¹ Ellegård, Alvar, Darwin and the general reader. The reception of Darwin's theory of evolution in the British periodical press (Göteborg, 1958).Google ScholarYoung, R. M., ‘Malthus and the evolutionists: the common context of biological and social theory’, Past and present, no. 43 (1969), 109–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘The impact of Darwin on conventional thought’, in Symondson, Anthony J. (ed.), The Victorian crisis of faith (London, 1970), pp. 13–35Google Scholar; ‘Darwin's metaphor: does Nature select?’, The monist, lv (1971), 442–503Google Scholar; ‘Natural theology, Victorian periodicals, and the fragmentation of the common context’, Victorian studies (in press).

² Burrow, J. W., Evolution and society. A study in Victorian social theory (Cambridge, 1966).Google Scholar

³ Cannon, Walter F., ‘The bases of Darwin's achievement: a revaluation’, Victorian studies, v (1961), 109–34.Google Scholar

⁴ This is clearly illustrated by the frustrations of ‘The Metaphysical Society’; see Brown, A. W., The Metaphysical Society. Victorian minds in crisis 1869–1880 (New York, 1947).Google Scholar

⁵ E.g. Huxley, T. H., ‘The Darwinian hypothesis’, in Darwiniana. Essays (London, 1893), pp. 1–21Google Scholar; Greene, John C., The death of Adam. Evolution and its impact on western thought (New York, 1961), p. 301Google Scholar; Passmore, John, A hundred years of philosophy (2nd edn., Harmondsworth, 1968), pp. 38–9Google Scholar; Dewey, John, ‘The influence of Darwinism on philosophy’, in The influence of Darwin on philosophy and other essays in contemporary thought (reprint, Bloomington, 1965), pp. 1–19Google Scholar; Dillenberger, John, Protestant thought and natural science. A historical interpretation (London, 1961)Google Scholar, chapter 8.

⁶ I have discussed this debate in a Ph.D. thesis (Cambridge University, 1970): ‘Physiological psychology and the philosophy of nature in mid-nineteenth century Britain’.

⁷ George, Wilma, Biologist philosopher. A study of the life and writings of Alfred Russel Wallace (London, 1964).Google Scholar For a list of Wallace's writings see Marchant, James, Alfred Russel Wallace. Letters and reminiscences (London, 1916), ii. 257–68.Google Scholar

⁸ Loren C. Eiseley has recognized Wallace's commitment to these values but has not understood their relation to this thought; see Eiseley, , ‘Alfred Russel Wallace’, Scientific American, cc (1959), 70–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Darwin's century. Evolution and the men who discovered it (reprint, New York, 1961), pp. 320–4.Google Scholar

⁹ McKinney, H. L., ‘Alfred Russel Wallace and the discovery of natural selection’, Journal of the history of medicine, xxi (1966), 333–57Google Scholar; ‘Wallace's earliest observations on evolution: 28 December 1845’, Isis, lx (1969), 370–3Google Scholar; and Wallace and natural selection (New Haven, 1972).Google Scholar Cf. Beddall, Barbara G., ‘Wallace, Darwin, and the theory of natural selection. A study in the development of ideas and attitudes’, Journal of the history of biology, i (1968), 261–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰ Journal of the Anthropological Society of London (miscited by Wallace as The anthropological review), ii (1864), clvii–clxxxvii.Google Scholar I have referred to the reprint, with alterations and omitting pages clxx–clxxxvii, published as, ‘The development of human races under the law of natural selection’, in Wallace, Natural selection and tropical nature. Essays on descriptive and theoretical biology (London, 1891), pp. 168–85.Google ScholarVorzimmer, P. J., in his Charles Darwin: the years of controversy. The Origin of Species and its critics 1859–1882 (Philadelphia, 1970), p. 190Google Scholar, states that Wallace was stimulated to write this paper by Lyell, Charles's The geological evidences of the antiquity of man with remarks on theories of the origin of species by variation (London, 1863)Google Scholar and by Lyell consulting his opinion in relation to Lyell's Presidential Address to the British Association in 1864 (‘Address’, Report of the thirty-fourth meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science [London, 1865], pp. lx–lxxv).Google Scholar

¹¹ Wallace, , op. cit. (10), p. 182.Google Scholar The view that man takes control of the selective process has been of widespread importance: see Dewey, John, ‘Evolution and ethics’, The monist, viii (1898), 321–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fiske, John, A century of science and other essays (New York, 1899), pp. 104–5, 111–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Huxley, Julian, Evolutionary ethics (London, 1943).Google Scholar

¹² Darwin, Francis (ed.), The life and letters of Charles Darwin, including an autobiographical chapter (London, 1888), iii. 89–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Marchant, , op. cit. (7), ii. 152–9.Google Scholar

¹³ Wallace, , op. cit. (10), p. 179Google Scholar; the italics are mine. Wallace later suggested that certain physical characteristics had not evolved entirely by means of natural selection; see below, note 27.

¹⁴ [Wallace], ‘Sir Charles Lyell on geological climates and the origin of species’, Quarterly review, cxxvi (1869), 359–94, 391–4.Google Scholar The tenth edition of Lyell's Principles (1867–1868)Google Scholar contained his half-hearted acceptance of the Darwinian theory, A possible interaction between Lyell and Wallace in the 1860s, in relation to their shared reluctance to accept the theory of the evolution of man by means of natural selection, remains to be investigated. See note 10.

¹⁵ Wallace did not have an objective measurement of utility. The question of neutral factors in adaptation has remained a difficult problem in evolutionary biology; see George, , op. cit. (7), PP. 72–4. 252–62.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Darwin diluted his theory of natural selection with a belief in the inheritance of acquired characteristics; see Darwin, , The origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (6th edn., London, 1872)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Romanes, G. J., Darwin and after Darwin. Darwinian theory and a discussion of post-Darwinian questions (London, 1892–1897), ii. 20–35.Google Scholar Vorzimmer, op. cit. (10), argues that Darwin did not radically alter successive editions of The origin of species in response to criticism as other historians have assumed. Vorzimmer virtually ignores Wallace's criticisms of Darwin's theory of the natural selection of man. Whereas Wallace had reservations in relation to the sufficiency of natural selection in the evolution of man, Darwin had reservations in relation to the sufficiency of natural selection in general.

¹⁷ Wallace, , op. cit. (14), 391.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Ibid., 394. It must be made clear that Wallace had no orthodox religous or Christian dogmas; he interpreted a ‘Higher Intelligence’ without doctrinal affiliations.

¹⁹ Darwin, Francis and Seward, A. C. (eds.), More letters of Charles Darwin. A record of his work in a series of hitherto unpublished letters (New York, 1903), ii. 40.Google Scholar

²⁰ Darwin, , op. cit. (12), iii. 116.Google Scholar

²¹ First published in Contributions to the theory of natural selection. A series of essays (London, 1870).Google Scholar I have referred to the reprint, published with slight alterations, in Natural selection and tropical nature. Essays on descriptive and theoretical biology (London, 1891), pp. 186–214.Google Scholar Cf. ‘Darwinism applied to man’, in Darwinism. An exposition of the theory of natural selection with some of its applications (London, 1889), pp. 445–78Google Scholar, and reprints of his 1864 and 1870 papers on man in The action of natural selection on man (New Haven, 1871).Google Scholar

²² Wallace, 1891, op. cit. (21), pp. 187–8.Google Scholar

²³ Ibid., p. 188.

²⁴ Ibid., p. 193.

²⁵ Ibid., p. 192.

²⁶ Ibid., pp. 203–4.

²⁷ Ibid., pp. 194–8.

²⁸ Ibid., p. 199.

²⁹ Ibid., p. 187.

³⁰ Ibid., p. 206.

³¹ Ibid., p. 212.

³² Darwin, Charles, The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex (London, 1871)Google Scholar, and The expression of the emotions in man and animals (London, 1872).Google Scholar The second part of The descent of man, on the theory of sexual selection, accounted for the existence of animal coloration and such human attributes as the singing voice. It is probably not coincidental that Wallace rejected Darwin's theory of sexual selection. Instead, in relation to animals, Wallace developed the theory of protective coloration and recognition. He could not apply this theory to man and was therefore left without a mechanism for the evolution of those attributes which Darwin explained by means of sexual selection. See Wallace, , ‘Mimicry and other protective resemblances among animals’, in Natural sselection, and tropical nature. Essays on descriptive and theoretical biology (London, 1891), pp. 34–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘The colours of animals and sexual selection’, in Ibid., pp. 338–94; Wallace, , My life. A record of events and opinions (London, 1905), ii. 17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and George, , op. cit. (7), pp. 183–218.Google Scholar Discussion of sexual selection and allied topics formed the major component of the Darwin-Wallace correspondence: see Marchant, , op. cit. (7), i. 154–302Google Scholar; Darwin, , op. cit. (12), iii. 92–8, 134–8Google Scholar; Darwin, and Seward, , op. cit. (19), ii. 84–93Google Scholar; unpublished letters from Wallace to Darwin in the Darwin Papers and Letters in the Cambridge University Library. For a commentary see Vorzimmer, , op. cit. (10), pp. 188–203.Google Scholar

³³ Wallace had written that ‘He is, indeed, a being apart, since he is not influenced by the great laws which irresistibly modify all other organic beings’ (Wallace, , op. cit. [10], p. 182).Google Scholar Darwin replied ‘I rather differ on the rank, under a classificatory point of view, which you assign to man; I do not think any character simply in excess ought ever to be used for the higher divisions’ (Darwin, , op. cit. [12], iii. 90).Google Scholar

³⁴ See Young, R. M., Mind, brain, and adaptation in the nineteenth century. Cerebral localization and its biological context from Gall to Ferrier (Oxford, 1970) pp. 44–5.Google Scholar The following analysis of the relation between the unitary nature of psychological faculties and Wallace's rejection of gradualism in the evolution of man serves, in retrospect, to link aspects of this thought. The relation was not explicitly acknowledged by Wallace.

³⁵ Wallace, , ‘The neglect of phrenology’, in The wonderful century. Its successes and failures (London, 1898), pp. 159–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁶ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), i. 234–5Google Scholar; Combe, Essay on the constitution of man considered in relation to external objects (Edinburgh, 1828).Google Scholar For phrenology see, Jefferson, Geoffrey, ‘The contemporary reaction to phrenology’, in Selected papers (London, 1960), pp. 94–112Google Scholar; Temkin, Owsei, ‘Gall and the phrenological movement’, Bulletin of the history of medicine, xxi (1947), 275–321Google Scholar; Young, op. cit. (34), passim.

³⁷ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), i. 257–62Google Scholar; Marchant, , op. cit. (7), i. 24.Google Scholar

³⁸ Young, op. cit. (34), chapter 1.

³⁹ Wallace, , op. cit. (14), 393.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Wallace, 1891, op. cit. (21), p. 203.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ibid., p. 204.

⁴² Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 227.Google Scholar He first became acquainted with hypnotism in 1844 (Ibid., i. 232–6), but it is not clear precisely when or why he became involved with spiritualism.

⁴³ ‘The opposition to hypnotism and psychical research’, in Wallace, , op. cit. (35), pp. 194–212.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Wallace, , On miracles and modern spiritualism. Three essays (London, 1875)Google Scholar; Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 275–350Google Scholar; Marchant, , op. cit. (7), ii. 181–215.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Wallace, 1875, op. cit. (44), p. vii.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ The following outline is developed in detail in chapters 4 and 5 of my Ph.D. thesis, cited in note 6.

⁴⁷ Bain, , The senses and the intellect (London, 1855)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Spencer, , The principles of psychology (London, 1855).CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a commentary see Ribot, Th., English psychology (London, 1873), pp. 124–254.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Spencer, , First principles (London, 1862)Google Scholar; Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 23.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Wallace, 1891, op. cit. (21), p. 210.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Wallace, , The world of life. A manifestation of creative power, directive mind and ultimate purpose (London, 1910), p. 399.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Wallace, 1891, op. cit. (21), pp. 211–14.Google Scholar

⁵² Ibid., p. 212.

⁵³ Whewell, William, The philosophy of the inductive sciences, founded upon their history (London, 1840), i. 157–84Google Scholar; Herschel, J. F. W., ‘On the origin of force’, in Familiar lectures on scientific subjects (London, 1866), pp. 460–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mansel, H. L., Psychology the test of moral and metaphysical philosophy… (Oxford, 1855), p. 31Google Scholar; Martineau, James, ‘Is there any “axiom of causality”?’, in Essays, reviews and addresses (London, 1890–1891), iii. 567–79Google Scholar; Mill, J. S., A system of logic ratiocinative and inductive: being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the methods of scientific investigation (8th edn., London, 1872)Google Scholar, book III, chapters 5 and 21.

⁵⁴ Wallace, , op. cit. (50), pp. 394–6.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Wallace, 1889, op. cit. (21), p. 476.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ In anticipation of reading Wallace's views on man in 1869, Darwin had written ‘I hope you have not murdered too completely your own and my child’ (Darwin, and Seward, , op. cit. [19] ii 39Google Scholar). See T. H. Huxley, ‘Mr. Darwin's critics’, in Huxley, , op. cit. (5), pp. 120–86, 173–9Google Scholar; Wright, Chauncey, ‘Limits of natural selection’, North American review, cxi (1870), 282–311.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Wallace, 1891, op. cit. (21), pp. 204–5.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Ibid., pp. 205–6 note.

⁵⁹ See, for example, Huxley, T. H., Hume (reprint, London, 1902), pp. 120–8.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Wallace, , op. cit. (10), p. 181.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Wallace, 1891, op. cit. (21), p. 205.Google ScholarWallace, , in Man's place in the universe. A study of the results of scientific research in relation to the unity or plurality of worlds (4th edn., London, 1904)Google Scholar, demonstrated the unlikelihood of life existing elsewhere in the universe in order to show that the coincidence of the factors necessary for supporting life was providential.

⁶² Temkin, , op. cit. (36), 309–13.Google Scholar Wallace was also influenced by Owenite Socialism in his youth, an influence shared by Combe; see Harrison, J. F. C., Robert Owen and the Owenites in Britain and America (London, 1969), pp. 86–7, 103, 225, 240.Google Scholar

⁶³ Wallace, , op. cit. (10), pp. 184–5.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Ibid., p. 185.

⁶⁵ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), i. 232, 240, 361–3Google Scholar; McKinney, , op. cit. (9), 353–6Google Scholar; Young, 1969, op. cit. (1), 130–2.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Spencer, Herbert, Social statics; or the conditions essential to human happiness specified, and the first of them developed (London, 1851)Google Scholar; Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 235.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Marchant, , op. cit. (7), i. 319.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Wallace, , The Malay archipelago and the land of the orang-utan and the bird of paradise. A narrative of travel with studies of man and nature (10th edn., London, 1890), pp. 455–8.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Ibid., pp. 455–6.

⁷⁰ Ibid., p. 457.

⁷¹ See the chapter entitled ‘Land nationalization to socialism’, in Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 235–74.Google Scholar His interest in the land question derived from reading Spencer's Social statics (Ibid., ii. 234). For surveys of his views on social questions see Marchant, , op. cit. (7), ii. 139–65Google Scholar; George, , op. cit. (7), pp. 219–25.Google Scholar

⁷² Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 240.Google Scholar His first article on the land question (1880) was ‘How to nationalize the land: a radical solution of the Irish land problem’, reprinted in Wallace, , Studies, scientific and social (London, 1900), ii. 265–95.Google Scholar See also Land nationalization. Its necessity and its aims: being a comparison of the system of landlord and tenant, with that of ownership … (London, 1882).Google Scholar

⁷³ Henry George, Progress and poverty. An inquiry into the cause of industrial depressions and of increase of want with increase of wealth … The remedy (reprint, New York, 1966)Google Scholar; Marchant, , op. cit. (7), i. 317–18 and ii. 143.Google Scholar For a discussion of Wallace, Darwin, and George see Young, R. M., ‘“Non-scientific” factors in the Darwinian debate’, Actes du XII^e Congrès International d'Histoire des Sciences; Paris 1968 (Paris, 1971), viii. 221–6.Google Scholar The background of George's economic programme is discussed in Hofstadter, R., Social Darwinism in American thought (new edn., Boston, 1955), pp. 110–14Google Scholar, and his proposal for a land tax in Jones, P.d'A., The Christian Socialist revival, 1877–1914. Religion, class, and social conscience in late-Victorian England (Princeton, 1968), pp. 48–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Hofstadter's history of Social Darwinism is reassessed in Bannister, Robert C., ‘“The survival of the fittest is our doctrine”: history or histrionics?’, Journal of the history of ideas, xxxi (1970), 377–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷⁴ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 266Google Scholar; cf. George, , op. cit. (7), pp. 269–73.Google Scholar Bellamy was a moralistic novelist who contrasted (as a historian in an imaginary future) contemporary America with a Utopian socialist state in which the government guided the economic system to ensure equal rights and opportunities. His book sold nearly one million copies in ten years; see Sylvester Baxter's Introduction to Bellamy, Edward, Looking backward 2000–1887 (reprint, New York, n.d.)Google Scholar; Bannister, op. cit. (73).

⁷⁵ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 274.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ ‘Why live a moral life?’, in Wallace, 1900, op. cit. (72), ii. 375–83.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 382–3.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ ‘Human selection’, in Wallace, 1900, op. cit. (72), i. 509–26.Google Scholar He described this article (first published in 1890) as the ‘most important contribution I have made to the science of sociology and the cause of human progress’ (Wallace, 1905, op. cit. [32], ii. 209).Google Scholar It was also his first public commitment to socialism. Cf. ‘Human progress: past and future’, in Wallace, 1900, op. cit. (72), ii. 493–509.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ ‘Appendix—The remedy for want in the midst of wealth’, in Wallace, , op. cit. (36), p. 388.Google Scholar The sense of pessimism dominated his last two books, Social environment and moral progress (London, 1913)Google Scholar and The revolt of democracy (London, 1913).Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 407–8.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Wallace, 1889, op. cit. (21), p. 477.Google Scholar

⁸² See note 78.

⁸³ Wallace, 1905, op. cit. (32), ii. 389.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ See George, op. cit. (7).

⁸⁵ For an unsympathetic treatment of Wallace see Pearson, Karl, The grammar of science (3rd edn., London, 1911), pp. 393–4.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ See Spencer, Herbert, The principles of ethics (reprint, New York, 1912)Google Scholar; Dewey, op. cit. (11); Flew, Anthony, Evolutionary ethics (London, 1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gasman, Daniel, The scientific origins of National Socialism. Social Darwinism and the German Monist League (London, 1971)Google Scholar; Hofstadter, , op. cit. (73), pp. 39–43. 85–104, 138–40Google Scholar; Young, 1969, op. cit. (1), 138–9.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ In spite of trenchant criticisms: see Sidgwick, Henry, ‘The theory of evolution in its application to practice’, Mind, i (1876), 52–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Huxley, T. H., Evolution and ethics and other essays (New York, 1899).Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Wallace, 1889, op. cit. (21), p. 478.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ See Campbell, G. D. G., 8th Duke of Argyll, The reign of law (London, 1867)Google Scholar; Carpenter, W. B., ‘Man the interpreter of nature’, in Nature and man. Essays scientific and philosophical (London, 1888), pp. 185–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gray, Asa, ‘Evolutionary teleology’, in Darwiniana. Essays and reviews pertaining to Darwinism (reprint, Cambridge, Mass., 1963), pp. 293–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar; StMivart, G. J., ‘Theology and evolution’, in On the genesis of species (London, 1871), pp. 243–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar