0227Books 2/20/09 1:38 PM Page 1171 BOOKS ETAL. ing the translation of Origin of Species into translations involved an attempt to recast exist- And so, finally, we come to Haeckel. German, and (more intriguingly) diachroni- ing German terms in a newer, more up-to-date Gliboff’s key insight here is that Haeckel cally, as scientists reworked older words such mode that encompassed selection yet tamed originally read Bronn’s translation of Darwin, as “perfection” and “type” to lend them new Darwin’s emphasis on unpredictability to meet not Darwin in the original. Gliboff shows meanings. Gliboff’s own clear, crisp prose is the more rigorous requirements of a German Haeckel as both echoing and responding to key to the success of this analysis, as he deftly academic scientist’s understanding of a “law” Bronn’s concerns, rather than either reflect- leads his reader through dense philosophical of organic nature. Simultaneously, Bronn ing directly on Darwin’s original writing or and terminological thickets with nary a thorn sought to translate Darwin’s ideas about selec- reaching directly back to the Romantic scratch. This is some of the best close reading tion into a language without an exact equiva- embryologists. (Although Gliboff acknowl- I have seen. It also represents a profound chal- lent for the term, and for an academic audience edges the centrality of monism to Haeckel’s lenge to our standard picture of 19th-century lacking the gentlemanly traditions of breeding thought, he focuses on the working evolution- German biology. pigeons and dogs so central to Darwin’s expo- ary theorist, not the popular ideologue.) Like The old story, crudely put, is that Haeckel’s sition. The selection metaphor was further Bronn himself, Haeckel made further amend- version of evolution was a Darwinism in name fraught with an anthropomorphism foreign to ments both terminological and intellectual, only, best understood as an update on early- Germans, who were not brought up on British and Gliboff rereads Haeckel’s research pro- 19th-century idealistic morphologists such natural-theological assumptions about a per- gram as one not dominated by a typological as Carl0403NewsFocus.qxp F. Kielmeyer and 3/30/09 J. F. Meckel 5:23 thatPM Pagesonified 29 God who had created a perfectly and linear-recapitulationist mindset but retained their teleology, their typological adapted nature. Bronn’s translation, though it rather as continuing to wrestle with the need emphasis on form, and their linear recapitula- altered key ideas to make Darwin comprehen- to account for variability and unpredictable tionism. This story, emphasizing the long per- sible to a German academic audience, was not change in terms of mechanistic laws of sistence of a German transcendental approach a conservative throwback. It represented the nature—among which Haeckel included, at to nature, has been deeply entrenched in the dynamic engagement of a leading paleontolo- the top of his list, ORIGINSnatural selection. Haeckel’s history of biology. gist who had also long been working on many DarwinismIntroduction thus shows continuity with early- Gliboff challengesStockholm. “Whenthis history we started, right from of the questions Darwin claimed as his own— 19th-century concerns, mediated through 2 Darwin’s Inspiration, Darwin’s Legacy the beginning.the The search ascription profile was of simplebigger, linear a critical yet generous equal, who saw himself Bronn. But those concerns were always more Andrew Sugden recapitulationisma magnolia to the [flower],” views of Romanticshe as Contentsmoving science forward through the modi- flexible than has been acknowledged, and embryologists,recalls. he notes, But 30 owes years much ago, to she a carica- fications he made to Darwin’s flawed theory. their articulation changed over time. Of ture developedand byothers Karl discovered Ernst von tinyBaer in a Bronn’s death in 1862 afforded him little course Haeckel’s Darwinism was not polemical context,ancient then flowers adopted by uncriticallysieving by chance to steer the conversation further. Darwin’sArticles own, but it was not an aberration or through sand and clay sedi- influential historiansments. With such this as E.technique, S. a distortion 3 ofOn some the Origintrue theory, of Life any on more Earth Russell and theyStephen have nowJay collectedGould. hun- than any otherCarl post-Darwinian Zimmer additions or Gliboff’s freshdreds reading of ofmillimeter-size the orig- adjustments were.Science It was 9 January science 2009 moving 323: 198-199 on. inal sources flowers,interprets some Kielmeyer preserved in Gliboff’s overall picture of scientific and Meckelthree as fardimensions, less rigidly from Por- advance, in 5 contrastOn the to OriginRichards’s of Art emphasis and Symbolism on typological intugal their and orientation other locations and with charisma andMichael passion, Balter is one of scientists much more Cretaceousattentive to deposits nature’s 70 mil- building and innovatingScience 6 February incrementally, 2009 323: work- 709-711 lion to 120 million years old. variability thanThis has fossilbeen seendiversity ing with what their predecessors have handed before. Bothshows for these that early-19th-angiosperms were them and sculpting8 On the it intoOrigin something of Photosynthesis new yet century naturaliststhriving, and with for several their groups understandable Mitch to those Leslie around them. His sen- Science 6 March 2009 323: 1286-1287 intellectual heirs,well-established, Gliboff argues, by 100 mil- sitive reading allows Outus ofto the see past. post-1859 the critical issuelion was years to understandago. In some, the page 10 German evolutionists asTiny rational Amborella actorssits rather nature’s manifoldflower partsvariety are whorledwhile like than irrationally10 On stucktheat Origin the in bottom some of ofFlowering early-19th-the Plants those of modern flowers; in angiosperm family tree. seeking out underlying strict natu- century momentElizabeth with Pennisi unmodern commit- others they are spiraled, con- Science 3 April 2009 324: 28-31 ral laws to accountsidered for by it. some researchers ments. By challenging the very foundations of This provides a new starting as the more primitive arrangement. Some fromthe standard one 14of the narrativeAlexander nonflowering of vonGerman seed Humboldt plants morphol- and the General Physics point for analyzingflower fossilsDarwin’s have first prescribed numbers of “We are realizing that this orogy, gymnosperms, this careful, whosecompelling heyday account was 200 does at of the Earth petals, another modern feature, whereas in million years ago. Modern gymnosperms translator, the prominent paleon- least as much Stephenas Richards’s T. Jackson to undermine the others the petal count varies. huge diversity is probably include conifers, ginkgoes, and the cycads, tologist H. G. Bronn—a figure lit- association of Science19th-century 1 May 2009German 324: Darwin- 596-597 tle attended toIn in 1998, the Chinesestandard geologist Ge Sun of withism withtheir astout dangerously trunks and exceptional large fronds. view of Jilin University in Changchun, China, came the result of one innova- Before angiosperms came along, these story but the lynchpin of Gli- nature. But16 theMaking two books German offer very Evolution: different Translation and Tragedy (W. KOEHLER, GERA-UNTERMHAUS, 1905) GERA-UNTERMHAUS, KOEHLER, (W. across what seemed to be a much older plants were much more diverse and boff’s. Intriguinglyflower. Theand fossil, plausibly, called Archaefructus, was tion piled on top of includedreads. Is cycadlikescientificLynn K.species,progress Nyhart such a matter as the of per- Gliboff arguesan aquatic that Bronn’s plant that use looked to be 144 mil- another innovation.” extinctsonal anguish Bennettitales, Scienceand triumph, 27and February many or of woody2009 intellectualREPORTS 323: 1170-1171 of terms likelion “vervollkommnet” years old. By 2002, Sun and David plantschugging called along? Gnetales, Our concept of of whichit should be Dilcherpresence of ofthe two Florida lineages Museum that co-occur of Natural in the ad- 6.2% divergence). In contrast,—Peter sites Crane, located a fewpopulation representatives, expansion (23 )including are found the in the WANDERBILDER (perfect) as translations for Dar- capacious18 enough Darwin’s to include Originality both. Historyjacent refugia.(FLMNH) In all species,in Gainesville average net had nucle- outside (south of)University the refugia of are Chicago genetically jointunstable firs, area survive for H. today albomarginatus (see familyand H. tree, faber, win’s “improved”otide differencesor “favored” across localities (22) reflects more similar to each other, although to a lesser as well as in thePeter Bahia J. refugiumBowler area for H. faber were not aboutdescribed dragging an entire Darwin plant, from roots to flow- p. 31).References Also common andScience Notes in 9 theJanuary Jurassic 2009 were 323: 223-226 ers,high entombed geographic on a structure slab of rock within unearthed refugia (2.6 in to extentThese infossilsH. faber often(0.1 spark to 1.6%). debate Signatures because of seedand ferns,H. semilineatus a group now. The long lack gone; of signature their of backward into a German teleo- 1. E. Haeckel, Generelle Morphologie der Organismen Liaoning in northeastern China. page specimens16 tend to be imperfectly preserved most(Georg famous Reimer, member Berlin, 1866). is Caytonia, which logical view of nature (as has 22 The Red Queen and the Court Jester: Species Diversity Fig.In