242 APPENDIX A. 



question seems extremely slight, and does not compare, either with 

 that played by Venetz, de Charpentier, and Agassi/,, or even with 

 that of Renclu. Hugi, Desor, Vogt, Charles Martins, Daniel Dollfus- 

 Ausset, and James D. Forbes. Guyot not only waited many years 

 after the death of Agassiz before publishing his claim, but did not 

 print and distribute his biography of Agassiz until six years after 

 reading it before the National Academy, and one year after Desors 

 death, and after the disappearance of Forbes, his adversary in the 

 question. 



1885. Louis Agassiz, his Life and Correspondence, edited by 

 Elizabeth Gary Agassiz. Boston and London, 2 vols., 121110, 1885. 

 Two Swiss critics well acquainted with Agassiz and his family have 

 given the key to a just appreciation of the work. M. Auguste 

 Glardon, in the " Bibliotheque universelle et Revue Suisse," June, 

 p. 449, says: "The biography of a celebrated man, more especially 

 when it is due to his widow, always occasions some suspicions. To 

 demand from conjugal love a true impartiality would be entirely 

 unreasonable, and we must expect that a monument erected under 

 such circumstances will always be more or less a mausoleum." The 

 other critic, M. Charles Berthoud, in the "Journal de Geneve," 

 I4th December, 1886, after expressing his surprise at the complete 

 silence about the controversy with Karl Schimper, says : " The 

 book is a eulogy, a brilliant picture, without shadows, of a brilliant 

 life, more than a true portrait. We must wait for a complete 

 biography of the savant.' 1 Even as a family eulogy, the work lacks 

 now and then proper appreciation of some of the great difficulties 

 under which Agassiz laboured during the greater part of his life, 

 and of the extraordinary, but always successful, efforts which he 

 made at several critical moments to overcome them, and to continue 

 his herculean labours. There are many parts and some most impor- 

 tant acts of Agassiz's life which are not touched, or even hinted at, 

 by Mrs. Agassiz. The obviously eulogistic purpose of the work, 

 and its unquestionably partial character, diminish its interest. With 

 these exceptions, the work of Mrs. Agassiz is most important. It 

 is all that could reasonably be expected from a wife. 



1886. The daughter of Alexander Braun, Mrs. C. Mettenius. 



