|
Williams |
We have seen that
the focal points of the physiological world towards the close of the eighteenth
century were Italy and England, but when Spallanzani and Hunter passed
away the scene shifted to France. The time was peculiarly propitious, as
the recent advances in many lines of science had brought fresh data for
the student of animal life which were in need of classification, and, as
several minds capable of such a task were in the field, it was natural
that great generalizations should have come to be quite the fashion. Thus
it was that Cuvier came forward with a brand-new classification of the
animal kingdom, establishing four great types of being, which he called
vertebrates, mollusks, articulates, and radiates. Lamarck had shortly before
established the broad distinction between animals with and those without
a backbone; Cuvier's Classification divided the latter - the invertebrates
- into three minor groups. And this division, familiar ever since to all
students of zoology, has only in very recent years been supplanted, and
then not by revolution, but by a further division, which the elaborate
recent studies of lower forms of life seemed to make desirable.
In the course of those studies of comparative
anatomy which led to his new classification, Cuvier's attention was called
constantly to the peculiar co-ordination of parts in each individual organism.
Thus an animal with sharp talons for catching living prey - as a member
of the cat tribe - has also sharp teeth, adapted for tearing up the flesh
of its victim, and a particular type of stomach, quite different from that
of herbivorous creatures. This adaptation of all the parts of the animal
to one another extends to the most diverse parts of the organism, and enables
the skilled anatomist, from the observation of a single typical part, to
draw inferences as to the structure of the entire animal - a fact which
was of vast aid to Cuvier in his studies of paleontology. It did not enable
Cuvier, nor does it enable any one else, to reconstruct fully the extinct
animal from observation of a single bone, as has sometimes been asserted,
but what it really does establish, in the hands of an expert, is sufficiently
astonishing.
"While the study of the fossil remains
of the greater quadrupeds is more satisfactory," he writes, "by the clear
results which it affords, than that of the remains of other animals found
in a fossil state, it is also complicated with greater and more numerous
difficulties. Fossil shells are usually found quite entire, and retaining
all the characters requisite for comparing them with the specimens contained
in collections of natural history, or represented in the works of naturalists.
Even the skeletons of fishes are found more or less entire, so that the
general forms of their bodies can, for the most part, be ascertained, and
usually, at least, their generic and specific characters are determinable,
as these are mostly drawn from their solid parts. In quadrupeds, on the
contrary, even when their entire skeletons are found, there is great difficulty
in discovering their distinguishing characters, as these are chiefly founded
upon their hairs and colors and other marks which have disappeared previous
to their incrustation. It is also very rare to find any fossil skeletons
of quadrupeds in any degree approaching to a complete state, as the strata
for the most part only contain separate bones, scattered confusedly and
almost always broken and reduced to fragments, which are the only means
left to naturalists for ascertaining the species or genera to which they
have belonged.
"Fortunately comparative anatomy, when
thoroughly understood, enables us to surmount all these difficulties, as
a careful application of its principles instructs us in the correspondences
and dissimilarities of the forms of organized bodies of different kinds,
by which each may be rigorously ascertained from almost every fragment
of its various parts and organs.
"Every organized individual forms an entire
system of its own, all the parts of which naturally correspond, and concur
to produce a certain definite purpose, by reciprocal reaction, or by combining
towards the same end. Hence none of these separate parts can change their
forms without a corresponding change in the other parts of the same animal,
and consequently each of these parts, taken separately, indicates all the
other parts to which it has belonged. Thus, as I have elsewhere shown,
if the viscera of an animal are so organized as only to be fitted for the
digestion of recent flesh, it is also requisite that the jaws should be
so constructed as to fit them for devouring prey; the claws must be constructed
for seizing and tearing it to pieces; the teeth for cutting and dividing
its flesh; the entire system of the limbs, or organs of motion, for pursuing
and overtaking it; and the organs of sense for discovering it at a distance.
Nature must also have endowed the brain of the animal with instincts sufficient
for concealing itself and for laying plans to catch its necessary victims.
. . . . . . . . .
"To enable the animal to carry off its
prey when seized, a corresponding force is requisite in the muscles which
elevate the head, and this necessarily gives rise to a determinate form
of the vertebrae to which these muscles are attached and of the occiput
into which they are inserted. In order that the teeth of a carnivorous
animal may be able to cut the flesh, they require to be sharp, more or
less so in proportion to the greater or less quantity of flesh that they
have to cut. It is requisite that their roots should be solid and strong,
in proportion to the quantity and size of the bones which they have to
break to pieces. The whole of these circumstances must necessarily influence
the development and form of all the parts which contribute to move the
jaws. . . . . . . . . .
After these observations, it will be easily
seen that similar conclusions may be drawn with respect to the limbs of
carnivorous animals, which require particular conformations to fit them
for rapidity of motion in general; and that similar considerations must
influence the forms and connections of the vertebrae and other bones constituting
the trunk of the body, to fit them for flexibility and readiness of motion
in all directions. The bones also of the nose, of the orbit, and of the
ears require certain forms and structures to fit them for giving perfection
to the senses of smell, sight, and hearing, so necessary to animals of
prey. In short, the shape and structure of the teeth regulate the forms
of the condyle, of the shoulder-blade, and of the claws, in the same manner
as the equation of a curve regulates all its other properties; and as in
regard to any particular curve all its properties may be ascertained by
assuming each separate property as the foundation of a particular equation,
in the same manner a claw, a shoulder-blade, a condyle, a leg or arm bone,
or any other bone separately considered, enables us to discover the description
of teeth to which they have belonged; and so also reciprocally we may determine
the forms of the other bones from the teeth. Thus commencing our investigations
by a careful survey of any one bone by itself, a person who is sufficiently
master of the laws of organic structure may, as it were, reconstruct the
whole animal to which that bone belonged."[1]
We have already pointed out that no one
is quite able to perform the necromantic feat suggested in the last sentence;
but the exaggeration is pardonable in the enthusiast to whom the principle
meant so much and in whose hands it extended so far.
Of course this entire principle, in its
broad outlines, is something with which every student of anatomy had been
familiar from the time when anatomy was first studied, but the full expression
of the "law of co-ordination," as Cuvier called it, had never been explicitly
made before; and, notwithstanding its seeming obviousness, the exposition
which Cuvier made of it in the introduction to his classical work on comparative
anatomy, which was published during the first decade of the nineteenth
century, ranks as a great discovery. It is one of those generalizations
which serve as guideposts to other discoveries. |
|