As readers may be aware, Herbert Spencer has been much on my mind of late.
As a side effect of this, I became curious about who first used "social" as an adjective in front of "Darwinism," and in what context.
The answer may well be an otherwise forgotten writer named Joseph Fisher. [In wikipedia, there is a disambiguation page for the name "Joseph Fisher," which lists 13 different men of that name who are notable in various ways. Most of the "Fishers" listed are in blue, indicating that they each have a wikipedia article of his own. The Joseph Fisher I have in mind is the only one listed in red -- indicating no article -- so the only information about him you will find in wikipedia is the one fact used to distinguish him on the disambiguation page, that he "coined the phrase" social Darwinism.]
In 1877, the TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY ran Fisher's (very lengthy) article on "The History of Landholding in Ireland," a subject of obvious interest in Britain at the time, since the Irish tenants circa 1877 were getting so confrontational with their imperially-determined landlords.
About one-quarter of the way through this article, Fisher takes up a theory then recently expounded by Sir Henry Maine, who had written about how the Irish chieftains had developed into feudal barons. (The chieftains were mobile, but one has to settle down on a particular chunk of land to be a feudal baron.) Maine is a far better remembered fellow than Fisher, and this brings to mind a lot of question into how THAT thesis might have fit into Maine's big picture.
Nonetheless: Fisher isn't buying it. He regrets that Maine, whom he calls a "usually acute writer" would have bungled this point. "I can find nothing in the Brehon laws to warrant this theory of social Darwinism" Fisher writes. He doesn't believe the chieftains transformed gradually into feudal barons. He believes they stayed chieftains until they were conquered by folks from the next island over, who brought feudalism along with them.
That is peculiar. So far as I can tell, Maine's theory resembles Darwinism only insofar as Darwin spoke of the development of one species out of another, and Maine thought one social system can develop from another by gradual steps. There is nothing here that suggests, for example, that Maine thought the mechanism of the change was survival of the fittest. The use of the term "social Darwinism" seems to have been a quick "casting of shade" as people in the 21st century say: shade on Maine for associating himself even in the vaguest of ways with this disreputable Darwin fellow.
I'll think about this some more and I expect my next post will speak further to what, if anything, we can take from Fisher's usage, about Fisher, Maine, Darwin, and the subsequent history of the term.
Comments
Post a Comment