NOTES INTRODUCTION: CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY 1 Some historiographic reviews of the ever increasing eugenic scholarship include Robert A. Nye, “The Rise and Fall of the Eugenics Empire: Recent Perspectives on the Impact of Biomedical Thought in Modern Society,” The Historical Journal 36, 3 (1993): 687–700; Frank Dikötter, “Race Culture: Recent Perspectives on the History of Eugenics,” The American Historical Review 103, 2 (1998): 467–78; Peter Weingart, “Science and Political Culture: Eugenics in Comparative Perspective,” Scandinavian Journal of History 24, 2 (1999): 163–77; Paul Crook, “American Eugenics and the Nazis: Recent Historiography,” The European Legacy 7, 3 (2002): 363–81; and Marius Turda, “Recent Scholarship on Race and Eugenics,” The Historical Journal 51, 4 (2008): 1115–24. 2 The most impressive collective effort to date is Alison Bashford, Phillipa Levine, eds., The Oxford Handbook of the History of Eugenics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010). Previous works include Mark B. Adams, ed., The Wellborn Science. Eugenics in Germany, France, Brazil, and Russia (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990); Stefan Kühl, The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism and German National Socialism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994); Nils Roll-Hansen, Gunnar Broberg, eds., Eugenics and the Welfare State: Sterilization Policy in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland, 2nd ed. (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2005) [first edition 1997]; and Marius Turda, Paul J. Weindling, eds., Blood and Homeland: Eugenics and Racial Nationalism in Central and Southeast Europe, 1900–1944 (Budapest: Central European University Press, 2007). 3 Most convincingly by authors like Laura Doyle, Bordering on the Body: The Racial Matrix of Modern Fiction and Culture (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994); Donald J. Childs, Modernism and Eugenics: Woolf, Eliot, Yeats, and the Culture of Degeneration (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); and Angelique Richardson, Love and Eugenics in the Late Nineteenth Century: Rational Reproduction and the New Woman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003). 4 Roger Griffin, Modernism and Fascism: The Sense of a Beginning under Mussolini and Hitler (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 62. 127 128 NOTES 5 For a similar approach see Peter Weingart, “Eugenics – Medical or Social Science?” Science in Context 8, 1 (1995): 197–207; and Lene Koch, “Past Futures: On the Conceptual History of Eugenics – a Social Technology of the Past,” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 18, 3/4 (2006): 329–44. 6 Lene Koch, “Eugenic Sterilisation in Scandinavia,” The European Legacy 11, 3 (2006): 308. 7 See Melvin Richter, The History of Political and Social Concepts: A Critical Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 10. See also Reinhardt Koselleck, Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1985). 8 Nye, “The Rise and Fall of the Eugenics Empire,” 688. 9 For Poland, see Magdalena Gawin, Rasa i nowoczesnos´c´: historia polskiego ruchu eugenicznego, 1880–1952 (Warsaw: Wydawnicwo Neriton, 2003); for Hungary, see Marius Turda, A Healthy Nation: Eugenics, Race and Biopolitics in Hungary, 1904–1944 (Budapest: Central European University, forth- coming 2011); for Romania, see Maria Bucur, Eugenics and Modernization in Interwar Romania (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2002). 10 Alison Bashford, Imperial Hygiene: A Critical History of Colonialism, Nationalism and Public Health (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 5. 11 For a persuasive discussion of this aspect, see Aristotle Kallis, Genocide and Fascism: The Eliminationist Drive in Fascist Europe (New York: Routledge, 2009), esp. 48–84 and Marius Turda, The Idea of National Superiority in Central Europe, 1880–1918 (New York: Edwin Mellen, 2005). 12 Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (New York: Vintage, 1977), 26. 13 Reinhardt Koselleck, The Practice of Conceptual History: Timing History, Spacing Concepts (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002), 152. See also Peter Fritzsche, Stranded in the Present: Modern Time and the Melancholy of History (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004). 14 Griffin, Modernism and Fascism, 181. 15 Havelock Ellis, The Problem of Race-Regeneration (London: Cassell, 1911), 71. 16 David G. Horn, Social Bodies: Science, Reproduction, and Italian Modernity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 4. 17 Emilio Gentile has provided some of the most convincing arguments in favour of this interpretation. See, for example, his The Struggle for Modernity: Nationalism, Futurism, and Fascism (Westport, CT.: Praeger, 2003). 18 See Lene Koch, “The Meaning of Eugenics: Reflections on the Government of Genetic Knowledge in the Past and Present,” Science in Context 17, 3 (2004): 315–31; Merryn Ekberg, “The Old Eugenics and the New Genetics Compared,” Social History of Medicine 20, 3 (2007): 581–93; Paul Crook, “The New Eugenics? The Ethics of Bio-Technology,” NOTES 129 Australian Journal of Politics and History 54, 1 (2008): 135–43; Nancy E. Hansen, Heidi L. Janz, Dick J. Sobsey, “21st Century Eugenics?” The Lancet 372, supplement 1 (2008): 104–7; and Aviad E. Raz, “Eugenic Utopias/ Dystopias, Reprogenetics, and Community Genetics,” Sociology of Health and Illness 31, 4 (2009): 602–16. 1 THE PATHOS OF SCIENCE, 1870–1914 1 José Ortega y Gasset, “History as a System,” in Raymond Klibansky and H. J. Paton, eds., Philosophy and History (London: Oxford University Press, 1936), 313. 2 Alexis Carrel, Man, the Unknown (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1935), 257. 3 F. A. von Hayek, “Scientism and the Study of Society,” Economica 9, 35 (1942): 269. 4 Eric Voegelin, “The Origins of Scientism,” Social Research 15, 4 (1948): 489. 5 See Tzvetan Todorov, Imperfect Garden: The Legacy of Humanism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002), 23. 6 Richard G. Olson, Science and Scientism in Nineteenth-Century Europe (Champaign, IL.: University of Illinois Press, 2008), 1. 7 Havelock Ellis, The Problem of Race-Regeneration (London: Cassell, 1911), 51. 8 E. Ray Lankester, Degeneration: A Chapter in Darwinism (London: Macmillan, 1880), 62. 9 It is Durkeim’s theory of religion that promoters of the concept of politi- cal religion had found useful for their explorations of modern secular ideologies. See Stanley G. Payne, “On the Heuristic Value of the Concept of Political Religion and its Application,” Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions 6, 2 (2005): 163–74; and Roger Griffin, Robert Mallett, John Tortorice, eds., The Sacred in Twentieth-Century Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008). 10 Peter J. Bowler, Reconciling Science and Religion: The Debate in Early-Twentieth Century Britain (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 7. 11 Michael Burleigh, “Eugenic Utopias and the Genetic Present,” Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions 1, 1 (2000): 64. 12 Aaron Gillette, Eugenics and the Nature-Nurture Debated in the Twentieth Century (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). 13 Francis Galton, “Hereditary Character and Talent,” MacMillan’s Magazine 12, 70 (1865): 319. 14 Ibid., 322. 15 Francis Galton, “Heredity Improvement,” Fraser’s Magazine 7, 37 (1873): 116. 16 Ibid., 123. 17 Ibid., 129–30. 130 NOTES 18 Angelique Richardson, Love and Eugenics in the Late Nineteenth Century. Rational Reproduction and the New Woman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 81. 19 L. Hirschfeld and H. Hirschfeld, “Serological Differences between the Blood of Different Races,” The Lancet 197, 2 (1919): 675–9. See also William H. Schneider, “Chance and Social Setting in the Application of the Discovery of Blood Groups,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 57 (1983): 545–62; and Pauline M. H. Mazumdar, “Blood and Soil: The Serology of the Aryan Racial State,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 64 (1990): 187–19. 20 P. C. Mitchell, “Preface” to Elie Metchnikoff, The Nature of Man. Studies in Optimistic Philosophy (London: G. P. Putman’s Sons, 1903), ix. 21 The description belongs to Daniel J. Kevles. See his highly influential In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985). 22 Francis Galton, Memories of My Life, 2nd edn. (London: Methuen, 1908), 290. 23 Francis Galton, Inquiry into Human Faculty and Its Development (London: Macmillan, 1883), 17. 24 Ibid. 25 Alfred Ploetz, Grundlinien einer Rassen-Hygiene. Die Tüchtigkeit unserer Rasse und der Schutz der Schwachen (Berlin: S. Fischer, 1895), 13. 26 Francis Galton, “Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope and Aims,” The American Journal of Sociology 10, 1 (1904): 5. 27 Ibid. 28 Francis Galton, “Studies in Eugenics,” The American Journal of Sociology 11, 1 (1905): 11. 29 Ibid., 25. 30 Peter Gay, Modernism: The Lure of Modernism from Baudelaire to Becket and Beyond (London: William Heinemann, 2007), 28. 31 John M. Coulter, the chair of the Botany Department of the University of Chicago, hoped to convince Christian organisations to “add the prac- tical suggestions of biology to their own great motive, and to transform eugenics so that it may really be another effective form of religion.” John M. Coulter, “What Biology Has Contributed to Religion,” The Biblical World 41, 4 (1913): 223. 32 Maximilian A. Mügge, Eugenics and the Superman. A Racial Science and a Racial Religion (London: Eugenics Education Society, 1909), 10. Dan Stone has convincingly described the influence Nietzsche had on the British eugenicists. See his Breeding Superman: Nietzsche,