Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 29, 2021 Lyell's reception on the continent of Europe: a contribution to an open historiographical problem EZIO VACCARI Centro di Studio sulla Storia della Tecnica, CNR Via Balbi 6, 16126 Genova, Italy Abstract: After the publication of the Principles of Geology the name of Charles Lyell became well known among European geologists. However, the diffusion of his works and the intensity of the debates on his ideas varied throughout the continent. This paper attempts to analyse some aspects of Lyell's reception in Continental Europe, emphasizing the role of the translations of fundamental works such as the Principles of Geology and the Elements of Geology, as well as their influence on the first textbooks of geology published in Europe, especially from the 1840s onwards. Some significant examples of nineteenth-centuryEuropean reactions to Lyell's geology, and in particular to his uniformitarian statements, will be pointed out, in order to show the extent of Lyell's influence. The question of Charles Lyell's reception in Europe The different kinds of sources may be briefly is undoubtedly a major topic in the history of described as follows : geology, which encompasses several stimulating historiographical and scientific issues. In 1990, at (1) Translations of Lyell's major works, such as the the end of his new introduction to the facsimile Principles of Geology (1830-1833), the reprint of the first edition of Lyell's Principles of Elements of Geology (1838) and Antiquity of Geology, Martin Rudwick (1990, p. Iv) remarked Man (1863a), but also other writings. Research that 'the nature and timing of Lyell's influence may allow us to understand the editorial story outside the English-speaking world is an important of some translations, i.e. to evaluate the role of topic on which little historical research has yet been the possible promoters, the scientific standing done'. Indeed, in most works published since the of the translators and the extent of diffusion of time of the Lyell Centenary Symposium held in these publications within their linguistic areas. 1975- but also in earlier literature- the diffusion (2) Reviews of LyelI's writings in scientific and reception of Lyell's geological ideas in the periodicals that were more or less specialized various European national and scientific contexts in the geological sciences. Research here have been studied only patchily, for example in should address the problem of surveying Germany (Guntau 1975), Poland (Maslankiewicz systematically all the European periodicals that & Wojcik 1975), Sweden (Fr~ingsmyr 1976) and may have treated subjects related to the Earth Spain (Ordaz 1976). In general, as Rachel Laudan sciences during the second half of the nine- (1987, p. 221) remarked on the question of Lyell's teenth century- not only the first specialized impact, there is still need for 'further historical journals of geology which started to appear in scholarship to reveal the developments in geology this century, but also the periodicals of general after 1830'. natural history and the bulletins, proceedings or In this paper I do not claim to give a final answer transactions of societies, academies and other to the various gaps in this open historiographical institutions. This is an impressive body of problem. Besides my preliminary conclusions, I literature (Bolton 1885; Gascoigne 1985), would like to propose an agenda for further which has rarely been investigated in relation research, in order to indicate the remarkable to the geological sciences. quantity and the variety of the primary sources that (3) The early textbooks of geology which followed should be explored in detail. These are, in my the publication of Lyell's Principles and were opinion, the necessary tools for overcoming the published, especially in France and Germany, historiographical impasse and for achieving the from the late 1830s onwards. most complete picture possible of such a complex (4) The numerous copies of Quarterly Journal of cultural phenomenon as the 'reception' of a the Geological Society of London which were scientific author in a continental context. sent to overseas Fellows and Correspondents. VACCARL E. 1998. Lyell's reception on the continent of Europe: a contribution to an open historiographical 39 problem. In: BLUNDELL,D. J. & SCOTT, A. C. (eds) LvelI: the Past is the Key to the Present. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 143, 39-52. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 29, 2021 40 E. VACCARI (5) The university courses (published or famed Principles of Geology (Lyell 1830- unpublished) and other public lectures given by 1833). It is well known that the first volume of this European geologists, especially in the second work, published in the summer of 1830 while Lyell half of the nineteenth century. was doing field work in France and Spain, was a (6) Debates during the meetings of geological and great success with the reading public in Britain and scientific societies during the early and middle was promptly reviewed in some British journals by nineteenth century, as already pointed out by distinguished authors such as George Poulett Rudwick (1986) in the cases of the Soci~t6 Scrope (1830) in the Quarterly Review, William Grologique de France and the Gesellschaft Conybeare (1830) in the Philosophical Magazine Deutscher Naturforscher und Arzte. and William Whewell (1831) in the British Critic. (7) Correspondence between geologists, including Nevertheless, some copies also reached Paris, Lyell himself- although a preliminary analysis where Constant Prrvost (1787-1856), the French of his published letters (Lyell 1881) has geologist and co-founder with Ami Bou6 of the revealed only a few comments about the recep- Socirt6 Grologique de France, already owned the tion of his ideas on the continent. Nevertheless, proof sheets of the first volume of the Principles, during his travels in Italy, France, Germany, which he had received directly from his friend Lyell Switzerland and Scandinavia, Lyell met several in order to prepare a French translation (Wilson scientists and gave lectures in some institu- 1972, p. 301). Prrvost, a former student of Georges tions: consequently the heritage of contacts and Cuvier, had developed a firm actualistic view about scientific exchanges he experienced in the continuity of Earth history even before meeting Continental Europe cannot be ignored. Lyell, with whom he had shared geological ideas and several field trips from 1823 onwards (Bork It is evident that any historical research arranged 1990, Gohau 1995). However, in spite of his role as according to this agenda is destined to deal for a a staunch supporter of Lyell's uniformitarian long time with a large amount of material, hence theory-well shown, for example, in the 1835 the risk of studying in depth some aspects more debate on Leopold von Buch's theory of craters of than others. Therefore, in this paper I present a elevation (Dean 1980; Laudan 1987, pp. 192-193; selection of sources, considered as significant Bork 1990, pp. 24-26) - Prrvost failed to translate samples of a larger potential field of research and the Principles during the 1830s. related to Lyell's reception in France, Germany, Instead, between 1831 and 1834, the three Italy, Spain, Belgium and Switzerland. I do not treat volumes of Lyell's work were reviewed for French here the British context, where the response to readers by Ami Bou6 (1794-1881), who was at that Lyell's scientific ideas has been discussed in detail time secretary for the foreign correspondence of the in several historical works, often with particular Socirt6 grologique de France, of which he became attention to the role of Lyell's influence on Charles President in 1835. This geologist, born in Germany, Darwin (Gillispie [1951] 1996; Rudwick 1967, had studied in Edinburgh, Paris, Berlin and Vienna: 1975, 1990; Cannon 1960, 1976; Wilson 1972, consequently he had a good knowledge of several 1996; Bartholomew 1976, 1979; Page 1976; languages, including English, and he made numer- Morrell 1976; Ruse 1976, 1979; Lawrence 1978). ous field trips in France, Germany, Austria- Hungary and Italy (Birembaut 1970). Together with Constant Prrvost, Bou6 has been considered 'the The first reviews of Lyell's Principles closest Lyell had come to an active supporter in Although this paper is a preliminary report of work France' (Lawrence 1978, p. 119). However, he did in progress, I hope that the historical data used to not embrace Lyell's most rigid uniformitarian show Lyell's influence, or lack of it, will provide a conclusions on the constant intensity of the useful contribution to the analysis of a topic that geological phenomena from the past to the present, has been treated in the past mainly in terms just as he only partially accepted Elie de of the 'uniformitarian/catastrophist' controversy Beaumont's theory on mountain building and (Hooykaas 1959; Cannon 1960; Hallam 1983)or in firmly refused its catastrophist historical the light of the historiographical debate on Lyell's framework (Laurent 1993). This position is well revolutionary or non-revolutionary impact (Elena expressed in Bour's writings published in the 1988). Bulletin de la Socidtd gdologique de France and in Without underestimating the role of various his new periodical, the Mdmoires G~ologiques et scientific travels throughout the continent Pal~ontologiques, which continued from the undertaken by Lyell during the late