William
Swainson, a passionate and skilled English naturalist and artist, was born on
this day in 1789. Unfortunately his passion seemed to blind him to his own limits at crucial
points of his career, a myopia which can either lead to greatness, or – as in
his case – a tumble into something malodorous.
At the age of
14 he followed his father into the customs service, but already the lure of natural
history was loud in his ears and in order to travel he joined the army (not as
a combatant, but on the staff of the Commissary-General) and spent years immersed
in the plants and animals of the eastern Mediterranean. Unspecified illness
forced him from the army at age 26 on half-pay to pursue his real love, which by
now was further empowered by discovering and developing his considerable skills
as an artist. Crucially this happened at just the time that the new process of
lithography was being introduced, enabling an artist to draw directly onto a
stone printing block (with a waxy pencil, to which oily inks adhered) rather
than having to rely on an engraver to accurately interpret the artist’s work on
a copper plate. Teams of colourists hand-coloured the books, following the
artist’s colour template. This was a revolution akin to modern publishing software,
allowing artists to self-publish.
Swainson did
just that, pioneering the technique among naturalists, following a trip to
Brazil which he undertook almost as soon as he left the army. He was not the
first or last naturalist to succumb to the call of the tropics. Nor was he the
first or last to have trip to the tropics disrupted by political upheaval, but
he collected enough to begin a series of subscription-paid books of Brazilian
birds, and of shells, on which he had become an authority. They were published
in sections, each section subsidising the next.
Several bird
names were published by him, including some Australian ones. He was
sufficiently respected for the French ornithologist Anselme Desmarest to name a
particularly spectacular Australian parrot in his honour.
Additionally,
bird species from Africa and the Americas were also named for him, though not
all the original names have survived.
Swainson's Thrush Catharus ustulatus, Mindo Valley, Ecuador. This species was named by the US-based English ornithologist Thomas Nuttall. |
Meantime,
most unfortunately, he had enthusiastically espoused the new classification
system developed by WS MacLeay, the Quinary system. (MacLeay had already been a
diplomat and judge in the Spanish-English slave abolition commission in Cuba
and went on to play a major role in Australian entomology.) It was a serious
attempt at classification, but from our perspective it was also seriously loopy.
Groups of animals were allocated to one of three circles, containing
respectively ‘typical’, ‘subtypical’ and ‘aberrant’ members of the group. The
‘aberrant’ circle was further divided into three circles (hence the five of the
quinary). Associations of species
in different circles were linked with lines. The leading biologists of the day took
an interest – then shied away from its utter arbitrariness and irrelevance to
the real world. Not Swainson though. He was excited by the evident links
between tigers and zebras, on the basis that both are ‘striped and impossible
to tame’. Or baboons and whales with ‘head very large, little or no tail’, or
macaques and rodents with ‘tail relatively long, hare-lipped’. This did not
enhance his standing, but it didn’t totally destroy it either.
Cheaper book printing
processes also developed at this time, and Swainson contributed to the
revolution in learning which accompanied the availability of affordable books
by writing for Dionysius Lardner’s
Cabinet Cyclopedia
series. He produced 11 volumes on a wide range of topics before the difficulties
of working with Lardner got too much for him and he emigrated to New Zealand. The
question of the relative contribution to this move of his problems with Lardner
and the fall-out from the Quinary episode is unclear; both are cited as
reasons.
He should probably have stayed in New Zealand, though Maori
land claims over ‘his’ estate meant it wasn’t an entirely happy time. However, for
reasons and in ways not at all clear, he was head-hunted in 1853 by the
Victorian government to work on the colonial tree flora; as far as I can determine
he had never published or even shown any particular in botany before. Beware the
late arrival in a field. With explicit disdain for those who had gone before,
he listed in his report 1520 Victorian ‘gum trees’ and 213 casuarinas (where we
now recognise about 14). He would have done more but ran out of names…
He died two years later back in New Zealand. He
predicted ‘surprise and
almost incredulity amongst the botanists of Europe’. Indeed. Sir William Hooker
of Kew – a man noted for his tolerance and tact – wrote to von Mueller “in my
life I think I never read such a series of trash and nonsense. There is a man
who left this country with the character of a first rate naturalist, and of a
very first rate natural history artist, and he goes to Australia and takes up
the subject of botany, of which he is as ignorant as a goose.”
Given this,
the existence of the Australian pea genus Swainsona
might seem surprising, but in fact it honours William’s much older cousin Isaac,
botanical garden owner, herbalist – and purveyor of apparently quack medicines.
Perhaps
William should have left the plant side of biology to him; it’s probably better
to be remembered as a parrot than a goose.
BACK TOMORROW WITH A LIGHT OFFERING
4 comments:
I am unsure of the accuracy of the statement "ignorant as a goose" when it comes to botany. My guess is that geese are pretty much on the ball wrt botany, especially on the matter of the edible/inedible divide.
I suspect that vultures don't really care too much about plants. However "ignorant as a vulture" seems to lack something.
Martin
Google UK celebrated William Swainson yesterday with a "Doodle" - I can't recall any previous ornithological doodles. Australia missed out. Guardian on Swainson Google Doodle .
Excellent contribution - thank you Duncan. And of course, thank you too Martin for your unfailingly helpful contributions...
Re Martin's comment: I would think that geese would lump all "gum trees" and casuarinas together with most other trees as "inedible, of no interest".
Post a Comment