Matskási István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 86. (Budapest 1994)

Dely, O. Gy.: In commemoration of the centenary of Géza Gyula Fejérváry's birth

number of biologists of note are convinced of the effectiveness of natural selection in the Darwinian explanation of evolution, other scientist agree with LAMARCK'S theory about the acquired characters resulting in the adaptive changes of organisms. Discussions about this problem continued in the first decades of our century without resulting in a definitive solution. Whereas his master, MÉHELY declared himself a convinced follower of DARWIN'S theory, FEJÉRVÁRY's interest had been attracted by LAMARCK'S evolutional theory. In 1928 he felt himself forced to expound his conception about the problem of Darwinism contra Lamarckism. He was aroused to do that by an unexpected event. On 31st August 1927, a remarkable presidental address was read at the Leeds Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. This address, which bore the title "Darwin's Theory of Man's Descent as it Stands To-day" was presented by Sir ARTHUR KEITH. KEITH was of the opinion that the doctrine of Evolution, i.e. of biohistorical development is identical with Darwinism. FEJÉRVÁRY, accepting Sir ARTHUR KEITH'S authority, asserts strictly in his paper "Audiatur et altera pars - Evolution, Darwinism, Lamarckism" (published in 1928 in Hungarian, but one year later in English, too) that in fact this is not the case. Any scientist who believes in the Darwinian explanation of evolutional facts, does not only neglect the results of bionomical analysis but overlooks the very laws of evolution. It is a great error to believe that evolutional transformations may be understood from the Darwinian platform only. We cannot imagine Darwinism without evolution, whereas the process of evolution can be perfectly well explained without our applying the Darwinian suggestions. The substance of LAMARCK'S teaching can be summarized after FEJÉRVÁRY as follows: Species are not constant, they undergo in the course of Earth's history considerable changes resulting in the transformation of one species into another. Then follows the elucidation of the question: How are phylogenetic changes brought about? LAMARCK'S reply is clear, and both experimental and paleontological documents answer for its correctness: the function of every organism is dependent on its environment, they being responsible for the mechanical details obtained in vital regulation and structure. If, therefore, an organ undergoes functional change, as produced by an alteration in the environment, such will directly be followed by a change in structure and form. On the other side: palaeontology and field observations have long ago demonstrated that selection cannot be regarded as a creative factor in the evolution of organisms. In February 1930 FEJÉRVÁRY was appointed to a professorship at the Erzsébet University in Pécs. The Zoological Institute of that university headed by him was organized in that year. Besides continuing his earlier research work he had to teach a number of young people, too. And FEJÉRVÁRY proved to be an excellent teacher and science-organizer, too. He worked with never flagging enthusiasm for the establishment of a new institute, a new center of biology. He held excellent lectures on a very high level. But he was not only engaged on his students' interest, but planned to write a textbook of zoology for all students of the Hungarian universities, to make them acquainted with real zoology. But an unexpected tragic event shocked and distressed him deeply on 17th August that year. He was informed about the tragic suicide of his good friend and colleague ISTVÁN BOLKAY, who was also a herpetologist. They had been close friends since 1909. Both of them were fighting enthusiastically for the pure science. Two of FEJÉRVÁRY's papers published in 1931 should be mentioned. In one of them he writes about the basic problems of modern biology and about the practical application of biology and zoology. Among other things, he stresses that scientific accomplishments of modern biology have very often been misused by everyday politics and by the social movements. Misinterpreted biological knowledge involves a serious danger of causing damages to human civilization and cultural life. It is our moral responsibility to put the real rules of biological evolution into the service of the whole mankind. In spite of his main interest in herpetology FEJÉRVÁRY did not lose his inborn ability for