Why “Humboldt”?
Have you heard about the Pacific Ocean Houumboldt Current? which flows from Antarctica to Chile. or maybe you have read about or visited Humboldt Bay on the coast of California, the Humboldt River in Nevada, or the Humboldt Mountains in New Zealand. This name has also been used for towns in Argentina, Canada, Germany, and South Africa. There are also businesses, schools, and sports teams that use the Humboldt name. In science also, there are more species of plant and animal named after this name than anyone else in history. Some of the species include the Humboldt squid (which lives in the Current), -penguin (Spheniscus humboldti), -bat (Histiotus humboldti), -beetle (Onthophagus humboldti), -skunk (Conepatus h.), -cactus (Mammillaria h.), -lily (Lilium h.), mushroom (Russula h.), an oak tree (Quercus h.). Despite all these examples, few people know the full name apart from questioning why things are named after him.
Beyond historical questions, we need to be aware of the names inherited from our past to understand the people involved while conscious of the risk they undertook to be glorified, like Humboldt’s case. Many people have attempted to elevate their own work using this name, without caring to give information about his motives or concerns. This has led to confusion on his actions, intent, and influences, as well as its consequences. It has been noted that Alexander von Humboldt wrote over fifty thousand letters in his career and received more than double of his letters. Almost all his literary oeuvre was destroyed in a fire at an auction after death [13; 14]. Fortunately, the recipients of his letters saved them. Over time, as these have been rediscovered (and digital technology allows them to be copied and shared online), there is a renewal of interest in the story.
In 2019. it was 250th anniversary of Alexander von Humboldt, time to reflect on the person and legacy. Events so far have included a public lecture series, as well as a political visit of Germany’s President to Ecuador and Colombia, with press releases by governments involved claiming “both countries deserve recognition for their endeavors in the fields of environmental protection and species conservation”. Despite the evidence of loss, need for disruptive change is unacknowledged. This was not for lack of opportunity: on the date of May 6, 2019, the 190th anniversary of Humboldt’s death, the world’s headlines were filled by news of a major new study estimating over a million species at risk of extinction, with humans as the primary cause. Not only did Humboldt warn of this, he would be devastated and driven to action by the news, yet the officials attending events in his honor seem unconcerned. Beyond repairing historic inaccuracy, we must change direction so more optimistic milestones are seen in future centuries.
Though privilege undeniably opened doors to Humboldt that weren’t even accessible to others, encounters with injustice and poverty caused him to realize this, and he used his ability and influence to resist misogyny, racism, colonialism, and fascism. While his status did not depend on such behaviour (and if anything, was jeopardized by it), he openly supported movements for democracy, human rights, social justice, and natural protection. As his influence grew, he sought to control the use of his narrative for purposes which did not reflect these values, yet was overwhelmed by the momentum of a brand that ultimately harmed what he sought to study and protect. After his death, his legacy came to be used for many purposes contradictory to his efforts, yet there was no counter-narrative to resolve or clarify the influence.
Many lessons can be drawn from the Humboldt story; on one side it proves the potential in each of us for planetary-scale, multi-generational impact, given basic support and resources in our youth. At the same time, it shows the fragility of individual, mortal achievement, no matter the scale, and how well-intentioned efforts can be distorted beyond their original purpose. The following article aims to provide a fully-cited summary of the Humboldt story – elaborating connections to modern developments in science, technology, education, and politics. Beyond correcting misconceptions, the goal of this is to illustrate the potential for innovation, using the systems and capabilities now available, as well as the need for renewed innovation.
Early Life
On the 14th of September, 1769, Alexander von Humboldt was born on the outskirts of Berlin; as members of Prussia’s royal court, his parents lived on a piece of land outside the city, with forest and gardens. The exploits of the Humboldt boys (Alexander and his elder brother Wilhelm) in the neighbourhood are still told in local legends, such giving the area’s oldest tree, an oak of ~400 years, an undignified nickname in reference to their family cook. While both the house and tree still stand, most of this landscape is now beneath Berlin’s Tegel airport.
While the Humboldt parents were not highly educated themselves, they had witnessed how skill in arts, languages, and sciences aided success under Prussia’s King Frederick the Great (1712 – 1786). They modeled a passion for learning to their children, and encouraged interaction with adults visiting to the home, some notable instances being the children’s book author Joachim Campe, botanistCarl Willdenow, physicianMarcus Herz and intellectual wife Henriette De Lemos, and a then-young Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. The result is that some observational texts documenting the childrens’ development are available, and have been used by historians to establish events with some certainty.
The family took advantage of tutors living in the area serving the royal family and court, and “spared no expense in securing the services of the best” [1, p. 12]. By the time Alexander was 7, the brothers were taking courses in language, mathematics, philosophy, arts, and science. Partly to being more than two years older, Wilhelm excelled, while Alexander was labeled a poor student. He instead was more interested in the outdoors, adventure books, and day-dreaming about someday undertaking expeditions of his own. Then in 1779, when Alexander was just 10, the family life was broken by the sudden death of their father, leaving a now twice-widowed mother alone to care for the boys. As there remained a family fortune, Maria Elisabeth Colomb continued to invest in opportunities for the children.
Given the age difference, Wilhem left home for university earlier, leaving Alexander to reflect on his own plans. Still fascinated by ideas of travel and adventure, he briefly considered joining the military, but under pressure from his mother to gain a safe career in public service, applied to university for public finance and administration. Soon after his arrival however, he recognized the loss of his passion and transferred to Göttingen University (the same as his brother) for sciences and philosophy.
Having been established relatively recently, and operating beyond traditional church-led religious doctrine, Göttingen was a young university with a thriving scientific community. Outside their classes, the brothers joined emerging political activist groups, and re-introduced themselves to a then-famous Goethe, who was living nearby. Many people and ideas that the Humboldt brothers encountered in this period inspired their later activities, but they also consciously rejected others, such as the scientific racism (phrenology and eugenics) cultivated by Linnaeus, Blumenbach and Cuvier, which nonetheless went on to darken western politics and science [2, p. 209]. They instead established friendships with people such as Georg Lichtenberg, who in addition to work on electromagnetism, advocated public teaching of science, and was an outspoken critic of charlatans of the day, hawking pseudoscience and “magic” such as Mesmerism and Physiognomy, not to mention being a professed atheist. Another mentor to Alexander in particular was Georg Forster, who in 1772 had accompanied his father Johann Forster in Captain Cook’s circumnavigation of the Southern Hemisphere. While the elder Forster had been commissioned, Georg’s own summary of the expedition – often contradicting his father – established the younger’s fame [RiG, p. 263]. It was Forster in particular who impressed Alexander as a naturalist and ethnographer, and in the summer of 1790, the pair journeyed down the Rhine and across the English Channel to the Royal Society, where a 20-year-old Humboldt met famed scientists of the day, such as Joseph Banks [3].
Though Alexander’s interests and scientific ambitions had been stoked, he submitted again to maternal pressure to pursue a traditional, safer career. He enrolled in Freiburg’s Mining Academy – at the time, the world’s oldest still-operating mine training school – which promised bureaucratic safety, as well as the chance to learn more about geology. The Academy was led by the well-known geologist Abraham Werner, a radical proponent of theories of sedimentation and stratification (which despite being inspired by the Biblical “great flood” story, called Neptunism, are now accepted as the category of rock called ‘sedimentary’) and passionate instructor [4, p. 325]. This exposure to geologic concepts and timescales had a strong influence on Humboldt’s approach to other fields, causing him to be one of the first to understand the significance of matching rock types on both sides the Atlantic Ocean (evidencing continental drift), as well as exotic fossils discovered in mines of Europe [5].
Starting a job as a mine inspector in 1792, Humboldt impressed his superiors with enthusiasm to improve operating efficiency, productivity alongside safety, community equity, and environmental sustainability. At odds with others in this position, he often spent time underground with miners themselves; on witnessing their living and work conditions, became an advocate for measures such as injury compensation, safety reforms, and training [6, p. 60]. These efforts drew attention: in 5 years, he was promoted to Chief Mining Officer of Franconia, yet instead of relaxing into an upper-class life, he dedicated his time to visit mines of interest, and spent most of his salary on materials for study, experimenting, and contributing to research on topics of interest.
The 1796 death of the Humboldt family matriarch Maria Elisabeth removed oversight of the family fortune, and it was used as an opportunity by the brothers to refocus their careers on their passions – Wilhelm in education policy (until his progressivism caused him to retire), and at 27, Alexander quit his mining work to plan a research expedition, of which he had dreamt since his youth.
Various conflicts of the time made his ambition of full global circumnavigation impossible, and several years passed in failed attempts to join various expeditions to Africa and Asia. When the opportunity arose in 1799 to ‘pitch’ Spain’s king for a visit to the region of the Americas under Spanish colonial control, Humboldt seized it – drawing on childhood skills in Spanish, as well as political and geographic literacy to negotiate an authorization. The terms of the agreement required self-funding of the trip, as well as to donate findings to the Spanish crown, but Humboldt and his companion the French botanist Aimé Bonpland ultimately ignored it, and nonetheless became the first non-Spaniard Europeans to visit the region in centuries. The rest of this article summarizes observations of this trip and events thereafter, to clarify why Humboldt broke his contract to the Spanish king, and contextualize what he did thereafter.
Influence on Science
Most studies of European scientific history focus on a few individuals with the privilege to study, network and conduct research, and be recognized for their efforts, while others labored in shadows. Recent widening of research has shown this to be misleading: not only were there diverse (international and local) contributors to science that are left out of historical summaries [7], many successful scientists relied on women in their family, including siblings and spouses. While Humboldt had neither, he was mentored by and collaborated with many woman scientists on topics of mutual interest, and was careful to cite their contributions on-the-record. These included early salons in Berlin and Paris with Henriette Hertz, Rahel Varnagen (both Jewish), as well as
Humboldt is credited in various disciplines for helping “found” their domain, yet this was never his ambition – rather, his focus inherently went beyond any one subject, to the trans-disciplinary study of connections between systems, from interplanetary to microscopic scales, with particular interest in invisible connections. In his own words, he wanted to study how “the forces of nature interact on one another and the environment influences plant and animal life” [11, p. 65]. While the resulting academic career is interesting, viewing any person in just these terms is misleading, and his activities inevitably grew political, as it grew clear how powerful influence over scientific knowledge production and access was. Coming from privilege and having limited incentive to diverge, Humboldt became passionate about public education and political liberalization, as well as the obligation of scientists to inform and guide open society.
Scientific Method
To see the distinctiveness of Humboldt’s scientific contributions, it helps to review the context of European science in this period. For a century before his birth, the ideas of Francis Bacon and British Royal Society gained influence, proposing a “New Organ” for knowledge generation beyond the top-down rule of monarchs and priests, by fusing reductionism (isolation of systems in parts) with inductive reasoning (to find parts’ function), as well as skepticism to accept/teach results only if they can be reproduced. Humboldt admired the work of Bacon and others, but consciously went further, to focus on the “study of widespread but interconnected phenomena in order to find a definite law and a dynamical cause” in biotic and/or abiotic processes [12, p. 105].
An example of the tension between Baconian reductionism and interconnection in science is Carl Linnaeus’ (and as research shows, his wife Sara Elisabeth) Systema Naturae – an effort to list and order all organisms. When published in 1735, the print was 11 pages, covered only Europe, and located most humans in a hierarchy below monarchs and priests (who led by “divine providence”), and in turn being served by other creatures. The Linnaean paradigm remains influential to this day, with its hierarchy of biological organisms (kingdom-class-order-genus-species) and two-word binomial species naming structure. Yet also from its start, it’s reductionism was condemned by thinkers such as Immanuel Kant for its “arbitrary and artificial division of nature [that misses] the whole out of which the manifold character of things is being derived. We do not have as yet a system of nature“ [10]. By Alexander’s birth in 1769, Systema Naturae had been revised to reach over 3000 pages of organisms, but even this remained flawed – ignoring things such as long-extinct species. Though Humboldt didn’t reject Linnaean taxonomy outright (having begun to master it by his first botany article in 1790), he became familiar enough with its limits to propose his own changes/additions, and endorse others’ radical ideas about underlying relationships between species.
While Humboldt was far from the only thinker to focus on topics of interdisciplinarity, his support for this in the face of strong reductionist mainstream was significant. Beyond adopting merely a cross-disciplinary approach, he explicitly sought to advance a practice of learning and working between disciplines, to make new connections in unexpected ways, partly due to technological advances (described later in this article). Some researchers argue such trans-disciplinary methods are sufficiently distinct from Bacon to merit the distinction and descriptor of Humboldtian Science. Despite that such views were not unique to Humboldt, it is undeniable that his open sharing of his work, as well as open engagement with the scientific community about new research possibilities, had a considerable influence on scientific endeavours.
Scientific Contemporaries
The historic record contains many examples of scientists in Europe mentioning Humboldt’s assistance – whether by provisioning a piece of data, or a contact who might be able to support. In the words of Charles Babbage, “one of [his] most remarkable characteristics…was that he not merely loved science for its own sake, but derived pleasure and purpose from assisting with his information and advice any other inquirer, however humble, who might need it” [8, p. 118]. A review of these relationships shows Humboldt accepted – even desired – a legacy of building-up others pursuing their own ambitions. This altruism also makes sense, given his appreciation of science as a “team effort” of knowledge production, rather than fame or publication count. We know that Humboldt’s fame encouraged a lack of bibliographic diligence – excusable in the past as the connection is “so obviously central…a citation would have been redundant” [15, p. 13], as Humboldt has faded, the history of significant ideas is being distorted.
Two admirers of Humboldt were Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, the pair of British scientists now widely credited with the discovery of evolution. In fact, both heavily referenced Humboldt throughout their writing, from Voyage of the Beagle (1839) to Origin of Species (1859), and Narrative of travels on the Amazon and Rio Negro (1853), to … .
In his own autobiography, Charles Darwin recalled how, on being lent a copy of Humboldt’s Personal Narrative by his teacher and mentor John Henslow, he was inspired to the extent of hand-copying out “long passages…and read them aloud on [his camping/research] excursions” [16]. Not long after, Darwin began planning a voyage of his own to the relatively nearby island of Tenerife, following Humboldt’s footsteps. Despite committing to the extent of making his departure plans known and starting to learn Spanish, the initiative failed. Yet in an echo of Humboldt, it was not long after this Darwin received an invitation to join the Beagle on its global circumnavigation.
Just before the Beagle’s departure in December 1831, Henslow – wanting his own copy of Humboldt’s book returned – gifted Darwin a fresh one. This briefly created a minor but historically interesting problem: the Beagle’s captain already had a copy in his ship library (that he did not want to leave behind), and was concerned about excess weight. Thankfully for posterity, Darwin was allowed an exception, and filled the margins of this book with notes, while letters back to friends in Britain are full of references such as that “while I formerly admired Humboldt, I now almost adore him; he alone gives any notion of the feelings…on entering the tropics” [17, p. 141. online].
As soon as Darwin returned to Europe in 1839, he sent a draft of his first book to a then 70-year-old Humboldt. Despite this being mainly a summary of observations (of what later became Voyage of the Beagle), only hinting at synthesis to come
, Humboldt’s reply shows recognition of potential, praising “one of the most remarkable works… I have had the pleasure to see [given the] ingenious observations… on which you have enlarged and corrected my views.” In turn, Darwin returned his “thanks for your very kind letters: it was an honor I scarcely ventured to hope for” [18, p. 171]. While the two rarely met in person, they communicated by letter until the end of Humboldt’s life two decades later. Though Humboldt passed-away before publication of Origin of Species, he anticipated its impact, writing to Charles that “considering the importance…this may be the greatest success that my own humble work could bring. Works are of value only if they give rise to better ones” [19, p. 15].
Humboldt consistently behaved in altruistic ways toward his peers in his career, reviewing manuscripts, sharing ideas and connections, and providing encouragement to under-recognized and early career researchers. Beyond Darwin and Wallace, other figures who corresponded with (and were cited by) Humboldt include Mary Anning, Charles Babbage, Michael Faraday, Carl Gauss, Caroline & William Herschel, Pierre-Simon Laplace, Sarah Bowdich Lee, Charles Lyell, Blaise Pascal, Mary Somerville, Robert Remak and Allesandro Volta.
Given that so many scientists named species after Humboldt, his own pick when faced by this decision is noteworthy. The person he chose was Maria Sibylla Merian: a scientist from a century before, whose texts had been an inspiration to Humboldt, but more widely had been forgotten. Merian was one of the first to publish sketches of insect metamorphosis, plant germination and flowering, helping overturn prevailing Aristotelian views of spontaneous generation, and providing data foundational to later progress in biology. In 1699, at age 52, she even took a self-funded (by art sales) expedition to Surinam with her daughters [20].
Scientific Communication
Humboldt’s definition of science included the systematic generation of new knowledge, as well as its active sharing, distribution and application for collective human benefit. As democracy began to emerge in Europe, he saw the importance of public education and scientific literacy, leading to additional, non-research contributions. Though science remained his passion, he was active in various political movements, as well as advised policymakers on topics as broad as education to the environment.
Over Humboldt’s career, he saw popular opinion about science shift from widespread disinterest and apathy about a pastime of the wealthy, with low relevance to everydays needs, towards a respected profession with political influence and even celebrity. An unintended result of his own efforts to communicate in digestible, engaging ways in written works meant that for a period of time Humboldt was one of the most famous people in the western world. As later parts of this article show, his interactions with political leaders made it clear the extent to which scientific theory and data are manipulated to influence public opinion, so he became willing to call-out against such acts. He not only repudiated inaccurate results, but used his prominence to raise pressure against practices such as slavery, setting a precedent for engaging in politics as a scientist.
In summary, Humboldt’s scientific interests were remarkably broad, but were not aimless. Rather than master an individual subject, his ambition was to make new connections between disciplines. This resulted in an epic record of contributions in fields including astronomy, biology, chemistry, climatology, economics, electromagnetism, linguistics, medicine, meteorology, geography, geology, paleontology, volcanology and zoology.
Influence on Technology
Science and technology have always been intertwined. Centuries before Humboldt, the printing press was a key ingredient of the Enlightenment, allowing rapid sharing of written knowledge. Until the period of Humboldt’s birth in the late 1700s, scientific research was limited by low-accuracy, subjective observational data provided by human senses. Sudden leaps in the affordability and accessibility of devices to accurately record time, location, temperature, humidity, elevation, magnetism, electricity, and more caught experimentalists of the time unprepared. In contrast, the study of natural systems by augmented means was a primary focus of Humboldt’s research.
Humboldt’s penchant for experimenting with technology is recorded in anecdotes from throughout his life. At just sixteen years of age, upon learning of Benjamin Franklin’s discovery to avert lightning strikes by metal conduit (rod), he installed this device on his family home to provoked objections from local clergy as a “wanton trespassing against God’s will” [24, p. 21]. At university, his first published (undergraduate) paper was on “the weaving-loom in use among the Greeks and Romans,” in which he argued “the loom of the ancients was just the the high-warp loom introduced by [Arab] Saracens into France” [25, p. 76].
At 27, as he worked underground in mines, Humboldt had a near-death experience from exposure to poisonous gas. Collaborating with miners and some leading European chemists of the time, he investigated the properties of this gas, and developed a ‘safety lamp’ to warn of this otherwise invisible hazard, as well as a pioneering fresh-air ‘respirator’ to rescue those already subdued. He openly shared these designs, telling his colleagues “it is no secret [and they are free to] tell anyone” [26, p. 52]. While these technologies would be put to horrific offensive use in the future, Humboldt’s interest was the protection of life.
In the early 1790s, public interest and curiosity in the subject of electricity was renewed due to Luigi Galvani’s experiments on stimulated frog legs, which provoked controversy for implying “life force” as abiotic. Keen to understand, Humboldt studied the literature, then engaged the best known researchers such as Allesandro Volta, Georg Lichtenberg, Johann Ritter, Samuel Thomas von Sömmering, and others. He then conducted over 3000 experiments over the next several years – many on his own body – and published results. Some gruesome descriptions of these experiments partially inspired Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.
It is thought that Humboldt nearly discovered the battery in this period, yet he chose to suspend this work in favour of his trip to the Americas (though the trip itself was partly motivated by the potential to study electric eels). Volta’s breakthrough was made while Humboldt was on his trip, and while key parts of Humboldt’s assumptions are now known to be false, Volta is also known to have had an interest in bio-electricity, and referenced Humboldt’s experimental reports to a colleague on their publication [27].
Enthusiasm for innovation must be tempered by rigor in application, and in preparing for his trip to the Americas, Humboldt carefully researched and tested the tools he would use, to ensure accuracy and reliability. To navigate the many competing designs, he consulted domain experts and conducted his own tests, then took over 40 tools, including “thermometers for measuring the temperature of air and water, barometers for fixing elevation above sea level, quadrants and sextants to determine geographic position (small enough to fit in a pocket), telescopes, microscopes, a scale, chronometers, compasses, rain gauge, substances for performing chemical assays… electrometers… hygrometers (for measuring atmospheric moisture), a dip needle (for variations in Earth’s magnetic field), and eudiometers (for the amount of oxygen in the air)” [27, p. 25]. From the time of departing Europe, Humboldt then made observations and recordings using these instruments intensively, and yet despite their value and personal importance, he then donated many to Mexican and American hosts when ending his trip.
It is an interesting reflection of Humboldt’s character that despite discovering over 3000 plant and animal specimens unknown to western science [28], as well as geographic and anthropological discoveries, his own pick for the “most significant” finding of this trip, was a nuanced geomagnetic signal of his compass’ “dip angle” that implied a correlation in regard to latitude, and therefore a solar-induced connection. Continued measurements at sunrise, sunset, and during the eclipse also appeared to show the sun caused what Humboldt termed “magnetic storms” [29, p. 289].
Understanding the need for robust data, and statistical analysis thereof to support his claims, Humboldt sought the aid of mathematicians skilled in statistics and spherical projection. He approached Carl Friedrich Gauss, newly famous as the “prince of mathematicians,” for Gaussian (normal) distribution to predict the return of Ceres in 1801 [30, p. 50]. This resulted in the first (co-authored) papers to speculate reproducibly Earth’s magnetic field emanated in ‘poles’ whose locations were predicted.
Humboldt’s grasp of connections between multiple processes occurring deep inside the rock beneath his feet, and interplanetary orbits above, is a remarkable achievement. Yet to validate these hypotheses, he realized the need for additional monitoring systems to collect data at relevant scales. Facing the obstacle of national boundaries, Humboldt lobbied senior members in the scientific societies of Britain, France, and Russia to install standardized detectors on their territory, synchronize data collection and pool their results. This took considerable effort to achieve, yet resulted in arguably the first-ever international Earth observation program. Humboldt would have been astonished by today’s international choreography of Swarm, Cluster and other satellites to study Earth’s magnetosphere and solar budget.
Realizing the need for a talented mathematician to analyse and process his data, Humboldt set a strategy to secure the interest of Gauss, already famous at this time, by showing his results while the latter was attending a conference nearby. The resulting efforts not only led to advances in physics for later breakthroughs in electromagnetism, but in 1832, with funding arranged by Humboldt, Gauss and his collaborator Weber developed the first-ever telegraph [31]. Despite the commercial failure of the design, it validated the idea. Humboldt later supported American Samuel Morse [32], and Werner Siemens about their own designs, and then once telegraphs started to gain use on land, he then supported the efforts of Matthew Maury and others in a trans-Atlantic cable, calling it a “daring project of connecting the two hemispheres” [33, p. 56].
On return from America in 1804, Humboldt was living in Paris again only briefly when the first high-altitude flight (>7km) was conducted nearby. The pilots Joseph Gay-Lussac and Jean-Baptiste Biot sought to establish if magnetic forces and gas mixtures change according to altitude, but their stunt also captured Parisian interest and made them the latest scientific celebrities. Unfortunately for Humboldt, their result of no detectable change in magnetic and eudiometric data “at all attainable elevations” contradicted his hypotheses, and yet on first meeting Gay-Lussac at a party, as later recounted by mutual friend Arago, Humboldt congratulated the celebrity of-the-day, and offered friendship. The pair went on to discover the 2:1 hydrogen-oxygen ratio of water, and improve many instruments [34, p. 161].
Another noteworthy colleague of Humboldt was Charles Babbage, the British scientist and mathematician. While Babbage had already spent the better part of a decade working on a mechanical “difference engine,” at the time he contacted Humboldt in 1828, a lack of clear progress had exhausted support in England, and he was under considerable stress. Humboldt welcomed Babbage to Berlin with full honours as a visiting scholar, and continued a dialogue on the machines until at least 1841 [35]. While Babbage’s devices were never finished, they are considered a crucial step on the path to electronic, programmable computers a century later.
In 1838, Humboldt joined a Committee of the French Academy of Sciences to witness a demonstration of the pre-camera device called Daguerreotype. Despite the early state of the technology, he instantly saw the potential of such devices, having laboriously hand-drawn landscapes and specimens over his career. He purchased a unit [36, p. 204], and the ‘selfie’ shown is now an example of the first pictures ever taken. Photography is now ubiquitous, being a key tool across many scientific domains, as well as military, journalism, conservation and artistic uses.
It is important to assess a given technology’s potential benefit, to impacts. Though framing an innovation as ‘progress’ for humanity is an easy way to market a project, wiser assessments realize the truth is more complex: technological “progress” has social and natural impacts, that have historically been ignored to a degree that many now oppose technology, almost in principle. Recent political events encourage further techno-pessimism, and yet the contributions of Humboldt and his contemporaries show the power of ingenuity to advance our understanding of environmental processes. As the scientific reality of environmental and social ‘externalities’ are themselves increasingly scientifically established, it is clear that well-designed, -tested, and -validated systems are needed to augment human capacity to manage environmental systems. A tension must be navigated between focused innovation to address human priorities, and harm reduction of innovations that harm the collective.
Many criticisms of historical/current technology have legitimacy and importance. But the distrust of social- and environmental justice leaders of technology does not halt development, while limiting the amount of influence. The approach of Humboldt may be a guide, in its focus on ability to observe, assess, and collaborate on matters of scientific importance. The needed functionalities include the capacity to observe the environment in its present condition, to determine past processes which led to this point, anticipate potential futures, and support navigation toward a more optimal condition on a continuous basis. Significant challenges remain, from technical and resolution of cultural ramifications, and avert abuse. The requirements must systems that observe private and collective security, inequity, engagement and empowerment, support global scaling, as well as raise speed of implementation. Much dialogue and collaboration will be needed.
Influence on Education
Of the two Humboldt brothers, Wilhelm is better-known in education for his contributions to pedagogy, and education policy, as well as being the main founder of the Berlin University and Humboldtian model for higher education. According to Alexander himself, their childhood tutors had been “doubtful whether even ordinary powers of intelligence would ever be developed in him [compared with Wilhelm], and that it was only in quite later boyhood [he] began to show any evidence of mental vigour” [37, p. 31]. Yet it is clear an intrinsic drive to learn, and for sharing this learning with others, was core to Alexander’s development and personality. Furthermore, despite the fact that Alexander “never accepted the many and diverse university chairs offered him” [21, p. 52], preferring to work on an independent basis, he collaborated with academics, taught (the public, outside university walls), as well as helped found several schools. A label of poor student is inadequate to summarize a career of this extent, and its persistence raises questions.
In 1793, while in the mines, Alexander observed foremen communicating with labourers by hand-drawn diagrams, due to illiteracy from the young age at which children were starting work – in some cases, as early as 11 years old [38]. There were no secondary schools available for working-class children in Prussia, so Alexander founded one. Its aim was to provide literacy in reading and math, as well as inspire pupils to learn beyond “the hard work of mining, [and] to combat ‘superstition’ along with propagation of ‘reasonable concepts,’ so communities would not ‘undermine their prosperity through foolish undertakings.” Initial resistance to funding its expense from mine administrators was overcome by the community support, and skill of graduates. It was reported that “zeal is so great that [the building] is now open until 11 o’clock in the evening” [ibid, p. 61]. This demonstrates the younger Humboldt brother’s appreciation for education, as well as early awareness of inequalities in access, and its constitutive importance to human development.
In 1809, the Humboldt brothers co-founded the first University of Berlin, now re-named in their honour. Though Wilhelm was the driving force in its establishment as Alexander was then living in Paris, he helped design the governance structure and attract staff. The governance structure eventually spread around the world, becoming known as the ‘Humboldtian model of higher education,’ in contrast to prior universities of the era “devoted to transmission of [accepted] knowledge” from church authority, their institution was mandated to pursue “the search for, the pursuit of, the discovery of [scientifically based] knowledge,” and ensure “freedom of scientific inquiry” by legal, political, and financial means. The long-term goal was to channel advances made by researchers to students through “unity of teaching and research,” and this logic was adopted by many universities throughout Europe, and was cited at the founding of Johns Hopkins, which opened in 1874 as an early “true” university of the US [39, p. 253].
After presentations of his expeditions and research findings were shown to be of considerable audience interest, Alexander decided to raise public interest and literacy in science, in a then-apathetic Berlin, by direct action. In 1827 he delivered a series of open lectures titled Physical Geography and Man’s Effort to Understand the Cosmos. Despite their duration and technical content, they were so well received it became a template for Humboldt’s final, most ambitious book. Released in sections between 1845 and 1858, and left unfinished, Cosmos: Physical Description of the Universe sought to narrate a journey from the edge of the (then) known universe, through natural non-living and living systems, while detailing interconnections [40, p. 53]. The intent was to convey “all that has been accumulated up to the present day by an attentive and variously directed study of nature…[and how] in the course of ages, mankind has gradually attained to a partial insight into the relative dependence of phenomena. [The] duty is to depict the results of our knowledge in all their bearings with reference to the present” [41, p. 64].
After a bestseller release Cosmos that sold out in two months, according to his publisher, demand for the sequel in 1847 was “epoch-making,” as prints “destined for London and St. Petersburg were torn out of our hands by agents who wanted their orders filled for the bookstores in Vienna and Hamburg. Regular battles were fought over possession of this edition, and bribes offered for priorities” [42, p. 218]. The popularity surprised Humboldt, and even as he approached the end of his life, he used the opportunity, drawing on a life of advocacy, to highlight important political topics such as that for the “unity of the human race we [must] reject the disagreeable assumption of superior and inferior peoples… All are equally entitled to freedom in which the state of nature belongs to the individual and which in civilization belongs as a right to the entire citizenry through political institutions” [31, p. 342].
Unfortunately for his legacy in the english language, intense competition between publishers to be first to translate Cosmos volumes did not capture the ideas as eloquently or accurately as his original German. Humboldt died before completing his final book of the Cosmos series, and the books were soon outdated on publication of Origin of Species and later texts, while the lack of a continuity plan to support the Cosmos legacy with new editions caused it to fade [ibid, p. 218].
The inevitable outdatedness of his contributions was, in Humboldt’s words, “a subject of discouraging reflection, that…all works treating of empirical knowledge, and of the connection of natural phenomena and physical laws, are subject to the most marked modifications of form in the lapse of short periods of time, both by the improvement in the instruments used, and by the consequent expansion of the field of view opened to rational observation. Those scientific works which have, to use a common expression, become antiquated by the acquisition of new funds of knowledge, are thus continually being consigned to oblivion as
unreadable” (Alexandervon Humboldt, Cosmos:A Sketch of the Physical Description of the
Universe [New York: Harper and Brothers,1858; orig. Ger.1845-58], 1:xii).
Nonetheless, traces of it are woven throughout the careers of scientific figures such as Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, John Muir, Rachel Carson, and Albert Einstein. In the 20th Century, the Cosmos word and idea was re-used by new generations of science communicators: Maria Montessori wove it throughout her curriculum, Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan’s 1980 television series is well-known for encouraging young scientists to find their way, and the remakes in 201 with Druyan and Neil Degrasse-Tyson aim to achieve the same for new generations. Despite overlap in content, none of these mentions Humboldt.
While it is clear the younger Humboldt was a “difficult student” from a traditionalist view of education, his contributions to academia are undeniable. There is still much to do in order to better support diversity in learning, from motivations and learning styles, to interdisciplinary collaborations, and raising the social/political engagement of graduates. Among the differences from present-day thinking is that Alexander rejected notions of ‘education’ as conferred by institutions. Instead, he considered it the process by which an individual’s intrinsic motive to understand a topic brings them to the edge of collective knowledge, and how they might, by staying creative while also following rigorous methods, step still further ahead. He sought to foster such thinking wherever possible, writing and self-publishing, crafting institutions, aiding others’ research and policy, and answering letters personally until overwhelmed in his old age.
Influence on Politics
Long before Humboldt’s birth, Europe’s scientific enlightenment had already begun to reduce the perceived authority of monarchs and religious leaders.
While Humboldt was a cunning political operator who habitually destroyed his correspondence, he also shared considerable gossip with his friend Varnhagen von Ense. The release of these papers in xxx led to considerable new insight on his private views. Further, these records make it possible to extrapolate his position on issues that still remain important today. For example, he advocated the inclusion of women in science, the protection of indigenous livelihoods, and racial equality.
As with many Europeans weary of monarchist institutions in the 19th century, the Humboldt brothers cheered the American Declaration of Independence in 1776, and read the revolutionary writing of Ben Franklin, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. As they entered adulthood, ideas of democracy, republicanism and rule of law grew more immediate as revolutions emerged in Europe, followed by counter-revolution. The new Dutch republic in 1780 was followed by the ‘Brabant’ revolution in Belgium, France, Mainz (Germany), and beyond [28, p. 181].
While he remained an advisor to the monarchy to the end of his life, Humboldt remained a progressive voice in international affairs – both in public and in private. Toward the end of his life, his persona had become so large in Europe and the Americas, that he was receiving hundreds of letters a month, and being sought-out at his Berlin home by various people seeking political or business endorsements. Throughout the Americas, his name and story was being used to market colonized territory to potential immigrants, while distracting from processes of environmental destruction. While Humboldt’s name was undeniably complicit in the destruction of environmental and indigenous communities, and the gravity of such impacts merits sober review, evidence suggests he advocated civil liberties and human rights well before such concepts were international norms.
Slavery
Humboldt is one of the few academics of the time to support the Haitian revolution against French slavery and occupation – which preceded the French Revolution itself.
Condorcet and Arago
Thus, while he was already opposed to slavery before leaving Europe, after witnessing terrible activities on his trip to the Americas, his position as a social activist hardened. The colonial government sensed and grew so fearful of his potential to foment revolts that they issued a warrant for his arrest “for the spread of new ideas and dangerous principles among the faithful subjects of this realm at a time when the temper of the nation is in a condition so dangerous and difficult to deal with” [A, p. 396]. Unaware, he left the South American mainland for the island of Cuba, whose white elite had cultivated a reputation of being relatively anti-slavery. Humboldt , but were terrible offenders in realityrecognized the hypocrisy, and in his later Political Essay on the Island of Cuba (1826), dedicated considerable parts to the duplicity, while condemning slavery as “without doubt, the greatest of all evils that have befallen mankind” [30, p. 42]. This book was banned in Cuba and Spain, and censored in the US, yet he persisted to reference the topic throughout later publications, interleaving emphasis on its importance.
It was likely a combination of the need to stay beyond Portugese jurisdiction, avoid a British naval blockade, and interest to visit revolutionary anti-colonialists that in 1804 Humboldt detoured on his return to Europe via the United States. Though Humboldt arrived entirely unknown, and visited for just a short period, this left a deep impression on significant figures at a key time in the formation of the United States. On the other hand, the hypocrisy was not lost on Humboldt that many Americans declaring liberal ideals were themselves slave-owners, or supported indigenous genocide. He grew disillusioned. In the words of one biographer, he “had seen in America hope for humanity’s future but lived long enough to fear that his hope had been betrayed” [36, p. 95].
Colonialism
Soon after his return to Europe , Humboldt met a young Simon Bolivar who was visiting Europe from Latin America. Humboldt spoke so passionately about his experiences there and encouraged Bolivar to pursue “liberty and independence” of the continent – by Bolivar’s own admission, motivating him to become the “libertador” of (countries now called) Bolivia, Venezuela, Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, and Panama [32 p. 328]. Bolivar credits Humboldt with this push and continued to correspond with him throughout their lives, [33].
Significantly, by the mid-1800s the largest immigrant group in the United States had arrived from Germany (Deutschamerikaner), as well as a large percentage of settlers in Canada, Mexico, and Latin America. It disturbed Humboldt his own stories may be accelerating destruction and colonization, and as time progressed, he grew increasingly willing to appeal to the general public.
Despite Humboldt’s advocacy on topics which did not align with their own views, being associated his fame made endorsement (or implying it) valuable for political movements of many kinds. In 1856, on a pretext of “translation,” an unauthorized version of his Political Essay on the Island of Cuba essay was published in the US, which had been severely altered to imply support for US annexation of Cuba, and the chapter condemning slavery omitted. On being made aware, Humboldt replied by publishing an open editorial in “the New York Times, –Tribune, –Herald, and other papers [so that his condemnation of] the arbitrary manner in which his book had been treated, received the widest publicity” [34, p. 338]. The resulting uproar caused a rise in American political tension in the run-up to a crucial election. The (claimed anti-slavery) republican presidential candidate John C. Frémont’s campaign sought Humboldt’s endorsement as a “friend to liberal progress.” Though Humboldt obliged (presumably given Frémont’s policy statements and reputation for travels to the American west, in which he used a Humboldtian narrative), Frémont carefully to disclose his own leadership of indigenous massacres (at Klamath Lake, Sacramento River, and Sutter Butts) – all heinous acts Humboldt would have condemned in his time, and which would be considered as war crimes today [ibid, p. 340].
In a frustrated response to the US Supreme Court case Dred Scott of 1857 (which denied citizenship to a former slave), Humboldt encouraged Prussia’s king to pass a law that automatically freed any slaves on Prussian soil. While there is no hard evidence of direct influence, this policy anticipated Lincoln’s Civil War Emancipation Proclamation by several years [35]. Humboldt also befriended Franz Lieber, a German-American who penned the Lieber Code of 1863 – an early formalization of ‘war crimes’ also signed by Lincoln. Unfortunately, these lobbying efforts came to little. Soon after Humboldt’s death, both the Civil war and Sioux wars broke-out in the United States, following which awareness of Humboldt has steadily declined, despite the name still being present on communities he never visited, and private companies (in mining, petroleum, finance, cannabis, and more) that he might have objected to.
Europe
At the time Humboldt returned to Europe in 1804, the continent was on the brink of the Napoleonic wars. Attempted neutrality by Prussia led to defeat and the occupation of Berlin; in the trail of his father, Humboldt advised Prussia’s King during the period. His lifelong support for the monarchy implies some hypocrisy to the ideals of the 1790 Revolution, and this also weighed on Humboldt. His justification was due to the progressiveness of his king, that “the more he concerns himself with the interests of Germany, the more does he pledge himself to promote the preservation of peace throughout the world. The German confederation…is certainly a stranger to all ideas of aggression [A, p. 176]. Nonetheless, there was evident frustration at a lack of progress. On his 75th birthday in 1844, Alexander reminisced that “in 1789 I believed the world would have solved more problems than it has done” [V p. 180].
The subsequent outbreak of the 1848 Revolution validated his discontent, and Humboldt took a key role in de-escalating violence and mediating negotiations between the Prussian monarchy and democratic activists. Their peace was then betrayed however, and soon after Humboldt was ejected from the king’s inner circle. In a rising nationalist, authoritarian wave led by Otto von Bismarck, Humboldt wrote to a friend that were it “…not for his [public profile], he would not be suffered to remain in the country, but would be expelled, so strong is the hatred of the ultras and bigots.” A new political era was on the rise, and at this crucial time in the emergence of German imperial ambitions, Humboldt predicted “blood on the horizon, and it makes me sad” [V, p. 251].
After Humboldt’s death in 1859, his story was frequently used for propaganda by German political radicals. The appointment of imperialist von Bismarck as Imperial Chancellor soon brought conflict with Denmark, Austria, and France, followed by economic speculation that led to the 1873 financial crisis. In a ploy to gain resources by acquisition of territory, multiple European governments were inspired to establish geographical societies in the footprints of Humboldt, which led to the 1884 Berlin Conference, triggering a renewed colonial Scramble for Africa.
German imperialism continued rising until the conflicts of the next century, which saw its leadership in science and technology used for terrible ends. Into the 1900s, there continued to be multiple, competing narratives over the Humboldt legacy. The Nazi party sought to recast German history and culture by destroying all they called “Un-German” as part of the Gleichschaltung effort to ‘synchronize’ culture and history with their views [38]. On May 10, 1933, just three months after Hitler took his oath as Chancellor, the libraries of Berlin, including Humboldt University, were ransacked and burned to light a Goebbels speech. The scale and extent of these actions themselves show large parts of the society did not fit the narrative. Both Humboldt brothers had close Jewish friends, and were active “in fighting special legislation” against the Jews [39, p. 88]. Alexander was close with several members of the Mendelssohn family, and in another example, was so impressed by a young researcher’s work on nerve cells, he used his influence to override norms against Jews as doctors, to allow a 23-year-old Robert Remak to be the first Jew to submit a medical thesis in Berlin, and attain a research and teaching position in Vilnus in 1839. Humboldt’s support remained steadfast for decades, until in 1859 Remak was able to win appointment for as associate professor at the explicit order of Prussia’s king. In exchange, Remak dedicated many publications to Humboldt [MULLER].
As the Nazis gained power in German society, any universities which resisted were alleged to be involved in a global Jewish conspiracy against the country; however, they were unable to censor their most prominent: Albert Einstein had already left the country, then publicly resigned from the Academy of Science, and spoke out against the regime. On being challenged about these actions by other German scientists by mail, he responded that “I do not share your view that the scientist should observe silence in political matters… Does not such restraint signify a lack of responsibility? Where would we be had men like Giordano Bruno, Spinoza, Voltaire, and Humboldt behaved in such a fashion?” [Ein p. 92].
In Cold War Germany, the Humboldt legacy grew more complex as “East and West Germany produced opposing interpretations, one a Marxist-Leninist…the other a free market internationalist.” After the collapse of the Berlin Wall and German reunification the latter framing has grown in popularity, as well as, being recognized as a “supranational information network pioneer and supporter of popular causes ranging from environmentalism to gay rights” [38, p. 17]. Still today, even in German-speaking regions familiar with the story, politicians and government officials are happy to cite the name when convenient for public image, while directly contradicting his views in their actions.
In summary, Humboldt’s political influence was considerable, yet politicization of the Humboldt name itself has taken almost more significance – becoming a tool of imperial and racist ideas: twisted or “mistranslated,” as needed. Far from tolerating manipulation, when he was alive Humboldt would often resist this directly – calling-out those attempting to use his work for invalid purposes. The story underscores the importance to challenge how and what is communicated, and encourage participation in policies impacting environmental, social and economic health.
Environmentalism
While Humboldt is increasingly portrayed as a source of inspiration, or even creator of the environmental movement, his positions were not the same as many others who are associated with this – including the racism and colonial ideas. Nonetheless, many subsequent generations of western environmentalists openly disclose being inspired by Humboldt, including John Audubon, Charles Darwin, Joseph Forster, Henry David Thoreau, Thomas Jefferson, John Muir, and many others. Though environmentally-conscious, given his research related to human-environmental interdependence as well as stances on anti-racism and -colonial activism, it is reasonable to question how/if Humboldt would have supported modern conservation efforts, and where he would have diverged.
In seeking to understand natural and human systems across disciplines, his work showed that science, technology can either work to entrench damaging power structures and increase the rate of social/environmental destruction, or can also be used to increase understanding of systems’ optimal functioning, and potential to be better managed for the benefit of all.
It is now accepted that Homo sapiens exist in constant, dynamic interaction with our environment since our beginnings. For much of our history, the extent of this was a relatively localized, functional role, such as distributing seeds and helping maintain ecosystem stability by hunting, fishing, fire, and other activities [R]. However, starting in the late Pleistocene, our “increasingly intensive and complex niche construction behaviors through time [became] a key feature of human evolution, culminating in the advanced capacity for ecosystem engineering…whose early origins are increasingly apparent from cumulative archaeological and paleoecological datasets” [N]. As Humboldt and many others theorized, the network of interactions and relationships between human and natural systems has influenced cultural practices in many ways. This was further validated by the work of Dr. Elinor Ostrom, for which the (2009) Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded, for demonstrating that indigenous peoples around the world have many conventions and informal rules on the maintenance of ecosystem health on which community depends. Ongoing research in these areas has relevance for sustainability policy and innovation.
Despite longstanding affinity with nature in many cultures, in Humboldt’s childhood society of 18th Century Europe, the environment was often depicted as something wild/dangerous to be tamed, a resource whose conquest is a source of profit, or ‘Eden’ which had already been spoilt by human presence. Meanwhile, new industrial capacity led to rampant deforestation, erosion, industrial pollution, over-fishing and -hunting, as well as other activities. During his travels, Humboldt observed how liquidation of natural systems led to unanticipated costs. As described in the biography Invention of Nature, it was on his trip to the Americas in 1803, when visiting Lake Valencia, in today’s Venezuela, that he
“began to understand deforestation in a wider context and projected his local analysis forward to warn that the agricultural techniques of his day could have devastating consequences. The action of humankind across the globe, he warned, could affect future generations…[and he was, therefore, one of the first to articulate] functions of the forest for the ecosystem and the climate: the trees’ ability to store water and to enrich the atmosphere with moisture, their protection of the soil, and their cooling effect. He also talked about the impact of trees on the climate through their release of oxygen. The effects of the human species’ intervention were already ‘incalculable’ Humboldt insisted and could become catastrophic if they continued to disturb the world so brutally” [40]
Unfortunately, in Humboldt’s day, even the very concept of extinction was not taken seriously – only living species were contained in Linnaeus’ Systema Natura. Humboldt already knew this was false, thanks to his work in the mines (where he has been provided with exotic fossils), and interest in climate:biodiversity patterns, Humboldt was one of the first to grasp the implications of human excess. As detailed in earlier sections of this article, he argued science (and technologies powering it) can help us understand how the natural world supports our own species, how we affect it, and how to thrive together.
Humboldt Today
The details we know about Alexander von Humboldt show he was a remarkable person, with activities as scientist, technologist, activist, humanist and environmentalist. Long ago, he recognized the importance of links between deforestation and drought, between literacy and equality, and between environmental and human health. Not only did he think deeply about the world (in parts, and as a whole), and seek to contribute to it positively. Given that he was familiar with scientific and educational theory, as well as technical discoveries in optics, astronomy, navigation, and more, his warnings on misdirection of research and politics are poignant.
While many benefit from achievements, relatively few carry-ahead his passion to direct the use of knowledge in this way. Humboldt’s perceptiveness let him see that natural systems have always been a source of cultural and economic wealth, and that maintaining their function will require better understanding and governance. That his life was privileged is undeniable, yet he took responsibility for this, using it to learn, support, and elevate others.
Since his time much has been achieved regarding our grasp of living systems. We understand x, y, z, yet we often miss to go in the wrong direction on key parameters. As a citizen, Humboldt demonstrated how potent our individual freedoms can be, if used with focus and determination for collective benefit. His efforts had impact, and call for us to commit our own privilege, knowledge, and freedom to respond to threats against planetary health. Many of us have comparable privilege: trans-Atlantic travel, global communication, and access to scientific knowledge. Any of us can continue his work, at a scale he never imagined possible.
It is also a sobering warning that someone so well-known was unable to halt abuse of their work. There are ways to counter this today, which Humboldt may have used had they been available, from institutions dedicated to preserving research, development of ‘open source,’ and (despite their reputation), legal instruments to protect this. The immortality of a corporation is also noteworthy: more than 1000 businesses which existed at Humboldt’s birth remain operational today; such entities can operate across generations and nations, as needed, to persist a given culture and set of activities. By combining the technical, political, and financial advances since Humboldt, we are committed to human environment dynamics for the next 250 years, and beyond.
Call to Act
As the world’s populations learn where we stand on environmental harms, and push to shift our course, there remains a lack of progress – especially focused on anti-colonial, environmentalist topics. At the same time, technological progress has increased our ability to unite by social media, develop knowledge, monitor the distribution of plants and animals, inspire, teach/learn, and collaborate in new ways. Humboldt’s achievements in his career show the power of science to act as a light in finding solutions, and to accelerate progress in achieving them. Many components are already prepared, but we still need diverse contributors and practitioners – across individuals, governments, and companies – to work in coordination in order to ensure long-term access to robust information, tools, and funding.
While Humboldt’s own literary works, and those of any individual scientist, inevitably become outdated, we now have digital technologies that enable an information system which is of indefinite scale and capability, and can result in networks of international scale and intergenerational significance. It is possible to create a new form of knowledge, which exists independent of our
——-
Our logo represents Mount Chimborazo. At the time Humboldt tried to climb it in 1799, it was thought to be the highest on Earth. However, while Everest is now confirmed as higher from Earth’s surface, Chimborazo is furthest from its center (thus closest to space), and itself has been forgotten by the west. It was on this climb that Humboldt made important connections for his theory on abiotic/biotic systems’ connectivity. It also represents the escalator to extinction’ facing many temperature-dependent species from climate change.