Tarea

ERNST HAECKEL AND THE REDEMPTION OF NATURE

by
Nolan Heie

A thesis submitted to the Department of History
in conformity with the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Queen’s University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
(January 2008)
Copyright © Nolan Heie, 2008

Abstract
A respected marine biologist at the University of Jena, Ernst Haeckel (1834–1919) was
the mostvisible proponent of Darwin’s theory of evolution in Germany around the turn
of the twentieth century. Alongside his natural-scientific research activities, he attempted
to popularise a philosophy that he dubbed ‘Monism’ – which consisted essentially of
mid-nineteenth-century mechanistic materialism permeated with elements derived from
early-nineteenth-century German Romantic pantheism – and to usethis outlook as the
basis for a worldwide anticlerical movement. His popular science books were an
outstanding success, selling hundreds of thousands of copies throughout the world, but
his organisation attracted far fewer adherents. By examining Haeckel’s popular science
writings and contemporary reactions to them, especially among lesser-known
contemporaries who have received relativelylittle attention in previous studies, this thesis
explores the subjective appeal of Haeckel’s monistic philosophy. Specifically, it
investigates the way in which he employed metaphors and visual images to communicate
scientific and philosophical concepts, and in so doing seemed to provide his readers with
what they had feared lost along with the decline of orthodox religious belief: a feeling ofgreater purpose, a foundation for ethical behaviour, an appreciation of beauty in the
world, and a stable sense of identity. The imagery and metaphors that he employed were
open to multiple interpretations, and others saw in them an expression of the destructive
modern forces that threatened to bring about social collapse. Paradoxically, the same
devices that accounted for Haeckel’s appealas a popular science writer contributed to the
incoherence and fragmentation of his Monism movement.

ii

Acknowledgements

First of all I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Harold Mah, for his support and
encouragement. For their insightful questions and suggestions I would like to thank the
other members of the oral examination committee, comprising Dr. Christiane Arndt, Dr.
Sandraden Otter, Dr. Jennifer Jenkins, and Dr. Ian McKay. I am indebted as well to
numerous colleagues at Queen’s University who offered their reactions to earlier versions
of chapters that were read as seminar series presentations, including, but certainly not
limited to, Dr. Richard Bailey, Dr. Peter Campbell, Christopher Churchill, Dr. Gordon
Dueck, Dr. Adnan Husain, Milen Jissov, Dr. MarkJones, Dr. Tiffany Jones and Dr.
Barrington Walker. I also benefited from the constructive suggestions offered by the
anonymous reviewers at the Journal of the Canadian Historical Association concerning
the article ‘Ernst Haeckel and the Morphology of Ethics’, which became the basis for the
seventh chapter, and those of Dr. Brett de Bary, who chaired a conference panel at
Cornell University atwhich I presented the paper ‘Haeckel in Ceylon’, which became the
basis for the ninth chapter. For guiding me through the many procedures, forms and
deadlines that are an inevitable part of life for a graduate student, I must express my
appreciation to the graduate assistant, Yvonne Place. Finally, I am grateful to my family
for their patience during the long process of preparing this thesis.Research for this project was carried out at the Ernst-Haeckel-Haus Archives at
Friedrich-Schiller University at Jena and the libraries of Queen’s University, the
University of Toronto and the University of Alberta, as well as the Thüringer
Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek at Jena, the Staatsbibliothek at Berlin and the
Deutsche Bibliothek / Deutsche Bücherei at Leipzig. I would like to...