There have been great fears that his heart is affected; but, I hope to G.o.d, without foundation. Hooker"s book (Sir J. Hooker"s "Himalayan Journal.") is out, and MOST BEAUTIFULLY got up. He has honoured me beyond measure by dedicating it to me! As for myself, I am got to the page 112 of the Barnacles, and that is the sum total of my history.
By-the-way, as you care so much about North America, I may mention that I had a long letter from a shipmate in Australia, who says the Colony is getting decidedly republican from the influx of Americans, and that all the great and novel schemes for working the gold are planned and executed by these men. What a go-a-head nation it is! Give my kindest remembrances to Lady Lyell, and to Mrs. Bunbury, and to Bunbury. I most heartily wish that the Canaries may be ten times as interesting as Madeira, and that everything may go on most prosperously with your whole party.
My dear Lyell, Yours most truly and affectionately, C. DARWIN.
CHARLES DARWIN TO J.D. HOOKER. Down, March 1st [1854].
My dear Hooker,
I finished yesterday evening the first volume, and I very sincerely congratulate you on having produced a FIRST-CLa.s.s book ("Himalayan Journal.")--a book which certainly will last. I cannot doubt that it will take its place as a standard, not so much because it contains real solid matter, but that it gives a picture of the whole country. One can feel that one has seen it (and desperately uncomfortable I felt in going over some of the bridges and steep slopes), and one REALISES all the great Physical features. You have in truth reason to be proud; consider how few travellers there have been with a profound knowledge of one subject, and who could in addition make a map (which, by-the-way, is one of the most distinct ones I ever looked at, wherefore blessings alight on your head), and study geology and meteorology! I thought I knew you very well, but I had not the least idea that your Travels were your hobby; but I am heartily glad of it, for I feel sure that the time will never come when you and Mrs. Hooker will not be proud to look back at the labour bestowed on these beautiful volumes.
Your letter, received this morning, has interested me EXTREMELY, and I thank you sincerely for telling me your old thoughts and aspirations.
All that you say makes me even more deeply gratified by the Dedication; but you, bad man, do you remember asking me how I thought Lyell would like the work to be dedicated to him? I remember how strongly I answered, and I presume you wanted to know what I should feel; whoever would have dreamed of your being so crafty? I am glad you have shown a little bit of ambition about your Journal, for you must know that I have often abused you for not caring more about fame, though, at the same time, I must confess, I have envied and honoured you for being so free (too free, as I have always thought) of this "last infirmity of, etc."
Do not say, "there never was a past hitherto to me--the phantom was always in view," for you will soon find other phantoms in view. How well I know this feeling, and did formerly still more vividly; but I think my stomach has much deadened my former pure enthusiasm for science and knowledge.
I am writing an unconscionably long letter, but I must return to the Journals, about which I have hardly said anything in detail. Imprimis, the ill.u.s.trations and maps appear to me the best I have ever seen; the style seems to me everywhere perfectly clear (how rare a virtue), and some pa.s.sages really eloquent. How excellently you have described the upper valleys, and how detestable their climate; I felt quite anxious on the slopes of Kinchin that dreadful snowy night. Nothing has astonished me more than your physical strength; and all those devilish bridges!
Well, thank goodness! It is not VERY likely that I shall ever go to the Himalaya. Much in a scientific point of view has interested me, especially all about those wonderful moraines. I certainly think I quite realise the valleys, more vividly perhaps from having seen the valleys of Tahiti. I cannot doubt that the Himalaya owe almost all their contour to running water, and that they have been subjected to such action longer than any mountains (as yet described) in the world. What a contrast with the Andes!
Perhaps you would like to hear the very little that I can say per contra, and this only applied to the beginning, in which (as it struck me) there was not FLOW enough till you get to Mirzapore on the Ganges (but the Thugs were MOST interesting), where the stream seemed to carry you on more equably with longer sentences and longer facts and discussions, etc. In another edition (and I am delighted to hear that Murray has sold all off), I would consider whether this part could not be condensed. Even if the meteorology was put in foot-notes, I think it would be an improvement. All the world is against me, but it makes me very unhappy to see the Latin names all in Italics, and all mingled with English names in Roman type; but I must bear this burden, for all men of Science seem to think it would corrupt the Latin to dress it up in the same type as poor old English. Well, I am very proud of MY book; but there is one bore, that I do not much like asking people whether they have seen it, and how they like it, for I feel so much identified with it, that such questions become rather personal. Hence, I cannot tell you the opinion of others. You will have seen a fairly good review in the "Athenaeum."
What capital news from Tasmania: it really is a very remarkable and creditable fact to the Colony. (This refers to an unsolicited grant by the Colonial Government towards the expenses of Sir J. Hooker"s "Flora of Tasmania.") I am always building veritable castles in the air about emigrating, and Tasmania has been my head-quarters of late; so that I feel very proud of my adopted country: is really a very singular and delightful fact, contrasted with the slight appreciation of science in the old country. I thank you heartily for your letter this morning, and for all the gratification your Dedication has given me; I could not help thinking how much -- would despise you for not having dedicated it to some great man, who would have done you and it some good in the eyes of the world. Ah, my dear Hooker, you were very soft on this head, and justify what I say about not caring enough for your own fame. I wish I was in every way more worthy of your good opinion. Farewell.
How pleasantly Mrs. Hooker and you must rest from one of your many labours...
Again farewell: I have written a wonderfully long letter. Adios, and G.o.d bless you.
My dear Hooker, ever yours, C. DARWIN.
P.S.--I have just looked over my rambling letter; I see that I have not at all expressed my strong admiration at the amount of scientific work, in so many branches, which you have effected. It is really grand. You have a right to rest on your oars; or even to say, if it so pleases you, that "your meridian is past;" but well a.s.sured do I feel that the day of your reputation and general recognition has only just begun to dawn.
[In September, 1854, his Cirripede work was practically finished, and he wrote to Dr. Hooker:
"I have been frittering away my time for the last several weeks in a wearisome manner, partly idleness, and odds and ends, and sending ten thousand Barnacles out of the house all over the world. But I shall now in a day or two begin to look over my old notes on species. What a deal I shall have to discuss with you; I shall have to look sharp that I do not "progress" into one of the greatest bores in life, to the few like you with lots of knowledge."]
CHAPTER 1.X. -- THE GROWTH OF THE "ORIGIN OF SPECIES."
[The growth of the "Origin of Species" has been briefly described in my father"s words (above). The letters given in the present and following chapters will ill.u.s.trate and amplify the history thus sketched out.]
It is clear that in the early part of the voyage of the "Beagle" he did not feel it inconsistent with his views to express himself in thoroughly orthodox language as to the genesis of new species. Thus in 1834 he wrote (MS. Journals, page 468.) at Valparaiso: "I have already found beds of recent sh.e.l.ls yet retaining their colour at an elevation of 1300 feet, and beneath, the level country is strewn with them. It seems not a very improbable conjecture that the want of animals may be owing to none having been created since this country was raised from the sea."
This pa.s.sage does not occur in the published "Journal," the last proof of which was finished in 1837; and this fact harmonizes with the change we know to have been proceeding in his views. But in the published "Journal" we find pa.s.sages which show a point of view more in accordance with orthodox theological natural history than with his later views.
Thus, in speaking of the birds Synallaxis and Scytalopus (1st edition page 353; 2nd edition page 289), he says: "When finding, as in this case, any animal which seems to play so insignificant a part in the great scheme of nature, one is apt to wonder why a distinct species should have been created."
A comparison of the two editions of the "Journal" is instructive, as giving some idea of the development of his views on evolution. It does not give us a true index of the ma.s.s of conjecture which was taking shape in his mind, but it shows us that he felt sure enough of the truth of his belief to allow a stronger tinge of evolution to appear in the second edition. He has mentioned in the Autobiography that it was not until he read Malthus that he got a clear view of the potency of natural selection. This was in 1838--a year after he finished the first edition (it was not published until 1839), and five years before the second edition was written (1845). Thus the turning-point in the formation of his theory took place between the writing of the two editions.
I will first give a few pa.s.sages which are practically the same in the two editions, and which are, therefore, chiefly of interest as ill.u.s.trating his frame of mind in 1837.
The case of the two species of Molothrus (1st edition page 61; 2nd edition page 53) must have been one of the earliest instances noticed by him of the existence of representative species--a phenomenon which we know ("Autobiography,") struck him deeply. The discussion on introduced animals (1st edition page 139; 2nd edition page 120) shows how much he was impressed by the complicated interdependence of the inhabitants of a given area.
An a.n.a.logous point of view is given in the discussion (1st edition page 98; 2nd edition page 85) of the mistaken belief that large animals require, for their support, a luxuriant vegetation; the incorrectness of this view is ill.u.s.trated by the comparison of the fauna of South Africa and South America, and the vegetation of the two continents.
The interest of the discussion is that it shows clearly our a priori ignorance of the conditions of life suitable to any organism.
There is a pa.s.sage which has been more than once quoted as bearing on the origin of his views. It is where he discusses the striking difference between the species of mice on the east and west of the Andes (1st edition page 399): "Unless we suppose the same species to have been created in two different countries, we ought not to expect any closer similarity between the organic beings on the opposite sides of the Andes than on sh.o.r.es separated by a broad strait of the sea." In the 2nd edition page 327, the pa.s.sage is almost verbally identical, and is practically the same.
There are other pa.s.sages again which are more strongly evolutionary in the 2nd edition, but otherwise are similar to the corresponding pa.s.sages in the 1st edition. Thus, in describing the blind Tuco-tuco (1st edition page 60; 2nd edition page 52), in the first edition he makes no allusion to what Lamarck might have thought, nor is the instance used as an example of modification, as in the edition of 1845.
A striking pa.s.sage occurs in the 2nd edition (page 173) on the relationship between the "extinct edentata and the living sloths, ant-eaters, and armadillos."
"This wonderful relationship in the same continent between the dead and the living, will, I do not doubt, hereafter throw more light on the appearance of organic beings on our earth, and their disappearance from it, than any other cla.s.s of facts."
This sentence does not occur in the 1st edition, but he was evidently profoundly struck by the disappearance of the gigantic forerunners of the present animals. The difference between the discussions in the two editions is most instructive. In both, our ignorance of the conditions of life is insisted on, but in the second edition, the discussion is made to led up to a strong statement of the intensity of the struggle for life. Then follows a comparison between rarity (In the second edition, page 146, the destruction of Niata cattle by droughts is given as a good example of our ignorance of the causes of rarity or extinction. The pa.s.sage does not occur in the first edition.) and extinction, which introduces the idea that the preservation and dominance of existing species depend on the degree in which they are adapted to surrounding conditions. In the first edition, he is merely "tempted to believe in such simple relations as variation of climate and food, or introduction of enemies, or the increased number of other species, as the cause of the succession of races." But finally (1st edition) he ends the chapter by comparing the extinction of a species to the exhaustion and disappearance of varieties of fruit-trees: as if he thought that a mysterious term of life was impressed on each species at its creation.
The difference of treatment of the Galapagos problem is of some interest. In the earlier book, the American type of the productions of the islands is noticed, as is the fact that the different islands possess forms specially their own, but the importance of the whole problem is not so strongly put forward. Thus, in the first edition, he merely says:--
"This similarity of type between distant islands and continents, while the species are distinct, has scarcely been sufficiently noticed. The circ.u.mstance would be explained, according to the views of some authors, by saying that the creative power had acted according to the same law over a wide area."--(1st edition page 474.)
This pa.s.sage is not given in the second edition, and the generalisations on geographical distribution are much wider and fuller. Thus he asks:--
"Why were their aboriginal inhabitants, a.s.sociated...in different proportions both in kind and number from those on the Continent, and therefore acting on each other in a different manner--why were they created on American types of organisation?"--(2nd edition page 393.)
The same difference of treatment is shown elsewhere in this chapter.
Thus the gradation in the form of beak presented by the thirteen allied species of finch is described in the first edition (page 461) without comment. Whereas in the second edition (page 380) he concludes:--
"One might really fancy that from an original paucity of birds in this Archipelago, one species has been taken and modified for different ends."
On the whole it seems to me remarkable that the difference between the two editions is not greater; it is another proof of the author"s caution and self-restraint in the treatment of his theory. After reading the second edition of the "Journal," we find with a strong sense of surprise how far developed were his views in 1837. We are enabled to form an opinion on this point from the note-books in which he wrote down detached thoughts and queries. I shall quote from the first note-book, completed between July 1837 and February 1838: and this is the more worth doing, as it gives us an insight into the condition of his thoughts before the reading of Malthus. The notes are written in his most hurried style, so many words being omitted, that it is often difficult to arrive at the meaning. With a few exceptions (indicated by square brackets) (In the extracts from the note-book ordinary brackets represent my father"s parentheses.) I have printed the extracts as written; the punctuation, however, has been altered, and a few obvious slips corrected where it seemed necessary. The extracts are not printed in order, but are roughly cla.s.sified. (On the first page of the note-book, is written "Zoonomia"; this seems to refer to the first few pages in which reproduction by gemmation is discussed, and where the "Zoonomia" is mentioned. Many pages have been cut out of the note-book, probably for use in writing the Sketch of 1844, and these would have no doubt contained the most interesting extracts.)
"Propagation explains why modern animals same type as extinct, which is law, almost proved."
"We can see why structure is common in certain countries when we can hardly believe necessary, but if it was necessary to one forefather, the result would be as it is. Hence antelopes at Cape of Good Hope; marsupials at Australia."
"Countries longest separated greatest differences--if separated from immersage, possibly two distinct types, but each having its representatives--as in Australia."
"Will this apply to whole organic kingdom when our planet first cooled?"
The two following extracts show that he applied the theory of evolution to the "whole organic kingdom" from plants to man.
"If we choose to let conjecture run wild, then animals, our fellow brethren in pain, disease, death, suffering and famine--our slaves in the most laborious works, our companions in our amus.e.m.e.nts--they may partake [of?] our origin in one common ancestor--we may be all melted together."
"The different intellects of man and animals not so great as between living things without thought (plants), and living things with thought (animals)."
The following extracts are again concerned with an a priori view of the probability of the origin of species by descent ["propagation," he called it.].
"The tree of life should perhaps be called the coral of life, base of branches dead; so that pa.s.sages cannot be seen."
"There never may have been grade between pig and tapir, yet from some common progenitor. Now if the intermediate ranks had produced infinite species, probably the series would have been more perfect."