EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION xxxiii 



speculation." Yet he could not admit that Agassiz had said the final 

 word on the problem of species — naturalists, he affirmed, needed to 

 kno^v much more about the causes, mechanisms, and limitations of 

 variation. Nor was he satisfied that Agassiz had proved his contention 

 regarding the independent, plural origin of men and animals. His 

 doubts suggested subsequent acceptance of the evolutionary concept. 

 Dana's analysis reflected both Agassiz's stature in national science 

 and the restiveness of colleagues who felt too confined by the fetters 

 of special creationism. In his review the Yale naturalist spoke of 

 future volumes by Agassiz in the Contributions series as books that 

 would "make still broader the foundation for a true philosophy of 

 nature." But only two more studies — specialized treatments of 

 marine biology — were ever published, a further indication of the 

 totality of Agassiz's public involvements in later years. It thus re- 

 mained for other men to do what he had urged in the Essay: 



As long as men inquire, they will find opportunities to know more upon these 

 topics than those who have gone before them, so inexhaustibly rich is nature 

 in the innermost diversity of her treasures of beauty, order, and intelligence, 

 (p. 141) 



