Cii. n.] ' OKIGIN OF SPECIES.' * 43 



I began to write in 1856, the book would have been four or 

 five times as large as the Origin, and vory few would have had 

 the patience to read it. 



I gained much by my delay in publishing from about 1839, 

 when the theory was clearly conceived, to 1859 ; and I lost 

 nothing by it, for I cared very littlo whether men attributed 

 most originality to me or Wallace ; and his essay no doubt 

 aided in the reception of the theory. I was forestalled in only 

 one important point, which my vanity has always made me 

 regret, namely, the explanation by means of the Glacial period 

 of tho presence of the same species of plants and of some few 

 animals on distant mountain summits and in the arctic regions. 

 This view pleased mo so much that I wrote it out in extenso, 

 and I beliove that it was read by Hooker some years before 

 E. Forbes published his celebrated memoir* on tho subject. 

 In the very few points in which we differed, I still think that 

 I was in the right. I have never, of course, alluded in print 

 to my having independently worked out this view. 



Hardly any point gave me so much satisfaction when I was 

 at work on the Origin, as the explanation of tho wide difference 

 in many classes between the embryo and the adult animal, and 

 of the close resemblance of tho embryos within tho same class. 

 No notice of this point was taken, as far as I remember, in 

 the early reviews of the Origin, and I recollect expressing my 

 surprise on this head in a letter to Asa Gray. Within late 

 years several reviewers have given the whole credit to Fritz 

 Muller and Hackel, who undoubtedly have worked it out much 

 more fully, and in some respects more correctly than I did. 

 I had materials for a whole chapter on the subject, and I ought 

 to have made tho discussion longer ; for it is clear that I failed 

 to impress my readers; and he who succeeds in doing so 

 deserves, in my opinion, all the credit. 



This leads me to remark that I have almost always been 

 treated honestly by my reviewers, passing over those without 

 scientific knowledge as not worthy of notice. My views have 

 often been grossly misrepresented, bitterly opposed and ridi- 

 culed, but this has been generally done, as I believe, in good 

 faith. On the whole I do not doubt that my works have been 

 over and over again greatly overpraised. I rejoice that I have 

 avoided controversies, and this I owe to Lyell, who many years 

 ago, in reference to my geological works, strongly advised me 

 never to get entangled in a controversy, as it rarely did any 

 good and caused a miserable loss of time and temper. 



* Geolog. Survey Mem., 1846. 



