WI: Darwin reads Mendel

When the contents of Charles Darwin's library were examined after his death, one of its books was found to contain a copy of Gregor Mendel's ground-breaking manuscript on genetic inheritance. Those particular pages were still uncut, indicating Darwin never got around to reading it. Funnily enough, this paper clarified the one part of his theory (patterns/mechanisms of heredity) for which he'd not found decisive evidence.

What if Darwin had read it?
 
Last edited:
This article suggests that, even if Darwin did read Mendel's work - which was cited in works Darwin is known to have read, even if he hadn't read the article itself - he might either miss its significance or have just skimmed over it.

Darwin was noted (again see the article) to be rather dismissive of the use of mathematics in biology. So, it might not have changed very much.
 
I hadn't come across Darwin's 'like a scalpel in a carpenter's shop' dismissal of math in bio before. I'd just read the one where Darwin wishes he had some math talent, 'for men so endowed seem possessed of an extra sense'. So I'd have thought Darwin just might not have the math chops.

But Darwin had smart friends, and they talked. If Darwin had been shown what Mendel meant, he'd have repeated Mendel's experiments. And maybe failed to repeat them- I've read that Mendel's experiments were a little too on-the-nose to believe. But Darwin was good with experiments, and he had an amazing range of people corresponding with him, and if he'd had ten years or so his next edition of The Origin of Species would have been forty years ahead of our timeline. Resulting in- I don't know. Weizman's bacterium starts mass-producing acetone in 1870? Norman Borlaug's grandfather buries socialism in Britain under giant mounds of nosh in 1880?
 
When the contents of Charles Darwin's library were examined after his death, one of its books was found to contain a copy of Gregor Mendel's ground-breaking manuscript on genetic inheritance. Those particular pages were still uncut, indicating Darwin never got around to reading it. Funnily enough, this paper clarified the one part of his theory (patterns/mechanisms of heredity) for which he'd not found decisive evidence.

What if Darwin had read it?
Maybe it only takes one visionary person to connect the work of both. Maybe somebody who happens to have read both of them and connecting the dots. Somebody with knowledge in science.
 
Top