1908] on Biology and History. 49 



were necessary events at all. We must look elsewhere than amongst 

 the inherent and necessary factors of racial life for the causes which 

 determine these tragedies ; and we shall be entitled to assume as 

 conceivable the proposition that, notwithstanding the consistent falJ 

 of all our predecessors, these causes are not inevitable, but being 

 external and environmental, may possibly be controlled. 



The second of the two false interpretations of history in terms of 

 biology is still, and always has been, widely credited. It is that, in 

 consequence of success, a people becomes idle, thoughtless, unenter- 

 prising, luxurious ; and that these acquired characters are transmitted 

 to succeeding generations, so that finally there is produced a degene- 

 rate people unable to bear the burden of empire, and then the crash 

 comes. The historian usually introduces the idea already dismissed, 

 by saying that a " young and vigorous race " invaded the imperial 

 territories, and so forth. The terms " young " and " old," applied to 

 human races, usually mean nothing at all. 



This doctrine of the transmission to children of characters acquired 

 by their parents, is the explanation of organic evolution advanced 

 by Lamarck rather more than a century ago. It is employed by his- 

 torians for the explanation of both the processes they record, progress 

 and retrogression. Thus they suppose that for many generations a 

 race is disciplined, and so at last there is produced a race with dis- 

 pline in its very bone ; or for many generations a nation finds it 

 necessary to make adventure upon the sea, and so at last there is pro- 

 duced a generation of predestined sailors with blue water in its blood. 

 And, in similar terms, moral and physical retrogression or degeneration 

 are explained. 



Let us consider the contrast between the interpretation which 

 accepts the Lamarckian theory of the transmission of acquired 

 characters and that Avhich does not. Consider the babies of a new 

 generation. According to Lamarck, they have in their blood and 

 brain the consequences of the habits of their ancestors. If these have 

 been idle and luxurious, the new babies are predestined to be idle and 

 luxurious too. This, in short, is a " dying nation." But, if acquired 

 characters are not transmitted, the new generation is, on the whole, 

 not much better, not much worse, than its predecessors, so far as this 

 supposed factor of change is concerned. Each generation makes a 

 fresh start, as we see in the babies of our slums to-day. 



Lamarck's theory is discredited. The view of Mr. Francis Clalton 

 is accepted, that acquired characters are not transmitted, either for 

 good or for evil. If there are no other factors of racial degeneration 

 or racial advance, then races do not degenerate or advance, but make 

 a fresh start every generation, and empires rise and fall without any 

 relation to the breed of the imperial people — an incredible proposi- 

 tion. 



Certain apparent though not real exceptions exist to the denial of 

 the Tjamarckian theory of the transmission of acquired characters. 



Vol. XIX. (No. 102) E 



