Charles Lyell

Author(s):  
Ian J Smalley
Keyword(s):  
2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. David Archibald

Studies of the origin and diversification of major groups of plants and animals are contentious topics in current evolutionary biology. This includes the study of the timing and relationships of the two major clades of extant mammals – marsupials and placentals. Molecular studies concerned with marsupial and placental origin and diversification can be at odds with the fossil record. Such studies are, however, not a recent phenomenon. Over 150 years ago Charles Darwin weighed two alternative views on the origin of marsupials and placentals. Less than a year after the publication of On the origin of species, Darwin outlined these in a letter to Charles Lyell dated 23 September 1860. The letter concluded with two competing phylogenetic diagrams. One showed marsupials as ancestral to both living marsupials and placentals, whereas the other showed a non-marsupial, non-placental as being ancestral to both living marsupials and placentals. These two diagrams are published here for the first time. These are the only such competing phylogenetic diagrams that Darwin is known to have produced. In addition to examining the question of mammalian origins in this letter and in other manuscript notes discussed here, Darwin confronted the broader issue as to whether major groups of animals had a single origin (monophyly) or were the result of “continuous creation” as advocated for some groups by Richard Owen. Charles Lyell had held similar views to those of Owen, but it is clear from correspondence with Darwin that he was beginning to accept the idea of monophyly of major groups.


1997 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN C. YALDWYN ◽  
GARRY J. TEE ◽  
ALAN P. MASON

A worn Iguanodon tooth from Cuckfield, Sussex, illustrated by Mantell in 1827, 1839, 1848 and 1851, was labelled by Mantell as the first tooth sent to Baron Cuvier in 1823 and acknowledged as such by Sir Charles Lyell. The labelled tooth was taken to New Zealand by Gideon's son Walter in 1859. It was deposited in a forerunner of the Museum of New Zealand, Wellington in 1865 and is still in the Museum, mounted on a card bearing annotations by both Gideon Mantell and Lyell. The history of the Gideon and Walter Mantell collection in the Museum of New Zealand is outlined, and the Iguanodon tooth and its labels are described and illustrated. This is the very tooth which Baron Cuvier first identified as a rhinoceros incisor on the evening of 28 June 1823.


Zygon® ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Owen Anderson
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
James Aaron Green

Abstract In Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man (1863), Charles Lyell appraised the distinct contribution made by his protégé, Charles Darwin (On the Origin of Species (1859)), to evolutionary theory: ‘Progression … is not a necessary accompaniment of variation and natural selection [… Darwin’s theory accounts] equally well for what is called degradation, or a retrogressive movement towards a simple structure’. In Rhoda Broughton’s first novel, Not Wisely, but Too Well (1867), written contemporaneously with Lyell’s book, the Crystal Palace at Sydenham prompts precisely this sort of Darwinian ambivalence to progress; but whether British civilization ‘advance[s] or retreat[s]’, her narrator adds that this prophesized state ‘will not be in our days’ – its realization exceeds the single lifespan. This article argues that Not Wisely, but Too Well is attentive to the irreconcilability of Darwinism to the Victorian ‘idea of progress’: Broughton’s novel, distinctly from its peers, raises the retrogressive and nihilistic potentials of Darwin’s theory and purposes them to reflect on the status of the individual in mid-century Britain.


1902 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 385-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. T. Newton

The history of this gigantic rodent began to be written in 1809, when M. Gothelf Fischer described a skull from a sandy deposit on the borders of the Sea of Azof, to which he gave the name of Trogontherium. Since then, at varying intervals, to the present time, new chapters have been added to this history by both Continental and British workers, describing specimens of a more or less fragmentary character which have from time to time been discovered. The English specimens have been chiefly obtained from the ‘Cromer Forest Bed,’ that rich and remarkable series of beds occupying a position in time between the Crags and the Glacial deposits of East Anglia. The ‘Forest Bed’ specimens were first made known by Sir Charles Lyell in 1840, but were more fully described by Sir R. Owen in 1846 and referred to Fischer's Trogontherium Cuvieri. It will not be necessary at this time to refer specifically to each of the additions to our knowledge of this animal or to detail the varying opinions as to affinities and nomenclature, as these particulars will be found in the Memoirs of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom. Although most of the British specimens of Trogontherium Cuvieri have been found in the ‘Cromer Forest Bed’ a few examples have been met with in the Norwich and Weybourn Crags. The smaller species, which has been called T. minus, was obtained from the nodule bed below the Red Crag of Felixstowe, and an incisor tooth from the Norwich Crag was referred to the same species.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document