anthropocentric” position, which made all people in the past appear retrograde.
- 6.
Chartier , “Intellectual or Sociocultural History,” 36.
- 7.
Baker, “On the Problem of the Ideological Origins of the French Revolution,” 206.
- 8.
A term used by Paul White to refer to the problems of how the conventional “Darwin-centered scholarship” in the history of Victorian science and culture arguably distorts rather than restores the true historical picture; see White, “Introduction: Science, Literature, and the Darwin Legacy.”
- 9.
For works that challenged the idea of the “Darwinian revolution ,” see, e.g., Himmelfarb, Darwin, and the Darwinian Revolution; Secord , Victorian Sensation; Bowler, The Eclipse of Darwinism; Bowler, Non-Darwinian Revolution; Hodge, “Against ‘Revolution’ and ‘Evolution’”; Bowler, Darwin Deleted.
- 10.
Paul, “Darwin, Social Darwinism and Eugenics,” 226. For some key works on Darwinism’s reception and appropriation, see, e.g., Ellegård, Darwin and the General Reader; Jones, Social Darwinism and English Thought; Crook, Darwinism, War and History; Cantor, Quakers, Jews and Science; Numbers and Stenhouse eds., Disseminating Darwinism; Engels and Glick eds., The Reception of Charles Darwin in Europe.
- 11.
In this article, I distinguish between evolutionism and the Darwinian natural selection theory where necessary, to avoid the inexact attribution of ideas to Darwin when he could not really claim exclusive ownership of them. Though adopting the term “evolutionism ” for the purpose of enquiry in this chapter, I am aware of how an emphasis on the theme of evolution, driven by contemporary preoccupation, might miss or distort the original concerns of past theories. On this point, see Hodge, “Against ‘Revolution’ and ‘Evolution.’” On the multifarious meanings carried by the word “evolution” in Victorian culture, see also Lightman and Zon, Evolution and Victorian Culture.
- 12.
Darwin, On the Origin of Species, 359.
- 13.
See Bowler, Evolution; Ritvo , The Animal Estate, 1–45; Thomas, Man and the Natural World.
- 14.
On pre-Darwinian evolutionary ideas and their receptions, see Bowler, Evolution: The History of an Idea; Secord , Victorian Sensation; James Secord, “Introduction.”
- 15.
See Lightman , “The Popularization of Evolution and Victorian Culture.”
- 16.
See Bowler’s Eclipse of Darwinism , Non-Darwinian Revolution, and Charles Darwin.
- 17.
Chambers , “Explanations: A sequel to ‘Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation ,’” 184–185.
- 18.
See Browne, “Darwin in Caricature ,” 21–23.
- 19.
Times, January 17, 1876.
- 20.
See Lightman , “Science and Culture,” 29–38.
- 21.
Hill, The Relative Positions of the Higher and Lower Creation, 60–61.
- 22.
“The Late Charles Darwin,” Animal World, May 1882, 66.
- 23.
Zoophilist, June 1902, 46.
- 24.
Morris, A Curse of Cruelty, 6.
- 25.
Morris, “Infidelity and Cruelty”; Morris, A Curse of Cruelty, 6.
- 26.
Tait , “Dogs,” Animal World, February 1870, 92; March 1870, 98–99; April 1870, 122–123.
- 27.
Coleridge, “Darwin and Vivisection,” 18. See also Coleridge, The Idolatry of Science.
- 28.
Animals’ Defender, August 1920, 38–39.
- 29.
Cobbe , “The New Morality,” 167.
- 30.
See Cobbe , “Agnostic Morality”; Cobbe , Darwinism in Morals and Other Essays.
- 31.
Hutton, “The Darwinian Jeremiad,” 147–148.
- 32.
“Editorial,” Zoophilist, December 1884, 149–150, at 149.
- 33.
Barton, “Evolution: The Whitworth Gun in Huxley’s War for the Liberation of Science from Theology,” 262.
- 34.
On the development of the cerebral theory and moral alarms raised over it in the nineteenth century, see Young , Mind, Brain, and Adaptation in the Nineteenth Century; Rylance, Victorian Psychology and British Culture 1850–1880.
- 35.
Turner , Between Science and Religion , 31.
- 36.
Russell , Papers Read at the Meetings of the Metaphysical Society, 4. See also Catlett, “Huxley , Hutton and the ‘White Rage.’”
- 37.
Foster, “Vivisection,” 368–369.
- 38.
Lancet, January 2, 1875, 19–23, at 20.
- 39.
“The Church Congress ,” Times, October 7, 1892, 6.
- 40.
See Geison, Michael Foster and the Cambridge School of Physiology, 334.
- 41.
“Appendix VI: Darwin and Vivisection,” 580.
- 42.
White , “Darwin Wept,” 212.
- 43.
Letter from Charles Darwin to E. R. Lankester , March 22, 1871, in Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter No. 7612,” accessed on 30 August 2017, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/DCP-LETT-7612.
- 44.
For more on Darwin and vivisection , see “Appendix VI: Darwin and Vivisection.” For an alternative interpretation of Darwin’s role in the vivisection controversy, with a restricted focus on Darwin’s action in 1875 and the difference between Playfair’s bill and that prepared by Cobbe , see Feller, “Dog Fight.”
- 45.
Minutes of Evidence: Royal Commission on Vivisection, 234.
- 46.
Letter from Darwin to Romanes, June 4, 1876, collected in Romanes, Life and Letters of George John Romanes , 51.
- 47.
Darwin, “Mr. Darwin on Vivisection.”
- 48.
Edinburgh Evening Review, April 19, 1881. Quoted in “Professor Darwin on Vivisection ,” Home Chronicler , May 15, 1881, 61–62, at 61. See also “The “Spectator” on Mr. Darwin’s Letter,” Home Chronicler , May 15, 1881, 60.
- 49.
For Cobbe and Hutton’s letters in The Times in response to Darwin’s reply, see Special Supplement to the Zoophilist, May 1881, 17–19.
- 50.
See Charles Darwin to G. J. Romanes , dated April 22, 1881, in F. Darwin ed., The Life of Charles Darwin, 290.
- 51.
See Darwin to T. L. Brunton, dated November 19, 1881, in F. Darwin ed., More Letters of Charles Darwin, 437–438.
- 52.
“The Immortality of Animals,” Zoophilist, February 1899, 194.
- 53.
Cobbe , Life of Frances Power Cobbe, 490–491.
- 54.
Cesaresco, “The Growth of Modern Ideas on Animals,” 81. Other noted professed evolutionists who were also active defenders of animal experimentation included Huxley , Romanes , Michael Foster, John Burdon-Sanderson , John Tyndall , Ray Lankester , George Henry Lewes, etc.
- 55.
On the close connections between political radicalism and evolutionary theories, see Desmond, The Politics of Evolution; Cooter, The Cultural Meaning of Popular Science; Desmond, Archetypes and Ancestors.
- 56.
Huxley , “The Origin of Species [1860],” 23.
- 57.
See Hammer, Claiming Knowledge; Li, “The Theosophical Turn of Annie Besant .”
- 58.
On pre-Darwinian philosophical, literary, and natural historical inquiries in this respect, see Richards, Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior, 127–156; Worster, Nature’s Economy; Spencer , “Love and Hatred Are Common to the Whole Sensitive Creation”; Kenyon-Jones, Kindred Brutes; Perkins , Romanticism and Animal Rights; Heymans, Animality in British Romanticism.
- 59.
Youatt , The Obligation and Extent of Humanity to Brutes, 1.
- 60.
Styles , The Animal Creation, 85.
- 61.
This is perhaps understandable considering Darwin’s debt to both natural theology and the Romantic tradition, as pointed out by several scholars; see, e.g., Ruse, The Darwinian Revolution ; Richards, The Romantic Conception of Life.
- 62.
Darwin, The Descent of Man , 151.
- 63.
“Reviews,” Humane Review 2 (1901): 281.
- 64.
Salt, “Mr. Chesterton’s Mountain,” 85–86.
- 65.
Lind-af-Hageby , “The Science and Faith of Universal Kinship,” 156–157.
- 66.
Evans , Evolutional Ethics and Animal Psychology , 17–18.
- 67.
Quoted in Cleland, Experiment on Brute Animals, 14.
- 68.
Salt, Animals’ Rights , 21.
- 69.
Browne, “Darwin in Caricature .”
- 70.
Anon, “The Rights of Animals: Part Two—The Gospel,” 5.
- 71.
Moore, The New Ethics , 203.
- 72.
Ibid., 205.
- 73.
See the discussion in Chapter 2 on the movement’s adoption of the military metaphor that was prevalent in the wider controversies between religion and science in society.
- 74.
“An Inquiry into the Rationale of Anti-Vivisection. No. 1. The Moral and Scientific Aspects—Should They Be Antagonistic?” Anti-Vivisection Review 1 (1909–1910): 21–23, at 23.
- 75.
Salt, Seventy Years Among Savages, 134.
- 76.
Lind-af-Hageby , Mountain Meditations and Some Subjects of the Day and the War, 131; “An Inquiry into the Rationale of Anti-Vivisection,” 23.
- 77.
Carpenter, “The Need of a Rational and Humane Science,” 27.
- 78.
Thomson, “The Humane Study of Natural History.”
- 79.
Salt, “Concerning Faddists,” 240.
- 80.
On the Leigh Browne Trust , see Humanity, January 1897, 6–7; Kenealy, The Failure of Vivisection and the Future of Medical Research.
- 81.
On constructive anti-vivisection see [L. Lind-af-Hageby ] “Where Will Anti-Vivisection Lead?” Anti-Vivisection Review, September–October, 1911, 54–55, and numerous related articles in The Anti-Vivisection Review.
- 82.
The Association’s British section was formed in 1907; see “Objects of the International Medical Anti-Vivisection Association ,” Anti-Vivisection Review, March–April 1927, 68.
- 83.
See Bowler, Reconciling Science and Religion .
- 84.
Humanity 3 (1902–1903): 36.
- 85.
Cobbe stated in her letter to Japp in 1888: “I knew him and most of his family pretty well, and entirely endorse your view that he was one of the most amiable and gentle of men. But all his amiability and tenderness did not prevent him from doing infinite damage to the cause of humanity.” Quoted in Japp, Darwin Considered Mainly as Ethical Thinker, Humane Reformer and Pessimist, 49.
- 86.
Japp , “Darwinism and Humanitarianism ,” Humane Review 2 (1901): 384.
- 87.
See Moore, The Post-Darwinian Controversies, Chapter 4; Bowler, Evolution, Chapter 9.
- 88.
Salt, Seventy Years Among Savages, 202.
- 89.
On the theosophists’ evolutionary ideas, see Kingland, The Mission of Theosophy; Besant , The Seven Principles of Man; Li, “The Theosophical Turn of Annie Besant .”
- 90.
Tait , “Dogs,” Animal World, February 1870, 92.
- 91.
Collini , Public Moralists, 238.
- 92.
See Dixon, The Invention of Altruism, Chapters 4 and 7.
- 93.
Kropotkin , “Appendix: Natural Selection and Mutual Aid.”
- 94.
Humanity, December 1902, 78.
- 95.
See e.g., “Evolution and Ethics,” Zoophilist, June 1895, 190; “Mutual Aid Among Animals,” Animals’ Guardian, December 1903, 151; Bell, “Mutual Aid.”
- 96.
Whether Darwin held a progressive, teleological view of evolution, however, continues to be debated by historians; see Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies; Ruse, Monad to Man; Richards, Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior; Bowler, “Revisiting the Eclipse of Darwinism ,” 22–24.
- 97.
See e.g., A Report of the Proceedings at the Annual Meeting of the APRHAC , 20; RSPCA Annual Report, 1834, 13, 25–27; Hawkes, Creation’s Friend, 8.
- 98.
Salt, Humanitarianism , 24–25.
- 99.
Lee , “Vivisection: An Evolutionist to Evolutionist.” Looming behind the progressive view of morality of many animal activists was the idea of “degeneration ” was also current at the fin de siècle. How this fear of degeneration was incorporated into the movement’s discourses, e.g., in its representation of vivisectors, or of cruelty’s moral consequences, is another topic worthy of exploration.
- 100.
Moore, The Universal Kinship , 323, 328–329.
- 101.
Shaw , Back to Methuselah, xliv–lvi.
- 102.
Ibid., xc.
- 103.
Moore, The Universal Kinship , 240.
- 104.
Scopes was a high school biology teacher who violated the Tennessee statues that opposed the teaching of evolution.
- 105.
A condensed version of this work, The Whole World Kin, was published in the same year by G. Bell & Sons.
- 106.
The theory held that the growth of the embryo of an extant species repeated key stages in the past evolution of the race. It was usually associated with Lamarckism and neo-Lamarckism but lost favor among biologists with the advent of modern genetics; see Bowler, Evolution, 180, 202, 264.
- 107.
Moore, Universal Kinship, 320, 323.
- 108.
Ibid., 277, 319, 320.
- 109.
Ibid., 319.
- 110.
Ibid., 321; Darwin, The Descent of Man , 147.
- 111.
Moore, Ethics and Education, v.
- 112.
Letter from J. H. Moore to H. S. Salt, dated July 23, 1909, Wynne-Tyson Collection, Sussex.
- 113.
Quoted in Salt, “Howard Moore,” 179.
- 114.
Moore to Salt, dated November 3, 1915, Wynne-Tyson Collection.
- 115.
The address of the office of the HL.
- 116.
Moore to Salt, dated April 20, 1906, Wynne-Tyson Collection.
- 117.
“Howard Moore’s Lifework,” Humanitarian, October 1916, 185–187, at 186.
- 118.
Humanitarian, September 1906, 72.
- 119.
Cox, “The Universal Kinship.”
- 120.
“Mark Twain as Humanitarian,” Humanitarian, July 1910, 53–54, at 54.
- 121.
Supplement to the Humanitarian, January 1907.
- 122.
“Our Library Table,” Animals’ Friend, December 1897, 48.
- 123.
“Our Poor Relations,” Zoophilist and Animals’ Defender , March 1906, 210.
- 124.
“Books of the Month,” Animal World, May 1906, 122.
- 125.
Inge , More Lay Thoughts of a Dean, 267
- 126.
Inge , Lay Thoughts of a Dean, 200.
- 127.
Animal World, August 1923, 86.
- 128.
“An Animals’ Charter,” Vegetarian Messenger, May 1928, 78–79 at 78.
- 129.
Anti-Vivisection Review, January–February 1927, 12.
- 130.
Letter from Salt to Anges Davies, dated 28 September 1936, Wynne-Tyson Collection. The Creed of Kinship was a work of Salt published in 1935.
- 131.
Skinner , Visions of Politics, Volume I: Regarding Method, 6.
- 132.
See Turner , Contesting Cultural Authority, 3–37.
- 133.
Skinner , Visions of Politics, 6.
- 134.
On Christianity’s positive impact on the animal cause in the nineteenth century, see Chapter 2.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Archival and On-line Sources
Darwin Correspondence Project, University of Cambridge.
Henry Salt Papers, Wynne-Tyson Collection, Sussex.
RSPCA Archives, Horsham, West Sussex.
Official Publication
Minutes of Evidence: Royal Commission on Vivisection. London: H. M. S. O, 1876.
Periodicals
The Animals’ Defender and Zoophilist.
The Animals’ Friend.
The Animals’ Guardian.
The Animal World.
The Anti-Vivisection Review.
The Contemporary Review.
The Edinburgh Review.
The Home Chronicler.
The Humane Review.
The Humanitarian.
Humanity.
Lancet.
Macmillan’s Magazine.
The Times.
The Vegetarian Messenger.
The Voice of Humanity.
The Zoophilist.
The Zoophilist and Animals’ Defender.
Other Printed Primary and Secondary Works
Anon. “The Rights of Animals: Part Two—The Gospel.” Animals’ Friend 5 (1899): 5–7.
“Appendix VI: Darwin and Vivisection.” In The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, Vol. 23, edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al., 579–591. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
Baker, Keith Michael. “On the Problem of the Ideological Origins of the French Revolution.” In Modern European Intellectual History: Reappraisals & New Perspectives, edited by Dominick LaCapra and Steven L. Kaplan, 197–219. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982.
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.
Beers, Diane L. For the Prevention of Cruelty: The History and Legacy of Animal Rights Activism in the United States. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2006.
Bell, Ernest. “Mutual Aid.” In The Inner Life of Animals, 38–49. London: G. Bell & Sons, 1913.
Besant, Annie. The Seven Principles of Man. Madras: Theosophical Society, 1892.
Boddice, Rod. A History of Attitudes and Behaviours Towards Animals in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Britain: Anthropocentrism and the Emergence of Animals. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 2008.
Bowler, Peter J. Charles Darwin: The Man and His Influence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
———. Darwin Deleted: Imagining a World Without Darwin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013.
———. The Eclipse of Darwinism: Anti-Darwinian Evolution Theories in the Decades Around 1900. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983.
———. Evolution: The History of an Idea. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983.
———. Non-Darwinian Revolution: Reinterpreting a Historical Myth. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988.
———. Reconciling Science and Religion: The Debate in Early-Twentieth-Century Britain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.
———. “Revisiting the Eclipse of Darwinism.” Journal of the History of Biology 38, no. 1 (2005): 19–32.
Browne, Janet. “Darwin in Caricature: A Study in the Popularization and Dissemination of Evolutionary Theory.” In The Art of Evolution: Darwin, Darwinism, and Visual Culture, edited by Barbara Larson and Fae Brauer, 18–39. Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College Press, 2009.
Cantor, Geoffrey. Quakers, Jews and Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Carpenter, Edward. “The Need of a Rational and Humane Science.” In Humane Science Lectures, edited by Various Authors, 3–33. London: George Bell & Sons, 1897.
Catlett, Stephen. “Huxley, Hutton and the ‘White Rage’: A Debate on Vivisection at the Metaphysical Society.” Archives of Natural History 11 (1983): 181–189.
Cesaresco, E. M. “The Growth of Modern Ideas on Animals.” Contemporary Review 91 (1907): 68–82.
Chambers, Robert. “Explanations: A Sequel to ‘Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation.”’ In Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation and Other Evolutionary Writings, edited by James Secord, 1–198. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Chartier, Roger. “Intellectual or Sociocultural History.” In Modern European Intellectual History: Reappraisals & New Perspectives, edited by Dominick LaCapra and Steven L. Kaplan, 13–46. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982.
Cleland, John. Experiment on Brute Animals. London: J. W. Kolckmann, 1883.
Cobbe, Frances Power. “Agnostic Morality.” Contemporary Review 43 (1883): 783–794.
———. Darwinism in Morals and Other Essays. London: Williams and Norgate, 1872.
———. Life of Frances Power Cobbe, as Told by Herself. London: Swan Sonnenschein, 1904.
———. “The New Morality.” Zoophilist, January 1885, 167–169.
Coleridge, Stephen. “Darwin and Vivisection.” Animals’ Defender and Zoophilist, July 1920, 17–18.
———. The Idolatry of Science. London: John Lane, 1920.
Collini, Stefan. Public Moralists: Political Thought and Intellectual Life in Britain, 1850–1930. Oxford: Clarendon, 1991.
Cooter, Roger. The Cultural Meaning of Popular Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Cox, F. A. “The Universal Kinship.” Animals’ Friend, November 1915, 17–18.
Crook, Paul. Darwinism, War and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: Penguin, 2004 [1874, 2nd. ed.].
———. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. London: John Murray, 1872.
———. “Mr. Darwin on Vivisection.” Times, April 18, 1881, 10.
———. On the Origin of Species. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008 [1859].
Darwin, Francis, ed., The Life of Charles Darwin. London: John Murray, 1908.
———, ed., More Letters of Charles Darwin: A Record of His Work in a Series of Hitherto Unpublished Letters. London: John Murray, 1903.
Desmond, Adrian. Archetypes and Ancestors: Palaeontology in Victorian London, 1850–1875. London: Blond & Briggs, 1982.
———. The Politics of Evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989.
Dixon, Thomas. The Invention of Altruism: Making Moral Meanings in Victorian Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Ellegård, A. Darwin and the General Reader. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990 [1958].
Engels, Eve-Marie, and Thomas F. Glick, eds. The Reception of Charles Darwin in Europe. London: Continuum, 2008.
Evans, E. P. Evolutional Ethics and Animal Psychology. London: William Heinemann, 1898.
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. 4 (2009): 265–271.
Foster, Michael. “Vivisection.” Macmillan’s Magazine, March 1874, 367–376.
Geison, Gerald L. Michael Foster and the Cambridge School of Physiology. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978.
Gold, Mark. Animal Century: A Celebration of Changing Attitudes to Animals. Charlbury: Jon Carpenter, 1998.
Hammer, Olav. Claiming Knowledge: Strategies of Epistemology from Theosophy to the New Age. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
Hawkes, W. R. Creation’s Friend; Lines Addressed to, and Published with the Approbation of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. London: J. M. Mullinger, 1824.
Heymans, Peter. Animality in British Romanticism: The Aesthetics of Species. London: Routledge, 2012.
Hill, J. Woodroffe. The Relative Positions of the Higher and Lower Creation; A Plea for Dumb Animals. London: Bailliére, Tindall and Cox, 1881.
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution. New York: W. W. Norton, 1959.
Hodge, Jonathan. “Against ‘Revolution’ and ‘Evolution.’” Journal of the History of Biology 38, no. 1 (2005): 101–121.
Hutton, R. H. “The Darwinian Jeremiad.” In R. H. Hutton: Critic and Theologian, edited by Malcolm Woodfield, 146–150. Oxford: Clarendon, 1986.
Huxley, Thomas. “The Origin of Species [1860].” In Collected Essays: Volume 2, Darwiniana, edited by Thomas Huxley, 22–79. London: Macmillan, 1893.
Inge, W. R. Lay Thoughts of a Dean. London: Putnam, 1926.
———. More Lay Thoughts of a Dean. London: Putnam, 1931.
Japp, A. H. Darwin Considered Mainly as Ethical Thinker, Human Reformer and Pessimist. London: J. Bale, Sons & Danielsson, 1901.
———. “Darwinism and Humanitarianism: To the Editor of The Humane Review.” Humane Review 2 (1901): 377–384.
Jones, Greta. Social Darwinism and English Thought. Brighton: Harvester, 1980.
Kean, Hilda. Animal Rights: Social and Political Change Since 1800. London: Reaktion, 1998.
Kenealy, A. The Failure of Vivisection and the Future of Medical Research. London: George Bell & Sons, 1909.
Kenyon-Jones, Christine. Kindred Brutes: Animals in Romantic-Period Writing. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001.
Kidd, Benjamin. Social Evolution. London: Macmillan, 1894.
Kingland, W. The Mission of Theosophy. London: Theosophical Publishing Society, 1892.
Kropotkin, Peter. “Appendix: Natural Selection and Mutual Aid.” In Humane Science Lectures, edited by Various Authors, 182–186. London: G. Bell & Sons, 1897.
Lee, Vernon. “Vivisection: An Evolutionist to Evolutionist.” Contemporary Review 41 (1882): 803–811.
Li, Chien-hui. “The Theosophical Turn of Annie Besant: Religion, Science and Reform.” Cheng Kung Journal of Historical Studies, no. 51 (2016): 113–170 (In Chinese).
Lightman, Bernard. “The Popularization of Evolution and Victorian Culture.” In Evolution and Victorian Culture, edited by Bernard Lightman and Bennett Zon, 286–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
———. “Science and Culture.” In The Cambridge Companion to Victorian Culture, edited by Francis O’ Gorman, 12–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Lightman, Bernard, and Bennett Zone, eds. Evolution and Victorian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Lind-af-Hageby, L. Mountain Meditations and Some Subjects of the Day and the War. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1917.
———. “The Science and Faith of Universal Kinship.” Vegetarian Messenger, May 1914, 155–162.
Moore, James R. The 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.
Moore, John Howard. Ethics and Education. London: G. Bell & Sons, 1912.
———. The New Ethics. London: George Bell & Sons, 1907.
———. “The Psychical Kinship of Man and the Other Animals.” Humane Review 1 (1900–1901): 121–133.
———. The Universal Kinship. Fontwell, Sussex: Centaur Press, 1992 [1906].
———. The Whole World Kin: A Study in Threefold Evolution. London: George Bell & Sons, 1906.
Morris, F. O. A Curse of Cruelty. London: Elliot Stock, 1886.
———. The Demands of Darwinism on Credulity. Partridge, 1890.
———. Difficulties of Darwinism: Read Before the British Association. London, 1869.
———. Double Dilemma in Darwinism. London: William Poole, 1870.
———. “Infidelity and Cruelty.” Home Chronicler, July 14, 1878, 126.
Numbers, R. L., and J. Stenhouse, eds. Disseminating Darwinism: The Role of Place, Race, Religion, and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Paul, Diane B. “Darwin, Social Darwinism and Eugenics.” In The Cambridge Companion to Darwin, edited by Jonathan Hodge and Gregory Radick, 214–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Perkins, David. Romanticism and Animal Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Preece, Rod. Brute Souls, Happy Beasts, and Evolution: The Historical Status of Animals. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2005.
———. “Darwinism, Christianity, and the Great Vivisection Debate.” Journal of the History of Ideas 64, no. 3 (2003): 399–419.
———. “The Role of Evolutionary Thought in Animal Ethics.” In Critical Animal Studies: Thinking the Unthinkable, edited by John Sorenson, 67–78. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press, 2014.
———. “Thoughts Out of Season on the History of Animal Ethics.” Society and Animals 15, no. 4 (2007): 365–378.
Rachels, J. Created from Animals: The Moral Implications of Darwinism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
A Report of the Proceedings at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Promoting Rational Humanity Towards the Animal Creation. London: APRHAC, 1832.
Richards, Robert J. Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
———. The Romantic Conception of Life: Science and Philosophy in the Age of Goethe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002.
Ritvo, Harriet. The Animal Estate: The English and Other Creatures in the Victorian Age. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987.
Romanes, Ethel Duncan. Life and Letters of George John Romanes. London: Longmans, Green, 1896.
Ruse, Michael. The Darwinian Revolution: Nature Red in Tooth and Claw. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
———. Monad to Man: The Concept of Progress in Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996.
Russell, Arthur. Papers Read at the Meetings of the Metaphysical Society. Privately printed, 1896.
Rylance, Rick. Victorian Psychology and British Culture 1850–1880. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Salt, H. S. Animals’ Rights. Clarks Summits, PA: Society for Animal Rights, 1980 [1892].
———. “Concerning Faddists.” Anti-Vivisection and Humanitarian Review, November–December 1927, 239–240.
———. The Creed of Kinship. London: Constable, 1935.
———. “Howard Moore.” Humanitarian, September 1916, 177–179.
———. Humanitarianism. London: HL, 1893.
———. “Mr. Chesterton’s Mountain.” Humane Review 7 (1906): 84–89.
———. Seventy Years Among Savages. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1921.
Secord, James. “Introduction.” In Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation and Other Evolutionary Writings, edited by James Secord, ix–xlv. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
———. Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Shaw, George Bernard. Back to Methuselah: A Metabiological Pentateuch. New York: Brentano’s, 1929 [1921].
Singer, Peter. A Darwinian Left: Politics, Evolution and Cooperation. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1999.
———. Animal Liberation. London: Pimlico, 1995.
Skinner, Quentin. Visions of Politics, Volume I: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Spencer, Jane. ‘“Love and Hatred Are Common to the Whole Sensitive Creation’: Animal Feeling in the Century Before Darwin.” In After Darwin: Animals, Emotions, and the Mind, edited by Angelique Richardson, 24–50. Amsterdam: Rodipi, 2013.
Styles, John. The Animal Creation: Its Claims on Our Humanity Stated and Enforced. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1997 [1839].
Tait, Lawson. “Dogs.” Animal World, February 1870, 92; March 1870, 98–99; April 1870, 122–123.
Thomas, Keith. Man and the Natural World: Changing Attitudes in England 1500–1800. London: Penguin, 1984.
Thomson, J. A. “The Humane Study of Natural History.” In Humane Science Lectures, 35–76. London: G. Bell & Sons, 1897.
Turner, Frank M. 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.
White, Paul. “Darwin Wept: Science and the Sentimental Subject.” Journal of Victorian Culture 16, no. 2 (2011): 195–213.
———. “Introduction: Science, Literature, and the Darwin Legacy.” Interdisciplinary Studies in the Long Nineteenth Century (On-line Journal), September 2010.
Wise, Steven M. Rattling the Cage. London: Profile Books, 2000.
Worster, Donald. Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Youatt, William. The Obligation and Extent of Humanity to Brutes. London: Longman, 1839.
Young, Robert M. Mind, Brain, and Adaptation in the Nineteenth Century: Cerebral Localization and Its Biological Context from Gall to Ferrier. Oxford: Clarendon, 1970.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Li, Ch. (2019). Mobilizing the Evolutionary Tradition: A Darwinian Revolution in Animal Ethics?. 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_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52651-9_5
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)