CHAPTER FOUR SOCIAL FACTORS AFFECTING THE GEOLOGICAL CAREERS OF LYELL AND MANTELL The most striking social difference between Lyell and Mantell, or for that matter, between the ‘gentleman-specialists’ and Mantell, concerns their respective family backgrounds. In Mantell’s case, the fact that his father was a provincial shoe-maker, with dissenting religious beliefs and radical political views, resulted in Mantell having a markedly different social status from Lyell, and as a consequence, much more restricted educational and occupational opportunities. In this chapter the extent to which these factors proved to be a handicap to Mantell’s geological career are explored. Other social factors are also examined. These include patronage, the advantages of having an established network of influential friends and contacts, the resolution of career-choice clashes, fashioning a socially acceptable occupation in the world of gentlemanly geology, the importance of a supportive spouse and the income requirements for the lifestyle of a gentleman-specialist. In addition, personal qualities and factors such as ambition, diligence, and health problems are taken into account. The main emphasis in this chapter focuses on Mantell, since his case history epitomises that of an ‘outsider’, in contrast to the more orthodox case of Lyell. Nevertheless, Lyell also faced some career obstacles, which further illustrate aspects of early nineteenth-century geological life. 4.1 LITERATURE REVIEW The literature reviewed in this chapter falls into two broad categories: first, biographical material concerning Lyell and Mantell, and second, studies pertaining to scientific patronage, provincialism, occupational opportunities in natural history, and living standards, costs, and incomes. Most of these issues are interlinked, and in a broad sense the various factors reviewed focus on the question of how could a gentleman, or more pertinently, an ambitious person with gentlemanly pretensions, establish the necessary base 175 to achieve elite status in natural history during the first half of the nineteenth century. In this regard both Lyell and Mantell provide complementary and contrasting case histories. 4.1.1 LYELL AND MANTELL The review of biographical data on Lyell and Mantell has been restricted to material examining or raising relevant social factors that affected the geological careers of the two men. For this reason most of the pre-1970 biographies are not discussed,1 but use is made of his Life and Letters. (1) LYELL One of the earliest and most important sources of information on Lyell is Life, Letters and Journals of Sir Charles Lyell,2 edited by his sister-in-law, Katherine M. Lyell, and published in 1881. Extracts from these two volumes, which are typical of this late Victorian biographical genre, have been cited frequently in the literature on Lyell’s work and the history of English geology.3 They provide useful insights into Lyell’s boyhood,4 his close family relationships, the high opinion he held of Mantell in the 1830s,5 his social milieu, his determination to establish a successful career in geology, and to his apparent indifference to money. The relative importance of Lyell’s letters to Mantell in these two volumes is indicated below. 1 Examples in this category include:iA. Geikie, The Founders of Geology, J. Murray, London, 1897;iH.B. Woodward, History of Geology, Watts and Co., London, 1911; iE.B. Bailey, Charles Lyell, Doubleday, New York, 1962. 2 K.M. Lyell (ed.), Life, Letters and Journals of Sir Charles Lyell, Bart. author of ‘Principles of Geology &c’, 2 vols, J. Murray, London, 1881. 3 Extracts from these volumes are cited, for example, in:iJ.B. Morrell, ‘London Institutions and Lyell's Career: 1820-41’, The British Journal for the History of Science, 1976, 32, pp. 132- 146;iN.A. Rupke, The Great Chain of History. William Buckland and the English School of Geology (1814-1849), Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1983, pp. 72, 88, and 246;iM.J.S. Rudwick, The Great Devonian Controversy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1985, pp. 73, 75, and 380. 4 The first 31 pages of Volume 1 contains an autobiographical sketch of Lyell’s life until he entered Oxford at the age of 17 years. It was written in 1831-32 for the information of his fiancee, Mary Elizabeth Horner, who was then living in Bonn, Germany. As such, it has inherent limitations, but it does give a picture of a pleasurable, uncomplicated and privileged childhood. 5 K.M. Lyell, op. cit. (note 2), vol. 1, p. 377 and pp. 444-446. 176 Quoted Recipients of Lyell’s Letters Number of Letters Quoted Lyell’s sisters and mother 68 Charles Lyell Senior 49 L. Horner 42 G.A. Mantell 36 C. Bunbury 27 G. Tichnor 27 J. Fleming 15 C. Darwin 14 R.I. Murchison 7 A. Sedgwick 5 Since Horner was Lyell’s father-in-law, and Bunbury his wife’s brother-in- law, the quoted letters from Lyell to Mantell comprise the highest number written to any English geologist outside Lyell’s extended family. Additionally, these two volumes are interesting because of the nature of a number of subtle deletions and exclusions that Katherine Lyell made to some of the letters from Lyell to Mantell. These omissions have been identified by comparing the text of Lyell’s original letters with the 36 extracts quoted in the two volumes. For the most part the excisions made by Katherine Lyell relate to late nineteenth-century social conventions and to the impropriety of discussing financial matters, family incomes, and disparaging remarks concerning certain institutions and individuals. There are also strong indications of the editor deliberately fashioning and enhancing a favourable image of her brother-in-law. Lyell’s attitude to money is portrayed as that of the gentleman, relatively unconcerned with financial matters, as indicated in this extract from a letter to his father, dated 10 April 1827: I am quite clear, from all that I have seen of the world, that there is most real independence in that class of society who, possessing moderate means, are engaged in literary and scientific hobbies; and that in ascending from them upwards, the feeling of independence decreases pretty nearly in the same ratio as the fortunes increase.6 6 CL to CL Senior, 10 April 1827. Quoted in K.M. Lyell, op. cit. (note 2), vol. 1, pp. 170-171. 177 Lyell’s seeming offhand attitude to money is further illustrated in his letter to Murchison, 21 months later, following their joint expedition to Sicily: I shall never hope to make money by geology, but not to lose, and tax others for my amusement; and unless I can secure this, it would in my circumstances be selfish in me to devote myself as much as I hope to do to it.7 However, these and other quoted extracts from Lyell’s correspondence and journals do not provide an altogether balanced assessment of Lyell’s attitude to financial matters. A reading of all of Lyell’s 232 letters to Mantell indicates that Lyell was financially shrewd and worldly, and well aware of the importance of money. Under Katherine Lyell’s editorship, omissions range from a single key word to an entire significant letter, in order to enhance and consolidate a desired image. For example, in his letters to Mantell dated 14 June 1832 and 30 April 1833, Lyell made the following respective comments on his lectures at King’s College, London, and at the Royal Institution: My lectures were splendidly attended. [(chiefly by persons who honoured me) to the last. As yet, far less profitable for purse, & surely for solid fame than writing. But I won’t be hasty.]8 and My introductory lecture at Royal Institn. last Thursdy was attended by 250 persons, [95 of them proprietors who pay nothing.]9 The words in square parentheses in each of these quoted extracts, and which relate to Lyell’s income, were omitted from K. Lyell’s volumes.10 Other topics that were subject to editorial deletion concerned adverse references to the Established Church, particular individuals, and even the names of specific authors. In a letter to Mantell describing Buckland’s recent appointment as Canon at Christ Church, Lyell commented: 7 CL to R.I. Murchison, 15 January 1829, quoted in ibid., vol.1, p. 234. 8 CL to GAM, 14 June 1832, Mantell mss, ATL-NZ, Folder 63. (Supp. Vol.-Letter 92). 9 CL to GAM, 30 April 1833, Mantell mss, ATL-NZ, Folder 63. (Supp.Vol.-Letter 100). 10 K.M. Lyell, op. cit. (note 2), vol. 1, pp. 388 and 395 respectively. 178 The Canon has a glorious house & [but for the daily everlasting chapel going & long chants] is admirably set down for himself and geology.11 Again, the words in parentheses were omitted12 in this quoted letter in Life, Letters and Journals of Sir Charles Lyell. The socially disparaging term ‘tradesman’ was excised in a reference to the London publisher, John Murray,13 and in the same letter the following sentence was also excised: Featherstonaugh has made an ass of himself by a poem on the deluge which is despicable low and vulgar to a degree that would disgust you.14 Another exclusion concerns Katherine Lyell’s suppression of references to George Toulmin,15 whose name was purposely left blank in an important quoted extract from Lyell’s letter to Mantell dated 29 December 1827:16 I marvel less at Dr Toulmin anticipations ( as I supposed them ) in Geol.l speculations now that I observe he followed Hutton & cites him. I think he ran unnecessarily counter to the feelings & prejudices of the age.17 In a follow-up letter Lyell wrote on 5 February 1828, Katherine Lyell deleted the following sentence:18 I will send Toulmin very soon.