My dear Lyell

I will now amuse myself by rereading your last letter, & see if I have anything to answer.¹

The extinction of Ammonites, even after what you tell me about the great breaks in upper challk does yet seem to me a most singular fact; considering how long & how very largely they were developed during the Secondary periods, & considering how high they are in Molluscous scale.—

I do not think I sh^d. save you any trouble (I have ordered my own copy) by ordering the Atlantic Monthly for October; any Bookseller could order it or get it (for he has copies sent to him) at Trubners: I got lately from him the copy which you have of the August or 2^d. Article.—²

I am very glad to hear about the Germans reading my Book.³ No one will be converted, who has not independently begun to doubt about Species.—   Is not Krohn a good fellow?⁴ I have long meant to write to him. He has been working at Cirripedes & has detected 2 or 3 gigantic blunders, but in very difficult points. & about which, I thank Heaven, I spoke rather doubtfully, such difficult dissection that even Huxley failed.⁵ It is chiefly the interpretation which I put on parts that is so wrong; & not the parts which I describe. But they were gigantic blunders; & why I say all this is, because Krohn, instead of crowing at all pointed out my errors with the utmost gentleness & pleasantness.— I have always meant & write to him & thank him.⁶ I suppose “D^r Krohn, Bonn” would reach him.—⁷

With respect to Guinea-pig, I have asked A. Gray where Von Baer makes this statement; unless Von B. has some wonderful new evidence what is the wild parent; the fact goes for little; for I agree with those who entirely deny that the Aperea of La Plata & S. Brazil is the wild parent-stock.⁸ It seems that the Guinea-pig was domesticated when America was discovered.—

Did I ever tell you that the great Von Baer goes a long way with us on Species;⁹ he has read my Book with much attention.—

I would gladly keep myself the Hybrid Hare-Rabbit; but if I got them from France, what evidence should I have that those which I bought were half & half.?— Bartlett is setting about it in right way, namely by crossing wild Hare & Rabbit.—¹⁰ If you see him again just suggest that he sh^d. try several races of the Rabbit with Hare, if one fail; for there is some mystery about the whole case, as several have tried & could never get the two species to pair.—

I cannot see yet how multiple origin of dog can be properly brought as argument for multiple origin of man. Is not your feeling a remnant of that deeply-impressed one on all our minds, that a species is an entity,—something quite distinct from variety? Is it not that the dog case injures the argument from fertility; so that one main argument that the races of man are varieties & not ⁠⟨⁠species, i.e. because they⁠⟩⁠¹¹ are fertile inter ⁠⟨⁠se is⁠⟩⁠ much weakened?—

I quite agree with what Hooker says that whatever variation is possible under culture is possible under nature;— not that the same form would ever be accumulated & arrived at by selection for man’s pleasure, & by natural selection for the organism’s own good.—

Talking of “Natural Selection”, if I had to commence de novo, I would have used ⁠⟨⁠natural preservation⁠⟩⁠;¹² for I find men like Harvey of Dublin cannot understand me; though he has read the Book twice.¹³ D^r Gray of B. Museum, remarked to me that “Selection was obviously impossible with plants”! “No one could tell him how it could be possible”.—¹⁴ And he may now add that the Author did not attempt it to him!—

Yours ever affect | C. Darwin