Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ernst Haeckel’s contribution to Evo-Devo and scientific debate: a re-evaluation of Haeckel’s controversial illustrations in US textbooks in response to creationist accusations

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Theory in Biosciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As Blackwell (Am Biol Teach 69:135–136, 2007) pointed out, multiple authors have attempted to discredit Haeckel, stating that modern embryological studies have shown that Haeckel’s drawings are stylized or embellished. More importantly, though, it has been shown that the discussion within the scientific community concerning Haeckel’s drawings and the question of whether embryonic similarities are convergent or conserved have been extrapolated outside the science community in an attempt to discredit Darwin and evolutionary theory in general (Behe in Science 281:347–351, 1998; Blackwell in Am Biol Teach 69:135–136, 2007; Pickett et al. in Am Biol Teach 67:275, 2005; Wells in Am Biol Teach 61:345–349, 1999; Icons of evolution: science or myth? Why much of what we teach about evolution is wrong. Regnery Publishing, Washington, 2002). In this paper, we address the controversy surrounding Haeckel and his work in order to clarify the line between the shortcomings and the benefits of his research and illustrations. Specifically, we show that while his illustrations were not perfect anatomical representations, they were useful educational visualizations and did serve an important role in furthering studies in embryology.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Source: Google images, Page source: http://radaractive.blogspot.de/2013/07/darwinist-hall-of-shame-ernst-haeckel.html, Accessed 22 May 2017

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Throughout our paper, the term “embryo grids” refers to illustrations in which you have a horizontal comparison and vertical comparison of embryonic development from different species of animals. Typically, the horizontal level shows embryos from different species at similar stages of development, while the vertical columns depict the path by which those embryos develop towards a fully developed specimen of the given species.

  2. For information on Haeckel’s illustrations school books in the German Democratic Republic see “Ernst Haeckel’s embryology in biology textbooks in the German Democratic Republic, 1951–1988” in this same special issue (Hossfeld et al. 2019).

  3. Although it should be clearly stated that this proliferation came after George John Romanes’ (1848–1894) publication Darwin and After Darwin (1892) where he reproduced many of Haeckel’s drawings. So, while it could be said that these reproductions came via Romanes, the influential drawings, in particular the comparative grids, were originally drawn by Haeckel (Hopwood 2015, p. 214) and are referred to as Haeckel’s work throughout this paper.

  4. Calcareous sponges.

  5. See: https://evolutionisntscience.wordpress.com/evolution-frauds/ (Accessed September 18, 2017) Where the author describes the Haeckel drawings and makes such statements, “One of the most popular and familiar pieces of evidence used to bolster the theory of evolution—reproduced for decades in most high school and college biology textbooks—is fraudulent, and has been known to be fraudulent for nearly 100 years… Haeckel’s fraudulent drawings are just one of evolution’s pillars now under spectacular scientific assault.”

  6. (Wells 1999, 2002).

References

  • Beer Gd (1951) Embryos and ancestors. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Behe M (1998) Embryology and evolution [Letter to the editor]. Science 281:347–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackwell WH (2001) Don’t Heckle Haeckel so much. Am Biol Teach 63:550–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackwell WH (2007) What to make of all this commentary on Haeckel? Am Biol Teach 69:135–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blancke S, Hjermitslev HH, Kjærgaard PC (2014) Creationism in Europe John Hopkins UP. Baltimore, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Branch G (2016) The case of the vanishing embryos, vol 2017. NCSE, https://ncse.com/blog/2016/04/case-vanishing-embryos-0017004

  • Chiapetta E, Sethna G, Fillman D (1993) Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes? J Res Sci Teach 30:787–797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coyne J (2001) Creationism by stealth. Nature (Book review) 410:745–746

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • DiGregorio M (2005) From here to eternity. Ernst Haeckel and scientific faith. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelman L (2001) The BSCS story: a history of the biological science curriculum study. BSCS, Colorado Springs

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman B (2001a) Haeckel's forgeries. Am Biol Teach 63:20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman B (2001b) The Myth of “Biogenetic Law”. Am Biol Teach 63:84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garstang W (1922) The theory of recapitulation: a critical re-statement of the biogenetic law. J Linnean Soc Zool 35:81–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert SF (1991) Developmental biolgy, 3rd edn. Sinauer, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  • Gishlick AD (2006) Icon 4—Haeckel’s Embryos. National Center for Science Education, https://ncse.com/files/pub/creationism/icons/icons4.pdf

  • Gould SJ (1977) Ontogeny and phylogeny. Belknap, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (1980) The Panda’s Thumb. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (1985) The Flamingo’s Smile. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (1989) Wonderful Life. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (1992) Ever since Darwin: reflections in natural history. W. W. Norton & Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (2000) Abscheulich! (Atrocious!), Haeckel’s distortions did not help Darwin. Nat Hist 109:42–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (2002) The structure of evolutionary history. Belknap Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (2003) The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister’s Pox. Harmony Books, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grabiner JV, Miller PD (1974) Effects of the scopes trial. Science 185:832–837

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grant V (1991) The evolutionary process: a critical study of evolutionary theory, 2nd edn. Colombia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grell KG (1979) Die Gastraea-Theorie. Medizinhist J 14:275–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1866) Generelle Morphologie der Organismen, 2 vols.—i. Allgemeine Anatomie der Organismen; ii: Allgemeine Entwickelungsgeschichte der Organismen. Georg Reimer Verlag, Berlin

  • Haeckel E (1872) Monographie der Kalkschwämme, 3 vols. Georg Reimer Verlag, Berliln

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1874) Anthropogenie oder Entwickelungsgeschichte des Menschen. Gemeinverständliche wissenschaftliche Vorträge über die Grundzüge der menschlichen Keimes- und Stammesgeschichte. Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1875) Die Gastrula und die Eifurchung der Thiere. Jenaische Zeitschrift für Naturwissenschaft 9:402–508

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1894) Systematische Phylogenie. Entwurf eines natürlichen Systems der Organismen auf Grund ihrer Stammesgeschichte. Erster Theil, Systematsiche Phylogenie der Protisten und Pflanzen. Georg Reimer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1896a) The evolution of man, a popular exposition of the principal points of human ontogeny and phylogeny. Appleton and Co., New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1896b) Systematische Phylogenie. Zweiter Theil, Systematische Phylogenie der wirbelosen Thiere (Invertebrata). Georg Reimer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1910) Sandalion. Eine offene Antwort auf die Fälschungsanklagen der Jesuiten. Neuer Frankfurter Verlag, Frankfurt

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1911) The Answer of Ernst Haeckel to the falsehoods of the jesuits, catholic and protestant, from the German pamphlet “Sandalion” and “My Church Departure”. The Truth Seeker Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes N (1997) An Embryonic Liar. London

  • Hopwood N (2006) Pictures of evolution and charges of fraud: Ernst Haeckel’s embryological illustrations. Isis 97:260–301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood N (2015) Haeckel’s embryos: images, evolution, and fraud. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hossfeld U (1999) Haeckelrezeption im Spannungsfeld von Monismus, Sozialdarwinismus und Nationalsozialismus. Hist Philos Life Sci 21:195–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Hossfeld U (2010) absolute—Ernst Haeckel. Orange Press, Freiburg

  • Hossfeld U (2013) Protestantismus und Monismus - Das Beispiel Ernst Haeckel. In: Spurenlese. Kulturelle Wirkungen der Reformation. Hg. von der Reformgeschichtlichen Sozietät der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg. Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, Leipzig, pp 219–241

  • Hossfeld U (2016a) 150 Jahre Haeckel’sche Biologie. Blätter zur Landeskunde Thüringens, Landeszentrale für politische Bildung Erfurt 114

  • Hossfeld U (2016b) Geschichte der biologischen Anthropologie in Deutschland. Von den Anfängen bis in die Nachkriegszeit. 2. Auflage Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart

  • Hossfeld U, Levit GS (2016) ‘Tree of life’ took root 150 years ago. Nature 540:38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hossfeld U, Olsson L (2003a) The history of comparative anatomy in Jena: an overview. Theory Biosci 122:109–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Hossfeld U, Olsson L (2003b) The road from Haeckel. The Jena tradition in evolutionary morphology and the origin of „Evo-Devo“. Biol Philos 18:285–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossfeld U, Olsson L (2008) Entwicklung und Evolution ein zeitloses Thema Praxis der Naturwissenschaften/Biologie in der Schule—Themenheft „Evolution und Entwicklungsbiologie“ 57:4–8

  • Hossfeld U, Olsson L, Levit GS (2011) Evolutionäre Entwicklungsbiologie (Evo-Devo). In: Dreesmann D, Graf D, Witte K [Hrsg.]: Evolutionsbiologie—Moderne Themen für den Unterricht. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 151–179

  • Hossfeld U, Levit GS, Olsson L (2016) Haeckel reloaded: 150 Jahre „Biogenetisches Grundgesetz”. Biol unserer Zeit 46:190–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossfeld U, Watts E, Levit GS (2017) The first Darwinian phylogenetic tree of plants. Trends Plant Sci 22:99–102

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hossfeld U, Porges K, Levit GS, Watts E (2019) Ernst Haeckel’s embryology in biology textbooks in the German Democratic Republic, 1951–1988 Theory in Biosciences (this issue)

  • Johnson AW, Yost FH (1948) Separation of Church and State in the United States. Minnesota Archive Editions edition. University of Minnesota Press

  • Junker T, Hossfeld U (2009) Die Entdeckung der Evolution. Eine revolutionäre Theorie und ihre Geschichte. 2nd ed. WBG, Darmstadt

  • Junker R, Scherer S (2013) Evolution—Ein kritischer Lehrbuch. Weyel, Gießen

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutschera U (2016a) Ernst Haeckel’s biodynamics 1866 and the occult basis of organic farming. Plant Signal Behav 11(7):e1199315

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kutschera U (2016b) Haeckel’s 1866 tree of life and the origin of eukaryotes. Nat Microbiol 1/8

  • Kutschera U (2017) Maria Sibylla Merian and metamorphosis. Nat Ecol Evol

  • Ladouceur RP (2008) Ella Thea Smith and the lost history of American high school textbooks. J Hist Biol 4:435–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson EJ (2003) Trial and error: the American controversy over creation and evolution, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Laubichler MD, Maienschein J (eds) (2007) From embryology to Evo-Devo: a history of developmental evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Levit GS, Hossfeld U, Olsson L (2004) The Integration of Darwinism and evolutionary morphology: Alexej Nikolajevich Sewertzoff (1866–1936) and the developmental basis of evolutionary change. J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol 302B:343–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levit GS, Hossfeld U, Olsson L (2006) From the “Modern Synthesis” to cybernetics: Ivan Ivanovich Schmalhausen (1884–1963) and his research program for a synthesis of evolutionary and developmental biology. J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol 306B:89–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levit GS, Hossfeld U, Olsson L (2015) Alexei Sewertzoff and Adolf Naef: revising Haeckel’s biogenetic law. Hist Philos Life Sci 36:357–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein J, Wellner K (2011) Competing views of embryos for the twenty-first century: textbooks and society. Sci Educ 10:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Matzke NJ (2010) The evolution of creationist movements. Evolution 3:145–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1994) Recapitulation reinterpreted, the somatic program. Q Rev Biol 69:223–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller KR (2010) Evolution—by the (Text) book. Evo Edu Outreach 3:225–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minkoff EC (1983) Evolutionary biology. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Niklas KJ, Cobb ED, Kutschera U (2016) Haeckel’s biogenetic law and the land plant phylotypic stage. Bioscience 66:510–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson L, Hossfeld U (2007) Die Entwicklung: Die Zeit des Lebens. Ausgewählte Themen zur Geschichte der Entwicklungsbiologie. In: Höxtermann E, Hilger H [Hrsg.]: Lebenswissen. Eine Einführung in die Geschichte der Biologie. Natur & Text, Rangsdorf, pp 218–243

  • Olsson L, Hossfeld U, Breidbach O (2006) Preface. From evolutionary morphology to the modern synthesis and “Evo-Devo”: historical and contemporary perspectives. Theory Biosci 124:259–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson L, Hossfeld U, Breidbach O (2009) Preface Between ernst haeckel and the homeobox: the role of developmental biology in explaining evolution. Olsson, L. et al. [eds.]: Evo-Devo international. Theory Biosci 128:1–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson L, Levit GS, Hossfeld U (2010) Evolutionary developmental biology: its concepts and history with a focus on russian and german contributions. Naturwissenschaften 97:951–969

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson L, Levit GS, Hossfeld U (2017) The ‘‘Biogenetic Law’’ in zoology: from Ernst Haeckel’s formulation to current approaches. Theory Biosci 136:19–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Padian K, Gishlick AD (2002) The Talented Mr. Wells. Q Rev Biol 77:33–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennisi E (1997) Haeckel’s embryos: fraud rediscovered. Science 277:1435

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips LM, Norris SP, Macnab JS (2010) Visualizations and science1. In: Visualization in mathematics, reading and science education. Models and modeling in science education, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht

  • Pickett KM, Wenzel JW, Rissing SW (2005) Iconoclasts of evolution: Haeckel, Behe, Wells & the Ontogeny of a Fraud. Am Biol Teach 67:275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provine W (1998) Embryology. In: Mayr F, Provine W (eds) The evolutionary synthesis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 96–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiß C, Hossfeld U, Olsson L, Levit GS, Lemuth O (2009) Das autobiographische Manuskript des Entwicklungsbiologen Julius Schaxel (1887–1943) vom 24. Juli 1938—Versuch einer Kontextualisierung. Ann Hist Philos Biol 13:3–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiß C, Olsson L, Hossfeld U (2015) The history of the oldest self-sustaining laboratory animal: 150 Years of Axolotl research. J Exp Zool B Mole Dev Evol 324B:393–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards RJ (2008a) Haeckel’s embryos: fraud not proven. Biol Philos 24:147–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards RJ (2008b) The tragic sense of Life: Ernst Haeckel and the struggle over evolutionary thought. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson MK, Keuck G (2003) Haeckel’s ABC of evolution and development. Biol Rev 77:495–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson MK, Hanken J, Gooneratne ML, Pieau C, Raynaud A, Selwood L, Wright GM (1997) There is no highly conserved embryonic stage in the vertebrates: implications for current theories of evolution and development. Anat Embryol 196:91–106

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schafersman S (2009) Texas science standards and march madness: Did we win or lose? RNCSE 29:4–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Sedgwick A (1894) On the law of development commonly knownas von Baer’s law; and on the significance of ancestral rudiments in embryonic development. Q J Microsc Sci 36:35–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Shermer M (2006) Why Darwin matters: the case against intelligent design. Times Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith KK (2001) Heterochrony revisited: the evolution of developmental sequences. Biol J Lin Soc 73:169–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uschmann G (1985) Das Werk Ernst Haeckels, Voraussetzungen und Bedingtheiten. In: Wilhelmi B (ed) Leben und Evolution. Friedrich-Schiller Universität, Jena, pp 32–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Vavra KL, Janjic-Watrich V, Loerke K, Phillips LM, Norris SP, Macnab J (2011) Visualization in science education. ASEJ 41:22–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallis C (2005) The evolution wars. Time Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts E (2018) Analysis of Creationism in the United States from Scopes (1925) to Kitzmiller (2005) and its Effect on the Nation’s Science Education System, vol 19, issue 2014. Annals of the History and Philosophy of Biology. Universitätsverlag Göttingen

  • Watts E, Hossfeld U, Tolstikova II, Levit GS (2016a) Beyond borders: On the influence of creationist movement on the educational landscape in the USA and Russia. Theory Biosci 136:31–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watts E, Levit GS, Hossfeld U (2016b) Science standards: the foundation of evolution education in the United States. Perspect Sci 10:59–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber H, Hossfeld U (2006) Stichwort „Monismus“. Naturwissenschaftliche Rundschau 59:521–522

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellner KL (2014) Lessons from Embryos: Haeckel’s embryo drawings, evolution, and secondary biology textbooks. Arizona State University

  • Wells J (1999) Haeckel’s Embryos and evolution: setting the record straight. Am Biol Teach 61:345–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells J (2002) Icons of evolution: science or myth? Why much of what we teach about evolution is wrong. Regnery Publishing, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RE (2003) The importance of terminology in teaching K-12 science. J Res Sci Teach 20:577–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. This article is a contribution to the Special Issue Ernst Haeckel (1834–1919): The German Darwin and his impact on modern biology—Guest Editors: U. Hossfeld, G. S. Levit, U. Kutschera.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biology Education Research Group, Institute for Zoology and Evolutionary Research, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany

    Elizabeth Watts & Uwe Hossfeld

  2. Institute for Biology, Universität Kassel, Heinrich-Plett-Str. 40, 34109, Kassel, Germany

    Georgy S. Levit

Authors
  1. Elizabeth Watts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Georgy S. Levit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Uwe Hossfeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth Watts.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Watts, E., Levit, G.S. & Hossfeld, U. Ernst Haeckel’s contribution to Evo-Devo and scientific debate: a re-evaluation of Haeckel’s controversial illustrations in US textbooks in response to creationist accusations. Theory Biosci. 138, 9–29 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12064-019-00277-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12064-019-00277-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation