4 ANTIC 'IP A TION AND INTER PRE TA TION OF NA TURE. 



gather many fine illustrations of the force of uncon- 

 scious induction. Means of intercommunication 

 were slow, and we should advance cautiously before 

 concluding that any of the greater evolutionists 

 were dealing with borrowed ideas. 



Finally, I have attempted to estimate each author 

 from his thought a.s a whole, before placing him 

 in the scales with his predecessors, contemporaries, 

 and successors. When we study single passages, 

 we are often led widely afield. Haeckel, for ex- 

 ample, appears to have far overstated the relative 

 merits of Oken, a writer who shines forth brightly 

 in certain passages, and goes under a cloud in 

 others, his sum total being obscure and weak. 

 Krause has placed Erasmus Darwin over Lamarck 

 without sufficient consideration. Huxley has treated 

 Treviranus and Lamarck with almost equal re- 

 spect; they are really found to be most unequal 

 when tested by their approach to the modern con- 

 ception of Evolution. We must inquire into the 

 sources or grounds of the conclusions advanced by 

 each writer, how far derived from others, how far 

 from observation of Nature, and consider the sound- 

 ness of each as well as his suggestiveness and origi- 

 nality, before we can judge fairly what permanent 

 links he may have added or welded into the chain 

 of thought. 



