Haeckel and monophyly

[Finn N. Rasmussen]

Thom Lammers wrote:

<snip>
"Monophyly" had a perfectly good definition going back to Haeckel.
Cladistics comes on the scene and redefines it tightens it up, narrows it.
<endsnip>

Cladistics did not redefine monophyly. The cladists reinstated Heackels
original definition, which had been watered down by English-writing authors,
in particular Simpson (1961). The redefiniton by Ashlock only added to the
confusion i. m. o.
(I just had to return the Haeckel books to the library so I can't give an
exact reference - I think Monophylie is defined in the Geneirelle
Morphologie 1866).
Finn N Rasmussen, Copenhagen.