Lyell, Charles to Darwin, C. R.
- +
Returns "excellent" MS in which CD favours hybrid origin of domestic dog, which CL believes strengthens case for common progenitor of wild species.
- +
Doubts CD's authorities for antiquity of dingo.
- +
Variation will raise many points for investigation.
- +
"Leporine" hare–rabbit hybrid should be investigated.
- +
Has re-read passages in Origin that CD suggested.
- +
Annals of Natural History would probably reprint Gray's review of Origin at their own expense.
- +
CD's thought that modern reptiles could not develop into existing Mammalia but only into another high form is a "grand notion" compatible with "the infinite capacity of the creative power".
- +
Comments on New Guinea marsupials.
- +
Still thinks that the Australian genera and species are so well fitted for extraordinary droughts that they would get the better of the dingo.
- +
Suggests that once there were more races of man, though from common stock. Competition and then hybridity checked divergence.
- +
Falconer's views on elephant classification. CL attaches little value to Falconer's objection that mastodons and elephants do not come in chronologically, as they should in CD's view.
Summary Add
Transcription
25. Sept. 1860
--
I return the M.S. on dogs which I think excellent. The case you make out seems very strong not only of crosses from distinct living species having blended into the dog, but in favour of diff
All this helps the doctrine of the several so blendible wild species having themselves come down from a common remote progenitor & I suppose you will say in reply to Quart. Review that the only reason that pigeons have not so mixed is that Man had not the same motive to cross them with other species distinct from the Rock pigeon.
I think the subject too important to bear shortening. As to the antiquity of the Dingo I have turned up to your two references in Quart. G. S. Journal & they by no means bear out your inference. The fossils occurred in a cave in the basalt & were certainly posterior probably very long so, & there is no evidence as caves are gradually choked up that the Dingo was not one of the last creatures whose bones were introduced. I asked Falconer yesterday & he said, `let him take care he does not get himself into the same scrape which Owen did about Strzelecki's Australian Mastodon; I read the papers about Dingo & thought they had no proof.'
Falconer knows of no fossil, rodent or bat in Australia. He says Strzelecki's Mastodon was from S. America.
It seems strange that the question whether any Newfoundland dogs are semi-web-footed or not sh
Some one sh
The chapter on dogs makes me wish yr book soon out. That & the pigeons & the Tables of large & small genera w
You conclude yr. letter received this morning by doubting whether I care for so speculative a way of dealing with the question. It is just what I wanted & not more conjectural than my letter, much of which I w
I have been too deeply interested & taken up with the Dogs to have done with Asa Gray, but see enough to wish it to appear in Annals of N. H. & cannot but think they w
I think you have understood my point & the idea that if the original type of Mammalia had been lost & the reptilian had been greatly raised in grade, they w
I am glad you reminded me of the N. Guinea Marsupials. I had imagined that there was a larger admixture of placentals. I sh
The case of nat
Do you not think when Man was less advanced 50,000 years or generations back & tribes more isolated there must have been rather more races than now. tho' of course at a remoter period much fewer, & originally only one, & that one lower intellectually than any one now existing. In proportion as more powerful & more cosmopolite races arose they w
Falconer has been holding forth today on the diff
- +
- f1 2927a.f1
The text of the letter has been taken from a copy in Lyell's scientific journal. It is also printed in Wilson ed. 1970, pp. 493--5. Lyell returned to London on 23 September following a six-week visit to the Continent (ibid., p. 490 n. 88). - +
- f2 2927a.f2
See letter to Charles Lyell, 11 August [1860]. - +
- f3 2927a.f3
CD described the `doctrine' of Pyotr Simon Pallas concerning the origin of domestic breeds of dogs in a previous letter to Lyell (Correspondence vol. 7, letter to Charles Lyell, 25 October [1859]):He hypothetically supposes that when long domesticated they lose their tendency to sterility when crossed with the other domesticated species; & by their crossing when domesticated he believes that all our domestic races have originated. - +
- f4 2927a.f4
The review of Origin in the Quarterly Review ridiculed CD's example of the power of selection drawn from comparing the breeds of domestic pigeons, stating `this is all very pleasant writing, especially for pigeon-fanciers; but what step do we really gain in it at all towards establishing the alleged fact that variations are but species in the act of formation, or in establishing Mr. Darwin's position that a well-marked variety may be called an incipient species?' ([Wilberforce] 1860, p. 235). This passage and others relating to pigeons are heavily marked and annotated in CD's copy of the review (Darwin Pamphlet Collection--CUL). - +
- f5 2927a.f5
Selwyn 1858 and 1860. See letter to Charles Lyell, 23 [September 1860]. - +
- f6 2927a.f6
Lyell visited Hugh Falconer soon after returning to London to learn what progress had been made `on the great question at issue about the relation of certain elephant beds and the glacial epoch.' (K. M. Lyell ed. 1881, 2: 337). - +
- f7 2927a.f7
In 1844, Richard Owen had identified a fossilised molar tooth sent to him by Paul Edmund de Strzelecki as that of a mastodon. It was said to have been found in a cave in Australia (R. Owen 1844). Before then, the extinct mammalian fauna of Australia was believed to be exclusively restricted to marsupial forms. Falconer first questioned Owen's identification in 1857; in 1863, he published a full history and refutation of Owen's claim (see Falconer 1857--8, `Synoptical table of the species of Mastodon and elephant', facing p. 319; and Falconer 1863, pp. 96--101). - +
- f8 2927a.f8
The edition of Origin usually referred to as the second was published in January 1860. Lyell evidently considered this to have been a corrected reprint and rather refers to the major alterations that CD was intending to incorporate into the third edition of Origin, published in 1861. - +
- f9 2927a.f9
Lyell refers to the supposed hybrid between a hare and a rabbit said to have been bred in Angoulˆeme, France. See letter to Charles Lyell, 5 [July 1860]. - +
- f10 2927a.f10
Abraham Dee Bartlett was superintendent of the zoological gardens in London. Lyell had seen the so-called leporines at the gardens early in July 1860 (Wilson ed. 1970, p. 465). Bartlett conducted many breeding experiments for CD at the gardens, but an account of this particular cross has not been located in the Darwin Archive. - +
- f11 2927a.f11
CD was preparing the first part (Variation) of a substantial work, in which he planned to provide all the details and citations he had been unable to include in Origin. - +
- f12 2927a.f12
See letter to Charles Lyell, 23 [September 1860]. - +
- f13 2927a.f13
G¨oppert 1842. - +
- f14 2927a.f14
See Anca 1860. - +
- f15 2927a.f15
Falconer was engaged in an extensive study of the fossil elephants and mastodons of Europe and America. He published a paper on the British and European species in 1857 and one on the American forms in 1863 (Falconer 1857--8 and 1863). He had recently discovered a `small elephant, the size of a Shetland pony, in the small island of Malta.' (K. M. Lyell ed. 1881, 2: 339). See also letter to Charles Lyell, 28 [September 1860].