Skip to main content

Gregor Mendel and the History of Heredity

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of the Historiography of Biology

Part of the book series: Historiography of Science ((HISTSC,volume 1))

Abstract

Gregor Mendel’s paper “Experiments on Plant Hybrids” (1866) has become a paradigmatic case in the historiography of the life sciences because production and reception of a “discovery” sharply fell apart, thus raising fundamental questions about the relationship between scientific achievement and “its” time. In this chapter, I am providing an overview of answers that have been given to these questions by various historians. In a first section, I cover commentators who have claimed that Mendel was “ahead” of his time, and that contemporaries failed to recognize his achievement. I then move on to scholars and scientists who argued against this position, claiming that Mendel was not anticipating twentieth-century genetics, but was in fact representative of an older research tradition. In a last step, I turn to the more recent cultural history of heredity according to which Mendel was embedded in a local culture that combined a variety of advanced and traditional strands of nineteenth-century life-sciences. Overall, I am arguing that one should not overestimate the coherence and dominance of presumed “paradigms”, “epistemes” or “styles” in biology.

Ihr Lettern, meines Forschens Sprossen ...

Gregor Mendel, 1830s

First line from a poem that Gregor Mendel sketched in the late 1830s during his time at the gymnasium of Opava (Troppau). It can be translated as “Oh letters, rungs of my research ...”; the poem celebrates Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of movable print. Quoted from Iltis (1924, 14)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For Mendel’s biography, see Iltis (1924, English translation 1966), Orel (1996), and Klein and Klein (2013). I will rely on Orel for biographical details throughout this chapter.

  2. 2.

    Mendel (1866, p. 3); Mendel (2016a, p. 3, s. 6). There exist several English translations of Mendel’s essay (Mendel 1901, 1902, 1966, 2016b). I am quoting from the latest critical edition and translation, citing page and sentence number. The phrase “long neglect” can be traced back to Glass (1953, p. 148).

  3. 3.

    On references to Mendel’s paper before 1900, see Olby and Gautrey (1968). On its “rediscovery” in 1900, see Jahn (1958), Olby (1985, ch. 6), Rheinberger (1995), Stamhuis et al. (1999), Harwood (2000), and Simunek et al. (2011). Olby (1985, 219–234) provides English translations of some sources mentioning Mendel before 1900. On the history of Mendelian genetics, see Dietrich, this volume.

  4. 4.

    Sapp (1990, p. 146), Orel and Hartl (1994, p. 445), and Olby (1997, sect. “Scientific Disciplines”). All three review articles are accessible online at MendelWeb (www.mendelweb.org), an internet resource created by Roger B. Blumberg in 1995, but not updated since 1997. It offers a wealth of other useful material, including the German original and Bateson’s 1902 translation of Mendel’s paper for download.

  5. 5.

    Vries (1900, 85), Correns (1900, 159), and Tschermak (1900, 239). English translations of de Vries’s and Correns’ papers can be found in Stern and Sherwood (1966, 107–138), but I am here providing my own.

  6. 6.

    Vries (1900, 84–85).

  7. 7.

    Correns (1900, 166–68). Correns quotes Mendel’s own formulation of the alleged law; cf. Mendel (2016a, p. 29, s. 4).

  8. 8.

    Tschermak (1900, 235).

  9. 9.

    Tschermak (1901, 54). In the second edition (1911), Tschermak changed his mind and presented Mendel much more in line with what we today would consider as conventional Mendelism.

  10. 10.

    Ibid., 55.

  11. 11.

    Bateson (1900–1901, 60) and Mendel (1901, 2).

  12. 12.

    Brannigan (1979, 450).

  13. 13.

    The French Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser suggested that the “spontaneous philosophy of scientists” could provide an antidote to the tendency of philosophy “to speak about nothing but itself” (Macherey 2009, 19).

  14. 14.

    Correns (1905); Nägeli’s responses to Mendel are lost.

  15. 15.

    Bennett (1965); Stern and Sherwood (1966); Kříženecký (1965, 57–92).

  16. 16.

    Beer (1964); Heimans (1968, 1970); Weiling (1992). On Mendel biographies, see note 2.

  17. 17.

    Fisher (1936, 137).

  18. 18.

    Fisher (1936, 137).

  19. 19.

    Bateson (1902). This was the first book-length critical study of Mendel’s paper, and a second revised edition appeared in 1909.

  20. 20.

    Fisher (1936, 124). Whether Mendel, consciously or not, falsified “his data to produce results that were ‚too good to be true’ has been the subject of a fierce debate among statisticians, geneticists, and historians of science that continues to this day; see Franklin et al. (2008) for a collection of important contributions to this debate. The allegation of data manipulation was not new when Fisher wrote his article. Bateson’s main opponent, the biometrician Raphael Weldon (1860–1906), had actually raised it in 1902 already; see Radick (2015).

  21. 21.

    On the Modern Synthesis, see Borello, this volume.

  22. 22.

    Beer (1964).

  23. 23.

    Glass (1953, 158).

  24. 24.

    Carlson (1966); Sturtevant (1966).

  25. 25.

    Roberts (1929); Stubbe (1963); Robinson (1979).

  26. 26.

    Lesky (1951); Roger (1963/1998); Gasking (1967).

  27. 27.

    Kroeber (1917, 198); Ogburn and Thomas (1922); White (1949). Robert K. Merton (1910–2003), in his classic article on multiple discoveries (1961), considered the “case of Mendel” as “too well known” to even expand on it any further; see Merton (1996, 308).

  28. 28.

    Foucault (1970/1971, 16). The quoted passages rely heavily on earlier work by Foucault’s mentor Georges Canguilhem (1904–1995); see, e.g., Delaporte (1994, 37, 51).

  29. 29.

    Jacob (1970/1996, 202–9).

  30. 30.

    Mendel (2016a, 38–47). This last section was also included in what became the most popular English edition of Mendel’s paper. It originally appeared as an appendix in Castle (1916, 281–321) and was then reprinted as an inconspicuous brochure by Harvard University Press until 1965. It is all the more mysterious why Zirkle (1951, 99), otherwise a very attentive scientist historian, claimed that “Mendel himself described none of the earlier research”.

  31. 31.

    Olby (1966, 10). On Darwin as a “lifelong generation theorist,” see Hodge (1985).

  32. 32.

    See Jardine (2003) for critical reflections on the concept of “Whig history”.

  33. 33.

    Olby (1985, xi–xiv).

  34. 34.

    Olby (1979, 53–54).

  35. 35.

    Kampourakis (2015).

  36. 36.

    Campbell (1982), Olby (1985, ch. 5), and Sandler and Sandler (1985).

  37. 37.

    Mayr (1973); Callender (1988); Bishop (1996).

  38. 38.

    Olby (1997), sect. IV, “Mendel and the Darwinians.”

  39. 39.

    Jacob (1970/1996, 11).

  40. 40.

    Mayr (1982, 127).

  41. 41.

    Burkhardt (1994); Müller-Wille (2011).

  42. 42.

    Bowler (1988). For a defense against these attacks, see Mayr (1990).

  43. 43.

    Bowler (1989, 7).

  44. 44.

    Bowler (1989, 7, 44, and 94–95). Ironically, Bowler relied on an earlier explanation of the “long neglect” that had been proposed by two geneticists, Iris and Laurence Sandler; see Bowler (1989, 108).

  45. 45.

    Sosna (1966, vii–xi). The conference proceedings are available from the Wellcome Library’s Digital Collections (URL https://wellcomelibrary.org/item/b18019900).

  46. 46.

    Paleček (2016). Due to complex local developments in post-communist Brno, there are two Mendel museums now in Brno. The Mendelianum was moved to the Moravian Museum, while a new Mendel Museum sponsored by the Masaryk University was established in the monastery. Folia Mendeliana continues to appear (see http://www.mzm.cz/en/folia-mendeliana/), but its contents are unfortunately not yet available online.

  47. 47.

    Orel (2005). “Rehabilitating” Mendel was not just an academic question: Kříženecký lost his university position in 1948 and even spent 18 months in jail in 1958 (Orel 1992). At around the same time, Orel lost his job as head of the poultry research unit at the Agricultural University in Brno (Paleček 2016).

  48. 48.

    On Hessen, see Freudenthal and McLaughlin (2009).

  49. 49.

    Orel’s biography (1996) continues to be the best guide to the large body of literature on these different strands. The first volume of Klein’s biography (2013) adds much interesting detail about the German-Czech context of Mendel.

  50. 50.

    Wood and Orel (2001, 2005).

  51. 51.

    Allen (2002).

  52. 52.

    Gliboff (1999) and Radick (2011).

  53. 53.

    Farley (1982); Churchill (1987); Dröscher (2015).

  54. 54.

    Matalová (1992, 118).

  55. 55.

    Shapin and Ophir (1991); Dear (1995); Secord (2004).

  56. 56.

    Russell (1986); Allen (1991); Olby (1993); López Beltrán (1994). On the history of eugenics, see Weindling, this volume.

  57. 57.

    Keller (2000).

  58. 58.

    See, e.g., Jablonka and Lamb (2005).

  59. 59.

    For an attempt at a synthetic overview, see Müller-Wille and Rheinberger (2012).

  60. 60.

    López Beltrán (2004a); cf. Radick (2012).

  61. 61.

    Parnes et al. (2008); Weigel et al. (2013); see also Gayon and Wunenberger (1995).

  62. 62.

    Müller-Wille and Rheinberger (2007).

  63. 63.

    Rheinberger (2008) and Kampourakis (2010).

  64. 64.

    Lugt and Miramon (2008).

  65. 65.

    Hopwood et al. (in press).

  66. 66.

    Gaudillière and Löwy (2001); Gausemeier, Müller-Wille and Ramsden (2013); Gausemeier (2014), and Porter (2018).

  67. 67.

    López Beltrán (2004b); Müller-Wille (2007); Waller (2012); Müller-Wille and Brandt (2016).

  68. 68.

    Müller-Wille and Orel (2007); Rheinberger and Müller-Wille (2017).

  69. 69.

    Radick (2016).

  70. 70.

    Lévi-Strauss (1962/1966, 257).

  71. 71.

    Collingwood (1994).

  72. 72.

    Canguilhem (1966/2005).

  73. 73.

    Sapp (1987); Olby (1989).

  74. 74.

    Laubichler and Maienschein (2007); Barahona et al. (2010); Dröscher (2014). On Nägeli and colloid chemistry, see Liu (2016, ch. 4).

  75. 75.

    Jordanova (1995).

  76. 76.

    See Arni (2015) for an interesting exception.

  77. 77.

    Franklin (2013); Sabean et al. (2013).

  78. 78.

    Smith (2006).

  79. 79.

    For notable exceptions, see Lugt (2004) and López-Beltrán (2007).

References

  • Allen GE (1991) Essay review: history of agriculture and the study of heredity – a new horizon. J Hist Biol 24:529–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen GE (2002) The changing image of biology in the twentieth century. In: Stamhuis IH, Koetsier T, De Pater C, Van Helden A (eds) The changing image of science. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 43–83

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Arni C (2015) Traversing birth: continuity and contingency in research on development in nineteenth-century life and human sciences. Hist Philos Life Sci 37:50–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barahona A, Suarez-Díaz E, Rheinberger H-J (eds) (2010) The hereditary hourglass: genetics and epigenetics, 1868–2000. Preprint 392. Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson W (1900–1901) Problems of heredity as a subject for horticultural investigation. J R Hortic Soc 25:54–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson W (1902) Mendel’s Principles of Heredity: A Defence. At the University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • de Beer G (1964) Mendel, Darwin, and Fisher (1865-1965). Notes Rec R Soc Lond 19:192–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett JH (ed) (1965) Gregor Mendel. Experiments in plant hybridization. Mendel’s original paper in English translation with commentary and assessment by the late Sir Ronald Fisher. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop BE (1996) Mendel’s opposition to evolution and to Darwin. J Hered 87:205–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowler PJ (1988) The non-Darwinian revolution: reinterpreting a historical myth. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowler PJ (1989) The Mendelian revolution: the emergence of hereditarian concepts in modern science and society. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannigan A (1979) The reification of Mendel. Soc Stud Sci 9:423–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhardt RW (1994) Ernst Mayr: biologist-historian. Biol Philos 9:359–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callender LA (1988) Gregor Mendel: an opponent of descent with modification. Hist Sci 26:41–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell M (1982) Mendel’s theory: its context and plausibility. Centaurus 26:38–69

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Canguilhem G (2005) The object of the history of sciences. In: Gutting G (ed) Continental philosophy of science. Oxford, Blackwell, pp 198–207 (Originally published in French, 1966)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson EA (1966) The gene: a critical history. Saunders, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Castle WE (1916) Genetics and eugenics: a textbook for students of biology and a reference book for animal and plant breeders. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill F (1987) From heredity theory to ‘Vererbung’: the transmission problem, 1850–1915. Isis 78:337–364

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Collingwood RG (1994) The idea of history, edited by van der Dussen J. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Correns C (1900) G. Mendels Regel über das Verhalten der Nachkommenschaft der Rassenbastarde. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 18:158–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Correns C (ed) (1905) Gregor Mendels Briefe an Carl Nägeli, 1866–1873. Ein Nachtrag zu den veröffentlichten Bastardierungsversuchen Mendels. Teubner, Leipzig

    Google Scholar 

  • Dear P (1995) Cultural history of science: an overview with reflections. Sci Technol Hum Values 20:150–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delaporte F (ed) (1994) A vital rationalist. Selected writings from George Canguilhem. Zone Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dröscher A (2014) Images of cell trees, cell lines, and cell fates: the legacy of Ernst Haeckel and August Weismann in stem cell research. Hist Philos Life Sci 36:157–186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dröscher A (2015) Gregor Mendel, Franz Unger, Carl Nägeli and the magic of numbers. Hist Sci 54:492–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farley J (1982) Gametes and spores: ideas about sexual reproduction. 1750–1914. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher RA (1936) Has Mendel’s work been rediscovered? Ann Sci 1:115–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault M (1971) Orders of discourse. Rupert S (trans). Soc Sc Inf 10:7–30. Originally published in French, 1970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin A, Edwards AWF, Fairbanks DJ, Hartl DL (2008) Ending the Mendel-Fisher controversy. Univ. of Pittsburgh Pr., Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin S (2013) Biological relatives – IVF, stem cells and the future of kinship. Duke University Press, Durham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freudenthal G, McLaughlin P (eds) (2009) The social and economic roots of the scientific revolution. Texts by Boris Hessen and Henryk Grossmann, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 278. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasking E (1967) Investigations into generation 1651–1828. Hutchinson, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaudillière JP, Löwy I (eds) (2001) Heredity and infection: the history of disease transmission. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gausemeier B (2014) Pedigrees of madness: the study of heredity in nineteenth and early twentieth century psychiatry. Hist Philos Life Sci 36:467–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gausemeier B, Müller-Wille S, Ramsden E (eds) (2013) Human heredity in the twentieth century. Pickering and Chattoo, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayon J, Wunenburger J-J (eds) (1995) Le Paradigme de la filiation. L’Harmattan, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass HB (1953) The long neglect of scientific discovery: Mendel’s laws of inheritance. In: Johns Hopkins History of Ideas Club (ed) Studies in intellectual history. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, pp 148–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Gliboff S (1999) Gregor Mendel and the laws of evolution. Hist Sci 37:217–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harwood J (2000) The rediscovery of Mendelism in agricultural context: Erich von Tschermak as plant-breeder. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences – Series III – Sciences de La Vie 3232:1061–1067

    Google Scholar 

  • Heimans J (1968) Ein Notizblatt aus dem Nachlass Gregor Mendels mit Analysen eines seiner Kreuzungsversuche. Folia Mendeliana 4:5–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Heimans J (1970) A recently discovered note on hybridization in Mendel’s handwriting. Folia Mendeliana 5:13–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodge J (1985) Darwin as a lifelong generation theorist. In: Kohn D (ed) The Darwinian heritage. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 204–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood N, Flemming R, Kassell L (in press) Reproduction: antiquity to the present day. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Iltis H (1924) Gregor Johann Mendel: Leben, Werk und Wirkung. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Iltis H (1966) Life of Mendel. Paul C, Paul E (trans). London, Allen & Unwin

    Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka E, Lamb M (2005) Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob F (1996) The logic of life: a history of heredity. Spillman BE (trans). Princeton, Princeton University Press Originally published in French, 1970

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahn I (1958) Zur Geschichte der Wiederentdeckung der Mendelschen Gesetze. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Friedrich-Schiller Universität Jena, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe 7:2155–2127

    Google Scholar 

  • Jardine N (2003) Whigs and stories: Herbert Butterfield and the historiography of science. Hist Sci 41(2003):125–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordanova L (1995) Interrogating the concept of reproduction in the eighteenth century. In: Ginsburg FD, Rapp R (eds) Conceiving the new world order. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 369–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Kampourakis K (2010) Mendel and the path to genetics: portraying science as a social process. Sci & Educ 22:293–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kampourakis K (2015) Myth 16. That Gregor Mendel was a lonely pioneer of genetics, being ahead of his time. In: Numbers RL, Kampourakis K (eds) Newton’s apple and other myths about science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 129–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller EF (2000) The century of the gene. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein J, Klein N (2013) Solitude of a humble genius – Gregor Johann Mendel, Vol. 1: Formative years. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kříženecký J (ed) (1965) Fundamenta Genetica: the revised edition of Mendel’s classical paper with a collection of 27 papers published during the rediscovery era. Moravian Museum, Brno

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroeber AL (1917) The superorganic. Am Anthropol., New Series 19:163–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laubichler MD, Maienschein J (eds) (2007) From embryology to evo-devo: a history of developmental evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesky E (1951) Die Zeugungs- und Vererbungslehren der Antike und ihr Nachwirken. Abhandlungen der geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur in Mainz, Nr. 19. Franz Steiner, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Lévi-Strauss C (1966) The savage mind. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London. Originally published in French, 1962

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu D (2016) Visions of life and matter: protoplasm, scientific microscopy, and the origins of molecular biology, 1839–1941. PhD thesis. University of Wisconsin-Madison

    Google Scholar 

  • López Beltrán C (1994) Forging heredity: from metaphor to cause, a reification story. Stud Hist Philos of Sci 25:211–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • López-Beltrán C (2004a) In the cradle of heredity: French physicians and L’Hérédité Naturelle in the early nineteenth century. J Hist Biol 37:39–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • López-Beltrán C (2004b) El sesgo hereditario: ámbitos históricos del concepto de herencia biológica. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Beltrán C (2007) Hippocratic bodies, temperament and Castas in Spanish America (1570-1820). J Span Cult Stud 8:253–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Lugt M (2004) Le ver, le démon et la vierge. Les théories médiévales de la génération extraordinaire. Belles Lettres, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Lugt M, de Miramon C (2008) L’hérédité entre Moyen Age et époque moderne. SISMEL – Edizioni del Galluzzo, Florence

    Google Scholar 

  • Macherey P (2009) Althusser and the concept of a spontaneous philosophy of scientists. Parrhesia 6:14–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Matalová A (1992) Vítězslav Orel, chairman of the Mendelianum, retired. Folia Mendeliana 26–27 (1991–92): 118–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1973) The recent historiography of genetics. J Hist Biol 6:125–154

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1982) The growth of biological thought: diversity, evolution and inheritance. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1990) When is historiography Whiggish? J Hist Ideas 51:301–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendel G (1866) Versuche über Pflanzen-Hybriden. Verhandlungen des Naturforschenden Vereines zu Brünn 4:3–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendel G (1901) Experiments in plant hybridization, with an introductory note by W. Bateson, M.A., F.R.S. J R Hortic Soc 26 (1901, Part I):1–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendel G (1902) Experiments in plant-hybridisation. In: Bateson W (ed) Mendel’s principles of heredity: a defence. At the University Press, Cambridge, pp 40–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendel G (1966) “Experiments on plant hybrids,” In: Curt S and Sherwood ER (eds) The origin of genetics: a Mendel source book. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, pp 1–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendel G (2016a) Experiments on plant hybrids (1866). Translation and commentary by Staffan Müller-Wille and Kersten Hall. British Society for the History of Science Translation Series. URL http://www.bshs.org.uk/bshs-translations/mendel

  • Mendel G (2016b) “Experiments on plant hybrids,” Scott A, Daniel JF (trans). Genetics, 204:407–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton RK (1996) On social structure and science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wille S (2007) Hybrids, pure cultures, and pure lines: from nineteenth-century biology to twentieth-century genetics. Stud Hist Phil Biol Biomed Sci 38:796–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wille S (2011) Making sense of essentialism. Crit Q 53:61–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wille S, Brandt C (eds) (2016) Heredity explored: between public domain and experimental science, 1850–1930. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wille S, Orel V (2007) From Linnaean species to Mendelian factors: elements of hybridism, 1751-1870. Ann Sci 64:171–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wille S, Rheinberger H-J (eds) (2007) Heredity produced: At the crossroads of biology, politics and culture, 1500–1870. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wille S, Rheinberger H-J (2012) A cultural history of heredity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ogburn WF, Thomas D (1922) Are inventions inevitable? A note on social evolution. Polit Sci Q 37:83–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olby RC (1966) Origins of mendelism. Schocken Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Olby RC (1979) Mendel no Mendelian? Hist Sci 17:53–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olby RC (1985) Origins of Mendelism, 2nd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Olby R (1989) The dimensions of scientific controversy: the biometric-Mendelian debate. Br J Hist Sci 22:299–320

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Olby RC (1993) Constitutional and hereditary disorders. In: Bynum WF, Porter R (eds) Companion encyclopedia of the history of medicine. Routledge, London, pp 412–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Olby RC (1997) Mendel, mendelism and genetics. MendelWeb. URL http://www.mendelweb.org/MWolby.html. last accessed 2 Jan 2016

  • Olby R, Gautrey P (1968) Eleven references to Mendel before 1900. Ann Sci 24:7–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ophir A, Shapin S (1991) The place of knowledge: a methodological survey. Sci Context 4:3–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Orel V (1992) Jaroslav Krizenecky (1896-1964), tragic victim of Lysenkoism in Czechoslovakia. Q Rev Biol 67:487–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orel V (1996) Gregor Mendel: the first geneticist. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Orel V (2005) Contested memory: debates over the nature of Mendel’s paradigm. Hereditas 142:98–102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Orel V, Hartl DL (1994) Controversies in the interpretation of Mendels discovery. Hist Philos Life Sci 16:436–455

    Google Scholar 

  • Paleček P (2016) Vítězslav Orel (1926–2015): Gregor Mendel’s biographer and the rehabilitation of genetics in the communist bloc. Hist Philos Life Sci 38:4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-016-0104-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Porter T (2018) Genetics in the madhouse: the unknown history of heredity. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Radick G (2011) Physics in the Galtonian sciences of heredity. Stud Hist Phil Biol Biomed Sci 42:129–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radick G (2012) Should ‘heredity’ and ‘inheritance’ be biological terms? William Bateson’s change of mind as a historical and philosophical problem. Philos Sci 79:714–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radick G (2015) Beyond the ‘Mendel-Fisher controversy. Science 350:159–160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Radick G (2016) Presidential address: experimenting with the scientific past. Br J Hist Sci 49:153–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rheinberger H-J (1995) When did Carl Correns read Gregor Mendel’s paper: a research note. Isis 86:612–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rheinberger H-J (2008) Heredity and its entities around 1900. Stud Hist Phil Sci 39(2008):370–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rheinberger H-J, Müller-Wille S (2017) The Gene: from Genetics to Postgenomics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts HF (1929) Plant hybridization before Mendel. Hafner, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson G (1979) A prelude to genetics: theories of a material substance of heredity, Darwin to Weismann. Coronado Press, Lawrence

    Google Scholar 

  • Roger J (1998) The life sciences in eighteenth-century French thought. Keith B (ed) Robert E (trans). Stanford University Press, Stanford (Originally published in French, 1963)

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell N (1986) Like Engend’ring like: heredity and animal breeding in early modern England. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabean DW, Teuscher S, Mathieu J (eds) (2013) Kinship in Europe: approaches to long-term development (1300–1900). Berghahn, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandler I, Sandler L (1985) A conceptual ambiguity that contributed to the neglect of Mendel’s paper. Hist Philos Life Sci 7:3–70

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sapp J (1987) Beyond the gene: cytoplasmatic inheritance and the struggle for authority in genetics. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapp J (1990) The nine lives of Gregor Mendel. In: Le Grand HE (ed) Experimental inquiries historical, philosophical and social studies of experimentation in science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 137–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Secord JA (2004) Knowledge in transit. Isis 95:654–672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simunek M, Hoßfeld U, Wissemann V (2011) ‘Rediscovery’ revised: the cooperation of Erich and Armin von Tschermak-Seysenegg in the context of the ‘rediscovery’ of Mendel’s Laws in 1899–1901. Plant Biol 13:835–841

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JEH (ed) (2006) The problem of animal generation in early modern philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosna M (1966) G. Mendel memorial symposium 1865–1965: proceedings of a symposium held in Brno, August 4–7, 1965. Academia, Prague

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamhuis I, Meijer OG, Zevenhuizen EJA (1999) Hugo de Vries on heredity, 1889-1903: statistics, Mendelian laws, pangenes, mutations. Isis 90:238–267

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stern C, Sherwood ER (eds) (1966) The origin of genetics: a Mendel source book. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Stubbe H (1963) Kurze Geschichte der Genetik bis zur Wiederentdeckung der Vererbungsregeln Gregor Mendels. Vol. 2/1 of Genetik. Grundlagen, Ergebnisse und Probleme in Einzeldarstellungen. VEB Fischer, Jena

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturtevant AH (1966) A history of genetics. Modern perspectives in biology. Harper and Row, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Tschermak E (1900) Über künstliche Kreuzung bei Pisum sativum. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 18:232–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Tschermak E (ed) (1901) Versuche über Pflanzenhybriden. Zwei Abhandlungen (1865 und 1869) von Gregor Mendel. Ostwald’s Klassiker der exakten Naturwissenschaften. Nr. 121. Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vries H (1900) Das Spaltungsgesetz Der Bastarde (Vorläufige Mitteilung). Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 18:83–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller J (2012) Breeding: the human history of heredity, race, and sex. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Weigel S, Willer S, Jussen B (eds) (2013) Erbe: Übertragungskonzepte zwischen Natur und Kultur. Suhrkamp, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiling F (1992) Zur zeitlichen Datierung des genetischen ‘Notizblattes’ Johann Gregor Mendels. Folia Mendeliana 26–27:17–26

    Google Scholar 

  • White LA (1949) The science of culture, a study of man and civilisation. Grove Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnes O, Vedder U, Willer S (2008) Das Konzept der Generation: Eine Wissenschafts- und Kulturgeschichte. Frankfurt a. M, Suhrkamp

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood R, Orel V (2001) Genetic prehistory in selective breeding. A prelude to Mendel. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood R, Orel V (2005) Scientific breeding in Central Europe during the early nineteenth century: background to Mendel’s later work. J Hist Biol 38:239–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zirkle C (1951) Gregor Mendel and his precursors. Isis 42:97–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Staffan Müller-Wille .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Müller-Wille, S. (2018). Gregor Mendel and the History of Heredity. In: Dietrich, M., Borrello, M., Harman, O. (eds) Handbook of the Historiography of Biology. Historiography of Science, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74456-8_8-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74456-8_8-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74456-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74456-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics