Oh, he would’ve understood it very easily. Remember, he first… had to understand Mendelian genetics but he would’ve welcomed that very much because it solved a lot of problems that he was worried about, about so-called blending inheritance and… and the fact that it was particulate, and so on, he would have been very pleased with. And he was… sufficiently a… a scientist and a naturalist to appreciate the idea of the chromosomes in cells although that wasn’t the main level at which he worked. It would have been a little… take a little longer to explain to him, I think, about the nature of DNA because you have to explain the nature of organic chemistry which was only very… understood in a very primitive way in… in his time and certainly at the time he was doing most of his major work, and so on. So, once he’d got that, I think he would… he would be very happy to see there would be a molecular basis of replication because he had… makes odd remarks about… he had ideas about pan-genes and this, that and the other. I think he called them pan-genes or something like that, which were… those ideas were wrong and then he’d have been delighted, I think, to… to see it. And he wouldn’t have been at all put off by the complexities of the whole thing because, being a naturalist, he was used to the complexities of nature and… but nevertheless, he was a man who was looking for simple underlying principles, so I think he would have welcomed it very much.