Redrawing the Boundaries of Darwinism: Addressing Darwin’s Endorsement of the Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics in Darwin’s Celebrations, 1909–1959–2009

Since the publication of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection (1859), the concepts of “Darwinism” and “Darwinian evolution” have long been debated. Alongside the theoretical adjustments evolutionary biology has undergone over time through the integration of research traditions, tools of analysis and sets of data, the narratives and representations of Charles Darwin’s legacy have significantly changed. Undoubtedly, the in-depth study of Darwin’s notebooks, which only became known to historians in the mid-twentieth century, has contributed to better reconstructing the phases of his theoretical formulation as well as his constant consideration of issues raised by critics. However, the very meaning of the concept of “Darwinian evolution” has been disassembled and reassembled in light of the debates in evolutionary biology and thus seems to be the product of a long and complex interplay between historiographical and scientific needs. This appears clearly when considering the way evolutionary biologists addressed Darwin’s views on theoretical issues that turned out to be objects of great debate in twentieth-century evolutionary biology. In particular, this chapter will examine how scholars commented on Darwin’s endorsement of the inheritance of acquired characters on the occasions of the 1909, 1959, and 2009 celebrations. Not only did these years represent symbolic occasions for evolutionary biologists to take stock of the state of affairs within their research field but were also an opportunity to reassess Darwin’s legacy. This analysis will help deconstruct the category of Darwinism, showing that the boundary between “Darwinian” and “non-Darwinian” theories of evolution has undergone several shifts over time and that evolutionary biologists have often been concerned with identifying what the Darwinian research agenda should include and exclude, erecting research traditions, and confining inconvenient ideas.