Showing 21–40 of 44 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.
Has received copies of translation of Origin. Thanks HGB for undertaking it.
Comments on review by F. J. Pictet ["Sur l’origine de l’espèce, par Charles Darwin: analyse et critique",Arch. Sci. Phys. & Nat. n.s. 7 (1860): 231–55].
Asks Williams & Norgate to forward one copy of the German translation of Origin (Bronn trans. 1860) to Jan van der Hoeven, and another to Jacob Moleschott.
On THH’s lecture at Royal Institution ["On species and races, and their origin", Not. Proc. R. Inst. G. B. 3 (1858–62): 195–200]. Praises eloquence of his conclusion.
Has sent first part of German translation of Origin to THH.
Thanks HGB for sending copies of his Untersuchungen [1858] and Morphologische Studien [1858] and for a portrait.
Sends a letter concerning priority [of Patrick Matthew] for JDH to read and post.
Angered at Owen’s review.
Huxley’s Royal Institution lecture ends well.
Discusses crosses in sweetpeas and the difference between monstrosities and slight variations. Discusses peloric flowers.
Thanks for correction about furze.
On THH’s "Deep-sea soundings in the North Atlantic" ["Report on the examination of specimens of bottom" in Deep-sea soundings made in H.M.S. "Cyclops", Lieut. Commander J. Dayman (1858)]. Suggests further investigations be made of deposits of calcareous organisms.
THH’s "extinguished theologians lie about the cradle of every science" ["The origin of species", Westminster Rev. 17 (1860): 541–70].
Has resolved not to correct Owen’s misrepresentations in his review of Origin.
Discusses at length the theological implications of natural selection.
CD elected correspondent of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.
Sends queries for "Fanciers"
and asks about the mating of the queen bee.
What a base dog Owen is for praising his own work in reviewing Origin [anonymously].
J. H. Balfour is narrow-minded.
CD cannot understand pollination of Goodenia.
CD’s observations on curved styles read well. JDH seeks morphological rationale of curvature in the position of nectaries.
He has avoided lecturing to Royal Family’s children at Buckingham Palace.
Asks whether THH had by mistake taken the National Review containing W. B. Carpenter’s review.
CD acknowledges that Patrick Matthew, in his appendix to Naval timber and arboriculture (1831), anticipated by many years CD’s explanation of the origin of species by natural selection. CD was ignorant of the work. If another edition of Origin is called for, CD will insert a notice to the foregoing effect.
Origin reviews. Is annoyed at Richard Owen’s malignity [Edinburgh Rev. 111 (1860): 487–532].
August Laugel has sent him a copy of his review [of Origin] in Revue des Deux-Mondes [26 (1860): 644–71].
CD intrigued by the pollination mechanism of Leschenaultia formosa.
CD interested in Thomas Bell’s rumour that Owen avows his review.
Curved styles and their relation to pollination.
Sends list of plants with asymmetry in nectar-secreting surfaces and pistils bent in that direction. Shows insect agency so important that structure has changed. Asks for contrary or confirming examples and that request be passed on to Daniel Oliver.
Thanks CL for loan of paper by J. S. Newberry ["Notes on the ancient vegetation of N. America", Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 29 (1860): 208–18].
Mentions reviews of the Origin.
Discusses evolution of the domestic dog, especially with respect to the views of Owen, Pallas, and Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire.
Mentions W. B. Carpenter’s views on taxonomy.
Discusses hybridisation of plants and animals.
Comments on progress in human evolution.
Has read MS of AM’s review [of Origin, read at Edinburgh Royal Society, 20 Feb 1860]; has no complaints. Has never heard of a hostile reviewer’s doing so kind and generous an action [as sending his MS for CD’s criticism?]. Sends some remarks on details.