relation to the theory of epigensis no one worked either 

 for its proof and for substantiation of true principles of 

 its application, or partly for the restriction of its 

 extremely wide application, as Mr. Buildings advisor 

 Blumenbakh". This evidence of honest Kant encouraged me 

 again to scrutinize work of Blumenbakh, which I truly read 

 before, but did not imbue it. Here I found my Christof 

 (1-L.B.) Friedrich Wolff as an intermediate link between 

 Haller and Bonnet; on the one hand, and Blumenbakh, on the 

 other. For his epigenesis, Wolff must suppose the presence 

 of an organic element, on which creatures feed, which is 

 intended for organic life, and supplied this material by an 

 essential force". The mentioned words of Gete witness to 

 the superficial acquaintance of the great poet with the 

 views of Wolff (Even Wolff's name was written incorrectly 

 by Gete (44) . 



(21) A. E. Gaisinovich (1950, p. 462-463) mentioned 

 information, that Wolff at the beginning of the 70th year 

 taught in the academic high school— chemistry, anatomy and 

 botany, and he also directed the preparation of the scien- 

 tific activity of student Fedor Galchenkov (48) . 



(22) This place in the translation of Meckel tenden- 

 tiously stated: instead of "the Highest Creator" was put 

 "The creating nature". Wolff disputed the preformation of 

 formulated parts; in the German translation, his skepticism 

 is not related to the Creator for the authority is untouched, 

 but to nature. This "liberty of translation" bars the radi- 

 cality of scientific and philosophical view of Wolff (76) . 



(23) Here the phrase made by Wolff, has no connection 

 with other discussions and clearly intended for not blaming 

 atheism: eiusmodi vero materia, talibus, viribus instructa 

 immediate a Deo ex nihilo creata sit (it is also true that 

 material, supplied by these forces, is directly created by 

 God from nothingness) (76) . 



(24) A. E. Gaisinovich (1950, p. 455) repeated the 

 mentioned statement of K. M. Baer nearly literally: "This 

 remarkable work of Wolff... did not draw the attention of 

 all the scientific world up to 1812, when Meckel translated 

 it from the Latin language". It is necessary to notice, 

 however, that the work of Wolff was given due attention and 



609 



