Abstract

This volume continues the biography that Ellis Yochelson began with Charles Doolittle Walcott: Paleontologist , which Ronald Rainger reviewed for Isis . The present volume covers Walcott's years as Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, from 6 May 1907 until his death on 9 February 1927. The precise dates here are simply a sign that, mutatis mutandi, most of Rainger's criticisms regarding the first volume also apply to the second. Yochelson continues with his rigidly chronological presentation, including virtually every recorded event from Walcott's daily life during these nearly twenty years, with almost no selectivity. This is a particularly frustrating method of presentation for several reasons. Not only is almost everything of apparently equal value—administrative and scientific work and controversies, Christmas and Thanksgiving holidays, and the multiple trips to the dentist to remove teeth, one by one, in the latter chapters—but the interwoven presentation makes it very hard to follow the threads of the different stories that are of real interest to a historian. Events that unfolded over years here are revealed over the course of chapters, often one line at a time. While reading the book I often felt that I had been hijacked on the New York City subway system and that the train was hurtling from one station to another, along every line, with no apparent reason and hardly any indication of where I was headed. Surely not even in his own living of his life could Walcott have experienced it as so without organization.This book is not without themes, however, and several finally become very apparent. First, Yochelson evidently believes that Walcott was a near‐perfect scientist and administrator. Second, Yochelson obviously does not approve of a number of things about the more recent history of the Smithsonian and Congress's way of dealing with the institution. Third, Yochelson very much disagrees with Stephen Jay Gould's treatment of Walcott in Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History . Treating these in reverse order: Gould does not need whatever poor defense I might be able to make. Yochelson's presentation might have more credibility if he did not seem so pointedly sarcastic at times. And Walcott does not have to have been perfect to have been highly influential. Walcott and historians alike will be much better served when some historians sit down to study him as a human being, replete with abilities and foibles, a man of his time, a scientist, businessman, and administrator, with a hand in much of the development of the late nineteenth‐ and early twentieth‐century American scientific establishment. This treatment will of necessity be different than Yochelson's “day‐planner” approach. Finally, Yochelson could profitably have taken a lesson from Walcott, who evidently devoted much more time to proofreading than Yochelson did. This book is replete with typographical errors, at least some of which are also obvious errors of fact. This should make readers hesitant to rely on Yochelson alone as an authority.Yochelson has performed a useful task in drawing attention to Walcott, but I hope this work spurs historians to give him sustained, serious, and discriminating attention. His well‐documented career gives every indication of providing rich rewards to such study