1 74 Heredity. 



family, e.g. ^Lschylus and Cynegirus, the two Boileaus, the two 

 Corneilles, the two Van Eycks, the two Van Ostades, the Schlegels, 

 the two Cuviers, the two Humboldts, Charles Lamb and his sister, 

 Napoleon and his brothers, etc. We do not regard as strictly 

 collateral heredity anything save that heredity which passes from 

 an ancestor to a descendant In all the cases just cited, and in 

 others like them, it seems to us very probable that this talent 

 common to several brothers springs from one common source 

 from some kinsman whose merits lie unnoticed, for merit does not 

 belong exclusively to history : or else it is the result of some quiet 

 work of nature, for who can tell how and through what metamor- 

 phoses, she produces talent? We know not, and doubtless we 

 should be profoundly surprised if we could understand it But 

 as we wished in the foregoing table to state only incontestable 

 facts, we have carefully narrowed our ground. 



SECTION IV. THE HEREDITY OF INFLUENCE. 



We admit that, from the psychological point of view, we are 

 sceptical in regard to this form of heredity, especially as regards 

 man. It consists in the influence of a former alliance on the 

 children born of a subsequent marriage. 



The fact seems to be perfectly out of the order of things. 

 Atavism, though it may appear strange at first view, is explained 

 by the community of blood and of origin ; if the father and 

 mother seem to bear absolutely no resemblance to their child ; if 

 they are merely the channels of some quality or some feature 

 of the ancestors, at least there exists between these and the 

 descendants a continuous chain which accounts for the trans- 

 mission. Here is nothing of the kind : a child resembles a 

 person who has nothing in common with him, save that the person 

 was once its mother's husband. 



Still, among the lower and even the higher animals there are facts 

 to show that heredity of influence frequently occurs. 



We would mention in the first place Bonnet's well known 

 experiments on the aphis. He took a young aphis just after it 

 was hatched, isolated it completely, and saw it, in that state of 

 undoubted virginity, produce, after twenty-one days, ninety-five 



