scholarly journals ART. XXI.—Essays, Anatomical, Zoological, Surgical, and Miscellaneous, reprinted from the Philosophical Transactions, Transactions of the Medico-Chirurgical Society of London, Dublin Philosophical Journal, Dublin Hospital Reports, Reports of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, and the Dublin Medical Press

1847 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 445
Author(s):  
ARTHUR JACOB
1898 ◽  
Vol 46 (1192supp) ◽  
pp. 19114-19116
Author(s):  
W. F. R. Weldon, M.A., F.R.S.,

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 52-52
Author(s):  
Timothy P. Carman ◽  
David Perez-Meza ◽  
Bessam K. Farjo

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. BRINK-ROBY

This paper argues that, for a number of naturalists and lay commentators in the second half of the nineteenth century, evolutionary – especially Darwinian – theory gave new authority to mythical creatures. These writers drew on specific elements of evolutionary theory to assert the existence of mermaids, dragons and other fabulous beasts. But mythological creatures also performed a second, often contrapositive, argumentative function; commentators who rejected evolution regularly did so by dismissing these creatures. Such critics agreed that Darwin's theory legitimized the mythological animal, but they employed this legitimization to undermine the theory itself. The mermaid, in particular, was a focus of attention in this mytho-evolutionary debate, which ranged from the pages of Punch to the lecture halls of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Crossing social boundaries and taking advantage of a range of venues, this debate arose in response to the indeterminate challenge of evolutionary theory. In its discussions of mermaids and dragons, centaurs and satyrs, this discourse helped define that challenge, construing and constructing the meanings and implications of evolutionary theory in the decades following Darwin's publication.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document