^{Note 1 in page 552} See, e.g., Ernest Marchand, Frank Norris: A Study (Stanford, Calif., 1942), pp. 69–70, and Charles C. Walcutt, American Literary Naturalism, A Divided Stream (Minneapolis, Minn., 1956), pp. 117–125, 130–132, 155–156.

^{Note 2 in page 553} Almost all critics of Norris have commented upon his ethical dualism, with Stanley Cooperman, in “Frank Norris and the Werewolf of Guilt,” MLQ, xx (Sept. 1959), 252258, devoting the greatest attention to this aspect of Norris' thought. The failure of Cooperman and others, however, to place Norris' ethical dualism within Le Conte's system has resulted in an incomplete realization of the ethical dialectic in Norris' fiction. The only writer to examine in detail the relationship between Le Conte's ideas and Norris' is Robert D. Lundy, in “The Making of McTeague and The Octopus” unpubl. diss. (Univ. of California, 1956). Lundy, however, is concerned entirely with Le Conte's influence on The Octopus.

^{Note 3 in page 553} Such classmates of Norris' as H. W. Rhodes and Seymour Waterhouse recalled, in interviews with Franklin Walker in 1930, that Norris showed much interest in Le Conte's courses. Both Charles G. Norris and Jeannette Norris told Walker that Norris remembered and spoke highly of Le Conte. (Interview notes in the Franklin Walker Collection, Bancroft Library, Univ. of California. I wish to thank the Bancroft Library for permission to refer to its Franklin Walker and Frank Norris Collections.)

^{Note 4 in page 553} Transcript of Norris' University of California scholastic record (Franklin Walker Collection).

^{Note 5 in page 553} Le Conte, “Evolution and Human Progress,” Open Court, V (23 April 1891), 2779.

^{Note 6 in page 553} There has been little critical examination of Le Conte's position in the history of American evolutionary theism, since consideration of him is usually overshadowed by that given John-Fiske. But see Eugene W. Hilgard, “Biographical Memoir of Joseph Le Conte,” in Biographical Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences, vi (1909), 147–218, and Stow Persons, “Evolution and Theology in America,” in Evolutionary Thought in America, ed. Stow Persons (New Haven, 1950), pp. 441–447. Support for assuming that Norris was exposed in class to Le Conte's published ideas is found in Le Conte's statement that “Nearly everything I ever wrote was first given in my class-room and afterward written out and perfected,” and in his famous remark on his role as a popularizer of evolution, “Woe is me, if I preach not the Gospel.” See The Autobiography of Joseph Le Conte, ed. William D. Armes (New York, 1903), pp. 257, 336. Le Conte's major philosophical work is Evolution: Its Nature, Its Evidences, and Its Relation to Religious Thought, 2nd ed. (New York, 1891).

^{Note 7 in page 553} Evolution, p. 96.

^{Note 8 in page 553} “Evolution and Human Progress,” p. 2780.

^{Note 9 in page 553} Evolution, p. 329.

^{Note 10 in page 554} Ibid., p. 330.

^{Note 11 in page 554} Ibid., p. 375.

^{Note 12 in page 554} Complete Works of Frank Norris (Garden City, N. Y., 1928), X, 115–147; subsequent references, by volume and page number, will appear in my text.

^{Note 13 in page 554} Robert D. Lundy, in his “The Making of McTeague and The Octopus,” has determined this chronology by an examination of the themes (in the Frank Norris Collection, Bancroft Library, Univ. of California) which Norris wrote for Gates's class in composition.

^{Note 14 in page 555} The only overt medical diagnosis in the novel is made by a hotel doctor who briefly examines Vandover during an attack of lycanthropy. His diagnosis is therefore of that symptom rather than of the inclusive disease.

^{Note 15 in page 555} For an account of the history of general paralysis, see the article by George W. Henry, in Gregory Zilboorg, A History of Medical Psychology (New York, 1941), pp. 526–551.

^{Note 16 in page 555} The standard medical text was William J. Mickle, General Paralysis of the Insane, 2nd ed. (London, 1886). Mickle also wrote the account of general paralysis in the widely known and used Dictionary of Psychological Medicine, ed. D. Hack Tuke (Philadelphia, 1892), I, 519–544. Most contemporary general studies of insanity included descriptions of general paralysis which differed little from Mickle's account.

^{Note 17 in page 555} Mickle, in General Paralysis of the Insane, p. 89, noted that early in the disease “there is a failure of capability in accurately playing musical instruments, in painting, in drawing” because “the movements of the hands become lessened in adroitness; in exactitude.”

^{Note 18 in page 555} Lycanthropy, then as now, was usually discussed as a folk belief rather than as a mental disease. When analyzed as a mental illness, however, it was often noted, as in John C. Bucknill and D. Hack Tuke, A Manual of Psychological Medicine (Philadelphia, 1874), p. 211, that the disease is “intimately associated with a depressed state of the feelings —with Melancholia.”

^{Note 19 in page 556} I have not been able to discover an exact source for Norris' knowledge of general paralysis. He may have relied on texts in San Francisco or Boston, or he may have interviewed Dr. William M. Lawlor, a family friend. Dr. Lawlor, whom Norris later publicly defended against charges of mistreating patients in a state mental home, was a specialist in public health and mental illness. It was perhaps Lawlor, then, who supplied Norris with the clinical details of general paralysis, just as Norris' former classmate Dr. Albert J. Houston was a few years later to supply him with an exact account of a hip operation for A Man's Woman. See Franklin Walker, Frank Norris: A Biography (Garden City, N. Y., 1932), pp. 206, 301–304.

^{Note 20 in page 557} The murder was fully reported in the San Francisco newspapers of 10 October 1893, and for several days thereafter. This source was first noted by Charles Kaplan, in “Frank Norris and the Craft of Fiction,” unpubl. diss. (Northwestern, 1952), and was independently discovered by Robert D. Lundy.

^{Note 21 in page 557} For the headline, see the San Francisco Examiner, 10 October 1893. The Examiner of 11 October, for example, claimed that “Collins has the face of a brute,” and the Chronicle of 12 October stated that “Collins continues to bear himself with a stolid, brutish indifference that marks him as a type of all that is low in humanity.” Collins was eventually found guilty of murder and was executed.

^{Note 22 in page 557} I am, of course, narrowing down the influences on the portrayal of McTeague to those important for his basic character and nature. Lars Åhnebrink, in The Beginnings of Naturalism in American Fiction (Cambridge, Mass., 1950), pp. 278–282, surveys numerous possible influences.

^{Note 23 in page 558} The fullest treatment of Lombroso's influence on the conception of Jacques is by Martin Kanes, “A Critical and Historical Study of Zola's La Bêle humaine,” unpubl. diss. (Univ. of Pennsylvania, 1959). Lombroso himself critically examined Zola's dramatization of his theories in “Illustrative Studies in Criminal Anthropology. I. ‘La Bête Humaine’ and Criminal Anthropology,” Monist, I (Jan. 1891), 177–185.

^{Note 24 in page 558} Lombroso's major work, L'Uomo ielinquente (Milan, 1876; 5th rev. ed., 1896) was translated as L'Homme criminel (Paris, 1887). An English version, adapted by Gina Lom-broso-Ferrero, did not appear until the publication of Criminal Man, According to the Classification of Cesare Lombroso (New York and London, 1911). Lombroso's ideas, however, were well known in England and America by the late 1880's. Havelock Ellis' The Criminal (London, 1892) and Arthur MacDonald's Criminology (New York, 1893) were heavily Lombrosian, and Lombroso's translated articles appeared in such journals as the Forum, Century, and Contemporary Review. Much of the popularity of Lombroso's ideas was no doubt the result of his “scientific” confirmation of common beliefs concerning physiognomy and alcoholism. See also Arthur E. Fink, Causes of Crime: Biological Theories in the United Stales, 1800–1015 (Philadelphia, 1938), pp. 99–150.

^{Note 25 in page 558} Criminal Man, p. 24.

^{Note 26 in page 558} See Grant C. Knight, The Critical Period in American Literature (Chapel Hill, N. C, 1951), pp. 70–76.

^{Note 27 in page 558} Degeneration (New York, 1895), p. 556.

^{Note 28 in page 558} Wave, XVI (14 Aug. 1897), 5; xvi (9 Jan. 1897), 8; xvi (26 June 1897), 9. The three pieces are republished in Complete Works, IV, 43–50; x, 89–93; iv, 19–25.

^{Note 29 in page 559} Wave, XVI (11 Sept. 1897), 6; in Complete Works, x, 35–42. On a clipping of this story (in the Frank Norris Collection, Bancroft Library), Norris wrote “A Subject for Max Nordau” beneath the title. It is also possible that Norris may have learned of Lombroso from Dr. Lawlor, who was prison doctor at San Quentin while Norris was writing for the Wave during 1896–97. Norris wrote two articles on San Quentin for the Wave, and in “New Year's at San Quentin” he mentioned Lawlor by name.

^{Note 30 in page 559} Eugene S. Talbot, in Degeneracy : Its Causes, Signs, and Results (London and New York, 1899), p. vii, noted that the topic of degeneracy received its “popular apotheosis under Lombroso and Nordau.” Norris' Harvard themes dealing with McTeague present him as a drunkard who viciously mistreats and finally murders his wife.

^{Note 31 in page 559} Of course, many of Norris' characters have prominent jaws and yet are not criminals. Norris used prognathism as a crude symbol of the primitive strength which breaks down all barriers in its drive toward a goal or possession. He distinguished between criminal and noncriminal primitivism in terms of ends, not means. A prognathous Ward Bennett, for example, uses his strength beneficially, according to Norris, when he drives his men across the ice to safety in A Man's Woman, even though he commits inhumane acts in achieving that goal.

^{Note 32 in page 559} Complete Works, vm, 200. In addition to the above quotation, Norris indicated on pages 26, 155, and 362 (in almost the exact words) the unusual volatility of McTeague's animal nature.

^{Note 33 in page 559} viii, 27. It should be clear that Norris uses “race” in the above passage in the sense of “family heritage” rather than “mankind as a whole.” He uses the term in this same limited sense when discussing degenerate families in “Little Dramas of the Curbstone” and “A Case for Lombroso,” Complete Works, iv, 21; x, 36.