11. _Pisces._
12. _Reptilia._
13. _Aves._
14. _Mammiferæ._
The animals of the first primary division he defines as destitute of
feeling, and moving only by their excited irritability; and he assigns
as their character, the absence of a brain and of an elongate medullary
mass; senses wanting; forms various; articulations rarely existing.
The animals of the second division feel, but they obtain from their
sensations only _perceptions_ of objects, a kind of simple ideas which
they are unable to combine with each other in order to form complex
ones. They possess no vertebral column, but have a brain and most
frequently an elongate medullary mass; some distinct senses; organs
of motion attached under the skin; the form symmetrical, the parts
arranged in pairs. The _intelligent_ animals, forming the third grand
division, feel, and acquire ideas capable of being preserved, and
execute operations between these ideas which furnish them with others;
and they are intelligent in different degrees. They possess a vertebral
column, a brain and spinal marrow; distinct senses; organs of motion
fixed to an interior skeleton, and symmetrical forms, the parts being
placed in pairs[19].
This general distribution of animals has not been very much approved of
by naturalists; and Cuvier asserts that it is neither founded on their
organization, nor an exact observation of their faculties. The degree
of intelligence observed in the different classes, would certainly
lead most observers to give a very different position to several, from
that which they have obtained in the above scale. The _insecta_ and
_arachnides_, for example, which are made to occupy the lowest place
among the sentient races, are undoubtedly entitled to the rank assigned
to the _mollusca_ and _cirrhipedes_; for there can be no comparison in
this respect between a hive-bee or an ant, and an imperfectly organized
and almost inanimate mollusc.
At a subsequent period, in consequence of some new discoveries made
by M. M. Savigny, Leseur, and Desmarets, he separated certain tribes
from the polypi, and formed them into a distinct class under the name
of _ascidiens_. Some new views likewise occurred to him regarding the
general arrangement of animals, and instead of presenting them in a
simple series, he divided them into two subramose series, as follows:--
[Illustration:
| Series of inarticulated Series of articulated
| Animals. Animals.
| ----------^------------ ---------^-----------
| Infusoria |
| | |
| ----^---- |
| Polypes |
Apathetic Animals. < | |
| ----^---- |
| | | |
| | Radiarii --^---
| Ascidiens Vermes
| | |
| | ----^----
| | | |
| | | Epizoaria
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| ----^---- | ----^----
| Acephala | |
| | | Insecta
| ----^--- | ---^---
| Mollusca ------^-- | |
Sentient Animals. < Annelides | Arachnides
| |
| Crustacea
| ----^----
| |
| Cirrhipeda
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Pisces
Intelligent < Reptilia
Animals. | Aves
| Mammalia]
This arrangement is particularly deserving of attention, from its
being admitted by the author of the circular system to be the first
approach to a perception of that order of affinities which he supposes
to pervade the whole animal kingdom. “In the first volume of his
celebrated work,” says Mr. Mac Leay, “Lamarck acknowledges that the
idea of a simple series constituting the whole of the animal kingdom
does not agree with the evident order of nature, because, to use his
own words, this order is far from simple; it is branched, and is at the
same time composed of several distinct series. He then presumes, that
animals offer two separate subramose series, one commencing with the
_infusoria_, and leading by means of the mollusca to the cuttlefish
(_cephalopoda_), and the other commencing with the intestinal worms,
and leading to insects. Now, this notion could only have gained a place
in the mind of Lamarck from a conviction by experience of its being
an incontrovertible truth. His table of affinities, however confused
it may appear, or _subramose_, as it is termed, coincides with the
tabular view which I have laid before the public. We have only to join
the _radiata_ to the _cirripeda_, and the _annelides_ to fishes, and
Lamarck’s table of affinities, with scarcely any alteration, becomes
precisely the same as mine[20].”
In addition to the various branches of natural history already
enumerated as cultivated by this indefatigable and ingenious inquirer,
another still remains to be mentioned, to which he communicated a
remarkable impulse; namely, the history of fossil shells. This highly
important and interesting subject had long attracted the attention of
geologists, but owing to the difficulties with which it is invested,
it still remained in comparative obscurity. One of the facts most
desirable to be ascertained in relation to these remains, was, whether
they were identical with species now living, a point which could be
determined only by a careful comparison. Applying to this investigation
that profound knowledge which he had acquired of recent shells, Lamarck
was enabled to illustrate the subject in a most satisfactory manner,
and to throw light on some of the most anomalous phenomena which it
presents to the inquirer. Besides his extensive acquaintance with
the _testacea_, he enjoyed another advantage for entering upon an
inquiry of this nature by residing at Paris, the vicinity of which
has long been celebrated for the number and variety of its fossil
productions[21]. The result of his investigation appeared in several
of the earlier volumes of the Annals of the Museum; but the memoir was
never brought to a conclusion. It was accompanied with a quarto volume
of plates, containing figures of great beauty and accuracy.
Such are the principal subjects to which Lamarck’s attention was
directed, together with some of the results to which his investigations
led him. After his establishment in the Museum of Natural History,
much of his time was occupied with the objects whose history he
was appointed to teach; and so favourably were his labours in this
department received by the public, that his interest as well as his
inclination would have conspired to make him cultivate it to the
uttermost. But his exertions received an early check, and were at
last entirely stopped, by the inroads of a most afflicting calamity.
His eyes had long been weak, and as he advanced in years, they
became so diseased, that he was obliged to refrain from using them
for the examination of any minute object. Hence it was that he had
recourse to the celebrated Latreille to assist him in that part of
his system of invertebrata which related to insects. Notwithstanding
every precaution, the disorder increased, and at last produced total
blindness, which continued till his death. “This event was the
more distressing,” says Cuvier, “because it overtook him in such
circumstances that he could obtain none of those means of alleviation
which might otherwise have been procured. He had been married four
times, and was the father of seven children. The whole of his little
patrimony, and even the fruits of his early economy, were lost in
one of those hazardous investments which shameless speculators so
often hold out as baits to the credulous. His retired life, the
consequence of his youthful habits, and attachment to systems so little
in accordance with the ideas which prevailed in science, were not
calculated to recommend him to those who had the power of dispensing
favours. When numberless infirmities, brought on by old age, had
increased his wants, nearly his whole means of support consisted of a
small income derived from his chair. The friends of science, attracted
by the high reputation which his botanical and zoological works had
conferred on him, witnessed this with surprise. It appeared to them,
that a government which protects the sciences, ought to have provided
for the wants of a celebrated individual; but their esteem for him
was doubled, when they saw the fortitude with which the illustrious
old man bore up against the assaults both of fortune and of nature.
They particularly admired the devotedness which he inspired in such
of his children as remained with him. His eldest daughter, entirely
devoted to the duties of filial affection for many years, never left
him for an instant, readily engaged in every study which might supply
his want of sight, wrote to his dictation a portion of his last works,
and accompanied and supported him as long as he was able to take some
exercise. Her sacrifices, indeed, were carried to a degree which it is
impossible to express; when the father could no longer leave his room,
the daughter never left the house. When she afterwards did so, for the
first time, she was incommoded by the free air, the use of which had
been so long unfamiliar to her. It is rare to see virtue carried to
such a degree, and it is not less so to inspire it to that degree;
and it is adding to the praise of M. de Lamarck, to recount what his
children did for him.”
After several years of affliction, his constitution at last gave way,
and he died on the 18th December, 1829, in the 85th year of his age.
Some of his children had been carried off previously, and at the time
of his disease only two sons and two daughters survived. The eldest of
the former was appointed to a situation of considerable trust under
government.
A just estimate of Lamarck’s merits, will entitle him to occupy a
high place among modern naturalists. Endowed by nature with varied
and vigorous mental powers, he was fitted to excel in many branches
of knowledge, and never failed to strike out a new path in every
department to which he attached himself. He possessed, in an eminent
degree, some intellectual qualities which are not frequently combined;
a lofty and active imagination, in no way unfitted him for the most
unwearied and laborious investigation of minute matters of fact. Hence
he seems equally following the natural bent of his mind, when devising
a theory to explain the most recondite operations of nature, and
describing the markings of a shell, or the ramifications of a coral. It
is to be lamented that his imagination so often gained the ascendency
over his other faculties, and led to those daring and licentious
speculations which have been alluded to. But in other instances, his
fancy becomes the legitimate handmaid of his reason, and lends her
aid in beautifying and illustrating his speculations. He possessed
especially all the requisite qualifications for a zoologist, and it
is on what he accomplished in this department that his fame must
principally rest. When we perceive the admirable manner in which he
discerned and characterized natural groups, his skill in seizing on
the most distinctive marks of species, the indefatigable industry with
which he investigated their history and synonymy, together with the
excellence of his system of arrangement,--we are led to regret that he
was so late in entering upon this field of labour, as to be obliged
to confine his attention to one division of the animal kingdom, and
that he so frequently deviated even from that, in order to indulge his
favourite practice of theorizing.
However little value may now be attached to these theories, without
a due consideration of them, we can neither appreciate some of the
best of Lamarck’s writings, nor understand the character of the man
himself. In his own eyes, they appeared of paramount importance. The
most practically useful of his zoological and botanical works he
regarded as trivial in comparison. He conceived them to present a key
to some of the most secret operations of nature, and to afford the
means of placing many branches of knowledge on a new foundation. This
ardent attachment to views which have so generally been considered
extravagant and untenable, may seem surprising in the case of an
individual whom all must acknowledge to be possessed of much acuteness
and discrimination. It is perhaps to be accounted for by their being
nursed in the long solitudes to which his bad health and limited
circumstances frequently confined him, without having his eyes opened
to their fallacies by a discussion of their merits, or interchange of
thought with others: for
’Tis thought’s exchange, which, like the alternate rush
Of waves conflicting, breaks the learned scum,
And defecates the student’s standing pool;
By that untutor’d, contemplation raves,
And nature’s fool by wisdom is outdone.
It may likewise be supposed that he would be unwilling to perceive, or
if he did perceive, equally reluctant to acknowledge, the imperfection
of systems which he had wrought out with so much care and labour. For
that they must have cost him a great degree of laborious thought,
will appear from the slightest inspection. It must also be allowed,
that they evince a reach of mind, a power of original thinking, and
a degree of varied knowledge, calculated to convey no mean idea of
his intellectual character. Neither can we deny to them a certain
degree of consistency, or adaptation of parts to each other; and
although the praise of consistency must be qualified by the admission
that it is consistency in error, yet, in such cases, this is of such
difficult attainment, as of itself to imply a high degree of acuteness
and circumspection. However startling the conclusions to which
Lamarck leads us, they are generally drawn by a legitimate and fairly
managed process of induction from the assumed premises. But the very
extravagance of the conclusions ought to have created a suspicion that
the premises were erroneous; and they are, in fact, almost invariably
found to be wholly inadmissible.
While, therefore, we acknowledge Lamarck’s preeminent excellence in the
ordinary subjects of natural history, we cannot fail to lament that his
attention was so often engrossed by fanciful speculations; speculations
of which, all things considered, it is no undue depreciation to affirm
that they are at once absurd and impious--alike opposed to reason
and religion; and the regret which must be felt in making such an
assertion in regard to so celebrated a man, is not a little enhanced
by the accompanying reflection, that, with Lamarck and others of his
school, the latter imputation would be regarded as infinitely less
discreditable than the former.