by Wikipedia
Accessed: 9/9/20
The Ethnological Society of London (ESL) was a learned society founded in 1843 as an offshoot of the Aborigines' Protection Society (APS). The meaning of ethnology as a discipline was not then fixed: approaches and attitudes to it changed over its lifetime, with the rise of a more scientific approach to human diversity. Over three decades the ESL had a chequered existence, with periods of low activity and a major schism contributing to a patchy continuity of its meetings and publications. It provided a forum for discussion of what would now be classed as pioneering scientific anthropology from the changing perspectives of the period, though also with wider geographical, archaeological and linguistic interests.
In 1871 the ESL became part of what now is the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, merging back with the breakaway rival group the Anthropological Society of London.
Background
At the time of the Society's foundation, "ethnology" was a neologism. The Société Ethnologique de Paris was founded in 1839,[1] and the Ethnological Society of New York was founded in 1842.[2] An earlier Anthropological Society of London existed from 1837 to 1842; Luke Burke who was a member published an Ethnological Journal in 1848.[3]
The Paris society was set up by William Frederic Edwards, with a definite research programme in mind.[4] Edwards had been lecturing for a decade on the deficiency of considering the races as purely linguistic groups.[5] The Oxford English Dictionary records the term "ethnology" used in English by James Cowles Prichard in 1842, in his Natural History of Man, for the "history of nations". The approach to ethnology current at the time of the Society's founding relied on climate and social factors to explain human diversity; the debate was still framed by Noah's Flood, and the corresponding monogenism of human origins.[6] Prichard was a major figure in looking at human variability from a diachronic angle, and argued for ethnology as such a study, aimed at resolving the question of human origins.[7]
The early days of ethnology saw it in the position of a fringe science.[8] Prichard commented in 1848 that the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) still classed ethnology as a subdivision of natural history, as applied to man.[9] It stayed in Section D for a period, but in 1851 it was classed in a new Section E for Geology and Geography, after lobbying by supporters including Roderick Murchison.[10] The overlap of interests between the ESL and the Royal Geographical Society (RGS) was reflected by common membership.[11]
Around 1860 the discovery of human antiquity and the publication of the Origin of Species caused a fundamental change of perspective, with the older historical approach looking hopeless given the emergence of prehistory, but the biological issue gaining in interest.[12]
Tensions in the Aborigines' Protection Society
Further information: Aborigines' Protection Society
The Aborigines' Protection Society (APS) was set up as a result of parliamentary committee activity, and was largely the initiative of Thomas Fowell Buxton. It produced reports, but in the wake of the Niger expedition of 1841 some of its supporters believed a case made on science was being sidelined in the activities of the APS.[13]
The Niger expedition of 1841 was mounted by British missionary and activist groups in 1841-1842, using three British iron steam vessels to travel to Lokoja, at the confluence of the Niger River and Benue River, in what is now Nigeria. The British government backed the effort to make treaties with the native peoples, introduce Christianity and promote increased trade. The crews of the boats suffered a high mortality from disease.
The expedition was put into motion by an Exeter Hall meeting of 1 June 1840. It was chaired by Prince Albert. The organisers were the Society for the Extinction of the Slave Trade and for the Civilization of Africa, set up in 1839 by Thomas Fowell Buxton. Buxton was promoting a grandiose "New Africa" policy, based on a series of treaties to be made in West Africa, the introduction of Christianity, and increased commerce, as set out in his book the previous year.
-- Niger expedition of 1841, by Wikipedia
The APS was founded by Quakers in order to promote a specific social and political agenda. The Ethnological Society, though primarily a scientific organization, retained some of its predecessor's liberal outlook and activist bent.
Foundation
An ethnological questionnaire was produced by the BAAS in 1841, arising from a committee led by Thomas Hodgkin of the APS, and drawing on prior work in Paris by W. F. Edwards.[14] A prospectus for the Ethnological Society was issued in July 1842 by Richard King; King had been a student under Hodgkin at Guy's Hospital.[15] The Society first met in February 1843 at Hodgkin's house;[16] or on 31 January, when Ernst Dieffenbach read a paper On the Study of Ethnology.[17]
Among the other founders were James Cowles Prichard,[18] John Beddoe[19] and John Brown.[20] Apart from Hodgkin, King and Dieffenbach, the other significant common member with the APS was William Aldam, another Quaker.[21] The Society had Corresponding Members, who counted as Fellows;[22] they later included Hermann Welcker.[23] In the early days the Society had rooms at 27 Sackville Street, which were rented through King to the Westminster Medical Society.[24]
1840s
John Briggs became a Fellow of the ESL in 1845, and Brian Houghton Hodgson, also representing the ethnology of India, was at some point made an Honorary Fellow.[25] William Augustus Miles was a member and published a paper on the aboriginal Australian culture.[26]
After Prichard's death in 1848, the intellectual leader in the Society became Robert Gordon Latham. Links to the Aborigines' Protection Society were retained through the common membership of Hodgkin and Henry Christy, though the break was not completely amicable.[27] The Ethnological Society in its early years lacked good contacts with officialdom, certainly compared to the RGS and its good working relationship with the Colonial Office. Governor George Grey was helpful to the Society, but he was an exception: it took until the end of the decade for the Society to begin to appreciate its marginal position with respect to the flow of information from the British colonies.[28] Grey was an active member of the ESL while abroad as a colonial administrator, and his network included William Ellis, another member.[29]
1850s
In 1850 the Society was based at 17 Savile Row.[30] It saw a period of decline in the middle of the decade.[27] Among active members on the Council was William Devonshire Saull, who died in 1855.[31] George Bellas Greenough was a vice-president.[32] Richard Cull's 1852 report mentioned Singapore connections, in particular James Richardson Logan.[33]
Thomas Richard Heywood Thomson delivered a paper in 1854 to the Society on interfertility, casting doubt on comments of Paweł Edmund Strzelecki about female infertility among Aboriginal Australians after they had given birth to a child with a white father. The communication was well received, but as a contribution to the ongoing debate on race, was far from settling the significant underlying issue.[34]
James Hunt joined the ESL in 1854, and became a divisive figure because of his attacks on humanitarian attitudes of missionaries and abolitionists. He served as secretary from 1859 to 1862.[35] He found an ally in John Crawfurd, who had retired from service as colonial diplomat and administrator for the East India Company. Crawfurd came to ethnology through its section in the BAAS. His published views on race were discordant with the Quaker and APS tradition in the ESL.[36] Hunt and Crawfurd in 1858 tried to dislodge the President Sir James Clark at an ESL meeting, unsuccessfully, while Hodgkin was out of the country.[37]
1860s
The 1860s saw a revived interest in ethnology, triggered by recent work, such as that involving flint implements and the antiquity of man. The Ethnological Society became a more of meeting-place for archaeologists, as its interests kept pace with new work;[38] and during this decade the Society became a very different institution.[39] The society's original members had mainly been military officers, civil servants, and members of the clergy, but by the early 1860s younger scientists had supplanted them. The background was of continuing encounters worldwide with many peoples; John Thomson the photographer who was recording them became a member in 1866.[40] Thomas Henry Huxley, Augustus Lane Fox, Edward Tylor, Henry Christy, John Lubbock, and Augustus Wollaston Franks all figured prominently in the society's affairs after 1860.
The ESL's meetings and journal served as a forum for sharing new ideas, and as a clearing-house for ethnological data. In 1868 the Society set up a Classification Committee to try to get on top of the issues caused by haphazard reporting, and lack of systematic fieldwork.[41] This initiative was a proposal of Lane Fox.[42]
Split and merger
In the years after the publication of the Origin of Species in 1859, the "Ethnologicals" generally supported Charles Darwin against his critics, and rejected the more extreme forms of scientific racism. The movement towards Darwinism was not one way, however, as evidenced by the Honorary Fellowship given to Robert Knox in 1860.[43]
Robert Knox FRSE FRCSE MWS (4 September 1791 – 20 December 1862) was a Scottish anatomist, zoologist, ethologist and physician. He was a lecturer on anatomy in Edinburgh, where he introduced the theory of transcendental anatomy.
He is, however, now mainly remembered for his involvement in the Burke and Hare murders. An incautious approach to obtaining cadavers for dissection after the passage of the Anatomy Act and disagreements with professional colleagues ruined his career. A move to London did not improve matters.
His later pessimistic view of humanity contrasted sharply with his youthful attachment to the ideas of Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire. Knox also devoted the latter part of his life to theorising on evolution and ethnology, as well as being one of the pioneers of scientific racism in Britain. His work on the latter further harmed his legacy and overshadowed his contributions to evolutionary theory...
Knox returned to Edinburgh by Christmas 1822. On 1 December 1823 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh...
Before the Anatomy Act of 1832 widened the supply, the main legal supply of corpses for anatomical purposes in the UK were those condemned to death and dissection by the courts. This led to a chronic shortage of legitimate subjects for dissection, and this shortage became more serious as the need to train medical students grew, and the number of executions fell. In his school Knox ran up against the problem from the start, since—after 1815—the Royal Colleges had increased the anatomical work in the medical curriculum. If he taught according to what was known as 'French method' the ratio would have had to approach one corpse per pupil.
As a consequence, body-snatching became so prevalent that it was not unusual for relatives and friends of someone who had just died to watch over the body until burial, and then to keep watch over the grave after burial, to stop it being violated.
In November 1827, William Hare began a new career when an indebted lodger died on him by chance. He was paid £7.10s (seven pounds & ten shillings) for delivering the body to Knox's dissecting rooms at Surgeons' Square. Now Hare and his accomplice, William Burke, set about murdering the city’s poor on a regular basis. After 16 more transactions, each netting £8-10, in what later became known as the West Port Murders, on 2 November 1828 Burke and Hare were caught, and the whole city convulsed with horror, fed by ballads, broadsides, and newspapers, at the reported deeds of the pair. Hare turned King's evidence, and Burke was hanged, dissected and his remains displayed.
Knox was not prosecuted, which outraged many in Edinburgh. His house was attacked by a mob of 'the lowest rabble of the Old Town,' and windows were broken. A committee of the Royal Society of Edinburgh exonerated him on the grounds that he had not dealt personally with Burke and Hare, but there was no forgetting his part in the case, and many remained wary of him.
Almost immediately after the Burke and Hare case, the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh began to harry him, and by June 1831 they had procured his resignation as the Curator of the museum he had proposed and founded. In the same year he was obliged to resign his army commission to avoid further service in the Cape. This removed his last source of guaranteed income, but fortunately his classes were more popular than ever, with a record 504 students. His school moved to the grander premises of Old Surgeons' Hall in 1833 but his class declined after Edinburgh University made its own practical anatomy class compulsory in the mid-1830s. Knox continued to purchase cadavers for his dissection class from such shadowy figures as the 'Black Bull Man,' but the 1832 Anatomy Act made bodies more available to all anatomists, he quarrelled with HM Inspector of Anatomy over the supply of bodies, and his competitive edge was lost. In 1837 Knox applied for the chair in pathology at Edinburgh University but his candidature was blocked by eleven existing professors, who preferred to abolish the post rather than appoint him. In 1842 he was unable to make payments to the Edinburgh funeratory system, from which bodies were supplied to private schools, and he relocated to Glasgow where, still short of subjects for dissection, he closed his school in 1844. In 1847 the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh found him guilty of falsifying a student's certificate of attendance (a not uncommon practice in private schools) and refused to accept any further certificates from him, effectively banning him from teaching in Scotland. In the same year he was expelled from the Royal Society of Edinburgh and had his election retrospectively cancelled...
[U]ntil 1856 he worked on medical journalism, gave public lectures, and wrote several books, including his most ambitious work, The Races of Men in which he argued that each race was suited to its environment and "perfect in its own way."...
In his best-selling work, The Races of Men (1850), a "Zoological history" of mankind, Knox exaggerated supposed racial differences in support of his project, asserting that, anatomically and behaviourally, "race, or hereditary descent, is everything". He offered crude characterisations of each racial group: for example the Saxon (in which race he included himself) "invents nothing", "has no musical ear", lacks "genius", and is so "low and boorish" that "he does not know what you mean by fine art". No race was without its redeeming features, however; Knox described Saxons as "[t]houghtful, plodding, industrious beyond all other races, [and] a lover of labour for labour's sake". Such supposed racial characteristics meant that each race was naturally fitted for a particular environment and could not endure outside of it. While Knox maintained that all races were capable of some form civilized life, he maintained that a vast gulf stood between the limited attainments available to the 'negroid' and to most 'mongoloid' races on one hand and the much greater past achievements and future potential of white men on the other. The Black, Knox remarked, 'is no more a white man than an ass is a horse or a zebra'. Ultimately however, all races were "[d]estined ... to run, like all other animals, a certain limited course of existence", it mattering "little how their extinction is brought about". In 1862 Knox took the opportunity of a second edition of The Races of Men to defend the "much maligned races" of the Cape against accusations of cannibalism, and to rebuke the Dutch for treating them like "wild beasts".
From the perspective of a Lowland Scot Protestant, Knox's racist works espoused extreme racial hostility to Celts in general (including the Highland Scots and Welsh people, but particularly the Irish people). He considered the "Caledonian Celt" as touching "the end of his career: they are reduced to about one hundred and fifty thousand" and that the "Welsh Celts are not troublesome, but might easily become so." For Knox, "the Irish Celt is the most to be dreaded" and openy advocated their ethnic cleansing around the time that the Great Famine was happening, stating in The Races of Men: A Fragment (1850): "The source of all evil lies in the race, the Celtic race of Ireland. There is no getting over historical facts. Look at Wales, look at Caledonia; it is ever the same. [...] The race must be forced from the soil; by fair means, if possible; still they must leave. The Orange club of Ireland is a Saxon confederation for the clearing the land of all Papists and Jacobites; this means Celts. If left to themselves, they would clear them out, as Cromwell proposed, by the sword; it would not require six weeks to accomplish the work. But the Encumbered Estates Relief Bill will do it better."
-- Robert Knox, by Wikipedia
The Anthropological Society of London (ASL) was founded in 1863 as an institutional home for those who disagreed with the Ethnological Society's politics (in terms of party loyalties, Stocking makes the political complexion of the ESL 75% Liberal to 25% Conservative, with the proportions reversed in the ASL).[44] On the topic of race, the Ethnological Society retained views descending from Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, who had a five-race theory but was a monogenist, and from Prichard. The post-Darwin concept of human speciation was unacceptable to those forming the Anthropological Society.[45]
Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (11 May 1752 – 22 January 1840) was a German physician, naturalist, physiologist, and anthropologist. He was one of the first to explore the study of the human being as an aspect of natural history. His teachings in comparative anatomy were applied to his classification of human races, of which he claimed there were five, Caucasian, Mongolian, Malayan, Ethiopian, and American. He was a member of the Göttingen School of History.
Blumenbach's peers considered him one of the great theorists of his day, and he was a mentor or influence on many of the next generation of German biologists, including Alexander von Humboldt...
Blumenbach's work included his description of sixty human crania (skulls) published originally in fascicules as Decas craniorum (Göttingen, 1790–1828). This was a founding work for other scientists in the field of craniometry. He divided the human species into five races in 1779, later founded on crania research (description of human skulls)...
Further anatomical study led him to the conclusion that 'individual Africans differ as much, or even more, from other Africans as from Europeans'.
Blumenbach argued that physical characteristics like skin color, cranial profile, etc., depended on geography, diet, and mannerism.
Like other monogenists such as Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, Blumenbach held to the "degenerative hypothesis" of racial origins. Blumenbach claimed that Adam and Eve were Caucasian inhabitants of Asia (see Asia hypothesis), and that other races came about by degeneration from environmental factors such as the sun and poor diet. Thus, he claimed, Negroid pigmentation arose because of the result of the heat of the tropical sun, while the cold wind caused the tawny colour of the Eskimos, and the Chinese were fair-skinned compared to the other Asian stocks because they kept mostly in towns protected from environmental factors. He believed that the degeneration could be reversed in a proper environmental control and that all contemporary forms of man could revert to the original Caucasian race...
He did not consider his "degenerative hypothesis" as racist and sharply criticized Christoph Meiners, an early practitioner of scientific racialism, as well as Samuel Thomas von Sömmerring, who concluded from autopsies that Africans were an inferior race. Blumenbach wrote three other essays stating non-white peoples were capable of excelling in arts and sciences in reaction against racialists of his time...
His ideas were adopted by other researchers who used them to encourage scientific racism....Scientific racism, sometimes termed biological racism, is the pseudoscientific belief that empirical evidence exists to support or justify racism (racial discrimination), racial inferiority, or racial superiority. Historically, scientific racism received credence throughout the scientific community, but it is no longer considered scientific. Dividing humankind into biologically distinct groups is sometimes called racialism or race realism by its proponents. Modern scientific consensus rejects this view as being irreconcilable with modern genetic research.
Scientific racism employs anthropology (notably physical anthropology), anthropometry, craniometry, and other disciplines or pseudo-disciplines, in proposing anthropological typologies supporting the classification of human populations into physically discrete human races, some of which might be asserted to be superior or inferior to others. Scientific racism was common during the period from the 1600s to the end of World War II. Since the second half of the 20th century, scientific racism has been criticized as obsolete and discredited, yet has persistently been used to support or validate racist world-views, based upon belief in the existence and significance of racial categories and a hierarchy of superior and inferior races.
After the end of World War II, scientific racism in theory and action was formally denounced, especially in UNESCO's early antiracist statement "The Race Question" (1950): "The biological fact of race and the myth of 'race' should be distinguished. For all practical social purposes 'race' is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social myth. The myth of 'race' has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years, it has taken a heavy toll in human lives, and caused untold suffering." Since that time, developments in human evolutionary genetics and physical anthropology have led to a new consensus among anthropologists that human race is a sociopolitical phenomenon rather than a biological one.
The term scientific racism is generally used pejoratively when applied to more modern theories, such as those in The Bell Curve (1994). Critics argue that such works postulate racist conclusions, such as a genetic connection between race and intelligence, that are unsupported by available evidence. Publications such as the Mankind Quarterly, founded explicitly as a "race-conscious" journal, are generally regarded as platforms of scientific racism because they publish fringe interpretations of human evolution, intelligence, ethnography, language, mythology, archaeology, and race.
-- Scientific racism, by Wikipedia
Blumenbach held that all living organisms "from man down to maggots, and from the cedar to common mould or mucor," possess an inherent "effort or tendency which, while life continues, is active and operative; in the first instance to attain the definite form of the species, then to preserve it entire, and, when it is infringed upon, so far as this is possible, to restore it." This power of vitality is "not referable to any qualities merely physical, chemical, or mechanical."
-- Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, by Wikipedia
Speciation is the evolutionary process by which populations evolve to become distinct species. The biologist Orator F. Cook coined the term in 1906 for cladogenesis, the splitting of lineages, as opposed to anagenesis, phyletic evolution within lineages. Charles Darwin was the first to describe the role of natural selection in speciation in his 1859 book On the Origin of Species.[4] He also identified sexual selection as a likely mechanism, but found it problematic.
There are four geographic modes of speciation in nature, based on the extent to which speciating populations are isolated from one another: allopatric, peripatric, parapatric, and sympatric. Speciation may also be induced artificially, through animal husbandry, agriculture, or laboratory experiments. Whether genetic drift is a minor or major contributor to speciation is the subject matter of much ongoing discussion.
Rapid sympatric speciation can take place through polyploidy, such as by doubling of chromosome number; the result is progeny which are immediately reproductively isolated from the parent population. New species can also be created through hybridisation followed, if the hybrid is favoured by natural selection, by reproductive isolation.
-- Speciation, by Wikipedia
The two societies co-existed warily for several years. The X Club, with members in common, supported the Ethnological Society's side of the debate.[46]
The X Club was a dining club of nine men who supported the theories of natural selection and academic liberalism in late 19th-century England. Thomas Henry Huxley was the initiator; he called the first meeting for 3 November 1864. The club met in London once a month—except in July, August and September—from November 1864 until March 1893, and its members are believed to have wielded much influence over scientific thought. The members of the club were George Busk, Edward Frankland, Thomas Archer Hirst, Joseph Dalton Hooker, Thomas Henry Huxley, John Lubbock, Herbert Spencer, William Spottiswoode, and John Tyndall, united by a "devotion to science, pure and free, untrammelled by religious dogmas.
The nine men who would compose the X Club already knew each other well. By the 1860s, friendships had turned the group into a social network, and the men often dined and went on holidays together. After Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species was published in 1859, the men began working together to aid the cause for naturalism and natural history. They backed the liberal Anglican movement that emerged in the early 1860s, and both privately and publicly supported the leaders of the movement.
According to its members, the club was originally started to keep friends from drifting apart, and to partake in scientific discussion free from theological influence. A key aim was to reform the Royal Society, with a view to making the practice of science professional. In the 1870s and 1880s, the members of the group became prominent in the scientific community and some accused the club of having too much power in shaping the scientific landscape of London. The club was terminated in 1893, after depletion by death, and as old age made regular meetings of the surviving members impossible....
The X Club came together during a period of turbulent conflict in both science and religion in Victorian England. The publication in 1859 of Charles Darwin's book On the Origin of Species through Natural Selection brought a storm of argument, with the scientific establishment of wealthy amateurs and clerical naturalists as well as the Church of England attacking this new development. Since the start of the 19th century they had seen evolutionism as an assault on the divinely ordained aristocratic social order. On the other side, Darwin's ideas on evolution were welcomed by liberal theologians and by a new generation of salaried professional scientists; the men who would later come to form the X Club supported Darwin, and saw his work as a great stride in the struggle for freedom from clerical interference in science. The members of the X social network played a significant part in nominating Darwin for the Copley Medal in 1864.
In 1860, Essays and Reviews, a collection of essays on Christianity written by a group of liberal Anglicans, was published. The collection represented a summation of a nearly century-long challenge to the history and prehistory of the Bible by higher critics as well as geologists and biologists. In short, the writers of Essays and Reviews sought to analyse the Bible like any other work of literature. At the time, Essays created more of a stir than Darwin's book. The members of the X network backed the collection, and Lubbock even sought to form an alliance between liberal Anglicans and scientists. Two liberal Anglican theologians were convicted of heresy, and when the government overturned the judgement on appeal, Samuel Wilberforce, the High Church and the evangelicals organised petitions and a mass backlash against evolution. At the Anglican convocation, the evangelicals presented a declaration reaffirming their faith in the harmony of God's word and his works and tried to make this a compulsory "Fortieth Article" of faith. They took their campaign to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, aiming to overthrow Huxley's "dangerous clique" of Darwin's allies.
In 1862, Bishop John William Colenso of Natal published The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua Critically Examined, an analysis of the first five books of the Old Testament. In his analysis Colenso used mathematics and concepts of population dynamics, including examinations of food supply and transportation, to show that the first five books of the Bible were faulty and unreliable. Outrage broke out within the Church of England, and the X network not only gave their support to Colenso, but at times even dined with him to discuss his ideas.
Later, in 1863, a new rift began to emerge within the scientific community over race theory. Debate was stirred up when the Anthropological Society of London, which rejected Darwinian theory, claimed that slavery was defensible based on the theory of evolution proposed by Darwin. The members of what would become the X Club sided with the Ethnological Society of London, which denounced slavery and embraced academic liberalism. The men of the X Club, especially Lubbock, Huxley, and Busk, felt that dissension and the "jealousies of theological sects" within learned societies were damaging, and they attempted to limit the contributions the Anthropological Society made to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, a society of which they were all members.
Thus, by 1864, the members of the X Club were joined in a fight, both public and private, to unite the London scientific community with the objective of furthering the ideas of academic liberalism.
-- X Club, by Wikipedia
Both societies took an interest in sexual morality as a topic, but the attitude of social evolutionism was very largely restricted to the Ethnological Society, where John Ferguson McLennan was a member, with the exception of Charles Staniland Wake who made little impact at the time.[47][48] Huxley made efforts to merge the societies in 1866, but was blocked by Crawfurd; the attempt was renewed in 1868 after Crawfurd's death.[49] The Ethnological Society and Anthropological Society merged in 1871 into the Anthropological Institute. A small group of past supporters of Hunt broke away in 1873, forming a London Anthropological Society that lasted two years.[50]
Publications
Initially the Ethnological Society did not aim to publish its own learned journal. Instead it adopted a suggestion of Robert Jameson, who edited the Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal, to have its transactions published there.[51] The early flow of published papers was in fact sparse.[52] Volume 46 from 1848 contained papers by George Ruxton and James Henry Skene contributed via the Ethnological Society.[53]
The Journal of the Ethnological Society of London was published in the years 1848 to 1856, a period in which four volumes appeared, and the Society's scientific activities were less marginal.[52] It was edited by Thomas Wright.[51] It then was published once more, under the title Transactions of the Ethnological Society of London, from 1861 to 1869; it was renamed and published, from 1869 to 1870, again as Journal of the Ethnological Society of London,[54] and was edited by George Busk.[55]
Presidents
• 1843 Charles Malcolm[56]
• 1848 James Cowles Prichard
• 1850 Charles Malcolm.[30]
• 1853–4 Sir Benjamin Collins Brodie, 1st Baronet[57][58][59]
• 1855–6 John Conolly[57][60]
• Sir James Clark
• 1861–? John Crawfurd
• 1863–5 John Lubbock[61]
• 1865-8 John Crawfurd[62]
• 1868-9 Thomas Huxley[63]
• Before merger: George Busk[64]
References
• Efram Sera-Shriar, The Making of British Anthropology, 1813–1871, London: Pickering and Chatto, 2013, pp. 53–79.
• Brent Henze, Scientific Definition in Rhetorical Formations: Race as "Permanent Variety" in James Cowles Prichard's Ethnology, Rhetoric Review Vol. 23, No. 4 (2004), pp. 311–331. Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. JSTOR 20176631
• Ronald Rainger, Philanthropy and Science in the 1830s: The British and Foreign Aborigines' Protection Society, Man, New Series, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Dec., 1980), pp. 702–717. Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. JSTOR 2801541
• Damon Ieremia Salesa (2011), Racial Crossings: Race, intermarriage, and the Victorian British Empire; Google Books.
• George W. Stocking, Jr. (1987), Victorian Anthropology
Notes
1. Waterloo Chronology of Scholarly Societies, 1830s
2. Michael Keevak, Becoming Yellow: A Short History of Racial Thinking (2011), p. 162 note 32; Google Books.
3. Richard Handler, Excluded Ancestors, Inventible Traditions: essays toward a more inclusive history of anthropology (2000), pp. 24–25 with note 7; Google Books.
4. Henrika Kuklick, New History of Anthropology (2009), p. 98; Google Books.
5. Stocking, p. 27.
6. Nicholas Jardine, James A. Secord, Emma C. Spary, Cultures of Natural History (1996), p. 339; Google Books.
7. Sadiah Qureshi, Peoples on Parade: Exhibitions, Empire, and Anthropology in Nineteenth-Century Britain (2011), p. 327 note 60; Google Books.
8. Salesa, p. 145; Google Books.
9. J. C. Prichard, On the Relations of Ethnology to Other Branches of Knowledge, Journal of the Ethnological Society of London (1848–1856) , Vol. 1, (1848), pp. 301–329. Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. doi:10.2307/3014091. JSTOR 3014091.
10. Paul Sillitoe, The Role Of Section H at the British Association for the Advancement of Science in the History Of Anthropology Archived 2012-10-19 at the Wayback Machine, Durham Anthropology Journal.
11. Notably Richard Francis Burton, John Crawfurd, Francis Galton, Frederick Hindmarsh, Thomas Hodgkin, William Spottiswoode, and Alfred Russel Wallace. David N. Livingstone, The Geographical Tradition: episodes in the history of a contested enterprise (1993), p. 163; Google Books.
12. Stocking, p. 76.
13. Stocking, pp. 241–5.
14. Philip D. Curtin (1973). Image of Africa: British Ideas and Action, 1780–1850. Univ of Wisconsin Press. p. 332. ISBN 978-0-299-83026-7. Retrieved 2 December 2012.
15. Stocking, p. 244.
16. ESL archives.
17. Robert Grant, New Zealand ‘Naturally’: Ernst Dieffenbach, Environmental Determinism and the Mid Nineteenth-Century British Colonization of New Zealand, New Zealand Journal of History, 37, 1 (2003) at p. 25; PDF.
18. RAI page: Prichard centenary.
19. Richardson, Angelique. "Beddoe, John". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/30666. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
20. Baigent, Elizabeth. "Brown, John". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/3629. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
21. Rainger, p. 711.
22. RAI page: Local Correspondents.
23. Hermann Welcker and J. B. D., On the Skull of Dante, Anthropological Review , Vol. 5, No. 16 (Jan., 1867), pp. 56–71. Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. doi:10.2307/3024871. JSTOR 3024871.
24. D. Zuck, The Westminster Medical Society 1809–1850, The History of Anaesthesia Society Proceedings vol. 42 (2010), pp. 9–25; ISSN 1360-6891; PDF, at p. 16.
25. Jan van Bremen, Akitoshi Shimizu, Anthropology and Colonialism in Asia and Oceania (1999), p. 87 note 33; Google Books.
26. Henze, p. 327.
27. George W. Stocking, Jr., What's in a Name: The Origins of the Royal Anthropological Institute (1837–71), at pp. 372–3, Man, New Series volume 6 issue 3, (Sep. 1971), 369–390; PDF.
28. Salesa, p. 146; Google Books.
29. Salesa, p. 155; Google Books.
30. Regulations of the Ethnological Society of London (1850); JSTOR 3014129.
31. Desmond, Adrian. "Saull, William Devonshire". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/24683. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
32. RAI page: Archive Contents 44 Archived 2012-04-20 at the Wayback Machine.
33. Journal of the Ethnological Society of London vol. III (1854), p. 171;archive.org.
34. Salesa, pp. 134–5; Google Books.
35. Brock, W. H. "Hunt, James". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/14194. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
36. Terry Jay Ellingson, The Myth of the Noble Savage (2001), p. 265; Google Books.
37. Ellingson, p. 275; Google Books.
38. Stocking, pp. 246–7.
39. Andrew L. Christenson, Tracing Archaeology's Past: the historiography of archaeology (1989), p. 155; Google Books.
40. Reed Institute, biography of Thomson.
41. Mark Bowden, Pitt Rivers: the life and archaeological work of Lieutenant-General Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers, DCL, FRS, FSA (1991), p. 45; Google Books.
42. Rethinking Pitt-Rivers: A year in the life: 1869.
43. Adrian J. Desmond, The Politics of Evolution: morphology, medicine, and reform in radical London (1992), p. 425; Google Books.
44. Stocking, p. 251.
45. Bronwen Douglas, Chris Ballard, Foreign Bodies: Oceania and the science of race 1750–1940 (2008), p. 206; Google Books.
46. Ruth Barton, X Club (act. 1864–1892), ODNB theme.
47. Larry T. Reynolds, Leonard Lieberman (editors), Race and other Misadventures: essays in honor of Ashley Montagu in his ninetieth year (1996), p. 350; Google Books.
48. Lester Richard Hiatt, Arguments about Aborigines: Australia and the evolution of social anthropology (1996), p. 40; Google Books.
49. Stocking, p. 255.
50. Douglas A. Lorimer, Colour, Class and the Victorians (1978), pp. 158–9.
51. RAI page: Ethnological Society of London. Publications.
52. Stocking, p. 245.
53. Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal (1848 – 1849 (Oct. – Apr.)) Volume 46; archive.org and later page.
54. https://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/su/anthro/antelect.html
55. Foote, Yolanda. "Busk, George". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/4168. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
56. Richard Cull, Obituary Notice of the Late Vice-Admiral Sir Charles Malcolm, President of the Ethnological Society, Journal of the Ethnological Society of London (1848–1856) , Vol. 3, (1854), pp. 112–114. Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. JSTOR 3014137.
57. Obituary of Conolly in the Transactions of 1867; archive.org.
58. http://web.prm.ox.ac.uk/rpr/images/stor ... nology.pdf[permanent dead link]
59. Presidential Address 1853.
60. R. J. Cooter, Phrenology and British Alienists, c. 1825–1845: Part I: Converts to a Doctrine p. 16 note 62; PDF.
61. Steven Mithen, After the Ice: a global human history, 20,000–5000 BC (2006), p. 514; Google Books.
62. Transactions, list of officers; archive.org.
63. Adrian Desmond, Huxley: The Devil's Disciple (1994), p. 371.
64. BMA obituary, p. 346; PDF.
External links
• WorldCat page