Search: 1860-1869::1860 in date 
Cambridge University Library in repository 
No in transcription-available 
Sorted by:

Showing 81100 of 215 items

From:
Henry Doubleday
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
3 May 1860
Source of text:
DAR 162.2: 237
Summary:

Has read Origin with pleasure.

Has performed many experiments which confirm his opinion that primrose, oxlip, and cowslip are three distinct species.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
John Stevens Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
5 May 1860
Source of text:
DAR 186: 47
Summary:

Reports to CD on what he has found out about Elodea growing near Cambridge.

Sedgwick is speaking at [Cambridge] Philosophical Society on CD’s "supposed errors" [Camb. Herald & Huntingdonshire Gaz. 19 May 1860, pp. 3–4].

JSH wonders how Owen can be so savage toward CD’s views when his own are "to a certain extent of the same character".

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
7 May [1860]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 52
Summary:

To understand Leschenaultia pollination CD requires field observations in the native country.

Has observed two forms of cowslips, which he calls male and female. The same two forms are found in primroses.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
7 May 1860
Source of text:
DAR 205.9: 396
Summary:

Saw Salter’s Spirifer specimens; a very good proof of indefinite modifiability.

Beginning to think gap between Cambrian and Lower Silurian enormous.

Édouard Lartet to give paper before Geological Society ["On coexistence of man with certain extinct quadrupeds", Q. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 16 (1859–60): 471–5].

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Stevens Henslow
Date:
8 May [1860]
Source of text:
DAR 93: A67–9
Summary:

Comments on Richard Owen’s review of the Origin [in Edinburgh Rev. 111 (1860): 487–532]. Considers Owen unfair to CD and most ungenerous toward Hooker.

Expects Sedgwick to be fierce against him. Sedgwick also misrepresented CD in his Spectator review [24 Mar and 7 Apr 1860].

Compares natural selection to the undulatory theory of light as a hypothesis explaining a large number of facts.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
William Masters
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
8 May 1860
Source of text:
DAR 76 (ser. 2): 166–7
Summary:

Observations on hybrids from crossed cabbage varieties.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Hewett Cottrell Watson
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
10 May 1860
Source of text:
DAR 47: 160–1
Summary:

Returns reviews of Origin.

F. J. Pictet [Arch. Sci. Phys. & Nat. n.s. 7 (1860): 231–55] goes further than he himself realises.

Naturalists will resist CD’s views until faith in certain "impassable" barriers between existent species is shaken.

Gives CD an instance of convergence.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
John Stevens Henslow
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
10 May 1860
Source of text:
MS Add. 9537/2
Summary:

Describes Sedgwick’s attack on CD’s views [at Cambridge Philosophical Society] and his own defence, though he believes CD has pressed his hypothesis too far.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
11 May [1860]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 53
Summary:

Dissection of Leschenaultia convinces CD insect agency necessary for self-fertilisation in this case.

Primroses and cowslips seem universally to occur in two forms. Very curious to see which plants set seed.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
John Cattell
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
12 May 1860
Source of text:
DAR 77: 171–2a
Summary:

Cannot provide plants CD requested.

Has sowed several kinds of lettuce seed near each other and has never observed them to cross naturally [see Cross and self-fertilisation, p. 173 n.].

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
13 [May 1860]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 54
Summary:

J. S. Henslow’s defence of CD;

[Thomas?] Thomson’s opposition to Origin.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
14 May [1860]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 55
Summary:

Instructs JDH on how to pollinate Leschenaultia.

Evidence of Leschenaultia and the dioecious condition of cowslips and Auricula is making necessity of insect pollination "clear and clearer".

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Stevens Henslow
Date:
14 May [1860]
Source of text:
DAR 93: A70–1
Summary:

Thanks JSH for his defence [see 2794].

He is not hurt for long by what his attackers say. His conclusions were arrived at after long study. He has certainly erred, but not so much as "Sedgwick and Co." think.

Asks JSH to send names of plants that vary greatly in length of pistil.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
15 [May 1860]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 56
Summary:

Lyell, de facto, first to stress importance of geological changes for geographical distribution.

Asa Gray has given CD too much credit for theories of geographical distribution.

Reaction to hostile criticism

and debt to Lyell, Huxley, JDH, and W. B. Carpenter.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Henry Doubleday
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
16 May 1860
Source of text:
DAR 162.2: 238
Summary:

Answers CD’s questions about his experiments with primroses, cowslips, and oxlips. HD is aware experiments must often be repeated many times. Has never met with the oxlip except where primrose and cowslip grow together.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Stevens Henslow
Date:
17 May [1860]
Source of text:
DAR 93: A72–3, A116
Summary:

Sends characters by which he can divide all primroses and cowslips into what he suspects will be male and female plants. Believes these forms are first step in formation of a dioecious plant.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
22 [May 1860]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 57
Summary:

Floral anatomy.

Wallace’s capital response on reading Origin.

E. W. Binney has published on coal-plants living in marine waters ["On the origin of coal", Mem. Lit. & Philos. Soc. Manchester 2d ser. 8 (1848): 148–94], an old CD idea.

Waste of pollen in horse chestnut will make a good case against perfection.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Lubbock, 4th baronet and 1st Baron Avebury
Date:
25 May [1860]
Source of text:
DAR 263: 32 (EH 88206481)
Summary:

Local affairs.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
29 [May 1860]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 58
Summary:

Convinced selection is the efficient cause. Less convinced of physical causes than JDH because he sees adaptation everywhere and that must be due to selection.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Lubbock, 4th baronet and 1st Baron Avebury
Date:
29 [May 1860]
Source of text:
DAR 263: 40 (EH 88206484)
Summary:

Local affairs.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project