darwin and modern science-第53章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
of science in the modern State。〃 He spoke of the theory of evolution as an unproved hypothesis； and declared that it ought not to be taught in the schools； because it was dangerous to the State。 〃We must not；〃 he said； 〃teach that man has descended from the ape or any other animal。〃 When Darwin； usually so lenient in his judgment； read the English translation of Virchow's speech； he expressed his disapproval in strong terms。 But the great authority that Virchow hadan authority well founded in pathology and sociologyand his prestige as President of the German Anthropological Society； had the effect of preventing any member of the Society from raising serious opposition to him for thirty years。 Numbers of journals and treatises repeated his dogmatic statement： 〃It is quite certain that man has descended neither from the ape nor from any other animal。〃 In this he persisted till his death in 1902。 Since that time the whole position of German anthropology has changed。 The question is no longer whether man was created by a distinct supernatural act or evolved from other mammals； but to which line of the animal hierarchy we must look for the actual series of ancestors。 The interested reader will find an account of this 〃battle of Munich〃 （1877） in my three Berlin lectures （April； 1905） （〃Der Kampf um die Entwickelungs…Gedanken〃。 （English translation； 〃Last Words on Evolution〃； London； 1906。）
The main points in our genealogical tree were clearly recognised by Darwin in the sixth chapter of the 〃Descent of Man〃。 Lowly organised fishes； like the lancelet （Amphioxus）； are descended from lower invertebrates resembling the larvae of an existing Tunicate （Appendicularia）。 From these primitive fishes were evolved higher fishes of the ganoid type and others of the type of Lepidosiren （Dipneusta）。 It is a very small step from these to the Amphibia：
〃In the class of mammals the steps are not difficult to conceive which led from the ancient Monotremata to the ancient Marsupials； and from these to the early progenitors of the placental mammals。 We may thus ascend to the Lemuridae； and the interval is not very wide from these to the Simiadae。 The Simiadae then branched off into two great stems； the New World and Old World monkeys； and from the latter； at a remote period； Man； the wonder and glory of the Universe； proceeded。〃 （〃Descent of Man〃 （Popular Edition）； page 255。）
In these few lines Darwin clearly indicated the way in which we were to conceive our ancestral series within the vertebrates。 It is fully confirmed by all the arguments of comparative anatomy and embryology； of palaeontology and physiology； and all the research of the subsequent forty years has gone to establish it。 The deep interest in geology which Darwin maintained throughout his life and his complete knowledge of palaeontology enabled him to grasp the fundamental importance of the palaeontological record more clearly than anthropologists and zoologists usually do。
There has been much debate in subsequent decades whether Darwin himself maintained that man was descended from the ape； and many writers have sought to deny it。 But the lines I have quoted verbatim from the conclusion of the sixth chapter of the 〃Descent of Man〃 （1871） leave no doubt that he was as firmly convinced of it as was his great precursor Jean Lamarck in 1809。 Moreover； Darwin adds； with particular explicitness； in the 〃general summary and conclusion〃 （chapter XXI。） of that standard work （〃Descent of Man〃； page 930。）：
〃By considering the embryological structure of manthe homologies which he presents with the lower animals；the rudiments which he retains；and the reversions to which he is liable； we can partly recall in imagination the former condition of our early progenitors； and can approximately place them in their proper place in the zoological series。 We thus learn that man is descended from a hairy； tailed quadruped； probably arboreal in its habits； and an inhabitant of the Old World。 This creature； if its whole structure had been examined by a naturalist； would have been classed amongst the Quadrumana； as surely as the still more ancient progenitor of the Old and New World monkeys。〃
These clear and definite lines leave no doubt that Darwinso critical and cautious in regard to important conclusionswas quite as firmly convinced of the descent of man from the apes （the Catarrhinae； in particular） as Lamarck was in 1809 and Huxley in 1863。
It is to be noted particularly that； in these and other observations on the subject； Darwin decidedly assumes the monophyletic origin of the mammals； including man。 It is my own conviction that this is of the greatest importance。 A number of difficult questions in regard to the development of man； in respect of anatomy； physiology； psychology； and embryology； are easily settled if we do not merely extend our progonotaxis to our nearest relatives； the anthropoid apes and the tailed monkeys from which these have descended； but go further back and find an ancestor in the group of the Lemuridae； and still further back to the Marsupials and Monotremata。 The essential identity of all the Mammals in point of anatomical structure and embryonic developmentin spite of their astonishing differences in external appearance and habits of lifeis so palpably significant that modern zoologists are agreed in the hypothesis that they have all sprung from a common root； and that this root may be sought in the earlier Palaeozoic Amphibia。
The fundamental importance of this comparative morphology of the Mammals； as a sound basis of scientific anthropology； was recognised just before the beginning of the nineteenth century； when Lamarck first emphasised （1794） the division of the animal kingdom into Vertebrates and Invertebrates。 Even thirteen years earlier （1781）； when Goethe made a close study of the mammal skeleton in the Anatomical Institute at Jena； he was intensely interested to find that the composition of the skull was the same in man as in the other mammals。 His discovery of the os intermaxillare in man （1784）； which was contradicted by most of the anatomists of the time； and his ingenious 〃vertebral theory of the skull；〃 were the splendid fruit of his morphological studies。 They remind us how Germany's greatest philosopher and poet was for many years ardently absorbed in the comparative anatomy of man and the mammals； and how he divined that their wonderful identity in structure was no mere superficial resemblance； but pointed to a deep internal connection。 In my 〃Generelle Morphologie〃 （1866）； in which I published the first attempts to construct phylogenetic trees； I have given a number of remarkable theses of Goethe； which may be called 〃phyletic prophecies。〃 They justify us in regarding him as a precursor of Darwin。
In the ensuing forty years I have made many conscientious efforts to penetrate further along that line of anthropological research that was opened up by Goethe； Lamarck； and Darwin。 I have brought together the many valuable results that have constantly been reached in comparative anatomy； physiology； ontogeny； and palaeontology； and maintained the effort to reform the classification of animals and plants in an evolutionary sense。 The first rough drafts of pedigrees that were published in the 〃Generelle Morphologie〃 have been improved time after time in the ten editions of my 〃Naturaliche Schopfungsgeschichte〃 （1868…1902）。 （English translation； 〃The History of Creation〃； London； 1876。） A sounder basis for my phyletic hypotheses； derived from a discriminating combination of the three great recordsmorphology； ontogeny； and palaeontologywas provided in the three volumes of my 〃Systematische Phylogenie （Berlin； 1894…96。） （1894 Protists and Plants； 1895 Vertebrates； 1896 Invertebrates）。 In my 〃Anthropogenie〃 （Leipzig； 1874； 5th edition 1905。 English translation； 〃The Evolution of Man〃； London； 1905。） I endeavoured to employ all the known facts of comparative ontogeny （embryology） for the purpose of completing my scheme of human phylogeny （evolution）。 I attempted to sketch the historical development of each organ of the body； beginning with the most elementary structures in the germ…layers of the Gastraea。 At the same t
