Precursors Of Darwinism

"No person, not even the most ignorant, could suppose that I meant to arrogate to myself the origination of the doctrine that species had not been independently created. The only novelty in my work is the attempt to show how species become modified, & to a certain extent how the theory of descent explains certain large classes of facts; & in these respects I received no assistance from mypredecessors." Letter from Darwin to Baden Powell, dated 7 February 1860. Quoted in de Beer 1959, p52.
"I should be extremely glad now to publish a sketch of my general views in about a dozen pages or so. But I cannot persuade myself that I can do so honourably ... I would far rather burn my whole book than that he or any man should think that I had behaved in a paltry spirit." Letter from Darwin toLyell, 25 June 1858 after receipt of Wallace's paper, quoted in Desmond and Moore 1991 and Quammen 1996.
"... the questions Darwin asked and the answers he supplied can be understood only in relation to his contemporary background, in large part because of his professional scientific status. He was not a solitary genius, indifferent to and unaffected by the currents around him." Ruse 1979, p32Darwin's theories consist of seven main hypotheses. He was neither original nor claimed to be on transmutation or the struggle for existence. He proposed original hypotheses extending earlier theories of common descent and biogeographical speciation. Natural selection and sexual selection were his own theories, not influenced either by earlier formulations or by Wallace's independent discoveries.His theory of heredity was not original except in his specific and mistaken hypothesis of pangenesis. Finally, Darwin was working as a bona fide scientist in the science of his day, and his theories are not mere reflections of his religious, political or economic beliefs.
The following table summarises the conclusions:
 
Hypothesis | Original to C Darwin | Influenced | First author |Transmutation of species | No | Possibly, by Lamarck, E Darwin, and Lyell's anti-Lamarckian arguments | Lamarck or Erasmus Darwin in the scientific tradition |
Struggle for existence | No | Yes, by numerous scientists and writers (eg, Malthus, Tennyson). | Heraclitus |
Common descent | No, but first to propose single ancestor of all life | Yes, by numerous scientists, especially von Baer and Owen. |Maupertuis |
Biogeographical speciation | No | Numerous scientists, esp. Wallace. | Gmelin, von Buch |
Natural selection | No | No. Independently discovered by Wallace. | Wells (not as mechanism of evolution - Darwin was first in this) |
Sexual selection | Yes | Possibly by comments by Erasmus Darwin. | C Darwin |
Heredity (use and disuse) | No | Yes, possibly by Lamarck. | Ancient |Heredity (pangenesis) | Yes | Yes | C Darwin |

It is sometimes claimed by those who wish to denigrate the achievements of Charles Darwin that he was little more than a "serial plagiarist". He is supposed to have lifted his central ideas, without giving due credit, from a number of precursors including earlier evolutionists and formulators of the principle of natural selection. This essay aims toshow that Darwin, like any scientist, had influences, but that he was honest in his theoretical development.
The theory of evolution would be as valid even if Darwin had lifted it entire from every person who has ever been claimed as a precursor, but in the interests of historical accuracy, and to introduce the reader to the material, I have put this FAQ together. Since the material and secondarycomment is scattered I thought it would be useful to have an introduction giving the references.
Mere use of the word "evolution" is no indication that an author's theory of origins is the same as Darwin's, either before The Origin or after1. A good many of those who preceded Darwin believed that species were mutable - that is, they were not static and unchanging kinds - and many if not most of...