THE BEG1XXIXGS OF LIFE. 245 



would at least be a continuity of Life the peculiar 

 powers of living matter would be directly communi- 

 cated or transmitted, although such living; matter mi^ht 



J \~f C? O 



take on new modes of growth and development ; but in 

 the occurrence of Archebiosis they would have to 

 imagine the actual new creation of the special and 

 peculiar c something' which they mentally associate 

 with the word c Life.' 



The general views entertained concerning Life its 

 nature, or the meaning to be attached to it as a term- 

 exercise no small influence in producing a variation in 

 the point of view of different writers as to the nature of 

 certain phenomena. Thus, statements which appear to 

 many to be consistent only with a belief in Archebiosis, 

 are, when taken in conjunction with the general views 

 of the writers, often found not to warrant such a con- 

 clusion. This may be best explained by a reference to 

 the opinions of two or three well-known writers on 

 the subject, 



In the first volume of his c Physiologic,' published in 

 1826, Burdach introduced the words Homogenla and 

 Heterogeniaj as names for the two principal class 

 distinctions in the mode of origin of living things. 

 Homogenla was the class-name applied to the processes 

 by which an individual results from a pre-existing 

 living thing, similar to itself in organization; whilst 

 Heterogenia was the class-name for processes by which 

 living things arise from the matter of pre-existing 

 organisms belonging to a totally different species. 



