Origin of Species Variorum

→ suppose any 1869 1872

choose to suppose that any of the 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ I to have been 1869

I have been 1859 1860 1861 1866

I, to have become 1872

→ lost all 1869 1872

more or less completely lost 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ likewise be lost,— as 1869

have been more or less completely lost,— as sometimes 1859 1860 1861 1866

be lost, as 1872

→ some few existing 1869 1872

existing 1859 1860 1861 1866

↑ 3 blocks not present in 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869; present in 1872

But this genus, though much isolated, will still occupy its proper intermediate position. The representation of the groups, as here given in the diagram on a flat surface, is much too simple. The branches ought to have diverged in all directions.

→ in the diagram as 1869

as 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ OMIT 1869

in the diagram, 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ a branching diagram had not been used, and only 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

OMIT 1872

→ written 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

simply written down 1872

→ possible to have given a natural arrangement; 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

natural; 1872

→ view which I hold, the 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

OMIT 1872

→ ancient languages had altered very 1869 1872

very ancient language had altered 1859 1860 1861 1866

will it be with each subordinate branch of descendants, at each successive

period.

stage.

If, however, we →suppose any

descendants

descendant

or of →I to have been so much modified as to have →lost all traces of

their

its

parentage, in this case,

their

its

places

place

the

natural

classification

system

will →likewise be lost,— as seems to have occurred with →some few existing organisms. All the descendants of the genus F, along its whole line of descent, are supposed to have been but little modified, and they

yet

....

form a single genus. ↑ But this genus, though much isolated, will still occupy its proper intermediate

position;

for

originally

was

intermediate

character

between

and

and

the

several

genera

descended

from

these

two

genera

will

have

inherited

certain

extent

their

characters.

This natural arrangement is

shown,

shown

→in the diagram as far as is possible on paper, →OMIT but in much too simple a manner. If →a branching diagram had not been used, and only the names of the groups had been →written in a linear series,

the representation

would have been still less →possible to have given a natural arrangement; and it is notoriously not possible to represent in a series, on a flat surface, the affinities which we discover in nature amongst the beings of the same group. Thus,

the →view which I hold, the natural system is genealogical in its

arrange- ment,

arrangement,

like a

pedigree:

pedigree;

but the

degrees

amount

of modification which the different groups have

undergone,

undergone

have

has

to be expressed by ranking them under different so-called genera, sub-families, families, sections, orders, and classes.

It may be worth while to illustrate this view of classification, by taking the case of languages. If we possessed a perfect pedigree of mankind, a genealogical arrangement of the races of man would afford the best classification of the various languages now spoken throughout the world; and if all extinct languages, and all intermediate and slowly changing dialects,

were

had

to be included, such an arrangement

would,

would

I think,

....

be the only possible one. Yet it might be that some →ancient languages had altered very

little,

little

and had given rise to few