,transcriber's note ,minor punctuation errors have been changed without notice4 ,printer errors have been changed and are listed at the end4 ,all other inconsistencies are as in the original4 ,,essays3 ,,scientific1 ,,political1 ,,speculative4 ,,by ,,herbert ,,spencer4 ,,library ,,edition1 7,,otherwise ,,fifth ,,thousand7 ,containing ,seven ,essays not before ,republished1 and various other additions4 ,,vol4 ,i4 ,,williams ,,and ,,norgate1 #ad1 ,,henrietta ,,street1 ,,covent ,,garden1 ,,london3 ,,and #bj4 ,,south ,,frederick ,,street4 ,,edinburgh4 #ahia4 ,,london3 ,g4 ,,norman ,,and ,,son1 ,,printers1 ,,hart ,,street1 ,,covent ,,garden4 ,,preface ,excepting those which have appeared as articles in periodicals during the last eight years1 the essays here gathered together were originally re-published in separate volumes at long intervals4 ,the first volume appeared in ,december #aheg2 the second in ,november #ahfc2 and the third in ,february #ahgd4 ,by the time the original editions of the first two had been sold1 ,american reprints1 differently entitled and having the essays differently arranged1 had been produced2 and1 for economy's sake1 ,i have since contented myself with importing successive supplies printed from the ,american stereotype plates4 ,of the third volume1 however1 supplies have1 as they were required1 been printed over here1 from plates partly ,american and partly ,english4 ,the completion of this final edition of course puts an end to this make-shift arrangement4 ,the essays above referred to as having been written since #ahhb1 are now incorporated with those previously re-published4 ,there are seven of them2 namely--,morals and ,moral ,sentiments1 ,the ,factors of ,organic ,evolution1 ,professor ,green's ,explanations1 ,the ,ethics of ,kant1 ,absolute ,political ,ethics1 ,from ,freedom to ,bondage1 and ,the ,americans4 ,as well as these large additions there are small additions1 in the shape of postscripts to various essays--one to ,the ,constitution of the ,sun1 one to ,the ,philosophy of ,style1 one to ,railway ,morals1 one to ,prison ,ethics1 and one to ,the ,origin and ,function of ,music3 which last is about equal in length to the original essay4 ,changes have been made in many of the essays3 in some cases by omitting passages and in other cases by including new ones4 ,especially the essay on ,the ,nebular ,hypothesis may be named as one which1 though unchanged in essentials1 has been much altered by additions and subtractions1 and by bringing its statements up to date2 so that it has been in large measure re-cast4 ,beyond these respects in which this final edition differs from preceding editions1 it differs in having undergone a verification of its references and quotations1 as well as a second verbal revision4 ,naturally the fusion of three separate series of essays into one series1 has made needful a general re-arrangement4 ,whether to follow the order of time or the order of subjects was a question which presented itself2 and1 as neither alternative promised satisfactory results1 ,i eventually decided to compromise--to follow partly the one order and partly the other4 ,the first volume is made up of essays in which the idea of evolution1 general or special1 is dominant4 ,in the second volume essays dealing with philosophical questions1 with abstract and concrete science1 and with aesthetics1 are brought together2 but though all of them are tacitly evolutionary1 their evolutionism is an incidental rather than a necessary trait4 ,the ethical1 political1 and social essays composing the third volume1 though mostly written from the evolution point of view1 have for their more immediate purposes the enunciation of doctrines which are directly practical in their bearings4 ,meanwhile1 within each volume the essays are arranged in order of time3 not indeed strictly1 but so far as consists with the requirements of sub-classing4 ,beyond the essays included in these three volumes1 there remain several which ,i have not thought it well to include--in some cases because of their personal character1 in other cases because of their relative unimportance1 and in yet other cases because they would scarcely be understood in the absence of the arguments to which they are replies4 ,but for the convenience of any who may wish to find them1 ,i append their titles and places of publication4 ,these are as follows3--,retrogressive ,religion1 in ,the ,nineteenth ,century for ,july #ahhd2 ,last ,words about ,agnosticism and the ,religion of ,humanity1 in ,the ,nineteenth ,century for ,november #ahhd2 a note to ,prof4 ,cairns' ,critique on the ,study of ,sociology1 in ,the ,fortnightly ,review1 for ,february #ahge2 ,a ,short ,rejoinder to ,mr4 ,j4 ,f4 ,mc,lennan1 ,fortnightly ,review1 ,june #ahgg2 ,prof4 ,goldwin ,smith as a ,critic1 ,contemporary ,review1 ,march #ahhb2 ,a ,rejoinder to ,m4 de ,laveleye1 ,contemporary ,review1 ,april #ahhe4 ,,london1 ,december1 #ahij4 ,,contents ,,of ,,vol4 ,i4 ,,page ,,the ,,development ,,hypothesis #a ,,progress3 ,,its ,,law ,,and ,,cause #h ,,transcendental ,,physiology #fc ,,the ,,nebular ,,hypothesis #ajh ,,illogical ,,geology #aib ,,bain ,,on ,,the ,,emotions ,,and ,,the ,,will #bda ,,the ,,social ,,organism #bfe ,,the ,,origin ,,of ,,animal ,,worship #cjh ,,morals ,,and ,,moral ,,sentiments #cca ,,the ,,comparative ,,psychology ,,of ,,man #cea ,,mr4 ,,martineau ,,on ,,evolution #cga ,,the ,,factors ,,of ,,organic ,,evolution #chi 7,for ,index1 see ,volume ,,iii47 ,,the ,,development ,,hypothesis4 ,originally published in ,the ,leader1 for ,march #bj1 #aheb4 ,brief though it is1 ,i place this essay before the rest1 partly because with the exception of a similarly-brief essay on ,use and ,beauty1 it came first in order of time1 but chiefly because it came first in order of thought1 and struck the keynote of all that was to follow4 ,in a debate upon the development hypothesis1 lately narrated to me by a friend1 one of the disputants was described as arguing that as1 in all our experience1 we know no such phenomenon as transmutation of species1 it is unphilosophical to assume that transmutation of species ever takes place4 ,had ,i been present ,i think that1 passing over his assertion1 which is open to criticism1 ,i should have replied that1 as in all our experience we have never known a species created1 it was1 by his own showing1 unphilosophical to assume that any species ever had been created4 ,those who cavalierly reject the ,theory of ,evolution as not being adequately supported by facts1 seem to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all4 ,like the majority of men who are born to a given belief1 they demand the most rigorous proof of any adverse belief1 but assume that their own needs none4 ,here we find1 scattered over the globe1 vegetable and animal organisms numbering1 of the one kind 7according to ,humboldt71 some #cbj1jjj species1 and of the other1 some #b1jjj1jjj species 7see ,carpenter72 and if to these we add the numbers of animal and vegetable species which have become extinct1 we may safely estimate the number of species that have existed1 and are existing1 on the ,earth1 at not less than ten millions4 ,well1 which is the most rational theory about these ten millions of species8 ,is it most likely that there have been ten millions of special creations8 or is it most likely that1 by continual modifications due to change of circumstances1 ten millions of varieties have been produced1 as varieties are being produced still8 ,doubtless many will reply that they can more easily conceive ten millions of special creations to have taken place1 than they can conceive that ten millions of varieties have arisen by successive modifications4 ,all such1 however1 will find1 on inquiry1 that they are under an illusion4 ,this is one of the many cases in which men do not really believe1 but rather believe they believe4 ,it is not that they can truly conceive ten millions of special creations to have taken place1 but that they think they can do so4 ,careful introspection will show them that they have never yet realized to themselves the creation of even one species4 ,if they have formed a definite conception of the process1 let them tell us how a new species is constructed1 and how it makes its appearance4 ,is it thrown down from the clouds8 or must we hold to the notion that it struggles up out of the ground8 ,do its limbs and viscera rush together from all the points of the compass8 or must we receive the old ,hebrew idea1 that ,god takes clay and moulds a new creature8 ,if they say that a new creature is produced in none of these modes1 which are too absurd to be believed1 then they are required to describe the mode in which a new creature may be produced--a mode which does not seem absurd2 and such a mode they will find that they neither have conceived nor can conceive4 ,should the believers in special creations consider it unfair thus to call upon them to describe how special creations take place1 ,i reply that this is far less than they demand from the supporters of the ,development ,hypothesis4 ,they are merely asked to point out a conceivable mode4 ,on the other hand1 they ask1 not simply for a conceivable mode1 but for the actual mode4 ,they do not say--,show us how this may take place2 but they say--,show us how this does take place4 ,so far from its being unreasonable to put the above question1 it would be reasonable to ask not only for a possible mode of special creation1 but for an ascertained mode2 seeing that this is no greater a demand than they make upon their opponents4 ,and here we may perceive how much more defensible the new doctrine is than the old one4 ,even could the supporters of the ,development ,hypothesis merely show that the origination of species by the process of modification is conceivable1 they would be in a better position than their opponents4 ,but they can do much more than this4 ,they can show that the process of modification has effected1 and is effecting1 decided changes in all organisms subject to modifying influences4 ,though1 from the impossibility of getting at a sufficiency of facts1 they are unable to trace the many phases through which any existing species has passed in arriving at its present form1 or to identify the influences which caused the successive modifications2 yet1 they can show that any existing species--animal or vegetable--when placed under conditions different from its previous ones1 immediately begins to undergo certain changes fitting it for the new conditions4 ,they can show that in successive generations these changes continue2 until1 ultimately1 the new conditions become the natural ones4 ,they can show that in cultivated plants1 in domesticated animals1 and in the several races of men1 such alterations have taken place4 ,they can show that the degrees of difference so produced are often1 as in dogs1 greater than those on which distinctions of species are in other cases founded4 ,they can show that it is a matter of dispute whether some of these modified forms are varieties or separate species4 ,they can show1 too1 that the changes daily taking place in ourselves--the facility that attends long practice1 and the loss of aptitude that begins when practice ceases--the strengthening of passions habitually gratified1 and the weakening of those habitually curbed--the development of every faculty1 bodily1 moral1 or intellectual1 according to the use made of it--are all explicable on this same principle4 ,and thus they can show that throughout all organic nature there is at work a modifying influence of the kind they assign as the cause of these specific differences3 an influence which1 though slow in its action1 does1 in time1 if the circumstances demand it1 produce marked changes--an influence which1 to all appearance1 would produce in the millions of years1 and under the great varieties of condition which geological records imply1 any amount of change4 ,which1 then1 is the most rational hypothesis8--that of special creations which has neither a fact to support it nor is even definitely conceivable2 or that of modification1 which is not only definitely conceivable1 but is countenanced by the habitudes of every existing organism8 ,that by any series of changes a protozoon should ever become a mammal1 seems to those who are not familiar with zoology1 and who have not seen how clear becomes the relationship between the simplest and the most complex forms when intermediate forms are examined1 a very grotesque notion4 ,habitually looking at things rather in their statical aspect than in their dynamical aspect1 they never realize the fact that1 by small increments of modification1 any amount of modification may in time be generated4 ,that surprise which they feel on finding one whom they last saw as a boy1 grown into a man1 becomes incredulity when the degree of change is greater4 ,nevertheless1 abundant instances are at hand of the mode in which we may pass to the most diverse forms by insensible gradations4 ,arguing the matter some time since with a learned professor1 ,i illustrated my position thus3--,you admit that there is no apparent relationship between a circle and an hyperbola4 ,the one is a finite curve2 the other is an infinite one4 ,all parts of the one are alike2 of the other no parts are alike save parts on its opposite sides4 ,the one incloses a space2 the other will not inclose a space though produced for ever4 ,yet opposite as are these curves in all their properties1 they may be connected together by a series of intermediate curves1 no one of which differs from the adjacent ones in any appreciable degree4 ,thus1 if a cone be cut by a plane at right angles to its axis we get a circle4 ,if1 instead of being perfectly at right angles1 the plane subtends with the axis an angle of #hi #ei1 we have an ellipse which no human eye1 even when aided by an accurate pair of compasses1 can distinguish from a circle4 ,decreasing the angle minute by minute1 the ellipse becomes first perceptibly eccentric1 then manifestly so1 and by and by acquires so immensely elongated a form1 as to bear no recognizable resemblance to a circle4 ,by continuing this process1 the ellipse passes insensibly into a parabola2 and1 ultimately1 by still further diminishing the angle1 into an hyperbola4 ,now here we have four different species of curve--circle1 ellipse1 parabola1 and hyperbola--each having its peculiar properties and its separate equation1 and the first and last of which are quite opposite in nature1 connected together as members of one series1 all producible by a single process of insensible modification4 ,but the blindness of those who think it absurd to suppose that complex organic forms may have arisen by successive modifications out of simple ones1 becomes astonishing when we remember that complex organic forms are daily being thus produced4 ,a tree differs from a seed immeasurably in every respect--in bulk1 in structure1 in colour1 in form1 in chemical composition3 differs so greatly that no visible resemblance of any kind can be pointed out between them4 ,yet is the one changed in the course of a few years into the other3 changed so gradually1 that at no moment can it be said--,now the seed ceases to be1 and the tree exists4 ,what can be more widely contrasted than a newly-born child and the small1 semi-transparent spherule constituting the human ovum8 ,the infant is so complex in structure that a cyclopdia is needed to describe its constituent parts4 ,the germinal vesicle is so simple that it may be defined in a line4 ,nevertheless a few months suffice to develop the one out of the other2 and that1 too1 by a series of modifications so small1 that were the embryo examined at successive minutes1 even a microscope would with difficulty disclose any sensible changes4 ,that the uneducated and the ill-educated should think the hypothesis that all races of beings1 man inclusive1 may in process of time have been evolved from the simplest monad1 a ludicrous one1 is not to be wondered at4 ,but for the physiologist1 who knows that every individual being is so evolved--who knows1 further1 that in their earliest condition the germs of all plants and animals whatever are so similar1 that there is no appreciable distinction amongst them1 which would enable it to be determined whether a particular molecule is the germ of a ,conferva or of an ,oak1 of a ,zoophyte or of a ,man2#a--;for him to make a difficulty of the matter is inexcusable4 ,surely if a single cell may1 when subjected to certain influences1 become a man in the space of twenty years2 there is nothing absurd in the hypothesis that under certain other influences1 a cell may1 in the course of millions of years1 give origin to the human race4 ,we have1 indeed1 in the part taken by many scientific men in this controversy of ,law versus ,miracle1 a good illustration of the tenacious vitality of superstitions4 ,ask one of our leading geologists or physiologists whether he believes in the ,mosaic account of the creation1 and he will take the question as next to an insult4 ,either he rejects the narrative entirely1 or understands it in some vague nonnatural sense4 ,yet one part of it he unconsciously adopts2 and that1 too1 literally4 ,for whence has he got this notion of special creations1 which he thinks so reasonable1 and fights for so vigorously8 ,evidently he can trace it back to no other source than this myth which he repudiates4 ,he has not a single fact in nature to cite in proof of it2 nor is he prepared with any chain of reasoning by which it may be established4 ,catechize him1 and he will be forced to confess that the notion was put into his mind in childhood as part of a story which he now thinks absurd4 ,and why1 after rejecting all the rest of the story1 he should strenuously defend this last remnant of it1 as though he had received it on valid authority1 he would be puzzled to say4 ,,footnote3 ,footnote #a3 ,carpenter1 ,principles of ,comparative ,physiology1 p4 #dgd4 ,,progress3 ,,its ,,law ,,and ,,cause4 ,first published in ,the ,westminster ,review for ,april1 #aheg4 ,though the ideas and illustrations contained in this essay were eventually incorporated in ,first ,principles1 yet ,i think it well here to reproduce it as exhibiting the form under which the ,general ,doctrine of ,evolution made its first appearance4 ,the current conception of progress is shifting and indefinite4 ,sometimes it comprehends little more than simple growth--as of a nation in the number of its members and the extent of territory over which it spreads4 ,sometimes it has reference to quantity of material products--as when the advance of agriculture and manufactures is the topic4 ,sometimes the superior quality of these products is contemplated2 and sometimes the new or improved appliances by which they are produced4 ,when1 again1 we speak of moral or intellectual progress1 we refer to states of the individual or people exhibiting it2 while1 when the progress of ,science1 or ,art1 is commented upon1 we have in view certain abstract results of human thought and action4 ,not only1 however1 is the current conception of progress more or less vague1 but it is in great measure erroneous4 ,it takes in not so much the reality of progress as its accompaniments--not so much the substance as the shadow4 ,that progress in intelligence seen during the growth of the child into the man1 or the savage into the philosopher1 is commonly regarded as consisting in the greater number of facts known and laws understood2 whereas the actual progress consists in those internal modifications of which this larger knowledge is the expression4 ,social progress is supposed to consist in the making of a greater quantity and variety of the articles required for satisfying men's wants2 in the increasing security of person and property2 in widening freedom of action2 whereas1 rightly understood1 social progress consists in those changes of structure in the social organism which have entailed these consequences4 ,the current conception is a teleological one4 ,the phenomena are contemplated solely as bearing on human happiness4 ,only those changes are held to constitute progress which directly or indirectly tend to heighten human happiness2 and they are thought to constitute progress simply because they tend to heighten human happiness4 ,but rightly to understand progress1 we must learn the nature of these changes1 considered apart from our interests4 ,ceasing1 for example1 to regard the successive geological modifications that have taken place in the ,earth1 as modifications that have gradually fitted it for the habitation of ,man1 and as therefore constituting geological progress1 we must ascertain the character common to these modifications--the law to which they all conform4 ,and similarly in every other case4 ,leaving out of sight concomitants and beneficial consequences1 let us ask what progress is in itself4 ,in respect to that progress which individual organisms display in the course of their evolution1 this question has been answered by the ,germans4 ,the investigations of ,wolff1 ,goethe1 and von ,baer1 have established the truth that the series of changes gone through during the development of a seed into a tree1 or an ovum into an animal1 constitute an advance from homogeneity of structure to heterogeneity of structure4 ,in its primary stage1 every germ consists of a substance that is uniform throughout1 both in texture and chemical composition4 ,the first step is the appearance of a difference between two parts of this substance2 or1 as the phenomenon is called in physiological language1 a differentiation4 ,each of these differentiated divisions presently begins itself to exhibit some contrast of parts3 and by and by these secondary differentiations become as definite as the original one4 ,this process is continuously repeated--is simultaneously going on in all parts of the growing embryo2 and by endless such differentiations there is finally produced that complex combination of tissues and organs constituting the adult animal or plant4 ,this is the history of all organisms whatever4 ,it is settled beyond dispute that organic progress consists in a change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,now1 we propose in the first place to show1 that this law of organic progress is the law of all progress4 ,whether it be in the development of the ,earth1 in the development of ,life upon its surface1 in the development of ,society1 of ,government1 of ,manufactures1 of ,commerce1 of ,language1 ,literature1 ,science1 ,art1 this same evolution of the simple into the complex1 through successive differentiations1 holds throughout4 ,from the earliest traceable cosmical changes down to the latest results of civilization1 we shall find that the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 is that in which progress essentially consists4 ,with the view of showing that if the ,nebular ,hypothesis be true1 the genesis of the solar system supplies one illustration of this law1 let us assume that the matter of which the sun and planets consist was once in a diffused form2 and that from the gravitation of its atoms there resulted a gradual concentration4 ,by the hypothesis1 the solar system in its nascent state existed as an indefinitely extended and nearly homogeneous medium--a medium almost homogeneous in density1 in temperature1 and in other physical attributes4 ,the first change in the direction of increased aggregation1 brought a contrast in density and a contrast in temperature1 between the interior and the exterior of this mass4 ,simultaneously the drawing in of outer parts caused motions ending in rotation round a centre with various angular velocities4 ,these differentiations increased in number and degree until there was evolved the organized group of sun1 planets1 and satellites1 which we now know--a group which presents numerous contrasts of structure and action among its members4 ,there are the immense contrasts between the sun and the planets1 in bulk and in weight2 as well as the subordinate contrasts between one planet and another1 and between the planets and their satellites4 ,there is the similarly-marked contrast between the sun as almost stationary 7relatively to the other members of the ,solar ,system71 and the planets as moving round him with great velocity3 while there are the secondary contrasts between the velocities and periods of the several planets1 and between their simple revolutions and the double ones of their satellites1 which have to move round their primaries while moving round the sun4 ,there is the yet further strong contrast between the sun and the planets in respect of temperature2 and there is good reason to suppose that the planets and satellites differ from each other in their proper heats1 as well as in the amounts of heat they receive from the sun4 ,when we bear in mind that1 in addition to these various contrasts1 the planets and satellites also differ in respect to their distances from each other and their primary2 in respect to the inclinations of their orbits1 the inclinations of their axes1 their times of rotation on their axes1 their specific gravities1 and their physical constitutions2 we see what a high degree of heterogeneity the solar system exhibits1 when compared with the almost complete homogeneity of the nebulous mass out of which it is supposed to have originated4 ,passing from this hypothetical illustration1 which must be taken for what it is worth1 without prejudice to the general argument1 let us descend to a more certain order of evidence4 ,it is now generally agreed among geologists and physicists that the ,earth was at one time a mass of molten matter4 ,if so1 it was at that time relatively homogeneous in consistence1 and1 in virtue of the circulation which takes place in heated fluids1 must have been comparatively homogeneous in temperature2 and it must have been surrounded by an atmosphere consisting partly of the elements of air and water1 and partly of those various other elements which are among the more ready to assume gaseous forms at high temperatures4 ,that slow cooling by radiation which is still going on at an inappreciable rate1 and which1 though originally far more rapid than now1 necessarily required an immense time to produce any decided change1 must ultimately have resulted in the solidification of the portion most able to part with its heat--namely1 the surface4 ,in the thin crust thus formed we have the first marked differentiation4 ,a still further cooling1 a consequent thickening of this crust1 and an accompanying deposition of all solidifiable elements contained in the atmosphere1 must finally have been followed by the condensation of the water previously existing as vapour4 ,a second marked differentiation must thus have arisen2 and as the condensation must have taken place on the coolest parts of the surface--namely1 about the poles--there must thus have resulted the first geographical distinction of parts4 ,to these illustrations of growing heterogeneity1 which1 though deduced from known physical laws1 may be regarded as more or less hypothetical1 ,geology adds an extensive series that have been inductively established4 ,investigations show that the ,earth has been continually becoming more heterogeneous in virtue of the multiplication of sedimentary strata which form its crust2 also1 that it has been becoming more heterogeneous in respect of the composition of these strata1 the later of which1 being made from the detritus of the earlier1 are many of them rendered highly complex by the mixture of materials they contain2 and further1 that this heterogeneity has been vastly increased by the actions of the ,earth's still molten nucleus upon its envelope1 whence have resulted not only many kinds of igneous rocks1 but the tilting up of sedimentary strata at all angles1 the formation of faults and metallic veins1 the production of endless dislocations and irregularities4 ,yet again1 geologists teach us that the ,earth's surface has been growing more varied in elevation--that the most ancient mountain systems are the smallest1 and the ,andes and ,himalayas the most modern2 while in all probability there have been corresponding changes in the bed of the ocean4 ,as a consequence of these ceaseless differentiations1 we now find that no considerable portion of the ,earth's exposed surface is like any other portion1 either in contour1 in geologic structure1 or in chemical composition2 and that in most parts it changes from mile to mile in all these characters4 ,moreover1 there has been simultaneously going on a differentiation of climates4 ,as fast as the ,earth cooled and its crust solidified1 there arose appreciable differences in temperature between those parts of its surface more exposed to the sun and those less exposed4 ,as the cooling progressed1 these differences became more pronounced2 until there finally resulted those marked contrasts between regions of perpetual ice and snow1 regions where winter and summer alternately reign for periods varying according to the latitude1 and regions where summer follows summer with scarcely an appreciable variation4 ,at the same time the many and varied elevations and subsidences of portions of the ,earth's crust1 bringing about the present irregular distribution of land and sea1 have entailed modifications of climate beyond those dependent on latitude2 while a yet further series of such modifications have been produced by increasing differences of elevation in the land1 which have in sundry places brought arctic1 temperate1 and tropical climates to within a few miles of one another4 ,and the general outcome of these changes is1 that not only has every extensive region its own meteorologic conditions1 but that every locality in each region differs more or less from others in those conditions2 as in its structure1 its contour1 its soil4 ,thus1 between our existing ,earth1 the phenomena of whose crust neither geographers1 geologists1 mineralogists1 nor meteorologists have yet enumerated1 and the molten globe out of which it was evolved1 the contrast in heterogeneity is extreme4 ,when from the ,earth itself we turn to the plants and animals which have lived1 or still live1 upon its surface1 we find ourselves in some difficulty from lack of facts4 ,that every existing organism has been developed out of the simple into the complex1 is indeed the first established truth of all2 and that every organism which existed in past times was similarly developed1 is an inference no physiologist will hesitate to draw4 ,but when we pass from individual forms of life to ,life in general1 and inquire whether the same law is seen in the ensemble of its manifestations1--whether modern plants and animals are of more heterogeneous structure than ancient ones1 and whether the ,earth's present ,flora and ,fauna are more heterogeneous than the ,flora and ,fauna of the past1--we find the evidence so fragmentary1 that every conclusion is open to dispute4 ,three-fifths of the ,earth's surface being covered by water2 a great part of the exposed land being inaccessible to1 or untravelled by1 the geologist2 the greater part of the remainder having been scarcely more than glanced at2 and even the most familiar portions1 as ,england1 having been so imperfectly explored that a new series of strata has been added within these four years1--it is impossible for us to say with certainty what creatures have1 and what have not1 existed at any particular period4 ,considering the perishable nature of many of the lower organic forms1 the metamorphosis of numerous sedimentary strata1 and the great gaps occurring among the rest1 we shall see further reason for distrusting our deductions4 ,on the one hand1 the repeated discovery of vertebrate remains in strata previously supposed to contain none1--of reptiles where only fish were thought to exist1--of mammals where it was believed there were no creatures higher than reptiles1--renders it daily more manifest how small is the value of negative evidence4 ,on the other hand1 the worthlessness of the assumption that we have discovered the earliest1 or anything like the earliest1 organic remains1 is becoming equally clear4 ,that the oldest known sedimentary rocks have been greatly changed by igneous action1 and that still older ones have been totally transformed by it1 is becoming undeniable4 ,and the fact that sedimentary strata earlier than any we know1 have been melted up1 being admitted1 it must also be admitted that we cannot say how far back in time this destruction of sedimentary strata has been going on4 ,thus the title ,palozoic1 as applied to the earliest known fossiliferous strata1 involves a petitio principii2 and1 for aught we know to the contrary1 only the last few chapters of the ,earth's biological history may have come down to us4 ,on neither side1 therefore1 is the evidence conclusive4 ,nevertheless we cannot but think that1 scanty as they are1 the facts1 taken altogether1 tend to show both that the more heterogeneous organisms have been evolved in the later geologic periods1 and that ,life in general has been more heterogeneously manifested as time has advanced4 ,let us cite1 in illustration1 the one case of the ,vertebrata4 ,the earliest known vertebrate remains are those of ,fishes2 and ,fishes are the most homogeneous of the vertebrata4 ,later and more heterogeneous are ,reptiles4 ,later still1 and more heterogeneous still1 are ,birds and ,mammals4 ,if it be said that the ,palozoic deposits1 not being estuary deposits1 are not likely to contain the remains of terrestrial vertebrata1 which may nevertheless have existed at that era1 we reply that we are merely pointing to the leading facts1 such as they are4 ,but to avoid any such criticism1 let us take the mammalian subdivision only4 ,the earliest known remains of mammals are those of small marsupials1 which are the lowest of the mammalian type2 while1 conversely1 the highest of the mammalian type--,man--is the most recent4 ,the evidence that the vertebrate fauna1 as a whole1 has become more heterogeneous1 is considerably stronger4 ,to the argument that the vertebrate fauna of the ,palozoic period1 consisting1 so far as we know1 entirely of ,fishes1 was less heterogeneous than the modern vertebrate fauna1 which includes ,reptiles1 ,birds1 and ,mammals1 of multitudinous genera1 it may be replied1 as before1 that estuary deposits of the ,palozoic period1 could we find them1 might contain other orders of vertebrata4 ,but no such reply can be made to the argument that whereas the marine vertebrata of the ,palozoic period consisted entirely of cartilaginous fishes1 the marine vertebrata of later periods include numerous genera of osseous fishes2 and that1 therefore1 the later marine vertebrate faunas are more heterogeneous than the oldest known one4 ,nor1 again1 can any such reply be made to the fact that there are far more numerous orders and genera of mammalian remains in the tertiary formations than in the secondary formations4 ,did we wish merely to make out the best case1 we might dwell upon the opinion of ,dr4 ,carpenter1 who says that the general facts of ,palontology appear to sanction the belief1 that the same plan may be traced out in what may be called the general life of the globe1 as in the individual life of every one of the forms of organized being which now people it4 ,or we might quote1 as decisive1 the judgment of ,professor ,owen1 who holds that the earlier examples of each group of creatures severally departed less widely from archetypal generality than the later examples--were severally less unlike the fundamental form common to the group as a whole2 and thus constituted a less heterogeneous group of creatures4 ,but in deference to an authority for whom we have the highest respect1 who considers that the evidence at present obtained does not justify a verdict either way1 we are content to leave the question open4#b ,whether an advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous is or is not displayed in the biological history of the globe1 it is clearly enough displayed in the progress of the latest and most heterogeneous creature--,man4 ,it is true alike that1 during the period in which the ,earth has been peopled1 the human organism has grown more heterogeneous among the civilized divisions of the species2 and that the species1 as a whole1 has been growing more heterogeneous in virtue of the multiplication of races and the differentiation of these races from each other4 ,in proof of the first of these positions1 we may cite the fact that1 in the relative development of the limbs1 the civilized man departs more widely from the general type of the placental mammalia than do the lower human races4 ,while often possessing well-developed body and arms1 the ,australian has very small legs3 thus reminding us of the chimpanzee and the gorilla1 which present no great contrasts in size between the hind and fore limbs4 ,but in the ,european1 the greater length and massiveness of the legs have become marked--the fore and hind limbs are more heterogeneous4 ,again1 the greater ratio which the cranial bones bear to the facial bones illustrates the same truth4 ,among the vertebrata in general1 progress is marked by an increasing heterogeneity in the vertebral column1 and more especially in the segments constituting the skull3 the higher forms being distinguished by the relatively larger size of the bones which cover the brain1 and the relatively smaller size of those which form the jaws1 c4 ,now this characteristic1 which is stronger in ,man than in any other creature1 is stronger in the ,european than in the savage4 ,moreover1 judging from the greater extent and variety of faculty he exhibits1 we may infer that the civilized man has also a more complex or heterogeneous nervous system than the uncivilized man3 and1 indeed1 the fact is in part visible in the increased ratio which his cerebrum bears to the subjacent ganglia1 as well as in the wider departure from symmetry in its convolutions4 ,if further elucidation be needed1 we may find it in every nursery4 ,the infant ,european has sundry marked points of resemblance to the lower human races2 as in the flatness of the al of the nose1 the depression of its bridge1 the divergence and forward opening of the nostrils1 the form of the lips1 the absence of a frontal sinus1 the width between the eyes1 the smallness of the legs4 ,now1 as the developmental process by which these traits are turned into those of the adult ,european1 is a continuation of that change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous displayed during the previous evolution of the embryo1 which every anatomist will admit2 it follows that the parallel developmental process by which the like traits of the barbarous races have been turned into those of the civilized races1 has also been a continuation of the change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,the truth of the second position--that ,mankind1 as a whole1 have become more heterogeneous--is so obvious as scarcely to need illustration4 ,every work on ,ethnology1 by its divisions and subdivisions of races1 bears testimony to it4 ,even were we to admit the hypothesis that ,mankind originated from several separate stocks1 it would still remain true1 that as1 from each of these stocks1 there have sprung many now widely-different tribes1 which are proved by philological evidence to have had a common origin1 the race as a whole is far less homogeneous than it once was4 ,add to which1 that we have1 in the ,anglo-,americans1 an example of a new variety arising within these few generations2 and that1 if we may trust to the descriptions of observers1 we are likely soon to have another such example in ,australia4 ,on passing from ,humanity under its individual form1 to ,humanity as socially embodied1 we find the general law still more variously exemplified4 ,the change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous is displayed in the progress of civilization as a whole1 as well as in the progress of every nation2 and is still going on with increasing rapidity4 ,as we see in existing barbarous tribes1 society in its first and lowest form is a homogeneous aggregation of individuals having like powers and like functions3 the only marked difference of function being that which accompanies difference of sex4 ,every man is warrior1 hunter1 fisherman1 tool-maker1 builder2 every woman performs the same drudgeries4 ,very early1 however1 in the course of social evolution1 there arises an incipient differentiation between the governing and the governed4 ,some kind of chieftainship seems coeval with the first advance from the state of separate wandering families to that of a nomadic tribe4 ,the authority of the strongest or the most cunning makes itself felt among a body of savages as in a herd of animals1 or a posse of schoolboys4 ,at first1 however1 it is indefinite1 uncertain2 is shared by others of scarcely inferior power2 and is unaccompanied by any difference in occupation or style of living3 the first ruler kills his own game1 makes his own weapons1 builds his own hut1 and1 economically considered1 does not differ from others of his tribe4 ,gradually1 as the tribe progresses1 the contrast between the governing and the governed grows more decided4 ,supreme power becomes hereditary in one family2 the head of that family1 ceasing to provide for his own wants1 is served by others2 and he begins to assume the sole office of ruling4 ,at the same time there has been arising a co-ordinate species of government--that of ,religion4 ,as all ancient records and traditions prove1 the earliest rulers are regarded as divine personages4 ,the maxims and commands they uttered during their lives are held sacred after their deaths1 and are enforced by their divinely-descended successors2 who in their turns are promoted to the pantheon of the race1 here to be worshipped and propitiated along with their predecessors3 the most ancient of whom is the supreme god1 and the rest subordinate gods4 ,for a long time these connate forms of government--civil and religious--remain closely associated4 ,for many generations the king continues to be the chief priest1 and the priesthood to be members of the royal race4 ,for many ages religious law continues to include more or less of civil regulation1 and civil law to possess more or less of religious sanction2 and even among the most advanced nations these two controlling agencies are by no means completely separated from each other4 ,having a common root with these1 and gradually diverging from them1 we find yet another controlling agency--that of ,ceremonial usages4 ,all titles of honour are originally the names of the god-king2 afterwards of the god and the king2 still later of persons of high rank2 and finally come1 some of them1 to be used between man and man4 ,all forms of complimentary address were at first the expressions of submission from prisoners to their conqueror1 or from subjects to their ruler1 either human or divine--expressions which were afterwards used to propitiate subordinate authorities1 and slowly descended into ordinary intercourse4 ,all modes of salutation were once obeisances made before the monarch and used in worship of him after his death4 ,presently others of the god-descended race were similarly saluted2 and by degrees some of the salutations have become the due of all4#c ,thus1 no sooner does the originally-homogeneous social mass differentiate into the governed and the governing parts1 than this last exhibits an incipient differentiation into religious and secular--,church and ,state2 while at the same time there begins to be differentiated from both1 that less definite species of government which rules our daily intercourse--a species of government which1 as we may see in heralds' colleges1 in books of the peerage1 in masters of ceremonies1 is not without a certain embodiment of its own4 ,each of these is itself subject to successive differentiations4 ,in the course of ages1 there arises1 as among ourselves1 a highly complex political organization of monarch1 ministers1 lords and commons1 with their subordinate administrative departments1 courts of justice1 revenue offices1 c41 supplemented in the provinces by municipal governments1 county governments1 parish or union governments--all of them more or less elaborated4 ,by its side there grows up a highly complex religious organization1 with its various grades of officials1 from archbishops down to sextons1 its colleges1 convocations1 ecclesiastical courts1 c42 to all which must be added the ever-multiplying independent sects1 each with its general and local authorities4 ,and at the same time there is developed a highly complex aggregation of customs1 manners1 and temporary fashions1 enforced by society at large1 and serving to control those minor transactions between man and man which are not regulated by civil and religious law4 ,moreover1 it is to be observed that this increasing heterogeneity in the governmental appliances of each nation1 has been accompanied by an increasing heterogeneity in the assemblage of governmental appliances of different nations3 all nations being more or less unlike in their political systems and legislation1 in their creeds and religious institutions1 in their customs and ceremonial usages4 ,simultaneously there has been going on a second differentiation of a more familiar kind2 that1 namely1 by which the mass of the community has been segregated into distinct classes and orders of workers4 ,while the governing part has undergone the complex development above detailed1 the governed part has undergone an equally complex development1 which has resulted in that minute division of labour characterizing advanced nations4 ,it is needless to trace out this progress from its first stages1 up through the caste-divisions of the ,east and the incorporated guilds of ,europe1 to the elaborate producing and distributing organization existing among ourselves4 ,it has been an evolution which1 beginning with a tribe whose members severally perform the same actions each for himself1 ends with a civilized community whose members severally perform different actions for each other2 and an evolution which has transformed the solitary producer of any one commodity into a combination of producers who1 united under a master1 take separate parts in the manufacture of such commodity4 ,but there are yet other and higher phases of this advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous in the industrial organization of society4 ,long after considerable progress has been made in the division of labour among different classes of workers1 there is still little or no division of labour among the widely separated parts of the community3 the nation continues comparatively homogeneous in the respect that in each district the same occupations are pursued4 ,but when roads and other means of transit become numerous and good1 the different districts begin to assume different functions1 and to become mutually dependent4 ,the calico manufacture locates itself in this county1 the woollen-cloth manufacture in that2 silks are produced here1 lace there2 stockings in one place1 shoes in another2 pottery1 hardware1 cutlery1 come to have their special towns2 and ultimately every locality becomes more or less distinguished from the rest by the leading occupation carried on in it4 ,this subdivision of functions shows itself not only among the different parts of the same nation1 but among different nations4 ,that exchange of commodities which free-trade is increasing so largely1 will ultimately have the effect of specializing1 in a greater or less degree1 the industry of each people4 ,so that1 beginning with a barbarous tribe1 almost if not quite homogeneous in the functions of its members1 the progress has been1 and still is1 towards an economic aggregation of the whole human race2 growing ever more heterogeneous in respect of the separate functions assumed by separate nations1 the separate functions assumed by the local sections of each nation1 the separate functions assumed by the many kinds of makers and traders in each town1 and the separate functions assumed by the workers united in producing each commodity4 ,the law thus clearly exemplified in the evolution of the social organism1 is exemplified with equal clearness in the evolution of all products of human thought and action2 whether concrete or abstract1 real or ideal4 ,let us take ,language as our first illustration4 ,the lowest form of language is the exclamation1 by which an entire idea is vaguely conveyed through a single sound1 as among the lower animals4 ,that human language ever consisted solely of exclamations1 and so was strictly homogeneous in respect of its parts of speech1 we have no evidence4 ,but that language can be traced down to a form in which nouns and verbs are its only elements1 is an established fact4 ,in the gradual multiplication of parts of speech out of these primary ones--in the differentiation of verbs into active and passive1 of nouns into abstract and concrete--in the rise of distinctions of mood1 tense1 person1 of number and case--in the formation of auxiliary verbs1 of adjectives1 adverbs1 pronouns1 prepositions1 articles--in the divergence of those orders1 genera1 species1 and varieties of parts of speech by which civilized races express minute modifications of meaning--we see a change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,another aspect under which we may trace the development of language is the divergence of words having common origins4 ,philology early disclosed the truth that in all languages words may be grouped into families1 the members of each of which are allied by their derivation4 ,names springing from a primitive root1 themselves become the parents of other names still further modified4 ,and by the aid of those systematic modes which presently arise1 of making derivatives and forming compound terms1 there is finally developed a tribe of words so heterogeneous in sound and meaning1 that to the uninitiated it seems incredible they should be nearly related4 ,meanwhile from other roots there are being evolved other such tribes1 until there results a language of some sixty thousand or more unlike words1 signifying as many unlike objects1 qualities1 acts4 ,yet another way in which language in general advances from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous1 is in the multiplication of languages4 ,whether all languages have grown from one stock1 or whether1 as some philologists think1 they have grown from two or more stocks1 it is clear that since large groups of languages1 as the ,indo-,european1 are of one parentage1 they have become distinct through a process of continuous divergence4 ,the same diffusion over the ,earth's surface which has led to differentiations of race1 has simultaneously led to differentiations of speech3 a truth which we see further illustrated in each nation by the distinct dialects found in separate districts4 ,thus the progress of ,language conforms to the general law1 alike in the evolution of languages1 in the evolution of families of words1 and in the evolution of parts of speech4 ,on passing from spoken to written language1 we come upon several classes of facts1 having similar implications4 ,written language is connate with ,painting and ,sculpture2 and at first all three are appendages of ,architecture1 and have a direct connection with the primary form of all ,government--the theocratic4 ,merely noting by the way the fact that sundry wild races1 as for example the ,australians and the tribes of ,south ,africa1 are given to depicting personages and events upon the walls of caves1 which are probably regarded as sacred places1 let us pass to the case of the ,egyptians4 ,among them1 as also among the ,assyrians1 we find mural paintings used to decorate the temple of the god and the palace of the king 7which were1 indeed1 originally identical72 and as such they were governmental appliances in the same sense as state-pageants and religious feasts were4 ,they were governmental appliances in another way3 representing as they did the worship of the god1 the triumphs of the god-king1 the submission of his subjects1 and the punishment of the rebellious4 ,further1 they were governmental1 as being the products of an art reverenced by the people as a sacred mystery4 ,from the habitual use of this pictorial representation there grew up the but-slightly-modified practice of picture-writing--a practice which was found still extant among ,north ,american peoples at the time they were discovered4 ,by abbreviations analogous to those still going on in our own written language1 the most frequently-recurring of these pictured figures were successively simplified2 and ultimately there grew up a system of symbols1 most of which had but distant resemblances to the things for which they stood4 ,the inference that the hieroglyphics of the ,egyptians were thus produced1 is confirmed by the fact that the picture-writing of the ,mexicans was found to have given birth to a like family of ideographic forms2 and among them1 as among the ,egyptians1 these had been partially differentiated into the kuriological or imitative1 and the tropical or symbolic2 which were1 however1 used together in the same record4 ,in ,egypt1 written language underwent a further differentiation1 whence resulted the hieratic and the epistolographic or enchorial2 both of which are derived from the original hieroglyphic4 ,at the same time we find that for the expression of proper names1 which could not be otherwise conveyed1 signs having phonetic values were employed2 and though it is alleged that the ,egyptians never achieved complete alphabetic writing1 yet it can scarcely be doubted that these phonetic symbols1 occasionally used in aid of their ideographic ones1 were the germs of an alphabetic system4 ,once having become separate from hieroglyphics1 alphabetic writing itself underwent numerous differentiations--multiplied alphabets were produced2 between most of which1 however1 more or less connection can still be traced4 ,and in each civilized nation there has now grown up1 for the representation of one set of sounds1 several sets of written signs used for distinct purposes4 ,finally1 from writing diverged printing2 which1 uniform in kind as it was at first1 has since become multiform4 ,while written language was passing through its first stages of development1 the mural decoration which contained its root was being differentiated into ,painting and ,sculpture4 ,the gods1 kings1 men1 and animals represented1 were originally marked by indented outlines and coloured4 ,in most cases these outlines were of such depth1 and the object they circumscribed so far rounded and marked out in its leading parts1 as to form a species of work intermediate between intaglio and bas-relief4 ,in other cases we see an advance upon this3 the raised spaces between the figures being chiselled off1 and the figures themselves appropriately tinted1 a painted bas-relief was produced4 ,the restored ,assyrian architecture at ,sydenham exhibits this style of art carried to greater perfection--the persons and things represented1 though still barbarously coloured1 are carved out with more truth and in greater detail3 and in the winged lions and bulls used for the angles of gateways1 we may see a considerable advance towards a completely sculptured figure2 which1 nevertheless1 is still coloured1 and still forms part of the building4 ,but while in ,assyria the production of a statue proper seems to have been little1 if at all1 attempted1 we may trace in ,egyptian art the gradual separation of the sculptured figure from the wall4 ,a walk through the collection in the ,british ,museum shows this2 while at the same time it affords an opportunity of observing the traces which the independent statues bear of their derivation from bas-relief3 seeing that nearly all of them not only display that fusion of the legs with one another and of the arms with the body which is characteristic of bas-relief1 but have the back united from head to foot with a block which stands in place of the original wall4 ,greece repeated the leading stages of this progress4 ,on the friezes of ,greek ,temples1 were coloured bas-reliefs representing sacrifices1 battles1 processions1 games--all in some sort religious4 ,the pediments contained painted sculptures more or less united with the tympanum1 and having for subjects the triumphs of gods or heroes4 ,even statues definitely separated from buildings were coloured2 and only in the later periods of ,greek civilization does the differentiation of ,sculpture from ,painting appear to have become complete4 ,in ,christian art we may trace a parallel re-genesis4 ,all early works of art throughout ,europe were religious in subject--represented ,christs1 crucifixions1 virgins1 holy families1 apostles1 saints4 ,they formed integral parts of church architecture1 and were among the means of exciting worship2 as in ,roman ,catholic countries they still are4 ,moreover1 the sculptured figures of ,christ on the cross1 of virgins1 of saints1 were coloured2 and it needs but to call to mind the painted madonnas still abundant in continental churches and highways1 to perceive the significant fact that ,painting and ,sculpture continue in closest connection with each other where they continue in closest connection with their parent4 ,even when ,christian sculpture became differentiated from painting1 it was still religious and governmental in its subjects--was used for tombs in churches and statues of kings2 while1 at the same time1 painting1 where not purely ecclesiastical1 was applied to the decoration of palaces1 and besides representing royal personages1 was mostly devoted to sacred legends4 ,only in recent times have painting and sculpture become quite separate and mainly secular4 ,only within these few centuries has ,painting been divided into historical1 landscape1 marine1 architectural1 genre1 animal1 still-life1 c42 and ,sculpture grown heterogeneous in respect of the variety of real and ideal subjects with which it occupies itself4 ,strange as it seems then1 we find that all forms of written language1 of ,painting1 and of ,sculpture1 have a common root in the politico-religious decorations of ancient temples and palaces4 ,little resemblance as they now have1 the landscape that hangs against the wall1 and the copy of the ,times lying on the table1 are remotely akin4 ,the brazen face of the knocker which the postman has just lifted1 is related not only to the woodcuts of the ,illustrated ,london ,news which he is delivering1 but to the characters of the billet-doux which accompanies it4 ,between the painted window1 the prayer-book on which its light falls1 and the adjacent monument1 there is consanguinity4 ,the effigies on our coins1 the signs over shops1 the coat of arms outside the carriage panel1 and the placards inside the omnibus1 are1 in common with dolls and paper-hangings1 lineally descended from the rude sculpture-paintings in which ancient peoples represented the triumphs and worship of their god-kings4 ,perhaps no example can be given which more vividly illustrates the multiplicity and heterogeneity of the products that in course of time may arise by successive differentiations from a common stock4 ,before passing to other classes of facts1 it should be observed that the evolution of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous is displayed not only in the separation of ,painting and ,sculpture from ,architecture and from each other1 and in the greater variety of subjects they embody1 but it is further shown in the structure of each work4 ,a modern picture or statue is of far more heterogeneous nature than an ancient one4 ,an ,egyptian sculpture-fresco usually represents all its figures as at the same distance from the eye2 and so is less heterogeneous than a painting that represents them as at various distances from the eye4 ,it exhibits all objects as exposed to the same degree of light2 and so is less heterogeneous than a painting which exhibits its different objects and different parts of each object as in different degrees of light4 ,it uses chiefly the primary colours1 and these in their full intensities2 and so is less heterogeneous than a painting which1 introducing the primary colours but sparingly1 employs numerous intermediate tints1 each of heterogeneous composition1 and differing from the rest not only in quality but in strength4 ,moreover1 we see in these early works great uniformity of conception4 ,the same arrangement of figures is perpetually reproduced--the same actions1 attitudes1 faces1 dresses4 ,in ,egypt the modes of representation were so fixed that it was sacrilege to introduce a novelty4 ,the ,assyrian bas-reliefs display parallel characters4 ,deities1 kings1 attendants1 winged-figures and animals1 are time after time depicted in like positions1 holding like implements1 doing like things1 and with like expression or non-expression of face4 ,if a palm-grove is introduced1 all the trees are of the same height1 have the same number of leaves1 and are equidistant4 ,when water is imitated1 each wave is a counterpart of the rest2 and the fish1 almost always of one kind1 are evenly distributed over the surface4 ,the beards of the kings1 the gods1 and the winged-figures1 are everywhere similar2 as are the manes of the lions1 and equally so those of the horses4 ,hair is represented throughout by one form of curl4 ,the king's beard is quite architecturally built up of compound tiers of uniform curls1 alternating with twisted tiers placed in a transverse direction1 and arranged with perfect regularity2 and the terminal tufts of the bulls' tails are represented in exactly the same manner4 ,without tracing out analogous facts in early ,christian art1 in which1 though less striking1 they are still visible1 the advance in heterogeneity will be sufficiently manifest on remembering that in the pictures of our own day the composition is endlessly varied2 the attitudes1 faces1 expressions1 unlike2 the subordinate objects different in sizes1 forms1 textures2 and more or less of contrast even in the smallest details4 ,or1 if we compare an ,egyptian statue1 seated bolt upright on a block1 with hands on knees1 fingers parallel1 eyes looking straight forward1 and the two sides perfectly symmetrical in every particular1 with a statue of the advanced ,greek school or the modern school1 which is asymmetrical in respect of the attitude of the head1 the body1 the limbs1 the arrangement of the hair1 dress1 appendages1 and in its relations to neighbouring objects1 we shall see the change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous clearly manifested4 ,in the co-ordinate origin and gradual differentiation of ,poetry1 ,music1 and ,dancing1 we have another series of illustrations4 ,rhythm in words1 rhythm in sounds1 and rhythm in motions1 were in the beginning parts of the same thing1 and have only in process of time become separate things4 ,among existing barbarous tribes we find them still united4 ,the dances of savages are accompanied by some kind of monotonous chant1 the clapping of hands1 the striking of rude instruments3 there are measured movements1 measured words1 and measured tones4 ,the early records of historic races similarly show these three forms of metrical action united in religious festivals4 ,in the ,hebrew writings we read that the triumphal ode composed by ,moses on the defeat of the ,egyptians1 was sung to an accompaniment of dancing and timbrels4 ,the ,israelites danced and sung at the inauguration of the golden calf4 ,and as it is generally agreed that this representation of the ,deity was borrowed from the mysteries of ,apis1 it is probable that the dancing was copied from that of the ,egyptians on those occasions4 ,again1 in ,greece the like relation is everywhere seen3 the original type being there1 as probably in other cases1 a simultaneous chanting and mimetic representation of the life and adventures of the hero or the god4 ,the ,spartan dances were accompanied by hymns and songs2 and in general the ,greeks had no festivals or religious assemblies but what were accompanied with songs and dances--both of them being forms of worship used before altars4 ,among the ,romans1 too1 there were sacred dances3 the ,salian and ,lupercalian being named as of that kind4 ,and even in ,christian countries1 as at ,limoges1 in comparatively recent times1 the people have danced in the choir in honour of a saint4 ,the incipient separation of these once-united arts from each other and from religion1 was early visible in ,greece4 ,probably diverging from dances partly religious1 partly warlike1 as the ,corybantian1 came the war-dances proper1 of which there were various kinds4 ,meanwhile ,music and ,poetry1 though still united1 came to have an existence separate from ,dancing4 ,the primitive ,greek poems1 religious in subject1 were not recited but chanted2 and though at first the chant of the poet was accompanied by the dance of the chorus1 it ultimately grew into independence4 ,later still1 when the poem had been differentiated into epic and lyric--when it became the custom to sing the lyric and recite the epic--poetry proper was born4 ,as during the same period musical instruments were being multiplied1 we may presume that music came to have an existence apart from words4 ,and both of them were beginning to assume other forms besides the religious4 ,facts having like implications might be cited from the histories of later times and peoples2 as the practices of our own early minstrels1 who sang to the harp heroic narratives versified by themselves to music of their own composition3 thus uniting the now separate offices of poet1 composer1 vocalist1 and instrumentalist4 ,but1 without further illustration1 the common origin and gradual differentiation of ,dancing1 ,poetry1 and ,music will be sufficiently manifest4 ,the advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous is displayed not only in the separation of these arts from each other and from religion1 but also in the multiplied differentiations which each of them afterwards undergoes4 ,not to dwell upon the numberless kinds of dancing that have1 in course of time1 come into use3 and not to occupy space in detailing the progress of poetry1 as seen in the development of the various forms of metre1 of rhyme1 and of general organization2 let us confine our attention to music as a type of the group4 ,as implied by the customs of still extant barbarous races1 the first musical instruments were1 without doubt1 percussive--sticks1 calabashes1 tom-toms--and were used simply to mark the time of the dance2 and in this constant repetition of the same sound1 we see music in its most homogeneous form4 ,the ,egyptians had a lyre with three strings4 ,the early lyre of the ,greeks had four1 constituting their tetrachord4 ,in course of some centuries lyres of seven and eight strings were employed2 and1 by the expiration of a thousand years1 they had advanced to their great system of the double octave4 ,through all which changes there of course arose a greater heterogeneity of melody4 ,simultaneously there came into use the different modes--,dorian1 ,ionian1 ,phrygian1 olian1 and ,lydian--answering to our keys2 and of these there were ultimately fifteen4 ,as yet1 however1 there was but little heterogeneity in the time of their music4 ,instrumental music being at first merely the accompaniment of vocal music1 and vocal music being subordinated to words1--the singer being also the poet1 chanting his own compositions and making the lengths of his notes agree with the feet of his verses1--there resulted a tiresome uniformity of measure1 which1 as ,dr4 ,burney says1 no resources of melody could disguise4 ,lacking the complex rhythm obtained by our equal bars and unequal notes1 the only rhythm was that produced by the quantity of the syllables1 and was of necessity comparatively monotonous4 ,and further1 it maybe observed that the chant thus resulting1 being like recitative1 was much less clearly differentiated from ordinary speech than is our modern song4 ,nevertheless1 in virtue of the extended range of notes in use1 the variety of modes1 the occasional variations of time consequent on changes of metre1 and the multiplication of instruments1 music had1 towards the close of ,greek civilization1 attained to considerable heterogeneity--not indeed as compared with our music1 but as compared with that which preceded it4 ,still1 there existed nothing but melody3 harmony was unknown4 ,it was not until ,christian church-music had reached some development1 that music in parts was evolved2 and then it came into existence through a very unobtrusive differentiation4 ,difficult as it may be to conceive a priori how the advance from melody to harmony could take place without a sudden leap1 it is none the less true that it did so4 ,the circumstance which prepared the way for it was the employment of two choirs singing alternately the same air4 ,afterwards it became the practice--very possibly first suggested by a mistake--for the second choir to commence before the first had ceased2 thus producing a fugue4 ,with the simple airs then in use1 a partially-harmonious fugue might not improbably thus result3 and a very partially-harmonious fugue satisfied the ears of that age1 as we know from still preserved examples4 ,the idea having once been given1 the composing of airs productive of fugal harmony would naturally grow up1 as in some way it did grow up1 out of this alternate choir-singing4 ,and from the fugue to concerted music of two1 three1 four1 and more parts1 the transition was easy4 ,without pointing out in detail the increasing complexity that resulted from introducing notes of various lengths1 from the multiplication of keys1 from the use of accidentals1 from varieties of time1 and so forth1 it needs but to contrast music as it is1 with music as it was1 to see how immense is the increase of heterogeneity4 ,we see this if1 looking at music in its ensemble1 we enumerate its many different genera and species--if we consider the divisions into vocal1 instrumental1 and mixed2 and their subdivisions into music for different voices and different instruments--if we observe the many forms of sacred music1 from the simple hymn1 the chant1 the canon1 motet1 anthem1 c41 up to the oratorio2 and the still more numerous forms of secular music1 from the ballad up to the serenata1 from the instrumental solo up to the symphony4 ,again1 the same truth is seen on comparing any one sample of aboriginal music with a sample of modern music--even an ordinary song for the piano2 which we find to be relatively very heterogeneous1 not only in respect of the variety in the pitches and in the lengths of the notes1 the number of different notes sounding at the same instant in company with the voice1 and the variations of strength with which they are sounded and sung1 but in respect of the changes of key1 the changes of time1 the changes of timbre of the voice1 and the many other modifications of expression4 ,while between the old monotonous dance-chant and a grand opera of our own day1 with its endless orchestral complexities and vocal combinations1 the contrast in heterogeneity is so extreme that it seems scarcely credible that the one should have been the ancestor of the other4 ,were they needed1 many further illustrations might be cited4 ,going back to the early time when the deeds of the god-king were recorded in picture-writings on the walls of temples and palaces1 and so constituted a rude literature1 we might trace the development of ,literature through phases in which1 as in the ,hebrew ,scriptures1 it presents in one work theology1 cosmogony1 history1 biography1 law1 ethics1 poetry2 down to its present heterogeneous development1 in which its separated divisions and subdivisions are so numerous and varied as to defy complete classification4 ,or we might trace out the evolution of ,science2 beginning with the era in which it was not yet differentiated from ,art1 and was1 in union with ,art1 the handmaid of ,religion2 passing through the era in which the sciences were so few and rudimentary1 as to be simultaneously cultivated by the same men2 and ending with the era in which the genera and species are so numerous that few can enumerate them1 and no one can adequately grasp even one genus4 ,or we might do the like with ,architecture1 with the ,drama1 with ,dress4 ,but doubtless the reader is already weary of illustrations2 and our promise has been amply fulfilled4 ,abundant proof has been given that the law of organic development formulated by von ,baer1 is the law of all development4 ,the advance from the simple to the complex1 through a process of successive differentiations1 is seen alike in the earliest changes of the ,universe to which we can reason our way back1 and in the earliest changes which we can inductively establish2 it is seen in the geologic and climatic evolution of the ,earth2 it is seen in the unfolding of every single organism on its surface1 and in the multiplication of kinds of organisms2 it is seen in the evolution of ,humanity1 whether contemplated in the civilized individual1 or in the aggregate of races2 it is seen in the evolution of ,society in respect alike of its political1 its religious1 and its economical organization2 and it is seen in the evolution of all those endless concrete and abstract products of human activity which constitute the environment of our daily life4 ,from the remotest past which ,science can fathom1 up to the novelties of yesterday1 that in which progress essentially consists1 is the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and now1 must not this uniformity of procedure be a consequence of some fundamental necessity8 ,may we not rationally seek for some all-pervading principle which determines this all-pervading process of things8 ,does not the universality of the law imply a universal cause8 ,that we can comprehend such cause1 noumenally considered1 is not to be supposed4 ,to do this would be to solve that ultimate mystery which must ever transcend human intelligence4 ,but it still may be possible for us to reduce the law of all progress1 above set forth1 from the condition of an empirical generalization1 to the condition of a rational generalization4 ,just as it was possible to interpret ,kepler's laws as necessary consequences of the law of gravitation2 so it may be possible to interpret this law of progress1 in its multiform manifestations1 as the necessary consequence of some similarly universal principle4 ,as gravitation was assignable as the cause of each of the groups of phenomena which ,kepler generalized2 so may some equally simple attribute of things be assignable as the cause of each of the groups of phenomena generalized in the foregoing pages4 ,we may be able to affiliate all these varied evolutions of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 upon certain facts of immediate experience1 which1 in virtue of endless repetition1 we regard as necessary4 ,the probability of a common cause1 and the possibility of formulating it1 being granted1 it will be well1 first1 to ask what must be the general characteristics of such cause1 and in what direction we ought to look for it4 ,we can with certainty predict that it has a high degree of abstractness2 seeing that it is common to such infinitely-varied phenomena4 ,we need not expect to see in it an obvious solution of this or that form of progress2 because it is equally concerned with forms of progress bearing little apparent resemblance to them3 its association with multiform orders of facts1 involves its dissociation from any particular order of facts4 ,being that which determines progress of every kind--astronomic1 geologic1 organic1 ethnologic1 social1 economic1 artistic1 c4--it must be involved with some fundamental trait displayed in common by these2 and must be expressible in terms of this fundamental trait4 ,the only obvious respect in which all kinds of progress are alike1 is1 that they are modes of change2 and hence1 in some characteristic of changes in general1 the desired solution will probably be found4 ,we may suspect a priori that in some universal law of change lies the explanation of this universal transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous4 ,thus much premised1 we pass at once to the statement of the law1 which is this3--,every active force produces more than one change--every cause produces more than one effect4 ,to make this proposition comprehensible1 a few examples must be given4 ,when one body strikes another1 that which we usually regard as the effect1 is a change of position or motion in one or both bodies4 ,but a moment's thought shows us that this is a very incomplete view of the matter4 ,besides the visible mechanical result1 sound is produced2 or1 to speak accurately1 a vibration in one or both bodies1 which is communicated to the surrounding air2 and under some circumstances we call this the effect4 ,moreover1 the air has not only been made to undulate1 but has had currents caused in it by the transit of the bodies4 ,further1 there is a disarrangement of the particles of the two bodies in the neighbourhood of their point of collision2 amounting1 in some cases1 to a visible condensation4 ,yet more1 this condensation is accompanied by the disengagement of heat4 ,in some cases a spark--that is1 light--results1 from the incandescence of a portion struck off2 and sometimes this incandescence is associated with chemical combination4 ,thus1 by the mechanical force expended in the collision1 at least five1 and often more1 different kinds of changes have been produced4 ,take1 again1 the lighting of a candle4 ,primarily this is a chemical change consequent on a rise of temperature4 ,the process of combination having once been started by extraneous heat1 there is a continued formation of carbonic acid1 water1 c4--in itself a result more complex than the extraneous heat that first caused it4 ,but accompanying this process of combination there is a production of heat2 there is a production of light2 there is an ascending column of hot gases generated2 there are inflowing currents set going in the surrounding air4 ,moreover1 the complicating of effects does not end here3 each of the several changes produced becomes the parent of further changes4 ,the carbonic acid given off will by and by combine with some base2 or under the influence of sunshine give up its carbon to the leaf of a plant4 ,the water will modify the hygrometric state of the air around2 or1 if the current of hot gases containing it comes against a cold body1 will be condensed3 altering the temperature of the surface it covers4 ,the heat given out melts the subjacent tallow1 and expands whatever it warms4 ,the light1 falling on various substances1 calls forth from them reactions by which its composition is modified2 and so divers colours are produced4 ,similarly even with these secondary actions1 which may be traced out into ever-multiplying ramifications1 until they become too minute to be appreciated4 ,and thus it is with all changes whatever4 ,no case can be named in which an active force does not evolve forces of several kinds1 and each of these1 other groups of forces4 ,universally the effect is more complex than the cause4 ,doubtless the reader already foresees the course of our argument4 ,this multiplication of effects1 which is displayed in every event of to-day1 has been going on from the beginning2 and is true of the grandest phenomena of the universe as of the most insignificant4 ,from the law that every active force produces more than one change1 it is an inevitable corollary that during the past there has been an ever-growing complication of things4 ,throughout creation there must have gone on1 and must still go on1 a never-ceasing transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous4 ,let us trace this truth in detail4 ,without committing ourselves to it as more than a speculation1 though a highly probable one1 let us again commence with the evolution of the ,solar ,system out of a nebulous medium4 ,the hypothesis is that from the mutual attraction of the molecules of a diffused mass whose form is unsymmetrical1 there results not only condensation but rotation4 ,while the condensation and the rate of rotation go on increasing1 the approach of the molecules is necessarily accompanied by an increasing temperature4 ,as the temperature rises1 light begins to be evolved2 and ultimately there results a revolving sphere of fluid matter radiating intense heat and light--a sun4 ,there are reasons for believing that1 in consequence of the higher tangential velocity originally possessed by the outer parts of the condensing nebulous mass1 there will be occasional detachments of rotating rings2 and that1 from the breaking up of these nebulous rings1 there will arise masses which in the course of their condensation repeat the actions of the parent mass1 and so produce planets and their satellites--an inference strongly supported by the still extant rings of ,saturn4 ,should it hereafter be satisfactorily shown that planets and satellites were thus generated1 a striking illustration will be afforded of the highly heterogeneous effects produced by the primary homogeneous cause2 but it will serve our present purpose to point to the fact that from the mutual attraction of the particles of an irregular nebulous mass there result condensation1 rotation1 heat1 and light4 ,it follows as a corollary from the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 that the ,earth must once have been incandescent2 and whether the ,nebular ,hypothesis be true or not1 this original incandescence of the ,earth is now inductively established--or1 if not established1 at least rendered so highly probable that it is an accepted geological doctrine4 ,let us look first at the astronomical attributes of this once molten globe4 ,from its rotation there result the oblateness of its form1 the alternations of day and night1 and 7under the influence of the moon and in a smaller degree the sun7 the tides1 aqueous and atmospheric4 ,from the inclination of its axis1 there result the many differences of the seasons1 both simultaneous and successive1 that pervade its surface1 and from the same cause joined with the action of the moon on the equatorial protuberance there results the precession of the equinoxes4 ,thus the multiplication of effects is obvious4 ,several of the differentiations due to the gradual cooling of the ,earth have been already noticed--as the formation of a crust1 the solidification of sublimed elements1 the precipitation of water1 c41--and we here again refer to them merely to point out that they are simultaneous effects of the one cause1 diminishing heat4 ,let us now1 however1 observe the multiplied changes afterwards arising from the continuance of this one cause4 ,the cooling of the ,earth involves its contraction4 ,hence the solid crust first formed is presently too large for the shrinking nucleus2 and as it cannot support itself1 inevitably follows the nucleus4 ,but a spheroidal envelope cannot sink down into contact with a smaller internal spheroid1 without disruption3 it must run into wrinkles as the rind of an apple does when the bulk of its interior decreases from evaporation4 ,as the cooling progresses and the envelope thickens1 the ridges consequent on these contractions will become greater1 rising ultimately into hills and mountains2 and the later systems of mountains thus produced will not only be higher1 as we find them to be1 but will be longer1 as we also find them to be4 ,thus1 leaving out of view other modifying forces1 we see what immense heterogeneity of surface has arisen from the one cause1 loss of heat--a heterogeneity which the telescope shows us to be paralleled on the face of ,mars1 and which in the moon too1 where aqueous and atmospheric agencies have been absent1 it reveals under a somewhat different form4 ,but we have yet to notice another kind of heterogeneity of surface similarly and simultaneously caused4 ,while the ,earth's crust was still thin1 the ridges produced by its contraction must not only have been small1 but the spaces between these ridges must have rested with great evenness upon the subjacent liquid spheroid2 and the water in those arctic and antarctic regions in which it first condensed1 must have been evenly distributed4 ,but as fast as the crust thickened and gained corresponding strength1 the lines of fracture from time to time caused in it1 must have occurred at greater distances apart2 the intermediate surfaces must have followed the contracting nucleus with less uniformity2 and there must have resulted larger areas of land and water4 ,if any one1 after wrapping up an orange in tissue paper1 and observing not only how small are the wrinkles1 but how evenly the intervening spaces lie upon the surface of the orange1 will then wrap it up in thick cartridge-paper1 and note both the greater height of the ridges and the larger spaces throughout which the paper does not touch the orange1 he will realize the fact that1 as the ,earth's solid envelope grew thicker1 the areas of elevation and depression increased4 ,in place of islands homogeneously dispersed amid an all-embracing sea1 there must have gradually arisen heterogeneous arrangements of continent and ocean4 ,once more1 this double change in the extent and in the elevation of the lands1 involved yet another species of heterogeneity--that of coast-line4 ,a tolerably even surface raised out of the ocean must have a simple1 regular sea-margin2 but a surface varied by table-lands and intersected by mountain-chains must1 when raised out of the ocean1 have an outline extremely irregular both in its leading features and in its details4 ,thus1 multitudinous geological and geographical results are slowly brought about by this one cause--the contraction of the ,earth4 ,when we pass from the agency termed igneous1 to aqueous and atmospheric agencies1 we see the like ever-growing complications of effects4 ,the denuding actions of air and water1 joined with those of changing temperature1 have1 from the beginning1 been modifying every exposed surface4 ,oxidation1 heat1 wind1 frost1 rain1 glaciers1 rivers1 tides1 waves1 have been unceasingly producing disintegration2 varying in kind and amount according to local circumstances4 ,acting upon a tract of granite1 they here work scarcely an appreciable effect2 there cause exfoliations of the surface1 and a resulting heap of dbris and boulders2 and elsewhere1 after decomposing the feldspar into a white clay1 carry away this and the accompanying quartz and mica1 and deposit them in separate beds1 fluviatile and marine4 ,when the exposed land consists of several unlike kinds of sedimentary strata1 or igneous rocks1 or both1 denudation produces changes proportionably more heterogeneous4 ,the formations being disintegrable in different degrees1 there follows an increased irregularity of surface4 ,the areas drained by different rivers being differently constituted1 these rivers carry down to the sea different combinations of ingredients2 and so sundry new strata of unlike compositions are formed4 ,and here we may see very simply illustrated1 the truth1 which we shall presently have to trace out in more involved cases1 that in proportion to the heterogeneity of the object or objects on which any force expends itself1 is the heterogeneity of the effects4 ,a continent of complex structure1 exposing many strata irregularly distributed1 raised to various levels1 tilted up at all angles1 will1 under the same denuding agencies1 give origin to innumerable and involved results3 each district must be differently modified2 each river must carry down a different kind of detritus2 each deposit must be differently distributed by the entangled currents1 tidal and other1 which wash the contorted shores2 and this multiplication of results must manifestly be greatest where the complexity of surface is greatest4 ,here we might show how the general truth1 that every active force produces more than one change1 is again exemplified in the highly-involved flow of the tides1 in the ocean currents1 in the winds1 in the distribution of rain1 in the distribution of heat1 and so forth4 ,but not to dwell upon these1 let us1 for the fuller elucidation of this truth in relation to the inorganic world1 consider what would be the consequences of some extensive cosmical catastrophe--say the subsidence of ,central ,america4 ,the immediate results of the disturbance would themselves be sufficiently complex4 ,besides the numberless dislocations of strata1 the ejections of igneous matter1 the propagation of earthquake vibrations thousands of miles around1 the loud explosions1 and the escape of gases2 there would be the rush of the ,atlantic and ,pacific ,oceans to fill the vacant space1 the subsequent recoil of enormous waves1 which would traverse both these oceans and produce myriads of changes along their shores1 the corresponding atmospheric waves complicated by the currents surrounding each volcanic vent1 and the electrical discharges with which such disturbances are accompanied4 ,but these temporary effects would be insignificant compared with the permanent ones4 ,the currents of the ,atlantic and ,pacific would be altered in their directions and amounts4 ,the distribution of heat achieved by those ocean currents would be different from what it is4 ,the arrangement of the isothermal lines1 not only on neighbouring continents1 but even throughout ,europe1 would be changed4 ,the tides would flow differently from what they do now4 ,there would be more or less modification of the winds in their periods1 strengths1 directions1 qualities4 ,rain would fall scarcely anywhere at the same times and in the same quantities as at present4 ,in short1 the meteorological conditions thousands of miles off1 on all sides1 would be more or less revolutionized4 ,thus1 without taking into account the infinitude of modifications which these changes would produce upon the flora and fauna1 both of land and sea1 the reader will perceive the immense heterogeneity of the results wrought out by one force1 when that force expends itself upon a previously complicated area2 and he will draw the corollary that from the beginning the complication has advanced at an increasing rate4 ,before going on to show how organic progress also depends on the law that every force produces more than one change1 we have to notice the manifestation of this law in yet another species of inorganic progress--namely1 chemical4 ,the same general causes that have wrought out the heterogeneity of the ,earth1 physically considered1 have simultaneously wrought out its chemical heterogeneity4 ,there is every reason to believe that at an extreme heat the elements cannot combine4 ,even under such heat as can be artificially produced1 some very strong affinities yield1 as1 for instance1 that of oxygen for hydrogen2 and the great majority of chemical compounds are decomposed at much lower temperatures4 ,but without insisting on the highly probable inference1 that when the ,earth was in its first state of incandescence there were no chemical combinations at all1 it will suffice for our purpose to point to the unquestionable fact that the compounds which can exist at the highest temperatures1 and which must1 therefore1 have been the first that were formed as the ,earth cooled1 are those of the simplest constitutions4 ,the protoxides--including under that head the alkalies1 earths1 c4--are1 as a class1 the most stable compounds we know3 most of them resisting decomposition by any heat we can generate4 ,these are combinations of the simplest order--are but one degree less homogeneous than the elements themselves4 ,more heterogeneous1 less stable1 and therefore later in the ,earth's history1 are the deutoxides1 tritoxides1 peroxides1 c42 in which two1 three1 four1 or more atoms of oxygen are united with one atom of metal or other element4 ,higher than these in heterogeneity are the hydrates2 in which an oxide of hydrogen1 united with an oxide of some other element1 forms a substance whose atoms severally contain at least four ultimate atoms of three different kinds4 ,yet more heterogeneous and less stable still are the salts2 which present us with molecules each made up of five1 six1 seven1 eight1 ten1 twelve1 or more atoms1 of three1 if not more1 kinds4 ,then there are the hydrated salts1 of a yet greater heterogeneity1 which undergo partial decomposition at much lower temperatures4 ,after them come the further complicated supersalts and double salts1 having a stability again decreased2 and so throughout4 ,without entering into qualifications for which space fails1 we believe no chemist will deny it to be a general law of these inorganic combinations that1 other things equal1 the stability decreases as the complexity increases4 ,when we pass to the compounds of organic chemistry1 we find this general law still further exemplified3 we find much greater complexity and much less stability4 ,a molecule of albumen1 for instance1 consists of #dhb ultimate atoms of five different kinds4 ,fibrine1 still more intricate in constitution1 contains in each molecule1 #bih atoms of carbon1 #di of nitrogen1 #b of sulphur1 #bbh of hydrogen1 and #ib of oxygen--in all1 #ffi atoms2 or1 more strictly speaking1 equivalents4 ,and these two substances are so unstable as to decompose at quite ordinary temperatures2 as that to which the outside of a joint of roast meat is exposed4 ,thus it is manifest that the present chemical heterogeneity of the ,earth's surface has arisen by degrees1 as the decrease of heat has permitted2 and that it has shown itself in three forms--first1 in the multiplication of chemical compounds2 second1 in the greater number of different elements contained in the more modern of these compounds2 and third1 in the higher and more varied multiples in which these more numerous elements combine4 ,to say that this advance in chemical heterogeneity is due to the one cause1 diminution of the ,earth's temperature1 would be to say too much2 for it is clear that aqueous and atmospheric agencies have been concerned2 and further1 that the affinities of the elements themselves are implied4 ,the cause has all along been a composite one3 the cooling of the ,earth having been simply the most general of the concurrent causes1 or assemblage of conditions4 ,and here1 indeed1 it may be remarked that in the several classes of facts already dealt with 7excepting1 perhaps1 the first71 and still more in those with which we shall presently deal1 the causes are more or less compound2 as indeed are nearly all causes with which we are acquainted4 ,scarcely any change can rightly be ascribed to one agency alone1 to the neglect of the permanent or temporary conditions under which only this agency produces the change4 ,but as it does not materially affect our argument1 we prefer1 for simplicity's sake1 to use throughout the popular mode of expression4 ,perhaps it will be further objected1 that to assign loss of heat as the cause of any changes1 is to attribute these changes not to a force1 but to the absence of a force4 ,and this is true4 ,strictly speaking1 the changes should be attributed to those forces which come into action when the antagonist force is withdrawn4 ,but though there is inaccuracy in saying that the freezing of water is due to the loss of its heat1 no practical error arises from it2 nor will a parallel laxity of expression vitiate our statements respecting the multiplication of effects4 ,indeed1 the objection serves but to draw attention to the fact1 that not only does the exertion of a force produce more than one change1 but the withdrawal of a force produces more than one change4 ,returning to the thread of our exposition1 we have next to trace1 throughout organic progress1 this same all-pervading principle4 ,and here1 where the evolution of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous was first observed1 the production of many effects by one cause is least easy to demonstrate4 ,the development of a seed into a plant1 or an ovum into an animal1 is so gradual1 while the forces which determine it are so involved1 and at the same time so unobtrusive1 that it is difficult to detect the multiplication of effects which is elsewhere so obvious4 ,but1 guided by indirect evidence1 we may safely conclude that here too the law holds4 ,note1 first1 how numerous are the changes which any marked action works upon an adult organism--a human being1 for instance4 ,an alarming sound or sight1 besides the impressions on the organs of sense and the nerves1 may produce a start1 a scream1 a distortion of the face1 a trembling consequent on general muscular relaxation1 a burst of perspiration1 a rush of blood to the brain1 followed possibly by arrest of the heart's action and by syncope2 and if the subject be feeble1 an indisposition with its long train of complicated symptoms may set in4 ,similarly in cases of disease4 ,a minute portion of the small-pox virus introduced into the system1 will1 in a severe case1 cause1 during the first stage1 rigors1 heat of skin1 accelerated pulse1 furred tongue1 loss of appetite1 thirst1 epigastric uneasiness1 vomiting1 headache1 pains in the back and limbs1 muscular weakness1 convulsions1 delirium1 c42 in the second stage1 cutaneous eruption1 itching1 tingling1 sore throat1 swelled fauces1 salivation1 cough1 hoarseness1 dyspnoea1 c42 and in the third stage1 oedematous inflammations1 pneumonia1 pleurisy1 diarrhoea1 inflammation of the brain1 ophthalmia1 erysipelas1 c43 each of which enumerated symptoms is itself more or less complex4 ,medicines1 special foods1 better air1 might in like manner be instanced as producing multipled results4 ,now it needs only to consider that the many changes thus wrought by one force upon an adult organism1 will be in part paralleled in an embryo organism1 to understand how here also1 the evolution of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous may be due to the production of many effects by one cause4 ,the external heat1 which1 falling on a matter having special proclivities1 determines the first complications of the germ1 may1 by acting on these1 superinduce further complications2 upon these still higher and more numerous ones2 and so on continually3 each organ as it is developed serving1 by its actions and reactions on the rest1 to initiate new complexities4 ,the first pulsations of the foetal heart must simultaneously aid the unfolding of every part4 ,the growth of each tissue1 by taking from the blood special proportions of elements1 must modify the constitution of the blood2 and so must modify the nutrition of all the other tissues4 ,the heart's action1 implying as it does a certain waste1 necessitates an addition to the blood of effete matters1 which must influence the rest of the system1 and perhaps1 as some think1 cause the formation of excretory organs4 ,the nervous connexions established among the viscera must further multiply their mutual influences2 and so continually4 ,still stronger becomes the probability of this view when we call to mind the fact1 that the same germ may be evolved into different forms according to circumstances4 ,thus1 during its earlier stages1 every embryo is sexless--becomes either male or female as the balance of forces acting on it determines4 ,again1 it is a well-established fact that the larva of a working-bee will develop into a queen-bee1 if before it is too late1 its food be changed to that on which the larv of queen-bees are fed4 ,all which instances suggest that the proximate cause of each advance in embryonic complication is the action of incident forces upon the complication previously existing4 ,indeed1 we may find a priori reason to think that the evolution proceeds after this manner4 ,for since no germ1 animal or vegetal1 contains the slightest rudiment or indication of the future organism--since the microscope has shown us that the first process set up in every fertilized germ1 is a process of repeated spontaneous fissions ending in the production of a mass of cells1 not one of which exhibits any special character2 there seems no alternative but to suppose that the partial organization at any moment existing in a growing embryo1 is transformed by the agencies acting upon it into the succeeding phase of organization1 and this into the next1 until1 through ever-increasing complexities1 the ultimate form is reached4 ,not indeed that we can thus really explain the production of any plant or animal4 ,we are still in the dark respecting those mysterious properties in virtue of which the germ1 when subject to fit influences1 undergoes the special changes that begin the series of transformations4 ,all we aim to show1 is1 that given a germ possessing those particular proclivities distinguishing the species to which it belongs1 and the evolution of an organism from it1 probably depends on that multiplication of effects which we have seen to be the cause of progress in general1 so far as we have yet traced it4 ,when1 leaving the development of single plants and animals1 we pass to that of the ,earth's flora and fauna1 the course of our argument again becomes clear and simple4 ,though1 as was admitted in the first part of this article1 the fragmentary facts ,paleontology has accumulated1 do not clearly warrant us in saying that1 in the lapse of geologic time1 there have been evolved more heterogeneous organisms1 and more heterogeneous assemblages of organisms1 yet we shall now see that there must ever have been a tendency towards these results4 ,we shall find that the production of many effects by one cause1 which as already shown1 has been all along increasing the physical heterogeneity of the ,earth1 has further involved an increasing heterogeneity in its flora and fauna1 individually and collectively4 ,an illustration will make this clear4 ,suppose that by a series of upheavals1 occurring1 as they are now known to do1 at long intervals1 the ,east ,indian ,archipelago were to be1 step by step1 raised into a continent1 and a chain of mountains formed along the axis of elevation4 ,by the first of these upheavals1 the plants and animals inhabiting ,borneo1 ,sumatra1 ,new ,guinea1 and the rest1 would be subjected to slightly modified sets of conditions4 ,the climate in general would be altered in temperature1 in humidity1 and in its periodical variations2 while the local differences would be multiplied4 ,these modifications would affect1 perhaps inappreciably1 the entire flora and fauna of the region4 ,the change of level would produce additional modifications3 varying in different species1 and also in different members of the same species1 according to their distance from the axis of elevation4 ,plants1 growing only on the sea-shore in special localities1 might become extinct4 ,others1 living only in swamps of a certain humidity1 would1 if they survived at all1 probably undergo visible changes of appearance4 ,while still greater alterations would occur in the plants gradually spreading over the lands newly raised above the sea4 ,the animals and insects living on these modified plants1 would themselves be in some degree modified by change of food1 as well as by change of climate2 and the modification would be more marked where1 from the dwindling or disappearance of one kind of plant1 an allied kind was eaten4 ,in the lapse of the many generations arising before the next upheaval1 the sensible or insensible alterations thus produced in each species would become organized--there would be a more or less complete adaptation to the new conditions4 ,the next upheaval would superinduce further organic changes1 implying wider divergences from the primary forms2 and so repeatedly4 ,but now let it be observed that the revolution thus resulting would not be a substitution of a thousand more or less modified species for the thousand original species2 but in place of the thousand original species there would arise several thousand species1 or varieties1 or changed forms4 ,each species being distributed over an area of some extent1 and tending continually to colonize the new area exposed1 its different members would be subject to different sets of changes4 ,plants and animals spreading towards the equator would not be affected in the same way as others spreading from it4 ,those spreading towards the new shores would undergo changes unlike the changes undergone by those spreading into the mountains4 ,thus1 each original race of organisms1 would become the root from which diverged several races differing more or less from it and from each other2 and while some of these might subsequently disappear1 probably more than one would survive in the next geologic period3 the very dispersion itself increasing the chances of survival4 ,not only would there be certain modifications thus caused by change of physical conditions and food1 but also in some cases other modifications caused by change of habit4 ,the fauna of each island1 peopling1 step by step1 the newly-raised tracts1 would eventually come in contact with the faunas of other islands2 and some members of these other faunas would be unlike any creatures before seen4 ,herbivores meeting with new beasts of prey1 would1 in some cases1 be led into modes of defence or escape differing from those previously used2 and simultaneously the beasts of prey would modify their modes of pursuit and attack4 ,we know that when circumstances demand it1 such changes of habit do take place in animals2 and we know that if the new habits become the dominant ones1 they must eventually in some degree alter the organization4 ,observe now1 however1 a further consequence4 ,there must arise not simply a tendency towards the differentiation of each race of organisms into several races2 but also a tendency to the occasional production of a somewhat higher organism4 ,taken in the mass these divergent varieties which have been caused by fresh physical conditions and habits of life1 will exhibit changes quite indefinite in kind and degree2 and changes that do not necessarily constitute an advance4 ,probably in most cases the modified type will be neither more nor less heterogeneous than the original one4 ,in some cases the habits of life adopted being simpler than before1 a less heterogeneous structure will result3 there will be a retrogradation4 ,but it must now and then occur1 that some division of a species1 falling into circumstances which give it rather more complex experiences1 and demand actions somewhat more involved1 will have certain of its organs further differentiated in proportionately small degrees1--will become slightly more heterogeneous4 ,thus1 in the natural course of things1 there will from time to time arise an increased heterogeneity both of the ,earth's flora and fauna1 and of individual races included in them4 ,omitting detailed explanations1 and allowing for the qualifications which cannot here be specified1 we think it is clear that geological mutations have all along tended to complicate the forms of life1 whether regarded separately or collectively4 ,the same causes which have led to the evolution of the ,earth's crust from the simple into the complex1 have simultaneously led to a parallel evolution of the ,life upon its surface4 ,in this case1 as in previous ones1 we see that the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous is consequent upon the universal principle1 that every active force produces more than one change4 ,the deduction here drawn from the established truths of geology and the general laws of life1 gains immensely in weight on finding it to be in harmony with an induction drawn from direct experience4 ,just that divergence of many races from one race1 which we inferred must have been continually occurring during geologic time1 we know to have occurred during the pre-historic and historic periods1 in man and domestic animals4 ,and just that multiplication of effects which we concluded must have produced the first1 we see has produced the last4 ,single causes1 as famine1 pressure of population1 war1 have periodically led to further dispersions of mankind and of dependent creatures3 each such dispersion initiating new modifications1 new varieties of type4 ,whether all the human races be or be not derived from one stock1 philology makes it clear that whole groups of races now easily distinguishable from each other1 were originally one race1--that the diffusion of one race into different climates and conditions of existence1 has produced many modified forms of it4 ,similarly with domestic animals4 ,though in some cases--as that of dogs--community of origin will perhaps be disputed1 yet in other cases--as that of the sheep or the cattle of our own country--it will not be questioned that local differences of climate1 food1 and treatment1 have transformed one original breed into numerous breeds now become so far distinct as to produce unstable hybrids4 ,moreover1 through the complication of effects flowing from single causes1 we here find1 what we before inferred1 not only an increase of general heterogeneity1 but also of special heterogeneity4 ,while of the divergent divisions and subdivisions of the human race many have undergone changes not constituting an advance2 while in some the type may have degraded2 in others it has become decidedly more heterogeneous4 ,the civilized ,european departs more widely from the vertebrate archetype than does the savage4 ,thus1 both the law and the cause of progress1 which1 from lack of evidence1 can be but hypothetically substantiated in respect of the earlier forms of life on our globe1 can be actually substantiated in respect of the latest forms4#d ,if the advance of ,man towards greater heterogeneity is traceable to the production of many effects by one cause1 still more clearly may the advance of ,society towards greater heterogeneity be so explained4 ,consider the growth of an industrial organization4 ,when1 as must occasionally happen1 some member of a tribe displays unusual aptitude for making an article of general use--a weapon1 for instance--which was before made by each man for himself1 there arises a tendency towards the differentiation of that member into a maker of such weapon4 ,his companions--warriors and hunters all of them1--severally feel the importance of having the best weapons that can be made2 and are therefore certain to offer strong inducements to this skilled individual to make weapons for them4 ,he1 on the other hand1 having not only an unusual faculty1 but an unusual liking1 for making such weapons 7the talent and the desire for any occupation being commonly associated71 is predisposed to fulfil each commission on the offer of an adequate reward3 especially as his love of distinction is also gratified and his living facilitated4 ,this first specialization of function1 once commenced1 tends ever to become more decided4 ,on the side of the weapon-maker practice gives increased skill--increased superiority to his products4 ,on the side of his clients1 cessation of practice entails decreased skill4 ,thus the influences which determine this division of labour grow stronger in both ways2 and the incipient heterogeneity is1 on the average of cases1 likely to become permanent for that generation if no longer4 ,this process not only differentiates the social mass into two parts1 the one monopolizing1 or almost monopolizing1 the performance of a certain function1 and the other losing the habit1 and in some measure the power1 of performing that function2 but it tends to initiate other differentiations4 ,the advance described implies the introduction of barter1--the maker of weapons has1 on each occasion1 to be paid in such other articles as he agrees to take in exchange4 ,he will not habitually take in exchange one kind of article1 but many kinds4 ,he does not want mats only1 or skins1 or fishing-gear1 but he wants all these1 and on each occasion will bargain for the particular things he most needs4 ,what follows8 ,if among his fellows there exist any slight differences of skill in the manufacture of these various things1 as there are almost sure to do1 the weapon-maker will take from each one the thing which that one excels in making3 he will exchange for mats with him whose mats are superior1 and will bargain for the fishing-gear of him who has the best4 ,but he who has bartered away his mats or his fishing-gear1 must make other mats or fishing-gear for himself2 and in so doing must1 in some degree1 further develop his aptitude4 ,thus it results that the small specialities of faculty possessed by various members of the tribe1 will tend to grow more decided4 ,and whether or not there ensue distinct differentiations of other individuals into makers of particular articles1 it is clear that incipient differentiations take place throughout the tribe3 the one original cause produces not only the first dual effect1 but a number of secondary dual effects1 like in kind1 but minor in degree4 ,this process1 of which traces may be seen among schoolboys1 cannot well produce lasting effects in an unsettled tribe2 but where there grows up a fixed and multiplying community1 such differentiations become permanent1 and increase with each generation4 ,the enhanced demand for every commodity1 intensifies the functional activity of each specialized person or class2 and this renders the specialization more definite where it already exists1 and establishes it where it is but nascent4 ,by increasing the pressure on the means of subsistence1 a larger population again augments these results2 seeing that each person is forced more and more to confine himself to that which he can do best1 and by which he can gain most4 ,presently1 under these same stimuli1 new occupations arise4 ,competing workers1 ever aiming to produce improved articles1 occasionally discover better processes or raw materials4 ,the substitution of bronze for stone entails on him who first makes it a great increase of demand2 so that he or his successor eventually finds all his time occupied in making the bronze for the articles he sells1 and is obliged to depute the fashioning of these articles to others2 and1 eventually1 the making of bronze1 thus differentiated from a pre-existing occupation1 becomes an occupation by itself4 ,but now mark the ramified changes which follow this change4 ,bronze presently replaces stone1 not only in the articles it was first used for1 but in many others--in arms1 tools1 and utensils of various kinds3 and so affects the manufacture of them4 ,further1 it affects the processes which these utensils subserve1 and the resulting products1--modifies buildings1 carvings1 personal decorations4 ,yet again1 it sets going manufactures which were before impossible1 from lack of a material fit for the requisite implements4 ,and all these changes react on the people--increase their manipulative skill1 their intelligence1 their comfort1--refine their habits and tastes4 ,thus the evolution of a homogeneous society into a heterogeneous one1 is clearly consequent on the general principle1 that many effects are produced by one cause4 ,space permitting1 we might show how the localization o special industries in special parts of a kingdom1 as well as the minute subdivision of labour in the making of each commodity1 are similarly determined4 ,or1 turning to a somewhat different order of illustrations1 we might dwell on the multitudinous changes--material1 intellectual1 moral1--caused by printing2 or the further extensive series of changes wrought by gunpowder4 ,but leaving the intermediate phases of social development1 let us take a few illustrations from its most recent and its passing phases4 ,to trace the effects of steam-power1 in its manifold applications to mining1 navigation1 and manufactures of all kinds1 would carry us into unmanageable detail4 ,let us confine ourselves to the latest embodiment of steam power--the locomotive engine4 ,this1 as the proximate cause of our railway system1 has changed the face of the country1 the course of trade1 and the habits of the people4 ,consider1 first1 the complicated sets of changes that precede the making of every railway--the provisional arrangements1 the meetings1 the registration1 the trial section1 the parliamentary survey1 the lithographed plans1 the books of reference1 the local deposits and notices1 the application to ,parliament1 the passing ,standing ,orders ,committee1 the first1 second1 and third readings3 each of which brief heads indicates a multiplicity of transactions1 and the extra development of sundry occupations--as those of engineers1 surveyors1 lithographers1 parliamentary agents1 share-brokers2 and the creation of sundry others--as those of traffic-takers1 reference-takers4 ,consider1 next1 the yet more marked changes implied in railway construction--the cuttings1 embankings1 tunnellings1 diversions of roads2 the building of bridges and stations1 the laying down of ballast1 sleepers1 and rails2 the making of engines1 tenders1 carriages1 and waggons3 which processes1 acting on numerous trades1 increase the importation of timber1 the quarrying of stone1 the manufacture of iron1 the mining of coal1 the burning of bricks2 institute a variety of special manufactures weekly advertised in the ,railway ,times2 and1 finally1 open the way to sundry new occupations1 as those of drivers1 stokers1 cleaners1 plate-layers1 c41 c4 ,and then consider the changes1 still more numerous and involved1 which railways in action produce on the community at large4 ,business agencies are established where previously they would not have paid2 goods are obtained from remote wholesale houses instead of near retail ones2 and commodities are used which distance once rendered inaccessible4 ,again1 the diminished cost of carriage tends to specialize more than ever the industries of different districts--to confine each manufacture to the parts in which1 from local advantages1 it can be best carried on4 ,further1 the fall in freights1 facilitating distribution1 equalizes prices1 and also1 on the average1 lowers prices3 thus bringing divers articles within the means of those before unable to buy them1 and so increasing their comforts and improving their habits4 ,at the same time the practice of travelling is immensely extended4 ,people who never before dreamed of it1 take trips to the sea2 visit their distant relations2 make tours2 and so we are benefited in body1 feelings1 and ideas4 ,the more prompt transmission of letters and of news produces other marked changes--makes the pulse of the nation faster4 ,once more1 there arises a wide dissemination of cheap literature through railway book-stalls1 and of advertisements in railway carriages3 both of them aiding ulterior progress4 ,and the countless changes here briefly indicated are consequent on the invention of the locomotive engine4 ,the social organism has been rendered more heterogeneous in virtue of the many new occupations introduced1 and the many old ones further specialized2 prices of nearly all things in every place have been altered2 each trader has modified his way of doing business2 and every person has been affected in his actions1 thoughts1 emotions4 ,illustrations to the same effect might be indefinitely accumulated1 but they are needless4 ,the only further fact demanding notice1 is1 that we here see still more clearly the truth before pointed out1 that in proportion as the area on which any force expends itself becomes heterogeneous1 the results are in a yet higher degree multiplied in number and kind4 ,while among the simple tribes to whom it was first known1 caoutchouc caused but few changes1 among ourselves the changes have been so many and varied that the history of them occupies a volume4#e ,upon the small1 homogeneous community inhabiting one of the ,hebrides1 the electric telegraph would produce1 were it used1 scarcely any results2 but in ,england the results it produces are multitudinous4 ,the comparatively simple organization under which our ancestors lived five centuries ago1 could have undergone but few modifications from an event like the recent one at ,canton2 but now1 the legislative decision respecting it sets up many hundreds of complex modifications1 each of which will be the parent of numerous future ones4 ,space permitting1 we could willingly have pursued the argument in relation to all the subtler results of civilization4 ,as before we showed that the law of progress to which the organic and inorganic worlds conform1 is also conformed to by ,language1 the plastic arts1 ,music1 c42 so might we here show that the cause which we have hitherto found to determine progress holds in these cases also4 ,instances might be given proving how1 in ,science1 an advance of one division presently advances other divisions--how ,astronomy has been immensely forwarded by discoveries in ,optics1 while other optical discoveries have initiated ,microscopic ,anatomy1 and greatly aided the growth of ,physiology--how ,chemistry has indirectly increased our knowledge of ,electricity1 ,magnetism1 ,biology1 ,geology--how ,electricity has reacted on ,chemistry and ,magnetism1 and has developed our views of ,light and ,heat4 ,in ,literature the same truth might be exhibited in the manifold effects of the primitive mystery-play1 as originating the modern drama1 which has variously branched2 or in the still multiplying forms of periodical literature which have descended from the first newspaper1 and which have severally acted and reacted on other forms of literature and on each other4 ,the influence which a new school of ,painting--as that of the pre-,raphaelites--exercises upon other schools2 the hints which all kinds of pictorial art are deriving from ,photography2 the complex results of new critical doctrines1 as those of ,mr4 ,ruskin1 might severally be dwelt upon as displaying the like multiplication of effects4 ,but we venture to think our case is already made out4 ,the imperfections of statement which brevity has necessitated1 do not1 we believe1 invalidate the propositions laid down4 ,the qualifications here and there demanded would not1 if made1 affect the inferences4 ,though1 in tracing the genesis of progress1 we have frequently spoken of complex causes as if they were simple ones2 it still remains true that such causes are far less complex than their results4 ,detailed criticisms do not affect our main position4 ,endless facts go to show that every kind of progress is from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous2 and that it is so because each change is followed by many changes4 ,and it is significant that where the facts are most accessible and abundant1 there these truths are most manifest4 ,however1 to avoid committing ourselves to more than is yet proved1 we must be content with saying that such are the law and the cause of all progress that is known to us4 ,should the ,nebular ,hypothesis ever be established1 then it will become manifest that the ,universe at large1 like every organism1 was once homogeneous2 that as a whole1 and in every detail1 it has unceasingly advanced towards greater heterogeneity4 ,it will be seen that as in each event of to-day1 so from the beginning1 the decomposition of every expended force into several forces has been perpetually producing a higher complication2 that the increase of heterogeneity so brought about is still going on and must continue to go on2 and that thus progress is not an accident1 not a thing within human control1 but a beneficent necessity4 99 99 99 99 99 ,a few words must be added on the ontological bearings of our argument4 ,probably not a few will conclude that here is an attempted solution of the great questions with which ,philosophy in all ages has perplexed itself4 ,let none thus deceive themselves4 ,after all that has been said1 the ultimate mystery remains just as it was4 ,the explanation of that which is explicable1 does but bring out into greater clearness the inexplicableness of that which remains behind4 ,little as it seems to do so1 fearless inquiry tends continually to give a firmer basis to all true ,religion4 ,the timid sectarian1 obliged to abandon one by one the superstitions bequeathed to him1 and daily finding his cherished beliefs more and more shaken1 secretly fears that all things may some day be explained2 and has a corresponding dread of ,science3 thus evincing the profoundest of all infidelity--the fear lest the truth be bad4 ,on the other hand1 the sincere man of science1 content to follow wherever the evidence leads him1 becomes by each new inquiry more profoundly convinced that the ,universe is an insoluble problem4 ,alike in the external and the internal worlds1 he sees himself in the midst of ceaseless changes1 of which he can discover neither beginning nor end4 ,if1 tracing back the evolution of things1 he allows himself to entertain the hypothesis that all matter once existed in a diffused form1 he finds it impossible to conceive how this came to be so2 and equally1 if he speculates on the future1 he can assign no limit to the grand succession of phenomena ever unfolding themselves before him4 ,similarly1 if he looks inward1 he perceives that both terminations of the thread of consciousness are beyond his grasp3 he cannot remember when or how consciousness commenced1 and he cannot examine the consciousness at any moment existing2 for only a state of consciousness which is already past can become the object of thought1 and never one which is passing4 ,when1 again1 he turns from the succession of phenomena1 external or internal1 to their essential nature1 he is equally at fault4 ,though he may succeed in resolving all properties of objects into manifestations of force1 he is not thereby enabled to conceive what force is2 but finds1 on the contrary1 that the more he thinks about it1 the more he is baffled4 ,similarly1 though analysis of mental actions may finally bring him down to sensations as the original materials out of which all thought is woven1 he is none the forwarder2 for he cannot in the least comprehend sensation4 ,inward and outward things he thus discovers to be alike inscrutable in their ultimate genesis and nature4 ,he sees that the ,materialist and ,spiritualist controversy is a mere war of words2 the disputants being equally absurd--each believing he understands that which it is impossible for any man to understand4 ,in all directions his investigations eventually bring him face to face with the unknowable2 and he ever more clearly perceives it to be the unknowable4 ,he learns at once the greatness and the littleness of human intellect--its power in dealing with all that comes within the range of experience2 its impotence in dealing with all that transcends experience4 ,he feels more vividly than any others can feel1 the utter incomprehensibleness of the simplest fact1 considered in itself4 ,he alone truly sees that absolute knowledge is impossible4 ,he alone knows that under all things there lies an impenetrable mystery4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #b3 ,since this was written 7in #aheg7 the advance of paleontological discovery1 especially in ,america1 has shown conclusively1 in respect of certain groups of vertebrates1 that higher types have arisen by modifications of lower2 so that1 in common with others1 ,prof4 ,huxley1 to whom the above allusion is made1 now admits1 or rather asserts1 biological progression1 and1 by implication1 that there have arisen more heterogeneous organic forms and a more heterogeneous assemblage of organic forms4 ,footnote #c3 ,for detailed proof of these assertions see essay on ,manners and ,fashion4 ,footnote #d3 ,the argument concerning organic evolution contained in this paragraph and the one preceding it1 stands verbatim as it did when first published in the ,westminster ,review for ,april1 #aheg4 ,i have thus left it without the alteration of a word that it may show the view ,i then held concerning the origin of species4 ,the sole cause recognized is that of direct adaptation of constitution to conditions consequent on inheritance of the modifications of structure resulting from use and disuse4 ,there is no recognition of that further cause disclosed in ,mr4 ,darwin's work1 published two and a half years later--the indirect adaptation resulting from the natural selection of favourable variations4 ,the multiplication of effects is1 however1 equally illustrated in whatever way the adaptation to changing conditions is effected1 or if it is effected in both ways1 as ,i hold4 ,i may add that there is indicated the view that the succession of organic forms is not serial but proceeds by perpetual divergence and re-divergence--that there has been a continual divergence of many races from one race3 each species being a root from which several other species branch out2 and the growth of a tree being thus the implied symbol4 ,footnote #e3 ,personal ,narrative of the ,origin of the ,caoutchouc1 or ,india-,rubber ,manufacture in ,england4 ,by ,thomas ,hancock4 ,,transcendental ,,physiology4 ,first published in ,the ,national ,review for ,october1 #aheg1 under the title of ,the ,ultimate ,laws of ,physiology4 ,the title ,transcendental ,physiology1 which the editor did not approve1 was restored when the essay was re-published with others in #aheg4 ,the title ,transcendental ,anatomy is used to distinguish that division of biological science which treats1 not of the structures of individual organisms considered separately1 but of the general principles of structure common to vast and varied groups of organisms1--the unity of plan discernible throughout multitudinous species1 genera1 and orders1 which differ widely in appearance4 ,and here1 under the head of ,transcendental ,physiology1 we purpose putting together sundry laws of development and function which hold not of particular kinds or classes of organisms1 but of all organisms3 laws1 some of which have not1 we believe1 been hitherto enunciated4 ,by way of unobtrusively introducing the general reader to biological truths of this class1 let us begin by noticing one or two with which he is familiar4 ,take first1 the relation between the activity of an organ and its growth4 ,this is a universal relation4 ,it holds1 not only of a bone1 a muscle1 a nerve1 an organ of sense1 a mental faculty2 but of every gland1 every viscus1 every element of the body4 ,it is seen1 not in man only1 but in each animal which affords us adequate opportunity of tracing it4 ,always providing that the performance of function is not so excessive as to produce disorder1 or to exceed the repairing powers either of the system at large or of the particular agencies by which nutriment is brought to the organ1--always providing this1 it is a law of organized bodies that1 other things equal1 development varies as function4 ,on this law are based all maxims and methods of right education1 intellectual1 moral1 and physical2 and when statesmen are wise enough to see it1 this law will be found to underlie all right legislation4 ,another truth co-extensive with the organic world1 is that of hereditary transmission4 ,it is not1 as commonly supposed1 that hereditary transmission is exemplified merely in re-appearance of the family peculiarities displayed by immediate or remote progenitors4 ,nor does the law of hereditary transmission comprehend only such more general facts as that modified plants or animals become the parents of permanent varieties2 and that new kinds of potatoes1 new breeds of sheep1 new races of men1 have been thus originated4 ,these are but minor exemplifications of the law4 ,understood in its entirety1 the law is that each plant or animal produces others of like kind with itself3 the likeness of kind consisting not so much in the repetition of individual traits as in the assumption of the same general structure4 ,this truth has been made by daily illustration so familiar as nearly to have lost its significance4 ,that wheat produces wheat1--that existing oxen are descended from ancestral oxen1--that every unfolding organism ultimately takes the form of the class1 order1 genus1 and species from which it sprang2 is a fact which1 by force of repetition1 has assumed in our minds the character of a necessity4 ,it is in this1 however1 that the law of hereditary transmission is principally displayed2 the phenomena commonly named as exemplifying it being quite subordinate manifestations4 ,and the law1 as thus understood1 is universal4 ,not forgetting the apparent1 but only apparent1 exceptions presented by the strange class of phenomena known as alternate generation1 the truth that like produces like is common to all types of organisms4 ,let us take next a universal physiological law of a less conspicuous kind4 ,to the ordinary observer1 it seems that the multiplication of organisms proceeds in various ways4 ,he sees that the young of the higher animals when born resemble their parents2 that birds lay eggs1 which they foster and hatch2 that fish deposit spawn and leave it4 ,among plants1 he finds that while in some cases new individuals grow from seeds only1 in other cases they also grow from tubers2 that by certain plants layers are sent out1 take root1 and develop new individuals2 and that many plants can be reproduced from cuttings4 ,further1 in the mould that quickly covers stale food1 and the infusoria that soon swarm in water exposed to air and light1 he sees a mode of generation which1 seeming inexplicable1 he is apt to consider spontaneous4 ,the reader of popular science thinks the modes of reproduction still more various4 ,he learns that whole tribes of creatures multiply by gemmation--by a development from the body of the parent of buds which1 after unfolding into the parental form1 separate and lead independent lives4 ,concerning microscopic forms of both animal and vegetal life1 he reads that the ordinary mode of multiplication is by spontaneous fission--a splitting up of the original individual into two or more individuals1 which by and by severally repeat the process4 ,still more remarkable are the cases in which1 as in the ,aphis1 an egg gives rise to an imperfect female1 from which other imperfect females are born viviparously1 grow1 and in their turns bear other imperfect females2 and so on for eight1 ten1 or more generations1 until finally1 perfect males and females are viviparously produced4 ,but now under all these1 and many more1 modified modes of multiplication1 the physiologist finds complete uniformity4 ,the starting-point1 not only of every higher animal or plant1 but of every clan of organisms which by fission or gemmation have sprung from a single organism1 is always a spore1 seed1 or ovum4 ,the millions of infusoria or of aphides which1 by sub-division or gemmation1 have proceeded from one individual2 the countless plants which have been successively propagated from one original plant by cuttings or tubers2 are1 in common with the highest creature1 primarily descended from a fertilized germ4 ,and in all cases--in the humblest alga as in the oak1 in the protozoon as in the mammal--this fertilized germ results from the union of the contents of two cells4 ,whether1 as among the lowest forms of life1 these two cells are seemingly identical in nature2 or whether1 as among higher forms1 they are distinguishable into sperm-cell and germ-cell2 it remains throughout true that from their combination results the mass out of which is evolved a new organism or new series of organisms4 ,that this law is without exception we are not prepared to say2 for in the case of the ,aphis certain experiments are thought to imply that under special conditions the descendants of an original individual may continue multiplying for ever1 without further fecundation4 ,but we know of no case where it actually is so2 for although there are certain plants of which the seeds have never been seen1 it is more probable that our observations are in fault than that these plants are exceptions4 ,and until we find undoubted exceptions1 the above-stated induction must stand4 ,here1 then1 we have another of the truths of ,transcendental ,physiology3 a truth which1 so far as we know1 transcends all distinctions of genus1 order1 class1 kingdom1 and applies to every living thing4 ,yet another generalization of like universality expresses the process of organic development4 ,to the ordinary observer there seems no unity in this4 ,no obvious parallelism exists between the unfolding of a plant and the unfolding of an animal4 ,there is no manifest similarity between the development of a mammal1 which proceeds without break from its first to its last stage1 and that of an insect1 which is divided into strongly-marked stages--egg1 larva1 pupa1 imago4 ,nevertheless it is now an established fact1 that all organisms are evolved after one general method4 ,at the outset the germ of every plant or animal is relatively homogeneous2 and advance towards maturity is advance towards greater heterogeneity4 ,each organized thing commences as an almost structureless mass1 and reaches its ultimate complexity by the establishment of distinctions upon distinctions1--by the divergence of tissues from tissues and organs from organs4 ,here1 then1 we have yet another biological law of transcendent generality4 ,having thus recognized the scope of ,transcendental ,physiology as presented in its leading truths1 we are prepared for the considerations that are to follow4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and first1 returning to the last of the great generalizations above given1 let us inquire more nearly how this change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous is carried on4 ,usually it is said to result from successive differentiations4 ,this1 however1 cannot be considered a complete account of the process4 ,during the evolution of an organism there occur1 not only separations of parts1 but coalescences of parts4 ,there is not only segregation1 but aggregation4 ,the heart1 at first a simple pulsating blood-vessel1 by and by twists upon itself and becomes integrated4 ,the bile-cells constituting the rudimentary liver1 do not merely diverge from the surface of the intestine in which they at first form a simple layer2 but they simultaneously consolidate into a definite organ4 ,and the gradual concentration seen in these and other cases is a part of the developmental process--a part which1 though more or less recognized by ,milne-,edwards and others1 does not seem to have been included as an essential element in it4 ,this progressive integration1 manifest alike when tracing up the several stages passed through by every embryo1 and when ascending from the lower organic forms to the higher1 may be most conveniently studied under several heads4 ,let us consider first what may be called longitudinal integration4 ,the lower ,annulosa--worms1 myriapods1 c4--are characterized by the great numbers of segments of which they respectively consist1 reaching in some cases to several hundreds2 but as we advance to the higher ,annulosa--centipedes1 crustaceans1 insects1 spiders1--we find these numbers greatly reduced1 down to twenty-two1 thirteen1 and even fewer2 and accompanying this there is a shortening or integration of the whole body1 reaching its extreme in crabs and spiders4 ,similarly with the development of an individual crustacean or insect4 ,the thorax of a lobster1 which1 in the adult1 forms1 with the head1 one compact box containing the viscera1 is made up by the union of a number of segments which in the embryo were separable4 ,the thirteen distinct divisions seen in the body of a caterpillar1 become further integrated in the butterfly3 several segments are consolidated to form the thorax1 and the abdominal segments are more aggregated than they originally were4 ,the like truth is seen when we pass to the internal organs4 ,in the lower annulose forms1 and in the larv of the higher ones1 the alimentary canal consists either of a tube that is uniform from end to end1 or else bulges into a succession of stomachs1 one to each segment2 but in the developed forms there is a single well-defined stomach4 ,in the nervous1 vascular1 and respiratory systems a parallel concentration may be traced4 ,again1 in the development of the ,vertebrata we have sundry examples of longitudinal integration4 ,the coalescence of several segmental groups of bones to form the skull is one instance of it4 ,it is further illustrated in the os coccygis1 which results from the fusion of a number of caudal vertebr4 ,and in the consolidation of the sacral vertebr of a bird it is also well exemplified4 ,that which we may distinguish as transverse integration1 is well illustrated among the ,annulosa in the development of the nervous system4 ,leaving out those simple forms which do not present distinct ganglia1 it is to be observed that the lower annulose animals1 in common with the larv of the higher1 are severally characterized by a double chain of ganglia running from end to end of the body2 while in the more advanced annulose animals this double chain becomes a single chain4 ,mr4 ,newport has described the course of this concentration in insects2 and by ,rathke it has been traced in crustaceans4 ,in the early stages of the ,astacus fluviatilis1 or common cray-fish1 there is a pair of separate ganglia to each ring4 ,of the fourteen pairs belonging to the head and thorax1 the three pairs in advance of the mouth consolidate into one mass to form the brain1 or cephalic ganglion4 ,meanwhile out of the remainder1 the first six pairs severally unite in the median line1 while the rest remain more or less separate4 ,of these six double ganglia thus formed1 the anterior four coalesce into one mass2 the remaining two coalesce into another mass2 and then these two masses coalesce into one4 ,here we see longitudinal and transverse integration going on simultaneously2 and in the highest crustaceans they are both carried still further4 ,the ,vertebrata exhibit this transverse integration in the development of the generative system4 ,the lowest of the mammalia--the ,monotremata--in common with birds1 have oviducts which towards their lower extremities are dilated into cavities severally performing in an imperfect way the function of a uterus4 ,in the ,marsupialia1 there is a closer approximation of the two lateral sets of organs on the median line2 for the oviducts converge towards one another and meet 7without coalescing7 on the median line2 so that their uterine dilatations are in contact with each other1 forming a true 'double uterus4' 444 ,as we ascend the series of 'placental' mammals1 we find the lateral coalescence becoming gradually more and more complete4444 ,in many of the ,rodentia1 the uterus still remains completely divided into two lateral halves2 whilst in others1 these coalesce at their lower portion1 forming a rudiment of the true 'body' of the uterus in the ,human subject4 ,this part increases at the expense of the lateral 'cornua' in the higher ,herbivora and ,carnivora2 but even in the lower ,quadrumana1 the uterus is somewhat cleft at its summit4#f ,and this process of transverse integration1 which is still more striking when observed in its details1 is accompanied by parallel though less important changes in the opposite sex4 ,once more2 in the increasing commissural connexion of the cerebral hemispheres1 which1 though separate in the lower vertebrata1 become gradually more united in the higher1 we have another instance4 ,and further ones of a different order1 but of like general implication1 are supplied by the vascular system4 ,now it seems to us that the various kinds of integration here exemplified1 which are commonly set down as so many independent phenomena1 ought to be generalized1 and included in the formula describing the process of development4 ,the fact that in an adult crab1 many pairs of ganglia originally separate have become fused into a single mass1 is a fact only second in significance to the differentiation of its alimentary canal into stomach and intestine4 ,that in the higher ,annulosa1 a single heart replaces the string of rudimentary hearts constituting the dorsal blood-vessel in the lower ,annulosa1 7reaching in one species to the number of one hundred and sixty71 is a truth as much needing to be comprised in the history of evolution1 as is the formation of a respiratory surface by a branched expansion of the skin4 ,a right conception of the genesis of a vertebral column1 includes not only the differentiations from which result the chorda dorsalis and the vertebral segments imbedded in it2 but quite as much it includes the coalescence of numerous vertebral processes with their respective vertebral bodies4 ,the changes in virtue of which several things become one1 demand recognition equally with those in virtue of which one thing becomes several4 ,evidently1 then1 the current statement which ascribes the developmental progress to differentiations alone1 is incomplete4 ,adequately to express the facts1 we must say that the transition from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous is carried on by differentiations and accompanying integrations4 ,it may not be amiss here to ask--,what is the meaning of these integrations8 ,the evidence seems to show that they are in some way dependent on community of function4 ,the eight segments which coalesce to make the head of a centipede1 jointly protect the cephalic ganglion1 and afford a solid fulcrum for the jaws1 c4 ,the many bones which unite to form a vertebral skull have like uses4 ,in the consolidation of the several pieces which constitute a mammalian pelvis1 and in the anchylosis of from ten to nineteen vertebr in the sacrum of a bird1 we have kindred instances of the integration of parts which transfer the weight of the body to the legs4 ,the more or less extensive fusion of the tibia with the fibula and the radius with the ulna in the ungulated mammals1 whose habits require only partial rotations of the limbs1 is a fact of like meaning4 ,and all the instances lately given--the concentration of ganglia1 the replacement of many pulsating blood-sacs by fewer and finally by one1 the fusion of two uteri into a single uterus--have the same implication4 ,whether1 as in some cases1 the integration is merely a consequence of the growth which eventually brings into contact adjacent parts performing similar duties2 or whether1 as in other cases1 there is an actual approximation of these parts before their union2 or whether1 as in yet other cases1 the integration is of that indirect kind which arises when1 out of a number of like organs1 one1 or a group1 discharges an ever-increasing share of the common function1 and so grows while the rest dwindle and disappear2--the general fact remains the same1 that there is a tendency to the unification of parts having similar duties4 ,the tendency1 however1 acts under limiting conditions2 and recognition of them will explain some apparent exceptions4 ,in the human foetus1 as in the lower vertebrata1 the eyes are placed one on each side of the head4 ,during evolution they become relatively nearer1 and at birth are in front2 though they are still1 in the ,european infant as in the adult ,mongol1 proportionately further apart than they afterwards become4 ,but this approximation shows no signs of further increase4 ,two reasons suggest themselves4 ,one is that the two eyes have not quite the same function1 since they are directed to slightly-different aspects of each object looked at2 and1 since the resulting binocular vision has an advantage over monocular vision1 there results a check upon further approach towards identity of function and unity of structure4 ,the other reason is that the interposed structures do not admit of any nearer approach4 ,for the orbits of the eyes to be brought closer together1 would imply a decrease in the olfactory chambers2 and as these are probably not larger than is demanded by their present functional activity1 no decrease can take place4 ,again1 if we trace up the external organs of smell through fishes1#g reptiles1 ungulate mammals and unguiculate mammals1 to man1 we perceive a general tendency to coalescence in the median line2 and on comparing the savage with the civilized1 or the infant with the adult1 we see this approach of the nostrils carried furthest in the most perfect of the species4 ,but since the septum which divides them has the function both of an evaporating surface for the lachrymal secretion1 and of a ramifying surface for a nerve ancillary to that of smell1 it does not disappear entirely3 the integration remains incomplete4 ,these and other like instances do not however militate against the hypothesis4 ,they merely show that the tendency is sometimes antagonized by other tendencies4 ,bearing in mind which qualification1 we may say1 that as differentiation of parts is connected with difference of function1 so there appears to be a connexion between integration of parts and sameness of function4 99 99 99 99 99 ,closely related to the general truth that the evolution of all organisms is carried on by combined differentiations and integrations1 is another general truth1 which physiologists appear not to have recognized4 ,when we look at the organic world as a whole1 we may observe that1 on passing from lower to higher forms1 we pass to forms which are not only characterized by a greater differentiation of parts1 but are at the same time more completely differentiated from the surrounding medium4 ,this truth may be contemplated under various aspects4 ,in the first place it is illustrated in structure4 ,the advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous itself involves an increasing distinction from the inorganic world4 ,in the lowest ,protozoa1 as some of the ,rhizopods1 we have a homogeneity approaching to that of air1 water1 or earth2 and the ascent to organisms of greater and greater complexity of structure1 is an ascent to organisms which are in that respect more strongly contrasted with the relatively structureless masses in the environment4 ,in form again we see the same truth4 ,a general characteristic of inorganic matter is its indefiniteness of form1 and this is also a characteristic of the lower organisms1 as compared with the higher4 ,speaking generally1 plants are less definite than animals1 both in shape and size--admit of greater modifications from variations of position and nutrition4 ,among animals1 the ,amoeba and its allies are not only almost structureless1 but are amorphous2 and the irregular form is constantly changing4 ,of the organisms resulting from the aggregation of amoeba-like creatures1 we find that while some assume a certain definiteness of form1 in their compound shells at least1 others1 as the ,sponges1 are irregular4 ,in the ,zoophytes and in the ,polyzoa1 we see compound organisms1 most of which have modes of growth not more determinate than those of plants4 ,but among the higher animals1 we find not only that the mature shape of each species is quite definite1 but that the individuals of each species differ very little in size4 ,a parallel increase of contrast is seen in chemical composition4 ,with but few exceptions1 and those only partial ones1 the lowest animal and vegetal forms are inhabitants of the water2 and water is almost their sole constituent4 ,dessicated ,protophyta and ,protozoa shrink into mere dust2 and among the acalephes we find but a few grains of solid matter to a pound of water4 ,the higher aquatic plants1 in common with the higher aquatic animals1 possessing as they do much greater tenacity of substance1 also contain a greater proportion of the organic elements2 and so are chemically more unlike their medium4 ,and when we pass to the superior classes of organisms--land plants and land animals--we find that1 chemically considered1 they have little in common either with the earth on which they stand or the air which surrounds them4 ,in specific gravity1 too1 we may note the like4 ,the very simplest forms1 in common with the spores and gemmules of the higher ones1 are as nearly as may be of the same specific gravity as the water in which they float2 and though it cannot be said that among aquatic creatures superior specific gravity is a standard of general superiority1 yet we may fairly say that the superior orders of them1 when divested of the appliances by which their specific gravity is regulated1 differ more from water in their relative weights than do the lower4 ,in terrestrial organisms1 the contrast becomes extremely marked4 ,trees and plants1 in common with insects1 reptiles1 mammals1 birds1 are all of a specific gravity considerably less than the earth and immensely greater than the air4 ,we see the law similarly fulfilled in respect of temperature4 ,plants generate but an extremely small quantity of heat1 which is to be detected only by delicate experiments2 and practically they may be considered as being in this respect like their environment4 ,aquatic animals rise very little above the surrounding water in temperature3 that of the invertebrata being mostly less than a degree above it1 and that of fishes not exceeding it by more than two or three degrees1 save in the case of some large red-blooded fishes1 as the tunny1 which exceed it by nearly ten degrees4 ,among insects1 the range is from two to ten degrees above that of the air3 the excess varying according to their activity4 ,the heat of reptiles is from four to fifteen degrees more than that of their medium4 ,while mammals and birds maintain a heat which continues almost unaffected by external variations1 and is often greater than that of the air by seventy1 eighty1 ninety1 and even a hundred degrees4 ,once more1 in greater self-mobility a progressive differentiation is traceable4 ,dead matter is inert3 some form of independent motion is our most general test of life4 ,passing over the indefinite border-land between the animal and vegetable kingdoms1 we may roughly class plants as organisms which1 while they exhibit the kind of motion implied in growth1 are not only without locomotive power1 but in nearly all cases are without the power of moving their parts in relation to one another2 and thus are less differentiated from the inorganic world than animals4 ,though in those microscopic ,protophyta and ,protozoa inhabiting the water--the spores of alg1 the gemmules of sponges1 and the infusoria generally--we see locomotion produced by ciliary action2 yet this locomotion1 while rapid relatively to their sizes1 is absolutely slow4 ,of the ,coelenterata1 a great part are either permanently rooted or habitually stationary1 and so have scarcely any self-mobility but that implied in the relative movements of parts2 while the rest1 of which the common jelly-fish serves as a sample1 have mostly but little ability to move themselves through the water4 ,among the higher aquatic ,invertebrata1--cuttle-fishes and lobsters1 for instance1--there is a very considerable power of locomotion2 and the aquatic ,vertebrata are1 considered as a class1 much more active in their movements than the other inhabitants of the water4 ,but it is only when we come to air-breathing creatures that we find the vital characteristic of self-mobility manifested in the highest degree4 ,flying insects1 mammals1 birds1 travel with velocities far exceeding those attained by any of the lower classes of animals2 and so are more strongly contrasted with their inert environments4 ,thus1 on contemplating the various grades of organisms in their ascending order1 we find them more and more distinguished from their inanimate media in structure1 in form1 in chemical composition1 in specific gravity1 in temperature1 in self-mobility4 ,it is true that this generalization does not hold with regularity4 ,organisms which are in some respects the most strongly contrasted with the inorganic world1 are in other respects less contrasted than inferior organisms4 ,as a class1 mammals are higher than birds2 and yet they are of lower temperature1 and have smaller powers of locomotion4 ,the stationary oyster is of higher organization than the free-swimming medusa2 and the cold-blooded and less heterogeneous fish is quicker in its movements than the warm-blooded and more heterogeneous sloth4 ,but the admission that the several aspects under which this increasing contrast shows itself bear variable ratios to one another1 does not negative the general truth enunciated4 ,looking at the facts in the mass1 it cannot be denied that the successively higher groups of organisms are severally characterized1 not only by greater differentiation of parts1 but also by greater differentiation from the surrounding medium in sundry other physical attributes4 ,it would seem that this peculiarity has some necessary connexion with superior vital manifestations4 ,one of those lowly gelatinous forms which are some of them so transparent and colourless as to be with difficulty distinguished from the water they float in1 is not more like its medium in chemical1 mechanical1 optical1 thermal1 and other properties1 than it is in the passivity with which it submits to all the actions brought to bear on it2 while the mammal does not more widely differ from inanimate things in these properties than it does in the activity with which it meets surrounding changes by compensating changes in itself4 ,between these two extremes1 we see a tolerably constant ratio between these two kinds of contrast4 ,in proportion as an organism is physically like its environment it remains a passive partaker of the changes going on in its environment2 while in proportion as it is endowed with powers of counteracting such changes1 it exhibits greater unlikeness to its environment4 99 99 99 99 99 ,thus far we have proceeded inductively1 in conformity with established usage2 but it seems to us that much may be done in this and other departments of biologic inquiry by pursuing the deductive method4 ,the generalizations at present constituting the science of physiology1 both general and special1 have been reached a posteriori2 but certain fundamental data have now been discovered1 starting from which we may reason our way a priori1 not only to some of the truths that have been ascertained by observation and experiment1 but also to some others4 ,the possibility of such a priori conclusions will be at once recognized on considering some familiar cases4 ,chemists have shown that a necessary condition to vital activity in animals is oxidation of certain matters contained in the body either as components or as waste products4 ,the oxygen requisite for this oxidation is contained in the surrounding medium--air or water1 as the case may be4 ,if the organism be minute1 mere contact of its external surface with the oxygenated medium achieves the requisite oxidation2 but if the organism is bulky1 and so exposes a surface which is small in proportion to its mass1 any considerable oxidation cannot be thus achieved4 ,one of two things is therefore implied4 ,either this bulky organism1 receiving no oxygen but that absorbed through its integument1 must possess but little vital activity2 or else1 if it possesses much vital activity1 there must be some extensive ramified surface1 internal or external1 through which adequate aeration may take place--a respiratory apparatus4 ,that is to say1 lungs1 or gills1 or branchi1 or their equivalents1 are predicable a priori as possessed by all active creatures of any size4 ,similarly with respect to nutriment4 ,there are entozoa which1 living in the insides of other animals1 and being constantly bathed by nutritive fluids1 absorb a sufficiency through their outer surfaces2 and so have no need of stomachs1 and do not possess them4 ,but all other animals1 inhabiting media that are not in themselves nutritive1 but only contain masses of food here and there1 must have appliances by which these masses of food may be utilized4 ,evidently mere external contact of a solid organism with a solid portion of nutriment1 could not result in the absorption of it in any moderate time1 if at all4 ,to effect absorption1 there must be both a solvent or macerating action1 and an extended surface fit for containing and imbibing the dissolved products3 there must be a digestive cavity4 ,thus1 given the ordinary conditions of animal life1 and the possession of stomachs by all creatures living under these conditions may be deductively known4 ,carrying out the train of reasoning still further1 we may infer the existence of a vascular system or something equivalent to it1 in all creatures of any size and activity4 ,in a comparatively small inert animal1 such as the hydra1 which consists of little more than a sac having a double wall--an outer layer of cells forming the skin1 and an inner layer forming the digestive and absorbent surface--there is no need for a special apparatus to diffuse through the body the aliment taken up2 for the body is little more than a wrapper to the food it encloses4 ,but where the bulk is considerable1 or where the activity is such as to involve much waste and repair1 or where both these characteristics exist1 there is a necessity for a system of blood-vessels4 ,it is not enough that there be adequately extensive surfaces for absorption and aeration2 for in the absence of any means of conveyance1 the absorbed elements can be of little or no use to the organism at large4 ,evidently there must be channels of communication4 ,when1 as in the ,medus1 we find these channels of communication consisting simply of branched canals opening out of the stomach and spreading through the disk1 we may know1 a priori1 that such creatures are comparatively inactive2 seeing that the nutritive liquid thus partially distributed throughout their bodies is crude and dilute1 and that there is no efficient appliance for keeping it in motion4 ,conversely1 when we meet with a creature of considerable size which displays much vivacity1 we may know1 a priori1 that it must have an apparatus for the unceasing supply of concentrated nutriment1 and of oxygen1 to every organ--a pulsating vascular system4 ,it is manifest1 then1 that setting out from certain known fundamental conditions to vital activity1 we may deduce from them sundry of the chief characteristics of organized bodies4 ,doubtless these known fundamental conditions have been inductively established4 ,but what we wish to show is that1 given these inductively-established primary facts in physiology1 we may with safety draw certain general deductions from them4 ,and1 indeed1 the legitimacy of such deductions1 though not formally acknowledged1 is practically recognized in the convictions of every physiologist1 as may be readily proved4 ,thus1 were a physiologist to find a creature exhibiting complex and variously co-ordinated movements1 and yet having no nervous system2 he would be less astonished at the breach of his empirical generalization that all such creatures have nervous systems1 than at the disproof of his unconscious deduction that all creatures exhibiting complex and variously co-ordinated movements must have an internuncial apparatus by which the co-ordination may be effected4 ,or were he to find a creature having blood rapidly circulated and rapidly aerated1 but yet showing a low temperature1 the proof so afforded that active change of matter is not1 as he had inferred from chemical data1 the cause of animal heat1 would stagger him more than would the exception to a constantly-observed relation4 ,clearly1 then1 the a priori method already plays a part in physiological reasoning4 ,if not ostensibly employed as a means of reaching new truths1 it is at least privately appealed to for confirmation of truths reached a posteriori4 ,but the illustrations above given go far to show1 that it may to a considerable extent be safely used as an independent instrument of research4 ,the necessities for a nutritive system1 a respiratory system1 and a vascular system1 in all animals of size and vivacity1 seem to us legitimately inferable from the conditions to continued vital activity4 ,given the physical and chemical data1 and these structural peculiarities may be deduced with as much certainty as may the hollowness of an iron ball from its power of floating in water4 ,it is not1 of course1 asserted that the more special physiological truths can be deductively reached4 ,the argument by no means implies this4 ,legitimate deduction presupposes adequate data2 and in respect to the special phenomena of organic growth1 structure1 and function1 adequate data are unattainable1 and will probably ever remain so4 ,it is only in the case of the more general physiological truths1 such as those above instanced1 where we have something like adequate data1 that deductive reasoning becomes possible4 ,and here is reached the stage to which the foregoing considerations are introductory4 ,we propose now to show that there are certain still more general attributes of organized bodies1 which are deducible from certain still more general attributes of things4 99 99 99 99 99 ,in an essay on ,progress3 its ,law and ,cause1 elsewhere published1#h we have endeavoured to show that the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 in which all progress1 organic or other1 essentially consists1 is consequent on the production of many effects by one cause--many changes by one force4 ,having pointed out that this is a law of all things1 we proceeded to show deductively that the multiform evolutions of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous--astronomic1 geologic1 ethnologic1 social1 c41--were explicable as consequences4 ,and though in the case of organic evolution1 lack of data disabled us from specifically tracing out the progressive complication as due to the multiplication of effects2 yet1 we found sundry indirect evidences that it was so4 ,now in so far as this conclusion1 that organic evolution results from the decomposition of each expended force into several forces1 was inferred from the general law previously pointed out1 it was an example of deductive physiology4 ,the particular was concluded from the universal4 ,we here propose in the first place to show1 that there is another general truth closely connected with the above2 and in common with it underlying explanations of all progress1 and therefore the progress of organisms--a truth which may indeed be considered as taking precedence of it in respect of time1 if not in respect of generality4 ,this truth is1 that the condition of homogeneity is a condition of unstable equilibrium4 ,the phrase unstable equilibrium is one used in mechanics to express a balance of forces of such kind1 that the interference of any further force1 however minute1 will destroy the arrangement previously existing1 and bring about a different arrangement4 ,thus1 a stick poised on its lower end is in unstable equilibrium3 however exactly it may be placed in a perpendicular position1 as soon as it is left to itself it begins1 at first imperceptibly and then visibly1 to lean on one side1 and with increasing rapidity falls into another position4 ,conversely1 a stick suspended from its upper end is in stable equilibrium3 however much disturbed1 it will return to the same position4 ,our meaning is1 then1 that the state of homogeneity1 like the state of the stick poised on its lower end1 is one that cannot be maintained2 and that hence results the first step in its gravitation towards the heterogeneous4 ,let us take a few illustrations4 ,of mechanical ones the most familiar is that of the scales4 ,if accurately made and not clogged by dirt or rust1 a pair of scales cannot be perfectly balanced3 eventually one scale will descend and the other ascend--they will assume a heterogeneous relation4 ,again1 if we sprinkle over the surface of a liquid a number of equal-sized particles1 having an attraction for one another1 they will1 no matter how uniformly distributed1 by and by concentrate irregularly into groups4 ,were it possible to bring a mass of water into a state of perfect homogeneity--a state of complete quiescence1 and exactly equal density throughout--yet the radiation of heat from neighbouring bodies1 by affecting differently its different parts1 would soon produce inequalities of density and consequent currents2 and would so render it to that extent heterogeneous4 ,take a piece of red-hot matter1 and however evenly heated it may at first be1 it will quickly cease to be so3 the exterior1 cooling faster than the interior1 will become different in temperature from it4 ,and the lapse into heterogeneity of temperature1 so obvious in this extreme case1 is ever taking place more or less in all cases4 ,the actions of chemical forces supply other illustrations4 ,expose a fragment of metal to air or water1 and in course of time it will be coated with a film of oxide1 carbonate1 or other compound3 its outer parts will become unlike its inner parts4 ,thus1 every homogeneous aggregate of matter tends to lose its balance in some way or other--either mechanically1 chemically1 thermally or electrically2 and the rapidity with which it lapses into a non-homogeneous state is simply a question of time and circumstances4 ,social bodies illustrate the law with like constancy4 ,endow the members of a community with equal properties1 positions1 powers1 and they will forthwith begin to slide into inequalities4 ,be it in a representative assembly1 a railway board1 or a private partnership1 the homogeneity1 though it may continue in name1 inevitably disappears in reality4 ,the instability thus variously illustrated becomes still more manifest if we consider its rationale4 ,it is consequent on the fact that the several parts of any homogeneous mass are necessarily exposed to different forces--forces which differ either in their kinds or amounts2 and being exposed to different forces they are of necessity differently modified4 ,the relations of outside and inside1 and of comparative nearness to neighbouring sources of influence1 imply the reception of influences which are unlike in quantity or quality or both2 and it follows that unlike changes will be wrought in the parts dissimilarly acted upon4 ,the unstable equilibrium of any homogeneous aggregate can thus be shown both inductively and deductively4 ,and now let us consider the bearing of this general truth on the evolution of organisms4 ,the germ of a plant or animal is one of these homogeneous aggregates--relatively homogeneous if not absolutely so--whose equilibrium is unstable4 ,but it has not simply the ordinary instability of homogeneous aggregates3 it has something more4 ,for it consists of units which are themselves specially characterized by instability4 ,the constituent molecules of organic matter are distinguished by the feebleness of the affinities which hold their component elements together4 ,they are extremely sensitive to heat1 light1 electricity1 and the chemical actions of foreign elements2 that is1 they are peculiarly liable to be modified by disturbing forces4 ,hence then it follows1 a priori1 that a homogeneous aggregate of these unstable molecules will have an excessive tendency to lose its equilibrium4 ,it will have a quite special liability to lapse into a non-homogeneous state4 ,it will rapidly gravitate towards heretogeneity4 ,moreover1 the process must repeat itself in each of the subordinate groups of organic units which are differentiated by the modifying forces4 ,each of these subordinate groups1 like the original group1 must gradually1 in obedience to the influences acting on it1 lose its balance of parts--must pass from a uniform into a multiform state4 ,and so on continuously4 ,thus1 starting from the general laws of things1 and the known chemical attributes of organic matter1 we may conclude deductively that the homogeneous germs of organisms have a peculiar proclivity towards a non-homogeneous state2 which may be either the state we call decomposition1 or the state we call organization4 99 99 99 99 99 ,at present we have reached a conclusion only of the most general nature4 ,we merely learn that some kind of heterogeneity is inevitable2 but as yet there is nothing to tell us what kind4 ,besides that orderly heterogeneity which distinguishes organisms1 there is the disorderly or chaotic heterogeneity1 into which a loose mass of inorganic matter lapses2 and at present no reason has been given why the homogeneous germ of a plant or animal should not lapse into the disorderly instead of the orderly heterogeneity4 ,but by pursuing still further the line of argument hitherto followed we shall find a reason4 ,we have seen that the instability of homogeneous aggregates in general1 and of organic ones in particular1 is consequent on the various ways and degrees in which their constituent parts are exposed to the disturbing forces brought to bear on them3 their parts are differently acted upon1 and therefore become different4 ,manifestly1 then1 a rationale of the special changes which a germ undergoes1 must be sought in the particular relations which its several parts bear to each other and to their environment4 ,however it may be masked1 we may suspect the fundamental principle of organization to be1 that the many like units forming a germ acquire those kinds and degrees of unlikeness which their respective positions entail4 ,take a mass of unorganized but organizable matter--either the body of one of the lowest living forms1 or the germ of one of the higher4 ,consider its circumstances4 ,it is immersed in water or air2 or it is contained within a parent organism4 ,wherever placed1 however1 its outer and inner parts stand differently related to surrounding existences--nutriment1 oxygen1 and the various stimuli4 ,but this is not all4 ,whether it lies quiescent at the bottom of the water1 whether it moves through the water preserving some definite attitude1 or whether it is in the inside of an adult2 it equally results that certain parts of its surface are more directly exposed to surrounding agencies than other parts--in some cases more exposed to light1 heat1 or oxygen1 and in others to the maternal tissues and their contents4 ,the destruction of its original equilibrium is therefore certain4 ,it may take place in one of two ways4 ,either the disturbing forces may be such as to overbalance the affinities of the organic elements1 in which case there results that chaotic heterogeneity known as decomposition2 or1 as is ordinarily the case1 such changes are induced as do not destroy the organic compounds1 but only modify them3 the parts most exposed to the modifying forces being most modified4 ,hence result those first differentiations which constitute incipient organization4 ,from the point of view thus reached1 suppose we look at a few cases3 neglecting for the present all consideration of the tendency to assume the inherited type4 ,note first what appear to be exceptions1 as the ,amoeba4 ,in this creature and its allies1 the substance of the jelly-like body remains throughout life unorganized--undergoes no permanent differentiations4 ,but this fact1 which seems directly opposed to our inference1 is really one of the most significant evidences of its truth4 ,for what is the peculiarity of the ,rhizopods1 exemplified by the ,amoeba8 ,they undergo perpetual and irregular changes of shape--they show no persistent relations of parts4 ,what lately formed a portion of the interior is now protruded1 and1 as a temporary limb1 is attached to some object it happens to touch4 ,what is now a part of the surface will presently be drawn1 along with the atom of nutriment sticking to it1 into the centre of the mass4 ,thus there is an unceasing interchange of places2 and the relations of inner and outer have no settled existence4 ,but by the hypothesis1 it is only in virtue of their unlike positions with respect to modifying forces1 that the originally-like units of a living mass become unlike4 ,we must not therefore expect any established differentiation of parts in creatures which exhibit no established differences of position in their parts4 ,this negative evidence is borne out by abundant positive evidence4 ,when we turn from these ever-changing specks of living jelly to organisms having unchanging distributions of substance1 we find differences of tissue corresponding to differences of relative position4 ,in all the higher ,protozoa1 as also in the ,protophyta1 we meet with a fundamental differentiation into cell-membrane and cell-contents1 answering to that fundamental contrast of conditions implied by the words outside and inside4 ,and on passing from what are roughly classed as unicellular organisms to the lowest of those which consist of aggregated cells1 we equally observe the connexion between structural differences and differences of circumstance4 ,in the sponge1 permeated throughout by currents of sea-water1 the absence of definite organization corresponds with the absence of definite unlikeness of conditions4 ,in the ,thalassicolla of ,professor ,huxley--a transparent1 colourless body1 found floating passively at the surface of the sea1 and consisting essentially of a mass of cells united by jelly--there is displayed a rude structure obviously subordinated to the primary relations of centre and surface3 in all of its many and important varieties1 the parts exhibit a more or less concentric arrangement4 ,after this primary modification1 by which the outer tissues are differentiated from the inner1 the next in order of constancy and importance is that by which some part of the outer tissues is differentiated from the rest2 and this corresponds with the almost universal fact that some part of the outer tissues is more directly exposed to certain environing influences than the rest4 ,here1 as before1 the apparent exceptions are extremely significant4 ,some of the lowest vegetable organisms1 as the ,hematococci and ,protococci1 evenly imbedded in a mass of mucus1 or dispersed through the ,arctic snow1 display no differentiations of surface3 the several parts of the surface being subjected to no definite contrasts of conditions4 ,the ,thalassicolla above mentioned1 unfixed1 and rolled about by the waves1 presents all its sides successively to the same agencies2 and all its sides are alike4 ,a ciliated sphere like the ,volvox has no parts of its periphery unlike other parts2 and it is not to be expected that it should have2 seeing that as it revolves in all directions1 it does not1 in traversing the water1 permanently expose any part to special conditions4 ,but when we come to creatures that are either fixed1 or while moving1 severally preserve a definite attitude1 we no longer find uniformity of surface4 ,the gemmule of a ,zoophyte1 which during its locomotive stage is distinguishable only into outer and inner tissues1 no sooner takes root than its upper end begins to assume a different structure from its lower4 ,the free-swimming embryo of an aquatic annelid1 being ovate and not ciliated all over1 moves with one end foremost2 and its differentiations proceed in conformity with this contrast of circumstances4 ,the principle thus displayed in the humbler forms of life1 is traceable during the development of the higher2 though being here soon masked by the assumption of the hereditary type1 it cannot be traced far4 ,thus the mulberry-mass into which a fertilized ovum of a vertebrate animal first resolves itself1 soon begins to exhibit a difference between the outer and inner parts answering to the difference of circumstances4 ,the peripheral cells1 after reaching a more complete development than the central ones1 coalesce into a membrane enclosing the rest2 and then the cells lying next to these outer ones become aggregated with them1 and increase the thickness of the germinal membrane1 while the central cells liquefy4 ,again1 one part of the germinal membrane presently becomes distinguishable as the germinal spot2 and without asserting that the cause of this is to be found in the unlike relations which the respective parts of the germinal membrane bear to environing influences1 it is clear that we have in these unlike relations an element of disturbance tending to destroy the original homogeneity of the germinal membrane4 ,further1 the germinal membrane by and by divides into two layers1 internal and external2 the one in contact with the liquefied interior part or yelk1 the other exposed to the surrounding fluids3 this contrast of circumstances being in obvious correspondence with the contrast of structures which follows it4 ,once more1 the subsequent appearance of the vascular layer between these mucous and serous layers1 as they have been named1 admits of a like interpretation4 ,and in this and the various complications which now begin to show themselves1 we may see coming into play that general law of the multiplication of effects flowing from one cause1 to which the increase of heterogeneity was elsewhere ascribed4#i ,confining our remarks1 as we do1 to the most general facts of development1 we think that some light is thus thrown on them4 ,that the unstable equilibrium of a homogeneous germ must be destroyed by the unlike exposure of its several units to surrounding influences1 is an a priori conclusion4 ,and it seems also to be an a priori conclusion1 that the several units thus differently acted upon1 must either be decomposed1 or must undergo such modifications of nature as may enable them to live in the respective circumstances they are thrown into3 in other words--they must either die or become adapted to their conditions4 ,indeed1 we might infer as much without going through the foregoing train of reasoning4 ,the superficial organic units 7be they the outer cells of a mulberry-mass1 or be they the outer molecules of an individual cell7 must assume the function which their position necessitates2 and assuming this function1 must acquire such character as performance of it involves4 ,the layer of organic units lying in contact with the yelk must be those through which the yelk is absorbed2 and so must be adapted to the absorbent office4 ,on this condition only does the process of organization appear possible4 ,we might almost say that just as some race of animals1 which multiplies and spreads into divers regions of the earth1 becomes differentiated into several races through the adaptation of each to its conditions of life2 so1 the originally homogeneous population of cells arising in a fertilized germ-cell1 becomes divided into several populations of cells that grow unlike in virtue of the unlikeness of their circumstances4 ,moreover1 it is to be remarked in further proof of our position1 that it finds its clearest and most abundant illustrations where the conditions of the case are the simplest and most general--where the phenomena are the least involved3 we mean in the production of individual cells4 ,the structures which presently arise round nuclei in a blastema1 and which have in some way been determined by those nuclei as centres of influence1 evidently conform to the law2 for the parts of the blastema in contact with the nuclei are differently conditioned from the parts not in contact with them4 ,again1 the formation of a membrane round each of the masses of granules into which the endochrome of an alga-cell breaks up1 is an instance of analogous kind4 ,and should the recently-asserted fact that cells may arise round vacuoles in a mass of organizable substance1 be confirmed1 another good example will be furnished2 for such portions of substance as bound these vacant spaces are subject to influences unlike those to which other portions of the substance are subject4 ,if then we can most clearly trace this law of modification in these primordial processes1 as well as in those more complex but analogous ones exhibited in the early changes of an ovum1 we have strong reason for thinking that the law is fundamental4 ,but1 as already more than once hinted1 this principle1 understood in the simple form here presented1 supplies no key to the detailed phenomena of organic development4 ,it fails entirely to explain generic and specific peculiarities2 and leaves us equally in the dark respecting those more important distinctions by which families and orders are marked out4 ,why two ova1 similarly exposed in the same pool1 should become the one a fish1 and the other a reptile1 it cannot tell us4 ,that from two different eggs placed under the same hen1 should respectively come forth a duckling and a chicken1 is a fact not to be accounted for on the hypothesis above developed4 ,here we are obliged to fall back upon the unexplained principle of hereditary transmission4 ,the capacity possessed by an unorganized germ of unfolding into a complex adult which repeats ancestral traits in minute details1 and that even when it has been placed in conditions unlike those of its ancestors1 is a capacity impossible for us to understand4 ,that a microscopic portion of seemingly structureless matter should embody an influence of such kind1 that the resulting man will in fifty years after become gouty or insane1 is a truth which would be incredible were it not daily illustrated4 ,but though the manner in which hereditary likeness1 in all its complications1 is conveyed1 is a mystery passing comprehension1 it is quite conceivable that it is conveyed in subordination to the law of adaptation above explained2 and we are not without reasons for thinking that it is so4 ,various facts show that acquired peculiarities resulting from the adaptation of constitution to conditions1 are transmissible to offspring4 ,such acquired peculiarities consist of differences of structure or composition in one or more of the tissues4 ,that is to say1 of the aggregate of similar organic units composing a germ1 the group going to the formation of a particular tissue1 will take on the special character which the adaptation of that tissue to new circumstances had produced in the parents4 ,we know this to be a general law of organic modifications4 ,further1 it is the only law of organic modifications of which we have any evidence4#aj ,it is not impossible then that it is the universal law2 comprehending not simply those minor modifications which offspring inherit from recent ancestry1 but comprehending also those larger modifications distinctive of species1 genus1 order1 class1 which they inherit from antecedent races of organisms4 ,and thus it may be that the law of adaptation is the sole law2 presiding not only over the differentiation of any race of organisms into several races1 but also over the differentiation of the race of organic units composing a germ1 into the many races of organic units composing an adult4 ,so understood1 the process gone through by every unfolding organism will consist1 partly in the direct adaptation of its elements to their several circumstances1 and partly in the assumption of characters resulting from analogous adaptations of the elements of all ancestral organisms4 ,but our argument does not commit us to any such far-reaching speculation as this2 which we introduce simply as suggested by it1 not involved4 ,all we are here concerned to show1 is1 that the deductive method aids us in interpreting some of the more general phenomena of development4 ,that all homogeneous aggregates are in unstable equilibrium is a universal truth1 from which is deducible the instability of every organic germ4 ,from the known sensitiveness of organic compounds to chemical1 thermal1 and other disturbing forces1 we further infer the unusual instability of every organic germ--a proneness far beyond that of other homogeneous aggregates to lapse into a heterogeneous state4 ,by the same line of reasoning we are led to the additional inference1 that the first divisions into which a germ resolves itself1 being severally in a state of unstable equilibrium1 are similarly prone to undergo further changes2 and so on continuously4 ,moreover1 we have found it to be equally an a priori conclusion1 that as1 in all other cases1 the loss of homogeneity is due to the different degrees and kinds of force brought to bear on the different parts2 so1 in this case too1 difference of circumstances is the primary cause of differentiation4 ,add to which1 that as the several changes undergone by the respective parts thus diversely acted upon1 are changes which do not destroy their vital activity1 they must be changes which bring that vital activity into subordination to the incident forces--they must be adaptations2 and the like must be in some sense true of all the subsequent changes4 ,thus by deductive reasoning we get some insight into the method of organization4 ,however unable we are1 and probably ever shall be1 to comprehend the way in which a germ is made to take on the special form of its race1 we may yet comprehend the general principles which regulate its first modifications2 and1 remembering the unity of plan so conspicuous throughout nature1 we may suspect that these principles are in some way concerned in succeeding modifications4 99 99 99 99 99 ,a controversy now going on among zoologists1 opens yet another field for the application of the deductive method4 ,we believe that the question whether there does or does not exist a necessary correlation among the several parts of an organism is determinable a priori4 ,cuvier1 who first asserted this necessary correlation1 professed to base his restorations of extinct animals upon it4 ,geoffroy ,st4 ,hilaire and ,de ,blainville1 from different points of view1 contested ,cuvier's hypothesis2 and the discussion1 which has much interest as bearing on paleontology1 has been recently revived under a somewhat modified form3 ,professors ,huxley and ,owen being respectively the assailant and defender of the hypothesis4 ,cuvier says--,comparative anatomy possesses a principle whose just development is sufficient to dissipate all difficulties2 it is that of the correlation of forms in organized beings1 by means of which every kind of organized being might1 strictly speaking1 be recognized by a fragment of any of its parts4 ,every organized being constitutes a whole1 a single and complete system1 whose parts mutually correspond and concur by their reciprocal reaction to the same definite end4 ,none of these parts can be changed without affecting the others2 and consequently each taken separately1 indicates and gives all the rest4 ,he then gives illustrations3 arguing that the carnivorous form of tooth necessitating a certain action of the jaw1 implies a particular form in its condyles2 implies also limbs fit for seizing and holding prey2 therefore implies claws1 a certain structure of the leg-bones1 a certain form of shoulder-blade4 ,summing up he says1 that the claw1 the scapula1 the condyle1 the femur1 and all the other bones1 taken separately1 will give the tooth or one another2 and by commencing with any one1 he who had a rational conception of the laws of the organic economy1 could reconstruct the whole animal4 ,it will be seen that the method of restoration here contended for1 is based on the alleged physiological necessity of the connexion between these several peculiarities4 ,the argument used is1 not that a scapula of a certain shape may be recognized as having belonged to a carnivorous mammal because we always find that carnivorous mammals do possess such scapulas2 but the argument is that they must possess them1 because carnivorous habits would be impossible without them4 ,and in the above quotation ,cuvier asserts that the necessary correlation which he considers so obvious in these cases1 exists throughout the system3 admitting1 however1 that in consequence of our limited knowledge of physiology we are unable in many cases to trace this necessary correlation1 and are obliged to base our conclusions upon observed coexistences1 of which we do not understand the reason1 but which we find invariable4 ,now ,professor ,huxley has recently shown that1 in the first place1 this empirical method1 which ,cuvier introduces as quite subordinate1 and to be used only in aid of the rational method1 is really the method which ,cuvier habitually employed--the so-called rational method remaining practically a dead letter2 and1 in the second place1 he has shown that ,cuvier himself has in several places so far admitted the inapplicability of the rational method1 as virtually to surrender it as a method4 ,but more than this1 ,professor ,huxley contends that the alleged necessary correlation is not true4 ,quite admitting the physiological dependence of parts on each other1 he denies that it is a dependence of a kind which could not be otherwise4 ,thus the teeth of a lion and the stomach of the animal are in such relation that the one is fitted to digest the food which the other can tear1 they are physiologically correlated2 but we have no reason for affirming this to be a necessary physiological correlation1 in the sense that no other could equally fit its possessor for living on recent flesh4 ,the number and form of the teeth might have been quite different from that which we know them to be1 and the construction of the stomach might have been greatly altered2 and yet the functions of these organs might have been equally well performed4 ,thus much is needful to give an idea of the controversy4 ,it is not here our purpose to go more at length into the evidence cited on either side4 ,we simply wish to show that the question may be settled deductively4 ,before going on to do this1 however1 let us briefly notice two collateral points4 ,in his defence of the ,cuvierian doctrine1 ,professor ,owen avails himself of the odium theologicum4 ,he attributes to his opponents the insinuation and masked advocacy of the doctrine subversive of a recognition of the ,higher ,mind4 ,now1 saying nothing about the questionable propriety of thus prejudging an issue in science1 we think this is an unfortunate accusation4 ,what is there in the hypothesis of necessary1 as distinguished from actual1 correlation of parts1 which is particularly in harmony with ,theism8 ,maintenance of the necessity1 whether of sequences or of coexistences1 is commonly thought rather a derogation from divine power than otherwise4 ,cuvier says--,none of these parts can be changed without affecting the others2 and consequently1 each taken separately1 indicates and gives all the rest4 ,that is to say1 in the nature of things the correlation could not have been otherwise4 ,on the other hand1 ,professor ,huxley says we have no warrant for asserting that the correlation could not have been otherwise2 but have not a little reason for thinking that the same physiological ends might have been differently achieved4 ,the one doctrine limits the possibilities of creation2 the other denies the implied limit4 ,which1 then1 is most open to the charge of covert ,atheism8 ,on the other point we lean to the opinion of ,professor ,owen4 ,we agree with him in thinking that where a rational correlation 7in the highest sense of the term7 can be made out1 it affords a better basis for deduction than an empirical correlation ascertained only by accumulated observations4 ,premising that by rational correlation is not meant one in which we can trace1 or think we can trace1 a design1 but one of which the negation is inconceivable 7and this is the species of correlation which ,cuvier's principle implies72 then we hold that our knowledge of the correlation is of a more certain kind than where it is simply inductive4 ,we think that ,professor ,huxley1 in his anxiety to avoid the error of making ,thought the measure of ,things1 does not sufficiently bear in mind the fact1 that as our notion of necessity is determined by some absolute uniformity pervading all orders of our experiences1 it follows that an organic correlation which cannot be conceived otherwise1 is guaranteed by a much wider induction than one ascertained only by the observation of organisms4 ,but the truth is1 that there are relatively few organic correlations of which the negation is inconceivable4 ,if we find the skull1 vertebr1 ribs1 and phalanges of some quadruped as large as an elephant2 we may indeed be certain that the legs of this quadruped were of considerable size--much larger than those of a rat2 and our reason for conceiving this correlation as necessary1 is1 that it is based1 not only upon our experiences of moving organisms1 but upon all our mechanical experiences relative to masses and their supports4 ,but even were there many physiological correlations really of this order1 which there are not1 there would be danger in pursuing this line of reasoning1 in consequence of the liability to include within the class of truly necessary correlations1 those which are not such4 ,for instance1 there would seem to be a necessary correlation between the eye and the surface of the body3 light being needful for vision1 it might be supposed that every eye must be external4 ,nevertheless it is a fact that there are creatures1 as the ,cirrhipedia1 having eyes 7not very efficient ones1 it may be7 deeply imbedded within the body4 ,again1 a necessary correlation might be assumed between the dimensions of the mammalian uterus and those of the pelvis4 ,it would appear impossible that in any species there should exist a well-developed uterus containing a full-sized foetus1 and yet that the arch of the pelvis should be too small to allow the foetus to pass4 ,and were the only mammal having a very small pelvic arch1 a fossil one1 it would have been inferred1 on the ,cuvierian method1 that the foetus must have been born in a rudimentary state2 and that the uterus must have been proportionally small4 ,but there happens to be an extant mammal having an undeveloped pelvis--the mole--which presents us with a fact that saves us from this erroneous inference4 ,the young of the mole are not born through the pelvic arch at all2 but in front of it6 ,thus1 granting that some quite direct physiological correlations may be necessary1 we see that there is great risk of including among them some which are not4 ,with regard to the great mass of the correlations1 however1 including all the indirect ones1 ,professor ,huxley seems to us warranted in denying that they are necessary2 and we now propose to show deductively the truth of his thesis4 ,let us begin with an analogy4 ,whoever has been through an extensive iron-works1 has seen a gigantic pair of shears worked by machinery1 and used for cutting in two1 bars of iron that are from time to time thrust between its blades4 ,supposing these blades to be the only visible parts of the apparatus1 anyone observing their movements 7or rather the movement of one1 for the other is commonly fixed71 will see from the manner in which the angle increases and decreases1 and from the curve described by the moving extremity1 that there must be some centre of motion--either a pivot or an external box equivalent to it4 ,this may be regarded as a necessary correlation4 ,moreover1 he might infer that beyond the centre of motion the moving blade was produced into a lever1 to which the power was applied2 but as another arrangement is just possible1 this could not be called anything more than a highly probable correlation4 ,if now he went a step further1 and asked how the reciprocal movement was given to the lever1 he would perhaps conclude that it was given by a crank4 ,but if he knew anything of mechanics1 he would know that it might possibly be given by an eccentric4 ,or again1 he would know that the effect could be achieved by a cam4 ,that is to say1 he would see that there was no necessary correlation between the shears and the remoter parts of the apparatus4 ,take another case4 ,the plate of a printing-press is required to move up and down to the extent of an inch or so2 and it must exert its greatest pressure when it reaches the extreme of its downward movement4 ,if now anyone will look over the stock of a printing-press maker1 he will see half a dozen different mechanical arrangements by which these ends are achieved2 and a machinist would tell him that as many more might readily be invented4 ,if1 then1 there is no necessary correlation between the special parts of a machine1 still less is there between those of an organism4 ,from a converse point of view the same truth is manifest4 ,bearing in mind the above analogy1 it will be foreseen that an alteration in one part of an organism will not necessarily entail some one specific set of alterations in the other parts4 ,cuvier says1 ,none of these parts can be changed without affecting the others2 and consequently1 each taken separately1 indicates and gives all the rest4 ,the first of these propositions may pass1 but the second1 which it is alleged follows from it1 is not true2 for it implies that all the rest can be severally affected in only one way and degree1 whereas they can be affected in many ways and degrees4 ,to show this1 we must again have recourse to a mechanical analogy4 ,if you set a brick on end and thrust it over1 you can predict with certainty in what direction it will fall1 and what attitude it will assume4 ,if1 again setting it up1 you put another on the top of it1 you can no longer foresee with accuracy the results of an overthrow2 and on repeating the experiment1 no matter how much care is taken to place the bricks in the same positions1 and to apply the same degree of force in the same direction1 the effects will on no two occasions be exactly alike4 ,and in proportion as the aggregation is complicated by the addition of new and unlike parts1 will the results of any disturbance become more varied and incalculable4 ,the like truth is curiously illustrated by locomotive engines4 ,it is a fact familiar to mechanical engineers and engine-drivers1 that out of a number of engines built as accurately as possible to the same pattern1 no two will act in just the same manner4 ,each will have its peculiarities4 ,the play of actions and reactions will so far differ1 that under like conditions each will behave in a somewhat different way2 and every driver has to learn the idiosyncrasies of his own engine before he can work it to the greatest advantage4 ,in organisms themselves this indefiniteness of mechanical reaction is clearly traceable4 ,two boys throwing stones will always differ more or less in their attitudes1 as will two billiard-players4 ,the familiar fact that each individual has a characteristic gait1 illustrates the point still better4 ,the rhythmical motion of the leg is simple1 and on the ,cuvierian hypothesis1 should react on the body in some uniform way4 ,but in consequence of those slight differences of structure which consist with identity of species1 no two individuals make exactly similar movements either of the trunk or the arms4 ,there is always a peculiarity recognizable by their friends4 ,when we pass to disturbing forces of a non-mechanical kind1 the same truth becomes still more conspicuous4 ,expose several persons to a drenching storm2 and while one will subsequently feel no appreciable inconvenience1 another will have a cough1 another a catarrh1 another an attack of diarrhoea1 another a fit of rheumatism4 ,vaccinate several children of the same age with the same quantity of virus1 applied to the same part1 and the symptoms will not be quite alike in any of them1 either in kind or intensity2 and in some cases the differences will be extreme4 ,the quantity of alcohol which will send one man to sleep1 will render another unusually brilliant--will make this maudlin1 and that irritable4 ,opium will produce either drowsiness or wakefulness3 so will tobacco4 ,now in all these cases--mechanical and other--some force is brought to bear primarily on one part of an organism1 and secondarily on the rest2 and1 according to the doctrine of ,cuvier1 the rest ought to be affected in a specific way4 ,we find this to be by no means the case4 ,the original change produced in one part does not stand in any necessary correlation with every one of the changes produced in the other parts2 nor do these stand in any necessary correlation with one another4 ,the functional alteration which the disturbing force causes in the organ directly acted upon1 does not involve some particular set of functional alterations in the other organs2 but will be followed by some one out of various sets4 ,and it is a manifest corollary1 that any structural alteration which may eventually be produced in the one organ1 will not be accompanied by some particular set of structural alterations in the other organs4 ,there will be no necessary correlation of forms4 ,thus ,paleontology must depend upon the empirical method4 ,a fossil species that was obliged to change its food or habits of life1 did not of necessity undergo the particular set of modifications exhibited2 but1 under some slight change of predisposing causes--as of season or latitude--might have undergone some other set of modifications3 the determining circumstance being one which1 in the human sense1 we call fortuitous4 ,may we not say then1 that the deductive method elucidates this vexed question in physiology2 while at the same time our argument collaterally exhibits the limits within which the deductive method is applicable4 ,for while we see that this extremely general question may be satisfactorily dealt with deductively2 the conclusion arrived at itself implies that the more special phenomena of organization cannot be so dealt with4 99 99 99 99 99 ,there is yet another method of investigating the general truths of physiology--a method to which physiology already owes one luminous idea1 but which is not at present formally recognized as a method4 ,we refer to the comparison of physiological phenomena with social phenomena4 ,the analogy between individual organisms and the social organism1 is one that has from early days occasionally forced itself on the attention of the observant4 ,and though modern science does not countenance those crude ideas of this analogy which have been from time to time expressed since the ,greeks flourished2 yet it tends to show that there is an analogy1 and a remarkable one4 ,while it is becoming clear that there are not those special parallelisms between the constituent parts of a man and those of a nation1 which have been thought to exist2 it is also becoming clear that the general principles of development and structure displayed in organized bodies are displayed in societies also4 ,the fundamental characteristic both of societies and of living creatures1 is1 that they consist of mutually-dependent parts2 and it would seem that this involves a community of various other characteristics4 ,those who are acquainted with the broad facts of both physiology and sociology1 are beginning to recognize this correspondence not as a plausible fancy1 but as a scientific truth4 ,and we are strongly of opinion that it will by and by be seen to hold to an extent which few at present suspect4 ,meanwhile1 if any such correspondence exists1 it is clear that physiology and sociology will more or less interpret each other4 ,each affords its special facilities for inquiry4 ,relations of cause and effect clearly traceable in the social organism1 may lead to the search for analogous ones in the individual organism2 and may so elucidate what might else be inexplicable4 ,laws of growth and function disclosed by the pure physiologist1 may occasionally give us the clue to certain social modifications otherwise difficult to understand4 ,if they can do no more1 the two sciences can at least exchange suggestions and confirmations2 and this will be no small aid4 ,the conception of the physiological division of labour1 which political economy has already supplied to physiology1 is one of no small value4 ,and probably it has others to give4 ,in support of this opinion1 we will now cite cases in which such aid is furnished4 ,and in the first place1 let us see whether the facts of social organization do not afford additional support to some of the doctrines set forth in the foregoing parts of this article4 ,one of the propositions supported by evidence was that in animals the process of development is carried on1 not by differentiations only1 but by subordinate integrations4 ,now in the social organism we may see the same duality of process2 and further1 it is to be observed that the integrations are of the same three kinds4 ,thus we have integrations which arise from the simple growth of adjacent parts that perform like functions3 as1 for instance1 the coalescence of ,manchester with its calico-weaving suburbs4 ,we have other integrations which arise when1 out of several places producing a particular commodity1 one monopolizes more and more of the business1 and leaves the rest to dwindle3 witness the growth of the ,yorkshire cloth-districts at the expense of those in the west of ,england2 or the absorption by ,staffordshire of the pottery-manufacture1 and the consequent decay of the establishments that once flourished at ,worcester1 ,derby1 and elsewhere4 ,and we have those yet other integrations which result from the actual approximation of the similarly-occupied parts3 whence result such facts as the concentration of publishers in ,paternoster ,row1 of lawyers in the ,temple and neighbourhood1 of corn-merchants about ,mark ,lane1 of civil engineers in ,great ,george ,street1 of bankers in the centre of the city4 ,finding thus that in the evolution of the social organism1 as in the evolution of individual organisms1 there are integrations as well as differentiations1 and moreover that these integrations are of the same three orders2 we have additional reason for considering these integrations as essential parts of the developmental process1 needed to be included in its formula4 ,and further1 the circumstance that in the social organism these integrations are determined by community of function1 confirms the hypothesis that they are thus determined in the individual organism4 ,again1 we endeavoured to show deductively1 that the contrasts of parts first seen in all unfolding embryos1 are consequent upon the contrasted circumstances to which such parts are exposed2 that thus1 adaptation of constitution to conditions is the principle which determines their primary changes2 and that1 possibly1 if we include under the formula hereditarily-transmitted adaptations1 all subsequent differentiations may be similarly determined4 ,well1 we need not long contemplate the facts to see that some of the predominant social differentiations are brought about in an analogous way4 ,as the members of an originally-homogeneous community multiply and spread1 the gradual separation into sections which simultaneously takes place1 manifestly depends on differences of local circumstances4 ,those who happen to live near some place chosen1 perhaps for its centrality1 as one of periodical assemblage1 become traders1 and a town springs up2 those who live dispersed1 continue to hunt or cultivate the earth2 those who spread to the sea-shore fall into maritime occupations4 ,and each of these classes undergoes modifications of character fitting to its function4 ,later in the process of social evolution these local adaptations are greatly multiplied4 ,in virtue of differences of soil and climate1 the rural inhabitants in different parts of the kingdom1 have their occupations partially specialized2 and are respectively distinguished as chiefly producing cattle1 or sheep1 or wheat1 or oats1 or hops1 or cider4 ,people living where coal-fields are discovered become colliers2 ,cornishmen take to mining because ,cornwall is metalliferous2 and the iron-manufacture is the dominant industry where ironstone is plentiful4 ,liverpool has assumed the office of importing cotton1 in consequence of its proximity to the district where cotton goods are made2 and for analogous reasons ,hull has become the chief port at which foreign wools are brought in4 ,even in the establishment of breweries1 of dye-works1 of slate-quarries1 of brick-yards1 we may see the same truth4 ,so that1 both in general and in detail1 these industrial specializations of the social organism which characterize separate districts1 primarily depend on local circumstances4 ,of the originally-similar units making up the social mass1 different groups assume the different functions which their respective positions entail2 and become adapted to their conditions4 ,thus1 that which we concluded1 a priori1 to be the leading cause of organic differentiations1 we find1 a posteriori1 to be the leading cause of social differentiations4 ,nay further1 as we inferred that possibly the embryonic changes which are not thus directly caused1 are caused by hereditarily-transmitted adaptations2 so1 we may actually see that in embryonic societies1 such changes as are not due to direct adaptations1 are in the main traceable to adaptations originally undergone by the parent society4 ,the colonies founded by distinct nations1 while they are alike in exhibiting specializations caused in the way above described1 grow unlike in so far as they take on1 more or less1 the organizations of the nations they sprung from4 ,a ,french settlement does not develop exactly after the same manner as an ,english one2 and both assume forms different from those which ,roman settlements assumed4 ,now the fact that the differentiation of societies is determined partly by the direct adaptation of their units to local conditions1 and partly by the transmitted influence of like adaptations undergone by ancestral societies1 tends strongly to enforce the conclusion1 otherwise reached1 that the differentiation of individual organisms1 similarly results from immediate adaptations compounded with ancestral adaptations4 ,from confirmations thus furnished by sociology to physiology1 let us now pass to a suggestion similarly furnished4 ,a factory1 or other producing establishment1 or a town made up of such establishments1 is an agency for elaborating some commodity consumed by society at large2 and may be regarded as analogous to a gland or viscus in an individual organism4 ,if we inquire what is the primitive mode in which one of these producing establishments grows up1 we find it to be this4 ,a single worker1 who himself sells the produce of his labour1 is the germ4 ,his business increasing1 he employs helpers--his sons or others2 and having done this1 he becomes a vendor not only of his own handiwork1 but of that of others4 ,a further increase of his business compels him to multiply his assistants1 and his sale grows so rapid that he is obliged to confine himself to the process of selling3 he ceases to be a producer1 and becomes simply a channel through which the produce of others is conveyed to the public4 ,should his prosperity rise yet higher1 he finds that he is unable to manage even the sale of his commodities1 and has to employ others1 probably of his own family1 to aid him in selling2 so that1 to him as a main channel are now added subordinate channels4 ,moreover1 when there grow up in one place1 as a ,manchester or a ,birmingham1 many establishments of like kind1 this process is carried still further4 ,there arise factors and buyers1 who are the channels through which is transmitted the produce of many factories2 and we believe that primarily these factors were manufacturers who undertook to dispose of the produce of smaller houses as well as their own1 and ultimately became salesmen only4 ,under a converse aspect1 all the stages of this development have been within these few years exemplified in our railway contractors4 ,there are sundry men now living who illustrate the whole process in their own persons--men who were originally navvies1 digging and wheeling2 who then undertook some small sub-contract1 and worked along with those they paid2 who presently took larger contracts1 and employed foremen2 and who now contract for whole railways1 and let portions to sub-contractors4 ,that is to say1 we have men who were originally workers1 but have finally become the main channels out of which diverge secondary channels1 which again bifurcate into the subordinate channels1 through which flows the money 7representing the nutriment7 supplied by society to the actual makers of the railway4 ,now it seems worth inquiring whether this is not the original course followed in the evolution of secreting and excreting organs in an animal4 ,we know that such is the process by which the liver is developed4 ,out of the group of bile-cells forming the germ of it1 some centrally-placed ones1 lying next to the intestine1 are transformed into ducts through which the secretion of the peripheral bile-cells is poured into the intestine2 and as the peripheral bile-cells multiply1 there similarly arise secondary ducts emptying themselves into the main ones2 tertiary ones into these2 and so on4 ,recent inquiries show that the like is the case with the lungs1--that the bronchial tubes are thus formed4 ,but while analogy suggests that this is the original mode in which such organs are developed1 it at the same time suggests that this does not necessarily continue to be the mode4 ,for as we find that in the social organism1 manufacturing establishments are no longer commonly developed through the series of modifications above described1 but now mostly arise by the direct transformation of a number of persons into master1 clerks1 foremen1 workers1 c42 so the approximate method of forming organs1 may in some cases be replaced by a direct metamorphosis of the organic units into the destined structure1 without any transitional structures being passed through4 ,that there are organs thus formed is an ascertained fact2 and the additional question which analogy suggests is1 whether the direct method is substituted for the indirect method4 ,such parallelisms might be multiplied4 ,and were it possible here to show in detail the close correspondence between the two kinds of organization1 our case would be seen to have abundant support4 ,but1 as it is1 these few illustrations will sufficiently justify the opinion that study of organized bodies may be indirectly furthered by study of the body politic4 ,hints may be expected1 if nothing more4 ,and thus we venture to think that the ,inductive ,method1 usually alone employed by most physiologists1 may not only derive important assistance from the ,deductive ,method1 but may further be supplemented by the ,sociological ,method4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #f3 ,carpenter's ,principles of ,comparative ,physiology1 pp4 #faf-ag4 ,footnote #g3 ,with the exception1 perhaps1 of the ,myxinoid fishes1 in which what is considered as the nasal orifice is single1 and on the median line4 ,but seeing how unusual is the position of this orifice1 it seems questionable whether it is the true homologue of the nostrils4 ,footnote #h3 ,in the ,westminster ,review for ,april1 #aheg2 and now reprinted in this volume4 ,footnote #i3 ,see ,essay on ,progress3 its ,law and ,cause4 ,footnote #aj3 ,this was written before the publication of the ,origin of ,species4 ,i leave it standing because it shows the stage of thought then arrived at4 ,,the ,,nebular ,,hypothesis4 ,first published in ,the ,westminster ,review for ,july1 #aheh4 ,in explanation of sundry passages1 it seems needful to state that this essay was written in defence of the ,nebular ,hypothesis at a time when it had fallen into disrepute4 ,hence there are some opinions spoken of as current which are no longer current4 ,inquiring into the pedigree of an idea is not a bad means of roughly estimating its value4 ,to have come of respectable ancestry1 is prima facie evidence of worth in a belief as in a person2 while to be descended from a discreditable stock is1 in the one case as in the other1 an unfavourable index4 ,the analogy is not a mere fancy4 ,beliefs1 together with those who hold them1 are modified little by little in successive generations2 and as the modifications which successive generations of the holders undergo do not destroy the original type1 but only disguise and refine it1 so the accompanying alterations of belief1 however much they purify1 leave behind the essence of the original belief4 ,considered genealogically1 the received theory respecting the creation of the ,solar ,system is unmistakably of low origin4 ,you may clearly trace it back to primitive mythologies4 ,its remotest ancestor is the doctrine that the celestial bodies are personages who originally lived on the ,earth--a doctrine still held by some of the negroes ,livingstone visited4 ,science having divested the sun and planets of their divine personalities1 this old idea was succeeded by the idea which even ,kepler entertained1 that the planets are guided in their courses by presiding spirits3 no longer themselves gods1 they are still severally kept in their orbits by gods4 ,and when gravitation came to dispense with these celestial steersmen1 there was begotten a belief1 less gross than its parent1 but partaking of the same essential nature1 that the planets were originally launched into their orbits by the ,creator's hand4 ,evidently1 though much refined1 the anthropomorphism of the current hypothesis is inherited from the aboriginal anthropomorphism1 which described gods as a stronger order of men4 ,there is an antagonist hypothesis which does not propose to honour the ,unknown ,power manifested in the ,universe1 by such titles as ,the ,master-,builder1 or ,the ,great ,artificer2 but which regards this ,unknown ,power as probably working after a method quite different from that of human mechanics4 ,and the genealogy of this hypothesis is as high as that of the other is low4 ,it is begotten by that ever-enlarging and ever-strengthening belief in the presence of ,law1 which accumulated experiences have gradually produced in the human mind4 ,from generation to generation ,science has been proving uniformities of relation among phenomena which were before thought either fortuitous or supernatural in their origin--has been showing an established order and a constant causation where ignorance had assumed irregularity and arbitrariness4 ,each further discovery of ,law has increased the presumption that ,law is everywhere conformed to4 ,and hence1 among other beliefs1 has arisen the belief that the ,solar ,system originated1 not by manufacture but by evolution4 ,besides its abstract parentage in those grand general conceptions which ,science has generated1 this hypothesis has a concrete parentage of the highest character4 ,based as it is on the law of universal gravitation1 it may claim for its remote progenitor the great thinker who established that law4 ,it was first suggested by one who ranks high among philosophers4 ,the man who collected evidence indicating that stars result from the aggregation of diffused matter1 was the most diligent1 careful1 and original astronomical observer of modern times4 ,and the world has not seen a more learned mathematician than the man who1 setting out with this conception of diffused matter concentrating towards its centre of gravity1 pointed out the way in which there would arise1 in the course of its concentration1 a balanced group of sun1 planets1 and satellites1 like that of which the ,earth is a member4 ,thus1 even were there but little direct evidence assignable for the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 the probability of its truth would be strong4 ,its own high derivation and the low derivation of the antagonist hypothesis1 would together form a weighty reason for accepting it--at any rate1 provisionally4 ,but the direct evidence assignable for the ,nebular ,hypothesis is by no means little4 ,it is far greater in quantity1 and more varied in kind1 than is commonly supposed4 ,much has been said here and there on this or that class of evidences2 but nowhere1 so far as we know1 have all the evidences been fully stated4 ,we propose here to do something towards supplying the deficiency3 believing that1 joined with the a priori reasons given above1 the array of a posteriori reasons will leave little doubt in the mind of any candid inquirer4 ,and first1 let us address ourselves to those recent discoveries in stellar astronomy which have been supposed to conflict with this celebrated speculation4 99 99 99 99 99 ,when ,sir ,william ,herschel1 directing his great reflector to various nebulous spots1 found them resolvable into clusters of stars1 he inferred1 and for a time maintained1 that all nebulous spots are clusters of stars exceedingly remote from us4 ,but after years of conscientious investigation1 he concluded that there were nebulosities which are not of a starry nature2 and on this conclusion was based his hypothesis of a diffused luminous fluid which1 by its eventual aggregation1 produced stars4 ,a telescopic power much exceeding that used by ,herschel1 has enabled ,lord ,rosse to resolve some of the nebul previously unresolved2 and1 returning to the conclusion which ,herschel first formed on similar grounds but afterwards rejected1 many astronomers have assumed that1 under sufficiently high powers1 every nebula would be decomposed into stars--that the irresolvability is due solely to distance4 ,the hypothesis now commonly entertained is1 that all nebul are galaxies more or less like in nature to that immediately surrounding us2 but that they are so inconceivably remote as to look1 through ordinary telescopes1 like small faint spots4 ,and not a few have drawn the corollary1 that by the discoveries of ,lord ,rosse the ,nebular ,hypothesis has been disproved4 ,now1 even supposing that these inferences respecting the distances and natures of the nebul are valid1 they leave the ,nebular ,hypothesis substantially as it was4 ,admitting that each of these faint spots is a sidereal system1 so far removed that its countless stars give less light than one small star of our own sidereal system2 the admission is in no way inconsistent with the belief that stars1 and their attendant planets1 have been formed by the aggregation of nebulous matter4 ,though1 doubtless1 if the existence of nebulous matter now in course of concentration be disproved1 one of the evidences of the ,nebular ,hypothesis is destroyed1 yet the remaining evidences remain4 ,it is a tenable position that though nebular condensation is now nowhere to be seen in progress1 yet it was once going on universally4 ,and1 indeed1 it might be argued that the still-continued existence of diffused nebulous matter is scarcely to be expected2 seeing that the causes which have resulted in the aggregation of one mass1 must have been acting on all masses1 and that hence the existence of masses not aggregated would be a fact calling for explanation4 ,thus1 granting the immediate conclusions suggested by these recent disclosures of the six-feet reflector1 the corollary which many have drawn is inadmissible4 ,but these conclusions may be successfully contested4 ,receiving them though we have been1 for years past1 as established truths1 a critical examination of the facts has convinced us that they are quite unwarrantable4 ,they involve so many manifest incongruities1 that we have been astonished to find men of science entertaining them1 even as probable4 ,let us consider these incongruities4 99 99 99 99 99 ,in the first place1 mark what is inferable from the distribution of nebul4 ,the spaces which precede or which follow simple nebul1 says ,arago1 and a fortiori1 groups of nebul1 contain generally few stars4 ,herschel found this rule to be invariable4 ,thus every time that during a short interval no star approached in virtue of the diurnal motion1 to place itself in the field of his motionless telescope1 he was accustomed to say to the secretary who assisted him1--',prepare to write2 nebul are about to arrive4' ,how does this fact consist with the hypothesis that nebul are remote galaxies8 ,if there were but one nebula1 it would be a curious coincidence were this one nebula so placed in the distant regions of space1 as to agree in direction with a starless spot in our own sidereal system4 ,if there were but two nebul1 and both were so placed1 the coincidence would be excessively strange4 ,what1 then1 shall we say on finding that there are thousands of nebul so placed8 ,shall we believe that in thousands of cases these far-removed galaxies happen to agree in their visible positions with the thin places in our own galaxy8 ,such a belief is impossible4 ,still more manifest does the impossibility of it become when we consider the general distribution of nebul4 ,besides again showing itself in the fact that the poorest regions in stars are near the richest in nebul1 the law above specified applies to the heavens as a whole4 ,in that zone of celestial space where stars are excessively abundant1 nebul are rare2 while in the two opposite celestial spaces that are furthest removed from this zone1 nebul are abundant4 ,scarcely any nebul lie near the galactic circle 7or plane of the ,milky ,way72 and the great mass of them lie round the galactic poles4 ,can this also be mere coincidence8 ,when to the fact that the general mass of nebul are antithetical in position to the general mass of stars1 we add the fact that local regions of nebul are regions where stars are scarce1 and the further fact that single nebul are habitually found in comparatively starless spots2 does not the proof of a physical connexion become overwhelming8 ,should it not require an infinity of evidence to show that nebul are not parts of our sidereal system8 ,let us see whether any such infinity of evidence is assignable4 ,let us see whether there is even a single alleged proof which will bear examination4 ,as seen through colossal telescopes1 says ,humboldt1 the contemplation of these nebulous masses leads us into regions from whence a ray of light1 according to an assumption not wholly improbable1 requires millions of years to reach our earth--to distances for whose measurement the dimensions 7the distance of ,sirius1 or the calculated distances of the binary stars in ,cygnus and the ,centaur7 of our nearest stratum of fixed stars scarcely suffice4 ,in this confused sentence there is implied a belief1 that the distances of the nebul from our galaxy of stars as much transcend the distances of our stars from one another1 as these interstellar distances transcend the dimensions of our planetary system4 ,just as the diameter of the ,earth's orbit1 is a mere point when compared with the distance of our ,sun from ,sirius2 so is the distance of our ,sun from ,sirius1 a mere point when compared with the distance of our galaxy from those far-removed galaxies constituting nebul4 ,observe the consequences of this assumption4 ,if one of these supposed galaxies is so remote that its distance dwarfs our interstellar spaces into points1 and therefore makes the dimensions of our whole sidereal system relatively insignificant2 does it not inevitably follow that the telescopic power required to resolve this remote galaxy into stars1 must be incomparably greater than the telescopic power required to resolve the whole of our own galaxy into stars8 ,is it not certain that an instrument which can just exhibit with clearness the most distant stars of our own cluster1 must be utterly unable to separate one of these remote clusters into stars8 ,what1 then1 are we to think when we find that the same instrument which decomposes hosts of nebul into stars1 fails to resolve completely our own ,milky ,way8 ,take a homely comparison4 ,suppose a man who was surrounded by a swarm of bees1 extending1 as they sometimes do1 so high in the air as to render some of the individual bees almost invisible1 were to declare that a certain spot on the horizon was a swarm of bees2 and that he knew it because he could see the bees as separate specks4 ,incredible as the assertion would be1 it would not exceed in incredibility this which we are criticising4 ,reduce the dimensions to figures1 and the absurdity becomes still more palpable4 ,in round numbers1 the distance of ,sirius from the ,earth is half a million times the distance of the ,earth from the ,sun2 and1 according to the hypothesis1 the distance of a nebula is something like half a million times the distance of ,sirius4 ,now1 our own starry island1 or nebula1 as ,humboldt calls it1 forms a lens-shaped1 flattened1 and everywhere detached stratum1 whose major axis is estimated at seven or eight hundred1 and its minor axis at a hundred and fifty times the distance of ,sirius from the ,earth4#aa ,and since it is concluded that the ,solar ,system is near the centre of this aggregation1 it follows that our distance from the remotest parts of it is some four hundred distances of ,sirius4 ,but the stars forming these remotest parts are not individually visible1 even through telescopes of the highest power4 ,how1 then1 can such telescopes make individually visible the stars of a nebula which is half a million times the distance of ,sirius8 ,the implication is1 that a star rendered invisible by distance becomes visible if taken twelve hundred times further off6 ,shall we accept this implication8 or shall we not rather conclude that the nebul are not remote galaxies8 ,shall we not infer that1 be their nature what it may1 they must be at least as near to us as the extremities of our own sidereal system8 ,throughout the above argument1 it is tacitly assumed that differences of apparent magnitude among the stars1 result mainly from differences of distance4 ,on this assumption the current doctrines respecting the nebul are founded2 and this assumption is1 for the nonce1 admitted in each of the foregoing criticisms4 ,from the time1 however1 when it was first made by ,sir ,w4 ,herschel1 this assumption has been purely gratuitous2 and it now proves to be inadmissible4 ,but1 awkwardly enough1 its truth and its untruth are alike fatal to the conclusions of those who argue after the manner of ,humboldt4 ,note the alternatives4 ,on the one hand1 what follows from the untruth of the assumption8 ,if apparent largeness of stars is not due to comparative nearness1 and their successively smaller sizes to their greater and greater degrees of remoteness1 what becomes of the inferences respecting the dimensions of our sidereal system and the distances of nebul8 ,if1 as has lately been shown1 the almost invisible star #fa ,cygni has a greater parallax than ,greek3 a ,cygni1 though1 according to an estimate based on ,sir ,w4 ,herschel's assumption1 it should be about twelve times more distant--if1 as it turns out1 there exist telescopic stars which are nearer to us than ,sirius2 of what worth is the conclusion that the nebul are very remote1 because their component luminous masses are made visible only by high telescopic powers8 ,clearly1 if the most brilliant star in the heavens and a star that cannot be seen by the naked eye1 prove to be equidistant1 relative distances cannot be in the least inferred from relative visibilities4 ,and if so1 nebul may be comparatively near1 though the starlets of which they are made up appear extremely minute4 ,on the other hand1 what follows if the truth of the assumption be granted8 ,the arguments used to justify this assumption in the case of the stars1 equally justify it in the case of the nebul4 ,it cannot be contended that1 on the average1 the apparent sizes of the stars indicate their distances1 without its being admitted that1 on the average1 the apparent sizes of the nebul indicate their distances--that1 generally speaking1 the larger are the nearer and the smaller are the more distant4 ,mark1 now1 the necessary inference respecting their resolvability4 ,the largest or nearest nebul will be most easily resolved into stars2 the successively smaller will be successively more difficult of resolution2 and the irresolvable ones will be the smallest ones4 ,this1 however1 is exactly the reverse of the fact4 ,the largest nebul are either wholly irresolvable1 or but partially resolvable under the highest telescopic powers2 while large numbers of quite small nebul are easily resolved by far less powerful telescopes4 ,an instrument through which the great nebula in ,andromeda1 two and a half degrees long and one degree broad1 appears merely as a diffused light1 decomposes a nebula of fifteen minutes diameter into twenty thousand starry points4 ,at the same time that the individual stars of a nebula eight minutes in diameter are so clearly seen as to allow of their number being estimated1 a nebula covering an area five hundred times as great shows no stars at all6 ,what possible explanation of this can be given on the current hypothesis8 ,yet a further difficulty remains--one which is1 perhaps1 still more obviously fatal than the foregoing4 ,this difficulty is presented by the phenomena of the ,magellanic clouds4 ,describing the larger of these1 ,sir ,john ,herschel says3-- ,the ,nubecula ,major1 like the ,minor1 consists partly of large tracts and ill-defined patches of irresolvable nebula1 and of nebulosity in every stage of resolution1 up to perfectly resolved stars like the ,milky ,way1 as also of regular and irregular nebul properly so called1 of globular clusters in every stage of resolvability1 and of clustering groups sufficiently insulated and condensed to come under the designation of 'clusters of stars4'--,cape ,observations1 p4 #adf4 ,in his ,outlines of ,astronomy1 ,sir ,john ,herschel1 after repeating this description in other words1 goes on to remark that-- ,this combination of characters1 rightly considered1 is in a high degree instructive1 affording an insight into the probable comparative distance of stars and nebul1 and the real brightness of individual stars as compared with one another4 ,taking the apparent semidiameter of the nubecula major at three degrees1 and regarding its solid form as1 roughly speaking1 spherical1 its nearest and most remote parts differ in their distance from us by a little more than a tenth part of our distance from its center4 ,the brightness of objects situated in its nearer portions1 therefore1 cannot be much exaggerated1 nor that of its remoter much enfeebled1 by their difference of distance2 yet within this globular space1 we have collected upwards of six hundred stars of the seventh1 eighth1 ninth1 and tenth magnitudes1 nearly three hundred nebul1 and globular and other clusters1 of all degrees of resolvability1 and smaller scattered stars innumerable of every inferior magnitude1 from the tenth to such as by their multitude and minuteness constitute irresolvable nebulosity1 extending over tracts of many square degrees4 ,were there but one such object1 it might be maintained without utter improbability that its apparent sphericity is only an effect of foreshortening1 and that in reality a much greater proportional difference of distance between its nearer and more remote parts exists4 ,but such an adjustment1 improbable enough in one case1 must be rejected as too much so for fair argument in two4 ,it must1 therefore1 be taken as a demonstrated fact1 that stars of the seventh or eighth magnitude and irresolvable nebula may co-exist within limits of distance not differing in proportion more than as nine to ten4--,outlines of ,astronomy 7#ajth ,ed471 pp4 #fef-eg4 ,this supplies yet another reductio ad absurdum of the doctrine we are combating4 ,it gives us the choice of two incredibilities4 ,if we are to believe that one of these included nebul is so remote that its hundred thousand stars look like a milky spot1 invisible to the naked eye2 we must also believe that there are single stars so enormous that though removed to this same distance they remain visible4 ,if we accept the other alternative1 and say that many nebul are no further off than our own stars of the eighth magnitude2 then it is requisite to say that at a distance not greater than that at which a single star is still faintly visible to the naked eye1 there may exist a group of a hundred thousand stars which is invisible to the naked eye4 ,neither of these suppositions can be entertained4 ,what1 then1 is the conclusion that remains8 ,this only3--that the nebul are not further from us than parts of our own sidereal system1 of which they must be considered members2 and that when they are resolvable into discrete masses1 these masses cannot be considered as stars in anything like the ordinary sense of that word4#ab ,and now1 having seen the untenability of this idea1 rashly espoused by sundry astronomers1 that the nebul are extremely remote galaxies2 let us consider whether the various appearances they present are not reconcilable with the ,nebular ,hypothesis4 99 99 99 99 99 ,given a rare and widely-diffused mass of nebulous matter1 having a diameter1 say1 of one hundred times that of the ,solar ,system1#ac what are the successive changes that may be expected to take place in it8 ,mutual gravitation will approximate its atoms or its molecules2 but their approximation will be opposed by that atomic motion the resultant of which we recognize as repulsion1 and the overcoming of which implies the evolution of heat4 ,as fast as this heat partially escapes by radiation1 further approximation will take place1 attended by further evolution of heat1 and so on continuously3 the processes not occurring separately as here described1 but simultaneously1 uninterruptedly1 and with increasing activity4 ,when the nebulous mass has reached a particular stage of condensation--when its internally-situated atoms have approached to within certain distances1 have generated a certain amount of heat1 and are subject to a certain mutual pressure1 combinations may be anticipated4 ,whether the molecules produced be of kinds such as we know1 which is possible1 or whether they be of kinds simpler than any we know1 which is more probable1 matters not to the argument4 ,it suffices that molecular unions1 either between atoms of the same kind or between atoms of different kinds1 will finally take place4 ,when they do take place1 they will be accompanied by a sudden and great disengagement of heat2 and until this excess of heat has escaped1 the newly-formed molecules will remain uniformly diffused1 or1 as it were1 dissolved in the pre-existing nebulous medium4 ,but now what may be expected by and by to happen8 ,when radiation has adequately lowered the temperature1 these molecules will precipitate2 and1 having precipitated1 they will not remain uniformly diffused1 but will aggregate into flocculi2 just as water1 precipitated from air1 collects into clouds4 ,concluding1 thus1 that a nebulous mass will1 in course of time1 resolve itself into flocculi of precipitated denser matter1 floating in the rarer medium from which they were precipitated1 let us inquire what are the mechanical results to be inferred4 ,of clustered bodies in empty space1 each will move along a line which is the resultant of the tractive forces exercised by all the rest1 modified from moment to moment by the acquired motion2 and the aggregation of such clustered bodies1 if it eventually results at all1 can result only from collision1 dissipation1 and the formation of a resisting medium4 ,but with clustered bodies already immersed in a resisting medium1 and especially if such bodies are of small densities1 such as those we are considering1 the process of concentration will begin forthwith3 two factors conspiring to produce it4 ,the flocculi described1 irregular in their shapes and presenting1 as they must in nearly all cases1 unsymmetrical faces to their lines of motion1 will be deflected from those courses which mutual gravitation1 if uninterfered with1 would produce among them2 and this will militate against that balancing of movements which permanence of the cluster pre-supposes4 ,if it be said1 as it may truly be said1 that this is too trifling a cause of derangement to produce much effect1 then there comes the more important cause with which it co-operates4 ,the medium from which the flocculi have been precipitated1 and through which they are moving1 must1 by gravitation1 be rendered denser in its central parts than in its peripheral parts4 ,hence the flocculi1 none of them moving in straight lines to the common centre of gravity1 but having courses made to diverge to one or other side of it 7in small degrees by the cause just assigned1 and in much greater degrees by the tractive forces of other flocculi7 will1 in moving towards the central region1 meet with greater resistances on their inner sides than on their outer sides2 and will be thus made to diverge outwardly from their courses more than they would otherwise do4 ,hence a tendency which1 apart from other tendencies1 will cause them severally to go on one or other side of the centre of gravity1 and1 approaching it1 to get motions more and more tangential4 ,observe1 however1 that their respective motions will be deflected1 not towards one side of the common centre of gravity1 but towards various sides4 ,how then can there result a movement common to them all8 ,very simply4 ,each flocculus1 in describing its course1 must give motion to the medium through which it is moving4 ,but the probabilities are infinity to one against all the respective motions thus impressed on this medium1 exactly balancing one another4 ,and if they do not balance one another the result must be rotation of the whole mass of the medium in one direction4 ,but preponderating momentum in one direction1 having caused rotation of the medium in that direction1 the rotating medium must in its turn gradually arrest such flocculi as are moving in opposition1 and impress its own motion upon them2 and thus there will ultimately be formed a rotating medium with suspended flocculi partaking of its motion1 while they move in converging spirals towards the common centre of gravity4#ad ,before comparing these conclusions with facts1 let us pursue the reasoning a little further1 and observe certain subordinate actions4 ,the respective flocculi must be drawn not towards their common centre of gravity only1 but also towards neighbouring flocculi4 ,hence the whole assemblage of flocculi will break up into groups3 each group concentrating towards its local centre of gravity1 and in so doing acquiring a vortical movement like that subsequently acquired by the whole nebula4 ,according to circumstances1 and chiefly according to the size of the original nebulous mass1 this process of local aggregation will produce various results4 ,if the whole nebula is but small1 the local groups of flocculi may be drawn into the common centre of gravity before their constituent masses have coalesced with one another4 ,in a larger nebula1 these local aggregations may have concentrated into rotating spheroids of vapour1 while yet they have made but little approach towards the general focus of the system4 ,in a still larger nebula1 where the local aggregations are both greater and more remote from the common centre of gravity1 they may have condensed into masses of molten matter before the general distribution of them has greatly altered4 ,in short1 as the conditions in each case determine1 the discrete masses produced may vary indefinitely in number1 in size1 in density1 in motion1 in distribution4 ,and now let us return to the visible characters of nebul1 as observed through modern telescopes4 ,take first the description of those nebul which1 by the hypothesis1 must be in an early stage of evolution4 ,among the irregular nebul1 says ,sir ,john ,herschel1 may be comprehended all which1 to a want of complete and in most instances even of partial resolvability by the power of the #bj-;feet reflector1 unite such a deviation from the circular or elliptic form1 or such a want of symmetry 7with that form7 as preclude their being placed in class #a1 or that of ,regular ,nebul4 ,this second class comprises many of the most remarkable and interesting objects in the heavens1 as well as the most extensive in respect of the area they occupy4 ,and1 referring to this same order of objects1 ,m4 ,arago says3--,the forms of very large diffuse nebul do not appear to admit of definition2 they have no regular outline4 ,this coexistence of largeness1 irregularity1 and indefiniteness of outline1 with irresolvability1 is extremely significant4 ,the fact that the largest nebul are either irresolvable or very difficult to resolve1 might have been inferred a priori2 seeing that irresolvability1 implying that the aggregation of precipitated matter has gone on to but a small extent1 will be found in nebul of wide diffusion4 ,again1 the irregularity of these large1 irresolvable nebul1 might also have been expected2 seeing that their outlines1 compared by ,arago with the fantastic figures which characterize clouds carried away and tossed about by violent and often contrary winds1 are similarly characteristic of a mass not yet gathered together by the mutual attraction of its parts4 ,and once more1 the fact that these large1 irregular1 irresolvable nebul have indefinite outlines--outlines that fade off insensibly into surrounding darkness--is one of like meaning4 ,speaking generally 7and of course differences of distance negative anything beyond average statements71 the spiral nebul are smaller than the irregular nebul1 and more resolvable2 at the same time that they are not so small as the regular nebul1 and not so resolvable4 ,this is as1 according to the hypothesis1 it should be4 ,the degree of condensation causing spiral movement1 is a degree of condensation also implying masses of flocculi that are larger1 and therefore more visible1 than those existing in an earlier stage4 ,moreover1 the forms of these spiral nebul are quite in harmony with the explanation given4 ,the curves of luminous matter which they exhibit1 are not such as would be described by discrete masses starting from a state of rest1 and moving through a resisting medium to a common centre of gravity2 but they are such as would be described by masses having their movements modified by the rotation of the medium4 ,in the centre of a spiral nebula is seen a mass both more luminous and more resolvable than the rest4 ,assume that1 in process of time1 all the spiral streaks of luminous matter which converge to this centre are drawn into it1 as they must be2 assume further1 that the flocculi1 or other discrete portions constituting these luminous streaks1 aggregate into larger masses at the same time that they approach the central group1 and that the masses forming this central group also aggregate into larger masses2 and there will finally result a cluster of such larger masses1 which will be resolvable with comparative ease4 ,and1 as the coalescence and concentration go on1 the constituent masses will gradually become fewer1 larger1 brighter1 and more densely collected around the common centre of gravity4 ,see now how completely this inference agrees with observation4 ,the circular form is that which most commonly characterises resolvable nebul1 writes ,arago4 ,resolvable nebul1 says ,sir ,john ,herschel1 are almost universally round or oval4 ,moreover1 the centre of each group habitually displays a closer clustering of the constituent masses than the outer parts2 and it is shown that1 under the law of gravitation1 which we now know extends to the stars1 this distribution is not one of equilibrium1 but implies progressing concentration4 ,while1 just as we inferred that1 according to circumstances1 the extent to which aggregation has been carried must vary2 so we find that1 in fact1 there are regular nebul of all degrees of resolvability1 from those consisting of innumerable minute masses1 to those in which their numbers are smaller and the sizes greater1 and to those in which there are a few large bodies worthy to be called stars4 ,on the one hand1 then1 we see that the notion1 of late years uncritically received1 that the nebul are extremely remote galaxies of stars like those which make up our own ,milky ,way1 is totally irreconcilable with the facts--involves us in sundry absurdities4 ,on the other hand1 we see that the hypothesis of nebular condensation harmonizes with the most recent results of stellar astronomy3 nay more--that it supplies us with an explanation of various appearances which in its absence would be incomprehensible4 99 99 99 99 99 ,descending now to the ,solar ,system1 let us consider first a class of phenomena in some sort transitional--those offered by comets4 ,in them1 or at least in those most numerous of them which lie far out of the plane of the ,solar ,system1 and are not to be counted among its members1 we have1 still existing1 a kind of matter like that out of which1 according to the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 the ,solar ,system was evolved4 ,hence1 for the explanation of them1 we must go back to the time when the substances forming the sun and planets were yet unconcentrated4 ,when diffused matter1 precipitated from a rarer medium1 is aggregating1 there are certain to be here and there produced small flocculi1 which long remain detached2 as do1 for instance1 minute shreds of cloud in a summer sky4 ,in a concentrating nebula these will1 in the majority of cases1 eventually coalesce with the larger flocculi near to them4 ,but it is tolerably evident that some of those formed at the outermost parts of the nebula1 will not coalesce with the larger internal masses1 but will slowly follow without overtaking them4 ,the relatively greater resistance of the medium necessitates this4 ,as a single feather falling to the ground will be rapidly left behind by a pillow-full of feathers2 so1 in their progress to the common centre of gravity1 will the outermost shreds of vapour be left behind by the great masses of vapour internally situated4 ,but we are not dependent merely on reasoning for this belief4 ,observation shows us that the less concentrated external parts of nebul1 are left behind by the more concentrated internal parts4 ,examined through high powers1 all nebul1 even when they have assumed regular forms1 are seen to be surrounded by luminous streaks1 of which the directions show that they are being drawn into the general mass4 ,still higher powers bring into view still smaller1 fainter1 and more widely-dispersed streaks4 ,and it cannot be doubted that the minute fragments which no telescopic aid makes visible1 are yet more numerous and widely dispersed4 ,thus far1 then1 inference and observation are at one4 ,granting that the great majority of these outlying portions of nebulous matter will be drawn into the central mass long before it reaches a definite form1 the presumption is that some of the very small1 far-removed portions will not be so2 but that before they arrive near it1 the central mass will have contracted into a comparatively moderate bulk4 ,what now will be the characters of these late-arriving portions8 ,in the first place1 they will have either extremely eccentric orbits or non-elliptic paths4 ,left behind at a time when they were moving towards the centre of gravity in slightly-deflected lines1 and therefore having but very small angular velocities1 they will approach the central mass in greatly elongated curves2 and rushing round it1 will go off again into space4 ,that is1 they will behave just as we see the majority of comets do2 the orbits of which are either so eccentric as to be indistinguishable from parabolas1 or else are not orbits at all1 but are paths which are distinctly either parabolic or hyperbolic4 ,in the second place1 they will come from all parts of the heavens4 ,our supposition implies that they were left behind at a time when the nebulous mass was of irregular shape1 and had not acquired a definite rotation2 and as the separation of them would not be from any one surface of the nebulous mass more than another1 the conclusion must be that they will come to the central body from various directions in space4 ,this1 too1 is exactly what happens4 ,unlike planets1 whose orbits approximate to one plane1 comets have orbits that show no relation to one another2 but cut the plane of the ecliptic at all angles1 and have axes inclined to it at all angles4 ,in the third place1 these remotest flocculi of nebulous matter will1 at the outset1 be deflected from their direct courses to the common centre of gravity1 not all on one side1 but each on such side as its form1 or its original proper motion1 determines4 ,and being left behind before the rotation of the nebula is set up1 they will severally retain their different individual motions4 ,hence1 following the concentrated mass1 they will eventually go round it on all sides2 and as often from right to left as from left to right4 ,here again the inference perfectly corresponds with the facts4 ,while all the planets go round the sun from west to east1 comets as often go round the sun from east to west as from west to east4 ,of #bfb comets recorded since #afhj1 #acj are direct1 and #acb are retrograde4 ,this equality is what the law of probabilities would indicate4 ,then1 in the fourth place1 the physical constitution of comets accords with the hypothesis4#ae ,the ability of nebulous matter to concentrate into a concrete form1 depends on its mass4 ,to bring its ultimate atoms into that proximity requisite for chemical union--requisite1 that is1 for the production of denser matter--their repulsion must be overcome4 ,the only force antagonistic to their repulsion1 is their mutual gravitation4 ,that their mutual gravitation may generate a pressure and temperature of sufficient intensity1 there must be an enormous accumulation of them2 and even then the approximation can slowly go on only as fast as the evolved heat escapes4 ,but where the quantity of atoms is small1 and therefore the force of mutual gravitation small1 there will be nothing to coerce the atoms into union4 ,whence we infer that these detached fragments of nebulous matter will continue in their original state4 ,non-periodic comets seem to do so4 ,we have already seen that this view of the origin of comets harmonizes with the characters of their orbits2 but the evidence hence derived is much stronger than was indicated4 ,the great majority of cometary orbits are classed as parabolic2 and it is ordinarily inferred that they are visitors from remote space1 and will never return4 ,but are they rightly classed as parabolic8 ,observations on a comet moving in an extremely eccentric ellipse1 which are possible only when it is comparatively near perihelion1 must fail to distinguish its orbit from a parabola4 ,evidently1 then1 it is not safe to class it as a parabola because of inability to detect the elements of an ellipse4 ,but if extreme eccentricity of an orbit necessitates such inability1 it seems quite possible that comets have no other orbits than elliptic ones4 ,though five or six are said to be hyperbolic1 yet1 as ,i learn from one who has paid special attention to comets1 no such orbit has1 ,i believe1 been computed for a well-observed comet4 ,hence the probability that all the orbits are ellipses is overwhelming4 ,ellipses and hyperbolas have countless varieties of forms1 but there is only one form of parabola2 or1 to speak literally1 all parabolas are similar1 while there are infinitely numerous dissimilar ellipses and dissimilar hyperbolas4 ,consequently1 anything coming to the ,sun from a great distance must have one exact amount of proper motion to produce a parabola3 all other amounts would give hyperbolas or ellipses4 ,and if there are no hyperbolic orbits1 then it is infinity to one that all the orbits are elliptical4 ,this is just what they would be if comets had the genesis above supposed4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and now1 leaving these erratic bodies1 let us turn to the more familiar and important members of the ,solar ,system4 ,it was the remarkable harmony among their movements which first made ,laplace conceive that the ,sun1 planets1 and satellites had resulted from a common genetic process4 ,as ,sir ,william ,herschel1 by his observations on the nebul1 was led to the conclusion that stars resulted from the aggregation of diffused matter2 so ,laplace1 by his observations on the structure of the ,solar ,system1 was led to the conclusion that only by the rotation of aggregating matter were its peculiarities to be explained4 ,in his ,exposition du ,systme du ,monde1 he enumerates as the leading evidences3--#a4 ,the movements of the planets in the same direction and in orbits approaching to the same plane2 #b4 ,the movements of the satellites in the same direction as those of the planets2 #c4 ,the movements of rotation of these various bodies and of the sun in the same direction as the orbital motions1 and mostly in planes little different2 #d4 ,the small eccentricities of the orbits of the planets and satellites1 as contrasted with the great eccentricities of the cometary orbits4 ,and the probability that these harmonious movements had a common cause1 he calculates as two hundred thousand billions to one4 ,this immense preponderance of probability does not point to a common cause under the form ordinarily conceived--an ,invisible ,power working after the method of a ,great ,artificer2 but to an ,invisible ,power working after the method of evolution4 ,for though the supporters of the common hypothesis may argue that it was necessary for the sake of stability that the planets should go round the ,sun in the same direction and nearly in one plane1 they cannot thus account for the direction of the axial motions4#af ,the mechanical equilibrium would not have been interfered with1 had the ,sun been without any rotatory movement2 or had he revolved on his axis in a direction opposite to that in which the planets go round him2 or in a direction at right angles to the average plane of their orbits4 ,with equal safety the motion of the ,moon round the ,earth might have been the reverse of the ,earth's motion round its axis2 or the motions of ,jupiter's satellites might similarly have been at variance with his axial motion2 or those of ,saturn's satellites with his4 ,as1 however1 none of these alternatives have been followed1 the uniformity must be considered1 in this case as in all others1 evidence of subordination to some general law--implies what we call natural causation1 as distinguished from arbitrary arrangement4 ,hence the hypothesis of evolution would be the only probable one1 even in the absence of any clue to the particular mode of evolution4 ,but when we have1 propounded by a mathematician of the highest authority1 a theory of this evolution based on established mechanical principles1 which accounts for these various peculiarities1 as well as for many minor ones1 the conclusion that the ,solar ,system was evolved becomes almost irresistible4 ,the general nature of ,laplace's theory scarcely needs stating4 ,books of popular astronomy have familiarized most readers with his conceptions2--namely1 that the matter now condensed into the ,solar ,system1 once formed a vast rotating spheroid of extreme rarity extending beyond the orbit of the outermost planet2 that as this spheroid contracted1 its rate of rotation necessarily increased2 that by augmenting centrifugal force its equatorial zone was from time to time prevented from following any further the concentrating mass1 and so remained behind as a revolving ring2 that each of the revolving rings thus periodically detached1 eventually became ruptured at its weakest point1 and1 contracting on itself1 gradually aggregated into a rotating mass2 that this1 like the parent mass1 increased in rapidity of rotation as it decreased in size1 and1 where the centrifugal force was sufficient1 similarly left behind rings1 which finally collapsed into rotating spheroids2 and that thus1 out of these primary and secondary rings1 there arose planets and their satellites1 while from the central mass there resulted the ,sun4 ,moreover1 it is tolerably well known that this a priori reasoning harmonizes with the results of experiment4 ,dr4 ,plateau has shown that when a mass of fluid is1 as far may be1 protected from the action of external forces1 it will1 if made to rotate with adequate velocity1 form detached rings2 and that these rings will break up into spheroids which turn on their axes in the same direction with the central mass4 ,thus1 given the original nebula1 which1 acquiring a vortical motion in the way indicated1 has at length concentrated into a vast spheroid of aeriform matter moving round its axis--given this1 and mechanical principles explain the rest4 ,the genesis of a ,solar ,system displaying movements like those observed1 may be predicted2 and the reasoning on which the prediction is based is countenanced by experiment4#ag ,but now let us inquire whether1 besides these most conspicuous structural and dynamic peculiarities of the ,solar ,system1 sundry minor ones are not similarly explicable4 99 99 99 99 99 ,take first the relation between the planes of the planetary orbits and the plane of the ,sun's equator4 ,if1 when the nebulous spheroid extended beyond the orbit of ,neptune1 all parts of it had been revolving exactly in the same plane1 or rather in parallel planes--if all its parts had had one axis2 then the planes of the successive rings would have been coincident with each other and with that of the ,sun's rotation4 ,but it needs only to go back to the earlier stages of concentration1 to see that there could exist no such complete uniformity of motion4 ,the flocculi1 already described as precipitated from an irregular and widely-diffused nebula1 and as starting from all points to their common centre of gravity1 must move not in one plane but in innumerable planes1 cutting each other at all angles4 ,the gradual establishment of a vortical motion such as we at present see indicated in the spiral nebul1 is the gradual approach towards motion in one plane4 ,but this plane can but slowly become decided4 ,flocculi not moving in this plane1 but entering into the aggregation at various inclinations1 will tend to perform their revolutions round its centre in their own planes2 and only in course of time will their motions be partly destroyed by conflicting ones1 and partly resolved into the general motion4 ,especially will the outermost portions of the rotating mass retain for a long time their more or less independent directions4 ,hence the probabilities are1 that the planes of the rings first detached will differ considerably from the average plane of the mass2 while the planes of those detached latest will differ from it less4 ,here1 again1 inference to a considerable extent agrees with observation4 ,though the progression is irregular1 yet1 on the average1 the inclinations decrease on approaching the ,sun2 and this is all we can expect4 ,for as the portions of the nebulous spheroid must have arrived with miscellaneous inclinations1 its strata must have had planes of rotation diverging from the average plane in degrees not always proportionate to their distances from the centre4 99 99 99 99 99 ,consider next the movements of the planets on their axes4 ,laplace alleged as one among other evidences of a common genetic cause1 that the planets rotate in a direction the same as that in which they go round the ,sun1 and on axes approximately perpendicular to their orbits4 ,since he wrote1 an exception to this general rule has been discovered in the case of ,uranus1 and another still more recently in the case of ,neptune--judging1 at least1 from the motions of their respective satellites4 ,this anomaly has been thought to throw considerable doubt on his speculation2 and at first sight it does so4 ,but a little reflection shows that the anomaly is not inexplicable1 and that ,laplace simply went too far in putting down as a certain result of nebular genesis1 what is1 in some instances1 only a probable result4 ,the cause he pointed out as determining the direction of rotation1 is the greater absolute velocity of the outer part of the detached ring4 ,but there are conditions under which this difference of velocity may be too insignificant1 even if it exists4 ,if a mass of nebulous matter approaching spirally to the central spheroid1 and eventually joining it tangentially1 is made up of parts having the same absolute velocities2 then1 after joining the equatorial periphery of the spheroid and being made to rotate with it1 the angular velocity of its outer parts will be smaller than the angular velocity of its inner parts4 ,hence1 if1 when the angular velocities of the outer and inner parts of a detached ring are the same1 there results a tendency to rotation in the same direction with the orbital motion1 it may be inferred that when the outer parts of the ring have a smaller angular velocity than the inner parts1 a tendency to retrograde rotation will be the consequence4 ,again1 the sectional form of the ring is a circumstance of moment2 and this form must have differed more or less in every case4 ,to make this clear1 some illustration will be necessary4 ,suppose we take an orange1 and1 assuming the marks of the stalk and the calyx to represent the poles1 cut off round the line of the equator a strip of peel4 ,this strip of peel1 if placed on the table with its ends meeting1 will make a ring shaped like the hoop of a barrel--a ring of which the thickness in the line of its diameter is very small1 but of which the width in a direction perpendicular to its diameter is considerable4 ,suppose1 now1 that in place of an orange1 which is a spheroid of very slight oblateness1 we take a spheroid of very great oblateness1 shaped somewhat like a lens of small convexity4 ,if from the edge or equator of this lens-shaped spheroid1 a ring of moderate size were cut off1 it would be unlike the previous ring in this respect1 that its greatest thickness would be in the line of its diameter1 and not in a line at right angles to its diameter3 it would be a ring shaped somewhat like a quoit1 only far more slender4 ,that is to say1 according to the oblateness of a rotating spheroid1 the detached ring may be either a hoop-shaped ring or a quoit-shaped ring4 ,one further implication must be noted4 ,in a much-flattened or lens-shaped spheroid1 the form of the ring will vary with its bulk4 ,a very slender ring1 taking off just the equatorial surface1 will be hoop-shaped2 while a tolerably massive ring1 trenching appreciably on the diameter of the spheroid1 will be quoit-shaped4 ,thus1 then1 according to the oblateness of the spheroid and the bulkiness of the detached ring1 will the greatest thickness of that ring be in the direction of its plane1 or in a direction perpendicular to its plane4 ,but this circumstance must greatly affect the rotation of the resulting planet4 ,in a decidedly hoop-shaped nebulous ring1 the differences of velocity between the inner and outer surfaces will be small2 and such a ring1 aggregating into a mass of which the greatest diameter is at right angles to the plane of the orbit1 will almost certainly give to this mass a predominant tendency to rotate in a direction at right angles to the plane of the orbit4 ,where the ring is but little hoop-shaped1 and the difference between the inner and outer velocities greater1 as it must be1 the opposing tendencies--one to produce rotation in the plane of the orbit1 and the other1 rotation perpendicular to it--will both be influential2 and an intermediate plane of rotation will be taken up4 ,while1 if the nebulous ring is decidedly quoit-shaped1 and therefore aggregates into a mass whose greatest dimension lies in the plane of the orbit1 both tendencies will conspire to produce rotation in that plane4 ,on referring to the facts1 we find them1 as far as can be judged1 in harmony with this view4 ,considering the enormous circumference of ,uranus's orbit1 and his comparatively small mass1 we may conclude that the ring from which he resulted was a comparatively slender1 and therefore a hoop-shaped one3 especially as the nebulous mass must have been at that time less oblate than afterwards4 ,hence1 a plane of rotation nearly perpendicular to his orbit1 and a direction of rotation having no reference to his orbital movement4 ,saturn has a mass seven times as great1 and an orbit of less than half the diameter2 whence it follows that his genetic ring1 having less than half the circumference1 and less than half the vertical thickness 7the spheroid being then certainly as oblate1 and indeed more oblate71 must have had a much greater width--must have been less hoop-shaped1 and more approaching to the quoit-shaped3 notwithstanding difference of density1 it must have been at least two or three times as broad in the line of its plane4 ,consequently1 ,saturn has a rotatory movement in the same direction as the movement of translation1 and in a plane differing from it by thirty degrees only4 ,in the case of ,jupiter1 again1 whose mass is three and a half times that of ,saturn1 and whose orbit is little more than half the size1 the genetic ring must1 for the like reasons1 have been still broader--decidedly quoit-shaped1 we may say2 and there hence resulted a planet whose plane of rotation differs from that of his orbit by scarcely more than three degrees4 ,once more1 considering the comparative insignificance of ,mars1 ,earth1 ,venus1 and ,mercury1 it follows that1 the diminishing circumferences of the rings not sufficing to account for the smallness of the resulting masses1 the rings must have been slender ones--must have again approximated to the hoop-shaped2 and thus it happens that the planes of rotation again diverge more or less widely from those of the orbits4 ,taking into account the increasing oblateness of the original spheroid in the successive stages of its concentration1 and the different proportions of the detached rings1 it may fairly be held that the respective rotatory motions are not at variance with the hypothesis but contrariwise tend to confirm it4 ,not only the directions1 but also the velocities of rotation seem thus explicable4 ,it might naturally be supposed that the large planets would revolve on their axes more slowly than the small ones3 our terrestrial experiences of big and little bodies incline us to expect this4 ,it is a corollary from the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 however1 more especially when interpreted as above1 that while large planets will rotate rapidly1 small ones will rotate slowly2 and we find that in fact they do so4 ,other things equal1 a concentrating nebulous mass which is diffused through a wide space1 and whose outer parts have1 therefore1 to travel from great distances to the common centre of gravity1 will acquire a high axial velocity in course of its aggregation2 and conversely with a small mass4 ,still more marked will be the difference where the form of the genetic ring conspires to increase the rate of rotation4 ,other things equal1 a genetic ring which is broadest in the direction of its plane will produce a mass rotating faster than one which is broadest at right angles to its plane2 and if the ring is absolutely as well as relatively broad1 the rotation will be very rapid4 ,these conditions were1 as we saw1 fulfilled in the case of ,jupiter2 and ,jupiter turns round his axis in less than ten hours4 ,saturn1 in whose case1 as above explained1 the conditions were less favourable to rapid rotation1 takes nearly ten hours and a half4 ,while ,mars1 ,earth1 ,venus1 and ,mercury1 whose rings must have been slender1 take more than double that time3 the smallest taking the longest4 99 99 99 99 99 ,from the planets let us now pass to the satellites4 ,here1 beyond the conspicuous facts commonly adverted to1 that they go round their primaries in the directions in which these turn on their axes1 in planes diverging but little from their equators1 and in orbits nearly circular1 there are several significant traits which must not be passed over4 ,one of them is that each set of satellites repeats in miniature the relations of the planets to the ,sun1 both in certain respects above named and in the order of their sizes4 ,on progressing from the outside of the ,solar ,system to its centre1 we see that there are four large external planets1 and four internal ones which are comparatively small4 ,a like contrast holds between the outer and inner satellites in every case4 ,among the four satellites of ,jupiter1 the parallel is maintained as well as the comparative smallness of the number allows3 the two outer ones are the largest1 and the two inner ones the smallest4 ,according to the most recent observations made by ,mr4 ,lassell1 the like is true of the four satellites of ,uranus4 ,in the case of ,saturn1 who has eight secondary planets revolving round him1 the likeness is still more close in arrangement as in number3 the three outer satellites are large1 the inner ones small2 and the contrasts of size are here much greater between the largest1 which is nearly as big as ,mars1 and the smallest1 which is with difficulty discovered even by the best telescopes4 ,but the analogy does not end here4 ,just as with the planets1 there is at first a general increase of size on travelling inwards from ,neptune and ,uranus1 which do not differ very widely1 to ,saturn1 which is much larger1 and to ,jupiter1 which is the largest2 so of the eight satellites of ,saturn1 the largest is not the outermost1 but the outermost save two2 so of ,jupiter's four secondaries1 the largest is the most remote but one4 ,now these parallelisms are inexplicable by the theory of final causes4 ,for purposes of lighting1 if this be the presumed object of these attendant bodies1 it would have been far better had the larger been the nearer3 at present1 their remoteness renders them of less service than the smallest4 ,to the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 however1 these analogies give further support4 ,they show the action of a common physical cause4 ,they imply a law of genesis1 holding in the secondary systems as in the primary system4 ,still more instructive shall we find the distribution of the satellites--their absence in some instances1 and their presence in other instances1 in smaller or greater numbers4 ,the argument from design fails to account for this distribution4 ,supposing it be granted that planets nearer the ,sun than ourselves1 have no need of moons 7though1 considering that their nights are as dark1 and1 relatively to their brilliant days1 even darker than ours1 the need seems quite as great7--supposing this to be granted2 how are we to explain the fact that ,uranus has but half as many moons as ,saturn1 though he is at double the distance8 ,while1 however1 the current presumption is untenable1 the ,nebular ,hypothesis furnishes us with an explanation4 ,it enables us to predict where satellites will be abundant and where they will be absent4 ,the reasoning is as follows4 ,in a rotating nebulous spheroid which is concentrating into a planet1 there are at work two antagonist mechanical tendencies--the centripetal and the centrifugal4 ,while the force of gravitation draws all the atoms of the spheroid together1 their tangential momentum is resolvable into two parts1 of which one resists gravitation4 ,the ratio which this centrifugal force bears to gravitation1 varies1 other things equal1 as the square of the velocity4 ,hence1 the aggregation of a rotating nebulous spheroid will be more or less hindered by this resisting force1 according as the rate of rotation is high or low3 the opposition1 in equal spheroids1 being four times as great when the rotation is twice as rapid2 nine times as great when it is three times as rapid2 and so on4 ,now the detachment of a ring from a planet-forming body of nebulous matter1 implies that at its equatorial zone the increasing centrifugal force consequent on concentration has become so great as to balance gravity4 ,whence it is tolerably obvious that the detachment of rings will be most frequent from those masses in which the centrifugal tendency bears the greatest ratio to the gravitative tendency4 ,though it is not possible to calculate what ratio these two tendencies had to each other in the genetic spheroid which produced each planet1 it is possible to calculate where each was the greatest and where the least4 ,while it is true that the ratio which centrifugal force now bears to gravity at the equator of each planet1 differs widely from that which it bore during the earlier stages of concentration2 and while it is true that this change in the ratio1 depending on the degree of contraction each planet has undergone1 has in no two cases been the same2 yet we may fairly conclude that where the ratio is still the greatest1 it has been the greatest from the beginning4 ,the satellite-forming tendency which each planet had1 will be approximately indicated by the proportion now existing in it between the aggregating power1 and the power that has opposed aggregation4 ,on making the requisite calculations1 a remarkable harmony with this inference comes out4 ,the following table shows what fraction the centrifugal force is of the centripetal force in every case2 and the relation which that fraction bears to the number of satellites4#ah ,mercury4 #a_/cfj ,venus4 #a_/bec ,earth4 #a_/bhi #a ,satellite4 ,mars4 #a_/abg #b ,satellites4 ,jupiter4 #a_/aad #d ,satellites4 ,saturn4 #a_/fd #h ,satellites1 and three rings4 ,uranus4 #a_/aji #d ,satellites4 ,thus taking as our standard of comparison the ,earth with its one moon1 we see that ,mercury1 in which the centrifugal force is relatively less1 has no moon4 ,mars1 in which it is relatively much greater1 has two moons4 ,jupiter1 in which it is far greater1 has four moons4 ,uranus1 in which it is greater still1 has certainly four1 and more if ,herschel was right4 ,saturn1 in which it is the greatest1 being nearly one-sixth of gravity1 has1 including his rings1 eleven attendants4 ,the only instance in which there is nonconformity with observation1 is that of ,venus4 ,here it appears that the centrifugal force is relatively greater than in the ,earth2 and1 according to the hypothesis1 ,venus ought to have a satellite4 ,respecting this anomaly several remarks are to be made4 ,without putting any faith in the alleged discovery of a satellite of ,venus 7repeated at intervals by five different observers71 it may yet be contended that as the satellites of ,mars eluded observation up to #ahgg1 a satellite of ,venus may have eluded observation up to the present time4 ,merely naming this as possible1 but not probable1 a consideration of more weight is that the period of rotation of ,venus is but indefinitely fixed1 and that a small diminution in the estimated angular velocity of her equator would bring the result into congruity with the hypothesis4 ,further1 it may be remarked that not exact1 but only general1 congruity is to be expected2 since the process of condensation of each planet from nebulous matter can scarcely be expected to have gone on with absolute uniformity3 the angular velocities of the superposed strata of nebulous matter probably differed from one another in degrees unlike in each case2 and such differences would affect the satellite-forming tendency4 ,but without making much of these possible explanations of the discrepancy1 the correspondence between inference and fact which we find in so many planets1 may be held to afford strong support to the ,nebular ,hypothesis4 ,certain more special peculiarities of the satellites must be mentioned as suggestive4 ,one of them is the relation between the period of revolution and that of rotation4 ,no discoverable purpose is served by making the ,moon go round its axis in the same time that it goes round the ,earth3 for our convenience1 a more rapid axial motion would have been equally good2 and for any possible inhabitants of the ,moon1 much better4 ,against the alternative supposition1 that the equality occurred by accident1 the probabilities are1 as ,laplace says1 infinity to one4 ,but to this arrangement1 which is explicable neither as the result of design nor of chance1 the ,nebular ,hypothesis furnishes a clue4 ,in his ,exposition du ,systme du ,monde1 ,laplace shows1 by reasoning too detailed to be here repeated1 that under the circumstances such a relation of movements would be likely to establish itself4 ,among ,jupiter's satellites1 which severally display these same synchronous movements1 there also exists a still more remarkable relation4 ,if the mean angular velocity of the first satellite be added to twice that of the third1 the sum will be equal to three times that of the second2 and from this it results that the situations of any two of them being given1 that of the third can be found4 ,now here1 as before1 no conceivable advantage results4 ,neither in this case can the connexion have been accidental3 the probabilities are infinity to one to the contrary4 ,but again1 according to ,laplace1 the ,nebular ,hypothesis supplies a solution4 ,are not these significant facts8 ,most significant fact of all1 however1 is that presented by the rings of ,saturn4 ,as ,laplace remarks1 they are1 as it were1 still extant witnesses of the genetic process he propounded4 ,here we have1 continuing permanently1 forms of aggregation like those through which each planet and satellite once passed2 and their movements are just what1 in conformity with the hypothesis1 they should be4 ,la dure de la rotation d'une plante doit donc tre1 d'aprs cette hypothse1 plus petite que la dure de la rvolution du corps le plus voisin qui circule autour d'elle1 says ,laplace4 ,and he then points out that the time of ,saturn's rotation is to that of his rings as #dbg to #dch--;an amount of difference such as was to be expected4#ai ,respecting ,saturn's rings it may be further remarked that the place of their occurrence is not without significance4 ,rings detached early in the process of concentration1 consisting of gaseous matter having extremely little power of cohesion1 can have little ability to resist the disruptive forces due to imperfect balance2 and1 therefore1 collapse into satellites4 ,a ring of a denser kind1 whether solid1 liquid1 or composed of small discrete masses 7as ,saturn's rings are now concluded to be71 we can expect will be formed only near the body of a planet when it has reached so late a stage of concentration that its equatorial portions contain matters capable of easy precipitation into liquid and1 finally1 solid forms4 ,even then it can be produced only under special conditions4 ,gaining a rapidly-increasing preponderance as the gravitative force does during the closing stages of concentration1 the centrifugal force cannot1 in ordinary cases1 cause the leaving behind of rings when the mass has become dense4 ,only where the centrifugal force has all along been very great1 and remains powerful to the last1 as in ,saturn1 can we expect dense rings to be formed4 ,we find1 then1 that besides those most conspicuous peculiarities of the ,solar ,system which first suggested the theory of its evolution1 there are many minor ones pointing in the same direction4 ,were there no other evidence1 these mechanical arrangements would1 considered in their totality1 go far to establish the ,nebular ,hypothesis4 99 99 99 99 99 ,from the mechanical arrangements of the ,solar ,system1 turn we now to its physical characters2 and1 first1 let us consider the inferences deducible from relative specific gravities4 ,the fact that1 speaking generally1 the denser planets are the nearer to the ,sun1 has been by some considered as adding another to the many indications of nebular origin4 ,legitimately assuming that the outermost parts of a rotating nebulous spheroid1 in its earlier stages of concentration1 must be comparatively rare2 and that the increasing density which the whole mass acquires as it contracts1 must hold of the outermost parts as well as the rest2 it is argued that the rings successively detached will be more and more dense1 and will form planets of higher and higher specific gravities4 ,but passing over other objections1 this explanation is quite inadequate to account for the facts4 ,using the ,earth as a standard of comparison1 the relative densities run thus3-- ,neptune4 ,uranus4 ,saturn4 ,jupiter4 ,mars4 ,earth4 ,venus4 ,mercury4 ,sun4 #jag #jbe #jaa #jbc #jde #ajj #jib #abf #jbe ,two insurmountable objections are presented by this series4 ,the first is1 that the progression is but a broken one4 ,neptune is denser than ,saturn1 which1 by the hypothesis1 it ought not to be4 ,uranus is denser than ,jupiter1 which it ought not to be4 ,uranus is denser than ,saturn1 and the ,earth is denser than ,venus--facts which not only give no countenance to1 but directly contradict1 the alleged explanation4 ,the second objection1 still more manifestly fatal1 is the low specific gravity of the ,sun4 ,if1 when the matter of the ,sun filled the orbit of ,mercury1 its state of aggregation was such that the detached ring formed a planet having a specific gravity equal to that of iron2 then the ,sun itself1 now that it has concentrated1 should have a specific gravity much greater than that of iron2 whereas its specific gravity is only half as much again as that of water4 ,instead of being far denser than the nearest planet1 it is but one-fifth as dense4 ,while these anomalies render untenable the position that the relative specific gravities of the planets are direct indications of nebular condensation2 it by no means follows that they negative it4 ,several causes may be assigned for these unlikenesses3--#a4 ,differences among the planets in respect of the elementary substances composing them2 or in the proportions of such elementary substances1 if they contain the same kinds4 #b4 ,differences among them in respect of the quantities of matter they contain2 for1 other things equal1 the mutual gravitation of molecules will make a larger mass denser than a smaller4 #c4 ,differences of temperatures2 for1 other things equal1 those having higher temperatures will have lower specific gravities4 #d4 ,differences of physical states1 as being gaseous1 liquid1 or solid2 or1 otherwise1 differences in the relative amounts of the solid1 liquid1 and gaseous matter they contain4 ,it is quite possible1 and we may indeed say probable1 that all these causes come into play1 and that they take various shares in the production of the several results4 ,but difficulties stand in the way of definite conclusions4 ,nevertheless1 if we revert to the hypothesis of nebular genesis1 we are furnished with partial explanations if nothing more4 ,in the cooling of celestial bodies several factors are concerned4 ,the first and simplest is the one illustrated at every fire-side by the rapid blackening of little cinders which fall into the ashes1 in contrast with the long-continued redness of big lumps4 ,this factor is the relation between increase of surface and increase of content3 surfaces1 in similar bodies1 increasing as the squares of the dimensions while contents increase as their cubes4 ,hence1 on comparing the ,earth with ,jupiter1 whose diameter is about eleven times that of the ,earth1 it results that while his surface is #abe times as great1 his content is #acij times as great4 ,now even 7supposing we assume like temperatures and like densities7 if the only effect were that through a given area of surface eleven times more matter had to be cooled in the one case than in the other1 there would be a vast difference between the times occupied in concentration4 ,but1 in virtue of a second factor1 the difference would be much greater than that consequent on these geometrical relations4 ,the escape of heat from a cooling mass is effected by conduction1 or by convection1 or by both4 ,in a solid it is wholly by conduction2 in a liquid or gas the chief part is played by convection--by circulating currents which continually transpose the hotter and cooler parts4 ,now in fluid spheroids--gaseous1 or liquid1 or mixed--increasing size entails an increasing obstacle to cooling1 consequent on the increasing distances to be travelled by the circulating currents4 ,of course the relation is not a simple one3 the velocities of the currents will be unlike4 ,it is manifest1 however1 that in a sphere of eleven times the diameter1 the transit of matter from centre to surface and back from surface to centre1 will take a much longer time2 even if its movement is unrestrained4 ,but its movement is1 in such cases as we are considering1 greatly restrained4 ,in a rotating spheroid there come into play retarding forces augmenting with the velocity of rotation4 ,in such a spheroid the respective portions of matter 7supposing them equal in their angular velocities round the axis1 which they will tend more and more to become as the density increases71 must vary in their absolute velocities according to their distances from the axis2 and each portion cannot have its distance from the axis changed by circulating currents1 which it must continually be1 without loss or gain in its quantity of motion3 through the medium of fluid friction1 force must be expended1 now in increasing its motion and now in retarding its motion4 ,hence1 when the larger spheroid has also a higher velocity of rotation1 the relative slowness of the circulating currents1 and the consequent retardation of cooling1 must be much greater than is implied by the extra distances to be travelled4 ,and now observe the correspondence between inference and fact4 ,in the first place1 if we compare the group of the great planets1 ,jupiter1 ,saturn1 and ,uranus1 with the group of the small planets1 ,mars1 ,earth1 ,venus1 and ,mercury1 we see that low density goes along with great size and great velocity of rotation1 and that high density goes along with small size and small velocity of rotation4 ,in the second place1 we are shown this relation still more clearly if we compare the extreme instances--,saturn and ,mercury4 ,the special contrast of these two1 like the general contrast of the groups1 points to the truth that low density1 like the satellite-forming tendency1 is associated with the ratio borne by centrifugal force to gravity2 for in the case of ,saturn with his many satellites and least density1 centrifugal force at the equator is nearly #a_/fth of gravity1 whereas in ,mercury with no satellite and greatest density centrifugal force is but #a_/cfjth of gravity4 ,there are1 however1 certain factors which1 working in an opposite way1 qualify and complicate these effects4 ,other things equal1 mutual gravitation among the parts of a large mass will cause a greater evolution of heat than is similarly caused in a small mass2 and the resulting difference of temperature will tend to produce more rapid dissipation of heat4 ,to this must be added the greater velocity of the circulating currents which the intenser forces at work in larger spheroids will produce--a contrast made still greater by the relatively smaller retardation by friction to which the more voluminous currents are exposed4 ,in these causes1 joined with causes previously indicated1 we may recognize a probable explanation of the otherwise anomalous fact that the ,sun1 though having a thousand times the mass of ,jupiter1 has yet reached as advanced a stage of concentration4 ,for the force of gravity in the ,sun1 which at his surface is some ten times that at the surface of ,jupiter1 must expose his central parts to a pressure relatively very intense2 producing1 during contraction1 a relatively rapid genesis of heat4 ,and it is further to be remarked that1 though the circulating currents in the ,sun have far greater distances to travel1 yet since his rotation is relatively so slow that the angular velocity of his substance is but about one-sixtieth of that of ,jupiter's substance1 the resulting obstacle to circulating currents is relatively small1 and the escape of heat far less retarded4 ,here1 too1 we may note that in the co-operation of these factors1 there seems a reason for the greater concentration reached by ,jupiter than by ,saturn1 though ,saturn is the elder as well as the smaller of the two2 for at the same time that the gravitative force in ,jupiter is more than twice as great as in ,saturn1 his velocity of rotation is very little greater1 so that the opposition of the centrifugal force to the centripetal is not much more than half4 ,but now1 not judging more than roughly of the effects of these several factors1 co-operating in various ways and degrees1 some to aid concentration and others to resist it1 it is sufficiently manifest that1 other things equal1 the larger nebulous spheroids1 longer in losing their heat1 will more slowly reach high specific gravities2 and that where the contrasts in size are so immense as those between the greater and the smaller planets1 the smaller may have reached relatively high specific gravities when the greater have reached but relatively low ones4 ,further1 it appears that such qualification of the process as results from the more rapid genesis of heat in the larger masses1 will be countervailed where high velocity of rotation greatly impedes the circulating currents4 ,thus interpreted then1 the various specific gravities of the planets may be held to furnish further evidences supporting the ,nebular ,hypothesis4 99 99 99 99 99 ,increase of density and escape of heat are correlated phenomena1 and hence in the foregoing section1 treating of the respective densities of the celestial bodies in connexion with nebular condensation1 much has been said and implied respecting the accompanying genesis and dissipation of heat4 ,quite apart1 however1 from the foregoing arguments and inferences1 there is to be noted the fact that in the present temperatures of the celestial bodies at large we find additional supports to the hypothesis2 and these1 too1 of the most substantial character4 ,for if1 as is implied above1 heat must inevitably be generated by the aggregation of diffused matter1 we ought to find in all the heavenly bodies1 either present high temperatures or marks of past high temperatures4 ,this we do1 in the places and in the degrees which the hypothesis requires4 ,observations showing that as we descend below the ,earth's surface there is a progressive increase of heat1 joined with the conspicuous evidence furnished by volcanoes1 necessitate the conclusion that the temperature is very high at great depths4 ,whether1 as some believe1 the interior of the ,earth is still molten1 or whether1 as ,sir ,william ,thomson contends1 it must be solid2 there is agreement in the inference that its heat is intense4 ,and it has been further shown that the rate at which the temperature increases on descending below the surface1 is such as would be found in a mass which had been cooling for an indefinite period4 ,the ,moon1 too1 shows us1 by its corrugations and its conspicuous extinct volcanoes1 that in it there has been a process of refrigeration and contraction1 like that which has gone on in the ,earth4 ,there is no teleological explanation of these facts4 ,the frequent destructions of life by earthquakes and volcanoes1 imply1 rather1 that it would have been better had the ,earth been created with a low internal temperature4 ,but if we contemplate the facts in connexion with the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 we see that this still-continued high internal heat is one of its corollaries4 ,the ,earth must have passed through the gaseous and the molten conditions before it became solid1 and must for an almost infinite period by its internal heat continue to bear evidence of this origin4 ,the group of giant planets furnishes remarkable evidence4 ,the a priori inference drawn above1 that great size joined with relatively high ratio of centrifugal force to gravity must greatly retard aggregation1 and must thus1 by checking the genesis and dissipation of heat1 make the process of cooling a slow one1 has of late years received verifications from inferences drawn a posteriori2 so that now the current conclusion among astronomers is that in physical condition the great planets are in stages midway between that of the ,earth and that of the ,sun4 ,the fact that the centre of ,jupiter's disc is twice or thrice as bright as his periphery1 joined with the facts that he seems to radiate more light than is accounted for by reflection of the ,sun's rays1 and that his spectrum shows the red-star line1 are taken as evidences of luminosity2 while the immense and rapid perturbations in his atmosphere1 far greater than could be caused by heat received from the ,sun1 as well as the formation of spots analogous to those of the ,sun1 which also1 like those of the ,sun1 show a higher rate of rotation near the equator than further from it1 are held to imply high internal temperature4 ,thus in ,jupiter1 as also in ,saturn1 we find states which1 not admitting of any teleological explanations 7for they manifestly exclude the possibility of life71 admit of explanations derived from the ,nebular ,hypothesis4 ,but the argument from temperature does not end here4 ,there remains to be noticed a more conspicuous and still more significant fact4 ,if the ,solar ,system was produced by the concentration of diffused matter1 which evolved heat while gravitating into its present dense form2 then there is an obvious implication4 ,other things equal1 the latest-formed mass will be the latest in cooling--will1 for an almost infinite time1 possess a greater heat than the earlier-formed ones4 ,other things equal1 the largest mass will1 because of its superior aggregative force1 become hotter than the others1 and radiate more intensely4 ,other things equal1 the largest mass1 notwithstanding the higher temperature it reaches1 will1 in consequence of its relatively small surface1 be the slowest in losing its evolved heat4 ,and hence1 if there is one mass which was not only formed after the rest1 but exceeds them enormously in size1 it follows that this one will reach an intensity of incandescence far beyond that reached by the rest2 and will continue in a state of intense incandescence long after the rest have cooled4 ,such a mass we have in the ,sun4 ,it is a corollary from the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 that the matter forming the ,sun assumed its present integrated shape at a period much more recent than that at which the planets became definite bodies4 ,the quantity of matter contained in the ,sun is nearly five million times that contained in the smallest planet1 and above a thousand times that contained in the largest4 ,and while1 from the enormous gravitative force of his parts to their common centre1 the evolution of heat has been intense1 the facilities of radiation have been relatively small4 ,hence the still-continued high temperature4 ,just that condition of the central body which is a necessary inference from the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 we find actually existing in the ,sun4 ,the paragraph which here follows1 though it contains some questionable propositions1 ,i reproduce just as it stood when first published in #aheh1 for reasons which will presently be apparent4 ,it may be well to consider more closely1 what is the probable condition of the ,sun's surface4 ,round the globe of incandescent molten substances1 thus conceived to form the visible body of the ,sun which in conformity with the argument in a previous section1 now transferred to the ,addenda1 was inferred to be hollow and filled with gaseous matter at high tension there is known to exist a voluminous atmosphere3 the inferior brilliancy of the ,sun's border1 and the appearances during a total eclipse1 alike show this4 ,what now must be the constitution of this atmosphere8 ,at a temperature approaching a thousand times that of molten iron1 which is the calculated temperature of the solar surface1 very many1 if not all1 of the substances we know as solid1 would become gaseous2 and though the ,sun's enormous attractive force must be a powerful check on this tendency to assume the form of vapour1 yet it cannot be questioned that if the body of the ,sun consists of molten substances1 some of them must be constantly undergoing evaporation4 ,that the dense gases thus continually being generated will form the entire mass of the solar atmosphere1 is not probable4 ,if anything is to be inferred1 either from the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 or from the analogies supplied by the planets1 it must be concluded that the outermost part of the solar atmosphere consists of what are called permanent gases--gases that are not condensible into fluid even at low temperatures4 ,if we consider what must have been the state of things here1 when the surface of the ,earth was molten1 we shall see that round the still molten surface of the ,sun1 there probably exists a stratum of dense aeriform matter1 made up of sublimed metals and metallic compounds1 and above this a stratum of comparatively rare medium analogous to air4 ,what now will happen with these two strata8 ,did they both consist of permanent gases1 they could not remain separate3 according to a well-known law1 they would eventually form a homogeneous mixture4 ,but this will by no means happen when the lower stratum consists of matters that are gaseous only at excessively high temperatures4 ,given off from a molten surface1 ascending1 expanding1 and cooling1 these will presently reach a limit of elevation above which they cannot exist as vapour1 but must condense and precipitate4 ,meanwhile the upper stratum1 habitually charged with its quantum of these denser matters1 as our air with its quantum of water1 and ready to deposit them on any depression of temperature1 must be habitually unable to take up any more of the lower stratum2 and therefore this lower stratum will remain quite distinct from it4#bj 99 99 99 99 99 ,considered in their ensemble1 the several groups of evidences assigned amount almost to proof4 ,we have seen that1 when critically examined1 the speculations of late years current respecting the nature of the nebul1 commit their promulgators to sundry absurdities2 while1 on the other hand1 we see that the various appearances these nebul present1 are explicable as different stages in the precipitation and aggregation of diffused matter4 ,we find that the immense majority of comets 7i4e4 omitting the periodic ones71 by their physical constitution1 their immensely-extended and variously-directed paths1 the distribution of those paths1 and their manifest structural relation to the ,solar ,system1 bear testimony to the past existence of that system in a nebulous form4 ,not only do those obvious peculiarities in the motions of the planets which first suggested the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 supply proofs of it1 but on closer examination we discover1 in the slightly-diverging inclinations of their orbits1 in their various rates of rotation1 and their differently-directed axes of rotation1 that the planets yield us yet further testimony2 while the satellites1 by sundry traits1 and especially by their occurrence in greater or less abundance where the hypothesis implies greater or less abundance1 confirm this testimony4 ,by tracing out the process of planetary condensation1 we are led to conclusions respecting the physical states of planets which explain their anomalous specific gravities4 ,once more1 it turns out that what is inferable from the ,nebular ,hypothesis respecting the temperatures of celestial bodies1 is just what observation establishes2 and that both the absolute and the relative temperatures of the ,sun and planets are thus accounted for4 ,when we contemplate these various evidences in their totality--when we observe that1 by the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 the leading phenomena of the ,solar ,system1 and the heavens in general1 are explicable2 and when1 on the other hand1 we consider that the current cosmogony is not only without a single fact to stand on1 but is at variance with all our positive knowledge of ,nature1 we see that the proof becomes overwhelming4 ,it remains only to point out that while the genesis of the ,solar ,system1 and of countless other systems like it1 is thus rendered comprehensible1 the ultimate mystery continues as great as ever4 ,the problem of existence is not solved3 it is simply removed further back4 ,the ,nebular ,hypothesis throws no light on the origin of diffused matter2 and diffused matter as much needs accounting for as concrete matter4 ,the genesis of an atom is not easier to conceive than the genesis of a planet4 ,nay1 indeed1 so far from making the ,universe less a mystery than before1 it makes it a greater mystery4 ,creation by manufacture is a much lower thing than creation by evolution4 ,a man can put together a machine2 but he cannot make a machine develop itself4 ,that our harmonious universe once existed potentially as formless diffused matter1 and has slowly grown into its present organized state1 is a far more astonishing fact than would have been its formation after the artificial method vulgarly supposed4 ,those who hold it legitimate to argue from phenomena to noumena1 may rightly contend that the ,nebular ,hypothesis implies a ,first ,cause as much transcending the mechanical ,god of ,paley1 as this does the fetish of the savage4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #aa3 ,cosmos4 7,seventh ,edition47 ,vol4 i4 pp4 #gi1 #hj4 ,footnote #ab3 ,since the publication of this essay the late ,mr4 ,r4 ,a4 ,proctor has given various further reasons for the conclusion that the nebul belong to our own sidereal system4 ,the opposite conclusion1 contested throughout the foregoing section1 has now been tacitly abandoned4 ,footnote #ac3 ,any objection made to the extreme tenuity this involves1 is met by the calculation of ,newton1 who proved that were a spherical inch of air removed four thousand miles from the ,earth1 it would expand into a sphere more than filling the orbit of ,saturn4 ,footnote #ad3 ,a reference may fitly be made here to a reason given by ,mons4 ,babinet for rejection of the ,nebular ,hypothesis4 ,he has calculated that taking the existing ,sun1 with its observed angular velocity1 its substance1 if expanded so as to fill the orbit of ,neptune1 would have nothing approaching the angular velocity which the time of revolution of that planet implies4 ,the assumption he makes is inadmissible4 ,he supposes that all parts of the nebulous spheroid when it filled ,neptune's orbit1 had the same angular velocities4 ,but the process of nebular condensation as indicated above1 implies that the remoter flocculi of nebulous matter1 later in reaching the central mass1 and forming its peripheral portions1 will acquire1 during their longer journeys towards it1 greater velocities4 ,an inspection of one of the spiral nebul1 as #east or #iith ,messier1 at once shows that the outlying portions when they reach the nucleus1 will form an equatorial belt moving round the common centre more rapidly than the rest4 ,thus the central parts will have small angular velocities1 while there will be increasing angular velocities of parts increasingly remote from the centre4 ,and while the density of the spheroid continues small1 fluid friction will scarcely at all change these differences4 ,a like criticism may1 ,i think1 be passed on an opinion expressed by ,prof4 ,newcomb4 ,he says3--,when the contraction of the nebulous spheroid had gone so far that the centrifugal and attracting forces nearly balanced each other at the outer equatorial limit of the mass1 the result would have been that contraction in the direction of the equator would cease entirely1 and be confined to the polar regions1 each particle dropping1 not towards the sun1 but towards the plane of the solar equator4 ,thus1 we should have a constant flattening of the spheroidal atmosphere until it was reduced to a thin flat disk4 ,this disk might then separate itself into rings1 which would form planets in much the same way that ,laplace supposed4 ,but there would probably be no marked difference in the age of the planets4 7,popular ,astronomy1 p4 #eab47 ,now this conclusion assumes1 like that of ,m4 ,babinet1 that all parts of the nebulous spheroid had equal angular velocities4 ,if1 as above contended1 it is inferable from the process by which a nebulous spheroid was formed1 that its outer portions revolved with greater angular velocities than its inner2 then the inference which ,prof4 ,newcomb draws is not necessitated4 ,footnote #ae3 ,it is true that since this essay was written reasons have been given for concluding that comets consist of swarms of meteors enveloped in aeriform matter4 ,very possibly this is the constitution of the periodic comets which1 approximating their orbits to the plane of the ,solar ,system1 form established parts of the ,system1 and which1 as will be hereafter indicated1 have probably a quite different origin4 ,footnote #af3 ,though this rule fails at the periphery of the ,solar ,system1 yet it fails only where the axis of rotation1 instead of being almost perpendicular to the orbit-plane1 is very little inclined to it2 and where1 therefore1 the forces tending to produce the congruity of motions were but little operative4 ,footnote #ag3 ,it is true that1 as expressed by him1 these propositions of ,laplace are not all beyond dispute4 ,an astronomer of the highest authority1 who has favoured me with some criticisms on this essay1 alleges that instead of a nebulous ring rupturing at one point1 and collapsing into a single mass1 all probability would be in favour of its breaking up into many masses4 ,this alternative result certainly seems the more likely4 ,but granting that a nebulous ring would break up into many masses1 it may still be contended that1 since the chances are infinity to one against these being of equal sizes and equidistant1 they could not remain evenly distributed round their orbit4 ,this annular chain of gaseous masses would break up into groups of masses2 these groups would eventually aggregate into larger groups2 and the final result would be the formation of a single mass4 ,i have put the question to an astronomer scarcely second in authority to the one above referred to1 and he agrees that this would probably be the process4 ,footnote #ah3 ,the comparative statement here given differs1 slightly in most cases and in one case largely1 from the statement included in this essay as originally published in #aheh4 ,as then given the table ran thus3-- ,mercury4 #a_/cfb ,venus4 #a_/bhb ,earth4 #a_/bhi #a ,satellite4 ,mars4 #a_/cbf ,jupiter4 #a_/ad #d ,satellites4 ,saturn4 #a_/fb #h ,satellites1 and three rings4 ,uranus4 #a_/i #d 7or #f according to ,herschel74 ,the calculations ending with these figures were made while the ,sun's distance was still estimated at #ie millions of miles4 ,of course the reduction afterwards established in the estimated distance1 entailing1 as it did1 changes in the factors which entered into the calculations1 affected the results2 and1 though it was unlikely that the relations stated would be materially changed1 it was needful to have the calculations made afresh4 ,mr4 ,lynn has been good enough to undertake this task1 and the figures given in the text are his4 ,in the case of ,mars a large error in my calculation had arisen from accepting ,arago's statement of his density 7#jie71 which proves to be something like double what it should be4 ,here a curious incident may be named4 ,when1 in #ahgg1 it was discovered that ,mars has two satellites1 though1 according to my hypothesis1 it seemed that he should have none1 my faith in it received a shock2 and since that time ,i have occasionally considered whether the fact is in any way reconcilable with the hypothesis4 ,but now the proof afforded by ,mr4 ,lynn that my calculation contained a wrong factor1 disposes of the difficulty--nay1 changes the objection to a verification4 ,it turns out that1 according to the hypothesis1 ,mars ought to have satellites2 and1 further1 that he ought to have a number intermediate between #a and #d4 ,footnote #ai3 ,since this paragraph was first published1 the discovery that ,mars has two satellites revolving round him in periods shorter than that of his rotation1 has shown that the implication on which ,laplace here insists is general only1 and not absolute4 ,were it a necessary assumption that all parts of a concentrating nebulous spheroid revolve with the same angular velocities1 the exception would appear an inexplicable one2 but if1 as suggested in a preceding section1 it is inferable from the process of formation of a nebulous spheroid1 that its outer strata will move round the general axis with higher angular velocities than the inner ones1 there follows a possible interpretation4 ,though1 during the earlier stages of concentration1 while the nebulous matter1 and especially its peripheral portions1 are very rare1 the effects of fluid-friction will be too small to change greatly such differences of angular velocities as exist2 yet1 when concentration has reached its last stages1 and the matter is passing from the gaseous into the liquid and solid states1 and when also the convection-currents have become common to the whole mass 7which they probably at first are not71 the angular velocity of the peripheral portion will gradually be assimilated to that of the interior2 and it becomes comprehensible that in the case of ,mars the peripheral portion1 more and more dragged back by the internal mass1 lost part of its velocity during the interval between the formation of the innermost satellite and the arrival at the final form4 ,footnote #bj3 ,i was about to suppress part of the above paragraph1 written before the science of solar physics had taken shape1 because of certain physical difficulties which stand in the way of its argument1 when1 on looking into recent astronomical works1 ,i found that the hypothesis it sets forth respecting the ,sun's structure has kinships to the several hypotheses since set forth by ,zllner1 ,faye1 and ,young4 ,i have therefore decided to let it stand as it originally did4 ,the contemplated partial suppression just named1 was prompted by recognition of the truth that to effect mechanical stability the gaseous interior of the ,sun must have a density at least equal to that of the molten shell 7greater1 indeed1 at the centre72 and this seems to imply a specific gravity higher than that which he possesses4 ,it may1 indeed1 be that the unknown elements which spectrum analysis shows to exist in the ,sun1 are metals of very low specific gravities1 and that1 existing in large proportion with other of the lighter metals1 they may form a molten shell not denser than is implied by the facts4 ,but this can be regarded as nothing more than a possibility4 ,no need1 however1 has arisen for either relinquishing or holding but loosely the associated conclusions respecting the constitution of the photosphere and its envelope4 ,widely speculative as seemed these suggested corollaries from the ,nebular ,hypothesis when set forth in #aheh1 and quite at variance with the beliefs then current1 they proved to be not ill-founded4 ,at the close of #ahei1 there came the discoveries of ,kirchhoff1 proving the existence of various metallic vapours in the ,sun's atmosphere4 ,,addenda4 ,speculative as is much of the foregoing essay1 it appears undesirable to include in it anything still more speculative4 ,for this reason ,i have decided to set forth separately some views concerning the genesis of the so-called elements during nebular condensation1 and concerning the accompanying physical effects4 ,at the same time it has seemed best to detach from the essay some of the more debatable conclusions originally contained in it2 so that its general argument may not be needlessly implicated with them4 ,these new portions1 together with the old portions which re-appear more or less modified1 ,i here append in a series of notes4 ,,note ,i4 ,for the belief that the so-called elements are compound there are both special reasons and general reasons4 ,among the special may be named the parallelism between allotropy and isomerism2 the numerous lines in the spectrum of each element2 and the cyclical law of ,newlands and ,mendeljeff4 ,of the more general reasons1 which1 as distinguished from these chemical or chemico-physical ones1 may fitly be called cosmical1 the following are the chief4 ,the general law of evolution1 if it does not actually involve the conclusion that the so-called elements are compounds1 yet affords a priori ground for suspecting that they are such4 ,the implication is that1 while the matter composing the ,solar ,system has progressed physically from that relatively-homogeneous state which it had as a nebula to that relatively-heterogeneous state presented by ,sun1 planets1 and satellites1 it has also progressed chemically1 from the relatively-homogeneous state in which it was composed of one or a few types of matter1 to that relatively-heterogeneous state in which it is composed of many types of matter very diverse in their properties4 ,this deduction from the law which holds throughout the cosmos as now known to us1 would have much weight even were it unsupported by induction2 but a survey of chemical phenomena at large discloses several groups of inductive evidences supporting it4 ,the first is that since the cooling of the ,earth reached an advanced stage1 the components of its crust have been ever increasing in heterogeneity4 ,when the so-called elements1 originally existing in a dissociated state1 united into oxides1 acids1 and other binary compounds1 the total number of different substances was immensely augmented1 the new substances were more complex than the old1 and their properties were more varied4 ,that is1 the assemblage became more heterogeneous in its kinds1 in the composition of each kind1 and in the range of chemical characters4 ,when1 at a later period1 there arose salts and other compounds of similar degrees of complexity1 there was again an increase of heterogeneity1 alike in the aggregate and in its members4 ,and when1 still later1 matters classed as organic became possible1 the multiformity was yet further augmented in kindred ways4 ,if1 then1 chemical evolution1 so far as we can trace it1 has been from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous1 may we not fairly suppose that it has been so from the beginning8 ,if1 from late stages in the ,earth's history1 we run back1 and find the lines of chemical evolution continually converging1 until they bring us to bodies which we cannot decompose1 may we not suspect that1 could we run back these lines still further1 we should come to still decreasing heterogeneity in the number and nature of the substances1 until we reached something like homogeneity8 ,a parallel argument may be derived from consideration of the affinities and stabilities of chemical compounds4 ,beginning with the complex nitrogenous bodies out of which living things are formed1 and which1 in the history of the ,earth1 are the most modern1 at the same time that they are the most heterogeneous1 we see that the affinities and stabilities of these are extremely small4 ,their molecules do not enter bodily into union with those of other substances so as to form more complex compounds still1 and their components often fail to hold together under ordinary conditions4 ,a stage lower in degree of composition we come to the vast assemblage of oxy-hydro-carbons1 numbers of which show many and decided affinities1 and are stable at common temperatures4 ,passing to the inorganic group1 we are shown by the salts c4 strong affinities between their components and unions which are1 in many cases1 not very easily broken4 ,and then when we come to the oxides1 acids1 and other binary compounds1 we see that in many cases the elements of which they are formed1 when brought into the presence of one another under favourable conditions1 unite with violence2 and that many of their unions cannot be dissolved by heat alone4 ,if1 then1 as we go back from the most modern and most complex substances to the most ancient and simplest substances1 we see1 on the average1 a great increase in affinity and stability1 it results that if the same law holds with the simplest substances known to us1 the components of these1 if they are compound1 may be assumed to have united with affinities far more intense than any we have experience of1 and to cling together with tenacities far exceeding the tenacities with which chemistry acquaints us4 ,hence the existence of a class of substances which are undecomposable and therefore seem simple1 appears to be an implication2 and the corollary is that these were formed during early stages of terrestrial concentration1 under conditions of heat and pressure which we cannot now parallel4 ,yet another support for the belief that the so-called elements are compounds1 is derived from a comparison of them1 considered as an aggregate ascending in their molecular weights1 with the aggregate of bodies known to be compound1 similarly considered in their ascending molecular weights4 ,contrast the binary compounds as a class with the quaternary compounds as a class4 ,the molecules constituting oxides 7whether alkaline or acid or neutral7 chlorides1 sulphurets1 c4 are relatively small2 and1 combining with great avidity1 form stable compounds4 ,on the other hand1 the molecules constituting nitrogenous bodies are relatively vast and are chemically inert2 and such combinations as their simpler types enter into1 cannot withstand disturbing forces4 ,now a like difference is seen if we contrast with one another the so-called elements4 ,those of relatively-low molecular weights--oxygen1 hydrogen1 potassium1 sodium1 c41--show great readiness to unite among themselves2 and1 indeed1 many of them cannot be prevented from uniting under ordinary conditions4 ,contrariwise1 under ordinary conditions the substances of high molecular weights--the noble metals--are indifferent to other substances2 and such compounds as they do form under conditions specially adjusted1 are easily destroyed4 ,thus as1 among the bodies we know to be compound1 increasing molecular weight is associated with the appearance of certain characters1 and as1 among the bodies we class as simple1 increasing molecular weight is associated with the appearance of similar characters1 the composite nature of the elements is in another way pointed to4 ,there has to be added one further class of phenomena1 congruous with those above named1 which here specially concerns us4 ,looking generally at chemical unions1 we see that the heat evolved usually decreases as the degree of composition1 and consequent massiveness1 of the molecules1 increases4 ,in the first place1 we have the fact that during the formation of simple compounds the heat evolved is much greater than that which is evolved during the formation of complex compounds3 the elements1 when uniting with one another1 usually give out much heat2 while1 when the compounds they form are recompounded1 but little heat is given out2 and1 as shown by the experiments of ,prof4 ,andrews1 the heat given out during the union of acids and bases is habitually smaller where the molecular weight of the base is greater4 ,then1 in the second place1 we see that among the elements themselves1 the unions of those having low molecular weights result in far more heat than do the unions of those having high molecular weights4 ,if we proceed on the supposition that the so-called elements are compounds1 and if this law1 if not universal1 holds of undecomposable substances as of decomposable1 then there are two implications4 ,the one is that those compoundings and recompoundings by which the elements were formed1 must have been accompanied by degrees of heat exceeding any degrees of heat known to us4 ,the other is that among these compoundings and recompoundings themselves1 those by which the small-moleculed elements were formed produced more intense heat than those by which the large-moleculed elements were formed3 the elements formed by the final recompoundings being necessarily later in origin1 and at the same time less stable1 than the earlier-formed ones4 ,,note ,,ii4 ,may we from these propositions1 and especially from the last1 draw any conclusions respecting the evolution of heat during nebular condensation8 ,and do such conclusions affect in any way the conclusions now current8 ,in the first place1 it seems inferable from physico-chemical facts at large1 that only through the instrumentality of those combinations which formed the elements1 did the concentration of diffused nebulous matter into concrete masses become possible4 ,if we remember that hydrogen and oxygen in their uncombined states oppose1 the one an insuperable and the other an almost insuperable1 resistance to liquefaction1 while when combined the compound assumes the liquid state with facility1 we may suspect that in like manner the simpler types of matter out of which the elements were formed1 could not have been reduced even to such degrees of density as the known gases show us1 without what we may call proto-chemical unions3 the implication being that after the heat resulting from each of such proto-chemical unions had escaped1 mutual gravitation of the parts was able to produce further condensation of the nebulous mass4 ,if we thus distinguish between the two sources of heat accompanying nebular condensation--the heat due to proto-chemical combinations and that due to the contraction caused by gravitation 7both of them1 however1 being interpretable as consequent on loss of motion71 it may be inferred that they take different shares during the earlier and during the later stages of aggregation4 ,it seems probable that while the diffusion is great and the force of mutual gravitation small1 the chief source of heat is combination of units of matter1 simpler than any known to us1 into such units of matter as those we know2 while1 conversely1 when there has been reached close aggregation1 the chief source of heat is gravitation1 with consequent pressure and gradual contraction4 ,supposing this to be so1 let us ask what may be inferred4 ,if at the time when the nebulous spheroid from which the ,solar ,system resulted1 filled the orbit of ,neptune1 it had reached such a degree of density as enabled those units of matter which compose the sodium molecules to enter into combination2 and if1 in conformity with the analogies above indicated1 the heat evolved by this proto-chemical combination was great compared with the heats evolved by the chemical combinations known to us2 the implication is that the nebulous spheroid1 in the course of its contraction1 would have to get rid of a much larger quantity of heat than it would1 did it commence at any ordinary temperature and had only to lose the heat consequent on contraction4 ,that is to say1 in estimating the past period during which solar emission of heat has been going on at a high rate1 much must depend on the initial temperature assumed2 and this may have been rendered intense by the proto-chemical changes which took place in early stages4#ba ,respecting the future duration of the solar heat1 there must also be differences between the estimates made according as we do or do not take into account the proto-chemical changes which possibly have still to take place4 ,true as it may be that the quantity of heat to be emitted is measured by the quantity of motion to be lost1 and that this must be the same whether the approximation of the molecules is effected by chemical unions1 or by mutual gravitation1 or by both2 yet1 evidently1 everything must turn on the degree of condensation supposed to be eventually reached2 and this must in large measure depend on the natures of the substances eventually formed4 ,though1 by spectrum-analysis1 platinum has recently been detected in the solar atmosphere1 it seems clear that the metals of low molecular weights greatly predominate2 and supposing the foregoing arguments to be valid1 it may be inferred1 as not improbable1 that the compoundings and recompoundings by which the heavy-moleculed elements are produced1 not hitherto possible in large measure1 will hereafter take place2 and that1 as a result1 the ,sun's density will finally become very great in comparison with what it is now4 ,i say not hitherto possible in large measure1 because it is a feasible supposition that they may be formed1 and can continue to exist1 only in certain outer parts of the ,solar mass1 where the pressure is sufficiently great while the heat is not too great4 ,and if this be so1 the implication is that the interior body of the ,sun1 higher in temperature than its peripheral layers1 may consist wholly of the metals of low atomic weights1 and that this may be a part cause of his low specific gravity2 and a further implication is that when1 in course of time1 the internal temperature falls1 the heavy-moleculed elements1 as they severally become capable of existing in it1 may arise3 the formation of each having an evolution of heat as its concomitant4#bb ,if so1 it would seem to follow that the amount of heat to be emitted by the ,sun1 and the length of the period during which the emission will go on1 must be taken as much greater than if the ,sun is supposed to be permanently constituted of the elements now predominating in him1 and to be capable of only that degree of condensation which such composition permits4 ,,note ,,iii4 ,are the internal structures of celestial bodies all the same1 or do they differ8 ,and if they differ1 can we1 from the process of nebular condensation1 infer the conditions under which they assume one or other character8 ,in the foregoing essay as originally published1 these questions were discussed2 and though the conclusions reached cannot be sustained in the form given to them1 they foreshadow conclusions which may1 perhaps1 be sustained4 ,referring to the conceivable causes of unlike specific gravities in the members of the solar system1 it was said that these might be-- #a4 ,differences between the kinds of matter or matters composing them4 #b4 ,differences between the quantities of matter2 for1 other things equal1 the mutual gravitation of atoms will make a large mass denser than a small one4 #c4 ,differences between the structures3 the masses being either solid or liquid throughout1 or having central cavities filled with elastic ariform substance4 ,of these three conceivable causes1 that commonly assigned is the first1 more or less modified by the second4 ,written as this was before spectrum-analysis had made its disclosures1 no notice could of course be taken of the way in which these conflict with the first of the foregoing suppositions2 but after pointing out other objections to it the argument continued thus3-- ,however1 spite of these difficulties1 the current hypothesis is1 that the ,sun and planets1 inclusive of the ,earth1 are either solid or liquid1 or have solid crusts with liquid nuclei4#bc ,after saying that the familiarity of this hypothesis must not delude us into uncritical acceptance of it1 but that if any other hypothesis is physically possible it may reasonably be entertained1 it was argued that by tracing out the process of condensation in a nebulous spheroid1 we are led to infer the eventual formation of a molten shell with a nucleus consisting of gaseous matter at high tension4 ,the paragraph which then follows runs thus3-- ,but what1 it may be asked1 will become of this gaseous nucleus when exposed to the enormous gravitative pressure of a shell some thousands of miles thick8 ,how can aeriform matter withstand such a pressure8 ,very readily4 ,it has been proved that1 even when the heat generated by compression is allowed to escape1 some gases remain uncondensible by any force we can produce4 ,an unsuccessful attempt lately made in ,vienna to liquify oxygen1 clearly shows this enormous resistance4 ,the steel piston employed was literally shortened by the pressure used2 and yet the gas remained unliquified6 ,if1 then1 the expansive force is thus immense when the heat evolved is dissipated1 what must it be when that heat is in great measure detained1 as in the case we are considering8 ,indeed the experiences of ,m4 ,cagniard de ,latour have shown that gases may1 under pressure1 acquire the density of liquids while retaining the aeriform state1 provided the temperature continues extremely high4 ,in such a case1 every addition to the heat is an addition to the repulsive power of the atoms3 the increased pressure itself generates an increased ability to resist2 and this remains true to whatever extent the compression is carried4 ,indeed it is a corollary from the persistence of force that if1 under increasing pressure1 a gas retains all the heat evolved1 its resisting force is absolutely unlimited4 ,hence the internal planetary structure we have described is as physically stable a one as that commonly assumed4 ,had this paragraph1 and the subsequent paragraphs1 been written five years later1 when ,prof4 ,andrews had published an account of his researches1 the propositions they contain1 while rendered more specific and at the same time more defensible1 would perhaps have been freed from the erroneous implication that the internal structure indicated is an universal one4 ,let us1 while guided by ,prof4 ,andrews' results1 consider what would probably be the successive changes in a condensing nebulous spheroid4 ,prof4 ,andrews has shown that for each kind of gaseous matter there is a temperature above which no amount of pressure can cause liquefaction4 ,the remark1 made a priori in the above extract1 that if1 under increasing pressure1 a gas retains all the heat evolved1 its resisting force is absolutely unlimited1 harmonizes with the inductively-reached result that if the temperature is not lowered to its critical point a gas does not liquify1 however great the force applied4 ,at the same time ,prof4 ,andrews' experiments imply that1 supposing the temperature to be lowered to the point at which liquefaction becomes possible1 then liquefaction will take place where there is first reached the required pressure4 ,what are the corollaries in relation to concentrating nebulous spheroids8 ,assume a spheroid of such size as will form one of the inferior planets1 and consisting externally of a voluminous1 cloudy atmosphere composed of the less condensible elements1 and internally of metallic gases3 such internal gases being kept by convection-currents at temperatures not very widely differing4 ,and assume that continuous radiation has brought the internal mass of metallic gases down to the critical point of the most condensible4 ,may we not say that there is a size of the spheroid such that the pressure will not be great enough to produce liquefaction at any other place than the centre8 or1 in other words1 that in the process of decreasing temperature and increasing pressure1 the centre will be the place at which the combined conditions of pressure and temperature will be first reached8 ,if so1 liquefaction1 commencing at the centre1 will spread thence to the periphery2 and1 in virtue of the law that solids have higher melting points under pressure than when free1 it may be that solidification will similarly1 at a later stage1 begin at the centre and progress outwards3 eventually producing1 in that case1 a state such as ,sir ,william ,thomson alleges exists in the ,earth4 ,but now suppose that instead of such a spheroid1 we assume one of1 say1 twenty or thirty times the mass2 what will then happen8 ,notwithstanding convection-currents1 the temperature at the centre must always be higher than elsewhere2 and in the process of cooling the critical point of temperature will sooner be reached in the outer parts4 ,though the requisite pressure will not exist near the surface1 there is evidently1 in a large spheroid1 a depth below the surface at which the pressure will be great enough1 if the temperature is sufficiently low4 ,hence it is inferable that somewhere between centre and surface in the supposed larger spheroid1 there will arise that state described by ,prof4 ,andrews1 in which flickering stri of liquid float in gaseous matter of equal density4 ,and it may be inferred that gradually1 as the process goes on1 these stri will become more abundant while the gaseous interspaces diminish2 until1 eventually1 the liquid becomes continuous4 ,thus there will result a molten shell containing a gaseous nucleus equally dense with itself at their surface of contact and more dense at the centre--a molten shell which will slowly thicken by additions to both exterior and interior4 ,that a solid crust will eventually form on this molten shell may be reasonably concluded4 ,to the demurrer that solidification cannot commence at the surface1 because the solids formed would sink1 there are two replies4 ,the first is that various metals expand while solidifying1 and therefore would float4 ,the second is that since the envelope of the supposed spheroid would consist of the gases and non-metallic elements1 compounds of these with the metals and with one another would continually accumulate on the molten shell2 and the crust1 consisting of oxides1 chlorides1 sulphurets1 and the rest1 having much less specific gravity than the molten shell1 would be readily supported by it4 ,clearly a planet thus constituted would be in an unstable state4 ,always it would remain liable to a catastrophe resulting from change in its gaseous nucleus4 ,if1 under some condition of pressure and temperature eventually reached1 the components of this suddenly entered into one of those proto-chemical combinations forming a new element1 there might result an explosion capable of shattering the entire planet1 and propelling its fragments in all directions with high velocities4 ,if the hypothetical planet between ,jupiter and ,mars was intermediate in size as in position1 it would apparently fulfil the conditions under which such a catastrophe might occur4 ,,note ,,iv4 ,the argument set forth in the foregoing note1 is in part designed to introduce a question which seems to require re-consideration--the origin of the minor planets or planetoids4 ,the hypothesis of ,olbers1 as propounded by him1 implied that the disruption of the assumed planet between ,mars and ,jupiter had taken place at no very remote period in the past2 and this implication was shown to be inadmissible by the discovery that there exists no such point of intersection of the orbits of the planetoids as the hypothesis requires4 ,the inquiry whether1 in the past1 there was any nearer approach to a point of intersection than at present1 having resulted in a negative1 it is held that the hypothesis must be abandoned4 ,it is1 however1 admitted that the mutual perturbations of the planetoids themselves would suffice1 in the course of some millions of years1 to destroy all traces of a place of intersection of their orbits1 if it once existed4 ,but if this be admitted why need the hypothesis be abandoned8 ,given such duration of the ,solar ,system as is currently assumed1 there seems no reason why lapse of a few millions of years should present any difficulty4 ,the explosion may as well have taken place ten million years ago as at any more recent period4 ,and whoever grants this must grant that the probability of the hypothesis has to be estimated from other data4 ,as a preliminary to closer consideration1 let us ask what may be inferred from the rate of discovery of the planetoids1 and from the sizes of those most recently discovered4 ,in #ahgh1 ,prof4 ,newcomb1 arguing that the preponderance of evidence is on the side of the number and magnitude being limited1 says that the newly discovered ones do not seem1 on the average1 to be materially smaller than those which were discovered ten years ago2 and further that the new ones will probably be found to grow decidedly rare before another hundred are discovered4 ,now1 inspection of the tables contained in the just-published fourth edition of ,chambers' ,descriptive ,astronomy 7vol4 ,i7 shows that whereas the planetoids discovered in #ahfh 7the year ,prof4 ,newcomb singles out for comparison7 have an average magnitude of #aaef those discovered last year 7#ahhh7 have an average magnitude of #abdc4 ,further1 it is observable that though more than ninety have been discovered since ,prof4 ,newcomb wrote1 they have by no means become rare3 the year #ahhh having added ten to the list1 and having therefore maintained the average rate of the preceding ten years4 ,if1 then1 the indications ,prof4 ,newcomb names1 had they arisen1 would have implied a limitation of the number1 these opposite indications imply that the number is unlimited4 ,the reasonable conclusion appears to be that these minor planets are to be counted not by hundreds but by thousands2 that more powerful telescopes will go on revealing still smaller ones2 and that additions to the list will cease only when the smallness ends in invisibility4 ,commencing now to scrutinize the two hypotheses respecting the genesis of these multitudinous bodies1 ,i may first remark concerning that of ,laplace1 that he might possibly not have propounded it had he known that instead of four such bodies there are hundreds1 if not thousands4 ,the supposition that they resulted from the breaking up of a nebulous ring into numerous small portions1 instead of its collapse into one mass1 might not1 in such case1 have seemed to him so probable4 ,it would have appeared still less probable had he been aware of all that has since been discovered concerning the wide differences of the orbits in size1 their various and often great eccentricities1 and their various and often great inclinations4 ,let us look at these and other incongruous traits of them4 7#a47 ,between the greatest and least mean distances of the planetoids there is a space of #bjj millions of miles2 so that the whole of the ,earth's orbit might be placed between the limits of the zone occupied1 and leave #g millions of miles on either side3 add to which that the widest excursions of the planetoids occupy a zone of #bgj millions of miles4 ,had the rings from which ,mercury1 ,venus1 and the ,earth were formed been one-sixth of the smaller width or one-ninth of the greater1 they would have united3 there would have been no nebulous rings at all1 but a continuous disk4 ,nay more1 since one of the planetoids trenches upon the orbit of ,mars1 it follows that the nebulous ring out of which the planetoids were formed must have overlapped that out of which ,mars was formed4 ,how do these implications consist with the nebular hypothesis8 7#b47 ,the tacit assumption usually made is that the different parts of a nebulous ring have the same angular velocities4 ,though this assumption may not be strictly true1 yet it seems scarcely likely that it is so widely untrue as it would be had the inner part of the ring an angular velocity nearly thrice that of the outer4 ,yet this is implied4 ,while the period of ,thule is #h4h years1 the period of ,medusa is #ca years4 7#c47 ,the eccentricity of ,jupiter's orbit is #jjdhaf1 and the eccentricity of ,mars' orbit is #jjicaa4 ,estimated by groups of the first found and last found of the planetoids1 the average eccentricity of the assemblage is about three times that of ,jupiter and more than one and a half times that of ,mars2 and among the members of the assemblage themselves1 some have an eccentricity thirty-five times that of others4 ,how came this nebulous zone1 out of which it is supposed the planetoids arose1 to have originated eccentricities so divergent from one another as well as from those of the neighbouring planets8 7#d47 ,a like question may be asked respecting the inclinations of the orbits4 ,the average inclination of the planetoid-orbits is four times the inclination of ,mars' orbit and six times the inclination of ,jupiter's orbit2 and among the planetoid-orbits themselves the inclinations of some are fifty times those of others4 ,how are all these differences to be accounted for on the hypothesis of genesis from a nebulous ring8 7#e47 ,much greater becomes the difficulty on inquiring how these extremely unlike eccentricities and inclinations came to co-exist before the parts of the nebulous ring separated1 and how they survived after the separation4 ,were all the great eccentricities displayed by the outermost members of the group1 and the small by the innermost members1 and were the inclinations so distributed that the orbits having much belonged to one part of the group1 and those having little to another part of the group2 the difficulty of explanation might not be insuperable4 ,but the arrangement is by no means this4 ,the orbits are1 to use an expressive word1 miscellaneously jumbled4 ,hence1 if we go back to the nebulous ring1 there presents itself the question1--,how came each planetoid-forming portion of nebulous matter1 when it gathered itself together and separated1 to have a motion round the ,sun differing so much from the motions of its neighbours in eccentricity and inclination8 ,and there presents itself the further question1--,how1 during the time when it was concentrating into a planetoid1 did it manage to jostle its way through all the differently-moving like masses of nebulous matter1 and yet to preserve its individuality8 ,answers to these questions are1 it seems to me1 not even imaginable4 99 99 99 99 99 ,turn we now to the alternative hypothesis4 ,during revision of the foregoing essay1 in preparation for that edition of the volume containing it which was published in #ahhc1 there occurred the thought that some light on the origin of the planetoids ought to be obtained by study of their distributions and movements4 ,if1 as ,olbers supposed1 they resulted from the bursting of a planet once revolving in the region they occupy1 the implications are3--first1 that the fragments must be most abundant in the space immediately about the original orbit1 and less abundant far away from it2 second1 that the large fragments must be relatively few1 while of smaller fragments the numbers will increase as the sizes decrease2 third1 that as some among the smaller fragments will be propelled further than any of the larger1 the widest deviations in mean distance from the mean distance of the original planet1 will be presented by the smallest members of the assemblage2 and fourth1 that the orbits differing most from the rest in eccentricity and in inclination1 will be among those of these smallest members4 ,in the fourth edition of ,chambers's ,handbook of ,descriptive and ,practical ,astronomy 7the first volume of which has just been issued7 there is a list of the elements 7extracted and adapted from the ,berliner ,astronomisches ,jahrbuch for #ahij7 of all the small planets 7#bha in number7 which had been discovered up to the end of #ahhh4 ,the apparent brightness1 as expressed in equivalent star-magnitudes1 is the only index we have to the probable comparative sizes of by far the largest number of the planetoids3 the exceptions being among those first discovered4 ,thus much premised1 let us take the above points in order4 7#a7 ,there is a region lying between #bej and #bhj 7in terms of the ,earth's mean distance from the ,sun7 where the planetoids are found in maximum abundance4 ,the mean between these extremes1 #bfe1 is nearly the same as the average of the distances of the four largest and earliest-known of these bodies1 which amounts to #bfd4 ,may we not say that the thick clustering about this distance 7which is1 however1 rather less than that assigned for the original planet by ,bode's empirical law71 in contrast with the wide scattering of the comparatively few whose distances are little more than #b or exceed #c1 is a fact in accordance with the hypothesis in question8#bd 7#b7 ,any table which gives the apparent magnitudes of the planetoids1 shows at once how much the number of the smaller members of the assemblage exceeds that of those which are comparatively large2 and every succeeding year has emphasized this contrast more strongly4 ,only one of them 7,vesta7 exceeds in brightness the seventh star-magnitude1 while one other 7,ceres7 is between the seventh and eighth1 and a third 7,pallas7 is above the eighth2 but between the eighth and ninth there are six2 between the ninth and tenth1 twenty2 between the tenth and eleventh1 fifty-five2 below the eleventh a much larger number is known1 and the number existing is probably far greater1--a conclusion we cannot doubt when the difficulty of finding the very faint members of the family1 visible only in the largest telescopes1 is considered4 7#c7 ,kindred evidence is furnished if we broadly contrast their mean distances4 ,out of the #ac largest planetoids whose apparent brightnesses exceed that of a star of the #ie magnitude1 there is not one having a mean distance that exceeds #c4 ,of those having magnitudes at least #ie and smaller than #aj1 there are #ae2 and of these one only has a mean distance greater than #c4 ,of those between #aj and #aje there are #ag2 and of these also there is one exceeding #c in mean distance4 ,in the next group there are #cg1 and of these #e have this great mean distance4 ,the next group1 #dh1 contains #ab such2 the next1 #dg1 contains #ac such4 ,of those of the twelfth magnitude and fainter1 #gb planetoids have been discovered1 and of those of them of which the orbits have been computed1 no fewer than #bc have a mean distance exceeding #c in terms of the ,earth's4 ,it is evident from this how comparatively erratic are the fainter members of the extensive family with which we are dealing4 7#d7 ,to illustrate the next point1 it may be noted that among the planetoids whose sizes have been approximately measured1 the orbits of the two largest1 ,vesta and ,ceres1 have eccentricities falling between 4#je and 4#aj1 whilst the orbits of the two smallest1 ,menippe and ,eva1 have eccentricities falling between 4#bj and 4#be1 and between 4#cj and 4#ce4 ,and then among those more recently discovered1 having diameters so small that measurement of them has not been practicable1 come the extremely erratic ones1--,hilda and ,thule1 which have mean distances of #c4ig and #d4be respectively2 thra1 having an orbit so eccentric that it cuts the orbit of ,mars2 and ,medusa1 which has the smallest mean distance from the ,sun of any4 7#e7 ,if the average eccentricities of the orbits of the planetoids grouped according to their decreasing sizes are compared1 no very definite results are disclosed1 excepting this1 that the eight ,polyhymnia1 ,atalanta1 ,eurydice1 thra1 ,eva1 ,andromache1 ,istria1 and ,eudora1 which have the greatest eccentricities 7falling between 4#cj and 4#ch71 are all among those of smallest star-magnitudes4 ,nor when we consider the inclinations of the orbits do we meet with obvious verifications2 since the proportion of highly-inclined orbits among the smaller planetoids does not appear to be greater than among the others4 ,but consideration shows that there are two ways in which these last comparisons are vitiated4 ,one is that the inclinations are measured from the plane of the ecliptic1 instead of being measured from the plane of the orbit of the hypothetical planet4 ,the other1 and more important one1 is that the search for planetoids has naturally been carried on in that comparatively narrow zone within which most of their orbits fall2 and that1 consequently1 those having the most highly-inclined orbits are the least likely to have been detected1 especially if they are at the same time among the smallest4 ,moreover1 considering the general relation between the inclination of planetoid orbits and their eccentricities1 it is probable that among the orbits of these undetected planetoids are many of the most eccentric4 ,but while recognizing the incompleteness of the evidence1 it seems to me that it goes far to justify the hypothesis of ,olbers1 and is quite incongruous with that of ,laplace4 ,and as having the same meanings let me not omit the remarkable fact concerning the planetoids discovered by ,d',arrest1 that if their orbits are figured under the form of material rings1 these rings will be found so entangled1 that it would be possible1 by means of one among them taken at hazard1 to lift up all the rest1--a fact incongruous with ,laplace's hypothesis1 which implies an approximate concentricity1 but quite congruous with the hypothesis of an exploded planet4 ,next to be considered come phenomena1 the bearings of which on the question before us are scarcely considered--,i mean those presented by meteors and shooting stars4 ,the natures and distributions of these harmonize with the hypothesis of an exploded planet1 and ,i think with no other hypothesis4 ,the theory of volcanic origin1 joined with the remark that the ,sun emits jets which might propel them with adequate velocities1 seems quite untenable4 ,such meteoric bodies as have descended to us1 forbid absolutely the supposition of solar origin4 ,nor can they rationally be ascribed to planetary volcanoes4 ,even were their mineral characters appropriate1 which many of them are not 7for volcanoes do not eject iron71 no planetary volcanoes could propel them with anything like the implied velocity--could no more withstand the tremendous force to be assumed1 than could a card-board gun the force behind a rifle bullet4 ,but that their mineral characters1 various as they are1 harmonize with the supposition that they were derived from the crust of a planet is manifest2 and that the bursting of a planet might give to them1 and to shooting stars1 the needful velocities1 is a reasonable conclusion4 ,along with those larger fragments of the crust constituting the known planetoids1 varying from some #bjj miles in diameter to little over a dozen1 there would be sent out still more multitudinous portions of the crust1 decreasing in size as they increased in number4 ,and while there would thus result such masses as occasionally fall through the ,earth's atmosphere to its surface1 there would1 in an accompanying process1 be an adequate cause for the myriads of far smaller masses which1 as shooting stars1 are dissipated in passing through the ,earth's atmosphere4 ,let us figure to ourselves1 as well as we may1 the process of explosion4 ,assume that the diameter of the missing planet was #bj1jjj miles2 that its solid crust was a thousand miles thick2 that under this came a shell of molten metallic matter which was another thousand miles thick2 and that the space1 #af1jjj miles in diameter1 within this1 was occupied by the equally dense mass of gases above the critical point1 which1 entering into a proto-chemical combination1 caused the destroying explosion4 ,the primary fissures in the crust must have been far apart--probably averaging distances between them as great as the thickness of the crust4 ,supposing them approximately equidistant1 there would1 in the equatorial periphery1 be between #fj and #gj fissures4 ,by the time the primary fragments thus separated had been heaved a mile outwards1 the fissures formed would severally have1 at the surface1 a width of #agj odd yards4 ,of course these great masses1 as soon as they moved1 would themselves begin to fall in pieces2 especially at their bounding surfaces4 ,but passing over the resulting complications1 we see that when the masses had been propelled #aj miles outwards1 the fissures between them would be each a mile wide4 ,notwithstanding the enormous forces at work1 an appreciable interval would elapse before these vast portions of the crust could be put in motion with any considerable velocities4 ,perhaps the estimate will be under the mark if we assume that it took #aj seconds to propel them through the first mile1 and that1 by implication1 at the end of #bj seconds they had travelled #d miles1 and at the end of #cj seconds #i miles4 ,supposing this granted1 let us ask what would be taking place in each intervening fissure a thousand miles deep1 which1 in the space of half a minute1 had opened out to nearly a mile wide1 and in the subsequent half minute to a chasm approaching #c miles in width4 ,there would first be propelled through it enormous jets of the molten metals composing the internal liquid shell2 and these would part into relatively small masses as they were shot into space4 ,presently1 as the chasm opened to some miles in width1 the molten metals would begin to be followed by the equally dense gaseous matter behind1 and the two would rush out together4 ,soon the gases1 predominating1 would carry with them the portions of the liquid shell continually collapsing2 until the blast became one filled with millions of small masses1 billions of smaller masses1 and trillions of drops4 ,these would be driven into space in a stream1 the emission of which would continue for many seconds or even several minutes4 ,remembering the rate of motion of the jets emitted from the solar surface1 and supposing that the blasts produced by this explosion reached only one-tenth of that rate1 these myriads of small masses and drops would be propelled with planetary velocities1 and in approximately the same direction4 ,i say approximately1 because they would be made to deviate somewhat by the friction and irregularities of the chasm passed through1 and also by the rotation of the planet4 ,observe1 however1 that though they would all have immense velocities1 their velocities would not be equal4 ,during its earlier stages the blast would be considerably retarded by the resistance which the sides of its channel offered4 ,when this became relatively small the velocity of the blast would reach its maximum2 from which it would decline when the space for emission became very wide1 and the pressure behind consequently less4 ,hence these almost infinitely numerous particles of planet-spray1 as we might call it1 as well as those formed by the condensation of the metallic vapours accompanying them1 would forthwith begin to part company3 some going rapidly in advance1 and others falling behind2 until the stream of them1 perpetually elongating1 formed an orbit round the ,sun1 or rather an assemblage of innumerable orbits1 separating widely at aphelion and perihelion1 but approximating midway1 where they might fall within a space of1 say1 some two millions of miles1 as do the orbits of the ,november meteors4 ,at a later stage of the explosion1 when the large masses1 having moved far outwards1 had also fallen to pieces of every size1 from that of ,vesta to that of an aerolite1 and when the channels just described had ceased to exist1 the contents of the planet would disperse themselves with lower velocities and without any unity of direction4 ,hence we see causes alike for the streams of shooting stars1 for the solitary shooting stars visible to the naked eye1 and for the telescopic shooting stars a score times more numerous4 ,further significant evidence is furnished by the comets of short periods4 ,of the thirteen constituting this group1 twelve have orbits falling between those of ,mars and ,jupiter3 one only having its aphelion beyond the orbit of ,jupiter4 ,that is to say1 nearly all of them frequent the same region as the planetoids4 ,by implication1 they are similarly associated in respect of their periods4 ,the periods of the planetoids range from #c4a to #h4h years2 and all these twelve comets have periods falling between these extremes3 the least being #c4bi and the greatest #h4hf4 ,once more this family of comets1 like the planetoids in the zone they occupy and like them in their periods1 are like them also in the respect that1 as ,mr4 ,lynn has pointed out1 their motions are all direct4 ,how happens this close kinship--how happens there to be this family of comets so much like the planetoids and so much like one another1 but so unlike comets at large8 ,the obvious suggestion is that they are among the products of the explosion which originated the planetoids1 the aerolites1 and the streams of meteors2 and consideration of the probable circumstances shows us that such products might be expected4 ,if the hypothetical planet was like its neighbour ,jupiter in having an atmosphere1 or like its neighbour ,mars in having water on its surface1 or like both in these respects2 then these superficial masses of liquid1 of vapour1 and of gas1 blown into space along with the solid matters1 would yield the materials for comets4 ,there would result1 too1 comets unlike one another in constitution4 ,if a fissure opened beneath one of the seas1 the molten metals and metallic gases rushing through it as above described1 would decompose part of the water carried with them2 and the oxygen and hydrogen liberated would be mingled with undecomposed vapour4 ,in other cases1 portions of the atmosphere might be propelled1 probably with portions of vapour2 and in yet other cases masses of water alone4 ,severally subject to great heat at perihelion1 these would behave more or less differently4 ,once more1 it would ordinarily happen that detached swarms of meteors projected as implied1 would carry with them masses of vapours and gases2 whence would result the cometic constitution now insisted on4 ,and sometimes there would be like accompaniments to meteoric streams4 ,see1 then1 the contrast between the two hypotheses4 ,that of ,laplace1 looking probable while there were only four planetoids1 but decreasing in apparent likelihood as the planetoids increase in number1 until1 as they pass through the hundreds on their way to the thousands1 it becomes obviously improbable1 is1 at the same time1 otherwise objectionable4 ,it pre-supposes a nebulous ring of a width so enormous that it would have overlapped the ring of ,mars4 ,this ring would have had differences between the angular velocities of its parts quite inconsistent with the ,nebular ,hypothesis4 ,the average eccentricities of the orbits of its parts must have differed greatly from those of adjacent orbits2 and the average inclinations of the orbits of its parts must similarly have differed greatly from those of adjacent orbits4 ,once more1 the orbits of its parts1 confusedly interspersed1 must have had varieties of eccentricity and inclination unaccountable in portions of the same nebulous ring2 and1 during concentration into planetoids1 each must have had to maintain its course while struggling through the assemblage of other small nebulous masses1 severally moving in ways unlike its own4 ,on the other hand1 the hypothesis of an exploded planet is supported by every increase in the number of planetoids discovered2 by the greater numbers of the smaller sizes2 by the thicker clustering near the inferred place of the missing planet2 by the occurrence of the greatest mean distances among the smallest members of the assemblage2 by the occurrence of the greatest eccentricities in the orbits of these smallest members2 and by the entanglement of all the orbits4 ,further support for the hypothesis is yielded by aerolites1 so various in their kinds1 but all suggestive of a planet's crust2 by the streams of shooting stars having their radiant points variously placed in the heavens2 and also by the solitary shooting stars visible to the naked eye1 and the more numerous ones visible through telescopes4 ,once more1 it harmonizes with the discovery of a family of comets1 twelve out of thirteen of which have mean distances falling within the zone of the planetoids1 have similarly associated periods1 have all the same direct motions1 and are connected with swarms of meteors and with meteoric streams4 ,may we not1 indeed1 say1 that if there once existed a planet between ,mars and ,jupiter which burst1 the explosion must have produced just such clusters of bodies and classes of phenomena as we actually find8 ,and what is the objection8 ,merely that if such an explosion occurred it must have occurred many millions of years ago--an objection which is in fact no objection2 for the supposition that the explosion occurred many millions of years ago is just as reasonable as the supposition that it occurred recently4 ,it is1 indeed1 further objected that some of the resulting fragments ought to have retrograde motions4 ,it turns out on calculation1 however1 that this is not the case4 ,assuming as true the velocity which ,lagrange estimated would have sufficed to give the four chief planetoids the positions they occupy1 it results that such a velocity1 given to the fragments which were propelled backwards by the explosion1 would not have given them retrograde motions1 but would simply have reduced their direct motions from something over #aa miles per second to about #f miles per second4 ,it is1 however1 manifest that this reduction of velocity would have necessitated the formation of highly-elliptic orbits--more elliptic than any of those at present known4 ,this seems to me the most serious difficulty which has presented itself4 ,still1 considering that there remain probably an immense number of planetoids to be discovered1 it is quite possible that among these there may be some having orbits answering to the requirement4 ,,note ,v4 ,shortly before ,i commenced the revision of the foregoing essay1 friends on two occasions named to me some remarkable photographs of nebul recently obtained by ,mr4 ,isaac ,roberts1 and exhibited at the ,royal ,astronomical ,society3 saying that they presented appearances such as might have been sketched by ,laplace in illustration of his hypothesis4 ,mr4 ,roberts has been kind enough to send me copies of the photographs in question and sundry others illustrative of stellar evolution4 ,those representing the ,great ,nebul in ,andromeda and ,canum ,venaticorum as well as #ha ,messier are at once impressive and instructive--illustrating as they do the genesis of nebulous rings round a central mass4 ,i may remark1 however1 that they seem to suggest the need for some modification of the current conception2 since they make it tolerably clear that the process is a much less uniform one than is supposed4 ,the usual idea is that a vast rotating nebulous spheroid arises before there are produced any of the planet-forming rings4 ,but both of these photographs apparently imply that1 in some cases at any rate1 the portions of nebulous matter composing the rings take shape before they reach the central mass4 ,it looks as though these partially-formed annuli must be prevented by their acquired motions from approaching even very near to the still-irregular body they surround4 ,be this as it may1 however1 and be the dimensions of the incipient systems what they may 7and it would seem to be a necessary implication that they are vastly larger than our ,solar ,system71 the process remains essentially the same4 ,practically demonstrated as this process now is1 we may say that the doctrine of nebular genesis passes from the region of hypothesis into the region of established truth4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #ba3 ,of course there remains the question whether1 before the stage here recognized1 there had already been produced a high temperature by those collisions of celestial masses which reduced the matter to a nebulous form4 ,as suggested in ,first ,principles 7 #acf in the edition of #ahfb1 and #ahb in subsequent editions71 there must1 after there have been effected all those minor dissolutions which follow evolutions1 remain to be effected the dissolutions of the great bodies in and on which the minor evolutions and dissolutions have taken place2 and it was argued that such dissolutions will be1 at some time or other1 effected by those immense transformations of molar motion into molecular motion1 consequent on collisions3 the argument being based on the statement of ,sir ,john ,herschel1 that in clusters of stars collisions must inevitably occur4 ,it may1 however1 be objected that though such a result may be reasonably looked for in closely aggregated assemblages of stars1 it is difficult to conceive of its taking place throughout our ,sidereal ,system at large1 the members of which1 and their intervals1 may be roughly figured as pins-heads #ej miles apart4 ,it would seem that something like an eternity must elapse before1 by ethereal resistance or other cause1 these can be brought into proximity great enough to make collisions probable4 ,footnote #bb3 ,the two sentences which1 in the text1 precede the asterisk1 ,i have introduced while these pages are standing in type3 being led to do so by the perusal of some notes kindly lent to me by ,prof4 ,dewar1 containing the outline of a lecture he gave at the ,royal ,institution during the session of #ahhj4 ,discussing the conditions under which1 if our so-called elements are compounded of elemental matter1 they may have been formed1 ,prof4 ,dewar1 arguing from the known habitudes of compound substances1 concludes that the formation is in each case a function of pressure1 temperature1 and nature of the environing gases4 ,footnote #bc3 ,at the date of this passage the established teleology made it seem needful to assume that all the planets are habitable1 and that even beneath the photosphere of the ,sun there exists a dark body which may be the scene of life2 but since then1 the influence of teleology has so far diminished that this hypothesis can no longer be called the current one4 ,footnote #bd3 ,it may here be mentioned 7though the principal significance of this comes under the next head7 that the average mean distance of the later-discovered planetoids is somewhat greater than that of these earlier-discovered2 amounting to #bfa for ,nos4 #a to #ce and #bhj for ,nos4 #baa to #bde4 ,for this observation ,i am indebted to ,mr4 ,lynn2 whose attention was drawn to it while revising for me the statements contained in this paragraph1 so as to include discoveries made since the paragraph was written4 ,,the ,,constitution ,,of ,,the ,,sun4 ,first published in ,the ,reader for ,february #be1 #ahfe4 ,i reproduce this essay chiefly to give a place to the speculation concerning the solar spots which forms the latter portion of it4 ,the hypothesis of ,m4 ,faye1 described in your numbers for ,january #bh and ,february #d1 respectively1 is to a considerable extent coincident with one which ,i ventured to suggest in an article on ,recent ,astronomy and the ,nebular ,hypothesis1 published in the ,westminster ,review for ,july1 #aheh4 ,in considering the possible causes of the immense differences of specific gravity among the planets1 ,i was led to question the validity of the tacit assumption that each planet consists of solid or liquid matter from centre to surface4 ,it seemed to me that any other internal structure which was mechanically stable1 might be assumed with equal legitimacy4 ,and the hypothesis of a solid or liquid shell1 having its cavity filled with gaseous matter at high pressure and temperature and of great density1 was one which seemed worth considering4 ,hence arose the inquiry--,what structure will result from the process of nebular condensation8 ,here followed a long speculation respecting the processes going on in a concentrating nebulous spheroid2 the general outcome of which is implied in ,note ,,iii of the foregoing essay4 ,i do not reproduce it because1 not having the guidance of ,prof4 ,andrew's researches1 ,i had concluded that the formation of a molten shell would occur universally1 instead of occasionally1 as is now argued in the note named4 ,the essay then proceeded thus3-- ,the process of condensation being in its essentials the same for all concentrating nebular spheroids1 planetary or solar1 it was argued that the ,sun is still passing through that incandescent stage which all the planets have long ago passed through3 his later aggregation1 joined with the immensely greater ratio of his mass to his surface1 involving comparative lateness of cooling4 ,supposing the sun to have reached the state of a molten shell1 inclosing a gaseous nucleus1 it was concluded that this molten shell1 ever radiating its heat1 but ever acquiring fresh heat by further integration of the ,sun's mass1 must be constantly kept up to that temperature at which its substance evaporates4 ,here followed part of the paragraph quoted in the preceding essay on p4 #aee2 and there succeeded1 in subsequent editions1 a paragraph aiming to show that the inferred structure of the ,sun's interior was congruous with the low specific gravity of the ,sun--a conclusion which1 as indicated on p4 #aef1 implies some very problematical assumptions respecting the natures of the unknown elements of the ,sun4 ,there then came this passage3-- ,the conception of the ,sun's constitution thus set forth1 is like that of ,m4 ,faye in so far as the successive changes1 the resulting structures1 and the ultimate state1 are concerned2 but unlike it in so far as the ,sun is supposed to have reached a later stage of concentration4 ,as ,i gather from your abstract of ,m4 ,faye's paper this referred to an article in ,the ,reader1 he considers the ,sun to be at present a gaseous spheroid1 having an envelope of metallic matters precipitated in the shape of luminous clouds1 the local dispersions of which1 caused by currents from within1 appear to us as spots2 and he looks forward to the future formation of a liquid film as an event that will soon be followed by extinction4 ,whereas the above hypothesis is that the liquid film already exists beneath the visible photosphere1 and that extinction cannot result until1 in the course of further aggregation1 the gaseous nucleus has become so much reduced1 and the shell so much thickened1 that the escape of the heat generated is greatly retarded4444 ,m4 ,faye's hypothesis appears to be espoused by him1 partly because it affords an explanation of the spots1 which are considered as openings in the photosphere1 exposing the comparatively non-luminous gases filling the interior4 ,but if these interior gases are non-luminous from the absence of precipitated matter1 must they not for the same reason be transparent8 ,and if transparent1 will not the light from the remote side of the photosphere seen through them1 be nearly as bright as that of the side next to us8 ,by as much as the intensely-heated gases of the interior are disabled by the dissociation of their molecules from giving off luminiferous undulations1 by so much must they be disabled from absorbing the light transmitted through them4 ,and if their great light-transmitting power is exactly complementary to their small light-emitting power1 there seems no reason why the interior of the ,sun1 disclosed to us by openings in the photosphere1 should not appear as bright as its exterior4 ,take1 on the other hand1 the supposition that a more advanced state of concentration has been reached4 ,a shell of molten metallic matter enclosing a gaseous nucleus still higher in temperature than itself1 will be continually kept at the highest temperature consistent with its state of liquid aggregation4 ,unless we assume that simple radiation suffices to give off all the heat generated by progressing integration1 we must conclude that the mass will be raised to that temperature at which part of its heat is absorbed in vaporizing its superficial parts4 ,the atmosphere of metallic gases hence resulting1 cannot continue to accumulate without reaching a height above the ,sun's surface1 at which the cooling due to radiation and rarefaction will cause condensation into cloud--cannot1 indeed1 cease accumulating until the precipitation from the upper limit of the atmosphere balances the evaporation from its lower limit4 ,this upper limit of the atmosphere of metallic gases1 whence precipitation is perpetually taking place1 will form the visible photosphere--partly giving off light of its own1 partly letting through the more brilliant light of the incandescent mass below4 ,this conclusion harmonizes with the appearances4 ,sir ,john ,herschel1 advocating though he does an antagonist hypothesis1 gives a description of the ,sun's surface which agrees completely with the processes here supposed4 ,he says3-- ,there is nothing which represents so faithfully this appearance as the slow subsidence of some flocculent chemical precipitates in a transparent fluid1 when viewed perpendicularly from above3 so faithfully1 indeed1 that it is hardly possible not to be impressed with the idea of a luminous medium intermixed1 but not confounded1 with a transparent and non-luminous atmosphere1 either floating as clouds in our air1 or pervading it in vast sheets and columns like flame1 or the streamers of our northern lights4--,treatise on ,astronomy1 p4 #bjh4 ,if the constitution of the ,sun be that which is above inferred1 it does not seem difficult to conceive still more specifically the production of these appearances4 ,everywhere throughout the atmosphere of metallic vapours which clothes the solar surface1 there must be ascending and descending currents4 ,the magnitude of these currents must obviously depend on the depth of this atmosphere4 ,if it is shallow1 the currents must be small2 but if many thousands of miles deep1 the currents may be wide enough to render visible to us the places at which they severally impinge on the limit of the atmosphere1 and the places whence the descending currents commence4 ,the top of an ascending current will be a space over which the thickness of condensed cloud is the least1 and through which the greatest amount of light from beneath penetrates4 ,the clouds perpetually formed at the top of such a current1 will be perpetually thrust aside by the uncondensed gases from below them2 and1 growing while they are thrust aside1 will collect in the spaces between the ascending currents1 where there will result the greatest degree of opacity4 ,hence the mottled appearance--hence the pores1 or dark interspaces1 separating the light-giving spots4#be ,of the more special appearances which the photosphere presents1 let us take first the facul4 ,these are ascribed to waves in the photosphere2 and the way in which such waves might produce an excess of light has been variously explained in conformity with various hypotheses4 ,what would result from them in a photosphere constituted and conditioned as above supposed8 ,traversing a canopy of cloud1 here thicker and there thinner1 a wave would cause a disturbance very unlikely to leave the thin and thick parts without any change in their average permeability to light4 ,there would probably be1 at some parts of the wave1 extensions in the areas of the light-transmitting clouds1 resulting in the passage of more rays from below4 ,another phenomenon1 less common but more striking1 appears also to be in harmony with the hypothesis4 ,i refer to those bright spots1 of a brilliancy greater than that of the photosphere1 which are sometimes observed4 ,in the course of a physical process so vast and so active as that here supposed to be going on in the ,sun1 we may expect that concurrent causes will occasionally produce ascending currents much hotter than usual1 or more voluminous1 or both4 ,one of these1 on reaching the stratum of luminous and illuminated cloud forming the photosphere1 will burst through it1 dispersing and dissolving it1 and ascending to a greater height before it begins itself to condense3 meanwhile allowing to be seen1 through its transparent mass1 the incandescent molten shell of the sun's body4 ,the foregoing passages1 to most of which ,i do not commit myself as more than possibilities1 ,i republish chiefly as introductory to the following speculation1 which1 since it was propounded in #ahfe1 has met with some acceptance4 ,but what of the spots commonly so called8 it will be asked4 ,in the essay on the ,nebular hypothesis1 above quoted from1 it was suggested that refraction of the light passing through the depressed centres of cyclones in this atmosphere of metallic gases1 might possibly be the cause2 but this1 though defensible as a true cause1 appeared on further consideration to be an inadequate cause4 ,keeping the question in mind1 however1 and still taking as a postulate the conclusion of ,sir ,john ,herschel1 that the spots are in some way produced by cyclones1 ,i was led1 in the course of the year following the publication of the essay1 to an hypothesis which seemed more satisfactory4 ,this1 which ,i named at the time to ,prof4 ,tyndall1 had a point in common with the one afterward published by ,prof4 ,kirchhoff1 in so far as it supposed cloud to be the cause of darkness2 but differed in so far as it assigned the cause of such cloud4 ,more pressing matters prevented me from developing the idea for some time2 and1 afterwards1 ,i was deterred from including it in the revised edition of the essay1 by its inconsistency with the willow-leaf doctrine1 at that time dominant4 ,the reasoning was as follows3--,the central region of a cyclone must be a region of rarefaction1 and1 consequently1 a region of refrigeration4 ,in an atmosphere of metallic gases rising from a molten surface1 and presently reaching a limit at which condensation takes place1 the molecular state1 especially toward its upper part1 must be such that a moderate diminution of density1 and fall of temperature1 will cause precipitation4 ,that is to say1 the rarefied interior of a solar cyclone will be filled with cloud3 condensation1 instead of taking place only at the level of the photosphere1 will here extend to a great depth below it1 and over a wide area4 ,what will be the characters of a cloud thus occupying the interior of a cyclone8 ,it will have a rotatory motion2 and this it has been seen to have4 ,being funnel-shaped1 as analogy warrants us in assuming1 its central parts will be much deeper than its peripheral parts1 and therefore more opaque4 ,this1 too1 corresponds with observation4 ,mr4 ,dawes has discovered that in the middle of the spot there is a blacker spot3 just where there would exist a funnel-shaped prolongation of the cyclonic cloud down toward the ,sun's body1 the darkness is greater than elsewhere4 ,moreover1 there is furnished an adequate reason for the depression which one of these dark spaces exhibits4 ,in a whirlwind1 as in a whirlpool1 the vortex will be below the general level1 and all around1 the surface of the medium will descend toward it4 ,hence a spot seen obliquely1 as when carried toward the ,sun's limb1 will have its umbra more and more hidden1 while its penumbra still remains visible4 ,nor are we without some interpretation of the penumbra4 ,if1 as is implied by what has been said1 the so-called willow-leaves1 or rice-grains1 are the tops of the currents ascending from the ,sun's body1 what changes of appearance are they likely to undergo in the neighbourhood of a cyclone8 ,for some distance round a cyclone there will be a drawing in of the superficial gases toward the vortex4 ,all the luminous spaces of more transparent cloud forming the adjacent photosphere1 will be changed in shape by these centripetal currents4 ,they will be greatly elongated2 and there will so be produced that thatch-like aspect which the penumbra presents4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the explanation of the solar spots above suggested1 which was originally propounded in opposition to that of ,m4 ,faye1 was eventually adopted by him in place of his own4 ,in the ,comptes ,rendus for #ahfg1 ,vol4 ,,lxiv41 p4 #djd1 he refers to the article in the ,reader1 partly reproduced above1 and speaks of me as having been replied to in a previous note4 ,again in the ,comptes ,rendus for #ahgb1 ,vol4 ,,lxxv41 p4 #affd1 he recognizes the inadequacy of his hypothesis1 saying3--,il est certain que l'objection de ,m4 ,spencer1 reproduit et dveloppe par ,m4 ,kirchoff1 est fonde jusqu' un certain point2 l'intrieur des taches1 si ce sont des lacunes dans la photosphre1 doit tre froid relativement4444 ,il est donc impossible qu'elles proviennent d'ruptions ascendantes4 ,he then proceeds to set forth the hypothesis that the spots are caused by the precipitation of vapour in the interiors of cyclones4 ,but though1 as above shown1 he refers to the objection made in the foregoing essay to his original hypothesis1 and recognizes its cogency1 he does not say that the hypothesis which he thereupon substitutes is also to be found in the foregoing essay4 ,nor does he intimate this in the elaborate paper on the subject read before the ,french ,association for the ,advancement of ,science1 and published in the ,revue ,scientifique for the #bdth ,march #ahhc4 ,the result is that the hypothesis is now currently ascribed to him4#bf ,about four months before ,i had to revise this essay on ,the ,constitution of the ,sun1 while staying near ,pewsey1 in ,wiltshire1 ,i was fortunate enough to witness a phenomenon which furnished1 by analogy1 a verification of the above hypothesis1 and served more especially to elucidate one of the traits of solar spots1 otherwise difficult to understand4 ,it was at the close of ,august1 when there had been a spell of very hot weather4 ,a slight current of air from the ,west1 moving along the line of the valley1 had persisted through the day1 which1 up to #e o'clock1 had been cloudless1 and1 with the exception now to be named1 remained cloudless4 ,the exception was furnished by a strange-looking cloud almost directly overhead4 ,its central part was comparatively dense and structureless4 ,its peripheral part1 or to speak strictly1 the two-thirds of it which were nearest and most clearly visible1 consisted of converging streaks of comparatively thin cloud4 ,possibly the third part on the remoter side was similarly constituted2 but this ,i could not see4 ,it did not occur to me at the time to think about its cause1 though1 had the question been raised1 ,i should doubtless have concluded that as the sky still remained cloudless everywhere else1 this precipitated mass of vapour must have resulted from a local eddy4 ,in the space of perhaps half-an-hour1 the gentle breeze had carried this cloud some miles to the ,east2 and now its nature became obvious4 ,that central part which1 seen from underneath1 seemed simply a dense1 confused part1 apparently no nearer than the rest1 now1 seen sideways1 was obviously much lower than the rest and rudely funnel-shaped--nipple-shaped one might say2 while the wide thin portion of cloud above it was disk-shaped3 the converging streaks of cloud being now1 in perspective1 merged together4 ,it thus became manifest that the cloud was produced by a feeble whirlwind1 perhaps a quarter to half-a-mile in diameter4 ,further1 the appearances made it clear that this feeble whirlwind was limited to the lower stratum of air3 the stratum of air above it was not implicated in the cyclonic action4 ,and then1 lastly1 there was the striking fact that the upper stratum1 though not involved in the whirl1 was1 by its proximity to a region of diminished pressure1 slightly rarified2 and that its precipitated vapour was1 by the draught set up towards the vortex below1 drawn into converging streaks4 ,here1 then1 was an action analogous to that which1 as above suggested1 happens around a sun-spot1 where the masses of illuminated vapour constituting the photosphere are drawn towards the vortex of the cyclone1 and simultaneously elongated into stri3 so forming the penumbra4 ,at the same time there was furnished an answer to the chief objection to the cyclonic theory of solar spots4 ,for if1 as here seen1 a cyclone in a lower stratum may fail to communicate a vortical motion to the stratum above it1 we may comprehend how1 in a solar cyclone1 the photosphere commonly fails to give any indication of the revolving currents below1 and is only occasionally so entangled in these currents as itself to display a vortical motion4 ,let me add that apart from the elucidations furnished by the phenomenon above described1 the probabilities are greatly in favour of the cyclonic origin of the solar spots4 ,that some of them exhibit clear marks of vortical motion is undeniable2 and if this is so1 the question arises--,what is the degree of likelihood that there are two causes for spots8 ,considering that they have so many characters in common1 it is extremely improbable that their common characters are in some cases the concomitants of vortical motion and in other cases the concomitants of a different kind of action4 ,recognizing this great improbability1 even in the absence of a reconciliation between the apparently conflicting traits1 it is1 ,i think1 clear that when1 in the way above shown1 we are enabled to understand how it happens that the vortical motion1 not ordinarily implicating the photosphere1 may consequently be in most cases unapparent1 the reasons for accepting the cyclonic theory become almost conclusive4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #be3 ,if the rice-grain appearance is thus produced by the tops of the ascending currents 7and ,m4 ,faye accepts this interpretation71 then ,i think it excludes ,m4 ,faye's hypothesis that the ,sun is gaseous throughout4 ,the comparative smallness of the light-giving spots and their comparative uniformity of size1 show us that they have ascended through a stratum of but moderate depth 7say #aj1jjj miles71 and that this stratum has a definite lower limit4 ,this favours the hypothesis of a molten shell4 ,footnote #bf3 ,i should add that while ,m4 ,faye ascribes solar spots to clouds formed within cyclones1 we differ concerning the nature of the cloud4 ,i have argued that it is formed by rarefaction1 and consequent refrigeration1 of the metallic gases constituting the stratum in which the cyclone exists4 ,he argues that it is formed within the mass of cooled hydrogen drawn from the chromosphere into the vortex of the cyclone4 ,speaking of the cyclones he says3--,dans leur embouchure vase ils entraneront l'hydrogne froid de la chromosphre1 produisant partout sur leur trajet vertical un abaissement notable de temprature et une obscurit relative1 due l'opacit de l'hydrogne froid englouti4 7,revue ,scientifique1 #bd ,march #ahhc47 ,considering the intense cold required to reduce hydrogen to the critical point1 it is a strong supposition that the motion given to it by fluid friction on entering the vortex of the cyclone1 can produce a rotation1 rarefaction1 and cooling1 great enough to produce precipitation in a region so intensely heated4 ,,illogical ,,geology4 ,first published in ,the ,universal ,review for ,july1 #ahei4 ,that proclivity to generalization which is possessed in greater or less degree by all minds1 and without which1 indeed1 intelligence cannot exist1 has unavoidable inconveniences4 ,through it alone can truth be reached2 and yet it almost inevitably betrays into error4 ,but for the tendency to predicate of every other case1 that which has been found in the observed cases1 there could be no rational thinking2 and yet by this indispensable tendency1 men are perpetually led to found1 on limited experience1 propositions which they wrongly assume to be universal or absolute4 ,in one sense1 however1 this can scarcely be regarded as an evil2 for without premature generalizations the true generalization would never be arrived at4 ,if we waited till all the facts were accumulated before trying to formulate them1 the vast unorganized mass would be unmanageable4 ,only by provisional grouping can they be brought into such order as to be dealt with2 and this provisional grouping is but another name for premature generalization4 ,how uniformly men follow this course1 and how needful the errors are as steps to truth1 is well illustrated in the history of ,astronomy4 ,the heavenly bodies move round the ,earth in circles1 said the earliest observers3 led partly by the appearances1 and partly by their experiences of central motions in terrestrial objects1 with which1 as all circular1 they classed the celestial motions from lack of any alternative conception4 ,without this provisional belief1 wrong as it was1 there could not have been that comparison of positions which showed that the motions are not representable by circles2 and which led to the hypothesis of epicycles and eccentrics4 ,only by the aid of this hypothesis1 equally untrue1 but capable of accounting more nearly for the appearances1 and so of inducing more accurate observations--only thus did it become possible for ,copernicus to show that the heliocentric theory is more feasible than the geocentric theory2 or for ,kepler to show that the planets move round the sun in ellipses4 ,yet again1 without the aid of ,kepler's more advanced theory of the ,solar system1 ,newton could not have established that general law from which it follows1 that the motion of a heavenly body is not necessarily in an ellipse1 but may be in any conic section4 ,and lastly1 it was only after the law of gravitation had been verified1 that it became possible to determine the actual courses of planets1 satellites1 and comets2 and to prove that1 in consequence of perturbations1 their orbits always deviate1 more or less1 from regular curves4 ,in these successive theories we may trace both the tendency men have to leap from scanty data to wide generalizations1 that are either untrue or but partially true2 and the necessity there is for such transitional generalizations as steps to the final one4 ,in the progress of geological speculation1 the same laws of thought are displayed4 ,we have dogmas that were more than half false1 passing current for a time as universal truths4 ,we have evidence collected in proof of these dogmas2 by and by a colligation of facts in antagonism with them2 and eventually a consequent modification4 ,in conformity with this improved hypothesis1 we have a better classification of facts2 a greater power of arranging and interpreting the new facts now rapidly gathered together2 and further resulting corrections of hypothesis4 ,being1 as we are at present1 in the midst of this process1 it is not possible to give an adequate account of the development of geological science as thus regarded3 the earlier stages are alone known to us4 ,not only1 however1 is it interesting to observe how the more advanced views now received respecting the ,earth's history1 have been evolved out of the crude views which preceded them2 but we shall find it extremely instructive to observe this4 ,we shall see how greatly the old ideas still sway both the general mind and the minds of geologists themselves4 ,we shall see how the kind of evidence that has in part abolished these old ideas1 is still daily accumulating1 and threatens to make other like revolutions4 ,in brief1 we shall see whereabouts we are in the elaboration of a true theory of the ,earth2 and1 seeing our whereabouts1 shall be the better able to judge1 among various conflicting opinions1 which best conform to the ascertained direction of geological discovery4 ,it is needless here to enumerate the many speculations which were in earlier ages propounded by acute men--speculations some of which contained portions of truth4 ,falling in unfit times1 these speculations did not germinate2 and hence do not concern us4 ,we have nothing to do with ideas1 however good1 out of which no science grew2 but only with those which gave origin to the existing system of ,geology4 ,we therefore begin with ,werner4 ,taking for data the appearances of the ,earth's crust in a narrow district of ,germany2 observing the constant order of superposition of strata1 and their respective physical characters2 ,werner drew the inference that strata of like characters succeeded each other in like order over the entire surface of the ,earth4 ,and seeing1 from the laminated structure of many formations and the organic remains contained in others1 that they were sedimentary2 he further inferred that these universal strata had been in succession precipitated from a chaotic menstruum which once covered our planet4 ,thus1 on a very incomplete acquaintance with a thousandth part of the ,earth's crust1 he based a sweeping generalization applying to the whole of it4 ,this ,neptunist hypothesis1 mark1 borne out though it seemed to be by the most conspicuous surrounding facts1 was quite untenable if analyzed4 ,that a universal chaotic menstruum should deposit a series of numerous sharply-defined strata1 differing from one another in composition1 is incomprehensible4 ,that the strata so deposited should contain the remains of plants and animals1 which could not have lived under the supposed conditions1 is still more incomprehensible4 ,physically absurd1 however1 as was this hypothesis1 it recognized1 though under a distorted form1 one of the great agencies of geological change--the action of water4 ,it served also to express the fact1 that the formations of the ,earth's crust stand in some kind of order4 ,further1 it did a little towards supplying a nomenclature1 without which much progress was impossible4 ,lastly1 it furnished a standard with which successions of strata in various regions could be compared1 the differences noted1 and the actual sections tabulated4 ,it was the first provisional generalization2 and was useful1 if not indispensable1 as a step to truer ones4 ,following this rude conception1 which ascribed geological phenomena to one agency1 acting during one primeval epoch1 there came a greatly-improved conception1 which ascribed them to two agencies1 acting alternately during successive epochs4 ,hutton1 perceiving that sedimentary deposits were still being formed at the bottom of the sea from the detritus carried down by rivers2 perceiving1 further1 that the strata of which the visible surface chiefly consists1 bore marks of having been similarly formed out of pre-existing land2 and inferring that these strata could have become land only by upheaval after their deposit2 concluded that throughout an indefinite past1 there had been periodic convulsions1 by which continents were raised1 with intervening eras of repose1 during which such continents were worn down and transformed into new marine strata1 fated to be in their turns elevated above the surface of the ocean4 ,and finding that igneous action1 to which sundry earlier geologists had ascribed basaltic rocks1 was in countless places a cause of disturbance1 he taught that from it resulted these periodic convulsions4 ,in this theory we see3--first1 that the previously-recognized agency of water was conceived to act1 not as by ,werner1 after a manner of which we have no experience1 but after a manner daily displayed to us2 and secondly1 that the igneous agency1 before considered only as originating special formations1 was recognized as a universal agency1 but assumed to act in an unproved way4 ,werner's sole process ,hutton developed from the catastrophic and inexplicable into the uniform and explicable2 while that antagonistic second process1 of which he first adequately estimated the importance1 was regarded by him as a catastrophic one1 and was not assimilated to known processes--not explained4 ,we have here to note1 however1 that the facts collected and provisionally arranged in conformity with ,werner's theory1 served1 after a time1 to establish ,hutton's more rational theory--in so far1 at least1 as aqueous formations are concerned2 while the doctrine of periodic subterranean convulsions1 crudely as it was conceived by ,hutton1 was a temporary generalization needful as a step towards the theory of igneous action4 ,since ,hutton's time1 the development of geological thought has gone still further in the same direction4 ,these early sweeping doctrines have received additional qualifications4 ,it has been discovered that more numerous and more heterogeneous agencies have been at work1 than was at first believed4 ,the conception of igneous action has been rationalized1 as the conception of aqueous action had previously been4 ,the gratuitous assumption that vast elevations suddenly occurred after long intervals of quiescence1 has grown into the consistent theory1 that islands and continents are the accumulated results of successive small upheavals1 like those experienced in ordinary earthquakes4 ,to speak more specifically1 we find1 in the first place1 that instead of assuming the denudation produced by rain and rivers to be the sole means of wearing down lands and producing their irregularities of surface1 geologists now see that denudation is only a part-cause of such irregularities2 and further1 that the new strata deposited at the bottom of the sea1 are not the products of river-sediment solely1 but are in part due to the actions of waves and tidal currents on the coasts4 ,in the second place1 we find that ,hutton's conception of upheaval by subterranean forces1 has not only been modified by assimilating these subterranean forces to ordinary earthquake-forces2 but modern inquiries have shown that1 besides elevations of surface1 subsidences are thus produced2 that local upheavals1 as well as the general upheavals which raise continents1 come within the same category2 and that all these changes are probably consequent on the progressive collapse of the ,earth's crust upon its cooling and contracting nucleus4 ,in the third place1 we find that beyond these two great antagonistic agencies1 modern ,geology recognizes sundry minor ones3 those of glaciers and icebergs1 those of coral-polypes2 those of ,protozoa having siliceous or calcareous shells--each of which agencies1 insignificant as it seems1 is found capable of slowly working terrestrial changes of considerable magnitude4 ,thus1 then1 the recent progress of ,geology has been a still further departure from primitive conceptions4 ,instead of one catastrophic cause1 once in universal action1 as supposed by ,werner--instead of one general continuous cause1 antagonized at long intervals by a catastrophic cause1 as taught by ,hutton2 we now recognize several causes1 all more or less general and continuous4 ,we no longer resort to hypothetical agencies to explain the phenomena displayed by the ,earth's crust2 but we are day by day more clearly perceiving that these phenomena have arisen from forces like those now at work1 which have acted in all varieties of combination1 through immeasurable periods of time4 99 99 99 99 99 ,having thus briefly traced the evolution of geologic science1 and noted its present form1 let us go on to observe the way in which it is still swayed by the crude hypotheses it set out with2 so that even now1 doctrines long since abandoned as untenable in theory1 continue in practice to mould the ideas of geologists1 and to foster sundry beliefs that are logically indefensible4 ,we shall see1 both how those simple sweeping conceptions with which the science commenced1 are those which every student is apt at first to seize hold of1 and how several influences conspire to maintain the twist thus resulting--how the original nomenclature of periods and formations necessarily keeps alive the original implications2 and how the need for arranging new data in some order1 results in their being thrust into the old classification1 unless their incongruity with it is very glaring4 ,a few facts will best prepare the way for criticism4 ,up to #ahci it was inferred1 from their crystalline character1 that the metamorphic rocks of ,anglesea were more ancient than any rocks of the adjacent main land2 but it has since been shown that they are of the same age with the slates and grits of ,carnarvon and ,merioneth4 ,again1 slaty cleavage having been first found only in the lowest rocks1 was taken as an indication of the highest antiquity3 whence resulted serious mistakes2 for this mineral characteristic is now known to occur in the ,carboniferous system4 ,once more1 certain red conglomerates and grits on the north-west coast of ,scotland1 long supposed from their lithological aspect to belong to the ,old ,red ,sandstone1 are now identified with the ,lower ,silurians4 ,these are a few instances of the small trust to be placed in mineral qualities1 as evidence of the ages or relative positions of strata4 ,from the recently-published third edition of ,siluria1 may be culled numerous facts of like implication4 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison considers it ascertained1 that the siliceous ,stiper stones of ,shropshire are the equivalents of the ,tremadock slates of ,north ,wales4 ,judged by their fossils1 ,bala slate and limestone are of the same age as the ,caradoc sandstone1 lying forty miles off4 ,in ,radnorshire1 the formation classed as upper ,llandovery rock1 is described at different spots1 as sandstone or conglomerate1 impure limestone1 hard coarse grits1 siliceous grit--a considerable variation for so small an area as that of a county4 ,certain sandy beds on the left bank of the ,towy1 which ,sir ,r4 ,murchison had1 in his ,silurian ,system1 classed as ,caradoc sandstone 7evidently from their mineral characters71 he now finds1 from their fossils1 belong to the ,llandeilo formation4 ,nevertheless1 inferences from mineral characters are still habitually drawn and received4 ,though ,siluria1 in common with other geological works1 supplies numerous proofs that rocks of the same age are often of widely-different composition a few miles off1 while rocks of widely-different ages are often of similar composition2 and though ,sir ,r4 ,murchison shows us1 as in the case just cited1 that he has himself in past times been misled by trusting to lithological evidence2 yet his reasoning all through ,siluria1 shows that he still thinks it natural to expect formations of the same age to be chemically similar1 even in remote regions4 ,for example1 in treating of the ,silurian rocks of ,south ,scotland1 he says3--,when traversing the tract between ,dumfries and ,moffat1 in #ahej1 it occurred to me1 that the dull reddish or purple sandstone and schist to the north of the former town1 which so resembled the bottom rocks of ,longmynd1 ,llanberis1 and ,st4 ,david's1 would prove to be of the same age2 and further on1 he again insists upon the fact that these strata are absolutely of the same composition as the bottom rocks of the ,silurian region4 ,on this unity of mineral character it is1 that this ,scottish formation is concluded to be contemporaneous with the lowest formations in ,wales2 for the scanty paleontological evidence suffices for neither proof nor disproof4 ,now1 had there been a continuity of like strata in like order between ,wales and ,scotland1 there might have been little to criticize in this conclusion4 ,but since ,sir ,r4 ,murchison himself admits1 that in ,westmoreland and ,cumberland1 some members of the system assume a lithological aspect different from what they maintain in the ,silurian and ,welsh region1 there seems no reason to expect mineralogical continuity in ,scotland4 ,obviously1 therefore1 the assumption that these ,scottish formations are of the same age with the ,longmynd of ,shropshire1 implies the latent belief that certain mineral characters indicate certain eras4 ,far more striking instances1 however1 of the influence of this latent belief remain to be given4 ,not in such comparatively near districts as the ,scottish lowlands only1 does ,sir ,r4 ,murchison expect a repetition of the ,longmynd strata2 but in the ,rhenish provinces1 certain quartzose flagstones and grits1 like those of the ,longmynd1 are seemingly concluded to be of contemporaneous origin1 because of their likeness4 ,quartzites in roofing-slates with a greenish tinge that reminded us of the lower slates of ,cumberland and ,westmoreland1 are evidently suspected to be of the same age4 ,in ,russia1 he remarks that the carboniferous limestones are overlaid along the western edge of the ,ural chain by sandstones and grits1 which occupy much the same place in the general series as the millstone grit of ,england2 and in calling this group1 as he does1 the representative of the millstone grit1 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison clearly shows that he thinks likeness of mineral composition some evidence of equivalence in time1 even at that great distance4 ,nay1 on the flanks of the ,andes and in the ,united ,states1 such similarities are looked for1 and considered as significant of certain ages4 ,not that ,sir ,r4 ,murchison contends theoretically for this relation between lithological character and date4 ,for on the page from which we have just quoted 7,siluria1 p4 #chg71 he says1 that whilst the soft ,lower ,silurian clays and sands of ,st4 ,petersburg have their equivalents in the hard schists and quartz rocks with gold veins in the heart of the ,ural mountains1 the equally soft red and green ,devonian marls of the ,valdai ,hills are represented on the western flank of that chain by hard1 contorted1 and fractured limestones4 ,but these1 and other such admissions1 seem to go for little4 ,while himself asserting that the ,potsdam-sandstone of ,north ,america1 the ,lingula-flags of ,england1 and the alum-slates of ,scandinavia are of the same period--while fully aware that among the ,silurian formations of ,wales1 there are oolitic strata like those of secondary age2 yet his reasoning is more or less coloured by the assumption1 that formations of like qualities probably belong to the same era4 ,is it not manifest1 then1 that the exploded hypothesis of ,werner continues to influence geological speculation8 ,but1 it will perhaps be said1 though individual strata are not continuous over large areas1 yet systems of strata are4 ,though within a few miles the same bed gradually passes from clay into sand1 or thins out and disappears1 yet the group of strata to which it belongs does not do so2 but maintains in remote regions the same relations to other groups4 ,this is the generally-current belief4 ,on this assumption the received geological classifications appear to be framed4 ,the ,silurian system1 the ,devonian system1 the ,carboniferous system1 etc41 are set down in our books as groups of formations which everywhere succeed each other in a given order2 and are severally everywhere of the same age4 ,though it may not be asserted that these successive systems are universal2 yet it seems to be tacitly assumed that they are4 ,in ,north and ,south ,america1 in ,asia1 in ,australia1 sets of strata are assimilated to one or other of these groups2 and their possession of certain mineral characters and a certain order of superposition are among the reasons assigned for so assimilating them4 ,though1 probably1 no competent geologist would contend that the ,european classification of strata is applicable to the globe as a whole2 yet most1 if not all geologists1 write as though it were4 ,among readers of works on ,geology1 nine out of ten carry away the impression that the divisions1 ,primary1 ,secondary and ,tertiary1 are of absolute and uniform application2 that these great divisions are separable into subdivisions1 each of which is definitely distinguishable from the rest1 and is everywhere recognizable by its characters as such or such2 and that in all parts of the ,earth1 these minor systems severally began and ended at the same time4 ,when they meet with the term ,carboniferous era1 they take for granted that it was an era universally carboniferous--that it was1 what ,hugh ,miller indeed actually describes it1 an era when the ,earth bore a vegetation far more luxuriant than it has since done2 and were they in any of our colonies to meet with a coal-bed1 they would conclude that1 as a matter of course1 it was of the same age as the ,english coal-beds4 ,now this belief that geologic systems are universal1 is no more tenable than the other4 ,it is just as absurd when considered a priori2 and it is equally inconsistent with the facts4 ,though some series of strata classed together as ,oolite1 may range over a wider district than any one stratum of the series2 yet we have but to ask what were the circumstances under which it was deposited1 to see that the ,oolitic series1 like one of its individual strata1 must be of local origin2 and that there is not likely to be anywhere else1 a series which corresponds1 either in its characters or in its commencement and termination4 ,for the formation of such a series implies an area of subsidence1 in which its component beds were thrown down4 ,every area of subsidence is necessarily limited2 and to suppose that there exist elsewhere groups of beds completely answering to those known as ,oolite1 is to suppose that1 in contemporaneous areas of subsidence1 like processes were going on4 ,there is no reason to suppose this2 but good reason to suppose the reverse4 ,that in contemporaneous areas of subsidence throughout the globe1 the conditions would cause the formation of ,oolite1 is an assumption which no modern geologist would openly make4 ,he would say that the equivalent series of beds found elsewhere1 would probably be of dissimilar mineral character4 ,moreover1 in these contemporaneous areas of subsidence1 the processes going on would not only be different in kind2 but in no two cases would they be likely to agree in their commencements and terminations4 ,the probabilities are greatly against separate portions of the ,earth's surface beginning to subside at the same time1 and ceasing to subside at the same time--a coincidence which alone could produce equivalent groups of strata4 ,subsidences in different places begin and end with utter irregularity2 and hence the groups of strata thrown down in them can but rarely correspond4 ,measured against each other in time1 their limits must disagree4 ,on turning to the evidence1 we find that it daily tends more and more to justify these a priori positions4 ,take1 as an example1 the ,old ,red ,sandstone system4 ,in the north of ,england this is represented by a single stratum of conglomerate4 ,in ,herefordshire1 ,worcestershire1 and ,shropshire1 it expands into a series of strata from eight to ten thousand feet thick1 made up of conglomerates1 red1 green1 and white sandstones1 red1 green1 and spotted marls1 and concretionary limestones4 ,to the south-west1 as between ,caermarthen and ,pembroke1 these ,old ,red ,sandstone strata exhibit considerable lithological changes2 on the other side of the ,bristol ,channel1 they display further changes in mineral characters2 while in ,south ,devon and ,cornwall1 the equivalent strata1 consisting chiefly of slates1 schists1 and limestones1 are so wholly different1 that they were for a long time classed as ,silurian4 ,when we thus see that in certain directions the whole group of deposits thins out1 and that its mineral characters change within moderate distances2 does it not become clear that the whole group of deposits was a local one8 ,and when we find1 in other regions1 formations analogous to these ,old ,red ,sandstone or ,devonian formations1 is it certain--is it even probable--that they severally began and ended at the same time with them8 ,should it not require overwhelming evidence to make us believe as much8 ,yet so strongly is geological speculation swayed by the tendency to regard the phenomena as general instead of local1 that even those most on their guard against it seem unable to escape its influence4 ,at page #aeh of his ,principles of ,geology1 ,sir ,charles ,lyell says3-- ,a group of red marl and red sandstone1 containing salt and gypsum1 being interposed in ,england between the ,lias and the ,coal1 all other red marls and sandstones1 associated some of them with salt1 and others with gypsum1 and occurring not only in different parts of ,europe1 but in ,north ,america1 ,peru1 ,india1 the salt deserts of ,asia1 those of ,africa--in a word1 in every quarter of the globe1 were referred to one and the same period4444 ,it was in vain to urge as an objection the improbability of the hypothesis which implies that all the moving waters on the globe were once simultaneously charged with sediment of a red colour4 ,but the rashness of pretending to identify1 in age1 all the red sandstones and marls in question1 has at length been sufficiently exposed1 by the discovery that1 even in ,europe1 they belong decidedly to many different epochs4 ,nevertheless1 while in this and many kindred passages ,sir ,c4 ,lyell protests against the bias here illustrated1 he seems himself not completely free from it4 ,though he utterly rejects the old hypothesis that all over the ,earth the same continuous strata lie one upon another in regular order1 like the coats of an onion1 he still writes as though geologic systems do thus succeed each other4 ,a reader of his ,manual would certainly suppose him to believe1 that the ,primary epoch ended1 and the secondary epoch began1 all over the world at the same time--that these terms really correspond to distinct universal eras4 ,when he assumes1 as he does1 that the division between ,cambrian and ,lower ,silurian in ,america1 answers chronologically to the division between ,cambrian and ,lower ,silurian in ,wales--when he takes for granted that the partings of ,lower from ,middle ,silurian1 and of ,middle ,silurian from ,upper1 in the one region1 are of the same dates as the like partings in the other region2 does it not seem that he believes geologic systems to be universal1 in the sense that their separations were in all places contemporaneous8 ,though he would1 doubtless1 disown this as an article of faith1 is not his thinking unconsciously influenced by it8 ,must we not say that1 though the onion-coat hypothesis is dead1 its spirit is traceable1 under a transcendental form1 even in the conclusions of its antagonists8 99 99 99 99 99 ,let us now consider another leading geological doctrine1--the doctrine that strata of the same age contain like fossils2 and that1 therefore1 the age and relative position of any stratum may be known by its fossils4 ,while the theory that strata of like mineral characters were everywhere deposited simultaneously1 has been ostensibly abandoned1 there has been accepted the theory that in each geologic epoch similar plants and animals existed everywhere2 and that1 therefore1 the epoch to which any formation belongs may be known by the organic remains contained in the formation4 ,though1 perhaps1 no leading geologist would openly commit himself to an unqualified assertion of this theory1 yet it is tacitly assumed in current geological reasoning4 ,this theory1 however1 is scarcely more tenable than the other4 ,it cannot be concluded with any certainty1 that formations in which similar organic remains are found1 were of contemporaneous origin2 nor can it be safely concluded that strata containing different organic remains are of different ages4 ,to most readers these will be startling propositions2 but they are fully admitted by the highest authorities4 ,sir ,charles ,lyell confesses that the test of organic remains must be used under very much the same restrictions as the test of mineral composition4 ,sir ,henry de la ,beche1 who variously illustrates this truth1 remarks on the great incongruity there must be between the fossils of our carboniferous rocks and those of the marine strata deposited at the same period4 ,but though1 in the abstract1 the danger of basing positive conclusions on evidence derived from fossils1 is recognized2 yet1 in the concrete1 this danger is generally disregarded4 ,the established convictions respecting the ages of strata1 have been formed in spite of it2 and by some geologists it seems altogether ignored4 ,throughout his ,siluria1 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison habitually assumes that the same1 or kindred1 species1 lived in all parts of the ,earth at the same time4 ,in ,russia1 in ,bohemia1 in the ,united ,states1 in ,south ,america1 strata are classed as belonging to this or that part of the ,silurian system1 because of the similar fossils contained in them--are concluded to be everywhere contemporaneous if they enclose a proportion of identical or allied forms4 ,in ,russia the relative position of a stratum is inferred from the fact that1 along with some ,wenlock forms1 it yields the ,pentamerus oblongus4 ,certain crustaceans called ,eurypteri1 being characteristic of the ,upper ,ludlow rock1 it is remarked that large ,eurypteri occur in a so-called black grey-wacke slate in ,westmoreland1 in ,oneida ,county1 ,new ,york1 which will probably be found to be on the parallel of the ,upper ,ludlow rock3 in which word probably1 we see both how dominant is this belief of universal distribution of similar creatures at the same period1 and how apt this belief is to make its own proof1 by raising the expectation that the ages are identical when the forms are alike4 ,besides thus interpreting the formations of ,russia1 ,england1 and ,america1 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison thus interprets those of the antipodes4 ,fossils from ,victoria ,colony1 he agrees with the ,government-surveyor in classing as of ,lower ,silurian or ,llandovery age3 that is1 he takes for granted that when certain crustaceans and mollusks were living in ,wales1 certain similar crustaceans and mollusks were living in ,australia4 ,yet the improbability of this assumption may be readily shown from ,sir ,r4 ,murchison's own facts4 ,if1 as he points out1 the fossil crustaceans of the uppermost ,silurian rocks in ,lanarkshire are1 with one doubtful exception1 all distinct from any of the forms known on the same horizon in ,england2 how can it be fairly presumed that the forms existing on the other side of the ,earth during the ,silurian period1 were nearly allied to those existing here8 ,not only1 indeed1 do ,sir ,r4 ,murchison's conclusions tacitly assume this doctrine of universal distribution1 but he distinctly enunciates it4 ,the mere presence of a graptolite1 he says1 will at once decide that the enclosing rock is ,silurian2 and he says this1 notwithstanding repeated warnings against such generalizations4 ,during the progress of ,geology1 it has over and over again happened that a particular fossil1 long considered characteristic of a particular formation1 has been afterwards discovered in other formations4 ,until some twelve years ago1 ,goniatites had not been found lower than the ,devonian rocks2 but now1 in ,bohemia1 they have been found in rocks classed as ,silurian4 ,quite recently1 the ,orthoceras1 previously supposed to be a type exclusively palozoic1 has been detected along with mesozoic ,ammonites and ,belemnites4 ,yet hosts of such experiences fail to extinguish the assumption1 that the age of a stratum may be determined by the occurrence in it of a single fossil form4 ,nay1 this assumption survives evidence of even a still more destructive kind4 ,referring to the ,silurian system in ,western ,ireland1 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison says1 in the beds near ,maam1 ,professor ,nicol and myself collected remains1 some of which would be considered ,lower1 and others ,upper1 ,silurian2 and he then names sundry fossils which1 in ,england1 belong to the summit of the ,ludlow rocks1 or highest ,silurian strata2 some1 which elsewhere are known only in rocks of ,llandovery age--that is1 of middle ,silurian age2 and some1 only before known in ,lower ,silurian strata1 not far above the most ancient fossiliferous beds4 ,now what do these facts prove8 ,clearly1 they prove that species which in ,wales are separated by strata more than twenty thousand feet deep1 and therefore seem to belong to periods far more remote from each other1 were really co-existent4 ,they prove that the mollusks and crinoids held to be characteristic of early ,silurian strata1 and supposed to have become extinct long before the mollusks and crinoids of the later ,silurian strata came into existence1 were really flourishing at the same time with these last2 and that these last possibly date back to as early a period as the first4 ,they prove that not only the mineral characters of sedimentary formations1 but also the collections of organic forms they contain1 depend1 to a great extent1 on local circumstances4 ,they prove that the fossils met with in any series of strata1 cannot be taken as representing anything like the whole ,flora and ,fauna of the period they belong to4 ,in brief1 they throw great doubt upon numerous geological generalizations4 ,notwithstanding facts like these1 and notwithstanding his avowed opinion that the test of organic remains must be used under very much the same restrictions as the test of mineral composition1 ,sir ,charles ,lyell1 too1 considers sundry positive conclusions to be justified by this test3 even where the community of fossils is slight and the distance great4 ,having decided that in various places in ,europe1 middle ,eocene strata are distinguished by ,nummulites2 he infers1 without any other assigned evidence1 that wherever ,nummulites are found--in ,morocco1 ,algeria1 ,egypt1 in ,persia1 ,scinde1 ,cutch1 ,eastern ,bengal1 and the frontiers of ,china--the containing formation is ,middle ,eocene4 ,and from this inference he draws the following important corollary3-- ,when we have once arrived at the conviction that the nummulitic formation occupies a middle place in the ,eocene series1 we are struck with the comparatively modern date to which some of the greatest revolutions in the physical geography of ,europe1 ,asia1 and northern ,africa must be referred4 ,all the mountain chains1 such as the ,alps1 ,pyrenees1 ,carpathians1 and ,himalayas1 into the composition of whose central and loftiest parts the nummulitic strata enter bodily1 could have had no existence till after the ,middle ,eocene period4--,manual1 p4 #bcb4 ,a still more marked case follows on the next page4 ,because a certain bed at ,claiborne in ,alabama1 which contains four hundred species of marine shells1 includes among them the ,cardita planicosta1 and some others identical with ,european species1 or very nearly allied to them1 ,sir ,c4 ,lyell says it is highly probable the ,claiborne beds agree in age with the central or ,bracklesham group of ,england4 ,when we find contemporaneity alleged on the strength of a community no greater than that which sometimes exists between strata of widely-different ages in the same country1 it seems as though the above-quoted caution had been forgotten4 ,it appears to be assumed for the occasion1 that species which had a wide range in space had a narrow range in time2 which is the reverse of the fact4 ,the tendency to systematize overrides the evidence1 and thrusts ,nature into a formula too rigid to fit her endless variety4 ,but1 it may be urged1 surely1 when in different places the order of superposition1 the mineral characters1 and the fossils1 agree1 it may safely be concluded that the formations thus corresponding date back to the same time4 ,if1 for example1 the ,united ,states display a succession of ,silurian1 ,devonian1 and ,carboniferous systems1 lithologically similar to those known here by those names1 and characterized by like fossils1 it is a fair inference that these groups of strata were severally being deposited in ,america while their equivalents were being deposited here4 ,on this position1 which seems a strong one1 we have1 in the first place1 to remark1 that the evidence of correspondence is always more or less suspicious4 ,we have already adverted to the several idols--if we may use ,bacon's metaphor--to which geologists unconsciously sacrifice1 when interpreting the structures of unexplored regions4 ,carrying with them the classification of strata existing in ,europe1 and assuming that groups of strata in other parts of the world must answer to some of the groups of strata known here1 they are necessarily prone to assert parallelism on insufficient evidence4 ,they scarcely entertain the previous question1 whether the formations they are examining have or have not any ,european equivalents2 but the question is--with which of the ,european series shall they be classed8--with which do they most agree8--from which do they differ least8 ,and this being the mode of inquiry1 there is apt to result great laxity of interpretation4 ,how lax the interpretation really is1 may be readily shown4 ,when strata are discontinuous1 as between ,europe and ,america1 no evidence can be derived from the order of superposition1 apart from mineral characters and organic remains2 for1 unless strata can be continuously traced1 mineral characters and organic remains afford the only means of classing them as such or such4 ,as to the test of mineral characters1 we have seen that it is almost worthless2 and no modern geologist would dare to say it should be relied on4 ,if the ,old ,red ,sandstone series in mid-,england1 differs wholly in lithological aspect from the equivalent series in ,south ,devon1 it is clear that similarities of texture and composition cannot justify us in classing a system of strata in another quarter of the globe with some ,european system4 ,the test of fossils is the only one that remains2 and with how little strictness this test is applied1 one case will show4 ,of forty-six species of ,british ,devonian corals1 only six occur in ,america2 and this1 notwithstanding the wide range which the ,anthozoa are known to have4 ,similarly of the ,mollusca and ,crinoidea1 it appears that1 while there are sundry genera found in ,america which are found here1 there are scarcely any of the same species4 ,and ,sir ,charles ,lyell admits that the difficulty of deciding on the exact parallelism of the ,new ,york subdivisions1 as above enumerated1 with the members of the ,european ,devonian1 is very great1 so few are the species in common4 ,yet it is on the strength of community of fossils1 that the whole ,devonian series of the ,united ,states is assumed to be contemporaneous with the whole ,devonian series of ,england4 ,and it is partly on the ground that the ,devonian of the ,united ,states corresponds in time with our own ,devonian1 that ,sir ,charles ,lyell concludes the superjacent coal-measures of the two countries to be of the same age4 ,is it not1 then1 as we said1 that the evidence in these cases is very suspicious8 ,should it be replied1 as it may fairly be1 that this correspondence from which the synchronism of distant formations is inferred1 is not a correspondence between particular species or particular genera1 but between the general characters of the contained assemblages of fossils--between the facies of the two ,faunas2 the rejoinder is1 that though such correspondence is a stronger evidence of synchronism it is still an insufficient one4 ,to infer synchronism from such correspondence1 involves the postulate that throughout each geologic era there has habitually existed a recognizable similarity between the groups of organic forms inhabiting all the different parts of the ,earth2 and that the causes which have in one part of the ,earth changed the organic forms into those which characterize the next era1 have simultaneously acted in all other parts of the ,earth1 in such ways as to produce parallel changes of their organic forms4 ,now this is not only a large assumption to make2 but it is an assumption contrary to probability4 ,the probability is1 that the causes which have changed ,faunas have been local rather than universal2 that hence while the ,faunas of some regions have been rapidly changing1 those of others have been almost quiescent2 and that when those of others have been changed1 it has been1 not in such ways as to maintain parallelism1 but in such ways as to produce divergence4 ,even supposing1 however1 that districts some hundreds of miles apart1 furnished groups of strata which completely agreed in their order of superposition1 their mineral characters1 and their fossils1 we should still have inadequate proof of contemporaneity4 ,for there are conditions1 very likely to occur1 under which such groups might differ widely in age4 ,if there be a continent of which the strata crop out on the surface obliquely to the line of coast--running1 say1 west-north-west1 while the coast runs east and west--it is clear that each group of strata will crop out on the beach at a particular part of the coast2 that further west the next group of strata will crop out on the beach2 and so continuously4 ,as the localization of marine plants and animals1 is in a considerable degree determined by the natures of the rocks and their detritus1 it follows that each part of this coast will have its more or less distinct ,flora and ,fauna4 ,what now must result from the action of the waves in the course of a geologic epoch8 ,as the sea makes slow inroads on the land1 the place at which each group of strata crops out on the beach will gradually move towards the west3 its distinctive fish1 mollusks1 crustaceans1 and sea-weeds1 migrating with it4 ,further1 the detritus of each of these groups of strata will1 as the point of outcrop moves westwards1 be deposited over the detritus of the group in advance of it4 ,and the consequence of these actions1 carried on for one of those enormous periods which a geologic change takes1 will be that1 corresponding to each eastern stratum1 there will arise a stratum far to the west1 which1 though occupying the same position relatively to other beds1 formed of like materials1 and containing like fossils1 will yet be perhaps a million years later in date4 99 99 99 99 99 ,but the illegitimacy1 or at any rate the great doubtfulness1 of many current geological inferences1 is best seen when we contemplate terrestrial changes now going on2 and ask how far such inferences are countenanced by them4 ,if we carry out rigorously the modern method of interpreting geological phenomena1 which ,sir ,charles ,lyell has done so much to establish--that of referring them to causes like those at present in action--we cannot fail to see how improbable are sundry of the received conclusions4 ,along each shore which is being worn away by the waves1 there are being formed mud1 sand1 and pebbles4 ,this detritus has1 in each locality1 a more or less special character2 determined by the nature of the strata destroyed4 ,in the ,english ,channel it is not the same as in the ,irish ,channel2 on the east coast of ,ireland it is not the same as on the west coast2 and so throughout4 ,at the mouth of each great river1 there is being deposited sediment differing more or less from that deposited at the mouths of other rivers in colour and quality2 forming strata which are here red1 there yellow1 and elsewhere brown1 grey1 or dirty white4 ,besides which various formations1 going on in deltas and along shores1 there are some much wider1 and still more strongly contrasted1 formations4 ,at the bottom of the gean ,sea1 there is accumulating a bed of ,pteropod shells1 which will eventually1 no doubt1 become a calcareous rock4 ,for some hundreds of thousands of square miles1 the ocean-bed between ,great ,britain and ,north ,america1 is being covered with a stratum of chalk2 and over large areas in the ,pacific1 there are going on deposits of coralline limestone4 ,thus1 there are at this moment being produced in different places multitudinous strata differing from one another in lithological characters4 ,name at random any part of the sea-bottom1 and ask whether the deposit there taking place is like the deposit taking place at some distant part of the sea-bottom1 and the almost-certainly correct answer will be--,no4 ,the chances are not in favour of similarity1 but against it--many to one against it4 ,in the order of superposition of strata there is being established a like variety4 ,each region of the ,earth's surface has its special history of elevations1 subsidences1 periods of rest3 and this history in no case fits chronologically with the history of any other portion4 ,river deltas are now being thrown down on formations of different ages3 some very ancient1 some quite modern4 ,while here there has been deposited a series of beds many hundreds of feet thick1 there has elsewhere been deposited but a single bed of fine mud4 ,while one region of the ,earth's crust1 continuing for a vast epoch above the surface of the ocean1 bears record of no changes save those resulting from denudation2 another region of the ,earth's crust gives proof of sundry changes of level1 with their several resulting masses of stratified detritus4 ,if anything is to be judged from current processes1 we must infer1 not only that everywhere the succession of sedimentary formations differs more or less from the succession elsewhere2 but also that in each place1 there exist groups of strata to which many other places have no equivalents4 ,with respect to the organic bodies imbedded in formations now in progress1 a like truth is equally manifest1 if not more manifest4 ,even along the same coast1 within moderate distances1 the forms of life differ very considerably2 and they differ much more on coasts that are remote from one another4 ,again1 dissimilar creatures which are living together near the same shore1 do not leave their remains in the same beds of sediment4 ,for instance1 at the bottom of the ,adriatic1 where the prevailing currents cause the deposits to be here of mud1 and there of calcareous matter1 it is proved that different species of co-existing shells are being buried in these respective formations4 ,on our own coasts1 the marine remains found a few miles from shore1 in banks where fish congregate1 are different from those found close to the shore1 where littoral species flourish4 ,a large proportion of aquatic creatures have structures which do not admit of fossilization2 while of the rest1 the great majority are destroyed1 when dead1 by various kinds of scavengers4 ,so that no one deposit near our shores can contain anything like a true representation of the ,fauna of the surrounding sea2 much less of the co-existing ,faunas of other seas in the same latitude2 and still less of the ,faunas of seas in distant latitudes4 ,were it not that the assertion seems needful1 it would be almost absurd to say1 that the organic remains now being buried in the ,dogger ,bank1 can tell us next to nothing about the fish1 crustaceans1 mollusks1 and corals1 which are being buried in the ,bay of ,bengal4 ,still stronger is the argument in the case of terrestrial life4 ,with more numerous and greater contrasts between the types inhabiting one continent and those inhabiting another1 there is a far more imperfect registry of them4 ,schouw marks out on the ,earth more than twenty botanical regions1 occupied by groups of forms so distinct1 that1 if fossilized1 geologists would scarcely be disposed to refer them all to the same period4 ,of ,faunas1 the ,arctic differs from the ,temperate2 the ,temperate from the ,tropical2 and the ,south ,temperate from the ,north ,temperate4 ,nay1 in the ,south ,temperate ,zone itself1 the two regions of ,south ,africa and ,south ,america are unlike in their mammals1 birds1 reptiles1 fishes1 mollusks1 insects4 ,the shells and bones now lying at the bottoms of lakes and estuaries in these several regions1 have certainly not that similarity which is usually looked for in those of contemporaneous strata2 and the recent forms exhumed in any one of these regions would very untruly represent the present ,flora and ,fauna of the ,earth4 ,in conformity with the current style of geological reasoning1 an exhaustive examination of deposits in the ,arctic circle1 might be held to prove that though at this period there were sundry mammals existing1 there were no reptiles2 while the absence of mammals in the deposits of the ,galapagos ,archipelago1 where there are plenty of reptiles1 might be held to prove the reverse4 ,and at the same time1 from the formations extending for two thousand miles along the great barrier-reef of ,australia--formations in which are imbedded nothing but corals1 echinoderms1 mollusks1 crustaceans1 and fish1 along with an occasional turtle1 or bird1 or cetacean--it might be inferred that there lived in our epoch neither terrestrial reptiles1 nor terrestrial mammals4 ,the mention of ,australia1 indeed1 suggests an illustration which1 even alone1 would amply prove our case4 ,the ,fauna of this region differs widely from any that is found elsewhere4 ,on land1 all the indigenous mammals1 except bats1 belong to the lowest1 or implacental division2 and the insects are singularly different from those found elsewhere4 ,the surrounding seas contain numerous forms which are more or less strange2 and among the fish there exists a species of shark1 which is the only living representative of a genus that flourished in early geologic epochs4 ,if1 now1 the modern fossiliferous deposits of ,australia were to be examined by one ignorant of the existing ,australian ,fauna2 and if he were to reason in the usual manner2 he would be very unlikely to class these deposits with those of the present time4 ,how1 then1 can we place confidence in the tacit assumption that certain formations in remote parts of the ,earth are referable to the same period1 because the organic remains contained in them display a certain community of character8 or that certain others are referable to different periods1 because the facies of their ,faunas are different8 ,but1 it will be replied1 in past eras the same1 or similar1 organic forms were more widely distributed than now4 ,it may be so2 but the evidence adduced by no means proves it4 ,the argument by which this conclusion is reached1 runs a risk of being quoted as an example of reasoning in a circle4 ,as already pointed out1 between formations in remote regions the accepted test of equivalence is community of fossils4 ,if1 then1 the contemporaneity of remote formations is concluded from the likeness of their fossils2 how can it be said that similar plants and animals were once more widely distributed1 because they are found in contemporaneous strata in remote regions8 ,is not the fallacy manifest8 ,even supposing there were no such fatal objection as this1 the evidence commonly assigned would still be insufficient4 ,for we must bear in mind that the community of organic remains usually thought sufficient proof of correspondence in time1 is a very imperfect community4 ,when the compared sedimentary beds are far apart1 it is scarcely expected that there will be many species common to the two3 it is enough if there be discovered a considerable number of common genera4 ,now had it been proved that throughout geologic time1 each genus lived but for a short period--a period measured by a single group of strata--something might be inferred4 ,but what if we learn that many of the same genera continued to exist throughout enormous epochs1 measured by several vast systems of strata8 ,among molluscs1 the genera ,avicula1 ,modiola1 ,terebratula1 ,lingula1 and ,orbicula1 are found from the ,silurian rocks upwards to the present day4 ,if1 then1 between the lowest fossiliferous formations and the most recent1 there exists this degree of community2 must we not infer that there will probably often exist a great degree of community between strata that are far from contemporaneous8 ,thus the reasoning from which it is concluded that similar organic forms were once more widely spread than now1 is doubly fallacious2 and1 consequently1 the classifications of foreign strata based on the conclusion are untrustworthy4 ,judging from the present distribution of life1 we cannot expect to find similar remains in geographically remote strata of the same age2 and where1 between the fossils of geographically remote strata1 we do find much similarity1 it is probably due rather to likeness of conditions than to contemporaneity4 ,if from causes and effects such as we now witness1 we reason back to the causes and effects of past epochs1 we discover inadequate warrant for sundry of the received doctrines4 ,seeing1 as we do1 that in large areas of the ,pacific this is a period characterized by abundance of corals2 that in the ,north ,atlantic it is a period in which a great chalk-deposit is being formed2 and that in the valley of the ,mississippi it is a period of new coal-basins--seeing also1 as we do1 that in one extensive continent this is peculiarly an era of implacental mammals1 and that in another extensive continent it is peculiarly an era of placental mammals2 we have good reason to hesitate before accepting these sweeping generalizations which are based on a cursory examination of strata occupying but a tenth part of the ,earth's surface4 99 99 99 99 99 ,at the outset1 this article was to have been a review of the works of ,hugh ,miller2 but it has grown into something much more general4 ,nevertheless1 the remaining two doctrines which we propose to criticize1 may conveniently be treated in connexion with his name1 as that of one who fully committed himself to them4 ,and first1 a few words respecting his position4 ,that he was a man whose life was one of meritorious achievement1 every one knows4 ,that he was a diligent and successful working geologist1 scarcely needs saying4 ,that with indomitable perseverance he struggled up from obscurity to a place in the world of literature and science1 shows him to have been highly endowed in character and intelligence4 ,and that he had a remarkable power of presenting his facts and arguments in an attractive form1 a glance at any of his books will quickly prove4 ,by all means1 let us respect him as a man of activity and sagacity1 joined with a large amount of poetry4 ,but while saying this we must add1 that his reputation stands by no means so high in the scientific world as in the world at large4 ,partly from the fact that our ,scotch neighbours are in the habit of blowing the trumpet rather loudly before their notabilities--partly because the charming style in which his books are written has gained him a large circle of readers--partly1 perhaps1 through a praiseworthy sympathy with him as a self-made man2 ,hugh ,miller has met with an amount of applause which1 little as we wish to diminish it1 must not be allowed to blind the public to his defects as a man of science4 ,the truth is1 he was so far committed to a foregone conclusion1 that he could not become a philosophical geologist4 ,he might be aptly described as a theologian studying geology4 ,the dominant idea with which he wrote1 may be seen in the titles of two of his books--,footprints of the ,creator1--,the ,testimony of the ,rocks4 ,regarding geological facts as evidence for or against certain religious conclusions1 it was scarcely possible for him to deal with geological facts impartially4 ,his ruling aim was to disprove the ,development ,hypothesis1 the assumed implications of which were repugnant to him2 and in proportion to the strength of his feeling1 was the one-sidedness of his reasoning4 ,he admitted that ,god might as certainly have originated the species by a law of development1 as he maintains it by a law of development2--the existence of a ,first ,great ,cause is as perfectly compatible with the one scheme as with the other4 ,nevertheless1 he considered the hypothesis at variance with ,christianity2 and therefore combated with it4 ,he apparently overlooked the fact1 that the doctrines of geology in general1 as held by himself1 had been rejected by many on similar grounds2 and that he had himself been repeatedly attacked for his anti-,christian teachings4 ,he seems not to have perceived that1 just as his antagonists were wrong in condemning as irreligious1 theories which he saw were not irreligious2 so might he be wrong in condemning1 on like grounds1 the ,theory of ,evolution4 ,in brief1 he fell short of that highest faith which knows that all truths must harmonize2 and which is1 therefore1 content trustfully to follow the evidence whithersoever it leads4 ,of course it is impossible to criticize his works without entering on this great question to which he chiefly devoted himself4 ,the two remaining doctrines to be here discussed1 bear directly on this question2 and1 as above said1 we propose to treat them in connexion with ,hugh ,miller's name1 because1 throughout his reasonings1 he assumes their truth4 ,let it not be supposed1 however1 that we shall aim to prove what he has aimed to disprove4 ,while we purpose showing that his geological arguments against the ,development ,hypothesis are based on invalid assumptions2 we do not purpose showing that the geological arguments urged in support of it are based on valid assumptions4 ,we hope to make it apparent that the geological evidence at present obtained1 is insufficient for either side2 further1 that there seems little probability that sufficient evidence will ever be obtained2 and that if the question is eventually decided1 it must be decided on other than geological grounds4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the first of the current doctrines to which we have just referred1 is1 that there occur in the serial records of former life on our planet1 two great blanks2 whence it is inferred that1 on at least two occasions1 the previously existing inhabitants of the ,earth were almost wholly destroyed1 and a different class of inhabitants created4 ,comparing the general life on the ,earth to a thread1 ,hugh ,miller says3-- ,it is continuous from the present time up to the commencement of the ,tertiary period2 and then so abrupt a break occurs1 that1 with the exception of the microscopic diatomace1 to which ,i last evening referred1 and of one shell and one coral1 not a single species crossed the gap4 ,on its farther or remoter side1 however1 where the ,secondary division closes1 the intermingling of species again begins1 and runs on till the commencement of this great ,secondary division2 and then1 just where the ,palozoic division closes1 we find another abrupt break1 crossed1 if crossed at all1--for there still exists some doubt on the subject1--by but two species of plant4 ,these breaks are supposed to imply actual new creations on the surface of our planet--supposed not by ,hugh ,miller only1 but by the majority of geologists4 ,and the terms ,palozoic1 ,mesozoic1 and ,cainozoic1 are used to indicate these three successive systems of life4 ,it is true that some accept this belief with caution2 knowing how geologic research has been all along tending to fill up what were once thought wide gaps4 ,sir ,charles ,lyell points out that the hiatus which exists in ,great ,britain between the fossils of the ,lias and those of the ,magnesian ,limestone1 is supplied in ,germany by the rich fauna and flora of the ,muschelkalk1 ,keuper1 and ,bunter ,sandstein1 which we know to be of a date precisely intermediate4 ,again he remarks that until lately the fossils of the coal-measures were separated from those of the antecedent ,silurian group by a very abrupt and decided line of demarcation2 but recent discoveries have brought to light in ,devonshire1 ,belgium1 the ,eifel1 and ,westphalia1 the remains of a fauna of an intervening period4 ,and once more1 he says1 we have also in like manner had some success of late years in diminishing the hiatus which still separates the ,cretaceous and ,eocene periods in ,europe4 ,to which let us add that1 since ,hugh ,miller penned the passage above quoted1 the second of the great gaps he refers to has been very considerably narrowed by the discovery of strata containing ,palozoic genera and ,mesozoic genera intermingled4 ,nevertheless1 the occurrence of two great revolutions in the ,earth's ,flora and ,fauna appears still to be held by many2 and geologic nomenclature habitually assumes it4 ,before seeking a solution of the problem thus raised1 let us glance at the several minor causes which produce breaks in the geological succession of organic forms2 taking first1 the more general ones which modify climate1 and1 therefore1 the distribution of life4 ,among these may be noted one which has not1 we believe1 been named by writers on the subject4 ,we mean that resulting from a certain slow astronomic rhythm1 by which the northern and southern hemispheres are alternately subject to greater extremes of temperature4 ,in consequence of the slight ellipticity of its orbit1 the ,earth's distance from the sun varies to the extent of some #c1jjj1jjj of miles4 ,at present1 the aphelion occurs at the time of our northern summer2 and the perihelion during the summer of the southern hemisphere4 ,in consequence1 however1 of that slow movement of the ,earth's axis which produces the precession of the equinoxes1 this state of things will in time be reversed3 the ,earth will be nearest to the sun during the summer of the northern hemisphere1 and furthest from it during the southern summer or northern winter4 ,the period required to complete the slow movement producing these changes1 is nearly #bf1jjj years2 and were there no modifying process1 the two hemispheres would alternately experience this coincidence of summer with relative nearness to the sun1 during a period of #ac1jjj years4 ,but there is also a still slower change in the direction of the axis major of the ,earth's orbit2 from which it results that the alternation we have described is completed in about #ba1jjj years4 ,that is to say1 if at a given time the ,earth is nearest to the sun at our mid-summer1 and furthest from the sun at our mid-winter2 then1 in #aj1ejj years afterwards1 it will be furthest from the sun at our mid-summer1 and nearest at our mid-winter4 ,now the difference between the distances from the sun at the two extremes of this alternation1 amounts to one-thirtieth2 and hence1 the difference between the quantities of heat received from the sun on a summer's day under these opposite conditions amounts to one-fifteenth4 ,estimating this1 not with reference to the zero of our thermometers1 but with reference to the temperature of the celestial spaces1 ,sir ,john ,herschel calculates #bc ,fahrenheit1 as the least variation of temperature under such circumstances which can reasonably be attributed to the actual variation of the sun's distance4 ,thus1 then1 each hemisphere has at a certain epoch1 a short summer of extreme heat1 followed by a long and very cold winter4 ,through the slow change in the direction of the ,earth's axis1 these extremes are gradually mitigated4 ,and at the end of #aj1ejj years1 there is reached the opposite state--a long and moderate summer1 with a short and mild winter4 ,at present1 in consequence of the predominance of sea in the southern hemisphere1 the extremes to which its astronomical conditions subject it1 are much ameliorated2 while the great proportion of land in the northern hemisphere1 tends to exaggerate such contrast as now exists in it between winter and summer3 whence it results that the climates of the two hemispheres are not widely unlike4 ,but #aj1jjj years hence1 the northern hemisphere will undergo annual variations of temperature far more marked than now4 ,in the last edition of his ,outlines of ,astronomy1 ,sir ,john ,herschel recognizes this as an element in geological processes2 regarding it as possibly a part-cause of those climatic changes indicated by the records of the ,earth's past4 ,that it has had much to do with those larger changes of climate of which we have evidence1 seems unlikely1 since there is reason to think that these have been far slower and more lasting2 but that it must have entailed a rhythmical exaggeration and mitigation of the climates otherwise produced1 seems beyond question4 ,and it seems also beyond question that there must have been a consequent rhythmical change in the distribution of organisms--a rhythmical change to which we here wish to draw attention1 as one cause of minor breaks in the succession of fossil remains4 ,each species of plant and animal has certain limits of heat and cold within which only it can exist2 and these limits in a great degree determine its geographical position4 ,it will not spread north of a certain latitude1 because it cannot bear a more northern winter1 nor south of a certain latitude1 because the summer heat is too great2 or else it is indirectly restrained from spreading further by the effect of temperature on the humidity of the air1 or on the distribution of the organisms it lives upon4 ,but now1 what will result from a slow alteration of climate1 produced as above described8 ,supposing the period we set out from is that in which the contrast of seasons is least marked1 it is manifest that during the progress towards the period of most violent contrast1 each species of plant and animal will gradually change its limits of distribution--will be driven back1 here by the winter's increasing cold1 and there by the summer's increasing heat--will retire into those localities that are still fit for it4 ,thus during #aj1jjj years1 each species will ebb away from certain regions it was inhabiting2 and during the succeeding #aj1jjj years will flow back into those regions4 ,from the strata there forming1 its remains will disappear2 they will be absent from some of the superposed strata2 and will be found in strata higher up4 ,but in what shapes will they re-appear8 ,exposed during the #ba1jjj years of their slow recession and their slow return1 to changing conditions of life1 they are likely to have undergone modifications2 and will probably re-appear with slight differences of constitution and perhaps of form--will be new varieties or perhaps new sub-species4 ,to this cause of minor breaks in the succession of organic forms--a cause on which we have dwelt because it has not been taken into account--we must add sundry others4 ,besides these periodically-recurring changes of climate1 there are the irregular ones produced by redistributions of land and sea2 and these1 sometimes less1 sometimes greater1 in degree1 than the rhythmical changes1 must1 like them1 cause in each region emigrations and immigrations of species2 and consequent breaks1 small or large as the case may be1 in the paleontological series4 ,other and more special geological changes must produce other and more local blanks in the succession4 ,by some inland elevation the natural drainage of a continent is modified2 and instead of the sediment previously brought down to the sea by it1 a great river brings down sediment unfavourable to various plants and animals living in its delta3 whereupon these disappear from the locality1 perhaps to re-appear in a changed form after a long epoch4 ,upheavals or subsidences of shores or sea-bottoms1 involving deviations of marine currents1 remove the habitats of many species to which such currents are salutary or injurious2 and further1 this redistribution of currents alters the places of sedimentary deposits1 and thus stops the burying of organic remains in some localities1 while commencing it in others4 ,had we space1 many more such causes of blanks in our paleontological records might be added4 ,but it is needless here to enumerate them4 ,they are admirably explained and illustrated in ,sir ,charles ,lyell's ,principles of ,geology4 ,now1 if these minor changes of the ,earth's surface produce minor breaks in the series of fossilized remains2 must not great changes produce great breaks8 ,if a local upheaval or subsidence causes throughout its small area the absence of some links in the chain of fossil forms2 does it not follow that an upheaval or subsidence extending over a large part of the ,earth's surface1 must cause the absence of a great number of such links throughout a very wide area8 ,when during a long epoch a continent1 slowly sinking1 gives place to a far-spreading ocean some miles in depth1 at the bottom of which no deposits from rivers or abraded shores can be thrown down2 and when1 after some enormous period1 this ocean-bottom is gradually elevated and becomes the site for new strata2 it is clear that the fossils contained in these new strata are likely to have but little in common with the fossils of the strata below them4 ,take1 in illustration1 the case of the ,north ,atlantic4 ,we have already named the fact that between this country and the ,united ,states1 the ocean-bottom is being covered with a deposit of chalk--a deposit which has been forming1 probably1 ever since there occurred that great depression of the ,earth's crust from which the ,atlantic resulted in remote geologic times4 ,this chalk consists of the minute shells of ,foraminifera1 sprinkled with remains of small ,entomostraca1 and probably a few ,pteropod-shells2 though the sounding lines have not yet brought up any of these last4 ,thus1 in so far as all high forms of life are concerned1 this new chalk-formation must be a blank4 ,at rare intervals1 perhaps1 a polar bear1 drifted on an iceberg1 may have its bones scattered over the bed2 or a dead1 decaying whale may similarly leave traces4 ,but such remains must be so rare1 that this new chalk-formation1 if accessible1 might be examined for a century before any of them were disclosed4 ,if now1 some millions of years hence1 the ,atlantic-bed should be raised1 and estuary deposits or shore deposits laid upon it1 these would contain remains of a ,flora and a ,fauna so distinct from everything below them1 as to appear like a new creation4 ,thus1 along with continuity of life on the ,earth's surface1 there not only may be1 but there must be1 great gaps in the series of fossils2 and hence these gaps are no evidence against the doctrine of ,evolution4 99 99 99 99 99 ,one other current assumption remains to be criticized2 and it is the one on which1 more than on any other1 depends the view taken respecting the question of development4 ,from the beginning of the controversy1 the arguments for and against have turned upon the evidence of progression in organic forms1 found in the ascending series of our sedimentary formations4 ,on the one hand1 those who contend that higher organisms have been evolved out of lower1 joined with those who contend that successively higher organisms have been created at successively later periods1 appeal for proof to the facts of ,paleontology2 which1 they say1 countenance their views4 ,on the other hand1 the ,uniformitarians1 who not only reject the hypothesis of development1 but deny that the modern forms of life are higher than the ancient ones1 reply that the paleontological evidence is at present very incomplete2 that though we have not yet found remains of highly-organized creatures in strata of the greatest antiquity1 we must not assume that no such creatures existed when those strata were deposited2 and that1 probably1 search will eventually disclose them4 ,it must be admitted that thus far1 the evidence has gone in favour of the latter party4 ,geological discovery has year after year shown the small value of negative facts4 ,the conviction that there are no traces of higher organisms in earlier strata1 has resulted not from the absence of such traces1 but from incomplete examination4 ,at p4 #dfj of his ,manual of ,elementary ,geology1 ,sir ,charles ,lyell gives a list in illustration of this4 ,it appears that in #agji1 fishes were not known lower than the ,permian system4 ,in #agic they were found in the subjacent ,carboniferous system2 in #ahbh in the ,devonian2 in #ahdj in the ,upper ,silurian4 ,of reptiles1 we read that in #agaj the lowest known were in the ,permian2 in #ahdd they were detected in the ,carboniferous2 and in #aheb in the ,upper ,devonian4 ,while of the ,mammalia the list shows that in #agih none had been discovered below the ,middle ,eocene3 but that in #ahah they were discovered in the ,lower ,oolite2 and in #ahdg in the ,upper ,trias4 ,the fact is1 however1 that both parties set out with an inadmissible postulate4 ,of the ,uniformitarians1 not only such writers as ,hugh ,miller1 but also such as ,sir ,charles ,lyell1#bg reason as though we had found the earliest1 or something like the earliest1 strata4 ,their antagonists1 whether defenders of the ,development ,hypothesis or simply ,progressionists1 almost uniformly do the like4 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison1 who is a ,progressionist1 calls the lowest fossiliferous strata1 ,protozoic4 ,prof4 ,ansted uses the same term4 ,whether avowedly or not1 all the disputants stand on this assumption as their common ground4 ,yet is this assumption indefensible1 as some who make it very well know4 ,facts may be cited against it which show that it is a more than questionable one--that it is a highly improbable one2 while the evidence assigned in its favour will not bear criticism4 ,because in ,bohemia1 ,great ,britain1 and portions of ,north ,america1 the lowest unmetamorphosed strata yet discovered1 contain but slight traces of life1 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison conceives that they were formed while yet few1 if any1 plants or animals had been created2 and1 therefore1 classes them as ,azoic4 ,his own pages1 however1 show the illegitimacy of the conclusion that there existed at that period no considerable amount of life4 ,such traces of life as have been found in the ,longmynd rocks1 for many years considered unfossiliferous1 have been found in some of the lowest beds2 and the twenty thousand feet of superposed beds1 still yield no organic remains4 ,if now these superposed strata throughout a depth of four miles1 are without fossils1 though the strata over which they lie prove that life had commenced2 what becomes of ,sir ,r4 ,murchison's inference8 ,at page #ahi of ,siluria1 a still more conclusive fact will be found4 ,the ,glengariff grits1 and other accompanying strata there described as #ac1ejj feet thick1 contain no signs of contemporaneous life4 ,yet ,sir ,r4 ,murchison refers them to the ,devonian period--a period which had a large and varied marine ,fauna4 ,how then1 from the absence of fossils in the ,longmynd beds and their equivalents1 can we conclude that the ,earth was azoic when they were formed8 ,but1 it may be asked1 if living creatures then existed1 why do we not find fossiliferous strata of that age1 or an earlier age8 ,one reply is1 that the non-existence of such strata is but a negative fact--we have not found them4 ,and considering how little we know even of the two-fifths of the ,earth's surface now above the sea1 and how absolutely ignorant we are of the three-fifths below the sea1 it is rash to say that no such strata exist4 ,but the chief reply is1 that these records of the ,earth's earlier history have been in great part destroyed1 by agencies which are ever tending to destroy such records4 ,it is an established geological doctrine1 that sedimentary strata are liable to be changed1 more or less profoundly1 by igneous action4 ,the rocks originally classed as transition1 because they were intermediate in character between the igneous rocks found below them1 and the sedimentary strata found above them1 are now known to be nothing else than sedimentary strata altered in texture and appearance by the intense heat of adjacent molten matter2 and hence are renamed metamorphic rocks4 ,modern researches have shown1 too1 that these metamorphic rocks are not1 as was once supposed1 all of the same age4 ,besides primary and secondary strata which have been transformed by igneous action1 there are similarly-changed deposits of tertiary origin--deposits changed1 even as far as a quarter of a mile from the point of contact with neighbouring granite4 ,by this process fossils are of course destroyed4 ,in some cases1 says ,sir ,charles ,lyell1 dark limestones1 replete with shells and corals1 have been turned into white statuary marble1 and hard clays1 containing vegetable or other remains1 into slates called mica-schist or hornblende-schist2 every vestige of the organic bodies having been obliterated4 ,again1 it is fast becoming an acknowledged truth that igneous rock1 of whatever kind1 is the product of sedimentary strata which have been completely melted4 ,granite and gneiss1 which are of like chemical composition1 have been shown1 in various cases1 to pass one into the other2 as at ,valorsine1 near ,mont ,blanc1 where the two1 in contact1 are observed to both undergo a modification of mineral character4 ,the granite still remaining unstratified1 becomes charged with green particles2 and the talcose gneiss assumes a granitiform structure without losing its stratification4 ,in the ,aberdeen-granite1 lumps of unmelted gneiss are abundant2 and we can ourselves bear witness that the granite on the banks of ,loch ,sunart yields proofs that1 when molten1 it contained incompletely-fused clots of sedimentary strata4 ,nor is this all4 ,fifty years ago1 it was thought that all granitic rocks were primitive1 or existed before any sedimentary strata2 but it is now no easy task to point out a single mass of granite demonstrably more ancient than all the known fossiliferous deposits4 ,in brief1 accumulated evidence shows1 that by contact with1 or proximity to1 the molten matter of the ,earth's nucleus1 all beds of sediment are liable to be actually melted1 or partially fused1 or so heated as to agglutinate their particles2 and that according to the temperature they have been raised to1 and the circumstances under which they cool1 they assume the forms of granite1 porphyry1 trap1 gneiss1 or rock otherwise altered4 ,further1 it is manifest that though strata of various ages have been thus changed1 yet the most ancient strata have been so changed to the greatest extent2 both because they have been nearer to the centre of igneous agency2 and because they have been for longer periods liable to be affected by it4 ,whence it follows1 that sedimentary strata passing a certain antiquity1 are unlikely to be found in an unmetamorphosed state2 and that strata much earlier than these are certain to have been melted up4 ,thus if1 throughout a past of indefinite duration1 there had been at work those aqueous and igneous agencies which we see still at work1 the state of the ,earth's crust might be just what we find it4 ,we have no evidence which puts a limit to the period throughout which this formation and destruction of strata has been going on4 ,for aught the facts prove1 it may have been going on for ten times the period measured by our whole series of sedimentary deposits4 ,besides having1 in the present appearances of the ,earth's crust1 no data for fixing a commencement to these processes--besides finding that the evidence permits us to assume such commencement to have been inconceivably remote1 as compared even with the vast eras of geology2 we are not without positive grounds for inferring the inconceivable remoteness of such commencement4 ,modern geology has established truths which are irreconcilable with the belief that the formation and destruction of strata began when the ,cambrian rocks were formed2 or at anything like so recent a time4 ,one fact from ,siluria will suffice4 ,sir ,r4 ,murchison estimates the vertical thickness of ,silurian strata in ,wales1 at from #bf1jjj to #bg1jjj feet1 or about five miles2 and if to this we add the vertical depth of the ,cambrian strata1 on which the ,silurians lie conformably1 there results1 on the lowest computation1 a total depth of some seven miles4 ,now it is held by geologists1 that this vast series of formations must have been deposited in an area of gradual subsidence4 ,these beds could not have been thus laid one on another in regular order1 unless the ,earth's crust had been at that place sinking1 either continuously or by small steps4 ,such an immense subsidence1 however1 must have been impossible without a crust of great thickness4 ,the ,earth's molten nucleus tends ever1 with enormous force1 to assume the form of a regular oblate spheroid4 ,any depression of its crust below the surface of equilibrium1 and any elevation of its crust above that surface1 have to withstand immense resistances4 ,it follows inevitably that1 with a thin crust1 nothing but small elevations and subsidences would have been possible2 and that1 conversely1 a subsidence of seven miles implies a crust of great strength1 or1 in other words1 of great thickness4 ,indeed1 if we compare this inferred subsidence in the ,silurian period1 with such elevations and depressions as our existing continents and oceans display1 we see no evidence that the ,earth's crust was appreciably thinner then than now4 ,what are the implications8 ,if1 as geologists generally admit1 the ,earth's crust has resulted from that slow cooling which is even still going on--if we see no sign that at the time when the earliest ,cambrian strata were formed1 this crust was appreciably thinner than now2 we are forced to conclude that the era during which it acquired that great thickness possessed in the ,cambrian period1 was enormous as compared with the interval between the ,cambrian period and our own4 ,but during the incalculable series of epochs thus implied1 there existed an ocean1 tides1 winds1 waves1 rain1 rivers4 ,the agencies by which the denudation of continents and filling up of seas have all along been carried on1 were as active then as now4 ,endless successions of strata must have been formed4 ,and when we ask--,where are they8 ,nature's obvious reply is--,they have been destroyed by that igneous action to which so great a part of our oldest-known strata owe their fusion or metamorphosis4 ,only the last chapter of the ,earth's history has come down to us4 ,the many previous chapters1 stretching back to a time immeasurably remote1 have been burnt2 and with them all the records of life we may presume they contained4 ,the greater part of the evidence which might have served to settle the ,development-controversy1 is for ever lost2 and on neither side can the arguments derived from ,geology be conclusive4 ,but how happen there to be such evidences of progression as exist8 it may be asked4 ,how happens it that1 in ascending from the most ancient strata to the most recent strata1 we do find a succession of organic forms1 which1 however irregularly1 carries us from lower to higher8 ,this question seems difficult to answer4 ,nevertheless1 there is reason for thinking that nothing can be safely inferred from the apparent progression here cited4 ,and the illustration which shows as much1 will1 we believe1 also show how little trust is to be placed in certain geological generalizations that appear to be well established4 ,with this somewhat elaborate illustration1 to which we now pass1 our criticisms may fitly conclude4 99 99 99 99 99 ,let us suppose that in a region now covered by wide ocean1 there begins one of those great and gradual upheavals by which new continents are formed4 ,to be precise1 let us say that in the ,south ,pacific1 midway between ,new ,zealand and ,patagonia1 the sea-bottom has been little by little thrust up toward the surface1 and is about to emerge4 ,what will be the successive phenomena1 geological and biological1 which are likely to occur before this emerging sea-bottom has become another ,europe or ,asia8 ,in the first place1 such portions of the incipient land as are raised to the level of the waves1 will be rapidly denuded by them3 their soft substance will be torn up by the breakers1 carried away by the local currents1 and deposited in neighbouring deeper water4 ,successive small upheavals will bring new and larger areas within reach of the waves2 fresh portions will each time be removed from the surfaces previously denuded2 and further1 some of the newly-formed strata1 being elevated nearly to the level of the water1 will be washed away and re-deposited4 ,in course of time the harder formations of the upraised sea-bottom will be uncovered4 ,these1 being less easily destroyed1 will remain permanently above the surface2 and at their margins will arise the usual breaking down of rocks into beach-sand and pebbles4 ,while in the slow course of this elevation1 going on at the rate of perhaps two or three feet in a century1 most of the sedimentary deposits produced will be again and again destroyed and reformed2 there will1 in those adjacent areas of subsidence which accompany areas of elevation1 be more or less continuous successions of sedimentary deposits lying on the pre-existing ocean bed4 ,and now1 what will be the character of these strata1 old and new8 ,they will contain scarcely any traces of life4 ,the deposits that had previously been slowly formed at the bottom of this wide ocean1 would be sprinkled with fossils of but few species4 ,the oceanic ,fauna is not a rich one2 its hydrozoa do not admit of preservation2 and the hard parts of its few kinds of molluscs and crustaceans and insects are mostly fragile4 ,hence1 when the ocean-bed was here and there raised to the surface--when its strata of sediment with their contained organic fragments were torn up and long washed about by the breakers before being re-deposited--when the re-deposits were again and again subject to this violent abrading action by subsequent small elevations1 as they would mostly be2 what few fragile organic remains they contained1 would be in nearly all cases destroyed4 ,thus such of the first-formed strata as survived the repeated changes of level1 would be practically azoic2 like the ,cambrian of our geologists4 ,when by the washing away of the soft deposits1 the hard sub-strata had been exposed in the shape of rocky islets1 and a footing had thus been furnished1 the pioneers of a new life might be expected to make their appearance4 ,what would they be8 ,not any of the surrounding oceanic species1 for these are not fitted for a littoral life2 but species flourishing on some of the far-distant shores of the ,pacific4 ,of such1 the first to establish themselves would be sea-weeds and zoophytes2 because the most readily conveyed on floating wood1 c41 and because when conveyed they would find fit food4 ,it is true that ,cirrhipeds and ,lamellibranchs1 subsisting on the minute creatures which everywhere people the sea1 would also find fit food4 ,but the chances of early colonization are in favour of species which1 multiplying by agamogenesis1 can people a whole shore from a single germ2 and against species which1 multiplying only by gamogenesis1 must be introduced in considerable numbers that some may propagate4 ,thus we infer that the earliest traces of life left in the sedimentary deposits near these new shores1 will be traces of life as humble as that indicated in the most ancient rocks of ,great ,britain and ,ireland4 ,imagine now that the processes above indicated1 continue--that the emerging lands become wider in extent1 and fringed by higher and more varied shores2 and that there still go on those ocean-currents which1 at long intervals1 convey from far distant shores immigrant forms of life4 ,what will result8 ,lapse of time will of course favour the introduction of such new forms3 admitting1 as it must1 of those combinations of fit conditions1 which can occur only after long intervals4 ,moreover1 the increasing area of the islands1 individually and as a group1 implies increasing length of coast1 and therefore a longer line of contact with the streams and waves which bring drifting masses bearing germs of fresh life4 ,and once more1 the comparatively-varied shores1 presenting physical conditions which change from mile to mile1 will furnish suitable habitats for more numerous species4 ,so that as the elevation proceeds1 three causes conspire to introduce additional marine plants and animals4 ,to what classes will the increasing ,fauna be for a long period confined8 ,of course1 to classes of which individuals1 or their germs1 are most liable to be carried far away from their native shores by floating sea-weed or drift-wood2 to classes which are also least likely to perish in transit1 or from change of climate2 and to those which can best subsist around coasts comparatively bare of life4 ,evidently then1 corals1 annelids1 inferior molluscs1 and crustaceans of low grade1 will chiefly constitute the early ,fauna4 ,the large predatory members of these classes1 will be later in establishing themselves2 both because the new shores must first become well peopled by the creatures they prey on1 and because1 being more complex1 they1 or their ova1 must be less likely to survive the journey1 and the change of conditions4 ,we may infer1 then1 that the strata deposited next after the almost azoic strata1 would contain the remains of invertebrata1 allied to those found near the shores of ,australia and ,south ,america4 ,of such invertebrate remains1 the lower beds would furnish comparatively few genera1 and those of relatively low types2 while in the upper beds the number of genera would be greater1 and the types higher3 just as among the fossils of our ,silurian system4 ,as this great geologic change slowly advanced through its long history of earthquakes1 volcanic disturbances1 minor upheavals and subsidences--as the extent of the archipelago became greater and its smaller islands coalesced into larger ones1 while its coast-line grew still longer and more varied1 and the neighbouring sea more thickly inhabited by inferior forms of life2 the lowest division of the vertebrata would begin to be represented4 ,in order of time1 fish would naturally come later than the lower invertebrata2 both as being less likely to have their ova transported across the waste of waters1 and as requiring for their subsistence a pre-existing ,fauna of some development4 ,they might be expected to make their appearance along with the predaceous crustaceans2 as they do in the uppermost ,silurian rocks4 ,and here1 too1 let us remark1 that as1 during this long epoch we have been describing1 the sea would have made great inroads on some of the newly-raised lands which had remained stationary2 and would probably in some places have reached masses of igneous or metamorphic rocks2 there might1 in course of time1 arise by the decomposition and denudation of such rocks1 local deposits coloured with oxide of iron1 like our ,old ,red ,sandstone4 ,and in these deposits might be buried the remains of the fish then peopling the neighbouring sea4 ,meanwhile1 how would the surfaces of the upheaved masses be occupied8 ,at first their deserts of naked rocks would bear only the humblest forms of vegetal life1 such as we find in grey and orange patches on our own rugged mountain sides2 for these alone could flourish on such surfaces1 and their spores would be the most readily transported4 ,when1 by the decay of such protophytes1 and that decomposition of rock effected by them1 there had resulted a fit habitat for mosses2 these1 of which the germs might be conveyed in drifted trees1 would begin to spread4 ,a soil having been eventually thus produced1 it would become possible for plants of higher organization to find roothold2 and as the archipelago and its constituent islands grew larger1 and had more multiplied relations with winds and waters1 such higher plants might be expected ultimately to have their seeds transferred from the nearest lands4 ,after something like a ,flora had thus colonized the surface1 it would become possible for insects to exist2 and of air-breathing creatures1 insects would manifestly be among the first to find their way from elsewhere4 ,as1 however1 terrestrial organisms1 both vegetal and animal1 are less likely than marine organisms to survive the accidents of transport from distant shores2 it is inferable that long after the sea surrounding these new lands had acquired a varied ,flora and ,fauna1 the lands themselves would still be comparatively bare2 and thus that the early strata1 like our ,silurians1 would afford no traces of terrestrial life4 ,by the time that large areas had been raised above the ocean1 we may fairly suppose a luxuriant vegetation to have been acquired4 ,under what circumstances are we likely to find this vegetation fossilized8 ,large surfaces of land imply large rivers with their accompanying deltas2 and are liable to have lakes and swamps4 ,these1 as we know from extant cases1 are favourable to rank vegetation2 and afford the conditions needful for preserving it in coal-beds4 ,observe1 then1 that while in the early history of such a continent a carboniferous period could not occur1 the occurrence of a carboniferous period would become probable after long-continued upheavals had uncovered large areas4 ,as in our own sedimentary series1 coal-beds would make their appearance only after there had been enormous accumulations of earlier strata charged with marine fossils4 ,let us ask next1 in what order the higher forms of animal life would make their appearance4 ,we have seen how1 in the succession of marine forms1 there would be something like a progress from the lower to the higher3 bringing us in the end to predaceous molluscs1 crustaceans1 and fish4 ,what are likely to succeed fish8 ,after marine creatures1 those which would have the greatest chance of surviving the voyage would be amphibious reptiles2 both because they are more tenacious of life than higher animals1 and because they would be less completely out of their element4 ,such reptiles as can live in both fresh and salt water1 like alligators2 and such as are drifted out of the mouths of great rivers on floating trees1 as ,humboldt says the ,orinoco alligators are2 might be early colonists4 ,it is manifest1 too1 that reptiles of other kinds would be among the first vertebrata to people the new continent4 ,if we consider what will occur on one of those natural rafts of trees1 soil1 and matted vegetable matter1 sometimes swept out to sea by such currents as the ,mississippi1 with a miscellaneous living cargo2 we shall see that while the active1 hot-blooded1 highly-organized creatures will soon die of starvation and exposure1 the inert1 cold-blooded ones1 which can go long without food1 will live perhaps for weeks2 and so1 out of the chances from time to time occurring during long periods1 reptiles will be the first to get safely landed on foreign shores3 as indeed they are even now known sometimes to be4 ,the transport of mammalia being comparatively precarious1 must1 in the order of probability1 be longer postponed2 and would1 indeed1 be unlikely to occur until by the enlargement of the new continent1 the distances of its shores from adjacent lands had been greatly diminished1 or the formation of intervening islands had increased the chances of survival4 ,assuming1 however1 that the facilities for immigration had become adequate2 which would be the first mammals to arrive and live8 ,not large herbivores2 for they would be soon drowned if by any accident carried out to sea4 ,not the carnivora2 for these would lack appropriate food1 even if they outlived the voyage4 ,small quadrupeds frequenting trees1 and feeding on insects1 would be those most likely both to be drifted away from their native lands and to find fit food in a new one4 ,insectivorous mammals1 like in size to those found in the ,trias and the ,stonesfield slate1 might naturally be looked for as the pioneers of the higher vertebrata4 ,and if we suppose the facilities of communication to be again increased1 either by a further shallowing of the intervening sea and a consequent multiplication of islands1 or by an actual junction of the new continent with an old one1 through continued upheavals2 we should finally have an influx of the larger and more perfect mammals4 ,now rude as is this sketch of a process that would be extremely elaborate and involved1 and open as some of its propositions are to criticisms which there is no space here to meet2 no one will deny that it represents something like the biologic history of the supposed new continent4 ,details apart1 it is manifest that simple organisms1 able to flourish under simple conditions of life1 would be the first successful immigrants2 and that more complex organisms1 needing for their existence the fulfilment of more complex conditions1 would afterwards establish themselves in something like an ascending succession4 ,at the one extreme we see every facility4 ,the new individuals can be conveyed in the shape of minute germs2 immense numbers of these are perpetually being carried in all directions to great distances by ocean-currents--either detached or attached to floating bodies2 they can find nutriment wherever they arrive2 and the resulting organisms can multiply asexually with great rapidity4 ,at the other extreme1 we see every difficulty4 ,the new individuals must be conveyed in their adult forms2 their numbers are1 in comparison1 utterly insignificant2 they live on land1 and are very unlikely to be carried out to sea2 when so carried1 the chances are immense against their escape from drowning1 starvation1 or death by cold2 if they survive the transit1 they must have a pre-existing ,flora or ,fauna to supply their special food2 they require1 also1 the fulfilment of various other physical conditions2 and unless at least two individuals of different sexes are safely landed1 the race cannot be established4 ,manifestly1 then1 the immigration of each successively higher order of organisms1 having1 from one or other additional condition to be fulfilled1 an enormously-increased probability against it1 would naturally be separated from the immigration of a lower order by some period like a geologic epoch4 ,and thus the successive sedimentary deposits formed while this new continent was undergoing gradual elevation1 would seem to furnish clear evidence of a general progress in the forms of life4 ,that lands thus raised up in the midst of a wide ocean1 would first give origin to unfossiliferous strata2 next1 to strata containing only the lowest marine forms2 next to strata containing only the higher marine forms1 ascending finally to fish2 and that the strata above these would contain reptiles1 then small mammals1 then great mammals2 seems to us demonstrable4 ,and if the succession of fossils presented by the strata of this supposed new continent1 would thus simulate the succession presented by our own sedimentary series2 must we not conclude that our own sedimentary series very possibly records nothing more than the phenomena accompanying one of these great upheavals8 ,the probability of this conclusion being admitted1 it must be admitted that the facts of ,paleontology can never suffice either to prove or disprove the ,development ,hypothesis2 but that the most they can do is to show whether the last few pages of the ,earth's biologic history1 are or are not in harmony with this hypothesis--whether the existing ,flora and ,fauna can or can not be affiliated upon the ,flora and ,fauna of the most recent geologic times4 ,,footnote3 ,footnote #bg3 ,sir ,charles ,lyell is no longer to be classed among ,uniformitarians4 ,with rare and admirable candour he has1 since this was written1 yielded to the arguments of ,mr4 ,darwin4 ,,bain ,,on ,,the ,,emotions ,,and ,,the ,,will4 ,first published in ,the ,medico-,chirurgical ,review for ,january1 #ahfj4 ,after the controversy between the ,neptunists and the ,vulcanists had been long carried on without definite results1 there came a reaction against all speculative geology4 ,reasoning without adequate data having led to nothing1 inquirers went into the opposite extreme1 and confining themselves wholly to collecting data1 relinquished reasoning4 ,the ,geological ,society of ,london was formed with the express object of accumulating evidence2 for many years hypotheses were forbidden at its meetings3 and only of late have attempts to organize the mass of observations into consistent theory been tolerated4 ,this reaction and subsequent re-reaction1 well illustrate the recent history of ,english thought in general4 ,the time was when our countrymen speculated1 certainly to as great an extent as any other people1 on all those high questions which present themselves to the human intellect2 and1 indeed1 a glance at the systems of philosophy that are or have been current on the ,continent1 suffices to show how much other nations owe to the discoveries of our ancestors4 ,for a generation or two1 however1 these more abstract subjects have fallen into neglect2 and1 among those who plume themselves on being practical1 even into contempt4 ,partly1 perhaps1 a natural accompaniment of our rapid material growth1 this intellectual phase has been in great measure due to the exhaustion of argument1 and the necessity for better data4 ,not so much with a conscious recognition of the end to be subserved1 as from an unconscious subordination to that rhythm traceable in social changes as in other things1 an era of theorizing without observing1 has been followed by an era of observing without theorizing4 ,during this long-continued devotion to concrete science1 an immense quantity of raw material for abstract science has been accumulated2 and now there is obviously commencing a period in which this accumulated raw material will be organized into consistent theory4 ,on all sides--equally in the inorganic sciences1 in the science of life1 and in the science of society--we may note the tendency to pass from the superficial and empirical to the more profound and rational4 ,in ,psychology this change is conspicuous4 ,the facts brought to light by anatomists and physiologists during the last fifty years1 are at length being used towards the interpretation of this highest class of biological phenomena2 and already there is promise of a great advance4 ,the work of ,mr4 ,alexander ,bain1 of which the second volume has been recently issued1 may be regarded as especially characteristic of the transition4 ,it gives us1 in orderly arrangement1 the great mass of evidence supplied by modern science towards the building-up of a coherent system of mental philosophy4 ,it is not in itself a system of mental philosophy1 properly so called2 but a classified collection of materials for such a system1 presented with that method and insight which scientific discipline generates1 and accompanied with occasional passages of an analytical character4 ,it is indeed that which it in the main professes to be--a natural history of the mind4 ,were we to say that the researches of the naturalist who collects and dissects and describes species1 bear the same relation to the researches of the comparative anatomist tracing out the laws of organization1 which ,mr4 ,bain's labours bear to the labours of the abstract psychologist1 we should be going somewhat too far2 for ,mr4 ,bain's work is not wholly descriptive4 ,still1 however1 such an analogy conveys the best general conception of what he has done2 and serves most clearly to indicate its needfulness4 ,for as1 before there can be made anything like true generalizations respecting the classification of organisms and the laws of organization1 there must be an extensive accumulation of the facts presented in numerous organic bodies2 so1 without a tolerably-complete delineation of mental phenomena of all orders1 there can scarcely arise any adequate theory of mind4 ,until recently1 mental science has been pursued much as physical science was pursued by the ancients2 not by drawing conclusions from observations and experiments1 but by drawing them from arbitrary a priori assumptions4 ,this course1 long since abandoned in the one case with immense advantage1 is gradually being abandoned in the other2 and the treatment of ,psychology as a division of natural history1 shows that the abandonment will soon be complete4 ,estimated as a means to higher results1 ,mr4 ,bain's work is of great value4 ,of its kind it is the most scientific in conception1 the most catholic in spirit1 and the most complete in execution4 ,besides delineating the various classes of mental phenomena as seen under that stronger light thrown on them by modern science1 it includes in the picture much which previous writers had omitted--partly from prejudice1 partly from ignorance4 ,we refer more especially to the participation of bodily organs in mental changes2 and the addition to the primary mental changes1 of those many secondary ones which the actions of the bodily organs generate4 ,mr4 ,bain has1 we believe1 been the first to appreciate the importance of this element in our states of consciousness2 and it is one of his merits that he shows how constant and large an element it is4 ,further1 the relations of voluntary and involuntary movements are elucidated in a way that was not possible to writers unacquainted with the modern doctrine of reflex action4 ,and beyond this1 some of the analytical passages that here and there occur1 contain important ideas4 ,valuable1 however1 as is ,mr4 ,bain's work1 we regard it as essentially transitional4 ,it presents in a digested form the results of a period of observation2 adds to these results many well-delineated facts collected by himself2 arranges new and old materials with that more scientific method which the discipline of our times has fostered2 and so prepares the way for better generalizations4 ,but almost of necessity its classifications and conclusions are provisional4 ,in the growth of each science1 not only is correct observation needful for the formation of true theory2 but true theory is needful as a preliminary to correct observation4 ,of course we do not intend this assertion to be taken literally2 but as a strong expression of the fact that the two must advance hand in hand4 ,the first crude theory or rough classification1 based on very slight knowledge of the phenomena1 is requisite as a means of reducing the phenomena to some kind of order2 and as supplying a conception with which fresh phenomena may be compared1 and their agreement or disagreement noted4 ,incongruities being by and by made manifest by wider examination of cases1 there comes such modification of the theory as brings it into a nearer correspondence with the evidence4 ,this reacts to the further advance of observation4 ,more extensive and complete observation brings additional corrections of theory2 and so on till the truth is reached4 ,in mental science1 the systematic collection of facts having but recently commenced1 it is not to be expected that the results can be at once rightly formulated4 ,all that may be looked for are approximate generalizations which will presently serve for the better directing of inquiry4 ,hence1 even were it not now possible to say in what way it does so1 we might be tolerably certain that ,mr4 ,bain's work bears the stamp of the inchoate state of ,psychology4 ,we think1 however1 that it will not be difficult to find in what respects its organization is provisional2 and at the same time to show what must be the nature of a more complete organization4 ,we propose here to attempt this3 illustrating our positions from his recently-issued second volume4 99 99 99 99 99 ,is it possible to make a true classification without the aid of analysis8 or must there not be an analytical basis to every true classification8 ,can the real relations of things be determined by the obvious characteristics of the things8 or does it not commonly happen that certain hidden characteristics1 on which the obvious ones depend1 are the truly significant ones8 ,this is the preliminary question which a glance at ,mr4 ,bain's scheme of the emotions suggests4 ,though not avowedly1 yet by implication1 ,mr4 ,bain assumes that a right conception of the nature1 the order1 and the relations of the emotions1 may be arrived at by contemplating their conspicuous objective and subjective characters1 as displayed in the adult4 ,after pointing out that we lack those means of classification which serve in the case of the sensations1 he says-- ,in these circumstances we must turn our attention to the manner of diffusion of the different passions and emotions1 in order to obtain a basis of classification analogous to the arrangement of the sensations4 ,if what we have already advanced on that subject be at all well founded1 this is the genuine turning point of the method to be chosen1 for the same mode of diffusion will always be accompanied by the same mental experience1 and each of the two aspects would identify1 and would be evidence of1 the other4 ,there is1 therefore1 nothing so thoroughly characteristic of any state of feeling as the nature of the diffusive wave that embodies it1 or the various organs specially roused into action by it1 together with the manner of the action4 ,the only drawback is our comparative ignorance1 and our inability to discern the precise character of the diffusive currents in every case2 a radical imperfection in the science of mind as constituted at present4 ,our own consciousness1 formerly reckoned the only medium of knowledge to the mental philosopher1 must therefore be still referred to as a principal means of discriminating the varieties of human feeling4 ,we have the power of noting agreement and difference among our conscious states1 and on this we can raise a structure of classification4 ,we recognise such generalities as pleasure1 pain1 love1 anger1 through the property of mental or intellectual discrimination that accompanies in our mind the fact of emotion4 ,a certain degree of precision is attainable by this mode of mental comparison and analysis2 the farther we can carry such precision the better2 but that is no reason why it should stand alone to the neglect of the corporeal embodiments through which one mind reveals itself to others4 ,the companionship of inward feeling with bodily manifestation is a fact of the human constitution1 and deserves to be studied as such2 and it would be difficult to find a place more appropriate than a treatise on the mind for setting forth the conjunctions and sequences traceable in this department of nature4 ,i shall make no scruple in conjoining with the description of the mental phenomena the physical appearances1 in so far as ,i am able to ascertain them4 ,there is still one other quarter to be referred to in settling a complete arrangement of the emotions1 namely1 the varieties of human conduct1 and the machinery created in subservience to our common susceptibilities4 ,for example1 the vast superstructure of fine art has its foundations in human feeling1 and in rendering an account of this we are led to recognise the interesting group of artistic or sthetic emotions4 ,the same outward reference to conduct and creations brings to light the so-called moral sense in man1 whose foundations in the mental system have accordingly to be examined4 ,combining together these various indications1 or sources of discrimination1--outward objects1 diffusive mode or expression1 inward consciousness1 resulting conduct and institutions1--,i adopt the following arrangement of the families or natural orders of emotion4 ,here1 then1 are confessedly adopted1 as bases of classification1 the most manifest characters of the emotions2 as discerned subjectively1 and objectively4 ,the mode of diffusion of an emotion is one of its outside aspects2 the institutions it generates form another of its outside aspects2 and though the peculiarities of the emotion as a state of consciousness1 seem to express its intrinsic and ultimate nature1 yet such peculiarities as are perceptible by simple introspection1 must also be classed as superficial peculiarities4 ,it is a familiar fact that various intellectual states of consciousness turn out1 when analyzed1 to have natures widely unlike those which at first appear2 and we believe the like will prove true of emotional states of consciousness4 ,just as our concept of space1 which is apt to be thought a simple1 undecomposable concept1 is yet resolvable into experiences quite different from that state of consciousness which we call space2 so1 probably1 the sentiment of affection or reverence is compounded of elements that are severally distinct from the whole which they make up4 ,and much as a classification of our ideas which dealt with the idea of space as though it were ultimate1 would be a classification of ideas by their externals2 so1 a classification of our emotions1 which1 regarding them as simple1 describes their aspects in ordinary consciousness1 is a classification of emotions by their externals4 ,thus1 then1 ,mr4 ,bain's grouping is throughout determined by the most manifest attributes--those objectively displayed in the natural language of the emotions1 and in the social phenomena that result from them1 and those subjectively displayed in the aspects the emotions assume in an analytical consciousness4 ,and the question is--,can they be correctly grouped after this method8 ,we think not2 and had ,mr4 ,bain carried farther an idea with which he has set out1 he would probably have seen that they cannot4 ,as already said1 he avowedly adopts the natural-history-method3 not only referring to it in his preface1 but in his first chapter giving examples of botanical and zoological classifications1 as illustrating the mode in which he proposes to deal with the emotions4 ,this we conceive to be a philosophical conception2 and we have only to regret that ,mr4 ,bain has overlooked some of its most important implications4 ,for in what has essentially consisted the progress of natural-history-classification8 ,in the abandonment of grouping by external1 conspicuous characters2 and in the making of certain internal1 but all-essential characters1 the bases of groups4 ,whales are not now ranged along with fish1 because in their general forms and habits of life they resemble fish2 but they are ranged with mammals1 because the type of their organization1 as ascertained by dissection1 corresponds with that of mammals4 ,no longer considered as sea-weeds in virtue of their forms and modes of growth1 ,polyzoa are now shown1 by examination of their economy1 to belong to the animal kingdom4 ,it is found1 then1 that the discovery of real relationships involves analysis4 ,it has turned out that the earlier classifications1 guided by general resemblances1 though containing much truth1 and though very useful provisionally1 were yet in many cases radically wrong2 and that the true affinities of organisms1 and the true homologies of their parts1 are to be made out only by examining their hidden structures4 ,another fact of great significance in the history of classification is also to be noted4 ,very frequently the kinship of an organism cannot be made out even by exhaustive analysis1 if that analysis is confined to the adult structure4 ,in many cases it is needful to examine the structure in its earlier stages2 and even in its embryonic stage4 ,so difficult was it1 for instance1 to determine the true position of the ,cirrhipedia among animals1 by examining mature individuals only1 that ,cuvier erroneously classed them with ,mollusca1 even after dissecting them2 and not until their early forms were discovered1 were they clearly proved to belong to the ,crustacea4 ,so important1 indeed1 is the study of development as a means to classification1 that the first zoologists now hold it to be the only absolute criterion4 ,here1 then1 in the advance of natural-history-classification1 are two fundamental facts1 which should be borne in mind when classifying the emotions4 ,if1 as ,mr4 ,bain rightly assumes1 the emotions are to be grouped after the natural-history-method2 then it should be the natural-history-method in its complete form1 and not in its rude form4 ,mr4 ,bain will doubtless agree in the belief1 that a correct account of the emotions in their natures and relations1 must correspond with a correct account of the nervous system--must form another side of the same ultimate facts4 ,structure and function must necessarily harmonize4 ,structures which have with each other certain ultimate connexions1 must have functions which have answering connexions4 ,structures which have arisen in certain ways1 must have functions which have arisen in parallel ways4 ,and hence if analysis and development are needful for the right interpretation of structures1 they must be needful for the right interpretation of functions4 ,just as a scientific description of the digestive organs must include not only their obvious forms and connexions1 but their microscopic characters1 and also the ways in which they severally result by differentiation from the primitive mucous membrane2 so must a scientific account of the nervous system include its general arrangements1 its minute structure1 and its mode of evolution2 and so must a scientific account of nervous actions include the answering three elements4 ,alike in classing separate organisms1 and in classing the parts of the same organism1 the complete natural-history-method involves ultimate analysis1 aided by development2 and ,mr4 ,bain1 in not basing his classification of the emotions on characters reached through these aids1 has fallen short of the conception with which he set out4 ,but1 it will perhaps be asked1 how are the emotions to be analyzed1 and their modes of evolution to be ascertained8 ,different animals1 and different organs of the same animal1 may readily be compared in their internal structures and microscopic structures1 as also in their developments2 but functions1 and especially such functions as the emotions1 do not admit of like comparisons4 ,it must be admitted that the application of these methods is here by no means so easy4 ,though we can note differences and similarities between the internal formations of two animals2 it is difficult to contrast the mental states of two animals4 ,though the true morphological relations of organs may be made out by observation of embryos2 yet1 where such organs are inactive before birth1 we cannot completely trace the history of their actions4 ,obviously1 too1 pursuance of inquiries of the kind indicated1 raises questions which science is not yet prepared to answer2 as1 for instance--,whether all nervous functions1 in common with all other functions1 arise by gradual differentiations1 as their organs do8 ,whether the emotions are1 therefore1 to be regarded as divergent modes of action that have become unlike by successive modifications8 ,whether1 as two organs which originally budded out of the same membrane have not only become different as they developed1 but have also severally become compound internally1 though externally simple2 so two emotions1 simple and near akin in their roots1 may not only have grown unlike1 but may also have grown involved in their natures1 though seeming homogeneous to consciousness8 ,and here1 indeed1 in the inability of existing science to answer these questions which underlie a true psychological classification1 we see how purely provisional any present classification is likely to be4 ,nevertheless1 even now1 classification may be aided by development and ultimate analysis to a considerable extent2 and the defect in ,mr4 ,bain's work is1 that he has not systematically availed himself of them as far as possible4 ,thus we may1 in the first place1 study the evolution of the emotions up through the various grades of the animal kingdom3 observing which of them are earliest and exist with the lowest organization and intelligence2 in what order the others accompany higher endowments2 and how they are severally related to the conditions of life4 ,in the second place1 we may note the emotional differences between the lower and the higher human races--may regard as earlier and simpler those feelings which are common to both1 and as later and more compound those which are characteristic of the most civilized4 ,in the third place1 we may observe the order in which the emotions unfold during the progress from infancy to maturity4 ,and lastly1 comparing these three kinds of emotional development1 displayed in the ascending grades of the animal kingdom1 in the advance of the civilized races1 and in individual history1 we may see in what respects they harmonize1 and what are the implied general truths4 ,having gathered together and generalized these several classes of facts1 analysis of the emotions would be made easier4 ,setting out with the assumption that every new form of emotion making its appearance in the individual or the race1 is a modification of some pre-existing emotion1 or a compound of several pre-existing emotions1 we should be greatly aided by knowing what always are the pre-existing emotions4 ,when1 for example1 we find that very few of the lower animals show any love of accumulation1 and that this feeling is absent in infancy--when we see that an infant in arms exhibits anger1 fear1 wonder1 while yet it manifests no desire of permanent possession1 and that a brute which has no acquisitiveness can nevertheless feel attachment1 jealousy1 love of approbation2 we may suspect that the feeling which property satisfies is compounded out of simpler and deeper feelings4 ,we may conclude that as1 when a dog hides a bone1 there must exist in him a prospective gratification of hunger2 so there must similarly at first1 in all cases where anything is secured or taken possession of1 exist an ideal excitement of the feeling which that thing will gratify4 ,we may further conclude that when the intelligence is such that a variety of objects come to be utilized for different purposes--when1 as among savages1 divers wants are satisfied through the articles appropriated for weapons1 shelter1 clothing1 ornament2 the act of appropriating comes to be one constantly involving agreeable associations1 and one which is therefore pleasurable1 irrespective of the end subserved4 ,and when1 as in civilized life1 the property acquired is of a kind not conducing to one order of gratification in particular1 but is capable of administering to all gratifications1 the pleasure of acquiring property grows more distinct from each of the various pleasures subserved--is more completely differentiated into a separate emotion4 ,this illustration1 roughly as it is sketched1 will show what we mean by the use of comparative psychology in aid of classification4 ,ascertaining by induction the actual order of evolution of the emotions1 we are led to suspect this to be their order of successive dependence2 and are so led to recognize their order of ascending complexity2 and by consequence their true groupings4 ,thus1 in the very process of arranging the emotions into grades1 beginning with those involved in the lowest forms of conscious activity and ending with those peculiar to the adult civilized man1 the way is opened for that ultimate analysis which alone can lead us to the true science of the matter4 ,for when we find both that there exist in a man feelings which do not exist in a child1 and that the ,european is characterized by some sentiments which are wholly or in great part absent from the savage--when we see that1 besides the new emotions which arise spontaneously as the individual becomes completely organized1 there are new emotions making their appearance in the more advanced divisions of our race2 we are led to ask--,how are new emotions generated8 ,the lowest savages have not even the ideas of justice or mercy3 they have neither words for them nor can they be made to conceive them2 and the manifestation of them by ,europeans they ascribe to fear or cunning4 ,there are sthetic emotions common among ourselves1 which are scarcely in any degree experienced by some inferior races2 as1 for instance1 those produced by music4 ,to which instances may be added the less marked but more numerous contrasts that exist between civilized races in the degrees of their several emotions4 ,and if it is manifest1 both that all the emotions are capable of being permanently modified in the course of successive generations1 and that what must be classed as new emotions may be brought into existence2 then it follows that nothing like a true conception of the emotions is to be obtained1 until we understand how they are evolved4 ,comparative ,psychology1 while it raises this inquiry1 prepares the way for answering it4 ,when observing the differences between races1 we can scarcely fail to observe also how these differences correspond with differences between their conditions of existence1 and consequent activities4 ,among the lowest races of men1 love of property stimulates to the obtainment only of such things as satisfy immediate desires1 or desires of the immediate future4 ,improvidence is the rule3 there is little effort to meet remote contingencies4 ,but the growth of established societies having gradually given security of possession1 there has been an increasing tendency to provide for coming years3 there has been a constant exercise of the feeling which is satisfied by a provision for the future2 and there has been a growth of this feeling so great that it now prompts accumulation to an extent beyond what is needful4 ,note1 again1 that under the discipline of social life--under a comparative abstinence from aggressive actions1 and a performance of those naturally-serviceable actions implied by the division of labour--there has been a development of those gentle emotions of which inferior races exhibit but the rudiments4 ,savages delight in giving pain rather than pleasure--are almost devoid of sympathy2 while among ourselves1 philanthropy organizes itself in laws1 establishes numerous institutions1 and dictates countless private benefactions4 ,from which and other like facts1 does it not seem an unavoidable inference1 that new emotions are developed by new experiences--new habits of life8 ,all are familiar with the truth that1 in the individual1 each feeling may be strengthened by performing those actions which it prompts2 and to say that the feeling is strengthened1 is to say that it is in part made by these actions4 ,we know1 further1 that not unfrequently1 individuals1 by persistence in special courses of conduct1 acquire special likings for such courses1 disagreeable as these may be to others2 and these whims1 or morbid tastes1 imply incipient emotions corresponding to these special activities4 ,we know that emotional characteristics1 in common with all others1 are hereditary2 and the differences between civilized nations descended from the same stock1 show us the cumulative results of small modifications hereditarily transmitted4 ,and when we see that between savage and civilized races which diverged from one another in the remote past1 and have for a hundred generations followed modes of life becoming ever more unlike1 there exist still greater emotional contrasts2 may we not infer that the more or less distinct emotions which characterize civilized races1 are the organized results of certain daily-repeated combinations of mental states which social life involves8 ,must we not say that habits not only modify emotions in the individual1 and not only beget tendencies to like habits and accompanying emotions in descendants1 but that when the conditions of the race make the habits persistent1 this progressive modification may go on to the extent of producing emotions so far distinct as to seem new8 ,and if so1 we may suspect that such new emotions1 and by implication all emotions analytically considered1 consist of aggregated and consolidated groups of those simpler feelings which habitually occur together in experience4 ,when1 in the circumstances of any race1 some one kind of action or set of actions1 sensation or set of sensations1 is usually followed1 or accompanied1 by various other sets of actions or sensations1 and so entails a large mass of pleasurable or painful states of consciousness2 these1 by frequent repetition1 become so connected together that the initial action or sensation brings the ideas of all the rest crowding into consciousness3 producing1 in some degree1 the pleasures or pains that have before been felt in reality4 ,and when this relation1 besides being frequently repeated in the individual1 occurs in successive generations1 all the many nervous actions involved tend to grow organically connected4 ,they become incipiently reflex2 and1 on the occurrence of the appropriate stimulus1 the whole nervous apparatus which in past generations was brought into activity by this stimulus1 becomes nascently excited4 ,even while yet there have been no individual experiences1 a vague feeling of pleasure or pain is produced2 constituting what we may call the body of the emotion4 ,and when the experiences of past generations come to be repeated in the individual1 the emotion gains both strength and definiteness2 and is accompanied by the appropriate specific ideas4 ,this view of the matter1 which we believe the established truths of ,physiology and ,psychology unite in indicating1 and which is the view that generalizes the phenomena of habit1 of national characteristics1 of civilization in its moral aspects1 at the same time that it gives us a conception of emotion in its origin and ultimate nature1 may be illustrated from the mental modifications undergone by animals4 ,on newly-discovered lands not inhabited by man1 birds are so devoid of fear as to allow themselves to be knocked over with sticks2 but in the course of generations1 they acquire such a dread of man as to fly on his approach2 and this dread is manifested by young as well as by old4 ,now unless this change be ascribed to the killing-off of the less fearful1 and the preservation and multiplication of the more fearful1 which1 considering the comparatively small number killed by man1 is an inadequate cause2 it must be ascribed to accumulated experiences2 and each experience must be held to have a share in producing it4 ,we must conclude that in each bird which escapes with injuries inflicted by man1 or is alarmed by the outcries of other members of the flock 7gregarious creatures of any intelligence being necessarily more or less sympathetic71 there is established an association of ideas between the human aspect and the pains1 direct and indirect1 suffered from human agency4 ,and we must further conclude that the state of consciousness which impels the bird to take flight1 is at first nothing more than an ideal reproduction of those painful impressions which before followed man's approach2 that such ideal reproduction becomes more vivid and more massive as the painful experiences1 direct or sympathetic1 increase2 and that thus the emotion in its incipient state1 is nothing else than an aggregation of the revived pains before experienced4 ,as1 in the course of generations1 the young birds of this race begin to display a fear of man before yet they have been injured by him1 it is an unavoidable inference that the nervous system of the race has been organically modified by these experiences3 we have no choice but to conclude that when a young bird is thus led to fly1 it is because the impression produced on its senses by the approaching man1 entails1 through an incipiently-reflex action1 a partial excitement of all those nerves which in its ancestors had been excited under the like conditions2 that this partial excitement has its accompanying painful consciousness2 and that the vague painful consciousness thus arising1 constitutes emotion proper--emotion undecomposable into specific experiences1 and therefore seemingly homogeneous4 ,if such be the explanation of the fact in this case1 then it is in all cases4 ,if emotion is so generated here1 then it is so generated throughout4 ,we must perforce conclude that the emotional modifications displayed by different nations1 and those higher emotions by which civilized are distinguished from savage1 are to be accounted for on the same principle4 ,and concluding this1 we are led strongly to suspect that the emotions in general have severally thus originated4 ,perhaps we have now made sufficiently clear what we mean by the study of the emotions through analysis and development4 ,we have aimed to justify the positions that1 without analysis aided by development1 there cannot be a true natural history of the emotions2 and that a natural history of the emotions based on external characters can be but provisional4 ,we think that ,mr4 ,bain1 in confining himself to an account of the emotions as they exist in the adult civilized man1 has neglected those classes of facts out of which the science of the matter must chiefly be built4 ,it is true that he has treated of habits as modifying emotions in the individual2 but he has not recognized the fact that where conditions render habits persistent in successive generations1 such modifications are cumulative3 he has not hinted that the modifications produced by habit are emotions in the making4 ,it is true1 also1 that he occasionally refers to the characteristics of children2 but he does not systematically trace the changes through which childhood passes into manhood1 as throwing light on the order and genesis of the emotions4 ,it is further true that he here and there refers to national traits in illustration of his subject2 but these stand as isolated facts1 having no general significance3 there is no hint of any relation between them and the national circumstances2 while all those many moral contrasts between lower and higher races which throw great light on classification1 are passed over4 ,and once more1 it is true that many passages of his work1 and sometimes1 indeed1 whole sections of it1 are analytical2 but his analyses are incidental--they do not underlie his entire scheme1 but are here and there added to it4 ,in brief1 he has written a ,descriptive ,psychology1 which does not appeal to ,comparative ,psychology and ,analytical ,psychology for its leading ideas4 ,and in doing this1 he has omitted much that should be included in a natural history of the mind2 while to that part of the subject with which he has dealt1 he has given a necessarily-imperfect organization4 99 99 99 99 99 ,even leaving out of view the absence of those methods and criteria on which we have been insisting1 it appears to us that meritorious as is ,mr4 ,bain's book in its details1 it is defective in some of its leading ideas4 ,the first paragraphs of his first chapter1 quite startled us by the strangeness of their definitions--a strangeness which can scarcely be ascribed to laxity of expression4 ,the paragraphs run thus3-- ,mind is comprised under three heads1--,emotion1 ,volition1 and ,intellect4 ,,emotion is the name here used to comprehend all that is understood by feelings1 states of feeling1 pleasures1 pains1 passions1 sentiments1 affections4 ,consciousness1 and conscious states also for the most part denote modes of emotion1 although there is such a thing as the ,intellectual consciousness4 ,,volition1 on the other hand1 indicates the great fact that our ,pleasures and ,pains1 which are not the whole of our emotions1 prompt to action1 or stimulate the active machinery of the living framework to perform such operations as procure the first and abate the last4 ,to withdraw from a scalding heat1 and cling to a gentle warmth1 are exercises of volition4 ,the last of these definitions1 which we may most conveniently take first1 seems to us very faulty4 ,we cannot but feel astonished that ,mr4 ,bain1 familiar as he is with the phenomena of reflex action1 should have so expressed himself as to include a great part of them along with the phenomena of volition4 ,he seems to be ignoring the discriminations of modern science1 and returning to the vague conceptions of the past--nay more1 he is comprehending under volition what even the popular speech would hardly bring under it4 ,if you were to blame any one for snatching his foot from the scalding water into which he had inadvertently put it1 he would tell you that he could not help it2 and his reply would be indorsed by the general experience1 that the withdrawal of a limb from contact with something extremely hot1 is quite involuntary--that it takes place not only without volition1 but in defiance of an effort of will to maintain the contact4 ,how1 then1 can that be instanced as an example of volition1 which occurs even when volition is antagonistic8 ,we are quite aware that it is impossible to draw any absolute line of demarcation between automatic actions and actions which are not automatic4 ,doubtless we may pass gradually from the purely reflex1 through the consensual1 to the voluntary4 ,taking the case ,mr4 ,bain cites1 it is manifest that from a heat of such moderate degree that the withdrawal from it is wholly voluntary1 we may advance by infinitesimal steps to a heat which compels involuntary withdrawal2 and that there is a stage at which the voluntary and involuntary actions are mixed4 ,but the difficulty of absolute discrimination is no reason for neglecting the broad general contrast2 any more than it is for confounding light with darkness4 ,if we are to include as examples of volition1 all cases in which pleasures and pains stimulate the active machinery of the living framework to perform such operations as procure the first and abate the last1 then we must consider sneezing and coughing as examples of volition2 and ,mr4 ,bain surely cannot mean this4 ,indeed1 we must confess ourselves at a loss4 ,on the one hand if he does not mean it1 his expression is lax to a degree that surprises us in so careful a writer4 ,on the other hand1 if he does mean it1 we cannot understand his point of view4 ,a parallel criticism applies to his definition of ,emotion4 ,here1 too1 he has departed from the ordinary acceptation of the word2 and1 as we think1 in the wrong direction4 ,whatever may be the interpretation that is justified by its derivation1 the word emotion has come generally to mean that kind of feeling which is not a direct result of any action on the organism2 but is either an indirect result of such action1 or arises quite apart from such action4 ,it is used to indicate those sentient states which are independently generated in consciousness2 as distinguished from those generated in our corporeal framework1 and known as sensations4 ,now this distinction1 tacitly made in common speech1 is one which ,psychology cannot well reject2 but one which it must adopt1 and to which it must give scientific precision4 ,mr4 ,bain1 however1 appears to ignore any such distinction4 ,under the term emotion1 he includes not only passions1 sentiments1 affections1 but all feelings1 states of feeling1 pleasures1 pains1--that is1 all sensations4 ,this does not appear to be a mere lapse of expression2 for when1 in the opening sentence1 he asserts that mind is comprised under the three heads--,emotion1 ,volition1 and ,intellect1 he of necessity implies that sensation is included under one of these heads2 and as it cannot be included under volition or intellect1 it must be classed with emotion2 as it clearly is in the next sentence4 ,we cannot but think this a retrograde step4 ,though distinctions which have been established in popular thought and language1 are not unfrequently merged in the higher generalizations of science 7as1 for instance1 when crabs and worms are grouped together in the sub-kingdom ,annulosa72 yet science very generally recognizes the validity of these distinctions1 as real though not fundamental4 ,and so in the present case4 ,such community as analysis discloses between sensation and emotion1 must not shut out the broad contrast that exists between them4 ,if there needs a wider word1 as there does1 to signify any sentient state whatever2 then we may fitly adopt for this purpose the word currently so used1 namely1 ,feeling4 ,and considering as ,feelings all that great division of mental states which we do not class as ,cognitions1 we may then separate this great division into the two orders1 ,sensations and ,emotions4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and here we may1 before concluding1 briefly indicate the leading outlines of a classification which reduces this distinction to a scientific form1 and develops it somewhat further--a classification which1 while suggested by certain fundamental traits reached without a very lengthened inquiry1 is yet1 we believe1 in harmony with that disclosed by detailed analysis4 ,leaving out of view the ,will1 which is a simple homogeneous mental state1 forming the link between feeling and action1 and not admitting of subdivisions2 our states of consciousness fall into two great classes--,,cognitions and ,,feelings4 ,,cognitions1 or those modes of mind in which we are occupied with the relations that subsist among our feelings1 are divisible into four great sub-classes4 ,presentative cognitions2 or those in which consciousness is occupied in localizing a sensation impressed on the organism--occupied1 that is1 with the relation between this presented mental state and those other presented mental states which make up our consciousness of the part affected3 as when we cut ourselves4 ,presentative-representative cognitions2 or those in which consciousness is occupied with the relation between a sensation or group of sensations and the representations of those various other sensations that accompany it in experience4 ,this is what we commonly call perception--an act in which1 along with certain impressions presented to consciousness1 there arise in consciousness the ideas of certain other impressions ordinarily connected with the presented ones3 as when its visible form and colour1 lead us to mentally endow an orange with all its other attributes4 ,representative cognitions2 or those in which consciousness is occupied with the relations among ideas or represented sensations2 as in all acts of recollection4 ,re-representative cognitions2 or those in which the occupation of consciousness is not by representation of special relations that have before been presented to consciousness2 but those in which such represented special relations are thought of merely as comprehended in a general relation--those in which the concrete relations once experienced1 in so far as they become objects of consciousness at all1 are incidentally represented1 along with the abstract relation which formulates them4 ,the ideas resulting from this abstraction1 do not themselves represent actual experiences2 but are symbols which stand for groups of such actual experiences--represent aggregates of representations4 ,and thus they may be called re-representative cognitions4 ,it is clear that the process of re-representation is carried to higher stages1 as the thought becomes more abstract4 ,,feelings1 or those modes of mind in which we are occupied1 not with the relations subsisting between our sentient states1 but with the sentient states themselves1 are divisible into four parallel sub-classes4 ,presentative feelings1 ordinarily called sensations1 are those mental states in which1 instead of regarding a corporeal impression as of this or that kind1 or as located here or there1 we contemplate it in itself as pleasure or pain3 as when eating4 ,presentative-representative feelings1 embracing a great part of what we commonly call emotions1 are those in which a sensation1 or group of sensations1 or group of sensations and ideas1 arouses a vast aggregation of represented sensations2 partly of individual experience1 but chiefly deeper than individual experience1 and1 consequently1 indefinite4 ,the emotion of terror may serve as an example4 ,along with certain impressions made on the eyes or ears1 or both1 are recalled in consciousness many of the pains to which such impressions have before been the antecedents2 and when the relation between such impressions and such pains has been habitual in the race1 the definite ideas of such pains which individual experience has given1 are accompanied by the indefinite pains that result from inherited effects of experiences--vague feelings which we may call organic representations4 ,in an infant1 crying at a strange sight or sound while yet in the nurse's arms1 we see these organic representations called into existence in the shape of dim discomfort1 to which individual experience has yet given no specific outlines4 ,representative feelings1 comprehending the ideas of the feelings above classed1 when they are called up apart from the appropriate external excitements4 ,as instances of these may be named the feelings with which the descriptive poet writes1 and which are aroused in the minds of his readers4 ,re-representative feelings1 under which head are included those more complex sentient states that are less the direct results of external excitements than the indirect or reflex results of them4 ,the love of property is a feeling of this kind4 ,it is awakened not by the presence of any special object1 but by ownable objects at large2 and it is not from the mere presence of such object1 but from a certain ideal relation to them1 that it arises4 ,as before shown 7p4 #bec7 it consists1 not of the represented advantages of possessing this or that1 but of the represented advantages of possession in general--is not made up of certain concrete representations1 but of the abstracts of many concrete representations2 and so is re-representative4 ,the higher sentiments1 as that of justice1 are still more completely of this nature4 ,here the sentient state is compounded out of sentient states that are themselves wholly1 or almost wholly1 re-representative3 it involves representations of those lower emotions which are produced by the possession of property1 by freedom of action1 etc42 and thus is re-representative in a higher degree4 ,this classification1 here roughly indicated and capable of further expansion1 will be found in harmony with the results of detailed analysis aided by development4 ,whether we trace mental progression through the grades of the animal kingdom1 through the grades of mankind1 or through the stages of individual growth2 it is obvious that the advance1 alike in cognitions and feelings1 is1 and must be1 from the presentative to the more and more remotely representative4 ,it is undeniable that intelligence ascends from those simple perceptions in which consciousness is occupied in localizing and classifying sensations1 to perceptions more and more compound1 to simple reasoning1 to reasoning more and more complex and abstract--more and more remote from sensation4 ,and in the evolution of feelings1 there is a parallel series of steps4 ,simple sensations2 sensations combined together2 sensations combined with represented sensations2 represented sensations organized into groups1 in which their separate characters are very much merged2 representations of these representative groups1 in which the original components have become still more vague4 ,in both cases1 the progress has necessarily been from the simple and concrete to the complex and abstract2 and as with the cognitions1 so with the feelings1 this must be the basis of classification4 ,the space here occupied with criticisms on ,mr4 ,bain's work1 we might have filled with exposition and eulogy1 had we thought this the more important4 ,though we have freely pointed out what we conceive to be its defects1 let it not be inferred that we question its great merits4 ,we repeat that1 as a natural history of the mind1 we believe it to be the best yet produced4 ,it is a most valuable collection of carefully-elaborated materials4 ,perhaps we cannot better express our sense of its worth1 than by saying that1 to those who hereafter give to this branch of ,psychology a thoroughly scientific organization1 ,mr4 ,bain's book will be indispensable4 ,,the ,,social ,,organism4 ,first published in ,the ,westminster ,review for ,january1 #ahfj4 ,sir ,james ,macintosh got great credit for the saying1 that constitutions are not made1 but grow4 ,in our day1 the most significant thing about this saying is1 that it was ever thought so significant4 ,as from the surprise displayed by a man at some familiar fact1 you may judge of his general culture2 so from the admiration which an age accords to a new thought1 its average degree of enlightenment may be inferred4 ,that this apophthegm of ,macintosh should have been quoted and requoted as it has1 shows how profound has been the ignorance of social science4 ,a small ray of truth has seemed brilliant1 as a distant rushlight looks like a star in the surrounding darkness4 ,such a conception could not1 indeed1 fail to be startling when let fall in the midst of a system of thought to which it was utterly alien4 ,universally in ,macintosh's day1 things were explained on the hypothesis of manufacture1 rather than that of growth2 as indeed they are1 by the majority1 in our own day4 ,it was held that the planets were severally projected round the ,sun from the ,creator's hand1 with just the velocity required to balance the ,sun's attraction4 ,the formation of the ,earth1 the separation of sea from land1 the production of animals1 were mechanical works from which ,god rested as a labourer rests4 ,man was supposed to be moulded after a manner somewhat akin to that in which a modeller makes a clay-figure4 ,and of course1 in harmony with such ideas1 societies were tacitly assumed to be arranged thus or thus by direct interposition of ,providence2 or by the regulations of law-makers2 or by both4 ,yet that societies are not artificially put together1 is a truth so manifest1 that it seems wonderful men should ever have overlooked it4 ,perhaps nothing more clearly shows the small value of historical studies1 as they have been commonly pursued4 ,you need but to look at the changes going on around1 or observe social organization in its leading traits1 to see that these are neither supernatural1 nor are determined by the wills of individual men1 as by implication the older historians teach2 but are consequent on general natural causes4 ,the one case of the division of labour suffices to prove this4 ,it has not been by command of any ruler that some men have become manufacturers1 while others have remained cultivators of the soil4 ,in ,lancashire1 millions have devoted themselves to the making of cotton-fabrics2 in ,yorkshire1 another million lives by producing woollens2 and the pottery of ,staffordshire1 the cutlery of ,sheffield1 the hardware of ,birmingham1 severally occupy their hundreds of thousands4 ,these are large facts in the structure of ,english society2 but we can ascribe them neither to miracle1 nor to legislation4 ,it is not by the hero as king1 any more than by collective wisdom1 that men have been segregated into producers1 wholesale distributors1 and retail distributors4 ,our industrial organization1 from its main outlines down to its minutest details1 has become what it is1 not simply without legislative guidance1 but1 to a considerable extent1 in spite of legislative hindrances4 ,it has arisen under the pressure of human wants and resulting activities4 ,while each citizen has been pursuing his individual welfare1 and none taking thought about division of labour1 or conscious of the need of it1 division of labour has yet been ever becoming more complete4 ,it has been doing this slowly and silently3 few having observed it until quite modern times4 ,by steps so small1 that year after year the industrial arrangements have seemed just what they were before--by changes as insensible as those through which a seed passes into a tree2 society has become the complex body of mutually-dependent workers which we now see4 ,and this economic organization1 mark1 is the all-essential organization4 ,through the combination thus spontaneously evolved1 every citizen is supplied with daily necessaries2 while he yields some product or aid to others4 ,that we are severally alive to-day1 we owe to the regular working of this combination during the past week2 and could it be suddenly abolished1 multitudes would be dead before another week ended4 ,if these most conspicuous and vital arrangements of our social structure have arisen not by the devising of any one1 but through the individual efforts of citizens to satisfy their own wants2 we may be tolerably certain that the less important arrangements have similarly arisen4 ,but surely1 it will be said1 the social changes directly produced by law1 cannot be classed as spontaneous growths4 ,when parliaments or kings order this or that thing to be done1 and appoint officials to do it1 the process is clearly artificial2 and society to this extent becomes a manufacture rather than a growth4 ,no1 not even these changes are exceptions1 if they be real and permanent changes4 ,the true sources of such changes lie deeper than the acts of legislators4 ,to take first the simplest instance4 ,we all know that the enactments of representative governments ultimately depend on the national will3 they may for a time be out of harmony with it1 but eventually they must conform to it4 ,and to say that the national will finally determines them1 is to say that they result from the average of individual desires2 or1 in other words--from the average of individual natures4 ,a law so initiated1 therefore1 really grows out of the popular character4 ,in the case of a ,government representing a dominant class1 the same thing holds1 though not so manifestly4 ,for the very existence of a class monopolizing all power1 is due to certain sentiments in the commonalty4 ,without the feeling of loyalty on the part of retainers1 a feudal system could not exist4 ,we see in the protest of the ,highlanders against the abolition of heritable jurisdictions1 that they preferred that kind of local rule4 ,and if to the popular nature must be ascribed the growth of an irresponsible ruling class2 then to the popular nature must be ascribed the social arrangements which that class creates in the pursuit of its own ends4 ,even where the ,government is despotic1 the doctrine still holds4 ,the character of the people is1 as before1 the original source of this political form2 and1 as we have abundant proof1 other forms suddenly created will not act1 but rapidly retrograde to the old form4 ,moreover1 such regulations as a despot makes1 if really operative1 are so because of their fitness to the social state4 ,his acts being very much swayed by general opinion--by precedent1 by the feeling of his nobles1 his priesthood1 his army--are in part immediate results of the national character2 and when they are out of harmony with the national character1 they are soon practically abrogated4 ,the failure of ,cromwell permanently to establish a new social condition1 and the rapid revival of suppressed institutions and practices after his death1 show how powerless is a monarch to change the type of the society he governs4 ,he may disturb1 he may retard1 or he may aid the natural process of organization2 but the general course of this process is beyond his control4 ,nay1 more than this is true4 ,those who regard the histories of societies as the histories of their great men1 and think that these great men shape the fates of their societies1 overlook the truth that such great men are the products of their societies4 ,without certain antecedents--without a certain average national character1 they neither could have been generated nor could have had the culture which formed them4 ,if their society is to some extent re-moulded by them1 they were1 both before and after birth1 moulded by their society--were the results of all those influences which fostered the ancestral character they inherited1 and gave their own early bias1 their creed1 morals1 knowledge1 aspirations4 ,so that such social changes as are immediately traceable to individuals of unusual power1 are still remotely traceable to the social causes which produced these individuals2 and hence1 from the highest point of view1 such social changes also1 are parts of the general developmental process4 ,thus that which is so obviously true of the industrial structure of society1 is true of its whole structure4 ,the fact that constitutions are not made1 but grow1 is simply a fragment of the much larger fact1 that under all its aspects and through all its ramifications1 society is a growth and not a manufacture4 99 99 99 99 99 ,a perception that there exists some analogy between the body politic and a living individual body1 was early reached2 and has from time to time re-appeared in literature4 ,but this perception was necessarily vague and more or less fanciful4 ,in the absence of physiological science1 and especially of those comprehensive generalizations which it has but lately reached1 it was impossible to discern the real parallelisms4 ,the central idea of ,plato's model ,republic1 is the correspondence between the parts of a society and the faculties of the human mind4 ,classifying these faculties under the heads of ,reason1 ,will1 and ,passion1 he classifies the members of his ideal society under what he regards as three analogous heads3--councillors1 who are to exercise government2 military or executive1 who are to fulfil their behests2 and the commonalty1 bent on gain and selfish gratification4 ,in other words1 the ruler1 the warrior1 and the craftsman1 are1 according to him1 the analogues of our reflective1 volitional1 and emotional powers4 ,now even were there truth in the implied assumption of a parallelism between the structure of a society and that of a man1 this classification would be indefensible4 ,it might more truly be contended that1 as the military power obeys the commands of the ,government1 it is the ,government which answers to the ,will2 while the military power is simply an agency set in motion by it4 ,or1 again1 it might be contended that whereas the ,will is a product of predominant desires1 to which the ,reason serves merely as an eye1 it is the craftsmen1 who1 according to the alleged analogy1 ought to be the moving power of the warriors4 ,hobbes sought to establish a still more definite parallelism3 not1 however1 between a society and the human mind1 but between a society and the human body4 ,in the introduction to the work in which he develops this conception1 he says-- ,for by art is created that great ,,leviathan called a ,,commonwealth1 or ,,state1 in ,latin ,,civitas1 which is but an artificial man2 though of greater stature and strength than the natural1 for whose protection and defence it was intended1 and in which the sovereignty is an artificial soul1 as giving life and motion to the whole body2 the magistrates and other officers of judicature and execution1 artificial joints2 reward and punishment1 by which1 fastened to the seat of the sovereignty1 every joint and member is moved to perform his duty1 are the nerves1 that do the same in the body natural2 the wealth and riches of all the particular members are the strength2 salus populi1 the people's safety1 its business2 counsellors1 by whom all things needful for it to know are suggested unto it1 are the memory2 equity and laws an artificial reason and will2 concord1 health2 sedition1 sickness2 and civil war1 death4 ,and ,hobbes carries this comparison so far as actually to give a drawing of the ,leviathan--a vast human-shaped figure1 whose body and limbs are made up of multitudes of men4 ,just noting that these different analogies asserted by ,plato and ,hobbes1 serve to cancel each other 7being1 as they are1 so completely at variance71 we may say that on the whole those of ,hobbes are the more plausible4 ,but they are full of inconsistencies4 ,if the sovereignty is the soul of the body-politic1 how can it be that magistrates1 who are a kind of deputy-sovereigns1 should be comparable to joints8 ,or1 again1 how can the three mental functions1 memory1 reason1 and will1 be severally analogous1 the first to counsellors1 who are a class of public officers1 and the other two to equity and laws1 which are not classes of officers1 but abstractions8 ,or1 once more1 if magistrates are the artificial joints of society1 how can reward and punishment be its nerves8 ,its nerves must surely be some class of persons4 ,reward and punishment must in societies1 as in individuals1 be conditions of the nerves1 and not the nerves themselves4 ,but the chief errors of these comparisons made by ,plato and ,hobbes1 lie much deeper4 ,both thinkers assume that the organization of a society is comparable1 not simply to the organization of a living body in general1 but to the organization of the human body in particular4 ,there is no warrant whatever for assuming this4 ,it is in no way implied by the evidence2 and is simply one of those fancies which we commonly find mixed up with the truths of early speculation4 ,still more erroneous are the two conceptions in this1 that they construe a society as an artificial structure4 ,plato's model republic--his ideal of a healthful body-politic--is to be consciously put together by men1 just as a watch might be2 and ,plato manifestly thinks of societies in general as thus originated4 ,quite specifically does ,hobbes express a like view4 ,for by art1 he says1 is created that great ,,leviathan called a ,,commonwealth4 ,and he even goes so far as to compare the supposed social contract1 from which a society suddenly originates1 to the creation of a man by the divine fiat4 ,thus they both fall into the extreme inconsistency of considering a community as similar in structure to a human being1 and yet as produced in the same way as an artificial mechanism--in nature1 an organism2 in history1 a machine4 ,notwithstanding errors1 however1 these speculations have considerable significance4 ,that such likenesses1 crudely as they are thought out1 should have been alleged by ,plato and ,hobbes and others1 is a reason for suspecting that some analogy exists4 ,the untenableness of the particular parallelisms above instanced1 is no ground for denying an essential parallelism2 since early ideas are usually but vague adumbrations of the truth4 ,lacking the great generalizations of biology1 it was1 as we have said1 impossible to trace out the real relations of social organizations to organizations of another order4 ,we propose here to show what are the analogies which modern science discloses4 99 99 99 99 99 ,let us set out by succinctly stating the points of similarity and the points of difference4 ,societies agree with individual organisms in four conspicuous peculiarities3-- #a4 ,that commencing as small aggregations1 they insensibly augment in mass3 some of them eventually reaching ten thousand times what they originally were4 #b4 ,that while at first so simple in structure as to be considered structureless1 they assume1 in the course of their growth1 a continually-increasing complexity of structure4 #c4 ,that though in their early1 undeveloped states1 there exists in them scarcely any mutual dependence of parts1 their parts gradually acquire a mutual dependence2 which becomes at last so great1 that the activity and life of each part is made possible only by the activity and life of the rest4 #d4 ,that the life of a society is independent of1 and far more prolonged than1 the lives of any of its component units2 who are severally born1 grow1 work1 reproduce1 and die1 while the body-politic composed of them survives generation after generation1 increasing in mass1 in completeness of structure1 and in functional activity4 ,these four parallelisms will appear the more significant the more we contemplate them4 ,while the points specified1 are points in which societies agree with individual organisms1 they are also points in which individual organisms agree with one another1 and disagree with all things else4 ,in the course of its existence1 every plant and animal increases in mass1 in a way not paralleled by inorganic objects3 even such inorganic objects as crystals1 which arise by growth1 show us no such definite relation between growth and existence as organisms do4 ,the orderly progress from simplicity to complexity1 displayed by bodies-politic in common with living bodies1 is a characteristic which distinguishes living bodies from the inanimate bodies amid which they move4 ,that functional dependence of parts1 which is scarcely more manifest in animals than in nations1 has no counterpart elsewhere4 ,and in no aggregate except an organic or a social one1 is there a perpetual removal and replacement of parts1 joined with a continued integrity of the whole4 ,moreover1 societies and organisms are not only alike in these peculiarities1 in which they are unlike all other things2 but the highest societies1 like the highest organisms1 exhibit them in the greatest degree4 ,we see that the lowest animals do not increase to anything like the sizes of the higher ones2 and1 similarly1 we see that aboriginal societies are comparatively limited in their growths4 ,in complexity1 our large civilized nations as much exceed primitive savage tribes1 as a mammal does a zoophyte4 ,simple communities1 like simple creatures1 have so little mutual dependence of parts1 that mutilation or subdivision causes but little inconvenience2 but from complex communities1 as from complex creatures1 you cannot remove any considerable organ without producing great disturbance or death of the rest4 ,and in societies of low type1 as in inferior animals1 the life of the aggregate1 often cut short by division or dissolution1 exceeds in length the lives of the component units1 very far less than in civilized communities and superior animals2 which outlive many generations of their component units4 ,on the other hand1 the leading differences between societies and individual organisms are these3-- #a4 ,that societies have no specific external forms4 ,this1 however1 is a point of contrast which loses much of its importance1 when we remember that throughout the vegetal kingdom1 as well as in some lower divisions of the animal kingdom1 the forms are often very indefinite--definiteness being rather the exception than the rule2 and that they are manifestly in part determined by surrounding physical circumstances1 as the forms of societies are4 ,if1 too1 it should eventually be shown1 as we believe it will1 that the form of every species of organism has resulted from the average play of the external forces to which it has been subject during its evolution as a species2 then1 that the external forms of societies should depend1 as they do1 on surrounding conditions1 will be a further point of community4 #b4 ,that though the living tissue whereof an individual organism consists1 forms a continuous mass1 the living elements of a society do not form a continuous mass2 but are more or less widely dispersed over some portion of the ,earth's surface4 ,this1 which at first sight appears to be an absolute distinction1 is one which yet to a great extent fades when we contemplate all the facts4 ,for1 in the lower divisions of the animal and vegetal kingdoms1 there are types of organization much more nearly allied1 in this respect1 to the organization of a society1 than might be supposed--types in which the living units essentially composing the mass1 are dispersed through an inert substance1 that can scarcely be called living in the full sense of the word4 ,it is thus with some of the ,protococci and with the ,nostoce1 which exist as cells imbedded in a viscid matter4 ,it is so1 too1 with the ,thalassicoll--bodies made up of differentiated parts1 dispersed through an undifferentiated jelly4 ,and throughout considerable portions of their bodies1 some of the ,acaleph exhibit more or less this type of structure4 ,now this is very much the case with a society4 ,for we must remember that though the men who make up a society are physically separate1 and even scattered1 yet the surface over which they are scattered is not one devoid of life1 but is covered by life of a lower order which ministers to their life4 ,the vegetation which clothes a country makes possible the animal life in that country2 and only through its animal and vegetal products can such a country support a society4 ,hence the members of the body-politic are not to be regarded as separated by intervals of dead space1 but as diffused through a space occupied by life of a lower order4 ,in our conception of a social organism1 we must include all that lower organic existence on which human existence1 and therefore social existence1 depend4 ,and when we do this1 we see that the citizens who make up a community may be considered as highly vitalized units surrounded by substances of lower vitality1 from which they draw their nutriment3 much as in the cases above instanced4 #c4 ,the third difference is that while the ultimate living elements of an individual organism are mostly fixed in their relative positions1 those of the social organism are capable of moving from place to place4 ,but here1 too1 the disagreement is much less than would be supposed4 ,for while citizens are locomotive in their private capacities1 they are fixed in their public capacities4 ,as farmers1 manufacturers1 or traders1 men carry on their businesses at the same spots1 often throughout their whole lives2 and if they go away occasionally1 they leave behind others to discharge their functions in their absence4 ,each great centre of production1 each manufacturing town or district1 continues always in the same place2 and many of the firms in such town or district1 are for generations carried on either by the descendants or successors of those who founded them4 ,just as in a living body1 the cells that make up some important organ severally perform their functions for a time and then disappear1 leaving others to supply their places2 so1 in each part of a society the organ remains1 though the persons who compose it change4 ,thus1 in social life1 as in the life of an animal1 the units as well as the larger agencies formed of them1 are in the main stationary as respects the places where they discharge their duties and obtain their sustenance4 ,and hence the power of individual locomotion does not practically affect the analogy4 #d4 ,the last and perhaps the most important distinction is1 that while in the body of an animal only a special tissue is endowed with feeling1 in a society all the members are endowed with feeling4 ,even this distinction1 however1 is not a complete one4 ,for in some of the lowest animals1 characterized by the absence of a nervous system1 such sensitiveness as exists is possessed by all parts4 ,it is only in the more organized forms that feeling is monopolized by one class of the vital elements4 ,and we must remember that societies1 too1 are not without a certain differentiation of this kind4 ,though the units of a community are all sensitive1 they are so in unequal degrees4 ,the classes engaged in laborious occupations are less susceptible1 intellectually and emotionally1 than the rest2 and especially less so than the classes of highest mental culture4 ,still1 we have here a tolerably decided contrast between bodies-politic and individual bodies2 and it is one which we should keep constantly in view4 ,for it reminds us that while1 in individual bodies1 the welfare of all other parts is rightly subservient to the welfare of the nervous system1 whose pleasurable or painful activities make up the good or ill of life2 in bodies-politic the same thing does not hold1 or holds to but a very slight extent4 ,it is well that the lives of all parts of an animal should be merged in the life of the whole1 because the whole has a corporate consciousness capable of happiness or misery4 ,but it is not so with a society2 since its living units do not and cannot lose individual consciousness1 and since the community as a whole has no corporate consciousness4 ,this is an everlasting reason why the welfares of citizens cannot rightly be sacrificed to some supposed benefit of the ,state1 and why1 on the other hand1 the ,state is to be maintained solely for the benefit of citizens4 ,the corporate life must here be subservient to the lives of the parts1 instead of the lives of the parts being subservient to the corporate life4 ,such1 then1 are the points of analogy and the points of difference4 ,may we not say that the points of difference serve but to bring into clearer light the points of analogy8 ,while comparison makes definite the obvious contrasts between organisms commonly so called1 and the social organism1 it shows that even these contrasts are not so decided as was to be expected4 ,the indefiniteness of form1 the discontinuity of the parts1 and the universal sensitiveness1 are not only peculiarities of the social organism which have to be stated with considerable qualifications2 but they are peculiarities to which the inferior classes of animals present approximations4 ,thus we find but little to conflict with the all-important analogies4 ,societies slowly augment in mass2 they progress in complexity of structure2 at the same time their parts become more mutually dependent2 their living units are removed and replaced without destroying their integrity2 and the extents to which they display these peculiarities are proportionate to their vital activities4 ,these are traits that societies have in common with organic bodies4 ,and these traits in which they agree with organic bodies and disagree with all other things1 entirely subordinate the minor distinctions3 such distinctions being scarcely greater than those which separate one half of the organic kingdom from the other4 ,the principles of organization are the same1 and the differences are simply differences of application4 ,here ending this general survey of the facts which justify the comparison of a society with a living body1 let us look at them in detail4 ,we shall find that the parallelism becomes the more marked the more closely it is examined4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the lowest animal and vegetal forms--,protozoa and ,protophyta--are chiefly inhabitants of the water4 ,they are minute bodies1 most of which are made individually visible only by the microscope4 ,all of them are extremely simple in structure1 and some of them1 as the ,rhizopods1 almost structureless4 ,multiplying1 as they ordinarily do1 by the spontaneous division of their bodies1 they produce halves which may either become quite separate and move away in different directions1 or may continue attached4 ,by the repetition of this process of fission1 aggregations of various sizes and kinds are formed4 ,among the ,protophyta we have some classes1 as the ,diatomace and the ,yeast-plant1 in which the individuals may be either separate or attached in groups of two1 three1 four1 or more2 other classes in which a considerable number of cells are united into a thread 7,conferva1 ,monilia72 others in which they form a network 7,hydrodictyon72 others in which they form plates 7,ulva72 and others in which they form masses 7,laminaria1 ,agaricus73 all which vegetal forms1 having no distinction of root1 stem1 or leaf1 are called ,thallogens4 ,among the ,protozoa we find parallel facts4 ,immense numbers of ,amoeba-like creatures1 massed together in a framework of horny fibres1 constitute ,sponge4 ,in the ,foraminifera we see smaller groups of such creatures arranged into more definite shapes4 ,not only do these almost structureless ,protozoa unite into regular or irregular aggregations of various sizes1 but among some of the more organized ones1 as the ,vorticell1 there are also produced clusters of individuals united to a common stem4 ,but these little societies of monads1 or cells1 or whatever else we may call them1 are societies only in the lowest sense3 there is no subordination of parts among them--no organization4 ,each of the component units lives by and for itself2 neither giving nor receiving aid4 ,the only mutual dependence is that consequent on mechanical union4 ,do we not here discern analogies to the first stages of human societies8 ,among the lowest races1 as the ,bushmen1 we find but incipient aggregation3 sometimes single families1 sometimes two or three families wandering about together4 ,the number of associated units is small and variable1 and their union inconstant4 ,no division of labour exists except between the sexes1 and the only kind of mutual aid is that of joint attack or defence4 ,we see an undifferentiated group of individuals1 forming the germ of a society2 just as in the homogeneous groups of cells above described1 we see the initial stage of animal and vegetal organization4 ,the comparison may now be carried a step higher4 ,in the vegetal kingdom we pass from the ,thallogens1 consisting of mere masses of similar cells1 to the ,acrogens1 in which the cells are not similar throughout the whole mass2 but are here aggregated into a structure serving as leaf and there into a structure serving as root2 thus forming a whole in which there is a certain subdivision of functions among the units1 and therefore a certain mutual dependence4 ,in the animal kingdom we find analogous progress4 ,from mere unorganized groups of cells1 or cell-like bodies1 we ascend to groups of such cells arranged into parts that have different duties4 ,the common ,polype1 from the substance of which may be separated cells that exhibit1 when detached1 appearances and movements like those of a solitary ,amoeba1 illustrates this stage4 ,the component units1 though still showing great community of character1 assume somewhat diverse functions in the skin1 in the internal surface1 and in the tentacles4 ,there is a certain amount of physiological division of labour4 ,turning to societies1 we find these stages paralleled in most aboriginal tribes4 ,when1 instead of such small variable groups as are formed by ,bushmen1 we come to the larger and more permanent groups formed by savages not quite so low1 we find traces of social structure4 ,though industrial organization scarcely shows itself1 except in the different occupations of the sexes2 yet there is more or less of governmental organization4 ,while all the men are warriors and hunters1 only a part of them are included in the council of chiefs2 and in this council of chiefs some one has commonly supreme authority4 ,there is thus a certain distinction of classes and powers2 and through this slight specialization of functions is effected a rude co-operation among the increasing mass of individuals1 whenever the society has to act in its corporate capacity4 ,beyond this analogy in the slight extent to which organization is carried1 there is analogy in the indefiniteness of the organization4 ,in the ,hydra1 the respective parts of the creature's substance have many functions in common4 ,they are all contractile2 omitting the tentacles1 the whole of the external surface can give origin to young hydr2 and1 when turned inside out1 stomach performs the duties of skin and skin the duties of stomach4 ,in aboriginal societies such differentiations as exist are similarly imperfect4 ,notwithstanding distinctions of rank1 all persons maintain themselves by their own exertions4 ,not only do the head men of the tribe1 in common with the rest1 build their own huts1 make their own weapons1 kill their own food2 but the chief does the like4 ,moreover1 such governmental organization as exists is inconstant4 ,it is frequently changed by violence or treachery1 and the function of ruling assumed by some other warrior4 ,thus between the rudest societies and some of the lowest forms of animal life1 there is analogy alike in the slight extent to which organization is carried1 in the indefiniteness of this organization1 and in its want of fixity4 ,a further complication of the analogy is at hand4 ,from the aggregation of units into organized groups1 we pass to the multiplication of such groups1 and their coalescence into compound groups4 ,the ,hydra1 when it has reached a certain bulk1 puts forth from its surface a bud which1 growing and gradually assuming the form of the parent1 finally becomes detached2 and by this process of gemmation the creature peoples the adjacent water with others like itself4 ,a parallel process is seen in the multiplication of those lowly-organized tribes above described4 ,when one of them has increased to a size that is either too great for co-ordination under so rude a structure1 or else that is greater than the surrounding country can supply with game and other wild food1 there arises a tendency to divide2 and as in such communities there often occur quarrels1 jealousies1 and other causes of division1 there soon comes an occasion on which a part of the tribe separates under the leadership of some subordinate chief and migrates4 ,this process being from time to time repeated1 an extensive region is at length occupied by numerous tribes descended from a common ancestry4 ,the analogy by no means ends here4 ,though in the common ,hydra the young ones that bud out from the parent soon become detached and independent2 yet throughout the rest of the class ,hydrozoa1 to which this creature belongs1 the like does not generally happen4 ,the successive individuals thus developed continue attached2 give origin to other such individuals which also continue attached2 and so there results a compound animal4 ,as in the ,hydra itself we find an aggregation of units which1 considered separately1 are akin to the lowest ,protozoa2 so here1 in a ,zoophyte1 we find an aggregation of such aggregations4 ,the like is also seen throughout the extensive family of ,polyzoa or ,molluscoida4 ,the ,ascidian ,mollusks1 too1 in their many forms1 show us the same thing3 exhibiting1 at the same time1 various degrees of union among the component individuals4 ,for while in the ,salp the component individuals adhere so slightly that a blow on the vessel of water in which they are floating will separate them2 in the ,botryllid there exist vascular connexions among them1 and a common circulation4 ,now in these different stages of aggregation1 may we not see paralleled the union of groups of connate tribes into nations8 ,though1 in regions where circumstances permit1 the tribes descended from some original tribe migrate in all directions1 and become far removed and quite separate2 yet1 where the territory presents barriers to distant migration1 this does not happen3 the small kindred communities are held in closer contact1 and eventually become more or less united into a nation4 ,the contrast between the tribes of ,american ,indians and the ,scottish clans1 illustrates this4 ,and a glance at our own early history1 or the early histories of continental nations1 shows this fusion of small simple communities taking place in various ways and to various extents4 ,as says ,m4 ,guizot1 in his ,history of the ,origin of ,representative ,government1-- ,by degrees1 in the midst of the chaos of the rising society1 small aggregations are formed which feel the want of alliance and union with each other4444 ,soon inequality of strength is displayed among neighbouring aggregations4 ,the strong tend to subjugate the weak1 and usurp at first the rights of taxation and military service4 ,thus political authority leaves the aggregations which first instituted it1 to take a wider range4 ,that is to say1 the small tribes1 clans1 or feudal groups1 sprung mostly from a common stock1 and long held in contact as occupants of adjacent lands1 gradually get united in other ways than by kinship and proximity4 ,a further series of changes begins now to take place1 to which1 as before1 we find analogies in individual organisms4 ,returning to the ,hydrozoa1 we observe that in the simplest of the compound forms the connected individuals are alike in structure1 and perform like functions2 with the exception that here and there a bud1 instead of developing into a stomach1 mouth1 and tentacles1 becomes an egg-sac4 ,but with the oceanic ,hydrozoa this is by no means the case4 ,in the ,calycophorid some of the polypes growing from the common germ1 become developed and modified into large1 long1 sack-like bodies1 which1 by their rhythmical contractions1 move through the water1 dragging the community of polypes after them4 ,in the ,physophorid a variety of organs similarly arise by transformation of the budding polypes2 so that in creatures like the ,physalia1 commonly known as the ,portuguese ,man-of-war1 instead of that tree-like group of similar individuals forming the original type1 we have a complex mass of unlike parts fulfilling unlike duties4 ,as an individual ,hydra may be regarded as a group of ,protozoa which have become partially metamorphosed into different organs2 so a ,physalia is1 morphologically considered1 a group of ,hydr of which the individuals have been variously transformed to fit them for various functions4 ,this differentiation upon differentiation is just what takes place during the evolution of a civilized society4 ,we observed how1 in the small communities first formed1 there arises a simple political organization3 there is a partial separation of classes having different duties4 ,and now we have to observe how1 in a nation formed by the fusion of such small communities1 the several sections1 at first alike in structures and modes of activity1 grow unlike in both--gradually become mutually-dependent parts1 diverse in their natures and functions4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the doctrine of the progressive division of labour1 to which we are here introduced1 is familiar to all readers4 ,and further1 the analogy between the economical division of labour and the physiological division of labour1 is so striking as long since to have drawn the attention of scientific naturalists3 so striking1 indeed1 that the expression physiological division of labour1 has been suggested by it4 ,it is not needful1 therefore1 to treat this part of the subject in great detail4 ,we shall content ourselves with noting a few general and significant facts1 not manifest on a first inspection4 ,throughout the whole animal kingdom1 from the ,coelenterata upwards1 the first stage of evolution is the same4 ,equally in the germ of a polype and in the human ovum1 the aggregated mass of cells out of which the creature is to arise1 gives origin to a peripheral layer of cells1 slightly differing from the rest which they include2 and this layer subsequently divides into two--the inner1 lying in contact with the included yelk1 being called the mucous layer1 and the outer1 exposed to surrounding agencies1 being called the serous layer3 or1 in the terms used by ,prof4 ,huxley1 in describing the development of the ,hydrozoa--the endoderm and ectoderm4 ,this primary division marks out a fundamental contrast of parts in the future organism4 ,from the mucous layer1 or endoderm1 is developed the apparatus of nutrition2 while from the serous layer1 or ectoderm1 is developed the apparatus of external action4 ,out of the one arise the organs by which food is prepared and absorbed1 oxygen imbibed1 and blood purified2 while out of the other arise the nervous1 muscular1 and osseous systems1 by the combined actions of which the movements of the body as a whole are effected4 ,though this is not a rigorously-correct distinction1 seeing that some organs involve both of these primitive membranes1 yet high authorities agree in stating it as a broad general distinction4 ,well1 in the evolution of a society1 we see a primary differentiation of analogous kind1 which similarly underlies the whole future structure4 ,as already pointed out1 the only manifest contrast of parts in primitive societies1 is that between the governing and the governed4 ,in the least organized tribes1 the council of chiefs may be a body of men distinguished simply by greater courage or experience4 ,in more organized tribes1 the chief-class is definitely separated from the lower class1 and often regarded as different in nature--sometimes as god-descended4 ,and later1 we find these two becoming respectively freemen and slaves1 or nobles and serfs4 ,a glance at their respective functions1 makes it obvious that the great divisions thus early formed1 stand to each other in a relation similar to that in which the primary divisions of the embryo stand to each other4 ,for1 from its first appearance1 the warrior-class1 headed by chiefs1 is that by which the external acts of the society are carried on3 alike in war1 in negotiation1 and in migration4 ,afterwards1 while this upper class grows distinct from the lower1 and at the same time becomes more and more exclusively regulative and defensive in its functions1 alike in the persons of kings and subordinate rulers1 priests1 and soldiers2 the inferior class becomes more and more exclusively occupied in providing the necessaries of life for the community at large4 ,from the soil1 with which it comes in most direct contact1 the mass of the people takes up1 and prepares for use1 the food and such rude articles of manufacture as are known2 while the overlying mass of superior men1 maintained by the working population1 deals with circumstances external to the community--circumstances with which1 by position1 it is more immediately concerned4 ,ceasing by-and-by to have any knowledge of1 or power over1 the concerns of the society as a whole1 the serf-class becomes devoted to the processes of alimentation2 while the noble class1 ceasing to take any part in the processes of alimentation1 becomes devoted to the co-ordinated movements of the entire body-politic4 ,equally remarkable is a further analogy of like kind4 ,after the mucous and serous layers of the embryo have separated1 there presently arises between the two a third1 known to physiologists as the vascular layer--a layer out of which are developed the chief blood-vessels4 ,the mucous layer absorbs nutriment from the mass of yelk it encloses2 this nutriment has to be transferred to the overlying serous layer1 out of which the nervo-muscular system is being developed2 and between the two arises a vascular system by which the transfer is effected--a system of vessels which continues ever after to be the transferrer of nutriment from the places where it is absorbed and prepared1 to the places where it is needed for growth and repair4 ,well1 may we not trace a parallel step in social progress8 ,between the governing and the governed1 there at first exists no intermediate class2 and even in some societies that have reached considerable sizes1 there are scarcely any but the nobles and their kindred on the one hand1 and the serfs on the other3 the social structure being such that transfer of commodities takes place directly from slaves to their masters4 ,but in societies of a higher type1 there grows up1 between these two primitive classes1 another--the trading or middle class4 ,equally at first as now1 we may see that1 speaking generally1 this middle class is the analogue of the middle layer in the embryo4 ,for all traders are essentially distributors4 ,whether they be wholesale dealers1 who collect into large masses the commodities of various producers2 or whether they be retailers1 who divide out to those who want them1 the masses of commodities thus collected together2 all mercantile men are agents of transfer from the places where things are produced to the places where they are consumed4 ,thus the distributing apparatus in a society1 answers to the distributing apparatus in a living body2 not only in its functions1 but in its intermediate origin and subsequent position1 and in the time of its appearance4 ,without enumerating the minor differentiations which these three great classes afterwards undergo1 we will merely note that throughout1 they follow the same general law with the differentiations of an individual organism4 ,in a society1 as in a rudimentary animal1 we have seen that the most general and broadly contrasted divisions are the first to make their appearance2 and of the subdivisions it continues true in both cases1 that they arise in the order of decreasing generality4 ,let us observe1 next1 that in the one case as in the other1 the specializations are at first very incomplete1 and approach completeness as organization progresses4 ,we saw that in primitive tribes1 as in the simplest animals1 there remains much community of function between the parts which are nominally different--that1 for instance1 the class of chiefs long remains industrially the same as the inferior class2 just as in a ,hydra1 the property of contractility is possessed by the units of the endoderm as well as by those of the ectoderm4 ,we noted also how1 as the society advanced1 the two great primitive classes partook less and less of each other's functions4 ,and we have here to remark that all subsequent specializations are at first vague and gradually become distinct4 ,in the infancy of society1 says ,m4 ,guizot1 everything is confused and uncertain2 there is as yet no fixed and precise line of demarcation between the different powers in a state4 ,originally kings lived like other landowners1 on the incomes derived from their own private estates4 ,nobles were petty kings2 and kings only the most powerful nobles4 ,bishops were feudal lords and military leaders4 ,the right of coining money was possessed by powerful subjects1 and by the ,church1 as well as by the king4 ,every leading man exercised alike the functions of landowner1 farmer1 soldier1 statesman1 judge4 ,retainers were now soldiers1 and now labourers1 as the day required4 ,but by degrees the ,church has lost all civil jurisdiction2 the ,state has exercised less and less control over religious teaching2 the military class has grown a distinct one2 handicrafts have concentrated in towns2 and the spinning-wheels of scattered farmhouses1 have disappeared before the machinery of manufacturing districts4 ,not only is all progress from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous1 but1 at the same time1 it is from the indefinite to the definite4 ,another fact which should not be passed over1 is that in the evolution of a large society out of a cluster of small ones1 there is a gradual obliteration of the original lines of separation--a change to which1 also1 we may see analogies in living bodies4 ,the sub-kingdom ,annulosa1 furnishes good illustrations4 ,among the lower types the body consists of numerous segments that are alike in nearly every particular4 ,each has its external ring2 its pair of legs1 if the creature has legs2 its equal portion of intestine1 or else its separate stomach2 its equal portion of the great blood-vessel1 or1 in some cases1 its separate heart2 its equal portion of the nervous cord2 and1 perhaps1 its separate pair of ganglia4 ,but in the highest types1 as in the large ,crustacea1 many of the segments are completely fused together2 and the internal organs are no longer uniformly repeated in all the segments4 ,now the segments of which nations at first consist1 lose their separate external and internal structures in a similar manner4 ,in feudal times the minor communities1 governed by feudal lords1 were severally organized in the same rude way1 and were held together only by the fealty of their respective rulers to a suzerain4 ,but along with the growth of a central power1 the demarcations of these local communities become relatively unimportant1 and their separate organizations merge into the general organization4 ,the like is seen on a larger scale in the fusion of ,england1 ,wales1 ,scotland1 and ,ireland2 and1 on the ,continent1 in the coalescence of provinces into kingdoms4 ,even in the disappearance of law-made divisions1 the process is analogous4 ,among the ,anglo-,saxons1 ,england was divided into tithings1 hundreds1 and counties3 there were county-courts1 courts of hundred1 and courts of tithing4 ,the courts of tithing disappeared first2 then the courts of hundred1 which have1 however1 left traces2 while the county-jurisdiction still exists4 ,chiefly1 however1 it is to be noted1 that there eventually grows up an organization which has no reference to these original divisions1 but traverses them in various directions1 as is the case in creatures belonging to the sub-kingdom just named2 and1 further1 that in both cases it is the sustaining organization which thus traverses old boundaries1 while1 in both cases1 it is the governmental1 or co-ordinating organization in which the original boundaries continue traceable4 ,thus1 in the highest ,annulosa the exo-skeleton and the muscular system never lose all traces of their primitive segmentation2 but throughout a great part of the body1 the contained viscera do not in the least conform to the external divisions4 ,similarly with a nation we see that while1 for governmental purposes1 such divisions as counties and parishes still exist1 the structure developed for carrying on the nutrition of society wholly ignores these boundaries3 our great cotton-manufacture spreads out of ,lancashire into ,north ,derbyshire2 ,leicestershire and ,nottinghamshire have long divided the stocking-trade between them2 one great centre for the production of iron and iron-goods1 includes parts of ,warwickshire1 ,staffordshire1 and ,worcestershire2 and those various specializations of agriculture which have made different parts of ,england noted for different products1 show no more respect to county-boundaries than do our growing towns to the boundaries of parishes4 ,if1 after contemplating these analogies of structure1 we inquire whether there are any such analogies between the processes of organic change1 the answer is--yes4 ,the causes which lead to increase of bulk in any part of the body-politic1 are of like nature with those which lead to increase of bulk in any part of an individual body4 ,in both cases the antecedent is greater functional activity consequent on greater demand4 ,each limb1 viscus1 gland1 or other member of an animal1 is developed by exercise--by actively discharging the duties which the body at large requires of it2 and similarly1 any class of labourers or artisans1 any manufacturing centre1 or any official agency1 begins to enlarge when the community devolves on it more work4 ,in each case1 too1 growth has its conditions and its limits4 ,that any organ in a living being may grow by exercise1 there needs a due supply of blood4 ,all action implies waste2 blood brings the materials for repair2 and before there can be growth1 the quantity of blood supplied must be more than is requisite for repair4 ,in a society it is the same4 ,if to some district which elaborates for the community particular commodities--say the woollens of ,yorkshire--there comes an augmented demand2 and if1 in fulfilment of this demand1 a certain expenditure and wear of the manufacturing organization are incurred2 and if1 in payment for the extra quantity of woollens sent away1 there comes back only such quantity of commodities as replaces the expenditure1 and makes good the waste of life and machinery2 there can clearly be no growth4 ,that there may be growth1 the commodities obtained in return must be more than sufficient for these ends2 and just in proportion as the surplus is great will the growth be rapid4 ,whence it is manifest that what in commercial affairs we call profit1 answers to the excess of nutrition over waste in a living body4 ,moreover1 in both cases when the functional activity is high and the nutrition defective1 there results not growth but decay4 ,if in an animal1 any organ is worked so hard that the channels which bring blood cannot furnish enough for repair1 the organ dwindles3 atrophy is set up4 ,and if in the body-politic1 some part has been stimulated into great productivity1 and cannot afterwards get paid for all its produce1 certain of its members become bankrupt1 and it decreases in size4 ,one more parallelism to be here noted1 is that the different parts of a social organism1 like the different parts of an individual organism1 compete for nutriment2 and severally obtain more or less of it according as they are discharging more or less duty4 ,if a man's brain be overexcited it abstracts blood from his viscera and stops digestion2 or digestion1 actively going on1 so affects the circulation through the brain as to cause drowsiness2 or great muscular exertion determines such a quantity of blood to the limbs as to arrest digestion or cerebral action1 as the case may be4 ,so1 likewise1 in a society1 great activity in some one direction causes partial arrests of activity elsewhere by abstracting capital1 that is commodities3 as instance the way in which the sudden development of our railway-system hampered commercial operations2 or the way in which the raising of a large military force temporarily stops the growth of leading industries4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the last few paragraphs introduce the next division of our subject4 ,almost unawares we have come upon the analogy which exists between the blood of a living body and the circulating mass of commodities in the body-politic4 ,we have now to trace out this analogy from its simplest to its most complex manifestations4 ,in the lowest animals there exists no blood properly so called4 ,through the small assemblage of cells which make up a ,hydra1 permeate the juices absorbed from the food4 ,there is no apparatus for elaborating a concentrated and purified nutriment1 and distributing it among the component units2 but these component units directly imbibe the unprepared nutriment1 either from the digestive cavity or from one another4 ,may we not say that this is what takes place in an aboriginal tribe8 ,all its members severally obtain for themselves the necessaries of life in their crude states2 and severally prepare them for their own uses as well as they can4 ,when there arises a decided differentiation between the governing and the governed1 some amount of transfer begins between those inferior individuals who1 as workers1 come directly in contact with the products of the earth1 and those superior ones who exercise the higher functions--a transfer parallel to that which accompanies the differentiation of the ectoderm from the endoderm4 ,in the one case1 as in the other1 however1 it is a transfer of products that are little if at all prepared2 and takes place directly from the unit which obtains to the unit which consumes1 without entering into any general current4 ,passing to larger organisms--individual and social--we meet the first advance on this arrangement4 ,where1 as among the compound ,hydrozoa1 there is a union of many such primitive groups as form ,hydr2 or where1 as in a ,medusa1 one of these groups has become of great size2 there exist rude channels running throughout the substance of the body3 not1 however1 channels for the conveyance of prepared nutriment1 but mere prolongations of the digestive cavity1 through which the crude chyle-aqueous fluid reaches the remoter parts1 and is moved backwards and forwards by the creature's contractions4 ,do we not find in some of the more advanced primitive communities an analogous condition8 ,when the men1 partially or fully united into one society1 become numerous--when1 as usually happens1 they cover a surface of country not everywhere alike in its products--when1 more especially1 there arise considerable classes which are not industrial2 some process of exchange and distribution inevitably arises4 ,traversing here and there the earth's surface1 covered by that vegetation on which human life depends1 and in which1 as we say1 the units of a society are imbedded1 there are formed indefinite paths1 along which some of the necessaries of life occasionally pass1 to be bartered for others which presently come back along the same channels4 ,note1 however1 that at first little else but crude commodities are thus transferred--fruits1 fish1 pigs or cattle1 skins1 etc43 there are few1 if any1 manufactured products or articles prepared for consumption4 ,and note also1 that such distribution of these unprepared necessaries of life as takes place1 is but occasional--goes on with a certain slow1 irregular rhythm4 ,further progress in the elaboration and distribution of nutriment1 or of commodities1 is a necessary accompaniment of further differentiation of functions in the individual body or in the body-politic4 ,as fast as each organ of a living animal becomes confined to a special action1 it must become dependent on the rest for those materials which its position and duty do not permit it to obtain for itself2 in the same way that1 as fast as each particular class of a community becomes exclusively occupied in producing its own commodity1 it must become dependent on the rest for the other commodities it needs4 ,and1 simultaneously1 a more perfectly-elaborated blood will result from a highly specialized group of nutritive organs1 severally adapted to prepare its different elements2 in the same way that the stream of commodities circulating throughout a society1 will be of superior quality in proportion to the greater division of labour among the workers4 ,observe1 also1 that in either case the circulating mass of nutritive materials1 besides coming gradually to consist of better ingredients1 also grows more complex4 ,an increase in the number of the unlike organs which add to the blood their waste matters1 and demand from it the different materials they severally need1 implies a blood more heterogeneous in composition--an a priori conclusion which1 according to ,dr4 ,williams1 is inductively confirmed by examination of the blood throughout the various grades of the animal kingdom4 ,and similarly1 it is manifest that as fast as the division of labour among the classes of a community becomes greater1 there must be an increasing heterogeneity in the currents of merchandize flowing throughout that community4 ,the circulating mass of nutritive materials in individual organisms and in social organisms1 becoming at once better in the quality of its ingredients and more heterogeneous in composition1 as the type of structure becomes higher1 eventually has added to it in both cases another element1 which is not itself nutritive but facilitates the processes of nutrition4 ,we refer1 in the case of the individual organism1 to the blood-discs2 and in the case of the social organism1 to money4 ,this analogy has been observed by ,liebig1 who in his ,familiar ,letters on ,chemistry says3-- ,silver and gold have to perform in the organism of the state1 the same function as the blood-corpuscles in the human organism4 ,as these round discs1 without themselves taking an immediate share in the nutritive process1 are the medium1 the essential condition of the change of matter1 of the production of the heat and of the force by which the temperature of the body is kept up1 and the motions of the blood and all the juices are determined1 so has gold become the medium of all activity in the life of the state4 ,and blood-corpuscles being like coin in their functions1 and in the fact that they are not consumed in nutrition1 he further points out that the number of them which in a considerable interval flows through the great centres1 is enormous when compared with their absolute number2 just as the quantity of money which annually passes through the great mercantile centres1 is enormous when compared with the quantity of money in the kingdom4 ,nor is this all4 ,liebig has omitted the significant circumstance that only at a certain stage of organization does this element of the circulation make its appearance4 ,throughout extensive divisions of the lower animals1 the blood contains no corpuscles2 and in societies of low civilization1 there is no money4 ,thus far we have considered the analogy between the blood in a living body and the consumable and circulating commodities in the body-politic4 ,let us now compare the appliances by which they are respectively distributed4 ,we shall find in the developments of these appliances parallelisms not less remarkable than those above set forth4 ,already we have shown that1 as classes1 wholesale and retail distributors discharge in a society the office which the vascular system discharges in an individual creature2 that they come into existence later than the other two great classes1 as the vascular layer appears later than the mucous and serous layers2 and that they occupy a like intermediate position4 ,here1 however1 it remains to be pointed out that a complete conception of the circulating system in a society1 includes not only the active human agents who propel the currents of commodities1 and regulate their distribution1 but includes1 also1 the channels of communication4 ,it is the formation and arrangement of these to which we now direct attention4 ,going back once more to those lower animals in which there is found nothing but a partial diffusion1 not of blood1 but only of crude nutritive fluids1 it is to be remarked that the channels through which the diffusion takes place1 are mere excavations through the half-organized substance of the body3 they have no lining membranes1 but are mere lacun traversing a rude tissue4 ,now countries in which civilization is but commencing1 display a like condition3 there are no roads properly so called2 but the wilderness of vegetal life covering the earth's surface is pierced by tracks1 through which the distribution of crude commodities takes place4 ,and while1 in both cases1 the acts of distribution occur only at long intervals 7the currents1 after a pause1 now setting towards a general centre and now away from it71 the transfer is in both cases slow and difficult4 ,but among other accompaniments of progress1 common to animals and societies1 comes the formation of more definite and complete channels of communication4 ,blood-vessels acquire distinct walls2 roads are fenced and gravelled4 ,this advance is first seen in those roads or vessels that are nearest to the chief centres of distribution2 while the peripheral roads and peripheral vessels long continue in their primitive states4 ,at a yet later stage of development1 where comparative finish of structure is found throughout the system as well as near the chief centres1 there remains in both cases the difference that the main channels are comparatively broad and straight1 while the subordinate ones are narrow and tortuous in proportion to their remoteness4 ,lastly1 it is to be remarked that there ultimately arise in the higher social organisms1 as in the higher individual organisms1 main channels of distribution still more distinguished by their perfect structures1 their comparative straightness1 and the absence of those small branches which the minor channels perpetually give off4 ,and in railways we also see1 for the first time in the social organism1 a system of double channels conveying currents in opposite directions1 as do the arteries and veins of a well-developed animal4 ,these parallelisms in the evolutions and structures of the circulating systems1 introduce us to others in the kinds and rates of the movements going on through them4 ,through the lowest societies1 as through the lowest creatures1 the distribution of crude nutriment is by slow gurgitations and regurgitations4 ,in creatures that have rude vascular systems1 just as in societies that are beginning to have roads1 there is no regular circulation along definite courses2 but1 instead1 periodical changes of the currents--now towards this point and now towards that4 ,through each part of an inferior mollusk's body1 the blood flows for a while in one direction1 then stops and flows in the opposite direction2 just as through a rudely-organized society1 the distribution of merchandize is slowly carried on by great fairs1 occurring in different localities1 to and from which the currents periodically set4 ,only animals of tolerably complete organizations1 like advanced communities1 are permeated by constant currents that are definitely directed4 ,in living bodies1 the local and variable currents disappear when there grow up great centres of circulation1 generating more powerful currents by a rhythm which ends in a quick1 regular pulsation4 ,and when in social bodies there arise great centres of commercial activity1 producing and exchanging large quantities of commodities1 the rapid and continuous streams drawn in and emitted by these centres subdue all minor and local circulations3 the slow rhythm of fairs merges into the faster one of weekly markets1 and in the chief centres of distribution1 weekly markets merge into daily markets2 while in place of the languid transfer from place to place1 taking place at first weekly1 then twice or thrice a week1 we by-and-by get daily transfer1 and finally transfer many times a day--the original sluggish1 irregular rhythm1 becomes a rapid1 equable pulse4 ,mark1 too1 that in both cases the increased activity1 like the greater perfection of structure1 is much less conspicuous at the periphery of the vascular system4 ,on main lines of railway1 we have1 perhaps1 a score trains in each direction daily1 going at from thirty to fifty miles an hour2 as1 through the great arteries1 the blood moves rapidly in successive gushes4 ,along high roads1 there go vehicles conveying men and commodities with much less1 though still considerable1 speed1 and with a much less decided rhythm2 as1 in the smaller arteries1 the speed of the blood is greatly diminished and the pulse less conspicuous4 ,in parish-roads1 narrower1 less complete1 and more tortuous1 the rate of movement is further decreased and the rhythm scarcely traceable2 as in the ultimate arteries4 ,in those still more imperfect by-roads which lead from these parish-roads to scattered farmhouses and cottages1 the motion is yet slower and very irregular2 just as we find it in the capillaries4 ,while along the field-roads1 which1 in their unformed1 unfenced state1 are typical of lacun1 the movement is the slowest1 the most irregular1 and the most infrequent2 as it is1 not only in the primitive lacun of animals and societies1 but as it is also in those lacun in which the vascular system ends among extensive families of inferior creatures4 ,thus1 then1 we find between the distributing systems of living bodies and the distributing systems of bodies-politic1 wonderfully close parallelisms4 ,in the lowest forms of individual and social organisms1 there exist neither prepared nutritive matters nor distributing appliances2 and in both1 these1 arising as necessary accompaniments of the differentiation of parts1 approach perfection as this differentiation approaches completeness4 ,in animals1 as in societies1 the distributing agencies begin to show themselves at the same relative periods1 and in the same relative positions4 ,in the one1 as in the other1 the nutritive materials circulated are at first crude and simple1 gradually become better elaborated and more heterogeneous1 and have eventually added to them a new element facilitating the nutritive processes4 ,the channels of communication pass through similar phases of development1 which bring them to analogous forms4 ,and the directions1 rhythms1 and rates of circulation1 progress by like steps to like final conditions4 99 99 99 99 99 ,we come at length to the nervous system4 ,having noticed the primary differentiation of societies into the governing and governed classes1 and observed its analogy to the differentiation of the two primary tissues which respectively develop into organs of external action and organs of alimentation2 having noticed some of the leading analogies between the development of industrial arrangements and that of the alimentary apparatus2 and having1 above1 more fully traced the analogies between the distributing systems1 social and individual2 we have now to compare the appliances by which a society1 as a whole1 is regulated1 with those by which the movements of an individual creature are regulated4 ,we shall find here parallelisms equally striking with those already detailed4 ,the class out of which governmental organization originates1 is1 as we have said1 analogous in its relations to the ectoderm of the lowest animals and of embryonic forms4 ,and as this primitive membrane1 out of which the nervo-muscular system is evolved1 must1 even in the first stage of its differentiation1 be slightly distinguished from the rest by that greater impressibility and contractility characterizing the organs to which it gives rise2 so1 in that superior class which is eventually transformed into the directo-executive system of a society 7its legislative and defensive appliances71 does there exist in the beginning1 a larger endowment of the capacities required for these higher social functions4 ,always1 in rude assemblages of men1 the strongest1 most courageous1 and most sagacious1 become rulers and leaders2 and1 in a tribe of some standing1 this results in the establishment of a dominant class1 characterized on the average by those mental and bodily qualities which fit them for deliberation and vigorous combined action4 ,thus that greater impressibility and contractility1 which in the rudest animal types characterize the units of the ectoderm1 characterize also the units of the primitive social stratum which controls and fights2 since impressibility and contractility are the respective roots of intelligence and strength4 ,again1 in the unmodified ectoderm1 as we see it in the ,hydra1 the units are all endowed both with impressibility and contractility2 but as we ascend to higher types of organization1 the ectoderm differentiates into classes of units which divide those two functions between them3 some1 becoming exclusively impressible1 cease to be contractile2 while some1 becoming exclusively contractile1 cease to be impressible4 ,similarly with societies4 ,in an aboriginal tribe1 the directive and executive functions are diffused in a mingled form throughout the whole governing class4 ,each minor chief commands those under him1 and1 if need be1 himself coerces them into obedience4 ,the council of chiefs itself carries out on the battle-field its own decisions4 ,the head chief not only makes laws1 but administers justice with his own hands4 ,in larger and more settled communities1 however1 the directive and executive agencies begin to grow distinct from each other4 ,as fast as his duties accumulate1 the head chief or king confines himself more and more to directing public affairs1 and leaves the execution of his will to others3 he deputes others to enforce submission1 to inflict punishments1 or to carry out minor acts of offence and defence2 and only on occasions when1 perhaps1 the safety of the society and his own supremacy are at stake1 does he begin to act as well as direct4 ,as this differentiation establishes itself1 the characteristics of the ruler begin to change4 ,no longer1 as in an aboriginal tribe1 the strongest and most daring man1 the tendency is for him to become the man of greatest cunning1 foresight1 and skill in the management of others2 for in societies that have advanced beyond the first stage1 it is chiefly such qualities that insure success in gaining supreme power1 and holding it against internal and external enemies4 ,thus that member of the governing class who comes to be the chief directing agent1 and so plays the same part that a rudimentary nervous centre does in an unfolding organism1 is usually one endowed with some superiorities of nervous organization4 ,in those larger and more complex communities possessing1 perhaps1 a separate military class1 a priesthood1 and dispersed masses of population requiring local control1 there grow up subordinate governing agents2 who1 as their duties accumulate1 severally become more directive and less executive in their characters4 ,and when1 as commonly happens1 the king begins to collect round himself advisers who aid him by communicating information1 preparing subjects for his judgment1 and issuing his orders2 we may say that the form of organization is comparable to one very general among inferior types of animals1 in which there exists a chief ganglion with a few dispersed minor ganglia under its control4 ,the analogies between the evolution of governmental structures in societies1 and the evolution of governmental structures in living bodies1 are1 however1 more strikingly displayed during the formation of nations by coalescence of tribes--a process already shown to be1 in several respects1 parallel to the development of creatures that primarily consist of many like segments4 ,among other points of community between the successive rings which make up the body in the lower ,annulosa1 is the possession of similar pairs of ganglia4 ,these pairs of ganglia1 though connected by nerves1 are very incompletely dependent on any general controlling power4 ,hence it results that when the body is cut in two1 the hinder part continues to move forward under the propulsion of its numerous legs2 and that when the chain of ganglia has been divided without severing the body1 the hind limbs may be seen trying to propel the body in one direction while the fore limbs are trying to propel it in another4 ,but in the higher ,annulosa1 called ,articulata1 sundry of the anterior pairs of ganglia1 besides growing larger1 unite in one mass2 and this great cephalic ganglion having become the co-ordinator of all the creature's movements1 there no longer exists much local independence4 ,now may we not in the growth of a consolidated kingdom out of petty sovereignties or baronies1 observe analogous changes8 ,like the chiefs and primitive rulers above described1 feudal lords1 exercising supreme power over their respective groups of retainers1 discharge functions analogous to those of rudimentary nervous centres4 ,among these local governing centres there is1 in early feudal times1 very little subordination4 ,they are in frequent antagonism2 they are individually restrained chiefly by the influence of parties in their own class2 and they are but irregularly subject to that most powerful member of their order who has gained the position of head-suzerain or king4 ,as the growth and organization of the society progresses1 these local directive centres fall more and more under the control of a chief directive centre4 ,closer commercial union between the several segments is accompanied by closer governmental union2 and these minor rulers end in being little more than agents who administer1 in their several localities1 the laws made by the supreme ruler3 just as the local ganglia above described1 eventually become agents which enforce1 in their respective segments1 the orders of the cephalic ganglion4 ,the parallelism holds still further4 ,we remarked above1 when speaking of the rise of aboriginal kings1 that in proportion as their territories increase1 they are obliged not only to perform their executive functions by deputy1 but also to gather round themselves advisers to aid in their directive functions2 and that thus1 in place of a solitary governing unit1 there grows up a group of governing units1 comparable to a ganglion consisting of many cells4 ,let us here add that the advisers and chief officers who thus form the rudiment of a ministry1 tend from the beginning to exercise some control over the ruler4 ,by the information they give and the opinions they express1 they sway his judgment and affect his commands4 ,to this extent he is made a channel through which are communicated the directions originating with them2 and in course of time1 when the advice of ministers becomes the acknowledged source of his actions1 the king assumes the character of an automatic centre1 reflecting the impressions made on him from without4 ,beyond this complication of governmental structure many societies do not progress2 but in some1 a further development takes place4 ,our own case best illustrates this further development and its further analogies4 ,to kings and their ministries have been added1 in ,england1 other great directive centres1 exercising a control which1 at first small1 has been gradually becoming predominant3 as with the great governing ganglia which especially distinguish the highest classes of living beings4 ,strange as the assertion will be thought1 our ,houses of ,parliament discharge1 in the social economy1 functions which are in sundry respects comparable to those discharged by the cerebral masses in a vertebrate animal4 ,as it is in the nature of a single ganglion to be affected only by special stimuli from particular parts of the body2 so it is in the nature of a single ruler to be swayed in his acts by exclusive personal or class interests4 ,as it is in the nature of a cluster of ganglia1 connected with the primary one1 to convey to it a greater variety of influences from more numerous organs1 and thus to make its acts conform to more numerous requirements2 so it is in the nature of the subsidiary controlling powers surrounding a king to adapt his rule to a greater number of public exigencies4 ,and as it is in the nature of those great and latest-developed ganglia which distinguish the higher animals1 to interpret and combine the multiplied and varied impressions conveyed to them from all parts of the system1 and to regulate the actions in such way as duly to regard them all2 so it is in the nature of those great and latest-developed legislative bodies which distinguish the most advanced societies1 to interpret and combine the wishes of all classes and localities1 and to make laws in harmony with the general wants4 ,we may describe the office of the brain as that of averaging the interests of life1 physical1 intellectual1 moral2 and a good brain is one in which the desires answering to these respective interests are so balanced1 that the conduct they jointly dictate1 sacrifices none of them4 ,similarly1 we may describe the office of a ,parliament as that of averaging the interests of the various classes in a community2 and a good ,parliament is one in which the parties answering to these respective interests are so balanced1 that their united legislation allows to each class as much as consists with the claims of the rest4 ,besides being comparable in their duties1 these great directive centres1 social and individual1 are comparable in the processes by which their duties are discharged4 ,the cerebrum is not occupied with direct impressions from without but with the ideas of such impressions4 ,instead of the actual sensations produced in the body1 and directly appreciated by the sensory ganglia1 or primitive nervous centres1 the cerebrum receives only the representations of these sensations2 and its consciousness is called representative consciousness1 to distinguish it from the original or presentative consciousness4 ,is it not significant that we have hit on the same word to distinguish the function of our ,house of ,commons8 ,we call it a representative body1 because the interests with which it deals are not directly presented to it1 but represented to it by its various members2 and a debate is a conflict of representations of the results likely to follow from a proposed course--a description which applies with equal truth to a debate in the individual consciousness4 ,in both cases1 too1 these great governing masses take no part in the executive functions4 ,as1 after a conflict in the cerebrum1 those desires which finally predominate act on the subjacent ganglia1 and through their instrumentality determine the bodily actions2 so the parties which1 after a parliamentary struggle1 gain the victory1 do not themselves carry out their wishes1 but get them carried out by the executive divisions of the ,government4 ,the fulfilment of all legislative decisions still devolves on the original directive centres3 the impulse passing from the ,parliament to the ,ministers and from the ,ministers to the ,king1 in whose name everything is done2 just as those smaller1 first-developed ganglia1 which in the lowest vertebrata are the chief controlling agents1 are still1 in the brains of the higher vertebrata1 the agents through which the dictates of the cerebrum are worked out4 ,moreover1 in both cases these original centres become increasingly automatic4 ,in the developed vertebrate animal1 they have little function beyond that of conveying impressions to1 and executing the determinations of1 the larger centres4 ,in our highly organized government1 the monarch has long been lapsing into a passive agent of ,parliament2 and now1 ministries are rapidly falling into the same position4 ,nay1 between the two cases there is a parallelism even in respect of the exceptions to this automatic action4 ,for in the individual creature it happens that under circumstances of sudden alarm1 as from a loud sound close at hand1 an unexpected object starting up in front1 or a slip from insecure footing1 the danger is guarded against by some quick involuntary jump1 or adjustment of the limbs1 which occurs before there is time to consider the impending evil and take deliberate measures to avoid it3 the rationale of which is that these violent impressions produced on the senses1 are reflected from the sensory ganglia to the spinal cord and muscles1 without1 as in ordinary cases1 first passing through the cerebrum4 ,in like manner on national emergencies calling for prompt action1 the ,king and ,ministry1 not having time to lay the matter before the great deliberative bodies1 themselves issue commands for the requisite movements or precautions3 the primitive1 and now almost automatic1 directive centres1 resume for a moment their original uncontrolled power4 ,and then1 strangest of all1 observe that in either case there is an after-process of approval or disapproval4 ,the individual on recovering from his automatic start1 at once contemplates the cause of his fright2 and1 according to the case1 concludes that it was well he moved as he did1 or condemns himself for his groundless alarm4 ,in like manner1 the deliberative powers of the ,state discuss1 as soon as may be1 the unauthorized acts of the executive powers2 and1 deciding that the reasons were or were not sufficient1 grant or withhold a bill of indemnity4#bh ,thus far in comparing the governmental organization of the body-politic with that of an individual body1 we have considered only the respective co-ordinating centres4 ,we have yet to consider the channels through which these co-ordinating centres receive information and convey commands4 ,in the simplest societies1 as in the simplest organisms1 there is no internuncial apparatus1 as ,hunter styled the nervous system4 ,consequently1 impressions can be but slowly propagated from unit to unit throughout the whole mass4 ,the same progress1 however1 which1 in animal-organization1 shows itself in the establishment of ganglia or directive centres1 shows itself also in the establishment of nerve-threads1 through which the ganglia receive and convey impressions and so control remote organs4 ,and in societies the like eventually takes place4 ,after a long period during which the directive centres communicate with various parts of the society through other means1 there at last comes into existence an internuncial apparatus1 analogous to that found in individual bodies4 ,the comparison of telegraph-wires to nerves is familiar to all4 ,it applies1 however1 to an extent not commonly supposed4 ,thus1 throughout the vertebrate sub-kingdom1 the great nerve-bundles diverge from the vertebrate axis side by side with the great arteries2 and similarly1 our groups of telegraph-wires are carried along the sides of our railways4 ,the most striking parallelism1 however1 remains4 ,into each great bundle of nerves1 as it leaves the axis of the body along with an artery1 there enters a branch of the sympathetic nerve2 which branch1 accompanying the artery throughout its ramifications1 has the function of regulating its diameter and otherwise controlling the flow of blood through it according to local requirements4 ,analogously1 in the group of telegraph-wires running alongside each railway1 there is a wire for the purpose of regulating the traffic--for retarding or expediting the flow of passengers and commodities1 as the local conditions demand4 ,probably1 when our now rudimentary telegraph-system is fully developed1 other analogies will be traceable4 ,such1 then1 is a general outline of the evidence which justifies the comparison of societies to living organisms4 ,that they gradually increase in mass2 that they become little by little more complex2 that at the same time their parts grow more mutually dependent2 and that they continue to live and grow as wholes1 while successive generations of their units appear and disappear2 are broad peculiarities which bodies-politic display in common with all living bodies2 and in which they and living bodies differ from everything else4 ,and on carrying out the comparison in detail1 we find that these major analogies involve many minor analogies1 far closer than might have been expected4 ,others might be added4 ,we had hoped to say something respecting the different types of social organization1 and something also on social metamorphoses2 but we have reached our assigned limits4 ,,footnote3 ,footnote #bh3 ,it may be well to warn the reader against an error fallen into by one who criticised this essay on its first publication--the error of supposing that the analogy here intended to be drawn1 is a specific analogy between the organization of society in ,england1 and the human organization4 ,as said at the outset1 no such specific analogy exists4 ,the above parallel is one between the most-developed systems of governmental organization1 individual and social2 and the vertebrate type is instanced merely as exhibiting this most-developed system4 ,if any specific comparison were made1 which it cannot rationally be1 it would be made with some much lower vertebrate form than the human4 ,,the ,,origin ,,of ,,animal ,,worship4 ,first published in ,the ,fortnightly ,review for ,may1 #ahgj4 ,mr4 ,mc,lennan's recent essays on the ,worship of ,animals and ,plants have done much to elucidate a very obscure subject4 ,by pursuing in this case1 as before in another case1 the truly scientific method of comparing the phenomena presented by existing uncivilized races with those which the traditions of civilized races present1 he has rendered both of them more comprehensible than they were before4 ,it seems to me1 however1 that ,mr4 ,mc,lennan gives but an indefinite answer to the essential question--,how did the worship of animals and plants arise8 ,indeed1 in his concluding paper1 he expressly leaves this problem unsolved2 saying that his is not an hypothesis explanatory of the origin of ,totemism1 be it remembered1 but an hypothesis explanatory of the animal and plant worship of the ancient nations4 ,so that we have still to ask--,why have savage tribes so generally taken animals and plants and other things as totems8 ,what can have induced this tribe to ascribe special sacredness to one creature1 and that tribe to another8 ,and if to these questions the reply is1 that each tribe considers itself to be descended from the object of its reverence1 then there presses for answer the further question--,how came so strange a notion into existence8 ,if this notion occurred in one case only1 we might set it down to some whim of thought or some illusive occurrence4 ,but appealing1 as it does1 with multitudinous variations among so many uncivilized races in different parts of the world1 and having left numerous marks in the superstitions of extinct civilized races1 we cannot assume any special or exceptional cause4 ,moreover1 the general cause1 whatever it may be1 must be such as does not negative an aboriginal intelligence like in nature to our own4 ,after studying the grotesque beliefs of savages1 we are apt to suppose that their reason is not as our reason4 ,but this supposition is inadmissible4 ,given the amount of knowledge which primitive men possess1 and given the imperfect verbal symbols used by them in speech and thought1 and the conclusions they habitually reach will be those that are relatively the most rational4 ,this must be our postulate2 and1 setting out with this postulate1 we have to ask how primitive men came so generally1 if not universally1 to believe themselves the progeny of animals or plants or inanimate bodies4 ,there is1 ,i believe1 a satisfactory answer4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the proposition with which ,mr4 ,mc,lennan sets out1 that totem-worship preceded the worship of anthropomorphic gods1 is one to which ,i can yield but a qualified assent4 ,it is true in a sense1 but not wholly true4 ,if the words gods and worship carry with them their ordinary definite meanings1 the statement is true2 but if their meanings are widened so as to comprehend those earliest vague notions out of which the definite ideas of gods and worship are evolved1 ,i think it is not true4 ,the rudimentary form of all religion is the propitiation of dead ancestors1 who are supposed to be still existing1 and to be capable of working good or evil to their descendants4 ,as a preparation for dealing hereafter with the principles of sociology1 ,i have1 for some years past1 directed much attention to the modes of thought current in the simpler human societies2 and evidence of many kinds1 furnished by all varieties of uncivilized men1 has forced on me a conclusion harmonizing with that lately expressed in this ,review by ,prof4 ,huxley--namely1 that the savage1 conceiving a corpse to be deserted by the active personality who dwelt in it1 conceives this active personality to be still existing1 and that his feelings and ideas concerning it form the basis of his superstitions4 ,everywhere we find expressed ,or implied the belief that each person is double2 and that when he dies1 his other self1 whether remaining near at hand or gone far away1 may return1 and continues capable of injuring his enemies and aiding his friends4#bi ,but how out of the desire to propitiate this second personality of a deceased man 7the words ghost and spirit are somewhat misleading1 since the savage believes that the second personality reappears in a form equally tangible with the first71 does there grow up the worship of animals1 plants1 and inanimate objects8 ,very simply4 ,savages habitually distinguish individuals by names that are either directly suggestive of some personal trait or fact of personal history1 or else express an observed community of character with some well-known object4 ,such a genesis of individual names1 before surnames have arisen1 is inevitable2 and how easily it arises we shall see on remembering that it still goes on in its original form1 even when no longer needful4 ,i do not refer only to the significant fact that in some parts of ,england1 as in the nail-making districts1 nicknames are general1 and surnames little recognized2 but ,i refer to a common usage among both children and adults4 ,the rude man is apt to be known as a bear2 a sly fellow1 as an old fox2 a hypocrite1 as the crocodile4 ,names of plants1 too1 are used2 as when the red-haired boy is called carrots by his school-fellows4 ,nor do we lack nicknames derived from inorganic objects and agents3 instance that given by ,mr4 ,carlyle to the elder ,sterling--,captain ,whirlwind4 ,now1 in the earliest savage state1 this metaphorical naming will in most cases commence afresh in each generation--must do so1 indeed1 until surnames of some kind have been established4 ,i say in most cases1 because there will occur exceptions in the cases of men who have distinguished themselves4 ,if the ,wolf1 proving famous in fight1 becomes a terror to neighbouring tribes1 and a dominant man in his own1 his sons1 proud of their parentage1 will not let fall the fact that they descended from the ,wolf2 nor will this fact be forgotten by the rest of the tribe who hold the ,wolf in awe1 and see reason to dread his sons4 ,in proportion to the power and celebrity of the ,wolf will this pride and this fear conspire to maintain among his grandchildren and great-grandchildren1 as well as among those over whom they dominate1 the remembrance of the fact that their ancestor was the ,wolf4 ,and if1 as will occasionally happen1 this dominant family becomes the root of a new tribe1 the members of this tribe will become known to themselves and others as the ,wolves4 ,we need not rest satisfied with the inference that this inheritance of nicknames will take place4 ,there is proof that it does take place4 ,as nicknaming after animals1 plants1 and other objects1 still goes on among ourselves1 so among ourselves does there go on the descent of nicknames4 ,an instance has come under my own notice on an estate in the ,west ,highlands1 belonging to some friends with whom ,i frequently have the pleasure of spending a few weeks in the autumn4 ,take a young ,croshek1 has more than once been the reply of my host to the inquiry1 who should go with me1 when ,i was setting out salmon-fishing4 ,the elder ,croshek ,i knew well2 and supposed that this name1 borne by him and by all belonging to him1 was the family surname4 ,years passed before ,i learned that the real surname was ,cameron2 that the father was called ,croshek1 after the name of his cottage1 to distinguish him from other ,camerons employed about the premises2 and that his children had come to be similarly distinguished4 ,though here1 as very generally in ,scotland1 the nickname was derived from the place of residence1 yet had it been derived from an animal1 the process would have been the same3 inheritance of it would have occurred just as naturally4 ,not even for this small link in the argument1 however1 need we depend on inference4 ,there is fact to bear us out4 ,mr4 ,bates1 in his ,naturalist on the ,river ,amazons 7#b;d ed41 p4 #cgf71 describing three half-castes who accompanied him on a hunting trip1 says--,two of them were brothers1 namely1 ,joo 7,john7 and ,zephyrino ,jabut3 ,jabut1 or tortoise1 being a nickname which their father had earned for his slow gait1 and which1 as is usual in this country1 had descended as the surname of the family4 ,let me add the statement made by ,mr4 ,wallace respecting this same region1 that one of the tribes on the river ,isnna is called ',jurupari' 7,devils74 ,another is called ',ducks2' a third1 ',stars2' a fourth1 ',mandiocca4' ,putting these two statements together1 can there be any doubt about the genesis of these tribal names8 ,let the ,tortoise become sufficiently distinguished 7not necessarily by superiority--great inferiority may occasionally suffice7 and the tradition of descent from him1 preserved by his descendants themselves if he was superior1 and by their contemptuous neighbours if he was inferior1 may become a tribal name4#cj ,but this1 it will be said1 does not amount to an explanation of animal-worship4 ,true3 a third factor remains to be specified4 ,given a belief in the still-existing other self of the deceased ancestor1 who must be propitiated2 given this survival of his metaphorical name among his grandchildren1 great-grandchildren1 etc42 and the further requisite is that the distinction between metaphor and reality shall be forgotten4 ,let tradition fail to keep clearly in view the fact that the ancestor was a man called the ,wolf--let him be habitually spoken of as the ,wolf1 just as when alive2 and the natural mistake of taking the name literally will bring with it1 firstly1 a belief in descent from an actual wolf1 and1 secondly1 a treatment of the wolf in a manner likely to propitiate him--a manner appropriate to one who may be the other self of the dead ancestor1 or one of the kindred1 and therefore a friend4 ,that a misunderstanding of this kind is likely to grow up1 becomes obvious when we bear in mind the great indefiniteness of primitive language4 ,as ,prof4 ,max ,mller says1 respecting certain misinterpretations of an opposite kind3 ,these metaphors 444 would become mere names handed down in the conversation of a family1 understood perhaps by the grandfather1 familiar to the father1 but strange to the son1 and misunderstood by the grandson4 ,we have ample reason1 then1 for supposing such misinterpretations4 ,nay1 we may go further4 ,we are justified in saying that they are certain to occur4 ,for undeveloped languages contain no words capable of indicating the distinction to be kept in view4 ,in the tongues of existing inferior races1 only concrete objects and acts are expressible4 ,the ,australians have a name for each kind of tree1 but no name for tree irrespective of kind4 ,and though some witnesses allege that their vocabulary is not absolutely destitute of generic names1 its extreme poverty in such is unquestionable4 ,similarly with the ,tasmanians4 ,dr4 ,milligan says they had acquired very limited powers of abstraction or generalization4 ,they possessed no words representing abstract ideas2 for each variety of gum-tree and wattle-tree1 etc41 etc41 they had a name1 but they had no equivalent for the expression1 'a tree2' neither could they express abstract qualities1 such as hard1 soft1 warm1 cold1 long1 short1 round1 etc42 for 'hard1' they would say 'like a stone2' for 'tall1' they would say 'long legs1' etc42 and for 'round1' they said 'like a ball1' 'like the moon1' and so on1 usually suiting the action to the word1 and confirming1 by some sign1 the meaning to be understood4#ca ,now1 even making allowance for over-statement here 7which seems needful1 since the word long1 said to be inexpressible in the abstract1 subsequently occurs as qualifying a concrete in the expression1 long legs71 it is manifest that so imperfect a language must fail to convey the idea of a name1 as something separate from a thing2 and that still less can it be capable of indicating the act of naming4 ,familiar use of such partially-abstract words as are applicable to all objects of a class1 is needful before there can be reached the conception of a name--a word symbolizing the symbolic character of other words2 and the conception of a name1 with its answering abstract term1 must be long current before the verb to name can arise4 ,hence1 men with speech so rude1 cannot transmit the tradition of an ancestor named the ,wolf1 as distinguished from the actual wolf4 ,the children and grandchildren who saw him will not be led into error2 but in later generations1 descent from the ,wolf will inevitably come to mean descent from the animal known by that name4 ,and the ideas and sentiments which1 as above shown1 naturally grow up round the belief that the dead parents and grandparents are still alive1 and ready1 if propitiated1 to befriend their descendants1 will be extended to the wolf species4 ,before passing to other developments of this general view1 let me point out how not simply animal-worship is thus accounted for1 but also the conception1 so variously illustrated in ancient legends1 that animals are capable of displaying human powers of speech and thought and action4 ,mythologies are full of stories of beasts and birds and fishes that have played intelligent parts in human affairs--creatures that have befriended particular persons by giving them information1 by guiding them1 by yielding them help2 or else that have deceived them1 verbally or otherwise4 ,evidently all these traditions1 as well as those about abductions of women by animals and fostering of children by them1 fall naturally into their places as results of the habitual misinterpretation ,i have described4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the probability of the hypothesis will appear still greater when we observe how readily it applies to the worship of other orders of objects4 ,belief in actual descent from an animal1 strange as we may think it1 is one by no means incongruous with the unanalyzed experiences of the savage2 for there come under his notice many metamorphoses1 vegetal and animal1 which are apparently of like character4 ,but how could he possibly arrive at so grotesque a conception as that the progenitor of his tribe was the sun1 or the moon1 or a particular star8 ,no observation of surrounding phenomena affords the slightest suggestion of any such possibility4 ,but by the inheritance of nicknames that are eventually mistaken for the names of the objects from which they were derived1 the belief readily arises--is sure to arise4 ,that the names of heavenly bodies will furnish metaphorical names to the uncivilized1 is manifest4 ,do we not ourselves call a distinguished singer or actor a star8 ,and have we not in poems numerous comparisons of men and women to the sun and moon2 as in ,love's ,labour's ,lost1 where the princess is called a gracious moon1 and as in ,henry ,,vii41 where we read--,those suns of glory1 those two lights of men8 ,clearly1 primitive peoples will be not unlikely thus to speak of the chief hero of a successful battle4 ,when we remember how the arrival of a triumphant warrior must affect the feelings of his tribe1 dissipating clouds of anxiety and brightening all faces with joy1 we shall see that the comparison of him to the sun is quite natural2 and in early speech this comparison can be made only by calling him the sun4 ,as before1 then1 it will happen that1 through a confounding of the metaphorical name with the actual name1 his progeny1 after a few generations1 will be regarded by themselves and others as descendants of the sun4 ,and1 as a consequence1 partly of actual inheritance of the ancestral character1 and partly of maintenance of the traditions respecting the ancestor's achievements1 it will also naturally happen that the solar race will be considered a superior race1 as we find it habitually is4 ,the origin of other totems1 equally strange1 if not even stranger1 is similarly accounted for1 though otherwise unaccountable4 ,one of the ,new-,zealand chiefs claimed as his progenitor the neighbouring great mountain1 ,tongariro4 ,this seemingly-whimsical belief becomes intelligible when we observe how easily it may have arisen from a nickname4 ,do we not ourselves sometimes speak figuratively of a tall1 fat man as a mountain of flesh8 ,and1 among a people prone to speak in still more concrete terms1 would it not happen that a chief1 remarkable for his great bulk1 would be nicknamed after the highest mountain within sight1 because he towered above other men as this did above surrounding hills8 ,such an occurrence is not simply possible1 but probable4 ,and1 if so1 the confusion of metaphor with fact would originate this surprising genealogy4 ,a notion perhaps yet more grotesque1 thus receives a satisfactory interpretation4 ,what could have put it into the imagination of any one that he was descended from the dawn8 ,given the extremest credulity1 joined with the wildest fancy1 it would still seem requisite that the ancestor should be conceived as an entity2 and the dawn is entirely without that definiteness and comparative constancy which enter into the conception of an entity4 ,but when we remember that the ,dawn is a natural complimentary name for a beautiful girl opening into womanhood1 the genesis of the idea becomes1 on the above hypothesis1 quite obvious4#cb 99 99 99 99 99 ,another indirect verification is that we thus get a clear conception of ,fetichism in general4 ,under the fetichistic mode of thought1 surrounding objects and agents are regarded as having powers more or less definitely personal in their natures2 and the current interpretation is1 that human intelligence1 in its early stages1 is obliged to conceive of their powers under this form4 ,i have myself hitherto accepted this interpretation2 though always with a sense of dissatisfaction4 ,this dissatisfaction was1 ,i think1 well grounded4 ,the theory is scarcely a theory properly so-called2 but rather1 a restatement in other words4 ,uncivilized men do habitually form anthropomorphic conceptions of surrounding things2 and this observed general fact is transformed into the theory that at first they must so conceive them--a theory for which the psychological justification attempted1 seems to me inadequate4 ,from our present stand-point1 it becomes manifest that ,fetichism is not primary but secondary4 ,what has been said above almost of itself shows this4 ,let us1 however1 follow out the steps of its genesis4 ,respecting the ,tasmanians1 ,dr4 ,milligan says3--,the names of men and women were taken from natural objects and occurrences around1 as1 for instance1 a kangaroo1 a gum tree1 snow1 hail1 thunder1 the wind1 flowers in blossom1 etc4 ,surrounding objects1 then1 giving origin to names of persons1 and being1 in the way shown1 eventually mistaken for the actual progenitors of those who descend from persons nicknamed after them1 it results that these surrounding objects come to be regarded as in some manner possessed of personalities like the human4 ,he whose family tradition is that his ancestor was the ,crab1 will conceive the crab as having a disguised inner power like his own2 an alleged descent from the ,palm-tree will entail belief in some kind of consciousness dwelling in the palm-tree4 ,hence1 in proportion as the animals1 plants1 and inanimate objects or agents that originate names of persons1 become numerous 7which they will do in proportion as a tribe becomes large and the number of persons to be distinguished from one another increases71 multitudinous things around will acquire imaginary personalities4 ,and so it will happen that1 as ,mr4 ,mc,lennan says of the ,feejeeans1 ,vegetables and stones1 nay1 even tools and weapons1 pots and canoes1 have souls that are immortal1 and that1 like the souls of men1 pass on at last to ,mbulu1 the abode of departed spirits4 ,setting out1 then1 with a belief in the still-living other self of the dead ancestor1 the alleged general cause of misapprehension affords us an intelligible origin of the fetichistic conception2 and we are enabled to see how it tends to become a general1 if not a universal1 conception4 99 99 99 99 99 ,other apparently inexplicable phenomena are at the same time divested of their strangeness4 ,i refer to the beliefs in1 and worship of1 compound monsters--impossible hybrid animals1 and forms that are half human1 half brutal4 ,the theory of a primordial ,fetichism1 supposing it otherwise adequate1 yields no feasible solutions of these4 ,grant the alleged original tendency to think of all natural agencies as in some way personal4 ,grant1 too1 that hence may arise a worship of animals1 plants1 and even inanimate bodies4 ,still the obvious implication is that the worship so derived will be limited to things that are1 or have been1 perceived4 ,why should this mode of thought lead the savage to imagine a combination of bird and mammal2 and not only to imagine it1 but to worship it as a god8 ,if even we admit that some illusion may have suggested the belief in a creature half man1 half fish1 we cannot thus explain the prevalence among ,eastern races of idols representing bird-headed men1 and men having their legs replaced by the legs of a cock1 and men with the heads of elephants4 ,carrying with us the inferences above drawn1 however1 it is a corollary that ideas and practices of these kinds will arise4 ,when tradition preserves both lines of ancestry--when a chief1 nicknamed the ,wolf1 carries away from an adjacent tribe a wife who is remembered either under the animal name of her tribe1 or as a woman2 it will happen that if a son distinguishes himself1 the remembrance of him among his descendants will be that he was born of a wolf and some other animal1 or of a wolf and a woman4 ,misinterpretation1 arising in the way described from defects of language1 will entail belief in a creature uniting the attributes of the two2 and if the tribe grows into a society1 representations of such a creature will become objects of worship4 ,one of the cases cited by ,mr4 ,mc,lennan may here be repeated in illustration4 ,the story of the origin of the ,dikokamenni ,kirgheez1 they say1 from a red greyhound and a certain queen and her forty handmaidens1 is of ancient date4 ,now1 if the red greyhound was the nickname of a man extremely swift of foot 7celebrated runners have been nicknamed greyhound among ourselves71 a story of this kind would naturally arise2 and if the metaphorical name was mistaken for the actual name1 there might result1 as the idol of the race1 a compound form appropriate to the story4 ,we need not be surprised1 then1 at finding among the ,egyptians the goddess ,pasht represented as a woman with a lion's head1 and the god ,har-hat as a man with the head of a hawk4 ,the ,babylonian gods--one having the form of a man with an eagle's tail1 and another uniting a human bust to a fish's body--no longer appear such unaccountable conceptions4 ,we get feasible explanations1 too1 of sculptures representing sphinxes1 winged human-headed bulls1 etc42 as well as of the stories about centaurs1 satyrs1 and the rest4 99 99 99 99 99 ,ancient myths in general thus acquire meanings considerably different from those ascribed to them by comparative mythologists4 ,though these last may be in part correct1 yet if the foregoing argument is valid1 they can scarcely be correct in their main outlines4 ,indeed1 if we read the facts the other way upward1 regarding as secondary or additional1 the elements that are said to be primary1 while we regard as primary1 certain elements which are considered as accretions of later times1 we shall1 ,i think1 be nearer the truth4 ,the current theory of the myth is that it has grown out of the habit of symbolizing natural agents and processes1 in terms of human personalities and actions4 ,now1 it may in the first place be remarked that1 though symbolization of this kind is common among civilized races1 it is not common among races that are the most uncivilized4 ,by existing savages1 surrounding objects1 motions1 and changes1 are habitually used to convey ideas respecting human transactions4 ,it needs but to read the speech of an ,indian chief to see that just as primitive men name one another metaphorically after surrounding objects1 so do they metaphorically describe one another's doings as though they were the doings of natural objects4 ,but assuming a contrary habit of thought to be the dominant one1 ancient myths are explained as results of the primitive tendency to symbolize inanimate things and their changes1 by human beings and their doings4 ,a kindred difficulty must be added4 ,the change of verbal meaning from which the myth is said to arise1 is a change opposite in kind to that which prevails in the earlier stages of linguistic development4 ,it implies a derivation of the concrete from the abstract2 whereas at first abstracts are derived only from concretes3 the concrete of abstracts being a subsequent process4 ,in the words of ,prof4 ,max ,mller1 there are dialects spoken at the present day which have no abstract nouns1 and the more we go back in the history of languages1 the smaller we find the number of these useful expressions 7,chips1 vol4 ii41 p4 #ed72 or1 as he says more recently--,ancient words and ancient thoughts1 for both go together1 have not yet arrived at that stage of abstraction in which1 for instance1 active powers1 whether natural or supernatural1 can be represented in any but a personal and more or less human form4 7,fraser's ,magazine1 ,april1 #ahgj47 ,here the concrete is represented as original1 and the abstract as derivative4 ,immediately afterward1 however1 ,prof4 ,max ,mller1 having given as examples of abstract nouns1 day and night1 spring and winter1 dawn and twilight1 storm and thunder1 goes on to argue that1 as long as people thought in language1 it was simply impossible to speak of morning or evening1 of spring and winter1 without giving to these conceptions something of an individual1 active1 sexual1 and at last1 personal character4 7,chips1 vol4 ii41 p4 #ee47 ,here the concrete is derived from the abstract--the personal conception is represented as coming after the impersonal conception2 and through such transformation of the impersonal into the personal1 ,prof4 ,max ,mller considers ancient myths to have arisen4 ,how are these propositions reconcilable8 ,one of two things must be said3--,if originally there were none of these abstract nouns1 then the earliest statements respecting the daily course of ,nature were made in concrete terms--the personal elements of the myth were the primitive elements1 and the impersonal expressions which are their equivalents came later4 ,if this is not admitted1 then it must be held that1 until after there arose these abstract nouns1 there were no current statements at all respecting these most conspicuous objects and changes which the heavens and the earth present2 and that the abstract nouns having been somehow formed1 and rightly formed1 and used without personal meanings1 afterward became personalized--a process the reverse of that which characterizes early linguistic progress4 ,no such contradictions occur if we interpret myths after the manner that has been indicated4 ,nay1 besides escaping contradictions1 we meet with unexpected solutions4 ,the moment we try it1 the key unlocks for us with ease what seems a quite inexplicable fact1 which the current hypothesis takes as one of its postulates4 ,speaking of such words as sky and earth1 dew and rain1 rivers and mountains1 as well as of the abstract nouns above named1 ,prof4 ,max ,mller says--,now in ancient languages every one of these words had necessarily a termination expressive of gender1 and this naturally produced in the mind the corresponding idea of sex1 so that these names received not only an individual1 but a sexual character4 ,there was no substantive which was not either masculine or feminine2 neuters being of later growth1 and distinguishable chiefly in the nominative4 7,chips1 vol4 ii41 p4 #ee47 ,and this alleged necessity for a masculine or feminine implication is assigned as a part of the reason why these abstract nouns and collective nouns became personalized4 ,but should not a true theory of these first steps in the evolution of thought and language show us how it happened that men acquired the seemingly-strange habit of so framing their words for sky1 earth1 dew1 rain1 etc41 as to make them indicative of sex8 ,or1 at any rate1 must it not be admitted that an interpretation which1 instead of assuming this habit to be necessary1 shows us how it results1 thereby acquires an additional claim to acceptance8 ,the interpretation ,i have indicated does this4 ,if men and women are habitually nicknamed1 and if defects of language lead their descendants to regard themselves as descendants of the things from which the names were taken1 then masculine or feminine genders will be ascribed to these things according as the ancestors named after them were men or women4 ,if a beautiful maiden known metaphorically as the ,dawn1 afterwards becomes the mother of some distinguished chief called the ,north ,wind1 it will result that when1 in course of time1 the two have been mistaken for the actual dawn and the actual north wind1 these will1 by implication1 be respectively considered as male and female4 ,looking1 now1 at the ancient myths in general1 their seemingly most inexplicable trait is the habitual combination of alleged human ancestry and adventures1 with the possession of personalities otherwise figuring in the heavens and on the earth1 with totally non-human attributes4 ,this enormous incongruity1 not the exception but the rule1 the current theory fails to explain4 ,suppose it to be granted that the great terrestrial and celestial objects and agents naturally become personalized2 it does not follow that each of them shall have a specific human biography4 ,to say of some star that he was the son of this king or that hero1 was born in a particular place1 and when grown up carried off the wife of a neighbouring chief1 is a gratuitous multiplication of incongruities already sufficiently great2 and is not accounted for by the alleged necessary personalization of abstract and collective nouns4 ,as looked at from our present stand-point1 however1 such traditions become quite natural--nay1 it is clear that they will necessarily arise4 ,when a nickname has become a tribal name1 it thereby ceases to be individually distinctive2 and1 as already said1 the process of nicknaming inevitably continues4 ,it commences afresh with each child2 and the nickname of each child is both an individual name and a potential tribal name1 which may become an actual tribal name if the individual is sufficiently celebrated4 ,usually1 then1 there is a double set of distinctions2 under one of which the individual is known by his ancestral name1 and under the other of which he is known by a name suggestive of something peculiar to himself3 just as we have seen happens among the ,scotch clans4 ,consider1 now1 what will result when language has reached a stage of development such that it can convey the notion of naming1 and is able1 therefore1 to preserve traditions of human ancestry4 ,it will result that the individual will be known both as the son of such and such a man by a mother whose name was so and so1 and also as the ,crab1 or the ,bear1 or the ,whirlwind--supposing one of these to be his nickname4 ,such joint use of nicknames and proper names occurs in every school4 ,now1 clearly1 in advancing from the early state in which ancestors become identified with the objects they are nicknamed after1 to the state in which there are proper names that have lost their metaphorical meanings1 there must be passed through a state in which proper names1 partially settled only1 may or may not be preserved1 and in which the new nicknames are still liable to be mistaken for actual names4 ,under such conditions there will arise 7especially in the case of a distinguished man7 this seemingly-impossible combination of human parentage with the possession of the non-human1 or superhuman1 attributes of the thing which gave the nickname4 ,another anomaly simultaneously disappears4 ,the warrior may have1 and often will have1 a variety of complimentary nicknames--the powerful one1 the destroyer1 etc4 ,supposing his leading nickname has been the ,sun2 then when he comes to be identified by tradition with the sun1 it will happen that the sun will acquire his alternative descriptive titles--the swift one1 the lion1 the wolf--titles not obviously appropriate to the sun1 but quite appropriate to the warrior4 ,then there comes1 too1 an explanation of the remaining trait of such myths4 ,when this identification of conspicuous persons1 male and female1 with conspicuous natural agents1 has become settled1 there will in due course arise interpretations of the actions of these agents in anthropomorphic terms4 ,suppose1 for instance1 that ,endymion and ,selene1 metaphorically named1 the one after the setting sun1 the other after the moon1 have had their human individualities merged in those of the sun and moon1 through misinterpretation of metaphors2 what will happen8 ,the legend of their loves having to be reconciled with their celestial appearances and motions1 these will be spoken of as results of feeling and will2 so that when the sun is going down in the west1 while the moon in mid-heaven is following him1 the fact will be expressed by saying3 ,selene loves and watches ,endymion4 ,thus we obtain a consistent explanation of the myth without distorting it2 and without assuming that it contains gratuitous fictions4 ,we are enabled to accept the biographical part of it1 if not as literal fact1 still as having had fact for its root4 ,we are helped to see how1 by an inevitable misinterpretation1 there grew out of a more or less true tradition1 this strange identification of its personages1 with objects and powers totally non-human in their aspects4 ,and then we are shown how1 from the attempt to reconcile in thought these contradictory elements of the myth1 there arose the habit of ascribing the actions of these non-human things to human motives4 ,one further verification may be drawn from facts which are obstacles to the converse hypothesis4 ,these objects and powers1 celestial and terrestrial1 which force themselves most on men's attention1 have some of them several proper names1 identified with those of different individuals1 born at different places1 and having different sets of adventures4 ,thus we have the sun variously known as ,apollo1 ,endymion1 ,helios1 ,tithonos1 etc4--personages having irreconcilable genealogies4 ,such anomalies ,prof4 ,max ,mller apparently ascribes to the untrustworthiness of traditions1 which are careless about contradictions1 or ready to solve them sometimes by the most atrocious expedients4 7,chips1 vol4 ii41 p4 #hd47 ,but if the evolution of the myth has been that above indicated1 there exists no anomalies to be got rid of3 these diverse genealogies become parts of the evidence4 ,for we have abundant proof that the same objects furnish metaphorical names of men in different tribes4 ,there are ,duck tribes in ,australia1 in ,south ,america1 in ,north ,america4 ,the eagle is still a totem among the ,north ,americans1 as ,mr4 ,mc,lennan shows reason to conclude that it was among the ,egyptians1 among the ,jews1 and among the ,romans4 ,obviously1 for reasons already assigned1 it naturally happened in the early stages of the ancient races1 that complimentary comparisons of their heroes to the ,sun were frequently made4 ,what resulted8 ,the ,sun having furnished names for sundry chiefs and early founders of tribes1 and local traditions having severally identified them with the ,sun1 these tribes1 when they grew1 spread1 conquered1 or came otherwise into partial union1 originated a combined mythology1 which necessarily contained conflicting stories about the ,sun-god1 as about its other leading personages4 ,if the ,north-,american tribes1 among several of which there are traditions of a ,sun-god1 had developed a combined civilization1 there would similarly have arisen among them a mythology which ascribed to the ,sun several different proper names and genealogies4 99 99 99 99 99 ,let me briefly set down the leading characters of this hypothesis which give it probability4 ,true interpretations of all the natural processes1 organic and inorganic1 that have gone on in past times1 habitually trace them to causes still in action4 ,it is thus in ,geology2 it is thus in ,biology2 it is thus in ,philology4 ,here we find this characteristic repeated4 ,nicknaming1 the inheritance of nicknames1 and to some extent1 the misinterpretation of nicknames1 go on among us still2 and were surnames absent1 language imperfect1 and knowledge as rudimentary as of old1 it is tolerably manifest that results would arise like those we have contemplated4 ,a further characteristic of a true cause is that it accounts not only for the particular group of phenomena to be interpreted1 but also for other groups4 ,the cause here alleged does this4 ,it equally well explains the worship of animals1 of plants1 of mountains1 of winds1 of celestial bodies1 and even of appearances too vague to be considered entities4 ,it gives us an intelligible genesis of fetichistic conceptions in general4 ,it furnishes us with a reason for the practice1 otherwise so unaccountable1 of moulding the words applied to inanimate objects in such ways as to imply masculine and feminine genders4 ,it shows us how there naturally arose the worship of compound animals1 and of monsters half man1 half brute4 ,and it shows us why the worship of purely anthropomorphic deities came later1 when language had so far developed that it could preserve in tradition the distinction between proper names and nicknames4 ,a further verification of this view is1 that it conforms to the general law of evolution3 showing us how1 out of one simple1 vague1 aboriginal form of belief1 there have arisen1 by continuous differentiations1 the many heterogeneous forms of belief which have existed and do exist4 ,the desire to propitiate the other self of the dead ancestor1 displayed among savage tribes1 dominantly manifested by the early historic races1 by the ,peruvians and ,mexicans1 by the ,chinese at the present time1 and to a considerable degree by ourselves 7for what else is the wish to do that which a lately-deceased parent was known to have desired87 has been the universal first form of religious belief2 and from it have grown up the many divergent beliefs which have been referred to4 ,let me add1 as a further reason for adopting this view1 that it immensely diminishes the apparently-great contrast between early modes of thought and our own mode of thought4 ,doubtless the aboriginal man differs considerably from us1 both in intellect and feeling4 ,but such an interpretation of the facts as helps us to bridge over the gap1 derives additional likelihood from doing this4 ,the hypothesis ,i have sketched out enables us to see that primitive ideas are not so gratuitously absurd as we suppose1 and also enables us to rehabilitate the ancient myth with far less distortion than at first sight appears possible4 ,these views ,i hope to develop in the first part of ,the ,principles of ,sociology4 ,the large mass of evidence which ,i shall be able to give in support of the hypothesis1 joined with the solutions it will be shown to yield of many minor problems which ,i have passed over1 will1 ,i think1 then give to it a still greater probability than it seems now to have4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #bi3 ,a critical reader may raise an objection4 ,if animal-worship is to be rationally interpreted1 how can the interpretation set out by assuming a belief in the spirits of dead ancestors--a belief which just as much requires explanation8 ,doubtless there is here a wide gap in the argument4 ,i hope eventually to fill it up4 ,here1 out of many experiences which conspire to generate this belief1 ,i can but briefly indicate the leading ones3 #a4 ,it is not impossible that his shadow1 following him everywhere1 and moving as he moves1 may have some small share in giving to the savage a vague idea of his duality4 ,it needs but to watch a child's interest in the movements of its shadow1 and to remember that at first a shadow cannot be interpreted as a negation of light1 but is looked upon as an entity1 to perceive that the savage may very possibly consider it as a specific something which forms part of him4 #b4 ,a much more decided suggestion of the same kind is likely to result from the reflection of his face and figure in water3 imitating him as it does in his form1 colours1 motions1 grimaces4 ,when we remember that not unfrequently a savage objects to have his portrait taken1 because he thinks whoever carries away a representation of him carries away some part of his being1 we see how probable it is that he thinks his double in the water is a reality in some way belonging to him4 #c4 ,echoes must greatly tend to confirm the idea of duality otherwise arrived at4 ,incapable as he is of understanding their natural origin1 the primitive man necessarily ascribes them to living beings--beings who mock him and elude his search4 #d4 ,the suggestions resulting from these and other physical phenomena are1 however1 secondary in importance4 ,the root of this belief in another self lies in the experience of dreams4 ,the distinction so easily made by us between our life in dreams and our real life1 is one which the savage recognizes in but a vague way2 and he cannot express even that distinction which he perceives4 ,when he awakes1 and to those who have seen him lying quietly asleep1 describes where he has been1 and what he has done1 his rude language fails to state the difference between seeing and dreaming that he saw1 doing and dreaming that he did4 ,from this inadequacy of his language it not only results that he cannot truly represent this difference to others1 but also that he cannot truly represent it to himself4 ,hence1 in the absence of an alternative interpretation1 his belief1 and that of those to whom he tells his adventures1 is that his other self has been away1 and came back when he awoke4 ,and this belief1 which we find among various existing savage tribes1 we equally find in the traditions of the early civilized races4 #e4 ,the conception of another self capable of going away and returning1 receives what to the savage must seem conclusive verifications from the abnormal suspensions of consciousness1 and derangements of consciousness1 that occasionally occur in members of his tribe4 ,one who has fainted1 and cannot be immediately brought back to himself 7note the significance of our own phrases returning to himself1 etc47 as a sleeper can1 shows him a state in which the other self has been away for a time beyond recall4 ,still more is this prolonged absence of the other self shown him in cases of apoplexy1 catalepsy1 and other forms of suspended animation4 ,here for hours the other self persists in remaining away1 and on returning refuses to say where he has been4 ,further verification is afforded by every epileptic subject1 into whose body1 during the absence of the other self1 some enemy has entered2 for how else does it happen that the other self1 on returning1 denies all knowledge of what his body has been doing8 ,and this supposition that the body has been possessed by some other being1 is confirmed by the phenomena of somnambulism and insanity4 #f4 ,what1 then1 is the interpretation inevitably put upon death8 ,the other self has habitually returned after sleep1 which simulates death4 ,it has returned1 too1 after fainting1 which simulates death much more4 ,it has even returned after the rigid state of catalepsy1 which simulates death very greatly4 ,will it not return also after this still more prolonged quiescence and rigidity8 ,clearly it is quite possible--quite probable even4 ,the dead man's other self is gone away for a long time1 but it still exists somewhere1 far or near1 and may at any moment come back to do all he said he would do4 ,hence the various burial-rites--the placing of weapons and valuables along with the body1 the daily bringing of food to it1 etc4 ,i hope hereafter to show that1 with such knowledge of the facts as he has1 this interpretation is the most reasonable the savage can arrive at4 ,let me here1 however1 by way of showing how clearly the facts bear out this view1 give one illustration out of many4 ,the ceremonies with which they the ,veddahs invoke them the shades of the dead are few as they are simple4 ,the most common is the following4 ,an arrow is fixed upright in the ground1 and the ,veddah dances slowly round it1 chanting this invocation1 which is almost musical in its rhythm3 ,m miya1 m miy1 m dey1 ,topang koyihetti mittigan yandh8 ,my departed one1 my departed one1 my ,god6 ,where art thou wandering8 ,this invocation appears to be used on all occasions when the intervention of the guardian spirits is required1 in sickness1 preparatory to hunting1 etc4 ,sometimes1 in the latter case1 a portion of the flesh of the game is promised as a votive offering1 in the event of the chase being successful2 and they believe that the spirits will appear to them in dreams and tell them where to hunt4 ,sometimes they cook food and place it in the dry bed of a river1 or some other secluded spot1 and then call on their deceased ancestors by name4 ',come and partake of this6 ,give us maintenance as you did when living6 ,come1 wheresoever you may be2 on a tree1 on a rock1 in the forest1 come6' ,and they dance round the food1 half chanting1 half shouting1 the invocation4--,bailey1 in ,transactions of the ,ethnological ,society1 ,london1 ,n4 ,s41 ii41 p4 #cja-b4 ,footnote #cj3 ,since the foregoing pages were written1 my attention has been drawn by ,sir ,john ,lubbock to a passage in the appendix to the second edition of ,prehistoric ,times1 in which he has indicated this derivation of tribal names4 ,he says3 ,in endeavouring to account for the worship of animals1 we must remember that names are very frequently taken from them4 ,the children and followers of a man called the ,bear or the ,lion would make that a tribal name4 ,hence the animal itself would be first respected1 at last worshipped4 ,of the genesis of this worship1 however1 ,sir ,john ,lubbock does not give any specific explanation4 ,apparently he inclines to the belief1 tacitly adopted also by ,mr4 ,mc,lennan1 that animal-worship is derived from an original ,fetichism1 of which it is a more developed form4 ,as will shortly be seen1 ,i take a different view of its origin4 ,footnote #ca3 ,proceedings of the ,royal ,society of ,tasmania1 iii41 p4 #bhj-ha4 ,footnote #cb3 ,i have since found1 however1 that the name ,dawn1 which occurs in various places1 seems more frequently a birth-name1 given because the birth took place at dawn4 ,,morals ,,and ,,moral ,,sentiments4 ,first published in ,the ,fortnightly ,review for ,april1 #ahga4 ,if a writer who discusses unsettled questions takes up every gauntlet thrown down to him1 polemical writing will absorb much of his energy4 ,having a power of work which unfortunately does not suffice for executing with anything like due rapidity the task ,i have undertaken1 ,i have made it a policy to avoid controversy as much as possible1 even at the cost of being seriously misunderstood4 ,hence it resulted that when in ,macmillan's ,magazine1 for ,july1 #ahfi1 ,mr4 ,richard ,hutton published1 under the title ,a ,questionable ,parentage for ,morals1 a criticism on a doctrine of mine1 ,i decided to let his misrepresentations pass unnoticed until1 in the course of my work1 ,i arrived at the stage where1 by a full exposition of this doctrine1 they would be set aside4 ,it did not occur to me that1 in the meantime1 these erroneous statements1 accepted as true statements1 would be repeated by other writers1 and my views commented upon as untenable4 ,this1 however1 has happened4 ,in more periodicals than one1 ,i have seen it asserted that ,mr4 ,hutton has effectually disposed of my hypothesis4 ,supposing that this hypothesis has been rightly expressed by ,mr4 ,hutton1 ,sir ,john ,lubbock1 in his ,origin of ,civilisation1 c41 has been led to express a partial dissent2 which ,i think he would not have expressed had my own exposition been before him4 ,mr4 ,mivart1 too1 in his recent ,genesis of ,species1 has been similarly betrayed into misapprehensions4 ,and now ,sir ,alexander ,grant1 following the same lead1 has conveyed to the readers of the ,fortnightly ,review another of these conceptions1 which is but very partially true4 ,thus ,i find myself compelled to say as much as will serve to prevent further spread of the mischief4 99 99 99 99 99 ,if a general doctrine concerning a highly-involved class of phenomena could be adequately presented in a single paragraph of a letter1 the writing of books would be superfluous4 ,in the brief exposition of certain ethical doctrines held by me1 which is given in ,professor ,bain's ,mental and ,moral ,science1 it is stated that they are-- as yet1 nowhere fully expressed4 ,they form part of the more general doctrine of ,evolution which he is engaged in working out2 and they are at present to be gathered only from scattered passages4 ,it is true that1 in his first work1 ,social ,statics1 he presented what he then regarded as a tolerably complete view of one division of ,morals4 ,but without abandoning this view1 he now regards it as inadequate--more especially in respect of its basis4 ,mr4 ,hutton1 however1 taking the bare enunciation of one part of this basis1 deals with it critically2 and1 in the absence of any exposition by me1 sets forth what he supposes to be my grounds for it1 and proceeds to show that they are unsatisfactory4 ,if1 in his anxiety to suppress what he doubtless regards as a pernicious doctrine1 ,mr4 ,hutton could not wait until ,i had explained myself1 it might have been expected that he would use whatever information was to be had concerning it4 ,so far from seeking out such information1 however1 he has1 in a way for which ,i cannot account1 ignored the information immediately before him4 ,the title which ,mr4 ,hutton has chosen for his criticism is1 ,a ,questionable ,parentage for ,morals4 ,now he has ample means of knowing that ,i allege a primary basis of ,morals1 quite independent of that which he describes and rejects4 ,i do not refer merely to the fact that having1 when he reviewed ,social ,statics1#cc expressed his very decided dissent from this primary basis1 he must have been aware that ,i alleged it2 for he may say that in the many years which have since elapsed he had forgotten all about it4 ,but ,i refer to the distinct enunciation of this primary basis in that letter to ,mr4 ,mill from which he quotes4 ,in a preceding paragraph of the letter1 ,i have explained that1 while ,i accept utilitarianism in the abstract1 ,i do not accept that current utilitarianism which recognizes for the guidance of conduct nothing beyond empirical generalizations2 and ,i have contended that-- ,morality1 properly so-called--the science of right conduct--has for its object to determine how and why certain modes of conduct are detrimental1 and certain other modes beneficial4 ,these good and bad results cannot be accidental1 but must be necessary consequences of the constitution of things2 and ,i conceive it to be the business of ,moral ,science to deduce1 from the laws of life and the conditions of existence1 what kinds of action necessarily tend to produce happiness1 and what kinds to produce unhappiness4 ,having done this1 its deductions are to be recognised as laws of conduct2 and are to be conformed to irrespective of a direct estimation of happiness or misery4 ,nor is this the only enunciation of what ,i conceive to be the primary basis of morals1 contained in this same letter4 ,a subsequent paragraph separated by four lines only from that which ,mr4 ,hutton extracts1 commences thus3-- ,progressing civilization1 which is of necessity a succession of compromises between old and new1 requires a perpetual re-adjustment of the compromise between the ideal and the practicable in social arrangements3 to which end1 both elements of the compromise must be kept in view4 ,if it is true that pure rectitude prescribes a system of things far too good for men as they are1 it is not less true that mere expediency does not of itself tend to establish a system of things any better than that which exists4 ,while absolute morality owes to expediency the checks which prevent it from rushing into ,utopian absurdities1 expediency is indebted to absolute morality for all stimulus to improvement4 ,granted that we are chiefly interested in ascertaining what is relatively right1 it still follows that we must first consider what is absolutely right2 since the one conception presupposes the other4 ,i do not see how there could well be a more emphatic assertion that there exists a primary basis of morals independent of1 and in a sense antecedent to1 that which is furnished by experiences of utility2 and consequently1 independent of1 and1 in a sense antecedent to1 those moral sentiments which ,i conceive to be generated by such experiences4 ,yet no one could gather from ,mr4 ,hutton's article that ,i assert this2 or would even find reasons for a faint suspicion that ,i do so4 ,from the reference made to my further views1 he would infer my acceptance of that empirical utilitarianism which ,i have expressly repudiated4 ,and the title which ,mr4 ,hutton gives to his paper clearly asserts1 by implication1 that ,i recognize no parentage for morals beyond that of the accumulation and organization of the effects of experience4 ,i cannot believe that ,mr4 ,hutton intended to convey this erroneous impression4 ,he was1 ,i suppose1 too much absorbed in contemplating the proposition he combats to observe1 or1 at least1 to attach any weight to1 the propositions which accompany it4 ,but ,i am sorry he did not perceive the mischief he was likely to do me by spreading this one-sided statement4 99 99 99 99 99 ,i pass now to the particular question at issue--not the parentage for morals1 but the parentage of moral sentiments4 ,in describing my view on this more special doctrine1 ,mr4 ,hutton has similarly1 ,i regret to say1 neglected the data which would have helped him to draw an approximately true outline of it4 ,it cannot well be that the existence of such data was unknown to him4 ,they are contained in the ,principles of ,psychology2 and ,mr4 ,hutton reviewed that work when it was first published4#cd ,in a chapter on the ,feelings1 which occurs near the end of it1 there is sketched out a process of evolution by no means like that which ,mr4 ,hutton indicates2 and had he turned to that chapter he would have seen that his description of the genesis of moral sentiments out of organized experiences is not such a one as ,i should have given4 ,let me quote a passage from that chapter4 ,not only are those emotions which form the immediate stimuli to actions1 thus explicable2 but the like explanation applies to the emotions that leave the subject of them comparatively passive3 as1 for instance1 the emotion produced by beautiful scenery4 ,the gradually increasing complexity in the groups of sensations and ideas co-ordinated1 ends in the co-ordination of those vast aggregations of them which a grand landscape excites and suggests4 ,the infant taken into the midst of mountains1 is totally unaffected by them2 but is delighted with the small group of attributes and relations presented in a toy4 ,the child can appreciate1 and be pleased with1 the more complicated relations of household objects and localities1 the garden1 the field1 and the street4 ,but it is only in youth and mature age1 when individual things and small assemblages of them have become familiar and automatically cognizable1 that those immense assemblages which landscapes present can be adequately grasped1 and the highly aggregated states of consciousness produced by them1 experienced4 ,then1 however1 the various minor groups of states that have been in earlier days severally produced by trees1 by fields1 by streams1 by cascades1 by rocks1 by precipices1 by mountains1 by clouds1 are aroused together4 ,along with the sensations immediately received1 there are partially excited the myriads of sensations that have been in times past received from objects such as those presented2 further1 there are partially excited the various incidental feelings that were experienced on all these countless past occasions2 and there are probably also excited certain deeper1 but now vague combinations of states1 that were organized in the race during barbarous times1 when its pleasurable activities were chiefly among the woods and waters4 ,and out of all these excitations1 some of them actual but most of them nascent1 is composed the emotion which a fine landscape produces in us4 ,it is1 ,i think1 amply manifest that the processes here indicated are not to be taken as intellectual processes--not as processes in which recognized relations between pleasures and their antecedents1 or intelligent adaptations of means to ends1 form the dominant elements4 ,the state of mind produced by an aggregate of picturesque objects is not one resolvable into propositions4 ,the sentiment does not contain within itself any consciousness of causes and consequences of happiness4 ,the vague recollections of other beautiful scenes and other delightful days which it dimly rouses1 are not aroused because of any rational co-ordinations of ideas that have been formed in bygone years4 ,mr4 ,hutton1 however1 assumes that in speaking of the genesis of moral feelings as due to inherited experiences of the pleasures and pains caused by certain modes of conduct1 ,i am speaking of reasoned-out experiences--experiences consciously accumulated and generalized4 ,he overlooks the fact that the genesis of emotions is distinguished from the genesis of ideas in this2 that whereas the ideas are composed of elements that are simple1 definitely related1 and 7in the case of general ideas7 constantly related1 emotions are composed of enormously complex aggregates of elements that are never twice alike1 and which stand in relations that are never twice alike4 ,the difference in the resulting modes of consciousness is this3--,in the genesis of an idea the successive experiences1 be they of sounds1 colours1 touches1 tastes1 or be they of the special objects which combine many of these into groups1 have so much in common that each1 when it occurs1 can be definitely thought of as like those which preceded it4 ,but in the genesis of an emotion the successive experiences so far differ that each of them1 when it occurs1 suggests past experiences which are not specifically similar1 but have only a general similarity2 and1 at the same time1 it suggests benefits or evils in past experience which likewise are various in their special natures1 though they have a certain community in general nature4 ,hence it results that the consciousness aroused is a multitudinous1 confused consciousness1 in which1 along with a certain kind of combination among the impressions received from without1 there is a vague cloud of ideal combinations akin to them1 and a vague mass of ideal feelings of pleasure or pain which were associated with these4 ,we have abundant proof that feelings grow up without reference to recognized causes and consequences1 and without the possessor of them being able to say why they have grown up2 though analysis1 nevertheless1 shows that they have been formed out of connected experiences4 ,the familiar fact that a kind of jam which was1 during childhood1 repeatedly taken after medicine1 may become1 by simple association of sensations1 so nauseous that it cannot be tolerated in after-life1 illustrates clearly the way in which repugnances may be established by habitual association of feelings1 without any belief in causal connexion2 or rather1 in spite of the knowledge that there is no causal connexion4 ,similarly with pleasurable emotions4 ,the cawing of rooks is not in itself an agreeable sound3 musically considered1 it is very much the contrary4 ,yet the cawing of rooks usually produces in people feelings of a grateful kind--feelings which most of them suppose to result from the quality of the sound itself4 ,only the few who are given to self-analysis are aware that the cawing of rooks is agreeable to them because it has been connected with countless of their greatest gratifications--with the gathering of wild flowers in childhood2 with ,saturday-afternoon excursions in school-boy days2 with midsummer holidays in the country1 when books were thrown aside and lessons were replaced by games and adventures in the fields2 with fresh1 sunny mornings in after-years1 when a walking excursion was an immense relief from toil4 ,as it is1 this sound1 though not causally related to all these multitudinous and varied past delights1 but only often associated with them1 can no more be heard without rousing a dim consciousness of these delights1 than the voice of an old friend unexpectedly coming into the house can be heard without suddenly raising a wave of that feeling that has resulted from the pleasures of past companionship4 ,if we are to understand the genesis of emotions1 either in the individual or in the race1 we must take account of this all-important process4 ,mr4 ,hutton1 however1 apparently overlooking it1 and not having reminded himself1 by referring to the ,principles of ,psychology1 that ,i insist upon it1 represents my hypothesis to be that a certain sentiment results from the consolidation of intellectual conclusions6 ,he speaks of me as believing that what seems to us now the 'necessary' intuitions and a priori assumptions of human nature1 are likely to prove1 when scientifically analysed1 nothing but a similar conglomeration of our ancestors' best observations and most useful empirical rules4 ,he supposes me to think that men having1 in past times1 come to see that truthfulness was useful1 the habit of approving truth-speaking and fidelity to engagements1 which was first based on this ground of utility1 became so rooted1 that the utilitarian ground of it was forgotten1 and we find ourselves springing to the belief in truth-speaking and fidelity to engagements from an inherited tendency4 ,similarly throughout1 ,mr4 ,hutton has so used the word utility1 and so interpreted it on my behalf1 as to make me appear to mean that moral sentiment is formed out of conscious generalizations respecting what is beneficial and what detrimental4 ,were such my hypothesis1 his criticisms would be very much to the point2 but as such is not my hypothesis1 they fall to the ground4 ,the experiences of utility ,i refer to are those which become registered1 not as distinctly recognized connexions between certain kinds of acts and certain kinds of remote results1 but those which become registered in the shape of associations between groups of feelings that have often recurred together1 though the relation between them has not been consciously generalized--associations the origin of which may be as little perceived as is the origin of the pleasure given by the sounds of a rookery2 but which1 nevertheless1 have arisen in the course of daily converse with things1 and serve as incentives or deterrents4 ,in the paragraph which ,mr4 ,hutton has extracted from my letter to ,mr4 ,mill1 ,i have indicated an analogy between those effects of emotional experiences out of which ,i believe moral sentiments have been developed1 and those effects of intellectual experiences out of which ,i believe space-intuitions have been developed4 ,rightly considering that the first of these hypotheses cannot stand if the last is disproved1 ,mr4 ,hutton has directed part of his attack against this last4 ,but would it not have been well if he had referred to the ,principles of ,psychology1 where this last hypothesis is set forth at length1 before criticising it8 ,would it not have been well to give an abstract of my own description of the process1 instead of substituting what he supposes my description must be8 ,any one who turns to the ,principles of ,psychology 7first edition1 pp4 #bah-bde71 and reads the two chapters1 ,the ,perception of ,body as presenting ,statical ,attributes1 and ,the ,perception of ,space1 will find that ,mr4 ,hutton's account of my view on this matter has given him no notion of the view as it is expressed by me2 and will1 perhaps1 be less inclined to smile than he was when he read ,mr4 ,hutton's account4 ,i cannot here do more than thus imply the invalidity of such part of ,mr4 ,hutton's argument as proceeds upon this incorrect representation4 ,the pages which would be required for properly explaining the doctrine that space-intuitions result from organized experiences may be better used for explaining this analogous doctrine at present before us4 ,this ,i will now endeavour to do2 not indirectly by correcting misapprehensions1 but directly by an exposition which shall be as brief as the extremely involved nature of the process allows4 ,an infant in arms1 when old enough to gaze at objects around with some vague recognition1 smiles in response to the laughing face and soft caressing voice of its mother4 ,let there come some one who1 with an angry face1 speaks to it in loud1 harsh tones4 ,the smile disappears1 the features contract into an expression of pain1 and1 beginning to cry1 it turns away its head1 and makes such movements of escape as are possible4 ,what is the meaning of these facts8 ,why does not the frown make it smile1 and the mother's laugh make it weep8 ,there is but one answer4 ,already in its developing brain there is coming into play the structure through which one cluster of visual and auditory impressions excites pleasurable feelings1 and the structure through which another cluster of visual and auditory impressions excites painful feelings4 ,the infant knows no more about the relation existing between a ferocious expression of face1 and the evils which may follow perception of it1 than the young bird just out of its nest knows of the possible pain and death which may be inflicted by a man coming towards it2 and as certainly in the one case as in the other1 the alarm felt is due to a partially-established nervous structure4 ,why does this partially-established nervous structure betray its presence thus early in the human being8 ,simply because1 in the past experiences of the human race1 smiles and gentle tones in those around have been the habitual accompaniments of pleasurable feelings2 while pains of many kinds1 immediate and more or less remote1 have been continually associated with the impressions received from knit brows1 and set teeth1 and grating voice4 ,much deeper down than the history of the human race must we go to find the beginnings of these connexions4 ,the appearances and sounds which excite in the infant a vague dread1 indicate danger2 and do so because they are the physiological accompaniments of destructive action--some of them common to man and inferior mammals1 and consequently understood by inferior mammals1 as every puppy shows us4 ,what we call the natural language of anger1 is due to a partial contraction of those muscles which actual combat would call into play2 and all marks of irritation1 down to that passing shade over the brow which accompanies slight annoyance1 are incipient stages of these same contractions4 ,conversely with the natural language of pleasure1 and of that state of mind which we call amicable feeling3 this1 too1 has a physiological interpretation4#ce ,let us pass now from the infant in arms to the children in the nursery4 ,what have the experiences of each been doing in aid of the emotional development we are considering8 ,while its limbs have been growing more agile by exercise1 its manipulative skill increasing by practice1 its perceptions of objects growing by use quicker1 more accurate1 more comprehensive2 the associations between these two sets of impressions received from those around1 and the pleasures and pains received along with them1 or after them1 have been by frequent repetition made stronger1 and their adjustments better4 ,the dim sense of pain and the vague glow of delight which the infant felt1 have1 in the urchin1 severally taken shapes that are more definite4 ,the angry voice of a nursemaid no longer arouses only a formless feeling of dread1 but also a specific idea of the slap that may follow4 ,the frown on the face of a bigger brother1 along with the primitive1 indefinable sense of ill1 brings the ideas of ills that are definable as kicks1 and cuffs1 and pullings of hair1 and losses of toys4 ,the faces of parents1 looking now sunny1 now gloomy1 have grown to be respectively associated with multitudinous forms of gratification and multitudinous forms of discomfort or privation4 ,hence these appearances and sounds1 which imply amity or enmity in those around1 become symbolic of happiness and misery2 so that eventually1 perception of the one set or the other can scarcely occur without raising a wave of pleasurable feeling or of painful feeling4 ,the body of this wave is still substantially of the same nature as it was at first2 for though in each of these multitudinous experiences a special set of facial and vocal signs has been connected with a special set of pleasures or pains2 yet since these pleasures or pains have been immensely varied in their kinds and combinations1 and since the signs that preceded them were in no two cases quite alike1 it results that even to the end the consciousness produced remains as vague as it is voluminous4 ,the thousands of partially-aroused ideas resulting from past experiences are massed together and superposed1 so as to form an aggregate in which nothing is distinct1 but which has the character of being pleasurable or painful according to the nature of its original components3 the chief difference between this developed feeling and the feeling aroused in the infant being1 that on bright or dark background forming the body of it1 may now be sketched out in thought the particular pleasures or pains which the particular circumstances suggest as likely4 ,what must be the working of this process under the conditions of aboriginal life8 ,the emotions given to the young savage by the natural language of love and hate in the members of his tribe1 gain first a partial definiteness in respect to his intercourse with his family and playmates2 and he learns by experience the utility1 in so far as his own ends are concerned1 of avoiding courses which call from others manifestations of anger1 and taking courses which call from them manifestations of pleasure4 ,not that he consciously generalizes4 ,he does not at that age1 probably not at any age1 formulate his experiences in the general principle that it is well for him to do things which bring smiles1 and to avoid doing things which bring frowns4 ,what happens is that having1 in the way shown1 inherited this connexion between the perception of anger in others and the feeling of dread1 and having discovered that certain acts of his bring on this anger1 he cannot subsequently think of committing one of these acts without thinking of the resulting anger1 and feeling more or less of the resulting dread4 ,he has no thought of the utility or inutility of the act itself3 the deterrent is the mainly vague1 but partially definite1 fear of evil that may follow4 ,so understood1 the deterring emotion is one which has grown out of experiences of utility1 using that word in its ethical sense2 and if we ask why this dreaded anger is called forth from others1 we shall habitually find that it is because the forbidden act entails pain somewhere--is negatived by utility4 ,on passing from domestic injunctions to injunctions current in the tribe1 we see no less clearly how these emotions produced by approbation and reprobation come to be connected in experience with actions which are beneficial to the tribe1 and actions which are detrimental to the tribe2 and how there consequently grow up incentives to the one class of actions and prejudices against the other class4 ,from early boyhood the young savage hears recounted the daring deeds of his chief--hears them in words of praise1 and sees all faces glowing with admiration4 ,from time to time also he listens while some one's cowardice is described in tones of scorn1 and with contemptuous metaphors1 and sees him meet with derision and insult whenever he appears4 ,that is to say1 one of the things that come to be associated in his mind with smiling faces1 which are symbolical of pleasures in general1 is courage2 and one of the things that come to be associated in his mind with frowns and other marks of enmity1 which form his symbol of unhappiness1 is cowardice4 ,these feelings are not formed in him because he has reasoned his way to the truth that courage is useful to the tribe1 and1 by implication1 to himself1 or to the truth that cowardice is a cause of evil4 ,in adult life he may perhaps see this2 but he certainly does not see it at the time when bravery is thus joined in his consciousness with all that is good1 and cowardice with all that is bad4 ,similarly there are produced in him feelings of inclination or repugnance towards other lines of conduct that have become established or interdicted1 because they are beneficial or injurious to the tribe2 though neither the young nor the adults know why they have become established or interdicted4 ,instance the praiseworthiness of wife-stealing1 and the viciousness of marrying within the tribe4 ,we may now ascend a stage to an order of incentives and restraints derived from these4 ,the primitive belief is that every dead man becomes a demon1 who is often somewhere at hand1 may at any moment return1 may give aid or do mischief1 and has to be continually propitiated4 ,hence among other agents whose approbation or reprobation are contemplated by the savage as consequences of his conduct1 are the spirits of his ancestors4 ,when a child he is told of their deeds1 now in triumphant tones1 now in whispers of horror2 and the instilled belief that they may inflict some vaguely-imagined but fearful evil1 or give some great help1 becomes a powerful incentive or deterrent4 ,especially does this happen when the story is of a chief1 distinguished for his strength1 his ferocity1 his persistence in that revenge on enemies which the experiences of the savage make him regard as beneficial and virtuous4 ,the consciousness that such a chief1 dreaded by neighbouring tribes1 and dreaded1 too1 by members of his own tribe1 may reappear and punish those who have disregarded his injunctions1 becomes a powerful motive4 ,but it is clear1 in the first place1 that the imagined anger and the imagined satisfaction of this deified chief1 are simply transfigured forms of the anger and satisfaction displayed by those around2 and that the feelings accompanying such imaginations have the same original root in the experiences which have associated an average of painful results with the manifestation of another's anger1 and an average of pleasurable results with the manifestation of another's satisfaction4 ,and it is clear1 in the second place1 that the actions thus forbidden and encouraged must be mostly actions that are respectively detrimental and beneficial to the tribe2 since the successful chief is usually a better judge than the rest1 and has the preservation of the tribe at heart4 ,hence experiences of utility1 consciously or unconsciously organized1 underlie his injunctions2 and the sentiments which prompt obedience are1 though very indirectly and without the knowledge of those who feel them1 referable to experiences of utility4 ,this transfigured form of restraint1 differing at first but little from the original form1 admits of immense development4 ,accumulating traditions1 growing in grandeur as they are repeated from generation to generation1 make more and more superhuman the early-recorded hero of the race4 ,his powers of inflicting punishment and giving happiness become ever greater1 more multitudinous1 and more varied2 so that the dread of divine displeasure1 and the desire to obtain divine approbation1 acquire a certain largeness and generality4 ,still the conceptions remain anthropomorphic4 ,the revengeful deity continues to be thought of in terms of human emotions1 and continues to be represented as displaying these emotions in human ways4 ,moreover1 the sentiments of right and duty1 so far as they have become developed1 refer mainly to divine commands and interdicts2 and have little reference to the natures of the acts commanded or interdicted4 ,in the intended offering-up of ,isaac1 in the sacrifice of ,jephthah's daughter1 and in the hewing to pieces of ,agag1 as much as in the countless atrocities committed from religious motives by various early historic races1 as by some existing savage races1 we see that the morality and immorality of actions1 as we understand them1 are at first little recognized2 and that the feelings1 chiefly of dread1 which serve in place of them1 are feelings felt towards the unseen beings supposed to issue the commands and interdicts4 ,here it will be said that1 as just admitted1 these are not the moral sentiments properly so called4 ,they are simply sentiments that precede and make possible those highest sentiments which do not refer either to personal benefits or evils to be expected from men1 or to more remote rewards and punishments4 ,several comments are1 however1 called forth by this criticism4 ,one is1 that if we glance back at past beliefs and their correlative feelings1 as shown in ,dante's poem1 in the mystery-plays of the middle ages1 in ,st4 ,bartholomew massacres1 in burnings for heresy1 we get proof that in comparatively modern times right and wrong meant little else than subordination or insubordination--to a divine ruler primarily1 and under him to a human ruler4 ,another is1 that down to our own day this conception largely prevails1 and is even embodied in elaborate ethical works--instance the ,essays on the ,principles of ,morality1 by ,jonathan ,dymond1 which recognizes no ground of moral obligation save the will of ,god as expressed in the current creed4 ,and yet a further is1 that while in sermons the torments of the damned and the joys of the blessed are set forth as the dominant deterrents and incentives1 and while we have prepared for us printed instructions how to make the best of both worlds1 it cannot be denied that the feelings which impel and restrain men are still largely composed of elements like those operative on the savage3 the dread1 partly vague1 partly specific1 associated with the idea of reprobation1 human and divine1 and the sense of satisfaction1 partly vague1 partly specific1 associated with the idea of approbation1 human and divine4 ,but during the growth of that civilization which has been made possible by these ego-altruistic sentiments1 there have been slowly evolving the altruistic sentiments4 ,development of these has gone on only as fast as society has advanced to a state in which the activities are mainly peaceful4 ,the root of all the altruistic sentiments is sympathy2 and sympathy could become dominant only when the mode of life1 instead of being one that habitually inflicted direct pain1 became one which conferred direct and indirect benefits3 the pains inflicted being mainly incidental and indirect4 ,adam ,smith made a large step towards this truth when he recognized sympathy as giving rise to these superior controlling emotions4 ,his ,theory of ,moral ,sentiments1 however1 requires to be supplemented in two ways4 ,the natural process by which sympathy becomes developed into a more and more important element of human nature has to be explained2 and there has also to be explained the process by which sympathy produces the highest and most complex of the altruistic sentiments--that of justice4 ,respecting the first process1 ,i can here do no more than say that sympathy may be proved1 both inductively and deductively1 to be the concomitant of gregariousness3 the two having all along-increased by reciprocal aid4 ,multiplication has ever tended to force into an association1 more or less close1 all creatures having kinds of food and supplies of food that permit association2 and established psychological laws warrant the inference that some sympathy will inevitably result from habitual manifestations of feelings in presence of one another1 and that the gregariousness being augmented by the increase of sympathy1 further facilitates the development of sympathy4 ,but there are negative and positive checks upon this development--negative1 because sympathy cannot advance faster than intelligence advances1 since it presupposes the power of interpreting the natural language of the various feelings1 and of mentally representing those feelings2 positive1 because the immediate needs of self-preservation are often at variance with its promptings1 as1 for example1 during the predatory stages of human progress4 ,for explanations of the second process1 ,i must refer to the ,principles of ,psychology 7 #bjb1 first edition1 and #bae1 second edition7 and to ,social ,statics1 part ii4 chapter v4#cf ,asking that in default of space these explanations may be taken for granted1 let me here point out in what sense even sympathy1 and the sentiments that result from it1 are due to experiences of utility4 ,if we suppose all thought of rewards or punishments1 immediate or remote1 to be left out of consideration1 it is clear that any one who hesitates to inflict a pain because of the vivid representation of that pain which rises in his consciousness1 is restrained1 not by any sense of obligation or by any formulated doctrine of utility1 but by the painful association established in him4 ,and it is clear that if1 after repeated experiences of the moral discomfort he has felt from witnessing the unhappiness indirectly caused by some of his acts1 he is led to check himself when again tempted to those acts1 the restraint is of like nature4 ,conversely with the pleasure-giving acts3 repetitions of kind deeds1 and experiences of the sympathetic gratifications that follow1 tend continually to make stronger the association between such deeds and feelings of happiness4 ,eventually these experiences may be consciously generalized1 and there may result a deliberate pursuit of sympathetic gratifications4 ,there may also come to be distinctly recognized the truths that the remoter results1 kind and unkind conduct1 are respectively beneficial and detrimental--that due regard for others is conducive to ultimate personal welfare1 and disregard of others to ultimate personal disaster2 and then there may become current such summations of experience as honesty is the best policy4 ,but so far from regarding these intellectual recognitions of utility as preceding and causing the moral sentiment1 ,i regard the moral sentiment as preceding such recognitions of utility1 and making them possible4 ,the pleasures and pains directly resulting in experience from sympathetic and unsympathetic actions1 had first to be slowly associated with such actions1 and the resulting incentives and deterrents frequently obeyed1 before there could arise the perceptions that sympathetic and unsympathetic actions are remotely beneficial or detrimental to the actor2 and they had to be obeyed still longer and more generally before there could arise the perceptions that they are socially beneficial or detrimental4 ,when1 however1 the remote effects1 personal and social1 have gained general recognition1 are expressed in current maxims1 and lead to injunctions having the religious sanction1 the sentiments that prompt sympathetic actions and check unsympathetic ones are immensely strengthened by their alliances4 ,approbation and reprobation1 divine and human1 come to be associated in thought with the sympathetic and unsympathetic actions respectively4 ,the commands of the creed1 the legal penalties1 and the code of social conduct1 unitedly enforce them2 and every child as it grows up1 daily has impressed on it by the words and faces and voices of those around the authority of these highest principles of conduct4 ,and now we may see why there arises a belief in the special sacredness of these highest principles1 and a sense of the supreme authority of the altruistic sentiments answering to them4 ,many of the actions which1 in early social states1 received the religious sanction and gained public approbation1 had the drawback that such sympathies as existed were outraged1 and there was hence an imperfect satisfaction4 ,whereas these altruistic actions1 while similarly having the religious sanction and gaining public approbation1 bring a sympathetic consciousness of pleasure given or of pain prevented2 and1 beyond this1 bring a sympathetic consciousness of human welfare at large1 as being furthered by making altruistic actions habitual4 ,both this special and this general sympathetic consciousness become stronger and wider in proportion as the power of mental representation increases1 and the imagination of consequences1 immediate and remote1 grows more vivid and comprehensive4 ,until at length these altruistic sentiments begin to call in question the authority of those ego-altruistic sentiments which once ruled unchallenged4 ,they prompt resistance to laws that do not fulfil the conception of justice1 encourage men to brave the frowns of their fellows by pursuing a course at variance with customs that are perceived to be socially injurious1 and even cause dissent from the current religion2 either to the extent of disbelief in those alleged divine attributes and acts not approved by this supreme moral arbiter1 or to the extent of entire rejection of a creed which ascribes such attributes and acts4 ,much that is required to make this hypothesis complete must stand over until1 at the close of the second volume of the ,principles of ,psychology1 ,i have space for a full exposition4 ,what ,i have said will make it sufficiently clear that two fundamental errors have been made in the interpretation put upon it4 ,both ,utility and ,experience have been construed in senses much too narrow4 ,utility1 convenient a word as it is from its comprehensiveness1 has very inconvenient and misleading implications4 ,it vividly suggests uses1 and means1 and proximate ends1 but very faintly suggests the pleasures1 positive or negative1 which are the ultimate ends1 and which1 in the ethical meaning of the word1 are alone considered2 and1 further1 it implies conscious recognition of means and ends--implies the deliberate taking of some course to gain a perceived benefit4 ,experience1 too1 in its ordinary acceptation1 connotes definite perceptions of causes and consequences1 as standing in observed relations1 and is not taken to include the connexions formed in consciousness between states that recur together1 when the relation between them1 causal or other1 is not perceived4 ,it is in their widest senses1 however1 that ,i habitually use these words1 as will be manifest to every one who reads the ,principles of ,psychology2 and it is in their widest senses that ,i have used them in the letter to ,mr4 ,mill4 ,i think ,i have shown above that1 when they are so understood1 the hypothesis briefly set forth in that letter is by no means so indefensible as is supposed4 ,at any rate1 ,i have shown--what seemed for the present needful to show--that ,mr4 ,hutton's versions of my views must not be accepted as correct4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #cc3 ,see ,prospective ,review for ,january1 #aheb4 ,footnote #cd3 ,his criticism will be found in the ,national ,review for ,january1 #ahef1 under the title ,atheism4 ,footnote #ce3 ,hereafter ,i hope to elucidate at length these phenomena of expression4 ,for the present1 ,i can refer only to such further indications as are contained in two essays on ,the ,physiology of ,laughter and ,the ,origin and ,function of ,music4 ,footnote #cf3 ,i may add that in ,social ,statics1 chap4 xxx41 ,i have indicated1 in a general way1 the causes of the development of sympathy and the restraints upon its development--confining the discussion1 however1 to the case of the human race1 my subject limiting me to that4 ,the accompanying teleology ,i now disclaim4 ,,the ,,comparative ,,psychology ,,of ,,man4 ,originally read before the ,anthropological ,institute1 and afterwards published in ,mind1 for ,january1 #ahgf4 ,while discussing with two members of the ,anthropological ,institute the work to be undertaken by its psychological section1 ,i made certain suggestions which they requested me to put in writing4 ,when reminded1 some months after1 of the promise ,i had made to do this1 ,i failed to recall the particular suggestions referred to2 but in the endeavour to remember them1 ,i was led to glance over the whole subject of comparative human psychology4 ,hence resulted the following paper4 ,that making a general survey is useful as a preliminary to deliberate study1 either of a whole or of any part1 scarcely needs showing4 ,vagueness of thought accompanies the wandering about in a region without known bounds or landmarks4 ,attention devoted to some portion of a subject in ignorance of its connexion with the rest1 leads to untrue conceptions4 ,the whole cannot be rightly conceived without some knowledge of the parts2 and no part can be rightly conceived out of relation to the whole4 ,to map out the ,comparative ,psychology of ,man must also conduce to the more methodic carrying on of inquiries4 ,in this1 as in other things1 division of labour will facilitate progress2 and that there may be division of labour1 the work itself must be systematically divided4 ,we may conveniently separate the entire subject into three main divisions1 and may arrange them in the order of increasing speciality4 ,the first division will treat of the degrees of mental evolution of different human types1 generally considered3 taking account of both the mass of mental manifestation and the complexity of mental manifestation4 ,this division will include the relations of these characters to physical characters--the bodily mass and structure1 and the cerebral mass and structure4 ,it will also include inquiries concerning the time taken in completing mental evolution1 and the time during which adult mental power lasts2 as well as certain most general traits of mental action1 such as the greater or less persistence of emotions and of intellectual processes4 ,the connexion between the general mental type and the general social type should also be here dealt with4 ,in the second division may be conveniently placed apart1 inquiries concerning the relative mental natures of the sexes in each race4 ,under it will come such questions as these3--,what differences of mental mass and mental complexity1 if any1 existing between males and females1 are common to all races8 ,do such differences vary in degree1 or in kind1 or in both8 ,are there reasons for thinking that they are liable to change by increase or decrease8 ,what relations do they bear in each case to the habits of life1 the domestic arrangements1 and the social arrangements8 ,this division should also include in its scope the sentiments of the sexes towards one another1 considered as varying quantitatively and qualitatively2 as well as their respective sentiments towards offspring1 similarly varying4 ,for the third division of inquiries may be reserved the more special mental traits distinguishing different types of men4 ,one class of such specialities results from differences of proportion among faculties possessed in common2 and another class results from the presence in some races of faculties that are almost or quite absent from others4 ,each difference in each of these groups1 when established by comparison1 has to be studied in connexion with the stage of mental evolution reached1 and has to be studied in connexion with the habits of life and the social development1 regarding it as related to these both as cause and as consequence4 ,such being the outlines of these several divisions1 let us now consider in detail the subdivisions contained within each4 99 99 99 99 99 ,i4--,under the head of general mental evolution we may begin with the trait of-- #a4 ,mental mass4--,daily experiences show us that human beings differ in volume of mental manifestation4 ,some there are whose intelligence1 high though it may be1 produces little impression on those around2 while there are some who1 when uttering even commonplaces1 do it so as to affect listeners in a disproportionate degree4 ,comparison of two such1 makes it manifest that1 generally1 the difference is due to the natural language of the emotions4 ,behind the intellectual quickness of the one there is not felt any power of character2 while the other betrays a momentum capable of bearing down opposition--a potentiality of emotion that has something formidable about it4 ,obviously the varieties of mankind differ much in respect of this trait4 ,apart from kind of feeling1 they are unlike in amount of feeling4 ,the dominant races overrun the inferior races mainly in virtue of the greater quantity of energy in which this greater mental mass shows itself4 ,hence a series of inquiries1 of which these are some3--7a7 ,what is the relation between mental mass and bodily mass8 ,manifestly1 the small races are deficient in it4 ,but it also appears that races much upon a par in size--as1 for instance1 an ,englishman and a ,damara1 differ considerably in mental mass4 7b7 ,what is its relation to mass of brain8 and1 bearing in mind the general law that in the same species1 size of brain increases with size of body 7though not in the same proportion71 how far can we connect the extra mental mass of the higher races1 with an extra mass of brain beyond that which is proper to their greater bodily mass8 7c7 ,what relation1 if any1 is there between mental mass and the physiological state expressed in vigour of circulation and richness of blood1 as severally determined by mode of life and general nutrition8 7d7 ,what are the relations of this trait to the social state1 as nomadic or settled1 predatory or industrial8 #b4 ,mental complexity4--,how races differ in respect of the more or less involved structures of their minds1 will best be understood on recalling the unlikeness between the juvenile mind and the adult mind among ourselves4 ,in the child we see absorption in special facts4 ,generalities even of a low order are scarcely recognized1 and there is no recognition of high generalities4 ,we see interest in individuals1 in personal adventures1 in domestic affairs1 but no interest in political or social matters4 ,we see vanity about clothes and small achievements1 but little sense of justice3 witness the forcible appropriation of one another's toys4 ,while there have come into play many of the simpler mental powers1 there has not yet been reached that complication of mind which results from the addition of powers evolved out of these simpler ones4 ,kindred differences of complexity exist between the minds of lower and higher races2 and comparisons should be made to ascertain their kinds and amounts4 ,here1 too1 there may be a subdivision of the inquiries4 7a7 ,what is the relation between mental complexity and mental mass8 ,do not the two habitually vary together8 7b7 ,what is the relation to the social state1 as more or less complex8 that is to say--,do not mental complexity and social complexity act and react on each other8 #c4 ,rate of mental development4--,in conformity with the biological law that the higher the organisms the longer they take to evolve1 members of the inferior human races may be expected to complete their mental evolution sooner than members of the superior races2 and we have evidence that they do this4 ,travellers from many regions comment1 now on the great precocity of children among savage and semi-civilized peoples1 and now on the early arrest of their mental progress4 ,though we scarcely need more proofs that this general contrast exists1 there remains to be asked the question1 whether it is consistently maintained throughout all groups of races1 from the lowest to the highest--whether1 say1 the ,australian differs in this respect from the ,hindu1 as much as the ,hindu does from the ,european4 ,of secondary inquiries coming under this sub-head may be named several4 7a7 ,is this more rapid evolution and earlier arrest always unequally shown by the two sexes2 or1 in other words1 are there in lower types proportional differences in rate and degree of development1 such as higher types show us8 7b7 ,is there in many cases1 as there appears to be in some cases1 a traceable relation between the period of arrest and the period of puberty8 7c7 ,is mental decay early in proportion as mental evolution is rapid8 7d7 ,can we in other respects assert that where the type is low1 the entire cycle of mental changes between birth and death--ascending1 uniform1 descending--comes within a shorter interval8 #d4 ,relative plasticity4--,is there any relation between the degree of mental modifiability which remains in adult life1 and the character of the mental evolution in respect of mass1 complexity1 and rapidity8 ,the animal kingdom at large yields reasons for associating an inferior and more rapidly-completed mental structure1 with a relatively automatic nature4 ,lowly organized creatures1 guided almost entirely by reflex actions1 are in but small degrees changeable by individual experiences4 ,as the nervous structure complicates1 its actions become less rigorously confined within pre-established limits2 and as we approach the highest creatures1 individual experiences take larger and larger shares in moulding the conduct3 there is an increasing ability to take in new impressions and to profit by the acquisitions4 ,inferior and superior human races are contrasted in this respect4 ,many travellers comment on the unchangeable habits of savages4 ,the semi-civilized nations of the ,east1 past and present1 were1 or are1 characterized by a greater rigidity of custom than characterizes the more civilized nations of the ,west4 ,the histories of the most civilized nations show us that in their earlier times1 the modifiability of ideas and habits was less than it is at present4 ,and if we contrast classes or individuals around us1 we see that the most developed in mind are the most plastic4 ,to inquiries respecting this trait of comparative plasticity1 in its relations to precocity and early completion of mental development1 may fitly be added inquiries respecting its relations to the social state1 which it helps to determine1 and which reacts upon it4 #e4 ,variability4--,to say of a mind that its actions are extremely inconstant1 and at the same time to say that it is of relatively unchangeable nature1 apparently implies a contradiction4 ,when1 however1 the inconstancy is understood as referring to the manifestations which follow one another from minute to minute1 and the unchangeableness to the average manifestations1 extending over long periods1 the apparent contradiction disappears2 and it becomes comprehensible that the two traits may1 and ordinarily do1 co-exist4 ,an infant1 quickly wearied with each kind of perception1 wanting ever a new object which it soon abandons for something else1 and alternating a score times a day between smiles and tears1 shows us a very small persistence in each kind of mental action3 all its states1 intellectual and emotional1 are transient4 ,yet at the same time its mind cannot be easily changed in character4 ,true1 it changes spontaneously in due course2 but it long remains incapable of receiving ideas or emotions beyond those of simple orders4 ,the child exhibits less rapid variations1 intellectual and emotional1 while its educability is greater4 ,inferior human races show us this combination3 great rigidity of general character with great irregularity in its passing manifestations4 ,speaking broadly1 while they resist permanent modification1 they lack intellectual persistence1 and they lack emotional persistence4 ,of various low types we read that they cannot keep the attention fixed beyond a few minutes on anything requiring thought1 even of a simple kind4 ,similarly with their feelings3 these are less enduring than those of civilized men4 ,there are1 however1 qualifications to be made in this statement2 and comparisons are needed to ascertain how far these qualifications go4 ,the savage shows great persistence in the action of the lower intellectual faculties4 ,he is untiring in minute observation4 ,he is untiring1 also1 in that kind of perceptive activity which accompanies the making of his weapons and ornaments3 often persevering for immense periods in carving stones1 c4 ,emotionally1 too1 he shows persistence not only in the motives prompting these small industries1 but also in certain of his passions--especially in that of revenge4 ,hence1 in studying the degrees of mental variability shown us in the daily lives of the different races1 we must ask how far variability characterizes the whole mind1 and how far it holds only of parts of the mind4 #f4 ,impulsiveness4--,this trait is closely allied with the last3 unenduring emotions are emotions which sway the conduct now this way and now that1 without any consistency4 ,the trait of impulsiveness may1 however1 be fitly dealt with separately1 because it has other implications than mere lack of persistence4 ,comparisons of the lower human races with the higher1 appear generally to show that1 along with brevity of the passions1 there goes violence4 ,the sudden gusts of feeling which men of inferior types display1 are excessive in degree as they are short in duration2 and there is probably a connexion between these two traits3 intensity sooner producing exhaustion4 ,observing that the passions of childhood illustrate this connexion1 let us turn to certain interesting questions concerning the decrease of impulsiveness which accompanies advance in evolution4 ,the nervous processes of an impulsive being1 are less remote from reflex actions than are those of an unimpulsive being4 ,in reflex actions we see a simple stimulus passing suddenly into movement3 little or no control being exercised by other parts of the nervous system4 ,as we ascend to higher actions1 guided by more and more complicated combinations of stimuli1 there is not the same instantaneous discharge in simple motions2 but there is a comparatively deliberate and more variable adjustment of compound motions1 duly restrained and proportioned4 ,it is thus with the passions and sentiments in the less developed natures and in the more developed natures4 ,where there is but little emotional complexity1 an emotion1 when excited by some occurrence1 explodes in action before the other emotions have been called into play2 and each of these1 from time to time1 does the like4 ,but the more complex emotional structure is one in which these simpler emotions are so co-ordinated that they do not act independently4 ,before excitement of any one has had time to cause action1 some excitement has been communicated to others--often antagonistic ones2 and the conduct becomes modified in adjustment to the combined dictates4 ,hence results a decreased impulsiveness1 and also a greater persistence4 ,the conduct pursued1 being prompted by several emotions co-operating in degrees which do not exhaust them1 acquires a greater continuity2 and while spasmodic force becomes less conspicuous1 there is an increase in the total energy4 ,examining the facts from this point of view1 there are sundry questions of interest to be put respecting the different races of men4 7a7 ,to what other traits than degree of mental evolution is impulsiveness related8 ,apart from difference in elevation of type1 the ,new-,world races seem to be less impulsive than the ,old-,world races4 ,is this due to constitutional apathy8 ,can there be traced 7other things equal7 a relation between physical vivacity and mental impulsiveness8 7b7 ,what connexion is there between this trait and the social state8 ,clearly a very explosive nature--such as that of the ,bushman--is unfit for social union2 and1 commonly1 social union1 when by any means established1 checks impulsiveness4 7c7 ,what respective shares in checking impulsiveness are taken by the feelings which the social state fosters--such as the fear of surrounding individuals1 the instinct of sociality1 the desire to accumulate property1 the sympathetic feelings1 the sentiment of justice8 ,these1 which require a social environment for their development1 all of them involve imaginations of consequences more or less distant2 and thus imply checks upon the promptings of the simpler passions4 ,hence arise the questions--,in what order1 in what degrees1 and in what combinations1 do they come into play8 #g4 ,one further general inquiry of a different kind may be added4 ,what effect is produced on mental nature by mixture of races8 ,there is reason for believing that throughout the animal kingdom1 the union of varieties which have become widely divergent is physically injurious2 while the union of slightly divergent varieties is physically beneficial4 ,does the like hold with the mental nature8 ,some facts seem to show that mixture of human races extremely unlike1 produces a worthless type of mind--a mind fitted neither for the kind of life led by the higher of the two races1 nor for that led by the lower--a mind out of adjustment to all conditions of life4 ,contrariwise1 we find that peoples of the same stock1 slightly differentiated by lives carried on in unlike circumstances for many generations1 produce by mixture a mental type having certain superiorities4 ,in his work on ,the ,huguenots1 ,mr4 ,smiles points out how large a number of distinguished men among us have descended from ,flemish and ,french refugees2 and ,m4 ,alphonse de ,candolle1 in his ,histoire des ,sciences et des ,savants depuis deux ,sicles1 shows that the descendants of ,french refugees in ,switzerland have produced an unusually great proportion of scientific men4 ,though1 in part1 this result may be ascribed to the original natures of such refugees1 who must have had that independence which is a chief factor in originality1 yet it is probably in part due to mixtures of races4 ,for thinking this1 we have evidence which is not open to two interpretations4 ,prof4 ,morley draws attention to the fact that1 during seven hundred years of our early history the best genius of ,england sprang up on the line of country in which ,celts and ,anglo-,saxons came together4 ,in like manner ,mr4 ,galton1 in his ,english ,men of ,science1 shows that in recent days these have mostly come from an inland region1 running generally from north to south1 which we may reasonably presume contains more mixed blood than do the regions east and west of it4 ,such a result seems probable a priori4 ,two natures respectively adapted to slightly unlike sets of social conditions1 may be expected by their union to produce a nature somewhat more plastic than either--a nature more impressible by the new circumstances of advancing social life1 and therefore more likely to originate new ideas and display modified sentiments4 ,the ,comparative ,psychology of ,man may1 then1 fitly include the mental effects of mixture2 and among derivative inquiries we may ask--,how far the conquest of race by race has been instrumental in advancing civilization by aiding mixture1 as well as in other ways4 ,,ii4--,the second of the three leading divisions named at the outset is less extensive4 ,still1 concerning the relative mental natures of the sexes in each race1 questions of much interest and importance may be raised4 #a4 ,degree of difference between the sexes4--,it is an established fact that1 physically considered1 the contrast between males and females is not equally great in all types of mankind4 ,the bearded races1 for instance1 show us a greater unlikeness between the two than do the beardless races4 ,among ,south ,american tribes1 men and women have a greater general resemblance in form1 c41 than is usual elsewhere4 ,the question1 then1 suggests itself--,do the mental natures of the sexes differ in a constant or in a variable degree8 ,the difference is unlikely to be a constant one2 and1 looking for variation1 we may ask what is its amount1 and under what conditions does it occur8 #b4 ,difference in mass and in complexity4--,the comparisons between the sexes1 of course1 admit of subdivisions parallel to those made in the comparisons between races4 ,relative mental mass and relative mental complexity have chiefly to be observed4 ,assuming that the great inequality in the cost of reproduction to the two sexes1 is the cause of unlikeness in mental mass1 as in physical mass1 this difference may be studied in connexion with reproductive differences presented by the various races1 in respect of the ages at which reproduction commences1 and the periods over which it lasts4 ,an allied inquiry may be joined with this2 namely1 how far the mental developments of the two sexes are affected by their relative habits in respect to food and physical exertion8 ,in many of the lower races1 the women1 treated with great brutality1 are1 physically1 much inferior to the men3 excess of labour and defect of nutrition being apparently the combined causes4 ,is any arrest of mental development simultaneously caused8 #c4 ,variation of the differences4--,if the unlikeness1 physical and mental1 of the sexes is not constant1 then1 supposing all races have diverged from one original stock1 it follows that there must have been transmission of accumulated differences to those of the same sex in posterity4 ,if1 for instance1 the prehistoric type of man was beardless1 then the production of a bearded variety implies that within that variety the males continued to transmit an increasing amount of beard to descendants of the same sex4 ,this limitation of heredity by sex1 shown us in multitudinous ways throughout the animal kingdom1 probably applies to the cerebral structures as much as to other structures4 ,hence the question--,do not the mental natures of the sexes in alien types of ,man diverge in unlike ways and degrees8 #d4 ,causes of the differences4--,are any relations to be traced between these variable differences and the variable parts the sexes play in the business of life8 ,assuming the cumulative effects of habit on function and structure1 as well as the limitation of heredity by sex1 it is to be expected that if1 in any society1 the activities of one sex1 generation after generation1 differ from those of the other1 there will arise sexual adaptations of mind4 ,some instances in illustration may be named4 ,among the ,africans of ,loango and other districts1 as also among some of the ,indian ,hill-tribes1 the men and women are strongly contrasted as respectively inert and energetic3 the industry of the women having apparently become so natural to them that no coercion is needed4 ,of course1 such facts suggest an extensive series of questions4 ,limitation of heredity by sex may account both for those sexual differences of mind which distinguish men and women in all races1 and for those which distinguish them in each race1 or each society4 ,an interesting subordinate inquiry may be1 how far such mental differences are inverted in cases where there is inversion of social and domestic relations2 as among those ,khasi ,hill-tribes1 whose women have so far the upper hand that they turn off their husbands in a summary way if they displease them4 #e4 ,mental modifiability in the two sexes4--,along with comparisons of races in respect of mental plasticity may go parallel comparisons of the sexes in each race4 ,is it true always1 as it appears to be generally true1 that women are less modifiable than men8 ,the relative conservatism of women--their greater adhesion to established ideas and practices--is manifest in many civilized and semi-civilized societies4 ,is it so among the uncivilized8 ,a curious instance of stronger attachment to custom in women than in men is given by ,dalton1 as occurring among the ,juangs1 one of the lowest wild tribes of ,bengal4 ,until recently the only dress of both sexes was something less than that which the ,hebrew legend gives to ,adam and ,eve4 ,years ago the men were led to adopt a cloth bandage round the loins1 in place of the bunch of leaves2 but the women adhered to the aboriginal habit3 a conservatism shown where it might have been least expected4 #f4 ,the sexual sentiment4--,results of value may be looked for from comparisons of races made to determine the amounts and characters of the higher feelings to which the relation of the sexes gives rise4 ,the lowest varieties of mankind have but small endowments of these feelings4 ,among varieties of higher types1 such as the ,malayo-,polynesians1 these feelings seem considerably developed3 the ,dyaks1 for instance1 sometimes display them in great strength4 ,speaking generally1 they appear to become stronger with the advance of civilization4 ,several subordinate inquiries may be named4 7a7 ,how far is development of the sexual sentiment dependent upon intellectual advance--upon growth of imaginative power8 7b7 ,how far is it related to emotional advance2 and especially to evolution of those emotions which originate from sympathy8 ,what are its relations to polyandry and polygyny8 7c7 ,does it not tend towards1 and is it not fostered by1 monogamy8 7d7 ,what connexion has it with maintenance of the family bond1 and the consequent better rearing of children8 ,,iii4--,under the third head1 to which we may now pass come the more special traits of the different races4 #a4 ,imitativeness4--,one of the characteristics in which the lower types of men show us a smaller departure from reflex action than do the higher types1 is their strong tendency to mimic the motions and sounds made by others--an almost involuntary habit which travellers find it difficult to check4 ,this meaningless repetition1 which seems to imply that the idea of an observed action cannot be framed in the mind of the observer without tending forthwith to discharge itself in the action conceived 7and every ideal action is a nascent form of the consciousness accompanying performance of such action71 evidently diverges but little from the automatic2 and decrease of it is to be expected along with increase of self-regulating power4 ,this trait of automatic mimicry is evidently allied with that less automatic mimicry which shows itself in greater persistence of customs4 ,for customs adopted by each generation from the last without thought or inquiry1 imply a tendency to imitate which overmasters critical and sceptical tendencies3 so maintaining habits for which no reasons can be given4 ,the decrease of this irrational mimicry1 strongest in the lowest savage and feeblest in the highest of the civilized1 should be studied along with the successively higher stages of social life1 as being at once an aid and a hindrance to civilization3 an aid in so far as it gives that fixity to the social organization without which a society cannot survive2 a hindrance in so far as it offers resistance to changes of social organization that have become desirable4 #b4 ,incuriosity4--,projecting our own natures into the circumstances of the savage1 we imagine ourselves as marvelling greatly on first seeing the products and appliances of civilized life4 ,but we err in supposing that the savage has feelings such as we should have in his place4 ,want of rational curiosity respecting these incomprehensible novelties1 is a trait remarked of the lowest races wherever found2 and the partially-civilized races are distinguished from them as exhibiting rational curiosity4 ,the relation of this trait to the intellectual nature1 to the emotional nature1 and to the social state1 should be studied4 #c4 ,quality of thought4--,under this vague head may be placed many sets of inquiries1 each of them extensive--7a7 ,the degree of generality of the ideas2 7b7 the degree of abstractness of the ideas2 7c7 the degree of definiteness of the ideas2 7d7 the degree of coherence of the ideas2 7e7 the extent to which there have been developed such notions as those of class1 of cause1 of uniformity1 of law1 of truth4 ,many conceptions which have become so familiar to us that we assume them to be the common property of all minds1 are no more possessed by the lowest savages than they are by our own children2 and comparisons of types should be so made as to elucidate the processes by which such conceptions are reached4 ,the development under each head has to be observed--7a7 independently in its successive stages2 7b7 in connexion with the co-operative intellectual conceptions2 7c7 in connexion with the progress of language1 of the arts1 and of social organization4 ,already linguistic phenomena have been used in aid of such inquiries2 and more systematic use of them should be made4 ,not only the number of general words1 and the number of abstract words1 in a people's vocabulary should be taken as evidence1 but also their degrees of generality and abstractness2 for there are generalities of the first1 second1 third1 c41 orders1 and abstractions similarly ascending4 ,blue is an abstraction referring to one class of impressions derived from visible objects2 colour is a higher abstraction referring to many such classes of visual impressions2 property is a still higher abstraction referring to classes of impressions received not through the eyes alone1 but through other sense-organs4 ,if generalities and abstractions were arranged in the order of their extensiveness and in the order of their grades1 tests would be obtained which1 applied to the vocabularies of the uncivilized1 would yield definite evidence of the intellectual stages reached4 #d4 ,peculiar aptitudes4--,to such specialities of intelligence as mark different degrees of evolution1 have to be added minor ones related to modes of life3 the kinds and degrees of faculty which have become organized in adaptation to daily habits--skill in the use of weapons1 powers of tracking1 quick discrimination of individual objects4 ,and under this head may fitly come inquiries concerning some race-peculiarities of the sthetic class1 not at present explicable4 ,while the remains from the ,dordogne caves show us that their inhabitants1 low as we must suppose them to have been1 could represent animals1 both by drawing and carving1 with some degree of fidelity2 there are existing races1 probably higher in other respects1 who seem scarcely capable of recognizing pictorial representations4 ,similarly with the musical faculty4 ,almost or quite wanting in some inferior races1 we find it in other races not of high grade1 developed to an unexpected degree3 instance the ,negroes1 some of whom are so innately musical1 that1 as ,i have been told by a missionary among them1 the children in native schools when taught ,european psalm-tunes1 spontaneously sing seconds to them4 ,whether any causes can be discovered for race peculiarities of this kind1 is a question of interest4 #e4 ,specialities of emotional nature4--,these are worthy of careful study1 as being intimately related to social phenomena--to the possibility of social progress1 and to the nature of the social structure4 ,among others to be noted there are--7a7 ,gregariousness or sociality--a trait in the strength of which races differ widely3 some1 as the ,mantras1 being almost indifferent to social intercourse2 some being unable to dispense with it4 ,obviously the degree of this desire for the presence of fellow-men1 affects greatly the formation of social groups1 and consequently influences social progress4 7b7 ,intolerance of restraint4 ,men of some inferior types1 as the ,mapuch1 are ungovernable2 while those of other types1 no higher in grade1 not only submit to restraint1 but admire the persons exercising it4 ,these contrasted natures have to be observed in connexion with social evolution2 to the early stages of which they are respectively antagonistic and favourable4 7c7 ,the desire for praise is a trait which1 common to all races1 high and low1 varies considerably in degree4 ,there are quite inferior races1 as some of those in the ,pacific ,states1 whose members sacrifice without stint to gain the applause which lavish generosity brings2 while1 elsewhere1 applause is sought with less eagerness4 ,notice should be taken of the connexion between this love of approbation and the social restraints2 since it plays an important part in the maintenance of them4 7d7 ,the acquisitive propensity4 ,this1 too1 is a character the degrees of which1 and the relations of which to the social state1 have to be especially noted4 ,the desire for property grows along with the possibility of gratifying it2 and this1 extremely small among the lowest men1 increases as social development goes on4 ,with the advance from tribal property to family property and individual property1 the notion of private right of possession gains definiteness1 and the love of acquisition strengthens4 ,each step towards an orderly social state makes larger accumulations possible1 and the pleasures achievable by them more sure2 while the resulting encouragement to accumulate1 leads to increase of capital and to further progress4 ,this action and re-action of the sentiment and the social state1 should be in every case observed4 #f4 ,the altruistic sentiments4--,coming last1 these are also highest4 ,the evolution of them in the course of civilization1 shows us clearly the reciprocal influences of the social unit and the social organism4 ,on the one hand1 there can be no sympathy1 nor any of the sentiments which sympathy generates1 unless there are fellow-beings around4 ,on the other hand1 maintenance of union with fellow-beings depends in part on the presence of sympathy1 and the resulting restraints on conduct4 ,gregariousness or sociality favours the growth of sympathy2 increased sympathy conduces to closer sociality and a more stable social state2 and so1 continuously1 each increment of the one makes possible a further increment of the other4 ,comparisons of the altruistic sentiments resulting from sympathy1 as exhibited in different types of men and different social states1 may be conveniently arranged under three heads--7a7 ,pity1 which should be observed as displayed towards offspring1 towards the sick and aged1 and towards enemies4 7b7 ,generosity 7duly discriminated from the love of display7 as shown in giving2 as shown in the relinquishment of pleasures for the sake of others2 as shown by active efforts on others' behalf4 ,the manifestations of this sentiment1 too1 are to be noted in respect of their range--whether they are limited to relatives2 whether they extend only to those of the same society2 whether they extend to those of other societies2 and they are also to be noted in connexion with the degree of providence--whether they result from sudden impulses obeyed without counting the cost1 or go along with clear foresight of the future sacrifices entailed4 7c7 ,justice4 ,this most abstract of the altruistic sentiments is to be considered under aspects like those just named1 as well as under many other aspects--how far it is shown in regard to the lives of others2 how far in regard to their freedom2 how far in regard to their property2 how far in regard to their various minor claims4 ,and comparisons concerning this highest sentiment should1 beyond all others1 be carried on along with comparisons of the accompanying social states1 which it largely determines--the forms and actions of governments2 the characters of laws2 the relations of classes4 99 99 99 99 99 ,such1 stated as briefly as consists with clearness1 are the leading divisions and subdivisions under which the ,comparative ,psychology of ,man may be arranged4 ,in going rapidly over so wide a field1 ,i have doubtless overlooked much that should be included4 ,doubtless1 too1 various of the inquiries named will branch out into subordinate inquiries well worth pursuing4 ,even as it is1 however1 the programme is extensive enough to occupy numerous investigators1 who may with advantage take separate divisions4 ,though1 after occupying themselves with primitive arts and products1 anthropologists have devoted their attention mainly to the physical characters of the human races2 it must1 ,i think1 be admitted that the study of these yields in importance to the study of their psychical characters4 ,the general conclusions to which the first set of inquiries may lead1 cannot so much affect our views respecting the highest classes of phenomena as can the general conclusions to which the second set may lead4 ,a true theory of the human mind vitally concerns us2 and systematic comparisons of human minds1 differing in their kinds and grades1 will help us in forming a true theory4 ,knowledge of the reciprocal relations between the characters of men and the characters of the societies they form1 must influence profoundly our ideas of political arrangements4 ,when the inter-dependence of individual natures and social structures is understood1 our conceptions of the changes now taking place1 and hereafter to take place1 will be rectified4 ,a comprehension of mental development as a process of adaptation to social conditions1 which are continually remoulding the mind and are again remoulded by it1 will conduce to a salutary consciousness of the remoter effects produced by institutions upon character2 and will check the grave mischiefs which ignorant legislation now causes4 ,lastly1 a right theory of mental evolution as exhibited by humanity at large1 giving a key1 as it does1 to the evolution of the individual mind1 must help to rationalize our perverse methods of education2 and so to raise intellectual power and moral nature4 ,,mr4 ,,martineau ,,on ,,evolution4 ,first published in ,the ,contemporary ,review1 for ,june1 #ahgb4 ,the article by ,mr4 ,martineau1 in the ,april number of the ,contemporary ,review1 on ,the ,place of ,mind in ,nature1 and ,intuition of ,man1 recalled to me a partially-formed intention to deal with the chief criticisms which have from time to time been made on the general doctrine set forth in ,first ,principles2 since1 though not avowedly directed against propositions asserted or implied in that work1 ,mr4 ,martineau's reasoning tells against them by implication4 ,the fulfilment of this intention ,i should1 however1 have continued to postpone1 had ,i not learned that the arguments of ,mr4 ,martineau are supposed by many to be conclusive1 and that1 in the absence of replies1 it will be assumed that no replies can be made4 ,it seems desirable1 therefore1 to notice these arguments at once--especially as the essential ones may1 ,i think1 be effectually dealt with in a comparatively small space4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the first definite objection which ,mr4 ,martineau raises is1 that the hypothesis of ,general ,evolution is powerless to account even for the simpler orders of facts in the absence of numerous different substances4 ,he argues that were matter all of one kind1 no such phenomena as chemical changes would be possible2 and that1 in order to start the world on its chemical career1 you must enlarge its capital and present it with an outfit of heterogeneous constituents4 ,try1 therefore1 the effect of such a gift2 fling into the pre-existing cauldron the whole list of recognized elementary substances1 and give leave to their affinities to work4 ,the intended implication obviously is1 that there must exist the separately-created elements before evolution can begin4 ,here1 however1 ,mr4 ,martineau makes an assumption which few1 if any1 chemists will commit themselves to1 and which many will distinctly deny4 ,there are no recognized elementary substances1 if the expression means substances known to be elementary4 ,what chemists1 for convenience1 call elementary substances1 are merely substances which they have thus far failed to decompose2 but1 bearing in mind past experiences1 they do not dare to say that they are absolutely undecomposable4 ,water was taken to be an element for more than two thousand years1 and then was proved to be a compound2 and1 until ,davy brought a galvanic current to bear upon them1 the alkalies and the earths were supposed to be elements4 ,so little true is it that recognized elementary substances are supposed to be absolutely elementary1 that there has been much speculation among chemists respecting the process of compounding and recompounding by which they have been formed out of some ultimate substance--some chemists having supposed the atom of hydrogen to be the unit of composition1 but others having contended that the atomic weights of the so-called elements are not thus interpretable4 ,if ,i remember rightly1 ,sir ,john ,herschel was one1 among others1 who1 some five-and-twenty years ago1 threw out suggestions respecting a system of compounding that might explain these relations of the atomic weights4 ,what was at that time a suspicion has now become practically a certainty4 ,spectrum-analysis yields results wholly irreconcilable with the assumption that the conventionally-named simple substances are really simple4 ,each yields a spectrum having lines varying in number from two to eighty or more1 every one of which implies the intercepting of ethereal undulations of a certain order by something oscillating in unison or in harmony with them4 ,were iron absolutely elementary1 it is not conceivable that its atom could intercept ethereal undulations of eighty different orders4 ,though it does not follow that its molecule contains as many separate atoms as there are lines in its spectrum1 it must clearly be a complex molecule4 ,the evidence thus gained points to the conclusion that1 out of some primordial units1 the so-called elements arise by compounding and recompounding2 just as by the compounding and recompounding of so-called elements there arise oxides1 and acids1 and salts4 ,and this hypothesis is entirely in harmony with the phenomena of allotropy4 ,various substances1 conventionally distinguished as simple1 have several forms under which they present quite different properties4 ,the semi-transparent1 colourless1 extremely active substance called phosphorus may be so changed as to become opaque1 dark red1 and inert4 ,like changes are known to occur in some gaseous1 non-metallic elements1 as oxygen2 and also in metallic elements1 as antimony4 ,these total changes of properties1 brought about without any changes to be called chemical1 are interpretable only as due to molecular rearrangements2 and1 by showing that difference of property is producible by difference of arrangement1 they support the inference otherwise to be drawn1 that the properties of different elements result from differences of arrangement arising by the compounding and recompounding of ultimate homogeneous units4 ,thus ,mr4 ,martineau's objection1 which at best would imply a turning of our ignorance of the nature of elements into positive knowledge that they are simple1 is1 in fact1 to be met by two sets of evidences1 which imply that they are compound4 99 99 99 99 99 ,mr4 ,martineau next alleges that a fatal difficulty is put in the way of the ,general ,doctrine of ,evolution by the existence of a chasm between the living and the not-living4 ,he says3--,but with all your enlargement of data1 turn them as you will1 at the end of every passage which they explore1 the door of life is closed against them still4 ,here again our ignorance is employed to play the part of knowledge4 ,the fact that we do not know distinctly how an alleged transition has taken place1 is transformed into the assumption that no transition has taken place4 ,we have1 in a more general shape1 the argument which until lately was thought conclusive--the argument that because the genesis of each species of creature had not been explained1 therefore each species must have been separately created4 ,merely noting this1 however1 ,i go on to remark that scientific discovery is day by day narrowing the chasm1 or1 to vary ,mr4 ,martineau's metaphor1 opening the door4 ,not many years since1 it was held as certain that the chemical compounds distinguished as organic could not be formed artificially4 ,now1 more than a thousand organic compounds have been formed artificially4 ,chemists have discovered the art of building them up from the simpler to the more complex1 and do not doubt that they will eventually produce the most complex4 ,moreover1 the phenomena attending isomeric change give a clue to those movements which are the only indications we have of life in its lowest forms4 ,in various colloidal substances1 including the albuminoid1 isomeric change is accompanied by contraction or expansion1 and consequent motion2 and1 in such primordial types as the ,protogenes of ,haeckel1 which do not differ in appearance from minute portions of albumen1 the observed motions are comprehensible as accompanying isomeric changes caused by variations in surrounding physical actions4 ,the probability of this interpretation will be seen on remembering the evidence we have that1 in the higher organisms1 many functions are essentially effected by isomeric changes from one to another of the multitudinous forms which protein assumes4 ,thus the reply to this objection is1 first1 that there is going on from both sides a narrowing of the chasm supposed to be impassable2 and1 secondly1 that1 even were the chasm not in course of being filled up1 we should no more be justified in therefore assuming a supernatural commencement of life1 than ,kepler was justified in assuming that there were guiding-spirits to keep the planets in their orbits1 because he could not see how else they were to be kept in their orbits4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the third definite objection made by ,mr4 ,martineau is of kindred nature4 ,the ,hypothesis of ,evolution is1 he thinks1 met by the insurmountable difficulty that plant life and animal life are absolutely distinct4 ,you cannot1 he says1 take a single step toward the deduction of sensation and thought3 neither at the upper limit do the highest plants 7the exogens7 transcend themselves and overbalance into animal existence2 nor at the lower1 grope as you may among the sea-weeds and sponges1 can you persuade the sporules of the one to develop into the other4 ,this is an extremely unfortunate objection to raise4 ,for1 though there are no transitions from vegetal to animal life at the places ,mr4 ,martineau names1 where1 indeed1 no biologist would look for them2 yet the connexion between the two great kingdoms of living things is so complete that separation is now regarded as impossible4 ,for a long time naturalists endeavored to frame definitions such as would1 the one include all plants and exclude all animals1 and the other include all animals and exclude all plants4 ,but they have been so repeatedly foiled in the attempt that they have given it up4 ,there is no chemical distinction which holds2 there is no structural distinction which holds2 there is no functional distinction which holds2 there is no distinction as to mode of existence which holds4 ,large groups of the simpler animals contain chlorophyll1 and decompose carbonic acid under the influence of light1 as plants do4 ,large groups of the simpler plants1 as you may observe in the diatoms from any stagnant pool1 are no less actively locomotive than the minute creatures classed as animals seen along with them4 ,nay1 among these lowest types of living things1 it is common for the life to be now predominantly animal and presently to become predominantly vegetal4 ,the very name zoospores1 given to germs of alg1 which for a while swim about actively by means of cilia1 and presently settling down grow into plant-forms1 is given because of this conspicuous community of nature4 ,so complete is this community of nature that for some time past many naturalists have wished to establish for these lowest types a sub-kingdom1 intermediate between the animal and the vegetal3 the reason against this course being1 however1 that the difficulty crops up afresh at any assumed places where this intermediate sub-kingdom may be supposed to join the other two4 ,thus the assumption on which ,mr4 ,martineau proceeds is diametrically opposed to the conviction of naturalists in general4 99 99 99 99 99 ,though ,i do not perceive that it is specifically stated1 there appears to be tacitly implied a fourth difficulty of allied kind--the difficulty that there is no possibility of transition from life of the simplest kind to mind4 ,mr4 ,martineau says1 indeed1 that there can be with only vital resources1 as in the vegetable world1 no beginning of mind3 apparently leaving it to be inferred that in the animal world the resources are such as to make the beginning of mind comprehensible4 ,if1 however1 instead of leaving it a latent inference1 he had distinctly asserted a chasm between mind and bodily life1 for which there is certainly quite as much reason as for asserting a chasm between animal life and vegetal life1 the difficulties in his way would have been no less insuperable4 ,for those lowest forms of irritability in the animal kingdom which1 ,i suppose1 ,mr4 ,martineau refers to as the beginning of mind1 are not distinguishable from the irritability which plants display3 they in no greater degree imply consciousness4 ,if the sudden folding of a sensitive-plant's leaf when touched1 or the spreading out of the stamens in a wild-cistus when gently brushed1 is to be considered a vital action of a purely physical kind2 then so too must be considered the equally slow contraction of a polype's tentacles4 ,and yet1 from this simple motion of an animal of low type1 we may pass by insensible stages through ever-complicating forms of actions1 with their accompanying signs of feeling and intelligence1 until we reach the highest4 ,even apart from the evidence derived from the ascending grades of animals up from zoophytes1 as they are significantly named1 it needs only to observe the evolution of a single animal to see that there does not exist any break or chasm between the life which shows no mind and the life which shows mind4 ,the yelk of an egg which the cook has just broken1 not only yields no sign of mind1 but yields no sign of life4 ,it does not respond to a stimulus as much even as many plants do4 ,had the egg1 instead of being broken by the cook1 been left under the hen for a certain time1 the yelk would have passed by infinitesimal gradations through a series of forms ending in the chick2 and by similarly infinitesimal gradations would have arisen those functions which end in the chick breaking its shell2 and which1 when it gets out1 show themselves in running about1 distinguishing and picking up food1 and squeaking if hurt4 ,when did the feeling begin8 and how did there come into existence that power of perception which the chick's actions show8 ,should it be objected that the chick's actions are mainly automatic1 ,i will not dwell on the fact that1 though they are largely so1 the chick manifestly has feeling and therefore consciousness2 but ,i will accept the objection1 and propose that instead we take the human being4 ,the course of development before birth is just of the same general kind2 and similarly1 at a certain stage1 begins to be accompanied by reflex movements4 ,at birth there is displayed an amount of mind certainly not greater than that of the chick3 there is no power of running from danger--no power of distinguishing and picking up food4 ,if we say the chick is unintelligent1 we must certainly say the infant is unintelligent4 ,and yet from the unintelligence of the infant to the intelligence of the adult1 there is an advance by steps so small that on no day is the amount of mind shown1 appreciably different from that shown on preceding and succeeding days4 ,thus the tacit assumption that there exists a break1 is not simply gratuitous1 but is negatived by the most obvious facts4 99 99 99 99 99 ,certain of the words and phrases used in explaining that particular part of the ,doctrine of ,evolution which deals with the origin of species1 are commented upon by ,mr4 ,martineau as having implications justifying his view4 ,let us consider his comments4 ,he says that competition is not an original power1 which can of itself do anything2 further1 that it cannot act except in the presence of some possibility of a better or worse2 and that this possibility of a better or worse implies a world pre-arranged for progress1 a directing ,will intent upon the good4 ,had ,mr4 ,martineau looked more closely into the matter1 he would have found that1 though the words and phrases he quotes are used for convenience1 the conceptions they imply are not at all essential to the doctrine4 ,under its rigorously-scientific form1 the doctrine is expressible in purely-physical terms1 which neither imply competition nor imply better and worse4#cg ,beyond this indirect mistake there is a direct mistake4 ,mr4 ,martineau speaks of the survivorship of the better1 as though that were the statement of the law2 and then adds that the alleged result cannot be inferred except on the assumption that whatever is better is stronger too4 ,but the words he here uses are his own words1 not the words of those he opposes4 ,the law is the survival of the fittest4 ,probably1 in substituting better for fittest1 ,mr4 ,martineau did not suppose that he was changing the meaning2 though ,i dare say he perceived that the meaning of the word fittest did not suit his argument so well4 ,had he examined the facts1 he would have found that the law is not the survival of the better or the stronger1 if we give to those words any thing like their ordinary meanings4 ,it is the survival of those which are constitutionally fittest to thrive under the conditions in which they are placed2 and very often that which1 humanly speaking1 is inferiority1 causes the survival4 ,superiority1 whether in size1 strength1 activity1 or sagacity1 is1 other things equal1 at the cost of diminished fertility2 and where the life led by a species does not demand these higher attributes1 the species profits by decrease of them1 and accompanying increase of fertility4 ,this is the reason why there occur so many cases of retrograde metamorphosis--this is the reason why parasites1 internal and external1 are so commonly degraded forms of higher types4 ,survival of the better does not cover these cases1 though survival of the fittest does2 and as ,i am responsible for the phrase1 ,i suppose ,i am competent to say that the word fittest was chosen for this reason4 ,when it is remembered that these cases outnumber all others--that there are more species of parasites than there are species of all other animals put together--it will be seen that the expression survivorship of the better is wholly inappropriate1 and the argument ,mr4 ,martineau bases upon it quite untenable4 ,indeed1 if1 in place of those adjustments of the human sense-organs1 which he so eloquently describes as implying pre-arrangement1 ,mr4 ,martineau had described the countless elaborate appliances which enable parasites to torture animals immeasurably superior to them1 and which1 from his point of view1 no less imply pre-arrangement1 ,i think the notes of admiration which end his descriptions would not have seemed to him so appropriate4 ,one more word there is from the intrinsic meaning of which ,mr4 ,martineau deduces what appears a powerful argument--the word ,evolution itself4 ,he says3-- ,it means1 to unfold from within2 and it is taken from the history of the seed or embryo of living natures4 ,and what is the seed but a casket of pre-arranged futurities1 with its whole contents prospective1 settled to be what they are by reference to ends still in the distance8 ,now1 this criticism would have been very much to the point did the word ,evolution truly express the process it names4 ,if this process1 as scientifically defined1 really involved that conception which the word evolution was originally designed to convey1 the implications would be those ,mr4 ,martineau alleges4 ,but1 unfortunately for him1 the word1 having been in possession of the field before the process was understood1 has been adopted merely because displacing it by another word seemed impracticable4 ,and this adoption of it has been joined with a caution against misunderstandings arising from its unfitness4 ,here is a part of the caution3--,evolution has other meanings1 some of which are incongruous with1 and some even directly opposed to1 the meaning here given to it4444 ,the antithetical word1 ,involution1 would much more truly express the nature of the process2 and would1 indeed1 describe better the secondary characters of the process which we shall have to deal with presently4#ch ,so that the meanings which the word involves1 and which ,mr4 ,martineau regards as fatal to the hypothesis1 are already repudiated as not belonging to the hypothesis4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and now1 having dealt with the essential objections raised by ,mr4 ,martineau to the ,hypothesis of ,evolution as it is presented under that purely scientific form which generalizes the process of things1 firstly as observed and secondly as inferred from certain ultimate principles1 let me go on to examine that form of the ,hypothesis which he propounds--,evolution as determined by ,mind and ,will--,evolution as pre-arranged by a ,divine ,actor4 ,for ,mr4 ,martineau apparently abandons the primitive theory of creation by fiat of ,almighty ,will1 and also the theory of creation by manufacture--by a contriving and adapting power1 and seems to believe in evolution3 requiring only that an originating ,mind shall be taken as its antecedent4 ,let us ask1 first1 in what relation ,mr4 ,martineau conceives the originating ,mind to stand to the evolving ,universe4 ,from some passages it is inferable that he considers the presence of mind to be everywhere needful4 ,he says3-- ,it is impossible to work the theory of ,evolution upwards from the bottom4 ,if all force is to be conceived as ,one1 its type must be looked for in the highest and all-comprehending term2 and ,mind must be conceived as there1 and as divesting itself of some speciality at each step of its descent to a lower stratum of law1 till represented at the base under the guise of simple ,dynamics4 ,this seems to be an unmistakable assertion that1 wherever ,evolution is going on1 ,mind is then and there behind it4 ,at the close of the argument1 however1 a quite different conception is implied4 ,mr4 ,martineau says3-- ,if the ,divine ,idea will not retire at the bidding of our speculative science1 but retains its place1 it is natural to ask1 ,what is its relation to the series of so-called ,forces in the world8 ,but the question is too large and deep to be answered here4 ,let it suffice to say1 that there need not be any overruling of these forces by the ,will of ,god1 so that the supernatural should disturb the natural2 or any supplementing of them1 so that ,he should fill up their deficiencies4 ,rather is ,his thought related to them as1 in man1 the mental force is related to all below it4 ,it would take too much space to deal fully with the various questions which this last passage raises4 ,there is the question--,whence come these ,forces1 spoken of as separate from the ,will of ,god--did they pre-exist8 ,then what becomes of the ,divine ,power8 ,do they exist by the ,divine ,will8 ,then what kind of nature is that by which they act apart from the ,divine ,will8 ,again1 there is the question--,how do these deputy-forces co-operate in each particular phenomenon1 if the presiding ,will is not there present to control them8 ,either an organ which develops into fitness for its function1 develops by the co-operation of these forces under the direction of ,mind then present1 or it so develops in the absence of ,mind4 ,if it develops in the absence of ,mind1 the hypothesis is given up2 and if the originating ,mind is required to be then and there present1 we must suppose a particular providence to be present in each particular organ of each particular creature throughout the universe4 ,once more there is the question--,if ,his thought is related to them these ,forces as1 in ,man1 the mental force is related to all below it1 how can ,his thought be regarded as the cause of ,evolution8 ,in man the mental force is related to the forces below it neither as a creator of them nor as a regulator of them1 save in a very limited way3 the greater part of the forces present in man1 both structural and functional1 defy the mental force absolutely4 ,nay1 more1 it needs but to injure a nerve to see that the power of the mental force over the physical forces is dependent on conditions which are themselves physical2 and one who takes morphia in mistake for magnesia1 discovers that the power of the physical forces over the mental is unconditioned by any thing mental4 ,not dwelling on these questions1 however1 ,i will merely draw attention to the entire incongruity of this conception with the previous conception which ,i have quoted4 ,assuming that1 when the choice is pressed on him1 ,mr4 ,martineau will choose the first1 which alone has any thing like defensibility1 let us go on to ask how far ,evolution is made more comprehensible by postulating ,mind1 universally immanent1 as its cause4 ,in metaphysical controversy1 many of the propositions propounded and accepted as quite believable1 are absolutely inconceivable4 ,there is a perpetual confusing of actual ideas with what are nothing but pseud-ideas4 ,no distinction is made between propositions that contain real thoughts1 and propositions that are only the forms of thoughts4 ,a thinkable proposition is one of which the two terms can be brought together in consciousness under the relation said to exist between them4 ,but very often1 when the subject of a proposition has been thought of as something known1 and when the predicate has been thought of as something known1 and when the relation alleged between them has been thought of as a known relation1 it is supposed that the proposition itself has been thought4 ,the thinking separately of the elements of a proposition is mistaken for the thinking of them in the combination which the proposition affirms4 ,and hence it continually happens that propositions which cannot be rendered into thought at all1 are supposed to be not only thought but believed4 ,the proposition that ,evolution is caused by ,mind is one of this nature4 ,the two terms are separately intelligible2 but they can be regarded in the relation of effect and cause only so long as no attempt is made to put them together in this relation4 ,the only thing which any one knows as ,mind is the series of his own states of consciousness2 and if he thinks of any mind other than his own1 he can think of it only in terms derived from his own4 ,if ,i am asked to frame a notion of ,mind divested of all those structural traits under which alone ,i am conscious of mind in myself1 ,i cannot do it4 ,i know nothing of thought save as carried on in ideas originally traceable to the effects wrought by objects and forces on me4 ,a mental act is an unintelligible phrase if ,i am not to regard it as an act in which states of consciousness are severally known as like other states in the series that has gone by1 and in which the relations between them are severally known as like past relations in the series4 ,if1 then1 ,i have to conceive ,evolution as caused by an originating ,mind1 ,i must conceive this ,mind as having attributes akin to those of the only mind ,i know1 and without which ,i cannot conceive ,mind at all4 ,i will not dwell on the many incongruities hence resulting1 by asking how the originating ,mind is to be thought of as having states produced by things objective to it2 as discriminating among these states1 and classing them as like and unlike2 and as preferring one objective result to another4 ,i will simply ask--,what happens if we ascribe to the originating ,mind the character absolutely essential to the conception of ,mind1 that it consists of a series of states of consciousness8 ,put a series of states of consciousness as cause1 and the evolving ,universe as effect1 and then endeavor to see the last as flowing from the first4 ,i find it possible to imagine in some dim way a series of states of consciousness serving as antecedent to any one of the movements ,i see going on2 for my own states of consciousness are often indirectly the antecedents to such movements4 ,but how if ,i attempt to think of such a series as antecedent to all actions throughout the ,universe--to the motions of the multitudinous stars through space1 to the revolutions of all their planets round them1 to the gyrations of all these planets on their axes1 to the infinitely-multiplied physical processes going on in each of these suns and planets8 ,i cannot think of a single series of states of consciousness as causing even the relatively small group of actions going on over the ,earth's surface4 ,i cannot think of it even as antecedent to all the various winds and the dissolving clouds they bear1 to the currents of all the rivers1 and the grinding actions of all the glaciers2 still less can ,i think of it as antecedent to the infinity of processes simultaneously going on in all the plants that cover the globe1 from scattered polar lichens to crowded tropical palms1 and in all the millions of quadrupeds that roam among them1 and the millions of millions of insects that buzz about them4 ,even to a single small set of these multitudinous terrestrial changes1 ,i cannot conceive as antecedent a single series of states of consciousness--cannot1 for instance1 think of it as causing the hundred thousand breakers that are at this instant curling over on the shores of ,england4 ,how1 then1 is it possible for me to conceive an originating ,mind1 which ,i must represent to myself as a single series of states of consciousness1 working the infinitely-multiplied sets of changes simultaneously going on in worlds too numerous to count1 dispersed throughout a space that baffles imagination8 ,if1 to account for this infinitude of physical changes everywhere going on1 ,mind must be conceived as there under the guise of simple ,dynamics1 then the reply is that1 to be so conceived1 ,mind must be divested of all attributes by which it is distinguished2 and that1 when thus divested of its distinguishing attributes1 the conception disappears--the word ,mind stands for a blank4 ,if ,mr4 ,martineau takes refuge in the entirely different and1 as it seems to me1 incongruous hypothesis of something like a plurality of minds--if he accepts1 as he seems to do1 the doctrine that you cannot explain ,evolution unless among your primordial elements you scatter already the germs of ,mind as well as the inferior elements--if the insuperable difficulties ,i have just pointed out are to be met by assuming a local series of states of consciousness for each phenomenon1 then we are obviously carried back to something like the alleged fetichistic notion1 with the difference only1 that the assumed spiritual agencies are indefinitely multiplied4 ,clearly1 therefore1 the proposition that an originating ,mind is the cause of ,evolution1 is a proposition that can be entertained so long only as no attempt is made to unite in thought its two terms in the alleged relation4 ,that it should be accepted as a matter of faith1 may be a defensible position1 provided good cause is shown why it should be so accepted2 but that it should be accepted as a matter of understanding--as a statement making the order of the universe comprehensible--is a quite indefensible position4 99 99 99 99 99 ,here let me guard myself against a misinterpretation very likely to be put upon the foregoing arguments2 especially by those who have read the ,essay to which they reply4 ,the statements of that ,essay carry the implication that all who adhere to the hypothesis it combats1 imagine they have solved the mystery of things when they have shown the processes of ,evolution to be naturally caused4 ,mr4 ,martineau tacitly represents them as believing that1 when every thing has been interpreted in terms of ,matter and ,motion1 nothing remains to be explained4 ,this1 however1 is by no means the fact4 ,the ,doctrine of ,evolution1 under its purely scientific form1 does not involve ,materialism1 though its opponents persistently represent it as doing so4 ,indeed1 among adherents of it who are friends of mine1 there are those who speak of the ,materialism of ,buechner and his school1 with a contempt certainly not less than that felt by ,mr4 ,martineau4 ,to show how anti-materialistic my own view is1 ,i may1 perhaps1 without impropriety1 quote some out of many passages which ,i have written on the question elsewhere3 ,hence though of the two it seems easier to translate so-called ,matter into so-called ,spirit1 than to translate so-called ,spirit into so-called ,matter 7which latter is1 indeed1 wholly impossible72 yet no translation can carry us beyond our symbols4#ci ,and again3 ,see then our predicament4 ,we can think of ,matter only in terms of ,mind4 ,we can think of ,mind only in terms of ,matter4 ,when we have pushed our explorations of the first to the uttermost limit1 we are referred to the second for a final answer2 and1 when we have got the final answer of the second1 we are referred back to the first for an interpretation of it4 ,we find the value of x in terms of y2 then we find the value of y in terms of x2 and so on we may continue forever without coming nearer to a solution4 ,the antithesis of subject and object1 never to be transcended while consciousness lasts1 renders impossible all knowledge of that ,ultimate ,reality in which subject and object are united4#dj ,it is thus1 ,i think1 manifest that the difference between ,mr4 ,martineau's view and the view he opposes is by no means so wide as he makes it appear2 and further1 it seems to me that such difference as exists is rather the reverse of that indicated by his exposition4 ,briefly expressed1 the difference is that1 where he thinks there is no mystery1 the doctrine he combats recognizes a mystery4 ,speaking for myself only1 ,i may say that1 agreeing entirely with ,mr4 ,martineau in repudiating the materialistic interpretation as utterly futile1 ,i differ from him simply in this1 that while he says he has found another interpretation1 ,i confess that ,i cannot find any interpretation2 while he holds that he can understand the ,power which is manifested in things1 ,i feel obliged to admit1 after many failures1 that ,i cannot understand it4 ,so that1 in presence of the transcendent problem which the universe presents1 ,mr4 ,martineau regards the human intellect as capable1 and ,i as incapable4 ,this contrast does not appear to me of the kind which his ,essay tacitly asserts4 ,if there is such a thing as the pride of ,science1 it is obviously exceeded by the pride of ,theology4 ,i fail to perceive humility in the belief that the human mind is able to comprehend that which is behind appearances2 and ,i do not see how piety is especially exemplified in the assertion that the ,universe contains no mode of existence higher in ,nature than that which is present to us in consciousness4 ,on the contrary1 ,i think it quite a defensible proposition that humility is better shown by a confession of incompetence to grasp in thought the ,cause of all things2 and that the religious sentiment may find its highest sphere in the belief that the ,ultimate ,power is no more representable in terms of human consciousness than human consciousness is representable in terms of a plant's functions4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #cg3 ,principles of ,biology1 #aei-afh4 ,footnote #ch3 ,first ,principles1 second edition1 #ig4 ,footnote #ci3 ,principles of ,psychology1 second edition1 vol4 i41 #fc4 ,footnote #dj3 ,ibid41 #bgb4 ,,the ,,factors ,,of ,,organic ,,evolution4 ,first published in ,the ,nineteenth ,century1 for ,april and ,may1 #ahhf4 ,i4 ,within the recollection of men now in middle life1 opinion concerning the derivation of animals and plants was in a chaotic state4 ,among the unthinking there was tacit belief in creation by miracle1 which formed an essential part of the creed of ,christendom2 and among the thinking there were two parties1 each of which held an indefensible hypothesis4 ,immensely the larger of these parties1 including nearly all whose scientific culture gave weight to their judgments1 though not accepting literally the theologically-orthodox doctrine1 made a compromise between that doctrine and the doctrines which geologists had established2 while opposed to them were some1 mostly having no authority in science1 who held a doctrine which was heterodox both theologically and scientifically4 ,professor ,huxley1 in his lecture on ,the ,coming of ,age of the ,origin of ,species1 remarks concerning the first of these parties as follows3-- ,one-and-twenty years ago1 in spite of the work commenced by ,hutton and continued with rare skill and patience by ,lyell1 the dominant view of the past history of the earth was catastrophic4 ,great and sudden physical revolutions1 wholesale creations and extinctions of living beings1 were the ordinary machinery of the geological epic brought into fashion by the misapplied genius of ,cuvier4 ,it was gravely maintained and taught that the end of every geological epoch was signalised by a cataclysm1 by which every living being on the globe was swept away1 to be replaced by a brand-new creation when the world returned to quiescence4 ,a scheme of nature which appeared to be modelled on the likeness of a succession of rubbers of whist1 at the end of each of which the players upset the table and called for a new pack1 did not seem to shock anybody4 ,i may be wrong1 but ,i doubt if1 at the present time1 there is a single responsible representative of these opinions left4 ,the progress of scientific geology has elevated the fundament principle of uniformitarianism1 that the explanation of the past is to be sought in the study of the present1 into the position of an axiom2 and the wild speculations of the catastrophists1 to which we all listened with respect a quarter of a century ago1 would hardly find a single patient hearer at the present day4 ,of the party above referred to as not satisfied with this conception described by ,professor ,huxley1 there were two classes4 ,the great majority were admirers of the ,vestiges of the ,natural ,history of ,creation--a work which1 while it sought to show that organic evolution has taken place1 contended that the cause of organic evolution1 is an impulse supernaturally imparted to the forms of life1 advancing them1 444 through grades of organization4 ,being nearly all very inadequately acquainted with the facts1 those who accepted the view set forth in the ,vestiges were ridiculed by the well-instructed for being satisfied with evidence1 much of which was either invalid or easily cancelled by counter-evidence1 and at the same time they exposed themselves to the ridicule of the more philosophical for being content with a supposed explanation which was in reality no explanation3 the alleged impulse to advance giving us no more help in understanding the facts than does ,nature's alleged abhorrence of a vacuum help us to understand the ascent of water in a pump4 ,the remnant1 forming the second of these classes1 was very small4 ,while rejecting this mere verbal solution1 which both ,dr4 ,erasmus ,darwin and ,lamarck had shadowed forth in other language1 there were some few who1 rejecting also the hypothesis indicated by both ,dr4 ,darwin and ,lamarck1 that the promptings of desires or wants produced growths of the parts subserving them1 accepted the single vera causa assigned by these writers--the modification of structures resulting from modification of functions4 ,they recognized as the sole process in organic development1 the adaptation of parts and powers consequent on the effects of use and disuse--that continual moulding and re-moulding of organisms to suit their circumstances1 which is brought about by direct converse with such circumstances4 ,but while this cause accepted by these few is a true cause1 since unquestionably during the life of the individual organism changes of function produce changes of structure2 and while it is a tenable hypothesis that changes of structure so produced are inheritable2 yet it was manifest to those not prepossessed1 that this cause cannot with reason be assigned for the greater part of the facts4 ,though in plants there are some characters which may not irrationally be ascribed to the direct effects of modified functions consequent on modified circumstances1 yet the majority of the traits presented by plants are not to be thus explained4 ,it is impossible that the thorns by which a briar is in large measure defended against browsing animals1 can have been developed and moulded by the continuous exercise of their protective actions2 for in the first place1 the great majority of the thorns are never touched at all1 and1 in the second place1 we have no ground whatever for supposing that those which are touched are thereby made to grow1 and to take those shapes which render them efficient4 ,plants which are rendered uneatable by the thick woolly coatings of their leaves1 cannot have had these coatings produced by any process of reaction against the action of enemies2 for there is no imaginable reason why1 if one part of a plant is eaten1 the rest should thereafter begin to develop the hairs on its surface4 ,by what direct effect of function on structure1 can the shell of a nut have been evolved8 ,or how can those seeds which contain essential oils1 rendering them unpalatable to birds1 have been made to secrete such essential oils by these actions of birds which they restrain8 ,or how can the delicate plumes borne by some seeds1 and giving the wind power to waft them to new stations1 be due to any immediate influences of surrounding conditions8 ,clearly in these and in countless other cases1 change of structure cannot have been directly caused by change of function4 ,so is it with animals to a large extent1 if not to the same extent4 ,though we have proof that by rough usage the dermal layer may be so excited as to produce a greatly thickened epidermal layer1 sometimes quite horny2 and though it is a feasible hypothesis that an effect of this kind persistently produced may be inherited2 yet no such cause can explain the carapace of the turtle1 the armour of the armadillo1 or the imbricated covering of the manis4 ,the skins of these animals are no more exposed to habitual hard usage than are those of animals covered by hair4 ,the strange excrescences which distinguish the heads of the hornbills1 cannot possibly have arisen from any reaction against the action of surrounding forces2 for even were they clearly protective1 there is no reason to suppose that the heads of these birds need protection more than the heads of other birds4 ,if1 led by the evidence that in animals the amount of covering is in some cases affected by the degree of exposure1 it were admitted as imaginable that the development of feathers from preceding dermal growths had resulted from that extra nutrition caused by extra superficial circulation1 we should still be without explanation of the structure of a feather4 ,nor should we have any clue to the specialities of feathers--the crests of various birds1 the tails sometimes so enormous1 the curiously placed plumes of the bird of paradise1 c41 c4 ,still more obviously impossible is it to explain as due to use or disuse the colours of animals4 ,no direct adaptation to function could have produced the blue protuberances on a mandril's face1 or the striped hide of a tiger1 or the gorgeous plumage of a kingfisher1 or the eyes in a peacock's tail1 or the multitudinous patterns of insects' wings4 ,one single case1 that of a deer's horns1 might alone have sufficed to show how insufficient was the assigned cause4 ,during their growth1 a deer's horns are not used at all2 and when1 having been cleared of the dead skin and dried-up blood-vessels covering them1 they are ready for use1 they are nerveless and non-vascular1 and hence are incapable of undergoing any changes of structure consequent on changes of function4 ,of these few then1 who rejected the belief described by ,professor ,huxley1 and who1 espousing the belief in a continuous evolution1 had to account for this evolution1 it must be said that though the cause assigned was a true cause1 yet1 even admitting that it operated through successive generations1 it left unexplained the greater part of the facts4 ,having been myself one of these few1 ,i look back with surprise at the way in which the facts which were congruous with the espoused view monopolized consciousness and kept out the facts which were incongruous with it--conspicuous though many of them were4 ,the misjudgment was not unnatural4 ,finding it impossible to accept any doctrine which implied a breach in the uniform course of natural causation1 and1 by implication1 accepting as unquestionable the origin and development of all organic forms by accumulated modifications naturally caused1 that which appeared to explain certain classes of these modifications1 was supposed to be capable of explaining the rest3 the tendency being to assume that these would eventually be similarly accounted for1 though it was not clear how4 ,returning from this parenthetic remark1 we are concerned here chiefly to remember that1 as said at the outset1 there existed thirty years ago1 no tenable theory about the genesis of living things4 ,of the two alternative beliefs1 neither would bear critical examination4 99 99 99 99 99 ,out of this dead lock we were released--in large measure1 though not ,i believe entirely--by the ,origin of ,species4 ,that work brought into view a further factor2 or rather1 such factor1 recognized as in operation by here and there an observer 7as pointed out by ,mr4 ,darwin in his introduction to the second edition71 was by him for the first time seen to have played so immense a part in the genesis of plants and animals4 ,though laying myself open to the charge of telling a thrice-told tale1 ,i feel obliged here to indicate briefly the several great classes of facts which ,mr4 ,darwin's hypothesis explains2 because otherwise that which follows would scarcely be understood4 ,and ,i feel the less hesitation in doing this because the hypothesis which it replaced1 not very widely known at any time1 has of late so completely dropped into the background1 that the majority of readers are scarcely aware of its existence1 and do not therefore understand the relation between ,mr4 ,darwin's successful interpretation and the preceding unsuccessful attempt at interpretation4 ,of these classes of facts1 four chief ones may be here distinguished4 ,in the first place1 such adjustments as those exemplified above are made comprehensible4 ,though it is inconceivable that a structure like that of the pitcher-plant could have been produced by accumulated effects of function on structure2 yet it is conceivable that successive selections of favourable variations might have produced it2 and the like holds of the no less remarkable appliance of the ,venus's ,fly-trap1 or the still more astonishing one of that water-plant by which infant-fish are captured4 ,though it is impossible to imagine how1 by direct influence of increased use1 such dermal appendages as a porcupine's quills could have been developed2 yet1 profiting as the members of a species otherwise defenceless might do by the stiffness of their hairs1 rendering them unpleasant morsels to eat1 it is a feasible supposition that from successive survivals of individuals thus defended in the greatest degrees1 and the consequent growth in successive generations of hairs into bristles1 bristles into spines1 spines into quills 7for all these are homologous71 this change could have arisen4 ,in like manner1 the odd inflatable bag of the bladder-nosed seal1 the curious fishing-rod with its worm-like appendage carried on the head of the lophius or angler1 the spurs on the wings of certain birds1 the weapons of the sword-fish and saw-fish1 the wattles of fowls1 and numberless such peculiar structures1 though by no possibility explicable as due to effects of use or disuse1 are explicable as resulting from natural selection operating in one or other way4 ,in the second place1 while showing us how there have arisen countless modifications in the forms1 structures1 and colours of each part1 ,mr4 ,darwin has shown us how1 by the establishment of favourable variations1 there may arise new parts4 ,though the first step in the production of horns on the heads of various herbivorous animals1 may have been the growth of callosities consequent on the habit of butting--such callosities thus functionally initiated being afterwards developed in the most advantageous ways by selection2 yet no explanation can be thus given of the sudden appearance of a duplicate set of horns1 as occasionally happens in sheep3 an addition which1 where it proved beneficial1 might readily be made a permanent trait by natural selection4 ,again1 the modifications which follow use and disuse can by no possibility account for changes in the numbers of vertebr2 but after recognizing spontaneous1 or rather fortuitous1 variation as a factor1 we can see that where an additional vertebra hence resulting 7as in some pigeons7 proves beneficial1 survival of the fittest may make it a constant character2 and there may1 by further like additions1 be produced extremely long strings of vertebr1 such as snakes show us4 ,similarly with the mammary glands4 ,it is not an unreasonable supposition that by the effects of greater or less function1 inherited through successive generations1 these may be enlarged or diminished in size2 but it is out of the question to allege such a cause for changes in their numbers4 ,there is no imaginable explanation of these save the establishment by inheritance of spontaneous variations1 such as are known to occur in the human race4 ,so too1 in the third place1 with certain alterations in the connexions of parts4 ,according to the greater or smaller demands made on this or that limb1 the muscles moving it may be augmented or diminished in bulk2 and1 if there is inheritance of changes so wrought1 the limb may1 in course of generations1 be rendered larger or smaller4 ,but changes in the arrangements or attachments of muscles cannot be thus accounted for4 ,it is found1 especially at the extremities1 that the relations of tendons to bones and to one another are not always the same4 ,variations in their modes of connexion may occasionally prove advantageous1 and may thus become established4 ,here again1 then1 we have a class of structural changes to which ,mr4 ,darwin's hypothesis gives us the key1 and to which there is no other key4 ,once more there are the phenomena of mimicry4 ,perhaps in a more striking way than any others1 these show how traits which seem inexplicable are explicable as due to the more frequent survival of individuals that have varied in favourable ways4 ,we are enabled to understand such marvellous simulations as those of the leaf-insect1 those of beetles which resemble glittering dew-drops upon the leaves2 those of caterpillars which1 when asleep1 stretch themselves out so as to look like twigs4 ,and we are shown how there have arisen still more astonishing imitations--those of one insect by another4 ,as ,mr4 ,bates has proved1 there are cases in which a species of butterfly1 rendered so unpalatable to insectivorous birds by its disagreeable taste that they will not catch it1 is simulated in its colours and markings by a species which is structurally quite different--so simulated that even a practised entomologist is liable to be deceived3 the explanation being that an original slight resemblance1 leading to occasional mistakes on the part of birds1 was increased generation after generation by the more frequent escape of the most-like individuals1 until the likeness became thus great4 ,but now1 recognizing in full this process brought into clear view by ,mr4 ,darwin1 and traced out by him with so much care and skill1 can we conclude that1 taken alone1 it accounts for organic evolution8 ,has the natural selection of favourable variations been the sole factor8 ,on critically examining the evidence1 we shall find reason to think that it by no means explains all that has to be explained4 ,omitting for the present any consideration of a factor which may be distinguished as primordial1 it may be contended that the above-named factor alleged by ,dr4 ,erasmus ,darwin and by ,lamarck1 must be recognized as a co-operator4 ,utterly inadequate to explain the major part of the facts as is the hypothesis of the inheritance of functionally-produced modifications1 yet there is a minor part of the facts1 very extensive though less1 which must be ascribed to this cause4 99 99 99 99 99 ,when discussing the question more than twenty years ago 7,principles of ,biology1 #aff71 ,i instanced the decreased size of the jaws in the civilized races of mankind1 as a change not accounted for by the natural selection of favourable variations2 since no one of the decrements by which1 in thousands of years1 this reduction has been effected1 could have given to an individual in which it occurred1 such advantage as would cause his survival1 either through diminished cost of local nutrition or diminished weight to be carried4 ,i did not then exclude1 as ,i might have done1 two other imaginable causes4 ,it may be said that there is some organic correlation between increased size of brain and decreased size of jaw3 ,camper's doctrine of the facial angle being referred to in proof4 ,but this argument may be met by pointing to the many examples of small-jawed people who are also small-brained1 and by citing not infrequent cases of individuals remarkable for their mental powers1 and at the same time distinguished by jaws not less than the average but greater4 ,again1 if sexual selection be named as a possible cause1 there is the reply that1 even supposing such slight diminution of jaw as took place in a single generation to have been an attraction1 yet the other incentives to choice on the part of men have been too many and great to allow this one to weigh in an adequate degree2 while1 during the greater portion of the period1 choice on the part of women has scarcely operated3 in earlier times they were stolen or bought1 and in later times mostly coerced by parents4 ,thus1 reconsideration of the facts does not show me the invalidity of the conclusion drawn1 that this decrease in size of jaw can have had no other cause than continued inheritance of those diminutions consequent on diminutions of function1 implied by the use of selected and well-prepared food4 ,here1 however1 my chief purpose is to add an instance showing1 even more clearly1 the connexion between change of function and change of structure4 ,this instance1 allied in nature to the other1 is presented by those varieties1 or rather sub-varieties1 of dogs1 which1 having been household pets1 and habitually fed on soft food1 have not been called on to use their jaws in tearing and crunching1 and have been but rarely allowed to use them in catching prey and in fighting4 ,no inference can be drawn from the sizes of the jaws themselves1 which1 in these dogs1 have probably been shortened mainly by selection4 ,to get direct proof of the decrease of the muscles concerned in closing the jaws or biting1 would require a series of observations very difficult to make4 ,but it is not difficult to get indirect proof of this decrease by looking at the bony structures with which these muscles are connected4 ,examination of the skulls of sundry indoor dogs contained in the ,museum of the ,college of ,surgeons1 proves the relative smallness of such parts4 ,the only pug-dog's skull is that of an individual not perfectly adult2 and though its traits are quite to the point they cannot with safety be taken as evidence4 ,the skull of a toy-terrier has much restricted areas of insertion for the temporal muscles2 has weak zygomatic arches2 and has extremely small attachments for the masseter muscles4 ,still more significant is the evidence furnished by the skull of a ,king ,charles's spaniel1 which1 if we allow three years to a generation1 and bear in mind that the variety must have existed before ,charles the ,second's reign1 we may assume belongs to something approaching to the hundredth generation of these household pets4 ,the relative breadth between the outer surfaces of the zygomatic arches is conspicuously small2 the narrowness of the temporal foss is also striking2 the zygomata are very slender2 the temporal muscles have left no marks whatever1 either by limiting lines or by the character of the surfaces covered2 and the places of attachment for the masseter muscles are very feebly developed4 ,at the ,museum of ,natural ,history1 among skulls of dogs there is one which1 though unnamed1 is shown by its small size and by its teeth1 to have belonged to one variety or other of lap-dogs1 and which has the same traits in an equal degree with the skull just described4 ,here1 then1 we have two if not three kinds of dogs which1 similarly leading protected and pampered lives1 show that in the course of generations the parts concerned in clenching the jaws have dwindled4 ,to what cause must this decrease be ascribed8 ,certainly not to artificial selection2 for most of the modifications named make no appreciable external signs3 the width across the zygomata could alone be perceived4 ,neither can natural selection have had anything to do with it2 for even were there any struggle for existence among such dogs1 it cannot be contended that any advantage in the struggle could be gained by an individual in which a decrease took place4 ,economy of nutrition1 too1 is excluded4 ,abundantly fed as such dogs are1 the constitutional tendency is to find places where excess of absorbed nutriment may be conveniently deposited1 rather than to find places where some cutting down of the supplies is practicable4 ,nor again can there be alleged a possible correlation between these diminutions and that shortening of the jaws which has probably resulted from selection2 for in the bull-dog1 which has also relatively short jaws1 these structures concerned in closing them are unusually large4 ,thus there remains as the only conceivable cause1 the diminution of size which results from diminished use4 ,the dwindling of a little-exercised part has1 by inheritance1 been made more and more marked in successive generations4 99 99 99 99 99 ,difficulties of another class may next be exemplified--those which present themselves when we ask how there can be effected by the selection of favourable variations1 such changes of structure as adapt an organism to some useful action in which many different parts co-operate4 ,none can fail to see how a simple part may1 in course of generations1 be greatly enlarged1 if each enlargement furthers1 in some decided way1 maintenance of the species4 ,it is easy to understand1 too1 how a complex part1 as an entire limb1 may be increased as a whole by the simultaneous due increase of its co-operative parts2 since if1 while it is growing1 the channels of supply bring to the limb an unusual quantity of blood1 there will naturally result a proportionately greater size of all its components--bones1 muscles1 arteries1 veins1 c4 ,but though in cases like this1 the co-operative parts forming some large complex part may be expected to vary together1 nothing implies that they necessarily do so2 and we have proof that in various cases1 even when closely united1 they do not do so4 ,an example is furnished by those blind crabs named in the ,origin of ,species which inhabit certain dark caves of ,kentucky1 and which1 though they have lost their eyes1 have not lost the foot-stalks which carried their eyes4 ,in describing the varieties which have been produced by pigeon-fanciers1 ,mr4 ,darwin notes the fact that along with changes in length of beak produced by selection1 there have not gone proportionate changes in length of tongue4 ,take again the case of teeth and jaws4 ,in mankind these have not varied together4 ,during civilization the jaws have decreased1 but the teeth have not decreased in proportion2 and hence that prevalent crowding of them1 often remedied in childhood by extraction of some1 and in other cases causing that imperfect development which is followed by early decay4 ,but the absence of proportionate variation in co-operative parts that are close together1 and are even bound up in the same mass1 is best seen in those varieties of dogs named above as illustrating the inherited effects of disuse4 ,we see in them1 as we see in the human race1 that diminution in the jaws has not been accompanied by corresponding diminution in the teeth4 ,in the catalogue of the ,college of ,surgeons ,museum1 there is appended to the entry which identifies a ,blenheim ,spaniel's skull1 the words--the teeth are closely crowded together1 and to the entry concerning the skull of a ,king ,charles's ,spaniel the words--the teeth are closely packed1 p4 #c1 is placed quite transversely to the axis of the skull4 ,it is further noteworthy that in a case where there is no diminished use of the jaws1 but where they have been shortened by selection1 a like want of concomitant variation is manifested3 the case being that of the bull-dog1 in the upper jaw of which also1 the premolars 444 are excessively crowded1 and placed obliquely or even transversely to the long axis of the skull4#da ,if1 then1 in cases where we can test it1 we find no concomitant variation in co-operative parts that are near together--if we do not find it in parts which1 though belonging to different tissues1 are so closely united as teeth and jaws--if we do not find it even when the co-operative parts are not only closely united1 but are formed out of the same tissue1 like the crab's eye and its peduncle2 what shall we say of co-operative parts which1 besides being composed of different tissues1 are remote from one another8 ,not only are we forbidden to assume that they vary together1 but we are warranted in asserting that they can have no tendency to vary together4 ,and what are the implications in cases where increase of a structure can be of no service unless there is concomitant increase in many distant structures1 which have to join it in performing the action for which it is useful8 ,as far back as #ahfd 7,principles of ,biology1 #aff7 ,i named in illustration an animal carrying heavy horns--the extinct ,irish elk2 and indicated the many changes in bones1 muscles1 blood-vessels1 nerves1 composing the fore-part of the body1 which would be required to make an increment of size in such horns advantageous4 ,here let me take another instance--that of the giraffe3 an instance which ,i take partly because1 in the sixth edition of the ,origin of ,species1 issued in #ahgb1 ,mr4 ,darwin has referred to this animal when effectually disposing of certain arguments urged against his hypothesis4 ,he there says3-- ,in order that an animal should acquire some structure specially and largely developed1 it is almost indispensable that several other parts should be modified and co-adapted4 ,although every part of the body varies slightly1 it does not follow that the necessary parts should always vary in the right direction and to the right degree 7p4 #agi74 ,and in the summary of the chapter1 he remarks concerning the adjustments in the same quadruped1 that the prolonged use of all the parts together with inheritance will have aided in an important manner in their co-ordination 7p4 #aii73 a remark probably having reference chiefly to the increased massiveness of the lower part of the neck2 the increased size and strength of the thorax required to bear the additional burden2 and the increased strength of the fore-legs required to carry the greater weight of both4 ,but now ,i think that further consideration suggests the belief that the entailed modifications are much more numerous and remote than at first appears2 and that the greater part of these are such as cannot be ascribed in any degree to the selection of favourable variations1 but must be ascribed exclusively to the inherited effects of changed functions4 ,whoever has seen a giraffe gallop will long remember the sight as a ludicrous one4 ,the reason for the strangeness of the motions is obvious4 ,though the fore limbs and the hind limbs differ so much in length1 yet in galloping they have to keep pace--must take equal strides4 ,the result is that at each stride1 the angle which the hind limbs describe round their centre of motion is much larger than the angle described by the fore limbs4 ,and beyond this1 as an aid in equalizing the strides1 the hind part of the back is at each stride bent very much downwards and forwards4 ,hence the hind-quarters appear to be doing nearly all the work4 ,now a moment's observation shows that the bones and muscles composing the hind-quarters of the giraffe1 perform actions differing in one or other way and degree1 from the actions performed by the homologous bones and muscles in a mammal of ordinary proportions1 and from those in the ancestral mammal which gave origin to the giraffe4 ,each further stage of that growth which produced the large fore-quarters and neck1 entailed some adapted change in sundry of the numerous parts composing the hind-quarters2 since any failure in the adjustment of their respective strengths would entail some defect in speed and consequent loss of life when chased4 ,it needs but to remember how1 when continuing to walk with a blistered foot1 the taking of steps in such a modified way as to diminish pressure on the sore point1 soon produces aching of muscles which are called into unusual action1 to see that over-straining of any one of the muscles of the giraffe's hind-quarters might quickly incapacitate the animal when putting out all its powers to escape2 and to be a few yards behind others would cause death4 ,hence if we are debarred from assuming that co-operative parts vary together even when adjacent and closely united--if we are still more debarred from assuming that with increased length of fore-legs or of neck1 there will go an appropriate change in any one muscle or bone in the hind-quarters2 how entirely out of the question it is to assume that there will simultaneously take place the appropriate changes in all those many components of the hind-quarters which severally require re-adjustment4 ,it is useless to reply that an increment of length in the fore-legs or neck might be retained and transmitted to posterity1 waiting an appropriate variation in a particular bone or muscle in the hind-quarters1 which1 being made1 would allow of a further increment4 ,for besides the fact that until this secondary variation occurred the primary variation would be a disadvantage often fatal2 and besides the fact that before such an appropriate secondary variation might be expected in the course of generations to occur1 the primary variation would have died out2 there is the fact that the appropriate variation of one bone or muscle in the hind-quarters would be useless without appropriate variations of all the rest--some in this way and some in that--a number of appropriate variations which it is impossible to suppose4 ,nor is this all4 ,far more numerous appropriate variations would be indirectly necessitated4 ,the immense change in the ratio of fore-quarters to hind-quarters would make requisite a corresponding change of ratio in the appliances carrying on the nutrition of the two4 ,the entire vascular system1 arterial and veinous1 would have to undergo successive unbuildings and rebuildings to make its channels everywhere adequate to the local requirements2 since any want of adjustment in the blood-supply in this or that set of muscles1 would entail incapacity1 failure of speed1 and loss of life4 ,moreover the nerves supplying the various sets of muscles would have to be proportionately changed2 as well as the central nervous tracts from which they issued4 ,can we suppose that all these appropriate changes1 too1 would be step by step simultaneously made by fortunate spontaneous variations1 occurring along with all the other fortunate spontaneous variations8 ,considering how immense must be the number of these required changes1 added to the changes above enumerated1 the chances against any adequate re-adjustments fortuitously arising must be infinity to one4 ,if the effects of use and disuse of parts are inheritable1 then any change in the fore parts of the giraffe which affects the action of the hind limbs and back1 will simultaneously cause1 by the greater or less exercise of it1 a re-moulding of each component in the hind limbs and back in a way adapted to the new demands2 and generation after generation the entire structure of the hind-quarters will be progressively fitted to the changed structure of the fore-quarters3 all the appliances for nutrition and innervation being at the same time progressively fitted to both4 ,but in the absence of this inheritance of functionally-produced modifications1 there is no seeing how the required re-adjustments can be made4 99 99 99 99 99 ,yet a third class of difficulties stands in the way of the belief that the natural selection of useful variations is the sole factor of organic evolution4 ,this class of difficulties1 already pointed out in #aff of the ,principles of ,biology1 ,i cannot more clearly set forth than in the words there used4 ,hence ,i may perhaps be excused for here quoting them4 ,where the life is comparatively simple1 or where surrounding circumstances render some one function supremely important1 the survival of the fittest may readily bring about the appropriate structural change1 without any aid from the transmission of functionally-acquired modifications4 ,but in proportion as the life grows complex--in proportion as a healthy existence cannot be secured by a large endowment of some one power1 but demands many powers2 in the same proportion do there arise obstacles to the increase of any particular power1 by 'the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life4' ,as fast as the faculties are multiplied1 so fast does it become possible for the several members of a species to have various kinds of superiorities over one another4 ,while one saves its life by higher speed1 another does the like by clearer vision1 another by keener scent1 another by quicker hearing1 another by greater strength1 another by unusual power of enduring cold or hunger1 another by special sagacity1 another by special timidity1 another by special courage2 and others by other bodily and mental attributes4 ,now it is unquestionably true that1 other things equal1 each of these attributes1 giving its possessor an extra chance of life1 is likely to be transmitted to posterity4 ,but there seems no reason to suppose that it will be increased in subsequent generations by natural selection4 ,that it may be thus increased1 the individuals not possessing more than average endowments of it1 must be more frequently killed off than individuals highly endowed with it2 and this can happen only when the attribute is one of greater importance1 for the time being1 than most of the other attributes4 ,if those members of the species which have but ordinary shares of it1 nevertheless survive by virtue of other superiorities which they severally possess2 then it is not easy to see how this particular attribute can be developed by natural selection in subsequent generations4 ,the probability seems rather to be1 that by gamogenesis1 this extra endowment will1 on the average1 be diminished in posterity--just serving in the long run to compensate the deficient endowments of other individuals1 whose special powers lie in other directions2 and so to keep up the normal structure of the species4 ,the working out of the process is here somewhat difficult to follow2 but it appears to me that as fast as the number of bodily and mental faculties increases1 and as fast as the maintenance of life comes to depend less on the amount of any one1 and more on the combined action of all2 so fast does the production of specialities of character by natural selection alone1 become difficult4 ,particularly does this seem to be so with a species so multitudinous in its powers as mankind2 and above all does it seem to be so with such of the human powers as have but minor shares in aiding the struggle for life--the sthetic faculties1 for example4 ,dwelling for a moment on this last illustration of the class of difficulties described1 let us ask how we are to interpret the development of the musical faculty4 ,i will not enlarge on the family antecedents of the great composers4 ,i will merely suggest the inquiry whether the greater powers possessed by ,beethoven and ,mozart1 by ,weber and ,rossini1 than by their fathers1 were not due in larger measure to the inherited effects of daily exercise of the musical faculty by their fathers1 than to inheritance1 with increase1 of spontaneous variations2 and whether the diffused musical powers of the ,bach clan1 culminating in those of ,johann ,sebastian1 did not result in part from constant practice2 but ,i will raise the more general question--,how came there that endowment of musical faculty which characterizes modern ,europeans at large1 as compared with their remote ancestors4 ,the monotonous chants of low savages cannot be said to show any melodic inspiration2 and it is not evident that an individual savage who had a little more musical perception than the rest1 would derive any such advantage in the maintenance of life as would secure the spread of his superiority by inheritance of the variation4 ,and then what are we to say of harmony8 ,we cannot suppose that the appreciation of this1 which is relatively modern1 can have arisen by descent from the men in whom successive variations increased the appreciation of it--the composers and musical performers2 for on the whole1 these have been men whose worldly prosperity was not such as enabled them to rear many children inheriting their special traits4 ,even if we count the illegitimate ones1 the survivors of these added to the survivors of the legitimate ones1 can hardly be held to have yielded more than average numbers of descendants2 and those who inherited their special traits have not often been thereby so aided in the struggle for existence as to further the spread of such traits4 ,rather the tendency seems to have been the reverse4 ,since the above passage was written1 ,i have found in the second volume of ,animals and ,plants under ,domestication1 a remark made by ,mr4 ,darwin1 practically implying that among creatures which depend for their lives on the efficiency of numerous powers1 the increase of any one by the natural selection of a variation is necessarily difficult4 ,here it is4 ,finally1 as indefinite and almost illimitable variability is the usual result of domestication and cultivation1 with the same part or organ varying in different individuals in different or even in directly opposite ways2 and as the same variation1 if strongly pronounced1 usually recurs only after long intervals of time1 any particular variation would generally be lost by crossing1 reversion1 and the accidental destruction of the varying individuals1 unless carefully preserved by man4--,vol4 ii1 #bib4 ,remembering that mankind1 subject as they are to this domestication and cultivation1 are not1 like domesticated animals1 under an agency which picks out and preserves particular variations2 it results that there must usually be among them1 under the influence of natural selection alone1 a continual disappearance of any useful variations of particular faculties which may arise4 ,only in cases of variations which are specially preservative1 as for example1 great cunning during a relatively barbarous state1 can we expect increase from natural selection alone4 ,we cannot suppose that minor traits1 exemplified among others by the sthetic perceptions1 can have been evolved by natural selection4 ,but if there is inheritance of functionally-produced modifications of structure1 evolution of such minor traits is no longer inexplicable4 99 99 99 99 99 ,two remarks made by ,mr4 ,darwin have implications from which the same general conclusion must1 ,i think1 be drawn4 ,speaking of the variability of animals and plants under domestication1 he says3-- ,changes of any kind in the conditions of life1 even extremely slight changes1 often suffice to cause variability4444 ,animals and plants continue to be variable for an immense period after their first domestication2 444 ,in the course of time they can be habituated to certain changes1 so as to become less variable2 444 ,there is good evidence that the power of changed conditions accumulates2 so that two1 three1 or more generations must be exposed to new conditions before any effect is visible4444 ,some variations are induced by the direct action of the surrounding conditions on the whole organization1 or on certain parts alone1 and other variations are induced indirectly through the reproductive system being affected in the same manner as is so common with organic beings when removed from their natural conditions4--7,animals and ,plants under ,domestication1 vol4 ii1 #bgj47 ,there are to be recognized two modes of this effect produced by changed conditions on the reproductive system1 and consequently on offspring4 ,simple arrest of development is one4 ,but beyond the variations of offspring arising from imperfectly developed reproductive systems in parents--variations which must be ordinarily in the nature of imperfections--there are others due to a changed balance of functions caused by changed conditions4 ,the fact noted by ,mr4 ,darwin in the above passage1 that the power of changed conditions accumulates2 so that two1 three1 or more generations must be exposed to new conditions before any effect is visible1 implies that during these generations there is going on some change of constitution consequent on the changed proportions and relations of the functions4 ,i will not dwell on the implication1 which seems tolerably clear1 that this change must consist of such modifications of organs as adapt them to their changed functions2 and that if the influence of changed conditions accumulates1 it must be through the inheritance of such modifications4 ,nor will ,i press the question--,what is the nature of the effect registered in the reproductive elements1 and which is subsequently manifested by variations8--,is it an effect entirely irrelevant to the new requirements of the variety8--,or is it an effect which makes the variety less fit for the new requirements8--,or is it an effect which makes it more fit for the new requirements8 ,but not pressing these questions1 it suffices to point out the necessary implication that changed functions of organs do1 in some way or other1 register themselves in changed proclivities of the reproductive elements4 ,in face of these facts it cannot be denied that the modified action of a part produces an inheritable effect--be the nature of that effect what it may4 ,the second of the remarks above adverted to as made by ,mr4 ,darwin1 is contained in his sections dealing with correlated variations4 ,in the ,origin of ,species1 p4 #aad1 he says-- ,the whole organization is so tied together during its growth and development1 that when slight variations in any one part occur1 and are accumulated through natural selection1 other parts become modified4 ,and a parallel statement contained in ,animals and ,plants under ,domestication1 vol4 ii1 p4 #cbj1 runs thus-- ,correlated variation is an important subject for us2 for when one part is modified through continued selection1 either by man or under nature1 other parts of the organization will be unavoidably modified4 ,from this correlation it apparently follows that1 with our domesticated animals and plants1 varieties rarely or never differ from each other by some single character alone4 ,by what process does a changed part modify other parts8 ,by modifying their functions in some way or degree1 seems the necessary answer4 ,it is indeed1 imaginable1 that where the part changed is some dermal appendage which1 becoming larger1 has abstracted more of the needful material from the general stock1 the effect may consist simply in diminishing the amount of this material available for other dermal appendages1 leading to diminution of some or all of them1 and may fail to affect in appreciable ways the rest of the organism3 save perhaps the blood-vessels near the enlarged appendage4 ,but where the part is an active one--a limb1 or viscus1 or any organ which constantly demands blood1 produces waste matter1 secretes1 or absorbs--then all the other active organs become implicated in the change4 ,the functions performed by them have to constitute a moving equilibrium2 and the function of one cannot1 by alteration of the structure performing it1 be modified in degree or kind1 without modifying the functions of the rest--some appreciably and others inappreciably1 according to the directness or indirectness of their relations4 ,of such inter-dependent changes1 the normal ones are naturally inconspicuous2 but those which are partially or completely abnormal1 sufficiently carry home the general truth4 ,thus1 unusual cerebral excitement affects the excretion through the kidneys in quantity or quality or both4 ,strong emotions of disagreeable kinds check or arrest the flow of bile4 ,a considerable obstacle to the circulation offered by some important structure in a diseased or disordered state1 throwing more strain upon the heart1 causes hypertrophy of its muscular walls2 and this change which is1 so far as concerns the primary evil1 a remedial one1 often entails mischiefs in other organs4 ,apoplexy and palsy1 in a scarcely credible number of cases1 are directly dependent on hypertrophic enlargement of the heart4 ,and in other cases1 asthma1 dropsy1 and epilepsy are caused4 ,now if a result of this inter-dependence as seen in the individual organism1 is that a local modification of one part produces1 by changing their functions1 correlative modifications of other parts1 then the question here to be put is--,are these correlative modifications1 when of a kind falling within normal limits1 inheritable or not4 ,if they are inheritable1 then the fact stated by ,mr4 ,darwin that when one part is modified through continued selection1 other parts of the organization will be unavoidably modified is perfectly intelligible3 these entailed secondary modifications are transmitted pari passu with the successive modifications produced by selection4 ,but what if they are not inheritable8 ,then these secondary modifications caused in the individual1 not being transmitted to descendants1 the descendants must commence life with organizations out of balance1 and with each increment of change in the part affected by selection1 their organizations must get more out of balance--must have a larger and larger amounts of re-organization to be made during their lives4 ,hence the constitution of the variety must become more and more unworkable4 ,the only imaginable alternative is that the re-adjustments are effected in course of time by natural selection4 ,but1 in the first place1 as we find no proof of concomitant variation among directly co-operative parts which are closely united1 there cannot be assumed any concomitant variation among parts which are both indirectly co-operative and far from one another4 ,and1 in the second place1 before all the many required re-adjustments could be made1 the variety would die out from defective constitution4 ,even were there no such difficulty1 we should still have to entertain a strange group of propositions1 which would stand as follows3--#a4 ,change in one part entails1 by reaction on the organism1 changes1 in other parts1 the functions of which are necessarily changed4 #b4 ,such changes worked in the individual1 affect1 in some way1 the reproductive elements3 these being found to evolve unusual structures when the constitutional balance has been continuously disturbed4 #c4 ,but the changes in the reproductive elements thus caused1 are not such as represent these functionally-produced changes3 the modifications conveyed to offspring are irrelevant to these various modifications functionally produced in the organs of the parents4 #d4 ,nevertheless1 while the balance of functions cannot be re-established through inheritance of the effects of disturbed functions on structures1 wrought throughout the individual organism2 it can be re-established by the inheritance of fortuitous variations which occur in all the affected organs without reference to these changes of function4 ,now without saying that acceptance of this group of propositions is impossible1 we may certainly say that it is not easy4 99 99 99 99 99 ,but where are the direct proofs that inheritance of functionally-produced modifications takes place8 is a question which will be put by those who have committed themselves to the current exclusive interpretation4 ,grant that there are difficulties2 still1 before the transmitted effects of use and disuse can be legitimately assigned in explanation of them1 we must have good evidence that the effects of use and disuse are transmitted4 ,before dealing directly with this demurrer1 let me deal with it indirectly1 by pointing out that the lack of recognized evidence may be accounted for without assuming that there is not plenty of it4 ,inattention and reluctant attention lead to the ignoring of facts which really exist in abundance2 as is well illustrated in the case of pre-historic implements4 ,biassed by the current belief that no traces of man were to be found on the ,earth's surface1 save in certain superficial formations of very recent date1 geologists and anthropologists not only neglected to seek such traces1 but for a long time continued to pooh-pooh those who said they had found them4 ,when ,m4 ,boucher de ,perthes at length succeeded in drawing the eyes of scientific men to the flint implements discovered by him in the quarternary deposits of the ,somme valley2 and when geologists and anthropologists had thus been convinced that evidences of human existence were to be found in formations of considerable age1 and thereafter began to search for them2 they found plenty of them all over the world4 ,or again1 to take an instance closely germane to the matter1 we may recall the fact that the contemptuous attitude towards the hypothesis of organic evolution which naturalists in general maintained before the publication of ,mr4 ,darwin's work1 prevented them from seeing the multitudinous facts by which it is supported4 ,similarly1 it is very possible that their alienation from the belief that there is a transmission of those changes of structure which are produced by changes of action1 makes naturalists slight the evidence which supports that belief and refuse to occupy themselves in seeking further evidence4 ,if it be asked how it happens that there have been recorded multitudinous instances of variations fortuitously arising and re-appearing in offspring1 while there have not been recorded instances of the transmission of changes functionally produced1 there are three replies4 ,the first is that changes of the one class are many of them conspicuous1 while those of the other class are nearly all inconspicuous4 ,if a child is born with six fingers1 the anomaly is not simply obvious but so startling as to attract much notice2 and if this child1 growing up1 has six-fingered descendents1 everybody in the locality hears of it4 ,a pigeon with specially-coloured feathers1 or one distinguished by a broadened and upraised tail1 or by a protuberance of the neck1 draws attention by its oddness2 and if in its young the trait is repeated1 occasionally with increase1 the fact is remarked1 and there follows the thought of establishing the peculiarity by selection4 ,a lamb disabled from leaping by the shortness of its legs1 could not fail to be observed2 and the fact that its offspring were similarly short-legged1 and had a consequent inability to get over fences1 would inevitably become widely known4 ,similarly with plants4 ,that this flower had an extra number of petals1 that that was unusually symmetrical1 and that another differed considerably in colour from the average of its kind1 would be easily seen by an observant gardener2 and the suspicion that such anomalies are inheritable having arisen1 experiments leading to further proofs that they are so1 would frequently be made4 ,but it is not thus with functionally-produced modifications4 ,the seats of these are in nearly all cases the muscular1 osseous1 and nervous systems1 and the viscera--parts which are either entirely hidden or greatly obscured4 ,modification in a nervous centre is inaccessible to vision2 bones may be considerably altered in size or shape without attention being drawn to them2 and1 covered with thick coats as are most of the animals open to continuous observation1 the increases or decreases in muscles must be great before they become externally perceptible4 ,a further important difference between the two inquiries is that to ascertain whether a fortuitous variation is inheritable1 needs merely a little attention to the selection of individuals and the observation of offspring2 while to ascertain whether there is inheritance of a functionally-produced modification1 it is requisite to make arrangements which demand the greater or smaller exercise of some part or parts2 and it is difficult in many cases to find such arrangements1 troublesome to maintain them even for one generation1 and still more through successive generations4 ,nor is this all4 ,there exist stimuli to inquiry in the one case which do not exist in the other4 ,the money-interest and the interest of the fancier1 acting now separately and now together1 have prompted multitudinous individuals to make experiments which have brought out clear evidence that fortuitous variations are inherited4 ,the cattle-breeders who profit by producing certain shapes and qualities2 the keepers of pet animals who take pride in the perfections of those they have bred2 the florists1 professional and amateur1 who obtain new varieties and take prizes2 form a body of men who furnish naturalists with countless of the required proofs4 ,but there is no such body of men1 led either by pecuniary interest or the interest of a hobby1 to ascertain by experiments whether the effects of use and disuse are inheritable4 ,thus1 then1 there are amply sufficient reasons why there is a great deal of direct evidence in the one case and but little in the other3 such little being that which comes out incidentally4 ,let us look at what there is of it4 99 99 99 99 99 ,considerable weight attaches to a fact which ,brown-,squard discovered1 quite by accident1 in the course of his researches4 ,he found that certain artificially-produced lesions of the nervous system1 so small even as a section of the sciatic nerve1 left1 after healing1 an increasing excitability which ended in liability to epilepsy2 and there afterwards came out the unlooked-for result that the offspring of guinea-pigs which had thus acquired an epileptic habit such that a pinch on the neck would produce a fit1 inherited an epileptic habit of like kind4 ,it has1 indeed1 been since alleged that guinea pigs tend to epilepsy1 and that phenomena of the kind described1 occur where there have been no antecedents like those in ,brown-,squard's case4 ,but considering the improbability that the phenomena observed by him happened to be nothing more than phenomena which occasionally arise naturally1 we may1 until there is good proof to the contrary1 assign some value to his results4 ,evidence not of this directly experimental kind1 but nevertheless of considerable weight1 is furnished by other nervous disorders4 ,there is proof enough that insanity admits of being induced by circumstances which1 in one or other way1 derange the nervous functions--excesses of this or that kind2 and no one questions the accepted belief that insanity is inheritable4 ,is it alleged that the insanity which is inheritable is that which spontaneously arises1 and that the insanity which follows some chronic perversion of functions is not inheritable8 ,this does not seem a very reasonable allegation2 and until some warrant for it is forthcoming1 we may fairly assume that there is here a further support for belief in the transmission of functionally-produced changes4 ,moreover1 ,i find among physicians the belief that nervous disorders of a less severe kind are inheritable4 ,men who have prostrated their nervous systems by prolonged overwork or in some other way1 have children more or less prone to nervousness4 ,it matters not what may be the form of inheritance--whether it be of a brain in some way imperfect1 or of a deficient blood-supply2 it is in any case the inheritance of functionally-modified structures4 ,verification of the reasons above given for the paucity of this direct evidence1 is yielded by contemplation of it2 for it is observable that the cases named are cases which1 from one or other cause1 have thrust themselves on observation4 ,they justify the suspicion that it is not because such cases are rare that many of them cannot be cited2 but simply because they are mostly unobtrusive1 and to be found only by that deliberate search which nobody makes4 ,i say nobody1 but ,i am wrong4 ,successful search has been made by one whose competence as an observer is beyond question1 and whose testimony is less liable than that of all others to any bias towards the conclusion that such inheritance takes place4 ,i refer to the author of the ,origin of ,species4 99 99 99 99 99 ,now-a-days most naturalists are more ,darwinian than ,mr4 ,darwin himself4 ,i do not mean that their beliefs in organic evolution are more decided2 though ,i shall be supposed to mean this by the mass of readers1 who identify ,mr4 ,darwin's great contribution to the theory of organic evolution1 with the theory of organic evolution itself1 and even with the theory of evolution at large4 ,but ,i mean that the particular factor which he first recognized as having played so immense a part in organic evolution1 has come to be regarded by his followers as the sole factor1 though it was not so regarded by him4 ,it is true that he apparently rejected altogether the causal agencies alleged by earlier inquirers4 ,in the ,historical ,sketch prefixed to the later editions of his ,origin of ,species 7p4 xiv1 note71 he writes3--,it is curious how largely my grandfather1 ,dr4 ,erasmus ,darwin1 anticipated the views and erroneous grounds of opinion of ,lamarck in his ',zoonomia' 7vol4 i1 pp4 #ejj-eaj71 published in #agid4 ,and since1 among the views thus referred to1 was the view that changes of structure in organisms arise by the inheritance of functionally-produced changes1 ,mr4 ,darwin seems1 by the above sentence1 to have implied his disbelief in such inheritance4 ,but he did not mean to imply this2 for his belief in it as a cause of evolution1 if not an important cause1 is proved by many passages in his works4 ,in the first chapter of the ,origin of ,species 7p4 #h of the sixth edition71 he says respecting the inherited effects of habit1 that with animals the increased use or disuse of parts has had a more marked influence2 and he gives as instances the changed relative weights of the wing bones and leg bones of the wild duck and the domestic duck1 the great and inherited development of the udders in cows and goats1 and the drooping ears of various domestic animals4 ,here are other passages taken from the latest edition of the work4 ,i think there can be no doubt that use in our domestic animals has strengthened and enlarged certain parts1 and disuse diminished them2 and that such modifications are inherited 7p4 #ajh74 ,and on the following pages he gives five further examples of such effects4 ,habit in producing constitutional peculiarities and use in strengthening and disuse in weakening and diminishing organs1 appear in many cases to have been potent in their effects 7p4 #aca74 ,when discussing special cases1 ,mr4 ,mivart passes over the effects of the increased use and disuse of parts1 which ,i have always maintained to be highly important1 and have treated in my ',variation under ,domestication' at greater length than1 as ,i believe1 any other writer 7p4 #agf74 ,disuse1 on the other hand1 will account for the less developed condition of the whole inferior half of the body1 including the lateral fins 7p4 #ahh74 ,i may give another instance of a structure which apparently owes its origin exclusively to use or habit 7p4 #ahh74 ,it appears probable that disuse has been the main agent in rendering organs rudimentary 7pp4 #djj-dja74 ,on the whole1 we may conclude that habit1 or use and disuse1 have1 in some cases1 played a considerable part in the modification of the constitution and structure2 but that the effects have often been largely combined with1 and sometimes overmastered by1 the natural selection of innate variations 7p4 #aad74 ,in his subsequent work1 ,the ,variation of ,animals and ,plants under ,domestication1 where he goes into full detail1 ,mr4 ,darwin gives more numerous illustrations of the inherited effects of use and disuse4 ,the following are some of the cases1 quoted from volume i of the first edition4 ,treating of domesticated rabbits1 he says3--the want of exercise has apparently modified the proportional length of the limbs in comparison with the body 7p4 #aaf74 ,we thus see that the most important and complicated organ the brain in the whole organization is subject to the law of decrease in size from disuse 7p4 #abi74 ,he remarks that in birds of the oceanic islands not persecuted by any enemies1 the reduction of their wings has probably been caused by gradual disuse4 ,after comparing one of these1 the water-hen of ,tristan d',acunha1 with the ,european water-hen1 and showing that all the bones concerned in flight are smaller1 he adds--,hence in the skeleton of this natural species nearly the same changes have occurred1 only carried a little further1 as with our domestic ducks1 and in this latter case ,i presume no one will dispute that they have resulted from the lessened use of the wings and the increased use of the legs 7pp4 #bhf-g74 ,as with other long-domesticated animals1 the instincts of the silk-moth have suffered4 ,the caterpillars1 when placed on a mulberry-tree1 often commit the strange mistake of devouring the base of the leaf on which they are feeding1 and consequently fall down2 but they are capable1 according to ,m4 ,robinet1 of again crawling up the trunk4 ,even this capacity sometimes fails1 for ,m4 ,martins placed some caterpillars on a tree1 and those which fell were not able to remount and perished of hunger2 they were even incapable of passing from leaf to leaf 7p4 #cjd74 ,here are some instances of like meaning from volume ii4 ,in many cases there is reason to believe that the lessened use of various organs has affected the corresponding parts in the offspring4 ,but there is no good evidence that this ever follows in the course of a single generation4444 ,our domestic fowls1 ducks1 and geese have almost lost1 not only in the individual but in the race1 their power of flight2 for we do not see a chicken1 when frightened1 take flight like a young pheasant4444 ,with domestic pigeons1 the length of the sternum1 the prominence of its crest1 the length of the scapul and furcula1 the length of the wings as measured from tip to tip of the radius1 are all reduced relatively to the same parts in the wild pigeon4 ,after detailing kindred diminutions in fowls and ducks1 ,mr4 ,darwin adds ,the decreased weight and size of the bones1 in the foregoing cases1 is probably the indirect result of the reaction of the weakened muscles on the bones 7pp4 #big-h74 ,nathusius has shown that1 with the improved races of the pig1 the shortened legs and snout1 the form of the articular condyles of the occiput1 and the position of the jaws with the upper canine teeth projecting in a most anomalous manner in front of the lower canines1 may be attributed to these parts not having been fully exercised4444 ,these modifications of structure1 which are all strictly inherited1 characterise several improved breeds1 so that they cannot have been derived from any single domestic or wild stock4 ,with respect to cattle1 ,professor ,tanner has remarked that the lungs and liver in the improved breeds 'are found to be considerably reduced in size when compared with those possessed by animals having perfect liberty2' 444 ,the cause of the reduced lungs in highly-bred animals which take little exercise is obvious 7pp4 #bii-cjj74 ,and on pp4 #cja1 #cjb and #cjc1 he gives facts showing the effects of use and disuse in changing1 among domestic animals1 the characters of the ears1 the lengths of the intestines1 and1 in various ways1 the natures of the instincts4 ,but ,mr4 ,darwin's admission1 or rather his assertion1 that the inheritance of functionally-produced modifications has been a factor in organic evolution1 is made clear not by these passages alone and by kindred ones4 ,it is made clearer still by a passage in the preface to the second edition of his ,descent of ,man4 ,he there protests against that current version of his views in which this factor makes no appearance4 ,the passage is as follows4 ,i may take this opportunity of remarking that my critics frequently assume that ,i attribute all changes of corporeal structure and mental power exclusively to the natural selection of such variations as are often called spontaneous2 whereas1 even in the first edition of the ',origin of ,species1' ,i distinctly stated that great weight must be attributed to the inherited effects of use and disuse1 with respect both to the body and mind4 ,nor is this all4 ,there is evidence that ,mr4 ,darwin's belief in the efficiency of this factor1 became stronger as he grew older and accumulated more evidence4 ,the first of the extracts above given1 taken from the sixth edition of the ,origin of ,species1 runs thus3-- ,i think there can be no doubt that use in our domestic animals has strengthened and enlarged certain parts1 and disuse diminished them2 and that such modifications are inherited4 ,now on turning to the first edition1 p4 #acd1 it will be found that instead of the words--,i think there can be no doubt1 the words originally used were--,i think there can be little doubt4 ,that this deliberate erasure of a qualifying word and substitution of a word implying unqualified belief1 was due to a more decided recognition of a factor originally under-estimated1 is clearly implied by the wording of the above-quoted passage from the preface to the ,descent of ,man2 where he says that even in the first edition of the ',origin of ,species1' c43 the implication being that much more in subsequent editions1 and subsequent works1 had he insisted on this factor4 ,the change thus indicated is especially significant as having occurred at a time of life when the natural tendency is towards fixity of opinion4 ,during that earlier period when he was discovering the multitudinous cases in which his own hypothesis afforded solutions1 and simultaneously observing how utterly futile in these multitudinous cases was the hypothesis propounded by his grandfather and ,lamarck1 ,mr4 ,darwin was1 not unnaturally1 almost betrayed into the belief that the one is all-sufficient and the other inoperative4 ,but in the mind of one so candid and ever open to more evidence1 there naturally came a reaction4 ,the inheritance of functionally-produced modifications1 which1 judging by the passage quoted above concerning the views of these earlier enquirers1 would seem to have been at one time denied1 but which as we have seen was always to some extent recognized1 came to be recognized more and more1 and deliberately included as a factor of importance4 99 99 99 99 99 ,of this reaction displayed in the later writings of ,mr4 ,darwin1 let us now ask--,has it not to be carried further8 ,was the share in organic evolution which ,mr4 ,darwin latterly assigned to the transmission of modifications caused by use and disuse1 its due share8 ,consideration of the groups of evidences given above1 will1 ,i think1 lead us to believe that its share has been much larger than he supposed even in his later days4 ,there is first the implication yielded by extensive classes of phenomena which remain inexplicable in the absence of this factor4 ,if1 as we see1 co-operative parts do not vary together1 even when few and close together1 and may not therefore be assumed to do so when many and remote1 we cannot account for those innumerable changes in organization which are implied when1 for advantageous use of some modified part1 many other parts which join it in action have to be modified4 ,further1 as increasing complexity of structure1 accompanying increasing complexity of life1 implies increasing number of faculties1 of which each one conduces to preservation of self or descendants2 and as the various individuals of a species1 severally requiring something like the normal amounts of all these1 may individually profit1 here by an unusual amount of one1 and there by an unusual amount of another2 it follows that as the number of faculties becomes greater1 it becomes more difficult for any one to be further developed by natural selection4 ,only where increase of some one is predominantly advantageous does the means seem adequate to the end4 ,especially in the case of powers which do not subserve self-preservation in appreciable degrees1 does development by natural selection appear impracticable4 ,it is a fact recognized by ,mr4 ,darwin1 that where1 by selection through successive generations1 a part has been increased or decreased1 its reaction upon other parts entails changes in them4 ,this reaction is effected through the changes of function involved4 ,if the changes of structure produced by such changes of function1 are inheritable1 then the re-adjustment of parts throughout the organism1 taking place generation after generation1 maintains an approximate balance2 but if not1 then generation after generation the organism must get more and more out of gear1 and tend to become unworkable4 ,further1 as it is proved that change in the balance of functions registers its effects on the reproductive elements1 we have to choose between the alternatives that the registered effects are irrelevant to the particular modifications which the organism has undergone1 or that they are such as tend to produce repetitions of these modifications4 ,the last of these alternatives makes the facts comprehensible2 but the first of them not only leaves us with several unsolved problems1 but is incongruous with the general truth that by reproduction1 ancestral traits1 down to minute details1 are transmitted4 ,though1 in the absence of pecuniary interests and the interests in hobbies1 no such special experiments as those which have established the inheritance of fortuitous variations have been made to ascertain whether functionally-produced modifications are inherited2 yet certain apparent instances of such inheritance have forced themselves on observation without being sought for4 ,in addition to other indications of a less conspicuous kind1 is the one ,i have given above--the fact that the apparatus for tearing and mastication has decreased with decrease of its function1 alike in civilized man and in some varieties of dogs which lead protected and pampered lives4 ,of the numerous cases named by ,mr4 ,darwin1 it is observable that they are yielded not by one class of parts only1 but by most if not all classes--by the dermal system1 the muscular system1 the osseous system1 the nervous system1 the viscera2 and that among parts liable to be functionally modified1 the most numerous observed cases of inheritance are furnished by those which admit of preservation and easy comparison--the bones3 these cases1 moreover1 being specially significant as showing how1 in sundry unallied species1 parallel changes of structure have occurred along with parallel changes of habit4 ,what1 then1 shall we say of the general implication8 ,are we to stop short with the admission that inheritance of functionally-produced modifications takes place only in cases in which there is evidence of it8 ,may we properly assume that these many instances of changes of structure caused by changes of function1 occurring in various tissues and various organs1 are merely special and exceptional instances having no general significance8 ,shall we suppose that though the evidence which already exists has come to light without aid from a body of inquirers1 there would be no great increase were due attention devoted to the collection of evidence8 ,this is1 ,i think1 not a reasonable supposition4 ,to me the ensemble of the facts suggests the belief1 scarcely to be resisted1 that the inheritance of functionally-produced modifications takes place universally4 ,looking at physiological phenomena as conforming to physical principles1 it is difficult to conceive that a changed play of organic forces which in many cases of different kinds produces an inherited change of structure1 does not do this in all cases4 ,the implication1 very strong ,i think1 is that the action of every organ produces on it a reaction which1 usually not altering its rate of nutrition1 sometimes leaves it with diminished nutrition consequent on diminished action1 and at other times increases its nutrition in proportion to its increased action2 that while generating a modified consensus of functions and of structures1 the activities are at the same time impressing this modified consensus on the sperm-cells and germ-cells whence future individuals are to be produced2 and that in ways mostly too small to be identified1 but occasionally in more conspicuous ways and in the course of generations1 the resulting modifications of one or other kind show themselves4 ,further1 it seems to me that as there are certain extensive classes of phenomena which are inexplicable if we assume the inheritance of fortuitous variations to be the sole factor1 but which become at once explicable if we admit the inheritance of functionally-produced changes1 we are justified in concluding that this inheritance of functionally-produced changes has been not simply a co-operating factor in organic evolution1 but has been a co-operating factor without which organic evolution1 in its higher forms at any rate1 could never have taken place4 ,be this or be it not a warrantable conclusion1 there is1 ,i think1 good reason for a provisional acceptance of the hypothesis that the effects of use and disuse are inheritable2 and for a methodic pursuit of inquiries with the view of either establishing it or disproving it4 ,it seems scarcely reasonable to accept without clear demonstration1 the belief that while a trivial difference of structure arising spontaneously is transmissible1 a massive difference of structure1 maintained generation after generation by change of function1 leaves no trace in posterity4 ,considering that unquestionably the modification of structure by function is a vera causa1 in so far as concerns the individual2 and considering the number of facts which so competent an observer as ,mr4 ,darwin regarded as evidence that transmission of such modifications takes place in particular cases2 the hypothesis that such transmission takes place in conformity with a general law1 holding of all active structures1 should1 ,i think1 be regarded as at least a good working hypothesis4 99 99 99 99 99 ,but now supposing the broad conclusion above drawn to be granted--supposing all to agree that from the beginning1 along with inheritance of useful variations fortuitously arising1 there has been inheritance of effects produced by use and disuse2 do there remain no classes of organic phenomena unaccounted for8 ,to this question ,i think it must be replied that there do remain classes of organic phenomena unaccounted for4 ,it may1 ,i believe1 be shown that certain cardinal traits of animals and plants at large are still unexplained2 and that a further factor must be recognized4 ,to show this1 however1 will require another paper4 ,,ii4 ,ask a plumber who is repairing your pump1 how the water is raised in it1 and he replies--,by suction4 ,recalling the ability which he has to suck up water into his mouth through a tube1 he is certain that he understands the pump's action4 ,to inquire what he means by suction1 seems to him absurd4 ,he says you know as well as he does1 what he means2 and he cannot see that there is any need for asking how it happens that the water rises in the tube when he strains his mouth in a particular way4 ,to the question why the pump1 acting by suction1 will not make the water rise above #cb feet1 and practically not so much1 he can give no answer2 but this does not shake his confidence in his explanation4 ,on the other hand an inquirer who insists on knowing what suction is1 may obtain from the physicist answers which give him clear ideas1 not only about it but about many other things4 ,he learns that on ourselves and all things around1 there is an atmospheric pressure amounting to about #ae pounds on the square inch3 #ae pounds being the average weight of a column of air having a square inch for its base and extending upwards from the sea-level to the limit of the ,earth's atmosphere4 ,he is made to observe that when he puts one end of a tube into water and the other end into his mouth1 and then draws back his tongue1 so leaving a vacant space1 two things happen4 ,one is that the pressure of air outside his cheeks1 no longer balanced by an equal pressure of air inside1 thrusts his cheeks inwards2 and the other is that the pressure of air on the surface of the water1 no longer balanced by an equal pressure of air within the tube and his mouth 7into which part of the air from the tube has gone7 the water is forced up the tube in consequence of the unequal pressure4 ,once understanding thus the nature of the so-called suction1 he sees how it happens that when the plunger of the pump is raised and relieves from atmospheric pressure the water below it1 the atmospheric pressure on the water in the well1 not being balanced by that on the water in the tube1 forces the water higher up the tube1 so that it follows the plunger4 ,and now he sees why the water cannot be raised beyond the theoretic limit of #cb feet3 a limit made much lower in practice by imperfections in the apparatus4 ,for if1 simplifying the conception1 he supposes the tube of the pump to be a square inch in section1 then the atmospheric pressure of #ae pounds per square inch on the water in the well1 can raise the water in the tube to such height only that the entire column of it weighs #ae pounds4 ,having been thus enlightened about the pump's action1 the action of a barometer becomes intelligible4 ,he perceives how1 under the conditions established1 the weight of the column of mercury balances that of an atmospheric column of equal diameter2 and how1 as the weight of the atmospheric column varies1 there is a corresponding variation in the weight of the mercurial column1--shown by change of height4 ,moreover1 having previously supposed that he understood the ascent of a balloon when he ascribed it to relative lightness1 he now sees that he did not truly understand it4 ,for he did not recognize it as a result of that upward pressure caused by the difference between the weight of the mass formed by the gas in the balloon plus the cylindrical column of air extending above it to the limit of the atmosphere1 and the weight of a similar cylindrical column of air extending down to the under surface of the balloon3 this difference of weight causing an equivalent upward pressure on the under surface4 ,why do ,i introduce these familiar truths so entirely irrelevant to my subject8 ,i do it to show1 in the first place1 the contrast between a vague conception of a cause and a distinct conception of it2 or rather1 the contrast between that conception of a cause which results when it is simply classed with some other or others which familiarity makes us think we understand1 and that conception of a cause which results when it is represented in terms of definite physical forces admitting of measurement4 ,and ,i do it to show1 in the second place1 that when we insist on resolving a verbally-intelligible cause into its actual factors1 we get not only a clear solution of the problem before us1 but we find that the way is opened to solutions of sundry other problems4 ,while we rest satisfied with unanalyzed causes1 we may be sure both that we do not rightly comprehend the production of the particular effects ascribed to them1 and that we overlook other effects which would be revealed to us by contemplation of the causes as analyzed4 ,especially must this be so where the causation is complex4 ,hence we may infer that the phenomena presented by the development of species1 are not likely to be truly conceived unless we keep in view the concrete agencies at work4 ,let us look closely at the facts to be dealt with4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the growth of a thing is effected by the joint operation of certain forces on certain materials2 and when it dwindles1 there is either a lack of some materials1 or the forces co-operate in a way different from that which produces growth4 ,if a structure has varied1 the implication is that the processes which built it up were made unlike the parallel processes in other cases1 by the greater or less amount of some one or more of the matters or actions concerned4 ,where there is unusual fertility1 the play of vital activities is thereby shown to have deviated from the ordinary play of vital activities2 and conversely1 if there is infertility4 ,if the germs1 or ova1 or seed1 or offspring partially developed1 survive more or survive less1 it is either because their molar or molecular structures are unlike the average ones1 or because they are affected in unlike ways by surrounding agencies4 ,when life is prolonged1 the fact implies that the combination of actions1 visible and invisible1 constituting life1 retains its equilibrium longer than usual in presence of environing forces which tend to destroy its equilibrium4 ,that is to say1 growth1 variation1 survival1 death1 if they are to be reduced to the forms in which physical science can recognize them1 must be expressed as effects of agencies definitely conceived--mechanical forces1 light1 heat1 chemical affinity1 c4 ,this general conclusion brings with it the thought that the phrases employed in discussing organic evolution1 though convenient and indeed needful1 are liable to mislead us by veiling the actual agencies4 ,that which really goes on in every organism is the working together of component parts in ways conducing to the continuance of their combined actions1 in presence of things and actions outside2 some of which tend to subserve1 and others to destroy1 the combination4 ,the matters and forces in these two groups1 are the sole causes properly so called4 ,the words natural selection1 do not express a cause in the physical sense4 ,they express a mode of co-operation among causes--or rather1 to speak strictly1 they express an effect of this mode of co-operation4 ,the idea they convey seems perfectly intelligible4 ,natural selection having been compared with artificial selection1 and the analogy pointed out1 there apparently remains no indefiniteness3 the inconvenience being1 however1 that the definiteness is of a wrong kind4 ,the tacitly implied ,nature which selects1 is not an embodied agency analogous to the man who selects artificially2 and the selection is not the picking out of an individual fixed on1 but the overthrowing of many individuals by agencies which one successfully resists1 and hence continues to live and multiply4 ,mr4 ,darwin was conscious of these misleading implications4 ,in the introduction to his ,animals and ,plants under ,domestication 7p4 #f7 he says3-- ,for brevity sake ,i sometimes speak of natural selection as an intelligent power2 444 ,i have1 also1 often personified the word ,nature2 for ,i have found it difficult to avoid this ambiguity2 but ,i mean by nature only the aggregate action and product of many natural laws1--and by laws only the ascertained sequence of events4 ,but while he thus clearly saw1 and distinctly asserted1 that the factors of organic evolution are the concrete actions1 inner and outer1 to which every organism is subject1 ,mr4 ,darwin1 by habitually using the convenient figure of speech1 was1 ,i think1 prevented from recognizing so fully as he would otherwise have done1 certain fundamental consequences of these actions4 ,though it does not personalize the cause1 and does not assimilate its mode of working to a human mode of working1 kindred objections may be urged against the expression to which ,i was led when seeking to present the phenomena in literal terms rather than metaphorical terms--the survival of the fittest2#db for in a vague way the first word1 and in a clear way the second word1 calls up an anthropocentric idea4 ,the thought of survival inevitably suggests the human view of certain sets of phenomena1 rather than that character which they have simply as groups of changes4 ,if1 asking what we really know of a plant1 we exclude all the ideas associated with the words life and death1 we find that the sole facts known to us are that there go on in the plant certain inter-dependent processes1 in presence of certain aiding and hindering influences outside of it2 and that in some cases a difference of structure or a favourable set of circumstances1 allows these inter-dependent processes to go on for longer periods than in other cases4 ,again1 in the working together of those many actions1 internal and external1 which determine the lives or deaths of organisms1 we see nothing to which the words fitness and unfitness are applicable in the physical sense4 ,if a key fits a lock1 or a glove a hand1 the relation of the things to one another is presentable to the perceptions4 ,no approach to fitness of this kind is made by an organism which continues to live under certain conditions4 ,neither the organic structures themselves1 nor their individual movements1 nor those combined movements of certain among them which constitute conduct1 are related in any analogous way to the things and actions in the environment4 ,evidently the word fittest1 as thus used1 is a figure of speech2 suggesting the fact that amid surrounding actions1 an organism characterized by the word has either a greater ability than others of its kind to maintain the equilibrium of its vital activities1 or else has so much greater a power of multiplication that though not longer lived than they1 it continues to live in posterity more persistently4 ,and indeed1 as we here see1 the word fittest has to cover cases in which there may be less ability than usual to survive individually1 but in which the defect is more than made good by higher degrees of fertility4 ,i have elaborated this criticism with the intention of emphasizing the need for studying the changes which have gone on1 and are ever going on1 in organic bodies1 from an exclusively physical point of view4 ,on contemplating the facts from this point of view1 we become aware that1 besides those special effects of the co-operating forces which eventuate in the longer survival of one individual than of others1 and in the consequent increase through generations1 of some trait which furthered its survival1 many other effects are being wrought on each and all of the individuals4 ,bodies of every class and quality1 inorganic as well as organic1 are from instant to instant subject to the influences in their environments2 are from instant to instant being changed by these in ways that are mostly inconspicuous2 and are in course of time changed by them in conspicuous ways4 ,living things in common with dead things1 are1 ,i say1 being thus perpetually acted upon and modified2 and the changes hence resulting1 constitute an all-important part of those undergone in the course of organic evolution4 ,i do not mean to imply that changes of this class pass entirely unrecognized2 for1 as we shall see1 ,mr4 ,darwin takes cognizance of certain secondary and special ones4 ,but the effects which are not taken into account1 are those primary and universal effects which give certain fundamental characters to all organisms4 ,contemplation of an analogy will best prepare the way for appreciation of them1 and of the relation they bear to those which at present monopolize attention4 ,an observant rambler along shores1 will1 here and there1 note places where the sea has deposited things more or less similar1 and separated them from dissimilar things--will see shingle parted from sand2 larger stones sorted from smaller stones2 and will occasionally discover deposits of shells more or less worn by being rolled about4 ,sometimes the pebbles or boulders composing the shingle at one end of a bay1 he will find much larger than those at the other3 intermediate sizes1 having small average differences1 occupying the space between the extremes4 ,an example occurs1 if ,i remember rightly1 some mile or two to the west of ,tenby2 but the most remarkable and well-known example is that afforded by the ,chesil bank4 ,here1 along a shore some sixteen miles long1 there is a gradual increase in the sizes of the stones2 which1 being at one end but mere pebbles1 are at the other end immense boulders4 ,in this case1 then1 the breakers and the undertow have effected a selection--have at each place left behind those stones which were too large to be readily moved1 while taking away others small enough to be moved easily4 ,but now1 if we contemplate exclusively this selective action of the sea1 we overlook certain important effects which the sea simultaneously works4 ,while the stones have been differently acted upon in so far that some have been left here and some carried there2 they have been similarly acted upon in two allied1 but distinguishable1 ways4 ,by perpetually rolling them about and knocking them one against another1 the waves have so broken off their most prominent parts as to produce in all of them more or less rounded forms2 and then1 further1 the mutual friction of the stones simultaneously caused1 has smoothed their surfaces4 ,that is to say in general terms1 the actions of environing agencies1 so far as they have operated indiscriminately1 have produced in the stones a certain unity of character2 at the same time that they have1 by their differential effects1 separated them3 the larger ones having withstood certain violent actions which the smaller ones could not withstand4 ,similarly with other assemblages of objects which are alike in their primary traits but unlike in their secondary traits4 ,when simultaneously exposed to the same set of actions1 some of these actions1 rising to a certain intensity1 may be expected to work on particular members of the assemblage changes which they cannot work in those which are markedly unlike2 while others of the actions will work in all of them similar changes1 because of the uniform relations between these actions and certain attributes common to all members of the assemblage4 ,hence it is inferable that on living organisms1 which form an assemblage of this kind1 and are unceasingly exposed in common to the agencies composing their inorganic environments1 there must be wrought two such sets of effects4 ,there will result a universal likeness among them consequent on the likeness of their respective relations to the matters and forces around2 and there will result1 in some cases1 the differences due to the differential effects of these matters and forces1 and in other cases1 the changes which1 being life-sustaining or life-destroying1 eventuate in certain natural selections4 ,i have1 above1 made a passing reference to the fact that ,mr4 ,darwin did not fail to take account of some among these effects directly produced on organisms by surrounding inorganic agencies4 ,here are extracts from the sixth edition of the ,origin of ,species showing this4 ,it is very difficult to decide how far changed conditions1 such as of climate1 food1 c41 have acted in a definite manner4 ,there is reason to believe that in the course of time the effects have been greater than can be proved by clear evidence4444 ,mr4 ,gould believes that birds of the same species are more brightly coloured under a clear atmosphere1 than when living near the coast or on islands2 and ,wollaston is convinced that residence near the sea affects the colours of insects4 ,moquin-,tandon gives a list of plants which1 when growing near the sea-shore1 have their leaves in some degree fleshy1 though not elsewhere fleshy 7pp4 #ajf-g74 ,some observers are convinced that a damp climate affects the growth of the hair1 and that with the hair the horns are correlated 7p4 #aei74 ,in his subsequent work1 ,animals and ,plants under ,domestication1 ,mr4 ,darwin still more clearly recognizes these causes of change in organization4 ,a chapter is devoted to the subject4 ,after premising that the direct action of the conditions of life1 whether leading to definite or indefinite results1 is a totally distinct consideration from the effects of natural selection2 he goes on to say that changed conditions of life have acted so definitely and powerfully on the organisation of our domesticated productions1 that they have sufficed to form new sub-varieties or races1 without the aid of selection by man or of natural selection4 ,of his examples here are two4 ,i have given in detail in the ninth chapter the most remarkable case known to me1 namely1 that in ,germany several varieties of maize brought from the hotter parts of ,america were transformed in the course of only two or three generations4 7,vol4 ii1 p4 #bgg47 ,and in this ninth chapter concerning these and other such instances he says some of the foregoing differences would certainly be considered of specific value with plants in a state of nature4 7,vol4 i1 p4 #cba47 ,mr4 ,meehan1 in a remarkable paper1 compares twenty-nine kinds of ,american trees1 belonging to various orders1 with their nearest ,european allies1 all grown in close proximity in the same garden and under as nearly as possible the same conditions4 ,and then enumerating six traits in which the ,american forms all of them differ in like ways from their allied ,european forms1 ,mr4 ,darwin thinks there is no choice but to conclude that these have been definitely caused by the long-continued action of the different climate of the two continents on the trees4 7,vol4 ii1 pp4 #bha-b47 ,but the fact we have to note is that while ,mr4 ,darwin thus took account of special effects due to special amounts and combinations of agencies in the environment1 he did not take account of the far more important effects due to the general and constant operation of these agencies4#dc ,if a difference between the quantities of a force which acts on two organisms1 otherwise alike and otherwise similarly conditioned1 produces some difference between them2 then1 by implication1 this force produces in both of them effects which they show in common4 ,the inequality between two things cannot have a value unless the things themselves have values4 ,similarly if1 in two cases1 some unlikeness of proportion among the surrounding inorganic agencies to which two plants or two animals are exposed1 is followed by some unlikeness in the changes wrought on them2 then it follows that these several agencies taken separately1 work changes in both of them4 ,hence we must infer that organisms have certain structural characters in common1 which are consequent on the action of the medium in which they exist3 using the word medium in a comprehensive sense1 as including all physical forces falling upon them as well as matters bathing them4 ,and we may conclude that from the primary characters thus produced there must result secondary characters4 ,before going on to observe those general traits of organisms due to the general action of the inorganic environment upon them1 ,i feel tempted to enlarge on the effects produced by each of the several matters and forces constituting the environment4 ,i should like to do this not only to give a clear preliminary conception of the ways in which all organisms are affected by these universally-present agents1 but also to show that1 in the first place1 these agents modify inorganic bodies as well as organic bodies1 and that1 in the second place1 the organic are far more modifiable by them than the inorganic4 ,but to avoid undue suspension of the argument1 ,i content myself with saying that when the respective effects of gravitation1 heat1 light1 c41 are studied1 as well as the respective effects1 physical and chemical1 of the matters forming the media1 water and air1 it will be found that while more or less operative on all bodies1 each modifies organic bodies to an extent immensely greater than the extent to which it modifies inorganic bodies4 99 99 99 99 99 ,here1 not discriminating among the special effects which these various forces and matters in the environment produce on both classes of bodies1 let us consider their combined effects1 and ask--,what is the most general trait of such effects8 ,obviously the most general trait is the greater amount of change wrought on the outer surface than on the inner mass4 ,in so far as the matters of which the medium is composed come into play1 the unavoidable implication is that they act more on the parts directly exposed to them than on the parts sheltered from them4 ,and in so far as the forces pervading the medium come into play1 it is manifest that1 excluding gravity1 which affects outer and inner parts indiscriminately1 the outer parts have to bear larger shares of their actions4 ,if it is a question of heat1 then the exterior must lose it or gain it faster than the interior2 and in a medium which is now warmer and now colder1 the two must habitually differ in temperature to some extent--at least where the size is considerable4 ,if it is a question of light1 then in all but absolutely transparent masses1 the outer parts must undergo more of any change producible by it than the inner parts--supposing other things equal2 by which ,i mean1 supposing the case is not complicated by any such convexities of the outer surface as produce internal concentrations of rays4 ,hence then1 speaking generally1 the necessity is that the primary and almost universal effect of the converse between the body and its medium1 is to differentiate its outside from its inside4 ,i say almost universal1 because where the body is both mechanically and chemically stable1 like1 for instance1 a quartz crystal1 the medium may fail to work either inner or outer change4 ,of illustrations among inorganic bodies1 a convenient one is supplied by an old cannon-ball that has been long lying exposed4 ,a coating of rust1 formed of flakes within flakes1 incloses it2 and this thickens year by year1 until1 perhaps1 it reaches a stage at which its exterior loses as much by rain and wind as its interior gains by further oxidation of the iron4 ,most mineral masses--pebbles1 boulders1 rocks--if they show any effect of the environment at all1 show it only by that disintegration of surface which follows the freezing of absorbed water3 an effect which1 though mechanical rather than chemical1 equally illustrates the general truth4 ,occasionally a rocking-stone is thus produced4 ,there are formed successive layers relatively friable in texture1 each of which1 thickest at the most exposed parts1 and being presently lost by weathering1 leaves the contained mass in a shape more rounded than before2 until1 resting on its convex under-surface1 it is easily moved4 ,but of all instances perhaps the most remarkable is one to be seen on the west bank of the ,nile at ,phil1 where a ridge of granite #ajj feet high1 has had its outer parts reduced in course of time to a collection of boulder-shaped masses1 varying from say a yard in diameter to six or eight feet1 each one of which shows in progress an exfoliation of successively-formed shells of decomposed granite3 most of the masses having portions of such shells partially detached4 ,if1 now1 inorganic masses1 relatively so stable in composition1 thus have their outer parts differentiated from their inner parts1 what must we say of organic masses1 characterized by such extreme chemical instability8--instability so great that their essential material is named protein1 to indicate the readiness with which it passes from one isomeric form to another4 ,clearly the necessary inference is that this effect of the medium must be wrought inevitably and promptly1 wherever the relation of outer and inner has become settled3 a qualification for which the need will be seen hereafter4 99 99 99 99 99 ,beginning with the earliest and most minute kinds of living things1 we necessarily encounter difficulties in getting direct evidence2 since1 of the countless species now existing1 all have been subject during millions upon millions of years to the evolutionary process1 and have had their primary traits complicated and obscured by those endless secondary traits which the natural selection of favourable variations has produced4 ,among protophytes it needs but to think of the multitudinous varieties of diatoms and desmids1 with their elaborately-constructed coverings2 or of the definite methods of growth and multiplication among such simple ,alg as the ,conjugat2 to see that most of their distinctive characters are due to inherited constitutions1 which have been slowly moulded by survival of the fittest to this or that mode of life4 ,to disentangle such parts of their developmental changes as are due to the action of the medium1 is therefore hardly possible4 ,we can hope only to get a general conception of it by contemplating the totality of the facts4 ,the first cardinal fact is that all protophytes are cellular--all show us this contrast between outside and inside4 ,supposing the multitudinous specialities of the envelope in different orders and genera of protophytes to be set against one another1 and mutually cancelled1 there remains as a trait common to them--an envelope unlike that which it envelopes4 ,the second cardinal fact is that this simple trait is the earliest trait displayed in germs1 or spores1 or other parts from which new individuals are to arise2 and that1 consequently1 this trait must be regarded as having been primordial4 ,for it is an established truth of organic evolution that embryos show us1 in general ways1 the forms of remote ancestors2 and that the first changes undergone1 indicate1 more or less clearly1 the first changes which took place in the series of forms through which the existing form has been reached4 ,describing1 in successive groups of plants1 the early transformations of these primitive units1 ,sachs#dd says of the lowest ,alg that the conjugated protoplasmic body clothes itself with a cell-wall 7p4 #aj72 that in the spores of ,mosses and ,vascular ,cryptogams and in the pollen of ,phanerogams 444 the protoplasmic body of the mother-cell breaks up into four lumps1 which quickly round themselves off and contract1 and become enveloped by a cell-membrane only after complete separation 7p4 #ac72 that in the ,equisetace the young spores1 when first separated1 are still naked1 but they soon become surrounded by a cell-membrane 7p4 #ad72 and that in higher plants1 as in the pollen of many ,dicotyledons1 the contracting daughter-cells secrete cellulose even during their separation 7p4 #ad74 ,here1 then1 in whatever way we interpret it1 the fact is that there quickly arises an outer layer different from the contained matter4 ,but the most significant evidence is furnished by the masses of protoplasm that escape into water from the injured sacs of ,vaucheria1 which often instantly become rounded into globular bodies1 and of which the hyaline protoplasm envelopes the whole as a skin 7p4 #da7 which is denser than the inner and more watery substance 7p4 #db74 ,as in this case the protoplasm is but a fragment1 and as it is removed from the influence of the parent-cell1 this differentiating process can scarcely be regarded as anything more than the effect of physico-chemical actions3 a conclusion which is supported by the statement of ,sachs that not only every vacuole in a solid protoplasmic body1 but also every thread of protoplasm which penetrates the sap-cavity1 and finally the inner side of the protoplasm-sac which encloses the sap-cavity1 is also bounded by a skin 7p4 #db74 ,if then every portion of a protoplasmic body immediately surrounds itself1 when it becomes isolated1 with such a skin1 which is shown in all cases to arise at the surface of contact with sap or water1 this primary differentiation of outer from inner must be ascribed to the direct action of the medium4 ,whether the coating thus initiated is secreted by the protoplasm1 or whether1 as seems more likely1 it results from transformation of it1 matters not to the argument4 ,either way the action of the medium causes its formation2 and either way the many varied and complex differentiations which developed cell-walls display1 must be considered as originating from those variations of this physically-generated covering which natural selection has taken advantage of4 ,the contained protoplasm of a vegetal cell1 which has self-mobility and when liberated sometimes performs amoeba-like motions for a time1 may be regarded as an imprisoned amoeba2 and when we pass from it to a free amoeba1 which is one of the simplest types of first animals1 or ,protozoa1 we naturally meet with kindred phenomena4 ,the general trait which here concerns us1 is that while its plastic or semi-fluid sarcode goes on protruding1 in irregular ways1 now this and now that part of its periphery1 and again withdrawing into its interior first one and then another of these temporary processes1 perhaps with some small portion of food attached1 there is but an indistinct differentiation of outer from inner 7a fact shown by the frequent coalescence of the pseudopodia in ,rhizopods72 but that when it eventually becomes quiescent1 the surface becomes differentiated from the contents3 the passing into an encysted state1 doubtless in large measure due to inherited proclivity1 being furthered1 and having probably been once initiated1 by the action of the medium4 ,the connexion between constancy of relative position among the parts of the sarcode1 and the rise of a contrast between superficial and central parts1 is perhaps best shown in the minutest and simplest ,infusoria1 the ,monadin4 ,the genus ,monas is described by ,kent as plastic and unstable in form1 possessing no distinct cuticular investment2 444 the food-substances incepted at all parts of the periphery2#de and the genus ,scytomonas he says differs from ,monas only in its persistent shape and accompanying greater rigidity of the peripheral or ectoplasmic layer4#df ,describing generally such low forms1 some of which are said to have neither nucleus nor vacuole1 he remarks that in types somewhat higher the outer or peripheral border of the protoplasmic mass1 while not assuming the character of a distinct cell-wall or so-called cuticle1 presents1 as compared with the inner substance of that mass1 a slightly more solid type of composition4#dg ,and it is added that these forms having so slightly differentiated an exterior1 while usually exhibiting a more or less characteristic normal outline1 can revert at will to a pseud-amoeboid and repent state4#dh ,here1 then1 we have several indications of the truth that the permanent externality of a certain part of the substance1 is followed by transformation of it into a coating unlike the substance it contains4 ,indefinite and structureless in the simplest of these forms1 as instance again the ,gregarina1#di the limiting membrane becomes1 in higher ,infusoria1 definite and often complex3 showing that the selection of favourable variations has had largely to do with its formation4 ,in such types as the ,foraminifera1 which1 almost structureless internally though they are1 secrete calcareous shells1 it is clear that the nature of this outer layer is determined by inherited constitution4 ,but recognition of this consists with the belief that the action of the medium initiated the outer layer1 specialized though it now is2 and that even still1 contact with the medium excites secretion of it4 ,a remarkable analogy remains to be named4 ,when we study the action of the medium in an inorganic mass1 we are led to see that between the outer changed layer and the inner unchanged mass1 comes a surface where active change is going on4 ,here we have to note that1 alike in the plant-cell and in the animal-cell1 there is a similar relation of parts4 ,immediately inside the envelope comes the primordial utricle in the one case1 and in the other case the layer of active sarcode4 ,in either case the living protoplasm1 placed in the position of a lining to the cuticle of the cell1 is shielded from the direct action of the medium1 and yet is not beyond the reach of its influences4 99 99 99 99 99 ,limited1 as thus far drawn1 to a certain common trait of those minute organisms which are mostly below the reach of unaided vision1 the foregoing conclusion appears trivial enough4 ,but it ceases to appear trivial on passing into a wider field1 and observing the implications1 direct and indirect1 as they concern plants and animals of sensible sizes4 ,popular expositions of science have so far familiarized many readers with a certain fundamental trait of living things around1 that they have ceased to perceive how marvellous a trait it is1 and1 until interpreted by the ,theory of ,evolution1 how utterly mysterious4 ,in past times1 the conception of an ordinary plant or animal which prevailed1 not throughout the world at large only but among the most instructed1 was that it is a single continuous entity4 ,one of these livings things was unhesitatingly regarded as being in all respects a unit4 ,parts it might have1 various in their sizes1 forms1 and compositions2 but these were components of a whole which had been from the beginning in its original nature a whole4 ,even to naturalists fifty years ago1 the assertion that a cabbage or a cow1 though in one sense a whole1 is in another sense a vast society of minute individuals1 severally living in greater or less degrees1 and some of them maintaining their independent lives unrestrained1 would have seemed an absurdity4 ,but this truth which1 like so many of the truths established by science1 is contrary to that common sense in which most people have so much confidence1 has been gradually growing clear since the days when ,leeuwenhoeck and his contemporaries began to examine through lenses the minute structures of common plants and animals4 ,each improvement in the microscope1 while it has widened our knowledge of those minute forms of life described above1 has revealed further evidence of the fact that all the larger forms of life consist of units severally allied in their fundamental traits to these minute forms of life4 ,though1 as formulated by ,schwann and ,schleiden1 the cell-doctrine has undergone qualifications of statement2 yet the qualifications have not been such as to militate against the general proposition that organisms visible to the naked eye1 are severally compounded of invisible organisms--using that word in its most comprehensive sense4 ,and then1 when the development of any animal is traced1 it is found that having been primarily a nucleated cell1 and having afterwards become by spontaneous fission a cluster of nucleated cells1 it goes on through successive stages to form out of such cells1 ever multiplying and modifying in various ways1 the several tissues and organs composing the adult4 ,on the hypothesis of evolution this universal trait has to be accepted not as a fact that is strange but unmeaning4 ,it has to be accepted as evidence that all the visible forms of life have arisen by union of the invisible forms2 which1 instead of flying apart when they divided1 remained together4 ,various intermediate stages are known4 ,among plants1 those of the ,volvox type show us the component protophytes so feebly combined that they severally carry on their lives with no appreciable subordination to the life of the group4 ,and among animals1 a parallel relation between the lives of the units and the life of the group is shown us in ,uroglena and ,syncrypta4 ,from these first stages upwards1 may be traced through successively higher types1 an increasing subordination of the units to the aggregate2 though still a subordination leaving to them conspicuous amounts of individual activity4 ,joining which facts with the phenomena presented by the cell-multiplication and aggregation of every unfolding germ1 naturalists are now accepting the conclusion that by this process of composition from ,protozoa1 were formed all classes of the ,metazoa#ej--7;as animals formed by this compounding are now called72 and that in a similar way from ,protophyta1 were formed all classes of what ,i suppose will be called ,metaphyta1 though the word does not yet seem to have become current4 ,and now what is the general meaning of these truths1 taken in connexion with the conclusion reached in the last section4 ,it is that this universal trait of the ,metazoa and ,metaphyta1 must be ascribed to the primitive action and re-action between the organism and its medium4 ,the operation of those forces which produced the primary differentiation of outer from inner in early minute masses of protoplasm1 pre-determined this universal cell-structure of all embryos1 plant and animal1 and the consequent cell-composition of adult forms arising from them4 ,how unavoidable is this implication1 will be seen on carrying further an illustration already used--that of the shingle-covered shore1 the pebbles on which1 while being in some cases selected1 have been in all cases rounded and smoothed4 ,suppose a bed of such shingle to be1 as we often see it1 solidified1 along with interfused material1 into a conglomerate4 ,what in such case must be considered as the chief trait of such conglomerate2 or rather--what must we regard as the chief cause of its distinctive characters8 ,evidently the action of the sea4 ,without the breakers1 no pebbles2 without the pebbles1 no conglomerate4 ,similarly then1 in the absence of that action of the medium by which was effected the differentiation of outer from inner in those microscopic portions of protoplasm constituting the earliest and simplest animals and plants1 there could not have existed this cardinal trait of composition which all the higher animals and plants show us4 ,so that1 active as has been the part played by natural selection1 alike in modifying and moulding the original units--largely as survival of the fittest has been instrumental in furthering and controlling the combination of these units into visible organisms1 and eventually into large ones2 yet we must ascribe to the direct effect of the medium on the first forms of life1 that character of which this everywhere-operative factor has taken advantage4 99 99 99 99 99 ,let us turn now to another and more obvious attribute of higher organisms1 for which also there is this same general cause4 ,let us observe how1 on a higher platform1 there recurs this differentiation of outer from inner--how this primary trait in the living units with which life commences1 re-appears as a primary trait in those aggregates of such units which constitute visible organisms4 ,in its simplest and most unmistakable form1 we see this in the early changes of an unfolding ovum of primitive type4 ,the original fertilized single cell1 having by spontaneous fission multiplied into a cluster of such cells1 there begins to show itself a contrast between periphery and centre2 and presently there is formed a sphere consisting of a superficial layer unlike its contents4 ,the first change1 then1 is the rise of a difference between that outer part which holds direct converse with the surrounding medium1 and that inclosed part which does not4 ,this primary differentiation in these compound embryos of higher animals1 parallels the primary differentiation undergone by the simplest living things4 ,leaving1 for the present1 succeeding changes of the compound embryo1 the significance of which we shall have to consider by-and-by1 let us pass now to the adult forms of visible plants and animals4 ,in them we find cardinal traits which1 after what we have seen above1 will further impress us with the importance of the effects wrought on the organism by its medium4 ,from the thallus of a sea-weed up to the leaf of a highly developed phnogam1 we find1 at all stages1 a contrast between the inner and outer parts of these flattened masses of tissue4 ,in the higher ,alg the outermost layers consist of smaller and firmer cells1 while the inner cells are often very large1 and sometimes extremely long2#ea and in the leaves of trees the epidermal layer1 besides differing in the sizes and shapes of its component cells from the parenchyma forming the inner substance of the leaf1 is itself differentiated by having a continuous cuticle1 and by having the outer walls of its cells unlike the inner walls4#eb ,especially significant is the structure of such intermediate types as the ,liverworts4 ,beyond the differentiation of the covering cells from the contained cells1 and the contrast between upper surface and under surface1 the frond of ,marchantia polymorpha clearly shows us the direct effect of incident forces2 and shows us1 too1 how it is involved with the effect of inherited proclivities4 ,the frond grows from a flat disc-shaped gemma1 the two sides of which are alike4 ,either side may fall uppermost2 and then of the developing shoot1 the side exposed to the light is under all circumstances the upper side which forms stomata1 the dark side becomes the under side which produces root-hairs and leafy processes4#ec ,so that while we have undeniable proof that the contrasted influences of the medium on the two sides1 initiate the differentiation1 we have also proof that the completion of it is determined by the transmitted structure of the type2 since it is impossible to ascribe the development of stomata to the direct action of air and light4 ,on turning from foliar expansions1 to stems and roots1 facts of like meaning meet us4 ,speaking generally of epidermal tissue and inner tissue1 ,sachs remarks that the contrast of the two is the plainer the more the part of the plant concerned is exposed to air and light4#ed ,elsewhere1 in correspondence with this1 it is said that in roots the cells of the epidermis1 though distinguished by bearing hairs1 are otherwise similar to those of the fundamental tissue which they clothe1#ee while the cuticular covering is relatively thin2 whereas in stems the epidermis 7often further differentiated7 is composed of layers of cells which are smaller and thicker-walled3 a stronger contrast of structure corresponding to a stronger contrast of conditions4 ,by way of meeting the suggestion that these respective differences are wholly due to the natural selection of favourable variations1 it will suffice if ,i draw attention to the unlikeness between imbedded roots and exposed roots4 ,while in darkness1 and surrounded by moist earth1 the outermost protective coats1 even of large roots1 are comparatively thin2 but when the accidents of growth entail permanent exposure to light and air1 roots acquire coverings allied in character to the coverings of branches4 ,that the action of the medium causes these and converse changes1 cannot be doubted when we find1 on the one hand1 that roots can become directly transformed into leaf-bearing shoots1 and1 on the other hand1 that in some plants certain apparent roots are only underground shoots1 and that nevertheless they are similar to true roots in function and in the formation of tissue1 but have no root-cap1 and1 when they come to the light above ground1 continue to grow in the manner of ordinary leaf-shoots4#ef ,if1 then1 in highly developed plants inheriting pronounced structures1 this differentiating influence of the medium is so marked1 it must have been all-important at the outset while types were undetermined4 ,as with plants so with animals1 we find good reason for inferring that while the specialities of the tegumentary parts must be ascribed to the natural selection of favourable variations1 their most general traits are due to the direct action of surrounding agencies4 ,here we come upon the border of those changes which are ascribable to use and disuse4 ,but from this class of changes we may fitly exclude those in which the parts concerned are wholly or mainly passive4 ,a corn and a blister will conveniently serve to illustrate the way in which certain outer actions initiate in the superficial tissues1 effects of very marked kinds1 which are related neither to the needs of the organism nor to its normal structure4 ,they are neither adaptive changes nor changes towards completion of the type4 ,after noting them we may pass to allied1 but still more instructive1 changes4 ,continuous pressure on any portion of the surface causes absorption1 while intermittent pressure causes growth3 the one impeding circulation and the passage of plasma from the capillaries into the tissues1 and the other aiding both4 ,there are yet further mechanically-produced effects4 ,that the general character of the ribbed skin on the under surfaces of the feet and insides of the hands is directly due to friction and intermittent pressure1 we have the proofs3--first1 that the tracts most exposed to rough usage are the most ribbed2 second1 that the insides of hands subject to unusual amounts of rough usage1 as those of sailors1 are strongly ribbed all over2 and third1 that in hands which are very little used1 the parts commonly ribbed become quite smooth4 ,these several kinds of evidence1 however1 full of meaning as they are1 ,i give simply to prepare the way for evidence of a much more conclusive kind4 ,where a wide ulcer has eaten away the deep-seated layer out of which the epidermis grows1 or where this layer has been destroyed by an extensive burn1 the process of healing is very significant4 ,from the subjacent tissues1 which in the normal order have no concern with outward growth1 there is produced a new skin1 or rather a pro-skin2 for this substituted outward-growing layer contains no hair-follicles or other specialities of the original one4 ,nevertheless1 it is like the original one in so far that it is a continually renewed protective covering4 ,doubtless it may be contended that this make-shift skin results from the inherited proclivity of the type--the tendency to complete afresh the structure of the species when injured4 ,we cannot1 however1 ignore the immediate influence of the medium1 on recalling the facts above named1 or on remembering the further fact that an inflamed surface of skin1 when not sheltered from the air1 will throw out a film of coagulable lymph4 ,but that the direct action of the medium is a chief factor we are clearly shown by another case4 ,accident or disease occasionally causes permanent eversion1 or protrusion1 of mucous membrane4 ,after a period of irritability1 great at first but decreasing as the change advances1 this membrane assumes the general character of ordinary skin4 ,nor is this all3 its microscopic structure changes4 ,where it is a mucous membrane of the kind covered by cylinder-epithelium1 the cylinders gradually shorten1 becoming finally flat1 and there results a squamous epithelium3 there is a near approach in minute composition to epidermis4 ,here a tendency towards completion of the type cannot be alleged2 for there is1 contrariwise1 divergence from the type4 ,the effect of the medium is so great that1 in a short time1 it overcomes the inherited proclivity and produces a structure of opposite kind to the normal one4 ,with but little break we come here upon a significant analogy1 parallel to an analogy already described4 ,as was pointed out1 an inorganic body that is modifiable by its medium1 acquires1 after a time1 an outer coat which has already undergone such change as surrounding agencies can effect2 has a contained mass which is as yet unchanged1 because unreached2 and has a surface between the two where change is going on--a region of activity4 ,and we saw that alike in the vegetal cell and the animal cell there exist analogous distributions3 of course with the difference that the innermost part is not inert4 ,now we have to note that in those aggregates of cells constituting the ,metaphyta and ,metazoa1 analogous distributions also exist4 ,in plants they are of course not to be looked for in leaves and other deciduous portions1 but only in portions of long duration--stems and branches4 ,naturally1 too1 we need not expect them in plants having modes of growth which early produce an outer practically dead part1 that effectually shields the inner actively living part of the stem from the influence of the medium--long-lived acrogens such as tree-ferns and long-lived endogens such as palms4 ,but in the highest plants1 exogens1 which have the actively living part of their stems within reach of environing agencies1 we find this part1--the cambium layer1--is one from which there is a growth inwards forming wood1 and a growth outwards forming bark3 there is an increasingly thick covering 7where it does not scale off7 of tissue changed by the medium1 and inside this a film of highest vitality4 ,in so far as concerns the present argument1 it is the same with the ,metazoa1 or at least all of them which have developed organizations4 ,the outer skin grows up from a limiting plane1 or layer1 a little distance below the surface--a place of predominant vital activity4 ,here perpetually arise new cells1 which1 as they develop1 are thrust outwards and form the epidermis3 flattening and drying up as they approach the surface1 whence1 having for a time served to shield the parts below1 they finally scale off and leave younger ones to take their places4 ,this still undifferentiated tissue forming the base of the epidermis1 and existing also as a source of renewal in internal organs1 is the essentially living substance2 and facts above given imply that it was the action of the medium on this essentially living substance1 which1 during early stages in the organization of the ,metazoa1 initiated that protective envelope which presently became an inherited structure--a structure which1 though now mainly inherited1 still continues to be modifiable by its initiator4 ,fully to perceive the way in which these evidences compel us to recognize the influence of the medium as a primordial factor1 we need but conceive them as interpreted without it4 ,suppose1 for instance1 we say that the structure of the epidermis is wholly determined by the natural selection of favourable variations2 what must be the position taken in presence of the fact above named1 that when mucous membrane is exposed to the air its cell-structure changes into the cell-structure of skin8 ,the position taken must be this3--,though mucous membrane in a highly-evolved individual organism1 thus shows the powerful effect of the medium on its surface2 yet we must not suppose that the medium had the effect of producing such a cell-structure on the surfaces of primitive forms1 undifferentiated though they were2 or1 if we suppose that such an effect was produced on them1 we must not suppose that it was inheritable4 ,contrariwise1 we must suppose that such effect of the medium either was not wrought at all1 or that it was evanescent3 though repeated through millions upon millions of generations it left no traces4 ,and we must conclude that this skin-structure arose only in consequence of spontaneous variations not physically initiated 7though like those physically initiated7 which natural selection laid hold of and increased4 ,does any one think this a tenable position8 99 99 99 99 99 ,and now we approach the last and chief series of morphological phenomena which must be ascribed to the direct action of environing matters and forces4 ,these are presented to us when we study the early stages in the development of the embryos of the ,metazoa in general4 ,we will set out with the fact already noted in passing1 that after repeated spontaneous fissions have changed the original fertilized germ-cell into that cluster of cells which forms a gemmule or a primitive ovum1 the first contrast which arises is between the peripheral parts and the central parts4 ,where1 as with lower creatures which do not lay up large stores of nutriment with the germs of their offspring1 the inner mass is inconsiderable1 the outer layer of cells1 which are presently made quite small by repeated subdivisions1 forms a membrane extending over the whole surface--the blastoderm4 ,the next stage of development1 which ends in this covering layer becoming double1 is reached in two ways--by invagination and by delamination2 but which is the original way and which the abridged way1 is not quite certain4 ,of invagination1 multitudinously exemplified in the lowest types1 ,mr4 ,balfour says3--,on purely priori grounds there is in my opinion more to be said for invagination than for any other view2#eg and1 for present purposes1 it will suffice if we limit ourselves to this3 making its nature clear to the general reader by a simple illustration4 ,take a small india-rubber ball--not of the inflated kind1 nor of the solid kind1 but of the kind about an inch or so in diameter with a small hole through which1 under pressure1 the air escapes4 ,suppose that instead of consisting of india-rubber its wall consists of small cells made polyhedral in form by mutual pressure1 and united together4 ,this will represent the blastoderm4 ,now with the finger1 thrust in one side of the ball until it touches the other3 so making a cup4 ,this action will stand for the process of invagination4 ,imagine that by continuance of it1 the hemispherical cup becomes very much deepened and the opening narrowed1 until the cup becomes a sac1 of which the introverted wall is everywhere in contact with the outer wall4 ,this will represent the two-layered gastrula--the simplest ancestral form of the ,metazoa3 a form which is permanently represented in some of the lowest types2 for it needs but tentacles round the mouth of the sac1 to produce a common hydra4 ,here the fact which it chiefly concerns us to remark1 is that of these two layers the outer1 called in embryological language the epiblast1 continues to carry on direct converse with the forces and matters in the environment2 while the inner1 called the hypoblast1 comes in contact with such only of these matters as are put into the food-cavity which it lines4 ,we have further to note that in the embryos of ,metazoa at all advanced in organization1 there arises between these two layers a third--the mesoblast4 ,the origin of this is seen in types where the developmental process is not obscured by the presence of a large food-yolk4 ,while the above-described introversion is taking place1 and before the inner surfaces of the resulting epiblast and hypoblast have come into contact1 cells1 or amoeboid units equivalent to them1 are budded off from one or both of these inner surfaces1 or some part of one or other2 and these form a layer which eventually lies between the other two--a layer which1 as this mode of formation implies1 never has any converse with the surrounding medium and its contents1 or with the nutritive bodies taken in from it4 ,the striking facts to which this description is a necessary introduction1 may now be stated4 ,from the outer layer1 or epiblast1 are developed the permanent epidermis and its out-growths1 the nervous system1 and the organs of sense4 ,from the introverted layer1 or hypoblast1 are developed the alimentary canal and those parts of its appended organs1 liver1 pancreas1 c41 which are concerned in delivering their secretions into the alimentary canal1 as well as the linings of those ramifying tubes in the lungs which convey air to the places where gaseous exchange is effected4 ,and from the mesoblast originate the bones1 the muscles1 the heart and blood-vessels1 and the lymphatics1 together with such parts of various internal organs as are most remotely concerned with the outer world4 ,minor qualifications being admitted1 there remain the broad general facts1 that out of that part of the external layer which remains permanently external1 are developed all the structures which carry on intercourse with the medium and its contents1 active and passive2 out of the introverted part of this external layer1 are developed the structures which carry on intercourse with the quasi-external substances that are taken into the interior--solid food1 water1 and air2 while out of the mesoblast are developed structures which have never had1 from first to last1 any intercourse with the environment4 ,let us contemplate these general facts4 ,who would have imagined that the nervous system is a modified portion of the primitive epidermis8 ,in the absence of proofs furnished by the concurrent testimony of embryologists during the last thirty or forty years1 who would have believed that the brain arises from an infolded tract of the outer skin1 which1 sinking down beneath the surface1 becomes imbedded in other tissues and eventually surrounded by a bony case8 ,yet the human nervous system in common with the nervous systems of lower animals is thus originated4 ,in the words of ,mr4 ,balfour1 early embryological changes imply that-- the functions of the central nervous system1 which were originally taken by the whole skin1 became gradually concentrated in a special part of the skin which was step by step removed from the surface1 and has finally become in the higher types a well-defined organ imbedded in the subdermal tissues4444 ,the embryological evidence shows that the ganglion-cells of the central part of the nervous system are originally derived from the simple undifferentiated epithelial cells of the surface of the body4#eh ,less startling perhaps1 though still startling enough1 is the fact that the eye is evolved out of a portion of the skin2 and that while the crystalline lens and its surroundings thus originate1 the percipient portions of the organs of special sense1 especially of optic organs1 are often formed from the same part of the primitive epidermis which forms the central nervous system4#ei ,similarly is it with the organs for smelling and hearing4 ,these1 too1 begin as sacs formed by infoldings of the epidermis2 and while their parts are developing they are joined from within by nervous structures which were themselves epidermic in origin4 ,how are we to interpret these strange transformations8 ,observing1 as we pass1 how absurd from the point of view of the special-creationist1 would appear such a filiation of structures1 and such a round-about mode of embryonic development1 we have here to remark that the process is not one to have been anticipated as a result of natural selection4 ,after numbers of spontaneous variations had occurred1 as the hypothesis implies1 in useless ways1 the variation which primarily initiated a nervous centre might reasonably have been expected to occur in some internal part where it would be fitly located4 ,its initiation in a dangerous place and subsequent migration to a safe place1 would be incomprehensible4 ,not so if we bear in mind the cardinal truth above set forth1 that the structures for holding converse with the medium and its contents1 arise in that completely superficial part which is directly affected by the medium and its contents2 and if we draw the inference that the external actions themselves initiate the structures4 ,these once commenced1 and furthered by natural selection where favourable to life1 would form the first term of a series ending in developed sense organs and a developed nervous system4#fj ,though it would enforce the argument1 ,i must1 for brevity's sake1 pass over the analogous evolution of that introverted layer1 or hypoblast1 out of which the alimentary canal and attached organs arise4 ,it will suffice to emphasize the fact that having been originally external1 this layer continues in its developed form to have a quasi-externality1 alike in its digesting part and in its respiratory part2 since it continues to deal with matters alien to the organism4 ,i must also refrain from dwelling at length on the fact already adverted to1 that the intermediate derived layer1 or mesoblast1 which was at the outset completely internal1 originates those structures which ever remain completely internal1 and have no communication with the environment save through the structures developed from the other two3 an antithesis which has great significance4 ,here1 instead of dwelling on these details1 it will be better to draw attention to the most general aspect of the facts4 ,whatever may be the course of subsequent changes1 the first change is the formation of a superficial layer or blastoderm2 and by whatever series of transformations the adult structure is reached1 it is from the blastoderm that all the organs forming the adult originate4 ,why this marvellous fact8 ,meaning is given to it if we go back to the first stage in which ,protozoa1 having by repeated fissions formed a cluster1 then arranged themselves into a hollow sphere1 as do the protophytes forming a ,volvox4 ,originally alike all over its surface1 the hollow sphere of ciliated units thus formed1 would1 if not quite spherical1 assume a constant attitude when moving through the water2 and hence one part of the spheroid would more frequently than the rest come in contact with nutritive matters to be taken in4 ,a division of labour resulting from such a variation being advantageous1 and tending therefore to increase in descendants1 would end in a differentiation like that shown in the gemmules of various low types of ,metazoa1 which1 ovate in shape1 are ciliated over one part of the surface only4 ,there would arise a form in which the cilium-bearing units effected locomotion and aeration2 while on the others1 assuming an amoeba-like character1 devolved the function of absorbing food3 a primordial specialization variously indicated by evidence4#fa ,just noting that an ancestral origin of this kind is implied by the fact that in low types of ,metazoa a hollow sphere of cells is the form first assumed by the unfolding embryo1 ,i draw attention to the point here of chief interest2 namely that the primary differentiation of this hollow sphere is in such case determined by a difference in the converse of its parts with the medium and its contents2 and that the subsequent invagination arises by a continuance of this differential converse4 ,even neglecting this first stage and commencing with the next1 in which a gastrula has been produced by the permanent introversion of one portion of the surface of the hollow sphere1 it will suffice if we consider what must thereafter have happened4 ,that which continued to be the outer surface was the part which from time to time touched quiescent masses and occasionally received the collisions consequent on its own motions or the motions of other things4 ,it was the part to receive the sound-vibrations occasionally propagated through the water2 the part to be affected more strongly than any other by those variations in the amounts of light caused by the passing of small bodies close to it2 and the part which met those diffused molecules constituting odours4 ,that is to say1 from the beginning the surface was the part on which there fell the various influences pervading the environment1 the part by which there was received those impressions from the environment serving for the guidance of actions1 and the part which had to bear the mechanical re-actions consequent upon such actions4 ,necessarily1 therefore1 the surface was the part in which were initiated the various instrumentalities for carrying on intercourse with the environment4 ,to suppose otherwise is to suppose that such instrumentalities arose internally where they could neither be operated on by surrounding agencies nor operate on them1--where the differentiating forces did not come into play1 and the differentiated structures had nothing to do2 and it is to suppose that meanwhile the parts directly exposed to the differentiating forces remained unchanged4 ,clearly1 then1 organization could not but begin on the surface2 and having thus begun1 its subsequent course could not but be determined by its superficial origin4 ,and hence these remarkable facts showing us that individual evolution is accomplished by successive in-foldings and in-growings4 ,doubtless natural selection soon came into action1 as1 for example1 in the removal of the rudimentary nervous centres from the surface2 since an individual in which they were a little more deeply seated would be less likely to be incapacitated by injury of them4 ,and so in multitudinous other ways4 ,but nevertheless1 as we here see1 natural selection could operate only under subjection4 ,it could do no more than take advantage of those structural changes which the medium and its contents initiated4 ,see1 then1 how large has been the part played by this primordial factor4 ,had it done no more than give to ,protozoa and ,protophyta that cell-form which characterizes them--had it done no more than entail the cellular composition which is so remarkable a trait of ,metazoa and ,metaphyta--had it done no more than cause the repetition in all visible animals and plants of that primary differentiation of outer from inner which it first wrought in animals and plants invisible to the naked eye2 it would have done much towards giving to organisms of all kinds certain leading traits4 ,but it has done more than this4 ,by causing the first differentiations of those clusters of units out of which visible animals in general arose1 it fixed the starting place for organization1 and therefore determined the course of organization2 and1 doing this1 gave indelible traits to embryonic transformations and to adult structures4 99 99 99 99 99 ,though mainly carried on after the inductive method1 the argument at the close of the foregoing section has passed into the deductive4 ,here let us follow for a space the deductive method pure and simple4 ,doubtless in biology priori reasoning is dangerous2 but there can be no danger in considering whether its results coincide with those reached by reasoning posteriori4 ,biologists in general agree that in the present state of the world1 no such thing happens as the rise of a living creature out of non-living matter4 ,they do not deny1 however1 that at a remote period in the past1 when the temperature of the ,earth's surface was much higher than at present1 and other physical conditions were unlike those we know1 inorganic matter1 through successive complications1 gave origin to organic matter4 ,so many substances once supposed to belong exclusively to living bodies1 have now been formed artificially1 that men of science scarcely question the conclusion that there are conditions under which1 by yet another step of composition1 quaternary compounds of lower types pass into those of highest types4 ,that there once took place gradual divergence of the organic from the inorganic1 is1 indeed1 a necessary implication of the hypothesis of ,evolution1 taken as a whole2 and if we accept it as a whole1 we must put to ourselves the question--,what were the early stages of progress which followed1 after the most complex form of matter had arisen out of forms of matter a degree less complex8 ,at first1 protoplasm could have had no proclivities to one or other arrangement of parts2 unless1 indeed1 a purely mechanical proclivity towards a spherical form when suspended in a liquid4 ,at the outset it must have been passive4 ,in respect of its passivity1 primitive organic matter must have been like inorganic matter4 ,no such thing as spontaneous variation could have occurred in it2 for variation implies some habitual course of change from which it is a divergence1 and is therefore excluded where there is no habitual course of change4 ,in the absence of that cyclical series of metamorphoses which even the simplest living thing now shows us1 as a result of its inherited constitution1 there could be no point d'appui for natural selection4 ,how1 then1 did organic evolution begin8 ,if a primitive mass of organic matter was like a mass of inorganic matter in respect of its passivity1 and differed only in respect of its greater changeableness2 then we must infer that its first changes conformed to the same general law as do the changes of an inorganic mass4 ,the instability of the homogeneous is a universal principle4 ,in all cases the homogeneous tends to pass into the heterogeneous1 and the less heterogeneous into the more heterogeneous4 ,in the primordial units of protoplasm1 then1 the step with which evolution commenced must have been the passage from a state of complete likeness throughout the mass to a state in which there existed some unlikeness4 ,further1 the cause of this step in one of these portions of organic matter1 as in any portion of inorganic matter1 must have been the different exposure of its parts to incident forces4 ,what incident forces8 ,those of its medium or environment4 ,which were the parts thus differently exposed8 ,necessarily the outside and the inside4 ,inevitably1 then1 alike in the organic aggregate and the inorganic aggregate 7supposing it to have coherence enough to maintain constant relative positions among its parts71 the first fall from homogeneity to heterogeneity must always have been the differentiation of the external surface from the internal contents4 ,no matter whether the modification was physical or chemical1 one of composition or of decomposition1 it comes within the same generalization4 ,the direct action of the medium was the primordial factor of organic evolution4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and now1 finally1 let us look at the factors in their ensemble1 and consider the respective parts they play3 observing1 especially1 the ways in which1 at successive stages1 they severally give place one to another in degree of importance4 ,acting alone1 the primordial factor must have initiated the primary differentiation in all units of protoplasm alike4 ,i say alike1 but ,i must forthwith qualify the word4 ,for since surrounding influences1 physical and chemical1 could not be absolutely the same in all places1 especially when the first rudiments of living things had spread over a considerable area1 there necessarily arose small contrasts between the degrees and kinds of superficial differentiation effected4 ,as soon as these became decided1 natural selection came into play2 for inevitably the unlikenesses produced among the units had effects on their lives3 there was survival of some among the modified forms rather than others4 ,utterly in the dark though we are respecting the causes which set up that process of fission everywhere occurring among the minutest forms of life1 we must infer that1 when established1 it furthered the spread of those which were most favourably differentiated by the medium4 ,though natural selection must have become increasingly active when once it had got a start2 yet the differentiating action of the medium never ceased to be a co-operator in the development of these first animals and plants4 ,again taking the lead as there arose the composite forms of animals and plants1 and again losing the lead with that advancing differentiation of these higher types which gave more scope to natural selection1 it nevertheless continued1 and must ever continue1 to be a cause1 both direct and indirect1 of modifications in structure4 ,along with that remarkable process which1 beginning in minute forms with what is called conjugation1 developed into sexual generation1 there came into play causes of frequent and marked fortuitous variations4 ,the mixtures of constitutional proclivities made more or less unlike by unlikenesses of physical conditions1 inevitably led to occasional concurrences of forces producing deviations of structure4 ,these were of course mostly suppressed1 but sometimes increased1 by survival of the fittest4 ,when1 along with the growing multiplication in forms of life1 conflict and competition became continually more active1 fortuitous variations of structure of no account in the converse with the medium1 became of much account in the struggle with enemies and competitors2 and natural selection of such variations became the predominant factor4 ,especially throughout the plant-world its action appears to have been immensely the most important2 and throughout that large part of the animal world characterized by relative inactivity1 the survival of individuals that had varied in favourable ways1 must all along have been the chief cause of the divergence of species and the occasional production of higher ones4 ,but gradually with that increase of activity which we see on ascending to successively higher grades of animals1 and especially with that increased complexity of life which we also see1 there came more and more into play as a factor1 the inheritance of those modifications of structure caused by modifications of function4 ,eventually1 among creatures of high organization1 this factor became an important one2 and ,i think there is reason to conclude that1 in the case of the highest of creatures1 civilized men1 among whom the kinds of variation which affect survival are too multitudinous to permit easy selection of any one1 and among whom survival of the fittest is greatly interfered with1 it has become the chief factor3 such aid as survival of the fittest gives1 being usually limited to the preservation of those in whom the totality of the faculties has been most favourably moulded by functional changes4 ,of course this sketch of the relations among the factors must be taken as in large measure a speculation4 ,we are now too far removed from the beginnings of life to obtain data for anything more than tentative conclusions respecting its earliest stages2 especially in the absence of any clue to the mode in which multiplication1 first agamogenetic and then gamogenetic1 was initiated4 ,but it has seemed to me not amiss to present this general conception1 by way of showing how the deductive interpretation harmonizes with the several inferences reached by induction4 99 99 99 99 99 ,in his article on ,evolution in the ,encyclopdia ,britannica1 ,professor ,huxley writes as follows3-- ,how far 'natural selection' suffices for the production of species remains to be seen4 ,few can doubt that1 if not the whole cause1 it is a very important factor in that operation4444 ,on the evidence of palontology1 the evolution of many existing forms of animal life from their predecessors is no longer an hypothesis1 but an historical fact2 it is only the nature of the physiological factors to which that evolution is due which is still open to discussion4 ,with these passages ,i may fitly join a remark made in the admirable address ,prof4 ,huxley delivered before unveiling the statue of ,mr4 ,darwin in the ,museum at ,south ,kensington4 ,deprecating the supposition that an authoritative sanction was given by the ceremony to the current ideas concerning organic evolution1 he said that science commits suicide when it adopts a creed4 ,along with larger motives1 one motive which has joined in prompting the foregoing articles1 has been the desire to point out that already among biologists1 the beliefs concerning the origin of species have assumed too much the character of a creed2 and that while becoming settled they have been narrowed4 ,so far from further broadening that broader view which ,mr4 ,darwin reached as he grew older1 his followers appear to have retrograded towards a more restricted view than he ever expressed4 ,thus there seems occasion for recognizing the warning uttered by ,prof4 ,huxley1 as not uncalled for4 ,whatever may be thought of the arguments and conclusions set forth in this article and the preceding one1 they will perhaps serve to show that it is as yet far too soon to close the inquiry concerning the causes of organic evolution4 ,,note4 ,the following passages formed part of a preface to the small volume in which the foregoing essay re-appeared4 ,i append them here as they cannot now be conveniently prefixed4 ,though the direct bearings of the arguments contained in this ,essay are biological1 the argument contained in its first half has indirect bearings upon ,psychology1 ,ethics1 and ,sociology4 ,my belief in the profound importance of these indirect bearings1 was originally a chief prompter to set forth the argument2 and it now prompts me to re-issue it in permanent form4 ,though mental phenomena of many kinds1 and especially of the simpler kinds1 are explicable only as resulting from the natural selection of favourable variations2 yet there are1 ,i believe1 still more numerous mental phenomena1 including all those of any considerable complexity1 which cannot be explained otherwise than as results of the inheritance of functionally-produced modifications4 ,what theory of psychological evolution is espoused1 thus depends on acceptance or rejection of the doctrine that not only in the individual1 but in the successions of individuals1 use and disuse of parts produce respectively increase and decrease of them4 ,of course there are involved the conceptions we form of the genesis and nature of our higher emotions2 and1 by implication1 the conceptions we form of our moral intuitions4 ,if functionally-produced modifications are inheritable1 then the mental associations habitually produced in individuals by experiences of the relations between actions and their consequences1 pleasurable or painful1 may1 in the successions of individuals1 generate innate tendencies to like or dislike such actions4 ,but if not1 the genesis of such tendencies is1 as we shall see1 not satisfactorily explicable4 ,that our sociological beliefs must also be profoundly affected by the conclusions we draw on this point1 is obvious4 ,if a nation is modified en masse by transmission of the effects produced on the natures of its members by those modes of daily activity which its institutions and circumstances involve2 then we must infer that such institutions and circumstances mould its members far more rapidly and comprehensively than they can do if the solo cause of adaptation to them is the more frequent survival of individuals who happen to have varied in favourable ways4 ,i will add only that1 considering the width and depth of the effects which acceptance of one or other of these hypotheses must have on our views of ,life1 ,mind1 ,morals1 and ,politics1 the question--,which of them is true8 demands1 beyond all other questions whatever1 the attention of scientific men4 99 99 99 99 99 ,after the above articles were published1 ,i received from ,dr4 ,downes a copy of a paper ,on the ,influence of ,light on ,protoplasm1 written by himself and ,mr4 ,t4,p4 ,blunt1 ,m4,a41 which was communicated to the ,royal ,society in #ahgh4 ,it was a continuation of a preceding paper which1 referring chiefly to ,bacteria1 contended that-- ,light is inimical to1 and under favourable conditions may wholly prevent1 the development of these organisms4 ,this supplementary paper goes on to show that the injurious effect of light upon protoplasm results only in presence of oxygen4 ,taking first a comparatively simple type of molecule which enters into the composition of organic matter1 the authors say1 after detailing experiments3-- ,it was evident1 therefore1 that oxygen was the agent of destruction under the influence of sunlight4 ,and accounts of experiments upon minute organisms are followed by the sentence-- ,it seemed1 therefore1 that in absence of an atmosphere1 light failed entirely to produce any effect on such organisms as were able to appear4 ,they sum up the results of their experiments in the paragraph-- ,we conclude1 therefore1 both from analogy and from direct experiment1 that the observed action on these organisms is not dependent on light per se1 but that the presence of free oxygen is necessary2 light and oxygen together accomplishing what neither can do alone3 and the inference seems irresistible that the effect produced is a gradual oxidation of the constituent protoplasm of these organisms1 and that1 in this respect1 protoplasm1 although living1 is not exempt from laws which appear to govern the relations of light and oxygen to forms of matter less highly endowed4 ,a force which is indirectly absolutely essential to life as we know it1 and matter in the absence of which life has not yet been proved to exist1 here unite for its destruction4 ,what is the obvious implication8 ,if oxygen in presence of light destroys one of these minutest portions of protoplasm1 what will be its effect on a larger portion of protoplasm8 ,it will work an effect on the surface instead of on the whole mass4 ,not like the minutest mass made inert all through1 the larger mass will be made inert only on its outside2 and1 indeed1 the like will happen with the minutest mass if the light or the oxygen is very small in quantity4 ,hence there will result an envelope of changed matter1 inclosing and protecting the unchanged protoplasm--there will result a rudimentary cell-wall4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote #da3 ,it is probable that this shortening has resulted not directly but indirectly1 from the selection of individuals which were noted for tenacity of hold2 for the bull-dog's peculiarity in this respect seems due to relative shortness of the upper jaw1 giving the underhung structure which1 involving retreat of the nostrils1 enables the dog to continue breathing while holding4 ,footnote #db3 ,though ,mr4 ,darwin approved of this expression and occasionally employed it1 he did not adopt it for general use2 contending1 very truly1 that the expression ,natural ,selection is in some cases more convenient4 ,see ,animals and ,plants under ,domestication 7first edition7 ,vol4 i1 p4 #f2 and ,origin of ,species 7sixth edition7 p4 #di4 ,footnote #dc3 ,it is true that while not deliberately admitted by ,mr4 ,darwin1 these effects are not denied by him4 ,in his ,animals and ,plants under ,domestication 7vol4 ii1 #bha71 he refers to certain chapters in the ,principles of ,biology1 in which ,i have discussed this general inter-action of the medium and the organism1 and ascribed certain most general traits to it4 ,but though1 by his expressions1 he implies a sympathetic attention to the argument1 he does not in such way adopt the conclusion as to assign to this factor any share in the genesis of organic structures--much less that large share which ,i believe it has had4 ,i did not myself at that time1 nor indeed until quite recently1 see how extensive and profound have been the influences on organization which1 as we shall presently see1 are traceable to the early results of this fundamental relation between organism and medium4 ,i may add that it is in an essay on ,transcendental ,physiology1 first published in #aheg1 that the line of thought here followed out in its wider bearings1 was first entered upon4 ,footnote #dd3 ,text-,book of ,botany1 c4 by ,julius ,sachs4 ,translated by ,a4 ,w4 ,bennett and ,w4 ,t4 ,t4 ,dyer4 ,footnote #de3 ,a ,manual of the ,infusoria1 by ,w4 ,saville ,kent4 ,vol4 i1 p4 #bcb4 ,footnote #df3 ,ib4 ,vol4 i1 p4 #bda4 ,footnote #dg3 ,kent1 ,vol4 i1 p4 #ef4 ,footnote #dh3 ,ib4 ,vol4 i1 p4 #eg4 ,footnote #di3 ,the ,elements of ,comparative ,anatomy1 by ,t4 ,h4 ,huxley1 pp4 #g-i4 ,footnote #ej3 ,a ,treatise on ,comparative ,embryology1 by ,f4 ,m4 ,balfour1 ,vol4 ii1 chap4 xiii4 ,footnote #ea3 ,sachs1 p4 #baj4 ,footnote #eb3 ,ibid4 pp4 #hc-d4 ,footnote #ec3 ,ibid4 p4 #ahe4 ,footnote #ed3 ,ibid4 #hj4 ,footnote #ee3 ,sachs1 p4 #hc4 ,footnote #ef3 ,ibid4 p4 #adg4 ,footnote #eg3 ,a ,treatise on ,comparative ,embryology4 ,by ,francis ,m4 ,balfour1 ,,ll4,d41 ,f4,r4,s4 ,vol4 ii1 p4 #cdc 7second edition74 ,footnote #eh3 ,balfour1 l4c4 ,vol4 ii1 #djj-a4 ,footnote #ei3 ,balfour1 l4c4 ,vol4 ii1 p4 #dja4 ,footnote #fj3 ,for a general delineation of the changes by which the development is effected1 see ,balfour1 l4c4 ,vol4 ii1 pp4 #dja-d4 ,footnote #fa3 ,see ,balfour1 ,vol4 i1 #adi and ,vol4 ii1 #cdc-d4 ,a ,,counter-,,criticism4 ,first published in ,the ,nineteenth ,century1 for ,february1 #ahhh4 ,while ,i do not concur in sundry of the statements and conclusions contained in the article entitled ,a ,great ,confession1 contributed by the ,duke of ,argyll to the last number of this ,review1 yet ,i am obliged to him for having raised afresh the question discussed in it4 ,though the injunction ,rest and be thankful1 is one for which in many spheres much may be said--especially in the political1 where undue restlessness is proving very mischievous2 yet rest and be thankful is an injunction out of place in science4 ,unhappily1 while politicians have not duly regarded it1 it appears to have been taken to heart too much by naturalists2 in so far1 at least1 as concerns the question of the origin of species4 ,the new biological orthodoxy behaves just as the old biological orthodoxy did4 ,in the days before ,darwin1 those who occupied themselves with the phenomena of life1 passed by with unobservant eyes the multitudinous facts which point to an evolutionary origin for plants and animals2 and they turned deaf ears to those who insisted on the significance of these facts4 ,now that they have come to believe in this evolutionary origin1 and have at the same time accepted the hypothesis that natural selection has been the sole cause of the evolution1 they are similarly unobservant of the multitudinous facts which cannot rationally be ascribed to that cause2 and turn deaf ears to those who would draw their attention to them4 ,the attitude is the same2 it is only the creed which has changed4 ,but1 as above implied1 though the protest of the ,duke of ,argyll against this attitude is quite justifiable1 it seems to me that many of his statements cannot be sustained4 ,some of these concern me personally1 and others are of impersonal concern4 ,i propose to deal with them in the order in which they occur4 99 99 99 99 99 ,on page #add the ,duke of ,argyll quotes me as omitting for the present any consideration of a factor which may be distinguished as primordial2 and he represents me as implying by this that ,darwin's ultimate conception of some primordial 'breathing of the breath of life' is a conception which can be omitted only 'for the present4' ,even had there been no other obvious interpretation1 it would have been a somewhat rash assumption that this was my meaning when referring to an omitted factor2 and it is surprising that this assumption should have been made after reading the second of the two articles criticised1 in which this factor omitted from the first is dealt with3 this omitted third factor being the direct physico-chemical action of the medium on the organism4 ,such a thought as that which the ,duke of ,argyll ascribes to me1 is so incongruous with the beliefs ,i have in many places expressed that the ascription of it never occurred to me as possible4 ,lower down on the same page are some other sentences having personal implications1 which ,i must dispose of before going into the general question4 ,the ,duke says it is more than doubtful whether any value attaches to the new factor with which he ,i desires to supplement it natural selection2 and he thinks it unaccountable that ,i should make so great a fuss about so small a matter as the effect of use and disuse of particular organs as a separate and a newly-recognised factor in the development of varieties4 ,i do not suppose that the ,duke of ,argyll intended to cast upon me the disagreeable imputation1 that ,i claim as new that which all who are even slightly acquainted with the facts know to be anything rather than new4 ,but his words certainly do this4 ,how he should have thus written in spite of the extensive knowledge of the matter which he evidently has1 and how he should have thus written in presence of the evidence contained in the articles he criticizes1 ,i cannot understand4 ,naturalists1 and multitudes besides naturalists1 know that the hypothesis which ,i am represented as putting forward as new1 is much older than the hypothesis of natural selection--goes back at least as far as ,dr4 ,erasmus ,darwin4 ,my purpose was to bring into the foreground again a factor which has1 ,i think1 been of late years improperly ignored2 to show that ,mr4 ,darwin recognized this factor in an increasing degree as he grew older 7by showing which ,i should have thought ,i sufficiently excluded the supposition that ,i brought it forward as new72 to give further evidence that this factor is in operation2 to show there are numerous phenomena which cannot be interpreted without it2 and to argue that if proved operative in any case1 it may be inferred that it is operative on all structures having active functions4 ,strangely enough1 this passage1 in which ,i am represented as implying novelty in a doctrine which ,i have merely sought to emphasize and extend1 is immediately succeeded by a passage in which the ,duke of ,argyll himself represents the doctrine as being familiar and well established3-- ,that organs thus enfeebled i4e4 by persistent disuse are transmitted by inheritance to offspring in a like condition of functional and structural decline1 is a correlated physiological doctrine not generally disputed4 ,the converse case--of increased strength and development arising out of the habitual and healthy use of special organs1 and of the transmission of these to offspring--is a case illustrated by many examples in the breeding of domestic animals4 ,i do not know to what else we can attribute the long slender legs and bodies of greyhounds so manifestly adapted to speed of foot1 or the delicate powers of smell in pointers and setters1 or a dozen cases of modified structure effected by artificial selection4 ,in none of the assertions contained in this passage can ,i agree4 ,had the inheritance of functional and structural decline been not generally disputed1 half my argument would have been needless2 and had the inheritance of increased strength and development caused by use been recognized1 as illustrated by many examples1 the other half of my argument would have been needless4 ,but both are disputed2 and1 if not positively denied1 are held to be unproved4 ,greyhounds and pointers do not yield valid evidence1 because their peculiarities are more due to artificial selection than to any other cause4 ,it may1 indeed1 be doubted whether greyhounds use their legs more than other dogs4 ,dogs of all kinds are daily in the habit of running about and chasing one another at the top of their speed--other dogs more frequently than greyhounds1 which are not much given to play4 ,the occasions on which greyhounds exercise their legs in chasing hares1 occupy but inconsiderable spaces in their lives1 and can play but small parts in developing their legs4 ,and then1 how about their long heads and sharp noses8 ,are these developed by running8 ,the structure of the greyhound is explicable as a result mainly of selection of variations occasionally arising from unknown causes2 but it is inexplicable otherwise4 ,still more obviously invalid is the evidence said to be furnished by pointers and setters4 ,how can these be said to exercise their organs of smell more than other dogs8 ,do not all dogs occupy themselves in sniffing about here and there all day long3 tracing animals of their own kind and of other kinds8 ,instead of admitting that the olfactory sense is more exercised in pointers and setters than in other dogs1 it might1 contrariwise1 be contended that it is exercised less2 seeing that during the greater parts of their lives they are shut up in kennels where the varieties of odours1 on which to practise their noses1 is but small4 ,clearly if breeders of sporting dogs have from early days habitually bred from those puppies of each litter which had the keenest noses 7and it is undeniable that the puppies of each litter are made different from one another1 as are the children in each human family1 by unknown combinations of causes71 then the existence of such remarkable powers in pointers and setters may be accounted for2 while it is otherwise unaccountable4 ,these instances1 and many others such1 ,i should have gladly used in support of my argument1 had they been available2 but unfortunately they are not4 ,on the next page of the ,duke of ,argyll's article 7page #ade71 occurs a passage which ,i must quote at length before ,i can deal effectually with its various statements4 ,it runs as follows3-- ,but if natural selection is a mere phrase1 vague enough and wide enough to cover any number of the physical causes concerned in ordinary generation1 then the whole of ,mr4 ,spencer's laborious argument in favour of his 'other factor' becomes an argument worse than superfluous4 ,it is wholly fallacious in assuming that this 'factor' and 'natural selection' are at all exclusive of1 or even separate from1 each other4 ,the factor thus assumed to be new is simply one of the subordinate cases of heredity4 ,but heredity is the central idea of natural selection4 ,therefore natural selection includes and covers all the causes which can possibly operate through inheritance4 ,there is thus no difficulty whatever in referring it to the same one factor whose solitary dominion ,mr4 ,spencer has plucked up courage to dispute4 ,he will never succeed in shaking its dictatorship by such a small rebellion4 ,his little contention is like some bit of ,bumbledom setting up for ,home ,rule--some parochial vestry claiming independence of a universal empire4 ,it pretends to set up for itself in some fragment of an idea4 ,but here is not even a fragment to boast of or to stand up for4 ,his new factor in organic evolution has neither independence nor novelty4 ,mr4 ,spencer is able to quote himself as having mentioned it in his ,principles of ,biology published some twenty years ago2 and by a careful ransacking of ,darwin he shows that the idea was familiar to and admitted by him at least in his last edition of the ,origin of ,species4444 ,darwin was a man so much wiser than all his followers1 c4 ,had there not been the ,duke of ,argyll's signature to the article1 ,i could scarcely have believed that this passage was written by him4 ,remembering that on reading his article in the preceding number of this ,review1 ,i was struck by the extent of knowledge1 clearness of discrimination1 and power of exposition1 displayed in it1 ,i can scarcely understand how there has come from the same pen a passage in which none of these traits are exhibited4 ,even one wholly unacquainted with the subject may see in the last two sentences of the above extract1 how strangely its propositions are strung together4 ,while in the first of them ,i am represented as bringing forward a new factor1 ,i am in the second represented as saying that ,i mentioned it twenty years ago6 ,in the same breath ,i am described as claiming it as new and asserting it as old6 ,so1 again1 the uninstructed reader1 on comparing the first words of the extract with the last1 will be surprised on seeing in a scientific article statements so manifestly wanting in precision4 ,if natural selection is a mere phrase1 how can ,mr4 ,darwin1 who thought it explained the origin of species1 be regarded as wise8 ,surely it must be more than a mere phrase if it is the key to so many otherwise inexplicable facts4 ,these examples of incongruous thoughts ,i give to prepare the way2 and will now go on to examine the chief propositions which the quoted passage contains4 ,the ,duke of ,argyll says that heredity is the central idea of natural selection4 ,now it would1 ,i think1 be concluded that those who possess the central idea of a thing have some consciousness of the thing4 ,yet men have possessed the idea of heredity for any number of generations and have been quite unconscious of natural selection4 ,clearly the statement is misleading4 ,it might just as truly be said that the occurrence of structural variations in organisms is the central idea of natural selection4 ,and it might just as truly be said that the action of external agencies in killing some individuals and fostering others is the central idea of natural selection4 ,no such assertions are correct4 ,the process has three factors--heredity1 variation1 and external action--any one of which being absent1 the process ceases4 ,the conception contains three corresponding ideas1 and if any one be struck out1 the conception cannot be framed4 ,no one of them is the central idea1 but they are co-essential ideas4 ,from the erroneous belief that heredity is the central idea of natural selection the ,duke of ,argyll draws the conclusion1 consequently erroneous1 that natural selection includes and covers all the causes which can possibly operate through inheritance4 ,had he considered the cases which1 in the ,principles of ,biology1 ,i have cited to illustrate the inheritance of functionally-produced modifications1 he would have seen that his inference is far from correct4 ,i have instanced the decrease of the jaw among civilized men as a change of structure which cannot have been produced by the inheritance of spontaneous1 or fortuitous1 variations4 ,that changes of structure arising from such variations may be maintained and increased in successive generations1 it is needful that the individuals in whom they occur shall derive from them advantages in the struggle for existence--advantages1 too1 sufficiently great to aid their survival and multiplication in considerable degrees4 ,but a decrease of jaw reducing its weight by even an ounce 7which would be a large variation71 cannot1 by either smaller weight carried or smaller nutrition required1 have appreciably advantaged any person in the battle of life4 ,even supposing such diminution of jaw to be beneficial 7and in the resulting decay of teeth it entails great evils71 the benefit can hardly have been such as to increase the relative multiplication of families in which it occurred generation after generation4 ,unless it has done this1 however1 decreased size of the jaw cannot have been produced by the natural selection of favourable variations4 ,how can it then have been produced8 ,only by decreased function--by the habitual use of soft food1 joined1 probably1 with disuse of the teeth as tools4 ,and now mark that this cause operates on all members of a society which falls into civilized habits4 ,generation after generation this decreased function changes its component families simultaneously4 ,natural selection does not cover the case at all--has nothing to do with it4 ,and the like happens in multitudinous other cases4 ,every species spreading into a new habitat1 coming in contact with new food1 exposed to a different temperature1 to a drier or moister air1 to a more irregular surface1 to a new soil1 c41 c41 has its members one and all subject to various changed actions1 which influence its muscular1 vascular1 respiratory1 digestive1 and other systems of organs4 ,if there is inheritance of functionally-produced modifications1 then all its members will transmit the structural alterations wrought in them1 and the species will change as a whole without the supplanting of some stocks by others4 ,doubtless in respect of certain changes natural selection will co-operate4 ,if the species1 being a predacious one1 is brought1 by migration1 into the presence of prey of greater speed than before2 then1 while all its members will have their limbs strengthened by extra action1 those in whom this muscular adaptation is greatest will have their multiplication furthered2 and inheritance of the functionally-increased structures will be aided1 in successive generations1 by survival of the fittest4 ,but it cannot be so with the multitudinous minor changes entailed by the modified life4 ,the majority of these must be of such relative unimportance that one of them cannot give to the individual in which it becomes most marked1 advantages which predominate over kindred advantages gained by other individuals from other changes more favourably wrought in them4 ,in respect to these1 the inherited effects of use and disuse must accumulate independently of natural selection4 ,to make clear the relations of these two factors to one another and to heredity1 let us take a case in which the operations of all three may be severally identified and distinguished4 ,here is one of those persons1 occasionally met with1 who has an additional finger on each hand1 and who1 we will suppose1 is a blacksmith4 ,he is neither aided nor much hindered by these additional fingers2 but1 by constant use1 he has greatly developed the muscles of his right arm4 ,to avoid a perturbing factor1 we will assume that his wife1 too1 exercises her arms in an unusual degree3 keeps a mangle1 and has all the custom of the neighbourhood4 ,such being the circumstances1 let us ask what are the established facts1 and what are the beliefs and disbeliefs of biologists4 ,the first fact is that this six-fingered blacksmith will be likely to transmit his peculiarity to some of his children2 and some of these1 again1 to theirs4 ,it is proved that1 even in the absence of a like peculiarity in the other parent1 this strange variation of structure 7which we must ascribe to some fortuitous combination of causes7 is often inherited for more than one generation4 ,now the causes which produce this persistent six-fingeredness are unquestionably causes which operate through inheritance4 ,the ,duke of ,argyll says that natural selection includes and covers all the causes which can possibly operate through inheritance4 ,how does it cover the causes which operate here8 ,natural selection never comes into play at all4 ,there is no fostering of this peculiarity1 since it does not help in the struggle for existence2 and there is no reason to suppose it is such a hindrance in the struggle that those who have it disappear in consequence4 ,it simply gets cancelled in the course of generations by the adverse influences of other stocks4 ,while biologists admit1 or rather assert1 that the peculiarity in the blacksmith's arm which was born with him is transmissible1 they deny1 or rather do not admit1 that the other peculiarities of his arm1 induced by daily labour--its large muscles and strengthened bones--are transmissible4 ,they say that there is no proof4 ,the ,duke of ,argyll thinks that the inheritance of organs enfeebled by disuse is not generally disputed2 and he thinks there is clear proof that the converse change--increase of size consequent on use--is also inherited4 ,but biologists dispute both of these alleged kinds of inheritance4 ,if proof is wanted1 it will be found in the proceedings at the last meeting of the ,british ,association1 in a paper entitled ,are ,acquired ,characters ,hereditary8 by ,professor ,ray ,lankester1 and in the discussion raised by that paper4 ,had this form of inheritance been1 as the ,duke of ,argyll says1 not generally disputed1 ,i should not have written the first of the two articles he criticizes4 ,but supposing it proved1 as it may hereafter be1 that such a functionally-produced change of structure as the blacksmith's arm shows us1 is transmissible1 the persistent inheritance is again of a kind with which natural selection has nothing to do4 ,if the greatly strengthened arm enabled the blacksmith and his descendants1 having like strengthened arms1 to carry on the battle of life in a much more successful way than it was carried on by other men1 survival of the fittest would ensure the maintenance and increase of this trait in successive generations4 ,but the skill of the carpenter enables him to earn quite as much as his stronger neighbour4 ,by the various arts he has been taught1 the plumber gets as large a weekly wage4 ,the small shopkeeper by his foresight in buying and prudence in selling1 the village-schoolmaster by his knowledge1 the farm-bailiff by his diligence and care1 succeed in the struggle for existence equally well4 ,the advantage of a strong arm does not predominate over the advantages which other men gain by their innate or acquired powers of other kinds2 and therefore natural selection cannot operate so as to increase the trait4 ,before it can be increased1 it is neutralized by the unions of those who have it with those who have other traits4 ,to whatever extent1 therefore1 inheritance of this functionally-produced modification operates1 it operates independently of natural selection4 ,one other point has to be noted--the relative importance of this factor4 ,if additional developments of muscles and bones may be transmitted--if1 as ,mr4 ,darwin held1 there are various other structural modifications caused by use and disuse which imply inheritance of this kind--if acquired characters are hereditary1 as the ,duke of ,argyll believes2 then the area over which this factor of organic evolution operates is enormous4 ,not every muscle only1 but every nerve and nerve-centre1 every blood-vessel1 every viscus1 and nearly every bone1 may be increased or decreased by its influence4 ,excepting parts which have passive functions1 such as dermal appendages and the bones which form the skull1 the implication is that nearly every organ in the body may be modified in successive generations by the augmented or diminished activity required of it2 and1 save in the few cases where the change caused is one which conduces to survival in a pre-eminent degree1 it will be thus modified independently of natural selection4 ,though this factor can operate but little in the vegetal world1 and can play but a subordinate part in the lowest animal world2 yet1 seeing that all the active organs of all animals are subject to its influence1 it has an immense sphere4 ,the ,duke of ,argyll compares the claim made for this factor to some bit of ,bumbledom setting up for ,home ,rule--some parochial vestry claiming independence of a universal empire4 ,but1 far from this1 the claim made for it is to an empire1 less indeed than that of natural selection1 and over a small part of which natural selection exercises concurrent power2 but of which the independent part has an area that is immense4 ,it seems to me1 then1 that the ,duke of ,argyll is mistaken in four of the propositions contained in the passages ,i have quoted4 ,the inheritance of acquired characters is disputed by biologists1 though he thinks it is not4 ,it is not true that heredity is the central idea of natural selection4 ,the statement that natural selection includes and covers all the causes which can possibly operate through inheritance1 is quite erroneous4 ,and if the inheritance of acquired characters is a factor at all1 the dominion it rules over is not insignificant but vast4 99 99 99 99 99 ,here ,i must break off1 after dealing with a page and a half of the ,duke of ,argyll's article4 ,a state of health which has prevented me from publishing anything since ,the ,factors of ,organic ,evolution1 now nearly two years ago1 prevents me from carrying the matter further4 ,could ,i have pursued the argument it would1 ,i believe1 have been practicable to show that various other positions taken up by the ,duke of ,argyll do not admit of effectual defence4 ,but whether or not this is probable1 the reader must be left to judge for himself4 ,on one further point only will ,i say a word2 and this chiefly because1 if ,i pass it by1 a mistaken impression of a serious kind may be diffused4 ,the ,duke of ,argyll represents me as giving up the famous phrase survival of the fittest1 and wishing to abandon it4 ,he does this because ,i have pointed out that its words have connotations against which we must be on our guard1 if we would avoid certain distortions of thought4 ,with equal propriety he might say that an astronomer abandons the statement that the planets move in elliptic orbits1 because he warns his readers that in the heavens there exist no such things as orbits1 but that the planets sweep on through a pathless void1 in directions perpetually changed by gravitation4 ,i regret that ,i should have had thus to dissent so entirely from various of the statements made1 and conclusions drawn1 by the ,duke of ,argyll1 because1 as ,i have already implied1 ,i think he has done good service by raising afresh the question he has dealt with4 ,though the advantages which he hopes may result from the discussion are widely unlike the advantages which ,i hope may result from it1 yet we agree in the belief that advantages may be looked for4 ,,end ,,of ,,vol4 ,i4 99 99 99 99 99 ,transcriber's note ,the following changes have been made to the text3 ,page #ba3 heterogeenity changed to heterogeneity4 ,page #dg3 multipled results changed to multiplied results4 ,page #ei3 pre-,raffaelites changed to pre-,raphaelites4 ,page #hd3 heretogeneity changed to heterogeneity4 ,page #id3 observedcoexistences changed to observed coexistences4 ,page #ig3 ,cirrhipoedia changed to ,cirrhipedia4 ,page #ajh3 prim facie changed to prima facie4 ,page #aab3 fortiori changed to a fortiori4 ,page #abd3 irreconcileable changed to irreconcilable4 ,page #adj3 some thing like double changed to something like double4 ,page #baf3 representive changed to representative4 ,page #bia3 inbibe changed to imbibe4 ,page #cjf3 whic hthey and living changed to which they and living4 ,page #cei3 of the two races1 not changed to of the two races1 nor4 ,page #cic3 parenthethic changed to parenthetic4 ,page #daa3 hypertropic changed to hypertrophic4