Charles Kingsley and Science

Author(s): Mary Wheat Hanawalt

Source: Studies in Philology, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Oct., 1937), pp. 589-611
Published by: University of North Carolina Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4172388
Accessed: 26/01/2009 22:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uncpress.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of North Carolina Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Studies in Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

CHARLES KINGSLEY AND SCIENCE

By

MARY WHEAT HANAWALT

Opinions vary concerning Charles Kingsley's place in his century and in literature.' He is usually dismissed by writers with
the statement that he was an exponent of Christian socialism and
sanitary reform. The part which his scientific study had in the
development of his philosophy is ignored. The use of science in
his novels is summarily dismissed by one critic with the verdict
that we spend too much time with atoms and minutiae under a
microscope, instead of the fortunes of human beings.2 In Two
Years Ago, the novel referred to in this criticism, the scientific
background plays an integral part in the development of the individuals, as will be pointed out more fully later. In Kingsley's
opinion, science could not be separated from human conduct and
progress. In a lecture, "The Ancien Re'gime," he maintained
that it was inductive physical science which " helped more than all
to break up the superstitions of the Ancien Regime, and to set
man face to face with the facts of the universe." 3 Leslie Stephen
was somewhat unfair in analyzing Kiingsley as being the type of
person who insists " on seeing the facts through the medium of
the imagination, and substituting poetic intuition for the slow
1 Some examples follow: "Mr. Kingsley is one of those men whom we
could with most decision fix upon as representative of his age." Peter
Bayne, Essays in Biography and Criticism (Boston, 1858), p. 2. "He was
too timid or too impatient to work out consistent theories or acquire mnuch
depth of conviction." Leslie Stephen, Hours in a Library (London, 1919),
III, 58. "Charles Kingsley has such a place, not by reasoni of any
supreme work or any very rare quality of his own, but by virtue of his
versatility, his verve, his fecundity, his irresistible gift of breaking out
in some new line, his strong and reckless sympathy, and above all by real
literary brilliance." Frederic Harrison, Early Victorian Literature (London, 1902), p. 164. ":His name really stands so high and has had so wide
an influence that in that tangled mass of conflicting interests and aims
which we have learnt to call the nineteenth century, Kingsley (and all
that Kingsley stands for) explains far more than the work of greater men."
William F. Lord, The Mirror of the Century (London, 1905), p. 190.
Charles Kingsley (Cornell University Press, 1934),
2 Stanley Baldwin,
p. 123.
8 Historical Lectures and Essays (London, 1893), p. 149.

589

590

Charles Kingsley and Science

and chilling processes of scientific reasoning." 4 The lecture just

referred to, for instance, while not an example of " slow and chilling " scientific reasoning, is no less an example of clearly defined
logical thinking.
The nature of Kingsley's philosophy and art, then, has been
misunderstood because his interest in science has been ignored. If
possible, this study will correct this misunderstanding, first. by
showing Kingsley's lifelong interest in science; secondly, by considering the relation of this study and research to his theory of
art as revealed in his novels and poetry; thirdly, by presenting in
a discussion of his belief in science and his religion further evidence of his realization of the importance of science in man's existence; and fourthly, by showing the influence of science upon such
a philosophy as he held.

Kingsley's early concentration on scientific study has been observed bv his biographers.5 Naturally, this liking for scientific
observation was reflected in his school career.6 His research and
collections were continued throughout his life. Study at Torquay
in 1845 yielded him a list of about sixty species of molluska, annelids, crustacea, and polypes.7 I)uring the year in which he was
considering the writing of The Autobiography of a Cockney Poet,8
be spent a majority of the time collecting shells and zoophytes.
This interest in science was not abandoned when he left college
and entered upon what was to be a long career of service in
Eversley parish. He sought for, and obtained, acquaintance with
4 Op. cit., III, 8. Stephen describes Coleridge, Maurice, and Carlyle in
this manner, and includes Kingsley in the group.
6 Moritz Kaufmann,
Charles Kingsley, Christian Socialist and Social
Reformer (London, 1892), p. 10; Letters and Memories of His Life, edited
by Mrs. Charles Kingsley (London, 1894) (hereafter referred to as Letters),
I, 9; Henry Evershed, " Canon Kingsley as a Naturalist and Country
Clergyman," Living Age, CLXXII (January, 1887), p. 98; James C. Bowman, editor, Essays, " My Winter Garden," by Charles Kingsley (New
York, 1918), p. 144.
6 Richard Cowley Powles, a schoolmate at Helston, stated that " Charles'
chief taste was for physical science." Letters, I, 15; see also pages 14 and
25.
71bid.,
8

I, 316.

This developed into Altor, Locke.

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

591

men of science, who were impressed by his zeal and his sincerity.9
Of this association, there are many records.10 George Eliot at one
time wrote to a friend to inform her of a group of " scientific and
philosophic men " who were organizing " for the sake of bringing
people who care to know and speak the truth as well as they can,
into regular communication.""11 Thomas Huxley was the president of the group, and Charles Kingsley, the vice-president. In
1854, Kingsley spent his time collecting data on the sea-anlimals
of Torbay to be sent to the naturalist, Philip Henry Gosse.'2 That
his observations were accurate and important is shown by the fact
that his work is cited by Charles Darwin in The Descent of Man.13
Darwin and Huxley both respected the intellectual ability of the
novelist, and corresponded with him, often sending him copies of
their books. On November 18, 1859, Kingsley wrote to thank
Later, in 1863, he
Darwin for a copy of The Origin of Species.'4
9 With all who came to Eversley, he discussed science as extensively as
theology and art. Letters, II, 46. He once stated that his favorite kind of
literature was that of physical science. Ibid., II, 298..
10 He mentioned repeatedly such works as the following: Darwin's The
Origin of Species, The Descent of Man and Orchids are Fertilized, Asa
Gray's pamphlet on Darwin, Hugh Miller's Footprints of the Creator,
White's History of Selborne (an earlier book), and Chambers' Vestiges
of Creation. In this connection, note the following: Letters, I, 315; II,
154-55, 254, 256; Glaucus (London, 1890), p. 8, p. 13; Health and Education (N. Y., 1893), p. 173-74; "Natural Theology of the Future," Macmillan's, XXIII, 369; Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, edited by Francis
Darwin (N. Y., 1890), II, 81-2. References to his acquaintance with
scientists include: Letters, I, 299, 315; II, 154-57, 277; Darwin, op. cit.,
II, 81-2; Thomas Huxley, Life and Letters, edited by Leonard Huxley
(N. Y., 1901), I, 233, 238, 266-67, 297-98, 323-24. References to his
correspondence with these men: Letters, I, 315; II, 114-15, 126, 154-55,
198, 226, 254, 258, 266; Huxley, op. cit., I, 257-61; James Marchant,
Alfred Russel Wallace: Letters and Reminiscences (N. Y., 1916), p. 287.
"'-Kaufmann, op. cit., pp. 242-43.
12
Letters, I, 299, 313. These data may have been used in Gosse's Manual
of Marine Zoology for the British -Isles.
13
The Descent of Man (N. Y., 1898, first published in 1871), p. 354.
An article by Kingsley in Nature (May, 1870), p. 40, is used by Darwin
as a basis for a passage on the noises made by fishes.
14 Darwin,
Life, II, 81-2. " I have to thank you for the unexpected
honour of your book. That the Naturalist whom, of all naturalists living,
I most wish to know and to learn from, should have sent a scientist like
me his book, encourages me at least to observe more carefully and think
more slowly."

592

Charles Kingsley and Science

studied Darwin's Orchids are Fertilized, and informed the author

that he had made nature "a live thing" for him.15 Huxley exchanged books with Kingsley, sending him in 1863 a copy of his
lectures and, later, of his book, Man's Place in lVature, and expressing his sympathy with Kingsley's concern to save the old
faith."' When Huxley's son died in 1863, there followed a long
correspondence between Huxley and Kingsley on the subject of
immortality.17 In 1866, the scientist expressed his intention of
bearing Kingsley preach at the Royal Institution.'8 The two men
agreed in their disapproval of Comte's doctrines.19 Huxley is one
of the few who believed Kingsley right in the controversy with
Newman, and he described Newman as "the slipperiest sophist I
have ever met with."20 Kingsley also corresponded with John
Stuart MVill,discussing with him the rights of women, and Huxley's
philosophv.21 Among the other scientists with whom Kingsley
Corresponded, A. R. Wallace is perhaps the most important.
Kingsley read his Essay on Natural Selection, and praised it
highly.22

Further evidence that his interest in science was more than that
of a dilettante is furnished by the record of his participation in
the activities of scientific societies. He was elected president of
Letters, II, 155.
1"Huxley, op. cit., I, 257-60. Huxley writes: " I have a great respect for
all the old bottles, and if the new wine can be got to go into them and
not burst them I shall be very glad. . . ." Again, he writes: "It is a
great pleasure to me to be able to speak out to any one who, like yourself,
is striving to get at truth through a region of intellectual and moral
influences so entirely distinct from those to which I am exposed."
17Ibid., I, 233 ff. Huxley here speaks " openly and distinctly " of his
" I write this the more readily to you,
own disbelief in immortality.
because it is clear to me that if that great and powerful instrument for
good or evil, the Church of England, is to be saved from being shivered
into fragments by the advancing tide of science . . . it must be by the
efforts of men, who, like yourself, see your way to the combination of the
practice of the Church with the spirit of sciene. . . . I have always said
I would swear by your truthfulness and sincerity, and that good must
come of your efforts. The more plain this was to me, however, the more
obvious the necessity to let you see where the men of science are driving,
and it has often been in my mind to write to you before."
18 Ibid., I, 297-98.
21 Letters,
II, 226.
22 Ibid., p. 254.
18 Ibid., I, 323-24.
20 Ibid., II, 240.

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

593

the Devonshire Literary and Scientific Association at Bideford, in

1871. The following year he was made president of the Natural
Science Society at Chester, an organization which he had been
instrumental in founding. Honors in science came to him early.
In 1857 he was made a Fellow of the Linnean Society; and six
years later, became a Fellow of the Geological Society, his membership having been proposed by Sir Charles Bunbury and seconded
by Sir Charles Lyell.23 In addition to lending his influence on
behalf of scientific societies, Kingsley did science no small service
in his many lectures.24
II
Kingsley's interest in science and activity in its behalf are
definitely reflected in his novels-are even, in some cases, almost
their raison d'etre. He believed that art must be purposeful. Content concerned him more than form. For this reason, he condemned " high art " in Germany:
I mean to run amuck against all this talk about genius and high art,
and the rest of it. It will be the ruin of us, as it has been of Germany.
They have been for fifty years finding out, and showing people how to do
everything in heaven and earth, and have done nothing. They are dead
even yet, and will be till they get out of the high art fit.'5

This view is also presented in Yeast.26 Lancelot is represented as

believing in the interrelation of art, science, religion-of everything that touches upon man's existence.'7 The fullest expression
of this view is to be found in a letter from the novelist to a friend:
I want to talk to you about Yeast, and in doing so consolidate my owll
notions on it. . . . In Yeast, as its name implies, I have tried to show
the feelings which are working in the age, in a fragmentary and turbid
23 Ibid., p. 45,

pp. 140-41.
Kaufmann, op. cit., p. 212. References to his lectures include: Letters,
II, 2, 45, 69, 279-80, 367. Many of his lectures were concerned with
sanitary reform, evidence that he was one of the first to recognize the
close connection between science and health. Note Kaufmann's discussion,
op. cit., p. 8, and the analysis of Kingsley's view of sanitary reform in
C. W. Stubbs, Charles Kingsley and the Christian Social Movement
(London, 1899), p. 177. See also Letters, I, 176; II, 67, 87-8.
Memoir by Thomas Hughes,
25 Alton Locke (N. Y., 1911), Prefatory
24

p. xxviii.
20

Yeast (N. Y., 1888), p. 335.

Ibid., p. 373.

594

Charles Kingsley and Science

state. In the next part, The Artists, I shall try to unravel the tangled
skein, by means of conversations on Art, connected as they will be necessarily with the deepest questions of science, anthropology, social life, and
Christianity. . . . Thus I think Lancelot, having grafted on his own
naturalism, the Christianity of Tregarva, the classicism of Mellot, and
the spiritual symbolism of Luke, ought to be in a state to become the
mesothetic artist of the future, and beat each of his tutors at their own
weapons.28

Chaotic his purpose is, indeed, and justifies critics for condemning "his half-animal impatience which cannot be satisfied with
working out patiently a single idea." 29 Throughout this chaos,
however, runs the thread of his interest in science, and his desire
for its widespread appreciation and application. There is perhaps
a reflection of his own experience in the following description of
Lancelot's journalistic career:
He had the unhappiest knack (as all geniuses have) of seeing connections,
humorous or awful, between the most seemingly antipodal things; of
illustrating every subject from three or four different spheres which it is
anathema to mention in the same page. If he wrote a physical-science
article, able editors asked him what the deuce a scrap of high-churchism
did in the middle of it? If he took the same article to a high-church
magazine, the editor could not commit himself to any theory which made
the earth more than six thousand years old. ...0

Kiingsley, like Lancelot, considered art an excellent means for

conveying to all men a realization of the importance and power of
science. In the fairy tale, The Water-Babies, it was the writer's
purpose to adapt Darwin's theory of the natural selection of species
for children's information.31 Two Years Ago is the instructive
biography of a man of science. Yeast is an attempt to analyze the
influence of scientific discoveries upon the youth of the nineteenth
century. Kingsley beheld the young men of his day " fast parting
from their parents and each other; the more thoughtful . . . wanLetters, I, 181-82. Sir Oliver Lodge (Past Years, London, 1931, p.
265) considered Yeast a true picture of eonditions in the ' forties.'
29" Review," Living Age, LXXVII (June 20, 1863), p.
567.
30 Yeast, ed. cit., pp. 273-74.
28

31In 1862 he wrote to Maurice (Letters, II, 127): "I have tried, in
all sorts of queer ways, to make children and grown folks understand that
there is a quite miraculous and divine element underlying all physical
nature. . . . Meanwhile, remember that the physical science in the book
is not nonsense, but accurate earnest, as far as I dare speak yet."

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

595

dering either towards Rome, towards sheer materialism, or towards

an unchristian and unphilosophic spiritualism." 32 He recognized
a need for ethical guidance, and attempted to provide it in his
novels.
Now, didactic art tends also to be an art which reflects life
closely. When Alton Locke aspires to write of missionaries and sin
in pagan islands, the grim realist, Sandy Mackaye, informs him
that there is sufficient sin in London for his pen to portray:
Look! there's not a soul down that yard but's either beggar, drunkard,
thief, or warse. Write anent that! Say how you saw the mouth o' hell,
pawnbroker's shop o' one
and the twa pillars thereof at the entry-the
monstrous deevils, eating up
side, and the gin palace at the other-twa
men, and women, and bairns, body and soul. Look at the jaws o' the
monsters, how they open and open, and swallow in anither victim and
anither. Write anent that.38

If art wishes to aid in improving the material and spiritual condition of the world, then, in Mackaye's opinion, it must deal with
reality.34 Similarly, Kingsley defends Yeast on the ground that
it is a picture of the age.35 Why did not this realistic impulse
carry Kingsley on into scientific naturalism? Leslie Stephen believes that he was rescued, " as other men have been rescued, by the
elevating influence of a noble passion." 36 Undoubtedly this acted
as a deterrent force, but broader and more important reasons will
emerge as this article proceeds.
Kingsley's study of science influenced not only his choice of
themes, but his literary method as well. The realistic nature of his
theory of art may be seen in several details. Not one of his novels
dealing with his own century lacks a man of science for its central
figure. These characters vary from dilettante students of science to
medical men definitely interested in records and research. The
descriptions of the explorations by Tom Thurnall are reminiscent
of Darwin's voyage on the Beagle and of Huxley's career on the
Rattlesnalce. Around this character, Tom Thurnall, a doctor,
much of the science in the novel Two Years Ago centers. Kingsley
had studied medicine,37and-had a brother in the profession. One is
82

Yeast, ed. cit., p. xviii.

34 Ibid.
" Alton Locke, ed. cit., p. 67.
86 Yeast, ed. cit., Epilogue, p. 364.
88
Hours in a Library, III, 33-4.
87 Letters, I, 64
(letter to his wife, 1842).

596

Charles Kingsley and Science

not surprised, therefore, to find the character Thurnall depicted

with realism. Besides his interest in medical science, he shares his
father's enthusiasm for geology and botany. His friend, Major
Campbell, is a portrayal of Kingsley's ideal soldier, since he is interested in physical science as well as military.38 These men are
both students of photography, a comparatively new science in the
nineteenth century. Campbell speaks of being tired of painting
nature clumsily, and then seeing a sun-picture outdo all his efforts.
In The Water-Babies, Kingsley pointed forward to further inventions in this science when he mentioned color photography.39
This inclusion of men of science as characters in the novels
naturally involves the use of many scientific terms. An article is
mentioned in Yeast, for instance, which Lancelot is writing on the
Silurian system.40 Dean Winnstay has written a " diatribe on the
Geryon Trifurcifer." Tom Thurnall and Major Campbell hold
long conversations concerning the insects which they are collecting. Microscopes are familiar stage property. The vocabulary of
medical science is freely introduced.4' Scientific terminology is
also employed in the nature descriptions throughout the novels.42
However, in spite of the fact that the novels are often set in
surroundings with which the author is intimately acquainted, he
does not let his knowledge betray him into long technical descriptions which might detract materially from interest in the novels
themselves. The nature background of Two Years Ago is definitely
involved in the development of both Elsley Vavasour and Tom
Thurnall. It should be recognized that science is the basis of the
novel. Science must almost be accepted as a silent actor, though
not one possessing deterministic power and exercising it upon the
human characters of the story. It is, for instance, a definite part
38 See the view expressed in Health
and Education, ed. cit., p. 156.
S The Water-Babies (London, 1922, first published in 1863), p. 186.
40 Kingsley was interested in geology, and in Madam How and Lady Why
(N. Y., 1898), pp. 171-72, speaks of Sir Roderick Murchison's Siluria, as
"that great book."
41 See, for example, Two Years Ago (London, 1911, first published in
1857), pp. 74, 87.
42 Ibid.,
p. 5. In addition, see " My Winter Garden," ed. cit., p. 163.
Bayne (op. cit., 44) states that a comparison of the descriptions of South
American river scenery in Westward Ho! with those of Humboldt reveals
"minute accuracy " in the novel.

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

597

of Tom Thurnall's character, and it offers a basis for the friendship of Thurnall and Campbell. The normality of Thurnall's
character as contrasted with the mentally unbalanced nature of
Elsley Vavasour, may in part be ascribed to the former's scientific
pursuits. In so far as this deliberate character contrast is a matter
of art, Kingsley's scientific knowledge may be said to become here a
part of his artistic technique.
Kingsley's plots are not deterministic. He recognized the influence of environment upon character, as in Alton Locke, but he
made this influence secondary to that of the human will. Each
one of his characters is represented as free to behave as he wishes,
a result of the author's faith in the natural goodness of man. The
character of Tom Thurnall is perhaps the best exemplification of
this Rousseauistic belief. Though tempted, Tom trusts his instincts, yielding to neither environment nor supernatural guidance, until the end, when, almost as an afterthought, he admits
that he can not do " well enough " without God. Because of this
reliance on self, the development of character is impulsive, and not
the result of cause and effect relationships. No strong chain of
circumstances, for instance, causes Elsley Vavasour's downfall, but
rather self-deception and a refusal to trust his own ability.
Alton Locke appears, at first glance, to be the victim of unavoidable circumstances. His poverty and environment prevent the
realization of his ambitions. But this is part of the author's technique in motivation of plot and character, rather than part of his
philosophy of life. Locke, according to Kingsley, has happiness
within his reach, but forfeits it by striving to attain a goal not
intended for him by God. He stated that the moral of Alton Locke
was to show " that the working man who tries to get on, to desert
his class and rise above it, enters into a lie, and leaves God's path
for his own-with consequences."43 The direct cause of Locke's
fall, then, is not environment, but his own unwise desires. It
should be noted that the author did not attempt to decide whether
it was right or wrong that Locke should be condemned to either of
two alternatives-to remain a workingman, or to perish unhappily
in his attempt to rise above his class. It is not the environment
which matters, according to Kingsley, but man's attitude toward it.
Man is thus free to follow the path of either good or evil. How" Letters, I, 199.

598

Charles Kingsley and Science

ever, free will is not, to Kingsley, the same as wilfulness. The

individual must not, as Alton Locke did, " leave God's path for his
own." So long as the individual follows the guide of his conscience, he is following God. The Dean tells Alton Locke that
man must obey not merely the laws of outward nature; he must
obey also " the inner ideas, the spirit of Nature, which is the will
of God."4 This identification is made the basis for action in certain instances in Kingsley's novels. The natural act becomes the
moral act. Argemone desires to enter a convent, but she discovers that her " womanhood" yields to Lancelot's " manly will."
In other words, as Lancelot tells her, God is leading her to him.45
To follow " the inner ideas of Nature " is to follow God, according
to Kingsley. This is also evidence of his belief in reliance on instinct.46 Tom Thurnall's final turning to God indicates that he
has not been looking deep enough to discover the " inner ideas."
Another characteristic of the novels attendant upon Kingsley's
study of science is the realism, borderiingupon naturalism, which
enters into his descriptions of disease and sin.47 A well-known
illustration is Alton Locke's strange fever dream. The passage
deals with an imaginary evolution through various stages of life:
a madrepore, then, in turn, a shell, a remora, ostrich, mylodon, an
ape, and finally, a human being.48 The chapter is not without
power in its approach to modern symbolism. There is a curious
parallel to it in a poem written by Kingsley in early boyhood.49
In relating Sandy Mackaye's walk with Alton Locke around LonAlton Locke, ed. cit., p. 291.
Yeast, ed. cit., pp. 193-94.
46This also explains Kingsley's objection to asceticism and celibacy, as
he expressed it in The Saint's Tragedy and Hypatia. They are " unnatural"
rather than " natural," in his opinion.
47 The literary realism in the novels of the nineteenth century is ascribed
to scientific influence by Madeleine Cazamian (Le Roman et les Idees en
Angleterre, L'Influence de la Science 1860-1890, Oxford University Press,
1923): " Le realisme litteraire est en partie fonde, on le verra, sur une
conception scientifique de l'art; les th4ories nouvelles ont dans une tres
large mesure oriente les vues et eclaire les horizons des romanciers; et
lorsque ceux-ci expriment leurs idWes personelles, ils restent en rapport
intime avec le mouvement intellectuel de leur temps."
48 Ed. cit., pp. 265-69.
49 PoeMs
(London, 1907), p. 206, " Hypotheses Hypochondriacae," written
in 1835.
44

45

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

599

don to prove to Locke that vice in his own city justifies a protest
in art, the author includes another bit of realism to illustrate
Mackaye's lesson:
It was a foul, chilly, foggy Saturday night. From the butchers' and
greengrocers' shops the gas-lights flared and flickered, wild and ghastly
over haggard groups of slip-shod dirty women, bargaining for scraps of
stale meat and frost-bitten vegetables, wrangling about short weight and
bad quality. Fish-stalls and fruit-stalls lined the edge of the greasy pavement, sending up odours as foul as the language of sellers and buyers . . .
while above, hanging like cliffs over the streets-those
narrow, brawling
torrents of filth, and poverty, and sin,-the
houses with their teeming
load of life were piled up into the dingy choking night. A ghastly, deafening, sickening sight it was. Go, scented Belgravian! and see what London
is! and then go to the library which God has given thee-one often fears
in vain-and
see what science says this London might be! 30

The village revel to which Lancelot is taken by Tregarve,51 and

the chapter in Two Years Ago entitled "Baalzebub's Banquet,"
afford further illustration of the novelist's method.
This realism is allowed further scope, because Kingsley used the
novel as a vehicle for his views concerning the need of equal opportunities for knowledge among all classes. Museums were to be an
important factor in the dissemination of knowledge.52 Stangrave
finds it "very hopeful to see your aristocracy joining in the general movement, and bringing their taste and knowledge to bear on
the lower classes." 5 Kingsley also supported Mechanics' Institutes.54 Lack of proper facilities for the education of the poor, in
his opinion, would lead to " unhealthy superstition." "
50Alton Locke, ed. cit., pp. 66-7.
Yeast, ed. cit., pp. 226-64, " The Village Revel."
52 Letters,
I, 136-37, 279; II, 145-46, 150-51; Hypatia (London, 1913),
p. 11; Health and Education, ed. cit., pp. 6.5-6. This statement made by
Kingsley in Politics for the People (June, 1848), p. 183: "The British
Museum is my glory and joy; because it is almost the only place which
is free to English citizens as such-where the poor and the rich may meet
together, and . . . feel that 'The Lord is the Maker of them all,' " is
repeated in essence by Mellot (Two Years Ago, ed. cit., p. 5): "I find
everywhere schools, libraries, and mechanics' institutes springing up: and
rich and poor meeting together more and more in the faith that God has
made them all."
53 Two Years Ago, ed. cit., p. 11.
5' Ibid., p. 6.
These educational societies were called by one nineteenthcentury writer, " mere vehicles for the transmission of heretical doctrines"
(Felicia Skene, S. Alban's; or The Prisoner of Hope, London, 1853).
55Health and Education, ed. crit., pp. 144, 259.
51

600

Charles Kingsley and Science

In spite of his serious interest in scientific research, however,

Kingsley could not resist ridiculing the unduly serious naturalist.
There is, indeed, so much ridicule of science and men of science in
The Water-Babies, that one wonders how the author expected to
convey a serious impression of Darwinism. Professor Ptthmllnsprts is obviously a comic figure.56 Kingsley was present at the
debate between Owen and Huxley on the hippocampus question,57
and he seized upon the idea for a parody.58 It is significant that
he refused to be concerned with the fundamental issue, perhaps
because be considered the whole matter indefinite and hence not to
be taken seriously until established more conclusively.
III
The nineteenth century witnessed a long quarrel between science
and religion.59 To what extent did K-ingsley participate in the
argument and allow it to enter into his novels? As early as 1843
he recognized that a struggle was coming.60 It is a simple matter
to state that the novelist "took ground directly in Darwin's
favor "; 61 it is just as easy to state that he was a devout believer
in the tenets of the English Church.62 However, it is not directly
56

The Water-Babies, ed. cit., pp. 117-19.

57

Letters, II, 129.

The Water-Babies, ed. cit., p. 120.

One of the most comprehensive studies of this quarrel is contained in
J. M. Robertson's A History of Free Thought in the Nineteenth Century
(London, 1919). There is a complete historical survey by Andrew D.
White, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology (N. Y., 1877).
The terms " science" and "religion " are used in this study in their
general meanings; " science to include its various branches and methods;
"religion," of course, to denote systems of faith and worship of the
spiritual. The terms, while not as exact as could be desired, are nevertheless expedient because they are used so often in the period under consideration. For instance, note their use in the following: Fleeming Jenkin,
"Technical Education," Fortnightly Review, X (July, 1868), 197-228; and
Darwin, Life, ed. cit., I, 276.
10Letters, I, 82: "In the present day a struggle is coming. A question
must be tried-Is intellectual Science or the Bible, truth; and all Truth?"
He does not attempt to answer the question.
I" White, op. cit., p. 82: " Men of larger mind like Kingsley and Farrar,
with English and American broad churchmen generally, took ground
directly in Darwin's favor."
82 Robertson, op. cit., II, 420: " Kingsley,
as we have seen, stood at once
by the Athanasian Creed and by Darwinism."
58

69

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

601

possible to reconcile these two views. He never ventured to do it

for himself.63 His attitude, however, can be defined and the difficulties in his position indicated.
Iypatia, to which Kingsley gave the sub-title Old Foes with a
New Face, is made the vehicle for the author's views concerning
the state of religion in the nineteenth century. Then, as in the
Alexandrian era, " the minds of men, cut adrift from their ancient
moorings, wandered wildly over pathless seas of speculative doubt.
64
The faults of his characters, whether the result of futile
philosophy, worldliness, love of power, agnosticism, or ignorance,
were also the faults of Kingsley's contemporaries, in his opinion.65
In its condemnation of asceticism, the novel offers an interesting
contrast to Newman's Callista. Kingsley believed in the teachings of science too wholeheartedly to countenance nunneries and
monasteries:
C'est un roman historique, impr4gn6 d'intentions religieuses; le mouvement d'Oxford,l'?tglise romaine, le celibat des pretres et l'ideal monastique,
tels sont les adversaires contemporains auxquels Kingsley fait la guerre,
en decouvrant leurs origines ou leurs analogies dans l'Alexandrie du Ve
si6cle.68

Philammon's monkish ignorance of the world and iypatia's trust

in " wire-drawn dreams of metaphysics " 67 are both indications of
the author's belief that no one should abandon trust in his own
instincts and natural desires. Hypatia's world was a "brilliant
cloud-world."68 She did not wish to descend from " the mountain heights of science" into "the foul fields and farmyards of
" 69 There is no direct statement of the
earthly practical life. .
63 Other novelists asserted themselves more decisively.
See, among these,
DuMaurier, Trilby (N. Y., 1894), p. 275; Disraeli, Coningsby (London,
1919, first published in 1844), p. 152; Disraeli, Lothair (London, 1920,
first published in 1870), pp. xv-xvi; also p. 409.
64 Hypatia, ed. cit., p. ix.
85
Ibid., p. 345.
68 Louis Cazamian, Le Roman Social
en Angleterre, 1830-1850 (Paris,
1903), p. 527. For a discussion of Kingsley and the Oxford movement, see
Fritz KWhler, Charles Kingsley als religibser tendenzschriftsteller
(Marburg, 1912), p. 8.
67 Hypatia, ed. cit., p. 38.
68
69

Ibid., p. 307.
Ibid., p. 36.

602

Charles Kingsley and Science

quarrel between science and religion, although Kingsley's neoPlatonic views are set forth in Hypatia's lectures, and his belief
in the creation as evidence of a divine creator is stated by Pambo.70
The niovel,as a whole, reflects the confusion of thought existing in
the author's own century.
Kingsley himself, in his early years. did nTot know what philosophy to adopt as his own, and not until 1841, after a long period
of religious doubt,71 did he decide to become a minister in the
Church of England.72 Nor did he feel that any inconsistency
existed between his religious beliefs and his scientific knowledge.73
He was influenced by his reading of Coleridge's Aids to Reflection,
relying on its doctrine of first cause, and its assertion that no conflict need exist between the natural and the supernatural, the seen
and the unseen. It is necessary to keep in mind the eclectic
nature of Kingsley's philosophy. When planning a life of St.
Theresa, for example, he decided to read, as he wrote in a letter in
1841, " Tersteegen, Jacob Behmen, Madam Guyon, Alban, Butler,
Fanelon, some of Origen and Clemens Alexandrinus, and Coleridge's Aids, etc., also some of Kant, and a German history of
mysticism." 74 He was a student of Paley's doctrines, accepting
natural theology without reservation.75 In a letter to Frederick
Maurice, his master, he spoke of working out points of natural
theology by the light of Huxley, Darwin, and Lyell.76 In his
opinion:
... we might accept all that Mr. Darwin, all that Professor Huxley, all
that other most able men, have so learnedly and so acutely written on
70
Ibid., p. 92. Pambo speaks of the whole creation as a book wherein
the word of God may be read. Ibid., p. 114.
71Letters, I, 49.

Ibid., I, 34.
Coleridge, confronted by a not dissimilar problem, had no difficulty in
resolving it. See Robert Shafer, Christianity and Naturalism (Yale University Press, 1926), p. 41.
74 Letters, I, 48.
75 Natural theology to him meant "what can be learned concerning God
Himself " from the universe. Westminster Sermons (London, 1894), pp.
v-vi. This, however, did not imply speaking of God in materilal terms.
See the objection to this in Literary and Historical Essays (London, 1888),
p. 157, " Phaethon."
78 Letters, II, 155.
72

7s

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

physical science, and yet preserve our natural theology
same basis as that on which Butler and Paley left it.7

603
on exactly

the

This is not a satisfactory statement, but it must be remembered

that many of the startling discoveries in scienicewere then recent,78
and that it was possible for one to maintain his belief in religion
on the ground of the tentative nature of the discoveries. Kingsley
held to his faith that matter reflected spirit.79 He stated to a
friend that matter should be studied, not for its own sake, but as
the countenance of God.80 Believing, as he did, that a "divine
element " underlay all physical nature,81 he maintained that all
the discoveries made in physical science simply added to the glory
of the Creator. In one of his lectures, he argued further:
We shall dread no inroads of materialism; because we shall be standing
upon that spiritual ground which underlies . . . the material.82

That it is not always possible to begin with the spiritual, Kingsley

recognized, at least in part for he caused Lancelot to argue against
it:
Those laws of Nature must reveal Him, and be revealed by Him, whatever
else is not. Man's scientific conquest of Nature must be one phase of His
kingdom on Earth, whatever else is not.83

Alton endeavors to argue with Dean Winnstay on a similar point,

but loses.84 The Dean maintains that even miracles may be the
orderly result of some natural law which man has not yet discovered.V5 Barnakill promises to lead Lancelot to a land where
such laws may be found.86
The main difficulty lies in Kingsley's attempt to identify spiritual or moral law with physical law.87 In this attempt he was not
alone. Later in the century, Henry Drummond asked:
Westminster Sermons, ed. cit., p. xxii.
78 L. T. Townsend, The Bible and other Ancient Literature

in the Nine-

teenth Century (N. Y., 1889), p. 24.

79
My Winter Garden," ed. cit., p. 153.
80 Letters, I, 63.
81

Ibid., II, 127.

Roman and the Teuton (London, 1891), pp. 341-42.

8" Ibid., p. 289.
Yeast, ed. cit., pp. 96-7.
84 Alton Locke, ed. cit., p. 291.
88 Yeast, ed. cit., pp. 346-47.
87 Spiritual and physical law should not be identified. The first may be
Howcalled "prescriptive," while the second is primarily "descriptive."
82The
88

604

Charles Kingsley and Science

. . is it not plain that one thing thinking men are waiting for is the
introduction of Law among the Phenomena of the Spiritual World? Whein
that comes we shall offer to such men a truly scientific theoloay. And
the reign of Law will transform the whole Spiritual World as it has
already transformed the Natural World.88

Kingsley's theory of moral evolution, as will be shown in the next

section, embodied this belief in spiritual law.89 He also maintained a peculiar theory that the soul secreted the body.90 Huxley
pointed out to him the absurdity of any possibility of proving
this.9'
Such theories, however, were not his only applications of science
to religion. He called upon his knowledge of natural science to
prove and defend his faith. He was one of the first to urge upon
travelers a scientific exploration of Palestine, in order to aid in
determining the chronology of the Bible.92 Then, too, in matters
of doctrine, he turned to science for evidence. In writing to
Thomas Cooper, concerning the doctrine of the " Three in One,"
he argued that this was no more contrary to experience than were
certain scientific peculiarities which could not be explained.93
Here it appears that Kingsley's religion was unshaken by scientific discoveries because he felt that science had not proved itself
omniscient. He did not recognize the serious problem that would
be raised were science to find a material explanation for " multiplicity in unity" and the other matters on which he rested his
faith. If God is given the province of the " unknowable," then, in
proportion as the knowledge of science becomes greater, the province
ever, Kingsley appears to have recognized this difficulty. See, for example,
The Roman and the Teuton, ed. cit., pp. 317-18.
88 Natural
Law in the Spiritual World (N. Y., 1885), p. ix. It was
against such a philosophy that Huxley argued in a letter to Kingsley,
May 22, 1863 (Huxley, op. cit., I, 261): " I know nothing of Necessity,
abominate the word Law (except as meaning that we know nothing to the
contrary). . . . My own fundamental axiom of speculative philosophy is
that materialism and spiritualism are opposite poles of the same absurdity-the
absurdity of imagining that we know anything about either
spirit or matter. . .."
89 Drummond
maintained (op. cit., p. xiii), that the application of
physical law to the spiritual world did not differ from Bagehot's extension of natural science to the political world, or Spencer's application
of natural law to the social world.
92 Letters, II, 141-42.
90 Letters, II, 133 and 156.
91Huxley, op. cit., I, 261.
93 Ibid., I, 311.

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

605

of God must conceivably become narrower, until, if science explained every phenomenon, then God would be "explained
away." 94 Kingsley failed to perceive this problem, but he was
not alone in failing to perceive it. His mistakes, do not seem so
serious, for example, as those of his contemporary, Philip Henry
Gosse, the author of Omphalos.95
While it is true, then, that Kingsley deliberately avoided coming
to terms with the problems raised by science, it is equally true that
he did not dogmatically refuse to consider the propositions set
forth by science.96 He definitely stated in his novels, sermons, and
letters, his opinion that where science and religion seem to conflict, " it is our duty to believe that they are reconcilable by fuller
knowledge." 97 To Kingsley, as to Dr. Benjamin Jowett, his contemporary, science " had revealed . . . that the progress of mankind
lay in complete resignation to the Divine Will, and in obedience
to the laws of nature in conjunction with it." 98 In view of his
liberal attitude, we cannot condemn Kingsley for his refusal to
enter into the strife, and call him superficial.99 So far as he held
94 Shafer in Christianity and Naturalism (pp. 6-7) recognizes the serious
effects of this belief. Compare also the arguments in Samuel Butler, The
Fair Haven (London, 1913, first published in 1873).
6 Edmund Gosse in Father and Son (N. Y., 1907), pp. 115-17, pointed
out the seriousness of his father's unfortunate attempt to reconcile re" This was
ligion and the discoveries of nineteenth-century geologists.
interpreted as meaning that God put the fossils in rocks to test man's
faith . . . even Charles Kingsley, from whom my father had expected the
most instant appreciation, wrote that he could not give up 'the painful
and slow conclusion of five and twenty years' study of geology, and believe
that God has written on the rocks one enormous and superfluous lie.'"
Note Hugh Miller's mistaken conception of geology in Footprints of the
Creator (Edinburgh, 1872), p. 12; also Drummond's attitude in The
Ascent of Man (N. Y., 1894), pp. 341-42.
96In a lecture at Bideford, 1871 (Letters, II, 278) Kingsley maintained
that " the physical origin of man was strictly a physioloaical and anatomical
However physical science may decide the controversy, I say
question....
boldly, as a man and as a priest, that its decision will not affect one of my
duties here, one of my hopes for hereafter...
97 Alton Locke, ed. cit., p. 133.
98 E. F. Benson, As We Were (London, 1931), p. 129. For another point
of view, see John Stuart Mill, Three Essays on Religion (N. Y., 1874).
99See the passage in Robertson, op. cit., II, 327, beainning: "Kingsley
deserves commemoration as the Anglican cleric who in his time, following
in the steps of Baden Powell, most enercretically urged his fellow-Christians
to recognize the importance of science and accept its established conclusions."

606

Charles Kingsley and Science

it consistent with his religious beliefs, he accepted science and did

all that lay within his power to advance the cause of scientific
knowledge.100 Where the two conflicted, he remained true to his
religious beliefs, trusting in the future to find the solution.
IV
That very science which led many to despair in the nineteenth
century led Kingsley to hope. Every evidence of order in Nature
was to him further proof that the world had not been abandoned to
the moral chaos which would of necessity follow a belief in the
ineluctable nature of determinism.101 His study of science might
well have forced upon him a distrust of Nature as it did upon so
many of his contemporaries.102 To him, it was a matter of the
point of view adopted; for he believed Nature to be both kind and
cruel,103 and one's final attitude, therefore, dependent on the
emphasis.104 He himself believed that kindness predominated. His
faith in Nature induced him to have faith in science, faith that
the scientific discoveries would be blessings to mankind. However,
his was not a blind admiration. He could foresee a time when " the
triumphs of science " might be a curse:
Ibid.
101The Water of Life, ed. cit., pp. 180-81: "Horrible, I say, and increasingly horrible, not merely to the sentimentalist, but to the man of
sound reason and of sound conscience, must the scientific aspect of nature
become, if a mere abstraction called law is to be the sole ruler of the
universe."
102 See the
passage in Mill, op. cit., pp. 28-30, beginning: "In sober
truth, nearly all the things which men are hanged or imprisoned for doing
to one another are Nature's every day performances. Killing, the most
criminal act recognized by human laws, Nature does once to every being
that lives, and in a large proportion of cases after protracted tortures
such as only the greatest monsters whom we read of ever purposely inflicted on their living fellow-creatures." Note the similarity between this
and a lecture by Kingsley, in 1859 (Letters, II, 97) in which he said:
"Nature, insidious, inexpensive, silent, sends no roar of cannon, no glitter
of arms to do her work; she gives no warning note of preparation; she
has no protocol, nor any diplomatic advances. . . . By the very same laws
by which every blade of grass grows, and every insect springs to life in
the sunbeam, she kills, and kills, and kills, and is never tired of killing.
100

103
104

Miscellanies, ed. cit., II, 306, "North Devon."

Letters, II, 283.

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

607

I can conceive them-may

God avert the omen! -the
instruments of a
more crushing executive centralisation, of a more utter oppression of the
bodies and souls of men, than the world has yet seen. I can conceive-may
God avert the omen!--centuries
hence, some future world-ruler sitting at
the junction of all railroads, at the centre of all telegraph wires-a worldspider in the omphalos of his world-wide web; and smiting from thence
everything that dared to lift its head or utter a cry of pain, with a
swiftness and surety to which the craft of a Justinian or a Philip II, were
but clumsy and impotent.105

But even then, it was not an agency outside of man which was to
be all-evil, but rather, an agency within man himself, his own will.
" All, all outward things," he further stated in the lecture quoted
above, "be sure of it, are good or evil, exactly as they are in the
hands of good men or of bad." If the good predominate, " science
may scale Olympus after all." 10'
Kingsley was primarily interested in science because it could
ameliorate the condition of mankind; and hence, pure science was
secondary, in his opinion, to humanitarianism.'07 However, in at
least one essay, he recognized the other point of view as important:
Perhaps we are now entering upon it; an age in which mankind shall be
satisfied with the "triumphs of science," and shall look merely to the
greatest comfort (call it not happiness) of the greatest number. . . . But
one hope there is, and more than a hope-one
certainty, that however
satisfied enlightened public opinion may become with the results of science,
and the progress of the human race, there will be always a more enlightened private opinion or opinions, which will not be satisfied therewith at all; a few men of genius. . . . These will be the men of science,
whether physical or spiritual. Not merely the men who utilise and apply
that which is known (useful as they plainly are), but the men who
themselves discover that which was unknown, and are generally deemed
useless, if not hurtful to their race.108

lie continually stressed the belief that science existed not merely
for the good of man, but also for what he called "the glory of
God." 109 His novels served both causes, pointing out the practical effects of science, and representing its truths as evidence of the
glory of God.
10' Historical
Lectures and Essays, ed. cit., pp. 230-31.
10eIbid., pp. 233-34.
107
Health and Education, ed. cit., pp. 290-91.
108 Historical
Lectures and Essays, ed. cit., p. 232.
109
Sermons on National Subjects (London, 1890), pp. 110- I.

608

Charles Kingsley and Science

This aspect of Kingsley's philosophy explains his activity in

the Christian Socialist movement.110 Men in the early nineteenth
century had regarded poverty as inevitable, aiid hence, supported
charity rather than reform. This point of view, however, changed,
as science showed disease to be curable, and as it also introduced
industry which promised work for all. Improvement of conditions, if not actual progress, appeared possible, in spite of the fact
that organized religion still maintained that only the future life
could be perfect.-11 Maurice, Kingsley, and their associates in the
movement, attempted to direct reform along Christian lines.
Kingsley declared in a placard addressed to the workmen of Englalnd that there could be no true freedom "without virtue, no
true science without religion, no true industry without the fear of
God, and love to your fellow-citizens." 112 He contributed liberally
to Politics for the People,'13 and to The Christian Socialist.114 If
the conditions of the working-men improved as a result of the
Christian Socialist movement, no small credit must be given to the
efforts of 'Kingsley.115
The humanitarianism of Kiingsley did not, however, become
110 The movement was directed against the prevalent laissez-faire attitude
regarding the condition of the laboring class. It is discussed here only
4s it pertained to Kingsley and his attitude toward science. Complete
discussions of its various aspects may be found in the following: H. De
B. Gibbins, English Social Reformers (London, 1902); Kohler, op. cit.;
Hugh Martin, editor, Christian Social Reformers of the Nineteenth Century (London, 1927); Charles E. Raven, Christian Socialism (London,
1920); Stubbs, op. cit.
11Maurice
was deprived of his post at King's College because "he
dared to maintain that eternal life was a state in which men could live
here on earth, and to act up to his belief." Raven, op. cit., p. 13.
Letters, I, 119.
13Politics
for the People (London, 1848), pp. 5, 28, 38, 58, 136, 183,
228, 246.
114His contributions to The Christian Socialist were chiefly to show that
the Bible does not support " priestcraft, superstition and tyranny .
(i, 9), Raven, op. cit., p. 159.
11 Stubbs, op. cit., p. 104, speaks of Kingsley
as " the popular hero of
the movement," and calls Maurice " its directing spirit." In the opinion
of Raven, op. cit., p. 97, without Kingsley " the movement might never
have been started at all: without him it could never have achieved its
speedy recognition or its lasting influence." See also Raven's estimate of
Alton Locke in this connection, pp. 170-71.

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

609

sentimental. No one could win his respect who was not morally
strong."16 His nature was emotional, but not extremely passionate.
He considered discipline more essential than feeling.117 This
Platonistic view is reflected in the author's attitude toward Christmas, "a blest day," which
. . .aye reminds us, year by year,
What 'tis to be a man: to curb and spurn
The tyrant in us; that ignobler self
Which boasts, not loathes, its likeness to the brute,
And owns no good save ease, no ill save pain,
No purpose, save its share in that wild war
In which, through countless ages, living things
Compete in internecine greed.:1"

Kingsley's study of science impressed upon him a realization of

the continual change taking place in matter." " All but God is
changing day by day," the novelist maintained.'20 With this concept of change in Kingsley's philosophy is involved the concept of
moral evolution and the belief in progress through continual
change. The Water-Babies reveals Kingsley's peculiar interpretation of Darwin's theory. Physical evolution became moral evolution in his thought. For each physical change in life, some moral
reason could be found, for instance, industriousness or kindness.'21
Believing in design in Nature, Kingsley therefore also believed
11" He believed that individual reform was imperative.
"I don't deny,
my friends, it is much cheaper and pleasanter to be reformed by the devil
than by God; for God will only.reform society on condition of our reformthe devil is quite ready to help us to
ing every man his own self-while
mend the laws and the parliament, earth and heaven, without ever starting
such an impertinent and 'personal' request, as that a man should mend
himself." Politics for the People, ed. cit. (May 13, 1848), p. 29.
117 Kingsley
once stated: "When I talk, then, of excitement, I do not
wish to destroy excitability, but to direct it into the proper channel, and
to bring it under subjection. I have been reading Plato on this very subject. . . ." Letters, II, 33.
118 Poems, ed. cit., pp. 317-18, "Christmas Day."
119 See, for example, Two Years Ago, ed. cit., p. 14.
120
Poems, ed. cit., p. 10, "The Saint's Tragedy."
121
See his arguments in The Water-Babies. As has been indicated
earlier, the analogy between physical and moral law is not sound. See
also Hugh Miller's viewpoint, op. cit., p. 300.

610

Charles Kingsley and Science

that purpose motivated each change.122 He expressed this teleological view often in his letters 123 and in his poetry.12'
Kingsley's faith in progress was not unalloyed with doubt, His
own century, at first so full of discovery and advancement, seemed,
at the mid-turn, almost " on the eve of stagnation." 125 His generation, in his opinion, was living on the labours of an earlier one.120
Railroads, telegraphs-these were not progress, but " the fruits of
past progress ":
Progress is inward, of the soul. . . . The self-help and self-determination
of the independent soul-that
is the root of progress, and the more human
beings who have that, the more progress there is in the world.127

This statement perhaps marks him a deeper thinker than those

who believe in wholesale progress. Science was not able to delude
him into blind adoration of its material discoveries, though he
considered moral progress entirely probable:
If there be an order, a progress, they must be moral; fit for the guidance
of moral beings; limited by the obedience which those moral beings pay
to what they know. And such an order, such a progress as that, I have
good hope that we shall find in history.128

The same spirit is evident in his poem, " The World's Age":
Still the race of Hero-spirits
Pass the lamp from hand to hand.129

Science was able to show him nothing that could contradict this
belief in order and moral progress. Evolution, interpreted as
moral, strengthened his hope. Alton Locke in his fever dream sees
a vision of a maiden who prophesies to him man's return to
Paradise:
122

123
124

Madam How and Lady Why, ed. cit., p. 6.

Letters, II, 254.
Poems, ed. cit., p. 319, " September 21, 1870."

125
Hlistorical Lectures and Essays,
ed. cit., p. 254, he speaks of " this
progress and science," and of "how
epithets! "
126 Yeast,
op. cit., p. 8.
127
Historical Lectures and Essays,
128 The
Roman and the Teuton, ed.
129 Poems, ed. cit., p. 245.

ed. cit., p. 229. In Two Years Ago,

blessed age of ignorance, yclept of
our grandchildren will laugh at the

ed. cit., p. 230.

cit., pp. 337-38.

Mary Wheat Hanawalt

You went forth in ignorance and need-you
wealth, philosophy and art.180

611

shall return in science and

Thus, science is discovered to have played no minor role in the

life of Charles Kingsley. It enriched his art and gave to it a
definite value beyond contemporary initerest. He, in his turn, repaid his teacher well, popularizing scientific knowledge and the
advantages of scientific study. It is true that he was not always consistent-but he was as consistent as a man who was both a clergyman and an amateur scientist could be in the nineteenth century.
In a letter to John Bullar, he speaks of himself as a man containing "the strangest jumble of superstition and . . . reverence for
scientific induction which forbids me (simply for want of certain
facts) to believe heaps of things in which I see no a priori impossibility." 131 He realized that his sanction of both religion and science would cause some people to misunderstand him:
I shall, in due time, suffer the fate of most who see both sides and
be considered by both parties a hypocrite and a traitor.'82

This receptivity to ideas, however, has been one reason for his
continued literary reputation; and until a later generation may
succeed in solving the problems introduced into philosophy by science, there may be many who will continue to accept Kingsley's
attitude of compromise.133
Waterloo, Iowa.
130

Alton Locke, ed. cit., p. 275.

181

Letters, II, 50.

182

Ibid., p. 160.

The following passage from Madam How and Lady Why (ed. cit., pp.
320-21) embodies a full statement of his philosophy: "All we can do is,
to keep up the childlike heart, humble and teachable, though we grew as
wise as Newton or as Humboldt; and to follow, as good Socrates bids us,
Reason whithersoever it lead us, sure that it will never lead us wrong,
unless we have darkened it by hasty and conceited fancies of our own....
But if we love and reverence and trust Fact and Nature, which are the
will, not merely of Madam How, or even of Lady Why, but of Almighty
God Himself . . . we shall have our reward by discovering continually
fresh wonders and fresh benefits to man; and find it as true of science,
as it is of this life and of the life to come-that
eye hath not seen, nor
ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive, what
God has prepared for those who love Him."
133