On his frequent trips to the continent Grant became close friends with Geoffroy, a leading French comparative anatomist. The
Edinburgh extramural medical schools were fertile ground for Geoffroy's ideas, and Scottish radicals became Geoffroyan disciples. These included
William A. F. Browne, a phrenologist who later turned his energies to asylum reform and neurological psychiatry. Grant took these ideas to London, where he introduced
homology (the basic Geoffroyan technique) to his UCL students. He also advanced Lamarck and
de Blainville, whose ideas were of similar vein, and included ideas of
recapitulation theory.
Background on Geoffroy Geoffroy was a
deist, and his theory was not a theory of
common descent, but a working-out of existing potential in a given type. For him, the environment causes a direct induction of organic change. This opinion
Ernst Mayr labels as 'Geoffroyism'. It is definitely not what Lamarck believed (for Lamarck, a change in
habits is what changes the animal).
Lawrence had argued in 1816 that the climate does not directly cause the differences between human races. Geoffroy's comparative anatomy featured the comparison of the same organ or group of bones through a range of animals. He argued (1818–22) for the 'unity of composition' of all vertebrates. One of his major discoveries was the homology of the opercular plates of the
gill cover of fishes with the inner
ear ossicles of mammals. Geoffroy's methods worked well for vertebrates, but when he compared vertebrates to invertebrates by turning invertebrates upside down and partly inside out – "every animal is either inside or outside its vertebral column" – he met his
nemesis. The
Geoffroy-Cuvier debate in Paris before the Académie des Sciences (15 February 1830) saw
Georges Cuvier demolish his claim that the four Cuvierian branches of the animal kingdom could be reduced to one. The relation between the ideas of Geoffroy and Cuvier can be expressed thus: whereas with Cuvier structure determines function, with Geoffroy function determines structure. The issue between them, however, was religious, political and social as well as scientific.
Grant's programme Grant first went public on the subject of evolution in 1826. Here he speculated that 'transformation' might affect all organisms. He noted that successive strata seemed to show a progressive, natural succession of fossil animals. These forms "have evolved from a primitive model" by "external circumstances": this is a clear Lamarckian statement. Also, Grant accepted a common origin for plants and animals, and the basic units of life ('monads'), he proposed, were spontaneously generated. This is both
reductionism and materialism. The programme went further than either Geoffroy or Lamarck, but was not a complete theory of evolution.
Radicalism and Wakley Grant was a 'progressive' in both social and scientific terms. He was widely and probably correctly regarded as a materialist or
atheist: there was no place for the
supernatural in his account of biology. He was a supporter of
Thomas Wakley,
The Lancet and the
BMA, all of whom were anti-establishment in their day. The main idea of the radical reformers was that government should take over or at least oversee the licensing powers of the medical corporations. When Grant came to London he was not eligible to become a Fellow of the
Royal College of Physicians of London (RCP) because he was not a graduate of
Oxford or
Cambridge. Others who wished to practice in England had to take a licence from the RCP or acquire an apothecary's qualification. Grant refused to take out a London licence from the RCP, and so cut himself off from a lucrative source of income. He campaigned all his life for reform to both the RCP and the
Royal College of Surgeons of London. Wakley responded to Grant's support for the
Lancet and its radical programme with fulsome praise of Grant, and printed the text of all 60 lectures of Grant's comparative anatomy course in the
Lancet for 1833–4. Reviewers agreed that Grant's course was the first 'comprehensive and accessible' exposition of philosophical anatomy in English. ==Death and legacy==