HEREDITY AND ENVIRONMENT 85 



is born, not made. Plainly, then, lie did inherit his 

 i,^enius ; not in the sense that his parents had it, but 

 in the sense that it was potential in those two cells 

 — or in one of them, or in their combination — which 

 were derived from his parents and went to form him. 

 It may be objected that one cannot inherit that wliicli 

 one's parents have not got ; but obviously our (piarrel 

 is merely a matter of terminology. Let us reconsider it. 



It is immediately evident that Shakespeare's genius, 

 like any other character peculiar to him, such as the 

 lines of his mouth, or the particular ratios of his 

 tinger-lengths, was a variation. Now, according to 

 the old manner of thinking, this is as much as to say 

 that it was not inherited, variation being the '' oppo- 

 site" of heredity. But we have already seen that 

 this view is untenable; that variation is really a 

 form of heredity. Surely this must be apparent, if 

 we look at the concrete case in point. It may be 

 said that Shakespeare could not inherit what his 

 parents had not ; but it cannot be gainsaid tliat, in 

 point of fact, the particular variation whii-h we call 

 his genius was innate — according to the Latin tag — 

 or, in the language of science, was germinal. It was 

 potential in the cell from which Shakespeare was 

 formed; and that cell, with its potentialities, was 

 formed from parts of two cells, one contributed by 

 his father, and one by his mother. If, then, he did 

 not get his genius from his parents, it was at any 

 rate potential in that which he indisputably got from 

 his parents and from which he was formed. In this 

 sense, variation is a form of heredity. 



Let us now attack the familiar debating-society 

 question as to the relative impi)rtance of heredity 



