HistoryExtra Home of Britain’s bestselling history magazine and award-winning podcast 2026-01-16T14:41:44.000Z https://www.historyextra.com/people/charles-darwin/feed/atom York Membery <![CDATA[My history hero: Michael Buerk chooses Robert FitzRoy (1805–65)]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/my-history-hero-michael-buerk-chooses-robert-fitzroy/ 2026-01-16T14:41:44.000Z 2025-04-24T07:30:01.000Z
In profile
Robert FitzRoy was an officer in the Royal Navy, best known for being the captain of HMS Beagle during Darwin’s famous voyage. FitzRoy, later promoted to vice-admiral, was also a pioneering meteorologist and in 1854 founded what would later be called the Met Office. He served as governor of New Zealand from 1843–45. The father of five struggled with depression and died by suicide, aged 59.
When did you first hear about FitzRoy?
Several years ago, while making a programme about Darwin, because as captain of HMS Beagle, FitzRoy was integral to the story.
He first made a big impression on me because of his prowess as a sailor.
I subsequently read a super novel about him, Harry Thompson’s This Thing of Darkness, which deepened my interest.
What kind of man was he?
He was extraordinarily clever and brave, as well as honourable and chivalrous. He was not your common-or-garden aristocrat: if his fourth great-grandmother had been Charles II’s wife rather than his mistress, he would have been royalty. He was also a brilliant sailor. He was made captain of the Beagle at 23, and was just 26 when he set sail with Darwin.
However, he had bipolar disorder and would fall into black moods. I believe the contradiction – between his literal view of the Bible and the role he played in helping Darwin collect the evidence underpinning On the Origin of Species – gnawed away at him and contributed to his depression.
What made him a hero?
Here was a man of just 23 who sailed a small ship, the Beagle, on landmark voyages, one of which changed our entire perception of human beings’ place in nature. I am equally intrigued by the way this committed Christian struggled to accept the scientific evidence in Darwin’s book, despite his fine mind.
What was FitzRoy’s finest hour?
Firstly, sailing the 90ft long Beagle – which is what the navy used to call a ‘coffin brig’, because it had a reputation for being unseaworthy – around Cape Horn. Secondly, founding what became the Meteorological Office. He invented the term ‘forecast’, and instituted a scientific approach to predicting the weather that saved so many sailors’ lives.
Yet during FitzRoy’s lifetime a lot of boat owners tried to get the office closed down because they didn’t want fishermen to have an excuse for staying in port. Thirdly, I’d highlight his time as governor of New Zealand, where he sought to protect the Maori from unscrupulous settlers who wanted their land. As a result, he was recalled to London.
Is there anything that you don’t particularly admire about him?
Yes, he had a fairly explosive temper, but nothing else springs to mind.
Can you see any parallels between FitzRoy’s life and your own?
None whatsoever. I’m not the least bit honourable, I’m extraordinarily sceptical of all religions and I’m a dreadful sailor!
Michael Buerk has worked as both a news presenter and a foreign correspondent during his distinguished BBC career. He has hosted BBC Radio 4’s Moral Maze since 1990.
This article was first published in the May 2025 issue of BBC History Magazine
]]> HistoryExtra <![CDATA[Did Charles Darwin coin the phrase 'survival of the fittest'?]]> https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/survival-of-the-fittest-meaning-origin/ 2022-08-30T14:32:19.000Z 2022-01-28T07:28:55.000Z Although the phrase ‘survival of the fittest’ came about as a direct result of the publication of Charles Darwin’s seminal On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, it was not a phrase he at first used to describe what he called ‘natural selection’.
In fact the phrase first appears in the 1864 book Principals of Biology by the greatly overlooked polymath Herbert Spencer. Spencer believed that evolution was at work throughout the cosmos and applied to the creation of stars as much as to life on Earth as everything was evolving from simpler forms into more complex ones.
Having read Darwin’s masterpiece he incorporated these ideas into his own works, calling Darwin’s approach ‘survival of the fittest’. Not that Spencer agreed completely with Darwin, applying his ideas far beyond biology into sociology and politics. He thought that all societies evolve from more primitive, simpler forms to sophisticated ones, eventually reaching an evolutionary ‘end-point’ – a final state of perfect equilibrium – at which stage natural selection then stops.
It was not until the fifth edition of Origin of Species, published on 10 February 1869, that Darwin returned the compliment, using the phrase ‘survival of the fittest’. He chose this, and credited Spencer with its invention, as he felt that ‘natural selection’ implied a conscious choice whereas evolution in fact had no conscious decision-making process. What he did not mean was what the phrase has come to mean today, that is ‘in the best physical condition’. Rather ironically, because of this, modern evolutionary biologists nearly always use Darwin’s original term ‘natural selection’ instead.
- Read next | Charles Darwin vs God: did the 'Origin of Species' cause a clash between church and science?
This Q&A first appeared in BBC History Magazine
]]> HistoryExtra <![CDATA[Charles Darwin and the Beagle: how the voyage transformed our understanding of the world]]> https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/darwin-voyage-beagle-when-what-happened-discovered/ 2024-03-26T16:34:55.000Z 2020-12-27T08:02:44.000Z When HMS Beagle set sail from Plymouth Sound on 27 December 1831, under the command of Robert FitzRoy, its captain and crew – including recent arts graduate Charles Darwin – expected their voyage to last 24 months. Five years later, the brig returned.
The ship had circumnavigated the planet, while Darwin collected specimens and began developing a theory that would revolutionise everything our species knew about the world. Darwin’s findings questioned and then eclipsed prevailing notions of creationism pedalled by religious establishments, but when he boarded the Beagle, the 22-year-old didn’t mean to rock the boat. He was preparing to embark on a career as a country clergyman, and appeared destined for life as a parson with a passionate interest in nature. Instead, this epic adventure set him on a path that led to a place in the pantheon of science.
What type of vessel was the Beagle?
Built in 1820 as a Cherokee-class, ten-gun brigsloop, the Beagle was later refitted as a survey barque. At that time, the British had a keen eye on South America, where several nations had recently won independence from Spain and, in 1826, the Beagle embarked on a hydrographical survey of Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego, initially under the captainship of a Pringle Stokes. When Stokes took his own life in Tierra del Fuego, he was ultimately replaced by former flag lieutenant Robert FitzRoy – a 23-year-old who’d been in the Navy since the age of 13.
The Beagle returned to England with four Fuegians on board – two men, a boy and agirl – captured by the crew while in pursuit of a stolen boat in Tierra del Fuego. Nicknamed York Minster, Fuegia Basket, Jemmy Button and Boat Memory, these bewildered figures became the subjects of an experiment by FitzRoy, who intended to ‘civilise’ them with English manners and a Christian education, and then return them home to spread the word. Boat Memory died of smallpox in England, but FitzRoy persevered with his plan when he was commissioned to captain a second South American survey.
After Stokes’ death, FitzRoy wanted a self-funded scientist to accompany him on the expedition, as a gentleman companion. The position was offered to botany professor Reverend John Stevens Henslow, who instead put forward his pupil and protégé Charles Darwin.
The Beagle initially departed Devonport on 10 December, but was delayed in Plymouth by bad weather and then Christmas drunkenness. When the vessel eventually weighed anchor, Darwin instantly became sea sick and began questioning the wisdom of his mission. He was confined to his cabin for some time, completely missing Madeira, their first port of call.
In Tenerife, faced with 12 days’ quarantine because of a cholera outbreak in England, FitzRoy ordered the ship to proceed straight to the Cape Verde Islands. On Santiago, Darwin found a band of seashells 18 metres up a cliff face. He noted this as evidence of dramatic change in global sea levels, which seemed to support a controversial concept, previously put forward by geologist Charles Lyell, that the world had slowly changed over a huge period of time – this would be influential on Darwin’s theories. The Beagle crossed the equator on 16 February and, 12 days later, reached Brazil.
For two months, Darwin roamed Rio de Janeiro and its surrounds, collecting specimens. He explored rainforests around Rio Macaé and Botafogo Bay, while FitzRoy surveyed the Abrolhos Archipelago. Two crew members died of malaria in Brazil, and the ship’s surgeon, Robert McCormick – upset at playing second fiddle to Darwin – resigned and returned to England.
On 26 July, the Beagle arrived in Montevideo, where FitzRoy surveyed the Rio Paraná and sent 50 of his men to help local officials quell a riot. Here, Darwin shipped the first batch of specimens and notes back to his mentor, Reverend Henslow, wracked with doubt about the quality of his work.
What did Darwin collect on the Beagle voyage?
Darwin spent several weeks collecting specimens in Patagonia, around Bahía Bianca. There, he discovered huge fossil bones in a cliff at Punta Alta, which later proved to belong to long-extinct and previously unknown creatures including giant sloths and armadillos. Further south down the coast, he also found the bones of a llama-like, humpless camel.
- Read more about Mary Anning: the woman who hunted dinosaurs
The expedition departed Montevideo on 27 November, and Tierra del Fuego was sighted on 18 December. For a month, the Beagle was battered by tempestuous seas around Cape Horn, once almost capsizing – an incident that caused the loss of a significant stash of Darwin’s specimens.
Eventually, in smaller boats, FitzRoy and a landing party – including Darwin – entered the Beagle Channel (named after the ship during its previous expedition) and travelled along Ponsonby Sound to Woolya Cove. Here, the three surviving Fuegians were deposited, dressed in European clothing and armed with bags of trinkets and utterly useless gifts (such as tea sets) from a well-meaning British public.
The party built a small missionary post and, on 27 January 1833, Darwin and FitzRoy farewelled Reverend Richard Matthews, who remained behind with the three Fuegians to man the mission. Nine days later, when FitzRoy returned to see how his Anglicised ambassadors were progressing, he was disappointed to find that the site had been looted. Matthews had already had enough, and rejoined the Beagle, leaving the three Fuegians to their fate.
After a foray to the Falkland Islands – where FitzRoy supplied security for newly established British interests, and purchased a second boat – the expedition moved back up the east coast of South America.
While the Beagle and the new schooner (christened the Adventure) completed marine surveys, Darwin spent long periods exploring on land. As well as collecting specimens, he experienced gaucho culture during wild adventures on the Pampas.
What did Darwin's Beagle expedition find?
Beyond the discovery of giant bones belonging to extinct monsters like Mastodons and Megatheriums, these trips were highly eventful. During one extended excursion, Darwin travelled for a period with General Juan Manuel de Rosas – future dictator of Argentina.
This overland epic saw him complete a 200- mile horseback ride from Carmen de Patagones on the Rio Negro to Bahía Blanca, via the Rio Colorado. He then spent 12 days travelling 400 miles from Bahía Blanca to Buenos Aires, climbing the Sierra de la Ventana mountains en route, and subsequently riding along South America’s second longest river, Rio Paraná, for a further 300 miles to Santa Fe.
Attempting to return by riverboat down the Paraná, he arrived in Buenos Aires as a revolt was unfolding and became trapped, eventually escaping by boat to Montevideo, where he finally rejoined the Beagle.
Besides the evidence he was amassing about an entire strata of megafauna that had mysteriously disappeared, Darwin also found puzzling clues to another conundrum during his foraging forays, including teeth from a horse-like creature that pre-dated the arrival of Europeans to South America. These led him to question why species so similar to surviving animals could have disappeared.
As his collection grew, he took on a servant to help with the process of shooting and stuffing animals, and sending packages back to England. Occasionally, specimens found him. Darwin had been long been looking for a rare sub-species of rhea bird reported by the gauchos. In January 1834, while enjoying a meal shot by expedition artist Conrad Martens, the scientist suddenly realised he was eating the very elusive animal he’d been searching for.
- Read more | From Charles Darwin’s beard to George Eliot’s right hand: 4 famous Victorian bodily quirks
After travelling back down the flank of Patagonia – via the Falkland Islands, where FitzRoy’s men helped quash a revolt – the Beagle visited the mission in Tierra del Fuego. It was deserted. Jemmy Button remained nearby, but he’d shed his clothes, taken a wife and returned to a traditional way of life.
The expedition negotiated the Straits of Magellan in June 1834, entering the Pacific and turning north along the Chilean coast. In Valparaiso, Darwin ventured inland again, as far as Santiago and even Mendoza in Argentina, crossing the foothills of the Andes and making more observations about geological forces. On his return, he contracted a parasitic illness – possibly Chagas’ disease – that would cause him lifelong problems.
While in Chile, Darwin witnessed the effects of a volcanic eruption on Osorno and an earthquake in Concepción, prompting him to postulate about plate tectonics and the possibility that South America was rising from the sea (another theory put forward by Lyell).
On 15 September 1835, the Beagle reached the Galápagos Islands, where Darwin would make his biggest discoveries – helped by a chance encounter. When the scientist met Nicolas Lawson, the acting Governor of Galápagos happened to mention that he could tell which island a tortoise was from according to the shape of its shell.
Darwin subsequently noted differences between mocking birds native to individual islands and, although he didn’t label them at the time, collected finches from the archipelago that would become central to his theory of natural selection and evolution.
When did the Beagle return?
Heading west across the Pacific, the Beagle visited Tahiti – where Darwin explored his theory about the formation of coral reefs by sinking volcanic islands – and New Zealand.
Though disappointed by the lack of mammalian life in New Zealand, Darwin was spellbound by the wonderfully weird marsupials of Australia. After arriving in Sydney in January 1836, he travelled inland to the Blue Mountains, and later explored Tasmania and King George Sound (current-day Albany in Western Australia), before the Beagle sailed for Cape Town, via the Cocos Islands and Mauritius .
Using St Helena and Ascension Island as stepping stones, FitzRoy took the expedition across the Atlantic and back to Brazil, to double check his previous readings. From here, the Beagle finally trotted home, via the Azores, to arrive in Falmouth on 2 October 1836 – three years later than planned.
Darwin disembarked from the ship he would make famous, armed with ideas that would become the cornerstones of modern biology – even if it did take him two decades to make them public.
In 1839, Darwin conceived his theory of natural selection (that all species of life have evolved over time from common ancestors), but didn’t make it public until another naturalist and explorer, Alfred Russel Wallace, independently came up with the same concept. The two men’s ideas were released together in 1858 (without Wallace’s prior approval), and Darwin published his ideas in full in On the Origin of Species the following year. The theory split opinions – particularly in the Church of England – but ultimately became a foundation stone of modern natural history.
Pat Kinsella specialises in adventure journalism as a writer, photographer and editor
This article first appeared in BBC History Revealed in 2016
]]> HistoryExtra <![CDATA[My history hero: Andrew Marr chooses Charles Darwin (1809–82)]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/history-hero-andrew-marr-charles-darwin/ 2024-09-06T16:18:24.000Z 2020-12-11T18:28:11.000Z
Charles Darwin: in profile
Charles Darwin was a British naturalist and geologist. His five-year round-the-world voyage on HMS Beagle and subsequent publication of his diary-journal, Journal and Remarks, 1832–1836, established him as a leading geologist and author. But he is best-known for his groundbreaking book, On the Origin of Species (1859), in which he advanced his scientific theory that different species evolved over the course of time through a process of natural selection. The father-of-10 was buried in Westminster Abbey.
When did you first hear about Charles Darwin?
I read The Voyage of the Beagle as a boy, but I was really only turned on to science, and biology in particular, later in life. It wasn’t something I was much interested in at school, to the despair of my teachers. I then went on to champion Darwin in the BBC’s Greatest Britons television series in 2002. I’m proud of the fact that he came fourth in the competition [behind Winston Churchill, Isambard Kingdom Brunel and Diana, Princess of Wales] though I naturally think he should have won!
What kind of man was he?
He was extremely kind and empathetic, lacking pomposity in his demeanour and private life, and a loving father and husband. Yet in his intellect he was utterly ferocious and incredibly brave. To think the way that he thought, and push it to its logical conclusion, in a heavily Christianised period of our history was an extraordinary thing to do. Absolutely extraordinary.
What made Darwin a hero?
To me a hero can’t be a cruel or unpleasant person by definition. By the same token, a hero has to be an open, tolerant individual who treats people from all backgrounds, as well as animals, with kindness – and Darwin was all those things. He was endlessly curious and advanced a new way of thinking which transformed the way the whole world thought. Name me another person in British history on the same scale? There’s nobody.
Is there anything you don’t hugely admire about him?
I don’t think there was a darker side to Darwin, other than the fact that he engaged in feuds with rivals – especially with those who didn’t agree with him.
Could you have ended up as a naturalist, too, if you had been born a century earlier?
We are all the prisoners, in later life, of our early education. I wish I had been more focused on the sciences in general, and biology in particular, in my schooldays, and then indeed I would love to have been a naturalist back in the heroic days…
What would you ask Darwin if you could meet him?
I’d ask him whether he thought that his view of the world meant that humans should and could be bred to make them better – in other words, did he believe in eugenics? I’m pretty sure Darwin’s answer would have been: “Certainly not, what a horrible idea!” If he’d said that, he would have saved the world quite a lot of misery.
Andrew Marr was talking to York Membery. Marr is best-known for presenting The Andrew Marr Show on BBC One. His latest book, Elizabethans: How Modern Britain Was Forged (William Collins), is out now, and his BBC Two series, New Elizabethans, is available on BBC iPlayer now
This article was first published in the Christmas 2020 edition of BBC History Magazine
]]> HistoryExtra <![CDATA[Charles Darwin vs God: did the 'Origin of Species' cause a clash between church and science?]]> https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/darwin-vs-god-did-the-origin-of-species-cause-a-clash-between-church-and-science/ 2024-10-20T17:05:49.000Z 2020-11-24T13:30:47.000Z On 12 February 1809, Charles Darwin, the bearded Victorian sage on the ten pound note, was born. Many people believe he was the man who discovered we come from monkeys. Yet he did no such thing. Writers before Darwin had made connections between humans and apes and monkeys because of our obvious physical similarities. But the theory for which Darwin is so celebrated was not aimed particularly at human ancestry at all.
The implications of Darwin’s theory – most famously espoused in 1859 in the Origin of Species – were so wide-ranging that a concise caricature of what it was all about was probably needed. “Darwin says we come from monkeys” was perhaps an understandable popular shorthand. It at least encapsulates both that species change and that the human species is derived from non-human ancestors. Of course it is also woefully inadequate since humans are no more descended from the monkeys we see around us today than you are from your own cousin.
Instead, Darwin set out to answer the question, how are new species formed? Where do they come from? What is their origin? His theory was not about the origin of life itself. Although Darwin believed that question too would turn out to have a perfectly natural explanation, he thought that it was then beyond the power of science to answer.
More fantasy than fact
We often hear that when the Origin of Species was published there was a great outcry and an historic clash of science and religion. This is probably more fantasy than fact. Such stories can now be told and repeated only because we have forgotten just what was, and what was not, new and shocking in 1859.
Much of what is commonly attributed to Darwin’s book today had actually emerged in the half century or so before its publication. Such accounts assume that the Origin of Species not only proposed a new and ambitious theory of evolution, but that the Earth was more than 6,000 years old, that there was a progressive fossil record – and that it also proposed the precise lineage of human beings. According to such legendary accounts all of this was presented to a blinkered and prejudiced public believing in the literal truth of Genesis. This would have been an historic clash indeed! But this is not what happened.
The Victorian public that first read or read about the Origin of Species were, for the most part, not biblical literalists. For decades the most enlightened writers in the fields of science and religion had accepted that much of the Old Testament, and Genesis in particular, had to be read in a metaphorical sense. Some believed that the creation story dealt only with the latest geological epoch – in which humanity appears on Earth.
The immensely ancient Earth was not Darwin’s contribution, and it was not new. Geology had become a sophisticated science. No one knew how old the Earth was, but it was clear from the enormous numbers of geological formations that had been described and classified that so many long ages must have taken unimaginable lengths of time, millions upon millions of years. But no one knew how many. It was not until the discovery of radioactivity that accurate dating of rocks, and of the Earth itself, were feasible.
That fossil records revealed a succession of eras or ages of extinct ‘living’ things was also old news. It was almost universally accepted that these successive types of fossilised creatures were generally progressive through the oldest to the newest rocks.
In the oldest rocks were the most primitive creatures. Shells preceded fish, which preceded amphibians, which preceded reptiles which preceded mammals. This was true wherever one went throughout the world. In fact the geological strata were dated according to which fossils they contained – because the order of succession had been worked out in great detail. No human fossils were known and hence these ancient worlds were believed to predate the creation of mankind.
- Forgotten science: 7 of the strangest scientific theories in history
The other common belief is that Darwin’s book shocked Victorian religious and moral values. In fact most of the heat had already been spent over radically naturalistic works published in the preceding decades. Books like George Combe’s The Constitution of Man (1828) and the anonymous Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (1844) had shocked readers far more with their visions of natural laws that controlled all of the universe, mankind included, leaving virtually no place for God.
The later work was an evolutionary tour de force that began with the creation of the solar system from swirling clouds of dust and ended with the prediction that mankind would go on progressing into something even more exalted.
These books were also read by huge audiences. By the end of the 19th century, Vestiges had sold around 40,000 copies and Constitution an impressive 300,000. In comparison the Origin of Species sold 50,000 copies by 1900. Such was Constitution and Vestiges’ impact that they had societies founded to oppose them and, in at least one case, were publicly burned. No such treatment awaited the Origin of Species or its author. Indeed, by 1859, such reactions were unthinkably out of date.
Yet it would be a mistake to go so far as to claim that the Origin of Species did not create a stir. Countless reviews eventually appeared as well as pamphlets and books in support or opposition. Darwin’s name was already well-respected due to his Journal of Researches (or Voyage of the Beagle, as it is now known), and numerous other major scientific contributions, that his views had to be taken seriously.
So Victorian readers were confronted with one of the leading men of science of the day publishing a work that purported to establish that, contrary to long-held belief, new species were not somehow created in each new geological age to fit the new conditions. Instead, they were the lineal descendants of earlier species. These had gradually changed as the environment changed around them. Thus all living and extinct species were related on a single genealogical family tree – the tree of life.
Explaining evolution
A good starting point for Darwin’s theory was the most familiar example of how animals and plants were known to change: domestication. Darwin explained that because farmers or breeders selected individuals with particular features to breed from they thus increased the proportion of the desired features in their flocks or crops. By repeating the process over many generations, extraordinary modifications had been and were being produced.
For example, breeders had made such great alterations to some domestic pigeons that they’d have been described as different species if a naturalist had found them in the wild. Well-marbled beef was bred, sheep with legs too short to hop over fences, and so forth.
Darwin argued that if every life form which had ever lived on Earth reappeared, they could be laid out next to another, parent with offspring – and nowhere would one be able to indicate where one species ceases and another begins (except, of course, for extinctions). Instead one would see an endless chain of individuals in which each offspring differed no more from its progenitors than any child does from its parents.
Yet close study of many thousands of organisms showed that there was a constant abundance of variety or slight differences between all individuals. Darwin already knew this “from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants” – and was inspired by the grim population theory of Thomas Malthus.
As such, he recognised that the vast majority of living things that were annually produced – from eggs to seeds to pollen – did not survive to reproduce. If they did the entire Earth would be covered by any one species in a few hundred generations.
Therefore most individuals were destroyed. Hence the tiny minority that survived to propagate had made it through what was, in effect, a struggle for existence. They did so because they had the right characteristics that enabled specifically them to slip through the gauntlet. Again, if reiterated over the thousands of generations of geological time, limitless change could result.
Who was Charles Darwin?
Charles Robert Darwin (1809–1882) was born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire. His father was the financier and physician Robert Darwin. His mother, Susannah Wedgwood, was the daughter of the famous potter. Darwin went to school at Shrewsbury before studying medicine at Edinburgh between 1825–1827. From 1828–1831 Darwin was at Christ’s College, Cambridge where he graduated with a BA degree. Soon after, he was fortunate enough to receive an offer to join the Beagle, a surveying ship, as naturalist during a round-the-world expedition. Darwin returned immensely experienced in geology and zoology. He published numerous works based on the Beagle expedition – well received in the scientific world back in England – including his famous Journal of Researches (Voyage of the Beagle), and specialist works on the geology and zoology of the voyage. Based on some of the last of his Beagle specimens he began to study barnacles and ended up writing four volumes describing all known species. He then began to write up the theory on which he had been working for 20 years, his theory of evolution by natural selection. He published his great work in 1859. This, together with the Descent of Man (1871), established him as one of the foremost naturalists in the world. Living quietly at his home in Kent, he continued to publish subsidiary evolutionary subjects showing, with great originality, further details and elaborations of how evolution by natural selection works. He died on 19 April 1882 and was buried with great honour in Westminster Abbey.
Darwin’s theories inspired the whole gamut of reactions. Among the scientific community they ranged from contemptuous rejection to enthusiastic support. Darwin’s wide array of arguments and evidence persuaded many that he had found the hidden bond that naturalists had been seeking which explained how all the different genera and species were related. Suddenly the whole history of life on Earth and the key to its distribution and adaptations had been unlocked.
Other writers felt that Darwin’s views were an attack on the role of a Creator in nature and drove a wedge between the moral and spiritual values and aspirations of mankind. Instead of tracing a lineage to the son of God, Darwin’s theory suggested man had only beastly origins.
Others, like the Reverend Charles Kingsley, felt differently. He wrote enthusiastically to Darwin about his theory. In fact, such was his admiration that Darwin was granted permission to quote from the letter in the second edition of the Origin of Species: “A celebrated author and divine has written to me that ‘he has gradually learnt to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that He created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that He required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His laws’.”
Darwin debates Wilberforce
So, to religious thinkers of Kingsley’s ilk, Darwin had uncovered a new law by which God governed the natural world. For such thinkers it was quite reasonable to reconcile Darwin’s views with their religion. Probably the most famous episode in the reception of Darwin’s theory is the so-called Huxley/Wilberforce debate.
The event took place on 30 June 1860, in the library of the new University Museum in Oxford, during a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. There are numerous, sometimes contradictory, accounts of what happened. The naturalist Thomas Henry Huxley’s own rendition in a letter to Darwin sounds like what one wished one had said during an argument with hindsight.
- 7 famous Victorians: from Brontë to Brunel
Bishop Samuel Wilberforce, so it is said, asked Huxley if he claimed descent from an ape on his grandmother or grandfather’s side? Huxley, again according to legend, responded that he would rather be descended from an ape than a man who used his talents to bring ridicule into a serious scientific discussion. We will probably never know exactly what was said during this bout of verbal sparring, and it seems clear that the clash was as much about personalities as science versus religion. What we do know, however, is that Darwin’s theory was vigorously debated by the scientific community.
Joining that debate, the phrenologist and botanist HC Watson wrote to Darwin shortly after the publication of the Origin of Species: “Your leading idea will assuredly become recognised as an established truth in science, ie ‘Natural selection’. It has the characteristics of all great natural truths, clarifying what was obscure, simplifying what was intricate, adding greatly to previous knowledge. You are the greatest revolutionist in natural history of this century, if not of all centuries.”
More and more scientists found that Darwin’s explanation made sense of their particular areas of expertise. Articles and books soon began to appear praising Darwin’s ideas.
Butterfly effect
In 1861 Henry Walter Bates, a naturalist just returned from Brazil, showed that natural selection could explain the mystery of mimicry in South American butterflies. Bates had found that many types of brightly-coloured butterflies escaped being eaten because they were very unpalatable to birds. Wherever such species existed, different and rarer butterfly species – even those from different families – had evolved to look strikingly like them. Most significantly, the more one of these mimics resembled one of the inedible species, the greater its chances of being left alone by birds.
There was also a coterie of influential and active scientific supporters of Darwin’s views including JD Hooker, AR Wallace, Huxley and, to some extent, Charles Lyell. The combined support of these and other respected figures, together with the immense argumentative power of Darwin’s book itself, resulted in a dramatic overturn of previous views about the permanence of species.
As the years passed and reviews and counter-reviews appeared, the fact of Darwinian evolution, the common descent of species, became increasingly accepted. It made sense of a host of diverse kinds of evidence that were otherwise inexplicable.
Indeed, by around 1869, ten years after the Origin of Species first appeared, most scientists had accepted that Darwin was right. Of course things were not the same everywhere. In Germany the theory was accepted rather quickly and with little fuss; in France it was largely ignored for many years. However, by the 1870s Darwin was internationally regarded as a scientific revolutionary who had transformed the study of the natural world.
Yet, surprisingly, the other key Darwinian idea, natural selection, was much less welcome.
As scientific and non-scientific readers came increasingly to accept the Darwinian concept of common ancestry for species, the view that natural selection was the primary mechanism was often sidelined or rejected. Huxley welcomed the big picture of the evolution of life with open arms. Yet natural selection – that aspect of the theory that made divine intervention unnecessary – he could not accept.
Many suggested instead that the variations that natural selection picked out were themselves divinely guided or caused. The bottom line seemed to be – was there a meaning or intention behind how life changed? According to Darwin there were only natural reasons.
All these doubts notwithstanding, from the perspective of those who lived through that time, and even from hindsight today, that fact that Darwin’s views were largely accepted throughout the international scientific community in 10 to 15 years is remarkable. Scientists found that new avenues were thrown open to their particular researches. Countless confirmations and refinements to Darwin’s views were published. New fossil forms were discovered which filled gaps between already known groups, just as Darwin had predicted.
What is perhaps so extraordinary about Darwin is how far he went beyond his contemporaries. If he had died on the Beagle voyage, instead of Darwinism we would probably not have Wallaceism or anyone-else-ism. Instead, as with so many other sciences, over the succeeding decades a community of workers would have come up with the many different aspects that constitute Darwin’s theory.
Therefore the reason Darwin is special, and the reason he is still remembered as the father of evolutionary biology today, is that he advanced science so far on his own. He not only established evolution by natural selection, long before his contemporaries, but he did so much of the work of substantiating it and of convincing the scientific community of its veracity himself.
Myths and Darwin: can you believe in both God and evolution?
Three myths about Charles Darwin and evolution, debunked
It is impossible to believe in God and evolution at the same time
This myth has perhaps been strengthened all the more by the anti-religious fervour of outspoken atheists. But the fact is, it is possible to believe in God and evolution. This is as true today as it was in Darwin’s time.
Many people wrote to Darwin to ask him this question and he became rather tired of answering it. Yes, he would reply, of course you can believe in both. And to demonstrate this he supplied lists of prominent scientists who did exactly that.
Darwin was afraid of how his theory would be received
Another widespread legend is that Darwin was so afraid of what the reactions to his theory would be that he kept it a secret for 20 years.
On the contrary, when later answering claims that he exaggerated his originality in the Origin of Species, he replied that, before publishing in 1859, “I formerly spoke to very many naturalists on the subject of evolution, and never once met with any sympathetic agreement”. This appeared in the sixth and final edition of Origin of Species in 1872.
Darwin converted Christianity and recanted his evolutionary theory
It has been said that Darwin either converted to Christianity on his deathbed (he was an agnostic) and/or recanted his evolutionary theory as he approached death. Both are quite untrue and his family wrote many letters denying these claims when they first began to circulate around 1915.
John van Wyhe is a historian of science, currently at the National University of Singapore. He is the founder and director of Darwin Online, the world’s largest online resource on Charles Darwin
This content first appeared in the January 2009 issue of BBC History Magazine
]]> Emma Slattery Williams <![CDATA[7 famous Victorians: from Brontë to Brunel]]> https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/famous-victorians-bronte-brunel-darwin-who/ 2023-11-08T21:23:35.000Z 2020-10-19T14:33:28.000Z
Florence Nightingale, 1820–1910
The Lady with the Lamp transformed the nursing profession, making it a respectable role for women and saving countless lives by implementing simple changes. During the Crimean War (1853-6), Florence Nightingale was sent to the field hospitals in modern-day Turkey. There, amongst other things, she introduced regular handwashing and the provision of clean clothes for patients, which saw rates of infection drop, as well promoting a high level of dignity and care to the soldiers she was looking after. Nightingale’s reports on patient living conditions prompted a Royal Commission into the health of the British Army. In 1860, she opened the world’s first secular nursing school in London and the advice in her book Notes on Nursing is still used as a practical guide to hygiene and caring.
Charles Darwin, 1809–82
The so-called father of evolution, Charles Darwin became interested in the natural world from a young age, but he dropped out of medical school and subsequently took up theology. In 1831, Darwin took up the position of naturalist on HMS Beagle, beginning a five-year voyage that would change his life. Exploring remote parts of the world, including the Galápagos Islands and Brazil, Darwin examined fossils, plants and animal samples, and on his return formulated his theory that evolution took place by natural selection – that the fittest of a species survives to pass on its characteristics. Darwin’s ideas, despite contradicting the teachings of the Church, were published in his 1859 book On the Origin of Species. By the time of his death, in 1882, Darwin’s theories on evolution had been widely accepted by the scientific community.
Isambard Kingdom Brunel, 1806–59
Engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel was the mastermind behind some of Victorian Britain’s greatest engineering feats – from Bristol’s Clifton Suspension Bridge and the SS Great Britain to an entire railway network. Brunel’s first major engineering achievement was helping his father, also an engineer, build the Thames Tunnel – the first tunnel to be built under a navigable river. In 1833, Brunel became Chief Engineer for Great Western Railway and built a network of tunnels, viaducts and bridges on the route between London and Bristol.
- Read more about the history of railways in Britain
Sir Robert Peel, 1788–1850
Serving twice as British Prime Minister, Robert Peel brought in many reforms that changed Britain for the better. As Home Secretary he helped promote Catholic Emancipation, while as Prime Minister he improved conditions for the working classes – especially those working in mines and factories. Peel is also seen as the father of modern British policing with his introduction of a professional and full-time police force for London – a reformed style of policing that quickly spread across the country.
Sarah Forbes Bonetta, 1843–80
Born into the royal family of the West African Yoruba people, Aina (her name at birth) was captured during a slave-hunt war in which her parents were killed. At just five years old, she was taken as a slave by the king of Dahomey, in modern-day Benin. A British Navy captain – sent as an emissary to Dahomey – was given the girl as a suitable gift for Queen Victoria. Aina was baptised and given an English name, Forbes for the captain and Bonetta after his ship. Victoria was charmed by the young girl and became her protector, funding her education. Aina – now named Sarah – was a regular visitor to Windsor Castle and impressed the court with her academic abilities. At 19 she married a Yoruba businessman and philanthropist; they returned to Africa and raised a family. Sarah kept in touch with the queen and was given permission to name her first daughter Victoria – with the monarch standing as godmother. After Sarah died from tuberculosis, aged 37, Victoria continued to provide an annuity for the child.
Ada Lovelace, 1815–52
Daughter of the poet Lord Byron and Annabella Milbanke, Ada Lovelace is widely considered the world’s first computer programmer. Annabella, herself a highly educated woman, promoted her daughter’s interest in logic and mathematics. When she was just 17, Ada met mathematician and inventor Charles Babbage and became fascinated with his Analytical Engine – an automatic mechanical digital computer. She would later translate an article about the Analytical Engine by Italian engineer Luigi Federico Menabrea, adding her own notes (three times longer than the original text) which contain what is considered to be the first computer program or algorithm, and demonstrating her awareness of the machine’s future potential. There is still debate about how much Ada contributed to Babbage’s work and who wrote about what first, but she is remembered for her vision in an era of great restrictions for women.
Emily Brontë, 1818–48
One of the talented Brontë siblings, Emily lived most of her life on the remote Yorkshire Moors with her family. Her only published novel – the dark and tragic Wuthering Heights – is considered a classic of English literature. Along with sisters Charlotte and Anne, Emily was first published under a pseudonym in a book of poems. She died in 1848 of tuberculosis, less than three months after her brother Branwell.
This article first appeared in the October 2020 issue of BBC History Revealed
]]> HistoryExtra <![CDATA[10 places where history was made]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/10-places-where-history-was-made/ 2025-02-14T15:56:14.000Z 2013-05-23T08:50:38.000Z “People have always cared about the past,” exclaims Simon Thurley when I ask him why it was only in 1913 that the first legislation was passed to protect England’s historic sites. “One of the earliest poems in English is called The Ruin,” he continues. “It’s an Anglo-Saxon poem: an Anglo-Saxon man walking around the ruins of Bath, completely in awe of the remains of Roman civilisation. Admiring ancient monuments as things of beauty, wonder and awe is a very deep-seated concern in the human psyche. It is innate to be interested in, and want to protect, the past.
“Another good example can be found in the 16th century when, during bursts of Puritan iconoclasm, Elizabeth I issued edicts stating: ‘You must not destroy old monuments and churches. I can understand why you might want to take out some stained glass, but don’t touch the monuments.’”
Despite this reverence for the past, parliament eventually needed to step in to prevent certain places being lost. While a few important sites were protected by law by the end of the 19th century, it took the 1913 Ancient Monuments Amendment and Consolidation Act to revolutionise how we view and secure the physical remains of our history.
I ask Thurley (pictured right) why the act was needed at that time. “It’s a very modern notion for the state to get involved in heritage protection things, and interfere with people’s private property”, he says. “Before this there was a pretty solid consensus against it – not really surprising when you think that parliament in both houses was dominated by people who owned land. Certainly in the 19th century, land ownership was one of the criteria that got MPs elected, so why would you vote to restrain your own activities?
“Things did change, though, particularly as the industrial revolution progressed. By the 1830s and 1840s, it’s pretty clear to people that industrialisation is ugly; it’s destructive; and a blight on the landscape. The amount of destruction wrought by the coming of the railways in particular was unbelievable.
“This groundswell of concern came to a head in the early 20th century because of the fashion for Tudor and Stuart architecture in America,” he continues. “American collectors wanted to buy up bits of English houses and castles, and build them into their houses in the US. Consequently, a huge transatlantic trade in architectural features developed. Sometimes just individual features like fireplaces, doors and columns – but often whole rooms, and sometimes whole buildings.
“One case in particular triggered the act: Tattershall Castle in Lincolnshire. This was sold by its owners, and the fireplaces were offered to dealers who intended to ship them to America. They didn’t get that far: the fireplaces were saved before they got on the ship, but it caused quite a flurry.
“Very quickly, an act of parliament was passed, which for the first time made it possible to protect a building like Tattershall from speculation. For the first time, parliament accepted that the property rights of an individual could be constrained by the state in the greater interest of everyone else.”
But there had been three previous protective acts – in 1882, 1900 and 1910 – which were seen as inadequate. What then, I ask, did the 1913 act offer that its predecessors didn’t?
Says Thurley: “It introduced the concept of making a list of what’s important and needs to be protected. Secondarily, it introduced the concept of building up a collection of places that could then be used to educate people about the importance of British history.
“The idea was to tell the story of the nation. But in 1913 people’s perception of what constitutes history was different to that of today. Then, it was very much divided into two sections: the Reformation, which made England a Protestant country; and the Civil War, which was seen at the time as having established ‘the land of the free’, as well as parliamentary democracy. These two landmark events did, of course, produce some of our greatest monuments. They produced many of the ruined abbeys and castles we see today.
“Nowadays, however, many people see history as being the story of workers and ordinary people, and our collection reflects that: it even includes mills and factories from the ‘destructive’ industrial revolution era.
“Right the way through the interwar period, after the Second World War, the 1960s and 1970s, and even after the ancient monument branch became English Heritage in the 1980s, there was a strong feeling that the gaps that existed in the collection needed to be filled to tell the whole story.
“One example,” continues Thurley, “is Harmondsworth Great Barn on the edge of Heathrow airport. This is the greatest medieval barn in England, the like of which is not in public ownership anywhere.
“Like many acquisitions, the story of the barn is a sad one. It was purchased by speculators when it was thought Heathrow airport was going to be extended, and it was clearly going to be used as a sort of ‘bargaining chip’. The land that went with the barn was gradually sold off, but the barn itself was left to fall into terrible disrepair. When English Heritage told the owners they had to repair it, they refused, so we did the work and sent them the bill. They went bankrupt and we acquired the building.”
Clearly the challenges that English Heritage faces are numerous, varied and ever-changing. What, I ask Thurley, are the biggest threats faced by our ancient sites today?
“Since the Second World War, the single most destructive force against England’s heritage has been agriculture. Something like 20 monuments a day have been destroyed by agriculture since the war. It’s unbelievable. A countryside that in 1939 was full of the ancient humps and bumps of the prehistoric world was wiped out in a generation. The mechanisms to protect our heritage are only just catching up and starting to save sites.
“Fortunately, one of the big agricultural changes that has taken place is the ability to get subsidies for environmental improvement. Heritage is a major part of this: stewardship schemes go for nature conservation but also for heritage.”
I’m curious to know when, for English Heritage, a site becomes old and important enough to be considered for the collection. What, for instance, is the most modern place in the collection?
“When I arrived at the organisation, we had two offices in York,” says Thurley. “In the garden of one of these we found a nuclear bunker that had been built for the Royal Observer Corps. These were volunteers who were tasked with the job of going into this bunker and measuring the amount of radiation in the air in the event of nuclear war. A network of similar bunkers existed all over the country, but amazingly we found one in the garden of our office! I think there is one other in existence. We are the proud owners of a Cold War nuclear bunker! It’s our most modern site.”
What, though, is Thurley’s favourite site? Here he is loath to single out any individual English Heritage location. He does, however, tell me about his favourite walk to one of the most impressive castles in the collection.
“I live on the coast and I am mad about it,” he says. “The best walk is to Dunstanburgh Castle. You can only reach it by walking; it’s an incredibly wild place high up on the Northumberland coast. It’s a heartbreakingly beautiful spot.”
10 places in England’s history
Stonehenge, Wiltshire
One of the world’s most famous prehistoric sites
Stonehenge, one of Britain’s most famous and mysterious man-made structures, was last sold on the open market in 1915. Fortunately, its buyers, Cecil Chubb and his wife, gifted the entire site to the nation three years later and it thankfully remained open to the public. Set in glorious chalk downland and surrounded by barrows, prehistoric ditches and other monuments, the c5,000-year-old site has been blighted by two busy main roads – the A303 and the A344. By the end of this year the A344 will be closed and a new visitor centre will be opened by English Heritage. By summer 2014, skylarks will sing above the former road and the landscape will have a more evocative look and feel. 0870 333 1181 www.english-heritage.org.uk/stonehenge
Housesteads Roman Fort, Northumberland
An iconic fort on Hadrian’s Wall
Housesteads Roman Fort in Northumberland garrisoned up to 1,000 infantry at its peak. It is one of the most complete Roman forts in all of Europe. The site continues to yield secrets about the lesser-known, but equally gripping, lives of civilians who followed, supplied and depended on the Roman army. Owned by the National Trust, the 2.2-hectare site was seen as a vital part of the nation’s story, and was taken under the wing of the Ministry of Works in 1951 (and later English Heritage). Much of the rest of Hadrian’s Wall remains in private ownership. 01434 344363 www.english-heritage.org.uk/housesteads
1066 Battle of Hastings, Abbey and battlefield, East Sussex
Where William the Conqueror triumphed in 1066
This site marks one of the great turning points in English history. The abbey was built by William the Conqueror in thanks for his victory over Harold II and the Saxons in 1066. Though little of the original abbey still stands, other Norman architecture survives, including the gatehouse and courthouse. From the abbey terraces, visitors can look out over the battlefield and see the hill where the Saxons stood, initially resolute, until they broke ranks to follow the feigned retreat of William’s men. The abbey was dissolved in the 1530s and the estate was bought by the Department of the Environment in 1976, helped by donations from a group of Americans celebrating the bicentenary of American independence. 01424 775705 www.english-heritage.org.uk/1066
Dover Castle, Kent
Known as ‘the key to England’
For anyone approaching England from the nearest point in continental Europe, the imposing keep of Dover Castle is, in its role of defender of the shores, the perfect embodiment of the story of England. Once an Iron Age hillfort, Roman stronghold and Saxon fort, it stayed in military use until after the Second World War. It was besieged by the French prince Louis in 1216, but withstood the assault. In the Cold War it was intended to be a regional seat of government in the event of nuclear attack. It came completely under English Heritage management in 1991. 01304 211067 www.english-heritage.org.uk/dover
Rievaulx Abbey, North Yorkshire
One of England’s first Cistercian monasteries
Founded by the Cistercian order of monks in the 12th century, Rievaulx and the nearby abbeys of Fountains and Byland are wonderful examples of early English Gothic architecture. Although its monks were banished during the dissolution of the monasteries in the 1530s, the abbey was not destroyed. The buildings subsequently fell into ruin until its owners, the Duncombe estate, placed the site in the care of the Office of Works in 1917. The crumbling walls were rebuilt and strengthened to recreate a real sense of what this extraordinary religious building looked like at its height. The setting and spectacle are magical. 01439 798228 www.english-heritage.org.uk/rievaulx
Kenilworth Castle and Elizabethan garden, Warwickshire
Once the home of kings
At the centre of English history throughout the Middle Ages, Kenilworth Castle was home to King John; Simon de Montfort (who led the barons’ rebellion against Henry III in the 13th century); kingmaker, troublemaker and prince of the realm John of Gaunt (third son of Edward III); and Robert Dudley, suitor of Elizabeth I who stayed at the castle several times during her reign. The most spectacular additions to the castle, including the great palace (the hall of which still stands), were built by John of Gaunt. Ruined in the Civil War, Kenilworth Castle has survived down the centuries but was eventually bought for the nation by philanthropist Sir John Siddeley in 1937. 01926 852078 www.english-heritage.org.uk/kenilworth
Audley End House and Gardens, Essex
A palace in all but name
The magnificent palatial residence that survives today is just two-thirds of the inner court of what was once Britain’s largest private Jacobean house. Built between 1603 and 1614 by Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk, who rose to prominence under James VI & I, Audley End is the architectural manifestation of a strutting courtier bathed in royal patronage. Ruinously expensive to maintain, Audley End was sold to Charles II in 1666 and became a royal palace for a while. Sold to the nation in 1948, it is the perfect place in which to get a feel for the Jacobean and Stuart periods. 01799 522842 www.english-heritage.org.uk/audley
The home of Charles Darwin, Down House, Kent
The former home of a ground-breaking scientist
The significance of this property lies almost entirely with its historical resonance rather than any unique architectural qualities. Between 1842 and 1882 it was the home of Charles Darwin, and the place where he wrote On the Origin of Species and other great works. Sold by the Darwin family in 1907, the house slowly decayed under a series of owners until it was bought by English Heritage in 1996. The property has since been restored to how it looked when Charles Darwin lived there, and the house and surrounding gardens give an emotive insight into the great man’s life and thinking. 01689 859119 www.english-heritage.org.uk/darwin
Wrest Park, Bedfordshire
England’s largest ‘secret garden’
Previously overgrown and largely forgotten, Wrest Park is now widely regarded to be one of England’s greatest 18th-century gardens. It belonged to the de Grey family from the medieval period until the 20th century and the family commissioned many of the most famous Georgian designers to work on the landscape. But whereas in other gardens the previous designs were lost in the pursuit of new gardening vogues, each generation at Wrest Park respected the work of their predecessors. As a result visitors can walk through 300 years of English garden history. The house was built in the 1830s in the style of a magnificent French chateau and retains many of its original charms. During the First World War it was used as a military hospital. In 2006, English Heritage took over the management of the house and gardens and embarked on a 20-year plan to peel back the layers of over 300 years of garden history. Visitors today can see that the plans are already bearing fruit. 01525 860000 www.english-heritage.org.uk/wrest
Osborne, Isle of Wight
A royal seaside escape
There is probably no better place in Britain to gain an insight into the lives of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert than Osborne. Designed by Albert in the 1840s, it became both a comfortable home and a place from where the queen worked. Here Victoria attended to state business, received dignitaries and ministers, and managed her family and staff. Imperial influences can be found in the decoration of the house, notably the Indian feel to the Durbar room. When Victoria wanted to escape the pressures of monarchy, she had a private beach nearby, with a bathing machine set on rails which allowed her to descend to the water, dignity intact. Following Queen Victoria’s death in 1901, some parts of the house were opened to visitors, while a naval college was also set up in the grounds. 01983 200022 www.english-heritage.org.uk/osborne
This article first appeared in the May 2013 issue of BBC History Magazine
]]> HistoryExtra <![CDATA[Attenborough on Darwin]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/attenborough-on-darwin/ 2025-02-14T16:07:27.000Z 2009-02-19T14:17:52.000Z How to download the History Extra podcast
]]>