Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pragmatism, Patronage and Politics in English Biology: The Rise and Fall of Economic Biology 1904–1920

  • Published:
Journal of the History of Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The rise of applied biology was one of the most striking features of the biological sciences in the early 20th century. Strongly oriented toward agriculture, this was closely associated with the growth of a number of disciplines, notably, entomology and mycology. This period also saw a marked expansion of the English University system, and biology departments in the newly inaugurated civic universities took an early and leading role in the development of applied biology through their support of Economic Biology. This sought explicitly to promote the application of biological knowledge to economically important problems and especially to agriculture. The impact of Economic Biology was felt most strongly within Zoology, where it became synonymous with entomology. The transience of Economic Biology belies its significance, for example, in providing a means for the expansion of biology at the civic universities. More broadly, it opened up new research and employment opportunities within the life sciences. In late Edwardian Britain, newly available state funds for agriculturally relevant biological disciplines transformed the life sciences. This paper examines the impact of these funds – mobilized either under the 1909 Development Act, or under the auspices of colonial interests – on Economic Biology and the institutionalization of applied biology. The rise and fall of Economic Biology casts new light on the way in which institutional and political alignments profoundly shaped the development of British biology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, Garland. 1978. Life Science in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press.

  • Armytage, Walter Harry Green. 1955. Civic universities: Aspects of a British Tradition. London: Ernest Benn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, Sarah V. 1996. “England's Civic Universities and the Triumph of the Oxbridge Ideal.” History of Education Quarterly 36: 271–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, G. D. H. 1980. “The Journal of Agricultural Science, 1905-1980: A Historical Record.”Journal of Agricultural Science94: 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boney, A. D. 1991. “The Tansley Manifesto Affair.” The New Phytologist 118: 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brierley, W. B. 1934. “Some Viewpoints of an Applied Biologist.” Annals of Applied Biology 21: 351–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brierley, W. B. 1939. “The Association of Applied Biologists and the Annals of Applied Biology-A Retrospect.” Annals of Applied Biology 16: 178–195.

  • Bud, Robert F. and Roberts, Gerrylynn K. 1984.Science Versus Practice: Chemistry in Victorian Britain. Manchester University Press.

  • Butler, Stella V. F. 1986. “A Transformation in Training: The Formation of University Medical Faculties in Manchester, Leeds and Liverpool, 1870-1884.” Medical History 30: 115–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caron, Joseph A. 1988. “'Biology' in the Life Sciences: A Historiographical Contribution.” History of Science 26: 223–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, George H. 1910. “Biology-Pure and Applied.” Journal of Economic Biology 5: 174–181.

  • Charlton, Henry Buckley. 1951. Portrait of a University. Manchester University Press.

  • Collinge, Walter E. 1907a. “The Application of Economic Biology to Agriculture.” Journal of Economic Biology3: 96–106. Address given at the University of Bristol, 1907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinge, Walter E. 1907b. The Mermaid. The University of Birmingham, pp. 41–42.

  • Dale, Henry E. 1956. A.D. Hall: Pioneer of Scientific Agriculture. London: John Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, Adrian. 1998. Huxley: From Devil's Disciple to Evolution's High Priest. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drayton, Richard. 2000. Nature's Government: Science, Imperial Britain and the Improvement of the World. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ede, R. 1938. “The School of Agriculture, Cambridge.” Agricultural Progress 15: 137–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiddes, Edward. 1937. Chapters in the History of Owens College and Manchester University 1851-1914. Manchester University Press.

  • Freeman, William George. 1904. “Current Investigations in Economic Botany.” The New Phytologist 3: 75–79.

  • Fryer, J. C. F. and Pethybridge, G.H. 1924. “The Phytopathological Service of England and Wales.” Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture 31: 331–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamble, F. W. 1914. “Impending Developments in Agricultural Zoology.” Annals of Applied Biology 1: 5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geison, Gerald L. 1978. Michael Foster and the Cambridge School of Physiology: The Scientific Enterprise in Late Victorian Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooday, Graeme. 1991. “Nature in the Laboratory: Domestication and Discipline with the Microscope in Victorian Life Science.” British Journal for the History of Science24: 307–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Alfred D. 1921. “The Present Position of Research in Agriculture.” Journal of the Royal Society of Arts 69: 300–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, A.R. 1983. Science for Industry. A Short History of the Imperial College of Science and Technology. London: Imperial College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey-Gibson, R.J. 1919. Outlines of the History of Botany. London: Black.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harwood, Jonathan. 1997. “The Transformation of Biology as a Political Process.” Unpublished paper presented at the International Society for History, Philosophy and Social Studies of Biology, Seattle, U.S.A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickson, Sydney John.1903.Address to Section D (Zoology), BAAS, Southport, 1903.

  • Hickson, Sydney John 1910. “On the Place of Economic Zoology in a Modern University.” Journal of Economic Biology 5: 79–87. (Read before the AEB, Manchester, 7.7.1910.)

  • Holmes, C.J. 1988. “Science and the Farmer: The Development of the Agricultural Advisory Service in England and Wales, 1900-1939.” Agricultural History Review 36: 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horder, Thomas J., Witkowski, J.A. and Wylie, C.C. (eds.) 1986. A History of Embryology. Cambridge University Press. Eighth Symposium of the British Society for Developmental Biology.

  • Howard, L.O. 1931. The History of Applied Entomology. Washington: Smithsonian (Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 84).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, F.H. 1964. “Agricultural and Horticultural Entomology in the United Kingdom.” Annals of Applied Biology 53: 215–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, F.H. 1977. “Reflections of an Applied Biologist.” Annals of Applied Biology 87: 295–306.

  • Jones, David R. 1988. The Origins of the Civic Universities: Manchester, Leeds and Liverpool.London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, June. 1989. “Science, Utility and the “Second City of Empire”: The Sciences and Especially the Medical Sciences at Liverpool University 1881-1925.” Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST).

  • Kargon, R. 1977. Science in Victorian Manchester: Expertise and Enterprise. Manchester University Press.

  • Kohler, Robert E. 1982. From Medical Chemistry to Biochemistry: The Making of a Biomedical Discipline. Cambridge University Press.

  • Kohler, Robert E. 1994. Lords of the Fly: Drosophila Genetics and the Experimental Life. Chicago University Press.

  • Kraft, Alison. 2000. “Building Manchester Biology 1851-1963: National Agendas/ Provincial Strategies.” Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Manchester.

  • Kraft, Alison. and Alberti, Samuel J.M.M. 2003. “'Equal Though Different.' Museums, Laboratories and the Institutional Development of Biology in Late-Victorian Northern England.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences 34: 203–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefroy, H. Maxwell. 1911. “The Training of an Economic Entomologist.” Journal of Economic Biology 6: 50–58. (Read before the AEB, Birmingham, 6.4.1911.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefroy, H. Maxwell c. 1914. “The Future of the Association.” Undated manuscript, AAB Archives, The Institute of Biology, Horticultural Research International, Wellesbourne, Warwick, U.K.

  • Lefroy, H. Maxwell1914-1915. Editorial, Annals of Applied Biology 1: 2–4.

  • Lester, Joseph. 1995. E. Ray Lankester and the Making of Modern British Biology. Great Britain: British Society for the History of Science Monograph Series, No. 9.

  • Macleod, Roy, and Moseley, R. 1979. “Reflections on Women, Science and Victorian Cambridge.” History of Education 8: 321–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDiarmid Clark, John F. 1992. “Eleanor Ormerod (1828-1901) as an Economic Entomologist: 'Pioneer of Purity even more than of Paris Green.”' British Journal of the History of Science 25: 431–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. (ed.). 1986. Defining Biology: Lectures from the 1890s.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane 1991. Transforming Traditions in American Biology 1880-1915. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

  • Maienschein, Jane., Rainger, Ronald and Benson, Keith R. 1981. “Were American Morphologists in Revolt?” Journal of the History of Biology 14: 83–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R.W. 1953. “The Past and the Future of the Annals of Applied Biology.” The Annals of Applied Biology 40: 435–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miall, Louis Compton.1897.Address to Section D (Zoology), BAAS Transactions, p.670.

  • Miall, Louis Compton 1902. Injurious and Useful Insects: An Introduction to the Study of Economic Entomology. London: Bell.

  • Moore, W.C. 1942. “The Organization of Plant Pathology in England and Wales-Retrospect and Prospect.” Transactions of the British Mycological Society 25: 229–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrell, Jack. and Thackray, Arnold. 1981. Gentlemen of Science: The Early Years of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Oxford University Press.

  • Nyhart, Lynn K. 1995. Biology Takes Form: Animal Morphology and the German Universities, 1800-1900. Chicago University Press.

  • Nyhart, Lynn K. 1996. “Natural History and the New Biology.” In Nick Jardine, Anne Secord and Emma Spary. (eds.), Cultures of Natural History. Cambridge University Press, (pp. 426–443).

  • Olby, Robert. 1989. “Scientists and Bureaucrats in the Establishment of the John Innes Horticultural Institute under William Bateson.” Annals of Science 46: 497–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olby, Robert 1991. “Social Imperialism and State Support for Agricultural Research in Edwardian Britain.” Annals of Science 48: 509–526.

  • Palladino, Paulo. 1990. “The Political Economy of Applied Research: Plant Breeding in Great Britain 1910-1940.” Minerva 28: 446–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palladino, Paulo 1993. “Between Craft and Science: Plant Breeding, Mendelian Genetics and British Universities, 1900-1920.” Technology and Culture 34: 300–323.

  • Palladino, Paulo 1996. Entomology, Ecology and Agriculture. The Making of Scientific Careers in North America 1885-1985. Harwood Academic Publishers.

  • Pauly, Phillip J. 1984. “The Appearance of Academic Biology in Late Nineteenth Century America.” Journal of the History of Biology 17: 369–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D.M.S. 1964. The Organization of Entomology in Britain. XIIth International Congress of Entomology and The Royal Entomological Society, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainger, Ronald., Benson, Keith R. and Maienschein, Jane. (eds.). 1988. The American Development of Biology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, Stewart. 1982. “Agricultural Science in British Higher Education 1790-1914.” Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Kent at Canterbury.

  • Richards, Stewart 1983. “Masters of Arts and Bachelors of Barley: The Struggle for Agricultural Education in Mid-Nineteenth Century Britain.” History of Education 12: 161–175.

  • Richards, Stewart 1988. “The South Eastern Agricultural College and Public Support for Technical Education 1894-1914.” Agricultural History Review 36: 172–187.

  • Rossiter, Margaret. 1979. “The Organization of the Agricultural Sciences.” In Alexandra Oleson and John Voss. (eds.), The Organization of Knowledge in Modern America, 1860-1920. Baltimore, MD and London: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, Edward John. 1942a. “British Agricultural Research: Rothamsted.” (The British Council, Science in Britain Series). London: Longmans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, Edward John 1942b. “Rothamsted and its Experimental Station.” Agricultural History 2: 161–183.

  • Russell, Edward John 1955. “The Changing Problems of Applied Biology.” Annals of Applied Biology42: 8–21.

  • Sanderson, Michael. 1972. The Universities and British Industry 1850-1970. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomason, Bernard. 1987. “The New Botany in Britain circa 1870 to circa 1914.” Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Manchester.

  • Turner, Frank M. 1980. “Public Science in Britain 1880-1914.” Isis 71: 589–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tylecote, Mabel, P. 1941. The Education of Women at Manchester University, 1883-1933. Manchester University Press.

  • Vernon, Keith.1997.“Science for the Farmer? Agricultural Research in England 1909-1936.”Twentieth Century British History8: 310–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernon, Keith 1998. “Civic Colleges and the Idea of the University.” M. Hewitt (ed.), Scholarship in Victorian Britain. Leeds: Trinity and All Saints.

  • Vernon, Keith 2001. “Calling the Tune: British Universities and the State, 1880-1914.” History of Education 30: 251–271.

  • Walters, Stuart Max. 1981. The Shaping of Cambridge Botany. Cambridge University Press.

  • Waters, C. Kenneth and van Helden, Albert. (eds.). 1992. Julian Huxley: Biologist and Statesman of Science. Houston: Rice University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherall, Mark. 2000. Gentlemen, Scientists, and Doctors: Medicine at Cambridge, 1800-1940. Woodbridge: Boydell Press in association with Cambridge University Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, Frederick Ernest 1892. “tThe Applications of Modern Botany.” Inaugural address. Manchester: Cornish Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, T. B. 1922. “The School of Agriculture of the University of Cambridge.” Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture 29: 223–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worboys, Michael. 1979. “Science and British Colonial Imperialism 1895-1940.” Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Sussex.

  • Worboys, Michael. 1981. “The British Association and Empire: Science and Social Imperialism 1880-1940.” In Roy Malcolm Macleod and Peter Collins (eds.), The Parliament of Science. The British Association for the Advancement of Science 1831-1981. Northwood: Science Reviews

    Google Scholar 

  • 1990.“The Imperial Institute:The State and the Development of the Natural Resources of the Colonial Empire,1887-1923.” In J.M.Mackenzie (ed.)Imperialism and the Natural World. Manchester University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for the Study of Genetics, Biorisks and Society (IGBiS), Law and Social Sciences Building, The University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK

    Alison Kraft

Authors
  1. Alison Kraft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kraft, A. Pragmatism, Patronage and Politics in English Biology: The Rise and Fall of Economic Biology 1904–1920. Journal of the History of Biology 37, 213–258 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HIST.0000038268.39357.28

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HIST.0000038268.39357.28

Search

Navigation