GOETHE. 



113 



the two must be summoned to solve the problem. To 

 this archetype, itself incapable of representation, — to this 

 abstraction, and to this alone, — Nature, according to 

 Goethe, was bound to adhere in her work of creation, 

 "■ without being able, in the slightest measure, to break 

 through or overleap the circle." 



If it be attempted to make it appear that Goethe 

 actually proclaimed the doctrine of Descent, or was even 

 in a poetical sense its inspired prophet, either too much 

 value is attributed to his enunciations of " ceaseless pro- 

 gressive transformation,'' and such like, or the sense 

 which he connected with them is not appreciated. Now 

 let us take the following passage, which Haeckel looks 

 upon as decisive. "Thus much we should have gained; 

 that we may fearlessly affirm all the more perfect organic 

 beings, among which we include Fishes, Amphibians, 

 Birds, Mammals (and at the head of the latter, Man), to 

 be formed according to an archetype, which merely fluc- 

 tuates more or less in its very persistent parts, and more- 

 over, day by day, completes and transforms itself by 

 means of reproduction." Is it here meant, perchance, 

 that the persistent are contrasted with the non-persistent 

 parts? By no means. 



Even prior to Geoflfroy Saint Hilaire, Goethe had 

 spoken of a law, which is, however, no law, nor even an 

 expression of facts, namely, that Nature in her work has 

 to deal with a given quantity of material to which she 

 must adapt it. He does not seem to have been aware 

 that Aristotle had affirmed the same, that Nature, if 

 she enlarged an organ, did so only at the expense of 

 another. A second of the supposed fundamental laws 

 discovered by the Frenchman, than organ would sooner 



