of his audience? Can one doubt it in view of the professions of his audience? 42 
were doctors or surgeons but 37 medical students, 17 trainee pharmacists and 7 
students of the school for travelling naturalists accompanied them (6). 
 

It is interesting to note that Vachon's comments on the names present in the 
list closely followed the remarks and the very examples put forward by Landrieu. 
After the death of Max Vachon, the results of his work (as well as the original 
manuscript of the register) remained shut in cardboard boxes. Now, thanks to 
years of patient research and the kindness of M. Yves Laissus and Mme. Monique 
Ducreux, Director of the Bibliothèque centrale of the Muséum, who made the 
Vachon boxes available, it is possible to resume this research once more, and 
the manuscript has returned to the shelves of the Archives nationales.  It is 
inevitable that the task to be undertaken will reflect the change in research 
priorities and objectives that has taken place in studies of Lamarck and 
nineteenth century biology in general over the last two decades.
 

 It is well known that the 1970s were marked by a renewal of interest in the 
history of evolutionary theories. Although Darwin studies were the main focus of 
attention, Lamarck's work was not neglected (7).
 

In France, as well as in Italy, England and the US, a remarkable change occurred 
in the agenda of priorities characterizing Lamarck studies. The progressive 
weakening (albeit not yet complete) of the mythical certainties defended by 
apologists of Lamarck opened considerable space for historical research, for the 
systematic examination of the scientific, philosophical and institutional 
context of debates on natural history and its transformations at the beginning 
of the last century. 

(6) M. Vachon, "Lamarck et son enseignement au Muséum", in Histoire et Nature, 
17/18, 1981, pp. 7-11, p. 9.
 
(7) For a useful synthesis of the results achieved by the "Darwin industry" see 
D. Kohn, ed. The Darwinian Heritage, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 
1985. For important additions to the bibliography since 1985 see A. Desmond and 
J. Moore, Darwin, Michael Joseph, London 1991.