The complex case of Charles Darwin, from his views on religion to his marriage to his cousin (‘better than a dog’)

In the middle of February, there is a day to commemorate a figure whose name is frequently invoked but less often understood. To his critics he represents materialism and a contentious relationship with religion; to his supporters, he represents a deep and meaningful engagement with human nature.

I refer, of course, to Darwin Day. Beginning in 2002, figures such as the philosopher Massimo Pigliucci, humanists, and scientific advocacy groups have championed Charles Darwin’s birthday as a means of celebrating the accomplishments of science and, quite often, the triumph of secularism.

But what does Darwin’s own engagement with these issues tell us? Darwin was born on February 12th, 1809, the same day as Abraham Lincoln. While the future American president was born in a modest Kentucky log cabin, Darwin’s birthplace was somewhat grander: a Georgian villa in Shrewsbury.

Darwin’s father, Robert, was a well-respected local doctor, and it was expected that Charles would follow in his footsteps. However, the constitutionally delicate Darwin found anatomy lessons upsetting and the medicine course at the University of Edinburgh rather dull, preferring instead to wander the Firth of Forth collecting molluscs and joining scientific societies.

The Music Quiz: How many times has Bruce Springsteen performed in Ireland?

---

London’s plague of tacky US candy shops leaves a sour taste

---

Joe Biden must find a way to convince Americans on the economy

---

Darragh Ó Sé: Connacht final win gives Pádraic Joyce the selling power that Kevin McStay is lacking

---

An unimpressed Robert Darwin packed his son off to Cambridge, where he studied to become a Church of England parson. Despite coming from a family well-known for its unorthodox religious beliefs, this was one of the few realistic and respectable careers available to a country gentleman with Darwin’s interests and offered plentiful free time for scientific inquiry.

Darwin’s own beliefs were not affected by his theory; he had long struggled with the concept of hell, and any lingering religious sentiment disappeared when his beloved daughter Anna died at 10

As he was preparing for his clerical training, Darwin’s mentor John Stevens Henslow proposed that he join HMS Beagle on its two-year surveying mission. The Beagle’s captain, Robert FitzRoy, was a well-read aristocrat who sought a social and intellectual equal for companionship on the long voyage.

When the Beagle finally returned to England in October 1836, it had been at sea for almost five years. Darwin’s account of the voyage was a surprise publishing success, and he was celebrated in scientific circles for his observations on marine biology and geology.

Ever the romantic, Darwin married his cousin Emma Wedgwood following deep discussions about his agnosticism and her Unitarianism and compiling a pros and cons list that included “constant companion”, “better than a dog” and “less money to spend on books”. Finding the pace of London life uncongenial, the Darwins moved to Kent, where Darwin suffered frequent bouts of chronic illness but began work on his theory of natural selection.

This took up much of the next two decades, with Darwin hesitating to publish for various reasons. First, the dominant scientific approach of the time stressed observations, and natural selection could not be directly observed, only inferred. Second, although he avoided mentioning humans, his theory clearly implied that they had evolved from ape ancestors.

[ A matter of faith for Charles Darwin ]

He was particularly reluctant to court religious controversy, believing it would upset Emma. Darwin’s own beliefs were not affected by his theory; he had long struggled with the concept of hell, and any lingering religious sentiment disappeared when his beloved daughter Anna died aged 10. But he did not subscribe to an austere materialism. When he realised that Alfred Russel Wallace had conceived a similar theory of evolution, Darwin rushed to publish his work.

It was published in November 1859 as On the Origin of Species, and its conclusion argued “there is grandeur in this view of life”. Later editions included a reference to “the Creator” in this passage, and elsewhere Darwin wrote that he could “see no good reason why the views given in this volume should shock the religious feelings of any one”.

Here he was being slightly disingenuous, given his reservations about controversy. And prominent scientists such as Thomas Henry Huxley and John Tyndall did seize on the theory of evolution to attack the institutional power of religion. In 1860, for instance, Huxley sparred with the bishop of Oxford, Samuel Wilberforce, over evolution, while Robert FitzRoy, in the audience, waved a Bible and expressed his regret at taking Darwin on the Beagle.

But Darwin also received support from prominent figures in the church, particularly the writer Rev Charles Kingsley, whose Water Babies defended evolutionary ideas. When Darwin died in 1882, he was buried in Westminster Abbey and his pallbearers ranged from Huxley and Wallace to the Duke of Argyll, a noted evangelical, and Canon Frederic Farrar.

If, like me, you admire Darwin and his contribution to human understanding, honour the complexity and the grandeur this Darwin Day.

Stuart Mathieson is a postdoctoral fellow in the school of history and geography at Dublin City University