by Greg Mayer
The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, the oldest natural history museum in the United States, is closing. Drexel University, with which the Academy became affiliated in 2011, announced on September 1 that the museum, located at 19th and the Parkway in Philadelphia, would close at the end of the month. The closing of the museum is a tragedy.
The Academy was founded in 1812, and, in 1828, opened the museum at its first location, 12th and Sansom Streets; it opened at its current site in 1876. The Academy was the oldest surviving institution of its kind in America. As such, it was extremely influential in the development of American science, at a time when the scientific community, such as it was, was small and concentrated on the East Coast. Many 19th century scientists and naturalists were associated with the Academy in various capacities: Titian Peale, William Bartram, Alexander Wilson, John James Audubon, Spencer Fullerton Baird, John Cassin, Joseph Leidy, and Edward Drinker Cope, to name just a few. Charles Darwin was elected a corresponding member in 1860. Later Academy scientists include the original James Bond, the influential ecologist Ruth Patrick, and the co-describer of Tiktaalik, Ted Daeschler. The Academy sponsored expeditions all around the world, to places such as West Africa, Greenland, Mongolia, South America, and the West Indies. The American Medical Association (AMS; 1847) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS; 1848) were both founded at the Academy.
The collections of the Academy are priceless. Because of its age, influence, and international connections, it has received, by gift, exchange, and purchase, parts of the collections of the Lewis and Clark expedition, the United States Exploring Expedition, Thomas Jefferson, Captain Cook, and John Gould (the British ornithologist who described Darwin’s Galapagos specimens). These collections of specimens, and the associated written records and library of the Academy, form the core of the Academy’s scientific (and history of science) enterprise. But, as James Smithson enunciated in his bequest that founded the Smithsonian Institution, such institutions are for the “increase and diffusion of knowledge ” (emphasis added).
The public facing side of the Academy– it’s museum, public programs, and educational outreach: the way it “diffuses” knowledge– are as integral to a great institution of natural history as are its scientists. Institutions vary in how much effort is devoted to the increase vs. the diffusion sides of their missions. Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology and Harvard’s Museum of Comparative Zoology lean towards “increase”, having an at most modest public face; Atlanta’s Fernbank Museum of Natural History is almost all “diffusion”; while the American Museum of Natural History in New York, Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History, and the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History excel at both. The Academy has always been among the latter– excelling at both, with an excellent public museum, as well as an active research program among its affiliated scientists.
I have several times visited the Academy to work in its collections and get information from its archives. My most recent visit was last summer, to the Bird division, where I was hosted by an active and welcoming community of senior scientists and graduate students. I regret that I did not have time to go see the exhibits– I could never, at the time, have fathomed that it would be my last chance to see them. I contemplated trying to get to Philadelphia during this final month, but the logistics and scheduling of such a trip during the first month of my semester were daunting. Had the closing been announced well ahead of time (say, the end of this year), rather than just one month ahead, I would have made it.
Drexel University promises in some vague way to preserve the “legacy” of the Academy, but past experience does not augur well. I am reminded of other university’s casual loss of their collections (Princeton’s, for example), while others had theirs saved only by an outside institution willing to take the specimens (Duke’s, for example). If the Academy’s building is closing, where will the collections go? (They are in the same building as the public exhibits.) And what will happen to the scientists, students, and other staff who are working there? The Academy has had its ups and downs over the years (as will any 200+ year old institution), and perhaps this is just a low spot from which public-spirited citizens, perhaps with the support of the city and the state, may be able to effect a rebound. But based on what I know now, I very much fear for my colleagues and the collections, not to mention the people of Philadelphia and the world who experienced the Academy’s “diffusion”.
Peck, R.M., and P.T. Stroud. 2012. A Glorious Enterprise: the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia and the Making of American Science. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. A wonderful, well-illustrated, history of the Academy, celebrating its first 200 years, and intended to look forward to continuing glory. Now, it practically induces tears.
Wow – thanks for this piece – indeed, diffusion – I like that.
… “AI'”s got nuthin’ on the experience of museum pieces!
It was finances, of course, and a key aspect is that visitor attendance never rebounded to pre-Covid levels.
This is terrible news!
I’m sure the official Drexel line is something to do with finances and visitor numbers. But they are custodians of treasures that scientists have entrusted them with on the understanding they will care for, protect and share them.
It would, for example, be simply appalling if the collections are broken up and sold off – juicy specimens going into private collections where scientists cannot access them, and the less desirable ones being removed from their larger collecting context.
I don’t know how these things go, but surely the specimens and the already built displays should become treasured donations to other museums. Perhaps there are museums that could really use these to increase their own visitations.
ADDENDUM: I belatedly see the comments below from Greg Mayer about this issue.
Thanks Greg. Very sad indeed. The Academy of Natural Sciences founding even preceded the word “scientist” which was created and assigned to natural philosophers in 1834 I was surprised to learn several years ago when I was studying the history of K12 STEM curriculum.
Thanks again.
This closing marks a sad day for science and for history. Maybe the announcement will encourage a wealthy benefactor to swoop in and save it. But the museum’s administration must have already looked far and wide for such a person or institution.
And what of the collection, you ask? Will it be dispersed to other museums? If so, will the groups of artifacts remain together as collections, or will specimens be distributed willy nilly into various cases and drawers, no longer accessible as collections?
I remember many times exploring the drawers behind the scenes at Harvard’s Museum of Comparative Zoology and marveling not only at the specimens, but at the names of the collectors: naturalists who traveled the world, the pioneers of American science.
Comment by Greg Mayer
Norm–
This is a big question. The statement by Drexel says the Academy’s “legacy” will be preserved. As a minimum, I take this to mean that the collection will not be simply disposed of: they’ll either maintain it at Drexel, or find a suitable home.
If Drexel keeps it, where would that be? I assume a major cost is maintaining the Academy’s building on Logan Square, which is where the collection is. So, with the public museum closed, it’s all expense and no revenue. Some of the scientific staff could be made full time Drexel professors, but this would leave many other staff in the lurch. And this addresses the “increase of knowledge, but not the “diffusion” part. (Except perhaps for training graduate students.)
GCM
This is terrible. That museum was the first thing that was on my list to see when I first visited Philly to give a talk at Penn Medical School. Not the usual American history sites (though I wanted to see often as well)—that museum was #1. And like Greg and others, I worry about the collections. I hope that the various museums connected to other universities will step up (Harvard comes to mind; they have several excellent science museums). And I hope that the scientists and students will find other places to continue their work, though, given the current lack of regard for science in the US, led by certain governmental figures, is discouraging.
Comment by Greg Mayer
Starwolf– See my reply to Norm above about the fate of the collection.
GCM
I hope some tech billionaire can step in with a capital infusion…how much exactly is their net burn (excess of expenses over revenues) per month? Let’s say its a million dollars, which would be excessive (although I don’t know much about museum operating costs), but think of the number of super-wealthy individuals in this country. Inject $20 million to stave off extinction and keep things running for at least a year, send in a team of professionals to clean up operations, better monetize assets, create new revenue streams, and improve banking and financing arrangements.
Wouldn’t this be a much better “flex” for a tech mogul or billionaire than another yacht? Look, I saved a venerable institution…think of the excellent favorable media attention!
I’m dead serious here…I hope the museum is out mining its donor network for connections of this sort. It could be a package…multiple individuals contributing millions. People have this kind of money.
Greg, I’m a Research Associate at the Academy. This is a courtesy appointment, I’m not on staff, get no pay or benefits and may not get full information. I use the facilities for research on fish.
This disaster has been cooking for a while. Press releases from Drexel and ANSP trustees say that research activities etc. will go on as normal. On the other hand, the Phila Inquirer keeps on quoting “informed sources” say that Drexel intends to move the collections to an unspecified location and sell the building. This was in Drexel’s original request to the trustees to disaffiliate.
In the meantime, the William Penn Foundation has announced an offer to underwrite the Academy’s expenses for 1 year while conducting a search for stable sources of funding and assessing the building’s condition. A recent story in the Inquirer stated that repairs will cost ~150 million.
The soap opera isn’t over yet. That said, I’m a pessimist and expect that no sources of funding will be found.
This is beyond sad.
Comment by Greg Mayer
Dan–
Thanks much for this at least semi-inside info. I didn’t realize that Drexel wanted to “disaffiliate”. Selling the building and moving the collections is certainly far from a best-case scenario. (The affiliation with Drexel always seemed odd to me, but I didn’t know enough details to have a strong opinion on it.)
Some Harvard alum just gave Carnegie Mellon $3 billion to build a campus in Miami for 3500 students. To someone like that, $200 million for the ANSP is a rounding error, and would serve so many 1000s more people. A rich benefactor may be the best hope for the ANSP.
GCM
That donor is Ken Griffin, who also paid $45 million for a Stegosaurus skeleton. Maybe he’s the guy!
I was there in mid-September. It was mobbed with people getting a last look. The museum was full of children, toddlers to tweens and, boy, were they thrilled. There was a terrific presentation by two funny scientists. They engaged the children with their stories and explanations. On one of the floors there was a “dig” for little kids to uncover dinosaur bones! Lots of squeals of joy. It’s surely a loss for the city.
I fear they’d find no means of preserving everything and sell it all off.
Museums and rich snobs fighting over it all like hyenas.