PHILOSOPHIE ZOOLOGIQUE xxiii 



ance of acquired characters was one of the main facfcorsl 

 supposed by Lamarck to account for that evolution, I dol 

 not wish to deny ; but that the reputation of Lamarck is to 

 stand or fall by that one theory is a suggestion which can 

 scarcely be made by anyone who closely studies the present 

 translation. But to that I shall come shortly. 



Before beginning the translation, I had to consider on 

 what principles I should carry it out. The style of writing 

 and the mode of thinking that prevailed a century ago are 

 radically different from those that prevail at the present day. 

 As regards the style, Lamarck is lucid but ponderous. His 

 sentences are of great length, carrying numbers of sub- 

 ordinate clauses : his language is precise and carefully in 

 accordance with logical forms. All this is novel and more 

 or less disagreeable to modern readers. The formality of his 

 language soon becomes tedious ; we get lost in the relentless 

 prolixity of his sentences ; we do not care a snap for logical 

 forms. One further characteristic of Lamarck's style — and 

 this one unquestionably a vice — is that of redundancy. 

 Many favourite doctrines are repeated with such insistence, 

 and in so many different forms, that the student finds the 

 most abundant justification for frequent skipping. 



The mode of thought is not less contrasted with modern 

 modes, than is the style of writing. Every sort of scientific 

 or Kterary production is a product of its age, almost as much 

 as of the individual who attaches his name to them. _ In 

 the literature of any period there are current a certain 

 number qf^more or less established ideas. Those ideas 

 circulate through society, undergoing changes but slowly. 

 Each new book that is issued represents certain of those 

 ideas in a setting that is perhaps more or less new ; and if 

 it is an original work, of somewhat rare order, it may even 

 contain one or two ideas not previously current in society. 

 And these ideas, not being previously current, are not 

 understood ; if they advance at all, they can only do so 

 slowly. 



Hence the difS-Culty with which we are confronted on 



