The analyst is also tempted to venture a little farther and to raise the question whether the life of the author of this view itself did not subconsciously contribute a little to reinforce his theory. With a none too rich and full childhood and youth, waiting for years for adequate recognition, passionately if not precociously devoted to the study of embryology, in which field he became one of the ablest and most accomplished of all leaders,[173] it would not be surprising if he found certain compensations in devoting his life to a study of that stage in which its manifestations are most active, and ably developed in this field apperception centers he somewhat overworked, while his self-affirmation and the instinctive impulse we all have for due recognition give a subtle self-satisfaction in reiterating the paradox that death is most active near the beginning rather than the end of the life cycle. Whether this suggestion has any validity or not, no one has ever more challengingly presented the problem of why the rate of growth declines from first to last, and whether it be due to an inevitable loss of the initial momentum or biological _élan vital_ or to checks, arrests, and inhibitions of it, some of which may be removed. The very intensity of its early manifestations, if it gives us a haunting sense of loss also reinforces the hope that the high potential with which we all started somehow, sometime, may be better conserved, so that perhaps here, again, as with Metchnikoff’s views, the morale of Minot’s conclusions is, on the whole, optimistic. * * * * *