Irish Catholicism and Science: From "Godless Colleges" to the Celtic Tiger

Notes and References

Notes and References 241 INTRODUCTION 1 Janet Browne, ‘Noah’s Flood, the Ark and the Shaping of Early Modern Natural History’, in David C. Lindberg and Ronald L. Numbers (eds), When Science and Christianity Meet (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003), pp. 111–138. 2 Tess Cosslett, ‘Introductory Essay’, in idem (ed.), Science and Religion in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 12–14. 3 Alvar Ellegård, Darwin and the General Reader: The Reception of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution in the British Periodical Press, 1859–1872, foreword by David L. Hull (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1990), pp. 98–100, 155. 4 These observations were made by William J. Astore about American Catholics. It is very likely that the attitudes of Irish Catholics were similar to their American counterparts. See William J. Astore, ‘Gentle Skeptics? American Catholic Encounters with Polygenism, Geology and Evolutionary Theories from 1845 to 1875’, The Catholic Historical Review, vol. 82, no. 1 (January 1996), pp. 71–73. 5 See Andrew R. Holmes, ‘Presbyterians and Science in the North of Ireland before 1874’, The British Journal for the History of Science, vol. 41, no. 151 (December 2008), p. 561; in reference to J.R. Moore, ‘1859 and All That: Remaking the Story of Evolution and Religion’, in R.G. Chapman and C.T. Duval (eds), Charles Darwin, 1809-1882: A Centennial Commerative (Wellington, NZ: Nova Pacifica, 1982), pp. 167–194. We are informed by R.B. McDowell and D.A. Webb, in their history of Trinity College Dublin, that from 1860 to about 1890, academic interests focused mainly on physics, mathematics and classics. These subjects were almost entirely free from controversies at the time. Very few scholars were interested in geology, biology, philosophy, or literary criticism. Biblical criticism attracted little attention. R.B. McDowell and D.A. Webb, Trinity College Dublin, 1592–1952: An Academic History (Dublin: Trinity College Dublin Press in association with Environmental Publications, 2004), pp. 240–241. Samuel Haughton (1821–1897) – mathematician , geologist, anatomist, physiologist and a Church of Ireland minister – has been identified as Darwin’s first critic in Ireland. See Miguel DeArce, ‘Darwin’s Irish Correspondence’, Biology and Environment: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. 108B, no. 1 (2008), p. 48. 6 L. Perry Curtis Jr., Apes and Angels: The Irishman in Victorian Caricature, revised ed. (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1997), p. 104. See also Aodhán Kelly, ‘The Darwin Debate in Dublin, 1859–1908’ (M. Litt. thesis, National University of Ireland, Maynooth, 2009), pp 15–56. 242 Notes to pages xii–xx 7 Sean Lysaght, ‘Themes in the Irish History of Science’, The Irish Review, vol. 19 (Spring-Summer 1996), pp. 87–97; Philip McGuinness, ‘The Hue and Cry of Heresy: John Toland, Isaac Newton & the Social Context of Scientists’, History Ireland, vol. 4, no. 4 (Winter 1996), pp. 22–27; ‘Editors’ Introduction’, in Peter J. Bowler and Nicholas Whyte (eds), Science and Society in Ireland: The Social Context of Science and Technology in Ireland, 1800–1950 (Belfast: The Institute of Irish Studies, The Queen’s University of Belfast, 1997), p. vii. 8 David N. Livingstone, ‘Science, Region and Religion: The Reception of Darwinism in Princeton, Belfast and Edinburgh’, in Ronald L. Numbers and John Stenhouse (eds), Disseminating Darwinism: The Role of Place, Race, Religion and Gender (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 7–38. 9 See Dorinda Outram, ‘The History of Natural History: Grand Narrative or Local Lore?’, in John Wilson Foster and Helena C.G. Chesney (eds), Nature in Ireland: A Scientific and Cultural History (Dublin: The Lilliput Press, 1997), p. 468; and John Wilson Foster, ‘Natural History in Modern Irish Culture’, in Bowler and Whyte (eds), Science and Society in Ireland, p. 127. 10 See Owen Chadwick, The Secularization of the European Mind in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), pp. 164–165, 168–169, 172–173; and Martin Conway, Catholic Politics in Europe, 1918–1945 (London: Routledge, 1997), p. 12. Historian Jon H. Roberts, writing about the responses of religious authors in Britain and the United States to Darwinism, observed that public opinion polls were not undertaken until after 1920. Thus, ‘we know very little about what views, if any, the vast majority of people held about Darwinism.’ Jon H. Roberts, ‘Religious Reactions to Darwin’, in Peter Harrison (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Science and Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 82. 11 See Ellegård, Darwin and the General Reader, pp. 20...