In honour of Gerhard Winkel (1926-2009), the great environmental educator and founder of the Hanover Biology Centre, documented by Ulrich Kattmann on the occasion of his 70th birthday
1

In the cracks between the generously laid stone slabs of the garden terrace, a rich flora of bluegrass, bird's-foot trefoil and pennywort sprouted. Seeds of willowherb had sprouted along the edges and the sprouted plants were now in full bloom. Some were already releasing their hairy seeds into the light summer wind, which carried them away like feathers. A black ground beetle ran across the terrace and disappeared into the tangle of herbs opposite. The two gentlemen sat relaxed in the somewhat uncomfortable chairs at the wooden table under the old fruit trees and enjoyed the warmth of the afternoon. The tranquillity was accentuated by the gentle buzzing in the air, which numerous flying insects added to the atmosphere. Honey bees foraged the flowers of the willowherb one by one, while a few bumblebees flew to the large maws of the garden foxglove.

Charles Darwin squinted into the sun, looked up into the blue sky of the bright midsummer's day and tried to catch sight of the redstart, which had been singing its short verse on the highest point of the pear tree for some time, but only discovered a blue tit, which was turning in the branches, pecking at buds and letting out a bright, delicate trill. Finally, he looked at his counterpart with a clear gaze and sighed:
"When I look at this enchanting and idyllic scene, I couldn't care less how all these animals and birds came to be." 2

Carl von Linné was startled out of his thoughts, looked at Darwin in amazement, drew thoughtfully on his pipe, followed the rising blue smoke with his eyes and finally said, still looking upwards:
"What prevents you from marvelling at the Creator with nature?"

"The work of nature is clumsy, wasteful, bunglingly low and horribly cruel.3 You may doubt this when you have the peaceful sight of this garden or a magnificent landscape before you. And yet it is only too true that there is an incessant struggle in nature. Often this struggle is the lot of egg and seed, of seedlings, larvae and offspring, but it is inevitably the lot of every being in the course of its life or - more often - in larger periods of time, the lot of succeeding generations. "4

"There is another way of looking at it," Linné objected. "What seems cruel to us indicates that all beings are dependent on each other: The almighty Creator has arranged everything on our globe in such a marvellous order that not a single thing can be found that does not need the assistance of another. The globe itself, with its stones and ores and sands, receives its nourishment and sustenance from the elements. The plants, trees, herbs, grasses and mosses have their growth from the earth ball and the animals finally from the plants. In the end, these are transformed back into their first substances, the earth becomes food for the plants, the plants for the worms, the worms for the birds and the birds often for the predators: In the end the beast of prey is again consumed by the birds of prey, the birds of prey by the worms, the worms by the herbs, the herbs by the earth: yes, man, for whom everything must serve his need, often becomes the food of the beast of prey, the bird of prey, the fish of prey, the worm or the earth. Thus everything goes round in a circle." 5

Darwin smiled indulgently, the flash of his eyes betraying a slight mockery:
"Now you almost remind me of William Paley's remarks on purposefully constructed nature." 6

"Charley, do you really believe that Carolus Linnaeus has read William Paley's Theology of Nature?"
Linné had now entered into the conversation with commitment, which he betrayed with the confidential form of address, and he was struck in his vanity, which brought out his habit of speaking of himself in the third person:
"No natural scientist has made more observations in nature, no one has had more solid insight into all three realms of nature than he, no one has written more works, more correctly, more neatly and from his own experience, no one has so completely reformed an entire science and opened up a new epoch." 7

Darwin sensed that there might be a dispute, and took the precaution of conceding:
"Sir Carl, after a long struggle, I have come to the conclusion that struggle and competition dominate nature. The fiercest competition is between members of the same species inhabiting the same territory, demanding the same food and exposed to the same dangers, as can be observed in English society between people of different classes."
Darwin had addressed Linné with the title of nobility to flatter him, painfully aware that he himself had been denied the similar honour he had hoped for. Still intent on compromise, he continued:
"However, from the very beginning, ever since I began to publish my theory, I have emphasised unmistakably that I use the expression 'struggle for existence' only in a metaphorical sense, which - quite in your sense - includes the interdependence of beings. One can therefore rightly say that two dog-like predators fight with each other for food in times of scarcity, one can also say that a plant fights with drought on the edge of the desert, although one could just as well express it in this way: It depends on moisture. So the fight for existence is by no means just tooth and claw. It even involves beneficial relationships: As the mistletoe seed is spread by birds, its existence depends on them. Metaphorically speaking, mistletoe fights with other fruit-bearing plants to get birds to eat and spread their seeds." 8

"I'll put up with a fight without weapons. It's more like a love game," Linné mocked (little realising what a sensitive aspect of Darwin's theory he was touching). "Look at the dragonflies. As soon as a male notices his mate, he grabs her around the neck with the pincers of his abdomen. She is forced to follow and, in order to push him away, she bends her abdomen crookedly underneath her to the male's breast, just where Venus has hidden his love arrows, and is thus overcome by force, as it were, without violence.9 You seem to me to be very prejudiced against the idea of fighting."
Darwin's face fell painfully at the last word, for nothing weighed more heavily on him in science than the accusation of bias. But Linné continued unperturbed:
"One should look at the benefits that nature produces everywhere. Mistletoe must produce sticky fruits that serve as food for birds. The birds must clean their beaks of the sticky sap so that the seeds can be safely stripped from the next tree and grow there in the light: So every created thing is not just created for its own sake, but almost more for the sake of others: The pig and the hedgehog plough the earth. Moles plough the earth so that grass and herbs can grow in it more easily. The cockerels awaken us in the early morning, the cuckoo and the lark, as well as the redstart, during the day. The blackbird in the morning and evening. Nightingales sing to us at night. The fish have to move from the safe bottom of the sea to the unsafe shores every year and climb up into the rivers to be caught in heaps by animals, birds and us. The silk worms spin such long threads that we may clothe ourselves with them. The honeybees, as they buzz around us here, suck up the honey for our tasty tongues with such great labour. Even the sea has to throw heaps of snails, oysters and lobsters onto the shore with the ebb and flow of the tide, all for the service of humans and animals.10 The hair moss is soft and does not collapse into a hard surface when a mat is pushed out of the ground. Thus nature has given man everything in abundance and provided for him so well that he lacks nothing, and has even given him bedding in the desolate wasteland. However, man must first discover many benefits in order to secure them for himself. On my trip to Lapland, for example, I found forests full of large pine trees standing around uselessly, because nobody makes houses out of them. The trees fall down and rot. On my travels I realised that the whole economy of a country is based on knowledge of the natural bodies of the three kingdoms 'animals,' 'plants' and 'stones'. Without such knowledge, economists labour in vain to help the country." 11

Darwin thought for a while. The activities with which humans utilise nature were familiar and appealing to him. But the accusation of bias had struck him. He finally decided to tackle the core of the problem and - with due politeness - confide his true thoughts to his counterpart:
"For some time now, I have been unable to accept the idea that nature is perfectly and purposefully organised from the beginning.12 I tend to believe that the adaptations we admire in living beings are the result of long-lasting processes in which they have been adapted to their respective environment and way of life."

"How can you imagine that?" interrupted Linné. "How are all these marvellous adaptations supposed to come about?"

"That really is a very difficult question to answer! The facts that have kept me scientifically orthodox for the longest time are precisely those that concern adaptation.13 But I have now been convinced by numerous observations that organisms are not perfectly adapted, but only just perfect enough to be able to compete with their competitors. The individuals of a species tend to differ from one another in slight variations. "14

Linné frowned: "I have also noticed that species can be modified to a certain extent by environmental influences, so that many forms that had been described as species by other scientists were recognised by me as varieties, such as the form of the water star that forms when a puddle dries out, or the hornless cows, in which I was able to detect remnants of the horns under the skin.15 Perhaps the different species of a genus originate from such variations or crossbreeding.16 But species cannot change without limit. Such ideas stem from the superstitions of the people. For example, I was told about a strange tree. It was said to be an apple tree that had been bewitched one day by a begging troll woman. She had picked an apple and when the owner reprimanded her, cursed that the tree would never bear apples again. When I got to the place indicated, I found out that the tree in question was nothing other than a common elm.17 If species could be changed at will, nothing would be certain. A harmless sheep could instantly turn into a roaring lion. Such assumptions open the door to unreliable and unsound speculation. I am only talking about what I have seen and investigated. In my work, I have looked over the shoulder of the Creator. In this way I have succeeded in bringing the creatures into a valid system and thus grasping their essence. "18

"'God created the world, but Linné organised it', don't your friends and enemies alike claim? They seem to believe it themselves," Darwin replied, cancelling out the mockery in his words with a mild tone.
"I explain the kinship of living beings by common descent. The variation of species is unlimited. But I do not claim that a moss can change into a magnolia or a mollusc into a human being.19 The transformation of species happens slowly and in very small steps. You are right, this is a hypothesis, and it was only speculative until I was able to show what causes such a transformation of species can come about. If you consider the mutual relationship of living beings, their embryonic relationships, their geographical distribution, their geological succession and similar facts, you could well come to the conclusion that the species were not created independently of each other, but descended from other species in a similar way to the varieties. Nevertheless, such a conclusion, however well founded, would be unsatisfactory as long as it is not proved how the innumerable species inhabiting our earth have changed. It is therefore of the utmost importance to gain a clear insight into the means by which such changes and adaptations have been brought about. I have been convinced from the first that the knowledge of variation in the state of domestication will give the best and most certain information in this respect.20 In breeding, selection is made among varieties which occur at random. The great power of the principle of breeding selection is not hypothetical. Indeed, it is certain that several of our best breeders have significantly modified their cattle and sheep breeds. Breeders even think that they can reshape the organisation of their animals almost at will.21 I have found among 15 breeds of domestic pigeon differences corresponding to those of three good genera and 15 distinct species. Even their red blood cells were differently shaped. "22

"Where do you get the audacity to compare the breeding choices of man with the creations in nature? Here is the selecting man and there? Who selects in nature? And who sets the breeding goals, if we accept your hypothesis as possible?"

"There is no goal at all in the process I hypothesise. Among the variations between organisms there will occasionally be those that are advantageous for some part of their organisation. The environmental conditions play no role in the occurrence of such variations. The variations therefore occur randomly, i.e. undirected. It simply happens that they are useful. At least in some cases!"
Darwin spoke in a concentrated way to get to the heart of the matter:
"Individuals with favourable variations will have a greater chance of surviving and passing on their new, slightly modified structure. The less well-adapted varieties and species, on the other hand, will gradually die out. I call the process in which the relatively best adapted survive the struggle for existence natural selection. In this way, a living being - such as mistletoe - can be adapted to a large number of living and environmental conditions, as natural selection accumulates those slight variations from generation to generation. "23

"I also see that it might very well happen that some species would multiply so much that it would displace all others. Suppose, for example, that each tobacco plant produced 40,320 seeds a year and that there was no one to consume any of them, then such a plant would easily crowd out all others. But that's just speculation. By simple reasoning I come to the conclusion that such a thing cannot happen, because it would cause something to cease to exist that the all-wise Creator has created, and the proper order and balance would be disturbed. If you follow the chain of nature, you will see that the animals were created primarily for the benefit of the plants and not - at least not primarily - the plants for the animals. Indeed, I would not even know how the world could exist without harm if even a single species of animal were missing from it.24 Why should I not recognise the foresight of the Creator in his creatures?"

Darwin took a pinch of snuff to ease his tension. Religious talk stressed him out.
"I cannot persuade myself that a benevolent and omnipotent God deliberately and intentionally created the ichneumon wasps with the express intention that they should eat caterpillars alive from the inside. I don't want to hold God responsible for that.25 Nor would it comfort me if he had used the means of natural selection to do so."

Linné smiled at such petty beliefs. "Now you're talking about something you admittedly know nothing about."

"How right you are! I call myself an agnostic and don't presume to be able to say anything scientifically about God's plans. It is not necessarily more humane to doubt God's existence just because it seems more rational. Perhaps reason is not the only instrument for recognising truth. I don't know.26 But there is no place in science for the assumption that God intervenes in natural events. With divine intentions and directed evolution, the belief in miracles enters science and obscures insight into natural causes and laws.27

"One really must not be satisfied with convenient and pious answers in science. They explain nothing, but often only conceal ignorance," Linné agreed with his interlocutor's last statement.
"While travelling in Lapland, I wondered why the reindeer walked in such a way that it cracked its foot with every step. When I repeatedly asked the inhabitants, they all replied that God had created it that way. When I asked how the good Lord had created it so that it always cracked, they were at their wit's end with their theological wisdom. But not Linnaeus! I grabbed an ankle, pulled, bent, stretched it, squeezed it, but still heard no cracking. Eventually I found out that the cracking came from the claws, which are hollow inside. When the reindeer is standing, the claws are spread apart, but as soon as it lifts its foot, the shells of the claws collide and cause the cracking.28 I have no doubt that the almighty Creator created the world and that science has the task of investigating his thoughts."

Darwin took another pinch of snuff. He sucked it in heavily and waited for the relaxing effect. Arguments about religion always reminded him of the oppressive situation in his marriage. Where would I be without this marvellous wife, he thought. But religion stood between him and his pious wife Emma.
"I have always avoided writing about religion and restricted myself to science. I feel no remorse, as I should if I had committed any great sin. I believe that I have acted rightly in always following science.29 I have always been cautious in formulating my insights so as not to offend those who think differently. I have also never expressed myself as tastelessly as my loud German friend Ernst30 or slobbered like my bishop-eating bulldog. "31

"You were apparently not in the best of company," Linné interjected.

"I couldn't choose my contemporaries," Darwin grumbled.
"I needed allies, even if they didn't really understand my central hypothesis of selection. "32 The political radicals were in favour of evolutionary ideas, but discredited science. And, of course, my social position as a landowner. I was in constant danger of being socially marginalised. Should I offend serious scientists who sided with me? In the beginning, all scientific positions were occupied by clerical spirits. 'A School full of bishops is the devil's flower garden.'33 The worst reservations about my hypothesis stemmed from the fear that it could degrade man. For a long time I anxiously avoided commenting on the descent of man, although I had long considered it. In my book on the question of species I wrote only one sentence: 'Light will also fall on man and his history!'34 But the critics of the book immediately drew the heretical conclusion that man, as a product of chance, could not also have an immortal soul. The way in which immortality was dragged into my theory and the clergy was turned against me in order to leave me to their mercy was vile. They didn't want to burn me, but they took the precaution of getting the wood together and telling the Blackcoats how they could get hold of me.35 I was accused of having brought man too close to the apes. To this day, this is considered an insult to humanity - the greatest since Copernicus removed the Earth from the centre of the cosmos. "36

"Where does such sensitivity come from? Long before you, in my System of Nature, I placed man in the same order as the apes.37 You only have to look at the classic features, the teeth, hands and fingers, to realise how closely related we are to baboons and other apes or even an orangutan. To understand natural human characteristics, you should look at the apes. "38

"He who understands a baboon will do more for knowledge than our greatest philosopher "39 Darwin emphatically agreed.
"Your astute classification of man has not pleased some researchers. Richardus, Rex anatomicorum,40 even managed to call for a separate subclass of mammals for humans because humans had a unique brain lobe. Humans differ from chimpanzees as much as chimpanzees differ from platypuses. I just want to know what a chimpanzee would say.41 This is just a biased attempt to avoid the conclusion that humans are probably descended from an ancient subgroup of apes. Man should observe an orangutan in the zoo, listen to its expressive wails, see its intelligence and its emotions, its anger, its sulking and its acts of despair. And then he should - like me in Tierra del Fuego - look at a savage, naked and unshod, who makes no progress even though he is capable of it. And then this man should dare to arrogantly boast of his supremacy once again.42 It is absurd to talk of one living being being higher than another. Humans regard those animals with the most developed mental faculties as the highest. A honeybee would undoubtedly use communal brood-care instincts as a criterion.43 The insects buzzing around here would hardly regard you and me as the crown of creation. At least we should be able to fly!"

"The little creatures could teach us respect. Here in these small creatures, which we despise, we can find the greatest masterpieces of nature. We admire the sharp eyes of lizards and snakes and owls that see in the dark, but few see the eight eyes of spiders in one head or the eyes of horseflies and dragonflies, each of which has many small eyes in the larger eye. How marvellously the honeybee has arranged its home. How a queen bee loves so many males. She alone has received from her Creator the privilege, which no other female enjoys, that the will of the males should be subject to her. When will the time come when man's eyes will be opened to all these little creatures?" 44

"When I published my book on the efficacy of earthworms, which I had studied seriously for over 40 years, it was considered an unworthy whim of an old man, "45 Darwin replied with a sceptical expression. "Although I regret this attitude, the idea that man is descended from some lower form of life will be extremely repugnant to many.46 In evolution there is no goal, no predetermined order, no self-sustaining equilibrium, and man is a product of chance descended from the apes. 47 Even my dear friend Thomas, who would rather have an ape for a grandfather than the Bishop of Oxford,48 did not tolerate the proximity of humans and animals well under these circumstances. He believed he could save the dignity of man by claiming that the distance between civilised man and animals was immense. Descent or no descent, man was not cattle after all. 49 Note that my unusually tame bulldog only separated us civilised humans from the animals by a gulf with which he established the special position of man in nature."

Linné doubted whether he had grasped the idea correctly. Why was there a need for a special position in a perfectly organised nature? 50
"If we recognise that in the economy of nature every living creature is not created merely for itself, but for others, then we can also deduce from this the duty for man that he must serve mainly with the part with which he surpasses the other animals. Among the four-footed animals, none has received such a large brain as man. We did not acquire fine hearing like the wild pig, but we learnt to hear more accurately through the ear trumpet. So if the brain and reason are the noblest things that God and nature have given man, we must also use and refine them in the service of other creatures and people." 51

Darwin shifted uneasily in his chair. He felt uncomfortable the longer the conversation went on. "Man can be excused for feeling some pride in seeing himself at the top of the whole organic ladder. The fact that he has got there through evolution, instead of being put there from the beginning, can give him the hope of having an even higher destiny in the distant future." He hastened to add: "But hopes and fears are not the business of science." 52
The belief in progress of his contemporaries had caught up with Darwin for a moment. He knew that, according to his theory, there was no automatic progress and it followed that man could also fail in his development. Therefore, the thought of future evolution could not give him any real comfort or certain hope. Nor did he realise what unacceptable ideas and actions would be linked to his words:
"If progress is to be achieved, the social conditions must be created. In the struggle for existence, every living being must assert its existence in the competition for resources. This also applies to human beings. There must be open competition for all men, and the fittest must not be hindered by laws and customs from having the greatest success and rearing the greatest number of offspring." 53
Darwin rose ponderously from his garden chair and made an apologetic gesture:
"I am not fit for long disputes. I must rest for a while. The conversation has made me very tired."

Linné drew thoughtfully on his pipe until he realised with annoyance that it had gone out.
"Man, recognise yourself, "54 he muttered, though it was not clear whether he meant Darwin, who was trudging sedately towards the house.

The shadows of the treetops drew a dark pattern on the floor of the terrace. A cross spider was repeatedly and hurriedly reeling in the honeybee that had become entangled in its web. The broad bands of silken spider threads that sprang from its abdomen looked like the shroud of a mummy. A song thrush struck a ribbon snail on one of the terrace slabs, breaking the shell. The remains of shells from previous prey lay scattered like smashed porcelain. A single bumblebee buzzed aimlessly in a zig-zag pattern across the open area of the terrace, reaching the inflorescences that protruded into the sun as if by chance and finally disappearing into the throat of a red foxglove flower.
The redstart was still singing tirelessly.

Notes and references
1. Charles Darwin and Carl von Linné lived a century apart (12 February 1809-19 April 1882 and 22 May 1707-10 January 1778 respectively). The contemporaneity of the two great naturalists is established in the dialogue through the validity of their thoughts. The dialogue consists for the most part of original quotations taken from the writings and notes of the interlocutors (see bibliography). The statements in Darwin's notebooks are quoted according to the biography by Desmond/Moore (1994). Where the meaning of the quoted statements differs from the German translations, the original texts have been used for the version given here. In some places, the wording has been slightly modified for the purposes of the interview. The idea of bringing the two men together for a conversation was inspired by the disputes between eminent scientists in Norbert Bischof's book on the biological roots of human behaviour (1993).
The illustrations are by Wilfried Baalmann.
2 Darwin wrote this down while resting during a walk on the heath, where he fell asleep and woke up surrounded by a chorus of singing birds (Desmond/Moore, 528).
3. Desmond/Moore, 508.
4. Desmond/Moore, 509.
5. Linné: Rede von den Merkwürdigkeiten an den Insekten, 243.
6. Darwin had read the works of the theologian William Paley during his theological studies in Cambridge. At the time, they were very much in line with Darwin's rational world view. In his natural theology, Paley paints a picture of a happy, harmonious and purposefully organised nature.
7. Linné: Autobiography, 234.
8. Darwin: Origin of Species, 101 f.; 115.
9. Linné: Speech on the Curiosities of Insects, 256.
10. Linné: Speech on the Curiosities of Insects, 244 f..
11 Linné: Lapland Journey, 57; 45; 52; 77; Autobiography, 207; 226 f..
12 Darwin in a letter to the Boston zoologist Asa Gray (cited in Altner 1981, 7).
13. Desmond/Moore, 728.
14. Desmond/Moore, 523.
15. Linné: Lappland Journey, 25; 73.
16. Cf. Ballauff 1954, 303.
17. Linné: Lappland Journey, 14.
18. Linné: Autobiography, 229. Linné repeatedly expresses the idea of having "seen God on his back" in his writings (cf. Mierau 1991, 304).
19 Desmond/Moore, 497.
20 Darwin: Origin of Species, 26f.
21 Darwin: Origin of Species, 59 f..
22. Desmond/Moore, 485.
23. The paragraph is summarised according to Darwin's views in "Origin of Species" and the preliminary sketch on the "Variation of Species" (cf. Altner 1981, 25).
24 Linné: Politia naturae (cited in Ballauf, 1954, 307).
25 Desmond/Moore, 544 The study of ichneumon wasps played an important role in replacing the image of a harmonious, planned nature. Knowledge of the ichneumon contributes to the perception of a non-moral nature, as Gould (1991) impressively shows. The motif is also found in Linné (Von den Merkwürdigkeiten an den Insekten, 259).
26 Desmond/Moore, 713.
27 Desmond/Moore, 665.
28 Linné: Lappländische Reise, 87.
29 Desmond/Moore, 715; 724. His wife Emma played a decisive role in Darwin's life. Without her company, he felt insecure and uncomfortable. Emma cared for him during his many bouts of illness. Darwin therefore affectionately called her his nurse. He also gave her drafts of his writings to scrutinise. As early as 1844, he entrusted her with his draft on the question of species. When she commented on the gradual development of the eye through selection: "A daring hypothesis", Darwin rewrote the paragraph and since then broke out in a cold sweat every time he thought about the evolution of the eye. The couple did not agree on matters of faith, as Emma held firmly to biblical statements in the literal sense. Although she feared for her husband's salvation, she respected his integrity and understood that he had no choice but to follow his insights. In contrast to his followers Haeckel and Huxley, who defended the theory of evolution with religious fervour and dogmatically (see notes 30 and 31), Darwin kept his scientific statements open to the world (cf. Altner 1966).
30 Ernst Haeckel, professor of zoology in Jena, visited Darwin several times. His uncompromising zeal impressed the Darwins just as much as his loud nature. One of his tastelessnesses was that he drew the conclusion from the theological statement that man was created in the image of God that the Judeo-Christian God was a gaseous vertebrate (cf. Desmond/Moore, 612).
31 The London zoology professor Thomas Henry Huxley was referred to as "Darwin's bulldog", as he was an emphatic and fierce advocate of the theory of evolution. Huxley used the theory of evolution as an instrument to remove clerical scientists from office and replace them with like-minded people. Huxley and Haeckel were kindred spirits both in their uncompromisingness and their anti-clericalism (see notes 29 and 30; cf. Desmond/Moore, 566; 611 ff.).
32 Neither for Huxley nor for Haeckel did the theory of selection have the decisive significance that Darwin gave it (cf. Desmond/Moore. 556 f.; 611 f). Like many others, they merely took up the idea of evolution and substantiated it with "facts" that Darwin considered insufficient for his theory (see the quotation to note 19 in the discussion).
33 The English proverb that Darwin quotes here is: "A bench of bishops is the devil's flower garden" (Desmond/Moore, 566; 501). "Bench" means a "bench" in the English House of Lords and is therefore not to be translated literally into German.
34 Darwin: Origin of Species, 676.
35 Desmond/Moore, 542.
36 Siegmund Freud described Darwin's imposition of ape kinship as the second offence to humanity after Copernicus. (cf. Vollmer 1992). This statement does not usually explain why Darwin's theory and not Linné's categorisation of apes was perceived as an insult (cf. Kattmann 1994, 4 f.).
37 Linné: Systema naturae, 1st ed. 1735; 10th ed. 1760, vol. 1, 20.
38 Linné: Lappländische Reise, 94.
39 Desmond/Moore, 279. Darwin mentions Locke as a philosopher and metaphysics as knowledge.
40 Desmond/Moore, 536 The London zoologist Richard Owen was derisively referred to as "rex anatomicorum". Owen had described and classified the South American mammal fossils. He was the director of the Zoological Museum and was regarded as the greatest anatomical authority on vertebrate anatomy. As a representative of the clerical scientists, he was the target of Huxley's attacks. Owen had not sided with Darwin, although he himself had evolutionary ideas in which he wanted to see the Creator's plans embedded.
41 Desmond/Moore, 513.
42 Desmond/Moore, 279 f.. Darwin made these notes after he had observed an orang in the zoo for the first time.
43 Desmond/Moore, 266.
44 Linné: Rede von den Merkwürdigkeiten an den Insekten, 247; 248; 250; 251 f..
45. Desmond/Moore, 729; 734; 737.
46. Darwin: Descent of Man, 700.
47. Desmond/Moore, 542.
48. Darwin alludes to the now legendary controversy between Thomas Henry Huxley and Samuel ("Soapy Sam") Wilberforce, the Bishop of Oxford, which took place during the first public debate about Darwin's theory in 1860 at the British Association in Oxford (in Darwin's absence). According to Huxley's version of the story, the Bishop had ironically asked, referring to him, "Was it actually his grandfather's or grandmother's line that he described as descended from apes?" At this point, Huxley allegedly whispered: "The Lord has given him into my hands." Huxley reported the following about his answer: "If I were asked, I said, whether I would rather have a miserable ape for a grandfather, or a man of great influence, richly endowed by nature with all her gifts, but who would use these gifts and this influence to ridicule a weighty scientific question, I would unhesitatingly confess that I preferred the ape" (quoted in Taylor 1963, 162). According to Huxley, the auditorium then burst out laughing and was entirely on his side. Other accounts of the meeting, including those of Darwin's friends, saw no such success and observed no triumphant demeanour on Huxley's part, as he could not assert himself with his voice and therefore barely reached his audience. The triumph of the evolutionists in Oxford bears all the hallmarks of a heroic legend (written by Huxley himself) (cf. Desmond/Moore 557-563; Gauld 1994).
49 In "Evidences as to man's place in nature" (1863), Huxley provided the classical form of the special position of man postulated within the framework of biology. "We may, therefore, make what system of organs we please, the comparison of their different forms in the ape series leads to one and the same result, that the anatomical differences which separate man from the gorilla and the chimpanzee are not so great as those which separate the gorilla from the lower apes. ... At the same time, no one is so strongly convinced as I am that the distance between civilised man and the animals is an immense one. No one is so sure that, whether man comes from the animals or not, he is certainly not one of them." The biological attempts to formulate a special position for man appear to be the child of man's relationship with apes. From an unbiased evolutionary-biological perspective, the concept of special status should be replaced by the formulation of distinctiveness (cf. Kattmann 1974; 1994).
50 Pre-Darwinian biological justification of special status is not required due to the teleological understanding of nature (cf. Kattmann 1994, 4 f.).
51 Linné: Speech on the Curiosities of Insects, 246 ff.
52 Darwin: Abstammung des Menschen, 701.
53 Darwin: Abstammung des Menschen, 700.
54 In the 10th edition of "Systema naturae" (1760, vol. 1, 20), Linné already explains the relationship to the species name Homo sapiens in the 1st edition (1735). Nosce te ipsum" added to the species name Homo sapiens in the first edition (1735) in a note: "Nosce te ipsum est primus sapientiae, dictumque Solonis, quondam scriptum litteris aureis supra Dianae templum."

Literature
Altner, G. (1966). Charles Darwin and Ernst Haeckel. A comparison under theological aspects. (Theological Studies 85), Zurich: EVZ.
Altner, G. (1981) (ed.). Darwinism. The history of a theory. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Ballauff, T. (1954). The science of life. Volume 1: A History of Biology from Antiquity to Romanticism. Freiburg & Munich: Alber.
Bischof, N. (1993). The enigma of Oedipus. Munich: Piper (3rd ed.).
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of s pecies. (Reprint after the 1st edition, London: Penguin Classics 1985; German translation by Carl W. Neumann after the 6th edition of 1872, Stuttgart: Reclam 1963).
Darwin, C. (1871). The Descent of Man. Translated from the English by Viktor Carus (2nd ed. 1874, reprint 1992, Dreieich: Weiss-Verlag).
Desmond, A., & Moore, J. (1994). Darwin. Reinbek: Rowohlt (original English edition 1991, London: Michael Joseph).
Gauld, C. F. (1994). The ballad of "Soapy Sam" and "Darwin's Bulldog": A case study of the use of history in science education. St George Papers of Education 3, University of New South Wales, Australia.
Goerke, H. (1989). Carl von Linné. Stuttgart: Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft (2nd ed.).
Gould, S. J. (1991). Non-moral nature. In: How the zebra gets its stripes. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Taschenbuch (30-43).
Huxley, T. H. (1863). Evidences as to man's place in nature. Williams & Norgate, London (Eng.: Evidences as to man's place in nature. Stuttgart: Fischer 1963).
Kattmann, U. (1994). Image of man and the evolution of man. Unterricht Biologie 18 (200), 4-13.
Kattmann, U. (1974). Special status or peculiarity. On the position of man within living beings. Praxis der Naturwissenschaften 23 (10), 253-264.
Linné, C (1732). Lapland voyage. In: Linné, 1991, 6-156.
Linné, C (1739). Speech on the peculiarities of insects. Journey. In: Linné, 1991, 243-264.
Linné, C (1768). Carl Linné (autobiography). In: Linné, 1991, 158-242.
Linné, C. von (1735). Systema naturae. Leyden. (10th ed. Halle & Magdeburg: 1760).
Linné, C. von (1991). Lappish Journey and other writings. Leipzig: Reclam (4th ed.).
Mierau, S (1991). Afterword. In: Linné, 1991, 6-156.
Taylor, G. R. (1963). The knowledge of life. Munich & Zurich: Knaur.
Vollmer, G. (1992). The Fourth to Seventh Offence of Man - Brain, Evolution and the Image of Man. In: Biologie heute (400), 1-3; (401), 2-5.