skip to content

Darwin Correspondence Project

From L. A. Errera1   15 September 1877

Venise,

15 Sept. 1877

Monsieur

Depuis une couple d’années, j’ai eu occasion d’étudier l’hétérostylie chez le Primula elatior, en collaboration avec mon ami Mr. G. Gevaert. Dans un petit travail que nous avons rédigé sur ce sujet pour la Société royale de Botanique de Belgique, nous avons eu à résumer les principales conclusions de votre admirable livre “The effects of Cross & Self-fertilisation.”2 Parmi ces conclusions, il n’en est qu’une à laquelle nous ayons cru pouvoir nous permettre quelques objections: c’est à propos des effets du croisement entre fleurs différentes du même pied, comparé à la fécondation d’une fleur par son propre pollen.3 Mais comme il est fort possible que nous ayons mal compris votre manière de voir ou que nous nous trompions, je viens vous demander respectueusement la permission de vous expédier la partie de notre manuscrit que se rapporte à cette question.

Nous vous serions infiniment reconnaissants de nous dire si vous avez le temps de jeter un coup d’oeil sur nos arguments et sur les faits que nous citons à l’appui de notre opinion.— La jeunesse de mon collaborateur et la mienne vous feront, nous l’espérons, excuser la hardiesse de cette démarche.

Si vous vouliez avoir l’extrême bonté de me faire parvenir un mot de réponse, il suffirait de l’écrire en anglais, comme je comprends cette langue. Mon adresse est 6A rue royale, Bruxelles (Belgique).

Veuillez agréer, Monsieur, avec mes remerciements anticipés, l’expression de toute mon admiration & de mon profond respect. | Léo Errera | étudiant, membre de la Société royale de Botanique de Belgique.

Footnotes

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I.
At a meeting of the Royal Society of Botany of Belgium on 6 May 1877, Errera presented the results of his and Gevaert’s experiments on Primula elatior (true oxlip; see Bulletin de la Société royale de botanique de Belgique 16 (1877): 2–3). CD had mentioned P. elatior only briefly in Cross and self fertilisation, pp. 422 n., 427.
CD had concluded that a cross between two flowers on the same plant ‘did no good or very little good’ (Cross and self fertilisation, p. 444).

Bibliography

Cross and self fertilisation: The effects of cross and self fertilisation in the vegetable kingdom. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1876.

Translation

From L. A. Errera1   15 September 1877

Venice,

15 Sept. 1877

Sir

For a couple of years, I have been studying heterostyly in Primula elatior, together with my friend Mr. G. Gevaert. In a small article that we composed on the subject for the Royal Society of Botany of Belgium, we have given a summary of the principal conclusions of your admirable book “The effects of Cross & Self-fertilisation.”2 Among these conclusions, there is only one to which we believe we could take the liberty of making some objections: it concerns the effects of crossing different flowers on the same plant, compared to the fertilisation of a flower by its own pollen.3 But since it is very possible that we have misunderstood your way of seeing things or that we are mistaken, I would respectfully ask your permission to send the section of our manuscript that relates to this question.

We would be most grateful if you could let us know if you have the time to have a quick glance at our arguments and the facts that we put forward in support of our opinion.— The youth of my collaborator and myself, we hope, will excuse the boldness of this approach.

If you would be so extremely kind as to favour me with a word in reply, writing in English would suffice since I understand the language. My address is 6A rue Royale, Brussels (Belgium).

I remain, Sir, with thanks in advance, yours most respectfully | Léo Errera | student, member of the Royal Society of Botany of Belgium.

Footnotes

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see Transcript.
At a meeting of the Royal Society of Botany of Belgium on 6 May 1877, Errera presented the results of his and Gevaert’s experiments on Primula elatior (true oxlip; see Bulletin de la Société royale de botanique de Belgique 16 (1877): 2–3). CD had mentioned P. elatior only briefly in Cross and self fertilisation, pp. 422 n., 427.
CD had concluded that a cross between two flowers on the same plant ‘did no good or very little good’ (Cross and self fertilisation, p. 444).

Bibliography

Cross and self fertilisation: The effects of cross and self fertilisation in the vegetable kingdom. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1876.

Summary

Young Belgian students [L. A. Errera and Gustave Gevaert] ask CD to read their paper, which summarises Cross and self-fertilisation. They criticise CD’s views on the comparative effects of crossing flowers on the same stem and fertilisation of a flower by its own pollen ["Sur la structure et les modes de fécondation des fleurs", Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. 17 (1878): 38–181, 182–248].

Letter details

Letter no.
DCP-LETT-11142
From
Léo Abram Errera
To
Charles Robert Darwin
Sent from
Venice
Source of text
DAR 163: 26
Physical description
ALS 3pp (French) & ADraftS 3pp (French)

Please cite as

Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 11142,” accessed on 16 April 2024, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-11142.xml

letter