2 INTKODCCfJOy 



ulnious characters of ])lants and animals — tlicir forms, colours, 

 habits, distribution, their anatonu' and embryonic development — 

 and with the systems of classitication based iijjon such characters ; 

 and loui;" afterward it was, in the main, the study of like characters 

 with reference \.o their historical orij^in that led Darwin to his splen- 

 did triumphs. The study of microscopical anatomy, on which the 

 cell-theory was based, la\- in a different held. It was begun and long 

 carried forward witli no thought of its bearing on the origin of living 

 forms ; and even at the present day the fundamental problems of 

 organization, with which the cell-theory deals, are far less accessible 

 to historical inquiry than those suggested by the more obvious 

 external characters of plants and animals. Only within a few years, 

 indeed, has the ground been cleared for tliat close alliance between 

 students of organic evolution and students of the cell, which forms so 

 striking a feature of latter-day biology and is exerting so great an influ- 

 ence on the direction of research. It has, therefore, only recently 

 become possible adecpiatcly to formulate the great problems of devel- 

 opment and heredity in the terms of cellular biology — indeed, we can 

 as yet do little more than so formulate them. Yet the fact that these 

 two great lines of research, both concerned with the deeper problems 

 of life, yet having their beginnings so far apart, have at length 

 converged to a meeting-point, is one of the more striking evidences of 

 progress that modern biology has to show; and it sufficiently justifies 

 an attempt to treat the cell from the standpoint of the general student 

 of development. 



Let us at the outset briefly outline the cell-theory as thus regarded, 

 and indicate the manner of its historical connection with the general 

 problems of evolution.^ 



^ Schleiden and Schwann are universally and justly recognized as the founders of the cell- 

 theory; but like every other great generalization the theory was based on a long series of 

 earlier investigations beginning with the memorable microscopical researches of Leeuwen- 

 hoek, Malpighi, Hooke, and Grew in the second half of the seventeenth centurv. 



Wolff, in the llteoria Generationis (1759), clearly recognized the "spheres" and "vesi- 

 cles " composing the embryonic parts both of animals and of plants, though without grasping 

 their real nature or mode of origin, and his conclusions were developed by the botanist 

 Mirbel at the beginning of the present century. Nearly at the same time (1805) Oken fore- 

 shadowed the cell-theory in the form that it assumed with Schleiden and Schwann; but his 

 conception of " Urschleim " and " Blaschen " can hardly be regarded as more than a lucky 

 guess. A still closer approximation to the truth is found in the works of Turpin (1826), 

 Meyen (1830), Raspail (1831), and Dutrochet (1837); but these, like others of the same 

 period, only paved the v.ay for the real founders of the cell-theory. Among other immedi- 

 ate predecessors or contemporaries of Schleiden and Schwann should be especiallv mentioned 

 Robert Brown, Dujardin, Johannes Miiller, Purkinje, Hugo von Mohl, Valentin, Unger, 

 Nageli, and Henle. The signihcance of Schleiden's, and especially of Schwann's, work lies 

 in the thorough and comprehensive way in which the problem was studied, the philosophic 

 breadth with which the conclusions were developed, and the far-reaching influence which 

 they exercised upon subsequent research. In this respect it is hardly too much to com- 

 pare the Mikroskopische L'nteysiichiingeii with the Origin of Species. 



