Origin of Species Variorum

→ the origin of 1859 1860 1861 1866

OMIT 1869

←Subtitle not present 1859 1860 1861 Utilitarian Doctrine how far true: Beauty how acquired . 1866 1869

→ beauty in the eyes of 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

the sake of beauty, to delight 1872

→ or for 1859 1860 1861

or, as already mentioned and discussed, for the sake of 1866

or, as already discussed, for the sake of 1869

or the Creator (but this latter point is beyond the scope of scientific discussion), or for the sake of 1872

→ variety. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

variety, a view already discussed. 1872

→ possessors. 1859 1860 1861 1866

possessors, and may never have been of any use to their progenitors. 1869

possessors, and may never have been of any use to their progenitors; but this does not prove that they were formed solely for beauty or variety. 1872

↑ 2 blocks not present in 1859 1860 1861 1866; present in 1869 1872

No doubt, as recently remarked, the definite action of changed conditions, correlated variation, and reversion have all produced their effects. But the most important consideration is that the chief part of the organisation of every living creature is simply due to inheritance; and consequently, though each assuredly is well fitted for its place in nature, many structures now have no direct relation to existing habits of life.

→ played a most important part, 1859 1860 1861

has largely come into action, 1866

→ no 1859 1860 1861

structure of no 1866

ignorance of the precise cause of the slight analogous differences between

true species.

species.

I might have adduced for this same purpose the differences between the races of man, which are so strongly marked; I may add that some

~~little~~

little

light can apparently be thrown on →the origin of these differences,

~~chiefly~~

chiefly

through sexual selection of a particular kind, but without

~~here~~

here

entering on

full

copious

details my reasoning would appear frivolous. →

The foregoing remarks lead me to say a few words on the protest lately made by some naturalists, against the utilitarian doctrine that every detail of structure has been produced for the good of its possessor. They believe that

~~very~~

very

many structures have been created for →beauty in the eyes of

man

man,

→or for mere →variety.

Such

This

doctrines,

doctrine,

if true, would be absolutely fatal to my theory.

~~Yet~~

Yet

I fully admit that many structures are

now of

no direct use to their →possessors. ↑ Physical conditions probably have had some little

direct effect

effect

on structure, quite independently of any good thus gained. Correlation of growth

~~has~~

has

no doubt →played a most important part, and a useful modification of one part

has

will

often

~~have~~

have

entailed on other parts

~~diversified~~

diversified

changes of →no direct use. So again characters which formerly were useful, or which formerly had arisen from correlation of growth, or from other unknown

causes,

cause,

may reappear from the law of reversion, though now of no direct use. The effects of sexual selection, when displayed in beauty to charm the females, can be called useful only in rather a forced sense. But by far the most important consideration is that the chief part of the organisation of every being is simply due to inheritance; and consequently, though each being assuredly is well fitted for its place in nature, many structures now have no direct relation to the habits of life of each species. Thus, we can hardly believe that the webbed feet of the upland