{"title":"华莱士，达尔文和特尔纳特1858年。","authors":"Charles H Smith","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2013.0057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent debates on the mailing date of Alfred Russel Wallace's 'Ternate essay' to Charles Darwin in the spring of 1858 have ignored certain details that, once taken into account, alter the matter considerably. Here, a closer look is taken at the critical question of whether Wallace's manuscript-accompanying letter represented a reply to the Darwin letter that arrived in Ternate on 9 March; it is concluded that it very probably did not.</p>","PeriodicalId":520724,"journal":{"name":"Notes and records of the Royal Society of London","volume":" ","pages":"165-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2013.0057","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wallace, Darwin and Ternate 1858.\",\"authors\":\"Charles H Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1098/rsnr.2013.0057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Recent debates on the mailing date of Alfred Russel Wallace's 'Ternate essay' to Charles Darwin in the spring of 1858 have ignored certain details that, once taken into account, alter the matter considerably. Here, a closer look is taken at the critical question of whether Wallace's manuscript-accompanying letter represented a reply to the Darwin letter that arrived in Ternate on 9 March; it is concluded that it very probably did not.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520724,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Notes and records of the Royal Society of London\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"165-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2013.0057\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Notes and records of the Royal Society of London\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2013.0057\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Notes and records of the Royal Society of London","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2013.0057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent debates on the mailing date of Alfred Russel Wallace's 'Ternate essay' to Charles Darwin in the spring of 1858 have ignored certain details that, once taken into account, alter the matter considerably. Here, a closer look is taken at the critical question of whether Wallace's manuscript-accompanying letter represented a reply to the Darwin letter that arrived in Ternate on 9 March; it is concluded that it very probably did not.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
