THE INFLUENCE OF LYELL'S WORKS
Although the _Principles of Geology_ was received by the public with
something like enthusiasm--due to the cogency of its reasoning and the
charm of its literary style--there were not wanting critics who attacked
the author on the ground of his heterodox views. It had come to be so
generally understood, that every expression of geological opinion
should, by way of apology, be accompanied by an attempt to 'harmonise'
it with the early chapters of Genesis, that the absence of any
references of this kind was asserted to be a proof of 'infidelity' on
the part of the author.
But Lyell's sincere and earnest efforts to avoid exciting theological
prejudice, and the striking illustrations, which he gave in his
historical introduction, of the absurdities that had resulted from these
prejudices in the past, were not without effect. This was shown in a
somewhat remarkable manner in 1831, when, in response to an invitation
given to him, he consented to become a candidate for the Chair of
Geology at King's College, London, then recently founded.
The election was in the hands of an Archbishop, two Bishops and two
Doctors of Divinity, and Lyell relates their decision, as communicated
to him, in the following words:--
'They considered some of my doctrines startling enough, but
could not find that they were come by otherwise than in a
straightforward manner, and (as _I_ appeared to think) logically
deducible from the facts, so that whether the facts were true or
not, or my conclusions logical or otherwise, there was no reason
to infer that I had made my theory from any hostile feeling
towards revelation[61].'
The appointment was, in the end, made with only one dissentient, and it
is pleasing to find that Conybeare, the most determined opponent of
Lyell's evolutionary views, was extremely active in his efforts in his
support. The result was equally honourable to all parties, and affords a
pleasing proof of the fact that in the half century which had elapsed
since the persecution of Priestley and Hutton, theological rancour must
have greatly declined. But while the reception of the _Principles of
Geology_ by the general public was of such a generally satisfactory
character, Lyell had to acknowledge that his reasoning had but little
effect in modifying the views of his distinguished contemporaries in
the Geological Society.
The admiration felt for the author's industry and skill, in the
collection and marshalling of facts and of the observations made by him
in his repeated travels, were eloquently expressed by the generous
Sedgwick, as follows:--
'Were I to tell "the author" of the instruction I received from
every chapter of his work, and of the delight with which I rose
from the perusal of the whole, I might seem to flatter rather
than to speak the language of sober criticism; but I should only
give utterance to my honest sentiments. His work has already
taken, and will long maintain a distinguished place in the
philosophic literature of this country[62].'
Nevertheless, in the same address to the Geological Society, in which
these words were spoken, Sedgwick goes on to argue forcibly against the
doctrine of continuity, and to assert his firm belief in the occurrence
of frequent interruptions of the geological record by great convulsions.
Whewell was equally enthusiastic with Sedgwick, concerning the value of
the body of facts collected by Lyell, declaring that he had established
a new branch of science, 'Geological Dynamics'; but he also believed
with Sedgwick, that the evolutionary doctrine was as obnoxious to true
science as he thought it was to Scripture.
These were the views of all the great leaders of geological science at
that day, and in 1834, after the completion of the _Principles_, when a
great discussion took place in the Geological Society on the subject of
the effects ascribed by him to existing causes, Lyell says that
'Buckland, De la Beche, Sedgwick, Whewell, and some others treated them
with as much ridicule as was consistent with politeness in my
presence[63].'
It is interesting to be able to infer from Lyell's accounts of these
days, that the sagacious De la Beche was beginning to weaken in his
opposition to evolutionary views, and that Fitton and John Phillips were
inclined to support him, but neither of them was ready to come forward
boldly as the champions of unpopular opinions. John Herschel, who
sympathised with Lyell in all his opinions, was absent at the Cape,
Scrope was absorbed in the stormy politics of that day, and it was not
till Darwin returned from his South American voyage in 1838, that Lyell
found any staunch supporter in the frequent lively debates at the
Geological Society.
It is pleasing, however, to relate that this strong opposition to his
theoretical teachings, did not lessen the esteem, or interfere with the
friendship, felt for Lyell by his contemporaries. During all this time
he held the office of Foreign Secretary to the Society, and in 1835 was
elected President, retaining the office for two years.
The general feeling of the old geologists with respect to Lyell's
opinions was very exactly expressed by Professor Henslow, when in
parting from young Darwin on his setting out on his voyage, he referred
to the recently published first volume of the _Principles_ in the
following terms:--
'Take Lyell's new book with you and read it by all means, for it is very
interesting, but do not pay any attention to it, except in regard to
facts, for it is altogether wild as far as theory goes.'
(I quote the words as repeated to me by Darwin, in a conversation I had
with him on August 7th, 1880, of which I made a note at the time. Darwin
has himself referred to this conversation with Henslow in his
autobiography[64].)
Except in a few cases, this was the attitude maintained by all the old
geologists who were Lyell's contemporaries. Even as late as 1895 we find
the amiable Prestwich protesting strongly against 'the _Fetish_ of
uniformity[65],' and I well remember about the same time being solemnly
warned by a geologist of the old school against 'poor old Lyell's fads.'
It was not, indeed, till a new generation of geologists had arisen,
including Godwin-Austen, Edward Forbes, Ramsay, Jukes, Darwin, Hooker
and Huxley, that the real value and importance of Lyell's teaching came
to be recognised and acknowledged.
The most important influence of Lyell's great work is seen, however, in
the undoubted fact that it inspired the men, who became the leaders in
the revolution of thought which took place a quarter of a century later
in respect to the organic world. Were I to assert that if the
_Principles of Geology_ had not been written, we should never have had
the _Origin of Species_, I think I should not be going too far: at all
events, I can safely assert, from several conversations I had with
Darwin, that he would have most unhesitatingly agreed in that opinion.
Darwin's devotion to his 'dear master' as he used to call Lyell, was of
the most touching character, and it was prominently manifested in all
his geological conversations. In his books and in his letters he never
failed to express his deep indebtedness to his 'own true love' as he
called the _Principles of Geology_. In what was Darwin's own most
favourite work, the _Narrative of the Voyage of the Beagle_, he wrote
'To Charles Lyell, Esq., F.R.S., this second edition is dedicated with
grateful pleasure, as an acknowledgment that the chief part of whatever
scientific merit this Journal and the other works of the author may
possess, has been derived from studying the well-known, admirable
_Principles of Geology_.'
How Lyell's first volume inspired Darwin with his passion for geological
research, and how his second volume was one of the determining causes in
turning his mind in the direction of Evolution, we shall see in the
sequel. In 1844, Darwin wrote to Leonard Horner how 'forcibly impressed
I am with the infinite superiority of the Lyellian School of Geology
over the continental,' he even says, 'I always feel as if my books came
half out of Lyell's brain'; adding 'I have always thought that the great
merit of the _Principles_ was that it altered the whole tone of one's
mind, and therefore that, when seeing a thing never seen by Lyell one
yet saw it partially through his eyes[66].' About the same time Darwin
wrote, 'I am much pleased to hear of the call for a new edition of the
_Principles_: what glorious good that work has done[67]!' And in the
_Origin of Species_ he gives his deliberate verdict on the book,
referring to it as 'Lyell's grand work on the _Principles of Geology_,
which the future historian will recognise as having produced a
revolution in Natural Science[68].'
Darwin seemed always afraid, such was his sensitive and generous nature,
that he did not sufficiently acknowledge his indebtedness to Lyell. He
wrote to his friend in 1845:
'I have long wished not so much for your sake as for my own
feelings of honesty, to acknowledge more plainly than by mere
reference, how much I geologically owe you. Those authors,
however, who like you educate people's minds as well as teach
them special facts, can never, I should think, have full justice
done them except by posterity, for the mind thus insensibly
improved can hardly perceive its own upward ascent.'
Very heartily, as I can bear witness from long intercourse with him, was
this deep affection of Darwin reciprocated by the man who was addressed
by him in his letters as 'Your affectionate pupil.' But a stranger who
conversed with Lyell would have thought that he was the junior and a
disciple; so profound was his reverence for the genius of Darwin.
There can be no doubt that Lyell's extreme caution in statement, and his
candour in admitting and replying to objections, had much to do with his
acquirement of that authority with general, no less than with
scientific, readers, which he so long enjoyed. In his candour he
resembled his friend Darwin; but his caution was carried so far that,
even after full conviction had entered his mind on a subject, he would
still hesitate to avow that conviction. He was always obsessed by a
feeling that there still _might be_ objections, which he had not
foreseen and met, and therefore felt it unsafe to declare himself. No
doubt the peculiarly trying circumstances under which his work was
written--a seemingly hopeless protest against ideas held unswervingly by
teachers and fellow-workers--led to the creation in him of this habit of
mind.
Darwin, with all his candour, was of a far more sanguine and optimistic
temperament than Lyell, and the difference between them, in this
respect, often comes out in their correspondence.
Thus Darwin, from the horrors he had witnessed in South America, had
come to entertain a most fanatical hatred of slavery--his abhorrence of
which he used to express in most unmeasured terms. Lyell, in his travels
in the Southern United States, was equally convinced of the
undesirability of the institution; but he thought it just to state the
grounds on which it was defended, by those who had been his hosts in the
Slave-states. Even this, however, was too much for Darwin, and he felt
that he must 'explode' to his friend 'How could you relate so placidly
that atrocious sentiment' (it was of course only quoted by Lyell) 'about
separating children from their parents; and in the next page speak of
being distressed at the whites not having prospered: I assure you the
contrast made me exclaim out. But I have broken my intention (that is
not to write about the matter), so no more of this odious deadly
subject[69].'
It was just the same in their mode of viewing scientific questions. Thus
in 1838, while they were in the midst of the fierce battle with the 'Old
Guard' at the Geological Society, Lyell wrote to his brother-in-arms as
follows:--
'I really find, when bringing up my Preliminary Essays in
_Principles_ to the science of the present day, so far as I know
it, that the great outline, and even most of the details, stand
so uninjured, and in many cases they are so much strengthened
by new discoveries, especially by yours, that we may begin to
hope that the great principles there insisted on will stand the
test of new discoveries[70].'
To which the younger and more ardent Darwin warmly replied:--
'_Begin to hope_: why, the _possibility_ of a doubt has never
crossed my mind for many a day. This may be very
unphilosophical, but my geological salvation is staked on it ...
it makes me quite indignant that you should talk of
_hoping_[71].'
When talking with Lyell at this time about the opposition of the old
school of geologists to their joint views, Darwin said, 'What a good
thing it would be if every scientific man was to die at sixty years old,
as afterwards he would be sure to oppose all new doctrines[72].'
In conversations that I had with him late in life, Darwin several times
remarked to me, that 'he had seen so many of his friends make fools of
themselves by putting forward new theoretical views in their old age,
that he had resolved quite early in life, never to publish any
speculative opinions after he was sixty.' But both in conversation and
in his writings he always maintained that Lyell was an exception to all
such rules, seeing that at last he adopted the theory of Natural
Selection in his old age, thus displaying the most 'remarkable candour.'
All who had the pleasure of discussing geological questions with Lyell
will recognise the truth of the portrait drawn of his old friend by
Darwin, about a year before his own death.
He says:--
'His mind was characterised, as it appeared to me, by clearness,
caution, sound judgment, and a good deal of originality. When I
made a remark to him on Geology, he never rested until he saw
the whole case clearly, and often made me see it more clearly
than I had done before.'
And he sums up his admiration of the 'dear old master' in the words
'The science of Geology is enormously indebted to Lyell--more
so, as I believe, than to any other man who ever lived[73].'
Alfred Russel Wallace is scarcely less emphatic than Charles Darwin
himself in his expression of affection and admiration for Lyell, and his
indebtedness to the _Principles of Geology_.
In his Autobiography, Wallace writes:--
'With Sir Charles I soon felt at home, owing to his refined and
gentle manners, his fund of quiet humour, and his intense love
and extensive knowledge of natural science. His great liberality
of thought and wide general interests were also attractive to
me; and although when he had once arrived at a definite
conclusion, he held by it very tenaciously until a considerable
body of well-ascertained facts could be adduced against it, yet
he was always willing to listen to the arguments of his
opponents, and to give them careful and repeated
consideration[74].'
Of the influence of the _Principles of Geology_ in leading him to
evolution, he wrote:
'Along with Malthus I had read, and been even more deeply
impressed by, Sir Charles Lyell's immortal _Principles of
Geology_; which had taught me that the inorganic world--the
whole surface of the earth, its seas and lands, its mountains
and valleys, its rivers and lakes, and every detail of its
climatic conditions--were and always had been in a continual
state of slow modification. Hence it became obvious that the
forms of life must have become continually adjusted to these
changed conditions in order to survive. The succession of fossil
remains throughout the whole geological series of rocks is the
record of the change; and it became easy to see that the extreme
slowness of these changes was such as to allow ample opportunity
for the continuous automatic adjustment of the organic to the
inorganic world, as well as of each organism to every other
organism in the same area, by the simple processes of "variation
and survival of the fittest." Thus was the fundamental idea of
the "origin of species" logically formulated from the
consideration of a series of well ascertained facts[75].'
Nor were the two men (who, like Aaron and Hur so steadily sustained the
hands of Darwin in his long vigil), behind the two authors of Natural
Selection themselves in their devotion to Lyell. How touching is
Hooker's tribute of affection on the death of his friend, 'My loved, my
best friend, for well nigh forty years of my life. To me the blank is
fearful, for it never will, never can be filled up. The most generous
sharer of my own and my family's hopes, joys, and sorrows, whose
affection for me was truly that of a father and brother combined[76].'
And Huxley speaking of Lyell, the day after his death said, 'Sir Charles
Lyell would be known in history as the greatest geologist of his time.
Some days ago I went to my venerable friend, and put before him the
results of the _Challenger_ expedition. Nothing could then have been
more touching than the conflict between the mind and the material body,
the brain clear and comprehending all; while the lips could hardly
express the views which the busy mind formed[77].'
How well do I recollect my last visit to Lyell a day or two after this
farewell interview with Huxley, the glow of gratitude which lighted up
the noble features as with trembling lips he told me how 'Huxley had
repeated his whole Royal Institution lecture at his bedside.'
Huxley was a most devoted student of Lyell. Speaking to his fellow
geologists in 1869 he said, 'Which of us has not thumbed every page of
the _Principles of Geology_[78]?' and writing in 1887 on the reception
of the _Origin of Species_, he said:--
'I have recently read afresh the first edition of the
_Principles of Geology_; and when I consider that this
remarkable book had been nearly thirty years in everybody's
hands, and that it brings home to any reader of ordinary
intelligence a great principle and a great fact--the principle,
that the past must be explained by the present, unless good
cause be shown to the contrary; and the fact, that, so far as
our knowledge of the past history of life on our globe goes, no
such cause can be shown--I cannot but believe that Lyell, for
others, as for myself, was the chief agent in smoothing the road
for Darwin. For consistent uniformitarianism postulates
evolution as much in the organic as in the inorganic world. The
origin of a new species by other than ordinary agencies would be
a vastly greater 'catastrophe' than any of those which Lyell
successfully eliminated from sober geological speculation[79].'
How strongly Lyell had become convinced, as early as 1832, of the truth
and importance of the doctrine of Evolution--in the _organic_ as well as
in the inorganic world--in spite of his emphatic rejection of the theory
of Lamarck, we shall show in the next chapter. It was this conviction,
as we shall see, which led to his friendly encouragement of Darwin in
his persevering investigations and to his constant solicitude that the
results of his friend's labours should not be lost through delay in
their publication.