JDH’s letter on grounds of generalisation in plant morphology.
Faunal distribution and the glacial period.
Orchid homologies.
Showing 101–120 of 353 items
The Charles Darwin Collection
The Darwin Correspondence Project is publishing letters written by and to the naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882). Complete transcripts of letters are being made available through the Project’s website (www.darwinproject.ac.uk) after publication in the ongoing print edition of The Correspondence of Charles Darwin (Cambridge University Press 1985–). Metadata and summaries of all known letters (c. 15,000) appear in Ɛpsilon, and the full texts of available letters can also be searched, with links to the full texts.
JDH’s letter on grounds of generalisation in plant morphology.
Faunal distribution and the glacial period.
Orchid homologies.
JDH asked to check Lindley on Acropera.
Transport of an orchid to Down.
Acropera species may be males of other orchids.
Homologies of ducts in orchids.
Went to British Museum to see Bates’s mimetic butterflies.
Rudimentary ovules of Acropera.
High opinion of Bates.
Orchid anatomy.
Henri Lecoq’s miserable book on plant geography [Étude sur la géographie botanique de l’Europe (1854–8)].
H. W. Bates’s pleasure at meeting JDH.
Lindley suggests Gongora may be female Acropera.
CD’s orchid book nearly ready for press.
Discovers trimorphism in Lythrum is in H. Lecoq [Études sur la géographie botanique de l’Europe (1854–8)].
Seeks information on heating hothouses night and day.
Gongora cannot be female of Acropera; it may itself be a male.
Hopes Daniel Oliver will "sink Atlantis" in his Royal Institution lecture.
Entire family down with influenza. Has done nothing for three weeks.
Asks for Haast reference on New Zealand glacial deposits.
CD’s view of the North since Trent case. Can no longer write with sympathy to Asa Gray.
Encourages JDH about his son, Willy.
Problem of relation of colour to external conditions. Hopes JDH will undertake the investigation.
His answer to Asa Gray.
On JDH’s view of aristocracy. Primogeniture is dreadfully opposed to selection.
Orchid book proofs ready soon – has no idea whether it is worth publishing.
Huxley on Owen.
Feeble letter from J. H. Balfour against Huxley’s lectures ["Relation of man to lower animals", pt 2 of Man’s place in nature (1863)].
Has received the "astounding" Angraecum sesquipedale with nectary 1ft long: "what insect could suck it?"
Is JDH sure it is a Bletia, just received? Its pollen very different from any Epidendreæ he has seen. If it is Bletia, Lindley’s grand divisions are fanciful.
Accepts JDH’s offer to collect cases of dimorphism.
James Bateman has sent a lot of orchids with Angraecum sesquipedale. What a proboscis the moth that sucks its 11½ inch nectary must have!
Asks for the address of C. W. Crocker.
Thanks JDH for box of melastomes
and a very valuable reference from Daniel Oliver.
Is crossing Monochaetum which he thinks is dimorphic.
Is "sometimes half tempted to give up species & stick to experiments".
Pollen of Bletia hyacinthina is quite unlike other Bletia species but exactly the same as Epipactis.
Admires JDH’s paper on Arctic plants ["Distribution of Arctic plants", Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. 23 (1862): 251–348]. Such papers compel people to reflect on modification of species;
JDH will be driven to a cooled globe.
Serious erratum in paper.
New and original evidence in case of Greenland. Its flora requires accidental means of transport by ice and currents.
CD wishes he could sympathise with Asa Gray’s politics.
Orchids to appear soon.
Pre-glacial Arctic distribution.
Work on floral dimorphism.
High opinion of Buckle as a writer.
Thinks JDH is a bit hard on Asa Gray.
Bates’s letter is that of a true thinker. Asks to see JDH’s to Bates. Point raised in it is most difficult. "There is one clear line of distinction; – when many parts of structure as in woodpecker show distinct adaptation to external bodies, it is preposterous to attribute them to effect of climate etc. – but when a single point, alone, as a hooked seed, it is conceivable that it may thus have arisen." His study of orchids shows nearly all parts of the flower co-adapted for fertilisation by insects and therefore the result of natural selection. Mormodes ignea "is a prodigy of adaptation".
On effect of external conditions: CD thinks all variability due to changes in conditions of life because there is more variability under unnatural domestic conditions than under nature, and changed conditions affect the reproductive organs. But why one seedling out of thousands presents some new character transcends the wildest powers of conjecture.
Not shaken by "saltus" – he had examined all cases of normal structure resembling monstrosities which appear per saltum. Has fought his tendency to attribute too much to natural selection; perhaps he has too much conquered it.
Asks JDH to correct names of two species of Calanthe.
Note from Asa Gray ends "Yours cordially", so CD hopes he is forgiven.
His Catasetum paper will be read 3 Apr [Collected papers 2: 63–70].
Plants and seeds sent will be of great use, especially Lythrum, which according to J. P. E. Vaucher seems grand case of trimorphism. Asks what sort of man Vaucher is.
Both JDH’s and Bates’s letters are excellent. JDH has said all that can be said against direct effect of conditions, but CD still sticks to his own and Bates’s side. CD should have done what JDH suggests (since naturally he is pleased to attribute little to conditions) – viz., started on the fundamental principle that variation is innate and stated that afterwards, perhaps, this principle would be made explicable. Variation will show that "use and disuse" have some effect. Does not believe in perfect reversion. Demurs at JDH’s "centrifugal variation"; the doctrine of the good of diversification amply accounts for variation being centrifugal.
The wonderful mechanism of Mormodes ignea.