Introduction: Environmental History and the History of Biology
JANE CARRUTHERS
0
1
2
0
Department of History University of South Africa Pretoria
, Gauteng 0003 South Africa
1
Centre for Historical Research National Museum of Australia Canberra
, ACT 2600 Australia
2
LIBBY ROBIN Fenner School for Environment and Society The Australian National University Canberra
, ACT 0200 Australia
-
We are delighted to have been commissioned by Paul Farber, the
general editor of the Journal of the History of Biology, to edit this special
issue on Environmental History. This is a field of history which has long
been acknowledged to have strong links with the biological sciences, in
particular with conservation biology and ecology, and with other
branches of biology as well. Our brief in editing this issue of the Journal
of the History of Biology is to consider the shared boundaries by the two
fields of history and we believe that the articles in this issue will surely
illuminate some of them. A closer reading of the environmental history
literature can enrich many aspects of the history of biology and,
naturally, vice versa. We hope that this special issue will encourage regular
readers of this journal to make a foray into the field of environmental
history, enriching it with an even firmer base in the history of biology.
Environmental history is notoriously difficult to define. Take for
example the title of Douglas Weiners 2005 article in Environmental
History, written as he ended his term as President of the American
Society of Environmental History, A death-defying attempt to
articulate a coherent definition of environmental history.1 An anniversary
forum in Environmental History entitled Whats next for
environmental history showcased thirty viewpoints of leading practitioners,
revealing that environmental historians prefer broad and inclusive
definitions to narrow boundary setting and perhaps have a greater
predilection for futures than other historians, as suggested by the
forums title.2 The interdisciplinarity of environmental history is both a
strength and an anxiety for practitioners. So rlin and Warde urge
environmental historians to engage more critically in the understanding of
the social context of biology and other knowledge systems.3 History and
Theory carried a special issue on environmental history at the end of
2003 that appeared to accord the field theoretical imprimatur and
rec
ognition.4 Cultural historian Peter Burke concurs with this. He has
stated that it has moved through the relevant phases of pioneering and
consolidation, and now demonstrates that it has reached the age of
synthesis,5 a judgment that might apply just as well to the history of
biology. Environmental history is currently served with two
international scholarly journals, the US-based Environmental History (which
began under another name in 1975) and the UK-European based
Environment and History (first published in 1999).6
Perhaps more than has been the case with the history of biology, the
attention of the public has been propelled to take heed of environmental
history through a concatenation of social and political interest, a
burgeoning popular literature and current environmental concerns.
Certainly, the birth of environmentalism as a strong global social
movement with different forms in different parts of the world since the
1960s has contributed to its popularity and social profile. Popular
writers such as Jared Diamond (himself a biologist) with his books
Guns, Germs and Steel 1998 and Collapse 2005 have excited general
interest in the topic, and the focus on global climate change also
demands engagement with history.7 The Darwin bicentenary
celebration of 2009 was another catalyst in the publics engagement with
environmental history because it was, of course, Charles Darwin who
put history into biology with his daring idea that nature was not
immutable, it was in fact history, exhibiting change over time.
Essentially, environmental history interrogates how arenas that have
traditionally been termed nature and culture interweave with one
another in different places and at different times to create an
environment. It is not an homogenous discipline with a strong topical
thread or even a coherent body of knowledge. It is thus somewhat
broader than the history of biology, which, one might argue, deals with
certain defined aspects of this wider cultural canvas. A recent book
defines environmental history as explicitly history and thus
belonging in the humanist tradition of studying complex phenomena
with respect for humans as, ultimately, persons with intentions and
morals, and belonging in the realm of the polity.8 Australian Tom
Griffiths has argued that the very benefit of environmental history is
that it prioritizes the historians traditional concerns of identity,
agency, economy and politics using the narrative form.9 These remarks
might apply equally well to the history of biology as the range of articles
appearing over the years in the Journal of the History of Biology attes (...truncated)