The Principles of Biology, Volume 2 (of 2) — John Shaqi
The Principles of Biology, Volume 2 (of 2)Spencer, Herbert
Science
The Principles of Biology, Volume 2 (of 2)
Spencer, Herbert
Biology
Passing over certain vague anticipations which have been quoted from
ancient writers, and noting only that some clearer recognitions
were reached by Joachim Jung, a Hamburg professor, in the middle
of the 17th century; we come to the _Theoria Generationis_, which
Wolff published in 1759, and in which he gives definite forms to the
conceptions that have since become current. Specifying the views of
Wolff, Dr. Masters writes:--“After speaking of the homologous nature
of the leaves, the sepals and petals, an homology consequent on their
similarity of structure and identity of origin, he goes on to state
that the ‘pericarp is manifestly composed of several leaves, as in the
calyx, with this difference only, that the leaves which are merely
placed in close contact in the calyx, are here united together’; a
view which he corroborates by referring to the manner in which many
capsules open and separate ‘into their leaves.’ The seeds, too, he
looks upon as consisting of leaves in close combination. His reasons
for considering the petals and stamens as homologous with leaves, are
based upon the same facts as those which led Linnæus, and, many years
afterwards, Goethe, to the same conclusion. ‘In a word,’ says Wolff,
‘we see nothing in the whole plant, whose parts at first sight differ
so remarkably from each other, but leaves and stem, to which latter
the root is referrible.’” It appears that Wolff, too, enunciated the
now-accepted interpretation of compound fruits: basing it on the same
evidence as that since assigned. In the essay of Goethe, published
thirty years after, these relations among the parts of flowering plants
were traced out in greater detail, but not in so radical a way; for
Goethe did not, as did Wolff, verify his hypothesis by dissecting buds
in their early stages of development. Goethe appears to have arrived
at his conclusions independently. But that they were original with
him, and that he gave a more variously-illustrated exposition of them
than had been given by Wolff, does not entitle him to anything beyond
a secondary place, among those who have established this important
generalization.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account