The '''Scopes Trial''', sometimes known as the '''"Scopes monkey trial,"''' took place in the small hill town of Dayton, in east [[Tennessee]] in 1925. It was engineered as a test case brought challenge to challenge the state's Butler Act which prohibited public schools from teaching the theory that man had evolved from more primitive life forms. The willing defendant, high school teacher [[John Scopes]], had indeed used the textbook ''[[A Civic Biology]]'' that included a unit on evolution. He was duly convicted, although this was later overturned on a technicality. The trial gained notoriety after it was a national media sensationdramatized for both stage (1955) and screen (1960). Titled ''[[Inherit the Wind]]'', pitting evolution against both dramatizations distorted the Biblefacts of the case and were promoted to harm [[Christianity]]. <ref>"'Inherit the Wind' relentlessly distorts what happened in Dayton, Tenn., in 1925."[http://www.beliefnet.com/story/2/story_226_1.html]</ref><ref>As recently as April 17, 2007, the ''Village Voice'' endorsed a new Broadway rendition of ''Inherit the Wind'' as "a dramatization of the 1925 [Scopes] trial."[http://www.villagevoice.com/theater/0716,feingold,76394,11.html]</ref> The highlight of the trial was broadcast for four hours when [[Clarence Darrow]] agreed to testify as a day by radio station WGN of Chicagowitness if [[William Jennings Bryan]] would also testify. First Bryan testified before a huge crowd, but when Darrow's turn came he instead reneged on his deal and was covered in detail ended the trial by many newspapersasking the jury to find his client guilty, which ended the trial.
== Publicity Motivation ==
== The Trial ==
The trial in 1925 of [[John Scopes]] for teaching evolution in Tennessee was a defeat of [[Darwinism]]. The [[ACLU]] and [[liberal]] trial lawyer [[Clarence Darrow]] brought the Scopes case in the hopes of winning a public relations and legal victory. , but in fact [[William Jennings Bryan]], the evangelical [[Christian ]] who was the best known Democrat had been Secretary of State in Americathe Wilson Administration, won a legal victory in the trial.
The [[ACLU]] challenged a Tennessee statute, the Butler Act, that imposed a fine for teaching in government schools [[school]]s that man descended from more primitive life forms. The statute did not prohibit teaching most aspects of [[evolution]]. The textbook at issue in the case, ''[[A Civic Biology]]'', taught evolutioneugenics, stating including that man was supposedly descended from lower life formsand that some racial groups had evolved to more advanced levels than others. ===Textbook issues===The ambiguous nature of scientific diagrams of evolution led to much public confusion and fueled textbook also featured the fireworks at the trialfraudulent [[Piltdown Man]]. Prosecutor Bryan argued against a textbook diagram that placed humans in a seemingly insignificant position, included with other mammals in a small circle, while lower forms such as insects appeared more prominently. Other visual representations, especially family trees and linear comparisons of primate skeletons failed to depict At the influence of time, making humans appear more closely related to apes than scientists intended to suggest. Such diagrams Darwinists claimed that this and [[eugenics]] were extensively used in books and cartoons aimed at popular audiences, making the controversial assumption that "man is descended from monkeys" the most common view of evolution, even though scientists had yet indisputable science to reach a consensus on the matter. Despite efforts by paleontologists such as the president of the American Museum of Natural History, Henry Fairfield Osborn, be taught to defend evolution while upholding religious belief, the popular - though misleading - images proved more persuasivestudents.<ref> Clark (2000)</ref>
==Bryan vs Darrow==
Bryan and Darrow were both liberal Democrats who had cooperated in politics for many years. This time they were opponents, and much of the fireworks exploded during their confrontations.
Bryan quoted for the court how Darrow had previously claimed that murder defendants Leopold and Loeb were driven to crime by what they were taught, which was [[Nietzsche]]'s atheistic philosophy. Bryan quoted Darrow as saying that "Is there any blame attached because somebody took Nietzsche's philosophy seriously and fashioned his life on it? ... The university would be more to blame than he is. ... Your honor, it is hardly fair to hang a 19-year-old boy for the philosophy that was taught him at the university."
Bryan was an extraordinary speaker, recognized to be among the best in American history. Darrow wanted to prevent Bryan from making a persuasive [[closing argument]] to the jury, and Darrow searched for another way to try to score points for his side.
So Darrow stunned the court by requesting to cross-examine Bryan, in the hope that Bryan, like many attorneys, would be a poor witness. Darrow's attempt was unprecedented, because trial attorneys almost never take the witness stand in their own cases. Bryan agreed only on the condition that he could cross-examine Darrow. Based on that agreement, Bryan took the witness stand.
:Bryan--Not near you. (Laughter and applause).
Darrow tried again and again to trap Bryan, and, from his viewpoint, he sometimes succeeded. For example, Darrow grilled Bryan on the topic of Bryan's literal interpretation of the Bible. Notably, Darrow pressed Bryan on the issue of how the sun stood still for [[Joshua]] in the [[Old Testament]]. In the end he showed that it could not have taken place through natural causes, which, as an atheist, was all he felt he needed. For those who believed it was a miracle for the sun to stop at all in the sky, as the Bible infers, the concept that it could not have taken place naturally was irrelevant. He also brought up the story of Joshua and the Whale, apparently trying to claim that no fish existed that was large enough to fully swallow a man, as well as questioning Bryan about the origin of Cain's wife, and the way in which a snake walked before God cursed it to slither on its belly.
:Darrow--The Bible says Joshua commanded the sun to stand still for the purpose of lengthening the day, doesn't it, and you believe it?
== Aftermath ==
Bryan, a 65-year-old diabetic lacking in modern treatments, died peacefully in his sleep during his afternoon nap after church five days after the conclusion of the Scopes trial.<ref>{{hnb|Larson|2006|p=199}}</ref> Bryan's victory in the Scopes trial was a fitting end to a principled, illustrious career.<ref> http://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/side/bryan.html</ref> Scopes never had to pay the fine - the judge had set the amount but Tennessee law at the time prohibited judges from setting fines over $50.
The law challenged by the [[ACLU]] in the Scopes Trial remained in effect for over 50 more years. In 1967, Tennessee repealed the Butler Act, and in 1968, the Supreme Court ruled in ''Epperson v. Arkansas'', 393 U.S. 97, that such bans on teaching are unconstitutional if they are primarily religious in intent.
Tennessee continued to downplay evolution in its schools until 2005.<ref>http://www.edexcellence.net/institute/publication/publication.cfm?id=352&pubsubid=1169#1169</ref>
==Immediate impact==
The famous journalist [[H. L. Mencken]], a cultural conservative who ridiculed the locals as ignorant hicks, covered the trial from Dayton. His reports, illustrated by cartoons by Edmund Duffy, were widely reprinted across the nation and shaped the popular interpretation.<ref> S. L. Harrison, "The Scopes 'Monkey Trial' Revisited: Mencken and the Editorial Art of Edmund Duffy." ''Journal Of American Culture'' 1994 17(4): 55-63. </ref>
The trial revealed a growing chasm in American Christianity and two ways of finding truth, one "biblical" and one "scientific." Liberals saw a division between educated, tolerant Christians and narrow-minded, tribal, obscurantist Christians.<ref> David Goetz, "The Monkey Trial". ''Christian History'' 1997 16(3): 10-18. 0891-9666 </ref>
Gatewood (1969) analyzes the transition from the antievolution crusade of the 1920s to the creation science movement of the 1960s. Despite some similarities between these two causes, the creation science movement represented a shift from religious to scientific objections to Darwin's theory. Creation science also differed in terms of popular leadership, rhetorical tone, and sectional focus. It lacked a prestigious leader like Bryan, utilized scientific rather than religious rhetoric, and was a product of California and Michigan instead of the South.
Edwards (2000) contradicts the conventional view that in the wake of the Scopes trial a humiliated fundamentalism retreated into the political and cultural background, a viewpoint evidenced in the movie "Inherit the Wind" and the majority of contemporary historical accounts. Rather, the cause of fundamentalism's retreat was the death of its leader, Bryan. Most fundamentalists saw the trial as a victory and not a defeat, but Bryan's death soon after created a leadership void that no other fundamentalist leader could fill. Bryan, unlike the other leaders, brought name recognition, respectability, and the ability to forge a broad-based coalition of fundamentalist and mainline religious groups to argue for the antievolutionist position.
The American Civil Liberties Union at first had no objection to a general Christian outlook in the public schools, as long as it was that of no particular sect. By the time of the Scopes Trial, however, the ACLU and other advocates of secular humanism insisted that public education must not assume any religious outlook, laying the groundwork, as Bryan feared, for the triumph of materialism.
==Other states==
Webb (1991) traces the political and legal struggles between strict creationists and Darwinists to influence the extent to which evolution would be taught as science in Arizona and California schools. After Scopes was convicted, creationists throughout the United States sought similar antievolution laws for their states. These included Reverends R. S. Beal and Aubrey L. Moore in Arizona and members of the Creation Research Society in California, all supported by distinguished laymen. They sought to ban evolution as a topic for study or, at least, relegate it to the status of unproven theory perhaps taught alongside the biblical version of creation. Educators, scientists, and other distinguished laymen favored evolution. This struggle occurred later in the Southwest than in other US areas and persisted through the Sputnik era, which inspired increased faith in evolutionism.<ref>George E. Webb, "The Evolution Controversy in Arizona and California: From the 1920s to the 1980s." ''Journal of the Southwest'' 1991 33(2): 133-150. 0894-8410. See also Christopher K. Curtis, "Mississippi's Anti-Evolution Law of 1926." ''Journal Of Mississippi History'' 1986 48(1): 15-29. </ref>
==Memory==
Memory of the trial was refreshed when it was dramatized for both stage (1955) and screen (1960). Titled ''[[Inherit the Wind]]'', both dramatizations distorted the facts of the case and were promoted to harm [[Christianity]].<ref>"'Inherit the Wind' relentlessly distorts what happened in Dayton, Tenn., in 1925."[http://www.beliefnet.com/story/2/story_226_1.html]</ref><ref>As recently as April 17, 2007, the ''Village Voice'' endorsed a new Broadway rendition of ''Inherit the Wind'' as "a dramatization of the 1925 [Scopes] trial."[http://www.villagevoice.com/theater/0716,feingold,76394,11.html]</ref> The highlight of the trial was when [[Clarence Darrow]] agreed to testify as a witness if [[William Jennings Bryan]] would also testify. First Bryan testified before a huge crowd, but when Darrow's turn came he instead reneged on his deal and ended the trial by asking the jury to find his client guilty, which ended the trial.
==References==
<references/>
==BibliographySources==* Clark, Constance Areson. "Evolution for John Doe: Pictures, The Public, and the Scopes Trial Debate." ''Journal of American History'' 2000 87(4): 1275-1303. [http://www.jstor.org/stable/2674729 in JSTOR]* Conkin, Paul K. ''When All the Gods Trembled: Darwinism, Scopes, and American Intellectuals.'' (1998). 185 pp.
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Coulter
| ID = ISBN 978-1400054206
}}
* Edwards, Mark. "Rethinking the Failure of Fundamentalist Political Antievolutionism after 1925". ''Fides Et Historia'' 2000 32(2): 89-106. 0884-5379
* Folsom, Burton W., Jr. "The Scopes Trial Reconsidered." ''Continuity'' 1988 (12): 103-127. 0277-1446, by a leading conservative scholar
* Gatewood, Willard B., Jr., ed. ''Controversy in the Twenties: Fundamentalism, Modernism, & Evolution'' (1969)
* Harding, Susan. "Representing Fundamentalism: The Problem of the Repugnant Cultural Other." ''Social Research'' 1991 58(2): 373-393.
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Larson
| Publisher = Basic Books
| ID = ISBN 978-0465075102
}} [http://www.questia.com/library/book/summer-for-the-gods-the-scopes-trial-and-americas-continuing-debate-over-science-and-religion-by-edward-j-larson.jsp online edition]* Lienesch Michael. ''In the Beginning: Fundamentalism, the Scopes Trial, and the Making of the Antievolution Movement.'' University of North Carolina Press, 2007. 350pp
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Linder
| Publisher = University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law
| URL = http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/evolut.htm
}} * Moran, Jeffrey P. ''The Scopes Trial: A Brief History with Documents'', Bedford/St. Martin's, 2002. 240pp* Moran, Jeffrey P. "The Scopes Trial and Southern Fundamentalism in Black and White: Race, Region, and Religion." ''Journal of Southern History''. Volume: 70. Issue: 1. 2004. pp 95+. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5005987461 online edition]* Smout, Kary Doyle. ''The Creation/Evolution Controversy: A Battle for Cultural Power.'' (1998). 210 pp.Retrieved on 05-11-2007
[[Category:United States Law]]
[[category:evolution]]
[[category:creationism]]
[[category:Fundamentalism]]
[[category:1920s]]