The Mendelian Revolution. The Emergence of Hereditarian Concepts in Modern Science and Society

Both historians and scientists campaign under the banner of objectivity in the academic search for truths. Their paths seldom cross-historians look back, scientists look in-but, in recent years, historians of science have begun to make quite a stir, questioning whether the scientific claim to objectivity has a basis in historical reality. Peter J. Bowler operates from such a premise in this short but exceedingly thorough book. He presents the recent work of science historians who have investigated the discoveries of Gregor Mendel and the subsequent rise of classical genetics. Bowler's claim, well supported by his thorough documentation, is that the historical record does not support the popular myth that Mendel's fundamental laws of genetics remained unrecognized for three decades simply because nineteenth-century scientists were unwilling to accept the ramifications of developmental theories. Rather, Bowler notes, Mendel's discoveries lay dormant because they did not respond to the then-pressing question of whether new species could arise from existing ones. The canonization of Mendel's findings as laws resulted instead from turn-of-the-century cytologists and developmentalists, who seized upon Mendel's work as additional evidence for their own theories of "hard" heredity. Bowler is an excellent synthesizer of information and obviously has read all the relevant work of historians in this field. His explanations of the theories of heredity operating before and after Mendel are clear and concise, as he takes the reader chronologically through preformation, blending inheritance, and the "hard" hereditarian theories of Galton and Weissman. The interested reader will find the morass of nineteenth-century developmental theories simplified and made accessible. Selfadmittedly, however, little of Bowler's efforts come across as startlingly original; he claims only to be summarizing for the intelligent layman. His occasional insights, such as the fact that "new laws or theories are not simply 'discovered,' . . . they are invented to satisfy the cultural values of scientists and of the public with whom they must interact," may sell short laymen of even average intelligence. One must also question whether the author recognizes his audience. Only readers with a specific interest in Mendel's effect on genetics will find it worthwhile to read so thorough a book. For these readers, however, especially non-scientists with an interest in understanding how scientific myths develop, Bowler provides a great service by making accessible this recent reinterpretation of the history of classical genetics.