212 



SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT. 



responding terms may appropriately define the twofold 

 interest which we take in natural objects. The term 

 morphology 1 was introduced early in the century by 



1 The term morphology was in- 

 troduced by Goethe to define a series 

 of researches and studies to which 

 he was led by his equal interest in 

 art, nature, and human society. 

 Returning from Italy, which he de- 

 scribes as "rich in forms," to Ger- 

 many, which he terms in contrast 

 " gestaltlos," he reports that three 

 distinct problems had presented 

 themselves. " Wie die begiinstigte 

 griechische Nation verfahren um die 

 hbchste Kunst im eigenen National - 

 kreise zu entwickeln. . . . Wie die 

 Natur gesetzlich zu Werke gehe, 

 um lebendiges Gebild, als Muster 

 alles kliustlichen, hervorzubringen. 

 . . . Wie aus dem Zusammen- 

 treffen von Nothwendigkeit und 

 Willkiir, von Antrieb und Wollen, 

 von Bewegung und Widerstand ein 

 drittes hervorgeht . . . die mensch- 

 liche Gesellschaft." For the pur- 

 pose of finding an answer to the 

 second of these questions, Goethe 

 collected and observed, read and 

 speculated, and formed the con- 

 ception of a general science of or- 

 ganised beings, termed morphology, 

 which was not to treat merely of 

 external figure, but to comprise also 

 physiology and the study of develop- 

 ment. It is the first great attempt 

 to think of nature as a whole, and 

 to break down the rigid lines which 

 divided the several natural sciences. 

 He thus inaugurated the modern 

 view of nature by introducing the 

 general science of morphology. His 

 first literary attempt in this di- 

 rection was the now celebrated 

 pamphlet on the ' Metamorphosis 

 of Plants,' in which he represents 

 the leaf as the typical formation 

 from which the other parts of the 

 plant can be derived. Whether 

 this derivation is a real process in 



the sense of modern evolution, or a 

 merely ideal one in the sense of the 

 earlier archetypal view, Goethe does 



: not clearly say. This uncertainty 

 Goethe shares with the whole school 

 of the "Naturphilosophie, " as Julius 

 Sachs points out in his ' History of 

 Botany ' (German edition, 1875, 

 p. 170). This is not the point to 

 which I want to draw attention at 

 present. More important is the 

 remark which Goethe makes in the 

 further historical account of the 



gradual development of his morpho- 

 logical ideas. Wolf, the philologist, 

 pointed out to him that his own 

 namesake, Caspar Friedrich Wolf, 

 had anticipated Goethe in the at- 

 tempt to demonstrate the funda- 

 mental identity of the different 

 parts of a plant. In the sequel of 

 his most appreciative analysis of 

 Wolf's expositions, Goethe charac- 

 teristically notes that Wolf does 

 not include in his conception the 

 " metamorphosis of animals," or in- 

 troduces it only as something en- 

 tirely different. That Goethe's idea 

 of morphology as a general science 

 of the forms and change of forms in 

 nature is applicable likewise to in- 

 animate forms to geological, geo- 

 graphical, and many other forma- 

 tions, nay, even to rigid things like 

 crystals, and to such unstable for- 

 mations as the parts of speech and 

 language has in the course of the 

 century been abundantly recog- 

 nised. It is known how, guided by 

 the same general interest, Goethe 

 studied the formations and trans- 

 formations of animals, rocks, and 

 clouds, though, according to Zittel 

 ( ' Gesch. der Geologic,' 1899, p. 275), 

 C. F. Naumann first used the ex- 

 pression, " morphology of the sur- 

 face of the earth," in 1850. Goethe's 



