diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-03-15 09:21:35 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-03-15 09:21:35 -0700 |
| commit | 604ddc25773ad1e0d020ba704865e0eb6a00ddd3 (patch) | |
| tree | a2798ebd7e7f81db44a525742503b00feba17054 /old/39526-h/39526-h.htm | |
| parent | 3fc30d2bc6f0f0ed33ea21fa19ba8cf3bba8387e (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/39526-h/39526-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/39526-h/39526-h.htm | 10258 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 10258 deletions
diff --git a/old/39526-h/39526-h.htm b/old/39526-h/39526-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 21d262d..0000000 --- a/old/39526-h/39526-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,10258 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> -<head> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> -<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Pioneers of Evolution from Thales to Huxley, by Edward Clodd</title> - <style type="text/css"> - -body {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} - -h1,h2,h3,h4 {text-align: center; clear: both; font-weight: normal;} - -h1 {font-size: 150%; line-height: 180%; margin-top: 3em;} -h2 {font-size: 110%; line-height: 150%;} -h3 {font-size: 100%; line-height: 120%; margin-top: 1.5em;} - -p {margin-top: .75em; text-align: justify; margin-bottom: .75em;} - -p.tp1 {text-align: center; font-size: 90%; line-height: 150%; - margin-top: 3em;} -p.tp2 {text-align: center; font-size: 60%; line-height: 120%;} -p.tp3 {text-align: center; font-size: 80%; font-style: italic; - margin-top: 4em; margin-bottom: 4em;} -p.tp4 {text-align: center; font-size: 70%; font-variant: small-caps; - margin-top: 4em; margin-bottom: 4em; line-height: 125%;} -p.tp5 {text-align: center; font-size: 70%; line-height: 250%;} - -hr.l1 {width: 60%; margin-top: 4em; margin-bottom: 4em; - margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; clear: both;} -hr.l2 {width: 30%; margin-top: 4em; margin-bottom: 4em; - margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; clear: both;} -hr.l3 {width: 5em;} -hr.l4 {width: 10em;} -hr.l5 {width: 20em;} - -table.toc {font-size: 90%; max-width: 90%;} -table.sci {font-size: 90%; border-top: solid 1px; border-bottom: solid 1px;} -table.ess {font-variant: small-caps;} -table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} -td.col1 {text-align: center; padding-top: 1em;} -td.col2 {text-align: left; padding-left: 4em; text-indent: -4em; - vertical-align: top; font-variant: small-caps;} -td.col2a {text-align: left; padding-left: .7em; text-indent: -.5em; - vertical-align: top;} -td.col2b {text-align: left; padding-left: .7em; text-indent: -.7em; - vertical-align: top;} -td.col2c {text-align: justify; padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2em; - vertical-align: top;} -td.col3 {text-align: right; vertical-align: bottom;} -td.col3a {text-align: right; font-size: 70%; line-height: 50%;} -td.col4 {text-align: left; padding-left: 3.2em; text-indent: -1.8em; - vertical-align: top; font-variant: small-caps;} -td.col5 {text-align: left; vertical-align: top;} -td.col6 {text-align: right; vertical-align: top;} -td.col7 {text-align: center; vertical-align: top;} -td.col8 {text-align: left; vertical-align: top; border-right: solid 1px; - padding-left: .7em; text-indent: -.5em;} -td.col9 {text-align: center; vertical-align: top; border-right: solid 1px;} -td.col10 {text-align: center; border-right: solid 1px; border-bottom: solid 1px;} -td.col11 {text-align: center; border-bottom: solid 1px;} -td.col12 {text-align: left; padding-left: 1em; vertical-align: top;} - -.pagenum {position: absolute; left: 94%; font-size: 60%; text-align: right; - color: #999999; letter-spacing: 0; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;} - -.blockquot {margin-top: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1.4em; font-size: 90%; - margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} -.blockquo1 {margin-top: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1.4em; - margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} - -.sign {float: right; margin-right: 1em;} -.sign2 {margin-left: 1em; font-variant: small-caps;} -.sign3 {margin-left: 2em; font-style: italic;} - -div.qt {max-width: 24em; margin: auto; padding-top: 3em; padding-bottom: 3em; - font-size: 90%;} -div.qt1 {margin-top: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1.4em; font-size: 100%; - padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2em;} -div.qt2 {margin-top: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1.4em; font-size: 90%; - padding-left: 1.4em; text-indent: -1.4em;} - -div.ads {font-size: 90%;} - -div.drop p:first-letter {margin: 0 0 0 0; font-size: 220%; vertical-align: top; - line-height: 90%;} -div.drop {font-size: 110%; line-height: 150%;} - -.tt {font-style: italic; letter-spacing: .1em;} - -.st {text-align: center; font-size: 90%;} - -.in2 {text-indent: 2em;} - -.nrm {font-style: normal;} - -.edt {text-align: center; font-size: 100%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;} - -.ix {list-style-type: none; font-size: 90%; text-align: left; - padding-left: 1em; text-indent: -1em;} - -.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -.lower {text-transform: lowercase;} - -.center {text-align: center;} - -.r2 {margin-top: 2em;} -.r4 {margin-top: 4em;} - -.f7 {font-size: 70%;} -.f8 {font-size: 80%;} -.f9 {font-size: 90%;} -.f11 {font-size: 110%;} -.f14 {font-size: 140%;} -.f30 {font-size: 300%;} - -.figcenter {margin: auto; text-align: center; - padding-top: 1em; padding-bottom: 1em;} - -.centered {text-align: center; margin: auto; display: table;} -.poem {text-align: left; font-size: 90%;} -.poem br {display: none;} -.poem .stanza {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;} -.poem span.i0 {display: block; margin-left: 0em; - padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} -.poem span.i4 {display: block; margin-left: 2.4em; - padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} -.poem span.i10 {display: block; margin-left: 6em; - padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} - -.tnote {border: dashed 1px; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; - margin-top: 2em; padding: .5em 1em .5em 1em; font-size: 80%;} -.tn {text-align: center; margin-top: 1.5em; margin-bottom: 1.5em;} - - h1.pg { font-size: 190%; - line-height: 100%; - margin-top: 0em; - font-weight: bold; } - h4.pg { font-weight: bold; } - hr.full { width: 100%; - margin-top: 3em; - margin-bottom: 0em; - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - height: 4px; - border-width: 4px 0 0 0; /* remove all borders except the top one */ - border-style: solid; - border-color: #000000; - clear: both; } - </style> -</head> -<body> -<h1 class="pg">The Project Gutenberg eBook, Pioneers of Evolution from Thales to Huxley, -by Edward Clodd</h1> -<p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a></p> -<p>Title: Pioneers of Evolution from Thales to Huxley</p> -<p> With an Intermediate Chapter on the Causes of Arrest of the Movement</p> -<p>Author: Edward Clodd</p> -<p>Release Date: April 24, 2012 [eBook #39526]</p> -<p>Language: English</p> -<p>Character set encoding: UTF-8</p> -<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PIONEERS OF EVOLUTION FROM THALES TO HUXLEY***</p> -<p> </p> -<h4 class="pg">E-text prepared by Albert László, eagkw,<br /> - and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br /> - (<a href="http://www.pgdp.net">http://www.pgdp.net</a>)<br /> - from page images generously made available by<br /> - Internet Archive<br /> - (<a href="http://archive.org">http://archive.org</a>)</h4> -<p> </p> -<table border="0" style="background-color: #ccccff;margin: 0 auto;" cellpadding="10"> - <tr> - <td valign="top"> - Note: - </td> - <td> - Images of the original pages are available through - Internet Archive. See - <a href="http://archive.org/details/pioneersofevolutclod"> - http://archive.org/details/pioneersofevolutclod</a> - </td> - </tr> -</table> -<p> </p> -<hr class="full" /> -<p> </p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<img src="images/oi_001.jpg" width="408" height="639" alt="C. Darwin" title="C. Darwin" /> -</div> - - - - -<h1>PIONEERS OF EVOLUTION<br /> -FROM THALES TO HUXLEY</h1> - -<p class="tp1">WITH AN INTERMEDIATE CHAPTER ON<br /> -THE CAUSES OF ARREST OF THE MOVEMENT</p> - -<p> </p> - -<p class="tp1"><span class="f7">BY</span><br /> -<span class="f11">EDWARD CLODD</span></p> - -<p class="tp2">PRESIDENT OF THE FOLK-LORE SOCIETY<br /> -AUTHOR OF THE CHILDHOOD OF THE WORLD,<br /> -THE STORY OF CREATION,<br /> -THE STORY OF PRIMITIVE MAN, ETC.</p> - -<p class="tp3">WITH PORTRAITS</p> - - -<p class="tp1">NEW YORK<br /> -D. APPLETON AND COMPANY<br /> -1897</p> - -<hr class="l2" /> - - -<p class="tp4"><span class="smcap">Copyright, 1897,<br /> -By</span> D. APPLETON AND COMPANY.</p> - -<hr class="l2" /> - - -<p class="tp5">TO MY BELOVED<br /> -<span class="f14">A. A. L.</span><br /> -WHOSE FELLOWSHIP AND HELP<br /> -HAVE SWEETENED LIFE.</p> -<hr class="l2" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[v]</a></span></p> - - -<h2>PREFACE.</h2> - - -<p>This book needs only brief introduction. It attempts -to tell the story of the origin of the Evolution -idea in Ionia, and, after long arrest, of the revival -of that idea in modern times, when its profound and -permanent influence on thought in all directions, -and, therefore, on human relations and conduct, is -apparent.</p> - -<p>Between birth and revival there were the centuries -of suspended animation, when the nepenthe -of dogma drugged the reason; the Church teaching, -and the laity mechanically accepting, the sufficiency -of the Scriptures and of the General Councils to decide -on matters which lie outside the domain of -both. Hence the necessity for particularizing the -causes which actively arrested advance in knowledge -for sixteen hundred years.</p> - -<p>In indicating the parts severally played in the -Renascence of Evolution by a small group of illustrious -men, the writer, through the courtesy of Mr.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[vi]</a></span> -Herbert Spencer, has been permitted to see the original -documents which show that the theory of Evolution -as a whole; i. e., as dealing with the non-living, -as well as with the living, contents of the Universe, -was formulated by Mr. Spencer in the year preceding -the publication of the Origin of Species.</p> - -<p class="f9"><span class="sign2">Rosemont, Tufnell Park, London, N.,</span><br /> -<span class="sign3">14th December, 1896.</span><br /></p> -<hr class="l2" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">[vii]</a></span></p> - - -<h2>CONTENTS.</h2> - - -<div class="center"> -<table class="toc" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="2" summary="Contents"> -<tr><td class="col1" colspan="2">PART I.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col3a" colspan="2">PAGE</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col2">Pioneers of Evolution From Thales To Lucretius—<span class="lower">B. C.</span> -600-<span class="lower">A. D.</span> 50</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col1" colspan="2">PART II.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col2">The Arrest of Inquiry—<span class="lower">A. D.</span> 50-<span class="lower">A. D.</span> 1600.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col4">1. From the Early Christian Period To the time -Of Augustine—<span class="lower">A. D.</span> 50-<span class="lower">A. D.</span> 400</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_37">37</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col4">2. From Augustine To Lord Bacon—<span class="lower">A. D.</span> 400-a. -d. 1600</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_73">73</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col1" colspan="2">PART III.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col2">The Renascence of Science—<span class="lower">A. D.</span> 1600 Onward</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_99">99</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col1" colspan="2">PART IV.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col2">Modern Evolution—</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col4">1. Darwin and Wallace</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_126">126</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col4">2. Herbert Spencer</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_175">175</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col4">3. Thomas Henry Huxley</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_201">201</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col2">Index</td><td class="col3"><a href="#Page_267">267</a></td></tr> -</table></div> -<hr class="l2" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii">[viii]</a></span></p> - - - - -<div class="qt"> -<p>“Nature, which governs the whole, will soon change all -things which thou seest, and out of their substance will -make other things, and again other things from the substance -of them, in order that the world may be ever new.”</p> - -<p class="sign"><i>Marcus Aurelius</i>, vii, 25.<br /></p> -</div> -<hr class="l1" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p> - - -<h1>PIONEERS OF EVOLUTION.</h1> - -<hr class="l3" /> - - -<h2><i>PART I.</i></h2> - -<h2>PIONEERS OF EVOLUTION FROM THALES -TO LUCRETIUS.</h2> - -<p class="st">B. C. 600-A. D. 50.</p> - -<div class="qt2"> -<p>“These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but -having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them.”—<span class="smcap">Hebrews</span> -xi. 13.</p> -</div> - - -<p>“One event is always the son of another, and we -must never forget the parentage,” said a Bechuana -chief to Casalis the missionary. The barbarian philosopher -spoke wiser than he knew, for in his words -lay that doctrine of continuity and unity which is the -creed of modern science. They are a suitable text -to the discourse of this chapter, the design of which -is to bring out what the brilliancy of present-day -discoveries tends to throw into shadow, namely, the -antiquity of the ideas of which those discoveries are -the result. Although the Theory of Evolution, as we -define it, is new, the speculations which made it possible -are, at least, twenty-five centuries old. Indeed, -it is not practicable, since the remote past -yields no documents, to fix their beginnings. Moreover, -charged, as they are, with many crudities, they -are not detachable from the barbaric conceptions of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span> -the Universe which are the philosophies of past, and -the legends of present, times.</p> - -<p>Fontenelle, a writer of the last century, shrewdly -remarked that “all nations made the astounding part -of their myths while they were savage, and retained -them from custom and religious conservatism.” For, -as Walter Bagehot argues in his brilliant little book -on Physics and Politics, and as all anthropological -research goes to prove, the lower races are non-progressive -both through fear and instinct. And the -majority of the members of higher races have not -escaped from the operation of the same causes. -Hence the persistence of coarse and grotesque elements -in speculations wherein man has made gradual -approach to the truth of things; hence, too—the -like phenomena having to be interpreted—the -similarity of the explanation of them. And as primitive -myth embodies primitive theology, primitive -morals, and primitive science, the history of beliefs -shows how few there be who have escaped from the -tyranny of that authority and sanctity with which -the lapse of time invests old ideas.</p> - -<p>Dissatisfaction is a necessary condition of progress; -and dissatisfaction involves opposition. As -Grant Allen puts it, in one of his most felicitous -poems:</p> - -<div class="centered"><div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">If systems that be are the order of God,<br /></span> -<span class="i0">Revolt is a part of the order.<br /></span> -</div></div></div> - -<p>Hence a stage in the history of certain peoples when, -in questioning what is commonly accepted, intellectual<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span> -freedom is born. Such a stage was markedly -reached whenever, for example, an individual here -and there challenged the current belief about the -beginnings and nature of things, beliefs held because -they were taught, not because their correspondence -with fact had been examined.</p> - -<p>A pioneer (French, <i>pionnier;</i> Italian, <i>pedone;</i> -from Latin <i>pedes</i>) is, literally, a foot-soldier; one -who goes before an army to clear the road of obstructions. -Hence the application of the term to -men who are in the van of any new movement; -hence its special fitness in the present connection, as -designating men whose speculations cut a pathway -through jungles of myth and legend to the realities -of things. The Pioneers of Evolution—the first on -record to doubt the truth of the theory of special -creation, whether as the work of departmental gods -or of one Supreme Deity, matters not—lived in -Greece about the time already mentioned; six centuries -before Christ. Not in the early stages of the -Evolution idea, in the Greece limited, as now, to a -rugged peninsula in the southeastern corner of Europe -and to the surrounding islands, but in the Greece -which then included Ionia, on the opposite seaboard -of Asia Minor.</p> - -<p>From times beyond memory or record, the islands -of the Ægean had been the nurseries of culture -and adventure. Thence the maritime inhabitants -had spread themselves both east and west, feeding -the spirit of inquiry, and imbibing influences from<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span> -older civilizations, notably of Egypt and Chaldæa. -But, mix as they might with other peoples, the -Greeks never lost their own strongly marked individuality, -and, in imparting what they had acquired -or discovered to younger peoples, that is, younger -in culture, they stamped it with an impress all their -own.</p> - -<p>At the later period with which we are dealing, -refugees from the Peloponnesus, who would not submit -to the Dorian yoke, had been long settled in -Ionia. To what extent they had been influenced -by contact with their neighbours is a question which, -even were it easy to answer, need not occupy us -here. Certain it is that trade and travel had widened -their intellectual horizon, and although India lay too -remote to touch them closely (if that incurious, -dreamy East had touched them, it would have taught -them nothing), there was Babylonia with her star-watchers, -and Egypt with her land-surveyors. From -the one, these Ionians probably gained knowledge -of certain periodic movements of some of the heavenly -bodies; and from the other, a few rules of -mensuration, perchance a little crude science. But -this is conjecture. For all the rest that she evolved, -and with which she enriched the world, ancient -Greece is in debt to none.</p> - -<p>While the Oriental shrunk from quest after -causes, looking, as Professor Butcher aptly remarks -in his Aspects of the Greek Genius, on “each fresh -gain of earth as so much robbery of heaven,” the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span> -Greek eagerly sought for the law governing the facts -around him. And in Ionia was born the idea foreign -to the East, but which has become the starting-point -of all subsequent scientific inquiry—the idea that -Nature works by fixed laws. Sir Henry Maine said -that “except the blind forces of Nature, nothing -moves which is not Greek in its origin,” and we feel -how hard it is to avoid exaggeration when speaking -of the heritage bequeathed by Greece as the giver -of every fruitful, quickening idea which has developed -human faculty on all sides, and enriched every -province of life. Amid serious defects of character, -as craftiness, avariciousness, and unscrupulousness, -the Greeks had the redeeming grace of pursuit after -knowledge which naught could baffle (Plato, Republic, -vol. iv, p. 435), and that healthy outlook on things -which saved them from morbid introspection. There -arose among them no Simeon Stylites to mount his -profitless pillar; no filth-ingrained fakir to waste life -in contemplating the tip of his nose; no schoolman -to idly speculate how many angels could dance upon -a needle’s point; or to debate such fatuous questions -as the language which the saints in heaven will speak -after the Last Judgment.</p> - -<p>In his excellent and cautious survey of Early -Greek Philosophy, which we mainly follow in this -section, Professor Burnet says that the real advance -made by the Ionians was through their “leaving off -telling tales. They gave up the hopeless task of -describing what was when as yet there was nothing,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span> -and asked instead what all things really are now.” -For the early notions of the Greeks about nature, -being an inheritance from their barbaric ancestors, -were embodied in myths and legends bearing strong -resemblance to those found among the uncivilized -tribes of Polynesia and elsewhere in our day. For -example, the old nature-myth of Cronus separating -heaven and earth by the mutilation of Uranus occurs -among Chinese, Japanese, and Maoris, and among -the ancient Hindus and Egyptians.</p> - -<p>The earliest school of scientific speculation was -at Miletus, the most flourishing city of Ionia. Thales, -whose name heads the list of the “Seven Sages,” -was its founder. As with other noted philosophers -of this and later periods, neither the exact date of his -birth nor of his death are known, but the sixth -century before Christ may be held to cover the period -when he “flourished.”</p> - -<p>That “nothing comes into being out of nothing, -and that nothing passes away into nothing,” was the -conviction with which he and those who followed -him started on their quest. All around was change; -everything always becoming something else; “all in -motion like streams.” There must be that which is -the vehicle of all the changes, and of all the motions -which produce them. <i>What</i>, therefore, was this permanent -and primary substance? in other words, of -what is the world made? And Thales, perhaps -through observing that it could become vaporous, -liquid, and solid in turn; perhaps—if, as tradition<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span> -records, he visited Egypt—through watching the -wonder-working, life-giving Nile; perhaps as doubtless -sharing the current belief in an ocean-washed -earth, said that the primary substance was <span class="smcap">Water</span>. -Anaximander, his friend and pupil, disagreeing with -what seemed to him a too concrete answer, argued, -in more abstract fashion, that “the material cause -and first element of things was the Infinite.” This -material cause, which he was the first thus to name, -“is neither water nor any other of what are now -called the <i>elements</i>” (we quote from Theophrastus, -the famous pupil of Aristotle, born at Eresus in Lesbos, -371 <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span>). Perhaps, following Professor Burnet’s -able guidance through the complexities of definitions, -the term <span class="smcap">Boundless</span> best expresses the -“one eternal, indestructible substance out of which -everything arises, and into which everything once -more returns”; in other words, the exhaustless stock -of matter from which the waste of existence is being -continually made good.</p> - -<p>Anaximander was the first to assert the origin of -life from the non-living, i. e., “the moist element as -it was evaporated by the sun,” and to speak of man -as “like another animal, namely, a fish, in the beginning.” -This looks well-nigh akin to prevision of -the mutability of species, and of what modern biology -has proved concerning the marine ancestry of the -highest animals, although it is one of many ancient -speculations as to the origin of life in slimy matter. -And when Anaximander adds that “while other<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span> -animals quickly find food for themselves, man alone -requires a prolonged period of suckling,” he anticipates -the modern explanation of the origin of the -rudimentary family through the development of the -social instincts and affections. The lengthening of -the period of infancy involves dependence on the -parents, and evolves the sympathy which lies at the -base of social relations. (Cf. Fiske’s Outlines of Cosmic -Philosophy, vol. ii, pp. 344, 360.)</p> - -<p>In dealing with speculations so remote, we have -to guard against reading modern meanings into writings -produced in ages whose limitations of knowledge -were serious, and whose temper and standpoint -are wholly alien to our own. For example, shrewd -as are some of the guesses made by Anaximander, -we find him describing the sun as “a ring twenty-eight -times the size of the earth, like a cartwheel -with the felloe hollow and full of fire, showing the -fire at a certain point, as if through the nozzle of a -pair of bellows.” And if he made some approach -to truer ideas of the earth’s shape as “convex and -round,” the world of his day, as in the days of -Homer, thought of it as flat and as floating on the -all-surrounding water. The Ionian philosophers -lacked not insight, but the scientific method of starting -with working hypotheses, or of observation before -theory, was as yet unborn.</p> - -<p>In this brief survey of the subject there will be -no advantage in detailing the various speculations -which followed on the heels of those of Thales and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span> -Anaximander, since these varied only in non-essentials; -or, like that of Pythagoras and his school, -which Zeller regards as the outcome of the teachings -of Anaximander, were purely abstract and fanciful. -As is well known, the Pythagoreans, whose philosophy -was ethical as well as cosmical, held that all -things are made of numbers, each of which they believed -had its special character and property. A belief -in such symbols as entities seems impossible to -us, but its existence in early thought is conceivable -when, as Aristotle says, they were “not separated -from the objects of sense.” Even in the present day, -among the eccentric people who still believe in the -modern sham agnosticism, known as theosophy, -and in astrology, we find the delusion that numbers -possess inherent magic or mystic virtues. So far as -the ancients are concerned, “consider,” as Mr. Benn -remarks in his Greek Philosophers (vol. i, p. 12), “the -lively emotions excited at a time when multiplication -and division, squaring and cubing, the rule of -three, the construction and equivalence of figures, with -all their manifold applications to industry, commerce, -fine arts, and tactics, were just as strange and -wonderful as electrical phenomena are to us ... -and we shall cease to wonder that a mere form of -thought, a lifeless abstraction, should once have been -regarded as the solution of every problem; the cause -of all existence; or that these speculations were more -than once revived in after ages.”</p> - -<p>Xenophanes of Colophon, one of the twelve<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span> -Ionian cities of Asia Minor, deserves, however, a -passing reference. He, with Parmenides and Zeno, -are the chief representatives of the Eleatic school, -so named from the city in southwestern Italy where -a Greek colony had settled. The tendency of that -school was toward metaphysical theories. He was -the first known observer to detect the value of fossils -as evidences of the action of water, but his chief -claim to notice rests on the fact that, passing beyond -the purely physical speculations of the Ionian school, -he denied the idea of a primary substance, and theorized -about the nature and actions of superhuman -beings. Living at a time when there was a revival -of old and gross superstitions to which the vulgar -had recourse when fears of invasions arose, he dared -to attack the old and persistent ideas about the gods, -as in the following sentences from the fragments of -his writings:</p> - -<p>“Homer and Hesiod have ascribed to the gods -all things that are a shame and a disgrace among -men, theft and adulteries and deception of one another.”</p> - -<p>“There never was nor will be a man who has -clear certainty as to what I say about the gods and -about all things; for even if he does chance to say -what is right, yet he himself does not know that it -is so. But all are free to guess.”</p> - -<p>“Mortals think that the gods were born as they -are, and have senses and a voice and body like their -own. So the Ethiopians make their gods black and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span> -snub-nosed; the Thracians give theirs red hair and -blue eyes.”</p> - -<p>“There is one god, the greatest among gods and -men, unlike mortals both in mind and body.”</p> - -<p>Had such heresies been spoken in Athens, where -the effects of a religious revival were still in force, -the “secular arm” of the archons would probably -have made short work of Xenophanes. But in Elea, -or in whatever other colony he may have lived, “the -gods were left to take care of themselves.”</p> - -<p>Greater than the philosophers yet named is -Heraclitus of Ephesus, nicknamed “the dark,” from -the obscurity of his style. His original writings have -shared the fate of most documents of antiquity, and -exist, like many of these, only in fragments preserved -in the works of other authors. Many of -his aphorisms are indeed dark sayings, but those -that yield their meaning are full of truth and suggestiveness. -As for example:</p> - -<p>“The eyes are more exact witnesses than the -ears.”</p> - -<p>“You will not find out the boundaries of soul by -travelling in any direction.”</p> - -<p>“Man is kindled and put out like a light in the -nighttime.”</p> - -<p>“Man’s character is his fate.”</p> - -<p>But these have special value as keys to his philosophy:</p> - -<p>“You cannot step twice into the same rivers; -for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span></p> - -<p>“Homer was wrong in saying: ‘Would that -strife might perish from among gods and men!’ He -did not see that he was praying for the destruction -of the universe; for, if his prayer were heard, all -things would pass away.”</p> - -<p>Flux or movement, says Heraclitus, is the all-pervading -law of things, and in the opposition of -forces, by which things are kept going, there is underlying -harmony. Still on the quest after the primary -substance whose manifestations are so various, -he found it in <span class="smcap">Fire</span>, since “the quantity of it in a -flame burning steadily appears to remain the same; -the flames seems to be what we call a ‘thing.’ And -yet the substance of it is continually changing. It -is always passing away in smoke, and its place is -always being taken by fresh matter from the fuel -that feeds it. This is just what we want. If we regard -the world as an ‘ever-living fire’—‘this order, -which is the same in all things, and which no one -of gods or men has made’—we can understand how -fire is always becoming all things, while all things -are always returning to it.” And as is the world, so -is man, made up, like it, both soul and body, of the -fire, the water, and the earth. We are and are not -the same for two consecutive moments; “the fire in -us is perpetually becoming water, and the water -earth, but as the opposite process goes on simultaneously -we appear to remain the same.”</p> - -<p>As speculation advanced, it became more and -more applied to details, theories of the beginnings<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span> -of life being followed by theories of the origin of its -various forms. This is a feature of the philosophy -of Empedocles, who flourished in the fifth century -<span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span> The advance of Persia westward had led to -migrations of Greeks to the south of Italy and Sicily, -and it was at Agrigentum, in that island, that Empedocles -was born about 490. He has an honoured -place among the earliest who supplanted <i>guesses</i> -about the world by <i>inquiry</i> into the world itself. -Many legends are told of his magic arts, one of -which, it will be remembered, Matthew Arnold -makes an occasion of some fine reflections in his -poem Empedocles in Etna. The philosopher was -said to have brought back to life a woman who -apparently had been dead for thirty days. As he -ascends the mountain, Pausanias of Gela, with an -address to whom the poem of Empedocles opens, -would fain have his curiosity slaked as to this and -other marvels reported of him:</p> - -<div class="centered"><div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">Ask not the latest news of the last miracle,<br /></span> -<span class="i0">Ask not what days and nights<br /></span> -<span class="i0">In trance Pantheia lay,<br /></span> -<span class="i0">But ask how thou such sights<br /></span> -<span class="i0">May’st see without dismay;<br /></span> -<span class="i0">Ask what most helps when known, thou son of Anchitus.<br /></span> -</div></div></div> - -<p>His speculations about things, like those of Parmenides -before him and of Lucretius after him, are -set down in verse. From the remains of his Poem -on Nature we learn that he conceived “the four roots -of all things” to be <span class="smcap">Fire</span>, <span class="smcap">Air</span>, <span class="smcap">Earth</span>, and <span class="smcap">Water</span>. -They are “fools, lacking far-reaching thoughts, who<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span> -deem that what before was not comes into being, or -that aught can perish and be utterly destroyed.” -Therefore the “roots” or elements are eternal and -indestructible. They are acted upon by two forces, -which are also material, <span class="smcap">Love</span> and <span class="smcap">Strife</span>; the one -a uniting agent, the other a disrupting agent. From -the four roots, thus operated upon, arise “the colours -and forms” of living things; trees first, both male -and female, then fragmentary parts of animals, heads -without necks, and “eyes that strayed up and down -in want of a forehead,” which, combined together, -produced monstrous forms. These, lacking power -to propagate, perished, and were replaced by “whole-natured” -but sexless “forms” which “arose from -the earth,” and which, as Strife gained the upper -hand, became male and female. Herein, amidst -much fantastic speculation, would appear to be the -germ of the modern theory that the unadapted become -extinct, and that only the adapted survive. -Nature kills off her failures to make room for her -successes.</p> - -<p>Anaxagoras, who was a contemporary of Empedocles, -interests us because he was the first philosopher -to repair to Athens, and the first sufferer for -truth’s sake of whom we have record in Greek annals. -Because he taught that the sun was a red-hot -stone, and that the moon had plains and ravines -in it, he was put upon his trial, and but for the influence -of his friend, the famous Pericles, might have -suffered death. Speculations, however bold they be,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span> -pass unheeded till they collide with the popular creed, -and in thus attacking the gods, attack a seemingly -divinely settled order. Athens then, and long after, -while indifferent about natural science, was, under -the influence of the revival referred to above, actively -hostile to free thinking. The opinions of Anaxagoras -struck at the existence of the gods and -emptied Olympus. If the sky was but an air-filled -space, what became of Zeus? if the sun was only a -fiery ball, what became of Apollo? Mr. Grote says -(History of Greece, vol. i, p. 466) that “in the view -of the early Greek, the description of the sun, as -given in a modern astronomical treatise, would have -appeared not merely absurd, but repulsive and impious; -even in later times, Anaxagoras and other -astronomers incurred the charge of blasphemy for -dispersonifying Hēlios.” Of Socrates, who was himself -condemned to death for impiety in denying old -gods and introducing new ones, the same authority -writes: “Physics and astronomy, in his opinion, belonged -to the divine class of phenomena, in which -human research was insane, fruitless, and impious.” -So Demos and his “betters” clung, as the majority -still cling, to the myths of their forefathers. They repaired -to the oracles, and watched for the will of the -gods in signs and omens.</p> - -<p>In his philosophy Anaxagoras held that there -was a portion of everything in everything, and that -things are variously mixed in infinite numbers of -seeds, each after its kind. From these, through the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span> -action of an external cause, called <span class="smcap">Nous</span>, which also -is material, although the “thinnest of all things and -the purest,” and “has power over all things,” there -arose plants and animals. It is probable, as Professor -Burnet remarks, “that Anaxagoras substituted -<span class="smcap">Nous</span>, still conceived as a body, for the <span class="smcap">Love</span> and -<span class="smcap">Strife</span> of Empedocles simply because he wished -to retain the old Ionic doctrine of a substance that -‘knows’ all things, and to identify this with the -new theory of a substance that ‘moves’ all things.”</p> - -<p>Thus far speculation has run largely on the origin -of life forms, but now we find revival of speculation -about the nature of things generally, and the -formulation of a theory which links Greek cosmology -with early nineteenth-century science with Dalton’s -<span class="smcap">Atomic Theory</span>. Democritus of Abdera, who was -born about 460 <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span>, has the credit of having elaborated -an atomic theory, but probably he only further -developed what Leucippus had taught before him. -Of this last-named philosopher nothing whatever is -known; indeed, his existence has been doubted, but -it counts for something that Aristotle gives him the -credit of the discovery, and that Theophrastus, in -the first book of his Opinions, wrote of Leucippus as -follows: “He assumed innumerable and ever-moving -elements, namely, the atoms. And he made their -forms infinite in number, since there was no reason -why they should be of one kind rather than another, -and because he saw that there was unceasing becoming -and change in things. He held, further, that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span> -<i>what is</i> is no more real than <i>what is not</i>, and that -both are alike causes of the things that come into -being; for he laid down that the substance of the -atoms was compact and full, and he called them -<i>what is</i>, while they moved in the void which he called -<i>what is not</i>, but affirmed to be just as real as <i>what is</i>.” -Thus did “he answer the question that Thales had -been the first to ask.”</p> - -<p>Postponing further reference to this theory until -the great name of Lucretius, its Roman exponent, is -reached, we find a genuine scientific method making -its first start in the person of Aristotle. This remarkable -man, the founder of the experimental school, -and the Father of Natural History, was born 384 -<span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span> at Stagira in Macedonia. In his eighteenth -year he left his native place for Athens, where he -became a pupil of Plato. Disappointed, as it is -thought, at not succeeding his master in the Academy, -he removed to Mytilene in the island of Lesbos, -where he received an invitation from Philip of Macedon -to become tutor to his son, the famous Alexander -the Great. When Alexander went on his expedition -to Asia, Aristotle returned to Athens, teaching -in the “school” which his genius raised to the -first rank. There he wrote the greater part of his -works, the completion of some of which was stopped -by his death at Chalcis in 322. The range of his -studies was boundless, but in this brief notice we -must limit our survey—and the more so because Aristotle’s -speculations outside natural history abound in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span> -errors—to his pioneer work in organic evolution. -Here, in the one possible method of reaching the -truth, theory follows observation. Stagira lay on the -Strymonic gulf, and a boyhood spent by the seashore -gave Aristotle ample opportunity for noting the variations, -and withal gradations, between marine plants -and animals, among which last-named it should be -noted as proof of his insight that he was keen enough -to include sponges. Here was laid the foundation -of a classification of life-forms on which all corresponding -attempts were based. Then, he saw, as -none other before him had seen, and as none after -him saw for centuries, the force of heredity, that -still unsolved problem of biology. Speaking broadly -of his teaching, the details of which would fill pages, -its main features are (1) His insistence on observation. -In his History of Animals he says “we must -not accept a general principle from logic only, but -must prove its application to each fact. For it is -in facts that we must seek general principles, and -these must always accord with facts. Experience -furnishes the particular facts from which induction -is the pathway to general laws.” (2) His rejection -of chance and assertion of law, not, following a -common error, of law personified as cause, but as -the term by which we express the fact that certain -phenomena always occur in a certain order. In his -Physics Aristotle says that “Jupiter rains not that -corn may be increased, but from necessity. Similarly, -if some one’s corn is destroyed by rain, it does<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span> -not rain for this purpose, but as an accidental circumstance. -It does not appear to be from fortune -or chance that it frequently rains in winter, but from -necessity.” (3) On the question of the origin of life-forms -he was nearest of all to its modern solution, -setting forth the necessity “that germs should have -been first produced, and not immediately animals; -and that soft mass which first subsisted was the germ. -In plants, also, there is purpose, but it is less distinct; -and this shows that plants were produced in the same -manner as animals, not by chance, as by the union -of olives with grape vines. Similarly, it may be -argued, that there should be an accidental generation -of the germs of things, but he who asserts this -subverts Nature herself, for Nature produces those -things which, being continually moved by a certain -principle contained in themselves, arrive at a certain -end.” In the eagerness of theologians to discover -proof of a belief in one God among the old philosophers, -the references made by Aristotle to a -“perfecting principle,” an “efficient cause,” a “prime -mover,” and so forth, have been too readily construed -as denoting a monotheistic creed which, reminding -us of the “one god” of Xenophanes, is also akin to -the Personal God of Christianity. “The Stagirite,” -as Mr. Benn remarks (Greek Philosophers, vol. i, -p. 312), “agrees with Catholic theism, and he agrees -with the First Article of the English Church, though -not with the Pentateuch, in saying that God is without -parts or passions, but there his agreement ceases.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span> -Excluding such a thing as divine interference with -all Nature, his theology, of course, excludes the possibility -of revelation, inspiration, miracles, and -grace.” He is a being who does not interest himself -in human affairs.</p> - -<p>But, differ as the commentators may as to Aristotle’s -meaning, his assumed place in the orthodox -line led, as will be seen hereafter, to the acceptance -of his philosophy by Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, -in the fourth century, and by other Fathers of the -Church, so that the mediæval theories of the Bible, -blended with Aristotle, represent the sum of knowledge -held as sufficient until the discoveries of Copernicus -in the sixteenth century upset the Ptolemaic -theory with its fixed earth and system of cycles and -epicycles in which the heavenly bodies moved. He -thereby upset very much besides. Like Anaximander -and others, Aristotle believed in spontaneous -generation, although only in the case of certain animals, -as of eels from the mud of ponds, and of insects -from putrid matter. However, in this, both Augustine -and Thomas Aquinas, and many men of science -down to the latter part of the seventeenth century, -followed him. For example, Van Helmont, an experimental -chemist of that period, gave a recipe for -making fleas; and another scholar showed himself -on a level with the unlettered rustics of to-day, who -believe that eels are produced from horse hairs -thrown into a pond.</p> - -<p>Of deeper interest, as marking Aristotle’s prevision,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span> -is his anticipation of what is known as Epigenesis, -or the theory of the development of the -germ into the adult form among the higher individuals -through the union of the fertilizing powers -of the male and female organs. This theory, which -was proved by the researches of Harvey, the discoverer -of the circulation of the blood, and is accepted -by all biologists to-day, was opposed by Malpighi, -an Italian physician, born in 1628, the year -in which Harvey published his great discovery, and -by other prominent men of science down to the last -century. Malpighi and his school contended that -the perfect animal is already “preformed” in the -germ; for example, the hen’s egg, before fecundation, -containing an excessively minute, but complete, -chick. It therefore followed that in any germ -the germs of all subsequent offspring must be contained, -and in the application of this “box-within-box” -theory its defenders even computed the number -of human germs concentrated in the ovary of -mother Eve, estimating these at two hundred thousand -millions!</p> - -<p>When the “preformation” theory was revived by -Bonnet and others in the eighteenth century, Erasmus -Darwin, grandfather of Charles Darwin, passed -the following shrewd criticism on it: “Many ingenious -philosophers have found so great difficulty -in conceiving the manner of reproduction in animals -that they have supposed all the numerous progeny -to have existed in miniature in the animal originally<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span> -created. This idea, besides its being unsupported -by any analogy we are acquainted with, ascribes a -greater continuity to organized matter than we can -readily admit. These embryons ... must possess -a greater degree of minuteness than that which was -ascribed to the devils who tempted St. Anthony, of -whom twenty thousand were said to have been able -to dance a saraband on the point of a needle without -the least incommoding each other.”</p> - -<p>Although no theistic element could be extracted -by the theologians of the early Christian Church -from the systems of Empedocles and Democritus, -thereby securing them a share in the influence exercised -by the great Stagirite, they were formative -powers in Greek philosophy, and, moreover, have -“come by their own” in these latter days. Their -chief representative in what is known as the Post-Aristotelian -period is Epicurus, who was born at -Samos, 342 <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span> As with Zeno, the founder of the -Stoic school, his teaching has been perverted, so -that his name has become loosely identified with -indulgence in gross and sensual living. He saw -in pleasure the highest happiness, and therefore advocated -the pursuit of pleasure to attain happiness, -but he did not thereby mean the pursuit of the unworthy. -Rather did he counsel the following after -pure, high, and noble aims, whereby alone a man -could have peace of mind. It is not hard to see that -in the minds of men of low ideals the tendency towards -passivity which lurked in such teaching would<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span> -aid their sliding into the pursuit of mere animal enjoyment; -hence the gross and limited association of -the term Epicurean. Epicurus accepted the theory -of Leucippus, and applied it all round. The <i>fainéant</i> -gods, who dwell serenely indifferent to human affairs, -and about whom men should therefore have no -dread; all things, whether dead or living, even the -ideas that enter the mind; are alike composed of -atoms. He also accepted the theory broached by -Empedocles as to the survival of fit and capable -forms after life had arrived at these through the -processes of spontaneous generation and the production -of monstrosities. Adopting the physical -speculations of these forerunners, he made them the -vehicle of didactic and ethical philosophies which inspired -the production of the wonderful poem of -Lucretius.</p> - -<p>Between this great Roman and Epicurus—a period -of some two centuries—there is no name of sufficient -prominence to warrant attention. The decline -of Greece had culminated in her conquest by the -semi-barbarian Mummius, and in her consequent addition -to the provinces of the Roman Empire. What -life lingered in her philosophy within her own borders -expired with the loss of freedom, and the work -done by the Pioneers of Evolution in Greece was to -be resumed elsewhere. In the few years of the pre-Christian -period that remained the teaching of Empedocles, -and of Epicurus as the mouthpiece of the -atomic theory, was revived by Lucretius in his De<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span> -Rerum Natura. Of that remarkable man but little -is recorded, and the record is untrustworthy. He -was probably born 99 <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span>, and died—by his own -hand, Jerome says, but of this there is no proof—in -his forty-fourth year. It is difficult, taking up his -wonderful poem, to resist the temptation to make -copious extracts from it, since, even through the -vehicle of Mr. Munro’s exquisite translation, it is -probably little known to the general reader in these -evil days of snippety literature. But the temptation -must be resisted, save in moderate degree.</p> - -<p>With the dignity which his high mission inspires, -Lucretius appeals to us in the threefold character of -teacher, reformer, and poet. “First, by reason of -the greatness of my argument, and because I set the -mind free from the close-drawn bonds of superstition; -and next because, on so dark a theme, I compose -such lucid verse, touching every point with the -grace of poesy.” As a teacher he expounds the doctrines -of Epicurus concerning life and nature; as a -reformer he attacks superstition; as a poet he informs -both the atomic philosophy and its moral application -with harmonious and beautiful verse swayed -by a fervour that is akin to religious emotion.</p> - -<p>Discussing at the outset various theories of origins, -and dismissing these, notably that which asserts -that things came from nothing—“for if so, any kind -might be born of anything, nothing would require -seed,” Lucretius proceeds to expound the teaching -of Leucippus and other atomists as to the constitution<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span> -of things by particles of matter ruled in their -movements by unvarying laws. This theory he -works all round, explaining the processes by which -the atoms unite to carry on the birth, growth, and -decay of things, the variety of which is due to variety -of form of the atoms and to differences in modes -of their combination; the combinations being determined -by the affinities or properties of the atoms -themselves, “since it is absolutely decreed what each -thing can and what it cannot do by the conditions of -Nature.” Change is the law of the universe; what -is, will perish, but only to reappear in another form. -Death is “the only immortal”; and it is that and -what may follow it which are the chief tormentors -of men. “This terror of the soul, therefore, and this -darkness, must be dispelled, not by the rays of the -sun or the bright shafts of day, but by the outward -aspect and harmonious plan of Nature.” Lucretius -explains that the soul, which he places in the centre -of the breast, is also formed of very minute atoms of -heat, wind, calm air, and a finer essence, the proportions -of which determine the character of both -men and animals. It dies with the body, in support -of which statement Lucretius advances seventeen -arguments, so determined is he to “deliver those -who through fear of death are all their lifetime subject -to bondage.”</p> - -<p>These themes fill the first three books. In the -fourth he grapples with the mental problems of -sensation and conception, and explains the origin of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span> -belief in immortality as due to ghosts and apparitions -which appear in dreams. “When sleep has -prostrated the body, for no other reason does the -mind’s intelligence wake, except because the very -same images provoke our minds which provoke them -when we are awake, and to such a degree that we -seem without a doubt to perceive him whom life has -left, and death and earth gotten hold of. This Nature -constrains to come to pass because all the senses -of the body are then hampered and at rest throughout -the limbs, and cannot refute the unreal by real -things.”</p> - -<p>In the fifth book Lucretius deals with origins—of -the sun, the moon, the earth (which he held to be -flat, denying the existence of the antipodes); of life -and its development; and of civilization. In all this -he excludes design, explaining everything as produced -and maintained by natural agents, “the masses, -suddenly brought together, became the rudiments of -earth, sea, and heaven, and the race of living things.” -He believed in the successive appearance of plants -and animals, but in their arising separately and directly -out of the earth, “under the influence of rain -and the heat of the sun,” thus repeating the old -speculations of the emergence of life from slime, -“wherefore the earth with good title has gotten and -keeps the name of mother.” He did not adopt Empedocles’s -theory of the “four roots of all things,” -and he will have none of the monsters—the hippogriffs, -chimeras, and centaurs—which form a part of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span> -the scheme of that philosopher. These, he says, -“have never existed,” thus showing himself far in -advance of ages when unicorns, dragons, and such-like -fabled beasts were seriously believed to exist. -In one respect, more discerning than Aristotle, he -accepts the doctrine of the survival of the fittest as -taught by the sage of Agrigentum. For he argues -that since upon “the increase of some Nature set a -ban, so that they could not reach the coveted flower -of age, nor find food, nor be united in marriage,” -... “many races of living things have died out, and -been unable to beget and continue their breed.” -Lucretius speaks of Empedocles in terms scarcely -less exaggerated than those which he applied to Epicurus. -The latter is “a god” “who first found out -that plan of life which is now termed wisdom, and -who by tried skill rescued life from such great billows -and such thick darkness and moored it in so -perfect a calm and in so brilliant a light, ... he -cleared men’s breasts with truth-telling precepts, and -fixed a limit to lust and fear, and explained what -was the chief good which we all strive to reach.” As -to Empedocles, “that great country (Sicily) seems -to have held within it nothing more glorious than -this man, nothing more holy, marvellous, and dear. -The verses, too, of this godlike genius cry with a -loud voice, and make known his great discoveries, -so that he seems scarcely born of a mortal stock.”</p> - -<p>Continuing his speculations on the development -of living things, Lucretius strikes out in bolder and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span> -original vein. The past history of man, he says, lies -in no heroic or golden age, but in one of struggle -out of savagery. Only when “children, by their -coaxing ways, easily broke down the proud temper -of their fathers,” did there arise the family ties out -of which the wider social bond has grown, and softening -and civilizing agencies begin their fair offices. -In his battle for food and shelter, “man’s first arms -were hands, nails and teeth and stones and boughs -broken off from the forests, and flame and fire, as -soon as they had become known. Afterward the -force of iron and copper was discovered, and the use -of copper was known before that of iron, as its nature -is easier to work, and it is found in greater quantity. -With copper they would labour the soil of the earth -and stir up the billows of war.... Then by slow -steps the sword of iron gained ground and the make -of the copper sickle became a byword, and with iron -they began to plough through the earth’s soil, and -the struggles of wavering man were rendered equal.” -As to language, “Nature impelled them to utter the -various sounds of the tongue, and use struck out the -names of things.” Thus does Lucretius point the -road along which physical and mental evolution have -since travelled, and make the whole story subordinate -to the high purpose of his poem in deliverance -of the beings whose career he thus traces from superstition. -Man “seeing the system of heaven and the -different seasons of the years could not find out by -what causes this was done, and sought refuge in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span> -handing over all things to the gods and supposing -all things to be guided by their nod.” Then, in the -sixth and last book, the completion of which would -seem to have been arrested by his death, Lucretius -explains the “law of winds and storms,” of earthquakes -and volcanic outbursts, which men “foolishly -lay to the charge of the gods,” who thereby make -known their anger.</p> - -<div class="centered"><div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i4">So, loath to suffer mute,<br /></span> -<span class="i4">We, peopling the void air,<br /></span> -<span class="i4">Make Gods to whom to impute<br /></span> -<span class="i4">The ills we ought to bear;<br /></span> -<span class="i0">With God and Fate to rail at, suffering easily.<br /></span> -</div></div></div> - -<p>And what a motley crowd of gods they were on -whose caprice or indifference he pours his vials of -anger and contempt! The tolerant pantheon of -Rome gave welcome to any foreign deity with respectable -credentials; to Cybele, the Great Mother, -imported in the shape of a rough-hewn stone with -pomp and rejoicings from Phrygia 204 <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span>; to Isis, -welcomed from Egypt; to Herakles, Demeter, Asklepios, -and many another god from Greece. But -these were dismissed from a man’s thought when the -prayer or sacrifice to them had been offered at the -due season. They had less influence on the Roman’s -life than the crowd of native godlings who were -thinly disguised fetiches, and who controlled every -action of the day. For the minor gods survive the -changes in the pantheon of every race. Of the Greek -peasant of to-day Mr. Rennel Rodd testifies, in his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span> -Custom and Lore of Modern Greece, that much as -he would shudder at the accusation of any taint of -paganism, the ruling of the Fates is more immediately -real to him than divine omnipotence. Mr. -Tozer confirms this in his Highlands of Turkey. He -says: “It is rather the minor deities and those associated -with man’s ordinary life that have escaped -the brunt of the storm, and returned to live in a dim -twilight of popular belief.” In India, Sir Alfred -Lyall tells us that, “even the supreme triad of Hindu -allegory, which represents the almighty powers of -creation, preservation, and destruction, have long -ceased to preside actively over any such corresponding -distribution of functions.” Like limited monarchs, -they reign, but do not govern. They are -superseded by the ever-increasing crowd of godlings -whose influence is personal and special, as shown by -Mr. Crooke in his instructive Introduction to the -Popular Religion and Folk-lore of Northern India.</p> - -<p>The old Roman catalogue of spiritual beings, -abstractions as they were, who guarded life in minute -detail, is a long one. From the <i>indigitamenta</i>, as -such lists are called, we learn that no less than forty-three -were concerned with the actions of a child. -When the farmer asked Mother Earth for a good -harvest, the prayer would not avail unless he also -invoked “the spirit of breaking up the land and the -spirit of ploughing it crosswise; the spirit of furrowing -and the spirit of ploughing in the seed; and the -spirit of harrowing; the spirit of weeding and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span> -spirit of reaping; the spirit of carrying corn to the -barn; and the spirit of bringing it out again.” The -country, moreover, swarmed with Chaldæan astrologers -and casters of nativities; with Etruscan haruspices -full of “childish lightning-lore,” who foretold -events from the entrails of sacrificed animals; while -in competition with these there was the State-supported -college of augurs to divine the will of the -gods by the cries and direction of the flight of birds. -Well might the satirist of such a time say that the -“place was so densely populated with gods as to -leave hardly room for the men.”</p> - -<p>It will be seen that the justification for including -Lucretius among the Pioneers of Evolution lies in -his two signal and momentous contributions to the -science of man; namely, the primitive savagery of -the human race, and the origin of the belief in a -soul and a future life. Concerning the first, anthropological -research, in its vast accumulation of -materials during the last sixty years, has done little -more than fill in the outline which the insight of -Lucretius enabled him to sketch. As to the second, -he anticipates, well-nigh in detail, the ghost-theory -of the origin of belief in spirits generally which Herbert -Spencer and Dr. Tylor, following the lines laid -down by Hume and Turgot (see p. <a href="#Page_255">255</a>), have -formulated and sustained by an enormous mass of -evidence. The credit thus due to Lucretius for the -original ideas in his majestic poem—Greek in conception -and Roman in execution—has been obscured<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span> -in the general eclipse which that poem suffered -for centuries through its anti-theological spirit. -Grinding at the same philosophical mill, Aristotle, -because of the theism assumed to be involved in his -“perfecting principle,” was cited as “a pillar of the -faith” by the Fathers and Schoolmen; while Lucretius, -because of his denial of design, was “anathema -maranatha.” Only in these days, when the far-reaching -effects of the theory of evolution, supported by -observation in every branch of inquiry, are apparent, -are the merits of Lucretius as an original seer, more -than as an expounder of the teachings of Empedocles -and Epicurus, made clear.</p> - -<p> </p> - -<p>Standing well-nigh on the threshold of the Christian -era, we may pause to ask what is the sum of -the speculation into the causes and nature of things -which, begun in Ionia (with impulse more or less -slight from the East, in the sixth century before -Christ), by Thales, ceased, for many centuries, in the -poem of Lucretius, thus covering an active period -of about five hundred years. The caution not to see -in these speculations more than an approximate approach -to modern theories must be kept in mind.</p> - -<p>1. There is a primary substance which abides -amidst the general flux of things.</p> - -<p><i>All modern research tends to show that the various -combinations of matter are formed of some <em class="nrm">prima materia</em>. -But its ultimate nature remains unknown.</i></p> - -<p>2. Out of nothing comes nothing.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span></p> - -<p><i>Modern science knows nothing of a beginning, and, -moreover, holds it to be unthinkable. In this it stands -in direct opposition to the theological dogma that God -created the universe out of nothing; a dogma still -accepted by the majority of Protestants and binding on -Roman Catholics. For the doctrine of the Church of -Rome thereon, as expressed in the Canons of the -Vatican Council, is as follows: “If any one confesses -not that the world and all things which are contained -in it, both spiritual and mental, have been, in their -whole substance, produced by God out of nothing; or -shall say that God created, not by His free will from -all necessity, but by a necessity equal to the necessity -whereby He loves Himself, or shall deny that the -world was made for the glory of God: let him be -anathema.”</i></p> - -<p>3. The primary substance is indestructible.</p> - -<p><i>The modern doctrine of the Conservation of Energy -teaches that both matter and motion can neither be created -nor destroyed.</i></p> - -<p>4. The universe is made up of indivisible particles -called atoms, whose manifold combinations, ruled -by unalterable affinities, result in the variety of -things.</p> - -<p><i>With modifications based on chemical as well as -mechanical changes among the atoms, this theory of -Leucippus and Democritus is confirmed. (But recent -experiments and discoveries show that reconstruction -of chemical theories as to the properties of the atom may -happen.)</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span></p> - -<p>5. Change is the law of things, and is brought -about by the play of opposing forces.</p> - -<p><i>Modern science explains the changes in phenomena -as due to the antagonism of repelling and attracting -modes of motion; when the latter overcome the former, -equilibrium will be reached, and the present state of -things will come to an end.</i></p> - -<p>6. Water is a necessary condition of life.</p> - -<p><i>Therefore life had its beginnings in water; a theory -wholly indorsed by modern biology.</i></p> - -<p>7. Life arose out of non-living matter.</p> - -<p><i>Although modern biology leaves the origin of life -as an insoluble problem, it supports the theory of -fundamental continuity between the inorganic and the -organic.</i></p> - -<p>8. Plants came before animals: the higher organisms -are of separate sex, and appeared subsequent -to the lower.</p> - -<p><i>Generally confirmed by modern biology, but with -qualification as to the undefined borderland between -the lowest plants and the lowest animals. And, of -course, it recognises a continuity in the order and -succession of life which was not grasped by the Greeks. -Aristotle and others before him believed that some of -the higher forms sprang from slimy matter direct.</i></p> - -<p>9. Adverse conditions cause the extinction of -some organisms, thus leaving room for those better -fitted.</p> - -<p><i>Herein lay the crude germ of the modern doctrine -of the “survival of the fittest.”</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span></p> - -<p>10. Man was the last to appear, and his primitive -state was one of savagery. His first tools and -weapons were of stone; then, after the discovery of -metals, of copper; and, following that, of iron. His -body and soul are alike compounded of atoms, and -the soul is extinguished at death.</p> - -<p><i>The science of Prehistoric Archæology confirms the -theory of man’s slow passage from barbarism to civilization; -and the science of Comparative Psychology declares -that the evidence of his immortality is neither -stronger nor weaker than the evidence of the immortality -of the lower animals.</i></p> - -<p> </p> - -<p>Such, in very broad outline, is the legacy of suggestive -theories bequeathed by the Ionian school and -its successors, theories which fell into the rear when -Athens became a centre of intellectual life in which -discussion passed from the physical to those ethical -problems which lie outside the range of this survey. -Although Aristotle, by his prolonged and careful -observations, forms a conspicuous exception, the -fact abides that insight, rather than experiment, ruled -Greek speculation, the fantastic guesses of parts of -which themselves evidence the survival of the crude -and false ideas about earth and sky long prevailing. -The more wonderful is it, therefore, that so much -therein points the way along which inquiry travelled -after its subsequent long arrest; and the more apparent -is it that nothing in science or art, and but -little in theological speculations, at least among us<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span> -Westerns, can be understood without reference to -Greece.</p> - - -<h3><span class="smcap">Table.</span></h3> - -<div class="center"> -<table class="sci" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="The Ionian School and its Successors"> -<tr><td class="col10"><span class="smcap">Name.</span></td> -<td class="col10">Place.</td> -<td class="col10">Approximate date <br /><span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span></td> -<td class="col11" colspan="2">Speciality.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Thales.</td> -<td class="col8">Miletus<br />(Ionia).</td> -<td class="col9">600</td> -<td class="col2a">Cosmological Theory as to the Primary Substance</td> -<td class="col2a"><span class="f30">}</span>Water.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Anaximander.</td> -<td class="col9">“</td> -<td class="col9">570</td> -<td class="col7">“</td> -<td class="col2a">the Boundless.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Anaximenes.</td> -<td class="col9">“</td> -<td class="col9">500</td> -<td class="col7">“</td> -<td class="col2a">Air.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Pythagoras.</td> -<td class="col8">Samos (near the Ionian coast).</td> -<td class="col9">500</td> -<td class="col7">“</td> -<td class="col2a">Numbers:<br /> “a Cosmos built up of geometrical figures,” or (Grote, Plato, i, 12) “generated out of number.”</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Xenophanes.</td> -<td class="col8">Colophon<br /> (Ionia).</td> -<td class="col9">500</td> -<td class="col7"> </td> -<td class="col2a">Founder of the Eleatic school.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Heraclitus.</td> -<td class="col8">Ephesus<br /> (Ionia).</td> -<td class="col9">500</td> -<td class="col7">“</td> -<td class="col2a">Fire.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Empedocles.</td> -<td class="col8">Agrigentum<br /> (Sicily).</td> -<td class="col9">450</td> -<td class="col7">“</td> -<td class="col2a">Fire, Air, Earth, and Water: ruled by Love and Strife.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Anaxagoras.</td> -<td class="col8">Clazomenae<br /> (Ionia).</td> -<td class="col9">450</td> -<td class="col2a"> </td> -<td class="col2a">Nous.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Leucippus</td> -<td class="col8"> </td> -<td class="col8"> </td> -<td class="col2a"> </td> -<td class="col2a"> </td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Democritus.</td> -<td class="col8">Abdera (Thrace).</td> -<td class="col9">460</td> -<td class="col2a" colspan="2">Formulators of the Atomic Theory.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Aristotle.</td> -<td class="col8">Stagira (Macedonia).</td> -<td class="col9">350</td> -<td class="col2a" colspan="2">Naturalist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Epicurus.</td> -<td class="col8">Samos.</td> -<td class="col9">300</td> -<td class="col2a" colspan="2">Expounder of the Atomic Theory and Ethical Philosopher.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Lucretius.</td> -<td class="col8">Rome.</td> -<td class="col9"> 50</td> -<td class="col2a" colspan="2">Interpreter of Epicurus and Empedocles: the first Anthropologist.</td></tr> -</table></div> -<hr class="l1" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><i>Part II.</i></h2> - -<h2>THE ARREST OF INQUIRY.</h2> - -<p class="st">A. D. 50-A. D. 400.</p> - - -<h3>1. <i>From the Early Christian Period to the Time of -Augustine.</i></h3> - -<div class="qt2"> -<p>“A revealed dogma is always opposed to the free research that may -contradict it. The result of science is not to banish the divine -altogether, but ever to place it at a greater distance from the -world of particular facts in which men once believed they saw -it.”—<span class="smcap">Renan</span>, Essay on Islamism and Science.</p> -</div> - - -<p>A detailed account of the rise and progress of -the Christian religion is not within the scope of this -book. But as that religion, more especially in the -elaborated theological form which it ultimately assumed, -became the chief barrier to the development -of Greek ideas; except, as has been remarked, in -the degree that these were represented by Aristotle, -and brought into harmony with it; a short survey -of its origin and early stages is necessary to the continuity -of our story.</p> - -<p>The history of that great movement is told according -to the bias of the writers. They explain -its rapid diffusion and its ultimate triumph over -Paganism as due either to its Divine origin and -guidance; or to the favourable conditions of the time -of its early propagation, and to that wise adaptation -to circumstances which linked its fortunes with those<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span> -of the progressive peoples of Western Europe. In -the judgment of every unofficial narrator, this latter -explanation best accords with the facts of history, -and with the natural causes which largely determine -success or failure. The most partisan advocates of -its supernatural, and therefore special, character -have to show reason why the fortunes of the Christian -religion have varied like those of other great -religions, both older and younger than it; why, like -Buddhism, it has been ousted from the country in -which it rose; and why, in competition with Brahmanism, -as Sir Alfred Lyall testifies in his Asiatic -Studies (p. 110), and with Mohammedanism in -Africa, it has less success than these in the mission -fields where it comes into rivalry with them. Riven -into wrangling sects from an early period of its history, -it has, while exercising a beneficent influence -in turbulent and lawless ages, brought not “peace -on earth, but a sword.” It has been the cause of undying -hate, of bloody wars, and of persecutions between -parties and nations, whose animosity seems -the deeper when stirred by matters which are incapable -of proof. As Montaigne says, “Nothing is so -firmly believed as that which is least known.” To -bring the Christian religion, or, rather, its manifold -forms, from the purest spiritualistic to such degraded -type as exists, for example, in Abyssinia, within the -operation of the law which governs development, -and which, therefore, includes partial and local corruption; -is to make its history as clear as it is profoundly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span> -instructive; while, to demand for it an origin -and character different in kind from other religions, -is to import confusion into the story of mankind, -and to raise a swarm of artificial difficulties. -“If,” as John Morley observes in his criticism of -Turgot’s dissertation upon The Advantages that -the Establishment of Christianity has conferred upon -the Human Race (Miscell., vol. ii, p. 90), “there -had been in the Christian idea the mysterious self-sowing -quality so constantly claimed for it, how -came it that in the Eastern part of the Empire it was -as powerless for spiritual or moral regeneration as -it was for political health and vitality; while in the -Western part it became the organ of the most important -of all the past transformations of the civilized -world? Is not the difference to be explained by the -difference in the surrounding medium, and what is -the effect of such an explanation upon the supernatural -claims of the Christian idea?” Its inclusion -as one of other modes, varying only in degree, by -which man has progressed from the “ape and tiger” -stage to the highest ideals of the race, makes clear -what concerns us here, namely, its attitude toward -secular knowledge, and the consequent serious arrest -of that knowledge. That a religion which its -followers claim to be of supernatural origin, and secured -from error by the perpetual guidance of a -Holy Spirit, should have opposed inquiry into matters -the faculty for investigating which lay within -human power and province; that it should actually<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span> -have put to death those who dared thus to inquire, -and to make known what they had discovered; is a -problem which its advocates may settle among themselves. -It is no problem to those who take the opposite -view.</p> - -<p>In outlining the history of Christianity stress will -be here laid only upon those elements which caused -it to be an arresting force in man’s intellectual development, -and, therefore, in his spiritual emancipation -from terrors begotten of ignorance. It does -not fall within our survey to speak of that primary -element in it which was before all dogma, and which -may survive when dogma has become only a matter -of antiquarian interest. That element, born of emotion, -which, as a crowd of kindred examples show, -incarnates, and then deifies the object of its worship, -was the belief in the manifestation of the divine -through the human Jesus who had borne men’s -griefs, carried their sorrows, and offered rest to the -weary and heavy-laden. For no religion—and here -Evolution comes in as witness—can take root which -does not adapt itself to, and answer some need of, -the heart of man. Hence the importance of study -of the history of all religions.</p> - -<p>Evolution knows only one heresy—the denial of -continuity. Recognising the present as the outcome -of the past, it searches after origins. It knows that -both that which revolts us in man’s spiritual history -has, alike with that which attracts, its place, its necessary -place, in the development of ideas, and is, therefore,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span> -capable of explanation from its roots upward. -For this age is sympathetic, not flippant. It looks -with no favour on criticism that is only destructive, -or on ridicule or ribaldry as modes of attack on -current beliefs. Hence we have the modern science -of comparative theology, with its Hibbert Lectures, -and Gifford Lectures, which are critical and constructive; -as opposed to Bampton Lectures, Boyle and -Hulse Lectures, which are apologetic, the speaker -holding an official brief. Of the Boyle Lecturers, -Collings the “Deist” caustically said that nobody -doubted the existence of the Deity till they set to -work to prove it. Religions are no longer treated as -true or false, as inventions of priests or of divine -origin, but as the product of man’s intellectual speculations, -however crude or coarse; and of his spiritual -needs, no matter in what repulsive form they are satisfied. -For “proofs” and “evidences” we have substituted -explanations.</p> - -<p>Nevertheless, so strong, often so bitter, are the -feelings aroused over the most temperate discussion -of the origin of Christianity that it remains necessary -to repeat that to explain is not to attack, and that -to narrate is not to apportion blame, for no religion -can do aught than reflect the temper of the age in -which it flourishes.</p> - -<p>Let us now summarize certain occurrences which, -although familiar enough, must be repeated for the -clear understanding of their effects.</p> - -<p>Some sixty years after the death of Lucretius<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span> -there happened, in the subsequent belief of millions -of mankind, an event for which all that had gone -before in the history of this planet is said to have -been a preparation. In the fulness of time the Omnipotent -maker and ruler of a universe to which -no boundaries can be set by human thought, sent to -this earth-speck no less a person than His Eternal -Son. He was said to have been born, not by the -natural processes of generation, but to have been -incarnated in the womb of a virgin, retaining his -divine nature while subjecting it to human limitations. -This he had done that he might, as sinless -man, become an expiatory sacrifice to offended -deity, and to the requirements of divine justice, for -the sins which the human race had committed since -the transgression of Adam and Eve, or which men -yet to be born might commit.</p> - -<p>The “miraculous” birth of Jesus took place at -Nazareth in Galilee, in the reign of Cæsar Augustus, -about 750 <span class="smcap lower">A. U. C.</span>, as the Romans reckoned time. -Tradition afterward fixed his birthday on the 25th -December, which, curiously enough, although, perhaps, -explaining the choice, was the day dedicated to -the sun-god Mithra, an Oriental deity to whom altars -had been raised and sacrifices performed, with rites -of baptisms of blood, in hospitable Rome.</p> - -<p>Jesus is said to have lived in the obscurity of his -native mountain village till his thirtieth year. Except -one doubtful story of his going to Jerusalem -with his parents when he was twelve years old, nothing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span> -is recorded in the various biographies of him -between his birth and his appearance as a public -teacher. Probably he followed his father’s trade as -a carpenter. The event that seems to have called -him from home was the preaching of an enthusiastic -ascetic named John the Baptist. At his hands -Jesus submitted to the baptismal rite, and then entered -on his career, wandering from place to place. -The fragments of his discourses, which have survived -in the short biographies known as the Gospels, show -him to have been gifted with a simple, winning style, -and his sermons, brightened by happy illustration -or striking parable, went home to the hearts of his -hearers. Women, often of the outcast class, were -drawn to him by the sympathy which attracted even -more than his teaching. Among a people to whom -the unvarying order of Nature was an idea wholly -foreign—for Greek speculations had not penetrated -into Palestine—stories of miracle-working found -easy credit, falling in, as they did, with popular belief -in the constant intervention of deity. Thus, to -the reports of what Jesus taught were added those -of the wonders which he had wrought, from feeding -thousands of folk with a few loaves of bread to raising -the dead to life. His itinerant mission secured -him a few devoted followers from various towns and -villages, while the effect of success upon himself -was to heighten his own conception of the importance -of his work. The skill of the Romans in fusing -together subject races had failed them in the case of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span> -the Jews, whose belief in their special place in the -world as the “chosen people” never forsook them. -Nor had their misfortunes weakened their belief that -the Messiah predicted by their prophets would appear -to deliver them, and plant their feet on the neck -of the hated conqueror. This hope, as became a -pious Jew, Jesus shared, but it set him brooding -on some nobler, because more spiritual, conception -of it than his fellow-countrymen nurtured. Finally, -it led him to the belief, fostered by the ambition of -his nearer disciples, which was, however, material -in its hopes, that he was the spiritual Messiah. In -that faith he repaired to Jerusalem at the time of -the Passover feast when the city was crowded with -devotees, that he might, before the chief priests and -elders, make his appeal to the nation. According -to the story, his daring in clearing the holy temple -of money-changers and traders led to his appearance -before the Sanhedrin, the highest judicial council; -his plainness of speech raised the fury of the sects; -and when, dreaming of a purer faith, he spoke ominous -words about the destruction of the temple, the -charge of blasphemy was laid against him. His guilt -was made clear to his judges when, answering a -question of the high priest, he declared himself to be -the Messiah. This, involving claim to kingship over -the Jews, and therefore rebellion against the Empire, -was made the plea of haling him before the Roman -governor, Pontius Pilate, for trial. Pilate, looking -upon the whole affair as a local <i>émeute</i>, was disinclined<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span> -to severity, but nothing short of the death of -Jesus as a blasphemer (although his chief offence -appears to have been his disclaimer of earthly sovereignty) -would satisfy the angry mob. Amidst their -taunts and jeers he was taken to a place named Calvary, -and there put to death by the torturing process -of crucifixion, or, the particular mode not being clear, -of transfixion on a stake.</p> - -<p>This tragic event, on which, as is still widely held, -hang the destinies of mankind to the end of time, -attracted no attention outside Judæa. In the -Roman eye, cold, contemptuous, and practical, it was -but the execution of a troublesome fanatic who had -embroiled himself with his fellow-countrymen, and -added the crime of sedition to the folly of blasphemy. -Pilate himself passed on, without more ado, to the -next duty. Tradition, anxious to prove that retribution -followed his criminal act, as it was judged in -after-time to be, tells how he flung himself in remorse -from the mountain known as Pilatus, which overlooks -the lake of Lucerne. With truer insight, a -striking modern story, L’Etui de Nacre, by Anatole -France, makes Pilate, on his retirement to Sicily in -old age, thus refer to the incident in conversation -with a Roman friend who had loved a Jewish maiden.</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“A few months after I had lost sight of her I heard by -accident that she had joined a small party of men and women -who were following a young Galilean miracle-worker. His -name was Jesus, he came from Nazareth, and he was crucified -for I don’t know what crime. Pontius, do you remember this -man? Pontius Pilate knit his brow, and put his hand to his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span> -forehead like one who is searching his memory; then after a -few moments of silence: ‘Jesus,’ murmured he, ‘Jesus of -Nazareth. No, I don’t remember him.’”</p></div> - -<p>On the third day after his death, Jesus is said to -have risen from the grave, and appeared to a faithful -few of his disciples. On the fortieth day after -his resurrection he is said to have ascended to heaven. -Both these statements rest on the authority of the -biographies which were compiled some years after -his death. Jesus wrote nothing himself; therefore -the “brethren,” as his intimate followers called one -another, had no other sacred books than those of the -Old Testament. They believed that Jesus was the -Messiah predicted in Daniel and some of the apocryphal -writings, and they cherished certain “logia” or -sayings of his which formed the basis of the first -three Gospels. The earliest of these, that bearing -the name of Mark, probably took the shape in which -we have it (some spurious verses at the end excepted) -about 70 <span class="smcap lower">A. D.</span> The fourth Gospel, which tradition -attributes to John, is generally believed to be half a -century later than Mark. It seems likely that the -importance of collecting the words of Jesus into any -permanent form did not occur to those who had -heard them, because the belief in his speedy return -was all-powerful among them, and their life and attitude -toward everything was shaped accordingly.</p> - -<p>Without sacred books, priesthood, or organization, -these earliest disciples, whom the fate of their -leader had driven into hiding for a time, gathered<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span> -themselves into groups for communion and worship. -“In the church of Jerusalem,” says Selden in his -Table Talk (xiv), “the Christians were but another -sect of Jews that did believe the Messias was come.” -From that sacred city there went forth preachers of -this simple doctrine through the lands where Greek-speaking -Jews, known as those of the Dispersion, -had been long settled. These formed a very important -element in the Roman Empire, being scattered -from Asia Minor to Egypt, and thence in all the -lands washed by the Mediterranean. As their racial -isolation and national hopes made them the least -contented among the subject-peoples, a series of tolerant -measures securing them certain privileges, subject -to loyal behaviour, had been prudently granted -by their Roman masters. The new teaching spread -from Antioch to Alexandria and Rome. But early -in the onward career of the movement a division -broke out among the immediate disciples of Jesus -which ended in lasting rupture. A distinguished -convert had been won to the faith in the person of -the Apostle Paul. He is the real founder of Christianity -as a more or less systematized creed, and all -the development of dogma which followed are integral -parts of the structure raised by him. He converted -it from a local religion into a widespread -faith. This came about, at the start, through his defeat -of the narrower section headed by Peter, who -would have compelled all non-Jewish converts to -submit to the rite of circumcision.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span></p> - -<p>The unity of the Empire gave Christianity its -chance. Through the connection of Eurasia from -the Euphrates to the Atlantic by magnificent roads, -communication between peoples followed the lines -of least resistance. Happily for the future of Christianity, -the early missionaries travelled westward, -in the wake of the dispersed Jews, along the Mediterranean -seaboard, and thus its fortunes became -identified with the civilizing portion of mankind. -Had they travelled eastward, it might have been -blended with Buddhism, or, as its Gnostic phases -show, become merged in Oriental mysticism. The -story of progress ran smoothly till <span class="smcap lower">A. D.</span> 64, when we -first hear of the “Christians”—for by such name -they had become known—in “profane” history, as -it was once oddly called. Tacitus, writing many -years after the event, tells how on the night of the -18th July, in the sixty-fourth year of our era, a fierce -fire broke out in Rome, causing the destruction of -magnificent buildings raised by Augustus, and of -priceless works of Greek art. Suspicion fell on -Nero, and he, as has been suggested, was instigated -by his wife Poppaea Sabina, an unscrupulous woman, -and, according to some authorities, a convert to -Judaism, “to put an end to the common talk, by -imputing the fire to others, visiting, with a refinement -of punishment, those detestable criminals who -went by the name of Christians. The author of that -denomination was Christus, who had been executed -in the time of Tiberius, by the procurator, Pontius<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span> -Pilate.” Tacitus goes on to describe Christianity as -“a pestilent superstition,” and its adherents as guilty -of “hatred to the human race.” The indictment, on -the face of it, seems strange, but it has an explanation, -although the Christians were brutally murdered -on the charge of arson, and not of superstition. So -far as religious persecution went, they suffered this -first at the hands of Jews, the Empire intervening to -protect them. Broadly speaking, the Roman note -was toleration. Throughout the Empire religion was -a national affair, because it began and ended with the -preservation of the State. Thereupon it was the binding -duty—<i>religio</i>—of every citizen to pay due honour -to the protecting gods on whose favour the safety of -the State depended. That done, a man might believe -what he chose. Polytheism is, from its nature, -easy-going and tolerant; so long as there was no -open opposition to the authorized public worship, -the worshipper could explain it any way he chose. -In Greece a man “might believe or disbelieve that -the Mysteries taught the doctrine of immortality; -the essential thing was that he should duly sacrifice -his pig.” In Rome, that vast Cosmopolis, “the ordinary -pagan did not care two straws whether his -neighbour worshipped twenty gods or twenty-one.” -Why should he care?</p> - -<p>Now, against all this, the Christians set their -faces sternly, and the result was to make them regarded -as anti-patriotic and anti-social. Their success -among the lower classes had been rapid. Christianity<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span> -levelled all distinctions: it welcomed the master -and his slave, the outcast and the pure: it treated -woman as the spiritual equal of man: it held out to -each the hope of a future life. Thus far, all was to -the good, although the old Mithraic religion had -done well-nigh as much. But Christianity held aloof -from the common social life, putting itself out of -touch with the manifold activity of Rome. It sought -to apply certain maxims of Jesus literally; it discouraged -marriage, it brought disunion into family -life; it counselled avoidance of service in the army -or acceptance of any public office. This general -attitude was wholly due to the belief that with the -return of Jesus, the end of the world was at hand. -For Jesus had foretold his second coming, and the -earliest epistles of the apostles bade the faithful prepare -for it. Here there was no continuing city; citizenship -was in heaven, for the kingdom of Christ -was not of this world. Therefore to give thought to -the earthly and fleeting was folly and impiety, for -who would care to heap up wealth, to strive for place -or to pursue pleasure, or to search after what men -called “wisdom,” when these imperilled the soul, -and blocked the way to heaven?</p> - -<p>The prejudice created by this belief, expressed in -such direct action as refusal to worship the guardian -gods and the “genius” of the Emperor, was deepened -by ugly, although baseless, rumours as to the -cruel and immoral things done by the Christians at -their secret meetings. And so it came to pass that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span> -Tacitus spoke of Christianity in the terms quoted; -that Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius (who refers to -it only once in his Meditations) dismissed it with a -scornful phrase; that the common people called it -atheistic; and that, finally, it became a proscribed -and persecuted religion.</p> - -<p>Further than this there is no need to pursue its -career until, with wholly changed fortunes, we meet -it as a tolerated religion under a so-called Christian -Emperor. The object in tracing it thus far is to -indicate how enthusiasts, thus filled with an anti-worldly -spirit, would become and remain an arresting -force against the advance of inquiry and, therefore, -of knowledge; and how, as their religion gathered -power, and itself became worldly in policy, it would -the more strongly assert supremacy over the reason. -For intellectual activity would lead to inquiry into -the claims and authority of the Church, and inquiry, -therefore, was the thing to be proscribed. Then, -too, the committal of the floating biographies of -Jesus to written form, and their grouping, with the -letters of the apostles, into one more or less complete -collection, to be afterward called the New -Testament (a collection held to embrace, as the -theory of inspiration became formulated, all that it -is needful for man to know), would create a further -barrier against intellectual activity. Then, as Christianity -came into nearer touch with the enfeebled -remnants of Greek philosophy, and with other foreign -influences shaping its dogmas, discussions about<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span> -the person of Christ became active. The simple fluent -creed of the early Christians took rigid form in -the subtleties of the Nicene Creed, and as “Very -God of Very God” the final appeal was, logically, to -the words of Jesus. Hence another barrier against -inquiry.</p> - -<p>Conflict has never arisen on the ethical sayings -of Jesus, which, making allowance for the impracticableness -of a few, place him high among the sages -of antiquity. Comparing their teaching with his, it -is easy to group together maxims which do not yield -to the more famous examples in the Sermon on the -Mount as guides to conduct, or as inspiration to -high ideals. The “golden rule” is anticipated by -Plato’s “Thou shalt not take that which is mine, -and may I do to others as I would that they should -do to me” (Jowett’s translation, v, p. 483). And -it is paralleled by Isocrates, a contemporary of Plato, -in those words spoken by the King Nicocles when -addressing his governors, “You should be to others -what you think I should be to you.” But if there was -nothing new in what Jesus taught, there was freshness -in the method. Conflict is waged only over -statements the nature and limits of which might be -expected from the place and age when they were -delivered. They who hold that Jesus was God the -Son Eternal, and therefore incapable of error, may -reconcile, as best they can with this, his belief in the -mischievous delusions of his time. If they say that -so much of this as may be reported in the records of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span> -his life are spurious, they throw the whole contents -of the gospels into the melting-pot of criticism.</p> - -<p>Taking the narratives as we have them, documents -stamped with the hall-mark of the centuries, -“declaring,” as a body of clergymen proclaimed recently, -“incontrovertibly the actual historical truth -in all records, both of past events, and of the delivery -of predictions to be thereafter fulfilled,” we learn -that Jesus accepted the accuracy of the sacred writings -of his people; that he spoke of Moses as the -author of the Pentateuch; that he referred to its legends -as dealing with historical persons, and as reporting -actual events. All these beliefs are refuted -by the critical scholarship of to-day. We need not -go to Germany for the verdict; it is indorsed by -eminent Hebraists, officials of the Church of England. -Canon Driver, Professor of Hebrew at Oxford, -says that “like other people, the Jews formed -theories to account for the beginnings of the earth -and man”; that “they either did this for themselves, -or borrowed from their neighbours,” and that “of -the theories current in Assyria and Phoenicia fragments -have been preserved which exhibit parts of -resemblance to the Bible narratives sufficient to warrant -the inference that both are derived from the -same cycle of traditions.” If, therefore, the cosmogonic -and other legends are inspired, so must also -the common original of these and their corresponding -stories be inspired. The matter might be pursued -through the patriarchal age to the eve of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span> -Exodus, showing that, here also, the mythical element -is dominant; the existence of Abraham himself -dissolving in the solution of the “higher criticism.” -As to the Pentateuch, the larger number of -scholars place its composition, in the form in which -we have it—older documents being blended therein—about -the sixth and fifth centuries <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span></p> - -<p>Jesus spoke of the earth as if it were flat, and -the most important among the heavenly bodies. -Knowledge of the active speculations that went on -centuries before his time on the Ionian seaboard; -prevision of what secrets men would wrest from the -stars centuries hence—of neither did he dream. That -Homer and Virgil had sung; that Plato had discoursed; -that Buddha had founded a religion with -which his, when Western activity met Eastern passivity, -would vainly compete; these, and aught else -that had moved the great world without, were unknown -to the Syrian teacher.</p> - -<p>Jesus believed in an arch-fiend, who was permitted -by Omnipotence, the Omnipotence against -which he had rebelled, to set loose countless numbers -of evil spirits to work havoc on men and animals. -Jesus also believed in a hell of eternal torment -for the wicked; and in a heaven of unending -happiness for the good. There is no surer index of -the intellectual stage of any people than the degree -in which belief in the supernatural, and, especially -in the activity of supernatural agents, rules their lives. -The lower we descend, the more detailed and familiar<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span> -is the assumption of knowledge of the behaviour -of these agents, and of the nature of the places they -come from or haunt. Of this, mediæval speculations -on demonology, and modern books of anthropology, -supply any number of examples. Here we are concerned -only with the momentous fact that belief in -demoniacal activity pervades the New Testament -from beginning to end, and, therefore, gave the warrant -for the unspeakable cruelties with which that -belief has stained the annals of Christendom. John -Wesley was consistent when he wrote that “Giving -up the belief in witchcraft was in effect giving up -the Bible,” and it may be added that giving up belief -in the devil is giving up belief in the atonement—the -central doctrine of the Christian faith. To this -the early Christians would have subscribed: so, also, -would the great Augustine, who said that “nothing -is to be accepted save on the authority of Scripture, -since greater is that authority than all the powers -of the human mind”; so would all who have followed -him in ancient confessions of the faith. It is only -the amorphous form of that faith which, lingering -on, anæmic and boneless, denies by evasion.</p> - -<p>But they who abandon belief in maleficent demons -and in witches; as also, for this follows, in beneficent -agents, as angels; land themselves in serious -dilemma. For to this are such committed. If Jesus, -who came “that he might destroy the works of the -devil,” and who is reported, among other proofs of -his divine ministry, to have cast out demons from<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span> -“possessed” human beings, and, in one case, to -have permitted a crowd of the infernal agents to -enter into a herd of swine; if he verily believed that -he actually did these things; and if it be true that the -belief is a superstition limited to the ignorant or -barbaric mind; <i>what value can be attached to any statement -that Jesus is reported to have made about a spiritual -world?</i></p> - -<p>Here then (1) in the attitude of the early Christians -toward all mundane affairs as of no moment -compared with those affecting their souls’ salvation; -(2) in the assumed authority of Scripture as a full -revelation of both earthly and heavenly things; and -(3) in the assumed infallibility of the words of Jesus -reported therein; we have three factors which suffice -to explain why the great movement toward discovery -of the orderly relations of phenomena was -arrested for centuries, and theories of capricious government -of the universe sheltered and upheld.</p> - -<p>While, as has been said, the unity of the Empire -secured Christianity its fortunate start; the multiform -elements of which the Empire was made up—philosophic -and pagan—being gradually absorbed -by Christianity, secured it acceptance among the -different subject-peoples. The break up of the Empire -secured its supremacy.</p> - -<p>The absorption of foreign ideas and practices by -Christianity, largely through the influence of Hellenic -Jews, was an added cause of arrest of inquiry. -The adoption of pagan rites and customs, resting,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span> -as these did, on a bedrock of barbarism, dragged it -to a lower level. The intrusion of philosophic subtleties -led to terms being mistaken for explanations: -as Gibbon says, “the pride of the professors and of -their disciples was satisfied with the science of -words.” The inchoate and mobile character of Christianity -during the first three centuries gave both influences—pagan -and philosophic—their opportunity. -For long years the converts scattered throughout the -Empire were linked together, in more or less regular -federation, by the acknowledgment of Christ as Lord, -and by the expectation of his second coming. There -was no official priesthood, only overseers—“episkopoi”—for -social purposes, who made no claims -to apostolic succession; no formulated set of doctrines; -no Apostles’ Creed; no dogmas of baptismal -regeneration or of the real presence; no worship or -apotheosis of Mary as the Mother of God; no worship -of saints or relics.</p> - -<p><i>On the philosophic side</i>, it was the Greek influence -in the person of the more educated converts that -shaped the dogmas of the Church and sought to -blend them with the occult and mysterious elements -in Oriental systems, of which modern “Theosophy” -is the tenuous parody. That old Greek habit of asking -questions, of seeking to reach the reason of -things, which, as has been seen, gave the great impulse -to scientific inquiry, was as active as ever. -Appeals to the Old Testament touched not the Greek -as they did the Jewish Christian, and the Canon of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span> -the New Testament was as yet unsettled. Strange -as it may seem in view of the assumed divine origin -of the Gospels and Epistles, human judgment took -upon itself to decide which of them were, and which -were not, an integral part of supernatural revelation. -The ultimate verdict, so far as the Western Church -was concerned, was delivered by the Council of -Carthage in the early part of the fifth century. There -arose a school of Apologists, founders of theology, -who, to quote Gibbon, “equipped the Christian religion -for the conquest of the Roman world by -changing it into a philosophy, attested by Revelation. -They mingled together the metaphysics of -Platonism, the doctrine of the Logos, which came -from the Stoics, morality partly Platonic, partly -Stoic, methods of argument and interpretation learnt -from Philo, with the pregnant maxims of Jesus and -the religious language of the Christian congregations.” -Thus the road was opened for additions to -dogmatic theology, doctrines of the Trinity, of the -Virgin Birth, and whatever else could be inferentially -extracted from the Scriptures, and blended with foreign -ideas. The growing complexity of creed called -for interpretation of it, and this obviously fell to the -overseers or bishops, chosen for their special gifts -of “the grace of the truth.” These met, as occasion -required, to discuss subjects affecting the faith and -discipline of the several groups. Among such, precedence, -as a matter of course, would be accorded to -the overseer of the most important Christian society<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span> -in the Empire; and hence the prominence and authority, -from an early period, of the bishop of Rome. -In the simple and business-like act of his election as -chairman of the gatherings lay the germ of the audacious -and preposterous claims of the Papacy.</p> - -<p><i>On the pagan side</i>, the course of development is -not so easily traced. To determine when and where -this or that custom or rite arose is now impossible; -indeed, we may say, without exaggeration, that it -never arose at all, because the conditions for its -adoption were present throughout in human tendencies. -The first Christian disciples were Jews: and -the ritual which they followed was the direct outcome -of ideas common to all barbaric religions, so that -certain of the pagan rites and ceremonies with which -they came in contact in all parts of the Empire fitted -in with custom, tradition, and desire. And this applies, -with stronger force, to the converts scattered -from Edessa, east of the Euphrates, to the Empire’s -westernmost limits in Britain. Moreover, we know -that a policy of adaptation and conciliation wisely -governed the ruling minds of the Church, in whom, -stripped of all the verbiage about them as semi-inspired -successors of the apostles, there was deep-seated -superstition. Paganism might, in its turn, be -suppressed by Imperial edict, but it had too much -in common with the later forms of Christianity not -to survive in fact, however changed in name.</p> - -<p>It may be taken as a truism that in the ceremonies -of the higher religions there are no inventions,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span> -only survivals. This fact sent thinkers like -Hobbes, and dealers in literary antiquities of the type -of Burton, Bishop Newton, and, notablest of all, -Conyers Middleton, on the search after parallels, -which have received astonishing confirmation in our -day. Burton sees the mimicry of the “arch-deceiver -in the strange sacraments, the priests, and the sacrifices,” -as the Romanist missionaries to Tibet saw -the same diabolical parody of their rites in Buddhist -temples. But Hobbes, with the sagacity which might -be expected of him, recognises the continuity of -ideas: “<i>mutato nomine tantum;</i> Venus and Cupid -(Hobbes might have added Isis and Horus) appearing -as ‘the Virgin Mary and her Sonne,’ and the -<span title="Apothôsis"><i>Αποθέωσις</i></span> of the Heathen surviving in the Canonization -of Saints. The carrying of the Popes ‘by -Switzers under a Canopie’ is a ‘Relique of the Divine -Honours given to Cæsar’; the carriage of -Images in <i>Procession</i> ‘a Relique of the Greeks and -Romans.’ ... ‘The Heathen had also their <i>Aqua -Lustralis</i>, that is to say, <i>Holy Water</i>. The Church -of Rome imitates them also in their <i>Holy Dayes</i>. -They had their <i>Bacchanalia</i>, and we have our <i>Wakes</i> -answering to them; They their <i>Saturnalia</i>, and we -our Carnevalls and Shrove-tuesdays liberty of Servants; -They their Procession of Priapus, we our -fetching-in, erection, and dancing about <i>May-Poles;</i> -and Dancing is one kind of worship; They had their -Procession called <i>Ambarvalia</i>, and we our Procession -about the Fields in the <i>Rogation week</i>.’”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span></p> - -<p>Middleton examined the matter on the spot, and -in his celebrated Letter from Rome gives numerous -examples of “an exact <span class="smcap">Conformity</span> between <span class="smcap">Popery</span> -and <span class="smcap">Paganism</span>.” Since few read his book now-a-days, -some of these may be cited, because their presence -goes far to explain why the conglomerate religion -which Christianity had become was proof -against ideas spurned alike by pagans and ecclesiastics. -Visiting the place for classical study, and “not -to notice the fopperies and ridiculous ceremonies of -the present Religion,” Middleton soon found himself -“still in old Heathen Rome,” with its rituals of primitive -Paganism, as if handed down by an uninterrupted -succession from the priests of old to the -priests of new Rome. The “smoak of the incense” -in the churches transports him to the temple of the -Paphian Venus described by Virgil (Æneid, I, 420); -the surpliced boy waiting on the priest with the thurible -reminds him of sculptures on ancient bas-reliefs -representing heathen sacrifice, with a white-clad attendant -on a priest holding a little chest or box in -his hand. The use of holy water suggests numerous -parallels. At the entrance to Pagan temples -stood vases of holy liquid, a mixture of salt and -common water; and, on bas-reliefs, the aspergillum -or brush for the ceremony of sprinkling is carved. -In the annual festival of the benediction of horses, -when the animals were sent to the convent of St. -Anthony to be sprinkled (Middleton had his own -horses thus blest “for about eighteenpence of our<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span> -money”) there is the survival of a ceremony in the -Circensian games. In the lamps and wax candles -before the shrines of the Madonna and Saints he is -reminded of a passage in Herodotus as to the use of -lights in the Egyptian temples, while we know that -lamps to the Madonna took the place of those before -the images of the Lares, whose chapels stood at the -corners of the streets. The Synod of Elviri (305 <span class="smcap lower">A. D.</span>) -forbade the lighting of wax candles during the day -in cemeteries lest the spirits of the saints should be -disquieted, but the custom was too deeply rooted -to be abolished. As for votive offerings, Middleton -truly says that “no one <i>custom of antiquity</i> is so frequently -mentioned by all their writers” ... “but -the most common of all <i>offerings</i> were <i>pictures</i> representing -the history of the miraculous cure or deliverance -vouchsafed upon the vow of the donor.” Of -which offerings, the <i>blessed Virgin</i> is so sure always -to carry off the greatest share, that it may be truly -said of her what <i>Juvenal</i> says of the <i>Goddess Isis</i>, -whose religion was at that time in the greatest vogue in -<i>Rome</i>, that the “<i>painters got their livelihood out of her</i>.” -Middleton tells the story from Cicero which, not -without covert sympathy, Montaigne quotes in his -Essay on Prognostications. Diagoras, surnamed -the Atheist, being found one day in a temple, was -thus addressed by a friend: “You, who think the -gods take no care of human affairs, do not you see -here by this number of pictures how many people, -for the sake of their vows, have been saved in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span> -storms at sea, and got safe into harbour?” “Yes,” -answered Diagoras, “I see how it is; for those are -never painted who happen to be drowned.” There -is nothing new under the sun. Horace (Odes, Bk. -I, v) tells of the shipwrecked sailor who hung up -his clothes as a thank-offering in the temple of the -sea-god who had preserved him; Polydorus Vergilius, -who lived in the early part of the sixteenth -century, that is, some 1,500 years after Horace, describes -the classic custom of <i>ex voto</i> offerings at -length, while Pennant the antiquary, describing the -well of Saint Winifred in Flintshire in the last century, -tells of the votive offerings, in the shape of -crutches and other objects, which were hung about -it. To this day the store is receiving additions. The -sick crowd thither as of old they crowded into the -temples of Æsculapius and Serapis; mothers bring -their sick children as in Imperial Rome they took -them to the Temple of Romulus and Remus. A -draught of water from the basin near the bath, or -a plunge in the bath itself, is followed by prayers at -the altar of the chapel which incloses the well. When -the saint’s feast-day is held, the afflicted gather to -kiss the reliquary that holds her bones. Perhaps -one of the most pathetic sights in Catholic churches, -especially in out-of-the-way villages, is the altars on -which are hung votive offerings, rude daubs depicting -the disease or danger from which the worshipper -has been delivered.</p> - -<p>As to the images, tricked out in curious robes<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span> -and gewgaws, Middleton “could not help recollecting -the picture which old Homer draws of <i>Q. Hecuba -of Troy</i>, prostrating herself before the <i>miraculous -Image of Pallas</i>,” while his wonder at the Loretto -image of the “Queen of Heaven” with “a face as -black as a Negus” reminds him of the reference in -Baruch to the idols black with the “perpetual smoak -of lamps and incense.” In his Hibbert Lectures Professor -Rhys refers to churches dedicated to Notre -Dame in virtue of legends of discovery of images of -the Virgin on the spot. These were usually of wood, -which had turned black in the soil. Such a black -“Madonna” was found near Grenoble, in the commune -of La Zouche. Then, in the titles of the new -deities, Middleton correctly sees those of the old. -The Queen of Heaven reminds him of Astarte or -Mylitta; the Divine Mother of the Magna Mater, -the “great mother” of Oriental cults. In other attributes -of Mary, lineal descendant of Isis, there survive -those of Venus, Lucina, Cybele, or Maria. He -gives amusing examples of myths and misreadings -through which certain “saints” have a place in the -Roman Calendar. He apparently knew nothing of the -strange confusion by which Buddha appears therein -under the title of Saint Josaphat; but he tells how, by -misinterpretation of a boundary stone, Proefectus Viarum, -an overseer of highways, became S. Viar; how -S. Veronica secured canonization through a blunder -over the words Vera Icon: still more droll, how hagiology -includes both a mountain and a mantle!<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span></p> - -<p>The marks of hands or feet on rocks, said to be -made by the apparition of some saint or angel, call -to mind “the impression of Hercules’ feet on a stone -in Scythia”; the picture of the Virgin, which came -from heaven, suggests the descent of Numa’s shield -“from the clouds”; that of the weeping Madonna -the statue of Apollo, which Livy says wept for three -successive days and nights; while the periodical -miracle of the liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius -is obviously paralleled in the incidents named -by Horace on his journey to Brundusium, when the -priests of the temple at Gnatia sought to persuade -him that “the frankincense used to dissolve and melt -miraculously without the help of fire” (Sat., v, 97-100).</p> - -<p>Middleton, and those of his school, thought that -they were near primary formations when they struck -on these suggestive classic or pagan parallels to -Christian belief and custom. But in truth they had -probed a comparatively recent layer; since, far beneath, -lay the unsuspected prehistoric deposits of -barbaric ideas which are coincident with, and composed -of, man’s earliest speculations about himself -and his surroundings. When, however, we borrow -an illustration from geology, it must be remembered -that our divisions, like those into which the strata of -the globe are separated, are artificial. There is no -real detachment. The difference between former and -present methods of research is that nowadays we -have gone further down for discovery of the common<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span> -materials of which barbaric, pagan, and civilized -ideas are compounded. They arise in the comparison -which exists in the savage mind between the living -and the non-living, and in the attribution of like -qualities to things superficially resembling one another; -hence belief in their efficacy, which takes -active form in what may be generally termed magic. -For example, the rite of baptism is explained when -we connect it with barbaric lustrations and water-worship -generally; as also that of the Eucharist by -reference to sacrificial feasts in honour of the gods; -feasts at which they were held to be both the eaters -and the eaten. Middleton, himself a clergyman, -shows perplexity when watching the elevation of the -host at mass. He lacked that knowledge of the -origin of sacramental rites which study of barbaric -customs has since supplied. In Mr. Frazer’s Golden -Bough, the “central idea” of which is “the conception -of the slain god,” he shows at what an early -stage in his speculations man formulated the conception -of deity incarnated in himself, or in plant or animal, -and as afterward slain, both the incarnation and -the death being for the benefit of mankind. The -god is his own sacrifice, and in perhaps the most -striking form, as insisted upon by Mr. Frazer, he is, -as corn-spirit, killed in the person of his representative; -the passage in this mode of incarnation to the -custom of eating bread sacramentally being obvious. -The fundamental idea of this sacramental act, as -the mass of examples collected by Mr. Frazer further<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span> -goes to show, is that by eating a thing its physical -and mental qualities are acquired. So the barbaric -mind reasons, and extends the notion to all -beings. To quote Mr. Frazer: “By eating the body -of the god he shares in the god’s attributes and powers. -And when the god is a corn-god, the corn is -his proper body; when he is a vine-god, the juice -of the grape is his blood; and so by eating the bread -and drinking the wine the worshipper partakes of -the real body and blood of his god. Thus the drinking -of wine in the rites of a vine-god like Dionysus is -not an act of revelry; it is a solemn sacrament.” -It is, perhaps, needless to point out that the same -explanation applies to the rites attaching to Demeter, -or to add what further parallels are suggested -in the belief that Dionysus was slain, rose again, and -descended into Hades to bring up his mother Semele -from the dead. This, however, by the way. What -has to be emphasized is, that in the quotation just -given we have transubstantiation clearly anticipated -as the barbaric idea of eating the god. In proof of -the underlying continuity of that idea two witnesses—Catholic -and Protestant—may be cited.</p> - -<p>The Church of Rome, and in this the Greek -Church is at one therewith, thus defines the term -transubstantiation in the Canon of the Council of -Trent:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“If any one shall say that in the most holy sacrament of -the Eucharist there remains the substance of bread and wine -together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span> -and shall deny that wonderful and singular conversion of the -whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole -substance of the wine into the blood, the species of bread and -wine alone remaining—which conversion the Catholic Church -most fittingly calls Transubstantiation—let him be anathema.”</p></div> - -<p>The Church of England, through the medium of -a letter to a well-known newspaper, the British -Weekly (29th August, 1895), supplies the following -illustration of the position of its “High” section, -and this, it is interesting to note, from the church -of which Mr. Gladstone’s son is rector, and in which -the distinguished statesman himself often reads the -lessons:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“A few Sundays ago—8 o’clock celebration of Holy Communion. -Rector, officiating minister (Hawarden Church).</p> - -<p>“When the point was reached for the communicants to -partake, cards containing a hymn to be sung after Communion -were distributed among the congregation. This hymn opened -with the following couplet:—</p> - -<div class="centered"><div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">Jesu, mighty Saviour,<br /></span> -<span class="i0">Thou art <i>in</i> us now.<br /></span> -</div></div></div> - -<p>And my attention was arrested by an asterisk referring to a -footnote. The word ‘in,’ in the second line, was printed in -italics, and the note intimated that those who had <i>not</i> communicated -should sing ‘<i>with</i>’ instead of ‘<i>in</i>,’ i. e. those who had -taken the consecrated elements to sing ‘Thou art <i>in</i> us now,’ -and those who had not, to sing ‘Thou art <i>with</i> us now.’”</p></div> - -<p>Whether, therefore, the cult be barbaric or civilized, -we find theory and practice identical. The god -is eaten so that the communicant thereby becomes -a “partaker of the divine nature.”</p> - -<p>In the gestures denoting <i>sacerdotal benediction</i> we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span> -have probably an old form of averting the evil eye; -in the act of <i>breathing</i> on a bishop at the service of -consecration there was the survival of belief in transference -of spiritual qualities, the soul being, as language -evidences, well-nigh universally identified with -breath. The modern spiritualist who describes apparitions -as having the “consistency of cigar-smoke,” -is one with the Congo negroes who leave the house -of the dead unswept for a time lest the dust should -injure the delicate substance of the ghost. The inhaling -of the last breath of the dying Roman by his -nearest kinsman has parallel in the breathing of the -risen Jesus on his disciples that they might receive the -Holy Ghost (John xx, 22). In the offering of <i>prayers -for the dead;</i> in the <i>canonization</i> and <i>intercession</i> of -<i>saints;</i> in the <i>prayers</i> and <i>offerings</i> at the <i>shrines of -the Virgin</i> and <i>saints</i>, and at the <i>graves of martyrs;</i> -there are the manifold forms of that great cult of the -departed which is found throughout the world. To -this may be linked the <i>belief in angels</i>, whether good -or bad, or guardian, because the element common -to the whole is animistic, the peopling of the heavens -above, as well as the earth beneath, with an innumerable -company of spiritual beings influencing the destinies -of men. Well might Jews and Moslems reproach -the Christians, as they did down to the eighth -century, with having filled the world with more gods -than they had overthrown in the pagan temples; -while we have Erasmus, in his Encomium Moriae, -when reciting the names and functions of saints, adding<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span> -that “as many things as we wish, so many gods -have we made.” Closely related to this group of -beliefs is the <i>adoration of relics</i>, the vitality of which -has springs too deep in human nature to be wholly -abolished, whether we carry about us a lock from -the hair of some dead loved one, or read of the fragments -of saints or martyrs which lie beneath every -Catholic altar, or of the skull-bones of his ancestor -which the savage carries about with him as a charm. -Then there is the long list of <i>church festivals</i>, the -reference of which to pagan prototypes is but one -step toward their ultimate explanation in nature-worship; -there are the <i>processions</i> which are the successors -of Corybantic frenzies, and, more remotely, -of savage dances and other forms of excitation; -there is that now somewhat casual belief in the -<i>Second Advent</i> which is a member of the widespread -group wherein human hopes fix eyes on the return -of long-sleeping heroes; of Arthur and Olger Dansk, -of Väinämöinen and Quetzalcoatl, of Charlemagne -and Barbarossa, of the lost Marko of Servia and the -lost King Sebastian. We speak of it as “casual,” -because among the two hundred and eighty-odd sects -scheduled in Whitaker’s Almanack the curious in -such inquiries will note only three distinctive bodies -of Adventists.</p> - -<p>All changes in popular belief have been, and, -practically, remain superficial; the old animism pervades -the higher creeds. In our own island, for example, -the Celtic and pre-Celtic paganism remained<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span> -unleavened by the old Roman religion. The legions -took back to Rome the gods which they brought with -them. The names of Mithra and Serapis occur on -numerous tablets, the worship of the one—that “Sol -invictus” whose birthday at the winter solstice became -(see p. <a href="#Page_42">42</a>) the anniversary of the birth of -Christ—had ranged as far west as South Wales and -Northumberland; while the foundations of a temple -to the other have been unearthed at York. The chief -Celtic gods, in virtue of common attributes as elemental -nature-deities, were identified with certain -<i>dii majores</i> of the Roman pantheon, and the <i>deae -matres</i> equated with the gracious or malevolent spirits -of the indigenous faith. But the old names were not -displaced. Neither did the earlier Christian missionaries -effect any organic change in popular beliefs, -while, during the submergence of Christianity under -waves of barbaric invasion, there were infused into -the old religion kindred elements from oversea which -gave it yet more vigorous life. The eagle penetration -of Gibbon detected this persistent element at -work when he described the sequel to the futile efforts -of Theodosius to extirpate paganism. The ancestor -worship which lay at the core of much of it took -shape among the Christianized pagans in the worship -of martyrs and in the scramble after their relics. -The bodies of prophets and apostles were discovered -by the strangest coincidences, and transported to the -churches by the Tiber and the Bosphorus, and although -the supply of these more important remains<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span> -was soon exhausted, there was no limit to the production -of relics of their person or belongings, as -of filings from the chains of S. Peter, and from the -gridiron of S. Lawrence. The catacombs yielded -any number of the bodies of martyrs, and Rome became -a huge manufactory to meet the demands for -wonder-working relics from every part of Christendom. -A sceptical feeling might be aroused at the -claims of a dozen abbeys to possession of the veritable -crown of thorns wherewith the majesty of the -suffering Christ was mocked, but it was silenced before -the numerous fragments of his cross, since ingenuity -has computed that this must have contained -at least one hundred and eighty million cubic millemetres, -whereas the total cubic volume of all the -known relics is but five millions. “It must,” remarks -Gibbon (Decline and Fall, end of chap. xxviii), -“ingeniously be confessed that the ministers of the -Catholic Church imitated the profane model which -they were impotent to destroy. The most respectable -bishops had persuaded themselves that the ignorant -rustics would more cheerfully renounce the -superstitions of paganism if they found some resemblance, -some compensation, in the bosom of Christianity. -The religion of Constantine achieved, in less -than a century, the final conquest of the Roman Empire, -but the victors themselves were insensibly subdued -by the arts of their vanquished rivals.”</p> - -<p>Enough has been said on a topic to which prominence -has been given because it brings into fuller<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span> -relief the fact that in a religion for which its apologists -claim divine origin and guidance “to the end of -the world” we have the same intrusion of the rites -and customs of lower cults which marks other advanced -faiths. Hence, science and superstition being -deadly foes, the explanation of that hostile attitude -toward inquiry and that dread of its results which -marked Christianity down to modern times. While -the intrusion of corrupting elements presents difficulties -which the theory of the supernatural history -of Christianity alone creates, it accords with all that -might be predicted of a religion whose success was -due to its early escape from the narrow confines of -Judaism; and to its fortunate contact with the enterprising -peoples to whom the civilization of Europe -and the New World is due.</p> - - -<h3>2. <i>From Augustine to Lord Bacon.</i></h3> - -<p class="st">A. D. 400-A. D. 1600.</p> - -<p>The foregoing slight outline of the causes which -operated for centuries against the freedom of the -human mind will render it needless to follow the -history of the development of Christian polity and -dogma—the temporalizing of the one, and the crystallizing -of the other. Yet one prominent actor in -that history demands a brief notice, because of the -influence which his teaching wielded from the fifth -to the fifteenth centuries. The annals of the churches -in Africa, along whose northern shores Christianity -had spread early and rapidly, yield notable names,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span> -but none so distinguished as that of Augustine, -Bishop of Hippo from 395 to 430 <span class="smcap lower">A. D.</span> This greatest -of the Fathers of the Church sought, as has been -remarked already, to bring the system of Aristotle, -the greatest of ancient naturalists, into line with -Christian theology. His range of study was well-nigh -as wide as that of the famous Stagirite, but -we are here concerned only with so much of it as -bears on an attempt to graft the development theory -on the dogma of special creation. Augustine, accepting -the Old Testament cosmogony as a revelation, -believed that the world was created out of nothing, -but, this initial paradox accepted, he argued -that God had endowed matter with certain powers -of self-development which left free the operation of -natural causes in the production of plants and animals. -With this, however, as already noted, he held, -with preceding philosophers and with his fellow-theologians, -the doctrine of spontaneous generation. -It explained to him the existence of apparently purposeless -creatures, as flies, frogs, mice, etc. “Certain -very small animals,” he says, “may not have -been created on the fifth and sixth days, but may -have originated later from putrefying matter.” Not -till the seventeenth century did the experiments of -Redi refute a doctrine which had held part of the -biological field for above two thousand years, and -which still has adherents. Of course Augustine, as -do modern Catholic biologists, excepted man from -the operation of secondary causes, and held that his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span> -soul was created by the direct intervention of the -Creator. Augustine’s concessions are, therefore, -more seeming than real, and, moreover, we find him -denying the existence of the antipodes on the ground -that Scripture is silent about them, and also, that if -God had placed any races there, they could not see -Christ descending at his second coming. To Augustine -the air was full of devils who are the cause of -“all diseases of Christians.” In other words, he was -not ahead of the illusions of his age. Then, too, -he shows that allegorizing spirit which was manifest -in Greece a thousand years earlier; the spirit which -reads hidden meanings in Homer, in Horace, and in -Omar Khayyám; and which, in the hands of present-day -Gnostics, mostly fantastic or illiterate cabalists, -converts the plain narratives of Old and New Testaments -into vehicles of mysterious types and esoteric -symbols. It is in such allegorical vein that Augustine -explains the outside and inside pitching of the -ark as typifying the safety of the Church from the -leaking-in of heresy; while the ghastly application -of symbolical exegetics is seen in his citation of the -words of Jesus, “Compel them to come in,” as a Divine -warrant for the slaughter of heretics.</p> - -<p>We shall meet with no other such commanding -figure in Church history till nine hundred years have -passed, when Thomas Aquinas, the “Angel of the -Schools,” appears, but although that period marks -no advance of the Church from her central position, -it witnessed changes in her fortune through the intrusion<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span> -of a strange people into her territory and -sanctuaries.</p> - -<p> </p> - -<p>Perhaps there are few events in history more -impressive than the conversion of the wild and ignorant -Arab tribes of the seventh century from stone-worship -to monotheism. The series of conquests -which followed had also, as an indirect and unforeseen -result, effects of vast importance in the revival -and spread of Greek culture from the Tigris to the -Guadalquivir. It is not easy, neither does the inquiry -fall within our present purpose, to discover the -special impulses which led Mohammed, the leader -of the movement, to preach a new faith whose one -creed, stripped of all subtleties, was the unity of God. -Large numbers of Jews and Christians had settled -in Arabia long before his time, and he had become -acquainted with the narrowness of the one, and with -the causes of the wranglings of the other, riven, as -these last-named were, into sects quarrelling over -the nature of the Person of Christ. These, and the -fetichism of his fellow-countrymen, may, perhaps, -have impelled him to start a crusade the mandate -for which he, in fanatic impulse, believed came from -heaven. The result is well known. The hitherto -untamed nomads became the eager instruments of -the prophet. Under his leadership, and that of the -able Khalifs who succeeded him, the flag of Islam -was carried from East to West, till within one hundred -years of the flight of Mohammed from Mecca<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span> -(622 <span class="smcap lower">A. D.</span>) it waved from the Indian Ocean to the -Atlantic. With the conquest of Syria there was -achieved one of the greatest and most momentous of -triumphs in the capture of Jerusalem, and the seizure -of sites sanctified to Christians by association -with the crucifixion, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. -Only a few years before (614 <span class="smcap lower">A. D.</span>), the holy city had -been taken by Chosroes; the sacred buildings raised -over the venerated tomb had been burned, and the -cross—a spurious relic—carried off by the Persian -king. These places have been, as it were, the cockpit -of Christendom from the time of the siege of Jerusalem -under Titus to that of the Crimean war, when -blood was spilt like water in a conflict stirred by -squabbles between Latin and Greek Christians over -possession of the key of the Church of the Nativity -at Bethlehem. In the Church of the Holy Sepulchre -these sectaries are still kept from flying at one another’s -throats by the muskets of Mohammedan soldiers.</p> - -<p>The Arabian conquest of Persia followed that of -Syria. The turn of Egypt soon came, the city of -Alexandria being taken in 640, seven years after -the prophets’ death. Since the loss of Greek freedom, -and the decay of intellectual life at Athens, -that renowned place had become, notably under the -Ptolemies, the chief home of science and philosophy. -Through the propagandism of Christianity among -the Hellenized Jews, of whom, as of Greeks, large -numbers had settled there, it was also the birthplace<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span> -of dogmatic theology, and, therefore, the fountain -whence welled the controversies whose logomachies -were the gossip of the streets of Constantinople and -the cause of bloody persecution. After a few years’ -pause, the Saracens (Ar., <i>sharkiin</i>, orientals) resumed -their conquering march. They captured and burnt -Carthage, another famous centre of Christianity, and -then crossed over to Spain. In “the fair and fertile -isle of Andalusia” the Gothic king Roderick was -aroused from his luxurious life in Toledo to lead his -army in gallant, but vain, attempt to repel the infidel -invaders. So rapid was their advance that in -six years they had subdued the whole of Spain, the -north and northwestern portions excepted, for the -hardy Basque mountaineers maintained their independence -against the Arabs, as they had maintained -it against Celt, Roman, and Goth. Only before the -walls of Tours did the invaders meet with a rebuff -from Charles Martel and his Franks, which arrested -their advance in Western Europe; as, in a more momentous -defeat before Constantinople by Leo III. -in 718, fourteen years earlier, the torrent of Mohammedan -conquest was first checked.</p> - -<p>Enough, however, of Saracenic wars and their -destructive work, which, if tradition lies not, included -the burning of the remnants of the vast -Alexandrian library. “A revealed dogma is always -opposed to the free research that may contradict it,” -and Islam has ever been a worse foe to science than -Christianity. Its association, as a religion, with the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span> -renaissance of knowledge, was as wholly accidental -as the story of it is interesting.</p> - -<p>Under the Sassanian kings, Persia had become an -active centre of intellectual life, reaching the climax -of its Augustan age in the reign of Chosroes. Jew, -Greek, and Christian alike had welcome at his court, -and translations of the writings of the Indian sages -completed the eclecticism of that enlightened monarch. -Then came the ruthless Arab, and philosophy -and science were eclipsed. But with the advent of -the Abbaside Khalifs, who number the famous -Haroun al-Raschid among them, there came revival -of the widest toleration, and consequent return of -intellectual activity. Baghdad arose as the seat of -empire. Situated on the high road of Oriental commerce, -along which travelled foreign ideas and foreign -culture, that city became also the Oxford of her -time. Arabic was the language of the conquerors, -and into that poetic, but unphilosophic, tongue, -Greek philosophy and science were rendered. Under -the rule of those Khalifs, says Renan, “nontolerant, -nonreluctant persecutors,” free thought developed; -the <i>Motecallenim</i> or “disputants” held debates, where -all religions were examined in the light of reason. -Aristotle, Euclid, Galen, and Ptolemy were text-books -in the colleges, the repute of whose teachers -brought to Baghdad and Naishapur (dear to lovers -of “old” Khayyám) students westward from Spain, -and eastward from Transoxiana.</p> - -<p>“Arab” philosophy, therefore, is only a name.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span> -It has been well described as “a system of Greek -thought expressed in a Semitic tongue; and modified -by Oriental influences called into existence by the -patronage of the more liberal princes, and kept alive -by the zeal of a small band of thinkers.” In the -main, it began and ended with the study of Aristotle, -commentaries on whom became the chief work of -scholars, at whose head stands the great name of -Averroes. Through these—a handful of Jews and -Moslems—knowledge of Greek science, of astronomy, -algebra, chemistry, and medicine, was carried -into Western Europe. By the latter half of the tenth -century, one hundred and fifty years after the translation -of Aristotle into Arabic, Spain had become -no mean rival of Baghdad and Cairo. Schools were -founded; colleges to which the Girton girls of the -period could repair to learn mathematics and history -were set up by lady principals; manufactures and -agriculture were encouraged; and lovely and stately -palaces and mosques beautified Seville, Cordova, Toledo, -and Granada, which last-named city the far-famed -Alhâmra or Red Fortress still overlooks. -Seven hundred years before there was a public lamp -in London, and when Paris was a town of swampy -roadways bordered by windowless dwellings, Cordova -had miles of well-lighted, well-paved streets; -and the constant use of the bath by the “infidel” -contrasted with the saintly filth and rags which were -the pride of flesh-mortifying devotees and the outward -and odorous signs of their religion. The pages<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span> -of our dictionaries evidence in familiar mathematical -and chemical terms; in the names of the principal -“fixed” stars; and in the words “admiral” and -“chemise”; the influence of the “Arab” in science, -war, and dress.</p> - -<p>It forms no part of our story to tell how feuds -between rival dynasties and rival sects of Islam, -becoming more acute as time went on, enabled Christianity -to recover lost ground, and, in the capture -of Granada in 1492, to put an end to Moorish rule -in Spain. Before that event, a knowledge of Greek -philosophy had been diffused through Christendom -by the translation of the works of Avicenna, Averroes, -and other scholars, into Latin. That was about -the middle of the twelfth century, when Aristotle, -who had been translated into Arabic some three centuries -earlier, also appeared in Latin dress. The -detachment of any branch of knowledge from theology -being a thing undreamed of, the deep reverence -in which the Stagirite was held by his Arabian -commentators ultimately led to his becoming “suspect” -by the Christians, since that which approved -itself to the followers of Mohammed must, <i>ipso facto</i>, -be condemned by the followers of Jesus. Hence -came reaction, and recourse to the Scriptures as sole -guide to secular as well as sacred knowledge; recourse -to a method which, as Hallam says, “had not -untied a single knot, or added one unequivocal truth -to the domain of philosophy.”</p> - -<p>So far as the scanty records tell (for we may<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span> -never know how much was suppressed, or fell into -oblivion, under ecclesiastical frowns and threats; -nor how many thinkers toiled in secret and in dread), -none seemed possessed either of courage or desire to -supplement the revealed word by examination into -things themselves. To supplant it was not dreamed -of. But, in the middle of the thirteenth century, one -notable exception occurred in the person of Roger -Bacon, sometimes called Friar Bacon in virtue of -his belonging to the order of Franciscans. He was -born in 1214 at Ilchester, in Somerset, whence he -afterward removed to Oxford, and thence to Paris. -That this remarkable and many-sided man, classic -and Arabic scholar, mathematician, and natural philosopher, -has not a more recognised place in the annals -of science is strange, although it is, perhaps, -partly explained by the fact that his writings were -not reissued for more than three centuries after his -death. He has been credited with a number of inventions, -his title to which is however doubtful, although -the doubt in nowise impairs the greatness -of his name. He shared the current belief in alchemy, -but made a number of experiments in chemistry -pointing to his knowledge of the properties of -the various gases, and of the components of gunpowder. -If he did not invent spectacles, or the -microscope and telescope, he was skilled in optics, -and knew the principles on which those instruments -are made, as the following extract from his Opus -Majus shows: “We can place transparent bodies<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span> -in such a form and position between our eyes and -other objects that the rays shall be refracted and -bent toward any place we please, so that we shall -see the object near at hand, or at a distance, under -any angle we please; and thus from an incredible -distance we may read the smallest letters, and may -number the smallest particles of sand, by reason of -the greatness of the angle under which they appear.” -He knew the “wisdom of the ancients” in the cataloguing -of the stars, and suggested a reform of the -calendar—following the then unknown poet-astronomer -of Naishapur. But he believed in astrology, that -bastard science which from remotest times had ruled -the life of man, and which has no small number of -votaries among ourselves to this day. Roger Bacon’s -abiding title to fame rests, however, on his insistence -on the necessity of experiment, and his enforcement -of this precept by practice. As a mathematician he -laid stress on the application of this “first of all the -sciences”; indeed, as “preceding all others, and as -disposing us to them.” His experiments, both from -their nature and the seclusion in which they were -made, laid him open to the charge of black magic, -in other words, of being in league with the devil. -This, in the hands of a theology thus “possessed,” -became an instrument of awful torture to mankind. -Roger Bacon’s denial of magic only aggravated his -crime, since in ecclesiastical ears, this was tantamount -to a denial of the activity, nay more, of the -very existence of Satan. So, despite certain encouragement<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span> -in his scientific work from an old friend who -afterward became Pope Clement IV., for whose information -he wrote his Opus Majus, he was, on the -death of that potentate, thrown into prison, whence -tradition says he emerged, after ten years, only to -die.</p> - -<p>The theories of mediæval schoolmen—a monotonous -record of unprogressive ideas—need not be -scheduled here, the more so as we approach the -period of discoveries momentous in their ultimate -effect upon opinions which now possess only the -value attaching to the history of discredited conceptions -of the universe. Commerce, more than scientific -curiosity, gave the impetus to the discovery -that the earth is a globe. Trade with the East was -divided between Genoa and Venice. These cities -were rivals, and the Genoese, alarmed at the growing -success of the Venetians, resolved to try to reach -India from the west. Their schemes were justified -by reports of land indications brought by seamen -who had passed through the “Pillars of Hercules” -to the Atlantic. The sequel is well known. Columbus, -after clerical opposition, and rebuffs from other -states, “offering,” as Mr. Payne says, in his excellent -History of America, “though he knew it not, -the New World in exchange for three ships and provisions -for twelve months,” finally secured the support -of the Spanish king, and sailed from Cadiz on -the 3d of August, 1492. On 11th of October he -sighted the fringes of the New World, and believing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span> -that he had sailed from Spain to India, gave the name -West Indies to the island-group. America itself had -been discovered by roving Norsemen five hundred -years before, but the fact was buried in Icelandic -tradition. Following Columbus, Vasco de Gama, a -Portuguese, set sail in 1497, and taking a southerly -course, doubled the Cape of Good Hope. Twenty-two -years later, Ferdinand Magellan started on a -voyage more famous than that of Columbus, since -his ambition was to sail round the world, and thus -complete the chain of proof against the theory of its -flatness. For “though the Church hath evermore -from Holy Writ affirmed that the earth should be a -widespread plain bordered by the waters, yet he -comforted himself when he considered that in the -eclipses of the moon the shadow cast of the earth is -round; and as is the shadow, such, in like manner, -is the substance.” Doubling Cape Horn through -the straits that bear his name, Magellan entered the -vast ocean whose calm surface caused him to call it -the Pacific, and after terrible sufferings, he reached -the Ladrone Islands where, either at the hands of a -mutinous crew, or of savages, he was killed. His -chief lieutenant, Sebastian d’Eleano, continued the -voyage, and after rounding the Cape of Good Hope, -brought the San Vittoria—name of happy omen—to -anchor at St. Lucar, near Seville, on 7th of September, -1522. Brought, too, the story of a circumnavigated -globe, and of new groups of stars never -seen under northern skies.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span></p> - -<p>The scene shifts, for the time being, from the earth -to the heavens. The Church had barely recovered -from the blow struck at her authority on matters of -secular knowledge, when another dealt, and that -by an ecclesiastic, Copernicus, Canon of Frauenburg, -in Prussia. But before pursuing this, some reference -to the revolt against the Church of Rome, which is -the great event of the sixteenth century, is necessary, -if only to inquire whether the movement known as -the Reformation justified its name as freeing the -intellect from theological thraldom. Far-reaching -as were the areas which it covered and the effects -which it wrought, its quarrel with the Church of -Rome was not because of that Church’s attitude toward -freedom of thought. On the Continent it was -a protest of nobler minds against the corruptions -fostered by the Papacy; in England, it was personal -and political in origin, securing popular support by -its anti-sacerdotal character, and its appeal to national -irritation against foreign control. But, both -here and abroad, it sought mending rather than ending; -“not to vary in any jot from the faith Catholic.” -It disputed the claim of the Church to be the sole -interpreter of Scripture, and contended that such -interpretation was the right and duty of the individual. -But it would not admit the right of the -individual to call in question the authority of the -Bible itself: to that book alone must a man go for -knowledge of things temporal as of things spiritual. -So that the Reformation was but an exchange of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span> -fetters, or, as Huxley happily puts it, the scraping -of a little rust off the chains which still bound the -mind. “Learning perished where Luther reigned,” -said Erasmus, and in proof of it we find the Reformer -agreeing with his coadjutor, Melanchthon, in -permitting no tampering with the written Word. -Copernicus notwithstanding, they had no doubt that -the earth was fixed and that sun and stars travelled -round it, because the Bible said so. Peter Martyr, -one of the early Lutheran converts, in his Commentary -on Genesis, declared that wrong opinions -about the creation as narrated in that book would -render valueless all the promises of Christ. Wherein -he spoke truly. As for the schoolmen, Luther called -them “locusts, caterpillars, frogs, and lice.” Reason -he denounced as the “arch whore” and the -“devil’s bride,” Aristotle is a “prince of darkness, -horrid impostor, public and professed liar, beast, and -twice execrable.” Consistently enough, Luther believed -vehemently in a personal devil, and in witches; -“I would myself burn them,” he says, “even as it is -written in the Bible that the priests stoned offenders.” -To him demoniacal possession was a fact clear as -noonday: idiocy, lunacy, epilepsy and all other mental -and nervous disorders were due to it. Hence, -a movement whose intent appeared to be the freeing -of the human spirit riveted more tightly the -bolts that imprisoned it; arresting the physical explanation -of mental diseases and that curative treatment -of them which is one of the countless services<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span> -of science to suffering mankind. To Luther, the -descent of Christ into hell, which modern research -has shown to be a variant of an Orphic legend of -the underworld, was a real event, Jesus going thither -that he might conquer Satan in a hand-to-hand -struggle.</p> - -<p>Therefore, freedom of thought, as we define it, -had the bitterest foe in Luther, although, in his condemnation -of “works,” and his fanatical dogma of -man’s “justification by faith alone,” which made -him reject the Epistle of James as one “of straw,” -and as unworthy of a place in the Canon, he unwittingly -drove in the thin end of the rationalist wedge. -The Reformers had hedged the canonical books with -theories of verbal inspiration which extended even -to the punctuation of the sentences. They thus rendered -intelligent study of the Bible impossible, and -did grievous injury to a collection of writings of vast -historical value, and of abiding interest as records -of man’s primitive speculations and spiritual development. -But Luther’s application of the right of -private judgment to the omission or addition of this -or that book into a canon which had been closed by -a Council of the Church, surrendered the whole position, -since there was no telling where the thing might -stop.</p> - -<p>Copernicus waited full thirty years before he ventured -to make his theory public. The Ptolemaic -system, which assumed a fixed earth with sun, moon, -and stars revolving above it, had held the field for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span> -about fourteen hundred years. It accorded with -Scripture; it was adopted by the Church; and, moreover, -it was confirmed by the senses, the correction -of which still remains, and will long remain, a -condition of intellectual advance. Little wonder is -it, then, that Copernicus hesitated to broach a theory -thus supported, or that, when published, it was put -forth in tentative form as a possible explanation -more in accord with the phenomena. A preface, -presumably by a friendly hand, commended the -Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies to Pope Paul -III. It urged that “as in previous times others had -been allowed the privilege of feigning what circles -they chose in order to explain the phenomena,” Copernicus -“had conceived that he might take the liberty -of trying whether, on the supposition of the -earth’s motion, it was possible to find better explanations -than the ancient ones of the revolutions of the -celestial orbs.” A copy of the book was placed in -the hands of its author only a few hours before his -death on 23d of May, 1543.</p> - -<p>This “upstart astrologer,” this “fool who wishes -to reverse the entire science of astronomy,” for -“sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded -the sun to stand still, and not the earth”—these are -Luther’s words—was, therefore, beyond the grip of -the Holy Inquisition. But a substitute was forthcoming. -Giordano Bruno, a Dominican monk, had -added to certain heterodox beliefs the heresy of Copernicanism, -which he publicly taught from Oxford<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span> -to Venice. For these cumulative crimes he was imprisoned -and, after two years, condemned to be put -to death “as mercifully as possible and without the -shedding of his blood,” a Catholic euphemism for -burning a man alive. The murder was committed -in Rome on 17th of February, 1600.</p> - -<p>The year 1543 marks an epoch in biology as in -astronomy. As shown in the researches of Galen, -an Alexandrian physician of the second century, -there had been no difficulty in studying the structure -of the lower animals, but, fortified both by tradition -and by prejudice, the Church refused to permit -dissection of the human body, and in the latter part -of the thirteenth century, Boniface VIII. issued a -Bull of the major excommunication against offenders. -Prohibition, as usual, led to evasion, and Vesalius, -Professor of Anatomy in Padua University, -resorted to various devices to procure “subjects,” -the bodies of criminals being easiest to obtain. The -end justified the means, as he was able to correct -certain errors of Galen, and to give the <i>quietus</i> to -the old legend, based upon the myth of the creation -of Eve, that man has one rib less than woman. This -was among the discoveries announced in his De Corporis -Humani Fabrica, published when he was only -twenty-eight years of age. The book fell under the -ban of the Church because Vesalius gave no support -to the belief in an indestructible bone, nucleus of -the resurrection body, in man. The belief had, no -doubt, near relation to that of the Jews in the <i>os<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span> -sacru</i>, and may remind us of Descartes’ fanciful location -of the soul in the minute cone-like part of the -brain known as the <i>conarium</i>, or pineal gland. On -some baseless charge of attempting the dissection of -a living subject, the Inquisition haled Vesalius to -prison, and would have put him to death “as mercifully -as possible,” but for the intervention of King -Charles V. of Spain, to whom Vesalius had been -physician. Returning in October, 1564, from a pilgrimage -taken, presumably, as atonement for his -alleged offence, he was shipwrecked on the coast of -Zante, and died of exhaustion.</p> - -<p>While the heretical character and tendencies of -discoveries in astronomy and anatomy awoke active -opposition from the Church, the work of men of the -type of Gesner, the eminent Swiss naturalist, and of -Caesalpino, professor of botany at Padua, passed -unquestioned. No dogma was endangered by the -classification of plants and animals. But when a -couple of generations after the death of Copernicus -had passed, the Inquisition found a second victim -in the famous Galileo, who was born at Pisa in 1564. -After spending some years in mechanical and mathematical -pursuits, he began a series of observations -in confirmation of the Copernican theory, of the truth -of which he had been convinced in early life. With -the aid of a rude telescope, made by his own hands, -he discovered the satellites of Jupiter; the moon-like -phases of Venus and Mars; mountains and valleys -in the moon; spots on the sun’s disk; and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span> -countless stars which composed the luminous band -known as the Milky Way. Nought occurred to -disturb his observations till, in a work on the Solar -Spots, he explained the movements of the earth and -of the heavenly bodies according to Copernicus. On -the appearance of that book the authorities contented -themselves with a caution to the author. But action -followed his supplemental Dialogue on the Copernican -and Ptolemaic Systems. Through that convenient -medium which the title implies, Galileo makes -the defender of the Copernican theory an easy victor, -and for this he was brought before the Inquisition -in 1633. After a tedious trial, and threats of “rigorous -personal examination,” a euphemism for “torture,” -he was, despite the plea—too specious to deceive—that -he had merely put the <i>pros</i> and <i>cons</i> as -between the rival theories, condemned to abjure all -that he had taught. There is a story, probably fictitious, -since it was first told in 1789, that when the -old man rose from his knees, he muttered his conviction -that the earth moves, in the words “e pur si -muove.” As a sample of the arguments used by -the ecclesiastics when they substituted, as rare exception, -the pen for the faggot, the reasoning advanced -by one Sizzi against the existence of Jupiter’s -moons, may be cited. “There are seven windows -given to animals in the domicile of the head, through -which the air is admitted to the tabernacle of the -body, viz.: two nostrils, two eyes, two ears, and one -mouth. So, in the heavens, as in a macrocosm, or<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span> -great world, there are two favourable stars, Jupiter -and Venus; two unpropitious, Mars and Saturn; -two luminaries, the sun and moon, and Mercury -alone undecided and indifferent. From these and -many other phenomena of Nature, which it were -tedious to enumerate, we gather that the number of -planets is necessarily seven. Moreover, the satellites -are invisible to the naked eye, and, therefore, -can exercise no influence over the earth, and would, -of course, be useless; and, therefore, do not exist.”</p> - -<p>In this brief summary of the attitude of the -Church toward science, it is not possible, and if it -were so, it is not needful, to refer in detail to the -contributions of the more speculative philosophers, -who, although they made no discoveries, advocated -those methods of research and directions of inquiry -which made the discoveries possible. Among these -a prominent name is that of Lord Bacon, whose -system of philosophy, known as the Inductive, proceeds -from the collection, examination and comparison -of any group of connected facts to the relation -of them to some general principle. The universal -is thus explained by the particular. But the inductive -method was no invention of Bacon’s; wherever observation -or testing of a thing preceded speculation -about it, as with his greater namesake, there the -Baconian system had its application. Lord Bacon, -moreover, undervalued Greek science; he argued -against the Copernican theory; and either knew -nothing of, or ignored, Harvey’s momentous discovery<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span> -of the circulation of the blood. A more illustrious -name than his is that of René Descartes, a man who -combined theory with observation; “one who,” in -Huxley’s words, “saw that the discoveries of Galileo -meant that the remotest parts of the universe were -governed by mechanical laws, while those of Harvey -meant that the same laws presided over the operations -of that portion of the world which is nearest to -us, namely, our own bodily frame.” The greatness -of this man, a good Catholic, whom the Jesuits -charged with Atheism, has no mean tribute in his -influence on an equally remarkable man, Benedict -Spinoza. Spinoza reduced the Cartesian analysis of -phenomena into God, mind and matter to one phenomenon, -namely, God, of whom matter and spirit, -extension and thought, are but attributes. His short -life fell within the longer span of Newton’s, whose -strange subjection to the theological influences of -his age is seen in this immortal interpreter of the -laws of the universe wasting his later years on an -attempt to interpret unfulfilled prophecy. These and -others, as Locke, Leibnitz, Herder, and Schelling, -like the great Hebrew leader, had glimpses of a -goodly land which they were not themselves to -enter. But, perhaps, in the roll of illustrious men -to whom prevision came, none have better claim to -everlasting remembrance than Immanuel Kant. For -in his Theory of the Heavens, published in 1755, he -anticipates that hypothesis of the origin of the present -universe which, associated with the succeeding<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span> -names of Laplace and Herschel, has, under corrections -furnished by modern physics, common acceptance -among us. Then, as shown in the following -extract, Kant foresees the theory of the development -of life from formless stuff to the highest types: “It -is desirable to examine the great domain of organized -beings by means of a methodical comparative anatomy, -in order to discover whether we may not find -in them something resembling a system, and that -too in connection with their mode of generation, so -that we may not be compelled to stop short with a -mere consideration of forms as they are—which gives -no insight into their generation—and need not despair -of gaining a full insight into this department of -Nature. The agreement of so many kinds of animals -in a certain common plan of structure, which seems -to be visible not only in their skeletons, but also in -the arrangement of the other parts—so that a wonderfully -simple typical form, by the shortening or -lengthening of some parts, and by the suppression -and development of others, might be able to produce -an immense variety of species—gives us a ray of -hope, though feeble, that here perhaps some results -may be obtained, by the application of the principle -of the mechanism of Nature; without which, in fact, -no science can exist. This analogy of forms (in so -far as they seem to have been produced in accordance -with a common prototype, notwithstanding their -great variety) strengthens the supposition that they -have an actual blood-relationship, due to derivation<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span> -from a common parent; a supposition which is arrived -at by observation of the graduated approximation -of one class of animals to another, beginning -with the one in which the principle of purposiveness -seems to be most conspicuous, namely, man, and extending -down to the polyps, and from these even -down to mosses and lichens, and arriving finally at -raw matter, the lowest stage of Nature observable -by us. From this raw matter and its forces, the -whole apparatus of Nature seems to have been derived -according to mechanical laws (such as those -which resulted in the production of crystals); yet this -apparatus, as seen in organic beings, is so incomprehensible -to us, that we feel ourselves compelled to -conceive for it a different principle. But it would -seem that the archæologist of Nature is at liberty to -regard the great Family of creatures (for as a Family -we must conceive it, if the above-mentioned continuous -and connected relationship has a real foundation) -as having sprung from their immediate results of her -earliest revolutions, judging from all the laws of -their mechanisms known to or conjectured by him.”</p> - -<p>In our arrival at the age of these seers, we feel -the play of a freer, purer air; a lull in the miasmatic -currents that bring intolerance on their wings. The -tolerance that approaches is due to no surrender of -its main position by dogmatic theology, but to that -larger perception of the variety and complexity of -life, ignorance of, or wilful blindness to, which is the -secret of the survival of rigid opinion. The demonstration<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span> -of the earth’s roundness; the discovery of -America; the growing conception of inter-relation -between the lowest and the highest life-forms; the -slow but sure acceptance of the Copernican theory; -and, above all, the idea of a Cosmos, an unbroken -order, to which every advance in knowledge contributes, -justified and fostered the free play of the -intellect. Foreign as yet, however, to the minds of -widest breadth, was the conception of the inclusion -of <span class="smcap">Man</span> himself in the universal order. Duality—Nature -overruled by supernature—was the unaltered -note; the supernature as part of Nature a thing undreamed -of. Nor could it be otherwise while the -belief in diabolical agencies still held the field, sending -wretched victims to the stake on the evidence -of conscientious witnesses, and with the concurrence -of humane judges. Animism, the root of all personification, -whether of good or evil, had lost none -of its essential character, and but little of its vigour.</p> - -<p>“I flatter myself,” says Hume, in the opening -words of the essay upon Miracles, in his Inquiry -Concerning Human Understanding, “that I have -discovered an argument of a like nature (he is referring -to Archbishop Tillotson’s argument on Transubstantiation) -which, if just, will, with the wise and -learned, be an everlasting check to all kind of superstitious -delusion, and, consequently, will be useful -as long as the world endures.” Hume certainly did -not overrate the force of the blow which he dealt at -supernaturalism, one of a series of attacks which, in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span> -France and Britain, carried the war into the camp -of the enemy, and changed its tactics from aggressive -to defensive. But none the less is it true that the -“superstitious delusions” against which he planted -his logical artillery were killed neither by argument -nor by evidence. Delusion and error do not perish -by controversial warfare. They perish under the -slow and silent operation of changes to which they -are unable to adapt themselves. The atmosphere is -altered: the organism can neither respond nor respire; -therefore, it dies. Thus, save where lurks the -ignorance which is its breath of life, has wholly perished -belief in witchcraft; thus, too, is slowly perishing -belief in miracles, and, with this, belief in the -miraculous events, the incarnation, resurrection, and -ascension of Jesus, on which the fundamental tenets -of Christianity are based, and in which lies so largely -the secret of its long hostility to knowledge.</p> -<hr class="l1" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><i>PART III.</i></h2> - -<h2>THE RENASCENCE OF SCIENCE.</h2> - -<p class="st">A. D. 1600 ONWARDS.</p> - -<div class="qt2"> -<p>“Though science, like Nature, may be driven out with a fork, -ecclesiastical or other, yet she surely comes back again.”—<span class="smcap">Huxley</span>, -Prologue to Collected Essays, vol. v.</p> -</div> - - -<p>The exercise of a more tolerant spirit, to which -reference has been made, had its limits. It is true -that Dr. South, a famous divine, denounced the -Royal Society (founded 1645) as an irreligious body; -although a Dr. Wallis, one of the first members, especially -declared that “matters of theology” were -“precluded”: the business being “to discourse and -consider of philosophical inquiries and such as related -thereunto; as Physick, Anatomy, Geometry, -Astronomy, Navigation, Staticks, Magneticks, Chymicks, -and Natural Experiments; with the state of these -studies, and their cultivation at home and abroad.” -Regardless of South and such as agreed with him, -Torricelli worked at hydrodynamics, and discovered -the principle of the barometer; Boyle inquired into -the law of the compressibility of gases; Malpighi -examined minute life-forms and the structure of organs -under the microscope; Ray and Willughby -classified plants and animals; Newton theorized on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span> -the nature of light; and Roemer measured its speed; -Halley estimated the sun’s distance, predicted the -return of comets, and observed the transits of Venus -and Mercury; Hunter dissected specimens, and laid -the foundations of the science of comparative anatomy; -and many another illustrious worker contributed -to the world’s stock of knowledge “without -let or hindrance,” for in all this “matters of theology -were precluded.”</p> - -<p>But the old spirit of resistance was aroused when, -after a long lapse of time, inquiry was revived in -a branch of science which, it will be noticed, has no -distinct place in the subjects dealt with by the Royal -Society at the start. That science was Geology; a -science destined, in its ultimate scope, to prove a far -more powerful dissolvent of dogma than any of its -compeers.</p> - -<p>It seems strange that the discovery of the earth’s -true shape and movements was not sooner followed -by investigation into her contents, but the old ideas -of special creation remained unaffected by these and -other discoveries, and the more or less detailed -account of the process of creation furnished in the -book of Genesis sufficed to arrest curiosity. In the -various departments of the inorganic universe the -earth was the last to become subject of scientific research; -as in study of the organic universe, man excluded -himself till science compelled his inclusion.</p> - -<p>After more than two thousand years, the Ionian -philosophers “come to their own” again. Xenophanes<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span> -of Colophon has been referred to as arriving, -five centuries <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span>, at a true explanation of the imprints -of plants and animals in rocks. Pythagoras, -who lived before him, may, if Ovid, writing near the -Christian era, is to be trusted, have reached some -sound conclusions about the action of water in the -changes of land and sea areas. But we are on surer -ground when we meet the geographer Strabo, who -lived in the reign of Augustus. Describing the countries -in which he travelled, he notes their various -features, and explains the causes of earthquakes and -allied phenomena. Then eleven hundred years pass -before we find any explanation of like rational character -supplied. This was furnished by the Arabian -philosopher, Avicenna, whose theory of the origin -of mountains is the more marvellous when we remember -what intellectual darkness surrounded him. -He says that “mountains may be due to two different -causes. Either they are effects of upheavals of -the crust of the earth, such as might occur during a -violent earthquake, or they are the effect of water, -which, cutting for itself a new route, has denuded -the valleys, the strata being of different kinds, some -soft, some hard. The winds and waters disintegrate -the one, but leave the other intact. Most of the eminences -of the earth have had this latter origin. It -would require a long period of time for all such -changes to be accomplished, during which the mountains -themselves might be somewhat diminished in -size. But that water has been the main cause of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span> -these effects is proved by the existence of fossil remains -of aquatic and other animals on many mountains” -(cf. Osborn’s From the Greeks to Darwin, -p. 76). A similar explanation of fossils was given -by the engineer-artist Leonardo de Vinci in the fifteenth -century, and by the potter Bernard Palissy, -in the sixteenth century; but thence onward, for -more than a hundred years, the earth was as a sealed -book to man. The earlier chapters of its history, -once reopened, have never been closed again. Varied -as were the theories of the causes which wrought -manifold changes on its surface, they agreed in demanding -a far longer time-history than the Church -was willing to allow. If the reasoning of the geologists -was sound, the narrative in Genesis was a myth. -Hence the renewal of struggle between the Christian -Church and Science, waged, at first, over the six -days of the Creation.</p> - -<p>Here and there, in bygone days, a sceptical voice -had been raised in denial of the Mosaic authorship -of the Pentateuch. Such was that of La Peyrère -who, in 1655, published an instalment of a work in -which he anticipated what is nowadays accepted, -but what then was akin to blasphemy to utter. For -not only does he doubt whether Moses had any -hand in the writings attributed to him: he rejects -the orthodox view of suffering and death as the -penalties of Adam’s disobedience; and gives rationalistic -interpretation of the appearance of the star of -Bethlehem, and of the darkness at the Crucifixion.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span> -But La Peyrère became a Roman Catholic, and, of -course, recanted his opinions. Then, nearer the time -when controversy on the historical character of the -Scriptures was becoming active, one Astruc, a French -physician, suggested, in a work published in 1753, -that Moses may have used older materials in his -compilation of the earlier parts of the Pentateuch.</p> - -<p>But, practically, the five books included under -that name, were believed to have been written by -Moses under divine authority. The statement in -Genesis that God made the universe and its contents, -both living and non-living, in six days of twenty-four -hours each, was explicit. Thus interpreted, as -their plain meaning warranted, Archbishop Usher -made his famous calculation as to the time elapsing -between the creation and the birth of Christ. Dr. -White, in his important Warfare of Science with -Theology, gives an amusing example of the application -of Usher’s method in detail. A seventeenth -century divine, Dr. Lightfoot, Vice-Chancellor of -Cambridge University, computed that “man was -created by the Trinity on 23d October, 4004 <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span>, -at nine o’clock in the morning.” The same theologian, -who, by the way, was a very eminent Hebrew -scholar, following the interpretation of the great -Fathers of the Church, “declared, as the result of -profound and exhaustive study of the Scriptures, -that ‘heaven and earth, centre and circumference, -and clouds full of water, were created all together, -in the same instant.’”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span></p> - -<p>The story of the Deluge was held to furnish sufficing -explanation of the organic remains yielded by -the rocks, but failing this, a multitude of fantastic -theories were at hand to explain the fossils. They -were said to be due to a “formative quality” in the -soil; to its “plastic virtue”; to a “lapidific juice”; -to the “fermentation of fatty matter”; to “the influence -of the heavenly bodies,” or, as the late eminent -naturalist, Philip Gosse, seriously suggested in his -whimsical book Omphalos: an Attempt to untie -the Geological Knot, they were but simulacra wherewith -a mocking Deity rebuked the curiosity of man. -Every explanation, save the right and obvious one, -had its defenders, because it was essential to support -some theory to rebut the evidence supplied by remains -of animals as to the existence of death in -the world before the fall of Adam. Otherwise, the -statements in the Old Testament, on which the Pauline -reasoning rested, were baseless, and to discredit -these was to undermine the authority of the Scriptures -from Genesis to the Apocalypse. No wonder, -therefore, that theology was up in arms, or that it -saw in geology a deadlier foe than astronomy had -seemed to be in ages past. The Sorbonne, or Faculty -of Theology, in Paris burnt the books of the geologists, -banished their authors, and, in the case of -Buffon, the famous naturalist, condemned him to retract -the awful heresy, which was declared “contrary -to the creed of the Church,” contained in these -words: “The waters of the sea have produced the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span> -mountains and valleys of the land; the waters of the -heavens, reducing all to a level, will at last deliver -the whole land over to the sea, and the sea successively -prevailing over the land, will leave dry new -continents like those which we inhabit.” So the old -man repeated the submission of Galileo, and published -his recantation: “I declare that I had no intention -to contradict the text of Scripture; that I -believe most firmly all therein related about the -creation, both as to order of time and matter of -fact. I abandon everything in my book respecting -the formation of the earth, and generally all which -may be contrary to the narrative of Moses.” That -was in the year 1751.</p> - -<p>If the English theologians could not deliver -heretics of the type of Buffon to the secular arm, -they used all the means that denunciation supplied -for delivering them over to Satan. Epithets were -hurled at them; arguments drawn from a world -accursed of God levelled at them. Saint Jerome, -living in the fourth century, had pointed to the -cracked and crumpled rocks as proof of divine anger: -now Wesley and others saw in “sin the moral cause -of earthquakes, whatever their natural cause might -be,” since before Adam’s transgression, no convulsions -or eruptions ruffled the calm of Paradise. -Meanwhile, the probing of the earth’s crust went on; -revealing, amidst all the seeming confusion of distorted -and metamorphosed rocks, an unvarying sequence -of strata, and of the fossils imbedded in them.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span> -Different causes were assigned for the vast changes -ranging over vast periods; one school believing in -the action of volcanic and such like catastrophic -agents; another in the action of aqueous agents, seeing, -more consistently, in present operations the explanation -of the causes of past changes. But there -was no diversity of opinion concerning the extension -of the earth’s time-history and life-history to -millions on millions of years.</p> - -<p>So, when this was to be no longer resisted, theologians -sought some basis of compromise on such -non-fundamental points as the six days of creation. -It was suggested that perhaps these did not mean -the seventh part of a week, but periods, or eons, or -something equally elastic; and that if the Mosaic -narrative was regarded as a poetic revelation of the -general succession of phenomena, beginning with the -development of order out of chaos, and ending with -the creation of man, Scripture would be found to -have anticipated or revealed what science confirms. -It was impossible, so theologians argued, that there -could be aught else than harmony between the divine -works and the writings which were assumed to -be of divine origin. Science could not contradict -revelation, and whatever seemed contradictory was -due to misapprehension either of the natural fact, -or to misreading of the written word. But although -the story of the creation might be clothed, as so -exalted and moving a theme warranted, in poetic -form, that of the fall of Adam and of the drowning<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span> -of his descendants, eight persons excepted, must -be taken in all its appalling literalness. Confirmation -of the Deluge story was found in the fossil shells on -high mountain tops; while as for the giants of antediluvian -times, there were the huge bones in proof. -Some of these relics of mastodon and mammoth were -actually hung up in churches as evidence that “there -were giants in those days”! Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire -tells of one Henrion, who published a book in 1718 -giving the height of Adam as one hundred and -twenty-three feet nine inches, and of Eve as one hundred -and eighteen feet nine inches, Noah being of -rather less stature. But to parley with science is -fatal to theology. Moreover, arguments which involve -the cause they support in ridicule may be left -to refute themselves. And while theology was hesitating, -as in the amusing example supplied by Dr. -William Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible (published -in 1863) wherein the reader, turning up the article -“Deluge,” is referred to “Flood,” and thence -to “Noah”; archæology produced the Chaldæan -original of the legend whence the story of the -flood is derived. With candour as commendable -as it is rare, the Reverend Professor Driver, from -whom quotation has been made already, admits -that “read without prejudice or bias, the narrative -of Genesis i. creates an impression at variance -with the facts revealed by science”; all efforts -at reconciliation being only “different modes -of obliterating the characteristic features of Genesis,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span> -and of reading into it a view which it does not -express.”</p> - -<p>While the ground in favour of the literal interpretation -of Genesis was being contested, an invading -force, that had been gathering strength with the -years, was advancing in the shape of the science of -Biology. The workers therein fall into two classes: -the one, represented by Linnaeus and his school, applied -themselves to the classifying and naming of -plants and animals; the other, represented by Cuvier -and his school, examined into structure and function. -Anatomy made clear the machinery: physiology -the work which it did, and the conditions under -which the work was done. Then, through comparison -of corresponding organs and their functions in -various life-forms, came growing perception of their -unity. But only to a few came gleams of that unity -as proof of common descent of plant and animal, -for, save in scattered hints of inter-relation between -species, which occur from the time of Lord Bacon -onward, the theory of their immutability was dominant -until forty years ago.</p> - -<p>Four men form the chief vanguard of the biological -movement. “Modern classificatory method and -nomenclature have largely grown out of the work -of Linnaeus; the modern conception of biology, as a -science, and of its relation to climatology, geography, -and geology, are as largely rooted in the labours -of Buffon; comparative anatomy and palæontology -owe a vast debt to Cuvier’s results; while invertebrate<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span> -zoology and the revival of the idea of Evolution -are intimately dependent on the results of the -work of Lamarck. In other words, the main results -of biology up to the early years of this century are to -be found in, or spring out of, the works of these men.”</p> - -<p>Linnaeus, son of a Lutheran pastor, born at -Roeshult, in Sweden, in 1707, had barely passed his -twenty-fifth year before laying the ground-plan of -the system of classification which bears his name, -a system which advance in knowledge has since -modified. Based on external resemblances, its -formulation was possible only to a mind intent on -minute and accurate detail, and less observant of -general principles. In brief, the work of Linnaeus -was constructive, not interpretative. Hence, perhaps, -conjoined to the theological ideas then current, -the reason why the larger question of the fixity of -species entered not into his purview. To him each -plant and animal retained the impress of the Creative -hand that had shaped it “in the beginning,” and, -throughout his working life, he departed but slightly -from the plan with which he started, namely, “reckoning -as many species as issued in pairs” from the -Almighty fiat.</p> - -<p>Not so Buffon, born on his father’s estate in Burgundy -in the same year as Linnaeus, whom he survived -ten years, dying in 1788. His opinions, clashing -as they did with orthodox creeds, were given in -a tentative, questioning fashion, so that where ecclesiastical -censure fell, retreat was easier. As has been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span> -seen in his submission to the Sorbonne, he was not -of the stuff of which martyrs are made. Perhaps he -felt that the ultimate victory of his opinions was sufficiently -assured to make self-sacrifice needless. But, -under cover of pretence at inquiry, his convictions -are clear enough. He was no believer in the permanent -stability of species, and noted, as warrant of -this, the otherwise unexplained presence of aborted -or rudimentary structures. For example, he says, -“the pig does not appear to have been formed upon -an original, special, and perfect plan, since it is a -compound of other animals; it has evidently useless -parts, or rather, parts of which it cannot make any -use, toes, all the bones of which are perfectly formed, -and which, nevertheless, are of no service to it. Nature -is far from subjecting herself to final causes in -the formation of her creatures.” Then, further, as -showing his convictions on the non-fixity of species, -he says, how many of them, “being perfected or degenerated -by the great changes in land and sea, by -the favours or disfavours of Nature, by food, by the -prolonged influences of climate, contrary or favourable, -are no longer what they formerly were.” But -he writes with an eye on the Sorbonne when, hinting -at a possible common ancestor of horse and ass, and -of ape and man, he slyly adds that since the Bible -teaches the contrary, the thing cannot be. Thus he -attacked covertly; by adit, not by direct assault; -and to those who read between the lines there was -given a key wherewith to unlock the door to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span> -solution of many biological problems. Buffon, consequently, -was the most stimulating and suggestive -naturalist of the eighteenth century. There comes -between him and Lamarck, both in order of time -and sequence of ideas, Erasmus Darwin, the distinguished -grandfather of Charles Darwin.</p> - -<p>Born at Eton, near Newark, in 1731, he walked -the hospitals at London and Edinburgh, and settled, -for some years, at Lichfield, ultimately removing to -Derby. Since Lucretius, no scientific writer had -put his cosmogonic speculations into verse until Dr. -Darwin made the heroic metre, in which stereotyped -form the poetry of his time was cast, the vehicle of -rhetorical descriptions of the amours of flowers and -the evolution of the thumb. The Loves of the Plants, -ridiculed in the Loves of the Triangles in the Anti-Jacobin, -is not to be named in the same breath, for -stateliness of diction, and majesty of movement, as -the De rerum Natura. But both the prose work -Zoonomia and the poem The Temple of Nature (published -after the author’s death in 1802) have claim -to notice as the matured expression of conclusions at -which the clear-sighted, thoughtful, and withal, eccentric -doctor had arrived in the closing years of his -life. Krause’s Life and Study of the Works of Erasmus -Darwin supplies an excellent outline of the contents -of books which are now rarely taken down -from the shelves, and makes clear that their author -had the root of the matter in him. His observations -and reading, for the influence of Buffon and others<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span> -is apparent in his writings, led him to reject the current -belief in the separate creation of species. He -saw that this theory wholly failed to account for the -existence of abnormal forms, of adaptations of the -structure of organs to their work, of gradations between -living things, and other features inconsistent -with the doctrine of “let lions be, and there were -lions.” His shrewd comment on the preformation -notion of development has been quoted (p. 20). -The substance of his argument in support of a -“physical basis of life” is as follows: “When we -revolve in our minds the metamorphosis of animals, -as from the tadpole to the frog; secondly, the changes -produced by artificial cultivation, as in the breeds -of horses, dogs, and sheep; thirdly, the changes produced -by conditions of climate and of season, as in -the sheep of warm climates being covered with hair -instead of wool, and the hares and partridges of -northern climates becoming white in winter; when, -further, we observe the changes of structure produced -by habit, as seen especially by men of different -occupations; or the changes produced by artificial -mutilation and prenatal influences, as in the -crossing of species and production of monsters; -fourth, when we observe the essential unity of plan -in all warm-blooded animals—we are led to conclude -that they have been alike produced from a -similar living filament.” The concluding words of -this extract make remarkable approach to the modern -theory of the origin of life in the complex jelly-like<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span> -protoplasm, or, as some call it, nuclein or nucleoplasm. -And, on this, Erasmus Darwin further remarks: -“As the earth and ocean were probably -peopled with vegetable productions long before the -existence of animals, and many families of these -animals long before other animals of them, shall we -conjecture that one and the same kind of living filament -is and has been the cause of all organic life?” -Nor does he make any exception to this law of organic -development. He quotes Buffon and Helvetius -to the effect—“that many features in the anatomy -of man point to a former quadrupedal position, -and indicate that he is not yet fully adapted to the -erect position; that, further, man may have arisen -from a single family of monkeys, in which, accidentally, -the opposing muscle brought the thumb against -the tips of the fingers, and that this muscle gradually -increased in size by use in successive generations.” -While we who live in these days of fuller knowledge -of agents of variation may detect the <i>minus</i> in all -foregoing speculations, our interest is increased in -the thought of their near approach to the cardinal -discovery. And a rapid run through the later writings -of Dr. Darwin shows that there is scarcely a -side of the great theory of Evolution which has escaped -his notice or suggestive comment. Grant -Allen, in his excellent little monograph on Charles -Darwin, says that the theory of “natural selection -was the only cardinal one in the evolutionary system -on which Erasmus Darwin did not actually forestall<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span> -his more famous and greater namesake. For its -full perception, the discovery of Malthus had to be -collated with the speculations of Buffon.”</p> - -<p>In the Historical Sketch on the Progress of -Opinion on the Origin of Species, which Darwin -prefixed to his book, he refers to Lamarck as “the -first man whose conclusions on the subject excited -much attention;” rendering “the eminent service of -arousing attention to the probability of all change -in the organic, as well as in the inorganic world, -being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition.” -Lamarck was born at Bezantin, in Picardy, -in 1744. Intended for the Church, he chose the -army, but an injury resulting from a practical joke -cut short his career as a soldier. He then became a -banker’s clerk, in which occupation he secured leisure -for his favourite pursuit of natural history. -Through Buffon’s influence he procured a civil appointment, -and ultimately became a colleague of -Cuvier and Geoffroy St. Hilaire in the Museum of -Natural History at Paris. Of Cuvier it will here -suffice to say that he remained to the end of his life -a believer in special creation, or, what amounts to -the same thing, a series of special creations which, -he held, followed the catastrophic annihilations of -prior plants and animals. Although orthodox by -conviction, his researches told against his tenets, because -his important work in the reconstruction of -skeletons of long extinct animals laid the foundation -of palæontology.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span></p> - -<p>To Lamarck, says Haeckel, “will always belong -the immortal glory of having for the first time worked -out the Theory of Descent as an independent scientific -theory of the first order, and as the philosophical -foundation of the whole science of Biology.” He -taught that in the beginnings of life only the very simplest -and lowest animals and plants came into existence; -those of more complex structure developing -from these; man himself being descended from ape-like -mammals. For the Aristotelian mechanical figure -of life as a ladder, with its detached steps, he substituted -the more appropriate figure of a tree, as an inter-related -organism. He argued that the course of the -earth’s development, and also of all life upon it, was -continuous, and not interrupted by violent revolutions. -In this he followed Buffon and Hutton. Buffon, -in his Theory of the Earth, argues that “in -order to understand what had taken place in the past, -or what will happen in the future, we have but to -observe what is going on in the present.” This is -the keynote of modern geology. “Life,” adds -Lamarck, “is a purely physical phenomenon. All -its phenomena depend on mechanical, physical, and -chemical causes which are inherent in the nature of -matter itself.” He believed in a form of spontaneous -generation. Rejecting Buffon’s theory of the direct -action of the surroundings as agents of change in -living things, he sums up the causes of organic evolution -in the following propositions:</p> - -<p>1. Life tends by its inherent forces to increase<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span> -the volume of each living body and of all its parts -up to a limit determined by its own needs.</p> - -<p>2. New wants in animals give rise to new movements -which produce organs.</p> - -<p>3. The development of these organs is in proportion -to their employment.</p> - -<p>4. New developments are transmitted to offspring.</p> - -<p>The second and third propositions were illustrated -by examples which have, with good reason, -provoked ridicule. Lamarck accounts for the long -neck of the giraffe by that organ being continually -stretched out to reach the leaves at the tree-tops; -for the long tongue of the ant-eater or the woodpecker -by these creatures protruding it to get at -food in channel or crevice; for the webbed feet of -aquatic animals by the outstretching of the membranes -between the toes in swimming; and for the -erect position of man by the constant efforts of his -ape-like ancestors to keep upright. The legless condition -of the serpent which, in the legend of the Garden -of Eden, is accounted for on moral grounds, is -thus explained by Lamarck: “Snakes sprang from -reptiles with four extremities, but having taken up -the habit of moving along the earth and concealing -themselves among bushes, their bodies, owing to -repeated efforts to elongate themselves and to pass -through narrow spaces, have acquired a considerable -length out of all proportion to their width. Since -long feet would have been very useless, and short<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span> -feet would have been incapable of moving their -bodies, there resulted a cessation of use of these -parts, which has finally caused them to totally disappear, -although they were originally part of the -plan of organization in these animals.” The discovery -of an efficient cause of modifications, which -Lamarck refers to the efforts of the creatures themselves, -has placed his speculations in the museum of -biological curiosities; but sharp controversy rages -to-day over the question raised in Lamarck’s fourth -proposition, namely, the transmission of characters -acquired by the parent during its lifetime to the -offspring. This burning question between Weismann -and his opponents, involving the serious problem of -heredity, will remain unsettled till a long series of -observations supply material for judgment.</p> - -<p>Lamarck, poor, neglected, and blind in his old -age, died in 1829. Both Cuvier, who ridiculed him, -and Goethe, who never heard of him, passed away -three years later. The year following his death, when -Darwin was an undergraduate at Cambridge, Lyell -published his Principles of Geology, a work destined -to assist in paving the way for the removal of one -difficulty attending the solution of the theory of the -origin of species, namely, the vast period of time for -the life-history of the globe which that theory demands. -As Lyell, however, was then a believer—although, -like a few others of his time, of wavering -type—in the fixity of species, he had other aims in -view than those to which his book contributed. But<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span> -he wrote with an open mind, not being, as Herbert -Spencer says of Hugh Miller, “a theologian studying -geology.” Following the theories of uniformity -of action laid down by Hutton, by Buffon, and by -that industrious surveyor, William Smith, who travelled -the length and breadth of England, mapping -out the sequence of the rocks, and tabulating the -fossils special to each stratum, Lyell demonstrated -in detail that the formation and features of the earth’s -crust are explained by the operation of causes still -active. He was one among others, each working -independently at different branches of research; -each, unwittingly, collecting evidence which would -help to demolish old ideas, and support new theories.</p> - -<p>A year after the Principles of Geology appeared, -there crept unnoticed into the world a treatise, by -one Patrick Matthew, on Naval Timber and Arboriculture, -under which unexciting title Darwin’s theory -was anticipated. Of this, however, as of a still earlier -anticipation, more presently. About this period Von -Baer, in examining the embryos of animals, showed -that creatures so unlike one another in their adult -state as fishes, lizards, lions, and men, resemble one -another so closely in the earlier stages of their development -that no differences can be detected between -them. But Von Baer was himself anticipated -by Meckel, who wrote as follows in 1811: “There is -no good physiologist who has not been struck, incidentally, -by the observation that the original form -of all organisms is one and the same, and that out<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span> -of this one form, all, the lowest as well as the highest, -are developed in such a manner that the latter pass -through the permanent forms of the former as transitory -stages” (Osborn’s From the Greeks to Darwin, -p. 212). In botany Conrad Sprengel, who belongs -to the eighteenth century, had shown the work effected -by insects in the fertilization of plants. Following -his researches, Robert Brown made clear the -mode of the development of plants, and Sir William -Hooker traced their habits and geographical distribution. -Von Mohl discovered that material basis -of both plant and animal which he named “protoplasm.” -In 1844, nine years before Von Mohl told -the story of the building-up of life from a seemingly -structureless jelly, a book appeared which critics of -the time charged with “poisoning the fountains of -science, and sapping the foundations of religion.” -This was the once famous Vestiges of Creation, acknowledged -after his death as the work of Robert -Chambers, in which the origin and movements of -the solar system were explained as determined by -uniform laws, themselves the expression of Divine -power. Organisms, “from the simplest and oldest, -up to the highest and most recent,” were the result -of an “inherent impulse imparted by the Almighty -both to advance them from the several grades and -modify their structure as circumstances required.” -Although now referred to only as “marking time” -in the history of the theory of Evolution, the book -created a sensation which died away only some years<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span> -after its publication. Darwin remarks upon it in his -Historical Sketch that although displaying “in the -earlier editions little accurate knowledge and a great -want of scientific knowledge, it did excellent service -in this country in calling attention to the subject, in -removing prejudice, and in thus preparing the -ground for the reception of analogous views.”</p> - -<p>Three years after the Vestiges, there was, although -none then knew it, or knowing the fact, would -have admitted it, more “sapping of the foundations” -of orthodox belief, when M. Boucher de Perthes exhibited -some rudely-shaped flint implements which -had been found at intervals in hitherto undisturbed -deposits of sand and gravel—old river beds—in the -Somme valley, near Abbeville, in Picardy. For these -rough stone tools and weapons, being of human -workmanship, evidenced the existence of savage -races of men in Europe in a dim and dateless past, -and went far to refute the theories of his paradisiacal -state on that memorable “23 October, 4004 <span class="smcap lower">B. C.</span>,” -when, according to Dr. Lightfoot’s reckoning (see -p. <a href="#Page_103">103</a>), Adam was created. While the pickaxe, in -disturbing flint knives and spearheads, that had lain -for countless ages, was disturbing much besides, -English and German philosophers were formulating -the imposing theory which, under the name of the -Conservation of Energy, makes clear the indestructibility -of both matter and motion. Then, to complete -the work of preparation effected by the discoveries -now briefly outlined, there appeared, in a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span> -now defunct newspaper, the Leader, in its issue of -20th of March, 1852, an article by Herbert Spencer -on the Development Hypothesis, in which the following -striking passage occurs: “Those who cavalierly -reject the Theory of Evolution, as not adequately -supported by facts, seem quite to forget that -their own theory is supported by no facts at all. Like -the majority of men who are born to a given belief, -they demand the most rigorous proof of any adverse -belief, but assume that their own needs none. Here -we find, scattered over the globe, vegetable and animal -organisms numbering, of the one kind (according -to Humboldt) some 320,000 species, and of the -other, some 2,000,000 species (see Carpenter); and -if to these we add the numbers of animal and vegetable -species that have become extinct, we may safely -estimate the number of species that have existed, -and are existing, on the earth, at not less than <i>ten -millions</i>. Well, which is the most rational theory -about these ten millions of species? Is it most likely -that there have been ten millions of special creations? -or is it most likely that by continual modifications, -due to change of circumstances, ten millions of varieties -have been produced, as varieties are being produced -still?... Even could the supporters of the -Development Hypothesis merely show that the origination -of species by the process of modification is -conceivable, they would be in a better position than -their opponents. But they can do much more than -this. They can show that the process of modification<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span> -has effected, and is effecting, decided changes in all -organisms subject to modifying influences.... They -can show that in successive generations these changes -continue, until ultimately the new conditions become -the natural ones. They can show that in cultivated -plants, domesticated animals, and in the several races -of men, such alterations have taken place. They -can show that the degrees of difference so produced -are often, as in dogs, greater than those on which -distinctions of species are in other cases founded. -They can show, too, that the changes daily taking -place in ourselves—the facility that attends long -practice, and the loss of aptitude that begins when -practice ceases—the strengthening of passions habitually -gratified, and the weakening of those habitually -curbed—the development of every faculty, bodily, -moral, or intellectual, according to the use made of -it—are all explicable on this same principle. 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 differences; -an influence which, though slow in its -action, does, in time, if the circumstances demand it, -produce marked changes—an influence which, to all -appearance, would produce in the millions of years, -and under the great varieties of condition which geological -records imply, any amount of change.”</p> - -<p>This quotation shows, as perhaps no other reference -might show, how, by the middle of the present -century, science was trembling on the verge of discovery<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span> -of that “modifying influence” of which Mr. -Spencer speaks. That discovery made clear how all -that had preceded it not only contributed thereto, but -gained a significance and value which, apart from it, -could not have been secured. When the relation of -the several parts to the whole became manifest, each -fell into its place like the pieces of a child’s puzzle -map.</p> - - -<h3><span class="smcap">Leading Men of Science.</span></h3> - -<p class="st">A. D. 800 TO A. D. 1800.</p> - - -<div class="center"> -<table class="sci" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Leading Men of Science"> -<tr><td class="col10">Name.</td> -<td class="col10">Place and date <br />of birth.</td> -<td class="col10">Died.</td> -<td class="col11">Speciality.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Geber (Djafer).</td> -<td class="col8">Mesopotamia, 830.</td> -<td class="col9">....</td> -<td class="col2a">Earliest known Chemist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Avicenna (Ibu Sina).</td> -<td class="col8">Bokhara, 980.</td> -<td class="col9">1037</td> -<td class="col2a">Expositor of Aristotle; Physician and Geologist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Averroes (Ibu Roshd).</td> -<td class="col8">Spain, 1126.</td> -<td class="col9">1198</td> -<td class="col2a">Translator and Commentator of Aristotle.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Roger Bacon.</td> -<td class="col8">Ilchester, 1214.</td> -<td class="col9">1292</td> -<td class="col2a">First English Experimentalist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Christopher Columbus.</td> -<td class="col8">Genoa, 1445.</td> -<td class="col9">1506</td> -<td class="col2a">Discoverer of America, 1492.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Vasco de Gama.</td> -<td class="col8">Sines, 1469. (Portugal.)</td> -<td class="col9">1525</td> -<td class="col2a">Sailed round the South of Africa, 1497.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Ferdinand Magellan.</td> -<td class="col8">Ville de Sabroza, 1470.</td> -<td class="col9">1521</td> -<td class="col2a">Circumnavigator of the Globe, 1519.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Nicholas Copernicus.</td> -<td class="col8">Thorn, 1473. (Prussia.)</td> -<td class="col9">1543</td> -<td class="col2a">Discoverer of the Sun as the Centre of our System.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Andreas Vesalius.</td> -<td class="col8">Brussels, 1514.</td> -<td class="col9">1564</td> -<td class="col2a">Human Anatomist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Conrad Gesner.</td> -<td class="col8">Zurich, 1516.</td> -<td class="col9">1565</td> -<td class="col2a">Classification of Plants and Animals.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Andrew Caesalpino.</td> -<td class="col8">Arezzo, 1519. (Tuscany.)</td> -<td class="col9">1603</td> -<td class="col2a">Comparative Botanist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Tycho Brahe.</td> -<td class="col8">Knudstrup, 1546. (Sweden.)</td> -<td class="col9">1601</td> -<td class="col2a">Collector of Astronomical Data. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Giordano Bruno.</td> -<td class="col8">Nola, 1550.</td> -<td class="col9">1600</td> -<td class="col2a">Expounder of the Copernican System and Philosopher.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Francis, Lord Bacon.</td> -<td class="col8">London, 1561.</td> -<td class="col9">1626</td> -<td class="col2a">Expounder of the Inductive Philosophy.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Galileo Galilei.</td> -<td class="col8">Pisa, 1564.</td> -<td class="col9">1642</td> -<td class="col2a">Numerous Astronomical Discoveries.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Johann Kepler.</td> -<td class="col8">Würtemburg, 1571.</td> -<td class="col9">1630</td> -<td class="col2a">Discoverer of the Three Laws of Planetary Movements.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Thomas Hobbes.</td> -<td class="col8">Malmesbury, 1588.</td> -<td class="col9">1679</td> -<td class="col2a">One of the Founders of Modern Ethics.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">René Descartes.</td> -<td class="col8">La Haye, 1596. (Touraine.)</td> -<td class="col9">1650</td> -<td class="col2a">Resolution of all Phenomena into Terms of Matter and Motion. (Dualism.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Benedict Spinoza.</td> -<td class="col8">Amsterdam, 1632.</td> -<td class="col9">1677</td> -<td class="col2a">Resolution of all Phenomena into Terms of Substance=God. (Monism.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">John Locke.</td> -<td class="col8">Wrington, 1632. (Somerset.)</td> -<td class="col9">1704</td> -<td class="col2a">Moral Philosopher.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Gottfrid Wilhelm Leibnitz.</td> -<td class="col8">Leipsic, 1646.</td> -<td class="col9">1716</td> -<td class="col2a">Philosopher and Mathematician.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Sir Isaac Newton.</td> -<td class="col8">Woolsthorpe, 1642. (Lincoln.)</td> -<td class="col9">1727</td> -<td class="col2a">Expounder of the Law of Gravitation.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Edmund Halley.</td> -<td class="col8">London, 1656.</td> -<td class="col9">1741</td> -<td class="col2a">Astronomer.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">David Hartley.</td> -<td class="col8">Illingworth, 1705.</td> -<td class="col9">1757</td> -<td class="col2a">Psychology of Man.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Carl von Linnaeus.</td> -<td class="col8">Roeshult, 1707. (Sweden.)</td> -<td class="col9">1778</td> -<td class="col2a">Systematic Botany and Zoology.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Count de Buffon.</td> -<td class="col8">Burgundy, 1707.</td> -<td class="col9">1788</td> -<td class="col2a">Contributions from Biology toward Theory of Evolution and Geology.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">David Hume.</td> -<td class="col8">Edinburgh, 1711.</td> -<td class="col9">1776</td> -<td class="col2a">Philosophy of the Anti-supernatural; all Science Converging in Man.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Immanuel Kant.</td> -<td class="col8">Königsberg, 1724.</td> -<td class="col9">1804</td> -<td class="col2a">Formulator of the Nebular Theory.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">James Hutton.</td> -<td class="col8">Edinburgh, 1726.</td> -<td class="col9">1797</td> -<td class="col2a">Geologist: Uniformitarian. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span></td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Erasmus Darwin.</td> -<td class="col8">Elton, 1731. (Lincolnshire.)</td> -<td class="col9">1802</td> -<td class="col2a">(<i>See</i> <span class="smcap">Buffon</span>.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Sir William Herschel.</td> -<td class="col8">Hanover, 1738.</td> -<td class="col9">1822</td> -<td class="col2a">Astronomer.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Jean Baptiste Lamarck.</td> -<td class="col8">Bazantium, 1744.</td> -<td class="col9">1829</td> -<td class="col2a">Biologist: Contributions against fixity of Species.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Marquis de Laplace.</td> -<td class="col8">Beaumont-en-Ange, 1749.</td> -<td class="col9">1827</td> -<td class="col2a">Expounder of the Nebular Theory.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Conrad Sprengel.</td> -<td class="col8">Pomerania, 1766.</td> -<td class="col9">1833</td> -<td class="col2a">Botanist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">John Dalton.</td> -<td class="col8">Eaglesfield, 1767. (Cumberland.)</td> -<td class="col9">1844</td> -<td class="col2a">Formulator of the Modern Atomic Theory.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Baron Cuvier.</td> -<td class="col8">Montbeliard, 1769.</td> -<td class="col9">1832</td> -<td class="col2a">Palæontologist and Anatomist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Geoff. St. Hilaire.</td> -<td class="col8">Etampes, 1772.</td> -<td class="col9">1844</td> -<td class="col2a">Zoologist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Alexander von Humboldt.</td> -<td class="col8">Berlin, 1769.</td> -<td class="col9">1859</td> -<td class="col2a">Explorer.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">William Smith.</td> -<td class="col8">Churchill, 1769. (Oxon.)</td> -<td class="col9">1840</td> -<td class="col2a">Geologist: mapped Strata of Great Britain.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Boucher de Perthes.</td> -<td class="col8">1788</td> -<td class="col9">1868</td> -<td class="col2a">Discoverer of Evidences of Man’s Antiquity.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Sir William Hooker.</td> -<td class="col8">Norwich, 1785.</td> -<td class="col9">1865</td> -<td class="col2a">Botanist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Sir Charles Lyell.</td> -<td class="col8">Kinnordy, 1797. (Forfarshire.)</td> -<td class="col9">1875</td> -<td class="col2a">Geologist: developed Hutton’s Theory.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Ernst von Baer.</td> -<td class="col8">Esthonia, 1792.</td> -<td class="col9">1876</td> -<td class="col2a">Embryologist: Law of Organic Development.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Sir Richard Owen.</td> -<td class="col8">Lancaster, 1804.</td> -<td class="col9">1892</td> -<td class="col2a">Palæontologist.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Hugo von Mohl.</td> -<td class="col8">Germany, 1805.</td> -<td class="col9">1872</td> -<td class="col2a">Discoverer of Protoplasm.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Theodor Schwann.</td> -<td class="col8">Neuss, 1810. (Prussia.)</td> -<td class="col9">1882</td> -<td class="col2a">Founder of the Cell Theory.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col8">Hermann von Helmholtz.</td> -<td class="col8">Potsdam, 1821.</td> -<td class="col9">1894</td> -<td class="col2a">Formulator of the Doctrine of the Conservation of Energy.</td></tr> -</table></div> -<hr class="l1" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><i>PART IV.</i></h2> - -<h2>MODERN EVOLUTION.</h2> - - -<h3>1. <i>Darwin and Wallace.</i></h3> - -<div class="qt2"> -<p>We have to deal with Man as a product of Evolution; with Society -as a product of Evolution; and with Moral Phenomena as products -of Evolution.—<span class="smcap">Herbert Spencer</span>, Principles of Ethics, -§ 193.</p> -</div> - -<p><span class="smcap">Charles Robert Darwin</span> (the second name was -rarely used by him) was born at Shrewsbury on the -12th of February, 1809. He came of a long line of -Lincolnshire yeomen, whose forbears spelt the name -variously, as Darwen, Derwent, and Darwynne, perhaps -deriving it from the river of kindred name. -His father was a kindly, prosperous doctor, of sufficient -scientific reputation to secure his election into -the Royal Society, although that coveted honour -was then more easily obtained than now. Of the -more famous grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, the reminder -suffices that both his prose and poetry were -vehicles of suggestive speculations on the development -of life-forms. Dealing with bald facts and dates -for clearance of what follows, it may be added that -Charles Darwin was educated at the Grammar -School of his native town; that he passed thence to -Edinburgh and Cambridge Universities; was occupied -as volunteer naturalist on board the Beagle from<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span> -December, 1831, till October, 1836; that he published -his epoch-making Origin of Species in November, -1859; and that he was buried by the side -of Sir Isaac Newton in Westminster Abbey on the -26th of April, 1882.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<img src="images/oi_136.jpg" width="419" height="738" alt="Alfred R. Wallace" title="Alfred R. Wallace" /> -</div> - -<p>As with not a few other men of “light and leading,” -neither school nor university did much for him, -nor did his boyhood give indication of future greatness. -In his answers to the series of questions addressed -to various scientific men in 1873 by his distinguished -cousin, Francis Galton, he says: “I consider -that all I have learnt of any value has been -self-taught,” and he adds that his education fostered -no methods of observation or reasoning. Of the -Shrewsbury Grammar School, where, after the death -of his mother (daughter of Josiah Wedgwood, the -celebrated potter), in his ninth year, he was placed -as a boarder till his sixteenth year, he tells us, in the -modest and candid Autobiography printed in the -Life and Letters, “nothing could have been worse -for the development of my mind.” All that he was -taught were the classics, and a little ancient geography -and history; no mathematics, and no modern -languages. Happily, he had inherited a taste for -natural history and for collecting, his spoils including -not only shells and plants, but also coins and -seals. When the fact that he helped his brother in -chemical experiments became known to Dr. Butler, -the head-master, that desiccated pedagogue publicly -rebuked him “for wasting time on such useless subjects.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span> -Then his father, angry at finding that he was -doing no good at school, reproved him for caring -for nothing but shooting, dogs, and rat-catching, and -declared that he would be a disgrace to the family! -He sent him to Edinburgh University with his -brother to study medicine, but Darwin found the -dulness of the lectures intolerable, and the sight of -blood sickened him, as it did his father. Although -the effect of the “incredibly” dry lectures on geology -made him—the future Secretary of the Geological -Society!—vow never to read a book on the science, -or in any way study it, his interest in biological subjects -grew, and its first fruits were shown in a paper -read before the Plinian Society at Edinburgh in 1826, -in which he reported his discovery that the so-called -ova of <i>Flustra</i>, or the sea-mat, were larvæ.</p> - -<p>But his father had to accept the fact that Darwin -disliked the idea of being a doctor, and fearing that -he would degenerate into an idle sporting man, proposed -that he should become a clergyman! Darwin -says upon this:—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>I asked for some time to consider, as from what little I had -heard or thought on the subject I had scruples about declaring -my belief in all the dogmas of the Church of England, though -otherwise I liked the thought of being a country clergyman. -Accordingly I read with care Pearson on the Creed, and a few -other books on divinity; and, as I did not then in the least -doubt the strict and literal truth of every word in the Bible, I -soon persuaded myself that our creed must be fully accepted. -Considering how fiercely I have been attacked by the orthodox, -it seems ludicrous that I once intended to be a clergyman. -Nor was this intention and my father’s wish ever formally<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span> -given up, but died a natural death when, on leaving Cambridge, -I joined the Beagle as naturalist. If the phrenologists are to -be trusted, I was well fitted in one respect to be a clergyman. -A few years ago the secretaries of a German psychological -society asked me earnestly by letter for a photograph of myself; -and some time afterwards I received the proceedings of -one of the meetings, in which it seemed that the shape of my -head had been the subject of a public discussion, and one of -the speakers declared that I had the bump of reverence developed -enough for ten priests.</p></div> - -<p>The result was that early in 1828 Darwin went -to Cambridge, the three years spent at which were -“time wasted, as far as the academical studies were -concerned.” His passion for shooting and hunting -led him into a sporting, card-playing, drinking company, -but science was his redemption. No pursuit -gave him so much pleasure as collecting beetles, of -his zeal in which the following is an example: “One -day, on tearing off some old bark, I saw two rare -beetles, and seized one in each hand; then I saw a -third and new kind, which I could not bear to lose, -so I popped the one which I held in my right hand -into my mouth. Alas! it ejected some intensely -acrid fluid, which burnt my tongue so that I was -forced to spit the beetle out, which was lost, as was -the third one.”</p> - -<p>Happily for his future career, and therefore for -the interests of science, Darwin became intimate with -men like Whewell, Henslow, and Sedgwick, while the -reading of Humboldt’s Personal Narrative, and of -Sir John Herschel’s Introduction to Natural Philosophy,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span> -stirred up in him “a burning zeal to add -even the most humble contribution to the noble -structure of Natural Science.” The vow to eschew -geology was quickly broken when he came under -the spell of Sedgwick’s influence, but it was the -friendship of Henslow that determined his after -career, and prevented him from becoming the “Rev. -Charles Darwin.” For on his return from a geological -tour in Wales with Sedgwick he found a letter -from Henslow awaiting him, the purport of which -is in the following extract:—</p> - -<p>“I have been asked by Peacock (Lowndean -Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge) to recommend -him a naturalist as companion to Captain -Fitz-Roy, employed by Government to survey the -southern extremity of America. I have stated that -I consider you to be the best-qualified person I know -of who is likely to undertake such a situation.”</p> - -<p>In connection with this the following memorandum -from Darwin’s pocket-book of 1831 is of interest:—“Returned -to Shrewsbury at end of August. -Refused offer of voyage.”</p> - -<p>This refusal was given at the instance of his -father, who objected to the scheme as “wild and -unsettling, and as disreputable to his character as a -clergyman”; but he soon yielded on the advice of -his brother-in-law, Josiah Wedgwood, and on Darwin’s -plea that he “should be deuced clever to spend -more than his allowance whilst on board the Beagle.” -On this his father answered with a smile, “But they<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span> -tell me you are very clever.” It is amusing to find -that Darwin narrowly escaped being rejected by -Fitz-Roy, who, as a disciple of Lavater, doubted -whether a man with such a nose as Darwin’s “could -possess sufficient energy and determination for the -voyage.”</p> - -<p>The details of that voyage, the first of the two -memorable events in Darwin’s otherwise unadventurous -life, are set down in delightful narrative in his -Naturalist’s Voyage Round the World, and it will -suffice to quote a passage from the autobiography -bearing on the significance of the materials collected -during his five years’ absence.</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>During the voyage of the Beagle I had been deeply impressed -by discovering in the Pampean formation great fossil -animals covered with armour like that on the existing armadillos; -secondly, by the manner in which closely allied animals -replace one another in proceeding southwards over the continent; -and thirdly, by the South American character of most -of the productions of the Galapagos Archipelago, and more -especially by the manner in which they differ slightly on each -island of the group, none of the islands appearing to be very -ancient in a geological sense. It was evident that such facts -as these, as well as many others, could only be explained on -the supposition that species gradually became modified; and -the subject haunted me. But it was equally evident that -“none of the evolutionary theories then current in the scientific -world” could account for the innumerable cases in which -organisms of every kind are beautifully adapted to their habits -of life.... I had always been much struck by such adaptations, -and until these could be explained, it seemed to me -almost useless to endeavour to prove by indirect evidence that -species have been modified.... In October, 1838, that is,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span> -fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened -to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being -well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which -everywhere goes on, from long-continued observations of the -habits of plants and animals, it at once struck me that under -these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be -preserved, and unfavourable ones destroyed. The result of -this would be the formation of new species.</p></div> - -<p>Shortly after his return he settled in London, prepared -his journal and manuscripts of observations for -publication, and opened, he says, under date of July, -1837, “my first note-book for facts in relation to the -origin of species, about which I had long reflected, -and never ceased working for the next twenty years.” -He acted for two years as one of the honorary secretaries -of the Geological Society, which brought him -into close relations with Lyell, and, as his health -then allowed him to go into society, he saw a good -deal of prominent literary and scientific contemporaries.</p> - -<p>In the autumn of 1842, two years and eight -months after his marriage with his first cousin, -Emma Wedgwood, who died in October last (1896), -Darwin removed from London, the air and social -demands of which were alike unsuited to his health, -and finally fixed upon a house in the secluded village -of Down, near Beckenham, where he spent the rest -of his days. Henceforth the life of Darwin is merged -in the books in which, from time to time, he gave -the result of his long years of patient observation -and inquiry, from the epoch-making Origin to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span> -monograph on earthworms. With bad health, apparently -due to gouty tendencies aggravated by -chronic sea-sickness during his voyage; with nights -that never gave unbroken sleep; and days that were -never passed without prostrating pain; he might -well have felt justified in doing nothing whatever. -But he was saved from the accursed monotony of a -wealthy invalid’s life by his insatiate delight in -searching for that solution of the problem of the -mutability of species which time would not fail to -bring. In this, he tells us, he forgot his “daily discomfort,” -and thus was delivered from morbid introspection.</p> - -<p>Darwin worked at his rough notes on the variation -of animals and plants under domestication, adding -facts collected by “printed enquiries, by conversations -with skilful breeders and gardeners, and -by extensive reading,” gleams of light coming till -he says that he is “almost convinced that species -are not (it is like confessing a murder) immutable.” -But he was still groping in the dark as to the application -of selection to wild plants and animals, until, -as remarked above, the chance reading of Malthus -suggested a working theory. A brief sketch of this -theory, written out in pencil in 1842, was elaborated -in 1844 into an essay of two hundred and thirty -pages. The importance attached to this was shown -in a letter which Darwin then addressed to his wife, -charging her, in the event of his death, to apply -£400 to the expense of publication. He also named<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span> -certain competent men from whom an editor might -be chosen, preference being given to Sir Charles -(then Mr. Lyell, at whose advice Darwin began to -write out his views on a scale three or four times as -extensive as that in which they appeared in the -Origin of Species.) Their publication in an abstract -form was hastened by the receipt, in June, 1858, of -a paper, containing “exactly the same theory,” from -Mr. Alfred Russel Wallace at Ternate in the -Moluccas. This reference to that distinguished explorer, -will, before the story of the coincident discovery -is further told, fitly introduce a sketch of his -career.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Alfred Russel Wallace</span> was born at Usk, in -Monmouthshire, on the 8th of January, 1823. He was -educated at Hereford Grammar School, and in his -fourteenth year began the study of land-surveying -and architecture under an elder brother. Quick-witted -and observing, he studied a great deal more -on his own account in his journeyings over England -and Wales, the results of which abide in the wide -range of subjects—scientific, political, and social—engaging -his active pen from early manhood to the -present day.</p> - -<p>About 1844 he exchanged the theodolite for the -ferule, and became English master in the Collegiate -School at Leicester, in which town he found a congenial -friend in the person of his future fellow-traveller, -Henry Walter Bates. Bates was then employed -in his father’s hosiery warehouse, from which he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[135]</a></span> -escaped, as often as the long working hours then -prevailing allowed, into the fields with his collecting-box. -Both schoolmaster and shopman were ardent -naturalists, Mr. Wallace, as he tells us, being at that -time “chiefly interested in botany,” but he afterward -took up his friend’s favourite pursuit of -entomology. The writer, when preparing his memoir -of Bates (which prefaces a reprint of the first edition -of the delightful Naturalist on the Amazons), learned -from Mr. Wallace that in early life he did not keep -letters from Bates and other correspondents. But, -fortunately, among Bates’s papers, there was a -bundle of interesting letters from Wallace written -between June, 1845, and October, 1847, from Neath, -in South Wales, to which town he had removed. -In one of these, dated the 9th of November, 1845, -Wallace asks Bates if he had read the Vestiges of the -Natural History of Creation, and a subsequent letter -indicates that Bates had not formed a favourable -opinion of the book. A later letter is interesting -as conveying an estimate of Darwin. “I first,” Wallace -says, “read Darwin’s Journal three or four years -back, and have lately re-read it. As the journal of -a scientific traveller, it is second only to Humboldt’s -Personal Narrative; as a work of general interest, -perhaps supporter to it. He is an ardent admirer and -most able supporter of Mr. Lyell’s views. His style -of writing I very much admire, so free from all -labour, affectation, or egotism, yet so full of interest -and original thought.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[136]</a></span></p> - -<p>But, of still greater moment, is a letter in which -Wallace tells Bates that he begins “to feel dissatisfied -with a mere local collection. I should like to -take some one family to study thoroughly, principally -with a view to the theory of the origin of -species.” The two friends had often discussed -schemes for going abroad to explore some virgin -region, nor could their scanty means prevent the -fulfilment of a scheme which has enriched both science -and the literature of travel. The choice of -country to explore was settled by Wallace’s perusal -of a little book entitled A Voyage up the River -Amazons, including a Residence in Pará, by W. H. -Edwards, an American tourist, published in Murray’s -Family Library, in 1847. In the autumn of that -year Wallace proposed a joint expedition to the -river Amazons for the purpose of exploring the -Natural History of its banks; the plan being to -make a collection of objects, dispose of the duplicates -in London to pay expenses, and gather facts, -as Mr. Wallace expressed it in one of his letters, -“towards solving the problem of the origin of -species.”</p> - -<p>The choice was a happy one, for, except by the -German zoologist Von Spix, and the botanist Von -Martius in 1817-20, and subsequently by Count de -Castelnau, no exploration of a region so rich and -interesting to the biologist had been attempted. -Early in 1848 Bates and Wallace met in London -to study South American animals and plants in the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[137]</a></span> -principal collections, and afterward went to Chatsworth -to gain information about orchids, which they -proposed to collect in the moist tropical forests and -send home.</p> - -<p>On 26th of April, 1848, they embarked at Liverpool -in a barque of only 192 tons burden, one of the -few ships then trading to Pará, to which seaport of -the Amazons region a swift passage, “straight as -an arrow,” brought them on 28th of May.</p> - -<p>The travellers soon settled in a <i>rocinha</i>, or -country-house, a mile and half from Pará, and close -to the forest, which came down to their doors. Like -other towns along the Amazons, Pará stands on -ground cleared from the forest that stretches, a well-nigh -pathless jungle of luxuriant primeval vegetation, -two thousand miles inland. In that paradise of -the naturalist, the collectors gathered consignments -which met with ready sale in London, and thus -spent a couple of years in pursuits moderately remunerative -and wholly pleasurable, till, on reaching -Barra, at the mouth of the Rio Negro, one thousand -miles from Pará, in March, 1850, Bates and -Wallace, who was accompanied by his younger -brother, parted company, “finding it more convenient -to explore separate districts and collect independently.” -Wallace took the northern parts and -tributaries of the Amazons, and Bates kept to the -main stream, which, from the direction it seems to -take at the fork of the Rio Negro, is called the Upper -Amazons or the Solimoens. Different in character<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[138]</a></span> -and climatic conditions from the Lower Amazons, it -flows through a “vast plain about a thousand miles -in length, and five hundred or six hundred miles in -breadth covered with one uniform, lofty, impervious, -and humid forest.” Bates stayed in the country till -June, 1859, but Wallace left in 1852, and in the -following year published an account of his journey -under the title of Travels on the Amazon and Rio -Negro. That book was written under the serious -disadvantage of the destruction of the greater part -of the notes and specimens by the burning of the -ship in which Mr. Wallace took passage on his homeward -voyage. That it remains one of the select company -of works of travel for which demand is continuous -is evidenced in a reprint which appeared in 1891. -If it affords few hints of the author’s bent of mind -toward the question of the origin of species, it shows -what interest was being aroused within him over the -allied subject of the geographical distribution of -plants and animals which Mr. Wallace was to make -so markedly his own.</p> - -<p>In 1854 he sailed for the Malay Archipelago, -where nearly eight years were spent in exploring the -region from Sumatra to New Guinea. The large -and varied outcome of that labour was embodied in -numerous papers communicated to learned societies -and scientific journals, and in a series of delightful -books from The Malay Archipelago, first published -in 1869, to Island Life, published in 1880. Among -the minor results of his extensive travels—for all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[139]</a></span> -else that Wallace did pales before the great discovery -which links his name with Darwin’s—was the establishment -of a line, known as “Wallace’s,” which -divides the Malay Archipelago into two main groups, -“Indo-Malaysia and Austro-Malaysia, marked by -distinct species and groups of animals.” That line -runs through a deep channel separating the islands -of Bali and Lombok; the plants and animals on -which, although but fifteen miles of water separate -them, differ from each other even more than do the -islands of Great Britain and Japan. “A similar -line, but somewhat farther east, divides on the whole -the Malay from the Papuan races of man.”</p> - -<p>Among the more fugitive contributions which -mark Mr. Wallace’s approach to a solution of the -problem in quest of which he and Bates went to the -Amazons is a paper On the Law which has Regulated -the Introduction of New Species, published in -the Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 1855. -In this he shows that some form of evolution of one -species from another is needed to explain the geological -and geographical facts of which examples are -given.</p> - -<p>In the interesting preface to the reprint of the -famous paper On the Tendencies of Varieties to depart -Indefinitely from the Original Type, Mr. Wallace -recites the several researches which he made in -quest of that “form” till, when lying ill with fever at -Ternate, in February, 1858, something led him to -think of the “positive checks” described by Malthus<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[140]</a></span> -in his Essay on Population, a book which he had -read some years before. Oddly enough, therefore, -the honours lie with the maligned Haileybury Reverend -Professor of Political Economy in furnishing -both Darwin and Wallace with the clue. The “positive -checks”—war, disease, famine—Wallace felt -must act even more effectively on the lower animals -than on man, because of their more rapid rate of -multiplication. And he tells us, in the prefatory -note to a reprint of his paper, “there suddenly -flashed on me the <i>idea</i> of the survival of the fittest, -and in the two hours that elapsed before my ague -fit was over I had thought out the whole of the -theory, and in the two succeeding evenings wrote it -out in full and sent it by the next post to Mr. Darwin,” -asking him, if he thought well of the essay, to -send it to Lyell. This Darwin did with the following -remarks: “Your words have come true with a vengeance—that -I should be forestalled.... I never -saw a more striking coincidence; if Wallace had -my MS. sketch written out in 1842, he could not have -made a better short abstract! Even his terms now -stand as heads of my chapters. Please return me the -MS., which he does not say he wishes me to publish; -but I shall, of course, at once write and offer to send -to any journal. So all my originality, whatever it -may amount to, will be smashed, though my book, -if it will ever have any value, will not be deteriorated, -as all the labour consists in the application of the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[141]</a></span>theory.” Darwin came out well in this business. -For to have hit upon a theory which interprets so -large a question as the origin and causes of modification -of life-forms; to keep on turning it over and -over again in the mind for twenty long years; to -spend the working hours of every day in collection -and verification of facts for and against it; and then -to have another man launching a “bolt from the -blue” in the shape of a paper with exactly the same -theory, might well disturb even a philosopher of -Darwin’s serenity.</p> - -<p>However, both Hooker and Lyell had read his -sketch a dozen years before, and it was arranged by -them, not as considering claims of priority, which -have too often been occasion of unworthy wrangling, -but in the “interests of science generally,” that an -abstract of Darwin’s manuscript should be read with -Wallace’s paper at a meeting of the Linnæan Society -on the 1st of July, 1858. The full title of the joint communication -was On the Tendency of Species to form -Varieties, and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and -Species by Natural Selection. Sir Joseph Hooker, -describing the gathering, says that “the interest excited -was intense, but the subject was too novel and -too ominous for the old school to enter the lists before -armouring. After the meeting it was talked -over with bated breath. Lyell’s approval, and perhaps, -in a small way mine, as his lieutenant in the -affair, rather overawed the Fellows, who would -otherwise have flown out against the doctrine. We -had, too, the vantage ground of being familiar with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[142]</a></span> -the authors and their theme.” Nothing can deprive -Mr. Wallace of the honour due to him as the co-originator -of the theory, which, regarded in its application -to the origin, history, and destiny of man, involves -the most momentous changes in belief, and -there may be fitly quoted here his own modest and, -doubtless, correct, assessment of limitations which in -no wise invalidate his high claims. In the Preface -to his Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection -(1870), Mr. Wallace says the book will prove -that he both saw at the time the value and scope of -the law which he had discovered, and has since been -able to apply to some purpose in a few original lines -of investigation. “But,” he adds, “here my claims -cease. I have felt all my life, and I still feel, the -most sincere satisfaction that Mr. Darwin had been -at work long before me, and that it was not left for -me to attempt to write the Origin of Species. I -have long since measured my own strength, and -know full well that it would be quite unequal to -that task. Far abler men than myself may confess -that they have not that untiring patience in accumulating, -and that wonderful skill in using, large masses -of facts of the most varied kind—that wide and -accurate physiological knowledge—that acuteness in -devising and skill in carrying out experiments, and -that admirable style of composition at once clear, -persuasive, and judicial—qualities which, in their -harmonious combination, mark out Mr. Darwin as -the man, perhaps of all men now living, best fitted<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[143]</a></span> -for the great work he has undertaken and accomplished.”</p> - -<p>In a letter to Wallace dated 20th April, 1870, -Darwin says, “There has never been passed on me, -or, indeed, on any one, a higher eulogium than yours. -I wish that I fully deserved it. Your modesty and -candour are very far from new to me. I hope it is -a satisfaction to you to reflect—and very few things -in my life have been more satisfactory to me—that -we have never felt any jealousy towards each other, -though in one sense rivals. I believe I can say this -of myself with truth, and I am absolutely sure it is -true of you.”</p> - -<p> </p> - -<p>But on one question, and that round which discussion -still rages, the friends were poles asunder. -There had been correspondence between them as -to the bearing of the theory of natural selection on -man, and in April, 1869, Darwin wrote, “As you -expected, I differ grievously from you, and I am -very sorry for it. I can see no necessity for calling -in an additional and proximate cause in regard to -man.” In the fifteenth chapter of his comprehensive -book on Darwinism, Wallace admits the action of -natural selection in man’s physical structure. This -structure classes him among the vertebrates; the -mode of human suckling classes him among the -mammals; his blood, his muscles, and his nerves, -the structure of his heart with its veins and arteries, -his lungs and his whole respiratory and circulatory<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[144]</a></span> -systems, all closely correspond to those of other -mammals, and are often almost identical with them. -He possesses the same number of limbs, terminating -in the same number of digits, as belong fundamentally -to the mammals. His senses are identical with -theirs, and his organs of sense are the same in number -and occupy the same relative position. Every -detail of structure which is common to the mammalia -as a class is found also in man, while he differs from -them only in such ways and degrees as the various -species or groups of mammals differ from each other. -He is, like them, begotten by sexual conjugation; -like them, developed from a fertilized egg, and in -his embryonic condition passes through stages recapitulating -the variety of enormously remote ancestors -of whom he is the perfected descendant. -Full-grown, he appears as most nearly allied to the -anthropoid or man-like apes; so much does his -skeleton resemble theirs that, comparing him with -the chimpanzee, we find, with very few exceptions, -bone for bone, differing only in size, arrangement, -and proportion.</p> - -<p>Mr. Wallace, therefore, rejected the idea of man’s -special creation “as being entirely unsupported by -facts, as well as in the highest degree improbable.” -<i>But he would not allow that natural selection explains -the origin of man’s spiritual and intellectual nature.</i> -These, he argues, “must have had another origin, -and for this origin we can only find an adequate -cause in the unseen universe of Spirit.” More detailed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[145]</a></span> -treatment of this argument will be given further -on; here reference is made to it as furnishing -the explanation why Mr. Wallace kept not his “first -estate,” and dropped out of the ranks of Pioneers of -Evolution. Many subjects, as hinted above, have -occupied his facile pen—land nationalization, causes -of depression in trade, labourers’ allotments, vaccination, -<i>et hoc genus omne;</i> showing, at least, the prominence -which all social matters occupy in the minds of -the leading exponents of the theory of Evolution. -For of this, as will be seen, both Herbert Spencer -and Huxley supply cogent examples in their application -of that theory to human interests. But it is as a -defender, although on lines of his own not wholly -orthodox, of supernaturalism, with attendant beliefs -in miracles and the grosser forms of spiritualism, -that Mr. Wallace appears in the character of opponent -to the inclusion of man’s psychical nature as a -product of Evolution.</p> - -<p>The arresting influence of these views when -backed by honest, sincere, and eminent men of the -type of Mr. Wallace, and when also supported by -several prominent men of science, renders it desirable -to show that modern psychism is but savage animism -“writ large,” and wholly explicable on the theory of -continuity. In his book on Miracles and Modern -Spiritualism, of which a revised edition, with chapters -on Apparitions and Phantasms, was issued in 1895, -Mr. Wallace contends that “Spiritualism, if true, -furnishes such proofs of the existence of ethereal<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[146]</a></span> -beings and of their power to act upon matter, as -must revolutionise philosophy. It demonstrates the -actuality of forms of matter and modes of being before -inconceivable; it demonstrates mind without -brain, and intelligence disconnected from what we -know as the material body; and it thus cuts away all -presumption against our continued existence after -the physical body is disorganised and dissolved. Yet -more, it demonstrates, as completely as the fact can -be demonstrated, that the so-called dead are still -alive; that our friends are still with us, though unseen, -and guide and strengthen us when, owing to -absence of proper conditions, they cannot make their -presence known. It thus furnishes a <i>proof</i> of a future -life which so many crave, and for want of which so -many live and die in anxious doubt, so many in positive -disbelief. It substitutes a definite, real, and practical -conviction for a vague, theoretical, and unsatisfying -faith. It furnishes actual knowledge on a -matter of vital importance to all men, and as to which -the wisest men and most advanced thinkers have -held, and still hold, that no knowledge was attainable.”</p> - -<p>This claim, this tremendous claim, on behalf of -the phenomena of spiritualism to supply an answer -to “the question of questions; the ascertainment of -man’s relation to the universe of things; whence our -race has come; to what goal we are tending,” rests -on the assumption with which Mr. Wallace starts, -“Spiritualism, <i>if true</i>.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[147]</a></span></p> - -<p>The essay from which the above passages are -quoted is preceded by references in detail to a considerable -number of cases of “the appearance of -preterhuman or spiritual beings,” the evidence of -which “is as good and definite as it is possible for -any evidence of any fact to be.” These ghost-stories, -contrasted with the full-flavoured eerie tales of old, -are feebly monotonous. The apparatus of the -medium is limited: the phenomena are largely of the -“horse-play” order. Through the whole series we -vainly seek for some ennobling and exalting conception -of a life beyond, some glimpses “behind the -veil,” only to find that the shades are but diluted or -vulgarized parodies of ourselves; or that “the filthy -are filthy still,” like the departed bargee whose -“communicating intelligence” (we quote from a recent -book on spiritualism entitled The Great Secret) -was as coarse-mouthed as when in the flesh. In -considering, if it be deemed worth while, the evidence -of genuineness of the occurrences, we are -thrown, not on the honesty, but on the competency -of the witnesses. The most eminent among these -show themselves persons of undisciplined emotions. -The distinguished physicist, Professor Oliver Lodge, -who has been described to the writer by an intimate -friend of the Professor as “longing to believe something,” -argues that in dealing with psychical phenomena, -a hazy, muzzy state of mind is better than a -mind “keenly awake” and “on the spot” (see Address -to the Society for Psychical Research, Proceedings,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[148]</a></span> -part xxvi, pp. 14, 15). With this may be -compared a Mohammedan receipt for summoning -spirits given in Klunzinger’s Upper Egypt (p. 386): -“Fast seven days in a lonely place, and take incense -with you. Read a chapter 1001 times from the -Koran. That is the secret, and you will see indescribable -wonders; drums will be beaten beside you, -and flags hoisted over your head, and you will see -spirits.” Thus have the dreamy Oriental Moslem -and the self-hypnotized Western professor met together -to elicit truth from trance.</p> - -<p>Concerning the competence of Mr. Wallace himself -to weigh, unbiassed, the evidence which comes -before him, it suffices to cite the case of Eusapia -Paladino, a Neapolitan “medium,” who, in the words -of one of her most ardent dupes, became “the unexpected -instrument of driving conviction as to the -reality of psychical manifestations by the invisible -into the minds of many scientists.” A number of -distinguished savants testified to the genuineness of -the woman’s performances in Professor Richet’s cottage -on the Ile Roubant in the autumn of 1893. It -was the serious and complete conviction of all of -them (Lodge, Richet, Ochorowicz, and others) that -“on no single occasion during the occurrence of an -event recorded by them was a hand of Eusapia’s free -to execute any trick whatever.” Mr. Maskelyne, such -testimony notwithstanding, declared that the whole -business was “the sorriest of trickeries,” and, to the -credit of the Society for Psychical Research, it undertook<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[149]</a></span> -the expense of bringing Eusapia to England -for the purpose of testing the genuineness of her -doings. She was taken to a house in Cambridge, -and detected as a vulgar impostor. Yet Mr. Wallace, -in the new edition of his Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, -describes all the phenomena occurring at -Professor Richet’s house as “not explicable as the -result of any known physical causes,” and, in a subsequent -explanatory letter to the Daily Chronicle -of 24th of January, 1896, expresses the opinion that -“the Cambridge experiments, so far as they are -recorded, only prove that Eusapia <i>might</i> have deceived, -not that she actually and <i>consciously</i> did so.” -The integrity of Mr. Wallace is not to be doubted, -but what becomes of his competence to judge when -prejudice blinds itself to facts? Spiritualism, <i>if true</i>, -demonstrates this and that about the unseen; but -spiritualism, <i>proved to be untrue</i>, lacks half the dexterity -of an astute conjurer, and the whole of his -honesty. Every scientific man recognises the doctrine -of the Conservation of Energy as a fundamental -canon. But with those who regard the phenomena -of Spiritualism as “not explicable” except by supernatural -causes, it would seem that that doctrine, as -also the not unimportant conditions of Time and -Space, count for nothing. When we read their reports -of the behaviour of mediums who project (of -course, in the dark) “abnormal temporary prolongations” -like pseudopodia, we should feel alike depressed -and confounded were there not abundant<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[150]</a></span> -proofs what wholly untrustworthy observers scientific -specialists can be outside their own domain. As -the writer has remarked elsewhere, minds of this -type must be built in water-tight compartments. -They show how, even in the higher culture, the force -of a dominant idea may suspend or narcotize the -reason and judgment, and contribute to the rise and -spread of another of the epidemic delusions of which -history supplies warning examples.</p> - -<p>They also show that man’s senses have been his -arch-deceivers, and his preconceptions their abettors, -throughout human history; that advance has been -possible only as he has escaped through the discipline -of the intellect from the illusive impressions -about phenomena which the senses convey. Upon -this matter the words of the late Dr. Carpenter may -be quoted, words the more weighty because they are -the utterance of a man whose philosophy was influenced -by deep religious convictions: “With every -disposition to accept facts when I could once clearly -satisfy myself that they were facts, I have had to -come to the conclusion that whenever I have been -permitted to employ such tests as I should employ -in any scientific investigation, there was either intentional -deception on the part of interested persons, or -else self-deception on the part of persons who were -very sober-minded and rational upon all ordinary -affairs of life.” He adds further: “It has been my -business lately to inquire into the mental condition -of some of the individuals who have reported the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[151]</a></span> -most remarkable occurrences. I cannot—it would -not be fair—say all I could with regard to that mental -condition; but I can only say this, that it all fits -in perfectly well with the result of my previous -studies upon the subject, viz., that there is nothing -too strange to be believed by those who have once -surrendered their judgment to the extent of accepting -as credible things which common sense tells us -are entirely incredible.”</p> - -<p>The fact abides that the great mass of supernatural -beliefs which have persisted from the lower -culture till now, and which are still held by an -overwhelming majority of civilized mankind, are referable -to causes concomitant with man’s mental -development: causes operative throughout his history. -The low intellectual environment of his -barbaric past was constant for thousands of years, -and his adaptation thereto was complete. The intrusion -of the scientific method in its application to -man disturbed that equilibrium. But this, as yet, -only superficially. Like the foraminifera that persist -in the ocean depths, the great majority of mankind -have remained, but slightly, if at all, modified; thus -illustrating the truth of the doctrine of evolution in -their psychical history. (For that doctrine does not -imply all-round continuous advance. “Let us never -forget,” Mr. Spencer says in Social Statics, “that the -law is—adaptation to circumstances, be they what -they may.”) Therefore the superstitions that still -dominate the life of man, even in so-called civilized<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[152]</a></span> -centres, are no stumbling-blocks to us. They are -supports along the path of inquiry, because we account -for their persistence. Thought and feeling -have a common base, because man is a unit, not a -duality. But the exercise of the one has been active -from the beginnings of his history—indeed we know -not at what point backward we can classify it as -human or quasi-human—while the other, speaking -comparatively, has but recently been called into play. -So far as its influence on the modern World goes, -may we not say that it began at least in the domain -of scientific naturalism with the Ionian philosophers? -Emotionally, we are hundreds of thousands of years -old; rationally, we are embryos.</p> - -<p>In other words, man wondered countless ages -before he reasoned; because feeling travels along -the line of least resistance, while thought, or the -challenge by inquiry—therefore the assumption that -there may be two sides to a question—must pursue -a path obstructed by the dominance of custom, the -force of imitation, and the strength of prejudice and -fear. It is here that anthropology, notably that -psychical branch of it comprehended under folk-lore, -takes up the cue from the momentous doctrine of -heredity; explains the persistence of the primitive; -and the causes of man’s tardy escape from the illusions -of the senses, and the general conservatism of -human nature. “Born into life! in vain, Opinions, -those or these, unalter’d to retain the obstinate -mind decrees,” as in the striking illustration cited in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[153]</a></span> -Heine’s Travel-Pictures. “A few years ago Bullock -dug up an ancient stone idol in Mexico, and the -next day he found that it had been crowned during -the night with flowers. And yet the Spaniard had -exterminated the old Mexican religion with fire and -sword, and for three centuries had been engaged in -ploughing and harrowing their minds and implanting -the seed of Christianity.” The causes of error and -delusion, and of the spiritual nightmares of olden -time, being made clear, there is begotten a generous -sympathy with that which empirical notions of -human nature attributed to wilfulness or to man’s -fall from a high estate. Superstitions which are the -outcome of ignorance can only awaken pity. Where -the corrective of knowledge is absent, we see that -it could not be otherwise. Where that corrective -is present, but either perverted or not exercised, pity -is supplanted by blame. In either case, we learn that -the art of life largely consists in that control of the -emotions and that diversion of them into wholesome -channels, which the intellect, braced with the latest -knowledge, can alone effect.</p> - -<p>Therefore, discarding theories of revelation, -spiritual illumination, and other assumed supra-mundane -sources of knowledge, sufficing causes of -abnormal mental phenomena are found in abnormal -working of the mental apparatus. The investigation -of hallucinations (Lat. <i>alucinor</i>, to wander in -mind) leaves no doubt that they are the effect of a -morbid condition of that intricate, delicately poised<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[154]</a></span> -structure, the nervous system, under which objects -are seen and sensations felt when no corresponding -impression has been made through the medium of -the senses. When the nervous system is out of -gear, voices, whether divine or of the dead, may be -heard; and actual figures may be seen. A mental -image becomes a visual image; an imagined pain -a real pain, as the great physiologist, John Hunter, -testified when he said, “I am confident that I can -fix my attention to any part until I have a sensation -in that part.” Shakespere portrays the like condition -when Macbeth attempts to clutch the dagger wherewith -to stab Duncan:</p> - -<div class="centered"><div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i10">There’s no such thing;<br /></span> -<span class="i0">It is the bloody business which informs<br /></span> -<span class="i0">Thus to mine eyes.<br /></span> -</div></div></div> - -<p>This abnormal state, which sees things having no -existence outside the “mind’s eye,” is no respecter -of persons; the savage and the civilized are alike -its victims. It may be organic or functional. -Organic, when disease is present; functional, through -excessive fatigue, lack of food or sleep, or derangement -of the digestive system, causing the patient, -as Hood says, “to think he’s pious when he’s only -bilious.” Under such conditions, hallucinations of -all sorts possess the mind; hallucinations from which -the true peptic, who, as Carlyle says, “has no system,” -is delivered. Only the mentally anæmic, the -emotionally overwrought, the unbalanced, and the -epileptic, are the victims, whether of the lofty illusions<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[155]</a></span> -of august visions such as carried Saint Paul, -Saint Theresa, and Joan of Arc, into the presence -of the holiest; or hallucination of drowned cat, thin -and “dripping with water,” born of the disordered -nerves of Mrs. Gordon Jones. To quote from Dr. -Gower’s Bowman Lecture (Nature, 4th July, 1895) -on Subjective Visual Sensations, such as accompany -fits, when, e. g., sensations of sight occur without -the retina being stimulated:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>The spectra perceived before epileptic fits vary widely. -They may be stars or sparks, spherical luminous bodies, or -mere flashes of light, white or coloured, still or in movement. -Often they are more elaborate, distinct visions of faces, persons, -objects, places. They may be combined with sensations -from the other special senses, as with hearing and smell. In -one case a warning, constant for years, began with thumping -in the chest ascending to the head, where it became a beating -sound. Then two lights appeared, advancing nearer with a -pulsating motion. Suddenly these disappeared and were replaced -by the figure of an old woman in a red cloak, always -the same, who offered the patient something that had the -smell of Tonquin beans, and then he lost consciousness. Such -warnings may be called psychovisual sensations. The psychical -element may be very strong, as in one woman whose fits -were preceded by a sudden distinct vision of London in ruins, -the river Thames emptied to receive the rubbish, and she the -only survivor of the inhabitants.</p></div> - -<p>Had a man of lesser renown and mental calibre -than Mr. Wallace thrown the weight of his testimony -into the scales in favour of spiritualism, there would -have been neither necessity nor excuse for this digression. -But both these pleas prevail when we -find the co-formulator of the Darwinian theory<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[156]</a></span> -among mediums and their dupes. The respectful -attention which his words command: the tremendous -claims which he makes on behalf of the phenomena -at <i>séances</i> as proving the existence of soul apart -from body after death, and as revealing the conditions -under which it lives, have made incumbent -the foregoing attempt to indicate what other explanation -is given of those phenomena, showing -how these fall in with all we know of man’s tendencies -to imperfect observation and self-deception, -and with all that history tells of the persistence of -animistic ideas.</p> - -<p>A salutary lesson on the use and misuse of the -imagination is thus taught. That which, under -wholesome restraint, is the initiative and incentive -of inquiry, of enterprise, and of noble ideas; unrestricted, -leads the dreamer and the enthusiast into -ingulfing quicksands of illusions and delusions. -Hence the necessity of curbing a faculty so that in -unison with reason, it works toward definite ends -within the domain, marking man’s limits of service. -As Dr. Maudsley reminds us in his sane and sober -book on Natural Causes and Supernatural Seeming, -“not by standing out of Nature in the ecstasy of a -rapt and over-strained idealism of any sort, but by -large and close and faithful converse with Nature -and human nature in all their moods, aspects, and -relations, is the solid basis of fruitful ideas and the -soundest mental development laid. The endeavour -to stimulate and strain any mental function to an<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[157]</a></span> -activity beyond the reach and need of a physical -correlate in external nature, and to give it an independent -value, is certainly an endeavour to go directly -contrary to the sober and salutary method by -which solid human development has taken place in -the past, and is taking place in the present.”</p> - -<p> </p> - -<p>The story of Darwin’s work must now be resumed. -Shortly after the Linnæan meeting, he prepared -a series of chapters which, always regarded -by him as an “Abstract,” ultimately took book form, -and was published, under the title of the Origin of -Species, on the 24th of November, 1859.</p> - -<p>The story of the reception of the work is admirably -told by Huxley in the chapter which he contributed -to Darwin’s Life and Letters, and it may be -commended as useful reading to a generation which, -drinking-in Darwinism from its birth, will not readily -understand how such storm and outcry as rent the -air, both in scientific as well as clerical quarters, -could have been raised. “In fact,” says Huxley, -“the contrast between the present condition of public -opinion upon the Darwinian question; between the -estimation in which Darwin’s views are now held in -the scientific world; between the acquiescence, or, at -least, quiescence, of the theologian of the self-respecting -order at the present day, and the outburst of -antagonism on all sides in 1858-59, when the new -theory respecting the origin of species first became -known to the older generation to which I belong, is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[158]</a></span> -so startling that, except for documentary evidence, I -should be sometimes inclined to think my memories -dreams.” The like reflection arises when we consider -the indifference with which books of the most -daring and revolutionary character, both in theology -and morals, are treated nowadays, in contrast to the -uproar which greeted such a <i>brutum fulmen</i> as Essays -and Reviews. As for Colenso’s Pentateuch, and -books of its type, orthodoxy has long taken them to -its bosom.</p> - -<p>So far as the larger number of naturalists, and of -the intelligent public who followed their lead, were -concerned, there was an absolutely open mind on -the question of the mutation of species. There had -been, as the foregoing sections of this book have -shown, a long time of preparation and speculation. -We certainly find the keynote of Evolution in -Heraclitus, and more than two thousand years after -his time Herbert Spencer, above all men, had removed -it from the empirical stage, and placed it on -a base broad as the facts which supported it. But -it needed the leaven of the human and personal -to stir it into life, and touch man in his various -interests; and not all that Mr. Spencer had done in -application of the theory of development to social -questions and institutions could avail much till Darwin’s -theory gave it practical shape. Dissertations -on the passage of the “homogeneous to the heterogeneous”; -explanations of the theory of the evolution -of complex sidereal systems out of diffused<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[159]</a></span> -vapours of seemingly simple texture, interested -people only in a vague and wondering fashion. -But when Darwin illustrated the theory of the modification -of life-forms by familiar examples gathered -from his own experiments and observations, and from -intercourse with breeders of pigeons, horses, and -dogs, this went to men’s “business and bosoms,” -and if the vulgar interpreted Darwinism, as some, -who should know better, interpret it even now, as -explaining man’s descent from a monkey, or how a -bear became a whale by taking to swimming, the -thoughtful accepted it as a master-key unlocking not -the mystery of origins or of causes of variations, -but the mystery of the ceaselessly-acting agent -which, operating on favourable variations, has -brought about myriads of species from simple forms.</p> - -<p>As Huxley reminds us in the passage quoted -above, the attitude of the clergy toward the theory -of Evolution has undergone an astounding change. -Dr. Whewell remarked that every great discovery in -science has had to pass through three stages. First, -people said, “It is absurd”; then they said, “It is -contrary to the Bible”; finally, they said, “We -always knew that it was so.” Thus it has been with -Evolution. It is calmly discussed; even claimed as -a “defender of the faith,” at Church Congresses nowadays. -It was not so in the sixties. Here and there -a single voice was raised in qualified sympathy—Charles -Kingsley showed more than this—but both -in the Old and the New World the “drum ecclesiastic”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[160]</a></span> -was beaten. Cardinal Manning declared Darwinism -to be a “brutal philosophy, to wit, there is -no God and the ape is our Adam.” Protestant and -Catholic agreed in condemning it as “an attempt to -dethrone God”; as “a huge imposture,” as “tending -to produce disbelief of the Bible,” and “to do -away with all idea of God,” as “turning the Creator -out of doors.” Such are fair samples to be culled -from the anthology of invective which was the staple -content of nearly every “criticism.” Occasionally -some parody of reasoning appears when the “argument” -is advanced that there is “a simpler explanation -of the presence of these strange forms among -the works of God in the fall of Adam,” but even this -pseudo-concession to logic is rare; and one divine -had no hesitation in predicting the fate of Darwin -and his followers in the world to come. “If,” said a -Dr. Duffield in the Princeton Review, “the development -theory of the origin of man shall, in a -little while, take the place—as doubtless it will—with -other exploded scientific speculations, then they who -accept it with its proper logical consequences will, -in the life to come, have their portion with those who -in this life ‘know not God and obey not the Gospel -of His Son.’” But the most notable attack came -from Samuel Wilberforce, then Bishop of Oxford, in -the Quarterly Review of July, 1860. “It is,” said -Huxley, in his review of Haeckel’s Evolution of Man, -“a production which should be bound in good stout -calf, or better, asses’ skin, by the curious book-collector,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[161]</a></span> -together with Brougham’s attack on the undulatory -theory of light when it was first propounded -by Young.” The bishop declared “the principle of -natural selection to be absolutely incompatible with -the word of God” and as “contradicting the revealed -relations of creation to its Creator.” If by -“revealed relations” and the “word of God” the -Bible is intended, the evolutionist is in agreement -with the bishop. But, at this time of day, it seems -scarcely worth while to shake the dust off articles -which have gone the way of all purely controversial -matter, and justification for reference to them lies -only in the fact that the contest between the biologists -and the bishops is not yet ended.</p> - -<p>In contrast to all this, and in evidence of the -compromise by which theology is vainly striving to -justify itself, are these vague sentences from Archdeacon -Wilson’s address at the Church Congress at -Shrewsbury in the autumn of 1896: “It is scarcely -too much to say that the Theistic Evolutionist cannot -be otherwise than a practical Trinitarian, and cannot -find a difficulty in the Incarnation or in the doctrine -of the Holy Spirit.” “Christian doctrine, apart from -the statement of historical facts, is the attempt to -create out of Christ’s teaching, a philosophy of life -which shall satisfy these needs (i. e., the needs of -humanity), and it will therefore remain the same in -substance. But the form in which that doctrine will -be presented must change with man’s intellectual environment. -The bearing of Evolution on Christian<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[162]</a></span> -doctrine is, therefore, in a word, to modify, not the -doctrine, but the form in which it is expressed.”</p> - -<p>Postponing the story of the famous debate between -Wilberforce and Huxley, the reception accorded -to the Origin of Species by Darwin’s scientific -contemporaries may be noted. Herbert Spencer’s -position, as will be shown later on, was already -distinctive: he was a Darwinian before Darwin. -Hooker, Huxley,—who said that he was prepared to -go to the stake, if needs be, in support of some parts -of the book,—Bates, and Lubbock were immediate -converts; so were Asa Gray and Lyell, but with -reservations, for Lyell, whose creed was Unitarian, -never wholly accepted the inclusion of man, “body, -soul, and spirit,” as the outcome of natural selection. -Henslow and Pictet went one mile, but refused to go -twain; Agassiz, Murray, and Harvey would have -none of the new heresy; neither would Adam Sedgwick, -who wrote a long protest to Darwin, couched -in loving terms, and ending with the hope that “we -shall meet in heaven.” The attitude of Owen, if apparently -neutral or tentative in open conversation, -was, as an anonymous critic, deadly hostile. Although -it is not included in the list of his writings -given in the Life by his grandson, he is known to -have been the author of the critique on the Origin of -Species in the Edinburgh Review of April, 1860.</p> - -<p>At the outset of the article he speaks of Darwin’s -“seduction” of “several, perhaps the majority of our -younger naturalists” by the homœopathic form of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[163]</a></span> -the transmutation of species presented to them under -the phrase of natural selection.... “Owen has long -stated his belief that some pre-ordained law or -secondary cause is operative in bringing about the -change ... we therefore regard the painstaking -and minute comparison by Cuvier of the osteological -and every other character that could be tested in the -mummified ibis, cat, or crocodile with those of species -living in his time; and the equally philosophical -investigation of the polyps operating at an interval -of thirty thousand years in the building-up of coral -reefs by the profound palæontologist of Neuchâtel -(Agassiz is here referred to), as of far truer value in -reference to the inductive determination of the question -of the origin of species than the speculations of -Demailler, Buffon, Lamarck, ‘Vestiges,’ Baden -Powell, or Darwin” (p. 532).</p> - -<p>Entangled in the meshes of this theory of a “pre-ordained -law,” which seems to bear some relation to -Aristotle’s “perfecting principle,” and is in close -alliance with the teaching of the great Cuvier, at -whose feet Owen had sat, he remained to the end of -his life a type of arrested development. While the -Church cited him as an authority against the Darwinian -theory, especially in its application to man’s -descent, there remained in the memory of his brother -savants his lack of candour in never withdrawing the -statement made by him, and demonstrated by Huxley -as untrue, that the “hippocampus minor” in the -human brain is absent from the brain of the ape.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[164]</a></span></p> - -<p>As for the reception of the book abroad, the -French savants were somewhat coy, but the Germans, -with Haeckel at their head, were enthusiastic. Darwin -had, like all prophets, more honour in other -countries than in his own, Evolution being rechristened -<i>Darwinismus</i>. Translation after translation -of the Origin followed apace, and the personal interest -that gathered round the central idea led to -the perusal of the book by people who had never -before opened a scientific treatise. Punch seized on -it as subject of caricature; and writers of light verse -found welcome material for “chaff” which the winds -of oblivion have blown away, a stanza here and there -surviving, as in Mr. Courthope’s Aristophanic lines:</p> - -<div class="centered"><div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">Eggs were laid as before, but each time more and more varieties struggled and bred,<br /></span> -<span class="i0">Till one end of the scale dropped its ancestor’s tail, and the other got rid of his head.<br /></span> -<span class="i0">From the bill, in brief words, were developed the Birds, unless our tame pigeons and ducks lie;<br /></span> -<span class="i0">From the tail and hind legs, in the second-laid eggs, the apes.—and Professor Huxley!<br /></span> -</div></div></div> - -<p>Heeding neither squib, satire, nor sermon, Darwin, -in the quiet of his Kentish home, went on rearranging -old materials, collecting new materials, -and verifying both, the outcome of this being his -works on the Fertilization of Orchids and the Variation of -Plants and Animals under Domestication, -published in 1862 and 1867 respectively. Between -these dates Huxley’s Man’s Place in Nature—logical<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[165]</a></span> -supplement to the Origin of Species—appeared. But -of this more anon.</p> - -<p>Meanwhile, as already named, Mr. Patrick Matthew -had in the Gardener’s Chronicle of 7th April, -1860, drawn attention to an appendix to his book on -Naval Timber and Arboriculture published in 1831, -in which he anticipated Darwin and Wallace’s theory -as follows:</p> - -<p>“The self-regulating adaptive disposition of -organised life may, in part, be traced to the extreme -fecundity of Nature, who, as before stated, has in all -the varieties of her offspring a prolific power much -beyond (in many cases a thousandfold) what is necessary -to fill up the vacancies caused by senile decay. -As the field of existence is limited and pre-occupied, -it is only the hardier, more robust, better-suited-to-circumstance -individuals, who are able to struggle -forward to maturity, these inhabiting only the situations -to which they have superior adaptation and -greater power of occupancy than any other kind; -the weaker and less circumstance-suited being prematurely -destroyed. This principle is in constant -action; it regulates the colour, the figure, the capacities, -and instincts; those individuals in each -species whose colour and covering are best suited -to concealment or protection from enemies, or defence -from inclemencies or vicissitudes of climate, -whose figure is best accommodated to health, -strength, defence, and support; whose capacities and -instincts can best regulate the physical energies to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[166]</a></span> -self-advantage according to circumstances—in such -immense waste of primary and youthful life those -only come to maturity from the strict ordeal by -which Nature tests their adaptation to her standard -of perfection and fitness to continue their kind by -reproduction” (pp. 384, 385).</p> - -<p>While speaking of difficulty in understanding -some passages in Mr. Matthew’s appendix, Darwin -says that “the full force of the principle of natural -selection” is there, and, in referring to it in a letter -to Lyell, he adds that “one may be excused in not -having discovered the fact in a work on Naval -Timber!”</p> - -<p>Five years after this, another pre-Darwinian was -unearthed, and, like Patrick Matthew, in unsuspected -company. Dr. W. C. Wells read a paper before the -Royal Society in 1813 on a White Female Part of -whose Skin resembles that of a Negro, but this was -not published till 1818, when it formed part of a -volume including the author’s famous Two Essays -upon Dew and Single Vision. In his Historical -Sketch Darwin says that Wells “distinctly recognises -the principle of natural selection, and this is -the first recognition which has been indicated; but -he applies it only to the races of man, and to certain -characters alone.... Of the accidental varieties of -man, which would occur among the first few and -scattered inhabitants of the middle regions of Africa, -some one would be better fitted than the others to -bear the diseases of the country. This race would<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[167]</a></span> -consequently multiply, while the others would decrease; -not only from their inability to sustain the -attacks of disease, but from their incapacity of contending -with their more vigorous neighbours.”</p> - -<p>When the simplicity of the long-hidden solution -is brought home, we can understand Huxley’s reflection -on mastering the central idea of the Origin: -“How extremely stupid not to have thought of -that!” Twelve years elapsed before Darwin followed -up his world-shaking book with the Descent of Man. -But the ground had been prepared for its reception -in the decade between 1860 and 1870. Quoting -Grant Allen’s able summary of the advance of the -theory of Evolution in his Charles Darwin: “One -by one the few scientific men who still held out -were overborne by the weight of evidence. Geology -kept supplying fresh instances of transitional forms; -the progress of research in unexplored countries kept -adding to our knowledge of existing intermediate -species and varieties. During those ten years, Herbert -Spencer published his First Principles, his -Biology, and the remodelled form of his Psychology; -Huxley brought out Man’s Place in Nature, the -Lectures on Comparative Anatomy, and the Introduction -to the Classification of Animals; Wallace -produced his Malay Archipelago and his Contributions -to the Theory of Natural Selection (Bates, we -may here add to Mr. Allen’s list, published his paper -on Mimicry in 1861, and his Naturalist on the -Amazons in 1863); and Galton wrote his admirable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[168]</a></span> -work on Hereditary Genius, of which his own family -is so remarkable an instance. Tyndall and Lewes -had long since signified their warm adhesion. At -Oxford, Rolleston was bringing up a fresh generation -of young biologists in the new faith; at Cambridge, -Darwin’s old university, a whole school of -brilliant and accurate physiologists was beginning to -make itself both felt and heard. In the domain of -anthropology, Tylor was welcoming the assistance of -the new ideas, while Lubbock was engaged on his -kindred investigations into the Origin of Civilization -and the Primitive Condition of Man. All these -diverse lines of thought both showed the widespread -influence of Darwin’s first great work, and led up -to the preparation of his second, in which he dealt -with the history and development of the human race. -And what was thus true of England was equally -true of the civilized world, regarded as a whole: -everywhere the great evolutionary movement was -well in progress, everywhere the impulse sent forth -from the quiet Kentish home was permeating and -quickening the entire pulse of intelligent humanity.”</p> - -<p>The Origin of Species, as we have seen, was intended -as a rough draft or preliminary outline of -the theory of natural selection. The materials which -Darwin had collected in support of that theory being -enormous, the several books which followed between -1859 and 1881, the year before his death, were expansions -of hints and parts of the pioneer book. -The last to appear was that treating of The Formation<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[169]</a></span> -of Vegetable Mould through the Action of -Worms. It embodied the results of experiments -which had been carried on for more than forty years, -since, as far back as 1837, Darwin read a paper on -the subject before the Geological Society. Reference -to it recalls a story, characteristic of Darwin’s innate -modesty, told to the writer by the present John -Murray. Darwin called on the elder Murray (presumably -some time in 1880), and after fumbling -in his coat-tail pocket, drew out a packet, which -he handed to Murray with the timidity of an unfledged -author submitting his first manuscript. “I -have brought you,” he said, “a little thing of mine -on the action of worms on soil,” and then paused as -if in doubt whether Murray would care to run the -risk of bringing out the book! One story leads to -another, and our second relates to the burial of -Darwin in Westminster Abbey. Among the signatures -of members of Parliament, requesting Dean -Bradley’s consent to Darwin’s interment there, was -that of Mr. Richard B. Martin, partner in the well-known -bank of that name, trading under the sign of -the “Grasshopper.” In his history of this old institution -Mr. John B. Martin prints the following letter, -which was received on the 27th of April, 1882, the -day after Darwin’s funeral.—</p> - -<div class="blockquo1"> -<p><span class="smcap">Sirs</span>—We have this day drawn a check for the -sum of £280, which closes our account with your -firm. Our reasons for thus closing an account<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[170]</a></span> -opened so very many years ago are of so exceptional -a kind that we are quite prepared to find that they -are deemed wholly inadequate to the result.... They -are entirely the presence of Mr. R. B. Martin -at Westminster Abbey, not merely as giving sanction -to the same as an individual, but appearing as one -of the deputation from a Society which has especially -become the indorser and sustainer of Mr. Darwin’s -theories.<span class="sign">—— & Co.</span><br /></p> -</div> - -<p>The accordance of a resting-place to Darwin’s -remains among England’s illustrious dead in that -Valhalla, was an irenicon from Theology to one -whose theories, pushed to their logical issues, have -done more than any other to undermine the supernatural -assumptions on which it is built. Not that -Darwin was a man of aggressive type. If he speaks -on the high matters round which, like planet tethered -to sun, the spirit of man revolves by irresistible attraction, -it is with hesitating voice and with no deep -emotion. A man of placid temper, in whom the -observing faculties were stronger than the reflective, -he was content to collect and co-ordinate facts, -leaving to others the work of pointing out their -significance, and adjusting them, as best they could, -to this or that theory. It would be unjust to say of -him what John Morley says of Voltaire, that “he -had no ear for the finer vibrations of the spiritual -voice,” but we know from his own confessions, what -limitations hemmed in his emotional nature. The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[171]</a></span> -Life and Letters tells us that he was glad, after the -more serious work and correspondence of the day -were over, to listen to novels, for which he had a -great love so long as they ended happily, and contained -“some person whom one can thoroughly love, -if a pretty woman, so much the better.” But -strangely enough, he lost all pleasure in music, art, -and poetry after thirty. When at school he enjoyed -Thomson, Byron, and Scott; Shelley gave him intense -delight, and he was fond of Shakespeare, -especially the historical plays; but in his old age -he found him “so intolerably dull that it nauseated -me.”</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>This curious and lamentable loss of the higher æsthetic -tastes is all the odder, as books on history, biographies, and -travels (independently of any scientific facts which they may -contain), and essays on all sorts of subjects, interest me as -much as ever they did. My mind seems to have become a -kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections -of facts, but why this should have caused the atrophy of -that part of the brain alone on which the higher tastes depend -I cannot conceive. A man with a mind more highly organised -or better constituted than mine would not, I suppose, have -thus suffered; and, if I had to live my life again, I would have -made a rule to read some poetry and listen to some music at -least once every week, for perhaps the parts of my brain now -atrophied would thus have been kept active through use. The -loss of these tastes is a loss of happiness, and may possibly be -injurious to the intellect, and more probably to the moral character, -by enfeebling the emotional part of our nature.</p></div> - -<p>It is often said that a man’s religion concerns -himself only. So far as the value of the majority<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[172]</a></span> -of people’s opinions on such high matters goes, this -is true; but it is a shallow saying when applied to -men whose words carry weight, or whose discoveries -cause us to ask what is their bearing on the larger -questions of human relations and destinies to which -past ages have given answers that no longer satisfy -us, or that are not compatible with the facts discovered. -Whatever silence Darwin maintained in -his books as to his religious opinions, intelligent -readers would see that unaggressive as was the mode -of presentments of his theory, it undermined current -beliefs in special providence, with its special creations -and contrivances, and therefore in the intermittent -interference of a deity; thus excluding that supernatural -action of which miracles are the decaying -stock evidence.</p> - -<p>Nor could they fail to ask whether the theory of -natural selection by “descent with modification” was -to apply to the human species. And when Darwin, -already anticipated in this application by his more -daring disciples, Professors Huxley and Haeckel, -published his Descent of Man, with its outspoken -chapter on the origin of conscience and the development -of belief in spiritual beings, a belief subject to -periodical revision as knowledge increased, it was -obvious that the bottom was knocked out of all -traditional dogmas of man’s fall and redemption, of -human sin and divine forgiveness. Therefore, what -Darwin himself believed was a matter of moment. -His answers to inquiries which were made public<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[173]</a></span> -during his lifetime told us that while the varying -circumstances and modes of life caused his judgment -to often fluctuate, and that while he had never -been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence -of a God, “I think,” he says, “that generally (and -more and more as I grow older) but not always, an -agnostic would be the most correct description of -my state of mind.” The chapter on Religion, -although a part of the autobiography, is printed -separately in the Life and Letters. As the following -quotation shows, it is interesting as detailing a few -of the steps by which Darwin reached that suspensive -stage.</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I -remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers -(though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable -authority on some point of morality. I suppose it -was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I -had gradually come by this time—i. e., 1836 to 1839—to see -that the Old Testament was no more to be trusted than the -sacred books of the Hindoos. The question, then, continually -rose before my mind, and would not be banished—is it credible -that if God were now to make a revelation to the Hindoos -he would permit it to be connected with the belief in Vishnu, -Siva, etc., as Christianity is connected with the Old Testament? -This appeared to me utterly incredible.</p> - -<p>By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be -requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by -which Christianity is supported—and that the more we know -of the fixed laws of Nature the more incredible do miracles become—that -the men at that time were ignorant and credulous -to a degree almost incomprehensible by us, that the Gospels -can not be proved to have been written simultaneously with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[174]</a></span> -the events, that they differ in many important details, far too -important, as it seems to me, to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies -of eye-witnesses: by such reflections as these, which -I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced -me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a -divine revelation. The fact that many false religions have spread -over large portions of the earth like wildfire had some weight -with me.</p> - -<p>But I was very unwilling to give up my belief; I feel sure -of this, for I can well remember often and often inventing day-dreams -of old letters between distinguished Romans, and -manuscripts being discovered at Pompeii or elsewhere, which -confirmed in the most striking manner all that was written in -the Gospels. But I found it more and more difficult, with free -scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would -suffice to convince me. Thus disbelief crept over me at a very -slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow -that I felt no distress.</p> - -<p>Although I did not think much about the existence of a -personal God until a considerably later period of my life, I will -here give the vague conclusions to which I have been driven. -The old argument from design in Nature, as given by Paley, -which formerly seemed to me so conclusive, fails, now that the -law of natural selection has been discovered. We can no -longer argue that, for instance, the beautiful hinge of a bivalve -shell must have been made by an intelligent being, like the -hinge of a door by a man. There seems to be no more design -in the variability of organic beings, and in the action of natural -selection, than in the course which the wind blows. But I -have discussed this subject at the end of my book on the -Variation of Domesticated Animals and Plants, and the argument -there given has never, as far as I can see, been answered.</p></div> - -<p>Without doubt, the influence of the conclusions -deducible from the theory of Evolution are fatal to -belief in the supernatural. When we say the supernatural,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[175]</a></span> -we mean that great body of assumptions out -of which are constructed all theologies, the essential -element in these being the intimate relation between -spiritual beings, of whom certain qualities are predicated, -and man. These beings have no longer any -place in the effective belief of intelligent and unprejudiced -men, because they are found to have no -correspondence with the ascertained operations of -Nature.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<img src="images/oi_187.jpg" width="412" height="689" alt="Herbert Spencer" title="Herbert Spencer" /> -</div> - - -<h3>2. <i>Herbert Spencer.</i></h3> - -<p>Contact with many “sorts and conditions of -men” brings home the need of ceaselessly dinning -into their ears the fact that <i>Darwin’s theory deals only -with the evolution of plants and animals from a common -ancestry. It is not concerned with the origin of life -itself, nor with those conditions preceding life which -are covered by the general term</i>, Inorganic Evolution. -Therefore, it forms but a very small part of the general -theory of the origin of the earth and other bodies, -“as the sand by the seashore innumerable,” that fill -the infinite spaces.</p> - -<p>We have seen that speculation about the universe -had its rise in Ionia. After centuries of discouragement, -prohibition, and, sometimes, actual persecution, -it was revived, to advance, without further serious -arrest, some three hundred years ago. A survey -of the history of philosophies of the origin of the -cosmos from the time of the renascence of inquiry, -shows that the great Immanuel Kant has not had his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[176]</a></span> -due. As remarked already, he appears to have been -the first to put into shape what is known as the -nebular theory. In his General Natural History and -Theory of the Celestial Bodies; or an Attempt to -Account for the Constitution and the Mechanical -Origin of the Universe upon Newtonian Principles, -published in 1775, he “pictures to himself the universe -as once an infinite expansion of formless and -diffused matter. At one point of this he supposes -a single centre of attraction set up, and shows how -this must result in the development of a prodigious -central body, surrounded by systems of solar and -planetary worlds in all stages of development. In -vivid language he depicts the great world-maelstrom, -widening the margins of its prodigious eddy in the -slow progress of millions of ages, gradually reclaiming -more and more of the molecular waste, and -converting chaos into cosmos. But what is gained -at the margin is lost in the centre; the attractions -of the central systems bring their constituents together, -which then, by the heat evolved, are converted -once more into molecular chaos. Thus the -worlds that are lie between the ruins of the worlds -that have been and the chaotic materials of the -worlds that shall be; and in spite of all waste and -destruction, Cosmos is extending his borders at the -expense of Chaos.”</p> - -<p>Kant’s speculations were confirmed by the celebrated -mathematician, Laplace. He showed that the -“rings” rotate in the same direction as the central<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[177]</a></span> -body from which they were cast off; sun, planets, -and moons (those of Uranus excepted) moving in a -common direction, and almost in the same plane. -The probability that these harmonious movements -are the effects of like causes he calculated as 200,000 -billions to one.</p> - -<p>The observations of the famous astronomer, Sir -William Herschel, which resulted in the discovery of -binary or double stars, of star-clusters, and cloud-like -nebulæ (as that term implies) were further confirmations -of Kant’s theory. And such modifications in -this as have been made by subsequent advance in -knowledge, notably by the doctrine of the Conservation -of Energy (the hypothesis of Kant and Laplace -being based on gravitation alone), affect not the -general theory of the origin of the heavenly bodies -from seemingly formless, unstable, and highly-diffused -matter. The assumption of primitive unstableness -and unlikeness squares with the unequal -distribution of matter; with the movements of its -masses in different directions, and at different rates; -and with the ceaseless redistribution of matter and -motion. For all changes of states are due to the -rearrangement of the atoms of which matter is made -up, resulting in the evolution of the seeming like into -the actual unlike; of the simple into the more and -more complex, till—speaking of the only planet of -whose life-history we can have knowledge—with the -cooling of the earth to a temperature permitting of -the evolution of living matter, the highest complexity<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[178]</a></span> -is reached in the infinitely diverse forms of plants -and animals. Therefore, as our knowledge of matter -is limited to the changes of which we assume it to -be the vehicle, it would seem that science reduces -the Universe to the intelligible concept of Motion.</p> - -<p>Since the great discovery by Kirchoff, in 1859, -of the meaning of the dark lines that cross the -refracted sun-rays, the spectroscope has come as -powerful evidence in support of the nebular theory, -while the photographic plate is a scarcely less important -witness. The one has demonstrated that -many nebulæ, once thought to be star-clusters, are -masses of glowing hydrogen and nitrogen gases; -that, to quote the striking communication made by -the highest authority on the subject, Dr. Huggins, -in his Presidential Address to the British Association, -1891, “in the part of the heavens within our -ken, the stars still in the early and middle stages of -evolution exceed greatly in number those which -appear to be in an advanced condition of condensation.” -The other, recording infallible vibrations on -a sensitive plate, and securing accurate registration -of the impressions, reveals, as in Dr. Roberts’s grand -photograph of the nebula in Andromeda, a central -mass round which are distinct rings of luminous -matter, these being separated from the main body -by dark rifts or spaces. To quote Dr. Huggins once -more, “We seem to have presented to us some stage -of cosmical Evolution on a gigantic scale.”</p> - -<p>The great fact that lies at the back of all these<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[179]</a></span> -confirmations of the nebular theory is the fundamental -identity of the stuff of which the universe is -made; a fact which entered into the prevision of the -Ionian cosmologists. Dr. Huggins says that “if the -whole earth were heated to the temperature of the -sun, its spectrum would resemble very closely the -solar spectrum.”</p> - -<p>In referring to this, there may be carrying of -“owls to Athens,” but that re-statements may sometimes -be needful has illustration in Lord Salisbury’s -Presidential Address to the British Association, 1894, -wherein the assumed absence of oxygen and nitrogen -in the sun’s spectrum is adduced as an argument -against the theory of the common origin of the -bodies of the solar system. Speaking of the predominant -proportion of oxygen in the solid and -liquid substances of the earth, and of the predominance -of nitrogen in our atmosphere, his lordship -asked, “if the earth be a detached bit whisked -off the mass of the sun, as cosmogonists love to tell -us, how comes it that, in leaving the sun, we cleaned -him out so completely of his nitrogen and oxygen -that not a trace of these gases remains behind to -be discovered even by the searching vision of the -spectroscope?” If Lord Salisbury had consulted -Dr. Huggins, or some foreign astronomer of equal -rank, as Dunér or Scheiner, he would not have put -a question exposing his ignorance, and unmasking -his prejudice. These authorities would have told -him that when a mixture of the incandescent vapours<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[180]</a></span> -of the metals and metalloids (or non-metallic elementary -substances, to which class both oxygen and -nitrogen belong), or their compounds, is examined -with the spectroscope, the spectra of the metalloids -always yield before that of the metals. Hence the -absence of the lines of oxygen and other metalloids, -carbon and silicon excepted, among the vast crowd -of lines in the solar spectrum. Then, too, in extreme -states of rarefaction of the sun’s absorbing layer, -the absorption of the oxygen is too small to be sensible -to us.</p> - -<p>“While the genesis of the Solar System, and of -countless other systems like it, is thus rendered comprehensible, -the ultimate mystery continues as great -as ever. The problem of existence is not solved: -it is simply removed further back. The Nebular -Hypothesis throws no light on the origin of diffused -matter; and diffused matter as much needs accounting -for as concrete matter. The genesis of an atom -is not easier to conceive than the genesis of a planet. -Nay, indeed, so far from making the universe a less -mystery than before, it makes it a greater mystery. -Creation by manufacture is a much lower thing than -creation by evolution. A man can put together a -machine; but he cannot make a machine develop -itself. The ingenious artisan, able as some have -been so far to imitate vitality as to produce a mechanical -pianoforte player, may in some sort conceive -how, by greater skill, a complete man might -be artificially produced; but he is unable to conceive<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[181]</a></span> -how such a complex organism gradually arises out -of a minute structureless germ. That our harmonious -universe once existed potentially as formless -diffuse matter, and has slowly grown into its present -organized state, is a far more astonishing fact than -would have been its formation after the artificial -method vulgarly supposed. Those who hold it -legitimate to argue from phenomena to noumena, -may rightly contend that the Nebular Hypothesis -implies a First Cause as much transcending ‘the -mechanical God of Paley’ as does the fetish of the -savage.”</p> - -<p>This quotation is from an essay on the Nebular -Hypothesis, which appeared in the Westminster -Review of July, 1858, and which must, therefore, -have been written before the eventful date of the -reading of Darwin and Wallace’s memorable paper -before the Linnæan Society. The author of that -essay is Mr. Herbert Spencer, and the foregoing -extract from it may fitly preface a brief account of -his life-work in co-ordinating the manifold branches -of knowledge into a synthetic whole. In erecting a -complete theory of Evolution on a purely scientific -basis “his profound and vigorous writings,” to quote -Huxley, “embody the spirit of Descartes in the -knowledge of our own day.” Laying the foundation -of his massive structure in early manhood, Mr. -Spencer has had the rare satisfaction of placing the -topmost stone on the building which his brain devised -and his hand upreared. While the sheets of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[182]</a></span> -this little book are being passed for press, there arrives -the third volume of the Principles of Sociology, -which completes Mr. Spencer’s Synthetic Philosophy. -In the preface to this, the venerable author -says:</p> - -<p>“On looking back over the six-and-thirty years -which I have passed since the Synthetic Philosophy -was commenced, I am surprised at my -audacity in undertaking it, and still more surprised -by its completion. In 1860 my small resources had -been nearly all frittered away in writing and publishing -books which did not repay their expenses; and -I was suffering under a chronic disorder, caused by -overtax of brain in 1855, which, wholly disabling -me for eighteen months, thereafter limited my work -to three hours a day, and usually to less. How insane -my project must have seemed to onlookers, -may be judged from the fact that before the first -chapter of the first volume was finished, one of my -nervous breakdowns obliged me to desist.</p> - -<p>“But imprudent courses do not always fail. -Sometimes a forlorn hope is justified by the event. -Though, along with other deterrents, many relapses, -now lasting for weeks, now for months, and once for -years, often made me despair of reaching the end, -yet at length the end is reached. Doubtless in -earlier years some exultation would have resulted; -but as age creeps on feelings weaken, and now my -chief pleasure is in my emancipation. Still there is -satisfaction in the consciousness that losses, discouragements,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[183]</a></span> -and shattered health have not prevented -me from fulfilling the purpose of my life.”</p> - -<p>These words recall a parallel invited by Gibbon’s -record of his feelings on the completion of his immortal -work, when walking under the acacias of his -garden at Lausanne, he pondered on the “recovery -of his freedom, and perhaps the establishment of his -fame,” but with a “sober melancholy” at the thought -that “he had taken an everlasting leave of an old -and agreeable companion.”</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Herbert Spencer</span>, spiritual descendant—<i>longo -intervallo</i>—of Heraclitus and Lucretius, was born at -Derby on the 27th of April, 1820. His father was a -schoolmaster; a man of scientific tastes, and, it is -interesting to note, secretary of the Derby Philosophical -Association founded by Erasmus Darwin. -In Mr. Spencer’s book on Education there are hints -of his inheritance of the father’s bent as an observer -and lover of Nature in the remark that, “whoever -has not in youth collected plants and insects, knows -not half the halo of interest which lanes and hedgerows -can assume.” He was articled in his seventeenth -year to a railway engineer, and followed that -profession until he was twenty-five. During this -period he wrote various papers for the Civil Engineers’ -and Architects’ Journal, and, what is of -importance to note, a series of letters to the Nonconformist -in 1842 on The Proper Sphere of -Government (republished as a pamphlet in 1844), -in which “the only point of community with the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[184]</a></span> -general doctrine of Evolution is a belief in the modifiability -of human nature through adaptation to conditions, -and a consequent belief in human progression.” -After giving up engineering, Mr. Spencer -joined the staff of the Economist, and while thus -employed, published, in 1850, his first important -book, Social Statics, or the Conditions essential to -Human Happiness specified, and the first of them -developed. In a footnote to the later editions of this -work Mr. Spencer points out a brace of paragraphs -in the chapter on General Considerations in -which “may be seen the first step toward the general -doctrine of Evolution. After referring to the -analogy between the subdivision of labour, which -goes on in human society as it advances; and the -gradual diminution in the number of like parts and -the multiplication of unlike parts which are observable -in the higher animals; Mr. Spencer says:</p> - -<p>“Now, just the same coalescence of like parts and -separation of unlike ones—just the same increasing -subdivision of function—takes place in the development -of society. The earliest social organisms consist -almost wholly of repetitions of one element. -Every man is a warrior, hunter, fisherman, builder, -agriculturist, toolmaker. Each portion of the community -performs the same duties with every other -portion; much as each slice of the polyp’s body is -alike stomach, muscle, skin, and lungs. Even the -chiefs, in whom a tendency towards separateness of -function first appears, still retain their similarity to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[185]</a></span> -the rest in economic respects. The next stage is -distinguished by a segregation of these social units -into a few distinct classes—warriors, priests, and -slaves. A further advance is seen in the sundering -of the labourers into different castes, having special -occupations, as among the Hindoos. And, without -further illustration, the reader will at once perceive, -that from these inferior types of society up to our -own complicated and more perfect one, the progress -has ever been of the same nature. While he will -also perceive that this coalescence of like parts, as -seen in the concentration of particular manufactures -in particular districts, and this separation of agents -having separate functions, as seen in the more and -more minute division of labour, are still going on.</p> - -<p>“Thus do we find, not only that the analogy -between a society and a living creature is borne out -to a degree quite unsuspected by those who commonly -draw it, but also that the same definition of -life applies to both. This union of many men into -one community—this increasing mutual dependence -of units which were originally independent—this -formation of a whole consisting of unlike parts—this -growth of an organism, of which one portion -cannot be injured without the rest feeling it—may -all be generalized under the law of individuation. -The development of society, as well as the development -of man and the development of life generally, -may be described as a tendency to individuate—<i>to -become a thing</i>. And rightly interpreted, the manifold<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[186]</a></span> -forms of progress going on around us are uniformly -significant of this tendency.”</p> - -<p><i>Homo sum: humani nihil a me alienum puto:</i> “I -am a man and nothing human is foreign to me.” -This oft-quoted saying of the old farmer in the Self-Tormentor -of Terence might be affixed as motto -to Herbert Spencer’s writings from the tractate on -the Proper Sphere of Government to the concluding -volume of the Principles of Sociology. For thought -of human interests everywhere pervades them; social -and ethical questions are kept in the van throughout. -Philosophy is brought from her high seat to mix -in the sweet amenities of home, in the discipline of -camp, in the rivalry of market; and linked to conduct. -Conduct is defined as “acts adjusted to ends,” -the perfecting of the adjustment being the highest -aim, so that “the greatest totality of life in self, in -offspring, and in fellow-men” is secured, the limit -of evolution of conduct not being reached, “until, -beyond avoidance of direct and indirect injuries to -others, there are spontaneous efforts to further the -welfare of others.” Emerson puts this ideal into -crisp form when he speaks of the time in which a -man shall care more that he wrongs not his neighbour -than that his neighbour wrongs him; then will -his “market-cart become a chariot of the sun.”</p> - -<p>That humanity is the pivot round which Mr. -Spencer’s philosophic system revolves is seen in the -earliest Essays, and notably in his making mental -evolution the subject of the first instalment of his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[187]</a></span> -Synthetic Philosophy. For, in the Principles of -Psychology, published in 1855, he limits feeling or -consciousness to animals possessing a nervous system, -and traces its beginnings in the “blurred, -undetermined feeling answering to a single pulsation -or shock” (as for example, to go no lower down -the life-scale, in the medusa or jelly-fish), to its -highest form as self-consciousness, or knowing that -we know, in man. This dominant element in Mr. -Spencer’s philosophy secures it a life and permanence -which, had it been restricted to explaining the -mechanics of the inorganic universe, it could never -have possessed. It has been observed how the Darwinian -theory aroused attention in all quarters -because it touched human interests on every side. -And, although less obvious to the multitude, the -Synthetic Philosophy, dealing with all cosmic processes -as purely mechanical problems, interprets -“the phenomena of life (excluding the question of -its origin), mind, and society, in terms of matter -and motion.” Anticipating the levelling of epithets -against such apparent materializing of mental phenomena -involved in that method, Spencer remarks -on the dismay with which men, who have not risen -above the vulgar conception which unites with matter -the contemptuous epithets “gross” and “brute,” -regard the proposal to reduce the phenomena of Life, -of Mind, and of Society, to a level which they think -so degraded. “Whoever remembers that the forms -of existence which the uncultivated speak of with so<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[188]</a></span> -much scorn, are shown by the man of science to be -the more marvellous in their attributes the more they -are investigated, and are also proved to be in their -ultimate natures absolutely incomprehensible—as -absolutely incomprehensible as sensation, or the -conscious something which perceives it—whoever -clearly recognises this truth, will see that the course -proposed does not imply a degradation of the so-called -higher, but an elevation of the so-called lower. -Perceiving, as he will, that the Materialist and -Spiritualist controversy is a mere war of words,—in -which the disputants are equally absurd, each thinking -that he understands that which it is impossible -for any man to understand,—he will perceive how -utterly groundless is the fear referred to. Being -fully convinced that no matter what nomenclature is -used, the ultimate mystery must remain the same, -he will be as ready to formulate all phenomena in -terms of Matter, Motion, and Force, as in any other -terms; and will rather indeed anticipate, that only -in a doctrine which recognises the Unknown Cause -as co-extensive with all orders of phenomena, can -there be a consistent Religion, or a consistent -Philosophy.”</p> - -<p>This is clear enough; yet such is the crass density -of some objectors that eighteen years after the above -was written, Mr. Spencer, in answering criticisms -on First Principles, had to rebut the charge that he -believed matter to consist of “space-occupying -units, having shape and measurement.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[189]</a></span></p> - -<p>The Principles of Psychology was both preceded -and followed by a series of essays in which the -process of change from the “homogeneous to the -heterogeneous,” i. e., from the seeming like to the -actual unlike, was expounded. Mr. Spencer tells -us that in 1852 he first became acquainted with -Von Baer’s Law of Development, or the changes -undergone in each living thing, from the general to -the special, during its advance from the embryonic -to the fully-formed state. That law confirmed the -prevision indicated in the passages quoted above -from Social Statics, and impressed him as one of -the three doctrines which are indispensable elements -of the general theory of Evolution. The other two -are the Correlation of the Physical Forces, or the -transformation of different modes of motion into -other modes of motion, as of heat or light into -electricity, and so forth, in Proteus-like fashion; and -the Conservation of Energy, or the indestructibility -of matter and motion, whatever changes or transformations -these may undergo.</p> - -<p>In permitting the quotation of the useful abstract -of the Synthetic Philosophy which, originally drawn -up for the late Professor Youmans, was imbodied -in a letter to the Athenæum of 22d of July, 1882, Mr. -Spencer was good enough to volunteer the following -details to the writer:—</p> - -<p>“You are probably aware that the conception set -forth in that abstract was reached by slow steps during -many years. These steps occurred as follows:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[190]</a></span>—</p> - -<div class="center"> -<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="4" summary="Steps"> -<tr><td class="col12">1850.</td><td class="col2c">Social Statics: especially chapter General -Considerations. (Higher human Evolution.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col12">1852.</td><td class="col2c">March. Development Hypothesis, in the -Leader. (Evolution of species, <i>vid. -ante</i>, p. 111.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col12">1852.</td><td class="col2c">April. Theory of Population, etc., in Westminster -Review. (Higher human Evolution.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col12">1854.</td><td class="col2c">July. The Genesis of Science in British -Quarterly Review. (Intellectual Evolution.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col12">1855.</td><td class="col2c">July. Principles of Psychology. (Mental -Evolution in general.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col12">1857.</td><td class="col2c">April. Progress: its Law and Cause: Westminster -Review. (Evolution at large.)</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col12">1857.</td><td class="col2c">April. Ultimate Laws of Physiology. -National Review. (Another factor of -Evolution at large.)</td></tr> -</table></div> - -<p>“From these last two Essays came the inception -of the Synthetic Philosophy. The first programme -of it was drawn up in January, 1858.” ...</p> - -<p>When seeing Mr. Spencer on the subject of this -letter, he took the further trouble to point out certain -passages in the essays originally comprised in the -one volume edition of 1858 which contain germinal -ideas of his synthesis. That they are his selection -will add to the interest and value of their quotation, -revealing, as perchance they may, a fragment of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[191]</a></span> -autobiography which it is an open secret Mr. Spencer -has written.</p> - -<p>“That Law, Religion, and Manners are thus related—that -their respective kinds of operation come -under one generalisation—that they have in certain -contrasted characteristics of men a common support -and a common danger—will, however, be most -clearly seen on discovering that they have a common -origin. Little as from present appearances we -should suppose it, we shall yet find that at first, -the control of religion, the control of laws, and the -control of manners, were all one control. However -incredible it may now seem, we believe it to be -demonstrable that the rules of etiquette, the provisions -of the statute-book, and the commands of the -decalogue, have grown from the same root. If we -go far back enough into the ages of primeval -Fetishism, it becomes manifest that originally Deity, -Chief, and Master of the Ceremonies were identical” -(Essays, vol. i, 1883 edition; Manners and Fashion, -p. 65).</p> - -<p>“Scientific advance is as much from the special -to the general as from the general to the special. -Quite in harmony with this we find to be the admissions -that the sciences are as branches of one trunk, -and that they were at first cultivated simultaneously; -and this becomes the more marked on finding, as we -have done, not only that the sciences have a common -root, but that science in general has a common root -with language, classification, reasoning, art; that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[192]</a></span> -throughout civilisation these have advanced together, -acting and reacting on each other just as the separate -sciences have done; and that thus the development -of intelligence in all its divisions and subdivisions -has conformed to this same law to which -we have shown the sciences conform” (Ib. The -Genesis of Science, pp. 191, 192).</p> - -<p>(In correspondence with this, recognising that -the same method has to be adopted in all inquiry, -whether we deal with the body or the mind, the following -may be quoted from Hume’s Treatise on -Human Nature.</p> - -<p>“’Tis evident that all the sciences have a relation, -greater or less, to human nature; and that, however -wide any of them may seem to run from it, they -still return back by one passage or another. Even -<i>Mathematics</i>, <i>Natural Philosophy</i>, and <i>Natural Religion</i> -are in some measure dependent on the science -of <span class="smcap">Man</span>, since they lie under the cognisance -of men, and are judged of by their powers and -qualities.)</p> - -<p>“The analogy between individual organisms and -the social organisms is one that has in all ages forced -itself on the attention of the observant.... While it -is becoming clear that there are no such special -parallelisms between the constituent parts of a man -and those of a nation, as have been thought to exist, -it is also becoming clear that the general principles -of development and structure displayed in all organised -bodies are displayed in societies also. The fundamental<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[193]</a></span> -characteristic both of societies and of living -creatures is, that they consist of mutually dependent -parts; and it would seem that this involves a community -of various other characteristics.... Meanwhile, -if any such correspondence exists, it is clear -that Biology and Sociology will more or less interpret -each other.</p> - -<p>“One of the positions we have endeavoured to -establish is, that in animals the process of development -is carried on, not by differentiations only, but -by subordinate integrations. Now in the social organism -we may see the same duality of process; and -further, it is to be observed that the integrations are -of the same three kinds. Thus we have integrations -that arise from the simple growth of adjacent parts -that perform like functions; as, for instance, the coalescence -of Manchester with its calico-weaving -suburbs. We have other integrations that arise -when, out of several places producing a particular -commodity, one monopolises more and more of the -business, and leaves the rest to dwindle; as witness -the growth of the Yorkshire cloth districts at the -expense of those in the west of England.... And -we have yet those other integrations that result from -the actual approximation of the similarly-occupied -parts, whence results such facts as the concentration -of publishers in Paternoster Row, of lawyers in the -Temple and neighbourhood, of corn merchants about -Mark Lane, of civil engineers in Great George -Street, of bankers in the centre of the city” (Essays,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[194]</a></span> -vol. iii, 1878 edition; Transcendental Physiology, -pp. 414-416).</p> - -<p>But, divested of technicalities, and summarized -in words to be “understanded of the people,” the -following quotation from the Essay on Progress: Its -Law and Cause, gives the gist of the Synthetic Philosophy:</p> - -<p>“We believe we have shown beyond question -that that which the German physiologists (Von -Baer, Wolff, and others) have found to be the law -of organic development (as of a seed into a tree, -and of an egg into an animal), is the law of all development. -The advance from the simple to the -complex, through a process of successive differentiations -(i. e., the appearance of differences in the parts -of a seemingly like substance), is seen alike in the -earliest changes of the Universe to which we can -reason our way back; and in the earlier changes -which we can inductively establish; it is seen in the -geologic and climatic evolution of the Earth, and of -every single organism on its surface; it is seen in -the evolution of Humanity, whether contemplated -in the civilised individual, or in the aggregation of -races; it is seen in the evolution of Society in respect -alike of its political, its religious, and its economical -organisation; 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 life. From the remotest past -which Science can fathom, up to the novelties of yesterday,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[195]</a></span> -that in which Progress essentially consists, -is the transformation of the homogeneous into the -heterogeneous” (Essays, vol. i, 1883, p. 30).</p> - -<p>To this may fitly follow the “succinct statement -of the cardinal principles developed in the successive -works,” which Mr. Spencer, as named above, prepared -for Professor Youmans.</p> - -<p>1. Throughout the universe in general and in -detail there is an unceasing redistribution of matter -and motion.</p> - -<p>2. This redistribution constitutes evolution when -there is a predominant integration of matter and -dissipation of motion, and constitutes dissolution -when there is a predominant absorption of motion -and disintegration of matter.</p> - -<p>3. Evolution is simple when the process of integration, -or the formation of a coherent aggregate, -proceeds uncomplicated by other processes.</p> - -<p>4. Evolution is compound, when along with this -primary change from an incoherent to a coherent -state, there go on secondary changes due to differences -in the circumstances of the different parts of -the aggregate.</p> - -<p>5. These secondary changes constitute a transformation -of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous—a -transformation which, like the first, is -exhibited in the universe as a whole and in all (or -nearly all) its details; in the aggregate of stars and -nebulæ; in the planetary system; in the earth as an -inorganic mass; in each organism, vegetal or animal<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[196]</a></span> -(Von Baer’s law otherwise expressed); in the -aggregate of organisms throughout geologic time; -in the mind; in society; in all products of social -activity.</p> - -<p>6. The process of integration, acting locally as -well as generally, combines with the process of differentiation -to render this change not simply from -homogeneity to heterogeneity, but from an indefinite -homogeneity to a definite heterogeneity; and this -trait of increasing definiteness, which accompanies -the trait of increasing heterogeneity, is, like it, exhibited -in the totality of things and in all its divisions -and subdivisions down to the minutest.</p> - -<p>7. Along with this redistribution of the matter -composing any evolving aggregate there goes on a -redistribution of the retained motion of its components -in relation to one another; this also becomes, -step by step, more definitely heterogeneous.</p> - -<p>8. In the absence of a homogeneity that is infinite -and absolute, that redistribution, of which evolution -is one phase, is inevitable. The causes which -necessitate it are these—</p> - -<p>9. The instability of the homogeneous, which is -consequent upon the different exposures of the different -parts of any limited aggregate to incident -forces.</p> - -<p>The transformations hence resulting are—</p> - -<p>10. The multiplication of effects. Every mass -and part of a mass on which a force falls subdivides -and differentiates that force, which thereupon proceeds<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[197]</a></span> -to work a variety of changes; and each of -these becomes the parent of similarly-multiplying -changes; the multiplication of them becoming greater -in proportion as the aggregate becomes more -heterogeneous. And these two causes of increasing -differentiations are furthered by—</p> - -<p>11. Segregation, which is a process tending ever -to separate unlike units and to bring together like -units—so serving continually to sharpen, or make -definite, differentiations otherwise caused.</p> - -<p>12. Equilibration is the final result of these transformations -which an evolving aggregate undergoes. -The changes go on until there is reached an equilibrium -between the forces which all parts of the -aggregate are exposed to and the forces these parts -oppose to them.</p> - -<p>Equilibration may pass through a transition stage -of balanced motions (as in a planetary system) or of -balanced functions (as in a living body) on the way -to ultimate equilibrium; but the state of rest in inorganic -bodies, or death in organic bodies, is the -necessary limit of the changes constituting evolution.</p> - -<p>13. Dissolution is the counter-change which -sooner or later every evolved aggregate undergoes. -Remaining exposed to surrounding forces that are -unequilibrated, each aggregate is ever liable to be -dissipated by the increase, gradual or sudden, of its -contained motion; and its dissipation, quickly undergone -by bodies lately animate, and slowly undergone -by inanimate masses, remains to be undergone at an<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[198]</a></span> -indefinitely remote period by each planetary and -stellar mass, which since an indefinitely distant -period in the past has been slowly evolving; the -cycle of its transformations being thus completed.</p> - -<p>14. This rhythm of evolution and dissolution, -completing itself during short periods in small aggregates, -and in the vast aggregates distributed -through space completing itself in periods immeasurable -by human thought, is, so far as we can see, universal -and eternal—each alternating phase of the -process predominating now in this region of space -and now in that, as local conditions determine.</p> - -<p>15. All these phenomena, from their great features -down to their minutest details, are necessary -results of the persistence of force under its forms of -matter and motion. Given these as distributed -through space, and their quantities being unchangeable, -either by increase or decrease, there inevitably -result the continuous redistributions distinguishable -as evolution and dissolution, as well as all these special -traits above enumerated.</p> - -<p>16. That which persists unchanging in quantity, -but ever changing in form, under these sensible appearances -which the universe presents to us, transcends -human knowledge and conception—is an unknown -and unknowable power, which we are obliged -to recognise as without limit in space and without -beginning or end in time.</p> - -<p>All that is comprised in the dozen volumes which, -exclusive of the minor works and the Sociological<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[199]</a></span> -Tables, form the great body of the Synthetic Philosophy, -is the expansion of this abstract. The general -lines laid down in that Philosophy have become -a permanent way along which investigation will continue -to travel. The revisions which may be called -for will not affect it fundamentally, being limited to -details, more especially in the settlement of the relative -functions of individuals and communities, and -cognate questions. Into these we cannot enter here. -Suffice it, that to those who have the rare possession -of sound mental peptics, no more nutritive diet can -be recommended than is supplied by First Principles -and the works in which its theses are developed. -For those who, blessed with good digestion, lack -leisure, there is provided in a convenient volume the -excellent epitome which Mr. Howard Collins has -prepared.</p> - -<p>The prospectus of the then proposed issue of the -series of works which, beginning with First Principles, -ends with the Principles of Sociology (1862-1896), -was issued by Mr. Spencer in March, 1860. -Through his courtesy the writer has seen the documents -which prove that the first draft of that prospectus -was written out on the 6th of January, 1858, -and that it was the occasion of an interesting correspondence -between Mr. Spencer and his father—mainly -in the form of questions from the latter—during -that month. The record of these facts is of some -moment as evidencing that the scheme of the Synthetic -Philosophy took definite shape in 1857. Therefore,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[200]</a></span> -the Theory of Evolution, dealing with the universe -<i>as a whole</i>, was formulated some months before -the publication of the Darwin-Wallace paper, in which -only <i>organic evolution</i> was discussed. The Origin of -Species, as the outcome of that paper, showed that -the action of natural selection is a sufficing cause for -the production of new life-forms, and thus knocked -the bottom out of the old belief in special creation.</p> - -<p>The general doctrine of Evolution, however, is -not so vitally related to that of natural selection that -the two stand or fall together. The evidence as to -the connection between the succession of past life-forms -which, regard being had to the well-nigh obliterated -record, has been supplied by the fossil-yielding -rocks; and the evidence as to the unbroken -development of the highest plants and animals from -the lowest which more and more confirms the theory -of Von Baer; alike furnish a body of testimony placing -the doctrine of Organic Evolution on a foundation -that can never be shaken. And, firm as that, -stands the doctrine of Inorganic Evolution upon the -support given by modern science to the speculations -of Immanuel Kant.</p> - -<p>There is the more need for laying stress on this -because recent discussions, revealing divided opinions -among biologists as to the sufficiency of natural -selection as a cause of all modifications in the structure -of living things, lead timid or half-informed -minds to hope that the doctrine of Evolution may yet -turn out not to be true. It is in such stratum of intelligence<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[201]</a></span> -that there lurks the feeling, whenever some -old inscription or monument verifying statements -in the Bible is discovered, that the infallibility of that -book has further proof. For example, until the present -year, not a single confirmatory piece of evidence -as to the story of the Exodus was forthcoming from -Egypt itself. Even the inscription which has come -to light does not, in the judgment of such an expert -as Dr. Flinders Petrie, supply the exact confirmation -desired. But let that irrefragable witness appear, -and while the historian will welcome it as evidence -of the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt, thus throwing -light on the movements of races, and adding -to the historical value of the Pentateuch; the average -orthodox believer will feel a vague sort of satisfaction -that the foundations of his belief in the Trinity -and the Incarnation are somehow strengthened.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<img src="images/oi_215.jpg" width="417" height="650" alt="T. H. Huxley" title="T. H. Huxley" /> -</div> - - -<h3>3. <i>Thomas Henry Huxley.</i></h3> - -<p><span class="smcap">Thomas Henry Huxley</span> was born at Ealing, on -the 4th of May, 1825. Montaigne tells us that he -was “borne between eleven of the clock and noone,” -and, with like quaint precision, Huxley gives the -hour of his birth as “about eight o’clock in the -morning.” Speaking of his first Christian name, he -humorously said that, by curious chance, his parents -chose that of the particular apostle with whom, as -the doubting member of the twelve, he had always -felt most sympathy.</p> - -<p>Concerning his father, who was “one of the masters<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[202]</a></span> -in a large semi-public school” (the father of -Herbert Spencer, it will be remembered, was also a -schoolmaster), Huxley has little to say in the slight -autobiographical sketch reprinted as an introduction -to the first volume of the Collected Essays. On that -side, he tells us, he could find hardly any trace in -himself, except a certain faculty for drawing, and a -certain hotness of temper. “Physically and mentally,” -he was the son of his mother, “a slender -brunette, of an emotional and energetic temperament.” -His school training was brief and profitless; -his tastes were mechanical, and but for lack of means, -he would have started life in the same profession -which Herbert Spencer followed till he forsook -Messrs. Fox’s office for journalism. So, with a certain -shrinking from anatomical work, Huxley studied -medicine for a time under a relative, and in his seventeenth -year entered the Charing Cross Hospital -School as a student. In those days there was no instruction -in physics, and only in such branch of -chemistry as dealt with the nature of drugs. <i>Non -multa, sed multum</i>, and what was lacking in breadth -was, perhaps, gained in thoroughness. Huxley had -as excellent a teacher in Wharton Jones as the latter -had a promising pupil in Huxley, and in working -with the microscope, the evidence of that came in -his discovery of a certain root-sheath in the hair, -which has since then been known as “Huxley’s -layer.”</p> - -<p>Up to the time of his studentship, he had been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[203]</a></span> -left, intellectually, altogether to his own devices. -He tells us that he was a voracious and omnivorous -reader, “a dreamer and speculator of the first water, -well endowed with that splendid courage in attacking -any and every subject which is the blessed compensation -of youth and inexperience.” Among the books -and essays that impressed him were Guizot’s History -of Civilization; and Sir William Hamilton’s essay -On the Philosophy of the Unconditioned which he -accidentally came upon in an odd volume of the -Edinburgh Review. This, he adds, was “devoured -with avidity,” and it stamped upon his mind the -strong conviction “that on even the most solemn -and important of questions, men are apt to take -cunning phrases for answers; and that the limitation -of our faculties, in a great number of cases, renders -real answers to such questions, not merely actually -impossible, but theoretically inconceivable.” Thus, -before he was out of his teens, the philosophy that -ruled his life-teaching was taking definite shape.</p> - -<p>In 1845, he won his M. B. London with honours -in anatomy and physiology, and after a few months’ -practice at the East End, applied, at the instance of -his senior fellow-student, Mr. (afterwards Sir) Joseph -Fayrer, for an appointment in the medical service of -the Navy. At the end of two months he was fortunate -enough to be entered on the books of Nelson’s -old ship, the Victory, for duty at Haslar Hospital. -His official chief was the famous Arctic Explorer, Sir -John Richardson, through whose recommendation<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[204]</a></span> -he was appointed, seven months later, assistant surgeon -of the Rattlesnake. That ship, commanded by -Captain Owen Stanley, was commissioned to survey -the intricate passage within the Barrier Reef skirting -the eastern shores of Australia, and to explore the -sea lying between the northern end of that reef and -New Guinea. It was the best apprenticeship to what -was eventually the work of Huxley’s life—the solution -of biological problems and the indication of their -far-reaching significance. Darwin and Hooker had -passed through a like marine curriculum. The former -served as naturalist on board the Beagle when -she sailed on her voyage round the world in 1831; -the latter as assistant-surgeon on board the Erebus -on her Antarctic Expedition in 1839. Fortune was -to bring the three shoulder to shoulder when the -battle against the theory of the immutability of species -was fought.</p> - -<p>During his four-years’ absence Huxley, in whom -the biologist dominated the doctor, made observations -on the various marine animals collected. These -he sent home to the Linnæan Society in vain hope of -acceptance. A more elaborate paper to the Royal -Society, communicated through the Bishop of Norwich -(author of a book on birds, and father of Dean -Stanley), secured the coveted honour of publication, -and on Huxley’s return in 1850 a “huge packet of -separate copies” awaited him. It dealt with the -anatomy and affinities of the Medusæ, and the original -research which it evidenced justified his election<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[205]</a></span> -in 1851 to the fellowship of the society whose presidential -chair he was in after years to adorn. He -would seem to have won the blue ribbon of science -<i>per saltum</i>. Probably, so far as their biological value -is concerned, nothing that he did subsequently has -surpassed his contributions to scientific literature at -that period; but if his services to knowledge had -been limited to the class of work which they represent, -he would have remained only a distinguished -specialist. Further recognition of his well-won position -came in the award of the society’s royal medal. -But fellowships and medals keep no wolf from the -door, and Huxley was a poor man. After vain attempts -to obtain, first, a professorship of physiology -in England, and then a chair of natural history at -Toronto (Tyndall was at the same time an unsuccessful -candidate for the chair of physics in the same -university), a settled position was secured by Sir -Henry de la Beche’s offer of the professorship of -palæontology and of the lectureship on natural history -in the Royal School of Mines, vacated by Edward -Forbes. That was in 1854. Between that date -and the time of his return Huxley had contributed -a number of valuable papers on the structure of the -invertebrates, and on histology, or the science of -tissues. But these, while adding to his established -qualifications for a scientific appointment, demand -no detailed reference here. With both chairs there -was united the curatorship of the fossil collections -in the Museum of Practical Geology, and these, with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[206]</a></span> -the inspectorship of salmon fisheries, which office he -accepted in 1881, complete the list of Huxley’s more -important public appointments. He surrendered -them all in 1885, having reached the age at which, -as he jocosely remarked to the writer, “Every scientific -man ought to be poleaxed.” Perhaps he -dreaded the conservatism of attitude, the non-receptivity -to new ideas, which often accompany old age. -But for himself such fears were needless. He was -never of robust constitution; in addition to the lasting -effects of an illness in boyhood, Carlyle’s “accursed -Hag,” dyspepsia, which troubled both Darwin -and Bates for the rest of their lives after their -return from abroad, troubled him. Therefore, considerations -of health mainly prompted the surrender -of his varied official responsibilities, the loyal discharge -of which met with becoming recognition in -the grant of a pension. This secured a modest competence -in the evening of life to one who had never -been wealthy, and who had never coveted wealth. -To Huxley may fitly be applied what Faraday said -of himself, that he had “no time to make money.” -And yet, to his abiding discredit, the present editor -of Punch allowed his theological animus, which had -already been shown in abortive attempts in the pages -of that “facetious” journal to appraise a Roman -Catholic biologist at the expense of Huxley, to further -degrade itself by affixing the letters “L. S. D.” -to his name in a character-sketch.</p> - -<p>His public life may be said to date from 1854.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[207]</a></span> -The duties which he then undertook included the -delivery of a course of lectures to working men -every alternate year. Some of these—models of -their kind—have been reissued in the Collected Essays. -Among the most notable are those on Our -Knowledge of the Causes of the Phenomena of Organic -Nature. At the outset of his public career -lecturing was as distasteful to him as in earlier years -the trouble of writing was detestable. But mother -wit and “needs must” trained him in a short time -to win the ear of an audience. One evening in 1852 -he made his début at the Royal Institution, and the -next day he received a letter charging him with -every possible fault that a lecturer could commit—ungraceful -stoop, awkwardness in use of hands, -mumbling of words, or dropping them down the -shirt front. The lesson was timely, and its effect -salutary. Huxley was fond of telling this story, and -it is worth recording—if but as encouragement to -stammerers who have something to say—at what -price he “bought this freedom” which held an -audience spellbound. How he thus held it in later -years they will remember who in the packed theatre -of the Royal Institution listened on the evening of -Friday, 9th of April, 1880, to his lecture On the Coming -of Age of the Origin of Species.</p> - -<p>In 1856 Huxley visited the glaciers of the Alps -with Tyndall, the result appearing in their joint -authorship of a paper on Glacial Phenomena in the -Philosophical Transactions of the following year.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[208]</a></span> -But this was a rare interlude. What time could be -wrested from daily routine was given to the study of -invertebrate and vertebrate morphology, palæontology, -and ethnology, familiarity with which was no -mean equipment for the conflict soon to rage round -these seemingly pacific materials when their deep -import was declared. The outcome of such varied -industry is apparent to the student of scientific memoirs. -But a recital of the titles of papers contributed -to these, as e. g., On Ceratodus, Hyperodapedon -Gordoni, Hypsilophodon, Telerpeton, and -so forth, will not here tend to edification. The -original and elaborate investigations which they embody -have had recognition in the degrees and medals -which decorated the illustrious author. But it is not -by these that Huxley’s renown as one of the most -richly-endowed and widely-cultured personalities of -the Victorian era will endure. They might sink into -the oblivion which buries most purely technical work -without in any way affecting that foremost place -which he fills in the ranks of philosophical biologists -both as clear-headed thinker and luminous interpreter.</p> - -<p>In this high function the publication of the Origin -of Species gave him his opportunity. That was -in 1859. As with Hooker and Bates, his experiences -as a traveller, and, more than this, his penetrating -inquiry into significances and relations, prepared his -mind for acceptance of the theory of descent with -modification of living forms from one stock. Hence<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[209]</a></span> -the mutability, as against the old theory of the fixity, -of species.</p> - -<p>In the chapter On the Reception of the Origin -of Species, which Huxley contributed to Darwin’s -Life and Letters, he gives an interesting account of -his attitude toward that burning question. He -says—</p> - -<p> </p> - -<p>“I think that I must have read the Vestiges (see -p. <a href="#Page_119">119</a>) before I left England in 1846, but if I did -the book made very little impression upon me, and -I was not brought into serious contact with the -‘species’ question until after 1850. At that time I -had long done with the Pentateuchal cosmogony -which had been impressed upon my childish understanding -as Divine truth with all the authority of -parents and instructors, and from which it had cost -me many a struggle to get free. But my mind was -unbiassed in respect of any doctrine which presented -itself if it professed to be based on purely philosophical -and scientific reasoning.... I had not then -and I have not now the smallest <i>a priori</i> objection to -raise to the account of the creation of animals and -plants given in Paradise Lost, in which Milton so -vividly embodies the natural sense of Genesis. Far -be it from me to say that it is untrue because it -is impossible. I confine myself to what must be -regarded as a modest and reasonable request for -some particle of evidence that the existing species of -animals and plants did originate in that way as a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[210]</a></span> -condition of my belief in a statement which appears -to me to be highly improbable....</p> - -<p>“And by way of being perfectly fair, I had exactly -the same answer to give to the evolutionists -of 1851-58. Within the ranks of the biologists of -that time I met with nobody, except Dr. Grant, of -University College, who had a word to say for Evolution, -and his advocacy was not calculated to advance -the cause. Outside these ranks the only person -known to me whose knowledge and capacity -compelled respect, and who was at the same time a -thoroughgoing evolutionist, was Mr. Herbert Spencer, -whose acquaintance I made, I think, in 1852, -and then entered into the bonds of a friendship -which I am happy to think has known no interruption. -Many and prolonged were the battles we -fought on this topic. But even my friend’s rare dialectic -skill and copiousness of apt illustration could -not drive me from my agnostic position. I took my -stand upon two grounds: firstly, that up to that time -the evidence in favour of transmutation was wholly -insufficient; and secondly, that no suggestion respecting -the causes of the transmutation assumed -which had been made was in any way adequate to -explain the phenomena. Looking back at the state -of knowledge at that time, I really do not see that -any other conclusion was justifiable.</p> - -<p>“As I have already said, I imagine that most of -those of my contemporaries who thought seriously -about the matter were very much in my own state<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[211]</a></span> -of mind—inclined to say to both Mosaists and Evolutionists -‘A plague on both your houses!’ and -disposed to turn aside from an interminable and apparently -fruitless discussion to labour in the fertile -fields of ascertainable fact. And I may therefore -further suppose that the publication of the Darwin -and Wallace papers in 1858, and still more that of -the Origin in 1859, had the effect upon them of the -flash of light, which to a man who has lost himself -in a dark night suddenly reveals a road which, -whether it takes him straight home or not, certainly -goes his way. That which we were looking for and -could not find was a hypothesis respecting the origin -of known organic forms which assumed the operation -of no causes but such as could be proved to be -actually at work. We wanted, not to pin our faith -to that or any other speculation, but to get hold of -clear and definite conceptions which could be -brought face to face with facts, and have their -validity tested. The Origin provided us with the -working hypothesis we sought. Moreover, it did the -immense service of freeing us for ever from the dilemma—refuse -to accept the creation hypothesis, -and what have you to propose that can be accepted -by any cautious reasoner? In 1857 I had no answer -ready, and I do not think that any one else had. -A year later we reproached ourselves with dulness for -being perplexed by such an inquiry. My reflection, -when I first made myself master of the central idea -of the Origin was ‘How extremely stupid not to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[212]</a></span> -have thought of that!’ I suppose that Columbus’s -companions said much the same when he made the -egg stand on end. The facts of variability, of the -struggle for existence, of adaptation to conditions, -were notorious enough, but none of us had suspected -that the road to the heart of the species problem lay -through them, until Darwin and Wallace dispelled -the darkness, and the beacon-fire of the Origin -guided the benighted.”</p> - -<p>But the disciple soon outstripped the master. -As was said of Luther in relation to Erasmus, Huxley -hatched the egg that Darwin laid. For in the -Origin of Species the theory was not pushed to its -obvious conclusion: Darwin only hinted that it -“would throw much light on the origin of man and -his history.” His silence, as he candidly tells us in -the Introduction to the Descent of Man, was due to -a desire “not to add to the prejudices against his -views.” No such hesitancy kept Huxley silent. In -the spirit of Plato’s Laws, he followed the argument -whithersoever it led. In 1860 he delivered a course -of lectures to working-men On the Relations of Man -to the Lower Animals, and in 1862, a couple of lectures -on the same subject at the Edinburgh Philosophical -Institution. The important and significant -feature of these discourses was the demonstration -that no cerebral barrier divides man from apes; that -the attempt to draw a psychical distinction between -him and the lower animals is futile; and that “even -the highest faculties of feeling and of intellect begin<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[213]</a></span> -to germinate in lower forms of life.” The lectures -were published in 1863 in a volume entitled Evidence -as to Man’s Place in Nature; and it was with pride -warranted by the results of subsequent researches -that Huxley, in a letter to the writer, thus refers to -the book when arranging for its reissue among the -Collected Essays—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>I was looking through Man’s Place in Nature the other -day. I do not think there is a word I need delete, nor anything -I need add, except in confirmation and extension of the -doctrine there laid down. That is great good fortune for a -book thirty years old, and one that a very shrewd friend of -mine implored me not to publish, as it would certainly ruin all -my prospects.</p></div> - -<p>The sparse annotations to the whole series of reprinted -matter show that the like permanence attends -all his writings. And yet, true workman, -with ideal ever lying ahead, as he was, he remarked -to the writer that never did a book come hot from -the press, but he wished that he could suppress it -and rewrite it.</p> - -<p>But before dealing with the momentous issues -raised in Man’s Place in Nature, we must return -to 1860. For that was the “Sturm und Drang” -period. Then, at Oxford, “home of lost causes,” as -Matthew Arnold apostrophizes her in the Preface to -his Essays in Criticism, was fought, on Saturday, -30th of June, a memorable duel between biologist and -bishop; perhaps in its issues, more memorable than -the historic discussion on the traditional doctrine of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[214]</a></span> -special creation between Cuvier and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire -in the French Academy in 1830.</p> - -<p>Both Huxley and Wilberforce were doughty -champions. The scene of combat, the Museum -Library, was crammed to suffocation. Fainting -women were carried out. There had been “words” -between Owen and Huxley on the previous Thursday. -Owen contended that there were certain fundamental -differences between the brains of man and -apes. Huxley met this with “direct and unqualified -contradiction,” and pledged himself to “justify that -unusual procedure elsewhere.” No wonder that the -atmosphere was electric. The bishop was up to -time. Declamation usurped the vacant place of argument -in his speech, and the declamation became -acrid. He finished his harangue by asking Huxley -whether he was related by his grandfather’s or -grandmother’s side to an ape. “The Lord hath delivered -him into my hands,” whispered Huxley to -a friend at his side, as he rose to reply. After setting -his opponent an example in demonstrating his -case by evidence which, although refuting Owen, -evoked no admission of error from him then or ever -after, Huxley referred to the personal remark of -Wilberforce. And this is what he said—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>I asserted, and I repeat, that a man has no reason to be -ashamed of having an ape for his grandfather. If there were -an ancestor whom I should feel shame in recalling, it would be -a <i>man</i>, a man of restless and versatile intellect, who, not content -with an equivocal success in his own sphere of activity, -plunges into scientific questions with which he has no real<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[215]</a></span> -acquaintance, only to obscure them by an aimless rhetoric, and -distract the attention of his hearers from the real point at issue -by eloquent digressions, and skilled appeals to religious prejudice.</p></div> - -<p>Perhaps the best comment on a piece of what is -now ancient history is to quote the admissions made -by Lord Salisbury—a rigid High Churchman—in -his presidential address to the British Association in -this same city of Oxford in 1894—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>Few now are found to doubt that animals separated by -differences far exceeding those that distinguish what we know -as species have yet descended from common ancestors.... -Darwin has, as a matter of fact, disposed of the doctrine of -the immutability of species.</p></div> - -<p>Few, also, are now found to doubt not only that -doctrine, but also the doctrine that all life-forms -have a common origin; plants and animals being -alike built-up of matter which is identical in character. -This doctrine, to-day a commonplace of biology, -was, thirty years ago, rank heresy, since it -seemed to reduce the soul of man to the level of his -biliary duct. Hence the Oxford storm was but a -capful of wind compared with that which raged -round Huxley’s lecture on The Physical Basis of -Life delivered, thus aggravating the offence, on a -“Sabbath” evening in Edinburgh in 1868. People -had settled down, with more or less vague understanding -of the matter, into quiescent acceptance of -Darwinism. And now their somnolence was rudely -shaken by this Southron troubler of Israel, with his -production of a bottle of solution of smelling salts,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[216]</a></span> -and a pinch or two of other ingredients, which represented -the elementary substances entering into the -composition of every living thing from a jelly-speck -to man. Well might the removal of the stopper to -that bottle take their breath away! Microscopists, -philosophers “so-called,” and clerics alike raised the -cry of “gross materialism,” never pausing to read -Huxley’s anticipatory answer to the baseless charge, -an answer repeated again and again in his writings, -as in the essay of Descartes’ Discourse touching -the method of using one’s reason rightly, and in his -Hume. In season and out of season he never wearies -in insisting that there is nothing in the doctrine inconsistent -with the purest idealism. “All the phenomena -of Nature are, in their ultimate analysis, -known to us only as facts of consciousness.” The -cyclone thus raised travelled westward on the heels -of Tyndall, when in 1874 he asserted the fundamental -identity of the organic and inorganic; dashing, -as his Celtic blood stirred him, the statements -with a touch of poetry in the famous phrase that -“the genius of Newton was potential in the fires of -the sun.”</p> - -<p>The ancient belief in “spontaneous generation,” -which Redi’s experiments upset, was the subject of -Huxley’s Presidential Address to the British Association -in 1870. But while he showed how subsequent -investigation confirmed the doctrine of Abiogenesis, -or the non-production of living from dead -matter, he made this statement in support of Tyndall’s<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[217]</a></span> -creed as to the fundamental unity of the vital -and the non-vital.</p> - -<p>“Looking back through the prodigious vista of -the past, I find no record of the commencement of -life, and therefore I am devoid of any means of -forming a definite conclusion as to the conditions -of its appearance. Belief, in the scientific sense of -the word, is a serious matter, and needs strong -foundations. To say, therefore, in the admitted absence -of evidence, that I have any belief as to the -mode in which the existing forms of life have originated, -would be using words in a wrong sense. But -expectation is permissible where belief is not; and if -it were given to me to look beyond the abyss of -geologically recorded time to the still more remote -period when the earth was passing through physical -and chemical conditions which it can no more see -again than a man can recall his infancy, I should -expect to be a witness of the evolution of living -protoplasm from non-living matter. I should expect -to see it appear under forms of great simplicity, -endowed, like existing fungi, with the power of determining -the formation of new protoplasm from -such matters as ammonium carbonates, oxalates, and -tartrates, alkaline and earthy phosphates, and water, -without the aid of light. That is the expectation to -which analogical reasoning leads me; but I beg you -once more to recollect that I have no right to call -my opinion anything but an act of philosophical -faith.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[218]</a></span></p> - -<p>Huxley was the Apostle Paul of the Darwinian -movement, and one main result of his active propagandism -was to so effectively prepare the way for -the reception of the profounder issues involved in -the theory of the origin of species, that the publication -of Darwin’s Descent of Man in 1871 created -mild excitement. And the weight of his support is -the greater because he never omitted to lay stress on -the obscurity which still hides the causes of variation -which, it must be kept in mind, natural selection -cannot bring about, and on which it can only act. -He insists on the non-implication of the larger theory -with its subordinate parts, or with the fate of -them. The “doctrine of Evolution is a generalisation -of certain facts which may be observed by any -one who will take the necessary trouble.” The facts -are those which biologists class under the heads of -Embryology and Palæontology, to the conclusions -from which “all future philosophical and theological -speculations will have to accommodate themselves.”</p> - -<p>That is the direction of the revolution to which -the publication of Man’s Place in Nature gave impetus; -and it is in the all-round application of the -theory of man’s descent that Huxley stands foremost, -both as leader and lawgiver. Mr. Spencer has -never shrunk from controversy, but he has not forsaken -the study for the arena, and hence his influence, -great and abiding as it is, has been less direct -and personal than that of his comrade, “ever a -fighter,” who, in Browning’s words, “marched breast<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[219]</a></span> -forward.” Man’s Place in Nature was the first of a -series of deliverances upon the most serious questions -that can occupy the mind; and its successors, -the brilliant monograph on Hume, published in -1879, and the Romanes Lecture on Evolution and -Ethics, delivered at Oxford, 18th of May, 1893, are -but expansions of the thesis laid down in that wonderful -little volume; wonderful in the prevision which -fills it, and in the justification which it has received -from all subsequent research, notably in psychology.</p> - -<p>If the propositions therein maintained are unshaken, -then there is no possible reconciliation between -Evolution and Theology, and all the smooth -sayings in attempted harmonies between the two, -of which Professor Drummond’s Ascent of Man is a -type, and in speeches at Church Congresses of which -that delivered by Archdeacon Wilson (see p. <a href="#Page_161">161</a>) is -a type, do but hypnotize the “light half-believers of -our casual creeds.” To some there are “signs of the -times” which point to approaching acquiescence in -the sentiment of Ovid, paralleled by a famous passage -in Gibbon, that “the existence of the gods is a -matter of public policy, and we must believe it accordingly.” -It looks like the prelude to surrender -of what is the cardinal dogma of Christianity when -we read in the Archdeacon’s address that “the theory -of Evolution is indeed fatal to certain <i>quasi</i>-mythological -doctrines of the Atonement which once -prevailed, but it is in harmony with its spirit.” For -those doctrines, as the Venerable apologist may learn<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[220]</a></span> -from the evidence in Frazer’s Golden Bough (chap. -iii, <i>passim</i>), are wholly mythological, because barbaric. -But, in truth, there is not a dogma of Christendom, -not a foundation on which the dogma rests, -that Evolution does not traverse. The Church of -England adopts “as thoroughly to be received and -believed,” the three ancient creeds, known as the -Apostles’, the Athanasian, and the Nicene. There -is not a sentence in any one of these which finds -confirmation; and only a sentence or two that find -neither confirmation nor contradiction, in Evolution.</p> - -<p>The question, on which reams of paper have been -wasted, lies in a nutshell. The statements in the -Creeds profess to have warrant in the direct words -of the Bible; or in inferences drawn from those -words, as defined by the Councils of the Church. -The decisions of these Councils represent the opinion -of the majority of fallible men composing those assemblies, -and no number of fallible parts can make -an infallible whole. As Selden quaintly puts it -(Table Talk, xxx, Councils), “they talk (but blasphemously -enough) that the Holy Ghost is president -of their General Councils, when the truth is the odd -man is still the Holy Ghost.” With this same “odd -man” rested the decision as to what books should -be included or excluded from the collection on which -the Church bases its authority and formulates its -creeds. So, in the last result, both sets of questions -are settled by a human tribunal employing a circular -argument. But, dismissing this for the moment, let<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221">[221]</a></span> -us see to what issues the controversy is narrowed, to -quote Huxley’s words (written in 1871), by “the -spontaneous retreat of the enemy from nine-tenths -of the territory which he occupied ten years ago.”</p> - -<p>The battle has no longer to be fought over the -question of the fundamental identity of the physical -structure of man and of the anthropoid apes. The -most enlightened Protestant divines accept this as -proven; and not a few Catholic divines are adopting -an attitude toward it which is only the prelude to -surrender. Matters must have moved apace in the -Church which Huxley, backed by history, describes -as “that vigorous and consistent enemy of the highest -intellectual, moral, and social life of mankind,” -to permit the Roman Catholic Professor of Physics -in the University of Notre Dame, America, to parley -as follows:</p> - -<p>“Granting that future researches in palæontology, -anthropology, and biology, shall demonstrate -beyond doubt that man is genetically related to the -inferior animals, and we have seen how far scientists -are from such a demonstration (?), there will not be, -even in such an improbable event, the slightest -ground for imagining that then, at last, the conclusions -of science are hopelessly at variance with -the declarations of the sacred text, or the authorised -teachings of the Church of Christ. All that would -logically follow from the demonstration of the animal -origin of man, would be a modification of the traditional -view regarding the origin of the body of our<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222">[222]</a></span> -first ancestor. We should be obliged to revise the -interpretation that has usually been given to the -words of Scripture which refer to the formation of -Adam’s body, and read these words in the sense -which Evolution demands, a sense which, as we -have seen, may be attributed to the words of the -inspired record, without either distorting the meaning -of terms, or in any way doing violence to the -text” (Evolution and Dogma. By the Reverend J. -A. Zahm, Ph. D., C.S.C., pp. 364, 365).</p> - -<p>Upon this suggested revision of writings which -are claimed as forming part of a divine revelation, -one of the highest authorities, Francisco Suarez, thus -refers, in his Tractatus de Opere sex Dierum, to the -elastic interpretation given in his time to the “days” -in the first chapter of Genesis. “It is not probable -that God, in inspiring Moses to write a history of -the Creation, which was to be believed by ordinary -people, would have made him use language the true -meaning of which it was hard to discover, and still -harder to believe.” Three centuries have passed -since these wise words were penned, and the reproof -which they convey is as much needed now as then.</p> - -<p>In near connection with the question of man’s -origin is that of his antiquity. The existence of his -remains, rare as they are everywhere, in deposits -older than the Pleistocene or Quaternary Epoch is -not proven. This applies to the remarkable fragments -found by Dr. Dubois in Java, the character of -which, in the judgment of several palæontologists,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223">[223]</a></span> -indicates the nearest approach between man and ape -hitherto discovered. But the evidence of the physical -relation of these two being conclusive, the exact -place of man in the earth’s time-record is rendered -of subordinate importance.</p> - -<p>The theologians have come to their last ditch in -contesting that the mental differences between man -and the lower animals are fundamental, being differences -of kind, and therefore that no gradual process -from the mental faculties of the one to those of the -other has taken place. This struggle against the application -of the theory of Evolution to man’s intellectual -and spiritual nature will be long and stubborn. -It is a matter of life and death to the theologian -to show that he has in revelation, and in the -world-wide belief of mankind in spiritual existences -without, and in a spirit or soul within, evidence of the -supernatural. The evolutionist has no such corresponding -deep concern. When the argument against -him is adduced from the Bible, he can only challenge -the ground on which that book is cited as divine -authority, or as an authority at all. Granting, for -the sake of argument, that a revelation has been -made, the writings purporting to contain it must -comply with the twofold condition attaching to it, -namely, that it makes known matters which the -human mind could not, unaided, have found out; -and that it embodies those matters in language as -to the meaning of which there can be no doubt whatever. -If there be any sacred books which comply<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224">[224]</a></span> -with these conditions, they have yet to be discovered.</p> - -<p>When the argument against the evolutionist is -drawn from human testimony, he does not dispute -the existence of the belief in a soul and in all the -accompanying apparatus of the supernatural; but he -calls in the anthropologist to explain how these arose -in the barbaric mind.</p> - -<p>Meanwhile, let us summarize the evidence which -points to the psychical unity between man and the -lower life-forms. As stated on p. <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, Mr. Herbert -Spencer traces the gradual evolution of consciousness -from “the blurred, indeterminate feeling which -responds to a single nerve pulsation or shock.” -There is no trace of a nervous system in the simplest -organisms, but this counts for little, because there -are also no traces of a mouth, or a stomach, or limbs. -In these seemingly structureless creatures every part -does everything. The amœba eats and drinks, digests -and excretes, manifests “irritability,” that is, -responds to the various stimuli of its surroundings, -and multiplies, without possessing special organs for -these various functions. Division of labour arises at -a slightly higher stage, when rudimentary organs appear; -the development of function and organ going -on simultaneously.</p> - -<p>Speaking broadly, the functions of living things -are threefold: they feed; they reproduce; they respond -to their “environment,” and it is this last-named -function—communication with surroundings—which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225">[225]</a></span> -is the special work of the nervous system. -It was an old Greek maxim that “a man may once -say a thing as he would have said it: he cannot say -it twice.” This is the warrant for transferring a few -sentences on the origin of the nerves from my Story -of Creation. They are but a meagre abstract of Mr. -Spencer’s long, but luminous exposition of the subject.</p> - -<p>“As every part of an organism is made up of -cells, and as the functions govern the form of the -cells, the origin of nerves must be due to a modification -in cell shape and arrangement, whereby certain -tracts or fibres of communication between the body -and its surroundings are established.</p> - -<p>“But what excited that modification? The all-surrounding -medium, without which no life had -been, which determined its limits, and <i>touches</i> it at -every point with its throbs and vibrations. In the -beginnings of a primitive layer or skin manifested -by creatures a stage above the lowest, unlikenesses -would arise, and certain parts, by reason of their -finer structure, would be the more readily stimulated -by, and the more quickly responsive to, the ceaseless -action of the surroundings, the result being that -an extra sensitiveness along the lines of least resistance -would be set up in those more delicate -parts. These, developing, like all things else, by use, -would become more and more the selected paths of -the impulses, leading, as the molecular waves thrilled -them, to structural changes or modification into<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226">[226]</a></span> -nerve-cells, and nerve-fibres, of increasing complexity -as we ascend the scale of life. The entire nervous -system, with its connections; the brain and all the -subtle mechanism with which it controls the body; -the organs of the senses alike begin as sacs formed -by infoldings of the primitive outer skin.”</p> - -<p>Biologists are agreed that a certain stage in the -organization of the nervous system—the germs of -which, we saw, are visible in the quivering of an -amœba, and probably in plants as well as animals—must -be reached before consciousness is manifest. -Obscurity still hangs round the stage at which mere -irritability passes into sensibility, but so long as the -continuity of development is clear, the gradations -are of lesser importance. And, for the present purpose, -there is no need to descend far in the life-scale; -if the psychical connection between man and the -mammals immediately beneath him is proven, the -connection of the mammals with the lowest invertebrate -may be assumed as also established. Speaking -only of vertebrates, the brain being, whether in -fish or man, the organ of mental phenomena, how -far does its structure support or destroy the theory -of mental continuity? In Man’s Place in Nature, -and its invaluable supplement, the second part of -the monograph on Hume, this subject is expounded -by Huxley with his usual clearness. In the older -book he traces the gradual modification of brain in -the series of backboned animals. He points out that -the brain of a fish is very small compared with the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227">[227]</a></span> -spinal cord into which it is continued, that in reptiles -the mass of brain, relatively to the spinal cord, is -larger, and still larger in birds, until among the lowest -mammals, as the opossums and kangaroos, the -brain is so increased in proportion as to be extremely -different from that of fish, bird, or reptile. Between -these marsupials and the highest or placental mammals, -there occurs “the greatest leap anywhere made -by Nature in her brain work.” Then follows this -important statement in favour of continuity.</p> - -<p>“As if to demonstrate, by a striking example, the -impossibility of erecting any cerebral barrier between -man and the apes, Nature has provided us, in the -latter animals, with an almost complete series of -gradations from brains little higher than that of a -Rodent to brains little lower than that of Man.” -After giving technical descriptions in proof of this, -and laying special stress on the presence of the -structure known as the “hippocampus minor” in -the brain of man as well as of the ape—in the denial -of which Owen cut such a sorry figure, Huxley -adds:</p> - -<p>“So far as cerebral structure goes, therefore, it is -clear that Man differs less from the Chimpanzee or -the Orang than these do even from the Monkeys, -and that the difference between the brains of the -Chimpanzee and of Man is almost insignificant when -compared with that between the Chimpanzee brain -and that of a Lemur.... Thus, whatever system of -organs be studied, the comparison of their modifications<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228">[228]</a></span> -in the ape series leads to one and the same -result,—that the structural differences which separate -Man from the Gorilla and the Chimpanzee are not so -great as those which separate the Gorilla from the -lower apes. But in enunciating this important truth -I must guard myself against a form of misunderstanding -which is very prevalent ... that the structural -differences between man and even the highest -apes are small and insignificant. Let me then distinctly -assert, on the contrary, that they are great -and significant; that every bone of a Gorilla bears -marks by which it might be distinguished from the -corresponding bone of a Man; and that, in the present -creation, at any rate, no intermediate link bridges -over the gap between <i>Homo</i> and <i>Troglodytes</i>. It -would be no less wrong than absurd to deny the existence -of this chasm; but it is at least equally wrong -and absurd to exaggerate its magnitude, and, resting -on the admitted fact of its existence, to refuse to -inquire whether it is wide or narrow. Remember, if -you will, that there is no existing link between Man -and the Gorilla, but do not forget that there is a no -less sharp line of demarcation, a no less complete -absence of any traditional form, between the Gorilla -and the Orang, or the Orang and the Gibbon.”</p> - -<p>The brains of man and ape being fundamentally -the same in structure, it follows that the functions -which they perform are fundamentally the same. -The large array of facts mustered by a series of -careful observers prove how futile is the argument<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229">[229]</a></span> -which, in his pride of birth, man advances against -psychical continuity. Vain is the search after -boundary lines between reflex action and instinct, -and between instinct and reason. Barriers there are -between man and brute, for articulate speech and -the consequent power to transmit experiences has -set up these, and they remain impassable. “The -potentialities of language, as the vocal symbol of -thought, lay in the faculty of modulating and articulating -the voice. The potentialities of writing, as -the visual symbol of thought, lay in the hand that -could draw, and in the mimetic tendency which -we know was gratified by drawing as far back as -the days of Quaternary man” (Huxley’s Essays on -Controverted Questions, p. 47). But these specially -human characteristics are no sufficing warrant for -denying that the sensations, emotions, thoughts, and -volitions of man vary in kind from those of the -lower creation. “The essential resemblances in all -points of structure and function, so far as they can -be studied, between the nervous system of man and -that of the dog, leave no reasonable doubt that the -processes which go on in the one are just like those -which take place in the other. In the dog, there can -be no doubt that the nervous matter which lies -between the retina and the muscles undergoes a -series of changes, precisely analogous to those which, -in the man, give rise to sensation, a train of thought, -and volition.” This passage occurs in Huxley’s -Reply to Mr. Darwin’s Critics, which appeared in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230">[230]</a></span> -the Contemporary Review, 1871, and it may be supplemented -by a quotation from the chapter on The -Mental Phenomena of Animals in his Hume. “It -seems hard to assign any good reason for denying -to the higher animals any mental state or process -in which the employment of the vocal or visual -symbols of which language is composed is not involved; -and comparative psychology confirms the -position in relation to the rest of the animal world -assigned to man by comparative anatomy. As comparative -anatomy is easily able to show that, physically, -man is but the last term of a long series of -forms, which lead, by slow gradations, from the highest -mammal to the almost formless speck of living -protoplasm, which lies on the shadowy boundary -between animal and vegetable life; so, comparative -psychology, though but a young science, and far -short of her elder sister’s growth, points to the same -conclusion.”</p> - -<p>Within recent years the psychologists are doing -remarkable work in attacking the problem of the -mechanics of mental operations, and already in Europe -and America some thirty laboratories have been -started for experimental work. The subject is somewhat -abstruse for detailed reference here, and it must -suffice to say that the psychologist, beginning with -observations upon himself, measuring, for example, -“the degree of sensibility of his own eye to luminous -irritations, or of his own skin to pricking, passes on -to like inquiry into the numerical relations between<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231">[231]</a></span> -the energy of the stimuli of light, sound, and so forth, -and the energy of the sensations which they arouse -in the nerve-channels.” An excellent summary, with -references to the newest authorities on the subject, -is given by Prince Kropotkin in the Nineteenth -Century of August, 1896.</p> - -<p>All this, to the superficial onlooker, seems rank -materialism. But we cannot think without a brain -any more than we can see without eyes, and any -inquiry into the operation of the organ of thought -must run on the same lines as inquiry into the -operations of any other organ of the body. And -the inquiry leaves us at the point whence we began -in so far as any light is thrown on the connection -between the molecular vibrations in nerve-tissue and -the mental processes of which they are the indispensable -accompaniment. Changes take place in -some of the thousands of millions of brain-cells in -every thought that we think, and in every emotion -that we feel, but the nexus remains an impenetrable -mystery. Nevertheless, if we may not say that the -brain secretes thought as we say that the liver secretes -bile, we may also not say that the mind is -detachable from the nervous system, and that it is -an entity independent of it. Were it this, not only -would it stand outside the ordinary conditions of -development, but it would also maintain the equilibrium -which a dose of narcotics or of alcohol, or -which starvation and gorging alike rapidly upset.</p> - -<p>In his posthumous essay On the Immortality of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232">[232]</a></span> -the Soul, Hume says: “Matter and spirit are at -bottom equally unknown, and we cannot determine -what qualities inhere in the one or in the other.” -That is the conclusion to which the wisest come. -And in the ultimate correlation of the physical and -psychical lies the hope of arrival at that terminus of -unity which was the dream of the ancient Greeks, -and to which all inquiry makes approach. How, in -these matters, philosophy is at one, is again seen in -Huxley’s admission that “in respect of the great -problems of philosophy, the post-Darwinian generation -is, in one sense, exactly where the præ-Darwinian -generations were. They remain insoluble. -But the present generation has the advantage of -being better provided with the means of freeing itself -from the tyranny of certain sham solutions.”</p> - -<p>Science explains, and, in explaining, dissipates -the pseudo-mysteries by which man, in his myth-making -stage, when conception of the order of the -universe was yet unborn, accounted for everything. -But she may borrow the Apostle’s words, “Behold! -I show you a mystery,” and give to them a profounder -meaning as she confesses that the origin and -ultimate destiny of matter and motion; the causes -which determine the behaviour of atoms, whether -they are arranged in the lovely and varying forms -which mark their crystals, or whether they are quivering -with the life which is common to the amœba -and the man; the conversion of the inorganic into -the organic by the green plant, and the relation between<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233">[233]</a></span> -nerve-changes and consciousness; are all impenetrable -mysteries.</p> - -<p>In his speech on the commemoration of the jubilee -of his Professorship in the University of Glasgow -last year, Lord Kelvin said, “I know no more of -electric and magnetic force, or of the relation between -ether, electricity, and ponderable matter, or of -chemical affinity than I knew and tried to teach my -students of natural philosophy fifty years ago in my -first session as professor.”</p> - -<p>This recognition of limitations will content those -who seek not “after a sign”. For others, that search -will continue to have encouragement not only from -the theologian, but from the pseudo-scientific who -have travelled some distance with the Pioneers of -Evolution, but who refuse to follow them further. -In each of these there is present the “theological -bias” whose varied forms are skilfully analyzed by -Mr. Spencer in his chapter under that heading in -the Study of Sociology. This explains the attitude -of various groups which are severally represented -by Mr. St. George Mivart, and the late Dr. W. B. -Carpenter; by Professor Sir Geo. G. Stokes, and Mr. -Alfred Russel Wallace. The first-named is a Roman -Catholic; the second was a Unitarian; the third is -an orthodox Churchman, and the fourth, as already -seen, is a Spiritualist. In his Genesis of Species, Mr. -Mivart contends that “man’s body was evolved from -pre-existing material (symbolised by the term ‘dust -of the earth’), and was therefore only derivatively<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234">[234]</a></span> -created, i. e., by the operation of secondary laws,” -but that “his soul, on the other hand, was created in -quite a different way ... by the direct action of -the Almighty (symbolised by the term breathing),” -p. 325. In his Mental Physiology, Dr. Carpenter -postulates an Ego or Will which presides over, without -sharing in, the causally determined action of the -other mental functions and their correlated bodily -processes; “an entity which does not depend for its -existence on any play of physical or vital forces, but -which makes these forces subservient to its determinations” -(p. 27). Professor Mivart actually cites -St. Augustine and Cardinal Newman as authorities -in support of his theory of the special creation of the -soul. He might with equal effect subpœna Dr. -Joseph Parker or General Booth as authorities. Dr. -Carpenter argued as became a good Unitarian. In -his Gifford Lectures on Natural Theology, Professor -Stokes asserts, drawing “on sources of information -which lie beyond man’s natural powers,” in other -words, appealing to the Bible, that God made man -immortal and upright, and endowed him with freedom -of the will. As, without the exercise of this, -man would have been as a mere automaton, he was -exposed to the temptation of the devil, and fell. -Thereby he became “subject to death like the lower -animals,” and by the “natural effect of heredity,” -transmitted the taint of sin to his offspring. The -eternal life thus forfeited was restored by the voluntary -sacrifice of Christ, but can be secured only to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235">[235]</a></span> -those who have faith in him. This doctrine, which -is no novel one, is known as “conditional immortality.” -Professor Stokes attaches “no value to the -belief in a future life by metaphysical arguments -founded on the supposed nature of the soul itself,” -and he admits that the purely psychic theory which -would discard the body altogether in regard to the -process of thought is beset by very great difficulties. -So he once more has recourse to “sources of information -which lie beyond man’s natural powers.” -Following up certain distinctions between “soul” -and “spirit” drawn by the Apostle Paul in his tripartite -division of man, Professor Stokes, somewhat -in keeping with Dr. Carpenter, assumes an “Ego, -which, on the one hand, is not to be identified with -thought, which may exist while thought is in abeyance, -and which may, with the future body of which -the Christian religion speaks, be the medium of continuity -of thought.... What the nature of this body -might be we do not know; but we are pretty distinctly -informed that it would be something very -different from that of our present body, very different -in its properties and functions, and yet no less our -own than our present body.” “Words, words, -words,” as Hamlet says.</p> - -<p>Reference has been made in some fulness to Mr. -Wallace’s limitations of the theory of natural selection -in the case of man’s mental faculties. We must -now pursue this somewhat in detail, reminding the -reader of Mr. Wallace’s admission that, “provisionally,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236">[236]</a></span> -the laws of variation and natural selection ... -may have brought about, first, that perfection of -bodily structure in which man is so far above all -other animals, and, in co-ordination with it, the -larger and more developed brain by means of which -he has been able to subject the whole animal and -vegetable kingdoms to his service.” But, although -Mr. Wallace rejects the theory of man’s special creation -as “being entirely unsupported by facts, as -well as in the highest degree improbable,” he contends -that it does not necessarily follow that “his -mental nature, even though developed <i>pari passu</i> -with his physical structure, has been developed by -the same agencies.” Then, by the introduction of a -physical analogy which is no analogy at all, he suggests -that the agent by which man was upraised -into a kingdom apart bears like relation to natural -selection as the glacial epoch bears to the ordinary -agents of denudation and other changes in producing -new effects which, though continuous with preceding -effects, were not due to the same causes.</p> - -<p>Applying this “argument” (drawn from natural -causes), as Mr. Wallace names it, “to the case of -man’s intellectual and moral nature,” he contends -that such special faculties as the mathematical, -musical, and artistic (is this faculty to be denied the -nest-decorating bower bird?), and the high moral -qualities which have given the martyr his constancy, -the patriot his devotion, and the philanthropist his -unselfishness, are due to a “spiritual essence or nature,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237">[237]</a></span> -superadded to the animal nature of man.” We -are not told at what stage in man’s development this -was inserted; whether, once and for all, in “primitive” -man, with potentiality of transmission through -Palæolithic folk to all succeeding generations; or -whether there is special infusion of a “spiritual essence” -into every human being at birth.</p> - -<p>Any perplexity that might arise at the line thus -taken by Mr. Wallace vanishes before the fact, already -enlarged upon, that the author of the Malay -Archipelago and Island Life has written a book on -Miracles and Modern Spiritualism in defence of both. -The explanation lies in that duality of mind which, -in one compartment, ranks Mr. Wallace foremost -among naturalists, and, in the other compartment, -places him among the most credulous of Spiritualists.</p> - -<p>Despite this, Mr. Wallace has claims to a respectful -hearing and to serious reply. Fortunately, he -would appear to furnish the refutation to his own -argument in the following paragraph from his delightful -Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection:</p> - -<p>“From the time when the social and sympathetic -feelings came into operation and the intellectual and -moral faculties became fairly developed, man would -cease to be influenced by natural selection in his -physical form and structure. As an animal he would -remain almost stationary, the changes in the surrounding -universe ceasing to produce in him that -powerful modifying effect which they exercise on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238">[238]</a></span> -other parts of the organic world. But, from the -moment that the form of his body became stationary, -his mind would become subject to those very influences -from which his body had escaped; every slight -variation in his mental and moral nature which -should enable him better to guard against adverse -circumstances and combine for mutual comfort and -protection would be preserved and accumulated; the -better and higher specimens of our race would therefore -increase and spread, the lower and more brutal -would give way and successively die out, and that -rapid advancement of mental organisation would -occur which has raised the very lowest races of man -so far above the brutes (although differing so little -from some of them in physical structure), and, in conjunction -with scarcely perceptible modifications of -form, has developed the wonderful intellect of the -European races” (pp. 316, 317, Second Edition, -1871).</p> - -<p>This argument has suggestive illustration in the -fifth chapter of the Origin of Species. Mr. Darwin -there refers to a remark to the following effect made -by Mr. Waterhouse: “<i>A part developed in any species -in an extraordinary degree or manner in comparison -with the same part in allied species tends to be highly -variable.</i>” This applies only where there is unusual -development. “Thus, the wing of a bat is a most -abnormal structure in the class of mammals; but -the rule would not apply here, because the whole -group of bats possesses wings; it would apply only<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239">[239]</a></span> -if some one species had wings developed in a remarkable -manner in comparison with the other species -of the same genus.” And when this exceptional -development of any part or organ occurs, we may -conclude that the modification has arisen since the -period when the several species branched off from -the common progenitor of the genus; and this period -will seldom be very remote, as species rarely endure -for more than one geological period.</p> - -<p>How completely this applies to man, the latest -product of organic evolution. The brain is that part -or organ in him which has been developed “in an -extraordinary degree, in comparison with the same -part” in other Primates, and which has become -<i>highly variable</i>. Whatever may have been the favouring -causes which secured his immediate progenitors -such modification of brain as advanced him in intelligence -over “allied species,” the fact abides that -in this lies the explanation of their after-history; the -arrest of the one, the unlimited progress of the -other. Increasing intelligence at work through vast -periods of time originated and developed those social -conditions which alone made possible that progress -which, in its most advanced degree, but a small -proportion of the race has reached. For in this question -of mental differences the contrast is not between -man and ape, but between man savage and -civilized; between the incapacity of the one to count -beyond his fingers, and the capacity of the other to -calculate an eclipse of the sun or a transit of Venus.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240">[240]</a></span> -It would therefore seem that Mr. Wallace should -introduce his “spiritual essence, or nature,” in the -intermediate, and not in the initial stage.</p> - -<p>As answer to Mr. Wallace’s argument that in -their large and well-developed brains, savages “possess -an organ quite disproportioned to their requirements,” -Huxley cites Wallace’s own remarks in his -paper on Instinct in Man and Animals as to the -considerable demands made by the needs of the lower -races on their observing faculties which call into -play no mean exercise of brain function.</p> - -<p>“Add to this,” Huxley says, “the knowledge -which a savage is obliged to gain of the properties -of plants, of the characters and habits of animals, -and of the minute indications by which their course -is discoverable; consider that even an Australian -can make excellent baskets and nets, and neatly -fitted and beautifully balanced spears; that he learns -to use these so as to be able to transfix a quartern -loaf at sixty yards; and that very often, as in the -case of the American Indians, the language of a -savage exhibits complexities which a well-trained -European finds it difficult to master; consider that -every time a savage tracks his game, he employs a -minuteness of observation, and an accuracy of inductive -and deductive reasoning which, applied to other -matters, would assure some reputation, and I think -one need ask no further why he possesses such a -fair supply of brains.” ... But Mr. Wallace’s objection -“applies quite as strongly to the lower animals.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241">[241]</a></span> -Surely a wolf must have too much brain, or else -how is it that a dog, with only the same quantity -and form of brain, is able to develop such singular -intelligence? The wolf stands to the dog in the -same relation as the savage to the man; and therefore, -if Mr. Wallace’s doctrine holds good, a higher -power must have superintended the breeding up of -wolves from some inferior stock, in order to prepare -them to become dogs” (Critiques and Addresses, -p. 293).</p> - -<p>After all is said, perhaps the effective refutation -of the belief in a spiritual entity superadded in man -is found in the explanation of the origin of that belief -which anthropology supplies.</p> - -<p>The theory of the origin and growth of the belief -in souls and spiritual beings generally, and in a -future life, which has been put into coherent form -by Spencer and Tylor, is based upon an enormous -mass of evidence gathered by travellers among existing -barbaric peoples; evidence agreeing in character -with that which results from investigations -into beliefs of past races in varying stages of culture. -Only brief reference to it here is necessary, but the -merest outline suffices to show from what obvious -phenomena the conception of a soul was derived, a -conception of which all subsequent forms are but -elaborated copies. As in other matters, crude analogies -have guided the barbaric mind in its ideas about -spirits and their behaviour. A man falls asleep and -dreams certain things; on waking, he believes that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242">[242]</a></span> -these things actually happened; and he therefore -concludes that the dead who came to him or to -whom he went in his dreams, are alive; that the -friend or foe whom he knows to be far away, but -with whom he feasted or fought in dreamland, came -to him. He sees another man fall into a swoon or -trance that may lay him seemingly lifeless for hours -or even days; he himself may be attacked by deranging -fevers and see visions stranger than those -which a healthy person sees; shadows of himself and -of objects, both living and not living, follow or precede -him and lengthen or shorten in the withdrawing -or advancing light; the still water throws back images -of himself; the hillsides resound with mocking -echoes of his words and of sounds around him; and -it is these and allied phenomena which have given -rise to the notion of “another self,” to use Mr. Spencer’s -convenient term, or of a number of selves that -are sometimes outside the man and sometimes inside -him, as to which the barbaric mind is never sure. -Outside him, however, when the man is sleeping, -so that he must not be awakened, lest this “other -self” be hindered from returning; or when he is sick, -or in the toils of the medicine-man, who may hold -the “other self” in his power, as in the curious soul-trap -of the Polynesians—a series of cocoa-nut rings—in -which the sorcerer makes believe to catch and -detain the soul of an offender or sick person. When -Dr. Catat and his companions, MM. Maistre and -Foucart were exploring the “Bara” country on the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243">[243]</a></span> -west coast of Madagascar the people suddenly became -hostile. On the previous day the travellers, -not without difficulty, had photographed the royal -family, and now found themselves accused of taking -the souls of the natives with the object of selling -them when they returned to France. Denial was -of no avail; following the custom of the Malagasays, -they were compelled to catch the souls, which were -then put into a casket, and ordered by Dr. Catat -to return to their respective owners (Times, 24th -March, 1891).</p> - -<p>Although the difference presented by such phenomena -and by death is that it is abiding, while they -are temporary, to the barbaric mind the difference is -in degree, and not in kind. True, the “other self” -has left the body, and will never return to it; but it -exists, for it appears in dreams and hallucinations, -and therefore is believed to revisit its ancient haunts, -as well as to tarry often near the exposed or buried -body. The nebulous theories which identified the -soul with breath, and shadow, and reflection, slowly -condensed into theories of semi-substantiality still -charged with ethereal conceptions, resulting in the -curious amalgam which, in the minds of cultivated -persons, whenever they strive to envisage the idea, -represents the disembodied soul.</p> - -<p>Therefore, in vain may we seek for points of difference -in our comparison of primitive ideas of the -origin and nature of the soul with the later ideas. -The copious literature to which these have given<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244">[244]</a></span> -birth is represented in the bibliography appended to -Mr. Alger’s work on Theories of a Future Life, by -4977 books, exclusive of many published since his -list was compiled. Save in refinement of detail such -as a higher culture secures, what is there to choose -between the four souls of the Hidatsa Indians, the -two souls of the Gold Coast natives, and the tripartite -division of man by Rabbis, Platonists, and Paulinists, -which are but the savage other-self “writ large”? -Their common source is in man’s general animistic -interpretation of Nature, which is a <i>vera causa</i>, superseding -the need for the assumptions of which Mr. -Wallace’s is a type. As an excellent illustration of -what is meant by animism, we may cite what Mr. -Everard im Thurn has to say about the Indians of -Guiana, who are, presumably, a good many steps -removed from so-called “primitive” man. “The -Indian does not see any sharp line of distinction -such as we see between man and other animals, between -one kind of animal and another, or between -animals—man included—and inanimate objects. On -the contrary, to the Indian all objects, animate and -inanimate, seem exactly of the same nature, except -that they differ in the accident of bodily form. Every -object in the whole world is a being, consisting of -a body and spirit, and differs from every other object -in no respect except that of bodily form, and in -the greater or lesser degree of brute power and brute -cunning consequent on the difference of bodily form -and bodily habits. Our next step, therefore, is to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245">[245]</a></span> -note that animals, other than men, and even inanimate -objects, have spirits which differ not at all in -kind from those of men.”</p> - -<p>The importance of the evidence gathered by anthropology -in support of man’s inclusion in the general -theory of evolution is ever becoming more manifest. -For it has brought witness to continuity in organic -development at the point where a break has -been assumed, and driven home the fact that if -Evolution operates anywhere, it operates everywhere. -And operates, too, in such a way that every part co-operates -in the discharge of a universal process. -Hence it meets the divisions which mark opposition -to it by the transcendent power of unity.</p> - -<p>Until the past half-century, man excepted himself, -save in crude and superficial fashion, from that -investigation which, for long periods, he has made -into the earth beneath him and the heavens above -him. This tardy inquiry into the history of his own -kind, and its place in the order and succession of life, -as well as its relation to the lower animals, between -whom and itself, as has been shown, the barbaric -mind sees much in common, is due, so far as Christendom -is concerned (and the like cause applies, -<i>mutatis mutandis</i>, in non-Christian civilized communities), -to the subjection of the intellect to pre-conceived -theories based on the authority accorded to -ancient legends about man. These legends, invested -with the sanctity with which time endows the past, -finally became integral parts of sacred literatures, to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246">[246]</a></span> -question which was as superfluous as it was impious. -Thus it has come to pass that the only being competent -to inquire into his own antecedents has looked -at his history through the distorting prism of a -mythopœic past!</p> - -<p>Perhaps, in the long run, the gain has exceeded -the loss. For, in the precedence of study of other -sciences more remote from man’s “business and -bosom,” there has been rendered possible a more -dispassionate treatment of matters charged with profounder -issues. Since the Church, however she may -conveniently ignore the fact as concession after concession -is wrung from her, has never slackened in -jealousy of the advance of secular knowledge, it was -well for human progress that those subjects of inquiry -which affected orthodox views only indirectly -were first prosecuted. The brilliant discoveries in -astronomy, to which the Copernican theory gave impetus, -although they displaced the earth from its -assumed supremacy among the bodies in space, did -not apparently affect the doctrine of the supremacy -of man as the centre of Divine intervention, as the -creature for whom the great scheme of redemption -had been formulated “in the counsels of the Trinity,” -and the tragedy of the self-sacrifice of God the Son -enacted on earth. The surrender or negation of any -fundamental dogma of Christian theology was not -involved in the abandonment of the statement in -the Bible as to the dominant position of the earth -in relation to the sun and other self-luminous stars.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247">[247]</a></span> -To our own time the increase of knowledge concerning -the myriads of sidereal systems which revolve -through space is not held to be destructive -of those dogmas, but held, rather, to supply material -for speculation as to the probable extension of Divine -paternal government throughout the universe. -And, although, as coming nearer home, with consequent -greater chance of intrusion of elements of -friction, the like applies to the discoveries of geology. -Apart from intellectual apathy, which explains much, -the impact of these discoveries on traditional beliefs -was softened by the buffers which a moderating -spirit of criticism interposed in the shape of superficial -“reconciliations” emptying the old cosmogony -of all its poetry, and therefore of its value as a key -to primitive ideas, and converting it into bastard -science. Thus a temporary, because artificial, unity, -was set up. But with the evidence supplied by -study of the ancient life whose remains are imbedded -in the fossil-yielding strata, that unity is shivered. -In a Scripture that “cannot be broken” there was -read the story of conflict and death æons before man -appeared. Between this record, and that which -spoke of pain and death as the consequences of -man’s disobedience to the frivolous prohibition of -an anthropomorphic God, there is no possible reconciliation.</p> - -<p>To the evidence from fossiliferous beds was -added evidence from old river-gravels and limestone -caverns. The relics extracted from the stalagmitic<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248">[248]</a></span> -deposits in Kent’s Hole, near Torquay, had lain unheeded -for some years save as “curios,” when M. -Boucher des Perthes saw in the worked flints of a -somewhat rougher type which he found mingled with -the bones of rhinoceroses, cave-bears, mammoths, or -woolly-haired elephants, and other mammals in the -“drift” or gravel-pits of Abbeville, in Picardy, the -proofs of man’s primitive savagery, so far as Western -Europe was concerned. The presence of these -rudely-chipped flints had been noticed by M. de -Perthes in 1839, but he could not persuade savants -to admit that human hands had shaped them, until -these doubting Thomases saw for themselves like -implements <i>in situ</i> at a depth of seventeen feet from -the original surface of the ground. That was in -1858: a year before the publication of the Origin of -Species. Similar materials have been unearthed -from every part of the globe habitable once or inhabited -now. They confirm the speculations of Lucretius -as to a universal makeshift with stone, bone, -horn, and such-like accessible or pliable substances -during the ages that preceded the discovery of -metals. Therefore, the existence of a Stone Age at -one period or another where now an Age of Iron -(following an Age of Bronze) prevails, is an established -canon of archæological science. From this -follows the inference that man’s primitive condition -was that which corresponds to the lowest type extant, -the Australian and Papuan; that the further -back inquiry is pushed such culture as exists is found<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249">[249]</a></span> -to have been preceded by barbarism; and that the -savage races of to-day represent not a degradation to -which man, as the result of a fall from primeval purity -and Eden-like ease, has sunk, but a condition out of -which all races above the savage have emerged.</p> - -<p>While Prehistoric Archæology, with its enormous -mass of <i>material</i> remains gathered from “dens and -caves of the earth,” from primitive work-shops, from -rude tombs and temples, thus adds its testimony to -the “great cloud of witnesses”; <i>immaterial</i> remains, -potent as embodying the thought of man, are brought -by the twin sciences of Comparative Mythology and -Folklore, and Comparative Theology—remains of -paramount value, because existing to this day in -hitherto unsuspected form, as survivals in beliefs and -rites and customs. Readers of Tylor’s Primitive -Culture, with its wealth of facts and their significance; -and of Lyall’s Asiatic Studies, wherein is described -the making of myths to this day in the heart -of India; need not be told how the slow zigzag advance -of man in material things has its parallel in -the stages of his intellectual and spiritual advance -all the world over; from the lower animism to the -higher conception of deity; from bewildering guesses -to assuring certainties. To this mode of progress -no civilized people has been the exception, as notably -in the case of the Hebrews, was once thought—“the -correspondence between the old Israelitic and other -archaic forms of theology extending to details.”</p> - -<p>While, therefore, the discoveries of astronomers<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250">[250]</a></span> -and geologists have been disintegrating agencies -upon old beliefs, the discoveries classed under the -general term Anthropological are acting as more -powerful solvents on every opinion of the past. -Showing on what mythical foundation the story of -the fall of man rests, Anthropology has utterly demolished -the <i>raison d’être</i> of the doctrine of his redemption—the -keystone of the fabric. It has penetrated -the mists of antiquity, and traced the myth of -a forfeited Paradise, of the Creation, the Deluge, and -other legends, to their birthplaces in the valley of -the Euphrates or the uplands of Persia; legends -whose earliest inscribed records are on Accadian -tablets, or in the scriptures of Zarathustra. It has -in the spirit of the commended Bereans, “searched” -those and other scriptures, finding therein legends -of founders of ancient faiths cognate to those which -in the course of the centuries gathered round Jesus -of Nazareth; it has collated the rites and ceremonies -of many a barbaric theology with those of old-world -religions—Brahmanic, Buddhistic, Christian—and -found only such differences between them as are -referable to the higher or the lower culture. For -the history of superstitions is included in the history -of beliefs; the superstitions being the germ-plasm of -which all beliefs above the lowest are the modified -products. Belief incarnates itself in word or act. In -the one we have the charm, the invocation, and the -dogma; in the other the ritual and ceremony. “A -ritual system,” Professor Robertson Smith remarks,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251">[251]</a></span> -“must always remain materialistic, even if its materialism -is disguised under the cloak of mysticism.” -And it is with the incarnated ideas, uninfluenced by -the particular creed in connection with which it finds -them, that anthropology deals. Its method is that of -biology. Without bias, without assumptions of relative -truth or falsity, the anthropologist searches into -origins, traces variations, compares and classifies, -and relates the several families to one ordinal group. -He must be what was said of Dante, “a theologian -to whom no dogma is foreign.” Unfortunately, this -method, whose application to the physical sciences -is unchallenged, is, when applied to beliefs, regarded -as one of attack, instead of being one of explanation. -But this should not deter; and if in analyzing a belief -we kill a superstition, this does but show what -mortality lay at its core. For error cannot survive -dissection. Moreover, as John Morley puts it, “to -tamper with veracity is to tamper with the vital -force of human progress.” Therefore, delivering impartial -judgment, the verdict of anthropology upon -the whole matter is that the claims of Christian -theologians to a special and divine origin of their -religion are refuted by the accordant evidence of the -latest utterances of a science whose main concern is -with the origin, nature, and destiny of man.</p> - -<p>The extension of the comparative method to the -various products of man’s intellectual and spiritual -nature is the logical sequence to the adoption of that -method throughout every department of the universe.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252">[252]</a></span> -Of course it starts with the assumption of differences -in things, else it would be superfluous. But -it equally starts with the assumption of resemblances, -and in every case it has brought out the fact that -the differences are superficial, and that the resemblances -are fundamental.</p> - -<p>All this bears closely on Huxley’s work. The -impulse thereto has come largely from the evidence -focussed in Man’s Place in Nature, evidence of which -the material of the writings of his later years is the -expansion. The cultivation of intellect and character -had always been a favourite theme with him, and -the interest was widened when the passing of Mr. -Forster’s Elementary Education Act in 1870 brought -the problem of popular culture to the front. The -wave of enthusiasm carried a group of distinguished -liberal candidates to the polls, and Huxley was -elected a member of the School Board for London. -Then, although in not so acute a form as now, the -religious difficulty was the sole cause of any serious -division, and Huxley’s attitude therein puzzled a -good many people because he advocated the retention -of the Bible in the schools. Those who should -have known him better thought that he was (to -quote from one of his letters to the writer) “a hypocrite, -or simply a fool.” “But,” he adds, “my meaning -was that the mass of the people should not be -deprived of the one great literature which is open -to them, nor shut out from the perception of its -place in the whole past history of civilised mankind.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253">[253]</a></span> -He lamented, as every thoughtful person must lament, -the decay of Bible reading in this generation, -while, at the same time, he advocated the more -strenuously its detachment from the glosses and -theological inferences which do irreparable injury -to a literature whose value cannot be overrated.</p> - -<p>For Huxley was well read in history, and therefore -he would not trust the clergy as interpreters of -the Bible. After repeating in the Prologue to his -Essays on Controverted Questions what he had said -about the book in his article on the School Boards -in Critiques and Addresses, he adds, “I laid stress -on the necessity of placing such instruction in lay -hands; in the hope and belief that it would thus -gradually accommodate itself to the coming changes -of opinion; that the theology and the legend would -drop more and more out of sight, while the perennially -interesting historical, literary, and ethical contents -would come more and more into view.”</p> - -<p>Subsequent events have justified neither the hope -nor the belief. Had Huxley lived to see that all -the sectaries, while quarrelling as to the particular -dogmas which may be deduced from the Bible, agree -in refusing to use it other than as an instrument for -the teaching of dogma, he would probably have come -to see that the only solution in the interests of the -young, is its exclusion from the schools. Never -has any collection of writings, whose miscellaneous, -unequal, and often disconnected character is obscured -by the common title “Bible” which covers them,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254">[254]</a></span> -had such need for deliverance from the so-called -“believers” in it. Its value is only to be realized in -the degree that theories of its inspiration are abandoned. -Then only is it possible to treat it like any -other literature of the kind; to discriminate between -the coarse and barbaric features which evidence the -humanness of its origin, and the loftier features of -its later portions which also evidence how it falls into -line with other witnesses of man’s gradual ethical -and spiritual development.</p> - -<p>Huxley’s breadth of view, his sympathy with -every branch of culture, his advocacy of literary in -unison with scientific training, fitted him supremely -for the work of the School Board, but its demands -were too severe on a man never physically strong, -and he was forced to resign. However, he was -thereby set free for other work, which could be only -effectively done by exchanging the arena for the -study. The earliest important outcome of that relief -was the monograph on Hume, published in 1879, -and the latest was the Romanes lecture on Evolution -and Ethics, which was delivered in the Sheldonian -Theatre at Oxford on the 18th of May, 1893. -Between the two lie a valuable series of papers dealing -with the Evolution of Theology and cognate subjects. -In all these we have the application of the -theory of Evolution to the explanation of the origin -of beliefs and of the basis of morals. To quote the -saying attributed to Leibnitz, both Spencer and -Huxley, and all who follow them, care for “science<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255">[255]</a></span> -only because it enables them to speak with authority -in philosophy and religion.” In a letter to the writer, -wherein Huxley refers to his retirement from official -life, he says:—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>I was so ill that I thought with Hamlet, “the rest is silence.” -But my wiry constitution has unexpectedly weathered the storm, -and I have every reason to believe that with renunciation of the -devil and all his works (i. e., public speaking, dining, and being -dined, etc.) my faculties may be unimpaired for a good -spell yet. And whether my lease is long or short, I mean to -devote them to the work I began in the paper on the Evolution -of Theology.</p></div> - -<p>That essay was first published in two sections in -the Nineteenth Century, 1886, and was the sequel -to the eighth chapter of his Hume. The Romanes -Lecture supplemented the last chapter of that book. -All these are accessible enough to render superfluous -any abstract of their contents. But the tribute due -to David Hume, who may well-nigh claim place -among the few but fit company of Pioneers, warrants -reference to his anticipation of accepted theories -of the origin of belief in spiritual beings in his -Natural History of Religion, published in 1757. He -says: “There is an universal tendency among mankind -to conceive all beings like themselves, and to -transfer to every object those qualities with which -they are familiarly acquainted, and of which they -are intimately conscious.... The <i>unknown causes</i> -which continually employ their thought, appearing -always in the same aspect, are all apprehended to -be of the same kind or species. Nor is it long before<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256">[256]</a></span> -we ascribe to them thought, and reason, and -passion, and sometimes even the limbs and figures -of men, in order to bring them nearer to a resemblance -with ourselves.” In his address to the Sorbonne -on The Successive Advances of the Human -Mind, delivered in 1750, Turgot expresses the same -idea, touching, as John Morley says in his essay on -that statesman, “the root of most of the wrong -thinking that has been as a manacle to science.”</p> - -<p>The foregoing, and passages of a like order, are -made by Huxley the text of his elaborations of the -several stages of theological evolution, the one note -of all of which is the continuity of belief in supernatural -intervention. But more important than the -decay of that belief which is the prelude to decay of -belief in deity itself as commonly defined, is the -resulting transfer of the foundation of morals, in -other words, of motives to conduct, from a theological -to a social base. Theology is not morality; -indeed, it is, too often, immorality. It is concerned -with man’s relations to the gods in whom he believes; -while morals are concerned with man’s relations to -his fellows. The one looks heavenward, wondering -what dues shall be paid the gods to win their smiles -or ward off their frowns. In old Rome <i>sanctitas</i> or -holiness, was, according to Cicero, “the knowledge -of the rites which had to be performed.” These done, -the gods were expected to do their part. So in new -Rome, when the Catholic has attended mass, his -share in the contract is ended. Worship and sacrifice,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257">[257]</a></span> -as mere acts toward supernatural beings, may -be consonant with any number of lapses in conduct. -Morality, on the other hand, looks earthward, and -is prompted to action solely by what is due from a -man to his fellow-men, or from his fellow-men to -him. Its foundation therefore is not in supernatural -beliefs, but in social instincts. All sin is thus resolved -into an anti-social act: a wrong done by man to -man.</p> - -<p>This is not merely readjustment; it is revolution. -For it is the rejection of theology with its appeals -to human obligation to deity, and to man’s hopes of -future reward or fears of future punishment; and it -is the acceptance of wholly secular motives as incentives -to right action. Those motives, having -their foundation in the physical, mental, and moral -results of our deeds, rest on a stable basis. No -longer interlaced with the unstable theological, they -neither abide nor perish with it. And one redeeming -feature of our time is that the churches are beginning -to see this, and to be effected by it. John -Morley caustically remarks that “the efforts of the -heterodox have taught them to be better Christians -than they were a hundred years ago.” Certain extremists -excepted, they are keeping dogma in the -background, and are laying stress on the socialism -which it is contended was at the heart of the teaching -of Jesus. Wisely, if not very consistently, they -are seeking alliance with the liberal movements -whose aim is the “abolition of privilege.” The liberal<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258">[258]</a></span> -theologians, in the face of the varying ethical -standards which mark the Old Testament and the -New, no longer insist on the absoluteness of moral -codes, and so fall into line with the evolutionist in -his theory of their relativeness. For society in its -advance from lower to higher conceptions of duty, -completely reverses its ethics, looking back with -horror on that which was once permitted and unquestioned.</p> - -<p>It is with this checking of “the ape and tiger,” -and this fostering of the “angel” in man, that Huxley -dealt in his Romanes Lecture. There was much -unintelligent, and some wilful, misunderstanding of -his argument, else a prominent Catholic biologist -would hardly have welcomed it as a possible prelude -to Huxley’s submission to the Church. Yet the -reasoning was clear enough, and in no wise contravened -the application of Evolution to morals. Huxley -showed that Evolution is both <i>cosmical</i> and <i>ethical</i>. -<i>Cosmic Evolution</i> has resulted in the universe with -its non-living and living contents, and since, dealing -with the conditions which obtain on our planet, -there is not sufficient elbow-room or food for all the -offspring of living things, the result is a furious -struggle in which the strong win and transmit their -advantages to their descendants. Nature is wholly -selfish; the race is to the swift, and the battle to the -strong.</p> - -<p>But there are limits set to that struggle by man -in the substitution, also within limits, of social progress<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259">[259]</a></span> -for cosmic progress. In this <i>Ethical Evolution</i> -selfishness is so far checked as to permit groups of -human beings to live together in amity, recognising -certain common rights, which restrain the self-regarding -impulses. For, in the words of Marcus -Aurelius, “that which is not good for the swarm -is not good for the bee” (Med., vi, 54). Huxley -aptly likens this counter-process to the action of -a gardener in dealing with a piece of waste ground. -He stamps out the weeds, and plants fragrant flowers -and useful fruits. But he must not relax his efforts, -otherwise the weeds will return, and the untended -plants will be choked and perish. So in conduct. -For the common weal, in which the unit shares, -thus blending the selfish and the unselfish motives, -men check their natural impulses. The emotions and -affections which they share with the lower social -animals, only in higher degree, are co-operative, and -largely help the development of family, tribal, and -national life. But once we let these be weakened, and -society becomes a bear-garden. Force being the -dominant factor in life, the struggle for existence -revives in all its primitive violence, and atavism asserts -its power. Therefore, although he do the best -that in him lies, man can only set limits to that struggle, -for the ethical process is an integral part of the -cosmic powers, “just as the ‘governor’ in a steam-engine -is part of the mechanism of the engine.” -As with society, so with its units: there is no truce -in the contest. Dr. Plimmer, an eminent bacteriologist,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260">[260]</a></span> -describes to the writer the action of a kind of -yeast upon a species of Daphnia, or water-flea. -Metschnikoff observed that these yeast-cells, which -enter with the animal’s food, penetrate the intestines, -and get into the tissues. They are there seized upon -by the leukocytes, which gather round the invaders -in larger fashion, as if seemingly endowed with consciousness, -so marvellous is the strategy. If they -win, the Daphnia recovers; if they lose, it dies. “In -a similar manner in ourselves certain leukocytes -(phagocytes) accumulate at any point of invasion, -and pick up the living bacteria,” and in the success -or failure of their attack lies the fate of man. Which -things are fact as well as allegory; and time is on -the side of the bacteria. For as our life is but a temporary -arrest of the universal movement toward dissolution, -so naught in our actions can arrest the -destiny of our kind. Huxley thus puts it in the concluding -sentences of his Preface—written in July, -1894, one year before his death—to the reissue of -Evolution and Ethics:</p> - -<p>“That man, as a ‘political animal,’ is susceptible -of a vast amount of improvement, by education, by -instruction, and by the application of his intelligence -to the adaptation of the conditions of life to his -higher needs, I entertain not the slightest doubt. -But, so long as he remains liable to error, intellectual -or moral; so long as he is compelled to be perpetually -on guard against the cosmic forces, whose ends -are not his ends, without and within himself; so<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261">[261]</a></span> -long as he is haunted by inexpugnable memories -and hopeless aspirations; so long as the recognition -of his intellectual limitations forces him to acknowledge -his incapacity to penetrate the mystery of existence; -the prospect of attaining untroubled happiness, -or of a state which can, even remotely, deserve -the title of perfection, appears to me to be as misleading -an illusion as ever was dangled before the -eyes of poor humanity. And there have been many -of them. That which lies before the human race -is a constant struggle to maintain and improve, in -opposition to the State of Nature, the State of Art -of an organised polity; in which, and by which, man -may develop a worthy civilisation, capable of maintaining -and constantly improving itself, until the -evolution of our globe shall have entered so far upon -its downward course that the cosmic process resumes -its sway; and, once more, the State of Nature prevails -over the surface of our planet.”</p> - -<p>But only those of low ideals would seek in this -impermanence of things excuse for inaction; or -worse, for self-indulgence. The world will last a -very long time yet, and afford scope for battle against -the wrongs done by man to man. Even were it and -ourselves to perish to-morrow, our duty is clear while -the chance of doing it may be ours. Clifford,—dead -before his prime, before the rich promise of his -genius had its full fruitage,—speaking of the inevitable -end of the earth “and all the consciousness of -men” reminds us, in his essay on The First and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262">[262]</a></span> -Last Catastrophe, that we are helped in facing the -fact “by the words of Spinoza: ‘The free man -thinks of nothing so little as of death, and his wisdom -is a meditation not of death but of life.’” “Our -interest,” Clifford adds, “lies with so much of the -past as may serve to guide our actions in the present, -and to intensify our pious allegiance to the fathers -who have gone before us and the brethren who are -with us; and our interest lies with so much of the -future as we may hope will be appreciably affected -by our good actions now. Do I seem to say, ‘Let -us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die?’ Far from -it; on the contrary I say, ‘Let us take hands and -help, for this day we are alive together.’”</p> - -<p>Evolution and Ethics was Huxley’s last important -deliverance, since the completion of his reply to -Mr. Balfour’s “quaintly entitled” Foundations of -Belief was arrested by his death on the 30th of June, -1895.</p> - -<p>In looking through the Collected Essays, which -represent his non-technical contributions to knowledge, -there may be regret that throughout his life -circumstances were against his doing any piece of -long-sustained work, such as that which, for example, -the affluence and patience of Darwin permitted -him to do. But until Huxley’s later years, and, indeed, -through broken health to the end, his work -outside official demands had to be done fitfully and -piecemeal, or not at all. Notwithstanding this, it has -the unity which is inspired by a central idea. The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263">[263]</a></span> -application of the theory of evolution all round imparts -a quality of relation to subjects seemingly diverse. -And this comes out clearly and strongly in -the more orderly arrangement of the material in the -new issue of Collected Essays.</p> - -<p>These show what an omnivorous reader he was; -how well equipped in classics, theology, and general -literature, in addition to subjects distinctly his own. -He sympathized with every branch of culture. As -contrasted with physical science, he said, “Nothing -would grieve me more than to see literary training -other than a very prominent branch of education.” -One corner of his library was filled with a strange -company of antiquated books of orthodox type; this -he called “the condemned cell.” When looking at -the “strange bedfellows” that slept on the shelves, -the writer asked Huxley what author had most influenced -a style whose clearness and vigour, nevertheless, -seems unborrowed; and he at once named -the masculine and pellucid Leviathan of Hobbes. He -had the happy faculty of rapidly assimilating what he -read; of clearly grasping an opponent’s standpoint; -and what is a man’s salvation nowadays, freedom -from that curse of specialism which kills all sense of -proportion, and reduces its slave to the level of the -machine-hand that spends his life in making the -heads of screws. He believed in “scepticism as the -highest duty, and in blind faith as the one unpardonable -sin.” “And,” he adds, “it cannot be otherwise, -for every great advance in natural knowledge has<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264">[264]</a></span> -involved the absolute rejection of authority, the cherishing -of the keenest scepticism, the annihilation of -the spirit of blind faith; and the most ardent votary -of science holds his firmest convictions, not because -the men he most venerates holds them; not because -their verity is testified by portents and wonders; but -because his experience teaches him that whenever -he chooses to bring these convictions into contact -with their primary source, Nature—whenever he -thinks fit to test them by appealing to experiment -and to observation—Nature will confirm them. The -man of science has learned to believe in justification, -not by faith, but by verification.” Therefore he -nursed no illusions; would not say that he knew -when he did not or could not know, and bidding us -follow the evidence whithersoever it leads us, remains -the surest-footed guide of our time. Such -leadership is his, since he has gone on “from strength -to strength.” The changes in the attitude of man -toward momentous questions which new evidence -and the <i>zeit-geist</i> have effected, have been approaches -to the position taken by Huxley since he first caught -the public ear. His deep religious feeling kept him -in sympathetic touch with his fellows. Ever present -to him was “that consciousness of the limitation of -man, that sense of an open secret which he cannot -penetrate, in which lies the essence of all religion.” -In one of his replies to a prominent exponent of -the Comtian philosophy, that “incongruous mixture -of bad science with eviscerated papistry,” as he calls<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265">[265]</a></span> -it, Huxley protests against the idea that the teaching -of science is wholly negative.</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>I venture, he says, to count it an improbable suggestion -that any one who has graduated in all the faculties of human -relationships; who has taken his share in all the deep joys -and deeper anxieties which cling about them, who has felt the -burden of young lives entrusted to his care, and has stood -alone with his dead before the abyss of the Eternal—has never -had a thought beyond negative criticism.</p></div> - -<p>That is the Agnostic position as he defined it; -an attitude, not a creed; and if he refused to affirm, -he equally refused to deny.</p> - -<p> </p> - -<p>Thus have the Pioneers of Evolution, clear-sighted -and sure-footed, led us by ways undreamed-of -at the start to a goal undreamed-of by the earliest -among them. To have halted on the route when the -graver difficulties of the road began would have made -the journey futile, and have left their followers in -the wilds. Evolution, applied to everything up to -man, but stopping at the stage when he appears, -would have remained a fascinating study, but would -not have become a guiding philosophy of life. It -is in the extension of its processes as explanation of -all that appertains to mankind that its abiding value -consists. That extension was inevitable. The old -theologies of civilized races, useful in their day, because -answering, however imperfectly, to permanent -needs of human nature, no longer suffice. Their -dogmas are traced as the lineal descendants of barbaric -conceptions; their ritual is becoming an archæological<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266">[266]</a></span> -curiosity. They have no answer to the -questions propounded by the growing intelligence of -our time; neither can they satisfy the emotions -which they but feebly discipline. Their place is -being slowly, but surely, and more effectively, filled -by a theory which, interpreting the “mighty sum of -things,” substitutes clear conceptions of unbroken -order and relation between phenomena, in place of -hazy conceptions of intermittent interferences; a -theory which gives more than it takes away. For -if men are deprived of belief in the pseudo-mysteries -coined in a pre-scientific age, their wonder is fed, -and their inquiry is stimulated, by the consciousness -of the impenetrable mysteries of the Universe.</p> -<hr class="l1" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267">[267]</a></span></p> - - -<h2>INDEX</h2> - - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Abdera, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li> -<li>Abiogenesis, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>.</li> -<li>Abraham, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>.</li> -<li>Adam, fall of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> -<li>—— stature of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> -<li>Advent, the Second, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> -<li>Ægean, the, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> -<li>Agassiz, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li> -<li>Agrigentum, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>.</li> -<li>Air as primary substance, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>.</li> -<li>Alexander the Great, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>.</li> -<li>Alexandria, conquest of, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -<li>—— philosophical schools of, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -<li>Allegorical method, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>.</li> -<li>Allen, Grant, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>.</li> -<li>Amazons, river, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>.</li> -<li>America, discovery of, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li> -<li>Amoeba, the, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>.</li> -<li>Anatomy, comparative, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>.</li> -<li>—— human, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> -<li>Anaxagoras, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>.</li> -<li>Anaximander, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>.</li> -<li>Ancestor-worship, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> -<li>Andromeda, nebula in, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>Angels, belief in, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> -<li>Animism, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>.</li> -<li>Anthropology and belief in the soul, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>.</li> -<li>—— and dogmas of the Fall and the Redemption, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>.</li> -<li>—— and man’s place in Evolution, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li> -<li>Antioch, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>.</li> -<li>Ape and man, brain of, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>.</li> -<li>—— general relation of, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>.</li> -<li>Aquinas, Thomas, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>.</li> -<li>Arab conquest, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> -<li>—— philosophy, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> -<li>Arch-fiend, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>.</li> -<li>Aristotle, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>-<a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li> -<li>Arnold, Matthew, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>.</li> -<li>Ascent of Man, Drummond’s, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>.</li> -<li>Asklepios, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> -<li>Astruc, Dr., <a href="#Page_103">103</a>.</li> -<li>Athens, intellectual decay in, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -<li>—— persecution in, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>.</li> -<li>—— religious revival in, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li> -<li>Atomic theory, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li> -<li>Atonement, doctrine of the, and Anthropology, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>.</li> -<li>Augurs, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>.</li> -<li>Augustine, St., <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> -<li>Augustus, Cæsar, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> -<li>Aurelius, Marcus, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>.</li> -<li>Averroes, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> -<li>Avicenna, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Bacon, Lord, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> -<li>Bacon, Roger, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>.</li> -<li>Bacteria and leukocytes, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>.</li> -<li>Bagehot, Mr., <a href="#Page_2">2</a>. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268">[268]</a></span></li> -<li>Baghdad, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> -<li>Balfour, A. J., <a href="#Page_262">262</a>.</li> -<li>Baptism, origin of rite of, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>.</li> -<li>Bates, H. W., <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>.</li> -<li>Beagle, voyage of the, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>.</li> -<li>Benn, A. W., <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>.</li> -<li>Bible, Dictionary of the, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> -<li>Biology, advance in study of, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> -<li>Black magic, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li> -<li>Body and mind, mystery of connection between, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li> -<li>Bone, resurrection, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> -<li>Bonnet, Charles, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>.</li> -<li>“Boundless,” the, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> -<li>Breathing, symbolism of, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> -<li>Bruno, Giordano, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> -<li>Buddha, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li> -<li>Buffon, place of, in theory of Evolution, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> -<li>—— submission to the Sorbonne, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> -<li>Burnet, Prof., <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li> -<li>Burton’s Anatomy, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li> -<li>Butcher, Prof., <a href="#Page_4">4</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Caesalpino, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> -<li>Cairo, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> -<li>Canon of the Bible, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> -<li>Carpenter, Dr., <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li> -<li>Carthage, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>.</li> -<li>—— Council of, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> -<li>Casalis, Mr., <a href="#Page_1">1</a>.</li> -<li>Catat, Dr., <a href="#Page_242">242</a>.</li> -<li>Celtic religion, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> -<li>Chaldæa, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>.</li> -<li>Chambers, Robert, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> -<li>Charles Martel, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>.</li> -<li>Chosroes, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> -<li>Christianity and Anthropology, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>.</li> -<li>—— anti-social nature of, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>.</li> -<li>—— causes of success of, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> -<li>—— opposition to inquiry, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>.</li> -<li>—— origin of, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>.</li> -<li>—— pagan elements in, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>-<a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> -<li>—— philosophic elements in, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>.</li> -<li>—— polytheism of, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> -<li>—— varying fortunes of, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>.</li> -<li>Christians, persecution of, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li> -<li>Church Congress and Evolution, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>.</li> -<li>Circumnavigation of the globe, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> -<li>Clifford, Prof., <a href="#Page_261">261</a>.</li> -<li>Collings, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>.</li> -<li>Colophon, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> -<li>Columbus, Christopher, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li> -<li>Communion at Hawarden Church, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li> -<li>Comtism, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>.</li> -<li>Conduct, bases of, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>.</li> -<li>Consciousness, evolution of, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>.</li> -<li>—— self-, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>.</li> -<li>Conservation of energy, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> -<li>Copernicus, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>.</li> -<li>Cordova, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> -<li>Correlation of forces, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> -<li>Cosmic Evolution, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> -<li>Councils, general, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -<li>Courthope, W. J., <a href="#Page_164">164</a>.</li> -<li>Creation, days of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li> -<li>Credulity of the learned, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> -<li>Creeds, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -<li>Criticism of religions, features of modern, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>.</li> -<li>Cronus, myth of, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> -<li>Crooke, Mr., <a href="#Page_30">30</a>. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269">[269]</a></span></li> -<li>Cross, relics of the, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> -<li>Crown of thorns, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> -<li>Cuvier, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li> -<li>—— and Geoffroy St. Hilaire, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li> -<li>Cybele, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Dalton, John, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>Daphnia, Dr. Plimmer on, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>.</li> -<li>Darwin, Charles, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>-<a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>-<a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> -<li>—— Life and Letters of, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> -<li>—— religious belief of, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>.</li> -<li>—— Erasmus, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> -<li>Days of creation, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li> -<li>De Gama, Vasco, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> -<li>Deluge, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>.</li> -<li>Demeter, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>.</li> -<li>Democritus, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> -<li>Demons, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>.</li> -<li>De Perthes, Boucher, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>De Rerum Natura, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>.</li> -<li>Descartes, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>.</li> -<li>Descent into Hell, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> -<li>Descent of Man, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>.</li> -<li>Development, law of, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> -<li>Devil, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li> -<li>De Vinci, Leonardo, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li> -<li>Diagoras, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>.</li> -<li>Dictionary of the Bible, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> -<li>Dionysus, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>.</li> -<li>Dispersion of the Jews, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -<li>Dogma and Evolution, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -<li>Driver, Rev. Canon, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> -<li>Dubois, Dr., <a href="#Page_222">222</a>.</li> -<li>Dunér, Professor, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Earth as “element,” 13.</li> -<li>—— Greek notions about the, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li> -<li>Education and dogma, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>.</li> -<li>Egypt, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> -<li>—— conquest of, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -<li>Eleatic school, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li> -<li>Elviri, Synod of, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> -<li>Embryology, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>.</li> -<li>Empedocles, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>.</li> -<li>Ephesus, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li> -<li>Epictetus, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li> -<li>Epicurus, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>.</li> -<li>Epigenesis, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>.</li> -<li>Ethical Evolution, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>.</li> -<li>Etruscan haruspices, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>.</li> -<li>Eve, stature of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> -<li>Evil eye, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> -<li>Evolution and dogma, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -<li>—— cosmic, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> -<li>—— ethical, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> -<li>—— inclusion of man in, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li> -<li>—— inorganic, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> -<li>—— organic, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>.</li> -<li>Evolution and Ethics, Huxley on, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Fall, doctrine of the, and anthropology, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>.</li> -<li>Fire, as primary substance, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>.</li> -<li>First Principles, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li> -<li>Fiske, Professor, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li> -<li>Flint implements, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>Folk-lore, value of study of, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>.</li> -<li>Fontenelle, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>.</li> -<li>Fossils, theories about, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> -<li>Frazer, J. G., <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Galen, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> -<li>Galileo, discoveries and persecution of, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> -<li>Geology, effect of study of, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>.</li> -<li>—— revival of study of, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270">[270]</a></span></li> -<li>—— principles of, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> -<li>Gesner, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> -<li>Gibbon, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>.</li> -<li>Gladstone, Mr., <a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li> -<li>Gnosticism, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> -<li>Gods in Rome, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> -<li>Golden Bough, The, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -<li>Gospels, origin of, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>.</li> -<li>Gosse, P. H., <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> -<li>Gower, Dr., <a href="#Page_155">155</a>.</li> -<li>Granada, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> -<li>Greece, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> -<li>—— conquest and intellectual decline of, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>.</li> -<li>Greek philosophers, Table of, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> -<li>Greeks, early conception of earth by, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li> -<li>—— search of, for the primary substance, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>.</li> -<li>Grote, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Haeckel, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>.</li> -<li>Hallucinations, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>.</li> -<li>Haroun al-Raschid, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> -<li>Hartley, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>.</li> -<li>Haruspices, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>.</li> -<li>Harvey, William, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> -<li>Hawarden Church, Communion at, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li> -<li>Heine’s Travel-Pictures, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>.</li> -<li>Hellenized Jews, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -<li>Helmholtz, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>Henrion, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> -<li>Heraclitus, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li> -<li>Herakles, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> -<li>Herodotus, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> -<li>Herschel, Sir William, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> -<li>Hesiod, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li> -<li>Hippocampus minor, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>.</li> -<li>Hobbes’ Leviathan, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>.</li> -<li>Holy Communion, barbaric origin of rite of, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li> -<li>Homer, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>.</li> -<li>Hooker, Sir Joseph, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li> -<li>—— Sir William, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> -<li>Horace, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>.</li> -<li>Huggins, Dr. Wm., <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>Humanity and Evolution, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li> -<li>Humboldt, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>.</li> -<li>Hume, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>.</li> -<li>Hutton, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> -<li>Huxley, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>-<a href="#Page_266">266</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Indigitamenta, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>.</li> -<li>Inductive philosophy, the, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> -<li>Inquisition, the, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> -<li>Instinct, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>.</li> -<li>Ionia, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>.</li> -<li>Isis, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Jerome, St., <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>.</li> -<li>Jerusalem, early disciples of Jesus at, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>.</li> -<li>—— fall of, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -<li>—— Jesus at, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>.</li> -<li>Jesus, summary of life of, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>-<a href="#Page_46">46</a>.</li> -<li>—— superstition shared by, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>-<a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> -<li>Jews, Hellenized, or of the Dispersion, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Kant, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>.</li> -<li>Kelvin, Lord, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li> -<li>Kent’s Hole, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>Khalifs, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> -<li>Kirchoff, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>Kropotkin, Prince, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Lamarck, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> -<li>Language, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271">[271]</a></span></li> -<li>La Peyrère, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li> -<li>Laplace, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>.</li> -<li>Leading Men of Science, Table of, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>-<a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>Leibnitz, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>.</li> -<li>Leo III., <a href="#Page_78">78</a>.</li> -<li>L’Etui de Nacre, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>.</li> -<li>Leucippus, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> -<li>Leukocytes, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>.</li> -<li>Life and Letters, Darwin’s, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>.</li> -<li>Lightfoot, Dr., <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> -<li>Linnaeus, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> -<li>Linnæan Society, famous meeting at, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>.</li> -<li>Living and non-living matter, connection between, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>.</li> -<li>Locke, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> -<li>Lodge, Prof. Oliver, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>.</li> -<li>Love as an “element,” 14.</li> -<li>Lubbock, Sir John, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>.</li> -<li>Lucretius, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>-<a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>Luther, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>.</li> -<li>Lyall, Sir Alfred, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>.</li> -<li>Lyell, Sir Charles, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Madonna, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li> -<li>Magellan, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> -<li>Maine, Sir Henry, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li> -<li>Malay Archipelago, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>.</li> -<li>Malpighi, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>.</li> -<li>Malthus on Population, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>.</li> -<li>Man and Evolution, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>.</li> -<li>—— and ape, brain of, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>.</li> -<li>—— and ape, general structure of, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</li> -<li>—— antiquity of, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>.</li> -<li>—— inclusion of, in Evolution, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li> -<li>—— lower animals and, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>.</li> -<li>—— primitive state of, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>—— suckling, period of, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li> -<li>Manning, Cardinal, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>.</li> -<li>Man’s Place in Nature, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>.</li> -<li>Marcus Aurelius, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>.</li> -<li>Martin, R. B., <a href="#Page_169">169</a>.</li> -<li>Martyr, Peter, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>.</li> -<li>Maskelyne, Mr., <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> -<li>Matter, indestructibility of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> -<li>—— living and non-living, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>.</li> -<li>—— mystery of, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>.</li> -<li>Matthew, Patrick, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>.</li> -<li>Maudsley, Dr., <a href="#Page_156">156</a>.</li> -<li>Meckel, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> -<li>Messiah, Jewish belief in, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>.</li> -<li>Metals, age of, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>Middleton, Conyers, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li> -<li>Miletus, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>.</li> -<li>Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>.</li> -<li>Mithra worship, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>.</li> -<li>Mivart, Prof. St. George, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li> -<li>Mohammed, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> -<li>Montaigne, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> -<li>Morality, essential nature of, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>.</li> -<li>Morals and Evolution, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>.</li> -<li>—— scientific base of, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>.</li> -<li>Morley, John, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>.</li> -<li>Motion, concept of, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>—— indestructibility of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> -<li>—— mystery of, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>.</li> -<li>Mummius, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>.</li> -<li>Munro, Mr., <a href="#Page_24">24</a>. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272">[272]</a></span></li> -<li>Mysteries, Greek, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li> -<li>Mystery of matter, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li> -<li>—— motion, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>.</li> -<li>Myth, primitive, features of, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Nebula in Andromeda, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>Nebular theory, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li> -<li>Nero, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> -<li>Nervous system, disorders of the, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>.</li> -<li>—— origin of the, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>.</li> -<li>New Testament, canon of, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> -<li>—— origin of, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li> -<li>Nicene Creed, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -<li>Nous of Anaxagoras, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li> -<li>Numbers, in primitive thought, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> -<li>—— Pythagorean theory of, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Organic Evolution, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>.</li> -<li>Origin of species, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>.</li> -<li>—— publication of, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> -<li>—— reception of, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li> -<li>Osborn, Prof., <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> -<li>Ovid, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>.</li> -<li>Owen, Sir Richard, attitude of, towards Darwin’s theory, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li> -<li>—— review of the Origin of Species, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Pagan elements in Christianity, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>-<a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> -<li>Paladino, Eusapia, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> -<li>Palæontology, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>.</li> -<li>Palissy, Bernard, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li> -<li>Pantheon, Roman, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> -<li>Papacy, origin of the, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> -<li>Paul, St., <a href="#Page_47">47</a>.</li> -<li>Pausanias, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>.</li> -<li>Pentateuch, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>.</li> -<li>Pericles, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>.</li> -<li>Persia, intellectual activity in, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> -<li>Perthes, Boucher de, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>Petrie, Prof. Flinders, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>.</li> -<li>Philo, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> -<li>Philosophy, synthetic, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>.</li> -<li>Photography in Science, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>Physical Basis of Life, Huxley on, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>.</li> -<li>Pineal gland, theory of soul in, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> -<li>Plato, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>.</li> -<li>Polytheism, feature of, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li> -<li>—— in Christianity, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>.</li> -<li>Pontius Pilate, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> -<li>Poppaea, Sabina, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> -<li>Preformation theory, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>.</li> -<li>Primary substance, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> -<li>—— search after, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>.</li> -<li>Protoplasm, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> -<li>Psychical Research, Society for, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> -<li>Psychology, experimental, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>.</li> -<li>—— Principles of, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> -<li>Ptolemaic System, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> -<li>Punch, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</li> -<li>Pythagoras, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> -<li>Pythagorean theory of numbers, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Redi, experiments of, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>.</li> -<li>Reformation, non-intellectual, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> -<li>—— character of the, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>.</li> -<li>Relics, collection of, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>.</li> -<li>—— worship of, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> -<li>Revelations, condition of, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>.</li> -<li>Rhys, Professor, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273">[273]</a></span></li> -<li>Rodd, Rennell, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> -<li>Roman doctrine of transubstantiation, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>.</li> -<li>Rome, bishop of, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> -<li>—— fire in, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> -<li>—— gods in, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> -<li>—— polytheism of, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li> -<li>Royal Society, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Sacraments, barbaric origin of, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>-<a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li> -<li>Saints, fictitious, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li> -<li>Salisbury, Lord, Presidential Address of, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>.</li> -<li>Samos, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> -<li>Sanctitas, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>.</li> -<li>Saracens, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>.</li> -<li>Savages, brain of, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>.</li> -<li>Scheiner, Professor, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li> -<li>School Boards, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>.</li> -<li>Schwann, Theodor, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>Science, Leading men of, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>-<a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>Second Coming of Jesus, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> -<li>Sedgwick, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li> -<li>Selden, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> -<li>Serapis, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>.</li> -<li>Sin, essence of, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>.</li> -<li>Sizzi, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> -<li>Smith, Professor Robertson, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>.</li> -<li>—— William (geologist), <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> -<li>Social Statics, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> -<li>Society, evolution of, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> -<li>—— modification of struggle in, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>.</li> -<li>Sociology, Principles of, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>.</li> -<li>—— study of, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li> -<li>Socrates, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>.</li> -<li>Solar spectrum, lines in, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>Sorbonne, the, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>.</li> -<li>Soul, origin of belief in, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>-<a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li> -<li>—— location of, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> -<li>—— Lucretius on location of, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>.</li> -<li>Spain, intellectual advance in, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> -<li>Spectroscope, the, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> -<li>Spencer, Herbert, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>-<a href="#Page_201">201</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>.</li> -<li>Spinoza, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> -<li>Spiritualism, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>.</li> -<li>Spontaneous generation, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> -<li>Sprengel, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>St. Hilaire, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> -<li>Stagira, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>.</li> -<li>Stokes, Sir G. G., <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li> -<li>Stone, ages of, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> -<li>Strabo, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>.</li> -<li>Strife as an “element,” 14.</li> -<li>Struggle for life, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> -<li>Suarez, Francisco, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>.</li> -<li>Synthetic philosophy, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>.</li> -<li>—— abstract of the, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>.</li> -<li>—— first draft of, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Table of Greek Philosophers, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> -<li>—— of leading men of science, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>-<a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>Tacitus, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> -<li>Thales, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>.</li> -<li>Theology and Evolution, final issue between, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>.</li> -<li>Theophrastus, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li> -<li>Theosophy, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> -<li>Tozer, Mr., <a href="#Page_30">30</a>.</li> -<li>Transubstantiation, origin of belief in, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>.</li> -<li>Turgot, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>.</li> -<li>Tylor, Dr., <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li> -<li>Tyndall, Professor, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Usher, Archbishop, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>.</li> -</ul> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274">[274]</a></span></p> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Van Helmont, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>.</li> -<li>Vatican Council on Creation, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> -<li>Vesalius, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> -<li>Vestiges of Creation, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>.</li> -<li>Virgin Mary, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li> -<li>Virgins, Black, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li> -<li>Visual sensations, subjective, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>.</li> -<li>Von Baer, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>.</li> -<li>Von Mohl, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> -<li>Votive offerings, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Wallace, Alfred Russel, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>-<a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> -<li>—— as biologist, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</li> -<li>—— as spiritualist, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>-<a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> -<li>—— limitation of natural selection to man’s physical structure, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>-<a href="#Page_241">241</a>.</li> -<li>—— theory of origin of species identical with Darwin’s, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>.</li> -<li>“Wallace’s Line,” 139.</li> -<li>Water as primary substance, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> -<li>Water-worship, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>.</li> -<li>Weismann, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> -<li>Wells, Dr. W. C., <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li> -<li>Wesley, John, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>.</li> -<li>Whewell, Dr., <a href="#Page_159">159</a>.</li> -<li>White, Dr., <a href="#Page_103">103</a>.</li> -<li>Wilberforce, Bishop, and the Origin of Species, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>.</li> -<li>—— and Huxley, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>.</li> -<li>Wilson, Archdeacon, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>.</li> -<li>Winifred’s Well, St., <a href="#Page_63">63</a>.</li> -<li>Witchcraft, belief in, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> -<li>—— causes of decay of belief in, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>.</li> -<li>Worms, Darwin on the Action of, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Xenophanes, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<ul class="ix"> -<li>Zahm, Professor, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>.</li> -<li>Zeller, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> -<li>Zeno, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<p class="center r4">THE END.</p> -<hr class="l1" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275">[275]</a></span></p> - -<div class="ads"> -<p class="center">D. APPLETON AND COMPANY’S PUBLICATIONS.</p> -<hr class="l5" /> -<p class="center f9">THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL SERIES.</p> -<hr class="l4" /> -<p class="center f8">NOW READY.</p> - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">THE BEGINNINGS OF ART.</span> By <span class="smcap">Ernst -Grosse</span>, Professor of Philosophy in the University of Freiburg. -A new volume in the Anthropological Series, edited by Professor -<span class="smcap">Frederick Starr</span>. Illustrated. 12mo. Cloth. $1.75.</p> -</div> - -<p>This is an inquiry into the laws which control the life and development of art, and -into the relations existing between it and certain forms of civilization. The origin of -an artistic activity should be sought among the most primitive peoples, like the native -Australians, the Mincopies of the Andaman Islands, the Botocudos of South America, -and the Eskimos; and with these alone the author studies his subject. Their arts are -regarded as a social phenomenon and a social function, and are classified as arts of rest -and arts of motion. The arts of rest comprise decoration, first of the body by scarification, -painting, tattooing, and dress; and then of implements—painting and sculpture; -while the arts of motion are the dance (a living sculpture), poetry or song, with rhythm, -and music.</p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">WOMAN’S SHARE IN PRIMITIVE CULTURE.</span> -By <span class="smcap">Otis Tufton Mason</span>, A. M., Curator of the -Department of Ethnology in the United States National Museum. -With numerous Illustrations. 12mo. Cloth, $1.75.</p> -</div> - -<p>“A most interesting <i>résumé</i> of the revelations which science has made concerning -the habits of human beings in primitive times, and especially as to the place, the duties, -and the customs of women.”—<i>Philadelphia Inquirer.</i></p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">THE PYGMIES.</span> By <span class="smcap">A. de Quatrefages</span>, late -Professor of Anthropology at the Museum of Natural History, -Paris. With numerous Illustrations. 12mo. Cloth, $1.75.</p> -</div> - -<p>“Probably no one was better equipped to illustrate the general subject than Quatrefages. -While constantly occupied upon the anatomical and osseous phases of his subject, -he was none the less well acquainted with what literature and history had to say -concerning the pygmies.... This book ought to be in every divinity school in which -man as well as God is studied, and from which missionaries go out to convert the human -being of reality and not the man of rhetoric and text-books.”—<i>Boston Literary World.</i></p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">THE BEGINNINGS OF WRITING.</span> By <span class="smcap">W. J. -Hoffman</span>, M. D. With numerous Illustrations. 12mo. Cloth, -$1.75.</p></div> - -<p>This interesting book gives a most attractive account of the rude methods employed -by primitive man for recording his deeds. The earliest writing consists of pictographs -which were traced on stone, wood, bone, skins, and various paperlike substances. Dr. -Hoffman shows how the several classes of symbols used in these records are to be interpreted, -and traces the growth of conventional signs up to syllabaries and alphabets—the -two classes of signs employed by modern peoples.</p> - - -<p class="center r2">IN PREPARATION.</p> - -<p class="in2"><i>THE SOUTH SEA ISLANDERS.</i> By <span class="smcap">Dr. Schmeltz</span>.</p> - -<p class="in2"><i>THE ZUÑI.</i> By <span class="smcap">Frank Hamilton Cushing</span>.</p> - -<p class="in2"><i>THE AZTECS.</i> By Mrs. <span class="smcap">Zelia Nuttall</span>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276">[276]</a></span></p> - - -<p class="center f9 r4"><i>NEW EDITION OF PROF. HUXLEY’S ESSAYS.</i></p> - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">COLLECTED ESSAYS.</span> By <span class="smcap">Thomas H. Huxley.</span> -New complete edition, with revisions, the Essays being grouped -according to general subject. In nine volumes, a new Introduction -accompanying each volume. 12mo. Cloth, $1.25 per -volume.</p> -</div> - -<div class="center"> -<table class="ess" border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary="Collected Essays"> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">I.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">METHOD AND RESULTS.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">II.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">DARWINIANA.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">III.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">SCIENCE AND EDUCATION.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">IV.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">SCIENCE AND HEBREW TRADITION.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">V.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">SCIENCE AND CHRISTIAN TRADITION.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">VI.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">HUME.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">VII.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">MAN’S PLACE IN NATURE.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">VIII.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">DISCOURSES, BIOLOGICAL AND GEOLOGICAL.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col5">Vol.</td><td class="col6">IX.</td><td class="col7">—</td><td class="col2b">EVOLUTION AND ETHICS, AND OTHER ESSAYS.</td></tr> -</table></div> - -<p>“Mr. Huxley has covered a vast variety of topics during the last quarter of a -century. It gives one an agreeable surprise to look over the tables of contents and -note the immense territory which he has explored. To read these books carefully -and studiously is to become thoroughly acquainted with the most advanced thought -on a large number of topics.”—<i>New York Herald.</i></p> - -<p>“The series will be a welcome one. There are few writings on the more abstruse -problems of science better adapted to reading by the general public, and in this form -the books will be well in the reach of the investigator.... The revisions are the last -expected to be made by the author, and his introductions are none of earlier date -than a few months ago [1893], so they may be considered his final and most authoritative -utterances.”—<i>Chicago Times.</i></p> - -<p>“It was inevitable that his essays should be called for in a completed form, and they -will be a source of delight and profit to all who read them. He has always commanded -a hearing, and as a master of the literary style in writing scientific essays he is worthy -of a place among the great English essayists of the day. This edition of his essays -will be widely read, and gives his scientific work a permanent form.”—<i>Boston Herald.</i></p> - -<p>“A man whose brilliancy is so constant as that of Prof. Huxley will always command -readers; and the utterances which are here collected are not the least in weight -and luminous beauty of those with which the author has long delighted the reading -world.”—<i>Philadelphia Press.</i></p> - -<p>“The connected arrangement of the essays which their reissue permits brings into -fuller relief Mr. Huxley’s masterly powers of exposition. Sweeping the subject-matter -clear of all logomachies, he lets the light of common day fall upon it. He shows that -the place of hypothesis in science, as the starting point of verification of the phenomena -to be explained, is but an extension of the assumptions which underlie actions in everyday -affairs; and that the method of scientific investigation is only the method which -rules the ordinary business of life.”—<i>London Chronicle.</i></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277">[277]</a></span></p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">THE SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY OF HERBERT -SPENCER</span>. In nine volumes. 12mo. Cloth, $2.00 -per volume. The titles of the several volumes are as follows:</p> -</div> - -<div class="center"> -<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" summary="Synthetic Philosophy"> -<tr><td class="col6">(1.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">FIRST PRINCIPLES.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">I.</td><td class="col5">The Unknowable.</td> -<td class="col6">II.</td><td class="col5">Laws of the Knowable.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(2.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY. Vol. I.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">I.</td><td class="col5">The Data of Biology.</td> -<td class="col6">II.</td><td class="col5">The Inductions of Biology.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col7" colspan="4">III. The Evolution of Life.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(3.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY. Vol. II.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">IV.</td><td class="col5">Morphological Development.</td> -<td class="col6">V.</td><td class="col5">Physiological Development.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col7" colspan="4">VI. Laws of Multiplication.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(4.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY. Vol. I.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">I.</td><td class="col5">The Data of Psychology.</td> -<td class="col6">III.</td><td class="col5">General Synthesis.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">II.</td><td class="col5">The Inductions of Psychology.</td> -<td class="col6">IV.</td><td class="col5">Special Synthesis.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col7" colspan="4">V. Physical Synthesis.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(5.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY. Vol. II.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">VI.</td><td class="col5">Special Analysis.</td> -<td class="col6">VIII.</td><td class="col5">Congruities.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">VII.</td><td class="col5">General Analysis.</td> -<td class="col6">IX.</td><td class="col5">Corollaries.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(6.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY. Vol. I.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">I.</td><td class="col5">The Data of Sociology.</td> -<td class="col6">II.</td><td class="col5">The Inductions of Sociology.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col7" colspan="4">III. The Domestic Relations.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(7.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY. Vol. II.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">IV.</td><td class="col5">Ceremonial Institutions.</td> -<td class="col6">V.</td><td class="col5">Political Institutions.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(8.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY. Vol. III.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">VI.</td><td class="col5">Ecclesiastical Institutions.</td> -<td class="col6">VII.</td><td class="col5">Professional Institutions.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col7" colspan="4">VIII. Industrial Institutions.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(9.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF ETHICS. Vol. I.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">I.</td><td class="col5">The Data of Ethics.</td> -<td class="col6">II.</td><td class="col5">The Inductions of Ethics.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col7" colspan="4">III. The Ethics of Individual Life.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">(10.)</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">THE PRINCIPLES OF ETHICS. Vol. II.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">IV.</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">The Ethics of Social Life: Justice.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">V.</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">The Ethics of Social Life: Negative Beneficence.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6"> </td><td class="col6">VI.</td><td class="col5" colspan="4">The Ethics of Social Life: Positive Beneficence.</td></tr> -</table></div> - - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">DESCRIPTIVE SOCIOLOGY.</span> <i>A Cyclopædia of -Social Facts.</i> Representing the Constitution of Every Type -and Grade of Human Society, Past and Present, Stationary and -Progressive. By <span class="smcap">Herbert Spencer</span>. Eight Nos., Royal Folio.</p></div> - - -<div class="center"> -<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" summary="Descriptive Sociology"> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">I. </td><td class="col2a">ENGLISH</td><td class="col3">$4 00</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">II. </td><td class="col2a">MEXICANS, CENTRAL AMERICANS, CHIBCHAS, and PERUVIANS</td><td class="col3">4 00</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">III. </td><td class="col2a">LOWEST RACES, NEGRITO RACES, and MALAYO-POLYNESIAN RACES</td><td class="col3">4 00</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">IV. </td><td class="col2a">AFRICAN RACES</td><td class="col3">4 00</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">V. </td><td class="col2a">ASIATIC RACES</td><td class="col3">4 00</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">VI. </td><td class="col2a">AMERICAN RACES</td><td class="col3">4 00</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">VII. </td><td class="col2a">HEBREWS and PHŒNICIANS</td><td class="col3">4 00</td></tr> -<tr><td class="col6">No.</td><td class="col6">VIII. </td><td class="col2a">FRENCH (Double Number)</td><td class="col3">7 00</td></tr> -</table></div> - - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278">[278]</a></span></p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">THE STRUGGLE OF THE NATIONS</span>: -Egypt, Syria, and Assyria. By Professor <span class="smcap">Maspero</span>. Edited -by the Rev. Professor <span class="smcap">Sayce</span>. Translated by <span class="smcap">M. L. McClure</span>. -With Map, 3 Colored Plates, and over 400 Illustrations. Uniform -with “The Dawn of Civilization.” Quarto. Cloth, $7.50.</p> -</div> - -<p>This important work is a companion volume to “The Dawn of Civilization,” and -carries the history of the ancient peoples of the East from the twenty-fourth to the -ninth century before our era. It embraces the sojourn of the Children of Israel in -Egypt, and shows the historic connection between Egypt and Syria during the centuries -immediately following the exodus. The book embodies the latest discoveries in -the Field of Egyptian and Oriental archæology, and there is no other work dealing so -exhaustively with the period covered.</p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">THE DAWN OF CIVILIZATION.</span> (<span class="smcap">Egypt -and Chaldæa.</span>) By Prof. <span class="smcap">G. Maspero</span>. Edited by Rev. -Prof. <span class="smcap">A. H. Sayce</span>. Translated by <span class="smcap">M. L. McClure</span>. Revised -and brought up to date by the Author. With Map and over -470 Illustrations. Quarto. Cloth, $7.50.</p> -</div> - -<p>“The most sumptuous and elaborate work which has yet appeared on this theme.... -The book should be in every well-equipped Oriental library, as the most complete -work on the dawn of civilization. Its careful reading and studying will open a -world of thought to any diligent student, and very largely broaden and enlarge his -views of the grandeur, the stability, and the positive contributions of the civilization of -that early day to the life and culture of our own times.”—<i>Chicago Standard.</i></p> - -<p>“By all odds the best account of Egyptian and Assyrian theology, or, more properly -speaking, theosophy, with which we are acquainted.... The book will arouse many -enthusiasms. Its solid learning will enchant the scholar—its brilliancy will charm the -general reader and tempt him into a region which he may have hesitated to enter.”—<i>The -Outlook.</i></p> - -<p>“The most complete reconstruction of that ancient life which has yet appeared in -print. Maspero’s great book will remain the standard work for a long time to come.”—<i>London -Daily News.</i></p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">LIFE IN ANCIENT EGYPT AND ASSYRIA.</span> -By <span class="smcap">G. Maspero</span>, late Director of Archæology in Egypt, and -Member of the Institute of France. Translated by <span class="smcap">Alice -Morton</span>. With 188 Illustrations. 12mo. Cloth, $1.50.</p> -</div> - -<p>“A lucid sketch, at once popular and learned, of daily life in Egypt at the time of -Rameses II, and of Assyria in that of Assurbanipal.... As an Orientalist, M. Maspero -stands in the front rank, and his learning is so well digested and so admirably subdued -to the service of popular exposition, that it nowhere overwhelms and always interests -the reader.”—<i>London Times.</i></p> - -<p>“Only a writer who had distinguished himself as a student of Egyptian and Assyrian -antiquities could have produced this work, which has none of the features of a -modern book of travels in the East, but is an attempt to deal with ancient life as if one -had been a contemporary with the people whose civilization and social usages are -very largely restored.”—<i>Boston Herald.</i></p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279">[279]</a></span></p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">PIONEERS OF SCIENCE IN AMERICA.</span> -Sketches of their Lives and Scientific Work. Edited and revised -by <span class="smcap">William Jay Youmans</span>, M.D. With Portraits. -8vo. Cloth, $4.00.</p> -</div> - -<p class="f11">Impelled solely by an enthusiastic love of Nature, and neither asking -nor receiving outside aid, these early workers opened the way and initiated -the movement through which American science has reached its present commanding -position. This book gives some account of these men, their early -struggles, their scientific labors, and, whenever possible, something of their -personal characteristics. This information, often very difficult to obtain, has -been collected from a great variety of sources, with the utmost care to secure -accuracy. It is presented in a series of sketches, some fifty in all, each with -a single exception accompanied with a well-authenticated portrait.</p> - -<p>“Fills a place that needed filling, and is likely to be widely read.”—<i>N. Y. Sun.</i></p> - -<p>“It is certainly a useful and convenient volume, and readable too, if we judge correctly -of the degree of accuracy of the whole by critical examination of those cases -in which our own knowledge enables us to form an opinion.... In general, it seems -to us that the handy volume is specially to be commended for setting in just historical -perspective many of the earlier scientists who are neither very generally nor very well -known.”—<i>New York Evening Post.</i></p> - -<p>“A wonderfully interesting volume. Many a young man will find it fascinating. -The compilation of the book is a work well done, well worth the doing.”—<i>Philadelphia -Press.</i></p> - -<p>“One of the most valuable books which we have received.”—<i>Boston Advertiser.</i></p> - -<p>“A book of no little educational value.... An extremely valuable work of reference.”—<i>Boston -Beacon.</i></p> - -<p>“A valuable handbook for those whose work runs on these same lines, and is likely -to prove of lasting interest to those for whom ‘<i>les documents humain</i>’ are second only -to history in importance—nay, are a vital part of history.”—<i>Boston Transcript.</i></p> - -<p>“A biographical history of science in America, noteworthy for its completeness and -scope.... All of the sketches are excellently prepared and unusually interesting.”—<i>Chicago -Record.</i></p> - -<p>“One of the most valuable contributions to American literature recently made.... -The pleasing style in which these sketches are written, the plans taken to secure accuracy, -and the information conveyed, combine to give them great value and interest. -No better or more inspiring reading could be placed in the hands of an intelligent and -aspiring young man.”—<i>New York Christian Work.</i></p> - -<p>“A book whose interest and value are not for to-day or to-morrow, but for indefinite -time.”—<i>Rochester Herald.</i></p> - -<p>“It is difficult to imagine a reader of ordinary intelligence who would not be entertained -by the book.... Conciseness, exactness, urbanity of tone, and interestingness -are the four qualities which chiefly impress the reader of these sketches.”—<i>Buffalo -Express.</i></p> - -<p>“Full of interesting and valuable matter.”—<i>The Churchman.</i></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280">[280]</a></span></p> - - -<div class="drop qt1"> -<p><span class="tt">THE RISE AND GROWTH OF THE ENGLISH -NATION.</span> With Special Reference to Epochs and -Crises. A History of and for the People. By <span class="smcap">W. H. S. -Aubrey</span>, LL.D. In Three Volumes. 12mo. Cloth, $4.50.</p> -</div> - -<p>“The merit of this work is intrinsic. It rests on the broad intelligence and true -philosophy of the method employed, and the coherency and accuracy of the results -reached. The scope of the work is marvelous. Never was there more crowded into -three small volumes. But the saving of space is not by the sacrifice of substance or -of style. The broadest view of the facts and forces embraced by the subject is exhibited -with a clearness of arrangement and a definiteness of application that render it perceptible -to the simplest apprehension.”—<i>New York Mail and Express.</i></p> - -<p>“A useful and thorough piece of work. One of the best treatises which the -general reader can use.”—<i>London Daily Chronicle.</i></p> - -<p>“Conceived in a popular spirit, yet with strict regard to the modern standards. -The title is fully borne out. No want of color in the descriptions.”—<i>London Daily -News.</i></p> - -<p>“The plan laid down results in an admirable English history.”—<i>London Morning -Post.</i></p> - -<p>“Dr. Aubrey has supplied a want. His method is undoubtedly the right one.”—<i>Pall -Mall Gazette.</i></p> - -<p>“It is a distinct step forward in history writing; as far ahead of Green as he was of -Macaulay, though on a different line. Green gives the picture of England at different -times—Aubrey goes deeper, showing the causes which led to the changes.”—<i>New -York World.</i></p> - -<p>“A work that will commend itself to the student of history, and as a comprehensive -and convenient reference book.”—<i>The Argonaut.</i></p> - -<p>“Contains much that the ordinary reader can with difficulty find elsewhere unless -he has access to a library of special works.”—<i>Chicago Dial.</i></p> - -<p>“Up to date in its narration of fact, and in its elucidation of those great principles -that underlie all vital and worthy history.... The painstaking division, along with -the admirably complete index, will make it easy work for any student to get definite -views of any era, or any particular feature of it.... The work strikes one as being -more comprehensive than many that cover far more space.”—<i>The Christian Intelligencer.</i></p> - -<p>“One of the most elaborate and noteworthy of recent contributions to historical -literature.”—<i>New Haven Register.</i></p> - -<p>“As a popular history it possesses great merits, and in many particulars is excelled -by none. It is full, careful as to dates, maintains a generally praiseworthy impartiality, -and it is interesting to read.”—<i>Buffalo Express.</i></p> - -<p>“These volumes are a surprise and in their way a marvel.... They constitute an -almost encylopædia of English history, condensing in a marvelous manner the facts -and principles developed in the history of the English nation.... The work is one of -unsurpassed value to the historical student or even the general reader, and when more -widely known will no doubt be appreciated as one of the remarkable contributions to -English history published in the century.”—<i>Chicago Universalist.</i></p> - -<p>“In every page Dr. Aubrey writes with the far-reaching relation of contemporary -incidents to the whole subject. The amount of matter these three volumes contain is -marvelous. The style in which they are written is more than satisfactory.... The -work is one of unusual importance.”—<i>Hartford Post.</i></p> - -<hr class="l4" /> - -<p class="edt">New York: D. APPLETON & CO., 72 Fifth Avenue.</p> - -<hr class="l1" /> - -</div> -<div class="tnote"> -<p class="tn">Transcriber’s Note</p> - -<p>A few punctuation errors have beencorrected silently.</p> - -<p>The following corrections were made on the page indicated:<br /><br /> - -10 “Then” changed to “The” (The tendency of that school)<br /> - -15 “news” changed to “new” (introducing new ones)<br /> - -36 “Anaximender” changed to “Anaximander” (<span class="smcap">Table</span>)<br /> - -120 “95” changed to “103” (see p. 103)<br /> - -124 “Renè” changed to “René” (René Descartes)<br /> - -191 “Cermonies” changed to “Ceremonies” (Master of -the Ceremonies)<br /> - -239 “genius” changed to “genus” (of the same genus)<br /> - -254 “Liebnitz” changed to “Leibnitz” (attributed to -Leibnitz)<br /> - -259 “we” added and “we” changed to “be” -(once we let these -be weakened)<br /> - -263 “pelluccid” changed to “pellucid” (the masculine -and pellucid Leviathan)<br /> - -271 “Linnean” changed to “Linnæan” in the index (Linnæan -Society, famous)<br /> - -278 “enthusiams” changed to “enthusiasms” (will arouse -many enthusiasms).</p> - -<p>Otherwise this text has been preserved as in the original, including archaic -and inconsistent spelling and hyphenation.</p> -</div> - -<p> </p> -<p> </p> -<hr class="full" /> -<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PIONEERS OF EVOLUTION FROM THALES TO HUXLEY***</p> -<p>******* This file should be named 39526-h.txt or 39526-h.zip *******</p> -<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br /> -<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/3/9/5/2/39526">http://www.gutenberg.org/3/9/5/2/39526</a></p> -<p> -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed.</p> - -<p> -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. -</p> - -<h2>*** START: FULL LICENSE ***<br /> - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br /> -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</h2> - -<p>To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license">www.gutenberg.org/license</a>.</p> - -<h3>Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works</h3> - -<p>1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.</p> - -<p>1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below.</p> - -<p>1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.</p> - -<p>1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States.</p> - -<p>1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p> - -<p>1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed:</p> - -<p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a></p> - -<p>1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.</p> - -<p>1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.</p> - -<p>1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License.</p> - -<p>1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.</p> - -<p>1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that</p> - -<ul> -<li>You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."</li> - -<li>You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works.</li> - -<li>You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work.</li> - -<li>You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.</li> -</ul> - -<p>1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.</p> - -<p>1.F.</p> - -<p>1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment.</p> - -<p>1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE.</p> - -<p>1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem.</p> - -<p>1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p> - -<p>1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.</p> - -<p>1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.</p> - -<h3>Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life.</p> - -<p>Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and -the Foundation information page at <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a></p> - -<h3>Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation</h3> - -<p>The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.</p> - -<p>The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 -North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email -contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the -Foundation's web site and official page at <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org/contact">www.gutenberg.org/contact</a></p> - -<p>For additional contact information:<br /> - Dr. Gregory B. Newby<br /> - Chief Executive and Director<br /> - gbnewby@pglaf.org</p> - -<h3>Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS.</p> - -<p>The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a></p> - -<p>While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate.</p> - -<p>International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p> - -<p>Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a></p> - -<h3>Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works.</h3> - -<p>Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.</p> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.</p> - -<p>Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: -<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a></p> - -<p>This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p> - -</body> -</html> |