Thomas Henry Huxley; A Sketch Of His Life And WorkMitchell, P. Chalmers (Peter Chalmers), Sir
Science
Thomas Henry Huxley; A Sketch Of His Life And Work
Mitchell, P. Chalmers (Peter Chalmers), Sir
Huxley, Thomas Henry, 1825-1895
and in many ways a worthy upholder of the best traditions of science.
In the particular matter of species, he was known to be by no means a
firm supporter of the orthodox views. When Darwin's paper was read at
the Linnæan Society, and afterwards when the _Origin_ was published,
the verdict of Owen was looked to with the greatest interest by the
general public. For a time he wavered, and even expressed himself of
the opinion that he had already in his published works included a
considerable portion of Darwin's views. But two things seemed to have
influenced him: First, Wilberforce, the Bishop of Oxford, and Sedgwick
and Whewell, the two best-known men at Cambridge, urged him to stamp
once for all, as he only could do, upon this "new and pernicious
doctrine." Secondly, combined with his great abilities, he had the
keenest personal interest in his own position as the leader of English
science, and had no particular friendship for men or for views that
seemed likely to threaten his own supreme position. In a very short
time he changed from being neutral, with a tendency in favour of the
new views, to being a bitter opponent of them. In scientific societies
and in London generally, naturally enough he constantly came across
the younger scientific men, such as Huxley and Hooker, who had
declared for Darwin, and he made the irretrievable mistake of for a
time attempting to disguise his opposition while he was writing the
most bitter of all the articles against Darwinism. That appeared in
the _Edinburgh Review_ in April, 1860, and the range of knowledge it
displayed, and the form of arguments employed, naturally enough
betrayed the secret of its authorship, although Owen for very long
attempted to conceal his connection with it. Darwin, who had the most
unusual generosity towards his opponents, found this review too much
for him. Writing to Lyell soon after its publication, he said:
"I have just read the _Edinburgh_, which, without doubt is by
----. It is extremely malignant, clever, and, I fear, will be
very damaging. He is atrociously severe on Huxley's lecture, and
very bitter against Hooker. So we three _enjoyed_ it together.
Not that I really enjoyed it, for it made me uncomfortable for
one night; but I have quite got over it to-day. It requires much
study to appreciate all the bitter spite of many of the remarks
against me; indeed I did not discover all myself. It scandalously
misrepresents many parts. He misquotes some passages, altering
words within inverted commas.... It is painful to be hated in the
intense degree with which ---- hates me."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account