skip to content

Darwin Correspondence Project

From Ernst Haeckel   26 October 18641

Jena

26. October 1864.

Hochverehrter Herr und Freund!

Die vielen Arbeiten, welche jedesmal der Anfang des Wintersemesters und die Einrichtung der neuen Vorlesungen mit sich bringen,2 haben mich bisher verhindert, Ihnen für Ihren sehr willkommenen letzten Brief zu danken. Die wichtigen Notizen, welche Sie die Güte hatten, mir über den Entstehungsgang Ihrer grossen und so höchst wichtigen Anschauungen vom Ursprung der Arten mitzutheilen, haben mich im höchsten Masse interessirt, und i⁠⟨⁠ch⁠⟩⁠ sage Ihnen dafür ganz besonderen Dan⁠⟨⁠k,⁠⟩⁠ ebenso auch meine Freunde Schleic⁠⟨⁠her und⁠⟩⁠ Gegenbaur, denen ich Ihren Brief mi⁠⟨⁠tgeteilt⁠⟩⁠ habe.3 Für uns Biologen ist ⁠⟨⁠diese Mitteilung⁠⟩⁠ zur Entwicklungs-Geschichte ⁠⟨⁠ihrer Lehre⁠⟩⁠ vom höchsten Werth, um so m⁠⟨⁠ehr als Ihre Anschauungen⁠⟩⁠ zur Entstehungs-Geschichte ⁠⟨⁠der Arten⁠⟩⁠ die Grundlage aller unserer ⁠⟨⁠Erkenntniss bilden.⁠⟩⁠ Ich spreche hier mit Gegen⁠⟨⁠baur und Schlei⁠⟩⁠cher jeden Tag von Ihnen u⁠⟨⁠nd Ihrer Theorie⁠⟩⁠ und jeden Tag finden wir neue Beweise für die Wahrheit derselben und entdecken darin neue fruchtbare Anregungen für unsere Arbeiten. Wohin ich in irgend einem Zweige der Zoologie mein Auge wende, überall ist est das Princip der gemeinsamen Abstammung, welches Licht und Verständniss in die am meisten verwickelten Puncte bringt und die schwierigsten Räthsel löst. Ganz besondere Freude empfinde ich aber zu sehen, wie Ihre Lehre allerwärts und mit jedem Tage neue Fortschritte macht und jetzt selbst ⁠⟨⁠v⁠⟩⁠ielfach von denen anerkannt wird, die ⁠⟨⁠an⁠⟩⁠fangs Ihre heftigsten Gegner waren.

⁠⟨⁠In d⁠⟩⁠en Monaten August und September habe ich ⁠⟨⁠eine längere⁠⟩⁠ Reise durch Süd-Deutschland und die ⁠⟨⁠Schweiz gema⁠⟩⁠cht, dabei mehrere Universitäten ⁠⟨⁠besucht, wobei ich⁠⟩⁠ mich selbst von der fortschreiten ⁠⟨⁠den Verbrei⁠⟩⁠tung der Descendenz-Theorie ⁠⟨⁠überzeugen konnte.⁠⟩⁠ Ein fast eben so eifrigen An⁠⟨⁠hänger wie i⁠⟩⁠ch selbst, ist mein Freund Édouard ⁠⟨⁠Claparède⁠⟩⁠ in Genf, ein ausgezeichneter Zoolog, der aber leider durch schwere und unheilbare Krankheit am Arbeiten gehindert wird.4 Auch Prof. Max Schultze in Bonn, unser erster Histolog, und Prof. Leuckart in Giessen, einer der besten Zoologen, haben sich jetzt zu Ihrer Anschauung bekehrt.5 Mehrere sehr für mich belehrende Gespräche über die verschiedenen fruchtbaren Seiten Ihrer Theorie hatte ich vor wenigen Wochen in Berlin mit Prof. Alexander Braun, einem der ausgezeichnetsten deutschen Botaniker, der trotz seiner ziemlich hohen Jahre fast in allen Stücken mit Ihnen übereinstimt.6 Im Übrigen finde ich, dass die Botaniker weit weniger von Ihrer Theorie wissen und auch weit weniger Interesse und Nutzen daran zu finden behaupten, als die Zoologen.7 Zum Theil liegt dies wohl in der Natur der Sache, da die vergleichende Anatomie und Entwicklungsgeschichte der Thiere, welche uns auf jedem Schritte neue Beweise für die volle Wahrheit der Abstammungslehre liefert, bei den Pflanzen noch nicht entfernt so weit bekannt ist.

Die genealogischen Stammbäume der grossen Gruppen sind im Pflanzenreiche noch weit schwieriger herzustellen, als im Thierreich, wo ich mich jetzt mit dieser schwierigen Arbeit bei einigen Classen beschäftige. Die allgemeinere Arbeit über die Verwandschafts Verhältnisse der Thiere, von der ich Ihnen wohl schon schrieb, werde ich wohl erst in einigen Monaten beenden, da die Schwierigkeiten auf dem fast unbebauten Felde nicht gering sind und die Arbeit mir unter den Händen wächst.8 Ich hoffe aber, dass Ihnen dieselbe viele Freude machen wird, da ich ziemlich viele Beweise für die Wahrheit Ihrer Lehre zu liefern hoffe. Jetzt in meiner Einsamkeit, wo durch den Tod meiner Frau mein Gemüthsleben so vereinsamt ist, ist mir diese umfassende Arbeit ein grosser Trost, und ich treibe sie mit um so grösserem Eifer, als meine Anna selbst mich immer zu ihrer Ausführung antrieb und mir diese Aufgabe wie ein Vermächtniss hinterlassen hat.9 Meine Beobachtungen über die ausserordentliche Variabilität der Coelenteraten werde ich nun wohl erst nachher veröffentlichen.10

Mit grossem Interesse werden Sie die vortreffliche Arbeit von Fritz Müller: “Für Darwin”—gelesen haben.11 Dieser vorzügliche junge Zoologe ist ein geborener Pommer, jetzt Lehrer an einer Schule in Desterro (Brasilien). Er wanderte aber aus Preussen aus, weil der politische Druck dort zu sehr das freie Wort hemmt.12

Mein Freund Gegenbaur arbeitet jetzt die zweite Auflage seines Ihnen wohl bekannten Lehrbuchs aus: “Grundzüge der vergleichenden Anatomie” (Leipzig. 1855).13 Diese zweite Auflage wird er vollständig umarbeiten, da er überall das Princip der gemeinsamen Abstammung zu Grunde legen wird.

Sie haben die grosse Güte, verehrtester Freund, mir ein Exemplar Ihren Balaniden-Werckes anzubieten.14 Ich nehme dieses Anerbieten mit dem aufrichtigsten Dan⁠⟨⁠k⁠⟩⁠ aus der Hand des Mannes an, dessen Ref⁠⟨⁠orm-⁠⟩⁠ Werck meine wissenschaftliche Richtung b⁠⟨⁠e⁠⟩⁠stimmt und mein Leben ausfüllen wird. Ich werde dieses Geschenk als ein theures Andenken betrachten. Die beste Gelegenheit wird sein, mir dasselbe durch die hiesige Buchhandlung von Fr. Frommann zu übersenden, welche mit Londoner Buchhändlern in Verbindung steht.15

Mit der Hoffnung, dass Ihre Gesundheit sich mehr und mehr bessert, und Sie uns noch lange erhalten bleiben, verbleibe ich | mit der vorzüglichsten Hochachtung | Ihr ganz ergebener | Ernst Haeckel.

CD annotations

End of letter: ‘Your Pamphlets.’ pencil; ‘Book sent off’ ink . ‘est’ sic TJ . trans revised SI . translation checked 24 August 94 TJ . Info on the bookshop’s location from Anna’s correspondence with Stadtarchiv and Ernst-Haeckel-Haus. See queries.doc on F:annaqueries. . Para 6: ‘which you will probably know’ could also be translated ‘well-known to you’: the only way to handle it is to insert an extra footnote in the translations appendix set of notes when separated out. SE & AKM.

Footnotes

For a translation of this letter see Correspondence vol. 12, Appendix I.
For information on the courses taught by Haeckel in his capacity as professor extraordinarius of zoology at the University of Jena between 1861 and 1869, see Uschmann 1959, pp. 40–6.
The reference is to the Swiss naturalist and invertebrate zoologist Edouard Claparède, who contracted rheumatic fever in 1854. The attack left him with chronic and disabling heart problems, his symptoms including palpitations and spitting blood from the lungs. The illness prevented him from working for months on end, and during 1865 and 1866 he hardly worked at all (see Saussure 1873, pp. vii, xiii–xviii). In 1861 Claparède published a favourable review of CD’s theory (Claparède 1861); see Correspondence vol. 10. CD’s annotated copy of Claparède 1861 is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.
In 1865 Max Johann Sigismund Schultze published a paper containing positive remarks on CD’s theory (Schultze 1865); there is a copy of Schultze 1865 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Rodolf Leuckart did not express a view on CD’s theory until 1867, when he reviewed Haeckel’s Generelle Morphologie and concluded that on the question of descent he agreed with Haeckel (see Nyhart 1995, p. 138.) Nyhart also comments on Leuckart’s approach to teleology and adaptation: see ibid., pp. 138, 340. For more on Leuckart’s views on natural selection, see Wunderlich 1978, pp. 73–9.
Haeckel had studied botany under Alexander Carl Heinrich Braun at Berlin university in the spring of 1852 (Hemleben 1964, p. 23; Uschmann 1984, p. 15). Braun had expressed some ideas on evolution in plants as early as 1848 (see Henfrey trans. 1853), and although he was never convinced by CD’s theory of natural selection, he did try to reconcile his own teleological approach to transformation with CD’s (see Hoppe 1971, p. 405). For an overview of the reaction among German botanists, see Junker 1989.
For further discussions of the reception of CD’s theory in Germany, see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 9 [July 1864] and n. 6.
Haeckel is apparently referring to his Generelle Morphologie, which was eventually published in 1866 (Haeckel 1866). He had told CD about his plan to write the book in his letter of 9 [July 1864]. There is an annotated copy of Haeckel 1866 in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 355–7).
Haeckel’s wife, Anna Sethe, died on 16 February 1864 (see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 August 1864).
Haeckel published several essays on the Coelenterata between 1864 and 1865 (see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 9 [July 1864] and n. 15).
The reference is to F. Müller 1864; CD’s lightly annotated copy of this work is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 609). F. Müller 1864 was a study of the developmental history of the Crustacea, which Fritz Müller presented as a validation of CD’s theory. CD provided the financial backing for an English translation, which was published in 1869 (see letter to Fritz Müller, 16 March [1868] (Calendar no. 6014), Möller ed. 1915–21, and DSB).
Before leaving Prussia in 1852, Müller had been barred from taking his medical degree owing to his democratic political opinions and his refusal to take an oath recognising the established church and orthodox religious views (DSB). On Müller’s reasons for emigrating to Brazil, see Möller ed. 1915–21, 3: 24–44. For a discussion of state control and the suppression of political movements in German universities during this period, see McClelland 1980. For the state control of medical education and practice in Prussia, see Huerkamp 1990, including pp. 77-8 on the oath requirement. On the licensing of doctors in Prussia, see McClelland 1991, pp. 38–40.
Haeckel was mistaken: the first edition of Gegenbaur’s Grundzüge der vergleichenden Anatomie was published in 1859; the second edition appeared in 1870. There is a copy of Gegenbaur 1870 in the Darwin Library–Down (see Marginalia 1: 299).
See letter to Ernst Haeckel, [after 10] August – 8 October [1864] and n. 13, and CD’s annotation to this letter.
The reference is to the Friedrich Frommann bookshop, at house no. 225, later Markt 19, in Jena, owned by Friedrich Johann Frommann (Meyers Enzyklopädisches Lexikon).

Bibliography

Calendar: A calendar of the correspondence of Charles Darwin, 1821–1882. With supplement. 2d edition. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1994.

Claparède, Edouard. 1861. M. Darwin et sa théorie de la formation des espèces. Revue Germanique Française & étrangère 16: 523–59; 17: 232–63.

Correspondence: The correspondence of Charles Darwin. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. 29 vols to date. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985–.

DSB: Dictionary of scientific biography. Edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie and Frederic L. Holmes. 18 vols. including index and supplements. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. 1970–90.

Haeckel, Ernst. 1866. Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Allgemeine Grundzüge der organischen Formen-Wissenschaft, mechanisch begründet durch die von Charles Darwin reformirte Descendenz-Theorie. 2 vols. Berlin: Georg Reimer.

Hemleben, Johannes. 1964. Ernst Haeckel in Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag.

Hoppe, Brigitte. 1971. Die Geschichtlichtkeit der Natur und des Menschen. Die Entwicklungstheorie Alexander Brauns. In Medizingeschichte in unserer Zeit, edited by Hans-Heinz Eulner et al. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke Verlag.

Huerkamp, Claudia. 1990. The making of the modern medical profession, 1800–1914. Prussian doctors in the nineteenth century. In German professions, 1800–1950, edited by Geoffrey Cocks and Konrad H. Jarausch. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Junker, Thomas. 1989. Darwinismus und Botanik. Rezeption, Kritik und theoretische Alternativen im Deutschland des 19. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Deutscher Apotheker Verlag.

McClelland, Charles E. 1980. State, society, and university in Germany 1700–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marginalia: Charles Darwin’s marginalia. Edited by Mario A. Di Gregorio with the assistance of Nicholas W. Gill. Vol. 1. New York and London: Garland Publishing. 1990.

Nyhart, Lynn K. 1995. Biology takes form. Animal morphology and the German universities, 1800–1900. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Saussure, Henri de. 1873. Edouard-René Claparède. Né à Genève le 24 Avril 1832, mort à Sienne le 31 Mai 1871. Mémoires de la Société de Physique et d’Histoire Naturelle de Genève 22: i–xxiv.

Schultze, Max. 1865. Echiniscus Sigismundi, ein Arctiscoide der Nordsee. Archiv für mikroskopische Anatomie 1: 428–36.

Uschmann, Georg. 1959. Geschichte der Zoologie und der zoologischen Anstalten in Jena 1779–1919. Jena: VEB Gustav Fischer.

Uschmann, Georg. 1984. Ernst Haeckel. Biographie in Briefen. Gütersloh: Prisma Verlag.

Wunderlich, Klaus. 1978. Rudolf Leuckart. Weg und Werk. Jena: Gustav Fischer.

Translation

From Ernst Haeckel   26 October 18641

Jena

26 October 1864

Highly honoured Sir and Friend!

The many tasks, which the beginning of the winter term and the preparation of the new lectures always bring with them,2 have hitherto prevented me from thanking you for your most welcome last letter. The important notes concerning the development of your great and extremely important views on the origin of species that you were kind enough to send me greatly interested me and I want to thank you especially for them, as do my friends Schleicher ⁠⟨⁠and⁠⟩⁠ Gegenbaur, to whom I communicated your letter.3 For us biologists ⁠⟨⁠this information⁠⟩⁠ about the history of the development of ⁠⟨⁠your theory⁠⟩⁠ is of the greatest importance, especially since ⁠⟨⁠your views⁠⟩⁠ on the origin of ⁠⟨⁠species⁠⟩⁠ are the basis of all our ⁠⟨⁠knowledge⁠⟩⁠. Every day I speak to Gegenbaur ⁠⟨⁠and⁠⟩⁠ Schleicher about you and ⁠⟨⁠your theory⁠⟩⁠, and every day we find new evidence for its truth and receive fruitful new inspiration for our works. Wherever I turn my eye in whatever branch of zoology, it is the principle of common descent that makes clear and comprehensible the most complex subjects and solves the most difficult riddles. But I especially receive the greatest joy in seeing to what extent your theory makes progress in all directions every day and is even frequently accepted by those who were at first your most vehement opponents.

⁠⟨⁠In⁠⟩⁠ the months of August and September I was engaged in ⁠⟨⁠a lengthy⁠⟩⁠ journey through the South of Germany and ⁠⟨⁠Switzerland⁠⟩⁠ and ⁠⟨⁠visited⁠⟩⁠ several universities, ⁠⟨⁠where I could assure⁠⟩⁠ myself of the increasing spread of the theory of descent. A follower who is almost as enthusiastic as I am, is my friend Édouard ⁠⟨⁠Claparède⁠⟩⁠ in Geneva, an excellent zoologist whose work is unfortunately hindered by a serious and incurable illness.4 Also Prof. Max Schultze in Bonn, our foremost histologist, and Prof. Leuckart in Giessen, one of the best zoologists, have now been converted to your view.5 A few weeks ago, I had several very instructive conversations on the various fruitful aspects of your theory with Prof. Alexander Braun, one of the most eminent German botanists, who, notwithstanding his quite advanced age, agrees with you on almost all points.6 For the rest, I find that the botanists know much less of your theory and also have less interest in it and use for it than the zoologists.7 This is probably due in part to the nature of the subject, since the comparative anatomy and embryology of animals, which at each step provide new evidence for the full truth of the doctrine of descent, are less known by far in plants.

The genealogical trees of the large groups are much more difficult to produce in the vegetable than in the animal kingdom, where I am now engaged in this difficult work with some of the classes. The more general work on genealogical relationships in animals, about which I may already have written to you, will probably be finished only in a couple of months since the difficulties in this nearly unexplored field are not few and the work grows under my hands.8 However, I hope it will give you much pleasure, since I hope to provide quite a lot of evidence for the truth of your doctrine. Now in my solitude, in which the death of my wife has made my emotional life grow so lonely, this extensive work is a great consolation for me, and I pursue it with even greater zeal, since my Anna herself had always urged me to its realisation and left me this task as a legacy.9 I will probably publish my observations on the extraordinary variability of the Coelenterata only later.10

You will have read with great interest the excellent work of Fritz Müller: “Für Darwin”.11 This outstanding young zoologist is a Pomeranian by birth and now teacher in a school in Desterro, Brazil. He emigrated from Prussia because there free speech is hindered too much by political pressure.12

My friend Gegenbaur is at present working at the second edition of his text book, which you will probably know: “Grundzüge der vergleichenden Anatomie” (Leipzig. 1855).13 He will completely revise this second edition, in order to make the principle of common descent its foundation in all its parts.

You have been kind enough, highly honoured friend, to offer me a copy of your work on the Balanidae.14 I accept this offer with the most sincere thanks from the hand of the man whose reformatory work determines the direction of my scientific efforts and to which I will devote my life. I will regard this present as a precious memento. The best way will be to send it through the local Fr. Frommann bookshop, which has connections with London booksellers.15

With the hope that your health will continue to improve and that you will be preserved for us for a long time, I remain with the highest esteem | your devoted servant | Ernst Haeckel.

Footnotes

For a transcription of this letter in its original German, see Correspondence vol. 12, pp. 379–81.
For information on the courses taught by Haeckel in his capacity as professor extraordinarius of zoology at the University of Jena between 1861 and 1869, see Uschmann 1959, pp. 40–6.
The reference is to the Swiss naturalist and invertebrate zoologist Edouard Claparède, who contracted rheumatic fever in 1854. The attack left him with chronic and disabling heart problems, his symptoms including palpitations and spitting blood from the lungs. The illness prevented him from working for months on end, and during 1865 and 1866 he hardly worked at all (see Saussure 1873, pp. vii, xiii–xviii). In 1861 Claparède published a favourable review of CD’s theory (Claparède 1861); see Correspondence vol. 10. CD’s annotated copy of Claparède 1861 is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.
In 1865 Max Johann Sigismund Schultze published a paper containing positive remarks on CD’s theory (Schultze 1865); there is a copy of Schultze 1865 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Rodolf Leuckart did not express a view on CD’s theory until 1867, when he reviewed Haeckel’s Generelle Morphologie and concluded that on the question of descent he agreed with Haeckel (see Nyhart 1995, p. 138.) Nyhart also comments on Leuckart’s approach to teleology and adaptation: see ibid., pp. 138, 340. For more on Leuckart’s views on natural selection, see Wunderlich 1978, pp. 73–9.
Haeckel had studied botany under Alexander Carl Heinrich Braun at Berlin university in the spring of 1852 (Hemleben 1964, p. 23; Uschmann 1984, p. 15). Braun had expressed some ideas on evolution in plants as early as 1848 (see Henfrey trans. 1853), and although he was never convinced by CD’s theory of natural selection, he did try to reconcile his own teleological approach to transformation with CD’s (see Hoppe 1971, p. 405). For an overview of the reaction among German botanists, see Junker 1989.
For further discussions of the reception of CD’s theory in Germany, see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 9 [July 1864] and n. 6.
Haeckel is apparently referring to his Generelle Morphologie, which was eventually published in 1866 (Haeckel 1866). He had told CD about his plan to write the book in his letter of 9 [July 1864]. There is an annotated copy of Haeckel 1866 in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 355–7).
Haeckel’s wife, Anna Sethe, died on 16 February 1864 (see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 August 1864).
Haeckel published several essays on the Coelenterata between 1864 and 1865 (see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 9 [July 1864] and n. 15).
The reference is to F. Müller 1864; CD’s lightly annotated copy of this work is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 609). F. Müller 1864 was a study of the developmental history of the Crustacea, which Fritz Müller presented as a validation of CD’s theory. CD provided the financial backing for an English translation, which was published in 1869 (see letter to Fritz Müller, 16 March [1868] (Calendar no. 6014), Möller ed. 1915–21, and DSB).
Before leaving Prussia in 1852, Müller had been barred from taking his medical degree owing to his democratic political opinions and his refusal to take an oath recognising the established church and orthodox religious views (DSB). On Müller’s reasons for emigrating to Brazil, see Möller ed. 1915–21, 3: 24–44. For a discussion of state control and the suppression of political movements in German universities during this period, see McClelland 1980. For the state control of medical education and practice in Prussia, see Huerkamp 1990, including pp. 77-8 on the oath requirement. On the licensing of doctors in Prussia, see McClelland 1991, pp. 38–40.
Haeckel was mistaken: the first edition of Gegenbaur’s Grundzüge der vergleichenden Anatomie was published in 1859; the second edition appeared in 1870. There is a copy of Gegenbaur 1870 in the Darwin Library–Down (see Marginalia 1: 299).
See letter to Ernst Haeckel, [after 10] August – 8 October [1864] and n. 13, and CD’s annotation to this letter.
The reference is to the Friedrich Frommann bookshop, at house no. 225, later Markt 19, in Jena, owned by Friedrich Johann Frommann (Meyers Enzyklopädisches Lexikon).

Bibliography

Calendar: A calendar of the correspondence of Charles Darwin, 1821–1882. With supplement. 2d edition. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1994.

Claparède, Edouard. 1861. M. Darwin et sa théorie de la formation des espèces. Revue Germanique Française & étrangère 16: 523–59; 17: 232–63.

Correspondence: The correspondence of Charles Darwin. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. 29 vols to date. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985–.

DSB: Dictionary of scientific biography. Edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie and Frederic L. Holmes. 18 vols. including index and supplements. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. 1970–90.

Haeckel, Ernst. 1866. Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Allgemeine Grundzüge der organischen Formen-Wissenschaft, mechanisch begründet durch die von Charles Darwin reformirte Descendenz-Theorie. 2 vols. Berlin: Georg Reimer.

Hemleben, Johannes. 1964. Ernst Haeckel in Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag.

Hoppe, Brigitte. 1971. Die Geschichtlichtkeit der Natur und des Menschen. Die Entwicklungstheorie Alexander Brauns. In Medizingeschichte in unserer Zeit, edited by Hans-Heinz Eulner et al. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke Verlag.

Huerkamp, Claudia. 1990. The making of the modern medical profession, 1800–1914. Prussian doctors in the nineteenth century. In German professions, 1800–1950, edited by Geoffrey Cocks and Konrad H. Jarausch. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Junker, Thomas. 1989. Darwinismus und Botanik. Rezeption, Kritik und theoretische Alternativen im Deutschland des 19. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Deutscher Apotheker Verlag.

McClelland, Charles E. 1980. State, society, and university in Germany 1700–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marginalia: Charles Darwin’s marginalia. Edited by Mario A. Di Gregorio with the assistance of Nicholas W. Gill. Vol. 1. New York and London: Garland Publishing. 1990.

Nyhart, Lynn K. 1995. Biology takes form. Animal morphology and the German universities, 1800–1900. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Saussure, Henri de. 1873. Edouard-René Claparède. Né à Genève le 24 Avril 1832, mort à Sienne le 31 Mai 1871. Mémoires de la Société de Physique et d’Histoire Naturelle de Genève 22: i–xxiv.

Schultze, Max. 1865. Echiniscus Sigismundi, ein Arctiscoide der Nordsee. Archiv für mikroskopische Anatomie 1: 428–36.

Uschmann, Georg. 1959. Geschichte der Zoologie und der zoologischen Anstalten in Jena 1779–1919. Jena: VEB Gustav Fischer.

Uschmann, Georg. 1984. Ernst Haeckel. Biographie in Briefen. Gütersloh: Prisma Verlag.

Wunderlich, Klaus. 1978. Rudolf Leuckart. Weg und Werk. Jena: Gustav Fischer.

Summary

Thanks CD for notes concerning the development of his ideas about the origin of species. Says August Schleicher and Carl Gegenbaur also interested.

Names new supporters of CD’s theory, including Max Schultze, Rudolf Leuckart, and Alexander Braun. Zoologists have been more interested than botanists.

He is writing a general work on the relationships among animals [Generelle Morphologie der Organismen (1866)].

Comments on Fritz Müller’s Für Darwin [1864].

Gegenbaur is revising his Grundzüge der vergleichenden Anatomie [2d ed. (1870)] to accord with evolution.

Thanks CD for copy of book on balanids [Living Cirripedia, vol. 2].

Letter details

Letter no.
DCP-LETT-4646
From
Ernst Philipp August (Ernst) Haeckel
To
Charles Robert Darwin
Sent from
Jena
Source of text
DAR 166: 39
Physical description
ALS 6pp (German) damaged †

Please cite as

Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 4646,” accessed on 19 April 2024, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-4646.xml

Also published in The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, vol. 12

letter