LOUIS AGASSIZ. [CHAP, xx. 



results from a naturalist of such repute as Agassiz. It 

 is true that Bates remained there eleven years, while 

 Agassiz passed only ten months, but the store of 

 knowledge possessed by both was so different, that it 

 was natural to expect not only something startling, but 

 also something which might have some effect on the 

 theory of the origin of species, in a Cuvierian way. 

 The only part which can be called Cuvierian is an 

 appendix on "The Permanence of Characteristics in 

 Different Human Species." 



In Agassiz's volume the personal adventures and 

 incidents of travel are rather tame and the style dull 

 and heavy, not in harmony with the usual brilliancy and 

 spirit of the great naturalist, while in Bates's volume 

 the narrative is most attractive, whether he speaks of 

 adventures, incidents, or purely scientific matter, and 

 the style full of animation. The difference is due 

 mainly to their mode of travelling, one journeyed in 

 state, as it were, while the other, alone, and with very 

 scanty, sometimes without any pecuniary means at his 

 disposal, forced his way with great difficulty. Besides, 

 Bates was there in his prime, and wrote his volume 

 himself. 



However, Agassiz's influence on the progress of 

 natural history in Brazil was very great, so far as any- 

 thing makes a lasting impression upon a population 

 inhabiting such a warm climate; for we must not for- 

 get the dolcc far nicnte of the inhabitants of tropical 

 regions. 



It is interesting to sec how Agassiz was influenced 

 by what he observed during his Brazilian jourm-y, in 



