On Being An Animal,or,the Eighteenth-Century Zoophyte Controversy in Britain

On the fluidity of boundaries between eighteenth-century sciences and fields of knowledge, see the introduction to Rousseau G. S. Porter Roy (eds.), The ferment of knowledge: Studies in the historiography of eighteenth-century science (Cambridge, 1980); Schaffer Simon , “Natural philosophy” in Ibid.; Yeo Richard , “Classifying the sciences”, in Porter Roy (ed.), The Cambridge history of science, iv: Eighteenth-century science (Cambridge, 2003). Yeo's work discusses contemporary definitions of natural history and natural philosophy and some of their overlaps, but from an encyclopaedic, rather than from a practical, point of view.

In this article, I will focus just on zoophytes and not on the related question of animalcules which were also subject to questions about their true nature and proper kingdom.

Dawson Virginia P. , Nature's enigma: The problem of the polyp in the letters of Bonnet, Trembley and Réaumur (Philadelphia, 1987), chap. 1. Trembley's discoveries were propagated not just through his letters and publications, but also through his important “strategy of generosity” which entailed sending live polyps to scientists across Europe so that they could perform the experiments for themselves, see Ratcliffe Marc J. , The quest for the invisible: Microscopy in the Enlightenment (Farnham, 2009), chap. 5.

Some authors, such as Londa Schiebinger in Nature's body (Boston, 1993), 28, attribute this British, and most particularly English, preference for practice over theory to the decline of academic natural history which had been ongoing since the 1720s.

For a recent work on Ellis and Trembley see Ratcliffe , op. cit. (ref. 3), which focuses primarily on their microscopic work.

Goldsmith Oliver , An history of the earth, and animated nature (London, 1774), viii, 164–5.

John Ellis, An essay towards a natural history of the corallines and other productions of the like kind, commonly found on the coasts of Great Britain and Ireland. To which is added the description of a large marine polype taken near the Pole North , by the Whale-fishers, in the Summer 1753 (London, 1755). In modern terms, corallines are algae with calcareous jointed stems. For more on Ellis's background and his place in British natural history in this period, see Gascoigne John , Joseph Banks and the English Enlightenment: Useful knowledge and polite culture (Cambridge, 1994), chap. 3.

In, for example, Robert Grant's 1825–26 papers on sea sponges published in the Edinburgh new philosophical journal. A less original British work on zoophytes was Baker Henry , An attempt towards a natural history of the polype (London, 1743) in which he plagiarised much of Trembley's work; for more on this incident, see Ratcliffe , op. cit. (ref. 3) 109.

Ellis , op. cit. (ref. 7), Introduction v-vii; the book was dedicated to the Princess Dowager of Wales. For more on the use of the microscope in the study of zoophytes and other small organisms, see Ratcliffe , op. cit. (ref. 3); this book looks at microscopy in Europe as well as Britain and deliberately focuses on experiments performed with the microscope rather than their metaphysical interpretations, 103–5 and chap. 5.

Aristotle , Historia animalium, trans. by Peck A. L. (Cambridge 1979), 19–21. Lloyd's G. E. R. “Fuzzy natures”, in Aristotelian explorations (Cambridge, 1996), gives an excellent overview of Aristotle's doubts about the correct way to classify zoophytes.

Although Aristotle had not mentioned motion in the list of animal characteristics in Historia animalium, he did write an entire treatise on The movement of animals and motion was widely considered a standard animal property.

Dawson , op. cit. (ref. 3), 97–98.

Dawson Virginia P. , “Trembley's experiment of turning the polyp inside out and the influence of Dutch science”, in Lenhoff Howard M. Tardent Pierre (eds.), From Trembley's polyps to new directions in research on hydra: Proceedings of a symposium honoring Abraham Trembley (1710–1784) (Geneva, 1985), 326.

Dawson , op. cit. (ref. 13), 327.

Dawson , op. cit. (ref. 3), 102.

Smith James Edward , A selection of the correspondence of Linnæus, and other naturalists, from the original manuscript, i (London, 1821), 260–1. This belief, expressed in 1771, shows how Ellis had changed his views since 1755 when, in Natural history of the corallines, he had created a class that was a mixture of animal and vegetable.

Ellis , op. cit. (ref. 7), 2.

Ellis John , The natural history of many curious and uncommon zoophytes, collected from various parts of the globe by the late John Ellis, Esq. … Systematically arranged and described by the late Daniel Solander, M.D. F.R.S. &c. (London, 1786), 108. This work was co-authored by Daniel Solander (1733–82).

Smith , op. cit. (ref. 16), 152, 208.

Ellis John Woulfe Peter , “Extract of a letter from John Ellis, Esquire, F.R.S. to Dr. Linnæus, of Upsal, F.R.S. on the animal nature of the genus of zoophytes, called corallina”, Philosophical transactions, lvii (1767), 404–27. Ellis was later awarded the Royal Society's Copley Medal for this and the following paper.

For more on Marsigli's experiments and fieldwork relating to corals, see McConnell Anita , “The flowers of coral — Some unpublished conflicts from Montpellier and Paris during the early 18^th century”, History and philosophy of the life sciences, xii (1990), 51–66.

Ellis Woulfe , op. cit. (ref. 20); Campbell Alec , “Woulfe, Peter (1727?–1803)”, Oxford dictionary of national biography, ed. by Matthew H. C. G. Harrison Brian (Oxford, 2004).

Ellis Woulfe , op. cit. (ref. 20), 417–18.

Goodman D. C. , “The application of chemical criteria to biological classification in the eighteenth century”, Medical history, xv (1971), 23–44, pp. 36, 39.

Goodman , op. cit. (ref. 24), 41.

Ellis John , “An account of the actinia sociata, or clustered anima-flower, lately found on the sea-coasts of the new-ceded islands”, Philosophical transactions, lvii (1767), 428–37, pp. 431, 433, 435.

Chemistry was often employed in the mineralogical parts of natural history, but far less often in zoology and botany.

Brown S. W. , “Smellie, William (1740–1795)”, Oxford dictionary of national biography, ed. by Matthew H. C. G. Harrison Brian (Oxford, 2004. Online edition, ed. by Goldman Lawrence , May 2008).

Leclerc Georges-Louis de Buffon Comte , Natural history, general and particular, translated into English by Smellie William (2nd edn, London, 1785), p. xii.

Buffon , op. cit. (ref. 29), pp. xiv–xv.

Stevens Peter F. , The development of biological systematics: Antoine-Laurent de Jussieu, nature, and the natural system (New York, 1994), chap. 2, 18.

Dussinger John A. , “Goldsmith, Oliver (1728?–1774)”, Oxford dictionary of national biography, ed. by Matthew H. C. G. Harrison Brian (Oxford, 2004. Online edition, Jan 2009).

Goldsmith Oliver , op. cit. (ref. 6), i, preface, pp. viii–x; ii, 289–300.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), viii, 165.

Ellis , op. cit. (ref. 7), p. vi.

Ellis Woulfe , op. cit. (ref. 20), 404.

Ellis , op. cit. (ref. 26), 428.

Ellis John , “On the nature and formation of sponges”, Philosophical transactions, lv (1765), 280–9, p. 280.

There were three principal English translations of the Histoire naturelle in the eighteenth century, and one particularly important interpretation. The three translations were: Kenrick and Murdoch's of 1775; William Smellie's of 1780; and James Smith Barr's of 1792. The most popular interpretation of Histoire naturelle was Oliver Goldsmith's 1774 An history of the earth, and animated nature. The English editions all completely omitted the Premier discours. For a comparison of the main English translations of Buffon, see Loveland Jeff , “Georges-Loius Leclerc de Buffon's Histoire naturelle in English, 1775–1815”, Archives of natural history, xxxi (2004) 214–35.

As I am discussing the reception of Buffon in Britain, I have used one of the English-language translations in this section to present Buffon's words and ideas as many British naturalists would have read them. The quotations and chapter and volume references in this section come from the second edition of William Smellie's translation which appeared in 1785.

Buffon , op. cit. (ref. 29), ii, 6–9, 15, 209, 211–12.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), i, pp. xi, xiv.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), ii, 3.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), vii, 243–4.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), ii, 2, 3.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), viii, 161–4.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), viii, 188–91.

Aristotle , op. cit. (ref. 10), 11.

Ellis , op. cit. (ref. 7), 79.

Ellis John , “An account of the sea pen, or pennatula phosphorea of Linnæus; likewise a description of a new species of sea pen, found on the coast of South Carolina, with observations on sea-pens in general”, Philosophical transactions, liii (1763), 419–35, p. 433.

Ellis , op. cit. (ref. 38), 280–4.

Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 33), viii, 194.

Such as the works of Ward and Taylor: Ward Samuel , A modern system of natural history, containing accurate descriptions, and faithful histories, of animals, vegetables, and minerals. together with their properties, and various uses in medicine, mechanics, manufactures, &c. (London, 1776); Taylor Charles (a.k.a. Francis Fitzgerald), Surveys of nature, historical, moral, and entertaining, exhibiting the principles of natural science in various branches (London, 1787).

Reprints with new illustrations were still being published in the 1850s.

Ward , op. cit. (ref. 53), 177; cf. Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 32), viii, 171.

Taylor , op. cit. (ref. 53), 325–32; cf. Goldsmith , op. cit. (ref. 32), viii, chaps. viii—xii.

Leclerc Georges-Louis de Buffon Comte , Natural history, abridged. including the history of the elements, the earth, and its component parts, mountains, rivers, seas, winds, whirlwinds, waterspouts, volcanoes, earthquakes, of man, quadrupeds, birds, fishes, shell-fish, lizards, and serpents; with a general view of the insects world (London, 1791), p. vi.