Form and Function

and Function, by E. S. (Edward
Stuart) Russell

Project Gutenberg's Form and Function, by E. S. (Edward Stuart)
Russell This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and
with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: Form and Function A Contribution to the History of Animal
Morphology
Author: E. S. (Edward Stuart) Russell
Release Date: January 23, 2007 [EBook #20426]
Language: English
Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FORM
AND FUNCTION ***

Produced by Suzanne Lybarger, Turgut Dincer and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The Internet
Archive/Canadian Libraries)

FORM AND FUNCTION

A CONTRIBUTION TO THE HISTORY OF ANIMAL
MORPHOLOGY
By E.S. RUSSELL, M.A., B.Sc., F.Z.S.
ILLUSTRATED
LONDON
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W.
1916
All rights reserved
+---------------------------------------+ | Transcriber's Note: Obvious
printer | | errors have been corrected, all other | | inconsistencies in
spelling and | | punctuation are as in the original. |
+---------------------------------------+
PREFACE
This book is not intended to be a full or detailed history of animal
morphology: a complete account is given neither of morphological
discoveries nor of morphological theories. My aim has been rather to
call attention to the existence of diverse typical attitudes to the
problems of form, and to trace the interplay of the theories that have
arisen out of them.
The main currents of morphological thought are to my mind three--the
functional or synthetic, the formal or transcendental, and the
materialistic or disintegrative.
The first is associated with the great names of Aristotle, Cuvier, and
von Baer, and leads easily to the more open vitalism of Lamarck and
Samuel Butler. The typical representative of the second attitude is E.
Geoffroy St. Hilaire, and this habit of thought has greatly influenced
the development of evolutionary morphology.

The main battle-ground of these two opposing tendencies is the
problem of the relation of function to form. Is function the mechanical
result of form, or is form merely the manifestation of function or
activity? What is the essence of life--organisation or activity?
The materialistic attitude is not distinctively biological, but is common
to practically all fields of thought. It dates back to the Greek atomists,
and the triumph of mechanical science in the 19th century has induced
many to accept materialism as the only possible scientific method. In
biology it is more akin to the formal than to the functional attitude.
In the course of this book I have not hidden my own sympathy with the
functional attitude. It appears to me probable that more insight will be
gained into the real nature of life and organisation by concentrating on
the active response of the animal, as manifested both in behaviour and
in morphogenesis, particularly in the post-embryonic stages, than by
giving attention exclusively to the historical aspect of structure, as is
the custom of "pure morphology." I believe we shall only make
progress in this direction if we frankly adopt the simple everyday
conception of living things--which many of us have had drilled out of
us--that they are active, purposeful agents, not mere complicated
aggregations of protein and other substances. Such an attitude is
probably quite as sound philosophically as the opposing one, but I have
not in this place attempted any justification of it. I have touched very
lightly upon the controversy between vitalism and materialism which
has been revived with the early years of the present century. It hardly
lends itself as yet to historical treatment, and I could hardly hope to
maintain with regard to it that objective attitude which should
characterise the historian.
The main result I hope to have achieved with this book is the
demonstration, tentative and incomplete as it is, of the essential
continuity of animal morphology from the days of Aristotle down to
our own time. It is unfortunately true that modern biology, perhaps in
consequence of the great advances it has made in certain directions, has
to a considerable extent lost its historical consciousness, and if this
book helps in any degree to counteract this tendency so far as animal

morphology is concerned, it will have served its purpose.
I owe a debt of gratitude to my friends Dr James F. Gemmill and Prof.
J. Arthur Thomson for much kindly encouragement and helpful
criticism. The credit for the illustrations is due to my wife, Mrs Jehanne
A. Russell. One is from Nature; the others are drawn from the original
figures.
E.S.R.
CHELSEA, 1916.

CONTENTS
CHAP. PAGE
I. THE BEGINNINGS OF COMPARATIVE ANATOMY 1
II. COMPARATIVE ANATOMY BEFORE CUVIER 17
III. CUVIER 31
IV. GOETHE 45
V. ETIENNE GEOFFROY ST