In the supremacy and increased intelligence acquired by the ruling race, we see an ill.u.s.tration of the natural tendency of the organic world to grow more perfect; and, in their influence in repressing the advance of others, an example of one of those disturbing causes before enumerated, that _force of external circ.u.mstances_ which causes such wide chasms in the regular series of animated being.

When the individuals of the dominant race became very numerous, their ideas greatly increased in number, and they felt the necessity of communicating them to each other, and of augmenting and varying the signs proper for the communication of ideas. Meanwhile the inferior quadrumanous animals, although most of them were gregarious, acquired no new ideas, being persecuted and restless in the deserts, and obliged to fly and conceal themselves, so that they conceived no new wants. Such ideas as they already had remained unaltered, and they could dispense with the communication of the greater part of these. To make themselves, therefore, understood by their fellows, required merely a few movements of the body or limbs--whistling, and the uttering of certain cries varied by the inflexions of the voice.

On the contrary, the individuals of the ascendant race, animated with a desire of interchanging their ideas, which became more and more numerous, were prompted to multiply the means of communication, and were no longer satisfied with mere pantomimic signs, nor even with all the possible inflexions of the voice, but made continual efforts to acquire the power of uttering articulate sounds, employing a few at first, but afterwards varying and perfecting them according to the increase of their wants. The habitual exercise of their throat, tongue, and lips, insensibly modified the conformation of these organs, until they became fitted for the faculty of speech.[798]

In effecting this mighty change, "the exigencies of the individuals were the sole agents; they gave rise to efforts, and the organs proper for articulating sounds were developed by their habitual employment." Hence, in this peculiar race, the origin of the admirable faculty of speech; hence also the diversity of languages, since the distance of places where the individuals composing the race established themselves soon favored the corruption of conventional signs.[799]

In conclusion, it may be proper to observe that the above sketch of the Lamarckian theory is no exaggerated picture, and those pa.s.sages which have probably excited the greatest surprise in the mind of the reader are literal translations from the original.

CHAPTER x.x.xIV.

TRANs.m.u.tATION OF SPECIES--_Continued_.

Recapitulation of the arguments in favor of the theory of trans.m.u.tation of species--Their insufficiency--Causes of difficulty in discriminating species--Some varieties possibly more distinct than certain individuals of distinct species--Variability in a species consistent with a belief that the limits of deviation are fixed--No facts of trans.m.u.tation authenticated--Varieties of the Dog--the Dog and Wolf distinct species--Mummies of various animals from Egypt identical in character with living individuals--Seeds and plants from the Egyptian tombs--Modifications produced in plants by agriculture and gardening.

The theory of the trans.m.u.tation of species, considered in the last chapter, has met with some degree of favor from many naturalists, from their desire to dispense, as far as possible, with the repeated intervention of a First Cause, as often as geological monuments attest the successive appearance of new races of animals and plants, and the extinction of those pre-existing. But, independently of a predisposition to account, if possible, for a series of changes in the organic world by the regular action of secondary causes, we have seen that in truth many perplexing difficulties present themselves to one who attempts to establish the nature and reality of the specific character. And if once there appears ground of reasonable doubt, in regard to the constancy of species, the amount of transformation which they are capable of undergoing may seem to resolve itself into a mere question of the quant.i.ty of time a.s.signed to the past duration of animate existence.

Before entering upon the reasons which may be adduced for rejecting Lamarck's hypothesis, I shall recapitulate, in a few words, the phenomena, and the whole train of thought, by which I conceive it to have been suggested, and which have gained for this and a.n.a.logous theories, both in ancient and modern times, a considerable number of votaries.

In the first place, the various groups into which plants and animals may be thrown seem almost invariably, to a beginner, to be so natural, that he is usually convinced at first, as was Linnaeus to the last, "that genera are as much founded in nature as the species which compose them."[800] When by examining the numerous intermediate gradations the student finds all lines of demarcation to be in most instances obliterated, even where they at first appeared most distinct, he grows more and more sceptical as to the real existence of genera, and finally regards them as mere arbitrary and artificial signs, invented, like those which serve to distinguish the heavenly constellations, for the convenience of cla.s.sification, and having as little pretensions to reality.

Doubts are then engendered in his mind as to whether species may not also be equally unreal. The student is probably first struck with the phenomenon, that some individuals are made to deviate widely from the ordinary type by the force of peculiar circ.u.mstances, and with the still more extraordinary fact, that the newly acquired peculiarities are faithfully transmitted to the offspring. How far, he asks, may such variations extend in the course of indefinite periods of time, and during great vicissitudes in the physical condition of the globe? His growing incert.i.tude is at first checked by the reflection that nature has forbidden the intermixture of the descendants of distinct original stocks, or has, at least, entailed sterility on their offspring, thereby preventing their being confounded together, and pointing out that a mult.i.tude of distinct types must have been created in the beginning, and must have remained pure and uncorrupted to this day.

Relying on this general law, he endeavors to solve each difficult problem by direct experiment, until he is again astounded by the phenomenon of a prolific hybrid, and still more by an example of a hybrid perpetuating itself throughout several generations in the vegetable world. He then feels himself reduced to the dilemma of choosing between two alternatives; either to reject the test, or to declare that the two species, from the union of which the fruitful progeny has sprung, were mere varieties. If he prefer the latter, he is compelled to question the reality of the distinctness of all other supposed species which differ no more than the parents of such prolific hybrids; for although he may not be enabled immediately to procure, in all such instances, a fruitful offspring; yet experiments show, that after repeated failures, the union of two recognized species may at last, under very favorable circ.u.mstances, give birth to a fertile progeny. Such circ.u.mstances, therefore, the naturalist may conceive to have occurred again and again, in the course of a great lapse of ages.

His first opinions are now fairly unsettled, and every stay at which he has caught has given way one after another; he is in danger of falling into any new and visionary doctrine which may be presented to him; for he now regards every part of the animate creation as void of stability, and in a state of continual flux. In this mood he encounters the Geologist, who relates to him how there have been endless vicissitudes in the shape and structure of organic beings in former ages--how the approach to the present system of things has been gradual--that there has been a progressive development of organization subservient to the purposes of life, from the most simple to the most complex state--that the appearance of man is the last phenomenon in a long succession of events--and, finally, that a series of physical revolutions can be traced in the inorganic world, coeval and co-extensive with those of organic nature.

These views seem immediately to confirm all his preconceived doubts as to the stability of the specific character, and he begins to think there may exist an inseparable connection between a series of changes in the inanimate world, and the capability of the species to be indefinitely modified by the influence of external circ.u.mstances. Henceforth his speculations know no definite bounds; he gives the rein to conjecture, and fancies that the outward form, internal structure, instinctive faculties, nay, that reason itself may have been gradually developed from some of the simplest states of existence--that all animals, that man himself, and the irrational beings, may have had one common origin; that all may be parts of one continuous and progressive scheme of development, from the most imperfect to the more complex; in fine, he renounces his belief in the high genealogy of his species, and looks forward, as if in compensation, to the future perfectibility of man in his physical, intellectual, and moral attributes.

Let us now proceed to consider what is defective in evidence, and what fallacious in reasoning, in the grounds of these strange conclusions.

Blumenbach judiciously observes, that "no general rule can be laid down for determining the distinctness of species, as there is no particular cla.s.s of characters which can serve as a criterion. In each case we must be guided by _a.n.a.logy_ and _probability_." The mult.i.tude, in fact, and complexity of the proofs to be weighed is so great, that we can only hope to obtain presumptive evidence, and we must, therefore, be the more careful to derive our general views as much as possible from those observations where the chances of deception are least. We must be on our guard not to tread in the footsteps of the naturalists of the middle ages, who believed the doctrine of spontaneous generation to be applicable to all those parts of the animal and vegetable kingdoms which they least understood, in direct contradiction to the a.n.a.logy of all the parts best known to them; and who, when at length they found that insects and cryptogamous plants were also propagated from eggs or seeds, still persisted in retaining their old prejudices respecting the infusory animalcules and other minute beings, the generation of which had not then been demonstrated by the microscope to be governed by the same laws.

Lamarck has, indeed, attempted to raise an argument in favor of his system, out of the very confusion which has arisen in the study of some orders of animals and plants, in consequence of the slight shades of difference which separate the new species discovered within the last half century. That the embarra.s.sment of those who attempt to cla.s.sify and distinguish the new acquisitions, poured in such mult.i.tudes into our museums, should increase with the augmentation of their number, is quite natural; since to obviate this, it is not enough that our powers of discrimination should keep pace with the increase of the objects, but we ought to possess greater opportunities of studying each animal and plant in all stages of its growth, and to know profoundly their history, their habits, and physiological characters, throughout several generations; for, in proportion as the series of known animals grows more complete none can doubt there is a nearer approximation to a graduated scale of being; and thus the most closely allied species will be found to possess a greater number of characters in common.

_Causes of the difficulty of discriminating species._--But, in point of fact, our new acquisitions consist, more and more as we advance, of specimens brought from foreign and often very distant and barbarous countries. A large proportion have never even been seen alive by scientific inquirers. Instead of having specimens of the young, the adult, and the aged individuals of each s.e.x, and possessing means of investigating the anatomical structure, the peculiar habits, and instincts of each, what is usually the state of our information? A single specimen, perhaps, of a dried plant, or a stuffed bird or quadruped; a sh.e.l.l, without the soft parts of the animal; an insect in one stage of its numerous transformations;--these are the scanty and imperfect data which the naturalist possesses. Such information may enable us to separate species which stand at a considerable distance from each other; but we have no right to expect any thing but difficulty and ambiguity, if we attempt, from such imperfect opportunities, to obtain distinctive marks for defining the characters of species which are closely related.

If Lamarck could introduce so much certainty and precision into the cla.s.sification of several thousand species of recent and fossil sh.e.l.ls, notwithstanding the extreme remoteness of the organization of these animals from the type of those vertebrated species which are best known, and in the absence of so many of the living inhabitants of sh.e.l.ls, we are led to form an exalted conception of the degree of exactness to which specific distinctions are capable of being carried, rather than to call in question their reality.

When our data are so defective, the most acute naturalist must expect to be sometimes at fault, and, like the novice, to overlook essential points of difference, pa.s.sing unconsciously from one species to another, until, like one who is borne along in a current, he is astonished on looking back, at observing that he has reached a point so remote from that whence he set out.

It is by no means improbable, that, when the series of species of certain genera is very full, they may be found to differ less widely from each other than do the mere varieties or races of certain species.

If such a fact could be established, it would, undoubtedly, diminish the chance of our obtaining certainty in our results; but it would by no means overthrow our confidence in the reality of species.

_Some mere varieties possibly more distinct than certain individuals of distinct species._--It is almost necessary, indeed, to suppose that varieties will differ in some cases more decidedly than some species, if we admit that there is a graduated scale of being, and a.s.sume that the following laws prevail in the economy of the animate creation:--first, that the organization of individuals is capable of being modified to a limited extent, by the force of external causes; secondly, that these modifications are, to a certain extent, transmissible to their offspring; thirdly, that there are fixed limits, beyond which the descendants from common parents can never deviate from a certain type; fourthly, that each species springs from one original stock, and can never be permanently confounded by intermixing with the progeny of any other stock; fifthly, that each species shall endure for a considerable period of time. Now, let us a.s.sume, for the present, these rules hypothetically, and see what consequences may naturally be expected to result from them.

We must suppose that when the Author of Nature creates an animal or plant, all the possible circ.u.mstances in which its descendants are destined to live are foreseen, and that an organization is conferred upon it which will enable the species to perpetuate itself and survive under all the varying circ.u.mstances to which it must be inevitably exposed. Now, the range of variation of circ.u.mstances will differ essentially in almost every case. Let us take, for example, any one of the most influential conditions of existence, such as temperature. In some extensive districts near the equator, the thermometer might never vary, throughout several thousand centuries, for more than 20 Fahrenheit; so that if a plant or animal be provided with an organization fitting it to endure such a range, it may continue on the globe for that immense period, although every individual might be liable at once to be cut off by the least possible excess of heat or cold beyond the determinate degree. But if a species be placed in one of the temperate zones, and have a const.i.tution conferred on it capable of supporting a similar range of temperature only, it will inevitably perish before a single year has pa.s.sed away.

Humboldt has shown that, at c.u.mana, within the tropics, there is a difference of only 4 Fahr. between the temperature of the warmest and coldest months; whereas, in the temperate zones, the annual variation amounts to about 60, and the extreme range of the thermometer in Canada is not less than 90.

The same remark might be applied to any other condition, as food, for example; it may be foreseen that the supply will be regular throughout indefinite periods in one part of the world, and in another very precarious and fluctuating both in kind and quant.i.ty. Different qualifications may be required for enabling species to live for a considerable time under circ.u.mstances so changeable. If, then, temperature and food be among those external causes which, according to certain laws of animal and vegetable physiology, modify the organization, form, or faculties, of individuals, we instantly perceive that the degrees of variability from a common standard must differ widely in the two cases above supposed; since there is a necessity of accommodating a species in one case to a much greater lat.i.tude of circ.u.mstances than in the other.

If it be a law, for instance, that scanty sustenance should check those individuals in their growth which are enabled to accommodate themselves to privations of this kind, and that a parent, prevented in this manner from attaining the size proper to its species, should produce a dwarfish offspring, a stunted race will arise, as is remarkably exemplified in some varieties of the horse and dog. The difference of stature in some races of dogs, when compared to others, is as one to five in linear dimensions, making a difference of a hundred-fold in volume.[801] Now, there is a good reason to believe that species in general are by no means susceptible of existing under a diversity of circ.u.mstances, which may give rise to such a disparity in size, and, consequently, there will be a mult.i.tude of distinct species, of which no two adult individuals can ever depart so widely from a certain standard of dimensions as the mere varieties of certain other species--the dog, for instance. Now, we have only to suppose that what is true of size, may also hold in regard to color and many other attributes; and it will at once follow, that the degree of possible discordance between varieties of the same species may, in certain cases, exceed the utmost disparity which can arise between two individuals of many distinct species.

The same remarks may hold true in regard to instincts; for, if it be foreseen that one species will have to encounter a great variety of foes, it may be necessary to arm it with great cunning and circ.u.mspection, or with courage or other qualities capable of developing themselves on certain occasions; such, for example, as those migratory instincts which are so remarkably exhibited at particular periods, after they have remained dormant for many generations. The history and habits of one variety of such a species may often differ more considerably from some other than those of many distinct species which have no such lat.i.tude of accommodation to circ.u.mstances.

_Extent of known variability in species._--Lamarck has somewhat mis-stated the idea commonly entertained of a species; for it is not true that naturalists in general a.s.sume that the organisation of an animal or plant remains absolutely constant, and that it can never vary in any of its parts.[802] All must be aware that circ.u.mstances influence the habits, and that the habits may alter the state of the parts and organs; but the difference of opinion relates to the extent to which these modifications of the habits and organs of a particular species may be carried.

Now, let us first inquire what positive facts can be adduced in the history of known species, to establish a great and permanent amount of change in the form, structure, or instinct of individuals descending from some common stock. The best authenticated examples of the extent to which species can be made to vary may be looked for in the history of domesticated animals and cultivated plants. It usually happens, that those species, both of the animal and vegetable kingdom, which have the greatest pliability of organisation, those which are most capable of accommodating themselves to a great variety of new circ.u.mstances, are most serviceable to man. These only can be carried by him into different climates, and can have their properties or instincts variously diversified by differences of nourishment and habits. If the resources of a species be so limited, and its habits and faculties be of such a confined and local character, that it can only flourish in a few particular spots, it can rarely be of great utility.

We may consider, therefore, that in the domestication of animals and the cultivation of plants, mankind have first selected those species which have the most flexible frames and const.i.tutions, and have then been engaged for ages in conducting a series of experiments, with much patience and at great cost, to ascertain what may be the greatest possible deviation from a common type which can be elicited in these extreme cases.

_Varieties of the dog--no trans.m.u.tation._--The modifications produced in the different races of dogs exhibit the influence of man in the most striking point of view. These animals have been transported into every climate and placed in every variety of circ.u.mstances; they have been made, as a modern naturalist observes, the servant, the companion, the guardian, and the intimate friend of man, and the power of a superior genius has had a wonderful influence not only on their forms, but on their manners and intelligence.[803] Different races have undergone remarkable changes in the quant.i.ty and color of their clothing; the dogs of Guinea are almost naked, while those of the arctic circle are covered with a warm coat both of hair and wool, which enables them to bear the most intense cold without inconvenience. There are differences also of another kind no less remarkable, as in size, the length of their muzzles, and the convexity of their foreheads.

But, if we look for some of those essential changes which would be required to lend even the semblance of a foundation for the theory of Lamarck, respecting the growth of new organs and the gradual obliteration of others, we find nothing of the kind. For, in all these varieties of the dog, says Cuvier, the relation of the bones with each other remains essentially the same; the form of the teeth never changes in any perceptible degree, except that, in some individuals, one additional false grinder occasionally appears, sometimes on the one side, and sometimes on the other.[804] The greatest departure from a common type--and it const.i.tutes the maximum of variation as yet known in the animal kingdom--is exemplified in those races of dogs which have a supernumerary toe on the hind foot with the corresponding tarsal bones; a variety a.n.a.logous to one presented by six-fingered families of the human race.[805]

Lamarck has thrown out as a conjecture, that the wolf may have been the original of the dog; and eminent naturalists are still divided in opinion on this subject. It seems now admitted that both species agree in the period of gestation, and Mr. Owen has been unable to confirm the alleged difference in the structure of a part of the intestinal ca.n.a.l.[806] Mr. Bell inclines to the opinion that all the various races of dogs have descended from one common stock, of which the wolf is the original source.

It is well known that the horse, the ox, the boar, and other domestic animals which have been introduced into South America, and have run wild in many parts, have entirely lost all marks of domesticity, and have reverted to the original characters of their species. But dogs have also become wild in Cuba, Hayti, and in all the Caribbean islands. In the course of the seventeenth century, they hunted in packs from twelve to fifty, or more, in number, and fearlessly attacked herds of wild boars and other animals. It is natural, therefore, to inquire to what form they reverted? Now, they are said by many travellers to have resembled very nearly the shepherd's dog; but it is certain that they were never turned into wolves. They were extremely savage, and their ravages appear to have been as much dreaded as those of wolves; but when any of their whelps were caught, and brought from the woods to the towns, they grew up in the most perfect submission to man.[807]

Many examples might be adduced to prove that the extent to which the alteration of species can be pushed in the domestic state depends on the original capacity of the species to admit of variation. The horse has been as long domesticated as the dog, yet its different races depart much less widely from a common type; the a.s.s has been still less changed, the camel scarcely at all; yet these species have probably been subjected to the influence of domestication as long as the horse.

_Mummies of animals in Egyptian tombs identical with species still living._--As the advocates of the theory of trans.m.u.tation trust much to the slow and insensible changes which time may work, they are accustomed to lament the absence of accurate descriptions, and figures of particular animals and plants, handed down from the earliest periods of history, such as might have afforded data for comparing the condition of species, at two periods considerably remote. But, fortunately, we are in some measure independent of such evidence: for, by a singular accident, the priests of Egypt have bequeathed to us, in their cemeteries, that information which the museums and works of the Greek philosophers have failed to transmit.

For the careful investigation of these doc.u.ments, we are greatly indebted to the skill and diligence of those naturalists who accompanied the French armies during their brief occupation of Egypt: that conquest of four years, from which we may date the improvement of the modern Egyptians in the arts and sciences, and the rapid progress which has been made of late in our knowledge of the arts and sciences of their remote predecessors. Instead of wasting their whole time, as so many preceding travellers had done, in exclusively collecting human mummies, M. Geoffrey and his a.s.sociates examined diligently, and sent home great numbers of embalmed bodies of consecrated animals, such as the bull, the dog, the cat, the ape, the ichneumon, the crocodile, and the ibis.

To those who have never been accustomed to connect the facts of Natural History with philosophical speculations, who have never raised their conceptions of the end and import of such studies beyond the mere admiration of isolated and beautiful objects, or the exertion of skill in detecting specific differences, it will seem incredible that amidst the din of arms, and the stirring excitement of political movements, so much enthusiasm could have been felt in regard to these precious remains.

In the official report drawn up by the Professors of the Museum at Paris, on the value of these objects, there are some eloquent pa.s.sages, which may appear extravagant, unless we reflect how fully these naturalists could appreciate the bearing of the facts thus brought to light on the past history of the globe.

"It seems," say they, "as if the superst.i.tion of the ancient Egyptians had been inspired by Nature, with a view of transmitting to after ages a monument of her history. That extraordinary and eccentric people, by embalming with so much care the brutes which were the objects of their stupid adoration, have left us in their secret grottoes, cabinets of zoology almost complete. The climate has conspired with the art of embalming to preserve the bodies from corruption, and we can now a.s.sure ourselves by our own eyes what was the state of a great number of species three thousand years ago. We can scarcely restrain the transports of our imagination, on beholding thus preserved, with their minutest bones, with the smallest portions of their skin, and in every particular most perfectly recognizable, many an animal, which at Thebes or Memphis, two or three thousand years ago, had its own priests and altars."[808]

Among the Egyptian mummies thus procured were not only those of numerous wild quadrupeds, birds, and reptiles; but what was perhaps of still higher importance in deciding the great question under discussion, there were the mummies of domestic animals, among which those above mentioned, the bull, the dog, and the cat, were frequent. Now, such was the conformity of the whole of these species to those now living, that there was no more difference, says Cuvier, between them than between the human mummies and the embalmed bodies of men of the present day. Yet some of these animals have since that period been transported by man to almost every climate, and forced to accommodate their habits to the greatest variety of circ.u.mstances. The cat, for example, has been carried over the whole earth, and within the last three centuries, has been naturalized in every part of the new world,--from the cold regions of Canada to the tropical plains of Guiana; yet it has scarcely undergone any perceptible mutation, and is still the same animal which was held sacred by the Egyptians.

Of the ox, undoubtedly, there are many very distinct races; but the bull Apis, which was led in solemn processions by the Egyptian priests, did not differ from some of those now living. The black cattle that have run wild in America, where there were many peculiarities in the climate not to be found, perhaps, in any part of the old world, and where scarcely a single plant on which they fed was of precisely the same species, instead of altering their form and habits, have actually reverted to the exact likeness of the aboriginal wild cattle of Europe.

In answer to the arguments drawn from the Egyptian mummies, Lamarck said they were identical with their living descendants in the same country, because the climate and physical geography of the banks of the Nile have remained unaltered for the last thirty centuries. But why, it may be asked, have other individuals of these species retained the same characters in many different quarters of the globe, where the climate and many other conditions are so varied?

_Seeds and plants from the Egyptian tombs._--The evidence derived from the Egyptian monuments was not confined to the animal kingdom; the fruits, seeds, and other portions of twenty different plants, were faithfully preserved in the same manner; and among these the common wheat was procured by Delille, from closed vessels in the sepulchres of the kings, the grain of which retained not only their form but even their color; so effectual has proved the process of embalming with bitumen in a dry and equable climate. No difference could be detected between this wheat and that which now grows in the East and elsewhere; and in regard to the barley, I am informed by Mr. Brown, the celebrated botanist, that its ident.i.ty with the grain of our own times can be tested by the closest comparison. On examining, for example, one of the seeds from Mr. Sam's Egyptian collection in the British Museum, it is found that "the structure of the husks or that part of the flower which is persistent, agrees precisely with the barley of the present day, in having one perfect flower and the filiform rudiments of a second." Some naturalists believe that the perfect identification of the ancient Egyptian cerealia with the varieties now cultivated has been carried still further, by sowing the seeds taken out of the catacombs, and raising plants from them; but we want more evidence of this fact.

Certain it is, that when the experiment was recently made in the botanic garden at Kew, with 100 seeds of wheat, barley, and lentils, from the Egyptian collection before mentioned of the British Museum, not one of them would germinate.[809]

_Native country of the common wheat._--And here I may observe that there is an obvious answer to Lamarck's objection, that the botanist cannot point out a country where the common wheat grows wild, unless in places where it may have been derived from neighboring cultivation.[810] All naturalists are well aware that the geographical distribution of a great number of species is extremely limited; that it was to be expected that every useful plant should first be cultivated successfully in the country where it was indigenous; and that, probably, every station which it partially occupied, when growing wild, would be selected by the agriculturist as best suited to it when artificially increased.

Palestine has been conjectured, by a late writer on the cerealia, to have been the original habitation of wheat and barley; a supposition which is rendered the more plausible by Hebrew and Egyptian traditions, and by tracing the migrations of the worship of Ceres, as indicative of the migrations of the plant.[811]