 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
2
Hereditary Genius
I am aware that my views, which were first published four years ago in
Macmillan's Magazine (in June and August 1865), are in contradiction to
general opinion; but the arguments I then used have been since accepted, to
my great gratification, by many of the highest authorities on heredity. In
reproducing them, as I now do, in a much more elaborate form, and on a
greatly enlarged basis of induction, I feel assured that, inasmuch as what I
then wrote was sufficient to earn the acceptance of Mr. Darwin
(“Domestication of Plants and Animals,” ii. 7), the increased amount of
evidence submitted in the present volume is not likely to be gainsaid.
The general plan of my argument is to show that high reputation is a
pretty accurate test of high ability; next to discuss the relationships of a
large body of fairly eminent men—namely, the Judges of England from
1660 to 1868, the Statesmen of the time of George III., and the Premiers
during the last 100 years—and to obtain from these a general survey of the
laws of heredity in respect to genius. Then I shall examine, in order, the
kindred of the most illustrious Commanders, men of Literature and of
Science, Poets, Painters, and Musicians, of whom history speaks. I shall
also discuss the kindred of a certain selection of Divines and of modern
Scholars. Then will follow a short chapter, by way of comparison, on the
hereditary transmission of physical gifts, as deduced from the relationships
of certain classes of Oarsmen and Wrestlers. Lastly, I shall collate my
results, and draw conclusions.
It will be observed that I deal with more than one grade of ability. Those
upon whom the greater part of my volume is occupied, and on whose
kinships my argument is most securely based, have been generally reputed
as endowed by nature with extraordinary genius. There are so few of these
men that, although they are scattered
 |
|
 |
|