THE -'GENERAL MORPHOLOGY" 233 



pressed. An introduction, consisting of a hundred 

 and sixty pages of small type, gives us an idea 

 of the new system. This is the first scheme of a 

 real *^ natural classification" of living things. 

 From this we pass to special morphology. But 

 this fearless sketch of the specialised genealogical 

 tree, according to the new ideas, puts general 

 morphology in its true light. We are made to feel 

 that it is not all mere theory. To-morrow — nay, 

 to-day — the whole practice of zoology and botany 

 will have to be remodelled on the new principles. 

 OR with the roof of the ark ! The whole museum 

 must be cleared out. We want new divisions, new 

 labels. The old controversy between the Nomina- 

 lists and the Eealists seemed to have come to life 

 once more. How students had played with the 

 word '' affinity " as a symbol. The lemurs were 

 "related" to the apes, and to other groups of 

 mammals. The star-fishes were related to the 

 sea-urchins, to the encrinites. The word had, 

 in fact, led to a certain amount of arrangement ; 

 the stuffed or dried or preserved specimens in 

 the museum were placed side by side. Suddenly 

 the whole thing became a reality. The things 

 that were "related" to each other had really 

 been connected historically in earlier ages. The 

 lemurs were the progenitors of the apes. Behind 

 them were a series of other mammals. Star-fishes, 

 sea-urchins, and encrinites, formed a definite 

 branch of the great tree, and were historically 

 connected ; not symbolically, but in a real extinct 

 common ancestor. 



