NATURE 
THURSDAY, JUNE 19, 1902. 
THE PLACE OF LAMARCK IN THE HISTORY 
‘OF EVOLUTION. 
Lamarck, thé Founder of Evolution; his Life and 
Work. With Translations of his Writings on Organic 
Evolution. By Alpheus S. Packard, M.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Zoology and Geology in Brown University, 
&e. Pp. xiv + 451. (London and New York : Long- 
mans, Green and Co., rgor.) Price gs. net. 
HE name of Lamarck has of late been much in 
people’s mouths. Now that the doctrine of organic 
evolution has secured acceptance from all those who are 
qualified to form an opinion on the subject, an attempt is 
being made in some quarters to deprive Darwin, the real 
hero of the campaign, of at least a portion of his laurels, 
and to bestow them on a leader of inferior rank and far 
lower achievement. It cannot be doubted that this attempt 
is, in the long run, doomed to failure; but in the meantime 
there is considerable danger of an unwholesome reaction 
among those who have not perfectly comprehended the 
points at issue. 
It is often forgotten that the idea of “ special creation,” 
or, as we should rather say, of the “immutability of 
species,” is one of comparatively recent growth. Before 
the seventeenth century the current notions on this sub- 
ject were by no means rigid, while the terms “genus” 
and “species,” in their technical use, were the exclusive 
property of logicians. It is not until the time of Ray 
that we find the latter term borrowed by a naturalist in 
order to give precision to a conception which was then a 
novelty to the scientific mind. The definition of natural 
species in the Linnzean sense would have sounded as 
strange in the ears of Francis Bacon as would the denial 
of spontaneous generation. The work of Ray, Linnzus 
and Cuvier, greatly as it assisted the cause of science, 
carried with it a fatal defect. It left order where it had 
found confusion, but in substituting exactness of definition 
for the vague conceptions of a former age, it did much to 
obscure the rudimentary notions of organic evolution 
which had influenced naturalists and philosophers from 
Aristotle downwards. 
Nevertheless, the old transformist beliefs, though no 
longer popular, were not left quite without a witness. 
Buffon, being possibly influenced by considerations other 
than scientific, vacillated, as is well known, between the 
theories of mutability and fixity of species. Erasmus 
Darwin, on the other hand, was a vigorous and outspoken 
upholder of the transformist opinion, shorn of some, but 
not all, of its former crudities. Geoffroy St. Hilaire de- 
clared in favour of the derivation of different species 
from the same type; and six years later Lamarck, who 
had previously taught the fixity of species, announced 
his adherence to the evolutionary view. The author of 
the “ Vestiges of Creation” and Herbert Spencer may be 
said in some sort to have carried on the transformist 
succession, but it was reserved for Charles Darwin and 
Alfred Russel Wallace to import into the problem an 
entirely fresh set of considerations, and by means of a 
new and illuminating theory, supported ona secure basis 
of fact, to win universal acceptance fora doctrine which all 
NO. 1703, VOL, 66] 
169 
the skill and eloquence of its former advocates had failed 
to commend to the scientific world. 
Prof. Packard, on the title-page of the present work, 
calls Lamarck “the founder of evolution.” If the fore- 
going may be taken as a not unfair presentment of the 
course of opinion on the subject of transformism, it is 
difficult to see how such a claim can be justified. It is 
idle to discuss whether or not Lamarck was acquainted 
with the works of Erasmus Darwin. Transformism was 
in the air, and it is impossible to credit Lamarck with 
the origination of a view which had been present to the 
minds of Geoffroy St. Hilaire and of Buffon. Neither 
can it be said that Lamarck’s advocacy won general 
approval for a doctrine that was previously discredited. 
The strength of his own convictions and the persistence 
with which he urged them are not in question ; but the 
fact that he failed to convert either his contemporaries 
or his successors is equally indisputable. The only 
ground on which, if on any, the claim advanced on behalf 
of Lamarck can be sustained is the allegation that he 
was the first to render the doctrine of transmutation 
credible by pointing out the methods on which organic 
evolution has proceeded. Much, no doubt, depends on 
the acceptance or rejection of the so-called “ Lamarckian 
factors.” Inthe earlier stages of the present phase of 
the evolutionary controversy, these factors were somewhat 
uncritically accepted as adjuvants to the theory of 
natural selection propounded by Darwin and Wallace. 
But when the belief in the inheritance of acquired 
characters had once been seriously called in question, it 
was speedily perceived that no logical necessity existed 
for evolutionists to accept these factors at all. The 
question became clearly one of evidence; and in the 
opinion of many, if not most, of the leaders of scientific 
thought, the upholders of the Lamarckian view have so 
far failed to deal successfully with the burden of proof 
that undoubtedly rests upon them. The hereditary trans- 
mission of individually acquired characters is a necessary 
part of the Lamarckian system, and until this point is 
established to the satisfaction of scientific opinion, it is 
at least premature to hail Lamarck as in any sense the 
founder of organic evolution. And even should the 
proof be forthcoming, the facts would still remain that 
many of Lamarck’s views had been already foreshadowed, 
that his system contains much speculation unsupported 
by adequate evidence, and much that is demonstrably 
erroneous ; moreover, that it failed in any appreciable 
degree to influence his contemporaries. 
It is hardly necessary to point out how complete a con- 
trast to this is afforded by the history of Darwinism. 
Founded on a basis of observation and experiment to 
which the Lamarckian speculations can lay no claim, and 
calling in the aid of a principle—that of natural selection 
—which, given the observed facts of variation, actually 
showed how the adaptation everywhere manifest in nature 
might have been brought about, the Darwinian system 
supplied an element of rationality which had hitherto 
been absent, and compelled the attention of those to 
whom the unsupported hypotheses of previous trans- 
formists had failed to appeal. The importance ot 
Darwin’s work is seen in its results. Under the influence 
of the “ Origin of Species,” Huxley, Lyell, Hooker and 
Asa Gray ranged themselves on the side of evolution ; 
I 
