document_title: The Jungle Book (2016 film)

question_text: who does the voice of baloo in jungle book

text: The Jungle Book (2016 film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: Mowgli is a "man cub" raised by the wolf Raksha and her pack, led by Akela, in an Indian jungle ever since he was brought to them as a baby by the black panther Bagheera. Bagheera trains Mowgli to learn the ways of the wolves, but the boy faces certain challenges and falls behind his wolf siblings while Akela disapproves of him using human tricks like building tools instead of learning the ways of the pack.

text: One day, during the dry season, the jungle animals gather to drink the water that remains as part of a truce during a drought that enables the jungle's wildlife to drink without fear of being eaten by their predators. The truce is disrupted when a scarred tiger named Shere Khan arrives detecting Mowgli's scent in the large crowd. Resentful against man for scarring him, he issues a warning that he will kill Mowgli at the end of the drought. After the drought ends, the wolves debate whether they should keep Mowgli or not. Mowgli decides to leave the jungle for the safety of his pack. Bagheera agrees with the decision and volunteers to guide him to the nearby man village.

text: En route, Shere Khan ambushes them and injures Bagheera, but Mowgli manages to escape. Later, Mowgli meets an enormous python named Kaa who hypnotizes him. While under her influence, Mowgli sees a vision of his father being mauled while protecting him from Shere Khan. The vision also warns of the destructive power of the "red flower" (fire). Kaa attempts to devour Mowgli, but she is attacked by a sloth bear named Baloo, rescuing an unconscious Mowgli. Baloo and Mowgli bond while retrieving some difficult-to-access honey for Baloo and Mowgli agrees to stay with Baloo until the winter season arrives. Upon learning that Mowgli has left the jungle, Shere Khan kills Akela and threatens the pack to lure Mowgli out.

text: Bagheera eventually finds Mowgli and Baloo and is angered that Mowgli has not joined the humans as agreed, but Baloo calms him down and persuades both of them to sleep on it. During the night, Mowgli finds a herd of Indian elephants gathered around a ditch and uses his vines to save a baby elephant from the ditch. Although Baloo and Bagheera are both impressed, Baloo realizes that he cannot guarantee Mowgli's safety after learning that he is being hunted by Shere Khan. Baloo agrees to push Mowgli away to get him to continue onward to the man village.

text: Mowgli is kidnapped by the "Bandar-log" (monkeys) who present him to their leader, a giant ape named King Louie. Assuming that all humans can make fire, King Louie offers Mowgli protection from Shere Khan in exchange for it. Baloo distracts King Louie while Bagheera tries to sneak him out, but their plan is discovered. As King Louie chases Mowgli through his temple, he informs Mowgli of Akela's death. King Louie's rampage eventually causes his temple to collapse on top of him. Furious that Baloo and Bagheera never told him about Akela's death, Mowgli goes to confront Shere Khan alone.

text: Mowgli steals a lit torch at the village to use as a weapon and heads back to the jungle, accidentally starting a wildfire in the process. He confronts Shere Khan, who argues that Mowgli has made himself the enemy of the jungle by causing the wildfire. Mowgli throws the torch into the water, giving Shere Khan the advantage. Baloo, Bagheera, and the wolf pack intervene and hold Shere Khan off, giving Mowgli enough time to set a trap. He lures Shere Khan up a dead tree and onto a branch, which breaks under the tiger's weight and Shere Khan falls into the fire to his death. Mowgli then directs the elephants to divert the river and put out the fire.

text: In the aftermath, Raksha becomes the new leader of the wolf pack. Mowgli decides to utilize his equipment and tricks for his own use, having found his true home and calling with his wolf family, Baloo, and Bagheera.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Neel Sethi as Mowgli, a young boy who was raised by wolves.

Kendrick Reyes as toddler Mowgli

Ritesh Rajan as Mowgli's father

tag: ul

text: Voice cast[edit]

text:
Bill Murray as Baloo, a Sloth bear who befriends Mowgli.
Ben Kingsley as Bagheera, a Black panther who is Mowgli's mentor and protector.
Idris Elba as Shere Khan, a fearsome, scar-faced tiger with a grudge against Mowgli.
Lupita Nyong'o as Raksha, a female wolf who is Mowgli's adoptive mother.
Scarlett Johansson as Kaa, an enormous python.
Giancarlo Esposito as Akela, a male wolf who leads the pack.
Christopher Walken as King Louie, a Gigantopithecus who rules the Bandar-log.
Garry Shandling as Ikki, a porcupine that observes the Water Truce.[1]
Brighton Rose as Grey Brother, a wolf cub that is Mowgli's adoptive brother.[1]
Jon Favreau as Fred, a Pygmy Hog.[1]
Sam Raimi as a giant squirrel.[1]
Russell Peters as Rocky, a rhinoceros.[1]
Madeleine Favreau as Raquel, a rhinoceros.[1]
Sara Arrington as a Nilgai Antelope [1]

text: Emjay Anthony, Max Favreau, Chloe Hechter, Asher Blinkoff, Knox Gagnon, Sasha Schrieber, and Kai Schrieber voice the Young Wolves.[1]

text: Dee Bradley Baker, Artie Esposito, Sean Johnson, and Allan Trautman provide additional animal voices.[1]

text: Production[edit]

text: Development and casting[edit]

text:
"The idea of going out to the jungle and shooting this, it just felt like it wouldn't have the magic that the 1967 film had had. There was a dreamlike quality to it. There was a surreal quality to it. It was a high-water mark for character animation and to me, that's what I remember about it. And so I wanted to make sure we preserved that...But what [Alan] Horn said was: Look at the technology. Look at Life of Pi, Avatar. Why not use the technology to create a whole world that transports you? Let's really embrace this new technology and see what we can do if we push its limit."

— Jon Favreau on approaching the film's technical intent.[9]

tag: div

text: Walt Disney Pictures announced that a live-action remake of The Jungle Book was in development on July 9, 2013, with Justin Marks set to write the script.[10] The film would be Disney's second live-action adaptation of Rudyard Kipling's works, following the 1994 film, and the studio's third overall after the 1967 animated musical. Jon Favreau was later confirmed as director on November 5, 2013.[11] Favreau as a child used to watch Disney's 1967 animated musical version.[12] He felt the need to strike a balance between the two films by retaining the buoyant spirit of the 1967 film, including some of its memorable songs, while crafting a movie with more realism and peril. He also stressed the importance of nature and realized how things have shifted during Kipling's time and now, "In Kipling's time, nature was something to be overcome. Now nature is something to be protected."[12] He was encouraged by Walt Disney Studios chairman Alan Horn to take advantage of the film's setting and story as an opportunity to use the latest advancements in photorealistic rendering, computer-generated imagery, and motion capture technologies.[13] The story of the film is not independently taken from Kipling's works, but also borrows cinematic inspirations from other films, including the child-mentor relationship in Shane (1953), the establishment of rules in a dangerous world from Goodfellas (1990) and the use of a shadowy jungle figure in Apocalypse Now (1979).[12]

text: The cast was announced between March and August 2014, with Idris Elba being announced to voice Shere Khan during early stages and Bill Murray eventually confirmed as the voice of Baloo in August 2014. Between then, Scarlett Johansson, Ben Kingsley, and Christopher Walken were confirmed to play Kaa, Bagheera, and King Louie.[14][15][16][17] Favreau decided to cast Johansson to play Kaa, originally a male character, as he felt the original film was "a little too male-oriented."[18] Favreau and Marks noticed the lack of female characters in the 1967 film version and wanted to address that by featuring Raksha's character more prominently, as in Kipling's tales.[12] Lupita Nyong'o was cast as Raksha as Favreau believed her voice imbued the emotion required for the role, "Lupita has tremendous depth of emotion in her performance. There's an emotional underpinning she brings, and a strength, and we wanted that for this surrogate mother. Much of that comes from her voice."[19] Favreau also decided to change King Louie from an orangutan to a Gigantopithecus due to the fact that orangutans are not native to India, where the story takes place.[7] His character was given a slight alteration from the 1967 film and was partly inspired by Marlon Brando's character Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse Now,[12] as well as incorporating Walken's own physical mannerisms.[20] In regards to Louie's changes, Favreau stated, "We created this looming figure that was trying to extract the secret of fire from Mowgli. And also this gave Mowgli the idea that if he had fire, he could have power over Shere Khan, whether it was good or bad. So there was a Lord of the Rings aspect to that; the fire was almost like the ring in that was going to give someone ultimate power, but corrupt them as well as create destruction."[21] The film is dedicated to Garry Shandling, who voiced a porcupine in the film and died of a heart attack before the film's release.

text: The search for casting Mowgli was extensive, with thousands of children auditioning from the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Canada. Eventually, newcomer Neel Sethi was confirmed for the role, with casting director Rebecca Williams describing him as embodying "the heart, humor, and daring of the character. He's warm and accessible, yet also has an intelligence well beyond his years and impressed us all with his ability to hold his own in any situation."[22] Sethi underwent parkour training in preparation for the role.[8] Pixar Animation Studios assisted in the development of the story, as well as providing suggestions for the film's end credits sequence.[23]

text: Filming and visual effects[edit]

text: Principal photography took place entirely on sound stages at L.A. Center Studios[21] in downtown Los Angeles.[19][24] The animal characters were created entirely in key frame computer animation, with the assistance of footage of real animal movement, the actors recording their lines, and performance capture for reference.[7] The production team underwent a thorough process to realistically convey the animals' speaking, while still making them perceptually believable to the audience. Favreau researched earlier films featuring anthropomorphic animals—including Walt Disney's animated features, such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Bambi, as well as modern films such as Babe—and adopted certain techniques from those films into The Jungle Book.[21] Nearly 70 separate species of animals native to India are featured in the film, with several species being portrayed as "150% larger" than their actual counterparts.[21]

text: Jim Henson's Creature Shop was brought in to provide animal puppet figures for Sethi to act against, although none appear in the finished film.[25] The animal puppets were performed by Artie Esposito, Sean Johnson, Allan Trautman, and April Warren.[1] Favreau utilized motion capture with certain actors, expressing a desire to avoid overusing the technology in order to prevent evoking an uncanny valley effect.[7][18]

text: Moving Picture Company (MPC) and Weta Digital created the film's visual effects.[13] MPC developed new software for animating muscular structure in the animals.[21] Around 1,000 remote jungle locations in India were photographed and used as reference in post-production.[26] Weta was responsible for animating the King Louie sequence, with visual effects supervisor Keith Miller adding that, "It was important for Jon to see Christopher Walken in the creature. So we took some of the distinctive Walken facial features—iconic lines, wrinkles and folds—and integrated them into the animated character."[27] Favreau expressed desire in wanting the film's 3D shots to imbue the abilities of the multiplane camera system utilized in Disney's earlier animated films.[23] At Favreau's behest, the idea was extended into the film's version of the Walt Disney Pictures opening production logo, which was recreated as "a hand-painted, cel-animated multi-plane logo" in homage to the animated films of that era, also incorporating the word "Presents" in the same style as the 1967 film's opening credits.[23] The film's ending also features the original physical book that opened the 1967 film.[23]

text: Sound[edit]

text: Director Jon Favreau and composer John Debney sought to recreate the Fantasound experience Walt had in mind. When mixing the soundtrack in Dolby Atmos, as Favreau said, "we isolated instruments when we could. And in the sound mix, we created a Fantasound mix. If you see the film in Atmos, you will feel that there are instruments that move around the theater."[28] A mention for Fantasound appears in the film's closing credits.

text: Music[edit]

text: The musical score for The Jungle Book was composed and conducted by frequent Favreau collaborator John Debney,[29] mostly drawing from George Bruns' original music. Though Favreau decided not to make the film a musical, nevertheless, he and Debney incorporated several songs from the 1967 animated film.[30] "The Bare Necessities," written by Terry Gilkyson, is performed by Murray and Sethi,[12] and a cover version by Dr. John is featured in the end credits. "I Wan'na Be Like You" and "Trust in Me"—written by the Sherman Brothers—are performed by Walken and Johansson, respectively; Richard M. Sherman wrote revised lyrics for Walken's version of "I Wan'na Be Like You."[12] Johansson's rendition of "Trust in Me" was produced by Mark Ronson and appears in the end credits only.[12]

text: Soundtrack[edit]

text:
The Jungle Book (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack)

Film score by John Debney

Released
April 15, 2016

Recorded
2015–16

Studio
Sony Pictures Studios (score)
Esplanade Studios, New Orleans
Chalice Recording Studios
Music Shed Studios, New Orleans

Genre
Orchestral, swing jazz

Length
74:17

Label
Walt Disney

Producer
John Debney

John Debney chronology

The Young Messiah
(2016) The Young Messiah2016
The Jungle Book
(2016) The Jungle Book2016
Mother's Day
(2016) Mother's Day2016

text: Walt Disney Records released the film's soundtrack on April 15, 2016.[31]

text: Track listing[edit]

text:
No.
Title
Writer(s)
Performer(s)
Length

1.
"The Bare Necessities"
Terry Gilkyson
Dr. John and The Nite Trippers
3:36

2.
"Trust in Me"
Richard M. Sherman, Robert B. Sherman
Scarlett Johansson
2:55

3.
"Main Titles[Note 1] / Jungle Run"
John Debney & George Bruns

2:27

4.
"Wolves / Law of the Jungle"
John Debney

2:16

5.
"Water Truce"
John Debney

3:40

6.
"Rains Return"
John Debney

1:46

7.
"Mowgli's Leaving / Elephant Theme"
John Debney

3:28

8.
"Shere Khan Attacks / Stampede"
John Debney

2:06

9.
"Kaa / Baloo to the Rescue"

5:21

10.
"Honeycomb Climb"

3:31

11.
"Man Village"

2:59

12.
"Mowgli and the Pit"

3:26

13.
"Monkeys Kidnap Mowgli"

1:52

14.
"Arriving at King Louie's Temple"

4:35

15.
"Cold Lair Chase"

4:03

16.
"Red Flower"

3:15

17.
"To the River"

3:05

18.
"Shere Khan's War Theme"

2:37

19.
"Shere Khan and the Fire"

4:52

20.
"Elephant Waterfall"

3:27

21.
"Mowgli Wins the Race"

0:41

22.
"Jungle Book Closes"

2:16

23.
"I Wan'na Be Like You"
Richard M. Sherman, Robert B. Sherman
Christopher Walken
3:02

24.
"The Bare Necessities"
Terry Gilkyson
Bill Murray, Kermit Ruffins
3:01

Total length:
74:17

text: Note 1. ^ Original "When You Wish Upon a Star" melody composed by Leigh Harline; Walt Disney Pictures logo melody composed by Mark Mancina.

text: Release[edit]

text: The film was originally scheduled for October 9, 2015, but the film's release date was later postponed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures to April 15, 2016.[32][33] The film was released in the Dolby Vision format in Dolby Cinema in the United States,[34] and is the first film to be released in Dolby Vision 3D (in a few select theaters in New York City and Chicago).[35] The Jungle Book held its world premiere at the El Capitan Theatre on April 4, 2016.[36] It was released in 15 countries, a week ahead of its U.S. debut on April 15, in countries like Argentina, Australia, Russia, Malaysia and most notably in India on April 8.[37] The release date in India was strategic for the film as it coincided with the Indian New Year and was a holiday in most parts of the country.[38] Disney India commissioned a contemporary recording of "Jungle Jungle Baat Chali Hai," overseen by the song's composers Vishal Bhardwaj and Gulzar, and released it as part of the film's promotional campaign in India.[39][40]

text: Home media[edit]

text: The film was released digitally on August 23, 2016, and on DVD and Blu-ray on August 30 (August 22 in the UK[41]). A 3D Blu-ray was said to be coming by the end of the year.[42] The film topped the NPD VideoScan overall disc sales chart for two consecutive weeks.[43][44]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Box office[edit]

text: The film became a huge financial success and a surprise hit.[45] It briefly held the record for the biggest remake of all-time until the studio's own Beauty and the Beast surpassed it the following year.[46] It grossed $364 million in the United States and Canada and $602.5 million in other countries for a worldwide total of $966.6 million, against a budget of $175 million.[5] Worldwide, the film was released across 28,000 RealD 3D screens[35] and had an IMAX worldwide opening of $20.4 million from 901 IMAX screens, a new record for a PG film.[47] It grossed a total of $39 million in IMAX screens worldwide.[48] On May 13, it became the second film of 2016 (after the studio's own Zootopia) to pass the $800 million mark.[49][50] On June 10, it became the third film of 2016 after Zootopia and Captain America: Civil War to pass the $900 million mark.[51] Deadline.com calculated the net profit of the film to be $258 million, when factoring together all expenses and revenues for the film, making it the sixth most profitable release of 2016.[52]

text: North America[edit]

text: Projections for its opening weekend in the United States and Canada were continuously revised upwards, starting from $60 million to as high as $88 million, with female and older male quadrants being the prime draw.[3][35][53][54] The Jungle Book was shown across 4,028 theaters of which 3,100 theaters (75%) were in 3D, including 376 IMAX screens, 463 premium large format screens, and 145 D-Box locations.[3][4][55] It opened Friday, April 15, 2016, on around 9,500 screens across 4,028 theaters, and earned $32.4 million, the fourth biggest April Friday.[35][56] This includes $4.2 million from Thursday previews, the biggest preview number for a Disney live-adaptation film (tied with Maleficent),[57] an almost unheard-of for a PG title which rarely attracts many ticketbuyers later in the night.[58] In total, it earned $103.3 million in its opening weekend, exceeding expectations by 40% and recorded the biggest PG-rated April opening (breaking Hop's record), the second biggest Disney live-action adaptation opening (behind Alice in Wonderland), and the second biggest April opening (behind Furious 7).[35][59][60] It also performed exceptionally well in both 3D and IMAX formats, where they both generated an income of $44 million and $10.4 million of the film's opening weekend gross respectively, the later broke the record for the biggest April Disney release IMAX opening.[35][47] Notably, it also became the only second PG-rated release to ever open above $100 million (following Alice in Wonderland) and the third film of 2016 overall to open above $100 million (following Deadpool and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice).[35][61] It earned $130.7 million in its first full week, the second biggest for a Disney live-action adaptation, behind only Alice in Wonderland's $146.6 million seven-day gross.[62]

text: Buoyed by excellent word of mouth and benefiting from spring break, it fell only by 40% in its second weekend earning $61.5 million, still maintaining the top position and far surpassing newcomer The Huntsman: Winter's War.[63] That puts The Jungle Book in the top fifteen second weekends of all time and in terms of films that opened above $100 million, it scored the fourth smallest drop behind Shrek 2 (−33%), Spider-Man (−39%), and Star Wars: The Force Awakens (−39%).[64][65] Of those numbers, $5.6 million came from IMAX shows for a two weekend cumulative total of $18.4 million which represents about 10% of its entire North American box office gross.[63] It crossed $200 million on its twelfth day of release[66] and managed to hold the top spot for the third consecutive weekend with $43.7 million from 4,041 theaters (an addition of 13 more theaters), a fall of only 29%, outgrossing the next six pictures combined (including the openings of three newcomers)[67] and recorded the sixth biggest third weekend of all time.[68] Moreover, the 29% drop is the smallest third weekend drop (from its second weekend) for a $100 million opener ever.[68] Disney added an additional 103 theaters for the film's fourth weekend of release which propelled its theater count to 4,144 theaters,[69] but nevertheless, it was overtaken by Disney's own Captain America: Civil War after experiencing a −50% decline.[70][71] It passed $300 million on its thirtieth day of release, on May 14, as it continued to witness marginal declines in the wake of several new releases weekend after weekend.[72] It made 3.53 times its opening weekend numbers, which is one of the biggest of all time for a film opening above $100 million. It became one of the few surprise hits and one of the highest-grossing films of the year, alongside Finding Dory, The Secret Life of Pets, and Zootopia, centered around talking animals to dominate the year-end chart.[45]

text: Outside North America[edit]

text: The film was released in approximately 70 countries.[73] Internationally, it opened across 15 markets and 69 IMAX screens a week ahead of its U.S. debut, and faced notable competition from newcomer The Huntsman: Winter's War and holdover Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, the latter of which was entering its third weekend. The reason behind the divided release pattern was because Disney wanted to get some space before Captain America: Civil War releases in early May, as well as availing school holidays and avoiding local competitors.[74] It eventually grossed $31.7 million, debuting at first place in all markets and second overall at the international box office, behind Dawn of Justice, which was playing across 67 markets.[74] In its second weekend, it expanded to an additional 49 countries (88% of its total marketplace) and grossed $138.6 million from 64 countries, easily topping the international box office, a bulk of it came from China.[75] Approximately 63% or $85 million of that came from 3D screenings, with the largest 3D opening haul represented by China (98%), Germany (83%), Brazil (73%), Russia (60%), Mexico (47%), and the UK (39%).[75] $10 million alone came from 525 IMAX screens, a record for a PG and April release.[47] It further continued to hold the top spot in its third weekend after adding another $98.9 million from 53 territories, falling only by a marginal 32%. IMAX generated another $6.1 million from 484 IMAX theaters for a three-weekend total of $20.6 million.[48] After three straight No. 1 runs, it was finally dethroned by the studio's Captain America: Civil War in its fourth weekend.[76]

text: In India, it scored the second biggest opening day for a Hollywood film, earning $1.51 million (behind Avengers: Age of Ultron) from around 1,500 screens[77] and went on to score the second biggest Hollywood opening weekend of all time film, with $8.4 million from 1,600 screens, behind only Furious 7 in terms of local as well as U.S. currency,[78][79] performing better than expected and its initial $5–6 million opening projection.[77] Its opening weekend in India alone surpassed the entire lifetime total of Disney's other live-fantasy adaptations—Cinderella, Maleficent, Oz the Great and Powerful, and Alice in Wonderland—in the country.[74] It then went on to score the biggest opening and single week for a Hollywood film with $15.1 million.[73][80] In its second weekend, it dropped just by a mere 40% to $4.97 million.[81] In just ten days, it became the fourth highest-grossing Hollywood film there with $21.2 million.[59] On Wednesday, April 19—its twelfth day of release—it surpassed Furious 7 to become the highest-grossing Hollywood/foreign release of all time there.[82][83] By the end of its theatrical run, the film made an estimated $38.8 million with half of its revenue – 58% – coming from local dubbed versions, compared to Avengers: Age of Ultron, which saw 45% of its revenue from dubbed versions.[84]

text: In China, where the film was locally known as Fantasy Forest, expectations were high, with projections going as high $154–200 million or more.[85][86][87][88] Ultimately, it was unable to hit these marks.[72] Before the release of the film in the state, Disney had a very successful run at the box office with Zootopia the previous month, in which anthropomorphic animals were the central figure.[89] Forbes noted that The Jungle Book was precisely the sort of film that Chinese audiences love with its 3D visuals, heartwarming story, and talking animal cast.[86] It earned around $12 million on its opening day, including $300,000 worth of previews from 65,000 screenings.[86] Buoyed by good word of mouth and positive reception (albeit mostly from audiences with polarized reception from Chinese critics),[90] it rose 72% on its second day to $20 million.[88] Through its opening weekend it grossed $48.5 million, including $5.1 million from 279 IMAX screens, a new record for April release.[59][91] Its opening marked the biggest Walt Disney Pictures film opening ever,[92] the second biggest for a family film (behind Kung Fu Panda 3), the second biggest April debut (behind Furious 7), and the fourth biggest Disney opening (behind Avengers: Age of Ultron, Iron Man 3, and Star Wars: The Force Awakens).[93] It topped the daily box office through the whole opening week and went on to remain at the top of the box office for a second weekend, after dropping by a mere 20% to $29.8 million, despite facing some competitions.[94] It ended its run there with a total of $150.1 million after thirty days of playing in theaters, adding $1.2 million on its last day. Albeit falling just below expectations, it nevertheless emerged as a huge financial success and becoming the fourth biggest Disney release there.[72][95]

text: In the United Kingdom and Ireland, it had an opening weekend total of £9.9 million ($14.1 million) from 594 theaters[96] and in France with $8.1 million.[75] Elsewhere, the highest openings were recorded in Russia and the CIS ($7.4 million), Germany ($5.1 million), Spain ($3.9 million), Australia ($2.8 million), Argentina ($2.3 million), and in Malaysia, where it scored the biggest opening weekend for a live-action Disney film with $2.3 million.[74][75] In the UK, it became the first film of 2016 to earn over £5 million in three straight weekends and the first film since Jurassic World, Spectre, and Star Wars: The Force Awakens (all 2015 films) to achieve such an accomplishment,[97] and the first film of 2016 to earn above £40 million ($58 million).[98] In South Korea, it faced competition with Warcraft, but ended up debuting atop the charts with $6.2 million.[99] It has so far grossed a total of $18 million there.[100]

text: It opened in Japan on August 11, alongside the superhero film X-Men: Apocalypse[92][101] and delivered a four-day opening of $6.2 million from 676 screens ($3 million in two days), debuting at second place behind The Secret Life of Pets. Although the opening figure was considered mediocre, Deadline.com noted that Japan is a market that can see big multiples.[102][103] It fell just 30% in its second weekend earning $2.1 million for an eleven-day total of $13.7 million.[104][105]

text: In total earnings, its biggest markets outside of North America were China ($150.1 million), the United Kingdom ($66.2 million) and India ($38.8 million).[95] It was the highest-grossing film of 2016 in Europe with a total of $209 million,[106] the United Kingdom and Ireland,[107] and in India (although it was later surpassed by Sultan, in terms of Hollywood/imported films, it is still the biggest).[108]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: The film received praise for its visual effects, Debney's musical score, the performances of the voice cast, Favreau's direction, and its faithfulness to the animated film.[113][114][115] On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 95%, based on 288 reviews, with an average rating of 7.7/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "As lovely to behold as it is engrossing to watch, The Jungle Book is the rare remake that actually improves upon its predecessors – all while setting a new standard for CGI."[116] On Metacritic, the film has a score of 77 out of 100, based on 49 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews."[117] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "A" on an A+ to F scale. 97% of the audience gave the film an A or a B. It got As from both the under- and over-25 crowd and A+ among those under 18 years of age, and also for the over-50 audience.[35]

text: Todd McCarthy of The Hollywood Reporter wrote, "Exceptionally beautiful to behold and bolstered by a stellar vocal cast, this umpteenth film rendition of Rudyard Kipling's tales of young Mowgli's adventures amongst the creatures of the Indian jungle proves entirely engaging, even if it's ultimately lacking in subtext and thematic heft."[118] Andrew Barker of Variety felt that this version "can't rival the woolly looseness of Disney's 1967 animated classic, of course, but it succeeds on its own so well that such comparisons are barely necessary."[119] Robbie Collin of The Telegraph gave the film four stars out of five, and deemed it "a sincere and full-hearted adaptation that returns to Kipling for fresh inspiration."[120] Alonso Duralde of The Wrap says "This 'Book' might lack the post-vaudeville razzamatazz of its predecessor, but director Jon Favreau and a team of effects wizards plunge us into one of the big screen's most engrossing artificial worlds since Avatar."[121] Peter Bradshaw, writing for The Guardian, gave the film four out of five stars and felt that the film had a touch of Apocalypto in it, finding the plot elements to be similar to those in The Lion King. He wrote that the film was "spectacular, exciting, funny and fun" and that it "handsomely revives the spirit of Disney's original film."[122] Pete Hammond of Deadline.com wrote that the film had laughs, excitement, an exceptional voice cast and, most importantly, a lot of heart, calling it a cinematic achievement like no other. He particularly praised Murray's performance and the visual effects, deeming it "simply astonishing."[123] Chris Nashawaty of Entertainment Weekly graded the film an "A–," calling it one of the biggest surprises of 2016. He, however, felt the two songs were rather unnecessary and distracting, and believed the film to be a little too frightening for children.[124]

text: Richard Roeper of Chicago Sun-Times awarded the film three and a half stars, pointing out the CGI as the apex achievement of the film. He labelled it "a beautifully rendered, visually arresting take on Rudyard Kipling's oft-filmed tales" but found the musical numbers to be trivial, saying that without the musical numbers, the film might have been a more exhilarating streamlined adventure.[125] Los Angeles Times' Kenneth Turan remarked that "The Jungle Book is the kind of family film calculated to make even those without families wish they had one to take along."[126] Peter Travers of Rolling Stone awarded the film three and a half stars out of four, labeling it scary and thrilling, yet unique and unforgettable, and adding that it "fills us with something rare in movies today — a sense of wonder."[127] The Village Voice's Bilge Ebiri hailed the film as fast and light and that it "manages to be just scary enough to make us feel the danger of solitude in the middle of a massive jungle, but never indulgent or gratuitous."[128] The New York Times' Manohla Dargis was less enthusiastic.[129] Cath Clarke of Time Out compared Elba's character of Shere Khan to Scar from The Lion King, calling him "baddie of the year."[130] Matt Zoller Seitz of RogerEbert.com also had high praise for Elba's portrayal of Shere Khan stating: "His loping menace is envisioned so powerfully that he'd be scary no matter what, but the character becomes a great villain through imaginative empathy. We understand and appreciate his point-of-view, even though carrying it out would mean the death of Mowgli."[111]

text: The film's visual effects and 3D photography received acclaim, with comparisons being made to the likes of Avatar, Gravity, Hugo, and Life of Pi.[113][121][131] Sarah Ward of Screen International wrote that the level of detail on display in the film "is likely to evoke the same jaw-dropping reaction as James Cameron's box office topper."[132] Entertainment Weekly called it "one of the few 3D movies that actually benefits from being in 3D."[124] The film also garnered a positive reception from Indian contemporary critics and publications,[133] such as The Times of India,[134] The Hindu,[135] India Today,[136] The Indian Express,[137] and The Economic Times.[138]

text: The film also had its share of negative reviews with most reviewers criticizing the inconsistent tone of the film and the director's indecision to stick to one vision. Sam C. Mac of Slant Magazine wrote, "Jon Favreau draws heavily on his film's animated predecessor for plot, characterizations, songs, and set pieces, but doesn't know how to fit these familiar elements into his own coherent vision"[139]. Josh Spiegel of Movie Mezzanine also echoed these feelings, saying that the film "stumbles because the people involved aren't willing to fully commit to either making a near-shot-for-shot remake or going in a completely different direction"[140]. Rene Rodriguez of the Miami Herald felt that the movie was soulless, writing that "The better these talking beasts look, the more the film resembles a gorgeous screen saver. You admire The Jungle Book, but you can't lose yourself in it"[141].

text: Accolades[edit]

text: Sequel[edit]

text: Following the film's early financial and critical success, the studio has begun working on a sequel. Jon Favreau is reported to return as director and Neel Sethi is reported to reprise his role of Mowgli, while screenwriter Justin Marks is also in negotiations to return.[142] It was announced on April 25, 2016 that Favreau and Marks will return to direct and write, and the sequel could potentially have a release sometime in 2019 and will shoot it back-to-back with a live-action remake of The Lion King.[143][144][145] However, it was reported in March 2017 that the sequel was put on hold in order for Favreau to instead focus mainly on The Lion King.[146]


document_title: Gomdhar Konwar

question_text: who lead the first revolt against british in assam

root

text: Gomdhar Konwar

text:
Gomdhar Konwar

Born
Assam, India

Died
Unknown

Occupation
Ahom royal prince

Known for
Indian independence activist

tag: table

text: In 1828, Gomdhar Konwar (Assamese: গোমধৰ কোঁৱৰ), a prince of the Ahom royal family, his colleague Dhanjay Borgohain and their followers rose in revolt against the British occupation of Assam.

tag: p

text: By end of 1828 the process extension of British dominion into Assam was completed. With the assumption of the political power by the officers of the East India Company, the ruling Ahom monarchy lost not only their political authority but social privileges too. The feudal structure of the society began to crumble as new measures were adopted by the colonial rulers to strip the nobility of their rights and privileges. Their enthusiasm for their new friend, who aided them in driving out the Burmese from Assam, soon disappeared and supportes of monarchy began the organize themselves the restore the old Ahom monarchy and oust the British. [1]

text: Gomdhar was formally enthroned near Jorhat according to Ahom rites, and arms and ammunitions were collected. But before he could make much headway a counter offensive was made by the British led by Lieutenant Rutherford. The rebels lost and Gomdhar fled to the Naga Hills. But, soon he and his associates were arrested by the British. Gomdhar was found guilty of “illegally assuming the Insignia of Royalty” and sentenced to death. This sentence was subsequently commuted to seven years of imprisonment in banishment and was deported to an unknown location to die in ignominy. [2]


document_title: Publication of Darwin's theory

question_text: when did charles darwin publish his theory of evolution

text: Publication of Darwin's theory

text: Background[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Darwin's ideas developed rapidly from the return in 1836 of the Beagle survey expedition. By December 1838 he had developed the principles of his theory. At that time similar ideas brought others disgrace and association with the revolutionary mob. He was conscious of the need to answer all likely objections before publishing. While he continued with research as his "prime hobby", his priority was an immense amount of work on geology and analysing and publishing findings from the Beagle expedition. This was repeatedly delayed by illness.

text: Natural history at that time was dominated by clerical naturalists whose income came from the Established Church of England and who saw the science of the day as revealing God's plan. Darwin found three close allies: Charles Lyell, Joseph Dalton Hooker and Thomas Huxley. Books by the eminent geologist Charles Lyell had influenced the young Darwin during the voyage, and he then befriended Darwin who he saw as a supporter of his ideas of gradual geological processes with continuing divine Creation of species. By the 1840s Darwin became friends with the young botanist Joseph Dalton Hooker, who had followed his father into that science, and after going on a survey voyage used his contacts to eventually find a position. In the 1850s Darwin met Thomas Huxley, an ambitious naturalist who had returned from a long survey trip but lacked the family wealth or contacts to find a career and who joined the progressive group around Herbert Spencer fighting to make science a profession, freed from the clerics.

text: Darwin made attempts to open discussions about his theory with his close scientific colleagues. In January 1842 Darwin sent a tentative description of his ideas in a letter to Lyell, then prepared a "Pencil Sketch" of his theory. He worked up his "Sketch" into an "Essay" in 1844, and eventually persuaded Hooker to read a copy in January 1847. His geology books and publication of Beagle findings were completed in 1846, when he began what became eight years of research into classification of barnacle species, exploring the immense amount of variation in nature.

text: In September 1854 Darwin had the last of his barnacle monographs ready for publication, and he turned his attention fully to questions about how species originated. He freely discussed his intention to write a book on the subject, and planned avenues of research with other scientists. He went over his previous notes and writings on the topic, and drew up proposals for investigations and research into the implications of his theory. One topic was explaining geographical distribution of organisms; he got information from international correspondence, and experimented on the viability of methods of dispersal. He widened his investigations into variability in nature, and experimented on plant hybridisation and cross-fertilisation.[4]

text: Variation under domestication became a major topic of research: in 1855 he began to develop a web of contacts, both in the UK and worldwide, to get information on the origins and variation of domesticated animals, particularly poultry, ducks, rabbits, and pigeons. He got extensive information, specimens and ideas from Edward Blyth in India, who put him in contact with Edgar Leopold Layard in South Africa. At the suggestion of William Yarrell, Darwin began pigeon breeding at Down House to investigate varieties of domestic pigeons, and gained access to the expertise of William Bernhard Tegetmeier who was glad to research aspects of interest to Darwin. From March, he also got information and specimens from his relative William Darwin Fox who bred poultry and ducks at his rectory in the parish of Delamere, Cheshire.[4]

text: In 1856 he was gradually bringing his friends round towards accepting evolution as a process, but was far from convincing them about the mechanism, when Wallace's entry into the discussion brought a new urgency to publication.

text: Wallace[edit]

text: Alfred Russel Wallace, a naturalist working as a specimen collector in Borneo, spent Christmas 1854 visiting Sir James Brooke, the White Rajah of Sarawak, then during the ensuing rainy season lived alone in a little Dayak house, with only one Malay servant as cook. He recalled, "during the evening and wet days, I had nothing to do but look over my books". He had already read Lyell's Principles of Geology which opposed Lamarck by arguing that the fossil record showed no progress, and the 1845 second edition of Darwin's Journal of Researches which hinted at evolution by describing the "wonderful relationship in the same continent" between fossil and extant species, which would "throw more light on the appearance of organic beings on our earth, and their disappearance from it, than any other class of facts", and how species unique to the Galápagos Islands "all show a marked relationship with those of America" despite its distance.[5][6]

text: Wallace had also been impressed by Pictet's studies of palaeontology, and was now annoyed by a recent article by Edward Forbes which dismissed evolutionary ideas and instead proposed that species were created in a pattern showing a divine plan of polarity. In February, Wallace completed his paper "On the Law which has Regulated the Introduction of New Species" which was published in September 1855 in the Annals and Magazine of Natural History.[5]

text: This "Sarawak paper" countered Forbes, and showed Wallace's opinions. He incorporated points from Lyell, Darwin, Pictet and others, including Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, combined with Wallace's own observations to support his conclusion that "Every species has come into existence coincident both in space and time with a closely allied species". This was a theory of a succession of species, but referred to "creation" rather than explicitly citing an evolutionary mechanism [in 1905 Wallace recalled that he left descent to be inferred]. Brooke read it as either a series of creations or one species growing into another, and in 1856 told Wallace he had no objection to the latter. Wallace had told him that the paper was to "feel the pulse of scientific men" about the hypothesis, and Brooke was indignant at the suggestion that "bigotry & intolerance" would be aroused by novel views: this would explain Wallace's ambiguity.[7][8] Lyell's resistance to Darwin's evolutionary ideas was shaken by the paper; in November 1855 Lyell began writing species notebooks, starting with a note about Wallace.[9] On 8 December Edward Blyth wrote from Calcutta to ask Darwin for his views on the paper. Blyth thought it "Good! Upon the whole!" and said "according to his theory, the various domestic races of animals have been fairly developed into species." It is not known when Darwin read this letter.[10]

text: During December 1855, Darwin extended his research into variation under domestication with letters to nearly 30 people around the world,[11] requesting their help in obtaining specimens of "Any domestic breed or race, of Poultry, Pigeons, Rabbits, Cats, & even dogs, if not too large, which has been bred for many generations in any little visited region."[12] As Blyth had suggested earlier, Darwin wrote on 9 December to Edgar Leopold Layard in South Africa, and said that he was "collecting all the facts & reasoning which I could, in regard to the variation & origin of species", particularly pigeons.[13] On 24 December Darwin wrote to the diplomat Sir Charles Augustus Murray in Persia, similarly saying he had "for many years been working on the perplexed subject of the origin of varieties & species, & for this purpose I am endeavouring to study the effects of domestication".[14] Letters also went to Brooke, and to Wallace via his agent Samuel Stevens. In August 1856 Wallace told Stevens that specimens for Darwin were included in a shipment. In November Darwin wrote to tell William Bernhardt Tegetmeier that a box of Persian poultry specimens from Murray had arrived, and "Mr Wallace is collecting in the Malay Archipelago".[11][15]

text: Wallace's "Sarawak paper" was included in the July–December 1855 volume of the Annals and Magazine of Natural History. Darwin jotted comments in his copy of this volume: "Laws of Geograph. Distrib. nothing very new", and "Uses my simile of tree— It seems all creation with him", but "he puts the facts in striking point of view". He noted Wallace's point that geological knowledge was imperfect, and commented "put generation for creation & I quite agree".[10] In December 1857 Darwin still thought Wallace was proposing creation as an explanation, and told him "I believe I go much further than you".[16][17]

text: "Natural Selection"[edit]

text: When Lyell and his wife visited the Darwins at Downe from 13 to 16 April 1856, Darwin explained his theory to Lyell, who then wrote up notes headed "With Darwin: On the Formation of Species by Natural Selection", with pigeons as one example. At another Down House party on 26–27 April, Darwin had long discussions with his guests Joseph Dalton Hooker, Thomas Henry Huxley, and Thomas Vernon Wollaston. Lyell subsequently heard that they "ran a tilt against species farther I believe than they are deliberately prepared to go. ... I cannot easily see how they can go so far, and not embrace the whole Lamarckian doctrine."[18][19][20]

text: On 1 May Lyell wrote to urge Darwin to establish priority: "I wish you would publish some small fragment of your data pigeons if you please & so out with the theory & let it take date—& be cited—& understood."[18] Darwin replied on 3 May: "With respect to your suggestion of a sketch of my view; I hardly know what to think, but will reflect on it; but it goes against my prejudices. To give a fair sketch would be absolutely impossible, for every proposition requires such an array of facts. If I were to do anything it could only refer to the main agency of change, selection,—& perhaps point out a very few of the leading features which countenance such a view, & some few of the main difficulties. But I do not know what to think: I rather hate the idea of writing for priority, yet I certainly shd be vexed if any one were to publish my doctrines before me."[21]

text: On Thursday 8 May, while in London for meetings, Darwin visited Lyell.[21] In a letter to Hooker the next day, Darwin said he "had good talk with Lyell about my species work, & he urges me strongly to publish something. I am fixed against any periodical or Journal, as I positively will not expose myself to an Editor or Council allowing a publication for which they might be abused". If he published, it could only be "a very thin & little volume, giving a sketch of my views & difficulties; but it is really dreadfully unphilosophical to give a resumé, without exact references, of an unpublished work". Lyell appeared to think it could be done "at the suggestion of friends" as Darwin had "been at work for 18 years, & yet could not publish for several years".[22] Hooker's response encouraging publication was welcomed by Darwin, who thought his suggestion "that the Essay might supersede & take away all novelty & value from my future larger Book, is very true; & that would grieve me beyond everything. On the other hand, (again from Lyell’s urgent advice) I published a preliminary sketch of Coral Theory & this did neither good nor harm.— I begin most heartily to wish that Lyell had never put this idea of an Essay into my head." On 14 May 1856 Darwin noted in his journal that he had begun his "species sketch".[23]

text: By July, Darwin had decided to produce Natural Selection as a full technical treatise on species. Lyell seemed to be coming round to Darwin's ideas, but in private was agonising over the social implications if humans had animal ancestry, particularly now that race was becoming an issue, with Robert Knox describing races as different species and warning of racial wars. Hooker's verdict on the growing manuscript was "incomparably more favourable" than Darwin had anticipated, while Darwin tried to put over the point that "external conditions do extremely little", it was the selection of "chance" variations that produced new species.

text: Darwin's experiments on how species spread were now extended to considering how animals such as snails could be carried on birds' feet, and seeds in birds' droppings. His tenth child, Charles Waring Darwin was born on 6 December apparently without his full share of intelligence, renewing fears of inbreeding and hereditary defects, a topic that he covered in principle in his book.

text: Darwin's cousin William Darwin Fox continued to give hims strong support, warning him against overworking on his huge book and recommending a holiday, but Darwin was immersed in his experiments and his writing.[24] "I am got most deeply interested in my subject; though I wish I could set less value on the bauble fame, either present or posthumous, than I do, but not, I think, to any extreme degree; yet, if I know myself, I would work just as hard, though with less gusto, if I knew that my Book wd be published for ever anonymously".[25]

text: On 23 February 1857 the Darwins were visited for lunch by Robert FitzRoy, who had been the captain of HMS Beagle during Darwin's voyage, together with his second wife, his first wife and his only daughter having died.[24]

text: Struggle for existence[edit]

text: Alfred Tennyson wrote his great poem "In Memoriam A.H.H." which introduced the phrase "Nature, red in tooth and claw", and Darwin worked on The Struggle for Existence. A discussion with Thomas Huxley on how jellyfish might cross-fertilise got the witty response that "the indecency of the process is to a certain extent in favour of its probability".[26] In July 1856 Darwin passed Huxley's remark on to Hooker with the comment, "What a book a Devil's chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low & horridly cruel works of nature!",[27] apparently a reference to the nickname given to the Radical Revd. Robert Taylor who had visited Cambridge on an "infidel home missionary tour" when Darwin was a student there (though the term goes back to Chaucer's Parson's Tale).

text: Darwin pressed on with writing his "big book" on Natural Selection, overworking, until in March 1857 illness began cutting his working day "ridiculously short". Eventually, he took a fortnight's water treatment at the nearby Moor Park spa run by Edward Lane, and this revived him.[28]

text: Wallace had been working for Darwin, sending domestic fowl specimens from Indonesia,[28] and a letter he had written in October reached Darwin at the spa. On 1 May Darwin replied, agreeing with Wallace's 1855 paper "On the Law which has Regulated the Introduction of New Species": "I can see that we have thought much alike & to a certain extent have come to similar conclusions. ... This summer will make the 20th year (!) since I opened my first-note-book, on the question how & in what way do species & varieties differ from each other.— I am now preparing my work for publication, but I find the subject so very large, that though I have written many chapters, I do not suppose I shall go to press for two years." He agreed with Wallace that "climatal conditions" had little effect, and wrote "It is really impossible to explain my views in the compass of a letter on the causes & means of variation in a state of nature; but I have slowly adopted a distinct & tangible idea.— Whether true or false others must judge".[29]

text: Darwin returned home in early May, but a cold and social pressure set him back. He had to return to the spa, finishing "variation" in July and posting pages to Huxley for checking.[30]

text: Working class militants were seizing on the popularity of gorillas (which were now appearing in travelling menageries) to trumpet man's monkey origins. To crush these ideas, Richard Owen as President-elect of the Royal Association announced his authoritative anatomical studies of primate brains showing that humans were not just a separate species, but a separate sub-class.[31] In July 1857, Darwin commented to Hooker, "Owen's is a grand Paper; but I cannot swallow Man making a division as distinct from a Chimpanzee, as an ornithorhynchus from a Horse: I wonder what a Chimpanzee wd. say to this?".[32]

text: Asa Gray and the young guard[edit]

text: Others helped with providing information, including Asa Gray on American plants. Darwin wrote to Gray on 20 July 1857 saying that after 19 years of work on the question of whether species "have descended from other species, like varieties from one species" and "that species arise like our domestic varieties with much extinction", he had "come to the heteredox conclusion that there are no such things as independently created species – that species are only strongly defined varieties. I know that this will make you despise me. – I do not much underrate the many huge difficulties on this view, but yet it seems to me to explain too much, otherwise inexplicable, to be false."[33] An intrigued Gray admitted to his own notion that there was some law or power inherent in plants making varieties appear, and asked if Darwin was finding this law.[34] Realising that Gray had not grasped what he was suggesting, Darwin sent him a letter on 5 September outlining the difficulties involved. He enclosed a brief but detailed abstract of his ideas on natural selection and divergence, copied out by the schoolmaster to make it more legible.[35][36]

text: Gray responded, questioning his use of the term "natural selection" as an agent. In his reply Darwin said that he had to use this shorthand to save incessantly having to expand it into a formula such as "the tendency to the preservation (owing to the severe struggle for life to which all organic beings at some time or generation are exposed) of any the slightest variation in any part, which is of the slightest use or favourable to the life of the individual which has thus varied; together with the tendency to its inheritance". He asked Gray to maintain secrecy.[37] The young guard of naturalists were now putting the "mode of creation" openly on the agenda, even in addresses to the Geological Society, but Darwin wanted his case to be fully prepared.[35]

text: Joseph Dalton Hooker, John Tyndall and Thomas Huxley now formed a group of young naturalists holding Darwin in high regard, basing themselves in the Linnean Society of London which had just moved to Burlington House, Piccadilly, London, near the Royal Society. Huxley had not yet understood natural selection despite Darwin's hints about pedigree and genealogical trees. Huxley's attention was focussed on defeating the dominant orthodoxy of the arrogant Owen.

text: The country squire[edit]

text: Darwin's attention turned from pigeons to seedlings, experimenting with subjecting plants to conditions which might produce variation. His family helped with this and with tracking bees, experimenting (unsuccessfully) to try to find out what would influence their flight path.

text: His wife Emma Darwin was now known throughout the parish for helping in the way a parson's wife might be expected to, and as well as providing nursing care for her own family's frequent illnesses, she gave out bread tokens to the hungry and "small pensions for the old, dainties for the ailing, and medical comforts and simple medicine" based on Robert Darwin's old prescription book. Charles Darwin also took on local duties, increasing his social standing by becoming a Justice of the Peace and a magistrate. To accommodate the needs of his large family and accommodate visiting cousins further house extensions got under way. In November 1857 he escaped the worries for a week's recuperation at Lane's Moor Park spa.

text: Human origins, Wallace encouraged[edit]

text: During his research in 1856, Darwin noted his intention to publish his views on human racial ancestry: by early September of that year while drafting his book on Natural Selection he began collecting notes for Chapter 6 on the topic of sexual selection. This would cover humans as well as birds and fishes. By 31 March 1857 he had drafted five chapters with the sixth under way, and he wrote out a table of contents. In the following months he completed ten pages of Chapter 6, some 2,500 words, and pencilled in the heading "Theory applied to Races of Man". At this stage he regarded sexual selection as due to a "struggle for supremacy" between males, and did not yet think of female choice as significant. He then apparently dropped the whole topic for some reason, possibly Charles Lyell's caution: the brief abstract Darwin sent to Asa Gray on 5 September made no mention of sexual selection or human evolution.[38]

text: Wallace, responding to Darwin's 1 May letter,[29] discussed his own theorising. Darwin replied on 22 December that he was "extremely glad to hear that you are attending to distribution in accordance with theoretical ideas. I am a firm believer, that without speculation there is no good & original observation", and added that "I believe I go much further than you; but it is too long a subject to enter on my speculative notions." He also said "You ask whether I shall discuss 'man';—I think I shall avoid whole subject, as so surrounded with prejudices, though I fully admit that it is the highest & most interesting problem for the naturalist."[17]

text: Huxley used his March 1858 Royal Institution lecture to claim that structurally gorillas are as close to humans as they are to baboons. He added "Nay more I believe that the mental & moral faculties are essentially & fundamentally the same kind in animals & ourselves". This was a clear challenge to Owen's lecture claiming human uniqueness, given at the same venue. In a subsequent lecture Huxley stated that if there was a solution to the problem of species, it "must come from the side of indefinite modifiability", an indication that he was moving towards Darwin's position. In June he used his lecture at the Royal Society to attack Owen's "etherial archetype". Having gained a foothold in science with the aid of the Westminster Review group led by John Chapman and Herbert Spencer, Huxley was out to dislodge the domination of science by wealthy clergymen– led by Owen– instead wanting to create a professional salaried scientific civil service. To Spencer, animal species had developed by "adaptions upon adaptions". Huxley was using arguments on origins to split science from theology, arguing that "it is as respectable to be modified monkey as modified dirt".

text: Forestalled[edit]

text: Darwin was throwing himself into his work and his "big book" on Natural Selection was well under way, when on 18 June 1858 he received a parcel from Wallace.[39] It enclosed about twenty pages describing an evolutionary mechanism, an unexpected response to Darwin's recent encouragement, with a request to send it on to Lyell. Shocked that he had been "forestalled", Darwin sent it on that day to Lyell, as requested by Wallace,[40][41] with a letter:

text:
Some year or so ago you recommended me to read a paper by Wallace in the 'Annals,' which had interested you, and, as I was writing to him, I knew this would please him much, so I told him. He has to-day sent me the enclosed, and asked me to forward it to you. It seems to me well worth reading. Your words have come true with a vengeance–that I should be forestalled. You said this, when I explained to you here very briefly my views of 'Natural Selection' depending on the struggle for existence. I never saw a more striking coincidence; if Wallace had my MS. sketch written out in 1842, he could not have made a better short abstract! Even his terms now stand as heads of my chapters. Please return me the MS., which he does not say he wishes me to publish, but I shall, of course, at once write and offer to send to any journal. So all my originality, whatever it may amount to, will be smashed, though my book, if it will ever have any value, will not be deteriorated; as all the labour consists in the application of the theory.
I hope you will approve of Wallace's sketch, that I may tell him what you say.[42]

text: There were differences, though these were not evident to Darwin on reading the paper. Wallace's idea of selection was the environment eliminating the unfit rather than cut-throat competition among individuals, and he took an egalitarian view of the Dayak natives he was among, while Darwin had seen the Fuegians as backwards savages, albeit capable of improvement.

text: It had come at a bad time, as his favourite retreat at Moor Spa was threatened by Lane being put on trial accused of adultery, and five days later Darwin's baby Charles Waring came down with scarlet fever. Darwin's first impression had been that though it meant losing priority, it would be dishonourable for him to be "induced to publish from privately knowing that Wallace is in the field", but Lyell quickly responded strongly urging him to reconsider. Darwin's reply of 25 June was a plea for advice, noting that the points in Wallace's sketch had been fully covered in his own Essay of 1844 which Hooker had read in 1847, and that he had also set out his ideas in a letter to Asa Gray in 1857, "so that I could most truly say and prove that I take nothing from Wallace. 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". He added a request that Hooker be informed to give a second opinion.[43]

text: Darwin was overwrought when baby Charles Waring Darwin died on 28 June, and the next day acknowledged Hooker's letters saying "I cannot think now on the subject, but soon will." That night he read the letters, and to meet Hooker's request, though "quite prostrated", got his servant to deliver Wallace's essay, the letter to Asa Gray and "my sketch of 1844 solely that you may see by your own handwriting that you did read it". He left matters in the hands of Lyell and Hooker, writing "Do not waste much time. It is miserable in me to care at all about priority."[44]

text: Publication of joint paper[edit]

text: Lyell and Hooker agreed on a joint paper to be presented at the Linnean Society – Lyell, Hooker and Darwin were all fellows of the society and council members, and Hooker had been closely involved in reviving the fortunes of the society and running its journal. Other venues were either inappropriate, or in the case of the Zoological Society of London, potentially hostile under the leadership of Richard Owen. It was now time for the summer break but, as they knew, its meeting had been postponed due to the death of former president Robert Brown on 10 June 1858, and the Council had arranged an extra meeting on 1 July.[45]

text: At the last minute, late in the evening of 30 June, Lyell and Hooker forwarded the Wallace and Darwin papers to the Secretary John Joseph Bennett, to be read at the meeting the next day. Mrs. Hooker had spent the afternoon copying out extracts from the handwritten documents Darwin had sent with his letter of the previous night, presumably chosen by Hooker to suit the verbal presentation, and Lyell and Hooker wrote a short introductory letter.[46] The papers entitled respectively On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection, incorporated Wallace's pages; and extracts from Darwin's 1844 Essay and his 1857 letter to Gray. At the meeting the Secretary read the papers out, before going on to six other papers, and there was no discussion of them at the end of the meeting, perhaps because of the amount of business that had been dealt with including an obituary notice for Robert Brown given by Lyell, or possibly due to reluctance to speak out against a theory supported by the eminent Lyell and Hooker. Thomas Bell, who had written up the description of Darwin's reptile specimens from the Beagle expedition, presided over the meeting. He apparently disapproved, and in his annual presidential report presented in May 1859 wrote that "The year which has passed has not, indeed, been marked by any of those striking discoveries which at once revolutionize, so to speak, the department of science on which they bear".[2][47] However, the Vice-President promptly removed all references to immutability from his own paper which was awaiting publication.[48]

text: As might be expected, the joint paper alerted those subscribers who met the argument for the first time in print, and whose minds were prepared by prior struggles with the species question. Alfred Newton, who held the chair in Zoology and Comparative Anatomy at Cambridge from 1866 to 1907, wrote this: "I sat up late that night to read it [the Linnean Society paper]; and never shall I forget the impression it made upon me. Herein was contained a perfectly simple solution of all the difficulties which had been troubling me for months past. I hardly know whether I at first felt more vexed at the solution not having occurred to me than pleased that it had been found at all" (he was not alone in that thought!—see T.H. Huxley). Newton remained a Darwinian for the rest of his life. (Wollaston 1921 p112; see also Newton 1888)

text: While the meeting took place, Darwin was attending his son's funeral. His family moved to his sister-in-law's in Sussex to escape the fever, which eventually killed six children in the village of Downe. It had been a frightening and miserable fortnight, but he was "more than satisfied" with the outcome of the meeting. He then took his children to the seaside at the Isle of Wight and pushed ahead with an "abstract" of Natural Selection which again began growing to book size. He returned to the Moor Park spa with stomach ailments.

text: Wallace's reaction, delivered in January 1859, was that he was gratified to have spurred Darwin into making the announcement and that it would have caused him "much pain & regret" if his papers had been published on their own, without Darwin's papers. Darwin was still sensitive on the point, and assured Wallace that he "had absolutely nothing whatever to do with leading Lyell and Hooker to what they thought was a fair course of action". He responded to Wallace's enquiry about what Lyell thought of the theory by saying that "I think he is somewhat staggered, but does not give in and speaks with horror [of] what a job it would be for the next edition of "The Principles" [of Geology] if he were "perverted". But he is most candid and honest, and I think he will end up by being "perverted"." Lyell was still struggling to come to terms with the idea of mankind, with immortal soul, originating from animals, but "Considering his age, his former views and position in society, I think his conduct has been heroic on the subject."

text: Publication of the "Origin of Species"[edit]

text: Darwin was now working hard on an "abstract" trimmed from his Natural Selection, writing much of it from memory. The chapters were sent to Hooker for correcting as they were completed, which led to a minor disaster when a large bundle was put by accident into the drawer Hooker's wife used to keep paper for the children to draw on. Lyell made arrangements with the publisher John Murray, who had brought out the second edition of The Voyage of the Beagle. Darwin fretted, asking "Does he know all the subject of the book?", and saying that to avoid being more "un-orthodox than the subject makes inevitable" he did not discuss the origin of man, or bring in any discussion about Genesis. Unusually, Murray agreed to publish the manuscript sight unseen, and to pay Darwin two-thirds of the net proceeds. He anticipated printing 500 copies.

text: Darwin had decided to call his book An Abstract of an Essay on the Origin of Species and Varieties through Natural Selection, but with Murray's persuasion it was eventually reduced to the snappier On the Origin of Species through Natural Selection. The full title reads On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, with races referring to varieties of domestic and wild organisms and not to human groups.

text: By the end of May, Darwin's health had failed again, but after a week's hydrotherapy he was able to start correcting the proofs. He struggled on despite rarely being able to write free of stomach pains for more than twenty minutes at a stretch, and made drastic revisions which left Murray with a huge £72 bill for corrections. Murray upped the print run to 1,250 copies, with a publication date in November. A copy was sent to Lyell, with a "foolishly anxious" Darwin hoping that he would "come round". An eager Lyell gave Darwin "very great kudos", though he was still concerned that "the dignity of man is at stake". One of Lyell's relatives commented that it was "sure to be very curious and important... however mortifying it may be to think that our remote ancestors were jelly fishes". Darwin was "sorry to say that I have no 'consolatory view' on the dignity of man. I am content that man will probably advance, and care not much whether we are looked at as mere savages in a remotely distant future."

text: On 1 October Darwin finished the proofs, suffering from fits of vomiting. He then went off for a two-month stay at Ilkley Wells House, a spa in the town of Ilkley. He was joined by his family for a time of "frozen misery" in the unusually early winter. Darwin wrote "I have been very bad lately, having had an awful 'crisis' one leg swelled like elephantiasis – eyes almost closed up – covered with a rash & fiery Boils; but they tell me it will surely do me much good – it was like living in Hell." On 2 November he was pleased to receive from Murray a specimen copy bound in royal green cloth, priced at fifteen shillings.

text: Presentation copies were sent out by Murray, and on 11 and 12 November, still at the spa, Darwin wrote notes to go with these complimentary copies. He disarmingly anticipated their reactions: to Asa Gray "there are very many serious difficulties", to the Revd. John Stevens Henslow "I fear you will not approve of your pupil", to Louis Agassiz "[not sent in] a spirit of defiance or bravado" and to Richard Owen "it will seem 'an abomination'.", amongst others. For Wallace's copy he wrote "God knows what the public will think".

text: Origin of Species goes on sale[edit]

text: On the Origin of Species was first published on 24 November 1859, priced at fifteen shillings. The book had been offered to booksellers at Murray's autumn sale on 22 November, and all available copies had been taken up immediately. In total, 1,250 copies were printed but after deducting presentation and review copies, and five for Stationers' Hall copyright, 1,192 copies were available for sale.[49] Significantly, 500 were taken by Mudie's Library, ensuring that the book would be widely circulated.[50]

text: By then the novelist Charles Kingsley, a Christian socialist country rector, had sent Darwin a letter of praise (dated 18 November) regarding the presentation copy he had received: it was "just as noble a conception of Deity, to believe that He created primal forms capable of self development...as to believe that He required a fresh act of intervention to supply the lacunas which He Himself had made."[51] In the second edition Darwin added these lines to the last chapter, with attribution to "a celebrated author and divine".

text: See the Reactions to On the Origin of Species for developments following publication, in the context of his life, work and outside influences at the time.

text: Notes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ van Wyhe 2007, pp. 184, 187
^ Jump up to: a b Keynes 2000, p. 318
Jump up ^ Olivia Judson (17 June 2008). "Darwinmania! – Evolution – Opinion". New York Times Blog. Retrieved 18 June 2008.
^ Jump up to: a b "Darwin in letters, 1851-1855: Death of a daughter". Darwin Correspondence Project. 12 June 2015. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
^ Jump up to: a b van Wyhe 2013, pp. 103–105, 109.
Jump up ^ Darwin 1845, pp. 173, 377 – the first edition called the relationship the "law of the succession of types"; Darwin 1839, p. 210.
Jump up ^ van Wyhe 2013, pp. 105–111.
Jump up ^ Brooke, James. (1856), [WCP3073.3041: Letter from Brooke, James to Wallace, Alfred Russel, Sarawak, dated 4 July 1856]. In : Beccaloni, G. W. (Ed.). Wallace Letters Online, accessed 20 December 2016
Jump up ^ van Wyhe 2013, p. 110.
^ Jump up to: a b "Letter 1792 – Blyth, E, to Darwin, C. R., 8 December 1855". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
^ Jump up to: a b van Wyhe 2013, p. 133.
Jump up ^ "Letter no. 1812 – Charles Darwin memorandum". Darwin Correspondence Project. December 1855. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
Jump up ^ "Letter no. 1794 – Charles Darwin to Edgar Leopold Layard". Darwin Correspondence Project. 9 December 1855. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
Jump up ^ "Letter no. 1798 – Charles Darwin to Charles Augustus Murray". Darwin Correspondence Project. 24 December 1855. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
Jump up ^ "Letter no. 2004 – Charles Darwin to W. B. Tegetmeier". Darwin Correspondence Project. 29 November 1856. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
Jump up ^ van Wyhe 2013, p. 111.
^ Jump up to: a b "Letter 2192 – Darwin, C. R. to Wallace, A. R., 22 December 1857". Darwin Correspondence Project.
^ Jump up to: a b "Letter 1862 – Lyell, C., to Darwin, C. R., 1–2 May 1856". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
Jump up ^ "Darwin in letters, 1856-1857: the 'Big Book'". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
Jump up ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 434–438.
^ Jump up to: a b "Letter 1866 – Darwin, C. R., to Lyell, C., 3 May (1856)". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
Jump up ^ "Letter 1870 – Darwin, C. R., to Hooker, J.D., 9 May (1856)". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
Jump up ^ "Letter 1874 – Darwin, C. R., to Hooker, J.D.,". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
^ Jump up to: a b Desmond & Moore 1991, p. 450.
Jump up ^ "Letter no. 2057 – Charles Darwin to W. D. Fox". Darwin Correspondence Project. 22 February 1857. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
Jump up ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, p. 449.
Jump up ^ "Darwin Correspondence Project – Letter 1924 – Darwin, C. R. to Hooker, J. D., 13 July (1856)". Retrieved 5 December 2008.
^ Jump up to: a b Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 453–454.
^ Jump up to: a b "Letter 2086 – Darwin, C. R. to Wallace, A. R., 1 May 1857". Darwin Correspondence Project.
Jump up ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 455–456.
Jump up ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 451–453.
Jump up ^ "Letter 2117 – Darwin, C. R. to Hooker, J. D., 5 July (1857)". Darwin Correspondence Project.
Jump up ^ "Letter 2125 – Darwin, C. R. to Gray, Asa, 20 July (1857)". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
Jump up ^ "Letter 2129 – Gray, Asa to Darwin, C. R., (Aug 1857)". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
^ Jump up to: a b Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 457–458.
Jump up ^ "Darwin Correspondence Project » Letter 2136 To Asa Gray   5 September [1857]". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
Jump up ^ "Letter 2176 – Darwin, C. R. to Gray, Asa, 29 Nov (1857)". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
Jump up ^ Moore & Desmond 2004, pp. xxx–xxxiii.
Jump up ^ Ball, Philip (12 December 2011). "Shipping timetables debunk Darwin plagiarism accusations". Nature News & Comment. Retrieved 26 February 2012.
Jump up ^ Ball, P. (2011). Shipping timetables debunk Darwin plagiarism accusations: Evidence challenges claims that Charles Darwin stole ideas from Alfred Russel Wallace. Nature. online
Jump up ^ J. van Wyhe and K. Rookmaaker. (2012). A new theory to explain the receipt of Wallace's Ternate Essay by Darwin in 1858. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01808.x
Jump up ^ Darwin 1887, p. 116
Jump up ^ Darwin 1887, p. 117
Jump up ^ Darwin 1887, p. 119
Jump up ^ Browne 2002, p. 35
Jump up ^ Browne 2002, p. 40
Jump up ^ Browne 2002, pp. 40–42
Jump up ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, p. 470.
Jump up ^ Freeman 1977
Jump up ^ Browne 2002, p. 89
Jump up ^ Letter 2534 – Kingsley, Charles to Darwin, C. R., 18 Nov 1859, Darwin Correspondence Project

tag: ol