184 VITALISM AND SCHOLASTICISM 



the matter in the briefest possible way a new 

 formation. A little thought will show that "this 

 is a yitalistic view-" all believers in epigenesis 

 are Vitalists," says Driesch.* Now, if,~~as has 

 been shown, it is indifferent to the first cell as 

 to whether it becomes one or eight, or more 

 individuals, it is clear that the process of 

 development of the embryo cannot be one of 

 evolution or unfolding, but must be the forma- 

 tion from indifferent material of a new indivi- 

 dual. However, let us go a step further. The 

 first and though it took some time for the 

 fact to be recognised epoch-making experi- 

 ments in this connection were made by Roux 

 and published in Virchow's Archiv."f I was 

 myself at that time engaged in studying the 

 problem of double monstrosity, and at once 

 saw the important bearing which Roux's ob- 

 servations had on that question. I dealt with 

 them in an article? which was, I think, the 

 first to call the attention of English readers to 

 Roux's ex- *^ e ma tter, since the periodical in which Roux's 

 periment conclusions appeared appealed more to medical 

 than to purely scientific readers. The experi- 

 ment was as follows : Roux very carefully 



* In his History, p. 37, where a short account of the con- 

 troversy and its protagonists will be found. 



t Vol. cxiv. 



$ Journal of Anatomy and Physiology, vol. xxiii. On the 

 Origin of Double Monstrosity. 



