按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
ld have been classed amongst the Quadrumana； as surely as the still more ancient progenitor of the Old and New World monkeys。〃
These clear and definite lines leave no doubt that Darwinso critical and cautious in regard to important conclusionswas quite as firmly convinced of the descent of man from the apes （the Catarrhinae； in particular） as Lamarck was in 1809 and Huxley in 1863。
It is to be noted particularly that； in these and other observations on the subject； Darwin decidedly assumes the monophyletic origin of the mammals； including man。 It is my own conviction that this is of the greatest importance。 A number of difficult questions in regard to the development of man； in respect of anatomy； physiology； psychology； and embryology； are easily settled if we do not merely extend our progonotaxis to our nearest relatives； the anthropoid apes and the tailed monkeys from which these have descended； but go further back and find an ancestor in the group of the Lemuridae； and still further back to the Marsupials and Monotremata。 The essential identity of all the Mammals in point of anatomical structure and embryonic developmentin spite of their astonishing differences in external appearance and habits of lifeis so palpably significant that modern zoologists are agreed in the hypothesis that they have all sprung from a common root； and that this root may be sought in the earlier Palaeozoic Amphibia。
The fundamental importance of this comparative morphology of the Mammals； as a sound basis of scientific anthropology； was recognised just before the beginning of the nineteenth century； when Lamarck first emphasised （1794） the division of the animal kingdom into Vertebrates and Invertebrates。 Even thirteen years earlier （1781）； when Goethe made a close study of the mammal skeleton in the Anatomical Institute at Jena； he was intensely interested to find that the composition of the skull was the same in man as in the other mammals。 His discovery of the os intermaxillare in man （1784）； which was contradicted by most of the anatomists of the time； and his ingenious 〃vertebral theory of the skull；〃 were the splendid fruit of his morphological studies。 They remind us how Germany's greatest philosopher and poet was for many years ardently absorbed in the comparative anatomy of man and the mammals； and how he divined that their wonderful identity in structure was no mere superficial resemblance； but pointed to a deep internal connection。 In my 〃Generelle Morphologie〃 （1866）； in which I published the first attempts to construct phylogenetic trees； I have given a number of remarkable theses of Goethe； which may be called 〃phyletic prophecies。〃 They justify us in regarding him as a precursor of Darwin。
In the ensuing forty years I have made many conscientious efforts to penetrate further along that line of anthropological research that was opened up by Goethe； Lamarck； and Darwin。 I have brought together the many valuable results that have constantly been reached in comparative anatomy； physiology； ontogeny； and palaeontology； and maintained the effort to reform the classification of animals and plants in an evolutionary sense。 The first rough drafts of pedigrees that were published in the 〃Generelle Morphologie〃 have been improved time after time in the ten editions of my 〃Naturaliche Schopfungsgeschichte〃 （1868…1902）。 （English translation； 〃The History of Creation〃； London； 1876。） A sounder basis for my phyletic hypotheses； derived from a discriminating combination of the three great recordsmorphology； ontogeny； and palaeontologywas provided in the three volumes of my 〃Systematische Phylogenie （Berlin； 1894…96。） （1894 Protists and Plants； 1895 Vertebrates； 1896 Invertebrates）。 In my 〃Anthropogenie〃 （Leipzig； 1874； 5th edition 1905。 English translation； 〃The Evolution of Man〃； London； 1905。） I endeavoured to employ all the known facts of comparative ontogeny （embryology） for the purpose of completing my scheme of human phylogeny （evolution）。 I attempted to sketch the historical development of each organ of the body； beginning with the most elementary structures in the germ…layers of the Gastraea。 At the same time I drew up a corrected statement of the most important steps in the line of our ancestral series。
At the fourth International Congress of Zoology at Cambridge （August 26th； 1898） I delivered an address on 〃Our present knowledge of the Descent of Man。〃 It was translated into English； enriched with many valuable notes and additions； by my friend and pupil in earlier days Dr Hans Gadow （Cambridge）； and published under the title： 〃The Last Link； our present knowledge of the Descent of Man〃。 （London； 1898。） The determination of the chief animal forms that occur in the line of our ancestry is there restricted to thirty types； and these are distributed in six main groups。
The first half of this 〃Progonotaxis hominis；〃 which has no support from fossil evidence； comprises three groups： （i） Protista （unicellular organisms； 1…5： （ii） Invertebrate Metazoa （Coelenteria 6…8； Vermalia 9… 11）： （iii） Monorrhine Vertebrates （Acrania 12…13； Cyclostoma 14…15）。 The second half； which is based on fossil records； also comprises three groups： （iv） Palaeozoic cold…blooded Craniota （Fishes 16…18； Amphibia 19； Reptiles 20： （v） Mesozoic Mammals （Monotrema 21； Marsupialia 22； Mallotheria 23）： （vi） Cenozoic Primates （Lemuridae 24…25； Tailed Apes 26…27； Anthropomorpha 28…30）。 An improved and enlarged edition of this hypothetic 〃Progonotaxis hominis〃 was published in 1908； in my essay 〃Unsere Ahnenreihe〃。 （〃Festschrift zur 350…jahrigen Jubelfeier der Thuringer Universitat Jena〃。 Jena； 1908。）
If I have succeeded in furthering； in some degree； by these anthropological works； the solution of the great problem of Man's place in nature； and particularly in helping to trace the definite stages in our ancestral series； I owe the success； not merely to the vast progress that biology has made in the last half century； but largely to the luminous example of the great investigators who have applied themselves to the problem； with so much assiduity and genius； for a century and a quarterI mean Goethe and Lamarck； Gegenbaur and Huxley； but； above all； Charles Darwin。 It was the great genius of Darwin that first brought together the scattered material of biology and shaped it into that symmetrical temple of scientific knowledge； the theory of descent。 It was Darwin who put the crown on the edifice by his theory of natural selection。 Not until this broad inductive law was firmly established was it possible to vindicate the special conclusion； the descent of man from a series of other Vertebrates。 By his illuminating discovery Darwin did more for anthropology than thousands of those writers； who are more specifically titled anthropologists； have done by their technical treatises。 We may； indeed； say that it is not merely as an exact observer and ingenious experimenter； but as a distinguished anthropologist and far…seeing thinker； that Darwin takes his place among the greatest men of science of the nineteenth century。
To appreciate fully the immortal merit of Darwin in connection with anthropology； we must remember that not only di