Leonardo’s Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms by Stephen Jay Gould
James, H. 1898. The Two Magics: The Turn of the Screw. London: Macmillan & Co.
Johanson, D. C. and D. Edgar. 1996. From Lucy to Language. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
Kemp, M. 1981. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Kennedy, D. H. 1983. Little Sparrow: A Portrait of Sophia Kovalevsky. Athens: Ohio University Press.
Kimmel, C. B. 1996. “Was Urbilateria Segmented?” Trends in Genetics 12: 329–31.
Kingsley, C. 1863. The Water Babies. New York: Macmillan.
Kipling, R. 1902. Just So Stories for Little Children. New York: Doubleday.
Kircher, A. 1664. Mundus Subterraneus. Amsterdam: J. Jansson.
Kitchener, A. 1987. “Fighting Behaviour of the Extinct Irish Elk.” Modern Geology 11: 1–28.
Koford, C. B. 1953. The California Condor. New York: National Audubon Society.
Kovalevsky, V. 1980. The Complete Works of Vladimir Kovalevsky. Edited by S. J. Gould. New York: Arno Press. (Contains French articles on horses, 1873; German article on horses, 1876; English article on artiodactyls, 1874; and two German articles on artiodactyls, 1876.)
Krafft-Ebing, R. von. 1892. Psychopathia Sexualis. London: F. A. Davis Co.
Lamarck, J. B. 1809. Philosophie Zoologique. Paris: Dentu.
Lankester, E. R. 1880. Degeneration: A Chapter in Darwinism. London: Macmillan and Co.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1967. Treasures of Prehistoric Art. New York: H. N. Abrams.
Levin, I. 1976. The Boys from Brazil. New York: Random House.
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema Naturae. Stockholm.
Linnaeus, C. 1759. Genera Morborum. Upsala.
Linnaeus, C. 1771. Fundamenta Testaceologiae. Upsala: ex officena Edmanniana.
Lister, A. M. 1994. “The Evolution of the Giant Deer, Megaloceros giganteus (Blumembach).” Journal of the Linnean Society of London 112: 65–100.
Lowell, P. 1906. Mars and Its Canals. New York: Macmillan Company.
Lutzen, J. 1984. “Growth, Reproduction, and Life Span in Sacculina carcini Thompson (Cirripedia:Rhizocephala) in the Isefjord, Denmark.” Sarsia 69: 91–106.
Lyell, C. 1832–33. Principles of Geology. London: J. Murray.
MacCurdy, E. 1939. The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci. New York: Reynal & Hitchcock.
Mayr, E. 1963. Animal Species and Evolution. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
McKay, D. S., E. K. Gibson Jr., K. L. Thomas-Keprta, H. Vali, C. S. Romanek, S. J. Clemett, X. D. F. Chillier, C. R. Maechling, and R. N. Zare. 1996. “Search for Past Life on Mars: Possible Relic Biogenic Activity in Martian Meteorite ALH84001.” Science 273: 924–30.
Mendes da Costa, E. 1757. A Natural History of Fossils. London: L. Davis and C. Reymers.
Mendes da Costa, E. 1776. Elements of Conchology, or, An Introduction to the Knowledge of Shells. London: B. White.
Mitchell, G. F., and H. M. Parkes. 1949. “The Giant Deer in Ireland.” Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 52(B)(7): 291–314.
Mivart, St. George J. 1871. On the Genesis of Species. New York: D. Appleton and Co.
Morison, S. E. 1942. Admiral of the Ocean Sea. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.
Muller, F. 1864. Für Darwin. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.
Nichols, J. 1817–58. Illustrations of the literary history of the eighteenth century. Consisting of authentic memoirs and original letters of eminent persons; and intended as a sequel to the Literary anecdotes. London: Nichols, Son, and Bentley.
Osborn, H. F. 1918. The Origin and Evolution of Life: On the Theory of Action, Reaction and Interaction of Energy. London: G. Bell.
Owen, R. 1846. A History of British Fossil Mammals, and Birds. London: J. Van Voorst.
Owen, R. 1865. Memoir on the Gorilla. London: Taylor and Francis.
Owen, R. 1866. Memoir of the Dodo. London: Taylor and Francis.
Paley, W. 1802. Natural Theology. London: R. Faulder.
Patten, E. 1920. The Grand Strategy of Evolution. Boston: R. G. Badger.
Rehbock, P. F. 1980. “The Victorian Aquarium in Ecological and Social Perspective.” In M. Sears and D. Merriman, eds. Oceanography: The Past, International Congress on the History of Oceanography. New York: Springer Verlag.
Richter, P. J. 1883. The Literary Works of Leonardo da Vinci. London: S. Low, Marston, Searle & Rivington.
Ritchie, L. E., and J. T. Høeg. 1981. “The Life History of Lernaeodiscus porcellanae (Cirripedia:Rhizocephala) and Co-Evolution with its Porcellanid Host.” Journal of Crustacean Biology 1: 334–47.
Rolfe, W. D. Ian, 1983. “William Hunter (1718–1783) on Irish ‘Elk’ and Stubbs’s Moose.” Archives of Natural History 11: 263–90.
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1992. Scenes from Deep Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rupke, N. A. 1994. Richard Owen: Victorian Naturalist. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ruspoli, M. 1987. The Cave of Lascaux: The Final Photographs. New York: Abrams.
Sauer, C. O. 1966. The Early Spanish Main. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Scheuchzer, J. J. 1732–37. Physique Sacrée, ou Histoire-Naturelle de la Bible. Amsterdam: Chez P. Schenk.
Smith, G. 1968. The Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stager, K. E. 1964. “The Role of Olfaction in Food Location by the Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura).” Los Angeles County Museum Contributions in Science 81:63.
Strickland, H. E. and A. G. Melville. 1848. The Dodo and Its Kindred. London: Reeve, Benham, and Reeve.
Stringer, C. 1996. African Exodus. London: Cape.
Swisher III, C. C., W. J. Rink, S. C. Anton, H. P. Schwarcz, G. H. Curtis, A. Suprijo, and Widiasmoro. 1996. “Latest Homo erectus of Java.” Science 274:5294, 1870–74.
Thompson, D. W. 1942. On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Turner, R. 1992. Inventing Leonardo. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Tyson, E. 1699. Orang-outang, sive, Homo sylvestris, or the Anatomy of a Pygmie compared with that of a Monkey, an Ape, and a Man. London: T. Bennet, Daniel Brown, and Mr. Hunt.
Vacelet, J., and N. Boury-Esnault. 1995. “Carnivorous Sponges.” Nature 373: 333–35.
Wallerius, J. G. 1747. Mineralogia, Eller Mineralriket, Indelt och beskrifvit. Stockholm.
Whitehead, P. J. P. 1977. “Emmanuel Mendes da Costa (1717–1791) and the Conchology, or Natural History of Shells.” Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Historical Series), 6: 1–24.
Wood, J. G. 1868. The Fresh and Salt-Water Aquarium. London: G. Routledge.
ILLUSTRATION CREDITS
Grateful acknowledgment is made for permission to reproduce the following:
La Gioconda (the Mona Lisa), Leonardo da Vinci, Louvre, Paris, France. Neg. no. 93DE1846. Photograph by RMN-R. G. Ojeda.
Sketches by Leonardo da Vinci from the Leicester Codex. Courtesy of Seth Joel/Corbis Corporation.
The Fighting Temeraire Tugged to Her Last Berth to Be Broken Up, 1838, J.M.W. Turner, 1839, copyright © National Gallery, London.
From Physica Sacra, J. J. Scheuchzer, 1730s. Photographs by Jackie Beckett, American Museum of Natural History.
From The Earth Before the Flood, Louis Figuier, 1863, and 4th ed., 1865. Photographs by Jackie Beckett, American Museum of Natural History.
From Rustic Adornments, Shirley Hibberd, 2nd ed., 1858. Photographs by Jackie Beckett, American Museum of Natural History.
From Fundamenta Testaceologiae, Carolus Linnaeus, 1771.
From On the Classification and Geological Distribution of the Mammalia, Richard Owen, 1859.
From monograph, Vladimir Kovalevsky, 1876. Photograph by Craig Chesek, American Museum of Natural History.
Lascaux Cave painting. Photograph by Jean-Marie Chauvet/Sygma. Courtesy of the French Government Tourist Office.
The Moose, George Stubbs, 1770, Hunterian Art Gallery, University of Glasgow, Scotland.<
Megaloceros from Cougnac Cave, southwest France. Modified after Lorblanchet et al., 1993, by A. M. Lister, 1994, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, London.
Skeleton of an Irish elk, Richard Owen, 1846. Neg. no. 2A23132. Courtesy of the Department of Library Services, American Museum of Natural History.
Copyright © 1997 Donald C. Johanson. Used by permission of Nevraumont Publishing Co., New York.
Photographs courtesy of Sally Walker.
Photograph by Jackie Beckett, American Museum of Natural History.
From Memoir of the Dodo, Richard Owen, 1866. Neg. no. 5848. Courtesy of the Department of Library Services, American Museum of Natural History.
LEFT: From Memoir of the Dodo, Richard Owen, 1866. Neg. no. 5847. RIGHT: From The Dodo and Its Kindred, H. E. Strickland and A. G. Melville, 1848. Neg. no. 5869. Both courtesy of the Department of Library Services, American Museum of Natural History.
Illustration by John Tenniel from Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll, 1865. Copyright © Corbis-Bettmann.
Engraving of Anton Von Werner’s original painting, copyright © The Granger Collection, New York.
Evolution, copyright © Vint Lawrence, 1995.
La giraffe, Georges Buffon.
From The Origin of Vertebrates, Walter Holbrook Gaskell, 1908.
From Memoires du Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1822. Neg. nos. 338680, 337423. Photographs by Jackie Beckett. Courtesy of the Department of Library Services, American Museum of Natural History.
E. M. De Robertis and Y. Sasai; reprinted with permission from Nature, vol. 380. Copyright © 1996 Macmillan Magazines Limited.
From Mars and Its Canals, Percival Lowell (New York: Macmillan, 1906). Courtesy of the Lowell Observatory, Arizona.
Copyright © UPI/Corbis-Bettmann.
From Degeneration: A Chapter in Darwinism, E. Ray Lankester (London: Macmillan and Co., 1880).
Courtesy of Archives de Zoologie Expérimentale Deuxième Série, Tome II, 1884.
Beth Beyerholm; with permission from Nature, vol. 377. Copyright © 1995 Macmillan Magazines Limited.
Courtesy of Nancy J. Haver, from Invertebrates, R. C. Brusca and G. J. Brusca (Sinauer Associates, 1990).
Reverse Evolution copyright © Vint Lawrence, 1995.
Footnotes
To return to the corresponding text, click on the reference number.
Introduction: PIECES OF EIGHT: CONFESSION OF A HUMANISTIC NATURALIST
1. The etymology is much disputed, but I will follow John Ciardi’s Browser’s Dictionary (Harper & Row, 1980) for the conventional story that American colonials (in the absence of an official mint before we became a nation) used the coins of several countries for change. The Spanish silver “piece of eight” (so called because the coin bore a large number 8 to signify its value as eight reals) was often cut into pieces, called “bits.” Since the real was worth about 12½ cents, two bits became an American quarter, four bits a half-dollar, and so on—in terminology still used today.
1. THE UPWARDLY MOBILE FOSSILS OF LEONARDO’S LIVING EARTH
1. What goes ’round, comes ’round—as Leonardo must have said somewhere. This Leicester Codex, one of Leonardo’s most important notebooks, filled largely with commentary on the nature and use of water, first came to light in the 1690s, when Giuseppi Ghezzi found the document in a chest of manuscripts in Rome. In 1717, Thomas Coke, late Lord Leicester (hence the codex’s name), purchased the notebook, which remained in his family until Armand Hammer bought it in 1980—and renamed it, in Trumpian fashion, Codex Hammer. With enormous fanfare (at enormous profit), Christie’s auctioned this notebook on November 11, 1994, where America’s Bill Gates outbid several European governments, and bought the manuscript for more money than I can count. Gates, to his credit, restored the original name, and has favored public exhibition of the document—including a show at the American Museum of Natural History in 1996, where I finally saw this icon of my dreams and admiration, and where I developed the ideas for this essay. The Leicester Codex is the only manuscript of Leonardo’s now residing in America.
2. An air of impenetrability continues to surround Leonardo. A scholar must still struggle to obtain a complete translation of any document like the Leicester Codex. The Richter edition of Leonardo’s notebooks is maddeningly fragmentary, and the individual passages of the codices are broken apart and rearranged by subject. (Thus, you can find Leonardo’s statements about water under a common heading, as abstracted from all his notebooks, but you cannot put together the text of the Leicester Codex—admittedly a hodgepodge and miscellany, but scholars do need to trace sequential jottings, however motley the apparent medley, for Leonardo often made odd juxtapositions for interesting reasons.) The other major edition of Leonardo’s notebooks—Edward MacCurdy’s compilation of 1939, and my source of quotation for this essay—is far more adequate (and nearly complete for the Leicester Codex), although also broken up by topic, I must confess to a wry amusement (which might have blossomed to near fury if I had a different temperament) at the recent exhibit of the Leicester Codex in New York’s Museum of Natural History. Visitors could see all the original pages and buy a beautiful catalog with each page reproduced in full facsimile. But no printed translation could be found anywhere, and the catalog only provided a pitifully scrappy summary of each page. You could purchase a CD-ROM with the full text (as Bill Gates showed his true commitment!), but most homes don’t have a machine for playback, and the version that I tried to use couldn’t even put a full line, with Leonardo’s marginal annotations, on the screen at once. Moreover, a scholar can’t work with only one part of a text on a screen at a time. You have to be able to compare passages from several pages at once—as you can do with an old-fashioned book. I almost felt as though our modern age of the passive sound bite—the attitude of “we know what little bit you need”—had launched a conspiracy against scholarship to keep Leonardo hidden. I do love to consult original sources in their original languages, but my skills (and patience) do not extend to long bouts of reading medieval Italian in a mirror!
3. Here Leonardo properly rejects a popular explanation supported by some of his contemporaries—that the earth, in cross section, is an elongated ellipse rather than a sphere, and that water at the end of the long axis of the ellipse will stand higher (farther from the earth’s center) than mountains in the short axis of the ellipse. Water could then flow “down” from oceans to mountains. But Leonardo recognized that the surface of the ocean will always lie below the summits of mountains on other quadrants of the earth’s surface.
4. THE CLAM STRIPPED BARE BY HER NATURALISTS, EVEN
1. Indeed, I did miss the only modern article published about Mendes da Costa, an excellent and thorough account by P. J. P. Whitehead in 1977 (see bibliography for details). I regret this oversight, both for my failure to honor Whitehead’s extensive work, and for the considerable extra time and labor I therefore spent in locating (from scratch and for a second time) the rare and sketchy sources that we both used as a basis for our articles. (Scholarship is truly a collective and accumulative exercise in this crucial sense, as 1 failed both Whitehead and myself. To be sure, Whitehead published his account in a small and highly technical journal not included in most standard bibliographies. But, no excuses. My sources on Mendes da Costa were far more obscure and far more difficult to locate!)
Whitehead’s article treats a quite different subject from my focus (the true authorship of Mendes da Costa’s book on conchology, which Whitehead determines to be, indeed, da Costa’s own work, and not that of other contenders). But he also includes an interesting account of Mendes da Costa’s life. We reach very much the same conclusions, but Whitehead’s work does resolve one issue in the original version of my essay (here corrected). I had been unable to find enough evidence to convince me of Mendes da Costa’s guilt in charges laid against him by the Royal Society in 1767, and leading to his several years in prison. But Whitehead proves th
In one crucial theme of my essay, Whitehead ably affirms my central claim that Mendes da Costa has—curiously, given his unique and fascinating status—elicited remarkably little attention from later historians and scientists. Whitehead writes: “Da Costa has so far received only brief biographical treatment although, like many of his colleagues, he was an avid letter-writer and his carefully preserved correspondence (over two thousand letters) still survives.” May I hope that some aspiring Ph.D. candidate in the history of science reads this footnote and finds a superb thesis topic thereby? Then Whitehead’s article and this essay will truly not have been in vain.
14. NON-OVERLAPPING MAGISTERIA
1. Interestingly, the main thrust of these paragraphs does not address evolution in general, but lies in refuting a doctrine that Pius calls “polygenism,” or the notion of human ancestry from multiple parents—for he regards such an idea as incompatible with the doctrine of original sin “which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.” In this one instance, Pius may be transgressing the NOMA principle—but I cannot judge, for I do not understand the details of Catholic theology and therefore do not know how symbolically such a statement may be read. If Pius is arguing that we cannot entertain a theory about derivation of all modern humans from an ancestral population rather than through an ancestral individual (a potential fact) because such an idea would question the doctrine of original sin (a theological construct), then I would declare him out of line for letting the magisterium of religion dictate a conclusion within the magisterium of science.
2. This passage, here correctly translated, provides a fascinating example of the subtleties and inherent ambiguities in rendering one language into another. Translation may be the most difficult of all arts, and meanings have been reversed (and wars fought) for perfectly understandable reasons. The Pope originally issued his statement in French, where this phrase read “. . . de nouvelles connaissances conduisent à reconnaitre dans la théorie de l’évolution plus qu’une hypothèse.” L’Osservatore Romano, the official Vatican newspaper, translated this passage as: “new knowledge has led to the recognition of more than one hypothesis in the theory of evolution.” This version (obviously, given the official Vatican source) then appeared in all English commentaries, including the original version of this essay.