Footnotes

Footnotes{1}See the extracts inLife and Letters of Charles Darwin, ii. p. 5.{2}The second volume,—especially important in regard to Evolution,—reached him in the autumn of 1832, as Prof. Judd has pointed out in his most interesting paper inDarwin and Modern Science. Cambridge, 1909.{3}Obituary Notice of C. Darwin,Proc. R. Soc.vol. 44. Reprinted in Huxley'sCollected Essays. See alsoLife and Letters of C. Darwin, ii. p. 179.{4}See the extracts in theLife and Letters, ii. p. 5.{5}Life and Letters, i. p. 82.{6}Obituary Notice,loc. cit.{7}Darwin and Modern Science.{8}Huxley,Obituary, p. xi.{9}In this citation the italics are mine.{10}Journal of Researches, Ed. 1860, p. 394.{11}F. Darwin’sLife of Charles Darwin(in one volume), 1892, p. 166.{12}Life and Letters, i. p. 83.{13}Life and Letters, ii. p. 8.{14}Avestruz Petise,i.e. Rhea Darwini.{15}A bird.{16}Life and Letters, i. p. 84.{17}It contains as a fact 231 pp. It is a strongly bound folio, interleaved with blank pages, as though for notes and additions. His ownMS.from which it was copied contains 189 pp.{18}Life and Letters, ii. p. 116.{19}Life and Letters, ii. p. 10.{20}Life and Letters, ii. p. 146.{21}J. Linn. Soc. Zool.iii. p. 45.{22}It is evident thatPartsandChapterswere to some extent interchangeable in the author’s mind, for p. 1 (of theMS.we have been discussing) is headed in ink Chapter I, and afterwards altered in pencil to Part I.{23}On p. 23 of theMS.of theFoundationsis a reference to the “back of p. 21 bis”: this suggests that additional pages had been interpolated in theMS.and that it may once have had 37 in place of 35 pp.{24}Life and Letters, i. p. 153.{25}Life and Letters, i. p. 84.{26}In the footnotes to the Essay of 1844 attention is called to similar passages.{27}Life and Letters, ii. p. 15.{28}The passage is given in theLife and Letters, ii. p. 124.{29}The extract consists of the section onNatural Means of Selection, p. 87.{30}Life and Letters, i. p. 84.{31}Life and Letters, ii. p. 18.{32}Mrs Darwin’s brother.{33}After Mr Strickland’s name comes the following sentence, which has been erased, but remains legible. “Professor Owen would be very good; but I presume he would not undertake such a work.”{34}The words “several years ago, and” seem to have been added at a later date.{35}Life and Letters, ii. p. 9.{36}Evidently a memorandum that an example should be given.{37}The importance of exposure to new conditions for several generations is insisted on in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 7, also p. 131. In the latter passage the author guards himself against the assumption that variations are “due to chance,” and speaks of “our ignorance of the cause of each particular variation.” These statements are not always remembered by his critics.{38}Cf.Origin, Ed. i. p. 10, vi. p. 9, “Young of the same litter, sometimes differ considerably from each other, though both the young and the parents, as Müller has remarked, have apparently been exposed to exactly the same conditions of life.”{39}This is paralleled by the conclusion in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 8, that “the most frequent cause of variability may be attributed to the male and female reproductive elements having been affected prior to the act of conception.”{40}The meaning seems to be that there must be some variability in the liver otherwise anatomists would not speak of the ‘beau ideal’ of that organ.{41}The position of the following passage is uncertain. “If individuals of two widely different varieties be allowed to cross, a third race will be formed—a most fertile source of the variation in domesticated animals. «In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 20 the author says that “the possibility of making distinct races by crossing has been greatly exaggerated.”» If freely allowed, the characters of pure parents will be lost, number of races thus «illegible» but differences «?» besides the «illegible». But if varieties differing in very slight respects be allowed to cross, such small variation will be destroyed, at least to our senses,—a variation [clearly] just to be distinguished by long legs will have offspring not to be so distinguished. Free crossing great agent in producing uniformity in any breed. Introduce tendency to revert to parent form.”{42}The swamping effect of intercrossing is referred to in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 103, vi. p. 126.{43}A discussion on the intercrossing of hermaphrodites in relation to Knight’s views occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 96, vi. p. 119. The parallelism between crossing and changed conditions is briefly given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 267, vi. p. 391, and was finally investigated inThe Effects of Cross and Self-Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom, 1876.{44}There is an article on thevis medicatrixin Brougham’sDissertations, 1839, a copy of which is in the author’s library.{45}This is the classification of selection into methodical and unconscious given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 33, vi. p. 38.{46}This passage, and a similar discussion on the power of the Creator (p. 6), correspond to the comparison between the selective capacities of man and nature, in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 83, vi. p. 102.{47}i.e. they are individually distinguishable.{48}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 133, vi. p. 165.{49}When the author wrote this sketch he seems not to have been so fully convinced of the general occurrence of variation in nature as he afterwards became. The above passage in the text possibly suggests that at this time he laid more stress onsportsormutationsthan was afterwards the case.{50}The author may possibly have taken the case of the woodpecker from Buffon,Histoire Nat. des Oiseaux, T. vii. p. 3, 1780, where however it is treated from a different point of view. He uses it more than once, see for instanceOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 3, 60, 184, vi. pp. 3, 76, 220. The passage in the text corresponds with a discussion on the woodpecker and the mistletoe inOrigin, Ed. i. p. 3, vi. p. 3.{51}This illustration occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 90, 91, vi. pp. 110, 111.{52}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 83, vi. p. 102, where the wordCreatoris replaced byNature.{53}Note in the original. “Good place to introduce, saying reasons hereafter to be given, how far I extend theory, say to all mammalia—reasons growing weaker and weaker.”{54}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 62, 63, vi. p. 77, where similar reference is made to De Candolle; for Malthus seeOrigin, p. 5.{55}This may possibly refer to the amount of destruction going on. SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 68, vi. p. 84, where there is an estimate of a later date as to death-rate of birds in winter. “Calculate robins” probably refers to a calculation of the rate of increase of birds under favourable conditions.{56}In theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 64, 65, vi. p. 80, he instances cattle and horses and certain plants in S. America and American species of plants in India, and further on, as unexpected effects of changed conditions, the enclosure of a heath, and the relation between the fertilisation of clover and the presence of cats (Origin, Ed. i. p. 74, vi. p. 91).{57}Origin, Ed. i. p. 74, vi. p. 91. “It has been observed that the trees now growing on ... ancient Indian mounds ... display the same beautiful diversity and proportion of kinds as in the surrounding virgin forests.”{58}The simile of the wedge occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 67; it is deleted in Darwin’s copy of the first edition: it does not occur in Ed. vi.{59}In a rough summary at the close of the Essay, occur the words:—“Every creature lives by a struggle, smallest grain in balance must tell.”{60}Cf.Origin, Ed. i. p. 77, vi. p. 94.{61}This is a repetition of what is given at p. 6.{62}CompareOrigin, Ed. i. p. 41, vi. p. 47. “I have seen it gravely remarked, that it was most fortunate that the strawberry began to vary just when gardeners began to attend closely to this plant. No doubt the strawberry had always varied since it was cultivated, but the slight varieties had been neglected.”{63}Here we have the two types of sexual selection discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 88 et seq., vi. pp. 108 et seq.{64}It is not obvious why the author objects to “chance” or “external conditions making a woodpecker.” He allows that variation is ultimately referable to conditions and that the nature of the connexion is unknown, i.e. that the result is fortuitous. It is not clear in the original to how much of the passage the two ? refer.{65}The meaning is “That sterility is not universal is admitted by all.”{66}SeeVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, i. p. 388, where the garden forms ofGladiolusandCalceolariaare said to be derived from crosses between distinct species. Herbert’s hybridCrinumsare discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 250, vi. p. 370. It is well known that the author believed in a multiple origin of domestic dogs.{67}The argument from gradation in sterility is given in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 248, 255, vi. pp. 368, 375. In theOrigin, I have not come across the cases mentioned, viz. crocus, heath, or grouse and fowl or peacock. For sterility between closely allied species, seeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 257, vi. p. 377. In the present essay the author does not distinguish between fertility between species and the fertility of the hybrid offspring, a point on which he insists in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 245, vi. p. 365.{68}Ackermann (Ber. d. Vereins f. Naturkunde zu Kassel, 1898, p. 23) quotes from Gloger that a cross has been effected between a domestic hen and aTetrao tetrix; the offspring died when three days old.{69}No doubt the sexual cells are meant. I do not know on what evidence it is stated that the mule has bred.{70}The sentence is all but illegible. I think that the author refers to forms usually ranked as varieties having been marked as species when it was found that they were sterile together. See the case of the red and blueAnagallisgiven from Gärtner in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 247, vi. p. 368.{71}In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 258, where the author speaks of constitutional differences in this connexion, he specifies that they are confined to the reproductive system.{72}The sensitiveness of the reproductive system to changed conditions is insisted on in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 8, vi. p. 10.The ferret is mentioned, as being prolific in captivity, inVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 90.{73}Lindley’s remark is quoted in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 9. Linnæus’ remark is to the effect that Alpine plants tend to be sterile under cultivation (seeVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 147). In the same place the author speaks of peat-loving plants being sterile in our gardens,—no doubt the American bog-plants referred to above. On the following page (p. 148) the sterility of the lilac (Syringa persicaandchinensis) is referred to.{74}The author probably means that the increase in the petals is due to a greater food supply being available for them owing to sterility. See the discussion inVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 151. It must be noted that doubleness of the flower may exist without noticeable sterility.{75}I have not come across this case in the author’s works.{76}For the somewhat doubtful case of the cheetah (Felis jubata) seeVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 133. I do not know to what fact “pig in India” refers.{77}This sentence should run “on which depends their incapacity to breed in unnatural conditions.”{78}This sentence ends in confusion: it should clearly close with the words “refused to breed” in place of the bracket and the present concluding phrase.{79}The author doubtless refers to the change produced by thesummationof variation by means of selection.{80}The meaning of this sentence is made clear by a passage in theMS.of 1844:—“Until man selects two varieties from the same stock, adapted to two climates or to other different external conditions, and confines each rigidly for one or several thousand years to such conditions, always selecting the individuals best adapted to them, he cannot be said to have even commenced the experiment.” That is, the attempt to produce mutually sterile domestic breeds.{81}This passage is to some extent a repetition of a previous one and may have been intended to replace an earlier sentence. I have thought it best to give both. In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 141, vi. p. 176, the author gives his opinion that the power of resisting diverse conditions, seen in man and his domestic animals, is an example “of a very common flexibility of constitution.”{82}In theOrigin, Ed. i. Chs.I.andV., the author does not admit reproduction, apart from environment, as being a cause of variation. With regard to the cumulative effect of new conditions there are many passages in theOrigin, Ed. i. e.g. pp. 7, 12, vi. pp. 8, 14.{83}As already pointed out, this is the important principle investigated in the author’sCross and Self-Fertilisation. Professor Bateson has suggested to me that the experiments should be repeated with gametically pure individuals.{84}In theOrigina chapter is given up to “difficulties on theory”: the discussion in the present essay seems slight even when it is remembered how small a space is here available. ForTibia&c. see p. 48.{85}This may be interpreted “The general structure of a bat is the same as that of non-flying mammals.”{86}That is truly winged fish.{87}The terrestrial woodpecker of S. America formed the subject of a paper by Darwin,Proc. Zool. Soc., 1870. SeeLife and Letters, vol. iii. p. 153.{88}The same proviso occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 207, vi. p. 319.{89}The tameness of the birds in the Galapagos is described in theJournal of Researches(1860), p. 398. Dogs and rabbits are probably mentioned as cases in which the hereditary fear of man has been lost. In the 1844MS.the author states that the Cuban feral dog shows great natural wildness, even when caught quite young.{90}In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 207, vi. p. 319, he refuses to define instinct. For Lord Brougham’s definition see hisDissertations on Subjects of Science etc., 1839, p. 27.{91}See James Hogg (the Ettrick Shepherd), Works, 1865,Tales and Sketches, p. 403.{92}This refers to the tailor-bird making use of manufactured thread supplied to it, instead of thread twisted by itself.{93}Often lostapplies toinstinct:birds get wilderis printed in a parenthesis because it was apparently added as an after-thought.Nest without roofrefers to the water-ousel omitting to vault its nest when building in a protected situation.{94}In theMS.of 1844 is an interesting discussion onfacultyas distinct frominstinct.{95}At this date and for long afterwards the inheritance of acquired characters was assumed to occur.{96}Part II. is here intended: see the Introduction.{97}The meaning is that the attitude assumed inshammingis not accurately like that of death.{98}This refers to thetransandantessheep mentioned in theMS.of 1844, as having acquired a migratory instinct.{99}In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 209, vi. p. 321, Mozart’s pseudo-instinctive skill in piano-playing is mentioned. SeePhil. Trans., 1770, p. 54.{100}In the discussion on bees’ cells,Origin, Ed. i. p. 225, vi. p. 343, the author acknowledges that his theory originated in Waterhouse’s observations.{101}The hawfinch-andSylvia-types are figured in theJournal of Researches, p. 379. The discussion of change of form in relation to change of instinct is not clear, and I find it impossible to suggest a paraphrase.{102}I should interpret this obscure sentence as follows, “No such opposing law is known, but in all works on the subject a law is (in flat contradiction to all known facts) assumed to limit the possible amount of variation.” In theOrigin, the author never limits the power of variation, as far as I know.{103}InVar. under Dom.Ed. 2, ii. p. 263, theDahliais described as showing sensitiveness to conditions in 1841. All the varieties of theDahliaare said to have arisen since 1804 (ibid.i. p. 393).{104}In the originalMS.the heading is: Part III.; but Part II. is clearly intended; for details see the Introduction. I have not been able to discover where §IV.ends and §V.begins.{105}This passage corresponds roughly to the conclusion of theOrigin, see Ed. i. p. 482, vi. p. 661.{106}A similar passage occurs in the conclusion of theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 481, vi. p. 659.{107}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 312, vi. p. 453.{108}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 280, 281, vi. p. 414. The author uses his experience of pigeons for examples for what he means byintermediate; the instance of the horse and tapir also occurs.{109}The absence of intermediate forms between living organisms (and also as regards fossils) is discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 279, 280, vi. p. 413. In the above discussion there is no evidence that the author felt this difficulty so strongly as it is expressed in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 299,—as perhaps “the most obvious and gravest objection that can be urged against my theory.” But in a rough summary written on the back of the penultimate page of theMS.he refers to the geological evidence:—“Evidence, as far as it does go, is favourable, exceedingly incomplete,—greatest difficulty on this theory. I am convinced not insuperable.” Buckland’s remarks are given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 329, vi. p. 471.{110}That the evidence of geology, as far as it goes, is favourable to the theory of descent is claimed in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 343-345, vi. pp. 490-492. For the reference tonetin the following sentence, see Note 1, p. 48, {Link:Note 161} of this Essay.{111}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 288, vi. p. 422. “The remains that do become embedded, if in sand and gravel, will, when the beds are upraised, generally be dissolved by the percolation of rain-water.”{112}The position of the following is not clear:—“Think of immense differences in nature of European deposits,—without interposing new causes,—think of time required by present slow changes, to cause, on very same area, such diverse deposits, iron-sand, chalk, sand, coral, clay!”{113}The paragraph which ends here is difficult to interpret. In spite of obscurity it is easy to recognize the general resemblance to the discussion on the importance of subsidence given in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 290 et seq., vi. pp. 422 et seq.{114}See Note 3, p. 27.{115}CompareOrigin, Ed. i. p. 298, vi. p. 437. “We shall, perhaps, best perceive the improbability of our being enabled to connect species by numerous, fine, intermediate, fossil links, by asking ourselves whether, for instance, geologists at some future period will be able to prove that our different breeds of cattle, sheep, horses, and dogs have descended from a single stock or from several aboriginal stocks.”{116}The sudden appearance of groups of allied species in the lowest known fossiliferous strata is discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 306, vi. p. 446. The gradual appearance in the later strata occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 312, vi. p. 453.{117}CompareOrigin, Ed. i. p. 307, vi. p. 448.{118}I have interpreted asSandstonea scrawl which I first read asSea; I have done so at the suggestion of Professor Judd, who points out that “footprints in the red sandstone were known at that time, and geologists were not then particular to distinguish between Amphibians and Reptiles.”{119}This refers to Cuvier's discovery ofPalæotherium&c. at Montmartre.{120}This simile is more fully given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 310, vi. p. 452. “For my part, following out Lyell’s metaphor, I look at the natural geological record, as a history of the world imperfectly kept, and written in a changing dialect; of this history we possess the last volume alone, relating only to two or three countries. Of this volume, only here and there a short chapter has been preserved; and of each page, only here and there a few lines. Each word of the slowly-changing language, in which the history is supposed to be written, being more or less different in the interrupted succession of chapters, may represent the apparently abruptly changed forms of life, entombed in our consecutive, but widely separated formations.” Professor Judd has been good enough to point out to me, that Darwin’s metaphor is founded on the comparison of geology to history in Ch. i. of thePrinciples of Geology, Ed. i. 1830, vol. i. pp. 1-4. Professor Judd has also called my attention to another passage,—Principles, Ed. i. 1833, vol. iii. p. 33, when Lyell imagines an historian examining “two buried cities at the foot of Vesuvius, immediately superimposed upon each other.” The historian would discover that the inhabitants of the lower town were Greeks while those of the upper one were Italians. But he would be wrong in supposing that there had been a sudden change from the Greek to the Italian language in Campania. I think it is clear that Darwin’s metaphor is partly taken from this passage. See for instance (in the above passage from theOrigin) such phrases as “history ... written in a changing dialect”—“apparently abruptly changed forms of life.” The passage within [ ] in the above paragraph:—“Lyell’s views as far as they go &c.,” no doubt refers, as Professor Judd points out, to Lyell not going so far as Darwin on the question of the imperfection of the geological record.

{1}See the extracts inLife and Letters of Charles Darwin, ii. p. 5.

{2}The second volume,—especially important in regard to Evolution,—reached him in the autumn of 1832, as Prof. Judd has pointed out in his most interesting paper inDarwin and Modern Science. Cambridge, 1909.

{3}Obituary Notice of C. Darwin,Proc. R. Soc.vol. 44. Reprinted in Huxley'sCollected Essays. See alsoLife and Letters of C. Darwin, ii. p. 179.

{4}See the extracts in theLife and Letters, ii. p. 5.

{5}Life and Letters, i. p. 82.

{6}Obituary Notice,loc. cit.

{7}Darwin and Modern Science.

{8}Huxley,Obituary, p. xi.

{9}In this citation the italics are mine.

{10}Journal of Researches, Ed. 1860, p. 394.

{11}F. Darwin’sLife of Charles Darwin(in one volume), 1892, p. 166.

{12}Life and Letters, i. p. 83.

{13}Life and Letters, ii. p. 8.

{14}Avestruz Petise,i.e. Rhea Darwini.

{15}A bird.

{16}Life and Letters, i. p. 84.

{17}It contains as a fact 231 pp. It is a strongly bound folio, interleaved with blank pages, as though for notes and additions. His ownMS.from which it was copied contains 189 pp.

{18}Life and Letters, ii. p. 116.

{19}Life and Letters, ii. p. 10.

{20}Life and Letters, ii. p. 146.

{21}J. Linn. Soc. Zool.iii. p. 45.

{22}It is evident thatPartsandChapterswere to some extent interchangeable in the author’s mind, for p. 1 (of theMS.we have been discussing) is headed in ink Chapter I, and afterwards altered in pencil to Part I.

{23}On p. 23 of theMS.of theFoundationsis a reference to the “back of p. 21 bis”: this suggests that additional pages had been interpolated in theMS.and that it may once have had 37 in place of 35 pp.

{24}Life and Letters, i. p. 153.

{25}Life and Letters, i. p. 84.

{26}In the footnotes to the Essay of 1844 attention is called to similar passages.

{27}Life and Letters, ii. p. 15.

{28}The passage is given in theLife and Letters, ii. p. 124.

{29}The extract consists of the section onNatural Means of Selection, p. 87.

{30}Life and Letters, i. p. 84.

{31}Life and Letters, ii. p. 18.

{32}Mrs Darwin’s brother.

{33}After Mr Strickland’s name comes the following sentence, which has been erased, but remains legible. “Professor Owen would be very good; but I presume he would not undertake such a work.”

{34}The words “several years ago, and” seem to have been added at a later date.

{35}Life and Letters, ii. p. 9.

{36}Evidently a memorandum that an example should be given.

{37}The importance of exposure to new conditions for several generations is insisted on in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 7, also p. 131. In the latter passage the author guards himself against the assumption that variations are “due to chance,” and speaks of “our ignorance of the cause of each particular variation.” These statements are not always remembered by his critics.

{38}Cf.Origin, Ed. i. p. 10, vi. p. 9, “Young of the same litter, sometimes differ considerably from each other, though both the young and the parents, as Müller has remarked, have apparently been exposed to exactly the same conditions of life.”

{39}This is paralleled by the conclusion in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 8, that “the most frequent cause of variability may be attributed to the male and female reproductive elements having been affected prior to the act of conception.”

{40}The meaning seems to be that there must be some variability in the liver otherwise anatomists would not speak of the ‘beau ideal’ of that organ.

{41}The position of the following passage is uncertain. “If individuals of two widely different varieties be allowed to cross, a third race will be formed—a most fertile source of the variation in domesticated animals. «In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 20 the author says that “the possibility of making distinct races by crossing has been greatly exaggerated.”» If freely allowed, the characters of pure parents will be lost, number of races thus «illegible» but differences «?» besides the «illegible». But if varieties differing in very slight respects be allowed to cross, such small variation will be destroyed, at least to our senses,—a variation [clearly] just to be distinguished by long legs will have offspring not to be so distinguished. Free crossing great agent in producing uniformity in any breed. Introduce tendency to revert to parent form.”

{42}The swamping effect of intercrossing is referred to in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 103, vi. p. 126.

{43}A discussion on the intercrossing of hermaphrodites in relation to Knight’s views occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 96, vi. p. 119. The parallelism between crossing and changed conditions is briefly given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 267, vi. p. 391, and was finally investigated inThe Effects of Cross and Self-Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom, 1876.

{44}There is an article on thevis medicatrixin Brougham’sDissertations, 1839, a copy of which is in the author’s library.

{45}This is the classification of selection into methodical and unconscious given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 33, vi. p. 38.

{46}This passage, and a similar discussion on the power of the Creator (p. 6), correspond to the comparison between the selective capacities of man and nature, in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 83, vi. p. 102.

{47}i.e. they are individually distinguishable.

{48}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 133, vi. p. 165.

{49}When the author wrote this sketch he seems not to have been so fully convinced of the general occurrence of variation in nature as he afterwards became. The above passage in the text possibly suggests that at this time he laid more stress onsportsormutationsthan was afterwards the case.

{50}The author may possibly have taken the case of the woodpecker from Buffon,Histoire Nat. des Oiseaux, T. vii. p. 3, 1780, where however it is treated from a different point of view. He uses it more than once, see for instanceOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 3, 60, 184, vi. pp. 3, 76, 220. The passage in the text corresponds with a discussion on the woodpecker and the mistletoe inOrigin, Ed. i. p. 3, vi. p. 3.

{51}This illustration occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 90, 91, vi. pp. 110, 111.

{52}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 83, vi. p. 102, where the wordCreatoris replaced byNature.

{53}Note in the original. “Good place to introduce, saying reasons hereafter to be given, how far I extend theory, say to all mammalia—reasons growing weaker and weaker.”

{54}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 62, 63, vi. p. 77, where similar reference is made to De Candolle; for Malthus seeOrigin, p. 5.

{55}This may possibly refer to the amount of destruction going on. SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 68, vi. p. 84, where there is an estimate of a later date as to death-rate of birds in winter. “Calculate robins” probably refers to a calculation of the rate of increase of birds under favourable conditions.

{56}In theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 64, 65, vi. p. 80, he instances cattle and horses and certain plants in S. America and American species of plants in India, and further on, as unexpected effects of changed conditions, the enclosure of a heath, and the relation between the fertilisation of clover and the presence of cats (Origin, Ed. i. p. 74, vi. p. 91).

{57}Origin, Ed. i. p. 74, vi. p. 91. “It has been observed that the trees now growing on ... ancient Indian mounds ... display the same beautiful diversity and proportion of kinds as in the surrounding virgin forests.”

{58}The simile of the wedge occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 67; it is deleted in Darwin’s copy of the first edition: it does not occur in Ed. vi.

{59}In a rough summary at the close of the Essay, occur the words:—“Every creature lives by a struggle, smallest grain in balance must tell.”

{60}Cf.Origin, Ed. i. p. 77, vi. p. 94.

{61}This is a repetition of what is given at p. 6.

{62}CompareOrigin, Ed. i. p. 41, vi. p. 47. “I have seen it gravely remarked, that it was most fortunate that the strawberry began to vary just when gardeners began to attend closely to this plant. No doubt the strawberry had always varied since it was cultivated, but the slight varieties had been neglected.”

{63}Here we have the two types of sexual selection discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 88 et seq., vi. pp. 108 et seq.

{64}It is not obvious why the author objects to “chance” or “external conditions making a woodpecker.” He allows that variation is ultimately referable to conditions and that the nature of the connexion is unknown, i.e. that the result is fortuitous. It is not clear in the original to how much of the passage the two ? refer.

{65}The meaning is “That sterility is not universal is admitted by all.”

{66}SeeVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, i. p. 388, where the garden forms ofGladiolusandCalceolariaare said to be derived from crosses between distinct species. Herbert’s hybridCrinumsare discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 250, vi. p. 370. It is well known that the author believed in a multiple origin of domestic dogs.

{67}The argument from gradation in sterility is given in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 248, 255, vi. pp. 368, 375. In theOrigin, I have not come across the cases mentioned, viz. crocus, heath, or grouse and fowl or peacock. For sterility between closely allied species, seeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 257, vi. p. 377. In the present essay the author does not distinguish between fertility between species and the fertility of the hybrid offspring, a point on which he insists in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 245, vi. p. 365.

{68}Ackermann (Ber. d. Vereins f. Naturkunde zu Kassel, 1898, p. 23) quotes from Gloger that a cross has been effected between a domestic hen and aTetrao tetrix; the offspring died when three days old.

{69}No doubt the sexual cells are meant. I do not know on what evidence it is stated that the mule has bred.

{70}The sentence is all but illegible. I think that the author refers to forms usually ranked as varieties having been marked as species when it was found that they were sterile together. See the case of the red and blueAnagallisgiven from Gärtner in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 247, vi. p. 368.

{71}In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 258, where the author speaks of constitutional differences in this connexion, he specifies that they are confined to the reproductive system.

{72}The sensitiveness of the reproductive system to changed conditions is insisted on in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 8, vi. p. 10.The ferret is mentioned, as being prolific in captivity, inVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 90.

{72}The sensitiveness of the reproductive system to changed conditions is insisted on in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 8, vi. p. 10.

The ferret is mentioned, as being prolific in captivity, inVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 90.

{73}Lindley’s remark is quoted in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 9. Linnæus’ remark is to the effect that Alpine plants tend to be sterile under cultivation (seeVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 147). In the same place the author speaks of peat-loving plants being sterile in our gardens,—no doubt the American bog-plants referred to above. On the following page (p. 148) the sterility of the lilac (Syringa persicaandchinensis) is referred to.

{74}The author probably means that the increase in the petals is due to a greater food supply being available for them owing to sterility. See the discussion inVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 151. It must be noted that doubleness of the flower may exist without noticeable sterility.

{75}I have not come across this case in the author’s works.

{76}For the somewhat doubtful case of the cheetah (Felis jubata) seeVar. under Dom., Ed. 2, ii. p. 133. I do not know to what fact “pig in India” refers.

{77}This sentence should run “on which depends their incapacity to breed in unnatural conditions.”

{78}This sentence ends in confusion: it should clearly close with the words “refused to breed” in place of the bracket and the present concluding phrase.

{79}The author doubtless refers to the change produced by thesummationof variation by means of selection.

{80}The meaning of this sentence is made clear by a passage in theMS.of 1844:—“Until man selects two varieties from the same stock, adapted to two climates or to other different external conditions, and confines each rigidly for one or several thousand years to such conditions, always selecting the individuals best adapted to them, he cannot be said to have even commenced the experiment.” That is, the attempt to produce mutually sterile domestic breeds.

{81}This passage is to some extent a repetition of a previous one and may have been intended to replace an earlier sentence. I have thought it best to give both. In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 141, vi. p. 176, the author gives his opinion that the power of resisting diverse conditions, seen in man and his domestic animals, is an example “of a very common flexibility of constitution.”

{82}In theOrigin, Ed. i. Chs.I.andV., the author does not admit reproduction, apart from environment, as being a cause of variation. With regard to the cumulative effect of new conditions there are many passages in theOrigin, Ed. i. e.g. pp. 7, 12, vi. pp. 8, 14.

{83}As already pointed out, this is the important principle investigated in the author’sCross and Self-Fertilisation. Professor Bateson has suggested to me that the experiments should be repeated with gametically pure individuals.

{84}In theOrigina chapter is given up to “difficulties on theory”: the discussion in the present essay seems slight even when it is remembered how small a space is here available. ForTibia&c. see p. 48.

{85}This may be interpreted “The general structure of a bat is the same as that of non-flying mammals.”

{86}That is truly winged fish.

{87}The terrestrial woodpecker of S. America formed the subject of a paper by Darwin,Proc. Zool. Soc., 1870. SeeLife and Letters, vol. iii. p. 153.

{88}The same proviso occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 207, vi. p. 319.

{89}The tameness of the birds in the Galapagos is described in theJournal of Researches(1860), p. 398. Dogs and rabbits are probably mentioned as cases in which the hereditary fear of man has been lost. In the 1844MS.the author states that the Cuban feral dog shows great natural wildness, even when caught quite young.

{90}In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 207, vi. p. 319, he refuses to define instinct. For Lord Brougham’s definition see hisDissertations on Subjects of Science etc., 1839, p. 27.

{91}See James Hogg (the Ettrick Shepherd), Works, 1865,Tales and Sketches, p. 403.

{92}This refers to the tailor-bird making use of manufactured thread supplied to it, instead of thread twisted by itself.

{93}Often lostapplies toinstinct:birds get wilderis printed in a parenthesis because it was apparently added as an after-thought.Nest without roofrefers to the water-ousel omitting to vault its nest when building in a protected situation.

{94}In theMS.of 1844 is an interesting discussion onfacultyas distinct frominstinct.

{95}At this date and for long afterwards the inheritance of acquired characters was assumed to occur.

{96}Part II. is here intended: see the Introduction.

{97}The meaning is that the attitude assumed inshammingis not accurately like that of death.

{98}This refers to thetransandantessheep mentioned in theMS.of 1844, as having acquired a migratory instinct.

{99}In theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 209, vi. p. 321, Mozart’s pseudo-instinctive skill in piano-playing is mentioned. SeePhil. Trans., 1770, p. 54.

{100}In the discussion on bees’ cells,Origin, Ed. i. p. 225, vi. p. 343, the author acknowledges that his theory originated in Waterhouse’s observations.

{101}The hawfinch-andSylvia-types are figured in theJournal of Researches, p. 379. The discussion of change of form in relation to change of instinct is not clear, and I find it impossible to suggest a paraphrase.

{102}I should interpret this obscure sentence as follows, “No such opposing law is known, but in all works on the subject a law is (in flat contradiction to all known facts) assumed to limit the possible amount of variation.” In theOrigin, the author never limits the power of variation, as far as I know.

{103}InVar. under Dom.Ed. 2, ii. p. 263, theDahliais described as showing sensitiveness to conditions in 1841. All the varieties of theDahliaare said to have arisen since 1804 (ibid.i. p. 393).

{104}In the originalMS.the heading is: Part III.; but Part II. is clearly intended; for details see the Introduction. I have not been able to discover where §IV.ends and §V.begins.

{105}This passage corresponds roughly to the conclusion of theOrigin, see Ed. i. p. 482, vi. p. 661.

{106}A similar passage occurs in the conclusion of theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 481, vi. p. 659.

{107}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 312, vi. p. 453.

{108}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 280, 281, vi. p. 414. The author uses his experience of pigeons for examples for what he means byintermediate; the instance of the horse and tapir also occurs.

{109}The absence of intermediate forms between living organisms (and also as regards fossils) is discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 279, 280, vi. p. 413. In the above discussion there is no evidence that the author felt this difficulty so strongly as it is expressed in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 299,—as perhaps “the most obvious and gravest objection that can be urged against my theory.” But in a rough summary written on the back of the penultimate page of theMS.he refers to the geological evidence:—“Evidence, as far as it does go, is favourable, exceedingly incomplete,—greatest difficulty on this theory. I am convinced not insuperable.” Buckland’s remarks are given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 329, vi. p. 471.

{110}That the evidence of geology, as far as it goes, is favourable to the theory of descent is claimed in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 343-345, vi. pp. 490-492. For the reference tonetin the following sentence, see Note 1, p. 48, {Link:Note 161} of this Essay.

{111}SeeOrigin, Ed. i. p. 288, vi. p. 422. “The remains that do become embedded, if in sand and gravel, will, when the beds are upraised, generally be dissolved by the percolation of rain-water.”

{112}The position of the following is not clear:—“Think of immense differences in nature of European deposits,—without interposing new causes,—think of time required by present slow changes, to cause, on very same area, such diverse deposits, iron-sand, chalk, sand, coral, clay!”

{113}The paragraph which ends here is difficult to interpret. In spite of obscurity it is easy to recognize the general resemblance to the discussion on the importance of subsidence given in theOrigin, Ed. i. pp. 290 et seq., vi. pp. 422 et seq.

{114}See Note 3, p. 27.

{115}CompareOrigin, Ed. i. p. 298, vi. p. 437. “We shall, perhaps, best perceive the improbability of our being enabled to connect species by numerous, fine, intermediate, fossil links, by asking ourselves whether, for instance, geologists at some future period will be able to prove that our different breeds of cattle, sheep, horses, and dogs have descended from a single stock or from several aboriginal stocks.”

{116}The sudden appearance of groups of allied species in the lowest known fossiliferous strata is discussed in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 306, vi. p. 446. The gradual appearance in the later strata occurs in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 312, vi. p. 453.

{117}CompareOrigin, Ed. i. p. 307, vi. p. 448.

{118}I have interpreted asSandstonea scrawl which I first read asSea; I have done so at the suggestion of Professor Judd, who points out that “footprints in the red sandstone were known at that time, and geologists were not then particular to distinguish between Amphibians and Reptiles.”

{119}This refers to Cuvier's discovery ofPalæotherium&c. at Montmartre.

{120}This simile is more fully given in theOrigin, Ed. i. p. 310, vi. p. 452. “For my part, following out Lyell’s metaphor, I look at the natural geological record, as a history of the world imperfectly kept, and written in a changing dialect; of this history we possess the last volume alone, relating only to two or three countries. Of this volume, only here and there a short chapter has been preserved; and of each page, only here and there a few lines. Each word of the slowly-changing language, in which the history is supposed to be written, being more or less different in the interrupted succession of chapters, may represent the apparently abruptly changed forms of life, entombed in our consecutive, but widely separated formations.” Professor Judd has been good enough to point out to me, that Darwin’s metaphor is founded on the comparison of geology to history in Ch. i. of thePrinciples of Geology, Ed. i. 1830, vol. i. pp. 1-4. Professor Judd has also called my attention to another passage,—Principles, Ed. i. 1833, vol. iii. p. 33, when Lyell imagines an historian examining “two buried cities at the foot of Vesuvius, immediately superimposed upon each other.” The historian would discover that the inhabitants of the lower town were Greeks while those of the upper one were Italians. But he would be wrong in supposing that there had been a sudden change from the Greek to the Italian language in Campania. I think it is clear that Darwin’s metaphor is partly taken from this passage. See for instance (in the above passage from theOrigin) such phrases as “history ... written in a changing dialect”—“apparently abruptly changed forms of life.” The passage within [ ] in the above paragraph:—“Lyell’s views as far as they go &c.,” no doubt refers, as Professor Judd points out, to Lyell not going so far as Darwin on the question of the imperfection of the geological record.

Back to Index Next