1883.] 77 w Scope and Provinces of Zoology . 337 
employed in the terminologies adopted in this country. In 
some half-dozen points this table further differs from that 
given in the author’s “ Generelle Morphologie” in 1866. The 
word “ oecology” is common to both ; it is also defined in the 
“ History of Creation” and in the “ Evolution of Man,” and 
thus has claim to familiarity, though Professor Karl Semper, 
who undertook an examination of “ Haeckelism” some time 
ago, and contributed to the “ International Scientific Series” 
a volume purely oecological, ignores the word, employing in 
its stead the cumbersome phrases “ Universal Physiology” 
and “ Physiology of Organisms.” The difference in the 
two terms lies in this : Professor Semper’s “ Physiology of 
Organisms” embraces dispersal, but seemingly not Chorology. 
Professor Haeckel’s Chorology embraces dispersal, though 
his definition of cecology entitles it to include the latter. It 
runs as follows (vide the address) : — “ By oecology we mean 
the study of the ceconomy, the housekeeping of animal 
organisms. This has to do with the totality of the relations 
of the animal, both to its inorganic and organic surround- 
ings, and, above all, the amicable and inimical relations to 
those animals and plants with which it comes into direct or 
indirect contadt : in a word, all those complex mutual re- 
lationships that Darwin has shown are the conditions of the 
struggle for existence.” In the “ History of Creation,” 
oecology is stated to concern “ especially the circumstances 
of parasitism, &c.” Why should oecology concern especially 
the relations of living beings to organic surroundings? In 
his Stettin address, not less historical than those delivered 
at Munich and Eisenach, Professor Haeckel said in 1863 
(vide p. 25) “ Many gaps and weak places in the growing 
edifice give large opportunity to the attack of foes. On the 
other hand, many circumstances are still altogether, or 
almost altogether, unknown to us that are possibly of no 
less moment in the origin of species than Natural Selection 
in the struggle for existence, on which overstress is, perhaps, 
laid by Darwin, No less important than these must be those 
external conditions of existence of the inorganic world that 
are too much negle( 5 ted by Darwin or to utilise the ana- 
logy, it may be a housekeeper's business to be affable to 
visitors and hostile to burglars, but not “ especially” so — 
not more so than to prevent a perpetual draught invading a 
much-frequented passage or speedily to renovate disordered 
drains. (Ecology, therefore, includes the relation of animals 
and plants to the wind and other “ means of dispersal.” 
Profitable as it may be for original workers to read choro- 
logical facets in the light of oecological and physiographical 
