Abstract
THE British public are deeply indebted to the Times Reviewer for his very comforting and reassuring remarks on Mr. Darwin's “Descent of Man,” in which he has so well exposed the “utterly unsupported hypotheses,” the “unsubstantial presumptions,” the “cursory investigations,” of that “reckless” and “unscientific” writer. It is a great satisfaction to find that Mr. Darwin's odious conclusion that the genealogy of the Talbots, and the Howards, and the Percys must be traced back beyond the Conqueror to an Anthropomorphous Ape, and beyond the ape to an Acephalous Mollusk, rests on no logical foundation whatever. The Reviewer well suggests that anything so odious in idea, so immoral in its apparent tendency, and so different from what we have been accustomed to believe, cannot possibly be true. One is so glad indeed to be free once and for ever from the mischievous influence of such, “unpractical,” “disintegrating speculations,” that it seems worth while trying, if space can be found for the experiment, to elicit from the good nature of the Reviewer, or of those who think with him, a little clearer explanation here and there, before the subject is finally consigned to a well-merited oblivion.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
STEBBING, T. The “Times” Review of Darwin's “Descent of Man”. Nature 3, 488–489 (1871). https://doi.org/10.1038/003488c0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/003488c0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.