MagazineR216

In Darwin’s Shadow - MichaelShermer (Oxford University Press,Oxford). ISBN: 0-19-514830-4).

One of the most challengingfigures in nineteenth-centurybiology is that of Alfred RusselWallace, co-founder of the theoryof natural selection. Of ongoinginterest is just how much Darwinand Wallace had each developedtheir versions of the theory andconspiratorial thoughts thatDarwin may have actually fleshedout some of his work with the thenunknown Wallace’s ideas sent tohim in the famous essay in 1858. Anew biography by MichaelShermer, takes a fresh look atthese issues.

The social contrast betweenWallace and Darwin could hardlyhave been greater. Darwin wasborn into an affluent middle-classfamily, educated at Cambridgeand Edinburgh universities andhad sufficient private income to beable to devote his whole time tohis scientific studies. He also hadtop-level contact with the mostsenior British scientists.

Wallace was born into a familywith little money and whose onlyformal education comprised a fewyears at a grammar school inHertford. He spent his lifeconstantly worrying about earningcash. Darwin set sail on hisadventures to pursue his scientificinterests; Wallace set off to theAmazon and the Malay peninsulato make some money from the newfashion for collecting specimens ofexotic creatures trickling into thecountry with its expanding empire.But while their original motives mayhave been different, as Shermerhighlights, their fascination in theorigin of species brought the twominds together.

The matter of who was first inthe discovery and description ofnatural selection has been thesubject of much confusion for

three reasons, writes Shermer.“The letter and essay fromWallace to Darwin in the spring of1858 is missing, making direct andtangible resolution impossible; amisunderstanding of intellectualproperty and how prioritiesdisputes were settled at that time:and the pugnacious win-losemodel of priority held by somescientific communities does notrecognize the cumulative,interactive, and social nature ofthe scientific enterprise.”

Wallace’s co-discoverer statuswith Darwin is generally acceptedby all biologists and historians. Butshould Wallace be given even morecredit for his work, asks Shermer.He describes the emotional appealmade by the journalist ArnoldBrackman in A DelicateArrangement, published in 1980,for Wallace’s case. Brackmansuggested that Darwin’s influentialfriends, the geologist Charles Lyelland botanist Joseph Hooker, withDarwin’s knowledge (but not hisdirection), conspired to negateWallace’s credit, whilesimultaneously boosting Darwin’s.“Specifically, Brackman claims thatDarwin received Wallace’s letterand essay earlier than theannounced June 18, 1858, date,and that he probably spent timefleshing out the missing pieces ofhis theory from Wallace’s essay,then feigned surprise and distressover Wallace’s parallel ideas,” saysShermer.

Although there is no directevidence of when Darwin receivedthe essay, the strongestassociative evidence that it mayhave arrived earlier than Darwinadmitted comes from anotherletter sent by Wallace to theyounger brother of his Amazoncompanion, Henry Walter Bates.This letter is dated March 2 and isassumed to have gone by thesame steamship as the letter toDarwin dated on Mar 9. The Bates

letter, which has survived, isfranked as arriving in London onJune 3.

But the circumstantial evidencethat Wallace’s letter and essay toDarwin may have arrived at thesame time and thus gave Darwin acouple of weeks to beef up hisown ideas “is not supported bythe evidence,” writes Shermer. “IfDarwin were going to rig (or allowto be rigged) the editorialpresentation of the papers toaward him priority, or worse,plagiarize from Wallace certainkey ideas (such as the principle ofthe divergence of species), whyannounce the arrival of Wallace’spaper and submit it for publicationin the first place?”

Shermer looks at some ofDarwin’s correspondenceimmediately prior to June 18 forany evidence that Darwin wassuddenly aware of a rival. But hefinds a leisurely tone in Darwin’srequests for Hooker to take a lookat one of his manuscripts and hisintention to take quite some timeto complete his biggest work, in aletter to Syms Covington, hisformer assistant on the Beagle.‘“These are hardly the words of aman about to see his life’s workforstalled by another, and hisletters in the days leading up toJune 18 are filled with trivial chitchat and musings on the minutiaeof natural history.” But after June18 the Darwin correspondencechanges dramatically, saysShermer.

Events then unfolded rapidlywith the decision prompted byHooker and Lyell for Darwin topublish a paper alongsideWallace’s at the Linnean Societyin London. In the convention ofthe day, Darwin’s alphabeticalprecedence would mean that hispaper would appear first. Muchspeculation has surroundedWallace’s true feelings about thisproposal, particularly as he hadlittle opportunity to intervene ashe was still in the Malaypeninsular. But Shermer quotes

Feature

In Darwin’s shadowA new biography of Alfred Russel Wallace, co-founder of the theory ofnatural selection, aims to throw light on the key interaction and specialrelationship with Charles Darwin. Nigel Williams reports.

Wallace’s letter to Joseph Hookeron October 6, 1858, after thepapers had jointly been publishedand read at the society:

“I beg leave to acknowledge thereceipt of your letter of July last,sent me by Mr Darwin, & informingme of the steps you have takenwith reference to a paper I hadcommunicated to that gentleman.Allow me in the first placesincerely to thank yourself & SirCharles Lyell for your kind officeson this occasion, & to assure youof the gratification afforded meboth by the course you havepursued & the favourable opinionsof my essay which you have sokindly expressed. I cannot butconsider myself a favoured partyin this matter, because it hashitherto been too much thepractice in cases of this sort toimpute all the merit to the firstdiscoverer of a new fact or a newtheory, & little or none to anyother party who may, quiteindependently, have arrived at thesame result a few years or a fewhours later...

It would have caused me suchpain & regret had Mr Darwin’sexcess of generosity led him tomake public my paperunaccompanied by his own muchearlier & I doubt not much morecomplete views on the samesubject, & I must again thank youfor the course you have adopted,which while strictly just to bothparties, is so favourable tomyself...”

Shermer highlights the warmthand appreciation in this key letterwhich highlights Wallace’spleasure at being taken soseriously by such established andinfluential scientists. His views arefurther illuminated in a letter to hismother. Wallace written on thesame day. “I have received lettersfrom Mr Darwin and Dr Hooker,two of the most eminentnaturalists in England, which hashighly gratified me. I sent MrDarwin an essay on a subject onwhich he is now writing a greatwork. He showed it to Dr Hookerand Sir C. Lyell, who thought sohighly of it that they immediatelyread it before the Linnean Society.This assures me the acquaintanceand assistance of these eminentmen on my return home.”

But despite their differing socialpositions, Darwin and Wallacemaintained a warm friendshipbetween each other through theircorrespondence. “An 1870 letterfrom Darwin to Wallace shows thespecial win-win nature of theirrelationship”, says Shermer. “Ihope it is a satisfaction to you toreflect – and very few things in mylife have been more satisfactory tome – that we have never felt anyjealousy towards each other,though in one sense rivals.”

Wallace explained in an 1886interview after Darwin’s death: “Iarrived at the theoryindependently of Darwin, nodoubt, and communicated it tohim before he had publishedanything on the subject.” But,Wallace continued in response to

a question about how thisaffected his relationship withDarwin, “we have been on themost friendly terms throughout upto the very time of his death; wewere always exceedingly friendly.”

Wallace’s economic struggleswould haunt him much of his lifebut his financial situation wasfinally aided in 1881 when, thanksto the political machinations ofDarwin, Huxley, and others wellconnected in British science andpolitics, Wallace was awarded apension of £200 a year for life,directly approved by the primeminister, William Gladstone, andjustified by Wallace’s scientificand geographical exploratorycontributions to the British Empireduring the height of itsimperialistic expansion.

MagazineR217

The last great Victorian: Alfred Russel Wallace said that it would have caused him such“pain and regret had Mr Darwin’s excess of generosity led him to make public my paperunaccompanied by his own.”