474 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



In the course of the historical development of any branch of 

 science, what is universally observed is this : that the men who 

 make epochs and are the real architects of the fabric of exact 

 knowledge are those who introduce fruitful ideas or methods. As 

 a rule, the man who does this pushes his idea or his method too 

 far ; or, if he does not, his school is sure to do so, and those who 

 follow have to reduce his work to its proper value, and assign 

 it its place in the whole. Not unfrequently they, in their turn, 

 overdo the critical process, and, in trying to eliminate errors, 

 throw away truth. 



Thus, as I said, Linnaeus, Buffon, Cuvier, Lamarck, really " set 

 forth the results " of a developing science, although they often 

 heartily contradict one another. Notwithstanding this circum- 

 stance, modern classificatory method and nomenclature have 

 largely grown out of the results of the work of Linnaeus ; the 

 modern conception of biology, as a science, and of its relation to 

 climatology, geography, and geology, are as largely rooted in the 

 results of the labors of Buffon ; comparative anatomy and pale- 

 ontology owe a vast debt to Cuvier's results ; while invertebrate 

 zoology and the revival of the idea of evolution are intimately 

 dependent on the results of the work of Lamarck. In other words, 

 the main results of biology up to the early years of this century 

 are to be found in, or spring out of, the works of these men. 



So, if I mistake not, Strauss, if he did not originate the idea of 

 taking the mythopceic faculty into account in the development of 

 the Gospel narratives ; and, though he may have exaggerated the 

 influence of that faculty, obliged scientific theology hereafter to 

 take that element into serious consideration ; so Baur, in giving 

 prominence to the cardinal fact of the divergence of the Nazarene 

 and Pauline tendencies in the primitive Church ; so Reuss, in set- 

 ting a marvelous example of the cool and dispassionate applica- 

 tion of the principles of scientific criticism over the whole field of 

 Scripture ; so Volkmar, in his clear and forcible statement of the 

 Nazarene limitations of Jesus, contributed results of permanent 

 value in scientific theology. I took these names as they occurred 

 to me. Undoubtedly, I might have advantageously added to 

 them; perhaps I might have made a better selection. But it 

 really is absurd to try to make out that I did not know that these 

 writers widely disagree ; and I believe that no scientific theologian 

 will deny that, in principle, what I have said is perfectly correct. 

 Ecclesiastical advocates, of course, can not be expected to take 

 this view of the matter. To them, these mere seekers after truth, 

 in so far as their results are unfavorable to the creed the clerics 

 have to support, are more or less " infidels," or favorers of " in- 

 fidelity " ; and the only thing they care to see, or probably can see, 

 is the fact that, in a great many matters, the truth-seekers differ 



