Showing 1–14 of 14 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.
Reports work on sexual selection. Problems with the relative numbers of the two sexes and polygamy. Asks ARW’s help with several questions on polygamous birds.
Pleased by ARW’s response to Pangenesis.
On negative reception by his friends.
Further argument concerning sterility and natural selection.
Polygamy and sexual selection.
Protection.
On his Primula paper for the Linnean Society ["On the specific difference between Primula veris, Brit. Fl. (var. officialis, Linn.), P. vulgaris, Brit. Fl. var. acaulis, Linn.), and P. elatior, Jacq.; and on the hybrid nature of the common oxlip; with supplementary remarks on naturally produced hybrids of the genus Verbascum", [officinalis!?] J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 10 (1869): 437–54].
Peacocks and sexual selection.
ARW’s sterility argument has driven CD’s sons half-mad.
On problem of sterility, CD cannot persuade himself that it has been gained by natural selection.
On sexual selection and minute variations, he tends to agree with ARW. Sends George Darwin’s notes on ARW’s argument.
There are so many doubtful points on the problems relating to sterility that they will never agree.
More on the "terrible problem" of natural selection and sterility. CD’s reasons for disagreeing with ARW. CD analyses and answers ARW in detail in defence of his conclusion that sterility cannot be increased through natural selection.
Warns ARW of dubious character of list of European alpine genera and species in volcanoes of Hawaii. Problems of geographical distribution in oceanic islands.
Admires ARW’s "Theory of birds’ nests" [J. Travel & Nat. Hist. 1 (1868): 73].
Discusses their respective views on birds’ nests, sexual selection, and protection.
Asks why, if brilliant colours of female butterflies are result of protective mimicry, do not males become equally brilliant? CD believes variation in females alone accounts for it, rather than protection.
More on CD’s objections to ARW’s views on protection and natural selection.
Sexual selection.
Criticism of ARW for too little esteem of the role of sexual selection as agent in giving colour.
Response to other topics.
The problem of dimorphic plants and their fertility.
CD’s oscillating views relating to protection and sexual selection.
On their differences concerning sexual selection and protection.
Sexual selection, protection.