52 WILDER ON MORPHOLOGY AND TELEOLOGY 



Thus we have teeth morphologically canine, but ideologically incisor, — the outer pair of teeth 

 in the incisive row in the lower jaw of the typical Ruminants, (sheep, cattle, &c. ;) and, on 

 the other hand, we have teeth which are morphologically incisor, but ideologically canine, — the 

 only pair of teeth in the intermaxillary bone of the Camelidae, in which aberrant group of 

 Ruminants the lower canines above mentioned assume their proper form and function, 

 as if to compensate for the absence of horns. 



And this brings us at once to the consideration of the important question, whether every 

 anatomical generalization is not an expression of morphology ; whether every grouping of 

 facts which we regard as natural, and which enables us better to comprehend and arrange 

 other facts, is not morphology in the strictest sense of the word. If so, as I believe, then 

 all anatomy is or should be morphology ; for all particulars should be studied with refer- 

 ence to generals already ascertained or to be elucidated. And thus morphology conies to 

 be a very simple thing, and not at all a mystery, and will be avoided only by those who 

 confound rational philosophy with unprofitable imaginings of pretty, pleasing fancies. The 

 Creator did not work with barren isolated facts; and only those who strive to rise above 

 these, will ever gain an insight into the way in which He did work, with general laws first 

 established, but only with reference to the particular ultimate facts which were groined 

 around them. 



In the human body must exist just such complication of structure and arrangement of 

 parts as best adapt it to be the fit and willing agent of the human mind ; and as this is, if 

 not always actually, yet potentially, on a plane superior to that of brutes, so we are pre- 

 pared to find in its fleshy covering a perfection of structure and harmonious arrangement 

 of parts, which, in their totality, far surpass what we observe in inferior animals. 



In animals, it is true, there may often exist a higher development of one function or 

 class of functions; but this, as we shall see, is always at the expense of the rest, besides mar- 

 ring that beauty of proportion which is really an important element in the human frame. 

 The fish and the whale swim better than man, but the form and structure requisite for this 

 simplest mode of locomotion render every other impossible ; even the limbs of the seal, 

 though rather more free, are awkward imitations of anything unless it be paddles. The 

 teeth and stomachs of the strictly carnivorous or herbivorous animals are better adapted 

 for seizing and lacerating or chewing, and for digesting certain kinds of food; but the 

 necessary limitation, as regards other kinds, is an obvious imperfection, taking the creat- 

 ure as a whole. The bird flies through the air with a velocity which man will probably 

 never equal by any mechanical contrivance ; but the necessary concentration of weight 

 between the wings makes the anterior and posterior extremities mere bony supports for 

 air and earth, the head taking the place of the hand as an organ of prehension, and becom- 

 ing thereby incapable of speech or expression. The great strength of the ox, and the 

 speed of the horse or of the deer, are gained by such an arrangement of the muscles of the 

 limbs, and modification of their bony frame, as almost to preclude any other motion than 

 simple flexion and extension forward and backward, involving also the loss of prehensile 

 power in the hand. Even the ape, whose structure is so perfectly fitted for climbing, is, 

 so far as regards the location of the organs of prehension and of progression, a man 

 reversed; 1 and the power of free rotation in the forearm, with the great strength of the 

 fingers, is specially adapted to its peculiar mode of progression, and not to the elevated 

 uses which the human hand performs. 



1 Contributions to the Comparative Myology of the Chimpanzee, Boston Journal of Natural History, vol. vii. 



