•Hi

1 m

THE LIBRARY

OF

THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA

PRESENTED BY

PROF. CHARLES A. KOFOID AND
MRS. PRUDENCE W. KOFOID

NATURAL HISTORY

FROM A PHOTOGRAPH BY ELLIOTT AND FRY.

NATURAL HISTORY

ITS RISE AND PROGRESS IN BRITAIN

AS DEVELOPED IN THE

anb

xrf

BY

H. ALLEYNE NICHOLSON, M.D., D.Sc.

REGIUS PROFESSOR OF NATURAL HISTORY IN THE
UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN

W. & R. CHAMBERS

LONDON AND EDINBURGH

1886

Edinburgh :
Printed by W. & R. Chambers.

IN the present work the Author has endeavoured
to give a brief and general outline of the rise and
progress of the science of Natural History in
Britain. As the great advances in this and other
sciences have been for the most part brought about
by individual workers, it has been thought desir-
able, in consistence with the principle of the Series
to which this book belongs, to throw this outline
into the form of biographical sketches ; and as
some of the most important steps in the develop-
ment of the science of zoology have been effected
by foreign investigators, it has been necessary to
some extent to pass beyond the limits of our own
country.

As the last great epoch in zoology is that marked
by the appearance of the ' Origin of Species by
means of Natural Selection,' the survey here under-
taken ends naturally with the great name of
Darwin ; obvious reasons rendering it undesirable

W367417

vi PREFACE.

to attempt any estimate of the scientific work of
the great naturalists who are still among us.

It is hardly necessary to add that the present
work lays no claim to exhaustiveness. Anything of
the nature of a detailed history of the rise and
progress of Zoological Science would necessarily
appeal to experts only. That which has been
attempted here, is to give an untechnical, but not
unscientific, account of the principal steps which
have marked the development of Natural History
in our own country. The object of this volume,
as of the Series, is to convey through the bio-
graphies of the principal workers, an intelligent
conception of the progress and leading principles
of the science treated of, so that the unprofessional
reader may be placed in a position of knowledge
to appreciate some of the great questions which
at present occupy the scientific world.

INTRODUCTION I

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD 5

RAY AND WILLUGHBY 21

RAY AND WILLUGHBY — continued. 37

LINNAEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION 46

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN —

Sir Hans Sloane 64

John Hunter 69

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS 9O

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS— continued. 107

The Rev. Gilbert White no

Alexander Wilson 121

CUVIER 136

RETROGRESSION — Swauison and the Circular Classification 168

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS — continued. 183

EDWARD FORBES... 192

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PERIOD — Erasmus Darwin....223

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES — Lamarck 236.

THE DOCTRINE OF PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT — The 'Vestiges

of Creation' 264

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION— Charles Darwin 275

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION — continued. 293

INDEX 3°7

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS^

PAGE

DARWIN Frontispiece

ARISTOTLE 5

THE CICADA IQ

RAY 21

TANTALLON AND BASS ROCK 25

WILLUGHBY 37

LINN^US 46

SIR HANS SLOANE 64

JOHN HUNTER 70

ALEXANDER WILSON 122

FISH-HAWK 129

CUVIER , 136

LOWER JAW OF WOMBAT — PELVIS OF A KANGAROO 163

THE FOSSIL OPOSSUM OF MONTMARTRE 165

FORBES 192

MAP SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF PLANTS IN BRITAIN 2l6

FEET OF FOSSIL EQUID^ 30$

NATURAL HISTORY.

INTRODUCTION.

As Man, upon any theory of his origin, cannot pro-
perly be said to have existed as Man, until he had
become possessed of that faculty of reason which con-
stitutes his title to the name of homo sapiens •, it is not
altogether extravagant to say that the study of natural
history dates its first beginnings from the time of the
first appearance of man upon the earth.

Primitive man, whatever may have been the develop-
ment of his reasoning powers, was assuredly very indiffer-
ently provided with the appliances of modern civilisation.
So far as concerns their mastery of the forces of external
nature, we may, without much risk of controversy, assume
that the early races of men were savages. It would there-
fore have been indeed strange if man, cast, to begin with,
amongst a vast series of living creatures, many of which
had the power of influencing his material condition for
good or for evil, should have shown himself insensible to

A

2 NATURAL HISTORY.

their presence, or wholly inobservant of their characters,
habits, and modes of life. The contrary must always
have been the case. It may well be that the rude Palaeo-
lithic men who roamed through the trackless forests of
Western Europe, clad in undressed skins, and armed only
with roughly chipped flints, would gaze wholly unmoved
on the thousand beauties of the world around them.
Nature has no emotional side, save for those whose souls
are freed from the ever-present necessity of procuring food
and raiment, shelter from the elements, and protection
against wild beasts.

Precisely the same indifference to the softer aspects
of nature, and the same insensibility to its beauties, are
shown by modern savages, and, for essentially the same
reasons, by the poorest members of civilised com-
munities at the present day. We may take it for
granted, however, that, just as existing savages are
usually accurately acquainted with the larger animals
inhabiting their country, so the early flint-men of Post-
glacial Europe must have possessed a minute knowledge
of the external characters and habits of such animals as
the cave-lion, the cave-bear, the mammoth, and the rein-
deer. Such accurate knowledge of animals, however, even
if wholly confined to an acquaintance with their general
appearance and mode of life, is, in truth, the basis of
scientific natural history.

It is probable, then, that the beginnings of natural
history consisted in the knowledge, which the early races
of mankind could not fail to acquire, of all those larger
animals which, inhabiting the earth or its waters, were
either of value for food, or a source of danger from their

INTRODUCTION. 3

size and ferocity. Apart from this, most early mytho-
logies bear testimony to a primeval and widely-spread
belief in the mystical or sacred character of various of
the more conspicuous animals with which each aboriginal
people might happen to be familiar. Not only were
particular animals endowed by popular consent with
special qualities, good or evil, but specially human attri-
butes were commonly ascribed to them, or they were
even regarded as the companions or the representatives
of particular deities.

That this association of certain animals with early
religious beliefs was, however, of comparatively late
growth, is shown conclusively by the fact that, as a
general rule, these primitive myths have a distinctly
local colouring; the animals regarded as sacred or
symbolic by each people being commonly those indi-
genous to the region inhabited by that people. Thus, the
animals regarded with special veneration, or associated
with special deities, among the nations of Central and
Northern Europe, are such as the bear, the wild boar, and
the wolf; while among the peoples of warmer regions
similar supernatural qualities are ascribed to the elephant,
the lion, the panther, and the peacock. That there is,
nevertheless, some common ground for such beliefs is
attested by the fact that the same animals are sometimes
found to have been credited with some hidden significance
among races now widely remote from one another.
Thus, to give a single example, the goose — or, it may
be, the swan — is mixed up in various ways with the folk-
lore or religious myths of the Hindus, the Romans, the
Greeks, and the Northern European races generally. The

4 NATURAL HISTORY.

extraordinarily wide diffusion of early beliefs as to the
mystical characters of certain animals is further attested
by the known facts as to the system of ' totemism ' among
primitive races, or by the almost universal traces which
are met with of the strange 'cult' known as 'serpent-
worship.'

Another and a most important source of zoological
knowledge is that arising from the friendly relations which
almost all primitive peoples seem to have established
with particular kinds of animals. In many cases — indeed
in most — such friendly relations seem to have been formed
in times long anterior to written history. Philology,
moreover, teaches us that among particular groups of
nations — as, for example, among all the main stems which
have diverged from the great Aryan stock — the names
of particular domestic animals are based upon some
common root. We thus are furnished with decisive evi-
dence that the animals so designated were known to the
Aryans prior to the commencement of their dispersal.
Thus, almost all our most valuable domestic animals,
such as the ox, the sheep, the pig, the horse, and the
dog, are designated in Sanscrit, Latin, Greek, Gothic,
and often in German, English, and other allied languages,
by names which can be shown to have originated in the
same root-form.

ARISTOTLE.

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD.

WHEN we leave prehistoric ground, and come to the
period of written records, we find ample evidence that
the ancients were close observers of nature, although
natural history, as a science, had as yet no existence.
No reader of the Old Testament can fail to admire the
beauty, the fitness, and the power of many of the epi-
thets therein applied to animals. An eminent German
critic (Gervinus) has remarked, very unjustly, that the
ancients had no pleasure in nature ; but the writings of
Homer, as of all great poets, are by no means without
those felicitous phrases descriptive of animals, which

6 NATURAL HISTORY.

show that their author was an acute observer of living
beings. It need not be denied that the branches of
learning most cultivated by the classical nations were
those of rhetoric and logic, grammar, geometry, and
metaphysics ; and that what we now know as the ' natural
sciences' received comparatively little attention, even
from the most learned of the Latin and Greek philoso-
phers, while the fine arts were the object of the most
successful and the most general pursuit. Nevertheless,
Aristotle,* the father of the modern science of zoology,
was a Greek, trained in the schools of the Greek
philosophy, and as eminent in those purely speculative
subjects in which the Greek intellect had always
delighted, as he was in the concrete science of natural
history.

As there was no ' science,' properly so called, of
natural history anterior to the time of Aristotle, and as
he may be regarded as the first who gave a systematic
form to zoology, it will be well to consider briefly the
condition in which this great philosopher left the science
which he founded. This is the more needful, as he had
no successor, and, so far as the progress of zoology was
concerned, might just as well have lived and worked
seventeen or eighteen centuries later than the reign of
Alexander the Great. However minute may have been

* Aristotle was born at Stagira, in the year 384 B.C. He wrote his great work
on the ' History of Animals' (Hty rat, Zuot, 'I<rro^«) about 340 B.C. As regards the
nature and value of the scientific writings of Aristotle, the following may be
consulted : ' Aristoteles Thierkunde,' Jiirgen Bona Meyer, 1855 ; 'Life and Analysis
of the Scientific Writings of Aristotle,' George Henry Lewes, 1864 ; ' Leben,
Schriften und Schuler des Aristoteles,' Stahr, 1832 ; ' Geschichte der Zoologie,"
Victor Carus, 1872. Short popular memoirs of the life and writings of Aristotle are
those of Macgillivray ('Edinburgh Cabinet Library,' vol. xvi. 1834), and of the
Rev. Andrew Crichton ('Naturalists' Library,' vol. iii. 1843).

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 7

the knowledge which the ancients possessed as to the
external characters or habits of the larger animals which
they had domesticated, or which lived in a wild state
around them, no system of natural history had arisen
among them prior to the time of Aristotle. Entire
branches of zoological science, as now understood, may
be said to have been at this time practically non-existent
Moreover, anything like a methodised study of animal
life was necessarily attended with extreme difficulties,
in the absence of the improved modern means for the
investigation and preservation of organic bodies.

In order, however, more clearly to comprehend
Aristotle's relations to the science of natural history,
what he accomplished, and what he failed to accomplish,
where he succeeded in planting a permanent landmark,
and where he deviated from the right line of progress,
it is needful to have some clear conception as to the
precise scope of what is now understood as NATURAL
HISTORY.

Now, natural history, as a whole, is only the aggregate
history of all known species of animals. The general
elements, therefore, which would constitute a perfect
science of natural history are the same as those which
would give us a perfect history of any given animal. We
have, then, to consider what, precisely speaking, are the
points upon which we should require to obtain accurate
knowledge, if we wished to give a complete history of any
single kind or species of animals, such as the dog, for
example,' or the horse. These points form the bases of
the different divisions of a complete natural history, and
are as follows :

8 NATURAL HISTORY.

The first point, then, which we should have to study
in connection with any animal is its actual structure —
that is to say, its external characters and the form and
arrangement of its internal organs. The study of the
configuration of animals constitutes that department of
natural history which is technically known as MORPHOLOGY,
or the science of Form — in other words, what is generally
understood as ANATOMY.

Secondly, having acquired an acquaintance with the
structure of an animal, it is next necessary to study its
vital functions, to discover the uses of its internal organs,
and the way in which they work, and to investigate the
purposes subserved by its various parts when in action.
This constitutes the department of natural history known
as PHYSIOLOGY, or the science of Function.

In the third place, our knowledge of an animal is
very incomplete, unless it embraces an acquaintance with
those changes which it undergoes in passing from the
germ to the adult condition. The study of these con-
stitutes the important branch of zoology known as
EMBRYOLOGY, or the science of Development.

In the fourth place, it is necessary to know of each
species of animals what are its relations to the world
we live in. We have to inquire where the species now
lives, what are the conditions under which it exists, and
so forth; and the study of these points constitutes a
special branch of natural history, which is termed the
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF ANIMALS.

Again, fifthly, we should find that each species of animals
has had a history, extending backwards into the past;
and we should have to study the time of the first

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 9

introduction of the species upon the earth, the duration
of its existence as a species, its geographical range in
past time, and various other similar points. The study
of these questions constitutes another department of
natural history, which is known under the name of
PALAEONTOLOGY.

In the sixth place, it is necessary to have some clear
ideas as to the relations of each species of animals to
other species, and as to the place which the species
should occupy in the long series of forms of which the
entire animal kingdom is made up. The study of this
constitutes what is known as the science of CLASSIFICATION
or TAXONOMY ; and it is, perhaps, the branch of natural
history which most nearly fulfils the popular notion of
what natural history really is. A ' naturalist ' is popularly
supposed to be a man who can take any animal and
give a name to it, and can place it in some particular
drawer or pigeon-hole in the great cabinet of nature.
Most of the naturalists of the seventeenth and of the
earlier half of the eighteenth centuries concerned them-
selves principally with questions touching classification;
not a few of them, in fact, being little more than
'collectors.' While older workers, not unnaturally, were
led to give this branch of the science a position of
unmerited prominence, there has of late years been
shown a tendency unduly to decry the systematic or
taxonomic study of natural history, as being a matter
of comparatively small moment. In reality, however, it
is not possible to study natural history scientifically,
unless we start with the foundation of a systematic
classification of some kind. Moreover, if we consider

10 NATURAL HISTORY.

that a strictly ' natural ' classification embodies the know-
ledge of the time as to the lines of descent of animals
from primordial types, it would seem difficult to overrate
the value and importance of the study of classification.

Finally, we should have to study each species of animal
from still another point of view, which, however, is
indissolubly connected with the study of its palseonto-
logical relations and its systematic position. We should
have, namely, to inquire into its mode of origin and its
history as a species. This constitutes what is known as the
science of EVOLUTION.

The above seven heads would embrace the principal
sorts of knowledge which the naturalist would find it
needful to obtain with regard to any particular species of
animal, if he wished to write a complete history of it.
Natural history as a whole is, therefore, only the aggregate
of our knowledge, under all these seven heads, of all
known animals, living and extinct. Perhaps, if our means
of investigation were thereto adapted, we should have,
further, to study each animal as regards its Psychology,
or from the side of its mental activity, and also as
regards its Teleology, or the end for which it exists, and
the purposes which it subserves in the general economy
of nature. At present, however, we have no adequate
means for the study of the psychology of animals; and
an inquiry into the teleology of animals is necessarily
ultra-scientific. It follows from what has been just
remarked, that the departments of knowledge requisite
to give us a complete acquaintance with any one
animal are also the great departments of the science
of zoology. Hence, modern natural history consists

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. TT

of the subordinate subjects of the morphology (or
anatomy), physiology, embryology, geographical distri-
bution, palaeontology, classification, and evolution of
animals.

Speaking generally, the progress of natural history, as
a science, has corresponded precisely with the extent
to which these separate departments have had their
existence recognised, their boundaries defined, and their
inter-relations explored. In the early days of natural
history these subdivisions had only a very partial
existence, or did not exist at all;- and it was for the
most part considered enough to acquire a knowledge
of the external characters of animals, and of their habits
and mode of life, and to give them names by which they
could be arranged in some sort of an order. Not only was
this the case, but zoology, properly so called, was for
long very imperfectly separated from the sciences of
botany, geology, and mineralogy, all of which were
regarded as forming parts of the general subject of
natural history.

This imperfect differentiation of the science of natural
history may be said to have prevailed generally up to the
middle or nearly the end of the eighteenth century. It is
therefore all the more surprising to find that Aristotle,
living in the fourth century before our era, and having
little or no previously accumulated knowledge to fall back
upon, should have been able to form any philosophical
conception of the laws of animal life, or to produce a
work which should be thought worthy of profound and
minute study by the naturalists of the present day.

Aristotle's principal work on natural history, namely his

12 NATURAL HISTORY.

' History of Animals,' has been the object of extravagant
and uncalled-for eulogy ; while other critics, as a reaction
from this, have shown themselves unduly oblivious of its
unquestionable merits. Thus Cuvier,* on the one hand,
says of it : 'I cannot read this work without being carried
away with wonder. Indeed it is impossible to conceive
how a single man was able to collect and compare the
multitude of particular facts implied in the numerous
general rules and aphorisms contained in this work.' On
the ofher hand, Mr George Henry Lewes, t though
admitting that it is 'a stupendous effort ' when viewed in
comparison with the works which for centuries succeeded
it, remarks that 'looked at absolutely, that is to say in
relation to the science of which it treats, it is an ill-
digested, ill-compiled mass of details, mostly of small
value, with an occasional gleam of something better.
There is, strictly speaking, no science in it at all. There
is not even a system which might look like science.
There is not one good description. It is not an
anatomical treatise ; it is not a descriptive zoology ; it
is not a philosophy of zoology; it is a collection of
remarks about animals, their structure, resemblances,
differences, and habits. As a collection it is immense.
But it is at the best only a collection of details, without
a trace of organisation ; and the details themselves are
rarely valuable, often inaccurate.'

It would be quite out of place to enter here into any
detailed analysis of the ' History of Animals,' or of the
less famous but not less important treatise 'On the

* ' Histoire des Sciences Naturelles,' 1841, torn. L, p. 146.

t 'Aristotle, a Chapter from the History of Science,' 1864, p. 271.

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 13

Parts of Animals/ A few general remarks may be made,
however, as to the place which Aristotle holds in relation
to the science of natural history.

In the first place, then, Aristotle occupied an attitude
towards natural history which in one very important sense
agrees with that held by modern scientific workers —
namely, in so far as he regarded direct observation as
more important than speculation or theory. He cannot
be said to have invariably observed this rule strictly ; but
upon the whole he displays a marvellous love for facts,
and also a much greater care in sifting his facts than
was usual at the period in which he wrote, or indeed in
much later periods. Many of the facts which he records
are naturally inaccurately given ; others are not facts at
all, but mere fictions ; while others are so glaringly wide of
the truth, and could so readily have been shown to be so,*
that one can only wonder how they should for an instant
have been accepted by a man of his extraordinary sagacity.
Nevertheless, Aristotle knew that observation ought to be
the guide to all sound scientific investigation, and in this
respect he was a notable exception to those philosophers
who followed him for many centuries. Moreover, con-
sidering the time at which he lived, and the very imperfect
methods which he was forced to employ, he must be set
down as an observer of pre-eminent powers. This is
especially conspicuous in his treatment of certain groups
of animals, with which we may suppose him to have had
a more intimate personal acquaintance than he could have
had with other groups. Thus, his observations upon Cuttle-

* For example, the statement that the males of the human species, of sheep, of
goats, and of pigs, have more teeth than the females.

14 NATURAL HISTORY.

fishes are not only still valuable, but they embrace certain
points which have only been verified and thoroughly
elucidated within the present century.

Not only was Aristotle an admirable observer, but he
often exhibits a remarkable power of generalisation.
Hence he recognised in various instances the existence
of biological laws, which have been firmly established
only in quite modern times. Thus, he recognised that
there often exists a real relationship — what is now called
a relationship of 'homology' — between apparently dis-
similar parts or organs in different animals. For example,
he points out that there exists an agreement of this kind
between a claw and a nail, or between the feather of a
bird and the scale of a fish. Again, he clearly divined the
law of what is now known as the law of the * correlation
of organs' — namely, that certain organs, which are not
necessarily in obvious connection with one another, are
only found in association with one another, or that certain
other organs which, for aught we see, might quite well
coexist, are never found in the same animal. Thus, he
points out that no quadruped possesses both horns and
tusks, and that most animals with horns are two-hoofed ;
while he adds that a one-hoofed animal with horns (such
as the unicorn of heraldry) had never been observed.
Similarly he points out that all winged insects which have
stings at the fore part of the body (what he calls the sting
in these cases consists really of pointed or lancet-like
jaws) are two- winged, while those which have the sting
at the hinder end of the body are four-winged.

It should be said that Aristotle was essentially what we
should now call a * teleologist ' — that is to say, he generally

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 15

sought not only for the cause but also for the end of the
natural phenomena which came under his notice. Of
course, in many instances the final causes which he assigns
for particular phenomena are not only ludicrously
inadequate, but are also based upon a totally false view
of the facts ; as, for example, when he states that ' animals
are four-footed because their souls are not powerful
enough to carry the weight of their bodies in an erect
position,' and that the reason why man (and man only)
has flesh on his legs is that the upper part of his body
may be rendered lighter, and he may thus be enabled
to walk erect. In the present age, the existence of a
teleological side to nature is very generally denied; and
it may well be that we may never be in a position to
investigate the ends of any natural structures ; so that, for
us, teleology may have practically no existence. Never-
theless, it is probable enough that this is a point upon
which the last word has not yet been spoken.

Apart altogether from the accuracy of his observations,
or the value of his theoretical views, the importance of
Aristotle's works depends, as has been remarked by
Carus,* upon the fact that ' he first created a systematic
and scientific method of treating the animal kingdom.
This method of treatment not only was fitted to serve,
and did serve, as a starting-point for well-grounded
investigations directed towards the discovery of new lines
of research, or the perfection of old ones ; but, above
all, it for the first time put zoology in its proper place
in the series of the inductive sciences.' The facts which

* 'Geschichte der Zoologic,' p. 71.

1 6 NATURAL HISTORY.

he so laboriously accumulated were, naturally, often in-
accurate, sometimes wholly baseless. In such branches
as anatomy and physiology his knowledge was, of
necessity, very imperfect, often entirely erroneous ; though
in certain fields of physiological inquiry, especially in
those relating to development and reproduction, his
observations are commonly extremely accurate. Palae-
ontology had, of course, no existence for him; and his
acquaintance with the laws of the geographical distribu-
tion of animals could not fail to be limited by the limited
knowledge which the ancients possessed as to geography
itself. Of our modern views as to the evolution of specific
forms also, he does not seem to have possessed any
foreshadowing. Rather, he held that ' species ' had a
real existence, and that they were therefore immutable.

Lastly, as a systematist and classifier, Aristotle has
undoubtedly been credited with more than his proper
due. Upon this point, Mr Lewes's arguments are con-
clusive. Aristotle has usually been regarded as the first
who propounded a general classification of the animal
kingdom. The truth is, however, that he propounded no
formal or systematic arrangement of animals. As Agassiz *
puts it, his work shows ' a total absence of systematic
form, of any classification or framework to express the
divisions of the animal kingdom into larger or lesser
groups. His only divisions are genera and species :
classes, orders, and families, as we understand them now,
are quite foreign to the Greek conception of the animal
kingdom.' It is true that Aristotle divided animals into

* ' Methods of Study in Natural History,' 1864, p. 3.

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 17

two great groups, the Enaima and Anaima, or animals
with blood and animals without blood ; but he does not
use this as the basis of any distinct classification. Under
the head of Enaima, or animals with blood (that is, with
red blood), he seems to have included all the animals
which we know as the 'Vertebrate Animals,' and he
recognises certain distinctions amongst these according
as they are viviparous or oviparous, or according to the
number of legs which they possessed ; but he cannot
reasonably be said to have established a classification of
the Vertebrata upon these distinctions. Similarly, the
Anaima, or animals without blood (that is, with colourless
blood, or having, as he thought, a fluid analogous to
blood, though not really the same), were understood by
Aristotle as comprising the 'Invertebrate Animals;' and
he recognised certain groups of these, such as the Shell-
fish, the Crustaceans, the Cuttle-fishes, and the Insects;
but here also he laid down no regular classification.
Upon the whole, therefore, we may accept the verdict
of Mr George Henry Lewes* upon this point, that
' zoologists may read a classification in Aristotle's pages,
but they do violence to the plain meaning of the text;
they disregard context, and piece together from far and
wide detached observations never meant to be connected
with one another.'

We have dwelt thus at length upon the labours of
Aristotle, partly because he is the best, and indeed almost
the only, representative of the knowledge possessed by
the ancients as to natural history, and partly because it is

'Aristotle, a Chapter from the History of Science,' p. 278.
B

1 8 NATURAL HISTORY.

possible to pass at almost a single step from the phil-
osopher of Stagira to John Ray, one of the first of the
great British naturalists. With the death of Aristotle,
the scientific prosecution of natural history practically
came to a close, not for a short time merely, but for a
period of many centuries.

The Roman empire, nearly four hundred years later,
produced Pliny the Elder, whose name as a naturalist is
familiar to every one. In truth, however, Pliny hardly
deserves this title at all ; since his great work — the
' Historia Naturalis ' — is really a kind of cyclopaedia, in
which little or nothing deserving of the name of ' science '
can be detected. It is simply a huge compilation of
unassorted facts and fables, principally the latter. From
the time of Pliny to the commencement of the sixteenth
century, natural history may be said to have been almost
at a standstill, and assuredly never even approached the
high-water mark left by the researches of Aristotle. With
the fall of the Roman empire fell also the learning and the
culture of the ancients; and the aptly named period of
the 'dark ages' records in its annals few names which
would find even a humble place in the zoological temple
of fame.

With the dawn of a better time in the beginning of
the sixteenth century, natural history did not for long
remain unaffected by the general revival of learning.
Belon, Rondeletius, Salviani, Conrad Gesner, and Aldro-
vandus, all well-known naturalists, are names of this period,
which bear testimony to a renewed interest in the world
of nature. It was not, however, till the early part of the
seventeenth century that natural history showed signs of

ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 19

awakening in our own country. The first zoological work
ever printed in England is the ' Theatre of Insects' by
Moufet,* of date 1634, a translation of which into the
vernacular was published twenty-five years later by Edward
Topsel. We append an accurate copy of one of the
woodcuts of this curious old work, the one selected
representing the Cicada.

The first work which treated specially of the native
animals and plants of Britain is the ' Pinax Rerum Natura-
lium Britannicarum ' of Christopher Merret, published in
1667. This, in addition to animals and plants, embraced
fossils also; but it is nothing more than a sort of cata-
logue or enumeration of the animals and plants known

* ' Insectorum sive Minimorum Animalium Theatrum, olim ab Edoardo Wottono,
Conrado Gesnero, Thomaque Pennio inchoatum : tandem Tho. Moufeti Londinatis,
opera sumptibusque maximis concinnatum, auctum, perfectum: et ad vivum expres-
sis iconibus illustratum. Londini ex officina typographic^ Thorn. Cotes,' 1634.

20 NATURAL HISTORY.

to the writer. Indeed, both of these early works are
exceedingly rude and imperfect productions, and have
no value at the present time. On the other hand, the
close of the seventeenth century was rendered memorable
in the history of zoology through the labours of several
British naturalists, and notably of John Ray and Francis
Willughby. Ray may therefore be appropriately selected
as the chief representative of the natural sciences in
Britain during the pre-Linnean period.

RAY AND WILLUGHBY.

THE seventeenth century has been characterised — of
course from the point of view of a naturalist — as
' the dawn of the Golden Age.' The torch of zoo-
logical discovery lighted by Aristotle, after flickering
fitfully in the hands of his successors for a space, had
become extinguished, and the entire domain of natural
history had for centuries lain shrouded under the thick
darkness of the middle ages. With the commencement
of the sixteenth century, the natural sciences participated
in the general revival of learning which signalised this
period in the history of Europe. Even at the present
day, Belon, Rondeletius, and Gesner are something more
than merely the shadows of names. In Britain the first
pioneers in the renewed exploration of the world of life
were little more than mere compilers. The seventeenth
century, however, gave origin in Britain to a cluster of emi-
nent men who devoted themselves to the study of zoology
and botany, and who for the time being placed England
in the first rank as regards the advancement of natural
science. The two names which stand out foremost in this

22 NATURAL HISTORY.

cluster are those of the friends and fellow-workers, John
Ray and Francis Willughby.

John Ray has been called the ' Aristotle of England,'
but he was in reality rather the English Linnaeus, his
merits as an observer and systematiser being greater than
his abilities as a philosopher. Moreover, he was more of
a botanist than a zoologist; his purely zoological work
being so far blended with that of Willughby, that it is
a thankless task to attempt to indicate precisely the share
of merit which posterity ought to allot to each of these
great men.

John Ray was born on the 291)1 of November 1628, at
the little village of Black Notley, near Braintree, in Essex.
He was* of humble birth, his father, Roger Ray, being a
blacksmith ; and he certainly owed comparatively little to
his early education, as he was bred a scholar at Brain-
tree School, and has left it on record that he regarded
this as a great misfortune. Little is known of his boyish
years ; but it may be gathered that he was deeply attached
to his parents, and especially to his 'most dear and
honoured mother.' When he was sixteen years of age he
was sent to Cambridge, where he entered at St Catharine's
Hall.* In about a year and three-quarters, however, he
removed to Trinity College, where he had the advantage
of being taught by the well-known Dr Duport, a celebrated
scholar of his day.t ' Under this learned tutor,' to use Dr

* Ray's name appears in the college books as ' Wray,' he having for a time
chosen to write himself in this fashion.

t James Duport was Master of Magdalene College, Dean of Peterborough, and
Professor of Greek at Cambridge. He died in 1679. The present writer possesses
one of his works entitled ' Threnothriambos,' consisting of the book of Job translated
into Greek verse, with a Latin version ; together with Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and
Solomon's Song in Greek hexameters. This copy is interesting as bearing upon its

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 23

Derham's words, ' Mr Ray so closely applied himself to
his studies, that what he missed of at Braintree School,
he sufficiently attained to at Trinity College; having
acquired great skill in Greek and Latin, and, I have good
reason to think, in Hebrew also. Beside which, I find
by some of his papers written about that time, that he
was very early an excellent orator and naturalist; and
upon the account of his great diligence, learning, and
virtue, he was soon taken notice of by the College, and
at about three years' standing was chosen Minor Fellow
of Trinity, on September 8th, 1649, together with his
ingenious friend Isaac Barrow; and as Dr Duport had
been tutor to both of them, so he used to boast of them,
as Mr Ray's fellow-collegian, the late pious and learned
Mr Brokesby, informed me, who saith that he, in discourse
with Dr Duport, reckoning up several gentlemen of worth
that the doctor had been tutor to, the doctor said the
chief of all his pupils were Mr Ray and Dr Barrow, to
whom he esteemed none of the rest comparable.' *

On taking his degree as Master of Arts, Ray was
elected Major Fellow of Trinity, and subsequently filled
several highly honourable posts in his college, being
successively Greek lecturer, mathematical lecturer, and
humanity reader. At this period of his life Ray was
not in holy orders ; but as the custom of the time was,
he nevertheless was in the habit of delivering sermons
both in his college and before the university. Such
college sermons were usually termed 'commonplaces,'

title-page the signature, "Tho. Baker, Coll: Jo: Socius ejectus.' It belonged to
Thomas Baker, a well-known antiquary of his day, who was one of the ' non-juring '
clergy of 1690, and was ejected from his Fellowship in 1716.
* ' Select Remains and Life of Ray, by William Derham, D.D.

24 NATURAL HISTORY.

a name which doubtless was often fully deserved. In
this particular instance, however, we have sufficient
evidence that Ray's collegiate ' exercises ' were some-
thing more than formal platitudes; for some of them
(as, for example, his 'Wisdom of God in the Creation')
were subsequently published in an enlarged form, and
met with the greatest acceptance.

Ray's taste for science seems to have been of early
growth ; but his first published work was a * Catalogue of
Cambridge Plants/ which was given to the world in 1660.
It was merely an alphabetical list of all the plants with
which he was acquainted as growing round Cambridge,
the localities for each being appended. It was neverthe-
less much more genuinely scientific than the ' Herbals,'
which constituted the chief botanical literature of the
day; and it was so far successful, that Ray conceived
the idea of preparing a similar catalogue for the whole
of England. With this object, he took two journeys (in
1 66 1 and 1662) with his bosom-friend Willughby and
some others of his intimates, through portions of England
and Scotland, in which he investigated all the objects of
scientific or antiquarian interest which came in his way,
but more especially the plants and animals. He had
previously (in 1658) undertaken by himself a similar
journey through parts of England and Wales, and having
kept a daily journal, the record of these three journeys
was published after his death by Dr Derham. These
' Itineraries,' though not intended by their writer for publi-
cation, are highly interesting as giving us a glimpse of
the aspect of many well-known places about the middle
of the seventeenth century; such observations being

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 25

indiscriminately mingled with notes upon the plants,
animals, or fossils met with, or quaint observations upon
men or manners. One might quote endlessly from this
olla podrida of scientific, antiquarian, and social observa-
tions ; but it will suffice to take, by way of specimen,

TANTALLON AND BASS ROCK.

Ray's account of his journey from Dunbar to Edinburgh,
on which occasion he paid a visit with his companions to
the Bass Rock.

* August the i Qth, we went to Leith, keeping all along
the side of the Fryth. By the way we viewed Tontallon
Castle, and passed over to the Basse Island, where we
saw on the rocks innumerable of the soland geese. The
old ones are all over white, excepting the pinion or hard
feathers of the wings, which are black. The upper part

26 NATURAL HISTORY.

of the head and neck, in those that are old, is of a
yellowish dun colour ; they lay but one egg apiece, which
is white and not very large. They are very bold, and
sit in great multitudes till one comes close up to them,
because they are not wont to be scared or disturbed.
The young ones are esteemed a choice dish in Scotland,
and sold very dear (is. 8d. plucked). We eat of them at
Dunbar. They are in bigness little inferior to an ordinary
goose. The young one is upon the back black, and
speckled with little white spots; under the breast and
the belly gray. The beak is sharp-pointed, the mouth
very wide and large, the tongue very small, the eyes
great, the foot hath four toes webbed together. It feeds
upon mackerel and herring, and the flesh of the young
one smells and tastes strong of these fish. The other
birds which nestle in the Basse are these : the scout,
which is double-ribbed; the cattiwake, the cormorant,
the scart, and a bird called the turtle-dove, whole
footed, and the feet red.* There are verses which
contain the names of these birds among the vulgar, two
whereof are :

The scout, the scart, and the cattiwake,
The soland goose sits on the lack,
Yearly in the spring.

'We saw [some] of the scout's eggs, which are very
large and speckled. It is very dangerous to climb the
rocks for the young of these fowls, and seldom a year
passeth but one or other of the climbers fall down,
and lose their lives, as did one not long before our

• * The 'scout ' is the razor-bill ; the ' cattiwake ' is the kittiwake gull ; the ' scart '
is the shag ; and the ' turtle-dove ' is the black guillemot.

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 27

being there. The laird of this island makes a great
profit yearly of the soland geese taken; as I remember,
they told us 1307. sterling. There is in the isle a
small house, which they call a castle; it is inaccessible
and impregnable, but of no great consideration in a
war, there being no harbour, nor anything like it. The
island will afford grass to keep thirty sheep. They
make strangers that come to visit it burgesses of the
Basse, by giving them to drink of the water of the
well, which springs near the top of the rock, and a
flower out of the garden thereby. The island is nought
else but a rock, and stands off the land near a mile;
at Dunbar you would not guess it above a mile distant,
though it be thence at least five. We found growing
in the island in great plenty, Beta marina^ Lychnis
marina nostras, Malva arborea marina nostras, and
Cochlearia rotundifolia. By the way we saw also glasses
made of kelp and sand mixed together, and calcined
in an oven. The crucibles which contained the melted
glass, they told us, were made of tobacco-pipe clay.

'At Leith we saw one of those citadels built by the
Protector, one of the best fortifications that ever we
beheld, passing fair and sumptuous. There are three
forts advanced above the rest, and two platforms. The
works round about are faced with freestone towards
the ditch, and are almost as high as the highest build-
ings within, and withal thick and substantial. Below
are very pleasant, convenient, and well-built houses for
the governor, officers, and soldiers, and for magazines
and stores; there is also a good capacious chapel, the
piazza, or void space within, as large as Trinity College

28 NATURAL HISTORY.

(in Cambridge) great court. This is one of the four
forts. The other three are at St Johnston's, Inverness,
and Ayre. The building of each of which (as we were
credibly informed) cost above ioo,ooo/. sterling; indeed,
I do not see how it could cost less. In England it
would have cost much more.

'In Edinburgh we went to the principal public build-
ings. These are : ( i ) The castle, a very strong building
on a precipitous solid rock; it is one of the king's
houses, but of no very great receipt; in it are kept
the crown and sceptre of Scotland. There was then
lying in the castle yard an old great iron gun, which
they call Mount's Meg, and some, Meg of Berwick, of
a great bore, but the length is not answerable to the
bigness. (2) Heriot's Hospital, a square stone building,
having a large turret at each corner. It hath very
spacious and beautiful gardens, and is well inclosed.
There is a cloister on both sides of the court, on each
hand as one goeth in, and a well in the middle thereof.
At our being there it maintained three-score boys,
who wore blue gowns ; but they told us it was designed
for other purposes. It would make a very handsome
college, comparable to the best in our universities.
Over the gate, within-side, stands the figure G. Heriot,
the founder thereof, and under him this verse,

Corporis hsec, animi est hoc opus effigies.

(3) The College, for the building of it, [is] but mean,
and of no very great capacity, in both comparable to
Caius College, in Cambridge. Most of the students
here live after the fashion of Leyden, in the town; and

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 29

wear no gowns till they be laureat, as 'they call it.
At our being there (being the time of the vacancy),
there was not a student in town ; the premier also, as
they call him, was absent in London. In the hall of
this College, the king's commissioner, Middleton, was
entertained by the citizens of Edinburgh.

'(4) The parliament house, which is but of small con-
tent, as far as we could judge, not capable of holding
two hundred persons. The Lords and commons sit
both in the same room together. There is also a place
which they call the inner house, in which sit fifteen lords,
chosen out of the house, as it were a grand committee.
There is an outer room like the lobby, which they call
the waiting-room; and two other rooms above-stairs,
where commissioners sit. We saw Argyle and Guthry
their heads standing on the gates and toll-booth. At
the time we were in Scotland, divers women were burnt
for witches, they reported to the number of about one
hundred and twenty.'

In 1660, after the Restoration, Ray was ordained;
but two years later his direct connection with the
Church of England came to an end, in consequence of
the passing of the 'Act of Uniformity.' By this act,
as is well known, every clergyman was required to
declare his assent to everything contained in the Book
of Common Prayer, to take the oath of canonical
obedience, and to abjure the Solemn League and Cove-
nant; and there is no reason to doubt that Ray, an
attached son of the church, would willingly have signed
these articles. A declaration was, however, further

30 NATURAL HISTORY.

required, that those who had already signed the Solemn
League and Covenant did not lie under any obligation to
keep their oath ; and to this Ray could not conscientiously
subscribe. Rather than do so, he sacrificed his fellowship,
and, with it, all his hopes of ecclesiastical preferment;
thus setting, along with many other high-minded men,
a noble example of adherence to principle, and of dis-
regard for considerations of personal comfort or worldly
profit.

Having thus abandoned his career in Cambridge, Ray
determined to travel abroad for a time; and he carried
this determination into practice early in 1663, in company
with his friend Francis Willughby and two of his own
pupils. Ray's journeyings on the Continent lasted till
March 1666, and took him through a large part of Western
and Southern Europe, including Sicily and Malta. The
record of his travels, and of the scientific observations
which he made thereon, was given to the world in 1673,
under the title of ' Observations, topographical, moral, and
physiological, made in a Journey through part of the Low
Countries, Germany, Italy, and France.' This most quaint
and interesting journal abounds in information of all
kinds, and upon all sorts of subjects. Observations upon
the towns, public buildings, political and social institu-
tions, habits of the people, and natural scenery, are
mingled in the oddest way with learned disquisitions
upon scientific problems, or descriptions of the animals
and plants met with on the journey. Endless quotations
might be made, but one characteristic sample will be
enough.

Journeying from Niirnberg to Ratisbon, Ray stopped

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 31

a day at Altdorf,* which he describes as ' a little walled
town, and an university belonging to the Nurenbergers,
where there is a pretty physic garden.' He then appends
in full, a Latin inscription containing a history of the
university, in which 'are maintained thirty-six students
at the charges of the city of Nurenberg, which also
pays the professors their stipends.' The degrees given
by this little university are those of ' doctor of law,
physic, and poetry, batchelor of divinity, and master of
arts.'

Here Ray was shown some ' serpent-stones, and some
petrified cockle and muscle shells;' and he takes occasion
thereupon to enter upon a digression of more than a
dozen pages as to the nature of ' fossils ' in general. In
this digression he not only gives a list of the localities
known to him as affording fossils, but he discusses all
the theories as to their origin, and particularly the two
principal rival hypotheses of his day. By one of these
theories — which Ray speaks of as the ' general opinion
of the antients' — it was held that fossils 'were original
the shells or bones of living fishes or other animals bred
in the sea;' the ancients in this matter agreeing with
modern scientific men. On the other hand, there was
the widely spread opinion of those who imagined 'these
bodies to have been the effects and products of some
plastic power in the earth, and to have been formed
after the manner of diamonds and other precious stones,
or the crystals of coagulated salts, by shooting into such

* Altdorf was at one time a famous university, having come into existence in
1575 ; but it ceased to exist in 1809, shortly after Niirnberg had been incorporated
with the kingdom of Bavaria.

32 NATURAL HISTORY.

figures.' Ray winds up a long argument upon the merits
of these two theories as follows : ' For my own part, I
confess, I propend to the first opinion, as being more
consonant to the nature of the thing, and could wish
that all external arguments and objections against it were
rationally and solidly answered.' Having satisfactorily
disposed of this knotty point, he then immediately continues
the thread of his narrative, as if it had been wholly
uninterrupted, by giving a full list of the then professors
in the university of Altdorf, together with a statement
as to the books which were studied in the different
classes.

The two or three years which followed Ray's return
home, were occupied by him in all sorts of scientific work,
and in travelling through England. Much of his time
he spent with his friend Willughby, with whom he carried
out at this period a series of well-known experiments
upon the ascent and descent of the sap in trees. In 1667,
Ray became a Fellow of the Royal Society of London,
which had only been incorporated for about five
years. Two years later he published his ' Catalogue
of English Plants/ which, after going into a second
edition, was remodelled, and ultimately appeared in
1690 as the famous 'Synopsis Methodica Stirpium
Britannicarum.' So far as botany was concerned, this
well-known treatise ' proved the great corner-stone of his
reputation.'

Year after year thus passed by, and found Ray still
absorbed in his peaceful and uneventful scientific labours,
till, in 1672, his friend and coadjutor Willughby was
carried off by a fever; 'to the infinite and unspeakable

RAY AND WILLUGHBY, 33

loss and grief,' he writes, ' of myself, his friends, and all
good men.' This event materially changed Ray's life
for a time at any rate. He had been left by Willughby
an annuity of sixty pounds a year, with the charge of
superintending the education of his sons, Francis and
Thomas, the eldest of these being at this time not four
years old. He was also left as Willughby's literary and
scientific executor.

Under these circumstances, Ray made Middleton
Hall, the seat of the Willughbys, his headquarters ;
and occupied himself during the next three or four
years in the education of the boys intrusted to his
care, and in editing and completing Willughby's manu-
scripts. His work in connection with the latter will be
noticed hereafter ; but some idea may be formed of his
wonderful intellectual activity and power of work, from
the fact that, in addition to carrying out the duties above
mentioned, he published a ' Nomenclator Classicus ' (1672),
his work on the Low Countries (1673), and his well-known
'Collection of Unusual or Local English Words' (1673).
He also, at the same time, carried on an extensive corres-
pondence with Martin Lister, Mr Oldenburg (the Secretary
of the Royal Society), Sir Hans Sloan e, Dr Tancred
Robinson, and others. At this period, letters were some-
thing much more serious and substantial than they are
at the present day, and many of Ray's letters to Olden-
burg were published in the ' Philosophical Transactions.'
They dealt with the most extraordinary variety of subjects,
amongst which Dr Derham enumerates, St Paul's battoons
[peculiar stones found in Malta], 'the Trochites of mush-
rooms, maize, the bleeding of trees and motion of their

34 NATURAL HISTORY.

sap, spontaneous generation, musk-scented insects, the
scolopendra, the acid juice of pismires, the darting of
spiders, the anatomy of the porpus, the air-bladder in
fishes, the macreuse' [scoter duck], 'and the wood-
cracker.' * A number of these letters, together with those
of his correspondents, were published shortly after Ray's
death by Dr Derham; inr which the industrious reader
will surely discover, as Dr Derham quaintly puts it, ' so
entertaining and profitable a variety of curious learning, as
will sufficiently compensate for defects, and cause him to
think that neither have I cast away my time and pains,
nor he his cost.'

Amidst all this press of scientific work, Ray found time
for the softer emotions, and in June 1673 he was married,
in Middleton Church, to Margaret, daughter of Mr John
Oakeley of Launton in Oxfordshire, his wife being some
twenty-five years younger than himself. About two years
after this event, Ray, who had with his wife been living
at Middleton Hall in Warwickshire, removed to Sutton
Cofield, a place about four miles off; his tuition of
Willughby's sons having now come to a close. Two
years later (1677) he again moved his quarters, this time
to Falborne Hall in Essex, whence two years afterwards
he finally shifted to Black Notley, his native place, in
which he spent the remaining years of his life.

From this time onward Ray's life was wholly unevent-
ful, and was occupied in incessant and most fruitful toil at
his favourite sciences, and in constant correspondence
with his friends. Book after book came from his hands,
some botanical, some zoological, some theological. Some

* 'Memorials of Ray,' p. 32.

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 35

account of these will be given immediately. In the
meanwhile we must hasten to the end. Ray's marriage
had not been blessed with children, and the last ten years
of his life were embittered by failing health and a painful
disorder. To the last, however, he intermitted not in his
labours, and was engaged in writing perhaps the best of
his zoological treatises (namely his ( History of Insects '),
when death overtook him. His last letter, penned on
his deathbed, bearing, as Dr Derham says, 'the marks of
a dying hand in every letter/ and broken off at the end
by reason of failing strength, was to Sir Hans Sloane. It
is subjoined below in its entirety. Few who have known
what it is to enjoy a long and tried friendship, will read it
unmoved.

DEAR SIR— The best of friends j these are to take a final
leave of you as to this world. I look upon myself as a dying
man. God requite your kindness expressed any ways towards
me an hundred fold, bless you with a confluence of all good
things in this world, and eternal life and happiness hereafter,
and grant us an happy meeting in heaven. I am, sir, eternally
yours, JOHN RAY.

BLACK NOTLEY, Jan. *jth, 1704.

Postscript. — When you happen to write to my singular friend
Dr Hotton, I pray tell him I received his most obliging and
affectionate letter, for which I return thanks, and acquaint him
that I was not able to answer it ; or

On the 1 7th of January 1704, in his house at Black
Notley, Ray died, in the seventy-seventh year of his
age.

36 NATURAL HISTORY.

So passed away a great and good man, who to pre-
eminent intellectual gifts united a singularly upright,
simple, pure, and lovable disposition. As his biographer
Derham has it — ' in his dealings no man more strictly just ;
in his conversation, no man more humble, courteous, and
affable ; towards God, no man more devout ; and towards
the poor and distressed, no man more compassionate and
charitable, according to his abilities.'

WILLUGHBY.

RAY AND WILLUGHBY

(CONTINUED).

IN estimating Ray's intellectual achievements, and
the value of his scientific labours, his published works
may be divided into three groups. The first and most
considerable of these embraces his botanical treatises.
These we must wholly pass over here, though it is upon
them that Ray's scientific reputation most largely rests.
It is enough to quote in this respect the verdict of
Sir James E. Smith ('Rees's Cyclopaedia'), that Ray was
' the most accurate in observation — the most philosophical
in contemplation — and the most faithful in description,

38 NATURAL HISTORY.

amongst all the botanists of his own, or perhaps any
other time.'

The second division of Ray's works includes his theo-
logical treatises, of which two attained great celebrity —
namely, ' The Wisdom of God in the Creation,' which went
through many editions, and his three ' Physico-theological
Discourses concerning the Chaos, Deluge, and Dissolution
of the World,' of which three successive editions appeared.
The first of these is an elaborate and learned survey
of nature in general, and of the structure of the body
of man and animals in particular, from the teleological
point of view. From that point of view, it is a wonder-
ful production for the time in which it was written —
clear in conception, full in illustration, elevated in
sentiment, and dignified in language. The second of
the works just referred to is, in the main, a cosmogony
and a theory of geological action.

As was natural at the time he wrote, and with his
views, Ray did not wholly eschew hypothetical causes in
his endeavour to explain how the earth had reached its
present condition. All the geologists of his day relied
upon imaginary causes, or invoked hypothetical agencies
in their explanations of the formation of the earth. Ray,
however, was in this respect more advanced than most
of his contemporaries, for he relied upon known physical
agencies, whenever it seemed to him possible to account
for the presumed course of events by the ordinary and
recognised operations of nature. He not only showed
a desire to get rid of imaginary causes in his explana-
tion of the creation of the world; but he endeavoured
to explain the anticipated dissolution of the world by

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 39

similar causes. Thus, he drew particular attention to
the * denuding' action of rain, rivers, and the sea,
and to the manner in which the dry land is at the
present day worn away by these agencies; and he
speculates upon the result in the future of the long
continuance of this action. The value of Ray's treatise
is now, of course, purely historical; but as a piece of
philosophical reasoning, it attains a much higher level
than its more celebrated contemporary, the ' Essay towards
a Natural History of the Earth and Terrestrial Bodies,'
by John Woodward (1695).

The third group of the works which the world owes
to Ray comprises his zoological treatises. Ray's con-
tributions to the science of zoology are, however, so
largely, and in many respects so indissolubly linked
with those of his friend Willughby, that it is not
possible, even if it were desirable, to consider the two
separately. It may therefore be proper to preface
this subject by the following brief account of the life
of the latter.

Francis Willughby was born at Middleton in War-
wickshire, in the year 1635, and was the only son of
Sir Francis Willughby. Little is known of his early
life, except that he was a most diligent student. In
1653, he entered at Trinity College, Cambridge, gradu-
ating as Bachelor of Arts in 1656, and as Master of
Arts in 1659. ^ was at Cambridge that he commenced
his lifelong friendship with John Ray, whose pupil he
is stated to have been; though on this point there
seems to be some doubt. Be this as it may, it is
certain that from this time forward Ray and Willughby

40 NATURAL HISTORY.

became the closest of intimates, and that both threw
themselves with the utmost ardour into the study of
nature. Ray had largely devoted himself to botany,
whereas the bent of Willughby's mind was rather to
zoology; though the former also extensively investigated
animals, and the latter worked at times with plants.
Hence, when Ray, being forced, as already narrated, to
abandon his life at Cambridge, determined to travel
abroad, Willughby agreed to join him ; they having formed
the design of preparing together a kind of general account
of the animal and vegetable kingdom. Ray's own
version of this design, and of the part which it was
intended that he and Willughby should respectively take
in its execution, has been preserved to us by Dr Derham,
who writes as follows upon this point :

* These two gentlemen, rinding the " History of Nature "
very imperfect, had agreed between themselves, before
their travels beyond sea, to reduce the several tribes
of things to a method ; and to give accurate descrip-
tions of the several species, from a strict view of them.
And forasmuch as Mr Willughby's genius lay chiefly
to animals, therefore he undertook the birds, beasts,
fishes, and insects, as Mr Ray did the vegetables.
And how each of these two great men discharged his
province, the world hath seen in their works; which
show that Mr Ray lived to bring his part to great
perfection ; and that Mr Willughby carried his as far
as the utmost application and diligence of a short life
could enable him.'

The joint tour, for which the above great design
served as an object, lasted, as has been previously seen,

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 41

from 1663 to the beginning of 1666; but Willughby
parted from Ray in the later part of 1664, for the
purpose of travelling in Spain. The journal of his
Spanish tour was appended to the 'Travels in the Low
Countries/ published by Ray in 1673; but it was un-
fortunate that all the scientific papers written by the
two friends while they were together, and describing
the animals and plants which they had met with, were lost
on their return.

At the close of the year 1665, Willughby lost his father,
and succeeded to the family estates. He now took up
his abode at Middleton Hall, where Ray was his frequent
guest. Willughby now applied himself with the utmost
zeal to the execution of his great plan of publishing a
systematic work dealing with the whole animal kingdom.
Ray was often with him, helping him in ordering the
extensive collections which he had accumulated. The
two took scientific tours together — making their way at
one time as far as Land's End ; and they worked together
at various scientific researches. Thus for a few years
Willughby lived, immersed in his work, and enjoying his
quiet home-life. In 1668, he married, but four years later
he was attacked with pleurisy and fever, to which he
succumbed at the early age of thirty-seven. ' Thus,' as
Dr Derham remarks, ' was the world deprived of this great
and good man, in his very prime. . . . His example
deserves the imitation of every person of estate and
honour. For he was a man whom God had blessed with
a very plentiful estate, and with excellent parts, capable
of making him useful to the world ; and accordingly he
neglected no opportunity of being so. He did not (as

42 NATURAL HISTORY.

the fashion too much is) depend upon his riches, and
spend his time in sloth and sports, idle-company keeping,
and luxury ; but practising what was laudable and good,
and what might be of service to mankind.'

Had it not been for the affectionate care of his friend
Ray, the world would not have been in a position to
estimate, even in part, what it had lost in Francis
Willughby. For, though he had been so long engaged
in scientific researches, Willughby, up to the time of his
death, had published hardly any of his observations. He
had, in fact, published nothing independently, save two or
three entomological papers in the Transactions of the
Royal Society, of which he was a Fellow. Ray, however,
undertook to edit and bring out the mass of scientific
notes which Willughby had for the most part 'rhapsodi-
cally written in Latin,' and which he had left in prepara-
tion for his contemplated work on animals ; and this task
Ray discharged with the utmost fidelity. Indeed, much
controversy, of a wholly profitless nature, has arisen as to
the respective share of the original author and of the
editor, in the zoological treatises which subsequently
appeared under the name of Willughby. We may take
it for granted that much of the merit of these treatises
was due to Ray, but that their groundwork should be
credited to Willughby. On this point, we have Ray's
own testimony ; who says that, on examining Willughby's
manuscripts after his death, he ' found the several animals
of every kind, both birds and beasts, and fishes and insects,
digested into a method of his own contriving, but few of
their descriptions or histories so full or perfect as he
intended them.'

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 43

The first work of Willughby's which was published
under the editorial superintendence of Ray was a syste-
matic treatise on birds, 'wherein all the birds hitherto
known, being reduced into a method suitable to their
natures, are accurately described.'* This great work
was published in one volume, folio, in 1676; it was
translated by Ray into English in 1678; and a
French edition was published by Salerne in 1767. The
descriptive part of this well-known treatise is very good,
and it contains excellent accounts of the habits of the
birds described. Much cannot be said, however, for
the illustrations, so glowingly described in the title. They
are mostly poor copies of previously existing figures, and
according to Macgillivray — an excellent authority — there
are 'not ten figures in the work which bear an accurate
resemblance to their originals.' The classification adopted
in the work is a purely artificial one, as, indeed, it could
not have otherwise been ; and it would serve no particular
purpose to summarise it or discuss it here. It may be
added, however, that in spite of its deficiencies, it is his
* Ornithology ' which has mainly conduced to keep alive
the memory of Willughby as a naturalist.

Ten years after the appearance of the ' Ornithology,' Ray
edited and published a second work of Willughby's, under
the title ' Historiae Piscium, Libri Quatuor,' London, folio,
1686. This famous treatise contained descriptions and
figures not only of most of the fishes which had been
recorded by previous ichthyologists, but also of numerous

* ' Ornithologia, sive de Avibus, Libri tres : in quibus Aves omnes hactenus cognitae,
in Methodum naturis suis convenientum redactse, accurate describuntur. Descrip-
tiones iconibus elegantissimis et vivarum avium simillimis aeri incisis illustrantur.
Totum opus recognovit, digressit, supplevit Johannis Raius.'

44 NATURAL HISTORY.

types which had come under the observation of the authors
in their joint travels on the Continent. Thus Cuvier states
that it contained many observations on the fishes of the
Mediterranean, which were not to be elsewhere obtained ;
and one of our highest living authorities (Dr Albert
Giinther) has stated that 'it is no exaggeration to say that
at that time these two Englishmen knew the fishes of the
Continent, especially those of Germany, better than any
continental zoologist (' Introduction to the Study of Fishes,'
p. 8). It is interesting to note, by way of marking the
progress of natural history, that while Aristotle is supposed
to have been acquainted with about one hundred and
fifteen species of fishes, Ray estimates the total number
known to him at about five hundred species. At the
present day, on the other hand, naturalists are acquainted
with about six thousand species of fishes ; nearly seven
hundred species of fresh-water fishes — a number greater
than the whole of the fishes known to Ray — having been
recognised as occurring in the single area of tropical South
America.

In addition to the ' Ornithology ' and ' Ichthyology ' of
Willughby, Ray published under his own name three
Synopses, so as to give a brief conspectus of the entire
series of the Vertebrate Animals. The first of these
appeared in 1693, with the title, 'Synopsis methodica Ani-
malium Quadrupedum, et Serpentini Generis.' This work
commences with an introduction dealing with the general
characters of animals ; but the bulk of the work is a
synoptical account of Mammals, Reptiles, and Amphibians.
The classification of animals here adopted is of interest,
as almost the first attempt at a systematic arrangement

RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 45

of the animal kingdom; and it will be noticed more
particularly immediately, in connection with the later
Linnean classification. The second ' Synopsis Methodica '
appeared in 1713, after Ray's death, and consisted of
two parts, one dealing with birds, and the other with
fishes, thus completing the series of the Vertebrate
Animals.

Lastly, Ray undertook, at the very close of his long
and laborious life, to complete a systematic treatise
on Insects, which Willughby had intended to write,
and had, in fact, sketched out. This work Ray did
not live to complete, but it was published after his
death, in 1710, at the expense of the Royal Society,
under the title, i Historia Insectorum.' It is unfortunate
that this treatise was not accompanied by illustrations,
which detracted considerably from the value which it
might otherwise have possessed. Under the name of
1 Insects,' Ray understood not only the animals now so
named, but also the Spiders and Scorpions, the Centipedes
and Millepedes, and the true Worms. The classification
of the Insects proper which Ray adopted is based
essentially upon their ' metamorphoses,' that is to say,
upon the changes which the insect undergoes in passing
from the egg to the adult condition; and .though, as
might be supposed, in many respects wholly out of accord
with modern knowledge, it nevertheless clearly recognises
various natural groups of insects.

LINN^US AND THE LINNEAN
CLASSIFICATION.

AT the time of Ray and Willughby, of which we have just
been speaking, naturalists were principally occupied with
making collections of animals ; with accumulating observa-
tions of all sorts in connection with their habits and mode
of life; and, above all, with framing classifications. The
zoological works of Ray and Willughby were largely con-
cerned with classification ; and it may be said that they
contain the first systematic classification of the whole
animal kingdom which had been attempted up to this
time. Their classification of animals was, however,

LINN.EUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 47

necessarily, altogether of what is called an c artificial '
character ; and we may here explain briefly what is meant
by an ' artificial ' as opposed to a ' natural ' classification.

Classification is simply the arrangement of a series of
objects in some kind of order, and its most obvious pur-
pose is to supply a means of identifying and finding any
given object in the series. When naturalists first came to
investigate the vast series of the animal kingdom, they
were at once confronted with the necessity of establishing
some arrangement of these, so that they might be able to
find out what any new animal was, and to place it in some
group. As, however, their knowledge was very imperfect,
they naturally adopted obvious and conspicuous characters
as the basis of their arrangement, regardless of the fact
that such characters are often of little real importance, and
may be quite outweighed by other much less readily
recognisable features. Ray's classification of animals,
which, in a slightly modified form, is here subjoined, is
based in this way on a few obvious characters. Ray
divided all animals as follows :

I. RED-BLOODED ANIMALS (= Vertebrata).

1. Respiring by lungs, and having a heart furnished with two

ventricles —

A. Viviparous —

a. Aquatic Cetacea (whales, &c.).

b. Terrestrial Ordinary Mammals.

B. Oviparous Birds.

2. Having a heart with a single ventricle —

A. Air-breathers, with lungs Reptiles.

B. Breathing by means of gills Fishes.

II. WHITE-BLOODED ANIMALS (= Invertebrate animals).

i Malacia, or Mollusca.

1. Of large size 3 Malacostraca, or Crustacea.

( Ostracoderma, or Testacea.

2. Of small size Insecta.

48 NATURAL HISTORY.

As regards the red-blooded or Vertebrate animals, the
structure of the ventricle of the heart is taken in the
above classification as the primary element of the arrange-
ment. Hence the first thing which Ray himself would
have done, in dealing with some Vertebrate animal which
he did not know, would have been to examine its heart.
If it had a double ventricle, he would have concluded
that it must belong to the Cetaceans (whales, dolphins,
&c.), the ordinary terrestrial quadrupeds, or the birds.
If it had a single ventricle, he would have placed it either
among the reptiles (under which name he included both
the true Reptiles and the Amphibians), or among the
fishes. Supposing the animal to belong to the first series
— that is, to the groups with a double ventricle — Ray would
have next investigated the method in which it brought
forth its young. If it were viviparous, he would have his
further choice restricted to the two groups of the Cetaceans
and the ordinary Mammals ; if it were oviparous, he would
be able to place it definitely among the birds. In the case
of its being viviparous, the only character which would be
consulted would be whether it lived in the water or upon
the land. If it were an aquatic animal, Ray would locate
it finally among the Cetaceans ; whereas it would find a
place among the ordinary quadrupeds, if its habits were
terrestrial.

Now this classification, though sufficiently convenient
when there is no particular object in view other than simply
to discover to what great group a given Vertebrate animal
is to be referred, is an eminently * artificial' arrangement.
That is to say, the characters used to separate the different
groups are to a large extent non-essential ones, and do

LINN/EUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 49

not express the real relationships of the animals grouped
together. Hence, this arrangement separates certain
animals which are closely allied to one another, and places
others in juxtaposition between which there is no real
affinity. Thus, the Cetaceans (whales and dolphins) are
separated from the ordinary quadrupeds, with which they
agree, in all really essential points, simply upon the trivial
ground of their aquatic habits; though Ray places the
almost equally aquatic Seals in their right place, and even
puts the Manatees (sea-cows) among the ordinary Mam-
mals. Again, the birds, by the structure of their heart, are
placed in the same primary division as the Mammals,
whereas their true affinities are with the Reptiles, in spite
of the incomplete heart possessed by the latter.

The above classification, therefore, does not express
the true order of nature, or indicate correctly the real
relationships that subsist between different groups of
animals. Like all 'artificial' classifications, it is essenti-
ally a mere index to the book of nature; and though
extremely useful for the purpose of discriminating between
different species of animals, it no more expresses the
relationships of these species to each other, than a good
index would enable one to recognise the connection,
between the different subjects of a volume.

On the other hand, a classification is a ' natural ' one
just so far as it does express these relationships. On a
really ' natural ' classification, animals are grouped together
according to their true affinities to each other; and as
these affinities are manifested in all the parts of the
organisation of animals, so the characters which are used
in such a classification are those of the entire structure,

50 NATURAL HISTORY.

and not merely some single peculiarity. A ' natural '
classification, therefore, resembles a subject index to a
book, rather than a mere alphabetical index. Of course,
no perfect classification would be possible unless our
knowledge of all animals were perfect ; and as this is not
the case, even the best of modern classifications is
necessarily, to a larger or smaller extent, an ' artificial ' one.
Still, naturalists recognise now, that the merit of a classi-
fication is in direct proportion to the extent to which it
ceases to be a mere arbitrary or convenient grouping, and
is based upon the points of structural or morphological
agreement between animals, quite irrespective of such
secondary matters as the way in which they live.

At the period at which Ray lived, our knowledge of
animals was not sufficiently extensive to render the framing
of anything but an artificial classification possible. More-
over, there existed at that time no clear and definite system
of zoological nomenclature. What was at that time
understood as a ' genus ' was generally what we should
now call a 'family/ or, in many cases, even an 'order'
of animals. There was also no fixed method of naming
' species ' of animals, so as to clearly indicate by their
names what precise place they occupied in their own
group. As ah example of this, we may take the British
species of the Crow family, and contrast their names at
the present day with those employed by Ray :

Ray's nomenclature. Modern nomenclature.

1 . Raven Corvus Corvus cor ax.

2. Carrion-crow Comix Corvus corone.

3. Rook Comix frugilega Corvus frugilega.

4. Hooded-cro w Comix cinerea frugilega . . . Corvus comix.

5. Jackdaw Monedula Corvus monedula.

6. Chough Coracias Fregilus graculus.

LINNAEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 51

It will be seen from the above that the names which
Ray used for the half-dozen British species of * crows ' (in
the wide sense of this term) are sometimes single, some-
times double, sometimes treble ; and also that the names
given to the raven and the jackdaw would not indicate
any relationship to the rook, the hooded crow, and the
carrion crow. On the other hand, the names used in the
modern system for the same birds, are, in the first place,
all built upon one system, being binomial, consisting of
two names, the second corresponding with a man's
Christian name and the first with his surname. We also
see that the raven, carrion crow, rook, and hooded crow are
closely allied to one another, as they all belong to the
single sept or ' genus ' Corvus* On the other hand, the
chough belongs to a group of crows distinguished from our
commoner forms by certain special peculiarities, in which
it agrees with two other existing species, and it is there-
fore removed from the rook and its immediate allies, and
placed in the separate genus Frtgilus.

Ray's classification of animals was, at the time it
appeared, the best arrangement of the animal kingdom
which had been brought forward. It was not destined,
however, to live long ; and it was superseded, less than
forty years after Ray's death, by the system propounded by
the celebrated Swedish naturalist Linnaeus, whose life
may be briefly sketched here.

Karl von Linne — usually known by the Latinised name
of Linnaeus — was born at Rashult, in the province of
Smaland in Sweden, in the year 1707. His father was

* Many ornithologists now break up the genus Corvus into subordinate groups,
which are distinguished by special names.

52 NATURAL HISTORY.

pastor of Rashult, and Linnaeus himself was educated
with the intention of entering the ministry ; but the strong
taste which he early manifested for botanical and other
scientific pursuits led to his ultimately entering upon the
study of medicine in preference to that of divinity. In
pursuance of this end, Linnaeus became a student in the
university of Lund in 1727, being greatly assisted in his
scientific studies by Stobaeus, the professor of medicine
and botany, in whose house he lived. Being, however,
strongly attracted to the university of Upsala by the
superior facilities which it offered for the study of the
natural sciences, Linnaeus abruptly left his friend and
patron Stobaeus, and betook himself to the more famous
seat of learning. Here he found himself reduced to great
straits by reason of poverty, and it was only after a year or
more passed in extreme indigence, that he was relieved
from this condition through the kindness of Professor
Celsius, who received him as a guest into his house. He
now ardently prosecuted his studies in botany and
zoology, and was shortly afterwards appointed assistant to
Rudbeck, the professor of botany in the university. It
was at this time also that he made the acquaintance of
Peter Artedi,* a fellow-student and kindred spirit; and
the intimacy thus commenced lasted till the death of the
latter in 1735.

In the year 1732, Linnaeus was selected by the Royal
Academy of Upsala as a properly qualified person to

*Artedi devoted himself particularly to the study of fishes, and is best known
at the present day by his famous ' Ichthyologia,' which was edited and published by
Linnseus in 1738, three years after the death of Artedi. In the close friendship
which subsisted between Linnajus and Artedi, and in the services which the
former rendered to the latter as scientific executor, there is much to remind us of
the relations which existed between Ray and Willughby.

LINNAEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 53

investigate the scientific productions of Lapland. In the
discharge of the commission thus intrusted to him, he
undertook a toilsome and solitary expedition, which con-
sumed six months' time, and was attended with many
hardships, but which was fruitful in scientific results. The
next two years of the life of Linnaeus may be passed over,
as being little more than a record of the struggles of a
proud, poor, and irritable genius to wring from his country-
men the recognition and position which his talents
deserved, but which were withheld from him on account of
his poverty. Being prohibited from lecturing at Upsala,
on the ground of his not having taken his academical
degree, he ultimately (1734) commenced to give lectures
on mineralogy at Fahlun, where he fell in love with his
future wife, the daughter of a Dr Moraeus. The lady in
question had saved about one hundred dollars, which sum
she gave to Linnaeus, in order that he might take his
degree — as was commonly done at that time — at some
foreign university. With this end in view, he journeyed
to Holland, and graduated as doctor of medicine in the
university of Harderwijk. Proceeding to Leyden, Lin-
naeus made the acquaintance of Gronovius,* who induced
him to publish (1735) his 'Systema Naturae.' This work,
afterwards so famous, comprised a classification of all
natural objects, animals, plants, and minerals; and in
this, the first edition, it consisted of only fourteen folio
pages.

From Holland, Linnaeus journeyed to England, where,
however, he did not experience a warm reception, his

* Lorenz Theodor Gronovius, a naturalist ; author of the ' Museum Ichthyologi-
cum,' published at Leyden in 1754.

54 NATURAL HISTORY.

innovations in botanical classification having rendered
him anything but a persona grata to such scientific lumin-
aries as Sir Hans Sloane and Dillenius, the latter being
the then professor of botany at Cambridge. In 1737,
Linnaeus returned to Holland, and published several
scientific works ; the best known being the ' Genera Plan-
tarum ' and the ' Flora Lapponica.' The former of these
contained the characters of all the known genera of plants;
while the latter was the result of the botanical observa-
tions which he had made in his expedition to Lapland.
At this time also he paid a visit to Paris, and formed a
permanent friendship with Antoine de Jussieu, the first of
a famous group of botanists of this name.

In 1738, Linnaeus returned to Sweden, having spent
three years and a half on his travels. He was now one
of the most famous naturalists in Europe, but the
reception which he met with from his own countrymen
was by no means of a flattering or cordial character ; and
an attempt to practise as a physician in Stockholm proved
at first far from profitable. The university of Gottingen
paid him the compliment of offering to him the chair of
botany, which he refused; and shortly thereafter one or
two lucky hits in his practice brought him into public
notice, with the result that he became one of the most
popular physicians in Stockholm. He was now offered,
and accepted, various scientific and medical preferments,
which added not only to his reputation, but also to his
income; and towards the close of 1739, he married the
daughter of Dr Moraeus, to whom he had been so long
engaged. In 1741, he was appointed to the professorship
of medicine and anatomy in the university of Upsala ;

LINNAEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 55

but he shortly afterwards exchanged this for the chair of
botany and natural history.

The remainder of the life of Linnaeus may be passed
over here very briefly. He had now attained the summit
of his ambition; and except for the trouble caused him
by those almost inevitable controversies which attend the
work of all reformers, his life was now free from anxiety
and annoyance. For thirty-seven years he remained as
professor in Upsala, with the result that this university
became the acknowledged centre of botanical and zoo-
logical learning in Europe. Students came from all
European countries to attend his prelections; and many
of his .more enthusiastic pupils — such as Hasselquist,
Forskal, Solander, and Sparrman — subsequently undertook
extensive scientific journeys, by which our knowledge of
the fauna and flora of distant regions was largely increased.
Linnaeus did not allow prosperity to abate his scientific
ardour, or to interfere with his scientific labours ; and the
list of the works which flowed from his pen during this
period of his life would be an extremely long one. Of
his botanical treatises, the two best known are his
* Philosophia Botanica .' and his 'Species Plantarum.' To
zoologists, Linnaeus is best known by his 'Systema
Naturae/ which contained a classification of the whole
animal kingdom, and which, as has been seen, first saw
the light at Leyden in 1735. This classical work went
through no less than twelve editions during the
lifetime of Linnaeus, the last being published in 1766.
Linnaeus also wrote various medical treatises, none of
which, however, would have sufficed to give him enduring
fame.

56 NATURAL HISTORY.

The later years of the life of Linnaeus were embittered
by domestic annoyances and by failing health. In 1772,
he had a slight attack of apoplexy, after which his health
rapidly declined ; and his remaining years present us, for
the most part, with nothing but the melancholy picture of
constantly increasing physical decrepitude and mental
infirmity. Exhausted with constant suffering, he died on
the loth of January 1778, in the seventy-first year of his
age.

Having thus sketched in outline the principal incidents
in the life of Linnaeus, a brief consideration may be given
to the scope and results of his labours as regards
natural history.

Like Ray, Linnaeus is best known as a botanist ; and
his fame as a zoologist is principally based upon his
classification of the animal kingdom. Ray, as we have
seen, adopted a classification of animals which, though
greatly in advance of anything which had previously
appeared, was nevertheless both artificial and in many
respects unnatural. Thus, the Vertebrata were divided
into primary groups in accordance with the single
character of the structure of the heart ; while minor groups
were established upon such trivial characters as the
possession of an aquatic or terrestrial habit of life.
Again, the primary divisions of the Invertebrate Animals
were founded upon such an entirely non-essential feature
as the mere size of the organism.

The Linnean classification, like that of Ray, was
essentially an ' artificial ' one, in the sense that the
principle adopted in framing it was that of selecting some
one exclusive character, to which undue importance was

LINNAEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 57

attached, and by the possession or absence of which
different groups were denned and kept apart. It is to be
remembered, however, that though the classification of
Linnaeus was in principle an artificial one, it was in
practice largely natural — that is to say, his groups, though
based on artificial distinctions, in many cases really do
correspond with natural groups. Moreover, it is to be
borne in mind that Linnaeus was perfectly well aware of
the artificial nature of his system, and that he was
acquainted with the requirements of a natural classifica-
tion. He purposely adopted the 'artificial' principle
upon the ground that, in the then state of knowledge, such
a classification was alone possible, and could alone be
used with advantage. To the Linnean classification,
therefore, we must assign the merit of being the most
simple and the most complete of all the systems of nature
which had been published up to the middle of the
eighteenth century; and it not only at once superseded
all others, but continued to be in general use for half
a century or more after the death of its illustrious author.
Under these circumstances no apology is needed for
giving here the following brief sketch of the Linnean
classification.

In the 'Systema Naturae,'* Linnaeus divided the
imperium natura, or the total assemblage of all natural

* The ' Systema Naturae ' bears the full title, ' Systema Naturae, sive regna tria
naturae systematice proposita per classes, ordines, genera et species.' The first
edition consisted of only fourteen folio pages, and was published at Leyden in 1735.
The twelfth edition, the last which appeared in the lifetime of Linnaeus, was
published in three volumes at Stockholm, in 1766-68. The edition which is usually
regarded as the authoritative one, is the thirteenth, which was published at Leipsic,
in ten volumes, in 1788-93. It was edited by Johann Friedrich Gmelin, who in
various ways added to it and amended it. An English translation of this edition,
by William Turton, was published in 1802-1806.

58 NATURAL HISTORY.

objects, into three regna or kingdoms — the mineral,
vegetable, and animal kingdoms. Minerals he defines
as bodies or accumulations of matter which have neither
life nor sensibility; vegetables are organised bodies which
have life, but are without sensibility; while animals are
not only organised and alive, but also possess sensibility
and the power of voluntary movement. With Linnaeus's
arrangement of the mineral kingdom we have nothing to
do here. It may be noted, however, that he included in
this kingdom all those remains of extinct animals or
plants which we now know as ' fossils.' These he placed
in a special division of the mineral kingdom (Larvata),
believing some to be real, while others (such as the
Graptolites) were thought by him to be imaginary, that
is to say, purely mimetic. We are also not concerned
here with the famous Linnean system of plants, though
it may be remarked that this constituted an immense
advance upon any system of classification of the vegetable
kingdom which had preceded it. The animal kingdom
was divided by Linnaeus into the following six great
* classes.'

( i ) Mammalia, or Quadrupeds, including the animals
which are at the present day placed under this name.
Linnaeus divided the quadrupeds into seven 'orders,' of
which the first, termed Primates, included man, the
monkeys, and the bats. The characters which induced
Linnaeus to place the bats with the monkeys are, that in
both these groups of animals there are generally only four
upper front teeth, and the mammary glands are only two
in number and are placed upon the chest. This is a good
example of the violation of natural affinities which results

LINNvEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 59

from the selection of some one or two arbitrary characters
as the basis of a classification ; since there is in reality no
close relationship between the bats and the monkeys, and
still less between the bats and man. As an instance of
the progress of zoological discovery since the time of the
great Swedish naturalist, it may be mentioned that while
Linnaeus, in the twelfth edition of the ' Systema Naturae,'
described or enumerated two hundred and twenty species
of quadrupeds, arranged in forty genera, a recent writer
(Mr Dobson) is able to describe, in the single order of the
Bats alone, some four hundred species, distributed in eighty
genera. One of the least satisfactory features in the
Linnean classification of the Mammals is, that he broke
up the great and natural division of the hoofed quad-
rupeds, which Ray had established under the name of
Ungulates, and disposed of them by establishing three
orders (the Bruta, Pecora, and Belluce\ in which they
were placed in unnatural juxtaposition with forms in no
way related to them.

(2) Aves, or Birds. — Linnaeus divided the birds into
six orders, comprising less than a thousand species.
His classification was a decided advance in clearness and
general applicability upon that of Ray and Willughby;
and his orders, though to a large extent artificial, have
remained in general use, with more or less extensive
modifications, even up to the present day.

(3) Amphibia. — By this name Linnaeus understood
the animals which we now know as the Reptiles, such
as lizards, turtles, crocodiles, and serpents. At the
same time he placed with these the animals which
modern naturalists call Amphibia, namely, the frogs, toads,

60 NATURAL HISTORY.

and newts ; these in reality being much more nearly
allied to the fishes than to the genuine Reptiles. Linnaeus
also placed in this .unnatural class quite a number of
true fishes, such as the lampreys, sturgeons, skates, and
sharks.

(4) Pisces, or Fishes. — Except for the fact that Linnaeus,
as just remarked, had placed certain fishes among the
Reptiles, this class corresponds with what naturalists now
understand by the same name. The minor groups of
fishes were based upon the presence or absence of the
hinder or 'ventral' pair of fins, and the position of
these when present, a character of a quite artificial
nature; but several of his smaller divisions are very
natural. In the department of fishes, however, Linnaeus
had been preceded by Artedi, and such changes as were
made in the ' Systema Naturae ' upon the classification pro-
posed by the latter, were scarcely changes for the better.

(5) Insecta, or Insects. — Linnaeus was acquainted with
about three thousand species of Insects, but he included
under this head not only the true Insects, but also the
Spiders and Scorpions, the Centipedes, and many of the
Crustaceans (crab, lobster, &c.), none of these being,
properly speaking, Insects. In other words, the Insecta
of Linnaeus correspond with the 'Articulate Animals' of
later writers. Six orders of genuine Insects are recognised,
and are defined by the nature of their wings; and a
seventh order, under the name of Aptera, is retained for
the reception of the wingless insects and the other
Articulate Animals just mentioned. To a large extent
the classification of Insects which was adopted by
Linnaeus is the one which is now in use ; and there is

LINNAEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 6 1

perhaps no part of his zoological system which has
suffered less alteration at the hands of later systematists,
that is, as regards its broad features.

(6) Verities. — Under this head, Linnaeus included all the
Invertebrate Animals, with the exception of the Insects and
the other Articulate Animals which he included among
the Insects. It need hardly be said, therefore, that the
sixth Linnean class is a wholly unnatural and mis-
cellaneous assemblage of animals, most of which do not
at all correspond with what we should now call ' Worms.'
It was only to be expected that at the time of Linnaeus
the Vertebrate animals were much better known than
the Invertebrate animals, and that the insects should be
the best known of all the Invertebrates. Hence, it is
no matter of wonder that the Linnean class of Verities —
in anything like the Linnean sense — should have totally
disappeared in the progress of zoological science, Cuvier
having played the most important part in the work of
demolition and reconstruction.

Upon the whole, in spite of its defects, and in spite
of the fact that it was largely based upon ' artificial '
principles, we must concede to the Linnean classification
great merits. It was, in fact, as Agassiz has remarked,
the first essay, on a large scale, 'at grouping animals
together according to certain common structural char-
acters.' It may, however, with some confidence be
stated that zoology owed at least as much to Linnaeus
for the system of scientific nomenclature which he intro-
duced, as it did on the score of his classification of the
animal kingdom.

Prior to the time of Linnaeus, as has been previously

62 NATURAL HISTORY.

pointed out, there existed no clear and definite system
of zoological nomenclature. No one except a work-
ing naturalist can form any conception of the amount
of confusion arising from the want of a precise nomen-
clature. Even with the limited number of specific
forms of animals which were known to naturalists
in the time of Ray, this confusion was almost intoler-
ably great. At the present day, and in the present
state of our knowledge, the study of natural history
would be an absolutely hopeless matter, if nomenclature
had remained in the condition in which it was at the
time of Ray and Willughby. Linnaeus, however, has
the transcendent merit of having conceived and intro-
duced the so-called ' binomial' system of nomenclature,
now in universal use among naturalists. On this system
each 'genus,' or group of related 'species,' of animals
receives a special Latin name — the 'generic name' — which
is used for every species belonging to the group. Each
'species' of the genus is distinguished by a second
subordinate title — the ' specific name ' — which is placed
immediately after the generic name. Consequently,
every species of animals is designated by two names,
one indicative of the genus to which it belongs, while
the other is its own proper appellation. Thus, to give
a single example, the dog and the wolf are two 'species'
of the ' genus ' Canis, and they are therefore distinguished
from each other as the Canis familiaris and the Cam's
lupus respectively. The cat and the tiger, again, are
two species of the genus Felts ^ and they therefore stand
as the Fdis catus and the Felts tigris.

At the present day, and in certain departments of

LINN^US AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 63

natural history, there are indications that it may be
necessary to give a further expansion to the Linnean
nomenclature, and to adopt a ' trinomial ' system, to
indicate differences which are slightly below what are
usually recognised as ' specific ' differences. Even, how-
ever, in the case of the general adoption of this modifica-
tion, the boon conferred upon naturalists by the Linnean
system of nomenclature would remain simply beyond
calculation.

SIR HANS SLOANE.

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN.

SIR HANS SLOANE,

AMONG those aids which are indispensable to the general
progress of natural history may be reckoned the forma-
tion of extensive and well-appointed collections of animals.
In this respect few countries occupy a more enviable
position than our own, the British Museum and the
Hunterian Museum being two of the largest and best
ordered collections in existence. It is therefore instruc-
tive to glance briefly at the origin of these great and
national institutions, each of which owes its inception
to the genius of a single individual — in the former case,

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 65

Sir Hans Sloane; in the latter instance, the celebrated
anatomist and physiologist, John Hunter.

Sir Hans Sloane was born in 1660, and was the
youngest son of Alexander Sloane, a Scotchman who had
settled in Ireland. In his youth he suffered from ill-
health; but few details are known as to his early life.
Having determined to adopt the profession of medicine,
he went to London, where during four years he diligently
studied chemistry, botany, anatomy, physic, and the
other subjects which at that time constituted the curri-
culum for medical students. Thereafter he went abroad,
and attended the botanical lectures of Tournefort, a
celebrated French botanist, in Paris, subsequently spending
a year in the study of the same subject under Professor
Magnol of Montpellier. It is believed that he graduated
as doctor of medicine at Montpellier; and it is, at any-
rate, certain that in 1684 he returned to London, where he
settled down to the practice of his profession. Here he
started with very brilliant prospects, as he had many
influential friends, such as the well-known naturalists, John
Ray and Martin Lister, and the famous physician, Dr
Sydenham. One evidence of this is the fact that almost
immediately after his return to London he was elected a
Fellow of the Royal Society, which body, at that time,
included almost all the leading scientific workers in the
country.

After little more than two years of professional life in
London, Sloane was offered the post of physician to the
Duke of Albemarle, who was then about to proceed to
Jamaica, of which island he had been appointed governor.
Sloane recognised in this offer an excellent opportunity

E

66 NATURAL HISTORY.

of adding to his knowledge of natural history and botany,
and unhesitatingly accepted it. Accordingly, in September
1687, he set sail for the West Indies, and, after various
halts at different stopping-places, finally reached Jamaica
on the i Qth of December of the same year. Shortly after
his arrival in Jamaica, the Duke of Albemarle died, this
untoward event bringing Sloane's official duties to an end
before they had well begun ; but he remained in the island
for rather more than a year, till the arrival of a new
governor from England. During this interval, he devoted
himself to an examination of the natural productions of
Jamaica ; and he not only kept a record of his observa-
tions, but brought back large and interesting collections.
Most of the observations which he made were subse-
quently given to the world in two extensive treatises —
namely, the 'Catalogue of Jamaica Plants' (1696), and
the ' Natural History of Jamaica ;' the latter being a large
and costly folio work, of which the second volume did
not appear till as late as 1725.

In the early part of 1689, Sloane returned to London,
and again settled down to practice, with the result that he
rapidly became one of the most successful physicians of
the metropolis. During his long professional career, he
held numerous valuable and honourable appointments,
amongst which may be mentioned the presidency, for
fifteen years, of the College of Physicians. He was also
Physician-General to the Army, and he enjoyed the
distinction of being the first English medical man upon
whom a baronetcy had been conferred (by George I. in
1716).

Not only did Sir Hans Sloane attain great professional

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 67

eminence, but he acquired also a high scientific reputa-
tion. For nearly twenty years (1693 to 1712) he held the
secretaryship of the Royal Society ; and for thirteen years
(1727-40) he was the president of that learned body.
His works on botany and natural history had rendered
him well known among naturalists generally; and the
wealth which he had acquired in the practice of his
profession enabled him not only to keep open house for
the benefit of scientific workers from all countries, but
also to promote scientific research in various ways. His
later life was wholly free from perturbation, or, indeed,
eventful occurrences of any kind. When close upon
eighty years of age, he retired from active practice, and
from public life generally, and resided peacefully in a
house which he possessed at Chelsea, where he lived
about fourteen years. His friend George Edwards, natu-
ralist and artist, used often to visit him at this period of his
life, * to divert him for an hour or two with the common
news of the town, and with anything particular that
should happen amongst his acquaintances of the Royal
Society;' and to him we owe an interesting picture of
Sir Hans Sloane's latest years. He died on the loth
of January 1753, at the age of ninety-three years.

From a scientific point of view, Sir Hans Sloane is
best known as the founder of the noble national collection
of natural history which is familiar to every one as the
British Museum. Two centuries ago, museums had hardly
any existence, and there was no public collection of natural
objects in Great Britain. The first collection of which
there is any record in this country was the property of
John Tradescant, a native of Holland, who had travelled

68 NATURAL HISTORY.

much abroad, and ultimately settled in London. He
founded a well-known botanic garden at Lambeth, and
obtained much notoriety through his museum, which was
known as ' Tradescant's Ark.' He died somewhere about
1652, and left his collections to his friend Elias Ashmole,
a well-known antiquary of his day. By Ashmole
the entire collection was ultimately presented to the
university of Oxford, where it became the nucleus
of the famous 'Ashmolean Museum.' Among the
great rarities in Tradescant's museum was a stuffed
specimen of the dodo, the great extinct pigeon of the
Mauritius, of which the bill and foot are still preserved at
Oxford.

Sir Hans Sloane's collections had, as their nucleus and
starting-point, the numerous zoological and botanical
specimens which he had gathered together during his stay
in the West Indies. To these he kept on constantly
adding during the whole of his long life. He received by
bequest one very extensive collection, which had been
got together by Mr William Courten (known later as
William Charlton), and which was estimated to have a
value of about eight thousand pounds — an enormous sum
of money in those 'days. He also bought for four thousand
pounds the collections of Mr James Petiver, who lived in
the later part of the seventeenth century. Petiver was a
member of the Apothecaries' Company, and a wealthy
man ; and having many acquaintances among the captains
and surgeons of ships, he was able to pick up many
rarities. He was, however, more than a mere collector,
and not only published several catalogues of portions of
his collections, but also contributed to the Philosophical

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 69

Transactions various papers in different departments of
natural history.

By his will, Sir Hans Sloan e bequeathed the whole of
his vast collections to the nation, upon the single condi-
tion that parliament should pay to his family the sum of
twenty thousand pounds. Large as this sum was, it was
much less than half of what the collections had cost
Sloane in actual money, and was believed to be ' not more
than the intrinsic value of the gold and silver medals, ores,
and precious stones' in the collection. To this offer
parliament agreed ; and in 1753 an Act was passed for the
purchase of Sir Hans Sloane's museum on the above terms.
A body of forty-eight trustees was incorporated ; Montague
House was purchased for the reception of the collections;
and the museum was opened to the public on the i5th of
January 1759. In this way originated the enormous and
wonderful collection of natural objects which is now
contained in the magnificent new buildings in Cromwell
Road.

JOHN HUNTER,

John Hunter, though best known to the public at large
as an eminent surgeon and a great anatomist, possesses
claims to immortality of a different kind, but of at least
equal validity. He was the first to apply the method of
comparative anatomy in a systematic manner to the
study of natural history. Indeed, he may almost be said
to have been the founder of the science of comparative
anatomy, which was afterwards so greatly extended by
the labours of the illustrious Cuvier. He was also the
founder of the ' Hunterian Museum,' which in its present

7o

NATURAL HISTORY.

JOHN HUNTER.

form is the largest and most complete collection of objects
illustrative of comparative anatomy which exists in this
country.

John Hunter was the youngest son of a small Lanark-
shire farmer, and was named after his father. He was
born at Long Calderwood, in the parish of Easter
Kilbride, on the i4th of February 1728. His father
died when he was only ten years old, and he seems to
have been allowed to grow up very much as he liked,
with the result that his early education was much
neglected, and he never in later life acquired the
literary knowledge which he should have obtained when

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 71

young. At the age of seventeen, he visited Glasgow, in
order to assist his brother-in-law, who was a cabinet-
maker, and had become embarrassed. It is said — and
the statement, if true, is by no means to his discredit —
that for a time he actually worked at his brother-in-law's
trade; but this has been denied. Eventually, John
Hunter returned home, and having no employment there,
he determined in 1748 to visit his brother William, who
had already obtained a great reputation as a lecturer on
anatomy in London, and as to whom a few words may
be said here by way of digression.

But for the fact that he has been overshadowed to
some degree by the great reputation of his brother
John, Dr William Hunter would have bulked more
largely in the eyes of posterity than he actually does.
He was one of the first anatomists, and admittedly the
best anatomical teacher of his day, and was at the same
time an eminent and successful physician. He made
many important discoveries, most of which are recorded
in his ' Medical Commentaries,' and he unfortunately
became involved in several warm controversies as to the
precise share of credit which he ought to receive for
these. This he himself endeavours to excuse upon the
ground that ' anatomists have ever been engaged in con-
tention,' and also upon the ground that unless a man
resist all 'encroachments upon his discoveries and his
reputation, he will hardly ever become considerable in
anatomy, or in any other branch of natural knowledge.'
It is greatly to be regretted, however, that amongst those
with whom he had passages of arms relative to priority
of discovery, should have been included his brother John,

72 NATURAL HISTORY.

both of these distinguished men having been of an
irascible and irritable temperament. William Hunter
accumulated a very extensive museum, mostly of ana-
tomical and physiological preparations, the whole of
which he left to the University of Glasgow, in which it
constitutes the well-known Hunterian Museum. He
was born in 1718, and died in 1783.

As above said, John Hunter finding, when in his
twentieth year, that he was still without any profession,
determined to visit his brother William, with a view of
qualifying himself as a medical man. William Hunter
not only consented to receive his brother, but at once
placed him as a pupil in his dissecting-room, and also
made arrangements for his studying surgery under
Cheselden, then the most celebrated surgeon of his
day. In anatomy, John Hunter's progress was so rapid,
that in 1749 he became demonstrator to his brother, and
it was in this capacity that he laid the foundation of that
marvellous manipulative skill for which he was in later
life so famous. He likewise prosecuted his studies in
surgery, which at that time was much less truly scientific
than it now is, with the greatest zeal. After acting as
assistant to William Hunter for about five years, John
was received into partnership with his brother as ana-
tomical lecturer (in 1755). He was, however, at this
time, as he continued to be all through his life, but a
very indifferent lecturer j whereas his brother William was
celebrated for the ease of his delivery and the flowing style
of his prelections.

The next four years of John Hunter's life are little more
than a mere record of incessant hard work; and the

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 73

various discoveries which he made at this time are only
of interest to specialists. In 1759, he was attacked by
inflammation of the lungs, which seems to have left him
in an unsatisfactory state of health. His relations with
his brother William had also become strained, and it was
probably difficult for the two to work together smoothly.
With a view, therefore, to change of scene and employ-
ment, John applied for an appointment in the army, and
was immediately made staff-surgeon. In this capacity he
saw a good deal of active service, being present at the
siege of Belleisle in 1761. In the year following this, he
took part in the campaign against Spain, where he like-
wise saw a good deal of fighting. One of the fruits of the
experience which he gained as military surgeon was the
celebrated work, which he published many years after-
wards, upon gun-shot wounds.

At the close of the Seven Years' War, Hunter, having
recovered his health, again settled down in London, and
commenced practice as a surgeon in 1764. At first his
progress was not very rapid, partly because his means
were small, and partly because his personal manners do
not seem to have been such as to quickly win public
confidence or professional good-will. Besides practising,
Hunter for several years gave lectures on anatomy
and operative surgery to a private class. He was at
no time, however, a successful lecturer, and his class
never amounted to twenty students. At this time of his
life, Hunter is said to have been companionable in his
habits, and to have mixed freely in society ; but his pro-
fessional engagements began to increase upon him, and he
soon became completely absorbed in his scientific pursuits.

74 NATURAL HISTORY.

More particularly he began now to devote himself to the
study of comparative anatomy, a science which had been
hitherto little cultivated, and in which he had not only
ample scope for his wonderful manipulative skill, but also
the certainty of being rewarded by many and important
discoveries. At an early period in his career, he had
begun to combine with his studies in human anatomy
similar investigations into the anatomy of the lower
animals ; and he had made many preparations illustrative
of the structure of the latter. He had also made various
interesting discoveries, such as that of the existence of
lymphatic vessels in birds; but he did not publish these
till a later period. Even during his military service
abroad, he had not pretermitted his zoological observa-
tions wholly, for we find him varying his duties as army
surgeon with experiments on the digestive powers of
lizards and snakes at different seasons, and with researches
into the auditory powers of fishes. When he returned
to London, and settled down as a surgical practitioner
and teacher, he renewed his old love for comparative
anatomy and physiology ; and devoted to this pursuit all
his spare time, and, it may be added, all his spare cash.
Finding it difficult to carry out many of his investigations
at his house in Golden Square, he purchased a piece of
ground at Brompton, which was then about two miles
out of London, and upon this he built a house, afterwards
well known under the name of Earl's Court. Here he
used to spend as much of his time as he could spare from
his professional avocations, surrounded by all sorts of
beasts and birds which had been presented to him, or
which he had purchased.

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 75

His studies in comparative anatomy and physiology
were, however, by no means of purely abstract interest
to him, nor disconnected entirely from surgery and
medicine. On this point the ablest of his biographers*
has made the following apt remarks : * At the time he
[John Hunter] commenced his labours, surgery, though
holding a far more respectable station as a practical art
than it had done fifty years before, was yet destitute of
those sound general views of the nature and treatment of
disease, which constitute the foundation of practice in the
present day, and the possession of which justly entitles it
to claim the rank of a science. The able men who, in
this country and on the Continent, immediately preceded
Hunter, had succeeded, by the exercise of correct observa-
tion and sound judgment, in removing a load of absurd
practices with which the art had been clogged ; but the
improvements suggested by them depended for the most
part on isolated experience, and were deficient in a solid
and satisfactory foundation upon well-known principles of
the animal economy. As yet little had been done towards
explaining the real nature of diseases, by showing in what
particulars they are allied to natural processes, and what
are the aberrations from those processes which give them
their peculiar character. Nor were the actions by which
nature operates in the cure of diseases at all better under-
stood, and the most vague notions prevailed respecting
the important functions of nutrition and absorption, and
the processes of adhesion, suppuration, granulation, &c. ;
the right understanding of which forms as it were the very
corner-stone of a good surgical education at the present

* Drewry Ottley.

76 NATURAL HISTORY.

day. Hunter perceived the want of this knowledge, which
in his opinion could alone furnish a sure foundation for
the future improvement of surgery ; and it was to con-
tribute towards supplying the deficiency that his labours
were hereafter to be unceasingly directed.

'He clearly saw, that in order to obtain just concep-
tions of the nature of those aberrations from healthy
actions which constitute disease, it was necessary first
to understand well the healthy actions themselves; and
that these required to be studied, not in man alone, but
throughout the whole animal series, and even to receive
further elucidation by comparison with the functions of
vegetable life. It was no less an undertaking, then, than
the study of the phenomena of life in health and disease,
throughout the whole range of organised beings, in which
Hunter proposed to engage — an undertaking which
required a genius like his to plan, and from the difficulties
of executing which, any mind less energetic, less industrious,
less devoted to science than his own would have shrunk.'

It should be added that Hunter, in carrying out his
scientific researches, adhered rigidly to the sound rule
of ascertaining the facts before he framed any theory,
rather than of starting with an hypothesis, and seeing
how far the facts could be made to square with that. He
not only invariably relied upon direct observation and
experiment in the collection of his facts, but he showed
himself a master of the art of experimental research. He
exhibited, indeed, a real genius, not only in the perception
of how any particular problem could be solved experi-
mentally, but also in varying his experiments so as to
meet the requirements of each special case. In this

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 77

respect John Hunter has probably rarely had his equal ;
and it is largely for this reason that his treatment of all
the subjects which he took up bore upon it the stamp of
originality. ' That man thinks for, himself/ is the remark
which Lavater is said to have made when shown Hunter's
portrait, and assuredly any expert, after reading one of
his scientific memoirs, would have arrived at the same
conclusion.

In the year 1767, John Hunter was elected a Fellow of
the Royal Society, and in the next year he became a
member of the Corporation (now the Royal College) of
Surgeons. He was also now appointed to the envied
post of surgeon to St George's Hospital, an appointment
which not only improved his professional status, but also
enabled him to obtain private pupils, in accordance with
the custom by which the medical students of that time
were bound apprentice to some medical man for a term
of years. Among those who commenced their medical
studies in this way under Hunter's care, was the celebrated
Dr Jenner, the discoverer of vaccination; and the relations
between these two eminent men, which were to begin
with those of master and pupil, ultimately grew into those
of a warm friendship, which only ceased with the death of
the elder.

In 1771, John Hunter married the eldest daughter of
Mr Home, who was surgeon to Burgoyne's regiment of
Light Horse, and whose son, subsequently too well known
under the name of Sir Everard Home, became ultimately
Hunter's assistant, and, in some sort, scientific successor.
Hunter's engagement had been, for want of sufficient
means, a long one; and it is stated that the expenses

78 NATURAL HISTORY.

which his marriage necessarily entailed upon him were
paid for by his well-known treatise entitled ' The Natural
History of the Teeth,' the first volume of which he had
published some two months previously. Mrs Hunter,
according to Ottley, was ' an agreeable, clever, and hand-
some woman, a little of a bas-bleu, and rather fond of
gay society, a taste which occasionally interfered with her
husband's more philosophic pursuits.'

In spite of his now having taken upon himself the
cares of domestic life, and also of his rapidly increasing
professional duties, Hunter continued to apply himself
with the utmost ardour to the study of comparative
anatomy and physiology. Much of his leisure was spent
at EarPs Court, where he carried out numerous experi-
ments on digestion, on the growth and destruction of bone,
on the metamorphosis of the silkworm, and on many
other similar subjects. The following is a short list of
some of the more important subjects of a physiological
or zoological nature upon which he published papers,
with the dates of publication.

In 1772, he published a paper in the 'Philosophical
Transactions ' on the power which the gastric juice has,
under certain circumstances, of 'digesting' or dissolving
the walls of the stomach itself after death. This phe-
nomenon, now well known, was new in Hunter's time,
and has important bearings upon the chemical theory of
digestion.

In 1773, he carried out a dissection of the electric
ray or torpedo, and published an account of his observa-
tions in the ' Philosophical Transactions.'

In the following year, in the same publication, he

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 79

gave an account of the system of cellular cavities or ' air-
receptacles ' which are connected with the lungs of birds,
and which in turn communicate with the interior of
many of the bones. He also published a paper on the
singular ' Gizzard Trout ' or ' Gillarroo Trout ' ( Salmo
stomachicus) of Ireland.

In 1775, he published a series of observations on the
great electric eel (Gymnotus electricus} of South America,
and described the anatomical structure of the electrical
organs in this fish.

Both in this year and in 1877, ne published in the
'Philosophical Transactions' a series of observations on
the temperature of animals and plants; and in the latter
year he gave to the world the second portion of his
' Treatise on the Natural History of the Teeth.'

Between 1779 and 1785, he published various zoological
papers in the 'Philosophical Transactions,' the most
important being one on the organ of hearing in fishes.

In 1786, appeared his well-known 'Observations on
certain parts of the Animal (Economy,' in which he not
only republished the papers above alluded to, but added
various others, dealing with the secretion in the crop of
breeding pigeons for the nourishment of their young;
on the colour of the pigmentum nigrum in different
animals; observations tending to show that the wolf,
jackal, and dog belong to a single species ; on the
structure and economy of whales ; and various more
strictly anatomical or surgical memoirs.

Subsequent to the publication of the 'Animal
(Economy.' Hunter published comparatively few zoo-
logical papers, though various observations which he

So NATURAL HISTORY.

made upon the structure and habits of different animals
appeared from time to time, either in the ' Philosophical
Transactions,' or in connection with such works as White's
' Journal of a Voyage to New South Wales,' or Russell's
* Natural History of Aleppo.'

Some notion of Hunter's unwearied activity, and of
the wide range of the subjects to which he devoted
his attention, may be gathered from the constant
but intermittently maintained correspondence which he
kept up with Jenner. The latter lived in the country,
and was in the habit of either supplying Hunter with
specimens, or of carrying out experiments under his
direction. Unfortunately, we have only Hunter's letters
to Jenner left to us, and these are rarely dated; but his
requirements from Jenner, and the directions which he
gives him, are often most amusing. At one time we find
him working at the cuckoo's stomach, and trying to
get material for his observations from Jenner. * I want,'
he writes, *a nest with eggs in it; also one with a
young cuckoo ; also an old cuckoo.' In the same
letter he advises Jenner to remove the egg of a cuckoo
into the nest of another bird, and then to tame the
young cuckoo and see what sort of a note it has,
to which advice he appends the remark — 'There is
employment for you, young man ! ' In a later letter,
he urges Jenner to ' clear up ' the cuckoo, and various
other letters contain the same injunction. It may be
added that Jenner did ultimately communicate to the
Royal Society an account of the hatching and rearing of
the cuckoo.

Hedgehogs form another subject of endless corre-

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 8 1

spondence between Hunter and Jenner. Hunter dealt
with the hedgehog much in the same way as modern
physiologists have dealt with the guinea-pig — that is to
say, he employed this animal as a convenient vehicle
for the carrying out of certain physiological experiments,
especially some experiments connected with the tempera-
ture of the body. Few of Hunter's letters to Jenner are,
therefore, wholly without some allusions to this victim
of scientific research ; but he seems to have been unlucky
as to keeping his hedgehogs alive after he had got them.
Thus, in one letter he writes, ' I put three hedgehogs
in the garden, and put meat in different places for them
to eat as they went along ; but they all died.' In another
letter, dated a few months later, he writes, < Have you
made any experiments with the hedgehogs, and can you
send me some this spring ? for all those you sent me died,
so that I am hedgehogless.' In a postscript to a later
letter, he suggests that Jenner should send him some
hedgehogs in ' a box full of holes all round, filled with hay,
and some fresh meat put into it;' and Jenner obviously
complied with his instructions, for in another letter
Hunter acknowledges receipt of the hedgehogs, and adds
that one of them was dead on arrival. A year later, he
is again appealing to Jenner for more hedgehogs. 'If
you could send me a colony of them,' he writes, ' I should
be glad, as I have expended all I had except two ; one an
eagle ate, and a ferret caught the other.'

Among other subjects about which Hunter was con-
stantly writing to Jenner, are such points as the sexes
of eels, the spawning of salmon, the migrations of swallows,
the anatomy of the porpoise, the temperature of plants,

82 NATURAL HISTORY.

and the nature of fossils. We must not, however, linger
longer over this interesting, though unfortunately one-
sided correspondence.

In addition to his numerous published observations on
comparative anatomy and physiology, Hunter gave to the
world various important surgical treatises, one of the most
valuable being his work on the blood, inflammation, and
gunshot wounds. He was also incessantly engaged in
increasing his museum, which may, indeed, be regarded
as the great work of his life ; but we may leave this
subject till we have briefly recounted the chief remaining
incidents of his personal life and professional career.

In the main, however, Hunter's life subsequent to his
marriage contains little to record beyond what we should
expect to find in the case of any successful surgeon in
London, who, in addition to his professional duties, should
take upon himself the absorbing labours connected with
the prosecution of some much-loved non-professional
pursuit. Early in 1773, he showed the first symptoms of
subsequent disease of the heart, being attacked by a
violent paroxysm of angina pectoris ; but he apparently
recovered from this without any impairment of his general
health. In the same year, he commenced to lecture
publicly on the theory and principles of surgery. He
never had a large class, partly because he confined
himself almost entirely to the theoretical portions of
surgical science, and partly because he remained through-
out his life a poor and unattractive public speaker. It
has been recorded of him that he never delivered the
first lecture of his course without previously taking a dose
of opium to dull his sensibilities and abate his nervous-

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 83

ness. Owing to the imperfection of his early education,
he possessed no faculty of verbal expression, and was
unable to trust anything to his memory. According
to one of his biographers, 'he wrote his lectures on
detached pieces of paper, and such was his confusion
that frequently he found himself incapable of explain-
ing his opinion from his notes; and after having in vain
attempted to recall the transitory idea, now no longer
floating in his mind nor obedient to his will — after having
in vain rubbed his face, and shut his eyes, to invite
disobedient recollection, he would throw the subject by,
and take up another.' A singular contrast, in these
respects, were the two brothers, John and William Hunter,
the latter having acquired the reputation of being one of
the most perfect lecturers and demonstrators that ever
lived. Judging, however, from the written copies which
we possess of John Hunter's course on surgery, his
lectures were strikingly original and suggestive. More-
over, he ' loved truth better than system ' — an inestimable
virtue in a teacher — and never hesitated to admit a change
in his views, if he had been led by further research to
alter his previously expressed opinions on any point. It
is said, for instance, that Sir Astley Cooper, who was
one of his pupils, once exhibited surprise at hearing him
express an opinion directly contradictory of something
he had said the previous year, and asked him if he
had not held quite a different view before. ' Very likely
I did,' replied Hunter; <I hope I grow wiser every
year.'

In 1775, Hunter entertained the idea of establishing
a metropolitan school of natural history, but the

84 NATURAL HISTORY.

project fell through. In 1776, he received the appoint-
ment of surgeon-extraordinary to the king; and in the
same year he suffered from a severe attack of some
obscure nervous complaint, which laid him up for some
months. In 1780, he had an unfortunate controversy
with his brother William as to their respective claims to
an anatomical discovery of considerable importance, and
the result of this was the estrangement for a long period
of the two brothers. In 1783, Hunter purchased the
remainder of the lease of some extensive premises in
Leicester Square, where he erected suitable accommodation
for his rapidly extending museum, and whither he removed
from his former residence in Jermyn Street.

At this time Mr (after Sir) Everard Home, who
was Hunter's brother-in-law, and who had been on
foreign service as a staff-surgeon, returned to England,
and from this time forward attached himself to John
Hunter's fortunes, and became his assistant. Home
has left it on record that at this period Hunter
was 'at the height of his chirurgical career; his mind
and body were both in their full vigour; his hands
were capable of performing whatever was suggested by
his mind; and his judgment was matured by former
experience.' A few years more, however, of almost
unbroken prosperity, and of unintermitting labour at his
profession, in teaching, and in extending his splendid
collection, were all that remained to the great anatomist.
In 1785, he began again to suffer from attacks of that
most painful and distressing malady, angina pectoris ; and
though he was able to carry on his ordinary avocations,
and indeed was able to enjoy existence between the onsets

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 85

of the disease, he nevertheless from this time onward
carried his life in his hands. Any exertion, excitement,
or irritation sufficed to bring on a seizure; and as the
paroxysms of his malady became more frequent and more
severe, even his restless spirit began to recognise the
necessity for repose. His brother-in-law now became his
assistant in his practice, and later on undertook to deliver
his surgical lectures for him. Hunter, however, still
continued to publish his researches in various departments
of surgery, physiology, or natural history, and still laboured
on at his museum. In fact, his practice continued to
increase, and his professional duties became more onerous
in consequence of his having been appointed, in 1786,
Deputy Surgeon-general to the Army, and Inspector-
general of Hospitals.

Hunter had long been aware that, to use his own
expression, ' his life was in the hands of any rascal who
chose to tease and annoy him.' The immediate cause of
his death was the excitement consequent on a difference
with some of his colleagues at St George's Hospital. At
a meeting of the hospital board, one of his colleagues
gave a contradiction to some statement which Hunter was
at the moment making to the meeting. This excited his
passion, and fearing that he might not be able to control
his temper, he ceased speaking, and hurried into the
adjoining room, where he instantly fell lifeless into the
arms of one of the hospital physicians, who happened to
be present All attempts to recall life proved fruitless,
and in this way died one of the greatest surgeons and
anatomists that Britain has ever produced. He died on
the 1 6th of October 1793, in the sixty-fifth year of his age.

88 NATURAL HISTORY.

in such a manner as his executors might think best. It
was not, however, till 1799 that government could be
induced to take the matter up, when parliament voted the
sum of fifteen thousand pounds for the purchase of the
collection. Having bought the Hunterian collection,
government offered it to the Corporation of Surgeons,
which in the following year obtained from parliament a
royal charter, along with permission to confer diplomas,
and which thus became the great corporation now known
as the Royal College of Surgeons. The College of
Surgeons accepted the charge of Hunter's museum upon
the conditions imposed by the government — namely, that
they should maintain the efficiency of the collection, throw
it open to the Fellows of the college at stated times,
prepare a catalogue of it, appoint a conservator, and
institute an annual course of lectures on comparative
anatomy. In this way arose the present magnificent
Hunterian collection of the Royal College of Surgeons,
and the hardly less famous Hunterian lectures.*

It was not, however, till 1800 that the College of
Surgeons was in a position to take over the collections
from Hunter's own museum in Leicester Square, to the
temporary buildings allotted for their reception, until such
time as a permanent building (for which parliament had
voted the further sum of ;£i 5,000) could be erected.
When the transfer to the temporary buildings had been
effected, Sir Everard Home was appointed the first con-
servator of the museum. At this period Sir Everard
Home ordered that all Hunter's manuscripts should be

* Two of our most famous living naturalists — namely, Sir Richard Owen and
Professor Flower — have been conservators of the Hunterian museum.

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 89

removed from the museum to his own private residence,
on the ground that they were in need of arrangement
When, however, the trustees of the museum endeavoured
to recover these all-important manuscripts, for the purpose
of making a catalogue of the museum, they were not forth-
coming; and repeated attempts, made year after year,
failed to induce Sir Everard to give them up. Ultimately
it was ascertained that Sir Everard Home had deliberately
burnt the whole of the manuscripts which Hunter had left
behind him, upon the ground that Hunter had not men-
tioned them in his will, and upon the unsupported asser-
tion that Hunter had verbally instructed his brother-in-law
to destroy them. Thus were destroyed all Hunter's
unpublished observations. It has, however, been explicitly
asserted — and there seems to be too good reason to believe
that the assertion is correct — that most of these observa-
tions were published after all, and that they are to be found
in the six volumes entitled 'Lectures on Comparative
Anatomy ' which were subsequently issued by Sir Everard
Home, with his own name upon the title-page.

Admirable descriptive catalogues of different portions of
the Hunterian collection have been published from time to
time during the last fifty years, chiefly through the exer-
tions of Sir Richard Owen. At the present moment, this
vast collection, greatly enlarged and enriched as it has
been since the death of Hunter, may be regarded as
probably the largest and best series of specimens illustra-
tive of comparative anatomy and physiology that has ever
been got together beneath a single roof.

88 NATURAL HISTORY.

in such a manner as his executors might think best. It
was not, however, till 1799 that government could be
induced to take the matter up, when parliament voted the
sum of fifteen thousand pounds for the purchase of the
collection. Having bought the Hunterian collection,
government offered it to the Corporation of Surgeons,
which in the following year obtained from parliament a
royal charter, along with permission to confer diplomas,
and which thus became the great corporation now known
as the Royal College of Surgeons. The College of
Surgeons accepted the charge of Hunter's museum upon
the conditions imposed by the government — namely, that
they should maintain the efficiency of the collection, throw
it open to the Fellows of the college at stated times,
prepare a catalogue of it, appoint a conservator, and
institute an annual course of lectures on comparative
anatomy. In this way arose the present magnificent
Hunterian collection of the Royal College of Surgeons,
and the hardly less famous Hunterian lectures.*

It was not, however, till 1800 that the College of
Surgeons was in a position to take over the collections
from Hunter's own museum in Leicester Square, to the
temporary buildings allotted for their reception, until such
time as a permanent building (for which parliament had
voted the further sum of ;£i 5,000) could be erected.
When the transfer to the temporary buildings had been
effected, Sir Everard Home was appointed the first con-
servator of the museum. At this period Sir Everard
Home ordered that all Hunter's manuscripts should be

* Two of our most famous living naturalists— namely, Sir Richard Owen and
Professor Flower — have been conservators of the Hunterian museum.

THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 89

removed from the museum to his own private residence,
on the ground that they were in need of arrangement.
When, however, the trustees of the museum endeavoured
to recover these all-important manuscripts, for the purpose
of making a catalogue of the museum, they were not forth-
coming; and repeated attempts, made year after year,
failed to induce Sir Everard to give them up. Ultimately
it was ascertained that Sir Everard Home had deliberately
burnt the whole of the manuscripts which Hunter had left
behind him, upon the ground that Hunter had not men-
tioned them in his will, and upon the unsupported asser-
tion that Hunter had verbally instructed his brother-in-law
to destroy them. Thus were destroyed all Hunter's
unpublished observations. It has, however, been explicitly
asserted — and there seems to be too good reason to believe
that the assertion is correct — that most of these observa-
tions were published after all, and that they are to be found
in the six volumes entitled 'Lectures on Comparative
Anatomy ' which were subsequently issued by Sir Everard
Home, with his own name upon the title-page.

Admirable descriptive catalogues of different portions of
the Hunterian collection have been published from time to
time during the last fifty years, chiefly through the exer-
tions of Sir Richard Owen. At the present moment, this
vast collection, greatly enlarged and enriched as it has
been since the death of Hunter, may be regarded as
probably the largest and best series of specimens illustra-
tive of comparative anatomy and physiology that has ever
been got together beneath a single roof.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS.

WHILE the principles of zoological science were being
laboriously worked out, and natural history was thus
gradually being placed upon a sound and truly philo-
sophical basis, many investigators were engaged in re-
searches upon the animals which inhabited their own
countries.

As regards Britain, one of the earliest, as also one
of the most meritorious, of the naturalists who have
from time to time devoted themselves more particularly
to the study of the indigenous animals, was Martin Lister,
best known as a conchologist. Lister was born at Rad-
cliffe, in Buckinghamshire, in 1638, and was a contem-
porary and intimate friend of Ray. Like so many other
naturalists, he was by profession a medical man, and he
practised for many years in York, subsequently removing
to London. He was a well-known physician in his day,
having been for a time physician in ordinary to Queen
Anne, and he wrote various medical treatises,* which,
however, are of no particular value at the present day.
His title to fame rests upon his zoological writings, and

* The list of his writings, medical and zoological, occupies a column in Watt's
Bibliotheca Britannica.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 91

principally upon two of these, both dealing mainly with
shells — namely, his ' Historia Animalium Angliae/ and his
* Historian sive Synopsis Conchyliorum.' The first of these
is, so far as it goes, a * Natural History of Britain,' but it
deals only with the British spiders, the land and fresh-
water shells, and the marine Mollusca. Added to it
is a tract upon British fossils, or, as Lister puts it, * lapides
ad cochlearum imaginem figuratae.' The second of these
is a systematic treatise on shells, and was the best work
upon the Mollusca which had appeared up to that time.
According to Swainson,* Lister's works on natural history
are 'characterised by accurate observation, great know-
ledge of comparative anatomy, and, in general, just notions
of the natural affinities of animals. His various works
on shells have laid the foundation of all precise knowledge
on this subject;' and Linnaeus characterised his history
of the Mollusca as the fullest (ditissimus) treatise on this
group of animals which had appeared up to his time.

Another of the early naturalists who dealt with British
animals was the famous Sir Robert Sibbald, best known
as an antiquary of no mean pretensions. Sir Robert
Sibbald was born in 1641 in Edinburgh, in one of the
stormiest periods of the stormy history of Scotland, during
the seventeenth century. He adopted the profession of
medicine, and studied at Leyden and in Paris, taking his
degree at Angers. In 1662 he settled as a physician
in Edinburgh, where he practised for some years, and
took a prominent part in the establishment of a botanic
garden. Having inherited an estate, he left Edinburgh
and lived in the country, where he continued to carry

* ' Bibliography of Zoology,' p. 254.

92 NATURAL HISTORY.

on his scientific pursuits. He was appointed in 1682, by
Charles II., Royal Geographer for Scotland — a merely
honorary office — and in consequence of this he under-
took the preparation of a work on the geography and
natural history of his native country. He took a con-
siderable part in the formation and establishment of
the College of Physicians of Edinburgh, one result of
which was his having the honour of knighthood con-
ferred upon him. Shortly after the accession of James
II. to the throne of England, Sir Robert Sibbald
followed the example of his friend and patron the Earl
of Perth, and turned Roman Catholic. His perversion
was so ill received in Scotland, that an attempt was made
to assassinate him, and he thought it safest to make his
way to London. Here he became ill, and on reflection
decided that he had been altogether too precipitate
in abjuring his former religious views. He therefore
repented of his rashness, and resolved to return home
and re-enter the church in which he was born — a laud-
able resolution which he forthwith carried out.

Sibbald's later life is altogether obscure, and has never
been traced out, even the time of his death being
unknown, though this event is believed to have taken
place about the year 1722. The work by which Sir
Robert Sibbald is now best remembered is a large folio
volume published in 1684, under the title, 'Scotia Illus-
trata sive Prodromus Historiae Naturalis/ &c. The latter
half of this work deals with the animals and minerals
of Scotland, the descriptions of the animals being accom-
panied by illustrative plates. Upon the whole, however,
Sibbald's name is perhaps most familiar to naturalists

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS, 93

in connection with his account of a whale (often referred
to as ' Sibbald's whale ' ) which came ashore in November
1690, near Burntisland.

Coming to the eighteenth century, we find many well-
known observers devoting themselves, more or less exclu-
sively, to the study of British animals. One of the earliest
and most considerable of these was John Ellis, whose
name will be permanently associated with the study of
Corals and of Zoophytes in general. Very little is known
of Ellis's life. He is believed to have been born in
Ireland about the year 1710, and he died in 1776. He
was a merchant in London, and seems, from occasional
allusions in his correspondence, to have experienced the
ups and downs often associated with a mercantile life.
He early showed a strong taste for the study of natural
history in general, and of botany in particular, and con-
tributed many botanical papers to the Royal Society,
of which he was a Fellow. His commercial connec-
tion with foreign countries, and particularly with the
West Indies, led him to write several memoirs dealing
with plants having an economic value, the best known of
these being his ' Historical Account of Coffee,' published
in 1774.

Ellis, however, will be always and best remembered
as an investigator into the difficult and at that time
little understood group of the corals and their allies.
Prior to the researches of Ellis, naturalists had mostly
held that corals and ' zoophytes ' generally were of a
vegetable nature. In fact little doubt was entertained
as to the reference of most of these organisms to the
vegetable kingdom ; though an alternative view was held

94 NATURAL HISTORY.

by some observers, by which all the stony zoophytes were
regarded as being mineral productions, and therefore
really of an inorganic nature. Ray, for example, unhesi-
tatingly grouped the zoophytes generally among the sea-
weeds and mosses, though he seems to have thought
that some of the harder sorts ( ' Lithophytes ' ) were per-
haps really inorganic. An occasional naturalist, even
before the close of the seventeenth century, seems to have
ventured to express doubts as to the truth of the prevalent
doctrine regarding the vegetable or mineral nature of
zoophytes, but the first clear assertion of the animal
nature of these organisms was made by Peyssonnel, in a
memoir which he laid before the Paris Academy of
Sciences in 1727, but which does not seem to have been
published. The views of Peyssonnel did not meet with
acceptance; and it was not till 1741, when the experi-
ments of Trembley * upon the fresh-water polypes brought
the subject again under the notice of the scientific world,
that the question was once more seriously discussed.
Incited by Trembley's experiments, Bernard de Jussieu
investigated the nature of various marine zoophytes care-
fully, and presented a memoir to the French Academy
of Sciences in 1742, in which he maintained the animality
of these organisms. The views of Jussieu were accepted

* Abraham Trembley was born at Geneva in 1710, and died in 1784. He is
best known through his work dealing with the structure and life-history of the
Hydra or fresh-water polype ( ' Memoires pour servir a 1'histoire d'un Genre de
Polypes d'eau douce, a bras en forme de comes,' 2 vols., Paris, 1744). Leuwenhoek
had given some account of the Hydra, and of its propagating itself by means of
buds, as early as 1703 ; but Trembley first investigated the entire subject of the
habits, generation, and power of resisting mutilation of this interesting animal.
His experiments were repeated by many naturalists, and an English observer,
Henry Baker, published an ' Essay on the Natural History of the Polype,' in which
he fully confirmed the chief discoveries which had been announced by the Swiss
naturalist.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 95

by the well-known naturalist, Reaumur ; but they were
in general received with incredulity or entire scepticism.

When the controversy stood at this stage, Ellis was
induced to take the matter up, and soon satisfied himself
as to the correctness of the views of Peyssonnel and
Jussieu. The results of his investigations were from time
to time laid before the Royal Society, and were ultimately
given to the public in a complete form in his 'Essay
towards a Natural History of the Corallines and other
Marine Productions of the like kind, commonly found on
the Coasts of Great Britain and Ireland.' Not only did
Ellis, in this well-known treatise, completely establish the
animal nature of the zoophytes in general, but he de-
scribed and named many species, his descriptions being
accompanied by good and for the most part recognisable
figures. He also for the first time, showed that the horny
urn-shaped capsules ('ovarian vesicles') which are found
in the summer months attached to so many of our sea-firs,
were really parts of the zoophytes on which they were
found. The 'Essay towards a Natural History of the
Corallines ' was published in London in 1754 ; it was trans-
lated into French in 1756, and became one of the standard
treatises upon the group of animals with which it deals.

Ellis's reputation, however, rests largely, not upon the
above work alone, but upon a treatise entitled ' The Natural
History of many Curious and Uncommon Zoophytes,'
published in 1786. This work was a posthumous one,
and was based upon a series of plates which Ellis had
caused to be drawn, with a view of publishing a general
history of zoophytes. The plates were taken from
specimens in Ellis's own collection of zoophytes, and

g6 NATURAL HISTORY.

scientific descriptions of the figures were added and
systematically arranged by the eminent naturalist, Solander,
a pupil of Linnaeus. The work is therefore always
spoken of as ' Ellis and Solander's Natural History of
Zoophytes.' The figures of the corals described in this
classical treatise are remarkably good; and, to use the
words of Lamouroux, 'the beauty, the exactitude, and
the perfect execution of the plates placed this work at
the head of all those which had up to this time been
published.'

The first to write a complete ' British Zoology ' was the
well-known naturalist and antiquary, Thomas Pennant,
one of the most energetic of men, and one of the
most voluminous of writers. Pennant was born on
the 1 4th of June 1726, at Downing in Flintshire. He
was a descendant of an ancient Welsh family, and as he
ultimately inherited the estate of Downing, he was
throughout his life an independent and indeed a wealthy
man. Very little is known of his personal life, beyond
what is revealed incidentally in his writings, or more
especially, in that most original and amusing memoir
which he published himself under the title of ' My Literary
Life.' This, however, is essentially a chronological record
of his tours and his principal writings. It is known,
however, that he was educated at Oxford ; and his taste
for natural history was of much earlier date than his going
to the university. He himself ascribes his love for the
study of nature to the fact that he had been presented,
when about twelve years old, with a copy of Willughby's
' Ornithology '—the donor being the father of the celebrated
Mrs Piozzi. When he was twenty years old, he made the

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 97

first of the many journeys or ' tours ' which he took in later
life. On this occasion he visited Cornwall, where he
acquired 'a strong passion for minerals and fossils.'
Eight years later he visited Ireland, and, as he invariably
did, he kept a journal of his tour, which was extensive
enough, embracing, as it did, points as distant as Giants'
Causeway on the north, and Cork on the south. ' Owing,
however,' as he says himself, 'to the conviviality of the
country,' this journal ' never was a dish fit to be offered to
the public.'

In the year 1761, Pennant began his great work, the
' British Zoology,' the first edition being a folio, and, when
complete, containing one hundred and thirty-two plates.
This work went through many editions, in a smaller form,
and was translated into Latin and German. The editions
most valued are the quarto editions of 1776 and 1777.
There is also a good octavo edition of date 1776, in four
volumes. The classification adopted in the * British
Zoology ' is in the main that of ' the inestimable Ray,' with
such alterations as later discoveries seemed to Pennant
to render necessary. Pennant had no pretensions to be
a comparative anatomist, and his work therefore contains
no anatomical details. He gives, however, succinct,
descriptions of the more conspicuous and easily recognised
characters of the animals described in his work, along
with an account of their 'uses,' and a history of their
habits and mode of life. The figures of the animals
described are, further, often fairly characteristic. Pennant
was a keen observer, and in many cases the observations
which he makes on the habits of animals are not only
very interesting but also very accurate.

98 NATURAL HISTORY.

In other cases, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that
Pennant must have been endowed with a very lively imag-
ination; as, for example, in the circumstantial account
which he gives of the 'migrations' of the herring, part
of which may be quoted here. According to all our
modern knowledge, the herring is a local fish inhabit-
ing the German Ocean, the North Atlantic generally,
and the seas north of Asia. The shoals move from
place to place, but they are always present in larger
or smaller numbers in the seas which they inhabit, and
their movements are irregular, and apparently chiefly
governed by the conditions affecting food-supply. On
the other hand, Pennant, whose account has been referred
to by almost all writers on the subject, and was until
recently implicitly believed, gives a detailed account of
a set annual migration of the herrings to and from the
Arctic seas. ' The great winter rendezvous of the herring,'
he writes, ' is within the Arctic circle : there they continue
for many months in order to recruit themselves after the
fatigue of spawning, the seas within that space swarming
with insect food to a degree far greater than in our warmer
latitudes.

' This mighty army begins to put itself into motion in
the spring ; we distinguish this vast body by that name,
for the word herring is derived from the German Heer,
an army, to express their numbers.

' They begin to appear off the Shetland Isles in April
and May ; these are only forerunners of the grand shoal
which comes in June, and their appearance is marked by
certain signs, by the number of birds, such as gannets
and others, which follow to prey on them : but when the

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 99

main body approaches, its breadth and its depth is such as
to alter the appearance of the very ocean. It is divided
into distinct columns of five or six miles in length, and
three or four in breadth, and they drive the water before
them with a kind of rippling : sometimes they sink for the
space of ten or fifteen minutes, then rise again to the
surface, and in bright weather reflect a variety of splendid
colours, like a field of the most precious gems, in which,
or rather in a much more valuable light, should this
stupendous gift of Providence be considered by the
inhabitants of the British Isles.

'The first check this army meets in its march south-
wards is from the Shetland Isles, which divide it into two
parts ; one wing takes to the east, the other to the western
shores of Great Britain, and fill every bay and creek with
their numbers; others pass on towards Yarmouth, the
great and ancient mart of herrings ; they then pass through
the British Channel, and after that in a manner disappear.
Those which take to the west, after offering themselves
to the Hebrides, where the great stationary fishing is,
proceed towards the north of Ireland, where they meet
with a second interruption, and are forced to make a
second division; the one takes to the western side, and
is scarce perceived, being soon lost in the immensity of
the Atlantic; but the other, which passes into the Irish
Sea, rejoices and feeds the inhabitants of most of the
coasts that border on it.'

As an average sample of the style of the ' British
Zoology,' we may quote in full the description which
Pennant gives of the common hog. After giving the
synonymy of the species, and a list of its names in

IOO NATURAL HISTORY.

various European languages, he proceeds as follows :
' According to common appearances, the hog is certainly
the most impure and filthy of all quadrupeds ; we should,
however, reflect that filthiness is an idea merely relative
to ourselves; but we form a partial judgment from our
own sensations, and overlook that wise maxim of Provi-
dence, that every part of the creation should have its
respective inhabitants. By this ceconomy of nature, the
earth is never overstocked, nor any part of the creation
useless. This observation may be exemplified in the
animal before us; the hog alone devouring what is the
refuse of all the rest, and contributing not only to remove
what would be a nuisance to the human race, but also
converting the most nauseous offals into the richest
nutriment : for this reason its stomach is capacious, and
its gluttony excessive ; not that its palate is insensible to
the difference of eatables, for where it finds variety, it
will reject the worst with as distinguishing a taste as
other quadrupeds.

'This animal has (not unaptly) been compared to a
miser, who is useless and rapacious in his life, but on
his death becomes of public use, by the very effects of
his sordid manners. The hog during life renders little
service to mankind, except in removing that filth which
other animals reject: his more than common brutality
urges him to devour even his own offspring. All other
domestic quadrupeds show some degree of respect to
mankind, and even a sort of tenderness for us in our
helpless years ; but this animal will devour infants when-
ever it has opportunity.

t The parts of this animal are finely adapted to its way

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. TO I

of life. As its method of feeding is by turning up the
earth with its nose for roots of different kinds ; so nature
has given it a more prone form than other animals; a
strong brawny neck ; eyes small, and placed high in the
head ; a long snout, nose callous and tough, and a quick
sense of smelling to trace out its food. Its intestines have
a strong resemblance to those of the human species, a
circumstance which should mortify our pride. The
external form of its body is very unwieldy ; yet, by the
strength of its tendons, the wild boar (which is only a
variety of the common kind) is enabled to fly from the
hunters with amazing agility: the back toe on the feet
of this animal prevents its slipping while it descends
declivities, and must be of singular use when pursued;
yet, notwithstanding its powers of motion, it is by nature
stupid, inactive, and drowsy; much inclined to increase
in fat, which is disposed in a different manner from other
animals, and forms a regular coat over the whole body.
It is restless at a change of weather, and in certain high
winds is so agitated as to run violently, screaming horribly
at the same time: it is fond of wallowing in the dirt,
either to cool its surfeited body, or to destroy the lice,
ticks, and other insects with which it is infested. Its
diseases generally arise from intemperance; measles,
impostumes, and scrophulous complaints are reckoned
among them. Linntzus observes that its flesh is whole-
some food for athletic constitutions, or those which use
much exercise ; but bad for such as lead a sedentary life :
it is, though, of most universal use, and furnishes number-
less materials for epicurism, among which brawn is a
kind peculiar to England. The flesh of the hog is an

102 NATURAL HISTORY.

article of the first importance to a naval and commercial
nation, for it takes salt better than any other kind, and
consequently is capable of being preserved longer. The
lard is of great use in medicine, being an ingredient in
various sorts of plaisters, either pure, or in the form of
pomatum; and the bristles are formed into brushes of
various kinds.

' This animal has been applied to an use in this island,
which seems peculiar to Minorca and the part of Murray
which lies between the Spey and Elgin. It has been
there converted into a beast of draught ; for I have been
assured by a minister of that county, eye-witness to the
fact, that he had on his first coming into his parish seen
a cow, a sow, and two Trogues (young horses) yoked
together, and drawing a plough in a light sandy soil ; and
that the sow was the best drawer of the four. In Minorca,
the ass and the hog are common helpmates, and are
yoked together in order to turn up the land.

1 The wild boar was formerly a native of our country,
as appears from the laws of Hoel Dda, who permitted
his grand-huntsman to chase that animal from the middle
of November to the beginning of December. William the
Conqueror punished, with the loss of their eyes, any that
were convicted of killing the wild boar, the stag, or the
roebuck; and Fitz-Stephen tells us that the vast forest
that in his time grew on the north side of London, was
the retreat of stags, fallow deer, wild boars, and bulls.
Charles I. turned out wild boars in the New Forest,
Hampshire, but they were destroyed in the civil wars.'

The publication of the ' British Zoology ' was interrupted
in 1765, by a tour which Pennant made on the Continent.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 103

Here he made the personal acquaintance of several of the
most distinguished naturalists of the day, amongst whom
were Buffon and Pallas.

In 1769, Pennant undertook his first tour in Scotland
As he puts it himself, he had * the hardiness to venture on
a journey to the remotest part of North Britain, a country
almost as little known to its southern brethren as Kams-
chatka.' He was pleased with his visit, and thinks the
good report which he gave of the country ought to please
the Scotch ; as from his having shown that ' it might be
visited with safety, it has ever since been inondee with
southern visitants/ In 1772, Pennant again visited
Scotland, penetrating on this occasion as far as the
Hebrides. In this tour his success, he says, was equal
to his hopes. ' I pointed out everything which I thought
would be of service to the country ; it was roused to look
into its advantages; societies have been formed for the
improvement of the fisheries, and for founding of towns
in proper places ; to all which I sincerely wish the most
happy event ; vast sums will be flung away ; but incident-
ally, numbers will be benefited, and the passion of patriots
tickled.' The journals which he kept of 'both these tours
were published, and contain many interesting observations
on the natural history of Scotland, as well as on many
other points.

In 1771 was published Pennant's 'Synopsis of Quad-
rupeds.' This work was republished in 1781, in an
enlarged form, under the title, 'History of Quadrupeds.'
It went through several editions; and he published a
companion work to it under the name of 'The Genera
of Birds' (1781).

104 NATURAL HISTORY.

Pennant seldom allowed a year to pass without making
a ' tour ' of some kind ; and in this way he accomplished
very extensive peregrinations through all the principal
districts of England, in the Isle of Man, and in parts
of Wales. He always kept journals of his travels, which
were published, and enjoyed an extensive circulation — a
circulation which they well deserved on account of the
many observations which they contained as to the
antiquities, historical buildings, and natural features of
the regions traversed.

The most considerable zoological work which Pennant
published, after his ' British Zoology,' is his ' Arctic
Zoology.' This well-known work was originally intended
to comprehend an account of the natural history of
North America; but the author subsequently extended
it to include the animals of Northern Europe and
Asia. The ' Arctic Zoology' consisted of two quarto
volumes, with plates, and was published in 1785. It
was translated into German and French; and a second
English edition, in three quarto volumes, appeared in
1792.

Only Pennant's principal works have been here alluded
to, but his literary activity was incessant, and as varied as
it was perennial. No theme was too vast for him, and in
his sixty-seventh year he could not only plan an ' Outlines
of the Globe' which should extend to fourteen quarto
volumes, but he actually possessed energy sufficient to
write four of these. The same pen, however, which could
write a learned memoir for the ' Philosophical Trans-
actions,' found apparently equally congenial employment
in epistles on 'Mail Coaches,' 'Free Thoughts' on the

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 105

Militia Laws, or poetical effusions addressed to ladies of
his acquaintance.

Those who would form some idea of Pennant's
thoroughly original personal character, should read his
1 Literary Life,' the only defect of which is that there
is not enough of it. The motto to this — vixi et quern
dederat cursum fortuna peregi — is itself characteristic of
the man. His mind, to use his own words, 'was always
in a progressive state; it could never stagnate.' At
the same time, he was no philosopher or bookworm,
but a keen, shrewd, observant man of the world, fond
of an active outdoor life, and mixing much in society.
' In the midst of my reigning pursuits,' he says, ' I never
neglected the company of my convivial friends, or
shunned the society of the gay world.' His energy was
extraordinary, as evinced both by his unwearied literary
labours, and by the amount of bodily exertion which he
underwent. * Almost all my tours,' he tells us, 'were
performed on horseback; to that, and to the perfect
ease of mind I enjoyed in these pleasing journeys, I
owe my viridis senedus ; I still retain, as far as possible,
the same species of removal from place to place. I con-
sider the absolute resignation of one's person to the.
luxury of a carriage, to forebode a very short interval
between that and the vehicle which is to convey us to
our last stage.' In another place he says: 'I am often
astonished at the multiplicity of my publications, especially
when I reflect on the various duties it has fallen to my
lot to discharge — as father of a family, landlord of a
small but very numerous tenantry, and a not inactive
magistrate. I had a great share of health during the

106 NATURAL HISTORY.

literary part of my days; much of this was owing to
the riding exercise of my extensive tours, to my manner
of living, and to my temperance. I go to rest at ten ;
and rise winter and summer at seven, and shave regularly
at the same hour, being a true misopogon. I avoid the
meal of excess, a supper; and my soul rises with vigour
to its employs, and (I trust) does not disappoint the
end of its Creator.'

This happy, healthy, energetic vitality remained with
Pennant almost to the very end of his long life. In
his later years his body doubtless ' abated of its wonted
vigour ;' but his mind still retained ' its powers, its long-
ing after improvements, its wish to receive new light
through chinks which time hath made.' When close on
seventy years of age, he projected, and energetically
commenced his colossal 'Outlines of the Globe;' and
though he did not live to carry out this bold con-
ception, he will command universal assent when he
says : ' Happy is the old age that could thus beguile
its fleeting hours, without injury to any one, and, with
the addition of years, continue to rise in its pursuits/
After a comparatively brief period of decay and illness,
Pennant passed away on the i6th of December 1798,
at the age of seventy-two years. In the long roll of
British naturalists he will always hold an honourable
place. In the words of Swainson, ' whatever he touched,
he beautified, either by the elegance of his diction,
the historic illustrations he introduced, or the popular
charm he gave to things well known before.'

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS

(CONTINUED).

DURING the last part of the eighteenth century, and
during the few years of the nineteenth century which
preceded the appearance of the l Regne Animal,' natural
history was diligently prosecuted in Britain by numerous
observers, most of whom can be merely noticed here.
For intelligible reasons, the groups of animals most
largely studied at this period were birds, fishes, and
insects, and to a less extent shellfish (Mollusca). One
of the most purely British naturalists of this period was
George Montagu, a colonel in the army, and a wealthy
man, who left behind him two well-known works on
our native animals. One of these is his ' Ornithological
Dictionary, or Alphabetical Synopsis of British Birds,',
in two octavo volumes, published in 1802. A supple-
ment to this work was published in 1813. The other
work was the ' Testacea Britannica, an Account of all the
Shells hitherto discovered in Britain,' in two volumes
quarto, published in 1803, with a supplement in 1808.

The most extensive writer on ornithology of this period
was, however, Dr John Latham, a most voluminous writer,
and personally a most estimable man. His three great

I08 NATURAL HISTORY.

works are : ( i ) The ' General Synopsis of Birds,' in eight
volumes, small quarto, 1781. (2) The ' Index Ornitho-
logicus,' in two volumes quarto, 1790. (3) 'A General
History of Birds,' in eleven quarto volumes, 1821-26.
This last is little more than an enlarged edition of the
1 General Synopsis.'

Insects have always been a favourite branch of study,
and the names of Drury, Smeathman (who gave the
first good description of termites), and Moses Harris
are familiar to all entomologists. Drury, who was a
wealthy jeweller in London, was a great collector of
insects, though in no sense himself a naturalist. He
sent Smeathman to Africa to collect insects for his
cabinet, and he published a work on exotic insects, in
which the plates were executed by Moses Harris. This
last-named naturalist was an excellent artist, and ento-
mologists still use his * Aurelian, or Natural History of
English Butterflies and Moths.' He also published an
* Exposition of English Insects.'

In general zoology the two most noticeable of the
names of this period are Edward Donovan and Dr George
Shaw, both of whom were voluminous writers, though
neither left any permanent mark in the science of natural
history. Donovan's principal works form a series of
thirty-eight octavo volumes (1792-1818), dealing respect-
ively with British quadrupeds, British birds, British fishes,
British shells, and British insects. He also published
' Illustrations of Entomology, including the Insects of China,
India, and New Holland,' in three volumes (1805), and
'The Naturalist's Repository, or Miscellany of Exotic
Natural History,' in five volumes (1834). All his works

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 109

are illustrated by plates which are elaborately and often
very beautifully coloured ; but the text is of small value.
Dr George Shaw, who was assistant-zoologist in the
British Museum, was as copious a writer as Donovan,
but his works are in the main mere compilations. The
two most important are 'General Zoology,' in fourteen
volumes (1800-27), and the 'Naturalist's Miscellany,'
twenty-four volumes, with more than a thousand plates.

To this period also belongs the celebrated artist-
naturalist, Thomas Bewick, so universally famed for his
unrivalled delineations of animals, and for the immense
advance which he effected in the art of wood-engraving.
Thomas Bewick was born at Cherryburn, near Newcastle-
on-Tyne, in 1753, and died in 1828. As an artist, his
work has received full and critical examination in more
than one well-known treatise. As a naturalist, he is
best known by his ' General History of British Quadru-
peds,' the first edition of which appeared in 1790, and his
' History of British Birds,' of which the first volume
appeared in 1797, and the second in 1804. The
illustrations of these two works have never been sur-
passed for power of expression and truth to nature. He
possessed 'the royal stamp of genius,' and with it 'the
humbler, yet quite as necessary, gift of perseverance;
and together these led him to approach nature in
simplicity, to receive her lessons with faithfulness, and
to depict what he saw with unfailing certainty and
loveliness.' *

In addition to the above, the present period produced
two naturalists who have obtained a permanent fame for

* ' The Life and Works of Thomas Bewick,' by David Croal Thomson, 1882.

TIO NATURAL HISTORY.

the extraordinary accuracy of their observations, and for
their graphic descriptions of the habits of animals —
namely, Gilbert White and Alexander Wilson. These
two names well deserve something more than a passing
mention or a mere enumeration of their published
works.

THE REV. GILBERT WHITE.

There are few, probably, to whom the words ' White's
Selborne,' do not sound perfectly familiar, though possibly
many to whom these words are 'household words' have
not actually read the book of which they form the
abbreviated title. It must, in truth, be admitted — and the
admission cannot be made without some touch of pain
and regret — that the press and hurry of the latter half of
the nineteenth century render it almost impossible for the
majority of people to read a book like White's ' Selborne.'
Indeed, the art of reading books, in the sense in which
our forefathers read them, threatens to become altogether
lost; and it is almost inconceivable that a book like
White's ' Selborne ' should be written at the present day.
Such books are redolent of the health and peace of the
quiet country ; they breathe tranquillity and repose ; they
imply unlimited time for contemplation; they tell of a
mind, unresting it may be, but assuredly unhasting. Such
ingredients for a book are rarely to be obtained in any
age : in the feverish life of modern civilisation they bid
fair to disappear altogether.

It has to many appeared a matter for regret that so
very little — next to nothing in fact — is known of Gilbert
White himself. In this, however, one cannot but feel a

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. ITT

sort of fitness, a congruity with the quality of the shy,
modest spirit and the tranquil, contented life of the man.
Those who would know White, must read White's
'Selborne,' and when they have done that, and learned
to love it, they will love the writer of the book, and will
know more about him than any biographical enumeration
of facts could have told them.

Such facts as are known can be stated in very brief
compass. Gilbert White was born in Selborne, a little
village in the extreme eastern corner of Hampshire, on
the 1 8th of July 1720. His father, John White, who did
not at the time of Gilbert's birth reside in Selborne, was
the only son of Gilbert White, the vicar of Selborne, and
was a barrister in the Middle Temple. When Gilbert
was eleven years of age, his father came to reside per-
manently at Selborne. Little is known of him, but it
would seem that Gilbert derived from his father his strong
love of nature. He died in 1759, and left instructions
in his will that no monument should be erected to him,
'not desiring to have his name recorded, save in the
book of life.' Gilbert White was educated at Basingstoke,
under the Rev. Thomas Warton, the vicar of Basingstoke.
In 1739 he entered Oxford as a student of Oriel College,,
and he graduated as bachelor of arts in 1743. He
must have distinguished himself as a student, since he
was elected to a Fellowship of Oriel in 1744, not taking
his master's degree till 1746. He seems to have had
many opportunities of preferment in the church ; but he
elected to live peacefully at his old home in his native
village, where he died in the seventy-third year of his age,
on the 26th of June 1793. Of 'events,' in the ordinary

112 NATURAL HISTORY.

sense of the term, Gilbert White's life possesses none that
the most painstaking of biographers has ever been able
to discover. He never married, though he was at one
time in love. He was of cheerful and sociable disposi-
tion, and was beloved by one and all who knew him.
He does not appear to have had a large circle of acquaint-
ances; but he maintained a correspondence with several
of the leading naturalists of the day, and especially with
Pennant.

The work which has rendered Gilbert White immortal is
' The Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne, in the
County of Southampton,' the first edition of which was
published in London in 1789, in quarto. There have
been many subsequent editions, mostly of octavo size.
It is not possible to give any notion of this charming
book, by abstracting it, by enumerating its contents, or
by quotations. Gilbert White was essentially, to use the
words of his biographer (Mr Edward Jesse), ' an out-
door naturalist, following the pursuit with unwearied dili-
gence, and enjoying the charms of rural scenery with
unbounded admiration.' In his love of nature he
resembled Pennant; but the latter was a man of super-
abundant vitality, wholly unsentimental, self-reliant, self-
assertive, and not without a spice of personal vanity ;
whereas Gilbert White was a serene contemplative soul,
devoid of ambition, with the tender, sensitive spirit that a
poet — and he wrote poetry occasionally — ought to have.
His love of nature was, however, the love of a man of
science. In other words, it was a love which was not
diminished by close acquaintance with its object, but
which, on the contrary, depended on and grew out of the

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 113

minute and methodical observation of the most trivial
details.

' His diaries/ says Mr Jesse, ' were kept with unremit-
ting diligence; and in his annual migrations to Oriel
College and other places, his man Thomas, who seems
to have been well qualified for the office, recorded
the weather journal. The state of the thermometer,
barometer, and the variations of the wind are noted, as
well as the quantity of rain which fell. We have daily
accounts of the weather, whether hot or cold, sunny or
cloudy; we have also information of the first tree in
leaf, and even of the appearance of the first fungi, and
of the plants first in blossom. We are told when mosses
vegetate, and when insects first appear and disappear.
There are also remarks with regard to fish and other
animals ; with miscellaneous observations and memoranda
on various subjects.' Through this mass of what many
people might regard as insignificant, not to say wearisome,
details, runs a strong vein of humanity. To quote Mr
Jesse once more : c He " chronicled " his ale and beer, as
they were brewed by his man Thomas, who appears to
have been his valet, gardener, and assistant naturalist.
He takes notice of the quantity of port wine which came
to his share when he divided a pipe of it with some of his
neighbours ; and he makes frequent mention of his crops,
his fine and early cucumbers, and the flavour of his Card-
illiac peas — he evidently passing much time in his garden.
The appearance of his neighbours' hops, the beginning
and ending of their harvests, their bees, pigs, and poultry,
are also noticed in succession, and appear to have added
to the interest he took in rural life.'

114 NATURAL HISTORY.

He had also a whimsical sense of the humour that
underlies many of the actions of animals, or many of the
phenomena of animal life, when viewed from the human
standpoint. Take, for example, the account which he
gives of 'Timothy/ a large and aged tortoise, which he
kept for many years, and the habits of which he observed
with the same loving care as he bestowed upon all living
beings. ' The old Sussex tortoise,' he writes to his friend
the Hon. Daines Barrington, 'that I have mentioned to
you so often, is become my property. I dug it out of
its winter dormitory in March last, when it was enough
awakened to express its resentments by hissing; and,
packing it into a box with earth, carried it eighty miles
in post-chaises. The rattle and hurry of the journey
so perfectly roused it, that when I turned it out on a
border, it walked twice down to the bottom of my garden ;
however, in the evening, the weather being cold, it buried
itself in the loose mould, and continues still concealed. . . .
When one reflects on the state of this strange being, it is
a matter of wonder to find that Providence should bestow
such a profusion of days, such a seeming waste of lon-
gevity, on a reptile that appears to relish it so little as
to squander more than two-thirds of its existence in a
joyless stupor, and be lost to all sensation for months
together in the profoundest of slumbers. . . . Because
we call this creature an abject reptile, we are too apt to
undervalue his abilities, and to depreciate his powers of
instinct. Yet he is, as Mr Pope says of his lord,

Much too wise to walk into a well ;
and has so much discernment as not to fall down a haha,

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 115

but to stop and withdraw from the brink with the readiest
precaution.

'Though he loves warm weather, he avoids the hot
sun; because his thick shell, when once heated, would,
as the poet says of solid armour, " scald with safety." He
therefore spends the more sultry hours under the shelter
of a large cabbage leaf, or amidst the waving forests of an
asparagus bed. But as he avoids the heat in summer, so,
in the decline of the year, he improves the faint autumnal
beams by getting within the reflection of a fruit-wall ;
and though he never has read that planes inclining to
the horizon receive a greater share of warmth, he inclines
his shell, by tilting it against the wall, to collect and
admit every feeble ray.

' Pitiable seems the condition of this poor embarrassed
reptile : to be cased in a suit of ponderous armour ; to be
imprisoned, as it were, within his own shell, must preclude,
we should suppose, all activity and disposition for enter-
prise. Yet there is a season of the year (usually the
beginning of June) when his exertions are remarkable.
He then walks on tiptoe, and is stirring by five in the
morning; and, traversing the garden, examines every
wicket and interstice in the fences, through which he
will escape if possible; and often has eluded the care
of the gardener, and wandered to some distant field.
The motives that impel him to undertake these rambles
seem to be of the amorous kind. His fancy then becomes
intent on sexual attachments, which transport him beyond
his usual gravity, and induce him to forget for a time his
ordinary solemn deportment.'

As an admirable example of Gilbert White's wonderful

Il6 NATURAL HISTORY.

power of minute observation, we may quote his remarks on
the motions of birds, though there is hardly a letter in this
charming book that does not exhibit the same close and
faithful observation of nature in its out-of-door aspects.
* A good ornithologist,' he writes, ' should be able to
distinguish birds in the air, as well as by their colours
and shape, on the ground as well as on the wing, and
in the bush as well as in the hand. For, though it must
not be said that every species of birds has a manner
peculiar to itself, yet there is somewhat, in most genera
at least, that at first sight discriminates them, and
enables a judicious observer to pronounce upon them
with some certainty. Put a bird in motion,

Et vera incessu patuit
( And it is truly declared by its gait).

Thus kites and buzzards sail round in circles, with wings
expanded and motionless; and it is from their gliding
manner that the former are still called, in the north of
England, gleads, from the Saxon verb glidan, to glide.
The kestrel, or windhover, has a peculiar mode of hang-
ing in the air in one place, his wings all the while being
briskly agitated. Hen-harriers fly low over heaths or
fields of corn, and beat the ground regularly like a
pointer or setting dog. Owls move in a buoyant manner,
as if lighter than the air; they seem to want ballast.
There is a peculiarity belonging to ravens that must draw
the attention even of the most incurious — they spend all
their leisure time in striking and cuffing each other on
the wing in a kind of playful skirmish; and when they
move from one place to another, frequently turn on their
backs with a loud croak, and seem to be falling on the

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 1 17

ground. When this odd gesture betides them, they are
scratching themselves with one foot, and thus lose the
centre of gravity. Rooks sometimes dive and tumble in
a frolicsome manner; crows and daws swagger in their
walk ; woodpeckers fly volatu undosa, opening and closing
their wings at every stroke, and so are always rising and
falling in curves. All of this genus use their tails, which
incline downwards, as a support while they run up trees.
Parrots, like all hooked-clawed birds, walk awkwardly,
and make use of their bill as a third foot, climbing and
descending with ridiculous caution. All the Gallinse
parade and walk gracefully, and run nimbly ; but fly with
difficulty, with an impetuous whirring, and in a straight
line. Magpies and jays flutter with powerless wings, and
make no despatch ; herons seem encumbered with too much
sail for their light bodies; but these vast hollow wings
are necessary in carrying burdens, such as large fishes
and the like; pigeons, and particularly the sort called
smiters, have a way of clashing their wings, the one
against the other, over their backs, with a loud snap;
another variety, called tumblers, turn themselves over
in the air. Some birds have movements peculiar to
the season of love; thus ringdoves, though strong and
rapid at other times, yet in the spring, hang about on
the wing in a toying and playful manner ; thus the cock-
snipe, while breeding, forgetting his former flight, fans
the air like a windhover ; and the greenfinch, in particular,
exhibits such languishing and faltering gestures as to
appear like a wounded and dying bird. The kingfisher
darts along like an arrow; fern-owls, or goatsuckers,
glance in the dusk over the tops of trees like a meteor ;

Il8 NATURAL HISTORY.

starlings, as it were, swim along; while missel-thrushes
use a wild and desultory flight ; swallows sweep over the
surface of the ground and water, and distinguish them-
selves by rapid turns and quick evolutions ; swifts dash
round in circles ; and the bank-martin moves with frequent
vacillations like a butterfly. Most of the small birds
fly by jerks, rising and falling as they advance. Most
small birds hop ; but wagtails and larks walk, moving
their legs alternately. Skylarks rise and fall perpen-
dicularly as they sing; woodlarks hang poised in the
air; and titlarks rise and fall in large curves, singing in
their descent. The whitethroat uses odd jerks and
gesticulations over the tops of hedges and bushes. All
the duck-kind waddle ; divers and auks walk as if fettered,
and stand erect on their tails ; these are the compedes of
Linnaeus. Geese and cranes, and most wild-fowls, move
in figured flights, often changing their position. The
secondary remiges* of Tringae, wild-ducks, and some
others, are very long, and give their wings, when in motion,
a hooked appearance. Dabchicks, moor-hens, and coots
fly erect, with their legs hanging down, and hardly make
any despatch ; the reason is plain, their wings are placed
too far forward out of the true centre of gravity ; as the
legs of auks and divers are situated too far backward.'

Among the innumerable subjects which Gilbert White
investigated, there seem to have been few that interested
him more than the problem of the disappearance of the
swallows at the approach of winter. On this point he
never could make up his mind to fully accept the ordinary
theory of the migration of these birds in autumn to some

* Wing-feathers.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 119

warmer region. On the contrary, he clung to the widely-
spread belief that 'many of the swallow kind do not
depart from this island, but lay themselves up in holes
and caverns, and do, insect-like and bat-like, come forth
at mild times, and then retire again to their tatebrce or
lurking-places.' To this idea he recurs again and again ;
and he does not even appear to be quite clear, but that
the popular northern notion that swallows in autumn
bury themselves in the mud at the bottom of streams
and ponds may not have some truth in it. He seems to
have corresponded much with Pennant as regards this
qu&stio vexata ; and the latter devotes considerable space
in his 'British Zoology' to a discussion of the evidence
on the point. Pennant's own conclusion was that the
greater portion of the swallows migrate to some warmer
country, but that the late broods, being unfit for so
arduous a journey, hybernate in this country. We are
obliged, says Pennant, to conclude that ' one part of the
swallow tribe migrate, and that others have their winter
quarters near home. If it should be demanded, why
swallows alone are found in a torpid state, and not the
other many species of soft-billed birds, which likewise
disappear about the same time? the following reason
may be assigned :

' No birds are so much on the wing as swallows, none
fly with such swiftness and rapidity, none are obliged to
use such sudden and various evolutions in their flight,
none are at such pains to take their prey, and we may
add, none exert their voice more incessantly; all these
occasion a vast expense of strength and of spirits, and
may give such a texture to the blood, that other animals

I2O NATURAL HISTORY.

cannot experience ; and so dispose, or we may say,
necessitate, this tribe of birds, or part of them at least,
to a repose more lasting than that of any others.

'The third notion is, even at first sight, too amazing
and unnatural to merit mention, if it was not that some
of the learned have been credulous enough to deliver,
for fact, what has the strongest appearance of impossi-
bility; we mean the relation of swallows passing the
winter immersed under ice, at the bottom of lakes, or
lodged beneath the water of the sea at the foot of rocks.
The first who broached this opinion, was Olaus Magnus,
Archbishop of Upsal, who very gravely informs us, that
these birds are often found in clustered masses at the
bottom of the northern lakes, mouth to mouth, wing to
wing, foot to foot ; and that they creep down the reeds in
autumn to their subaqueous retreats. That when the
old fishermen discover such a mass, they throw it into the
water again ; but when young inexperienced ones take it,
they will, by thawing the birds at a fire, bring them indeed
to the use of their wings, which will continue but a very
short time, being owing to a premature and forced
revival.

'That the good archbishop did not want credulity, in
other instances, appears from this, that after having
stocked the bottom of the lakes with birds, he stores
the clouds with mice, which sometimes fall in plentiful
showers on Norway arid the neighbouring countries.

' Some of our own countrymen have given credit to the
submersion of swallows ; and Klem patronises the doctrine
strongly, giving the following history of their manner of
retiring, which he received from some countrymen and

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 121

others. They asserted that sometimes the swallows
assembled in numbers on a reed, till it broke and sunk
with them to the bottom; and that their immersion was
preluded by a dirge of a quarter of an hour's length.
That others would unite in laying hold of a straw with
their bills, and so plunge down in society. Others again
would form a large mass, by clinging together with their
feet, and so commit themselves to the deep.

1 Such are the relations given by those that are fond of
this opinion, and though delivered without exaggeration,
must provoke a smile. They assign not the smallest
reason to account for these birds being able to endure so
long a submersion without being suffocated, or without
decaying, in an element so unnatural to so delicate a bird ;
when we know that the otter, the cormorant, and the
grebes, soon perish if caught under ice, or entangled in
nets; and it is well known that those animals will con-
tinue much longer under water than any others to whom
nature hath denied that particular structure of heart
necessary for a long residence beneath that element.'

ALEXANDER WILSON.

Alexander Wilson, ' the American ornithologist,' was
the son of a 'wabster,' or weaver, of Paisley, and was
born on the 6th of July 1766. Little or nothing is
known of his early life, except that his parents cherished
the ambition, so common among the Scotch peasantry,
of bringing up a son to the church, and that, with this
end in view, Alexander Wilson was for a time placed
under the charge of Mr Barlas, a student of divinity, from
whom we may suppose he acquired some rudiments of

122

NATURAL HISTORY.

ALEXANDER WILSON.

a liberal education. Much, however, cannot be set down
to this, because his father found it impossible to carry
on his education, and the future naturalist was appren-
ticed, at the early age of thirteen, to an operative weaver
in Paisley. His apprenticeship lasted three years, and
though often, as he says himself, * feasted wi' the hazel-
oil,' he does not seem to have been unhappy, and he
was not wholly without opportunities of indulging his
taste for reading, and for wandering in the country.

On the expiry of his apprenticeship, Wilson adopted the
occupation of a journeyman weaver, which he carried on,
partly in Paisley and partly in Lochwinnoch, where his

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 123

father now lived, for a period of about four years. Subse-
quently he set up as a weaver in Paisley, in partnership
with a Mr David Brodie, afterwards a schoolmaster, with
whom he established a firm friendship, and who assisted
him greatly in studying both the more famous English
poets and some of the Latin classics. After a time, Wilson
tired of his occupation as a weaver, and determined to set
up as a pedlar, an avocation which would allow him to
gratify his love of nature and his taste for wandering, and
at the same time would supply him with bread and
cheese. He soon found, however, that the itinerant life
of a pedlar was by no means free from hardships and
annoyances, and he ultimately returned to Paisley, with
the intention of trying to utilise his poetical talents. He
had always had a taste for poetry, and had committed
many of his effusions to paper; and he now submitted
these to a gentleman in Paisley, upon whose judgment
he relied. The verdict being favourable, he printed a
small volume of poems, and again started off as a pedlar ;
his pack, however, now containing not only the ordinary
wares of his profession, but also a number of copies of
his book. This novel attempt to combine poetry with
hawking proved, as was to be expected, pecuniarily un-
profitable; and Wilson returned to Paisley, 'nearly
penniless, and much depressed in spirits.'

In consequence of this failure of his scheme for con-
quering fame and earning a living through his poems,
Wilson was obliged once more to take up his old trade of
weaving, at anyrate as an occasional thing; and he fell
into a low condition both of body and of mind. Ulti-
mately, he once more resumed his pack, and set off

124 NATURAL HISTORY.

again on his wanderings. At the same time, he began
to write for the periodicals of the day, and made a suc-
cessful hit with his well-known ballad of ' Watty and
Meg ;' but his literary struggles at this period of his life do
not concern us here. The west of Scotland was at this
time in an extremely unsettled state, partly owing to
depression in trade, and partly to the general restlessness
produced in the working-classes of almost all countries by
the French Revolution. The operatives of the west
country, rightly or wrongly, believed themselves to be an
oppressed and ill-treated race, and their cause was warmly
espoused by Wilson, who wrote a number of poetical
squibs, attacking both men and measures. These, unfortu-
nately, brought him under the notice of the authorities,
with the result that a prosecution was instituted against
him, and he was condemned to imprisonment in Paisley
jail, and also to burn one of his obnoxious pieces with his
own hands, in public.

On his liberation, Wilson determined to emigrate to
America, whither he set sail on the 23d of May 1794,
arriving in the state of Delaware some twenty-two days
after leaving Belfast. The first four years of Wilson's
life in America seem to have been passed in different
employments, but next to nothing is known of the details
of his life at this time. In 1800, we find him keeping
a school at Frankfort, Pennsylvania, and we have also
glimpses of him as a land-surveyor, and as a leader in a
local debating society. It is, however, clear that he had,
upon the whole, been an unsuccessful man, and that his
experiences in his new fatherland had not been agreeable ;
since he is found in 1801 writing to his friend Ord, urging

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 12$

him not to make any engagements which would bind
him to the ' unworthy soil ' of America, and looking
forward to a speedy return to Scotland.

Things were now to go somewhat more smoothly with
Wilson, and the beginning of a better time was ushered
in by his obtaining a post as schoolmaster at Gray's Ferry,
on the Schuylkill River, about four miles from Philadelphia.
Here he made acquaintance with William Bartram,'* who
kept a botanic garden on the western bank of the Schuyl-
kill, and was a good naturalist. Bartram introduced
Wilson to the study of natural history, and induced him
to use his pencil as a draughtsman of birds and other
natural objects. This proved the germ of what soon
became the one overmastering passion of his life, and
inspired him with the idea of illustrating the ornithology
of the United States. He now spent all his spare time
in studying natural history, in improving himself as a
draughtsman, in adding to his collections, and in making
excursions for the purpose of increasing his store of know-
ledge as to the habits of the birds of America. He even
learned, with the help of his friend Mr Lawson, who was
himself an engraver, to put his plates on the copper with
his Own hands. It need hardly be said that the zeal
which he displayed in his ornithological pursuits proved
by no means beneficial to his school ; and the prospect
of his being able to carry out his design of preparing a
work on the birds of the United States seemed further off
than ever. He proposed to his friend Lawson, in 1806, to
join him in the production of such a work ; but the latter

* William Bartram was the son of John Bartram, M.D., a naturalist. He was
the author of 'Travels in North and South Carolina,' £c., Philadelphia, 1791.

126 NATURAL HISTORY.

declined to do so, upon prudential grounds, and Wilson
determined to prosecute his plan unaided. At the worst,
as he said himself, he should, in so doing, at least leave
' a small beacon,' to point out where he perished.

Wilson now applied to Jefferson, then president of
the United States, for some post in connection with a
contemplated expedition to explore the region drained
by the Mississippi ; but, for some unexplained reason,
his application received no notice. However, fortune
now smiled upon him, and he was rendered to some
extent independent by being appointed assistant-editor on
* Rees's Cyclopaedia,' a new edition of which was about to
be brought out by Mr Samuel F. Bradford, a bookseller of
Philadelphia. He did not delay long in submitting to
Mr Bradford his plan for preparing an ornithology of
the United States; and Mr Bradford not only gave the
plan his approval, but agreed to become publisher, and
to find the necessary funds.

Wilson was now able to devote himself to his great
enterprise, whenever his editorial duties would allow
him to do so ; and he spent the next two years hard
at work on his contemplated treatise. 'At length,' to
use the words of his biographer and friend, Mr George
Ord, 'in the month of September 1808, the first volume of
the ' American Ornithology ' made its appearance. From
the date of the arrangement with the publisher,
a prospectus had been issued, wherein the nature
and intended execution of the work were specified. But
yet no one appeared to entertain an adequate idea of
the treat which was about to be afforded to the lovers
of the fine arts and of elegant literature ; and when the

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 127

superb volume was presented to the public, their delight
was equalled only by their astonishment that America, as
yet in its infancy, should produce an original work in
science, which could vie in its essentials with the proudest
productions of a similar nature of the European world.'

The remaining years of Wilson's too short life were
occupied principally with the preparation of the conclud-
ing volumes of his great work. When not busily engaged
on this, he was often away, for months together, on long
and toilsome excursions, in search of * birds and sub-
scribers.' In these journeys, he travelled over a large
part of the United States, and underwent many hardships.
Many of the incidents of his travels are recounted in
his letters to his friends, which also contain numerous
exceedingly interesting observations on the condition of
the United States at that time, the social habits of the
people, and other cognate matters. These letters are most
interesting reading, but they do not lend themselves to
extraction or quotation, and they must be read in their
entirety by those who would like to follow the adventurous
naturalist in his wanderings.

In the intervals between his excursions, Wilson applied
himself unremittingly to the publication of the successive
volumes of his work; and in the beginning of 1813 the
seventh volume made its appearance. He was in hopes
that the eighth volume would complete the undertaking, but
he was not destined to see the end of his labours. Too
severe application to his self-imposed task had impaired
his health, and he was seized with an attack of dysentery,
which in a few days terminated fatally. He died on the
23d of August 1813, in the forty-eighth year of his age.

128 NATURAL HISTORY.

The * American Ornithology,' by which the name of
Alexander Wilson will be ever remembered, consisted of
eight volumes quarto, to which a ninth volume was subse-
quently added by Prince Charles Lucien Bonaparte,
Prince of Musignano. The best English edition is that
by Sir William Jardine, in three volumes octavo, published
in 1832. From the purely zoological point of view, this
great work stands in an almost unique position. Wilson
was no trained naturalist, and naturally cared little for
zoological systems, for synonymy — the bugbear of working
naturalists — or for comparative anatomy. On the other
hand he was a wonderfully acute and accurate observer,
with a keen sense of what constituted the really essential
characters of a species, and thoroughly able to set down
these characters in clear and well-chosen language.
Above all, he was an outdoor naturalist. He did not
describe the birds of America from skins or stuffed
specimens, but from close personal observation of the
creatures themselves in their native haunts. Hence, as
Swainson has remarked, 'his descriptions are, in fact,
biographies.'

In illustration of the above remarks, we may quote some
portions of the description which Wilson gives of the
fish-hawk or osprey. * This formidable, vigorous-winged,
and well-known bird,' writes Wilson, ' subsists altogether on
the finny tribes that swarm in our bays, creeks, and rivers ;
procuring his prey by his own active skill and industry ;
and seeming no further dependent on the land than as a
mere resting-place, or, in the usual season, a spot of
deposit for his nest, eggs, and young. The figure here
given is reduced to one-third of the size of life, to

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 129

FISH-HAWK, FROM WILSONS ORNITHOLOGY.'

correspond with that of the bald eagle, his common
attendant and constant plunderer.*

'The fish-hawk is migratory, arriving on the coasts
of New York and New Jersey about the 2ist of March,
and retiring to the south about the 226. of September.
Heavy equinoctial storms may vary these periods of
arrival and departure a few days ; but long observation
has ascertained that they are kept with remarkable
regularity. On the arrival of these birds in the northern
parts of the United States, they sometimes find the bays
and ponds frozen, and experience a difficulty in pro-
curing fish for many days. Yet there is no instance on
record of their attacking birds, or inferior land animals,
with intent to feed on them ; though their great strength
of flight, as well as of feet and claws, would seem to

* This statement applies to the original figure in the American edition of the
work. The figure here given is one-eighth of the natural size.

I

130 NATURAL HISTORY.

render this no difficult matter. But they no sooner
arrive, than they wage war on the bald eagles, as against
a horde of robbers and banditti ; sometimes succeeding,
by force of numbers and perseverance, in driving them
from their haunts, but seldom or never attacking them
in single combat.

'The first appearance of the fish-hawk in spring is
welcomed by the fishermen, as the happy signal of the
approach of those vast shoals of herrings, shad, &c.
that regularly arrive on our coasts, and enter our rivers
in such prodigious multitudes. Two of a trade, it is
said, seldom agree; the adage, however, will not hold
good in the present case, for such is the respect paid
to the fish-hawk, not only by this class of men, but,
generally, by the whole neighbourhood where it resides,
that a person who should attempt to shoot one of them
would stand a fair chance of being insulted. This
prepossession in favour of the fish-hawk is honourable
to their feelings. They associate with its first appear-
ance ideas of plenty, and all the gaiety of business;
they see it active and industrious like themselves, inoffen-
sive to the productions of their farms; building with
confidence, and without the least disposition to con-
cealment, in the middle of their fields, and along their
fences ; and returning, year after year, regularly to its
former abode.

The nest of the fish-hawk is usually built on the top
of a dead or decaying tree, sometimes not more than
fifteen, often upwards of fifty, feet from the ground.
It has been remarked by the people of the sea-coasts,
that the most thriving tree will die in a few years after

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 131

being taken possession of by the fish-hawk. This is
attributed to the fish-oil, and to the excrements of the
bird; but is more probably occasioned by the large
heap of wet salt materials of which the nest is usually
composed. I ascended to several of these nests that
had been built in from year to year, and found them
constructed as follows : Externally, large sticks, from
half an inch to an inch and a half in diameter, and
two or three feet in length, piled to the height of
three or four feet, and from two to three feet in breadth ;
these were intermixed with corn-stalks, sea-weed, pieces
of wet turf in large quantities, mullein stalks, and lined
with dry sea-grass; the whole forming a mass very
observable at half a mile's distance, and large enough
to fill a cart, and be no inconsiderable load for a
horse .... About the first of May, the female fish-
hawk begins to lay her eggs, which are commonly three
in number, sometimes only two, and rarely four. They
are somewhat larger than those of the common hen,
and nearly of the same shape. The ground-colour
varies in different eggs, from a reddish cream to nearly
white, splashed and daubed all over with dark Spanish
brown, as if done by art. During the time the female
is sitting, the male frequently supplies her with fish;
though she occasionally takes a short circuit to sea
herself, but quickly returns again. The attention of the
male, on such occasions, is regulated by the circumstances
of the case. A pair of these birds, on the south side of
the Great Egg Harbour River, near its mouth, was noted
for several years. The female, having but one leg,
was regularly furnished, while sitting, with fish in such

132 NATURAL HISTORY.

abundance, that she seldom left the nest, and never to
seek for food. This kindness was continued both be-
fore and after incubation. Some animals, who claim the
name and rationality of man, might blush at the recital
of this fact. On the appearance of the young, which
is usually about the last of June, the zeal and watch-
fulness of the parents are extreme. They stand guard,
and go off to fish, alternately; one parent being always
within a short distance of the nest. On the near approach
of any person, the hawk utters a plaintive whistling note,
which becomes shriller as she takes to wing, and sails
around, sometimes making a rapid descent, as if aiming
directly for you ; but checking her course, and sweeping
past, at a short distance overhead, her wings making

a loud whizzing in the air It is universally

asserted by the people of the neighbourhood where
these birds breed, that the young remain so long before
they fly, that the parents are obliged at last to compel
them to shift for themselves, beating them with their
wings, and driving them from the nest. But that they
continue to assist them even after this, I know to be a
fact, from my own observation, as I have seen the
young bird meet its parent in the air, and receive from
him the fish he carried in his claws.

'The flight of the fish-hawk, his manoeuvres while in
search of fish, and his manner of seizing his prey, are
deserving of particular notice. In leaving the nest, he
usually flies direct till he comes to the sea, then sails
round, in easy curving lines, turning sometimes in the air
as on a pivot, apparently without the least exertion, rarely
moving the wings, the legs extended behind, and his

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 133

remarkable length, and curvature or bend of wing, dis-
tinguishing him from all other hawks. The height at
which he thus elegantly glides is various, from one
hundred to one hundred and fifty or two hundred feet,
sometimes much higher, all the while calmly reconnoit-
ring the face of the deep below. Suddenly he is seen to
check his course, as if struck by a particular object, which
he seems to survey for a few moments with such steadi-
ness, that he appears fixed in air, flapping his wings.
This object, however, he abandons; or rather the fish he
had in his eye has disappeared, and he is again seen
sailing around as before. Now his attention is again
arrested, and he descends with great rapidity ; but ere he
reaches the surface, shoots off on another course, as if
ashamed that a second victim had escaped him. He now
sails at a short height above the surface, and by a zigzag
descent, and without seeming to dip his feet in the water,
seizes a. fish, which, after carrying a short distance, he
probably drops, or yields up to the bald eagle ; and again
ascends, by easy spiral circles, to the higher circles of the
air, where he glides about in all the ease and majesty of
his species. At once, from this sublime aerial height, he
descends like a perpendicular torrent, plunging into the
sea with a loud rushing sound, and with the certainty of
a rifle. In a few moments he emerges, bearing in his
claws his struggling prey, which he always carries head
foremost, and, having risen a few feet above the surface,
shakes himself as a water-spaniel would do, and directs
his heavy and laborious course directly for the land. If
the wind blow hard, and his nest lie in the quarter from
whence it comes, it is amusing to observe with what

134 NATURAL HISTORY.

judgment and exertion he beats to windward, not in a
direct line, that is, in the wind's eye, but making several
successive tacks to gain his purpose. This will appear
the more striking, when we consider the size of the fish
which he sometimes bears along. A shad was taken from
a fish-hawk near Great Egg Harbour, on which he had
begun to regale himself, and had already eaten a consider-
able portion of it; the remainder weighed six pounds.
Another fish-hawk was passing Mr Beasley's, at the same
place, with, a large flounder in his grasp, which struggled
and shook him so, that he dropt it on the shore. The
flounder was picked up, and served the whole family for
dinner. It is singular that the hawk never descends to
pick up a fish which he happens to drop, either on the
land or in the water. There is a kind of abstemious
dignity in this habit of the hawk, superior to the gluttonous
voracity displayed by most other birds of prey, and
particularly by the bald eagle, whose piratical robberies
committed on the present species have been already fully
detailed in treating of his history.* The hawk, however,
in his fishing pursuits, sometimes mistakes his mark,
or overrates his strength, by striking fish too large and
powerful for him to manage, by whom he is suddenly
dragged under; and though he sometimes succeeds
in extricating himself, after being taken three or four
times down, yet oftener both parties perish. The
bodies of sturgeon and several other large fish, with that
of a fish-hawk fast grappled in them, have at different

* Wilson gives a most graphic and animated account of the habit of the bald
eagle of watching till the fish-hawk has caught a fish, and then pursuing him till
the latter, ' with a sudden scream, probably of despair and honest execration,' is
compelled to drop his prey, which the eagle instantly seizes and carries off.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 135

times been found dead on the shore, cast up by the
waves.'

To the above excerpt from Wilson's account of the
osprey, may be appended the lines which he wrote on this
bird, which allude specially to the friendly feelings with
which it is regarded by the fishermen on the Atlantic
coast of the United States :

The osprey sails above the sound,

The geese are gone, the gulls are flying ;

The herring-shoals swarm thick around,

The nets are launched, the boats are flying ;
Yo, ho, my hearts ! let 's seek the deep,
Raise high the song, and cheerly wish her,
Still as the bending net we sweep,
' God bless the fish-hawk and the fisher ! '

She brings us fish, she brings us spring,
Good times, fair weather, warmth and plenty,
Fine store of shad, trout, herring, ling,
Sheepshead and drum, and old- wives dainty,

Yo, ho, my hearts ! let 's seek the deep,

Ply every oar, and cheerly wish her,

Still as the bending net we sweep,

' God bless the fish-hawk and the fisher ! '

She rears her young on yonder tree,
She leaves her faithful mate to mind 'em,
Like us, for fish, she sails to sea,
And, plunging, shows us where to find 'em.

Yo, ho, my hearts ! let 's seek the deep,

Ply every oar, and cheerly wish her,

While the slow bending net we sweep,

'God bless the fish-hawk and the fisher ! '

C U V I E R.

WE must once more turn our attention to the Continent, in
order to acquire a notion of the enormous impulse given
to natural history, and the vast improvements effected in
scientific zoology by the genius of the illustrious Cuvier.
Georges Cuvier was born on the 23d of August 1769, at
Montbeliard, in the department of Doubs, then belonging
to Wiirtemberg. His father was a retired military man,
and was descended from a Protestant family, which had
been forced to emigrate from the Jura by the persecutions
directed against the Huguenots. Georges Cuvier was a
delicate and studious child, and early showed a marked
predilection for natural history. When fourteen years old,
he was placed at the academy of Stuttgart — the school of
Schiller and of other well-known men — and after a brilliant
career as a student, he entered the world to seek for his
living, at the age of eighteen. A short space of time sub-
sequent to his leaving the academy of Stuttgart was spent
as 'sous-lieutenant' in the Swiss regiment of Chateauvieux;
but this corps being disbanded, and his family being unable
to give him any pecuniary assistance, he accepted the posi-
tion of tutor in the family of the Comte d'Hericy, who

CTJVIIEIR.

CTJVIER.

CUVIER. 137

resided near Caen in Normandy. Here was spent a further
period of nearly seven years — from 1788 to the end of
1794 — in which Cuvier peacefully discharged his tutorial
duties, and occupied his leisure time with studying such
animals, and particularly such of the lower forms of life,
as were accessible to him in his country-retreat. It was
in this haven of refuge that Cuvier weathered the stormy
period of the ' Reign of Terror,' and it was here that he
met the friend who subsequently introduced him to the
scientific world of Paris.

Being one night at a meeting of a local agricultural
society of which he was secretary, Cuvier was struck
with the extraordinary mastery of the subject under
debate that evening shown by one of the members of
the society. So remarkable was this mastery, that Cuvier
at once concluded that the speaker must be the author
of the article ' Agriculture ' in the ' Encyclopedic Metho-
dique,' and at the end of the speech saluted him as such.
Cuvier was right in his conjecture, and the Abbe7 Tessier,
the writer in question, was at first greatly terrified at
the discovery of his personality, for he had been shelter-
ing himself at Fecamp from the fury of the Revolution.
Cuvier, however, assuaged his fears, and they became fast
allies, one result of their friendship being that Tessier
wrote strongly to his friends in Paris, recommending Cuvier
for some scientific post. In this way Cuvier was intro-
duced to the notice of the well-known naturalists, Lacepede
and Geoffrey St Hilaire, who strongly urged him to come
to Paris, an invitation which he accepted in the year
1795. Shortly after his arrival in the metropolis, he was
appointed professor of natural history in the Central

138 NATURAL HISTORY.

School of the Pantheon, and in the same year he was
elected assistant to Mertrud, the aged incumbent of the
new chair of comparative anatomy at the Muse'e d'Histoire
Naturelle.

Cuvier was now fairly launched upon that course of
incessant scientific activity which only terminated with
his life. In the year of his arrival at Paris (1795) he not
only opened his first course of lectures at the Jardin des
Plantes, but he published a number of researches on
various departments of natural history, such as the
structure of the lower larynx in birds, the anatomy of
the Roman Snail (Helix pomatia), the circulation of the
Invertebrata, the structure and classification of the
Mollusca (always a favourite study), and the classification
of the Invertebrata generally. In the course of the next
year Cuvier was elected a member of the newly-founded
National Institute, and was associated with Lacepede and
Daubenton as the nucleus of the section ' Zoology/ His
scientific activity suffered no abatement, and in this year
he published a further series of memoirs, of which three
are particularly interesting, as showing the first beginnings
of his palaeontological labours. One of the papers in
question dealt with the skeleton of one of the huge
extinct American ground-sloths, the Megalonyx, which had
previously been regarded as a carnivorous animal, but
which Cuvier showed to be truly a gigantic relative of
the existing sloths of South America. Another memoir
treated of the Megatherium, another extinct ground-sloth ;
and the third was concerned with the skulls of the cave-
bear, which had been found in the famous cavern of
Gailenreuth.

CUVIER. 139

In the years 1797 and 1798, Cuvier continued to enrich
the science of natural history by a long series of memoirs.
In the former of these years we find him writing upon such
diverse subjects as the nutritive processes in insects, the
structure of the Ascidian Molluscs, the anatomy of the
bivalve shell-fish, the nostrils of the Cetaceans, and the
characters of the different species of rhinoceros. In the
second of these years he was offered the opportunity
of accompanying the expedition which Napoleon was to
lead to Egypt, but he declined the offer. In this year he
not only published his first memoir upon the wonderful
series of fossil bones which are found in the Tertiary rocks
( ' Gypseous Series ') of Montmartre, near Paris ; but he also
gave to the world the first of his separate works — namely,
the ' Tableau elementaire de PHistoire naturelle des
Animaux.' This volume contained, in an abbreviated form,
the course of lectures which he delivered at the l Ecole
Centrale du Pantheon;' and it may be regarded as the
first general statement of the classification of the animal
kingdom which he subsequently elaborated more fully,
and which, in its main outlines, is still the accepted
arrangement of animals.

In the year 1799 Daubenton died, and the chair of
natural history in the College de France was thus rendered
vacant ; Cuvier being appointed his successor in 1 800. In
the latter year he was also appointed secretary of the
class of physical and mathematical sciences in the National
Institute, an appointment which was made perpetual in
1803, and which he held to the time of his death. In
this year he published a number of memoirs, dealing for
the most part with the bones of extinct animals. In this

140 NATURAL HISTORY.

year also appeared the first two volumes of his ' Legons
d'Anatomie comparee,' which at once took place as a
standard treatise on the subject with which it dealt. In
the first two volumes of this work Cuvier was assisted by
Dumeril, and in the three later ones by Duvernoy.

In 1 80 1 his principal contributions to science were a
memoir on a new species of fossil crocodile, and a second
treating of the teeth of fishes. In 1802, Cuvier was
appointed commissary of the Institute to accompany the
inspectors-general of public instruction, in which capacity
he spent some time in the south of France, superintending
the foundation of the colleges of Marseilles and Bordeaux.
This office he resigned in 1803, in which year he married
the widow of M. Duvaucel, a contractor for the public
taxes, by whom he had four children, all of whom pre-
deceased him. The next few years of Cuvier's life are
noticeable only for their extraordinary fruitfulness in
scientific work, each year producing a harvest of valuable
memoirs or extensive scientific treatises, which will be
noticed immediately. In 1808, he was placed by
Napoleon on the council of the Imperial University, in
which capacity he on three occasions (1809, 1811, and
1813) presided over commissions charged with the duty
of reporting upon the higher educational establishments
in those provinces beyond the Alps and the Rhine which
had been annexed to France, with the view of affiliating
these to the central university of Paris. In his official
capacity of perpetual secretary to the Institute, he was
further called upon to write the 'eloges historiques on
deceased members of the Institute. It was in the same
capacity that he was intrusted with the task of drawing

CUVIER. 141

up annual reports on the progress of the natural and
physical sciences; and it was as perpetual secretary that
he prepared his famous ' Rapport historique sur le Progres
des Sciences physiques depuis 1789,' which was published
in 1810.

The last twenty years of Cuvier's life were spent under
a burden of intellectual labour such as few men could
have borne. Not only was his activity as a teacher and as
an investigator unabated, but he had now various high
administrative posts placed in his hands, the duties of
which were both numerous and heavy. He was now,
by universal consent, the first of living naturalists, and
the scientific honours which were conferred on him are
too numerous to mention. He also now became a high
state official. Before the fall of Napoleon (1814), he was
admitted to the council of state; and Louis XVIII.
confirmed him in this office on being restored to the
throne of France. In the same year he was elected
Chancellor of the University of Paris, and later, he
was appointed Grand Master of the Faculties of Protestant
Theology, he being himself a Lutheran. In 1819 he
was appointed President of the Comite de 1'Interieur. In
1824, he was made Grand Officer of the Legion d'Hon-
neur; and in the beginning of 1832 he was raised by
Louis Philippe to the rank of peer of France, and subse-
quently nominated President of the entire Council of
State. On the 8th of May he lectured, as it proved for
the last time, at the College of France, but he was there-
after attacked by an illness, which commenced in paralysis
of the throat, and ultimately affected the respiratory organs.
Remedial measures proved of no avail, and on the i3th of

142 NATURAL HISTORY.

May Cuvier expired, apparently without pain, and retaining
his faculties almost to the last breath.

Cuvier's scientific activity between 1802 and 1832 was
something extraordinary, especially when his numerous
administrative and educational duties are taken into
account. Nothing but the briefest possible sketch of
his published scientific work during the thirty years in
question can be attempted here. Let us first deal with
his work as a specialist in zoology. Subsequent to 1802,
Cuvier may be considered as having more especially
devoted himself* l to three lines of inquiry, one dealing
with the structure and classification of the Mollusca; a
second treating of the comparative anatomy and systematic
arrangement of the fishes; and the third concerned with
fossil Mammals and reptiles primarily, and secondarily with
the osteology of living forms belonging to the same
groups. As regards the first of these fields of investiga-
tion, Cuvier published a long series of papers on the
Mollusca, which began as early as 1792, and dealt with
almost all the groups now admitted into this sub-kingdom,
with the exception of the Polyzoa. Most of these memoirs
were published in the " Annales du Museum," between 1802
and 1815, and they were subsequently collected into
the well-known and invaluable " Memoires pour servir a
1'Histoire et a 1'Anatomie des Mollusques," published in
one volume at Paris in 1817. In the department of fishes,
Cuvier's researches, begun in 1801, finally culminated in
the publication of the " Histoire Naturelle des Poissons."
This magnificent work contained descriptions of five

*This sketch of Cuvier's scientific work from 1802 to 1817 is taken from an
article by the present writer in the last edition of the ' Encyclopedia Britannica.'

CUVIER. 143

thousand species of fishes, and was the joint production
of Cuvier and Valenciennes, its publication (so far as the
former was concerned) extending over the years 1828-31.
Palaeontology was always a favourite study with Cuvier,
and the department of it dealing with the Mammalia may
be said to have been essentially created and established by
him. In this region of investigation he published a long
list of memoirs, partly relating to the bones of extinct
animals, and partly detailing the results of observations on
the skeletons of living animals specially examined with a
view of throwing light upon the structure and affinities of
the fossil forms. In the second category must be placed
a number of papers relating to the osteology of the
Rhinoceros indicus, the tapir, the Hyrax capensis, the
hippopotamus, the sloths, the manatee, &c. In the
former category must be classed an even greater number
of memoirs, dealing with the extinct Mammals of the
Eocene beds of Montmartre, the fossil species of hippo-
potamus, the Didelphys gypsorum, the Megalonyx, the
Megatherium, the cave-hyaena, the extinct species of rhin-
oceros, the cave-bear, the Mastodon, the extinct species
of elephant, fossil species of manatee and seals, fossil
forms of crocodilians, chelonians, fishes, birds, &c. The
results of Cuvier's principal palaeontological and geological
investigations were ultimately given to the world in the
form of two separate works. One of these is the
celebrated " Recherches sur les Ossemens fossiles," in
four volumes quarto, published in Paris in 1812, with
subsequent editions in 1821 and 1825 ; and the other is his
" Discours sur les Revolutions de la surface du Globe," in
one volume octavo, published in Paris in 1825.' This latter

144 NATURAL HISTORY.

work was in reality a second edition, in an enlarged form,
of the 'preliminary discourse' to the first edition of the
' Ossemens fossiles.' It was translated into English, and in
this form went through several editions. The ' Recherches
sur les Ossemens fossiles ' is one of the standard works of
zoologists and palaeontologists, and is likely long to remain
so. The edition most commonly used is the fourth, in
eight volumes octavo and two quarto volumes of plates,
published subsequently to Cuvier's death, and having an
introduction by Cuvier's brother Frederick, himself a
famous naturalist. The plates were not only in many
cases drawn by Cuvier himself, who was an admirable
draughtsman, but many of them were also engraved with
his own hand.

Famous as are the works just alluded to, nothing that
Cuvier published attained a higher reputation, or has been
more widely used, than his great systematic treatise on
the animal kingdom ( * Regne Animal distribue d'apres son
Organisation ' ). The first edition of this, in four octavo
volumes, appeared in 1817, but in subsequent editions it
was much enlarged. ' In this classical work, Cuvier
embodied the results of the whole of his previous
researches on the structure of living and fossil animals, as
giving confirmation and fixity to that system of classifica-
tion of which he was the originator, and the main features
of which still subsist. The whole of this work was his
own, with the exception of the Insects, in which he was
assisted by his friend Latreille.'

In taking a general view of the advances which Cuvier
effected in zoological science, the main results which he
accomplished fall naturally under three heads. In the

CUVIER. 145

first place, with regard to systematic zoology, and especially
to classification, it is necessary, to begin with, to call to
mind the condition in which the classification of the animal
kingdom had been left by Linnaeus, and in which, with
unimportant changes, it had remained ever since. Linnaeus
divided the animal kingdom into the two primary divisions
of the ' Animals with red blood,' and ' Animals with white
blood,' these divisions corresponding with what Lamarck
named the ' Vertebrate Animals ' and the ' Invertebrate
Animals.' The first of these primary divisions was further
split up into the four classes of the Mammalia (quadrupeds)
birds, reptiles, and fishes; while the second division was
separated into the two classes of the Insects and the
Worms (Vermes). Even among the Vertebrate animals,
there were features in the Linnean classification of the most
unnatural character. Thus, the Cetaceans (whales and
dolphins) found themselves with the fishes; while certain
of the latter (for example, the sharks) were placed among
the reptiles. Amongst the Invertebrate animals, on the
other hand, the confusion which reigned was much more
extensive. The only definite ' class ' of Invertebrates which
Linnaeus clearly recognised was that of the insects ; but
he included under this name not only the animals pro-
perly known as 'insects,' but also the Crustaceans, the
Spiders, the Centipedes, and the Ringed Worms. Thus the
Linnean 'Insecta' corresponded, in a general way, with
that great division of animals now known by the name of
Annulose Animals. On the other hand, all the other
Invertebrate animals were placed by Linnaeus in a second
' class,' which he termed Vermes. The Vermes of Lin-
naeus constituted, however, an entirely miscellaneous

J

146 NATURAL HISTORY.

assemblage of animals, bound together by no recognisable
bond, and comprising groups having no real affinity with
each other.

The Invertebrate animals had early been a favourite
study with Cuvier, and he soon recognised the unnatural
collocation of the groups composing the Linnean Vermes.
As early as 1795, therefore, he came to the conclusion that
the Invertebrate animals could be divided into six ' classes'
— namely, the Mollusca, the Crustacea, the Worms, the
Insects, the Echinoderms, and the Zoophytes. Further
researches convinced him of two other points — namely, that
certain of these groups were of a rank higher than that
assigned to ' classes,' and secondly, that certain of them
were so closely related together as to be properly refer-
able to a single division. Ultimately, therefore, Cuvier
divided the entire series of the Invertebrate animals into
three great ' embranchements,' or, as we should now say,
'sub-kingdoms,' to which he gave the names of the
Mollusca, the Articulata, and the Radiata. In the sub-
kingdom of the Mollusca he placed the animals which we
now know as l Molluscs,' the barnacles and acorn-shells
(Cirripedes) being, however, erroneously included among
the true shellfish. The Articulata of Cuvier comprised
the Ringed Worms (Annelides), the Crustacea (lobster,
crab, &c.), the spiders and scorpions (Arachnida), and
the true insects (Insecta). Lastly, in the division of the
Radiata, or ' Radiated Animals,' Cuvier included five large
groups — namely (i) The Echinoderms (sea-urchins and
star-fishes); (2) The Intestinal or Parasitic Worms; (3)
The Jelly-fishes (Acalephae) ; (4) The Corals and allied
animals (Polypi); and (5) The Infusoria, comprising

CUVIER. 147

certain microscopic animals. The Vertebrate animals
were, finally, raised by Cuvier from the rank of a ' class '
to that of a fourth ' embranchement,' equivalent in zoo-
logical value to the three primary divisions of the
Invertebrate animals.

There can be no question as to the enormous advance
presented by the Cuvierian classification of animals, as
above sketched out, upon the system established by
Linnaeus. This advance is seen not only in the greater
naturalness of the groups adopted by Cuvier, but also
in the fact that his divisions were based upon sounder
and more philosophical principles. So far as concerns
the actual groups established by Cuvier, naturalists at
present unanimously accept the three great divisions, or
sub-kingdoms, of the Vertebrata, the Mollusca, and the
Articulata; though certain minor changes have been
effected in all of these. Thus, the frogs and newts
(Amphibia) are now separated from the reptiles proper,
with which they were associated by Cuvier, and are regarded
as a separate * class' of Vertebrate animals. Again, the
barnacles and acorn-shells (Cirripedes) are now known
not to belong to the Molluscs, but to be properly refer-
able to the Crustaceans, and to be therefore 'Articulate
animals.' Lastly, the Articulata of Cuvier constitute the
' Annulose animals ' of modern zoologists ; and it is usual
to associate with these the group of parasitic worms,
which Cuvier had placed in his lowest ' embranchement '
of the animal kingdom.

On the other hand, the Radiata of Cuvier stand to
the Cuvierian classification in the same relation that
the Vermes did to the Linnean system. In each

148 NATURAL HISTORY.

case, the great systematist, finding himself confronted
with a large series of the lower animals with which
his acquaintance, as that of all naturalists of the day,
was comparatively imperfect, grouped these together
into a single great division, which was necessarily ill
denned and imperfectly characterised. To Cuvier is
due the recognition of the Articulate Animals as a great
primary division, and also the separation of the whole
series of the Molluscs from the Linnean Vermes, and
their establishment as a second great primary division
of Invertebrates. It was left to later naturalists to show
that the Cuvierian Radiata was really a miscellaneous
and artificial group; and that it could be split up into
three great divisions, which may be regarded as equivalent
to 'sub-kingdoms' — namely, (i) the Echinoderms (sea-
urchins and star-fishes); (2) the Coelenterate animals
(corals, sea-anemones, jelly-fishes, and zoophytes generally;
and (3) the Protozoa (Infusorian animalcules, &c.).

Not only was the grouping of the animal kingdom
adopted by Cuvier much more in accordance with the
true relationships of animals than that of Linnaeus, but
the principles upon which this grouping was based
were also much more philosophical. Linnaeus, as has
been seen, in framing his classification, was principally
anxious to supply naturalists with a kind of index to
the animal kingdom, so constructed that it might be
easy to determine the place in his system of any given
animal. He therefore based his arrangement upon
the presence or absence of certain easily recognisable,
for the most part externally visible, characters. Such
external and arbitrary characters, chosen principally

CUVIER. 149

because they are easy to recognise, tend, however, as
pointed out before, ' to the association of very differently
organised species, and as often separate into very remote
groups of an artificial system two animals which may
have very similar anatomical structures.' *

Cuvier, on the other hand, recognised that the basis of a
* natural ' classification could only be found in the anatomy
of the animals to be classified. He saw that it was neces-
sary to compare animals with one another, not merely as to
the possession of some one particular character — possibly
a character in itself of little real importance — but as
regards their whole organisation. In this way, by the
comparison of each animal in all the points of its structure
with every other animal, it was possible to show that
certain forms agreed with others as to the ' plan ' of their
organisation. In other words, Cuvier established the
fact that certain groups of animals could be shown to
be built upon the same general plan, irrespective of any
modifications which such a plan might undergo ; whereas
other groups of animals were built upon a different
fundamental plan. Moreover, Cuvier showed that in
comparing animals with one another it was necessary to
consider only the really essential underlying facts of struc-
ture, and that all such structural features as were merely
dependent upon adaptation to some particular mode of
life should be disregarded. Thus, Linnaeus had grouped
the whales and dolphins (Cetacea) with the fishes, the
ground of this arrangement being that both the whales
and the fishes live in a watery medium, and are there-

* Owen, ' Lectures on Invertebrate Animals,' p. 9.

150 NATURAL HISTORY.

fore similar to one another in the general form of the
body and in certain other external features.

On the other hand, Cuvier showed that, as regards their
whole organisation, and more especially as regards their
anatomical structure, the whales and dolphins are related,
not to the fishes, but to the ordinary quadrupeds, and
that therefore they should be regarded as a group of
Mammals specially modified for an aquatic life. Acting
upon this principle, we may say with Owen that
'the characters of the classes of animals have been
rendered by the immortal Cuvier, the highest expression
of the facts ascertained in the animal organisation.' It
is not meant by this, of course, to assert that Cuvier's
classification was by any means perfect, for we have
seen that it was not ; nor that he was always correct in
his views as to the facts concerning the anatomy of
animals ; nor even that he always applied his own
principles strictly. An absolutely perfect classification
will only be possible when we are acquainted with all
the facts as to the organisation of every animal — in
other words, it will never be possible. All that can be
asked of a classification is, that it should be the formal
expression of the known facts of comparative anatomy
at the time when it was drawn up. Cuvier recognised
the true principles of all philosophical classification, and
being admittedly the first comparative anatomist of his
day, he was able to construct a classification of the
animal kingdom which was an immense advance upon
anything that had preceded it, and the main outlines
of which still endure. Since Cuvier's time, however,
comparative anatomy has made incalculable strides, and

CUVIER. 151

it is therefore no disparagement to Cuvier's pre-eminent
merits, to say that naturalists are at present able to
construct a system of classification which in many respects
is greatly in advance of the arrangement proposed by the
great French zoologist. Moreover, there is one depart-
ment of zoology which in Cuvier's time was almost non-
existent, and which has the most important bearings upon
the classification of animals — namely, the department
of Embryology. It is now possible to supplement the
knowledge gained from an anatomical examination of
the bodies of adult animals by an investigation into the
various changes, anatomical and physiological, which
precede the attainment of the adult condition. The
true relationships of animals thus become much more
clearly recognisable than they can be when we have to
compare together only the much modified and specialised
structures of the fully-developed organisms.

Apart altogether from the merits of his system, or from
his recognition of the principle that comparative anatomy
is the true basis of scientific classification, Cuvier's con-
tributions to morphology are of the most extensive kind.
His 'Lemons d' Anatomic comparee' was the first systematic
treatise upon the science of comparative anatomy; for
John Hunter had not been able to publish any complete
work on this subject. In certain special departments,
Cuvier's anatomical researches form the basis of every-
thing which has been since accomplished. We may
instance more particularly his contributions to the
comparative anatomy of the Molluscs, the osteology of the
Mammalia, and the fishes. As regards the last of these
groups, Dr Giinther, one of the most eminent of living

152 NATURAL HISTORY.

ichthyologists, has remarked that 'the investigation of
their anatomy, and especially of their skeleton, was taken
up by Cuvier at an early period, and continued till he had
succeeded in completing so perfect a framework of the
system of the whole class, that his immediate successors
could content themselves with filling up those details for
which their master had no leisure.

Lastly, Cuvier effected the most important advances as
regards the natural history of former periods of the
development of the earth. Indeed, it is not too much
to say that Cuvier may fairly claim to have been the chief
founder of the modern science of 'Palaeontology;' a
science which has enormously expanded during the last
fifty years, and which, when fully mature, will obtain the
recognition to which it is justly entitled, of being from all
points of view one of the most important branches of
scientific zoology. It is true that palaeontology is often
spoken of — in some cases even by scientific writers — as
a branch of geology. It has even been termed ' the hand-
maid of geology.' A more erroneous conception of the
entire aim and scope of palaeontology could not well be
formed ; and it is one which will certainly not be accepted
by any one who is himself a palaeontologist in the proper
sense of the term. It may be freely admitted that many
of the earlier palaeontologists dealt with fossils to a large
extent from the geological point of view, rather than in
their zoological aspect. It is also true that some so-called
palaeontologists have been little more than 'collectors/
and have had no real grasp of the scientific side of
palaeontology. This is, however, equally true of zoology
in its earlier days ; and, even now, ' collectors ' are by no

CUVIER. 153

means extinct, nor are their labours by any means to be
despised. Recent zoology, also, has as one of its
departments the * Geographical Distribution of Animals ;'
but no one for this reason would think of asserting that
zoology was only a branch of geography. The sole
relations between the subjects of geology and palaeon-
tology arise from the fact that fossils occur in rocks.
Geology is to palaeontology almost precisely what
geography is to zoology. In its essence, however,
palaeontology is concerned entirely with the study of
the remains of animals and plants ; and in its two
divisions of palaeozoology and palaeobotany, it is a
branch of zoology on the one hand, or of botany on the
other hand. The very use of the separate term 'palae-
ontology ' is a misfortune and a cause of error. The truth
is, that all that part of palaeontology which is concerned
with animals is a branch of zoology; and just as a man
cannot be a good palaeontologist unless he is first a good
zoologist, so it may be safely stated that a man cannot
be a good zoologist, unless he has at least a good general
knowledge of palaeontology.

Cuvier's palseontological researches were mostly carried
out in connection with the numerous remains of animals,
chiefly Vertebrates, which had been met with in the strata
of the neighbourhood of Paris. With his usual love of
thoroughness in all he did, Cuvier undertook, in conjunc-
tion with Alexander Brongniart, an investigation into the
arrangement of the Tertiary strata round Paris, in which
these fossil remains abounded, and the results of this
investigation were published in 1808, in the famous joint
memoir, entitled ' Essai sur la Ge'ographie mine'ralogique

154 NATURAL HISTORY.

des Environs de Paris.' This work may be looked upon
as the most important contribution which had been made
up to that time to the study of the Tertiary series of rocks.
It was principally, however, by the study of the organic
remains contained in these strata that Cuvier has made
himself famous.

Long controversies had been carried out among the
earlier naturalists as to whether ' fossils ' were really the
remains of animals at all — many holding that they were
merely peculiar mineral structures, formed by a kind
of 'plastic virtue' in the earth itself. The notion, how-
ever, that fossils were merely lusus natures had been
given up before Cuvier's time by most of the leaders of
science ; though it was still generally held that fossils were
the remains of the animals and plants now in existence
upon the globe. It had, of course, often been pointed
out — as early as the time of Hooke and Ray, in fact —
that many fossil shells were quite unlike any similar shells
now existing ; but it had been common to meet this by
the argument that our knowledge of living animals was
still very imperfect, and that very probably further
investigations would show that the fossil forms which
were supposed to be extinct, were really still living in
some hitherto unexplored region. This last argument
was, however, rendered quite untenable by the discovery
of the remains of numerous unknown quadrupeds, often
of large size, in the Tertiary beds round Paris ; since, even
in the beginning of this century, it was certain that no
noteworthy discovery of large living Mammals was likely
to be made in any of the less known portions of the
earth's surface.

CUVIER. 155

Cuvier, however, went further than this. He showed,
by a close comparative examination of the fossil bones
of these Mammals with the bones of their nearest living
allies, with which they had previously been confounded,
that such differences existed between them as to render
it certain that the fossil forms belonged to l extinct'
species. The one grand point in which Cuvier's
views fell short of those of modern palaeontology, was
that he failed to recognise any direct connection, by
modification or descent, between the extinct species of
animals and those now alive. On the contrary, Cuvier,
like all the geologists of his time, was a ' catastrophist.'
In other words, he believed that the present period was
separated from preceding periods — as these were supposed
to be separated from each other — by sharp lines of demar-
cation, due to great ' catastrophes ' or natural convulsions,
by which the animals and plants of each period were
destroyed, a new series of organic forms coming into
existence at the commencement of each fresh period.

On the question, also, of the nature and origin of
1 species,' Cuvier was entirely in agreement with most of
the naturalists of his day, being a firm believer in their
fixity and immutability. His great predecessor and con-
temporary, Lamarck, whose views will be more fully
discussed hereafter, had attacked this complex problem
from its zoological side ; and had arrived at the conclu-
sion that the existing species of animals and plants had
been produced by the modification of pre-existing species.
In this conclusion, however, Lamarck had run counter to
the most cherished beliefs of zoologists generally; and
the prejudices which he had to confront were not lessened

156 NATURAL HISTORY.

by the fantastic theories which had been put forward upon
this subject by some of his own countrymen.

Thus, Benedict de Maillet, who wrote theoretically, and
without any special knowledge of zoological science, had
published a curious work entitled 'Telliamed,* or a
Discourse between an Indian Philosopher and a French
Missionary on the Diminution of the Sea,' of which an
English translation was published in 1749. The funda-
mental proposition of this work was that the sea had at one
time covered the whole of the dry land, and that therefore
all the primitive forms of animal life must have been
marine and aquatic in their habits. Hence, he supposed
that the inhabitants of this hypothetical universal ocean

•%r-

had become changed into new forms, when the sea had
retired, and the land had come into existence. In this
way, all our present diversified forms of animal life had
been produced, some of those animals which lived near
the surface of the sea (such as Flying-fishes) becoming
developed into birds ; while some of those which lived at
the bottom of the sea became converted into the terrestrial
quadrupeds.

Again, Robinet, another theorist, had likewise published,
in 1768, a work entitled 'Considerations philosophiques
sur la Gradation naturelle des Formes de Petre,' in which
he endeavoured to establish the proposition that the lower
animals were merely the unsuccessful attempts which
Nature had made in the production of Man.

In his views as to the fixity of species, Cuvier, on the
other hand, was strictly orthodox. He recognised the
existence of numerous varieties, especially among the

* Telliamed is an anagram of the author's own name.

CUVIER. 157

domesticated animals; but he regarded the peculiarities
of these as purely superficial. He believed that these
varietal differences were the result solely of differences in
the external conditions to which different individuals of
the same species were exposed. He regarded these
differences, therefore, as evanescent, and he would
certainly have rejected entirely the idea that 'varieties'
are ' incipient species.'

In dealing with the views which had been put forth by
Lamarck, it seemed to Cuvier a sufficient argument that
we find in the Catacombs of Egypt the mummies of cats,
dogs, monkeys, and other animals, in a state of excellent
preservation ; and that we can therefore be certain
that these particular species have remained essentially
unchanged during the long period, from a human point of
view, which separates the formation of the Catacombs
from the present day. This argument, however, was
sufficiently met by Lamarck himself. Lamarck saw no
difficulty in accepting the fact that the species of animals
preserved in the Egyptian catacombs are in all essential
respects precisely similar to forms now in existence. On
the contrary, ' it would assuredly be singular,' says he, ' if
this was otherwise; since the position and climate of
Egypt remain at the present day almost precisely what
they were in the epoch of the catacombs.' Hence the
animals which now live in Egypt find themselves under
exactly the same conditions as they were then, and have
therefore retained the habitudes which they at that time
possessed. Besides, he adds, there is nothing in the
observation in question to prove that these animals have
existed from the beginning in their present form. It

158 NATURAL HISTORY.

merely means that they have remained unchanged for the
last two or three thousand years ; but every one who has
been in the position to appreciate the antiquity of Nature,
will readily give the proper value to such a period, as
compared with the age of the world.

Apart from his views as to ' species,' it is to Cuvier that
we owe the establishment of a really scientific basis to
palaeontology. Cuvier showed that the only method by
which the remains of fossil animals could be scientifically
investigated, was by comparing them morphologically with
the known living forms. In other words, he applied to
palaeontology those principles of comparative anatomy
which he had used with such brilliant results in his purely
zoological investigations. There is, however, an obvious
difficulty in the way of the application of the laws of
comparative anatomy to fossils in the same way as they
can be applied to animals now in existence. In the case
of the latter, we have the entire organism before us ; we
have not only its skeleton, but also its muscles, nerves,
blood-vessels, and internal organs generally. Moreover,
in systematic zoology, it is from the soft parts, rather than
from the skeleton, that we in many cases draw our most
weighty conclusions. In fossil animals on the other hand,
with very few exceptions, only the hard parts are preserved
for our inspection and examination. If we are to draw
any conclusions at all as to the relationships and
systematic position of extinct animals, we must do so
from the characters and structure of the skeleton alone.
Besides, in the case of a great many fossil animals, it is
not usual that even the entire skeleton is preserved. In
the case of all the Vertebrate animals, at any rate, the

CUVIER. 159

palaeontologist is usually called upon to frame his con-
clusions on a fragmentary specimen. He may have only
a single bone or tooth ; or he may have a number of
detached bones. Only rarely does he find a complete
skeleton, or meet with the bones still in their proper
places and connections.

This inherent difficulty in all palaeontological investiga-
tion was solved by the establishment by Cuvier of the
famous law of ' the correlation of organs.' Cuvier showed
that certain organs or structures in animals are only
found in association with one another; so that if one
of these correlated organs be found to be present, then we
may be sure that the others will also be there. In some
cases, this correlation or association of particular organs is
based upon an obvious physiological connection. Thus,
thin-walled hollow bones are associated with a peculiar
form of lung, in which the greater air-passages (bronchi)
do not end within the lung itself, but become connected at
the surface of the lung with membranous receptacles or
air-sacs distributed in different parts of the body. Again,
the peculiar form of toe-bone which is adapted for the
carrying of a hoof is correlated with such other modifica-
tions of the bones of the limb as are needed to secure the
absence of rotation in the bones, and to insure the fitness
of the leg for its special function of supporting the weight
of the body. In very many cases, however, no physio-
logical explanation can be given as to the association or
correlation of particular organs. Thus, all animals in
which the skull is jointed to the backbone by a double
articulation, and in which the two halves of the lower jaw
are composed each of a single piece, have at the same

l6o NATURAL HISTORY.

time the glands by which they are enabled to suckle their
young. All animals possessing these two structures also
possess (or may possess) the special integumentary
appendages known as hairs. Similarly, all those animals
which have the stomach adapted for chewing the cud, or
ruminating, have as a correlation with this, no more than
two functionally useful toes, the third and fourth toes.
All such animals, moreover, have an incomplete develop-
ment of the incisor teeth in the upper jaw. They are also
the only living quadrupeds which have horns developed
upon the frontal bones.

The few examples given above may suffice to illustrate
the general nature of the ' law of the correlation of organs.'
Stated in its most general form, this law asserts that all
the parts of the organism stand in some relation to each
other, the form and characters of each being in direct
connection with the form and character of all the rest.
The nature of this connection is in many cases hidden
from us ; but it is certain that if, by an arbitrary exercise
of will, we could suddenly change the form of any one
organ in any given animal, we should find ourselves com-
pelled to make changes in all the other organs of the same
animal. In many cases, perhaps, the changes necessitated
by the modification of some particular organ might be
slight ; in most cases we should be unable to see why any
changes should be needed at all, beyond the one with
which we had started ; in all cases the fact would remain,
that the living organism is an aggregate of parts so put
together that any modification of any one part necessitates
a modification of all the rest.

The application of this law to palaeontology is easy to

CUVIER. l6l

understand. It is found from the study of living animals,
where all the parts of the organism can be investigated as
a whole, that certain organs or structures are found associ-
ated with one another, or, at any rate, are never found
apart. In the case of fossil animals, we never have more
than certain parts of the organism preserved. We never,
save in such exceptional instances as the preservation of
the bodies of animals in the frozen soil of Siberia, have the
opportunity of examining the whole organism. By the
help, however, of the law of ' the correlation of organs,' we
can 'reconstruct' the animal from its fragments. If we
find certain structures preserved in the fossil, we can infer
that certain other correlated parts must have been present.
Thus, from a single molar tooth it may be possible to
infer the form of the jaw, the structure of the limbs, and,
in fact, the general features of the organisation. Those
who wish to learn with what precision and certainty an
extinct animal may in this way be ' reconstructed ' from
its fragmentary remains, can easily satisfy their curiosity
by reference to the pages of the ' Ossemens fossiles ' of
Cuvier, or to the works of his illustrious disciple, Sir
Richard Owen.

It should be pointed out, however, as indeed was
recognised by both Cuvier and Owen, that the law of
correlation of organs can only be applied in practice with
certain reservations, of which the following are the most
important : In the first place, the law is a purely empirical
one, and is based wholly upon the results of observation
and experience. Having, therefore, no rational basis, it
is always liable to be overthrown in particular instances
by more extensive observation, though its validity as a

K.

1 62 NATURAL HISTORY.

general law remains unaffected. Thus, so far as our
present knowledge goes, milk-glands are never found
except in association with a double joint between the
skull and the backbone, and a simple structure of the
lower jaw. But it is quite possible that we might some
day find mammary glands in association with a differently
constructed jaw, or with a single occipital articulation,
however unlikely this may seem at present. Even living
animals are constantly demonstrating to us the danger of
these empirical generalisations. Thus, until recently, it
might have been safely asserted that all Vertebrate animals
with a bony skeleton, which produced their young as eggs,
had also a lower jaw in which each half was composed of
more than one piece. We know now, however, by recent
investigations that the duck-mole and spiny ant-eater, both
of which have the lower jaw simple, are oviparous animals.
Extinct animals still more forcibly exemplify the necessity
for caution in reasoning from the presence of one structure
that another correlated structure was present Thus, until
a few years ago, it would have been unhesitatingly admitted
that the possession of a covering of feathers was correlated
with the possession of a horny covering to the margins of
the jaws, and therefore with the absence of teeth. It
would also have been admitted that feathers were corre-
lated with saddle-shaped faces to the bodies of the verte-
brae of the neck. Through the researches of Professor
Marsh, we are, however, now acquainted with extinct
birds which must, as birds, have possessed feathers, but
in which the jaws were furnished with teeth in sockets
(the Odontornithes'). The same distinguished observer has
also brought to light an extinct bird {Ichthyornis\ in

CUVIER.

1. Lower jaw of Wombat, showing the ' inflected ' angle of the jaw.

2. Pelvis of a Kangaroo, showing the ' marsupial bones ' (m).

which not only were teeth present, but the faces of the
neck-vertebrae were cupped, as they are in fishes, instead
of being saddle-shaped as they are in normal birds. Again,
in all living animals in which hollow bones filled with air
are present, the skin is furnished with feathers ; but the
extinct Pterodactyles, or flying reptiles, possessed hollow
bones, while there is no reason to think that their skin was
feathered.

In the second place, when we have to deal with fossil
organisms, we may easily assume that a particular structure
was absent in an animal, whereas it might have been
present, and yet might not have been preserved, owing
to its only having been present in a condition incapable
of preservation in the fossil condition. Thus Marsupial

164 NATURAL HISTORY.

quadrupeds (kangaroos, opossums, &c.) may be stated, as
a general rule, to have the lower jaw of a characteristic
form, the part of the jaw known as the ' angle ' being bent
inwards or 'inflected.' Correlated with this peculiar
structure of the jaw, but having no recognisable connection
with it, are two little bony splints, which are attached to
the brim of the pelvis, and which are known as the
'marsupial bones.' No exceptions were known in the
time of Cuvier to this rule ; hence Cuvier was entitled to
regard this as a constant correlation. Thus he met with
a fossil skeleton of a quadruped, like all such fossils, only
preserved in parts, which showed the lower jaw ; and find-
ing that the angle of the jaw was ' inflected,' he came to
the conclusion that it was a Marsupial. Moreover, from
the structure of its teeth he inferred that the skeleton
belonged to one of the opossums, such as now inhabit
the American continent, and he named it the Didelphys
gypsorum.

As all living Marsupials are found in Australia, New
Guinea, certain of the islands of the Pacific, and in
North and South America, the alleged discovery of an
opossum in the Tertiary strata near Paris, naturally excited
some incredulity in the scientific world. In order to
dissipate this incredulity, Cuvier invited his scientific
colleagues to meet him, and proceeded in their presence
to cut away with a chisel the stone enveloping the bones,
so as to bring into view the front part of the pelvis, which
lay deeply buried in the matrix. On accomplishing this,
he was able to demonstrate at once that the pelvic bones
carried the ' marsupial bones,' which are so characteristic
of the opossums and of Marsupial quadrupeds in general.

CUVIER.

165

The Fossil Opossum of Montmartre (Didelphys gypsorum), showing the
' marsupial bones ' attached to the brim of the pelvis (m\

It is needless to add that this demonstration of the value
of the law of the correlation of organs in palseontological
researches excited the greatest admiration, and was
regarded as absolutely conclusive. In one important
point it was indeed conclusive ; since no known animal
outside of the order of the Marsupials is known to have
both an inflected angle to the lower jaw, and also mar-
supial bones on the brim of the pelvis.

The conclusiveness arose, however, from the fact that
Cuvier found both these structures together ; and we now
know that the presence of the one would not necessarily
prove the presence of the other. Cuvier knew this himself
so far as the presence of ' marsupial bones ' is concerned,
because he knew that these bones occur in the duck-mole

1 66 NATURAL HISTORY.

and spiny ant-eater, in which the angle of the jaw is never-
theless not inflected. He did not know that he might
have found the inflected angle of the lower jaw, and that
he might have been quite right in his conclusion that the
animal was a Marsupial ; and yet, on laying bare the
pelvis, he might have found no ' marsupial bones.' It
is known, namely, that in certain living Marsupials (the
Thyladnus of Tasmania) the 'marsupial bones' do not
become converted into bone, but remain permanently
in the condition of cartilage. These structures would
therefore be absent in any fossil specimen of such a
Marsupial, since cartilages are not preserved in the
fossil state. Hence, it is possible, though not probable,
that we might some day meet with the skeleton of some
extinct Marsupial, in which we should find the angle
of the lower jaw to be inflected, but which would never-
theless show no traces of * marsupial bones.'

In the third place, in any two correlated organs it is not
usual that each is correlated with the other, but that one of
the two is correlated with the other. That is to say, of
any two correlated organs, A and B, it may be true that
A is never found without B, but it does not follow that
B may not occur without A. Thus, the presence of a
stomach adapted for ' rumination ' is invariably associated
with an imperfect development of the incisors of the upper
jaw, the central upper incisors being always wanting ; but
it is not the case that an incomplete condition of the
upper incisors, or the absence of the central ones, is
necessarily correlated with the habit of chewing the cud.
The proper way of putting the case is to assert that
certain structures (A) are never found apart from other

CUVIER. 167

structures (B), though the latter may be present without
the former. When, therefore, we find a lower jaw having
its angle t inflected/ we may, with our present knowledge,
assert that the animal to which that jaw belonged must
have possessed ' marsupial bones ' or ' marsupial cartilages '
upon the brim of the pelvis. If, however, we were to
find a pelvis with marsupial bones, we should not be
justified in asserting that the owner of the same must
have possessed an inflected angle to the lower jaw. On
the contrary, we know that such an assertion would be
erroneous, since the ' marsupial bones ' are present in the
duck-mole and spiny ant-eater, in which the angle of the
jaw has its usual form.

RETROGRESSION.

SWAINSON AND THE CIRCULAR CLASSIFICATION.

WE have now considered the main features of the work
effected by Cuvier in zoology, and we have next to take a
glance at the retrograde and in all respects singular system
known as the Circular Classification. The original author
of this system was William Sharpe Macleay, a well-known
and able entomologist, and the first complete exposition of
his system is to be found in a very rare work entitled
'Horse Entomologies,' published in London in the year
1819. Though Macleay was the inventor — the term may
be used advisedly without disparagement of his undoubted
talents and perfect good faith — of the ' Circular System ' of
classification, Swainson, the well-known ornithologist, was
its principal expositor; and it is therefore most suitable
that we should consider this system in connection with
the latter rather than the former naturalist. In the first
place, then, let us take a glance at Swainson's life as told
by himself.*

William Swainson was born in October 1789, his father

* ' Cabinet Cyclopaedia : Biography of Zoologists,' pp. 338-352.

RETROGRESSION. 169

being an official in the Custom-house. His ancestors had
been for generations ' statesmen' in Westmorland, and
had lived on their property near Hawkshead; but the
family estate had gradually passed into other hands.
Swainson was brought up by his father with a view of
entering the Custom-house, and his early education was cut
short, in consequence of his having an impediment in his
speech which entirely prevented him from studying lan-
guages, and also because he does not appear to have had
* the least aptitude for the ordinary acquirements of schools.'
Hence, we find him at the age of fourteen as junior clerk
in a secretary's office in the Customs, with a salary of ;£8o
a year* He had, however, a passion for natural history, a
rooted dislike of official trammels, and a burning desire to
travel. After he had been about three years a clerk in the
Customs, his father obtained for him, in 1807, an appoint-
ment in the commissariat department of the army, and in
the spring of the same year he was despatched to join the
Mediterranean army in Sicily. Here he remained several
years, and as his duties were light, he was able to wander
all over Sicily, collecting animals and plants, and also to
visit Greece. Subsequently he was quartered in Italy,
first in one city, and then in another; but his health
became impaired, and in 1815 he was sent home on sick
leave.

Swainson had now risen to the rank of assistant com-
missary-general on the staff of the Mediterranean army,
and as he was only twenty-six years old, he might have
expected much higher promotion had he remained in the
service. He had, however, never taken kindly, as some
men never do, to official life. He could not even endure

1 70 NATURAL HISTORY.

the restraints of English society. 'I had/ says he, 'to
join dinner-parties, drink wines which I detested, ride in
carriages, dance at balls, and do a hundred other things
for which I had neither health nor inclination.' His old
passion for foreign travel returned irresistibly upon him.
He gave up his appointment in the army, and went upon
half-pay. At first he thought of visiting Cape Colony ;
but hearing that the traveller Burchell had just returned
thence with a collection of objects of natural history
which filled two wagons, he rashly concluded that there
would be nothing left for him to collect there, and he
abandoned his intention. It happened however, that at
this time Mr Koster, who had formerly travelled in Brazil,
and had published an account of his travels, was about to
return to that country ; and Swainson forthwith made up
his mind to accompany him. After some time spent in
South America, travelling about and making zoological
collections, Swainson returned to England, and settled
down to study his collections and describe the results.
He was shortly thereafter elected a Fellow of the Royal
Society, though he does not seem to have met otherwise
with much encouragement. With characteristic energy,
he determined to learn the then newly introduced art of
lithography, and to see how far this process could be
utilised in the production of plates of animals suitable for
colouring. His attempts in this direction proving suc-
cessful, he issued a series of descriptions and figures of
new, rare, or remarkable animals, under the title of
' Zoological Illustrations.'

Swainson now settled in Lond6n, where he worked hard
for two or three years, and followed up his former attempt

RETROGRESSION. I 7 I

at authorship, by the publication of some numbers of
illustrations and descriptions of exotic shells. An attempt
to obtain an appointment in the zoological department of
the British Museum was not successful, and Swainson,
having now married, found it necessary to increase his
income. He determined, therefore, to become a pro-
fessional author, and was fortunate enough to form a
connection with the great publishing house of Longman,
Orme, Brown, & Co. The next few years of Swainson's
life were occupied in incessant literary and scientific
activity. The principal works which he gave to the world
are the * Cabinet Cyclopaedia of Natural History,' the
portion of the * Fauna Boreali-Americana ' dealing with the
birds, a second series of the ' Zoological Illustrations,' and
three of the ornithological volumes in the ' Naturalists'
Library.'

In 1835, Swainson lost his wife, and he subsequently
determined to emigrate with his family to New Zealand.
This determination he carried into effect, and with this
closed his scientific career. He died in New Zealand in
the year 1855.

No doubt can be entertained as to Swainson's having
possessed considerable natural abilities. Had he received
a rigorous and methodical training in early life, he would
probably have left a much more abiding mark upon
zoological science, and have occupied a more conspicuous
place in the long list of British naturalists. As it is, he
attained a high reputation in certain departments, and
especially in ornithology. It is, however, unnecessary
here to discuss the value of Swainson's observations in
this last, or in any other of the many branches of natural

172 NATURAL HISTORY.

history upon which he wrote so copiously. He is at the
present day best known, perhaps, in consequence of his
close connection with the ' Circular System' of classification,
with which he had entirely identified himself. This theory
we may therefore now proceed to discuss very briefly ;
and in so doing, it will be best to consider Swainson's
enlarged and amended scheme, rather than the compara-
tively rough outline of the circular classification given by
Macleay, the actual author of the system, and the originator
of the notion of circular affinities.

In expounding his classification of the animal kingdom,
Swainson, to begin with, discusses fully what he conceives
should be the principles upon which a natural arrange-
ment of animals may be founded. He points out that the
likenesses which subsist between different animals are not
only different in degree, but also different in kind; and he
divides such likenesses into what he terms likenesses of
'analogy' and likenesses of 'affinity.' What he under-
stands as likenesses of ' analogy ' are all such likenesses or
resemblances between different animals as are either what
we may call accidental, or which depend merely upon
similarity of the mode of life. Thus, he instances the like-
ness between the striped skin of the tiger and that of the
zebra as an example of analogy. Similarly, the likeness
between the whales and the fishes, dependent upon the
purely aquatic life of both, he instances as a likeness of
analogy. On the other hand, Swainson recognised that
there exist other likenesses, affecting the whole organisa-
tion of the animals compared, of more real and funda-
mental character, and these he termed likenesses of
'affinity.' As an example of these, he instances the

RETROGRESSION. 173

likenesses between the tiger and the cat, which affect all
the more important features of the anatomical structure
of these two animals.

Though Swainson recognised in theory the distinction
between these two kinds of likenesses — now known
respectively as likenesses of * analogy ' and likenesses of
* homology ' — he showed, by his loose application of these
in practice, that he did not sufficiently recognise the causes
of the distinction between them. As modern naturalists
understand this matter, likenesses of ' analogy ' are purely
physiological or adaptive, and depend merely upon similarity
of mode of life or external environment. Thus, whales are
like fishes because both have certain structural modifica-
tions, as regards the form of the body and shape of the
limbs, which adapt them for a life in a watery medium.
Similarly, there is a certain resemblance between bats and
birds, due to the fact that both are adapted for flight in
the air. These physiological or analogical likenesses,
however, are quite independent of real relationships, and
they are therefore of no value for classificatory purposes.
On the other hand, there are likenesses between animals
which are morphological, and which are quite independent
of the kind of life which the animal may lead, or the
nature of its surroundings. These ' homological ' like-
nesses are dependent upon identity of structure and funda-
mental plan, and they exist irrespective of, and despite of,
the animal's habit of life or the particular use to which it
may put its organs. Thus, to give a single example, there
exists a homological likeness, due to identity in funda-
mental plan of construction, between a butterfly and a
lobster; though these animals are by no means like one

174 NATURAL HISTORY.

another in external appearance, and are adapted to entirely
different modes of life. It is in the separation of the
merely physiological or adaptive characters of an animal
from its really essential morphological characters that a
great part of the work of the scientific zoologist consists ;
and it is also upon characters of the latter class that all
modern systems of classification of the animal kingdom
are based.

To return, however, to Swainson and to the circular
classification. To some extent, Swainson undoubtedly
recognised the underlying distinction between these two
kinds of likenesses among animals. He also recognised
that all classifications which are based upon likenesses of
analogy are necessarily ' artificial/ and that the basis of a
' natural ' classification can only be found in the ' affinities '
or homological likenesses between animals, since these
alone are indicative of true relationships. It is singular
that, starting with comparatively clear ideas as to what
points were of really taxonomic value, Swainson should
have given his adhesion to one of the most fantastic and
unnatural systems of zoological arrangement which have
ever been promulgated. For our present purpose, it is
enough to give a mere outline of this system, which
Swainson laid down in the following propositions :

(i) The entire series of animals is a continuous one,
forming a circle ; so that, * commencing at any one given
point, and thence tracing all the modifications of struc-
ture, we shall be imperceptibly led, after passing through
numerous forms, again to the point from which we
started.' In accordance with this proposition, Swainson
divided the entire animal kingdom into five great groups,

RETROGRESSION.

175

which he arranged in a circle, as shown graphically
below.

In precisely the same way, Swainson divided the series
of the Vertebrate animals into a chain of circular groups,
as follows :

176 NATURAL HISTORY.

It would be a waste of time and space to point out
in detail the extraordinary inconsistencies of such a
circular arrangement as exhibited in either of the above
schemes. It is enough to point out that passage along
such a circular series as either of the above is easy
enough and natural enough in a certain direction, and
up to a given point; but that it is an impossibility to
complete the circle, in consequence of an absolutely im-
passable gap between two of the groups in the series.
Thus, in the circular arrangement of the whole animal
kingdom, as given above, one may pass, without any
violation of natural affinities, from the Acrita (the Protozoa
of modern naturalists) through the sponges to the Radiata
(the Ccelenterate animals and Echinoderms). Through
the Echinoderms one may pass from the sea-cucumbers
(Holothurians) to the spoon- worms, and thus into the
Annulose series; and the passage from the Annulose
animals to the Vertebrate animals is at any rate a con-
ceivable one. Similarly, in the backward progress, one
may pass naturally enough from the Vertebrates to the
Molluscs, through the cuttle-fishes (Cephalopods). In
order to complete the circle, however, there remains the
final step of passing from the Molluscs to the Protozoa
(the Acrita), two groups separated by a hiatus unbridged
by any intermediate form.

Similarly, in the circular series of the Vertebrate
animals, starting with the Amphibians (frogs and newts) as
the assumed lowest group, we pass naturally enough to the
reptiles, and from the reptiles to the nearly related group
of the birds. From the birds one may get to the Mammals
by the help of the oviparous duck-mole and spiny ant-

R ETROGRESSION. 177

eater. Or, if we pass in the other direction, we travel
quite naturally from the Amphibians to the fishes. In
either case, however, in order to complete the circle, one
has to get from fishes to Mammals, or vice versa. The
gap thus caused is, however, a hopeless one, since the
really intermediate groups of the reptiles and the birds
have been left on the other side of the circle.

(2) The second proposition of the circular system is,
that 'the primary circular divisions of every group are
three actually, or five apparently.' Differences of opinion
have arisen among the advocates of the circular classi-
fication as to the number of groups in each division,
though all were agreed that the system was based upon
some fixed number, which governed all the subdivisions
from the highest to the lowest. Macleay, the founder of
the system, thought there were five main divisions and
five smaller ones (making ten in all). Fries, the botanist,
adopted four as the number governing his classification
of plants; but as he admitted that his central group
could always be split into two, this practically made his
system likewise quinary. Swainson, as seen in the above-
quoted proposition, adopted three as his number; but
as one of these groups was supposed to be always
divisible into three smaller sections, this also was
practically identical with taking five as the ruling
number. Other ' circular ists,' again, adopted seven as
the governing number. Five was, however, the number
most usually adopted, and for this reason this system
has often been spoken of as the ' Quinary Classification.'
According to this, therefore, everything must go by fives.
If animals obstinately refused to range themselves into

1 78 NATURAL HISTORY.

fives, this could only be because we knew too little
about them to make them do so. Thus, as shown
above, there were five sub-kingdoms, or primary divisions,
of the animal kingdom. Each sub-kingdom was similarly
divisible into five classes, as shown above in the case
of the Vertebrates (in which there really are five classes).
Each class fell to be divided into five orders, each order
into five families, and so on.

As just mentioned, however, Swainson did not accept
this quinary arrangement without some modification.
He thought that three was the governing number; but
then he supposed that one group could always be
divided into three smaller circles. In any three groups —
forming a closed system — one group is what he called
'typical,' a second is ' sub-typical,' and the third is
'aberrant'; but the aberrant group itself forms a closed
system of three smaller circles, thus :

Aberrant Group

RETROGRESSION. 179

We may illustrate this neat mathematical arrangement
of animals by the Vertebrates :

Subtypical Birdg Mammals Typical

Group I A I Group

Aberrant Group

(3) The third, and perhaps the most fundamental,
proposition of the circular system is, the animals con-
tained in any given circular group are 'symbolically or
analogically represented ' by the animals contained in
each and every other circular group in the animal king-
dom. In order to understand this proposition fully, a
few words must first be said on what Swainson under-,
stood by his 'typical,' 'sub-typical,' and 'aberrant'
groups. In any given series of animals the 'typical'
group is that comprising those forms which possess the
largest number of the distinctive characters peculiar or
common to the whole series. The ' sub-typical ' group
comprises those forms which exhibit a smaller proportion
of the presumed distinctive characters of the series.
Finally, the 'aberrant' group comprises forms which

l8o NATURAL HISTORY.

have the fewest of the characters common to the series,
and which therefore necessarily possess many characters
common to other groups of animals. Moreover, Swainson
considered that every 'aberrant' group exhibited three
principal modifications of structure, which constituted
the basis of as many minor groups. One of these
subordinate sections of the aberrant group was supposed
to contain animals adapted for an aquatic life. The
animals of a second section were supposed to be adapted
for obtaining their food by suction; and a third or
'rasorial' section was formed for the reception of types
adapted for scratching or for climbing. Thus, as
shown in a preceding diagram, the Mammals are the
'typical' group of Vertebrates, and the birds are the
' sub-typical ' group ; while the ' aberrant ' group comprises
the 'aquatic' section of the fishes, the 'suctorial'
group of the Amphibians, and the 'rasorial' group of
the reptiles.

Now starting with this basis — admitting, that is, that
you could divide a given series of animals into three
primary groups, a typical, a sub-typical, and an aberrant
group, and admitting further that the last contains three
minor groups, one aquatic, one suctorial, and one
rasorial — the fundamental proposition of the circular
classification is, that every series of animals can be
similarly divided, and that each quinary system, however
small, must represent each and every other system. If
it does not do so, it is, ex hypothesi, not a natural group.
By way of exemplifying this proposition, we may present
here the tabular view which Swainson gives of what he
regards as the 'beautifully simple and harmonious'

RETROGRESSION. l8l

analogies between the circular system of the birds and
that of the Mammals :

Primary Types. Orders of Birds. Typical Characters. of Mammals.

1. Typical Insessores Organs of prehension Quadrumana

(Perchers). and general struc- (Monkeys),
ture highly de-
veloped.

2. Sub- typical... Raptores Carnivorous, claws re- Feres (Beasts of

(Birds of tractile. Prey).

Prey).

3. Aberrant Natatores Live and feed in the Cetacea (Whales,

(aquatic (Swimmers), water. Feet short, Dolphins, &c.)
group). or none.

4. Aberrant Grallatores Jaws much prolonged ; Glires (Rodents

(suctorial (Waders). burrow for their and most
group). food. Marsupials).

5. Aberrant Rasores Head with crests of Ungulata

(rasorial (Scratchers). horn or feathers; (Hoofed
group). habits domestic ; Quadrupeds).

feet long, formed

for walking.

Swainson excuses himself for not entering into long
details explanatory of the above table, on the ground
that explanation is unnecessary, seeing that ' the analogies
are so perfect, and the series so completely in unison
with those of all other animals.7 To the modern scientific
student it seems equally unnecessary to discuss such a
table, as it violates all those fundamental canons of
classification which have been established by the com-
bined labours of naturalists for the last two centuries.
It would not, indeed, be easy to produce a classificatory
table of Mammals and birds more entirely at variance
with what naturalists at the present day believe as to

1 82 NATURAL HISTORY.

the true relationships of animals. One fact sufficiently
proves this — namely, that in deference to the mystical
* quinary' law, the Mammals are divided into only five
groups or orders ; whereas naturalists consider that there
are at least fifteen or sixteen natural orders of these
animals.

The ' circular classification ' is, then, a mere figment
of the human mind; the notion of a quinary, ternary,
or septenary division of animals is equally a product
of the imagination. So far as our present knowledge
goes, two things are abundantly evident. One of these
is, that no numerically symmetrical arrangement of animals
can, by any possibility, accord with their natural affinities
and relationships. The other is, that any pictorial
representation of the different groups of the animal series
in the order of their natural alliances would assuredly
not present us with a system of similar closed circles,
but with a branched and ramified genealogical tree.
One main trunk we should undoubtedly find; and this
would give off numerous lateral stems, which would in
turn subdivide, some branches ascending in the course
of their development, while others, in consequence of
degeneration, would descend. No numerical law could,
however, possibly be formulated which would express the
branching of the main stem of life ; nor would there be
any parity of size, or equality in zoological value, between
the different branches of the parent trunk.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS

(CONTINUED).

IN the twenty or thirty years which followed the
publication, in 1817, of the 'Regne Animal/ the study of
natural history was prosecuted in Britain by many
distinguished and able men, and great advances were
effected in almost all branches of the science. These
advances, however, mostly concern our knowledge of
special groups of animals, and are therefore of little
interest except to specialists. As regards philosophical
zoology, or the principles of natural history, the condition
of the science remained without any noteworthy alteration,
very much as it had been left by Cuvier. All that can be
here attempted, therefore, is to give a very brief general
sketch of the progress which was made during this period
as regards special groups of the animal kingdom, with
more particular reference to any point of exceptional
interest. Many well-known names are, of course,
necessarily omitted in such an outline, and any attempt
to analyse the varied works which appeared at this epoch
would lead us into paths which are only pleasant to walk
upon for the initiated. The typical naturalist of this

184 NATURAL HISTORY.

period is Edward Forbes, who may be selected for a
longer notice.

As regards 'general zoology,' this period produced a
number of able workers. No one, perhaps, contributed
more largely to the diffusion of a knowledge of, and a taste
for, natural history than the well-known Dumfriesshire
baronet, Sir William Jardine, who united to a wide general
knowledge of natural history and of geology a special
acquaintance with ornithology. Sir William is probably
best known as the editor of that excellent and popular
work the 'Naturalists' Library,' of which more than one
edition was published. This work consists of forty
volumes, dealing with Mammals, birds, fishes, and insects,
and illustrated with spirited figures, drawn and engraved
by Lizars. Sir William Jardine was also joint-editor,
along with Mr Selby and Dr Johnston, of the ' Magazine
of Zoology and Botany,' of which only two volumes
appeared (in 1837 and 1838); when it became merged
in one of the most admirable of our existing zoological
periodicals — namely, the 'Annals and Magazine of Natural
History,' affectionately known to its readers by the
abbreviated name of the ' Annals and Mag.'

The only general work treating of the whole of the
animals of the British area, which appeared during this
period, was the 'History of British Animals,' by the
Rev. John Fleming, D.D., who was one time minister
of Flisk in Fifeshire, and subsequently professor of natural
philosophy in King's College, Aberdeen (from 1834 to
1845). This work was published in 1828, in one volume,
and dealt systematically with all known British animals —
a gigantic task for one man, even at that time, and an

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 185

almost impossible one for a single worker now. It is
unfortunately not illustrated, and the account given of the
lower Invertebrates is necessarily meagre and imperfect.
Fleming also wrote a work on ' The Philosophy of Zoology/
in two volumes, and a small treatise on the Mollusca,
which appeared first in the seventh edition of the
'Encyclopaedia Britannica,' and was published later (1837)
in a separate form.

As regards the special group of the quadrupeds, perhaps
the most important work published in England at this
time was the ' Fauna Boreali- Americana,' or ' Northern
Zoology,' of Sir John Richardson, which appeared in 1828.
This noble work treated of the zoology of the northern
parts of British North America, and was based upon the
collections which had been gathered together during the
northern land expeditions under the command of Sir
John Franklin. The four quarto volumes are admirably
illustrated, and treat respectively of the Mammals, the
birds, the insects, and the fishes; the insects being
described by Mr Kirby, while Swainson took part in the
production of the volume on the birds. Unlike the
'Arctic Zoology' of Pennant, the 'Fauna Boreali- Americana'
was the work of a naturalist who had personally visited
the region of which he described the animals. Sir John
Richardson had, in fact, been the chief surgeon and
naturalist to the overland Arctic expedition of Sir John
Franklin in 1825. In 1848, he once more visited the
Arctic regions, in the hope of discovering, if possible,
what had been the fate of the last disastrous expedition
of Franklin. Richardson was a Scotchman, born at
Dumfries in 1787. His life was one of great interest,

1 86 NATURAL HISTORY.

but cannot be more particularly noticed here. He died
in 1865.

The only other work dealing with Mammals, that may
be noticed as treating exclusively of British types, is the
' History of British Quadrupeds,' by Professor Thomas Bell,
at one time professor of zoology in King's College,
London. This excellent work appeared in 1836, and is
one of the admirable series of illustrated works on British
zoology issued, and still being issued, by the well-known
scientific publisher, Van Voorst. To this same series,
Professor Bell contributed two other equally excellent
treatises — namely, the 'History of British Reptiles'
(1829), and the ' History of British Stalk-eyed Crustacea7

(1853).

Ornithology has ever been a favourite subject with
naturalists, and the number of names which occur to any
one who has occasion to look into the zoological literature
of this period, as belonging to eminent ornithologists, is
noteworthy. Yarrell, Macgillivray, Swainson, Eyton,
Gould, Selby, Jardine, and Waterton are names which
have the pleasant ring of familiarity to the ears of all
naturalists, and in some cases to extra-zoological circles.
Such works as Eyton's 'Monograph of the Anatidae' (1838),
or Selby's 'Illustrations of British Ornithology' (1821-34),
are doubtless little known except to specialists ; but every
one who has dabbled in natural history is acquainted with
Gould's magnificent monographs, if only on account of
their inimitable illustrations. There must also be very
few, even of those who are not zoologically inclined, who
do not know something of Waterton, not through anything
that he did in ornithology, for in truth he was not a

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS, 187

scientific zoologist, but through that most delightful of
books, the * Wanderings in South America.'

The two most essentially British ornithologists of this
period were William Yarrell and William Macgillivray.
The former is the author of what may be regarded as
the standard work on the birds of our country — namely,
the * Natural History of British Birds ' (1839-43). Yarrell
was also the author of the equally well-known ' Natural
History of British Fishes,' the first edition of which was
published in 1836. Macgillivray is perhaps best known
as the author of the ' History of British Land and Water
Birds,' now a scarce and expensive work, which was
published in 1837, in five octavo volumes. He published
various other treatises, of which the two best known are
' The Natural History of Deeside and Braemar/ published
posthumously in 1855, and his 'Lives of Eminent Zoolo-
gists' (1834), which formed one of the volumes of the
' Edinburgh Cabinet Library.' Macgillivray occupied the
chair of natural history in Marischal College, Aber-
deen, from 1841 to 1853, and as an ornithologist has not
perhaps received generally full justice.

Coming next to the Invertebrates, there are only three
groups which may be noticed, namely the Molluscs, the
Insects, and the Zoophytes; and even these can only be
glanced at in the most cursory fashion. In the depart-
ment of the Mollusca, we find many well-known authors
such as Turton, Wood, Burrows, Broderip, &c. ; but none
of these call for special remark. The two names which
are most familiar to conchologists and naturalists generally
in connection with this period are those of Sowerby and
Woodward — though the latter more properly belongs to a

1 88 NATURAL HISTORY.

later time. The name of Sowerby, moreover, is that of a
series of naturalists and artists, who devoted themselves
especially to natural history, mineralogy, and botany ; and
of whom three were more particularly concerned with
conchology. One of these is James Sowerby, originally
an artist, who was born in 1757, and died in 1822. His
great work is the ' Mineral Conchology of Great Britain,'
which deals with the fossil shells of our islands. James
de Carle Sowerby was the son of the preceding, and
followed in his footsteps. He was born in 1787, and died
in 1850, and continued the publication of the 'Mineral
Conchology.' Lastly, in more recent times, conchologists
have been indebted to George Brettingham Sowerby for a
work on the 'Genera of Recent and Fossil Shells,' a
'Manual of Conchology,' and a 'Thesaurus Conchy-
liorum.'

There has, however, been no naturalist of the present
century to whom conchological students in general have
been more deeply indebted than to Samuel Woodward, who
was born in 1821, and died in 1865, and who therefore
does not strictly fall into the period now under considera-
tion. His ' Manual of the Mollusca,' of which the first
edition appeared in 1841, has a world-wide reputation as
one of the most philosophical and comprehensive treatises
on a single large group of animals ever published in such
a moderate compass. It is a model of everything which
such a manual should be.

Entomology — an even more favoured subject than orni-
thology— commanded many votaries during the period
here in question; and among them some of the most
distinguished entomologists Britain has yet produced.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 189

Nothing is, however, here possible beyond the mention of
some of the leading works which appeared at this time.
One of the best known and most widely used of these is
the 'Introduction to the Study of Entomology,' the first
edition of which appeared in 1828, the authors being the
Rev. William Kirby and Mr William Spence, both distin-
guished specialists in the department of entomology.
Another famous work is the * Introduction to the Modern
Classification of Insects,' by Professor J. O. Westwood.
This appeared in 1839, and being of a more technical
character than Kirby and Spence's * Introduction,' has
become one of the standard works of the entomological
specialist.

As regards purely British entomology, the most famous
work of this time is Curtis's 'British Entomology' ( 1824-
1840). This beautiful treatise, in sixteen octavo volumes,
is illustrated by admirably drawn coloured figures of the
insects and of the plants upon which they feed; and is
still one of the standard works on the subject with which
it deals. Another work of the same character, but only
dealing with certain groups, is the ' Illustrations of British
Entomology,' by James F. Stephens. Mention must also
be made here of the admirable anatomical memoirs dealing
with Insects and Myriapods (centipedes and their allies),
by Newport, who likewise contributed the article ' Insecta '
to Todd and Bowman's 'Cyclopaedia of Anatomy and
Physiology (1839).

Lastly, as regards the lower Invertebrate animals, and
more particularly the Zoophytes ( Ccelenterate animals),
there are only two names belonging to this period which
need special mention. One of these is that of Dr George

I go NATURAL HISTORY.

Johnston, a medical practitioner at Berwick-upon-Tweed,
and a well-known naturalist. The work by which Dr
Johnston is best known is his 'History of British Zoo-
phytes,' which appeared in 1838, and of which a second
edition was published in 1847. As the Ccelenterate animals
were, at the time when Johnston wrote his treatise, but
imperfectly separated from other animals, we find here
descriptions and figures not only of the British species
of the Zoophytes strictly so called (namely, the Sea-
anemones, the Sea-firs, &c. ), but also of the Sea-mats
and their allies (the Polyzoa). Moreover, it had not at
this time been discovered that there was any connection
between the jellyfishes and the ordinary plant-like Zoo-
phytes, and the former found, therefore, no place in
Johnston's work. The ' History of British Zoophytes ' will
always have to be consulted by any British naturalist who
may be engaged in the study of the particular group of
organisms of which it treats; though the several groups
with which it deals have now received a much fuller
exposition at the hands of modern investigators ( Allman,
Hincks, Gosse, &c.). Besides the work just mentioned,
Dr Johnston published in 1842, 'A History of British
Sponges and Lithophytes,' in which he not only dealt with
the sponges properly so called, but also with a number of
marine organisms which are now known to be of a
vegetable nature. Owing to the exceptional difficulties
which attend the study of the sponges, and the compara-
tively very limited knowledge possessed by the % naturalists
of fifty years ago as to the structure and nature of the
sponges in general, this work is not of nearly so much
value as the one on the British Zoophytes.

BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. igi

The other work alluded to above is the 'Rare and
Remarkable Animals of Scotland,' by Sir John Graham
Dalyell. This handsome work, published in 1847 by
Van Voorst, in two quarto volumes, deals with the
Ccelenterate animals or Zoophytes of the Scottish seas,
and is illustrated by beautiful coloured plates. To Sir
John Dalyell is due the credit of having independently
worked out the extraordinary phenomena attending the
production of the great swimming jellyfishes from the
little fixed Trumpet-polype or Hydra-tuba — one of the
most wonderful chapters in zoological history. It is true
that this subject had been previously investigated suc-
cessfully by the celebrated Norwegian naturalist, Sars
(1829-40); but the observations of the Scottish zoologist
would seem to have been made quite independently.

EDWARD FORBES.

EDWARD FORBES deserves special mention as an admirable
representative of the old and honourable race of general
naturalists. He was a naturalist in the old sense of this
term, rather than a zoologist ; and he belonged, therefore,
to a genus which is in the present epoch much less largely
represented than it used to be. As a matter of course, he
was essentially and principally a zoologist, or an investi-
gator of animals. He was even a specialist in zoology, and
his name will long be remembered in connection with
the British Mollusca and the British Echinoderms. But
he was much more than a mere zoologist; he was an
accomplished botanist, and a very able geologist.

Rarely, indeed, do we now find any one man uniting in
himself high excellence in these three departments. Nor
can such be well expected, in view of the enormous
development that these three sciences have, one and all,
undergone since the middle of this century. At the same
time, there is cause for regret that specialisation should
now so completely rule in all departments of natural his-
tory. Less than fifty years ago, any teacher of zoology
considered a knowledge of geology and palaeontology — the

EDWARD FORBES. 193

latter being only a department of zoology — as an absolutely
indispensable part of his equipment. At the present day,
it is no very unusual thing for even a distinguished zoolo-
gist to be largely or wholly ignorant of these subjects ; and
in another fifty years it is more than probable that the
increase in our store of knowledge will be so great, that
only the exceptionally gifted will be able to master
thoroughly more than a single branch of natural history.
That something may be thereby gained in depth is
probable enough; but there will be unquestionably a
corresponding loss in width.

Edward Forbes was born at Douglas, in the Isle of
Man, on the i2th February 1815. He was a delicate
child, and received, therefore, no systematic education up
to his twelfth year. He early showed a strong taste for
natural history; and was one of those boys who make
friends with all sorts of animals, whose pockets are always
full of all sorts of beasts, birds, and minerals, who are
never so happy as when in the open air, and who, naturally
enough, cause as much anxiety to their teachers as does
the supposititious duckling to the hen which brings it up.
The few years of school-life which he ultimately had, left
him with a limited amount of classical knowledge, a still
smaller amount of any mathematical learning, no know-
ledge of any physical or natural science, and a total want
of even a rudimentary acquaintance with any modern
language. The one accomplishment that he had acquired
was that of drawing, though it does not appear that he
learned even this at school. 'Educated,' therefore, he
certainly was not, when at sixteen years of age he left his
Manx school for good.

M

194 NATURAL HISTORY.

It was moreover unfortunate, as Dr George Wilson,
his biographer, has remarked, that ' his home-circle
included no intelligent senior of his own sex, who
could have wisely trained him to habits of systematic
study, and taught him by precept and example the
importance of rule and method in intellectual as well as
physical work. For want of such training, much of his
energy was unwisely directed, and he left behind him at
his death a far less compact and conspicuous monument
to his genius than his enormous diligence would have
produced, had his intellect revolved in an orbit of smaller
area, and been less liable to deflection towards new
centres of attraction in every portion of its path.' At the
same time, Forbes's mental idiosyncrasy was peculiar, and
it is doubtful if it could have been fundamentally altered
by any educational process. He had a naturally un-
methodical, discursive mind. As the wise writer above
quoted further remarks, ' the minds of some men are like
diving-bells, with walls of opaque iron, and one small
window at the top. Little light enters them, and that
always in one direction. The minds of an exactly
opposite class are crystal palaces, the walls all glass, and
light entering in every direction. The choicest minds are
intermediate in structure. They have windows to each
point of the compass, besides a goodly skylight, but
shaded corners abound under all degrees of illumination
short of exposure to the direct glare, and there are
shutters to close each window when that is desirable, and
prevent the confusion of conflicting cross-lights. Edward
Forbes's intellect was of the second class, and open at
every moment to all the skyey influences. It would have

EDWARD FORBES. 195

been better in some respects if he had been persuaded in
early life to make it less than all window, by a shutter
here and there ; but he loved the full light, and all that he
could be induced to do was to temper the brightness by a
veil, originally but one degree less transparent than the
glass, and even when thickest, more translucent than
opaque.'

In 1831, Edward Forbes, having completed his brief
school career, visited London, where he stayed between
three and four months. He had the intention of entering
upon the study of art, in order to become a professional
artist ; but he had mistaken his vocation. He was refused
admission to the Royal Academy as an art-student, and a
well-known artist under whose tuition he had placed him-
self held out to him no encouragement to follow his
proposed career any further. Under these circumstances
Forbes very sensibly abandoned all idea of art as a
profession, and made up his mind to study medicine.
He therefore proceeded to Edinburgh, where he entered
the university as a medical student in November 1831.

Forbes's career as a medical student cannot be touched
upon here. He studied botany under Professor Graham,
and natural history under Professor Jameson, both well-
known men in their day. It must be remembered, how-
ever, that scientific teaching at that time was a very
different thing from what it is now. It was, as Dr Wilson
says, a matter of dispute among the Edinburgh students
whether Professor Graham had altogether ' six or seven
diagrams to illustrate the structure of plants. A micro-
scope was never seen in the class-room, and the majority
of students could not have told with confidence which

196 NATURAL HISTORY.

end of the tube should be put to the eye. No instruction
was given in dissecting or examining plants, further than
by pulling them to pieces with the fingers, and examining
them with a pocket-lens.' In the department of natural
history, things were very much the same. Jameson, the
then professor of natural history, able man as he was,
nevertheless was more of a mineralogist and geologist
than a zoologist The anatomical side of natural history
was almost wholly neglected by him ; and the university
museum was almost entirely without morphological speci-
mens of any kind, such as skeletons, dissections of animals,
or even models of minute structures. No Invertebrates
were to be seen in the museum, with the exception of
examples of such groups as the insects, shellfish, or corals.
It would appear also that Jameson was essentially a
student himself, rather than a teacher.

Forbes began his systematic studies in zoology, however,
at a specially favourable time. The microscope had been
up till that time ' an instrument understood and handled
by few, and by such was regarded with much the same
feelings as an enthusiastic musician regards his Cremona
violin.' Now, however, great improvements had been
effected in its mechanical construction ; and not only had
the instrument thus gained greatly in efficiency and sim-
plicity, but it could be produced at a price so much reduced
as to render it possible for any one to purchase one. The
microscope became, therefore, at this time the inseparable
companion of all naturalists, the weapon of precision for
all new assaults on biological problems. ' Histology,' or
the science which deals with minute structures and tissues,
sprung suddenly into full existence. The smaller forms of

EDWARD FORBES. 197

animal and vegetable life, which till now had been imper-
fectly understood, or had wholly defied investigators, began
now to be slowly elucidated, and arranged in their proper
places in the system of nature. Endless problems in
physiology commenced to receive their final solution. In
short, the whole face of the biological sciences underwent
a rapid and fundamental alteration. .

Into all this Forbes threw himself with the utmost
ardour ; but his favourite studies, as was to be expected,
were natural history, botany, and geology. Not only
did he acquire a wide general knowledge of these sub-
jects, so far as these were known at that time; but
above all, he learned to observe and investigate for
himself. Even in his second year of university study,
we find him giving the preference to the more scientific
branches of the medical curriculum over the more
strictly technical and professional subjects. Year after
year, this process of clinging more and more closely to
the natural sciences went on; till in 1836 he finally and
formally abandoned the study of medicine.

During his vacations Forbes had wandered over many
parts of our country, and had occupied himself in all sorts
of scientific, principally zoological observations, and in
collecting specimens illustrative of the natural history,
botany, and geology of the districts which he visited.
On one occasion he extended his tour to Norway, in
company with a fellow-student, and at another time he
travelled through parts of France, Switzerland, and
Germany. At an early period also he began dredging
in the British seas, a practice which he afterwards pro-
secuted with such success and such brilliant scientific

198 NATURAL HISTORY.

results. Forbes may be said, in fact, to have been
one of the first British naturalists to recognise the
enormous value of the dredge as an instrument of
zoological research ; and, from this time on, we find him
engaged in dredging whenever he got an opportunity.
The results of his dredging expeditions round our coasts
were given to the world in various memoirs, the first of
which was published in the 'Annals and Magazine of
Natural History' as early as 1835, when he was still
an Edinburgh student.

In 1836, Forbes, having finally renounced medicine,
proceeded to Paris, where he stayed till the following
year, studying natural history under Geoffroy St Hilaire
and De Blainville, and working in the great museums
of the French capital. At the close of the Paris session
he paid a visit to the south of France, and from there
he made his way to Algeria, where he collected a
number of Molluscs, which he subsequently described
in the 'Annals of Natural History.' The winter of
1 83 7-38 Forbes again spent in Edinburgh, nominally
as a literary student, but in reality he worked at nothing
but science. It was at this time that he published his
first book, a little treatise entitled ' Malacologia Monensis,'
dealing with the Mollusca of the Isle of Man. The
summer of 1838 was spent once more on the Continent,
and the winter of the same year found him back again
in Edinburgh — always hard at work writing papers and
scientific memoirs, giving lectures on natural history,
collecting, and the like. The summer of 1839 was
spent mostly in dredging round the coasts of Scotland,
and in collecting materials for a report on the air-breathing

EDWARD FORBES. 1 99

Mollusca of Britain for the British Association. This
report Forbes laid, together with some other zoological
papers, before the meeting of the Association in the same
autumn ; and at the same meeting he founded the
celebrated dinner of the 'Red Lions.'* The whole of
1840 was spent in scientific work, a great part of which
was directed to the preparation and publication of his
well-known treatise on the sea-urchins, starfishes, and
other Echinoderms of Britain.

In the meanwhile Forbes, though steadily gaining
reputation, had failed to obtain any fixed employment in
science. Lecturing had proved pecuniarily a failure, and
his scientific works did not bring him in any money. In
the early part of 1841, however, he was offered the post of
naturalist to the surveying-ship Beacon, which was about to
start on an expedition to the Levant This offer he
accepted, and after a fruitless attempt to obtain the natural
history chair in Aberdeen — to which Macgillivray was
appointed — he started for the East on board the Beacon,
in company with his friend and fellow-naturalist, William
Thompson. It is not necessary to enter into any details
as to the incidents of the expedition, which occupied two
years. Not only was Forbes enabled to make a number
of interesting and important observations as to the distri-
bution of marine animals in the Mediterranean, but he was
also able to spend some three months in a tour in Asia

* The dinner of the ' Red Lion Club' was founded by Forbes in 1839, at the
meeting of the British Association at Birmingham. The name was derived from
the tavern at which the meeting of the club took place ; and the dinner became an
annual feature, which is still kept up at every British Association meeting. At the
dinner of the ' Red Lions,' the learned guests are supposed to drop all their science,
and tp give themselves up wholly to fun and merriment, approbation of the songs
or speeches being expressed by roars and growls.

20O NATURAL HISTORY.

Minor. A narrative of this, written in conjunction with
his friend and companion, Captain (then Lieutenant)
Spratt, was subsequently published under the title of
' Travels in Lycia ' (1847 ). As regards the scientific results
of this expedition, by far the greatest interest attached to
the researches which Forbes at this time carried out as to
the distribution of the Shellfish and Radiate animals at
different depths in the sea. This had long been a
favourite subject with him, and he had previously begun to
divide the British seas into ' zones ' of different depths,
characterised by particular assemblages of animals. It
will, however, be best to defer consideration of this
subject till the completion of this brief sketch of Forbes's
life.

At the close of the year 1842, Forbes returned to
England, when he found that he had been in his absence
appointed Professor of Botany in King's College, London.
This appointment he gladly accepted, as his father had
met with pecuniary losses, and was no longer in a position
to help him. Two or three months after his return, he
was also appointed Curator of the Museum of the Geo-
logical Society of London. He was thus plunged into
a constant whirl of work, principally of the thankless
official kind, and he found comparatively little time for
original research. Not only were his duties numerous and
trying; but the emoluments of his combined offices of
professor and curator did not bring him in much more
than about £200 per annum, and he was thus forced to
do literary work of the ' pot-boiling ' kind.

In 1844, however, his position was somewhat ame-
liorated by his being appointed to the newly created post

EDWARD FORBES. 2OI

of Palaeontologist to the Geological Survey, whereby he
was enabled to resign the curatorship of the Geological
Society. He found himself now in a much more con-
genial sphere. His connection with the Geological
Society had strengthened his early fondness for geology.
He now had the opportunity — indeed it was now his
duty — to enter fully into the study of palaeontology,
one of the great charms of which is that, though essen-
tially a part of zoology, it can hardly be successfully
approached save through the avenue of geology, while,
in one of its subordinate aspects, it really forms a
department of geological science. Besides, Forbes had
always had a special interest in all questions affecting
the ' distribution ' of animals, and there is no department
of natural history more fruitful in problems of this kind
than palaeontology.

The remainder of Forbes's too short life may be told
in a very few words. The next few years were spent in
constant work of all kinds — dredging, geologising, palae-
ontologising (to coin a much-needed word), lecturing, and
above all, writing incessantly. His personal relations with
his colleagues on the Geological Survey were of the happiest
kind. His reputation in scientific circles was of the
highest. His work was, much of it, thoroughly congenial.
He had little to complain of beyond the fact that, in
accordance with the traditional treatment of science and
of higher learning generally in Britain, he was greatly
overdriven, and was so ill paid that he was compelled to
do hack-work of various kinds in order to exist. The
primary result of this short-sighted policy was that one of
the finest and most original minds Britain has produced in

202 NATURAL HISTORY.

the last half-century was forced to expend a large part of
its energy in mere drudgery that could have been as well,
or perhaps better, done by one of meaner capacity. A
secondary result, it need not be doubted, was the impair-
ment of his health and the shortening of his term of life.

In 1848 Forbes married, his wife being the daughter of
General Sir C. Ash worth. In 1851, the Royal School of
Mines, in connection with the Geological Survey, was
founded, and Forbes was appointed to the professorship of
natural history in the new institution. During his tenure
of office the School of Mines never became prosperous
or popular, and its comparative failure was a source of
great disappointment to him. In 1853 Professor Jameson
at last resigned the chair of natural history in the uni-
versity of Edinburgh, towards which Forbes had been
looking for many years. To this chair, after some delays,
Forbes was ultimately appointed, thus realising what had
been the ambition of his life. The relief from the harassing
overwork of years had at last come to him; but it had
unfortunately come, as it proved, too late. In the summer
of 1854, Forbes gave his first course of lectures in his
new chair, to a very large class, and with brilliant success.
In the early part of this year he had been elected to the
highly honourable position of President of the Geological
Society of London ; and in the autumn of this year he
filled the presidential chair in the geological section of the
British Association. On the ist of November he delivered
the introductory lecture to the class of natural history,
but after a few days of lecturing he was attacked by a
severe illness, which from the first assumed a very serious
aspect, and to which he succumbed on the 23d of the

EDWARD FORBES. 203

month. Thus died one of the most accomplished and
original naturalists that this country has yet produced, in
the prime of life, for he was not forty years old, in the
zenith of his fame, and at the moment when he had just
commenced the happiest and most hopeful period of
his laborious career.

Of Forbes's multifarious scientific publications but few
can be noticed here. His special subjects in natural
history proper had always been the Zoophytes, the
Echinoderms, and the Mollusca, together with all
problems relating to the geographical distribution of
animals. As regards the first of these subjects, his chief
contributions are the following :

1 i ) ' On the Morphology of the reproductive system of the
Sertularian Zoophyte.' This memoir was published in the
'Annals and Magazine of Natural History' in 1844, and in
it he demonstrated that the singular urn-shaped capsules
which are seasonally produced by the common Sertularian
Zoophytes of our seas, and which have the function of
reproducing the species, are really a modified condition of
the ordinary buds of the colony, the function of which is
nutritive. In other words, he showed that just as the
flowers of a plant are only specially modified buds, and
therefore composed of altered leaves ; so the reproductive
buds of the sea-firs and their allies are only modifications
of the ordinary nutritive ' polypites.'

(2) 'On the Pulmograde Medusae of the British Seas,'
published in the ' Annals and Magazine of Natural History '
in 1846.

(3) 'A Monograph of the Naked-eye Medusae,' published
by the Ray Society in 1848. In this last well-known

204 NATURAL HISTORY.

work Forbes described and figured all the recognised species
of the smaller British jelly-fishes, which are called ' naked-
eyed/ because the little coloured eye-spots are placed con-
spicuously round the margin of the swimming-bell.

With regard to the star-fishes, sea-urchins, and other
Echinoderms, Forbes wrote a number of valuable works,
to say nothing of detached memoirs in different scientific
periodicals. The chief of these are :

1 i ) 'A History of British Star-fishes and other Animals
of the class Echinodermata.' This familiar work was
published by Van Voorst in 1841 as one of his series of
treatises on British zoology. It not only contains illustra-
tions of all the species described, but is embellished with
the picturesque or fanciful tailpieces which Forbes loved
to design.

(2) A ' Monograph of the British Fossil Asteriadae,'
published in the memoirs of the Geological Survey in
1848.

(3) A 'Monograph of the Silurian Cystideae of Britain,'
also published in the memoirs of the Geological Survey, in
the same volume as the preceding.

(4) 'Figures and Descriptions of British Organic
Remains : Echinoderms.' This constituted the third
'decade' of a series of palaeontological publications
issued by the Geological Survey ; the title of ' decades '
being given to them because each number was supposed
to contain ten plates.

( 5 ) ' A Monograph of the British Tertiary Echino-
derms,' published by the Palaeontographical Society in
1852.

Thirdly, in the department of the Shellfish (Mollusca],

EDWARD FORBES. 205

Forbes was the author of a number of very valuable
memoirs, descriptive of species, or dealing with the distri-
bution of these animals, and treating not only of the
marine types, but also of the land-shells and the fresh-
water forms. In this branch, however, his great work was
his ' History of British Mollusca,' written conjointly with
Mr Hanley. This standard work was in four large
volumes, the first of which appeared in 1848.

Much of Forbes's work as regards the Echinoderms and
the Molluscs was of a palaeontological character, and dealt
with fossil species. Apart from this, he did some excellent
work in what is called ' stratigraphical ' palaeontology, or in
other words in palaeontology as applied to geology. His
two best-known memoirs in this connection are one ' On
the Succession of Life in the Dorsetshire Purbecks,' and
one 'On the Fluvio-marine Tertiaries of the Isle of Wight'
The first of these was published as one of the ' Reports ' of
the British Association in 1850; and the second appeared
in the Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society in

1853-

Admirable as was Forbes's work in the various branches
of natural history above enumerated, he is perhaps best
known by his researches into the complicated problems
connected with the 'distribution' of animals, both in the
sea and upon the land. Before dealing briefly with these
researches, it may, however, be well to glance for a moment
at the views which he held with regard to the nature of
* species.' Now, Forbes, like almost all naturalists at
that time, was a firm believer in the fixity of species.
Lamarck's views as to the mutability of animal species had
at this period obtained no acceptance in the scientific

206 NATURAL HISTORY.

world. Forbes therefore, like Cuvier before him, believed
that each 'species' of animals and plants was so far
permanent, that though it might be exterminated alto-
gether, and thus become ' extinct ' it could not become
changed into a new species. This implies the further
belief that 'variation' is strictly limited and definite in
amount, and that ' varieties ' of animals are mere temporary
modifications instead of being 'incipient species.' To use
Forbes's own words, 'every true species presents in its
individuals, certain features, specific characters, which dis-
tinguish it from every other species ; as if the Creator had
set an exclusive mark or seal on each type.' He also
believed that what we call a ' genus,' that is to say, a group
of allied species, is similarly permanent. He believed —
to use his own expression — that ' a genus is an abstraction,
a divine idea .... a true genus is natural, and, as
such, is not dependent on man's will.'

This belief in the fixity of species carries with it, as an
almost necessary corollary, a belief in what are known as
'specific centres.' On the view of the permanence of
species, each particular species must have come into
existence at a particular moment of time and at a
particular place in space. That place must have been the
point where the first progenitor, or pair of progenitors, of
the species was created. This place must be supposed to
be one specially adapted for the life of the species, and it
constitutes the 'specific centre' for the species. From
this centre the species would gradually diffuse itself by
migration, over a more or less extensive area, till its
further progress would be stopped by meeting conditions
unsuitable for its existence. Hence, each species at the

EDWARD FORBES. 207

present day is found inhabiting a larger or smaller ' specific
area;' and there is found in that area one point — the
'metropolis' of the species — where the individuals are
more abundant than elsewhere, and which may therefore
be taken as the point where the species was originally
created. As a matter of course, no species could have
more than one 'specific centre.' If, therefore, a species
should be met with in two quite detached areas — as
sometimes happens — this must be explained on the
supposition that the original area of the species had
become divided into two in consequence of changes in
the physical geography of the area. Or, it might be
supposed that some individual of the species had been
accidentally transported from its original area to some
new place, where the conditions happened to be suitable
for its existence and propagation.

Forbes further believed that when a species had once
become extinct, it was never re-created. We sometimes
find, however, that a given species, after living a long time
in some particular region, disappears altogether from that
area, and that, after a longer or shorter period, it reappears
again in the same place. This phenomenon was explained
by Forbes on the supposition that the species had been
forced to abandon its original area, in consequence of
some change of conditions which rendered its further
existence there impossible, and that it had therefore
migrated to some adjoining area where it met with
suitable surroundings. At a later period, however, the
conditions of the original area might again become
favourable to the species, and then it would migrate back
again. In this case, therefore, there is no real extinction

208 NATURAL HISTORY.

of the species, but only its disappearance temporarily from
its original area.

Lastly, Forbes considered that ( genera,' or natural
groups of species, are distributed very much as species
are, each genus having its 'generic area.' When a
genus includes a large number of species, there may
be found within the generic area 'a point of maximum
(metropolis} around which the number of species becomes
less and less. A genus may have more centres than one.
It may have had unbroken extension at one time, and
yet, in the course of time and change, may have its centre
so broken up that there shall appear to be outlying
points. When, however, the history of a natural genus
shall have been traced equally through its extension in
time and space, it is not impossible that the area,
considered in the abstract, will be found to be necessarily
unique.'

Forbes, in addition, clearly formulated what he termed
the ' law of representation ' among species. He showed,
namely, that in all regions, however widely removed from
one another, species or groups of species of animals are
found which are very like each other, provided only that
the conditions of these regions are similar as regards
climate. In other words, wherever similar life-conditions
prevail, similar species of animals will be found. In all
such cases, however, though the species of such regions
are similar, they are not identical. Such species he termed
' representative species.'

As, in Forbes's view, species are permanent and
immutable, the only explanation which he could give
of the existence of these representative forms was that

EDWARD FORBES. 209

similar but specifically distinct types of animals and
plants had been created in all regions in which the
conditions of life were the same. Of the fact of the
existence of these * representative ' groups of species, or
of representative species, no doubt can be entertained;
but modern naturalists would explain their origin other-
wise. At the present day it would not be admitted that
two representative species had been specially created in
two areas where similar conditions prevailed. On the
contrary, the modern view would be, that two repre-
sentative species owe their likeness to the fact that they are
the descendants of a common ancestor ; and that their
unKkeness is due to the fact that, having become widely
separated by migration, and kept separate by the forma-
tion of some natural barrier, they have gradually become
modified by variation, till we now speak of them as
distinct species.

Some of the most interesting points connected with
Forbes's researches into the distribution of animal life
relate to the distribution of animals in the sea. Many of
these researches were carried on in his dredging excursions
round the British coasts ; but his visit to the Mediter-
ranean enabled him to carry out a series of elaborate
investigations on a more extended scale, and at greater
depths than he had previously explored. These investiga-
tions were published by Forbes in his well-known
'Report on the Mollusca and Radiata of the ^Egean
Sea,' which he laid before the meeting of the British
Association at Cork, in 1843. As regards British seas,
and more or less markedly round all coast-lines in
all regions, Forbes recognised four very well defined

210 NATURAL HISTORY.

'zones of depth,' each characterised by particular types
of animals.

The first of these zones is the so-called ' littoral zone,'
embracing the tract between tidemarks, and characterised,
not only by its abundant development of different kinds
of seaweeds, but also by a number of peculiar animals.
The littoral animals must be capable of being left
uncovered twice a day by the receding tide, and they
must also be able to withstand exposure to the direct rays
of the sun. Hence, the animals of the littoral zone are
mostly referable to peculiar types ; and the same types, or
'representative' types, are found between tide-marks in
almost all parts of the world.

Below low-water mark, and extending to the depth of
about fifteen fathoms, is what is known as the ' laminarian
zone,' so called from the abundance in it of the great
strap-like ' tangle ' (Laminaria). The fronds of this sea-
weed form a sort of submarine forest in the shallow
water all round our coasts, the upper edge of which is
just visible at the lowest ebb of the spring-tides ; and it
affords shelter and food to a vast abundance of marine
animals. Many of the species of the laminarian zone are
peculiar, and they are often remarkable for the brilliancy
of their coloration.

A third zone was termed by Forbes the ' coralline zone,'
and it extends from about fifteen fathoms to fifty fathoms
in depth. In this zone, plants are chiefly represented by
the peculiar coral-like calcareous Algce known as the
' Corallines ' and ' Nullipores.' Animal life is extremely
abundant, and many of the species are peculiar.

Lastly, Forbes recognised a fourth or 'deep-sea coral

EDWARD FORBES. 211

zone,' extending from fifty fathoms to about one hundred
fathoms or more in depth. In this zone animal life is
much less abundant than in the preceding, and among the
more characteristic types — in the northern seas, at any
rate — are certain kinds of corals, which only live and
flourish in deep water.

In his researches in the JEgean Sea, Forbes recognised
the occurrence of similar zones, but he thought they were
capable of further subdivision. He recognised in the
Eastern Mediterranean, in all, eight well-marked ' regions
of depth,' each of which is ' characterised by its peculiar
fauna, and when there are plants, by its flora.' The
lowest of these zones was beyond the limit of what he had
called the 'deep-sea coral zone,' and extended from a
hundred and five fathoms in depth to two hundred and
thirty fathoms, beyond which depth his explorations were
not carried. In this zone, animal life was extremely
sparse; the species were mostly small; and the shells
were mostly pale-coloured or white, in part, apparently,
owing to a deficient supply of light. As just remarked,
Forbes did not dredge at a depth of more than two
hundred and thirty fathoms, which at that time was
considered an extraordinary depth for the carrying out
of dredging operations. Owing to the great reduction
in the number of species of animals which he found at
this depth, he came to the conclusion that at depths
greater than this the animals would become fewer and
fewer, and that they would ultimately be found to dis-
appear altogether. In accordance with these observa-
tions, he placed the 'zero of animal life' at about
three hundred fathoms, and he concluded that at all

212 NATURAL HISTORY.

depths greater than this animal life would be found to be
altogether wanting.

Forbes's conclusions on this point met with the general
assent of naturalists, and it became an accepted doctrine
in zoology that animal life was wanting in the deeper
portions of the ocean. It would be out of place here
to detail the various steps which have led to an entire
reversal of Forbes's dictum on this point. Isolated
observations, both before and after Forbes's time, had
been recorded, which indicated the existence of animals
at great depths in the sea ; but these had been neglected
by naturalists, or had been looked upon with suspicion.
At present, however, the interest in these detached and
solitary observations is chiefly of an historical kind. Of
late years various nations, and notably our own, have
caused extensive and systematic explorations to be made
as to the physical and biological conditions prevailing
in the larger oceans. By various specially-equipped
expeditions — the most important of which was that of
the Challenger — the bottom of the deep sea has been
systematically explored by the dredge and trawl up to
depths of between three and four thousand fathoms, upon
a scale and with a completeness entirely beyond the reach
of any private individual. We now know that there is no
* zero of animal life' in the sea. So far from animals ceasing
to exist at depths greater than three hundred fathoms, they
are found at all depths in the sea. Nor are the animals of
the ' abyssal zone ' less numerous than those of shallower
waters. On the contrary, animal life exists in abundance
even at the greatest depths, where the temperature is
suitable; and it is the temperature of the water at the

EDWARD FORBES. 213

bottom, rather than the depth of the water, that is the
predominant factor in determining the nature and the
plentifulness of the forms of animals with which the floor
of ' the deep sea ' is peopled.

In addition to the investigations which he carried out
into the present distribution of animals and plants, and
particularly the laws which govern the occurrence of
animals at different depths in the sea, Forbes interested
himself greatly as to the causes of the presence of
particular types of animal or vegetable life in special
regions. As regards this subject, he was greatly assisted
by his wide knowledge both of the palseontological
department of natural history and also of geology proper.
Various of his published writings deal more or less
extensively with this problem ; but the one most generally
known is his famous memoir ' On the Connection between
the Distribution of the existing Fauna and Flora of the
British Isles, and the geological changes which have
affected their area, especially during the epoch of the
Northern Drift J ( ' Memoirs of the Geological Survey of
Great Britain,' vol. i., 1846). This memoir affords such
an admirable example of the way in which Forbes com-
bined and brought into a focus his varied knowledge of
zoology, palaeontology, and geology, that it may be well
to glance for a moment at some of the results at which he
arrived. In so doing, however, it will be best to leave
the animals altogether out of sight, and to restrict our
attention entirely to the conclusions which Forbes reached
as to the origin of the existing British plants, the problem
as regards these being of a less complex character than it
is in the case of the former.

214 NATURAL HISTORY.

It is to be remembered, to begin with, that in dealing
with this problem, Forbes started with a firm belief in the
doctrine of ' specific centres/ or geographical points from
which the individuals of each species have slowly diffused
themselves. The problem before Forbes, therefore, was
how to account, on the basis of ' specific centres,' for the
present distribution of animals and plants in Britain. As
regards the plants, which alone we shall consider here,
Forbes showed that there exist in Britain certain well-
marked areas or regions, characterised by peculiar types
which do not occur elsewhere. Of these botanical pro-
vinces he distinguished five, as follows :

(I.) An area which may be spoken of as the ' Asturian
area,' comprising the mountainous districts of the west and
south-west of Ireland. Here we meet with a number of
peculiar plants, comprising the Arbutus, the Mediterranean
Heath (Erica mediterranea\ and several peculiar species of
saxifrages. The nearest point in Europe where the same
plants are found growing as natives is in the Asturias, in
the north of Spain.

(II.) A second area comprises the south-west of England
(Devonshire and Cornwall principally), together with the
south-east of Ireland. In this area we find a number
of plants of what may be called the 'Armorican' type,
unlike those found in Britain generally, but intimately
related to the plants of the Channel Islands and of
Brittany and Normandy. Amongst these are the Cornish
Heath (Erica vagans), the Wild Madder (Rubiaper^rina\
the French Tamarisk (Tamarix gaUica), and various other
peculiar forms.

(III.) A third area comprises the south-east of England,

EDWARD FORBES. 21$

where the plants correspond in many respects to those of
the opposite coast of France, characteristic forms being the
Sainfoin (Onobrychis sativa), the Bryony (Bryonia dioica),
several species of Mullein ( Verbascum\ and the Box (Buxus
sempervirens). This is the least well defined of the areas
which Forbes distinguishes, though many of the land-snails
which it possesses are peculiar. Both as regards the plants
and the animals, however, the species are types which are
especially fond of districts where the white chalk is the
underlying formation, or where at any rate the soil is
calcareous. The peculiarities of their distribution, there-
fore, depend essentially upon the distribution of a soil
suitable for them.

(IV.) A fourth area may be distinguished by the name of
the Scandinavian or Arctic area, and comprises the High-
lands of Scotland, the higher parts of the Lake District of
Cumberland and Westmorland, and the more elevated
parts of Wales. Here we meet with numerous species of
plants identical with, or closely allied to, forms which are
characteristic of Scandinavia or of the Arctic regions.
Thus, we find the Blue Gentian (Gentiana nivalis), the
Dwarf Birch (Betula nana\ the Scotch Primrose {Primula
scotica\ the Alpine Veronica ( Veronica alpina\ two Dwarf
Willows (Salix herbacea and S. reticulata], and other
familiar northern types. There is, however, a progressive
diminution of these alpine forms of plants as we proceed
southwards ; the largest number of them being found in
the Highlands, a smaller number in the Lake District, and
a still smaller number in Wales.

(V.) The last area comprises all parts of the British
Isles not enumerated in the four regions previously

2l6

NATURAL HISTORY.

mentioned, and it is peopled by the general flora of our
country, which is everywhere present, alone or in com-
pany with the others. The plants of this area are

Map showing the Distribution of Plants in Britain. (After Forbes. )

identical with those of Central and Western Europe,
and may therefore be spoken of as forming the ' Germanic
type' of vegetation. This general flora of Britain com-
prises such universally distributed types as the daisy,

EDWARD FORBES. 217

the primrose, the buttercup, the lesser celandine, and,
in fact, our ordinary flowering-plants, together with our
common shrubs and trees. Some of the less abundant
species of this general flora are confined to the eastern
counties of England, and a considerable number of
common English types are not found to occur in Ireland.

The question next arises — how can the above remark-
able facts as to the distribution of plants in Britain be
accounted for? In attempting the solution of this
problem, Forbes points out three modes in which an
isolated area (such as the British Islands) might become
in the first place peopled by plants or animals :

(1) By special creation within the area.

( 2 ) By transport to it.

(3) By migration before isolation.

The first of these modes needs no consideration, as the
British animals and plants, taken as a whole, are identical
with those of the continent of Europe, and there is there-
fore no necessity, and indeed no room, for the supposition
that they were specially created for our area.

The second mode, namely introduction to the region by
transport, is insufficient. Supposing Britain to be, as it
now is, separated from the Continent, artificial or natural
means of transport might doubtless serve to explain the
existence with us of certain animals and plants ; but
it assuredly would not adequately account for the dis-
tribution of the general flora and fauna of our country.

The third hypothesis, therefore, alone remains — namely,
that our animals and plants have been introduced by
migration before isolation. In other words, our present
animals and plants have, in the main, simply reached us

2l8 NATURAL HISTORY.

by migrating hither at a time when Britain was not an
island, but was directly connected with other regions
by land. As regards the general or l Germanic ' flora,
there is no difficulty whatever in accepting this theory.
We have the most abundant evidence that at a geo-
logically very recent period (subsequent to the coming
into existence of our ordinary animals and plants),
Britain was directly connected with the continent of
Europe, the English Channel and the German Ocean
being in part or wholly converted into dry land. During
the same period of elevation, Ireland was united with
England, by the obliteration of the intervening sea.
It was, then, during the continuance of this land-con-
nection, that all our generally distributed plants and
animals migrated to our area from the Germanic regions
of the Continent. As this migration took place from
the east, the Germanic animals and plants necessarily
reached England at an earlier time than they found
their way to Ireland. We may further explain the
absence of certain common English plants and animals
(as, for example, snakes) from Ireland upon the sup-
position that the ultimate separation of Ireland from
England took place prior to the severance of the latter
country from the Continent.

Modern geological researches also enable us to explain,
without any difficulty, the existence in the Highlands of
Scotland and the mountainous districts of the north of
England and of Wales, of plants peculiar to Scandinavia
or to the Arctic regions. We know, namely, that during
the glacial period, the greater part of our islands
participated in the frigid and Arctic conditions which

EDWARD FORBES. 2 19

prevailed in Northern Europe, and in the northern portions
of North America. At this time, our mountains were
covered with ice and snow, and the general state of
things must have been very much what we now see in
the Arctic regions. During this period of glacial cold,
a great migration southwards of Arctic animals and plants
took place, and these, rinding suitable life-conditions,
established themselves far south of their former limits.
Thus, during this period the Icelandic Scallop (Pecten
islandicus\ and various other shellfish which are now
found living in Arctic seas, migrated as far as the coasts
of Britain, and we find their remains in the glacial clays
of the estuary of the Clyde, and elsewhere round our
coasts. Similarly various alpine and Arctic plants
invaded our area, and took advantage of the cold to
establish themselves on the low grounds and hills.
Contemporaneously with this southward migration of
northern plants and animals, we must suppose a like
movement to have taken place on the part of the animals
and plants which had previously inhabited our area.
These latter would be driven gradually farther and farther
south by the increasing cold, and a clear field would in
this way be left for the Arctic invaders.

When, however, the glacial period ended, and more
temperate conditions were gradually re-established, a
reverse movement would be set on foot The southern
forms of life would again move northwards, and piece
by piece reconquer the territory from which they had
been dispossessed; while the northern immigrants would
be driven, step by step, backwards towards the pole. But
as the climatic conditions became gradually less severe,

220 NATURAL HISTORY.

many of the Arctic animals and plants (the latter more
especially) would not retire northwards, but would be
driven from the low grounds to the more mountainous
parts of the country, when the temperature would still be
cold enough to suit them. Some of these, moreover,
would in this way succeed in maintaining a permanent
foothold in the country, since the elevation above the sea-
level to which they had retired, would secure them a suffi-
ciently low temperature for their existence. The above
processes must, of course, have been very slowly effected ;
but we need not doubt that Forbes's views on this point
were correct, and that the Scandinavian and Arctic plants
now living in the Scottish Highlands, in the Lake District,
and in Wales, are only the survivors of a much greater
number of northern types of life which invaded us during
the cold of the glacial period. We can also easily under-
stand, on this view, how it should be that the Highlands,
lying as they do nearer to the original home of the
northern invaders than either Cumberland or Wales,
should now possess a greater number of these Arctic
species than do the two districts last named.

There remain for consideration, the three smaller floras
which Forbes distinguished as occurring in the British
area. The plants characteristic of these three floras
are, according to Forbes, ' derived assemblages of plants
south of the great Germanic group. As the south of
England and of Ireland were in all probability unsub-
merged during the glacial epoch, they may have come
over either before, or during, or after that epoch. There
are strong reasons for believing they migrated before.'

The plants of the south-east of England, constituting

EDWARD FORBES. 221

what Forbes called the ' Kentish Flora,' must have been
derived from the north-western provinces of France, and
must have migrated into our area at a time when the
Strait of Dover had no existence. We have no evidence
as to the precise time when the Strait of Dover was
formed; but it is not improbable that its formation,
as believed by Forbes, was anterior to the severance of
the general land-connection between the eastern counties
of England and the opposite shores of Belgium and
Holland. In this case the Kentish flora would be con-
siderably older than the general ' Germanic ' flora of our
country.

The plants of the second or 'Armorican' flora
must have migrated into Devonshire, Cornwall, and
South-eastern Ireland, at a time when all these regions
were connected with one another and also with Brittany
and Normandy by land. According to Forbes's view,
this must have taken place at a time anterior to the
great glacial submergence of Britain; so that the
Armorican flora is also more ancient than either the
Scandinavian or the Germanic floras.

With regard to the Asturian flora of the south-west of
Ireland there are greater difficulties. The plants of this
flora are species which ' at present are forms peculiar to
or abundant in the great peninsula of Spain and Portugal,
and especially in Asturias.' There are, however, many
grounds for believing that these plants migrated from
Spain into Ireland at a period when there existed a direct
land-connection between these two regions, now separated
by such a wide stretch of sea. Difficult as it may appear
to establish any reasonable probability of there having

222 NATURAL HISTORY.

existed (since the differentiation of our existing species of
plants took place) a connection by continuous land
between Spain and Ireland, Forbes boldly faced the
problem. He brought forward geological and palaeonto-
logical evidence in support of the daring hypothesis that
towards the close of the Miocene period a great tract of
land, ' bearing the peculiar flora and fauna of the type now
known as Mediterranean, extended far into the Atlantic
— past the Azores — and that, in all probability, the great
semicircular belt of Gulf-weed ranging between the
fifteenth and forty-fifth degrees of north latitude, and
constant in its place, marks the position of that ancient
land, and had its parentage on its solid bounds.* Over
this land that flora, of which we have now a few fragments
in the west of Ireland, might with facility have migrated.'
On this hypothesis, the peculiar 'Asturian' plants of
Cornwall, Devonshire, and Western Ireland are the
remains of the oldest flora in the British Islands, and
their introduction into our area took place at the end of
the Miocene period.

* Tfhe Gulf-weed (Sargassum bacciferum] is the seaweed which gives rise to the
' Sargasso-sea ' so well known to navigators since the time of Columbus. Though
not now attached, it is very closely related to species of Sargassum which are
essentially littoral seaweeds, or live in shallow water near the shore. Eminent
botanical authorities, therefore, are of opinion that the Gulf- weed was at one time a
fixed seaweed, and that its present condition is an abnormal one. As the present
Gulf-weed does not propagate itself by fructification, but apparently simply by
breakage, this view would seem to be very probably correct. In this case there is
much to be said for the hypothesis of Forbes, that the present belt of Gulf-weed
in the Atlantic marks the position of an ancient coast-line, now deeply submerged.

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY
PERIOD.

ERASMUS DARWIN.

WE enter now upon the final phase of zoological science,
so far as we are here concerned — namely, the phase in
which naturalists definitely accepted the principle of
' Evolution ' as the key to biological problems of all
sorts, and more especially as explaining the much-vexed
question of the origin of ' species.' The two names which
are most intimately associated with the modern theory of
the origin of ' species ' by ' Descent with Modification ' —
the ' Descendenz-theorie ' of the Germans — are those of
Lamarck and of Charles Darwin. The former of these
wrote his 'Philosophic Zoologique' in the beginning of
the present century ; and the latter gave to the world his
epoch-making work on ' The Origin of Species by means
of Natural Selection' in the year 1859. The views put
forward in these two celebrated works will be shortly
sketched hereafter. In order, however, to trace with any
pretence to completeness the beginnings of the modern
theories as to the evolution of living beings, it is necessary

224 NATURAL HISTORY.

to return to the pre-Cuvierian period, and to glance at
the life and scientific opinions of Erasmus Darwin, the
grandfather of Charles Darwin, who may be regarded
as the first expositor, in any systematic form, of the
doctrine of the evolution of plants and animals from
pre-existent species.

Erasmus Darwin was born on the i2th of December
1731, at Elton Hall, near Newark, Nottinghamshire. He
was educated as a medical man, and had a most successful
professional career, first in Nottingham, then in Lichfield,
and finally in Derby. He married twice; and his son,
Robert Waring Darwin, the father of Charles Darwin, was
the offspring of his first marriage. He died in 1802.*
To quote Mr Grant Allen : f ' A powerful, robust, athletic
man, in florid health and of temperate habits, yet with the
full-blooded tendency of the eighteenth century vividly
displayed in his ample face and broad features, Erasmus
Darwin bubbled over with irrepressible vivacity, the
outward and visible sign of that overflowing energy which
forms everywhere one of the most marked determining
conditions of high genius. Strong in body and strong in
mind, a teetotaler before teetotalism, an abolitionist before
the anti-slavery movement, he had a great contempt for
weaknesses and prejudices of every sort, and he rose far
superior to the age in which he lived in breadth of view
and freedom from preconceptions.'

From very early years Erasmus Darwin had shown a

* An account of Erasmus Darwin is to be found in Dr Krause's ' Erasmus
Darwin und seine Stellung in der Geschichte der Descendenz-theorie,' 1880.
Further details are given in the same author's ' Charles Darwin und sein Verhaltniss
zu Deutschland,' 1885.

t Grant Allen, 'Life of Charles Darwin,' 1885.

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 225

strong leaning towards poetry, which in later life he was
enabled to indulge, not altogether to the advantage of his
reputation. To quote Mr Grant Allen once more, his
poetry, ' though ingenious as everything else he did, had a
certain false gallop of verse about it, which has doomed it
to become, since Canning's parody,* a sort of warning
beacon against the worst faults of the post-Augustan
decadence in the ten-syllabled metre.' Erasmus Darwin's
poetical works, however, though not worthy of preservation
as specimens of poetical art, derive a historical interest
from the scientific conceptions which they embody. The
best known of them is the curious treatise entitled * The
Botanic Garden.' The second part of this singular lucubra-
tion appeared anonymously in 1788, under the name of
'The Loves of the Plants;' the first part, entitled 'The
Economy of Vegetation,' not having been published till
1790. * The Botanic Garden ' dealt, in poetical fashion, with
the life of plants, and it was at first received with much
favour by the public, though its popularity was short-
lived, and at the present day it is probably never read
at all.

Erasmus Darwin's most famous and really most
important work was, however, his ' Zoonomia, or the Laws
of Organic Life,' the first edition of which was published
in London (1794-96), in two volumes quarto. The
special interest of this work lies in the fact that in it can
be traced the foreshadowing of a large portion of the
modern theory of the evolution of living beings. In so
far, therefore, as this is the case, it may be fairly claimed

* Canning wrote a parody upon Erasmus Darwin's ' Loves of the Plants ' with
the title ' Loves of the Triangles.'

O

226 NATURAL HISTORY.

that to Erasmus Darwin, rather than to Lamarck, belongs
the honour of having first given coherent expression to
those vague ideas as to the origin of species from pre-
existent species, which, floating formlessly in the minds of
many of the thinkers of this period, ultimately crystallised
into the modern theory of 'Descent with Modification.'
It is only, however, when read in the light of our present
knowledge that the real value of Erasmus Darwin's
'ZoonormV becomes evident, and that we can recognise
how greatly it was, as regards some of its leading ideas,
in advance of the time at which it was written. In this
respect, as remarked by Dr Krause, Erasmus Darwin
suffered a fate similar to that of Goethe, 'in whose
prophetic glances into the world of science the experts of
the day would see nothing but the melancholy con-
sequences of dilettanteism.'

It would be out of place here to enter into a detailed
analysis of a work so complex, and in many respects so
miscellaneous, as the 'Zoonomia;' but it may be of interest
to indicate to what extent it contained the germs of the
modern theories of evolution. It is to be remembered
that Erasmus Darwin lived and wrote at a time when the
great majority of naturalists believed implicitly in the
doctrine of the immutability of 'species.' A few writers
had ventured to suggest the possibility of the transmuta-
tion of species, but mostly in doubtful fashion, or upon
purely speculative grounds. Buffon, about the middle of
the eighteenth century, had clearly hinted in his ' Histoire
Naturelle ' at the possible, or even probable, evolution of
species from pre-existing species \ but he had so carefully
hedged upon the point, that his opinion was deprived of

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 227

almost all the weight which might otherwise have been
attached to it. Goethe, likewise, arrived at the idea of the
mutability of species, but he only expressed his views
' aphoristically,' and they met with no acceptance from the
world at large. Erasmus Darwin, however, firmly grasped
and clearly laid down many of the principles which are
involved in the modern theories of the evolution of
species. His views on this question are mostly contained
in the section of the 'ZoonormV which deals with the
function of reproduction ; but most of the ideas to which
he had been led had been more or less explicitly
propounded in the previously published 'Loves of the
Plants.'

In the first place, he not only recognised the natural
variations which present themselves in different individuals
of a species, but also those which are the result of
artificial or accidental cultivation. Thus, he pointed out
the numerous structural peculiarities which have been
induced in special breeds of such animals as horses and
dogs, which have been long exercised for particular
purposes; and he drew attention to the fact that some
of our domestic animals had undergone changes so great
that it was now no longer possible to determine with
certainty from what wild species they had their origin.
He also indicated that variations, sometimes of con-
siderable importance, such as the presence of an additional
digit, or the want of the tail, might occur, and might
become permanent.

In the second place, he clearly recognised the principle
of heredity; and he pointed out that not only might
the structural peculiarities of individual animals be trans-

228 NATURAL HISTORY.

mitted to their offspring, but that even some of the
habits of the parents may be similarly handed on to the
young. It is only, he remarks, from the imperfection
of language that we speak of a young organism as being
a new animal. The young animal is ' in truth a branch
or elongation of the parent ; since a part of the embryon-
animal is, or was, a part of the parent; and therefore
in strict language it cannot be said to be entirely new at
the time of its production.'

In the third place, he divined that the community of
fundamental structure which can be shown to underlie
the differences which separate different groups of animals,
affords an d priori presumption in favour of a community
of descent for these groups. On this point, he remarks :
'When we revolve in our minds the great similarity of
structure which obtains in all the warm-blooded animals,
as well quadrupeds, birds, and amphibious animals, as
in mankind; from the mouse and bat to the elephant
and whale; one is led to conclude that they have been
alike produced from a similar living filament.'

Up to this point, then, Erasmus Darwin had obviously
grasped several of the leading principles in the modern
theory of the Origin of Species by ' descent with modifica-
tion.' He understood the principles of variation and
inheritance, and he comprehended the importance of
'homologous' structures as proving blood-relationship.
Some of his further views, however, were more akin to
those afterwards put forth by Lamarck than to those
which were expounded by his illustrious grandson in
the ' Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection.'
Thus, he seems to have thought that interbreeding

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 229

between different species of animals was a probable cause
of modification. Again, he appears to ascribe to the
desires of the individual a greater power in producing
modifications of its structure than modern zoologists
would be disposed to allow. On this subject his views
are unfortunately not as unequivocal as might be wished,
since, though he uses the word ' desires,' it is not clear
that he does not really mean the needs of the animal, in
which case he would only mean what Lamarck in his
writings understood by the term 'besoins.' Erasmus
Darwin's views on this point are so interesting and
remarkable that we may quote in full the passage in
which they are set forth :

' From their first rudiment, or primordium, to the
termination of their lives, all animals,' he remarks,
'undergo perpetual transformations; which are in part
produced by their own exertions in consequence of their
desires and aversions, of their pleasures and their pains,
or of imitations, or of associations ; and many of
these acquired forms or propensities are transmitted to
their posterity.

'As air and water are supplied to animals in sufficient
profusion, the three great objects of desire which have
changed the forms of many animals by( their exertions
to gratify them, are those of love, hunger, and security.
A great want of one part of the animal world has
consisted in the desire of the exclusive possession of
the females; and these have acquired weapons to
combat each other for this purpose, as the very thick,
shieldlike, horny skin on the shoulder of the boar is
a defence only against animals of his own species,

230 NATURAL HISTORY.

who strike obliquely upwards, nor are his tusks for
other purposes, except to defend himself, as he is not
naturally a carnivorous animal. So the horns of the
stag are sharp to offend his adversary, but are branched
for the purpose of parrying or receiving the thrusts of
horns similar to his own, and have therefore been
formed for the purpose of combating other stags for the
exclusive possession of the females; who are observed,
like the ladies in the times of chivalry, to attend the
car of the victor.

'The birds which do not carry food to their young,
and do not therefore marry, are armed with spurs for
the purpose of fighting for the exclusive possession of
the females, as cocks and quails. It is certain that
these weapons are not provided for their defence against
other adversaries, because the females of these species
are without this armour. The final cause of this
contest among the males seems to be, that the
strongest and most active animal should propagate the
species, which should thence become improved.

'Another great want consists in the means of pro-
curing food, which has diversified the forms of all
species of animals. Thus the nose of the swine has
become hard for the purpose of turning up the soil
in search of insects and of roots. The trunk of the
elephant is an elongation of the nose for the purpose
of pulling down the branches of trees for his food, and
for taking up water without bending his knees. Beasts
of prey have acquired strong jaws or talons. Cattle
have acquired a rough tongue and a rough palate to
pull off the blades of grass, as cows and sheep.

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 231

Some birds have acquired harder beaks to crack nuts,
as the parrot. Others have acquired beaks adapted
to break the harder seeds, as sparrows. Others, fqr
the softer seeds of flowers, or the buds of trees,
as the finches. Other birds have acquired long beaks
to penetrate the moister soils in search of insects or
roots, as woodcocks ; and others, broad ones to filtrate
the water of lakes, and to retain aquatic insects, as
ducks. All which forms seem to have been gradually
produced during many generations by the perpetual
endeavour of the creatures to supply the want of food,
and to have been delivered to their posterity with
constant improvement of them for the purposes required.

'The third great want among animals is that of
security, which seems much to have diversified the
forms of their bodies and the colour of them; these
consist in the means of escaping other animals more
powerful than themselves. Hence some animals have
acquired wings instead of legs, as the smaller birds,
for the purpose of escape. Others, great length of fin
or of membrane, as the flying-fish and the bat. Others,
great swiftness of foot, as the hare. Others have acquired
hard or armed shells, as the tortoise and the Echinus
marinus [the sea-urchin]. Mr Osbeck, a pupil of
Linnaeus, mentions the American frog-fish, Lophius
histrio, which inhabits the large floating islands of sea-
weed about the Cape of Good Hope, and has fulcra
resembling leaves, that the fishes of prey may mistake
it for the seaweed which it inhabits.

'The contrivances for the purposes of security extend
even to vegetables, as is seen in the wonderful and

232 NATURAL HISTORY.

various means of their concealing or defending their
honey from insects, and their seeds from birds. On
the other hand, swiftness of wing has been acquired
by hawks and swallows to pursue their prey; and a
proboscis of admirable structure has been acquired by
the bee, the moth, and the humming-bird, for the
purpose of plundering the nectaries of flowers. All
which seem to have been formed by the original living
filament, excited into action by the necessities of the
creatures which possess them, and on which their
existence depends.'

It is a matter of great interest to note in the fore-
going passage that Erasmus Darwin had got hold of
one side of the principle which his grandson subsequently
elaborated into his theory of * Sexual Selection' — the
principle, namely, that certain structural peculiarities can
be acquired, and when acquired may be intensified in
the process of inheritance, owing to the fact that only
those males possessing the peculiarity have the oppor-
tunity of leaving descendants. Erasmus Darwin, how-
ever, ascribed to a 'final cause' what Charles Darwin
would have regarded as a result. We also see in the
above, that Erasmus Darwin clearly recognised the
significance and importance of what are now called
'protective resemblances.'* On the other hand, he
curiously inverts the case where he speaks of the con-
trivances by which plants protect or conceal their honey
from insects; and no one has done more than his own

* In other passages he gives a much fuller account of protective resemblances
among animals, and adduces many instances, as to which he says that though the
'final cause' is easily understood, 'the efficient cause would seem almost beyond
conjecture.'

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 233

grandson to prove how numerous, varied, and complex
are the contrivances by which many plants attract insects,
for the purpose of having their seeds fertilised.

In another passage, Erasmus Darwin makes special
note of the extraordinarily rapid multiplication of living
beings, and he recognised that the great majority of
the young of each species must of necessity perish
before reaching maturity. In this, however, he saw
nothing more than a provision of nature to prevent the
species, as a species, from suffering extinction. He
failed, therefore, just at the point where Charles
Darwin succeeded; and he does not appear to have
suspected that it is this fact which forms the starting-
point of the long series of causes concerned in the
origination of new species. No traces, in fact, of the
law of ' Natural Selection,' as subsequently set forth
by Charles Darwin, can be detected in his utterances
upon this subject

With regard to the general conclusions at which
Erasmus Darwin arrived, he concluded that 'all animals
have a common origin, namely from a single living
filament, and that the difference of their forms and
qualities has arisen only from the different irritabilities
and sensibilities, or voluntarities, or associabilities, of
this original living filament.' Hence he thought it
' not impossible but the great variety of species of animals
which now tenant the earth may have had their origin
from the mixture of a few natural orders.' Indeed,
he goes further than this would imply, since he says
in a later passage : ' From thus meditating on the great
similarity of the structure of the warm-blooded animals,

234 NATURAL HISTORY.

and at the same time of the great changes they undergo
both before and after their nativity ; and by considering
in how minute a portion of time many of the changes of
the animals above described have been produced ; would
it be too bold to imagine that all warm-blooded animals
have arisen from one living filament, which THE GREAT
FIRST CAUSE endued with animality, with the power
of acquiring new parts, attended with new propensities
directed by irritations, sensations, volitions, and associ-
ations; and thus possessing the faculty of continuing to
improve by its own inherent activity, and of delivering
down those improvements by generation to its posterity,
world without end ? '

It is clear, therefore, that Erasmus Darwin not only
taught the doctrine of the origin of species by descent
with modification, but he regarded the course of develop-
ment as an ascending one. This is rendered quite certain
by a still later passage, in which he expresses the opinion
that, 'from the beginning of the existence of this terra-
queous globe, the animals which inhabit it have con-
stantly improved, and are still in a state of progressive
improvement.' He adds, 'this idea of the gradual genera-
tion of all things seems to have been as familiar to the
ancient philosophers as to the modern ones; and to
have given rise to the beautiful hieroglyphic figure of
the *£urov *>ov, or first great egg, produced by NIGHT — that
is, whose origin is involved in obscurity, and animated
by t^os, that is, by DIVINE LOVE ; from whence proceeded
all things which exist'

Not only did Erasmus Darwin accept the principle of
evolution as applied to living beings; but he quotes

THE DAWN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 235

with approval the idea which Hume had put forth, that
the globe itself 'might have been gradually produced
from very small beginnings, increasing by the activity of
its inherent principles rather than by a sudden evolution
of the whole by the Almighty fiat.' Nor did he regard
this view as being in the smallest degree antagonistic
to the Theistic conception of the universe ; for he adds :
'What a magnificent idea of the infinite power of THE

GREAT ARCHITECT ! THE CAUSE OF CAUSES ! PARENT OF
PARENTS ! ENS ENTIUM !'

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES.

LAMARCK.

UP to the middle of the present century, naturalists in
general had regarded 'species,' both of animals and
plants, as immutable entities, founded upon abstract
conceptions in the mind of a Creative Being, and
necessarily incapable of modification except within the
narrowest limits. It was held that each species had
been created with a determinate and invariable organisa-
tion, by which it was specially adapted to the particular
region which it inhabited. On this view, the habits of
the species were the necessary result of its organisation,
and as the latter was believed not to vary, so it was
assumed that the former were also invariable. We have
seen that Edward Forbes held this opinion, and that
it was to the same doctrine that Cuvier lent the support
of his immense influence and his vast learning.

At the present day, it is questionable if there exist
any naturalists who regard ' species ' as being independent
creations, in the sense in which Cuvier and Edward
Forbes held that they were. The principle of evolution,

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. . 237

on the other hand, is, in one form or another, almost
or quite universally admitted. Opinions may and do
differ as to the extent to which evolution has operated,
and as to the precise method or methods in which the
process has been carried out. Admittedly, also, there
are still many difficulties remaining unexplained, or only
partially explained, by any theory of evolution. All
naturalists, however, are now willing to admit that the
existing species of animals have been produced by the
gradual modification of pre-existing species, and that
these, in turn, have been evolved from a still older series
of specific forms.

The successful accomplishment of this revolution in
the Philosophy of Zoology must be associated with the
great name of Charles Darwin. We have seen, however,
that the application of the principle of evolution to
the solution of the problems of organic life was first
systematically attempted by Erasmus Darwin, at the end
of last century. In the beginning of the present century,
the same principle was applied, more rigidly, and with
greater completeness, to the problem of the origin of
species by the celebrated French zoologist, De Lamarck,
whose life and writings may be briefly glanced at
here.

Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, usually known
as the Chevalier de Lamarck, was born on the ist of
August 1744, at Bezantin, a small village in Picardy. He
was of noble descent, but his father was poor, and being
the youngest of a large family he was educated with a view
to entering the church. He had, however, an invincible
repugnance to a clerical life, and when his father died in

238 NATURAL HISTORY.

1760, he at once abandoned his studies, and betook
himself straightway to the French army, which was at
that time in Germany. He was admitted as a volunteer in
a regiment of Grenadiers, and the next day distinguished
himself so highly on the field of battle, that he was at
once made an officer. His military career was, how-
ever, shortly thereafter brought to an abrupt close, in
consequence of an injury inflicted upon him in sport by
one of his companions, which necessitated the perform-
ance of a severe surgical operation, and left him
permanently unfitted for the life of a soldier. He was
therefore compelled to earn his own living as best he
could, and to begin with he became a banker's clerk, a
position in which he remained a long time. For four
years he studied medicine, but he ultimately abandoned
this, and devoted the whole of his spare time to scientific
studies, his favourite subjects at first being meteorology
and botany.

To the study of botany in particular Lamarck applied
himself with the greatest diligence; and in 1778 he
published his first book, the 'Flore Frangaise,' This was
a sort of descriptive catalogue of all the known species of
plants in France, and its special object was to allow of
the ready identification of any unknown plant. The
method of arrangement adopted in this work is what has
been called the ' dichotomous ' or 'binary' arrangement,
a method which has the merit of great simplicity, though
in itself essentially artificial. Lamarck was perfectly
acquainted with the natural system of classification of plants,
which had been introduced into botany by the Jussieus ;
and he fully recognised the merits of this system as a

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 239

philosophical arrangement. He recognised, however, that
the very merits of the natural classification render it
difficult of use by beginners. A natural arrangement can-
not be employed without difficulty for the mere purpose
of identifying an unknown species. On the other hand,
an artificial system, like that introduced into botany by
Linnaeus, can be used with the utmost ease in the identi-
fication of species, though it has the philosophical demerit
of associating together forms which have no real relation-
ships to one another. The method employed by Lamarck
in the ' Flore Frangaise ' was a sort of combination of
the natural and artificial methods of classification. The
' dichotomous ' or analytical method consists, in fact, in a
classification of natural objects by means of positive and
negative characters, the characters selected being always
obvious and easily recognised. In the identification of a
species, therefore, the choice is always restricted to one of
two opposite characters, and the method proceeds by
constantly dividing and subdividing by two. The dicho-
tomous method of classification, as adopted by Lamarck
in botany, has been used also in natural history. When
one has to deal with very large groups of nearly allied
species, such, for example, as the different groups which
constitute the order of the Beetles, or in the case of the
different species of a single large genus, the dichotomous
method is sometimes extremely useful. It is, however,
distinctly an artificial method, and labours under the
inherent weakness that a group defined by a negative
character only must be artificial in principle, and is hardly
likely to prove in actual practice to be natural even by
accident.

240 NATURAL HISTORY.

At the time when Lamarck published his 'Flore
Frangaise,' botany, owing largely to the influence of
Rousseau, was a favourite subject of study in France ;
and the work was very favourably received. Its publica-
tion led to his obtaining the friendship and patronage of
Buffon, and also to his being appointed to a subordinate
place in the botanical department of the Academy of
Sciences. Buffon likewise sent him, as tutor to his son,
on a tour through Europe, and obtained for him at the
same time a sort of official commission to visit foreign
botanical gardens and museums, whereby he much in-
creased his knowledge of plants and animals. Lamarck
now continued to prosecute diligently his studies on
plants, and published some large and excellent botanical
treatises ; but unfortunately he remained poor, and with-
out any remunerative or permanent employment. Ulti-
mately he was appointed curator of the botanical collec-
tions of the 'Cabinet du Roi.' In 1793, however, even
this ill-paid post was suppressed by the National Assembly,
when the ' Cabinet du Roi ' became converted into the
Museum of Natural History and the 'Jardin des Plantes.'
In this new institution Lamarck was called upon to take
the professorship of the Vermes and Insecta of Linnaeus,
or, as we should now say, of the Invertebrate Animals.

At this time, the Invertebrate animals were exceedingly
ill understood, if we except the Insecta, being, in fact,
very much in the condition in which they had been left by
Linnaeus. Besides, Lamarck, who was now fifty years
old, had not previously studied zoology closely, and was
very imperfectly acquainted with any of the groups of the
Invertebrates, except the Molluscs, the shell-fish having

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 241

always been one of his favourite subjects of study. It
was characteristic of the ardent and enthusiastic tempera-
ment of the man, and of the thoroughness with which he
threw himself into his work, that starting in this way, in
advanced life, and with a subject almost new to him, he
should have been able finally to give to the world that
gigantic and classical exposition of his special depart-
ment known as the ' Histoire Naturelle des Animaux sans
Vertebres.' The first edition of this great and famous
work was published between the years 1815-1822, in
seven octavo volumes, of which five were written wholly
by Lamarck himself. Owing to the failure of his sight,
he was assisted in the part relating to the insects by
Latreille ; and when his sight wholly gave way, the
remainder of the work was written by Valenciennes, or
drawn up by one of his daughters from his previously
written notes and papers. The second edition of this
work, edited by Deshayes and Henri Milne-Edwards, is
the one now generally used. It is in eleven volumes
octavo, and was published between 1835 and 1845. It is
not necessary here to enter into any detailed analysis of
this wonderful work. It is still indispensable to working
zoologists, in almost all the groups of Invertebrate
animals; and the classification adopted in it is in many
respects a great improvement upon any that had preceded
it. His primary division of the animal kingdom into
' Apathetic/ ' Sentient,' and ' Intelligent ' animals, even if
it expresses an underlying truth, is one practically in-
applicable. It is, however, to Lamarck that we owe the
exceedingly useful general name of ' Invertebrate Animals '

for the entire series of animals below the Vertebrata,

p

242 NATURAL HISTORY.

Lamarck's later life was an unfortunate one, and it was
greatly to the discredit of his countrymen, usually so
prompt to recognise and reward genius, that it should
have been so. He was attacked by a disease of the eyes,
which at first led only to an impairment of vision, but
which terminated in total blindness. His limited savings
had been lost in some unlucky investment, and he was
thus deprived not only of his employment but also of the
means of life. His closing years were therefore passed in
extreme poverty and in helplessness, though the latter
affliction was to some extent alleviated by the devoted
affection of one of his daughters. He died on the iSth of
December 1829, in the eighty-fifth year of his age.

The name of Lamarck can never be forgotten in the
history of zoology ; and his great work on the Invertebrate
Animals would alone have been sufficient to secure this.
He also left a permanent mark in certain special groups
of Invertebrates, and particularly as regards the Mollusca;
his labours as to living and fossil shell-fish having been
of great extent, and having produced results of great
value. Lamarck, however, was very much more than a
mere observer, describer, or classifier of animals. He
possessed a singularly original mind, prone to generalisa-
tion, and bold to rashness in its conceptions. In all
the subjects which he touched, he showed this tendency ;
and it is no matter for surprise to find him the author
of such books as the 'Systeme analytique des Connais-
sances positives de 1'Homme3 and the * Philosophic
Zoologique,' to say nothing of his writings on the Theory
of Chemistry or on Hydrogeology. The most famous
of his philosophical or theoretical treatises is his ' Philo-

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 243

sophie Zoologique/ published in 1809, in two volumes
octavo ; and the fame of this rests in large part upon the
fact that it was here that he first laid down what may be
regarded as the earliest definite theory of evolution, as
applied to living beings.

The only parts of Lamarck's theoretical views with
which we are specially concerned here, are those relating
to the nature of 'species,' and as to the way in which
species originated. Up to this time, naturalists in general
believed that though ' species ' might be capable of varia-
tion, such variations were only possible within certain
definite limits. On this view, a species might oscillate
backwards and forwards on both sides of a central line,
but it would sooner or later return to the position of
equilibrium represented by the type-form of the species.
This view was the one held by the illustrious Cuvier,
and by many naturalists long after the time of Lamarck.
Many, indeed, believed that ' species ' of animals and
plants were special creations, and as such necessarily in-
capable of transmutation. This, for example, was, as has
been seen, the view held by Edward Forbes. A few
observers (such as Dr Erasmus Darwin, Isid. Geoffroy
St Hilaire, and Goethe) had begun to doubt the stability
or permanence of species as early as the end of the
eighteenth century. Lamarck not only reached this belief
independently, but clearly formulated it, first in 1801, then
in the 'Philosophic Zoologique ' in 1809, and finally in
the introduction to the 'Animaux sans Vertebres' in
1815.

Lamarck was led to his views as to the transmutability
of species by his study of varieties, the ever-recurring

244 NATURAL HISTORY.

stumbling-block of systematic zoologists. The general
ideas which are in the minds of naturalists when they
speak of ' species ' are expressed by the definition, that
a ' species' of animals consists of an assemblage of indi-
viduals^ all resembling each other, and producing their like by
generation. Thus, all wolves* resemble each other and
produce fertile young; hence wolves constitute a single
'species,' the Cams lupus of Linnaeus. Similarly, the
individuals of the lion, tiger, brown bear, and so on,
resemble each other and produce fertile young, thus con-
stituting so many distinct ' species ' of animals. There is,
however, the obvious difficulty that the individuals of any
species do not altogether resemble each other. They
resemble each other in generals, but not in particulars.
All wolves are alike, but they are not absolutely alike.
Besides, in many cases the differences which exist in the
individuals which compose any given species may be
very considerable; and so far as our observation goes,
they may be permanent differences. This is most con-
spicuously the case among our domesticated animals, such
as the dog or pig. Such species are known by every
one to contain certain groups of individuals which differ
extraordinarily from each other ; and the differences
distinctive of these groups are to all appearance as per-
sistent as the differences which separate distinct species.
Thus, to take the case of dogs, the mastiff, greyhound,
bulldog, terrier, and so on represent such groups of differ-
ing individuals, which in common language are known
as different ' breeds ' or ' races ' of dogs. Such breeds are
in some cases known to have existed without notable

* The European wolves, of course, are meant.

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 245

change from the very earliest historical times onwards.
Though, for readily intelligible reasons, seen in a more
marked form in domestic animals than in wild ones, such
groups of differing individuals are seen in a vast number
of species of animals from the lowest to the highest.
Most ' species ' of animals, therefore, include one or more
'varieties;' .and this is a phenomenon quite as well seen
in the vegetable kingdom as amongst animals.

Now, the question arises — at what point do the differ-
ences which distinguish a 'variety' from a 'species'
become so pronounced, that we conclude that we have a
fresh species to deal with, and not a mere variety of an
old species ? This is a point upon which naturalists have
not as yet succeeded in laying down any fixed rules.
From the nature of the problem, it is extraordinarily
difficult to detect any underlying principle to guide us in
practice in deciding between species and varieties.
Hence, in what are called 'variable' genera (such, for
example, as the genus Rubus, including the brambles, or
the genus Salix, containing the willows), observers have
never been able to agree as to the precise number of
species which exist, even in a small country like Britain
— since what one observer sets down as two species,
another equally competent authority will regard as being
only a species and its variety. The test usually adopted
by naturalists in distinguishing between varieties and
species is what has been called the 'physiological test.'
That is to say, when the individuals of a given assem-
blage of animals or plants are fertile, and are capable of
giving rise to fertile offspring, then they are usually
regarded as constituting a single species^ however greatly

246 NATURAL HISTORY.

they may differ among themselves in structure or appear-
ance. 'Varieties/ therefore, are supposed to be always
capable of interbreeding with the type-form of the species.
On the other hand, if two groups of animals or plants,
otherwise nearly resembling each other, are found to be
incapable of producing fertile offspring by intercrossing,
then they are regarded as constituting two distinct species.
The physiological test, however, is wholly inapplicable
to extinct organisms, where the same difficulties as to the
distinction between species and varieties exist as among
living forms. It also cannot be applied without some
serious reservations even as regards living beings, since
some organisms which are otherwise clearly recognisable
as distinct species, are undoubtedly capable of producing
fertile offspring by interbreeding. This is seen in the
case of various plants, and in a few instances among
animals.

Lamarck was profoundly impressed with the difficulty
of separating species from varieties, and also with the
very wide range of the variability shown by many animals
and plants. To this point he recurs again and again.
' In proportion,' says he, * as we gather together the pro-
ductions of nature — in proportion as our collections
become more and more extensive, in the same propor-
tion do we see blank after blank filled up and our lines
of separation effaced. We find ourselves reduced to an
arbitrary determination, which at one time compels us to
seize on the most minute varietal differences as characters
of what we call a species, while at another time it forces
us to set down those slightly differing individuals of
which other observers make a species, as really nothing

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 247

more than a variety? Every working naturalist will
heartily concur in the truth of these remarks.

Lamarck, therefore, though willing to accept the
ordinary definition of a * species' as 'a collection of
similar individuals which were produced by individuals
like themselves,' rejected the idea of the constancy of
species. He maintained that those characters of a species
which we call * specific' were liable to variation, and he
supposed that this variation was indefinite. Hence, he
maintained that the constancy of species is not absolute,
but only relative to the circumstances in which all the
individuals of the species are placed.

Species, then, according to Lamarck, represent groups
of individuals which are only stable so long as their
environment remains essentially unchanged. That species
should appear to us to be permanent, he explained
upon the ground that our observations had only extended
over a few thousand years, and that this period had not
been long enough to allow of the transformation of
any one species into any other, especially as terrestrial
changes have been quite slight and unimportant during
the whole period embraced by human observation.

'A multitude of facts,' says Lamarck, * teach us that
in proportion as the individuals of our " species " change
their locality, their climate, their manner of living, or
their habits, in the same proportion they become subject
to influences which bit by bit change the consistence
and proportions of their parts, their form, their faculties,
even their organisation, in such manner that, given suffi-
cient time, everything in them participates in the muta-
tions to which they are exposed.

248 NATURAL HISTORY.

* In the same climate, the first result of a wide difference
of habitat or environment is to give rise to simple
variation of the individuals affected by these differences.
But in the progress of time the prolonged difference of
habitat in individuals which go on living and reproducing
themselves under similar conditions, gives rise in them
to differences which become to some extent essential to
their existence. Hence, in the course of many succeeding
generations, individuals which belonged, to begin with,
to one species, find themselves ultimately transformed into
another, new and distinct species.

'Suppose, for example, that the seeds of a grass, or of
any other plant natural to a humid meadow, should by
any chance be suddenly transported to the slope of a
neighbouring hill, where the soil, although more elevated,
was still sufficiently moist to allow of the plant maintain-
ing its existence. Suppose, further, that after having
lived there, and propagated itself there for a number of
times, it should by degrees reach the dry and almost arid
soil of a mountainous ridge. If the plant should succeed
in finding a subsistence in its new habitat, and should
perpetuate itself during a series of generations, it would
ultimately become to such an extent modified, that the
botanist who might find it would make out of it a new
species.

1 The same thing happens in the case of animals which
have been forced to change their climate, their manner
of living, and their habits \ but in their case the causes
which I shall subsequently cite demand a still longer
time than among plants, before their influence can pro-
duce noteworthy changes in individuals.'

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 249

Holding the above opinions as to the stability of
species, Lamarck necessarily wholly abandoned the view
that the animals and plants now in existence had been
produced de novo, just as and where we now find them.
He, of course, similarly rejected the view that the animals
and plants of each successive geological period had been
created specially, en masse, for that period. He admitted
partial and local catastrophes ; he would hear nothing of
universal catastrophes. On the contrary, his views led
irresistibly to the belief that the animals and plants of
each successive period of the earth's history, including
the present period, had been produced by variation from
animals and plants previously in existence.

Lamarck was not, however, clear as to the fact that
successive races of animals and plants had during the
progress of the ages become extinguished, and had been
replaced by other different assemblages of living beings.
He treats of this subject in a well-known chapter of the
' Philosophic Zoologique,' entitled ' Des especes dites
perdus.' Upon the whole he is inclined to doubt if the
means taken by nature to conserve species and races
have been so inefficient and imperfect that entire groups
could have become extinct. He admits that many fossil
animals are certainly distinct from any known living
species. Against this, he thinks, may be set off the fact
that our knowledge of living animals is still very im-
perfect. In the case of the Pal&otheria, and other large
Mammals described by Cuvier from the Tertiary rocks of
the Paris basin, he admits that it is impossible for living
representatives to exist, and yet to have escaped
observation. As regards these he is willing to admit

250 NATURAL HISTORY.

extinction; but he thinks that they have been exter-
minated by man.

On the other hand, in the case of marine animals, such
as shell-fish, where human agency certainly cannot have
caused extinction, he has a different theory. Such species,
he says, should not be regarded as really extinct, but
should rather be considered as belonging to existing
species — in the sense, namely, that the living types are
only the modified descendants of the fossil forms. The
real fact which, in his opinion, ought to astonish us is to
find among fossils any species which are identical with
living forms. 'This fact, which our collections place
beyond doubt, ought to lead us to the belief that the
fossil remains of animals which are still represented in the
living state, are those of which the antiquity is least. The
species to which such forms belong have, doubtless, not
yet had time to permit of their having varied to any great
extent.' Lamarck, therefore, had got hold of the prin-
ciple which Lyell afterwards employed with such effect in
his well-known classification of the Tertiary rocks.

Not only did Lamarck hold that the existing species of
animals had been produced by the gradual modification of
pre-existing species ; but he thought that the course of
modification had been, on the whole, a progressive and
not a retrograde one. He believed that the simpler forms
of life had been produced first, and the more complex
ones later — Man being the last evolved and the highest of
all animals. In order to account, however, for the exist-
ence at the present day of any simple or degraded types
of animal life, Lamarck thought it necessary to assume
that such simple forms were always being produced afresh

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 251

by spontaneous generation. Otherwise he thought that, in
the course of progressive modification, all the lowest forms
of living beings would long ere this have been ' improved
out of existence ' altogether. There is an interesting and
curious resemblance between the speculations of the
French philosopher on this and kindred subjects and the
notions which have been put forth by some writers even
in the last score of years.

The subject of the agencies which are concerned in the
production of modifications in species was dealt with by
Lamarck in a most interesting chapter of the ' Philosophic
Zoologique,' 'on the influence of circumstances on the
actions and habitudes of animals, and of these actions and
habitudes as causes which modify the organisation and
structure of animals.' The title of this chapter will of
itself show that he regarded the general organisation of an
animal as, in the long run, the outcome and expression of
its actions and its habits ; and he regarded these latter as
the direct result of the animal's environment. Hence, in
investigating the causes which have led to the production
of 'species,' Lamarck began with a consideration of the
action of external conditions.

It is an old and a natural idea that the organs of
animals were given to them for the purpose of adapting
them to the conditions under which they may happen to
be placed. Thus it is natural to the human mind to
think that the polar bear is white because it was created
to live among the snows of the Arctic regions; or that
the lion is tawny in colour because it is meant to live in
sandy deserts ; or that the long neck of the giraffe is a
pre-designed structure adapting it for feeding upon the

252 NATURAL HISTORY.

foliage of trees. Lamarck regarded this view of the
subject as a putting of the cart before the horse. He
thought that the adaptation between an animal and its
environment resulted from the fact that the animal had, so
to speak, been compelled to suit its structure to its sur-
roundings. He thought that it was the external condi-
tions which had gradually evoked the corresponding organ
or structure. In other words, he thought it was the
necessity for action which had produced the corresponding
parts.

The contrast between the older view on this subject
and that held by Lamarck may be shown by a single
example. The giraffe will answer the purpose very well.
The giraffe,* as is well known, lives in a region where
droughts are of common occurrence, and where therefore
the herbage is very liable to become burnt up and
destroyed. Being a large animal, it requires considerable
quantities of vegetable food ; and being gregarious in its
habits, it is clear that it could not exist except in a
country where plant-life flourished luxuriantly. Owing,
however, to the length of its neck, it is enabled to survive
the long African droughts, since it can browse upon lofty
shrubs and trees, which are not much affected even by a
prolonged want of rain.

Now, the older view of the matter would regard the
long neck of the giraffe as being a structure aboriginally
possessed by the species, and, in fact, specially given to
it for the purpose of adapting it for the conditions of its
life in its African home. On Lamarck's view of the

* The giraffe is one of the instances given by Lamarck of animals whose peculi-
arities have been produced by their environment, but his remarks on this particular
case are here amplified.

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 253

subject, on the other hand, it might be supposed that
the giraffe did not in the first instance possess the extraor-
dinarily elongated neck by which it is now characterised;
but that it resembled the ordinary Ruminants, to which
it is otherwise allied, in having a cervical region of the
normal length. It might further be supposed that, to begin
with, the climate of Africa was moister than it now is,
and that the regions inhabited by the giraffe were not
liable, as they now are, to prolonged periodic droughts.
If we next assume that the climate of Africa underwent
gradually a change, in consequence of which it became
drier, and droughts became more frequent, it is clear
that the existence of the giraffe would be rendered difficult
or precarious, because its short neck would not allow
it to reach the higher shrubs, and the ordinary ground
herbage might be destroyed for many months together.

According, however, to the conceptions of Lamarck,
the increasing frequency and severity of the droughts
would give rise to a gradual elongation of the neck of
the giraffe in successive generations, which would enable
the animal to dispense with the periodically destroyed
herbage, and to feed habitually on the foliage of trees
and shrubs. This gradual lengthening of the neck would
not, it need hardly be added, be produced in one
individual, but would be the result of the progressive
elongation of the cervical vertebrae in a long series of
generations. Hence, on Lamarck's view, the long neck
of the giraffe would have to be regarded as the direct
result of the surroundings of the animal, and not as a
pre-designed structure intended to meet foreseen con-
ditions.

254 NATURAL HISTORY.

We may pause for a moment here to ask the bearing
of the above explanation of the long neck of the giraffe on
the ordinary doctrine of design as displayed in nature. In
the coarse and rude teleology of the first half of the
present century, and of preceding periods, the long
neck of the giraffe would have been adduced as one
striking proof out of many, that the Creator had pro-
duced each species of animals as we now find it, and
had specially fashioned each to meet the conditions
present in the area within which it had been created.
To a teleology of this sort Lamarck's view is necessarily
and absolutely fatal. At the same time it is to be
remembered that Lamarck's theory is entirely compatible
with the belief in the existence of a Creator and of
design in nature. It is possible, namely, to believe that
the power enjoyed by the neck of the giraffe of lengthen-
ing under a given set of conditions formed an integral
part of the original design of the animal, or of the species
from which it was evolved. It may even be held that
the design which embraces the power of indefinite adap-
tation to varying conditions is of an infinitely higher order
than the design which merely adapts an animal for one
set of conditions, it being beforehand certain that those
conditions must ultimately give place to a different set.

In the same 'way, a much higher conception underlies
the theory of creation by evolution than is involved in
the older view of the separate creation of each species.
Lamarck has left us in no doubt as to what his own views
were on this point. Nor is there the smallest reason
to doubt the genuineness of his words, or to think that
his remarks — like some of those made by Buffon — were

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 255

merely intended to disarm the ecclesiastical prejudices of
his day.

'Without doubt,' says he, ' nothing exists save by the
will of the sublime Author of all things. But are we able
to lay down laws for Him in the execution of his will, or
to fix the methods in which He has carried out his
purposes ? Why should not His infinite power have been
able to create an order of things, which has successively
given rise to everything which we see, as well as to every-
thing which exists, but of the existence of which we are
ignorant?'

. Strictly speaking, according to Lamarck, circumstances
have in themselves no power of directly modifying the
organisation of an animal. Changed circumstances, how-
ever, give rise to changes in the needs ('besoins') of
animals; changed needs imply and necessitate changed
actions on the part of animals ; and if the changes of
circumstances become permanently established, so also
do the changes of habitudes thence resulting. But change
of habit implies corresponding change on the part of the
animal as to the organs which it most largely employs.
If an animal has enjoyed a particular habit of life, it has
necessarily used the organs which conform to that habit
and are in agreement with it. If, on the other hand, it
changes its habit of life, it must use more sparingly, or
cease to use, the organs which it formerly exercised, and
it must call into play another set of organs.

In the case of plants, which have no actions (in the
sense in which Lamarck used this term), and which then
cannot be properly said to have any habitudes, changed
conditions similarly produce changes of structure, some

256 NATURAL HISTORY.

organs becoming thereby more developed, while others
diminish or altogether disappear. In this case, however,
changed circumstances operate by inducing changes in
the nutrition of the plant, 'in its processes of absorption
and transpiration, in the quantity of heat, light, air, and
moisture which it habitually receives, finally in the pre-
dominance which may be established in some of its vital
movements over others.' Lamarck brings forward many
instances of the changes produced in plants by changed
circumstances, and expresses the opinion that in plants
such changes are more rapidly brought about than in
animals; since the causes which affect animals operate
very slowly, and are consequently difficult of appreciation
and recognition by us.

With regard to the nature of the circumstances which
are mainly operative in producing changes in animals,
Lamarck assigns the first place to the character of the
medium in which it lives — whether it be terrestrial, aerial,
or aquatic in its habits. He also attaches great import-
ance to the differences of temperature, moisture, and the
like in different regions, and thinks that such differences
are a great cause of variation in animals and plants.
Every one, he says, admits these great climatic differences ;
but 'what is not sufficiently recognised, or is even
altogether denied, is that each place itself is liable in the
course of time to changes of its climatic conditions;
these changes being effected with such slowness, in
relation to our lifetime, that we attribute to the existing
conditions a perfect stability? To this he elsewhere
adds that 'we may be sure that this appearance of
stability in natural things will always be taken, by the

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 257

generality of mankind, as real, because in general our
judgment is only relative to ourselves.' Our notion of
the permanence of 'species' is based, therefore, upon
our idea of the stability of the conditions existing in
each area; since species remain unchanged so long as
their environment remains the same, and the latter
changes so slowly as to elude our powers of observa-
tion.

Lamarck's doctrine that useful structures in animals
are really the result of the actions of surrounding
conditions, has been interpreted as implying that such
structures could be developed by repeated acts of volition
on the part of an animal. This, however, is a travesty
of his actual views,* and arises from confounding the
requirements ('besoins') of an animal, and the actions
thence resulting, with its wishes. As a good deal of
misconception has prevailed upon this point, it may be
well to quote one of the passages in which Lamarck
expresses his views in a concrete form :

'I propose to show,' he remarks, 'that the continued
use of an organ, together with the eiforts made by the
animal to adapt the organ for the purposes which its
surroundings render necessary, will strengthen, develop,
and enlarge that organ, or will create new organs which
are capable of discharging the functions which have
become needful.

'The bird which necessity conducts to the water for
the purpose of obtaining its food, separates its toes when
it wishes to strike the water or move upon its surface.

* This has been lately insisted upon by Professor P. Martin Duncan, in the
anniversary address to the Linnean Society for 1884, in which an excellent
summary of Lamarck's philosophico-zoological views is given.

Q

258 NATURAL HISTORY.

The skin which unites the toes at their bases acquires,
in consequence of the ceaselessly repeated separation
of the toes, the power of extension. Thus, in the course
of time, are formed the extended webs which unite the
toes of ducks, geese, and the like. Similar efforts to
swim, that is to say, to progress in a fluid element by
striking the water, have in like manner given rise to the
extension of the skin between the toes in frogs, turtles,
otters, beavers, and such like animals.

'On the contrary, a bird which is habituated by its
mode of life to perch on trees, and which is descended
from individuals all of which have had a similar habit,
necessarily possesses toes more elongated than, and
differently constructed to, those of the aquatic animals
just alluded to. Its claws, in course of time, become
lengthened, pointed, and curved, so that it can grasp
the branches of trees on which it so often reposes.

' In the same way, a bird frequenting the shore, which
does not wish to swim, but which nevertheless is obliged
to approach the margin of the water for the purpose
of catching its prey, is continually exposed to plunging
into the mud. Such a bird, then, being desirous to
save its body from becoming wet, makes every effort
to extend and lengthen its legs. From the long-continued
habit of extending the legs, contracted by this bird and
by all of its species, it results that the individuals of
the species are now found elevated, as it were, upon
stilts, having gradually obtained long naked legs, destitute
of feathers up to the thighs or even higher.

' Again, the same bird, wishing to fish without wetting
its body, is obliged to make continual efforts to lengthen

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 259

its neck. Now, the effect of such habitual efforts in
such a bird, and in all of its species, ought to be that
of producing in time a marked elongation of the neck;
and, as a matter of fact, such lengthening of the
neck is actually found in all shore-frequenting birds.'

It will be evident from the above, as from the entire
tenor of his arguments upon this subject, that Lamarck
does not mean that a mere act of volition, apart from
any positive action, could effect any change in the
structure of an animal. He assuredly did not mean,
for example, to imply that the long legs of wading birds
were the result of the fact that repeated generations
of these birds had gone on wishing that their legs were
a little longer. All that his theory would imply in such
a case is, that when a change in the previous condition
of a region had driven certain formerly terrestrial birds
into the habit of wading in streams, pools, or the sea,
for the purpose of obtaining food, the necessity for
keeping their bodies dry had ultimately brought about
a lengthening of the bones of the leg, and a disappear-
ance of part of their covering of feathers. In other
words, Lamarck really means that the constant efforts
made by any and every animal to bring itself into accord
with its surroundings inevitably leads in course of time
to corresponding changes of structure.

This point may be illustrated by an imaginary case.
As things stand at present, man has no necessity for
using his foot in prehension, his hand supplying all his
wants in this direction; and his great toe is therefore
practically useless as an organ of prehension. It is,
however, a well-known fact that men who leave the

260 NATURAL HISTORY.

foot in its natural condition, uncramped by artificial
coverings, have some power of using the great toe as-
a hinder thumb. This is exemplified in many sailors,
and in various savage tribes; and in such cases the
prehensile great toe is of much assistance in climbing.
It is also well-known that in individuals who have never
possessed, or who have lost the use of the hands, the
great toe can be trained by constant use to act as a
thumb, and the foot can thus be converted into a more
or less efficient hand. Suppose, however, that in some
particular region, circumstances should arise which should
render it advantageous or necessary for men to quit
the ground, and to take up their abode permanently
in trees. Such circumstances can be quite easily
imagined. In such a case, it would be of enormous
advantage to the individual that he should be able to
use his great toe in grasping, so as to help him in
climbing. We may assume, therefore, that each individual
would practise himself, consciously or unconsciously, in
using his feet as prehensile organs. We may also assume
that each individual would in the course of time succeed
in these prolonged attempts, and would ultimately acquire
a more or less complete power of 'opposing' the great
toe to the other digits, and so of using the foot to grasp
branches in climbing. Supposing, however, that the
conditions which drove men to reside in trees became
permanent, we cannot doubt that in each successive
generation this power of using the foot in grasping
would improve. We may rest assured that repeated
efforts to perform a particular function with a particular
organ must result in an increased ability on the part

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 261

of the organ to do the work demanded from it. It is,
moreover, certain that part passu with the change of
function of the great toe there would take place a
modification of its structure. It would gradually come
to be placed more and more at an open angle to the
other digits of the foot ; its muscles would become more
and more developed, giving it increased power and range
of movement ; an * opponent ' muscle might be developed ;
and, in all probability, the structure of the ankle would
become so far modified that the sole of the foot could
readily be turned inwards.*

The above case is, of course, a purely imaginary one;
but there is nothing in it which would be inconsistent
with universally admitted biological laws. It is, however,
also strictly consistent with the Lamarckian theory;
since it affords an instance in which repeated efforts
on the part of the individuals of successive generations
to use a particular organ in a particular way would result
in the gradual change of that organ, both as regards
function and structure, so as to suit it to the new require-
ments (besoins) of the individual.

As to the question how changes in the surrounding
conditions should give rise to corresponding changes in
the structures and organs of animals, Lamarck relied
principally upon the effects of use and disuse. No
doctrine in physiological science is better established
than that which teaches us that the habitual use of an
organ leads to a corresponding growth on the part of
the same. If we employ a particular muscle much, it

* This power of inverting the sole of the foot is naturally possessed by the
young of the human species, as is also the power of freely moving the great toe, both
being more or less extensively lost in later life.

262 NATURAL HISTORY.

will increase both in size and weight, and will at the
same time become more fully competent to discharge
its particular work. On the other hand, disuse of a
muscle leads, in the first place, to a decreased ability
on the part of the organ to perform its proper function.
Thus, the muscles of the left hand cannot in ordinary
people be used as efficiently as those of the right
hand, because they are less often used. If the disuse
be prolonged and habitual, the organ will become
diminished in size, and the ability to discharge its
function may be wholly lost. Thus, man possesses the
three muscles which are attached to the external ear,
and which enable many of the quadrupeds to move
their ears freely ; but in him they are extremely reduced
in size, and the power of employing them has, from
disuse, become almost, or entirely, lost. Finally, if
the disuse of an organ be complete, as when external
conditions no longer demand its employment, it may
become a mere rudiment, absolutely destitute of function.
This is the case, for example, with the eyes of certain
animals which spend their existence living underground
and in total darkness. Lamarck fully recognised the
important results which flow from the use or disuse
of organs ; and it was, therefore, to the effects of habit
that he chiefly ascribed the progressive modifications
which he believed to have affected the structure of all
living beings. He believed that a change in the sur-
rounding conditions would necessarily compel an animal
to modify its former habits of life; and that a change
in its habits would necessarily entail an increased use
of certain organs and a decreased use of others. The

THE TRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES. 263

organs upon which new and increased demands were
made would undergo a proportionate development in
size, and would simultaneously become better fitted for
their work. At the same time, they might become
modified in form, and thus might become better suited
for the purposes for which they were required. On
the other hand, the organs which were called into action
less frequently than they had previously been, would
gradually diminish in size, and might ultimately disappear.
By a continuance of this process through many successive
generations, the whole organisation of an animal might
become profoundly modified. This was therefore the
process by which, in the main, Lamarck believed that
'species' had been evolved out of other pre-existing
forms of life.

THE DOCTRINE OF PROGRESSIVE
DEVELOPMENT.

THE 'VESTIGES OF CREATION.'

BEFORE proceeding to give a sketch of the theory of
'Natural Selection,' as propounded by Charles Darwin,
a brief consideration may be fitly given to the celebrated
work entitled the 'Vestiges of Creation.' This well-
known treatise was first published in 1844, and the
tenth edition appeared in 1853, a sufficient proof of
the wide popularity which it enjoyed. Its author-
ship was never acknowledged during the lifetime of
its writer, and it was ascribed to various distinguished
persons, with the most varied qualifications for the
writing of such a work. Amongst others, Robert
Chambers was selected as the author of the 'Vestiges,'
and in this instance, as now" openly acknowledged, the
surmise was correct* As, however, the work was an
anonymous one, the personality of the writer may well

* A twelfth edition of the 'Vestiges' was published in 1884 (W. & R. Chambers),
containing a preface by Mr Alexander Ireland, in which the facts relating to the
authorship are given in detail.

THE DOCTRINE OF PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT. 265

be left out of account in the few remarks which will
here be made as to its general scope and teaching.

The * Vestiges ' not only dealt with the origin of the
various forms under which vitality has been manifested
in the past, or is exhibited at the present day ; but it also
took up the much wider and much more inscrutable
problem of the origin of life itself. It was therefore
more than simply an attempt to explain the origin of
'species.' The work is remarkable for the ability which
it displays in the handling of general principles, for the
closeness of its reasoning, for the clearness with which
fallacies are detected and exposed, for the lucidity of
its style, and for the wealth of its suggestions. It is,
nevertheless, inadequate for the purpose which the writer
proposed to himself as the object of his labours. It is,
namely, unmistakably, the work of a writer who had
mastered the general facts and principles of zoology and
the kindred sciences, but who at the same time was
without that minute knowledge of biological science
which can be obtained in no other way save by long-
continued and rigidly conducted first-hand investigation
into the phenomena presented by living beings. No fact,
indeed, stands out more clearly in the whole history
of science than the insufficiency of a merely general
knowledge for the establishment of generalisations of any
kind. Only the worker whose mind is stored with the
minutest details of his subject can safely enter upon
the task of generalisation.

Having premised so much, we may briefly sketch the
conclusions which are set forth in the 'Vestiges.' After
a general review of the relations of the earth to the

266 NATURAL HISTORY.

solar system, and of other astronomical considerations
which bear upon geology, an outline is given of the
known facts as to the life-history of the earth, and as to
the general succession and progression of organic types in
past time. With regard to the purely geological history
of the earth, the writer of the ' Vestiges ' concludes, with
Lyell, that 'there is nothing in the whole series of
operations displayed in inorganic geology, which may not
be accounted for by the agency of the ordinary forces
of nature.'

On the other hand, the past history of the earth is
not a mere record of physical changes. * Mixed up with
the geognostic changes, and apparently as a final object
connected with the formation of the globe itself, there is
another set of phenomena presented in the course of our
history — the coming into existence, namely, of a long suite
of living things, vegetable and animal, terminating in the
families which we still see occupying the surface. The
question arises — In what manner has this set of phe-
nomena originated? Can we touch at and rest for a
moment on the possibility of plants and animals having
likewise been produced in a natural way ; thus assigning
immediate causes of but one character for everything
revealed to our sensual observation ; or are we at once to
reject this idea, and remain content, either to suppose
that creative power here acted in a different way, or to
believe, unexaminingly, that the inquiry is one beyond our
powers ? '

In answering this question, the writer of the ' Vestiges '
decides unhesitatingly, as every naturalist would at the
present day decide, that we cannot consistently accept

THE DOCTRINE OF PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT. 267

natural causes as sufficiently explaining the phenomena of
the inorganic world, and at the same time invoke super-
natural causes to explain the phenomena presented by
living beings.

' It is surely,' he remarks, ' very unlikely, d priori, that in
two classes of phenomena, to all appearance perfectly
co-ordinate, and for certain intimately connected, there
should have been two totally distinct modes of the exercise of
the divine power. Were such the case, it would form a
most extraordinary, and what to philosophic considera-
tion ought to be a most startling, exception from that
which we otherwise observe of the character of the divine
procedure in the universe. Further, let us consider the
comparative character of the two classes of phenomena,
for comparison may of course be legitimate until the
natural system is admitted. The absurdities into which
we should thus be led must strike every reflecting mind.
The Eternal Sovereign arranges a solar or an astral
system, by dispositions imparted primordially to matter;
he causes, by the same majestic means, vast oceans to
form and continents to rise, and all of the grand meteoric
agencies to proceed in ceaseless alternation, so as to fit the
earth as a residence for organic beings. But when, in the
course of these operations, sea-weed and corals are to be
for the first time placed in those oceans, a change in his
plan of administration is required. It is not easy to say
what is presumed to be the mode of his operations. The
ignorant believe the very hand of the Deity to be at
work. Amongst the learned, we hear of " creative fiats,"
" interferences," " interpositions of the creative energy ;" all
of them very obscure phrases, apparently not susceptible of

268 NATURAL HISTORY.

a scientific explanation, but all tending simply to this —
that the work was done in a marvellous way, and not in
the way of nature. Let the contrast between the two
propositions be well marked. According to the first, all is
done by the continuous energy of the divine will — a
power which has no regard to great or small : according to
the second, there is a procedure strictly resembling that of
a human being in the management of his affairs. And not
only on this one occasion, but all along the stretch of
geological time, this special attention is needed whenever
a new family of organisms is to be introduced ; a new fiat
for fishes, another for reptiles, a third for birds ; nay,
taking up the present views of geologists as to species,
such an event as the commencement of a certain cephalo-
pod, one with a few new nodulosities and corrugations
upon its shell, would, on this theory, require the particular
care of that same Almighty who willed at once the whole
means by which INFINITY was replenished with its
worlds.'

It will be seen from the above characteristic quotation
that the theory of the ' special creation ' of the different
species of animals and plants was handled by the writer of
the ' Vestiges ' in the most uncompromising manner. It
is difficult for us, living at a time when naturalists have
almost universally abandoned the doctrine of independent
creation and of the fixity of species, to appreciate the
excitement, the alarm, and the indignation produced by
such outspoken deliverances as the above. It needs to
be remembered, however, that at the time of the appear-
ance of the ' Vestiges ' all the leading British naturalists
still adhered tenaciously to the idea that 'species' had

THE DOCTRINE OF PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT. 269

been separately produced, and were immutable. We can
therefore imagine the consternation of English naturalists
generally at the publication, by an unknown writer, of an
attack so direct and so unanswerable upon this so
cherished doctrine.

Of course, the writer of the 'Vestiges' was by many
held up to public obloquy as an obvious materialist, or
even as an atheist. It is, however, quite impossible for
any one to read the ' Vestiges ' with an unbiassed mind,
and not to recognise that the writer had discharged his
self-appointed task in a spirit at once genuinely reverential
and in the truest sense religious. On this point, it is
worth while to quote his own remarks. It has been urged,
he says, that ' to presume a creation of living beings as a
series of natural events, is equivalent to superseding the
whole doctrine of the divine authorship of organic nature.
With such a notion infesting the mind, it must of course
be almost hopeless that the question should be candidly
entertained. There can, in reality, be no reason adduced
for holding this as necessarily following from the idea of
organic creation in the manner of law, or by a natural
method, any more than from a similar view of inorganic
creation. The whole aim of science from the beginning
has been to ascertain law; one set of phenomena after
another has been brought under this conception, without
our ever feeling that God was less the adorable Creator of
his own world. It seems strange that a stand should
appear necessary at this particular point in the march of
science. Perhaps if our ordinary ideas respecting natural
law were more just, the difficulty might be lessened. It
cannot be sufficiently impressed that the whole idea

270 NATURAL HISTORY.

relates only to the mode in which the Deity has been
pleased to manifest his power in the external world. It
leaves the absolute fact of his authorship of and supremacy
over nature precisely where it was ; only telling us that,
instead of dealing with the natural world as a human
being traffics with his own affairs, adjusting each circum-
stance to a relation with other circumstances as they
emerge, in the mode befitting his finite capacity, the
Creator has originally conceived, and since sustained,
arrangements fitted to serve in a general sufficiency for all
contingencies ; himself, of course, necessarily living in all
such arrangements, as the only means by which they
could be, even for a moment, upheld. Were the question
to be settled upon a consideration of the respective moral
merits of the two theories, I would say that the latter is
greatly the preferable, as it implies a far grander view of
the divine power and dignity than the other.'

So much for the supposed 'irreligious' tendencies of
the ' Vestiges'! The question, after all, is, however, a
purely scientific one, and must be settled by scientific
men, upon scientific evidence, and wholly apart from its
supposed bearings upon theological problems. From this
merely scientific point of view, it may be said that the
principal merit of the ' Vestiges ' lay in the vigorous and
successful attack which it made upon the doctrine of the
1 special creation ' of species.

When we turn, on the other hand, to the constructive
side of the 'Vestiges/ we meet with few propositions
peculiar to its author which would find an assured place
among the generally accepted doctrines of modern zoology.
It is, however, unnecessary to enter here into any further

THE DOCTRINE OF PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT. 271

or more detailed analysis of the views put forward in this
striking work. Our purpose will be sufficiently served by
a brief notice as to the views of the author on the special
question of the origin of ' species ' among animals.

As regards the question of the fixity or mutability of
'species,' the author of the 'Vestiges' fully accepted
Lamarck's views, in so far as he maintained that species
are not invariable or constant. 'It is difficult,' he
remarks, ' to regard the idea of species or specific distinc-
tion as descriptive of a fact in nature ; it must be held as
merely applicable to certain appearances presented, perhaps
transiently, to our notice. The history of the question
seems to be this. Naturalists, starting with a limited fund
of observation — mainly, indeed, consisting of the remark
which the most superficial observation supplies, that like
usually produces like — lay it down as an axiom that
species is a determined thing. In a little time, certain
modifiabilities are observed. To maintain the axiom
intact, these are called varieties. Afterwards, much
greater variabilities are witnessed, even to the dissolution
of genera among the cryptogams and cereals, and the
community of algae and fungi — water and land plants.
Still, to keep the axiom whole, these are held in doubt, or
relegated to a place in the elastic region of the varieties.
Such is the stage which we have now attained. But this is
a process the reverse of philosophical : it is to start with a
theory, and then make the facts succumb to it. Were the
process reversed, and the facts taken first, we should
see that a great modifiability exists in organic nature,
especially in the humbler departments of the two king-
doms. And seeing that this modifiability presents itself

272 NATURAL HISTORY.

within the scope of a very limited experience, it might
safely be inferred that something much greater would be
detected, if our range of experience were extended, especi-
ally since the world presents us with results which can
only be naturally accounted for in this manner.'

As regards, however, the mode in which species have
originated, the writer of the ' Vestiges ' rejects the views
of Lamarck altogether, considering his theory as to the
cause of varieties (and therefore of species) as 'so far
from adequate to account for the facts, that it has had
scarcely a single adherent.' In this, the writer of the
' Vestiges ' does less than justice to Lamarck. The special
theory of the French naturalist does not fail because it
gives 'the adaptive theory too much to do.' It fails
because it does not recognise how useful adaptations
are preserved and strengthened. It was left to the
genius of Charles Darwin to fill this all-important hiatus
in the Lamarckian hypothesis.

The author entirely accepts the conception of a funda-
mental unity of organisation among animals ; and regards
this as implying ' that all were constructed upon one plan,
though in a series of improvements and variations, giving
rise to the special forms, and bearing reference to the con-
ditions in which each animal lives.' He points out that
this underlying unity of organisation is of itself a strong
d priori argument against the idea of the separate creation
of species. ' Organisms,' he remarks, ' we know to have
been produced, not at once, but in the course of a vast
series of ages • here we now see that they are not a group of
individually entire things accidentally associated, but parts
of great masses, nicely connected, and integral in their

THE DOCTRINE OF PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT. 273

respective totalities. Time, and a succession of forms in
gradation and affinity, become elements in the idea of
organic creation. It must be seen that the whole pheno-
mena thus pass into strong analogy with those attending
the production of the individual organism.'

This last sentence leads us to the special theory pro-
posed by the author to account for the existence of the
present forms of life. This theory, termed by the writer
the theory of ' progressive development,' may be stated in
his own words.

'The several series of animated beings, from the
simplest and oldest up to the highest and most recent,
are, under the providence of God, the results, first, of an
impulse which has been imparted to the forms of life,
advancing them in definite times by generation through
grades of organisation terminating in the highest
dicotyledons and Vertebrata, these grades being few in
number and generally marked by intervals of organic
character which we find to be a practical difficulty in
ascertaining affinities ; second, of another impulse con-
nected with the vital forces, tending in the course of
generations to modify organic structures in accordance
with external circumstances, as food, the nature of the
habitat, and the meteoric agencies, these being the
'adaptations' of the natural theologian. We may con-
template these phenomena as ordained to take place in
every situation and at every time where and when the
requisite conditions are presented — in other orbs as well
as in this — in any geographical area of this globe which
may at any time arise — observing only the variations

due to difference of materials and of conditions.'

R

274 NATURAL HISTORY.

Put briefly, the theory of progressive development is
that the primitive cells, which constituted on this
hypothesis the original forms of life, and which had
been presumably produced by spontaneous generation,
were advanced 'through a succession of higher grades
and a variety of modifications/ in obedience to some
law of an absolute nature, the whole process being
analogous to the embryonic development of an individual
animal. Just as each individual animal passes through
a series of changes during the course of its development —
these changes taking place in a fixed order — so the writer
of the ' Vestiges' supposes that the primordial forms of
life also passed through a series of developmental changes,
the different stages of their development being represented
by the life-assemblages of the successive great geological
periods. These developmental changes are supposed to
have taken place in a fixed order, and to have been
progressive in character; and the present forms of life
are supposed to represent the final term in the develop-
mental cycle of these hypothetical primordial cells. It
is not necessary to enter here into any discussion of
the theory of progressive development. The obvious
objection that an evolutionist of the Spencerian school
would take to it is that, from his point of view, 'the
impulse which has been imparted to the . forms of life/
and to which their subsequent progressive development is
supposed to be due, is a mere metaphysical conception,
a hypothetical and scientifically inadmissible agency.

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION.

CHARLES DARWIN.

IT remains to consider very briefly the leading points
involved in the theory of 'the Origin of Species by
means of Natural Selection/ which the world owes to
the genius of Charles Darwin, and by which the entire
science of zoology has been fundamentally altered. There
is, indeed, no revolution so great as that effected by
the introduction of a new principle ; since that involves
a reconstruction from the foundation upwards, and implies
a much more serious change than the mere putting on
of a roof, or the addition of a buttress or of any sort
of pendicle, however important such may be in itself.
Darwin, however, introduced a novel principle into
biology; and in so doing he profoundly altered the
entire attitude of naturalists and botanists towards the
world of living beings. Moreover, when the organic
world came to be viewed in the light of this new
principle, it became at once evident that its complexities
depended, to a large extent at any rate, upon causes
which are open to our investigation, and are not wholly

276 NATURAL HISTORY.

beyond our comprehension. The theory of the origin
of species by special creation laboured under the
inevitable defect that it 'closed the record/ and in
many directions shut the door to further research. The
theory of the origin of species by means of natural
selection has not only brought to light a whole series
of problems, many of which are of a most far-reaching
character, but it has solved some of them, and has
pointed out to us the way in which others may yet
be solved at some future date.

As has been seen, the theory that the present state of
the natural world was the result of its evolution from
a former state did not originate with Darwin. Like
others of the profoundest conceptions of the human
mind, it had been more or less clearly recognised by
more than one earlier philosopher, and notably by
Erasmus Darwin and Lamarck. The theory that the
' species ' of animals and plants now in existence had
been produced by the modification of pre-existing forms
of life, and that species were therefore not immutable,
also did not originate with Darwin. Lamarck had
definitely promulgated this theory, and other writers —
such as Erasmus Darwin and Goethe — in the early part
of this century or the close of the last, had put forth
similar ideas. Lamarck's views, however, had remained
little more than a barren speculation — unheeded by
most, and scoffed at by many — and no change had been
produced in the generally accepted views as to the
nature of ' species ' by the publication of the ' Philo-
sophic Zoologique.' To Darwin is incontestably due the
pre-eminent merit of having established a theory which

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 277

satisfactorily explains the method in which species have
been produced by evolution from other previously existing
forms. No naturalist at the present day, it may safely
be said, doubts that the theory of the origin of species
by means of natural selection is true so far as it goes,
and that it satisfactorily explains the principal difficulties
which it can be legitimately called upon to explain.
'Natural Selection' is, in other words, universally recog-
nised as a vera causa. The chief point that can be
said now to be at issue among naturalists is not whether
it be a genuinely active cause, but only as to the extent
to which it can be applied — some regarding it as the
sole factor in the production of 'species,' while others
look upon it as being only one of many concurrent
factors.

Darwin's life need only be referred to here in the
briefest way, and only for the purpose of showing
how thoroughly it qualified him for the task of elabor-
ating and establishing his great theory. Charles Darwin
was born at Shrewsbury, on the i2th of February 1809.
His father was Dr Robert Waring Darwin, a physician
of Shrewsbury, and his grandfather was the celebrated
Dr Erasmus Darwin, whose life and writings have been
previously noticed. At sixteen years of age, Charles
Darwin went to Edinburgh to study medicine ; but
he soon made up his mind that the pursuit of medicine
as a profession would not be in accordance with his
tastes, and he accordingly betook himself in 1828 to
Cambridge, with a view to studying theology. The
influences of the place, however, combined, we may
presume, with his own unconscious bent and aptitudes,

278 NATURAL HISTORY.

soon had the effect of so far awakening his early love
of nature, that he ultimately threw himself almost entirely
into scientific studies. This result was also in large part
due to the intercourse which he enjoyed with Professor
Henslow, the well-known botanist.

In 1831, Darwin graduated as Bachelor of Arts, and
in the autumn of the same year his final life-course was
determined for him by his appointment to the unpaid
post of naturalist to the Beagle, a ten-gun brig, com-
manded by Captain (afterwards Admiral) Fitzroy, and
then under orders to proceed on a long surveying voyage
round the world. This cruise occupied five years of
Darwin's life, and constituted 'the real great university
in which he studied nature, and read for his degree.' *
During this memorable voyage, he not only collected
a vast amount of scientific material of all kinds, but he
accumulated an endless store of observations which might,
and ultimately did, serve as the groundwork for his
magnum opus on the Origin of Species.

In October 1836, Darwin landed at Falmouth, after
his long and profitable cruise in the Beagle. The
next three years were spent by him in London, his hands
being fully occupied with preparing his journals for
publication, and in making the needful editorial arrange-
ments for the description of the great scientific collections
which he had brought home with him.t By the advice

* Grant Allen, ' Life of Charles Darwin.'

f Darwin's 'Journal of Researches into the Geology and Natural History of the
various Countries visited by H.M.S. Beagle' was published in 1839. The
descriptions of the scientific collections were ultimately published in ' The Zoology
of H.M.S. BeagleJ which appeared in 1840-44. In this magnificent work, the
fossil mammals were described by Owen, the living mammals by Waterhouse, the
birds by Gould, the fishes by Jenyns, and the reptiles by Bell.

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 279

of his friend Sir Charles Lyell — advice which his freedom
from pecuniary necessities fortunately enabled him to
take — Darwin, on his return home, sought no official
scientific appointment. In 1839, he married his cousin,
Miss Emma Wedgewood, and finally established "himself
at Down House, near Orpington, in Kent, which con-
tinued to be his home to the end of his life.

After his long voyage in the Beagle, Darwin never
left England again, not even to pay a brief visit to the
Continent. From his settlement at Down in 1839
onwards, he lived a quiet unostentatious life in his own
home, unremittingly occupied with his scientific pursuits.
On the i8th of April 1882, the great naturalist was
attacked by sudden illness, and at four o'clock in the
afternoon of the next day he breathed his last. He
was buried in Westminster Abbey, in the presence of
most of the foremost representatives of science in
Britain ; and his death deprived the scientific world
of the most prominent figure that this generation has
seen.

With regard to the vast ma.ss of scientific work which
Darwin produced, nothing further can be attempted here
than merely to mention the titles of his larger works.
His 'Journal' of researches made in the voyage of the
Beagle was, as we have seen, published in 1839.
Other fruits of the long series of observations which he
made on the same voyage were published later under
the names of 'The Structure and Distribution of Coral-
Reefs' (1842), 'Geological Observations on Volcanic
Islands' (1844), and 'Geological Observations on South
America' (1846). Many of Darwin's geological observa-

280 NATURAL HISTORY.

tions (such as those on cleavage and foliation, on the
structure of the 'pampas' of South America, and on
volcanic islands) are of the highest importance and of
permanent value ; and his theory of the Origin of Coral-
reefs obtained a world-wide reputation. Darwin, as
previously mentioned, also edited the 'Zoology of the
Voyage of the Beagle? Subsequently to his return to
England, he engaged in special zoological researches,
and published his classical ' Monograph of the Cirripedia,'
printed by the Ray Society in 1853 ; with a companion
volume on the fossil species of the same group, which
appeared under the auspices of the Palaeontographical
Society. In 1859 appeared the first edition of the
' Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection,' which
rendered his name at once famous over the whole
civilised world, and which gave rise to more discussion
than perhaps has ever been produced by any other
scientific book whatever. This work has been translated
into almost all European languages, and the English
edition now generally used is the sixth, published in
1872. Among the works which proceeded from the pen
of Dr Darwin during his later years may be enumerated
'The Fertilisation of Orchids' (1862); the 'Variations
of Animals and Plants under Domestication' (1867);
' The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex '
(1871); and 'The Expression of the Emotions in Man
and Animals' (1873).

The great principle which Darwin established in con-
nection with the highly complex problem of the Origin
of Species, is what is known as 'the Theory of Natural
Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 281

Struggle for Life.' Mr Alfred Russell Wallace has a
conjoint claim to the discovery of this principle, as he
published similar views to those of Mr Darwin in a
memoir entitled ' On the Tendency of Varieties to depart
indefinitely from the Original Type,' which appeared in
the Journal of the Linnean Society in 1859, in the same
year as the first edition of the ' Origin of Species' was
given to the world. It is, as has been seen, an error
to regard Mr Darwin as the originator of the theory
of Evolution, as applied to animals and plants. It is
the ' Theory of Natural Selection ' — a theory which
explains how evolution has taken place — with which
his name will be always associated ; and it is this theory
alone of which we propose here to give a general out-
line.

The bases of the 'Theory of Natural Selection' may
be laid down in the following propositions :

(i) The first proposition in the Theory of Natural
Selection embraces what has been called the ' Malthusian
law of increase' — the law, namely, that all living beings
tend to increase more rapidly than their means of
subsistence. The tendency of living beings, in fact, is
to increase in a geometrical ratio, and this is true not
only of all animals but also of all plants. In support
of this law it is not necessary to take the cases of
animals so prolific as the cod, the female of which
produces annually about ten millions of ova; for the
same law is exemplified quite as well by the elephant,
which is considered to be the slowest breeder of all
animals. Upon this point Darwin has made an interest-
ing calculation. The elephant begins to bear young

282 NATURAL HISTORY.

at thirty years of age, and continues to produce offspring
till it is ninety years old, during which time it has six
young ones. The average age of the elephant may be
calculated at about one hundred years, though this is
often exceeded. On this basis, Darwin calculates that
at the end of about seven hundred and fifty years the
offspring of the first pair of elephants would amount
to about nineteen millions of then living individuals.

(2) In consequence of this geometrical rate of increase
among all living beings, it necessarily follows that there
arises a ' Struggle for Existence' among animals and
plants. Each organism fills a certain place in the world
of nature, occupies a particular area, feeds on a particular
kind of food, requires, in short, a particular set of con-
ditions. As, however, every kind of animal and plant
is constantly bringing into the world more young than
can be accommodated, or for which suitable food can
be provided, it follows that there arises among the young
of each species a competition^ a struggle both for a proper
place and for proper food. This competition, which
is seen quite as much in plants as in animals, is what
is understood as the ' struggle for existence.' In using
this term, Darwin premises that he does so 'in a large
and metaphorical sense, including dependence of one
being on another, and including (what is more important)
not only the life of the individual, but success in leaving
progeny. Two canine animals, in a time of dearth,
may be truly said to struggle with each other which
shall get food and live. But a plant on the edge of
the desert is said to struggle for life against the drought,
though more properly it should be said to be dependent

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 283

on the moisture. A plant which annually produces a
thousand seeds, of which only one on an average comes
to maturity, may be more truly said to struggle with
the plants of the same and other kinds which already
clothe the ground. The mistletoe is dependent on the
apple and a few other trees, but can only in a far-fetched
sense be said to struggle with these trees, for, if too
many of these parasites grow on the same tree, it
languishes and dies. But several seedling mistletoes,
growing close together on the same branch, may more
truly be said to struggle with each other. As the
mistletoe is disseminated by birds, its existence depends
on them; and it may metaphorically be said to struggle
with other fruit-bearing plants, in tempting the birds to
devour and thus disseminate its seeds.'

(3) The third proposition of the theory of natural
selection is that all living beings are subject to variation.
As has been previously seen, the individuals which com-
pose any and every 'species' of animals and plants are
not precisely alike. They invariably differ from one
another in more or less numerous points, some of the
differences being extremely minute, while others may be
very conspicuous. We do not know whether variation
is indefinite, and affects every part of the organism, or
whether it is definite and is confined within certain limits.
Nor has it been clearly proved whether variation is
fortuitous, or whether it takes place in obedience to
some determinate law, which governs the direction which
it follows. It is, however, certain that ( variation,' to a
greater or less extent, is of universal occurrence among
all living beings.

284 NATURAL HISTORY.

(4) Some of the variations which occur in the in-
dividuals composing any species, are favourable to the
species; some are unfavourable. That is to say, some
variations will either help the individual to obtain more
food, or to keep himself warm, or render him less
liable to fall a prey to his natural enemies, or will
otherwise help him in the struggle for existence. On
the other hand, some variations will keep the individual
back in the race for life, and will increase the difficulty
which all individuals have in maintaining their exist-
ence. It follows from this, that in any given species
of animals or plants those individuals which are born
into the world in the possession of any favourable
variations are, cceteris paribus, likely to be preserved;
while those having unfavourable variations are likely
to go to the wall and to be stamped out.

This law is what Mr Herbert Spencer has called the law
of the ' Survival of the Fittest,' or what Mr Darwin has
called ' Natural Selection.' This last name is in allusion
to the fact that the action of 'Nature' — that is, the
aggregate of natural forces — is to insure the 'selection,'
out of the young of any species, of all those individuals
which are 'fittest' for their surroundings. These young
are preserved, while those not possessing any such
favourable variations, and therefore not so well fitted
for their surroundings, are weeded out and perish. The
operation of the law may be illustrated by the imaginary
example of the Giraffe, which Mr Darwin has himself
used as illustrating the action of natural selection, and
which was previously taken as illustrating Lamarck's view
as to the action of external conditions upon the structure

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 285

of animals. If we suppose, namely, that the giraffe, to
begin with, possessed a neck of no more than normal
length, and lived principally upon the ordinary terrestrial
herbage ; and if we further suppose a severe and pro-
tracted drought to occur in the region inhabited by
the giraffes, we may assume that many individuals would
perish for want of food, but that some would manage
to survive. In all such cases there must be some general
reason to account for the survival of the few who did
survive, in preference to the many who perished. In
this particular instance we may suppose that the indi-
viduals who survived were those who possessed necks
of a slightly greater length than the average, and who,
therefore, were better fitted for browsing upon shrubs
or trees, after the herbage had been destroyed by the
drought, than were the more normal individuals. This
imaginary example, then, will show how the possession
of a favourable variation tends to preserve certain
individuals, in preference to those which are without
the variation.

(5) But, the young of all animals and plants tend
to inherit the peculiarities of their parents. Hence,
favourable variations or peculiarities which preserve alive
certain individuals of each species, will tend to be handed
down to their offspring. On the other hand, individuals
not possessing these favourable variations, or possessing
unfavourable variations, are killed off, and do not have
the opportunity of transmitting their peculiarities to off-
spring. The general action of the law of the ' Survival of
the Fittest,' or of ' Natural Selection,' is, thus, to preserve
all favourable variations which may occur among the indi-

286 NATURAL HISTORY.

viduals composing any species, and to destroy all unfav-
ourable variations amongst the same.

To use once more the imaginary illustration above
employed, the longer necks which enabled certain indi-
vidual giraffes to survive a drought, would be handed
down by inheritance to their young. On the other hand,
the comparatively short-necked individuals would not have
the chance of leaving offspring because, by the hypothesis,
they would be killed off.

Moreover, in the course of this transmission, the
favourable variation (whatever it may be) will tend to
become intensified in each succeeding generation, so long
as the conditions which render the variation favourable
to the life of the individual remain in existence. So long
as this continues, the same process of 'selection' will go on
in each succeeding generation ; and the varying character
will become in each generation successively stronger and
stronger. Thus, in our illustration, so long as the
region tenanted by the giraffe continued subject to
periodic droughts, and so long as it was, therefore, good
for the individual giraffe to have a long neck, the
individuals in each generation which had the longest
necks would have the best chance of survival. The
best chance of survival, however, implies the best chance
of leaving offspring, and in this way the neck of the
giraffe might go on getting in each generation longer
and longer, by the preservation of the individuals which
possessed this variation to the greatest extent, and the
elimination of those with shorter necks.

By means of this process of ' natural selection,' it is
easy to comprehend how 'varieties' might be produced.

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 287

Nor can it be reasonably doubted that in the case of
animals this is the process by which varieties are
originated and established. But it has been previously
seen that * species ' and ' varieties ' pass into one another
by imperceptible gradations. It is, in fact, impossible
to lay down any fixed rule for the determination of
where a ' variety ' ends, and where a ' species ' begins.
If, therefore, it be admitted that ' varieties ' are produced
by 'natural selection,' it is not possible to deny that
the same cause must have given rise to at any rate
some of those groups of individuals which naturalists call
' species.' If this be conceded, it is an inevitable logical
conclusion that all species have been thus produced by
' natural selection.' At any rate, the admission that any
species have been produced by the operation of ' natural
selection,' throws upon those who deny the universal
operation of the law, the burden of proof that any
particular species has not been produced by the action
of the same law.

The above may be taken as a brief statement of the
principal propositions upon which Darwin based his
celebrated theory of the Origin of Species by means of
Natural Selection. This statement would, however, be
incomplete without a short additional exposition of what
Mr Darwin has called ' artificial selection.' In the case,
then, of our domestic animals and their innumerable
varieties, there is the obvious fact that the law of ' natural '
selection is prevented from operating in its entirety
owing to the action of man. Man, in the case of his
domestic animals, steps in as a deus ex machina, and
more or less efficiently interferes with the law of natural

288 NATURAL HISTORY.

selection by protecting certain individuals of a species
in the struggle for existence, and affording them assistance
which they could not have had in a wild state. The
individuals of the Wild Boar, for example, have to face
the rigid and merciless operation of the law of natural
selection, and the weakest therefore go to the wall. The
individuals of the Domestic Pig — the same animal really
as the wild boar — are so far relieved from the action
of the law of natural selection, that man feeds them
when they are hungry, protects them from the cold
artificially, and, so far as he can, cures them when they
are ill. Man does of course the same thing to the
weaker individuals of his own species, and all such
things as poor-laws and the like are, in the Darwinian
sense, attempts on the part of man to defeat or neutralise
the operation of * natural selection.' In the case of
many varieties of our domestic animals, it is certain that
man's interference has gone so far as to render them
wholly incapable of facing the law of natural selection
in its untempered severity. In other words, there are
many of our domesticated breeds of animals which would
infallibly become exterminated if they were turned loose
to make their own living, and if the protecting hand of
man were wholly withdrawn from them.

Man, however, not only protects domestic animals in
this way from the direct action of surrounding conditions,
but at the same time exercises, on his own behalf, a
sort of 'selection,' analogous to 'natural selection/ but
necessarily operating within much narrower limits, and
also exercised in a much more arbitrary fashion. Darwin
has given a masterly exposition of the whole of this

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 289

subject under the head of what he has called 'artificial
selection ;' and a few words may be said here as to what
he understands by this name. Our domesticated animals,
as is well known, have in all cases originated from wild
species, which have gradually been brought under the
influence and dominion of man. The same is true of all
our domesticated, or rather cultivated, plants. In certain
cases — as that of the pig above referred to — we not only
have the domesticated breed or breeds, but we are also
acquainted with the wild species from which the domestic
form was derived. In other cases, the domesticated
animals have undergone changes so great that we can no
longer point with certainty to the wild forms in which they
originated. In some cases, it may be, the wild form is no
longer in existence. In all cases, however, our domestic
animals show, more or less conspicuously, two remarkable
characteristics or tendencies. One of these is that they
exhibit more numerous and more marked ' varieties ' than
is the case, as a rule, with wild species. They have a
more pronounced tendency to variation than wild animals
have, and their variations also extend through a wider
range. The other is, that the peculiarities which are
distinctive of our domestic animals as compared with
their wild forms, are not of such a nature as to fit the
animal better for its natural wild life, but, as specially
insisted on by Mr Darwin, are adaptations to the taste, or
fancy, or requirements of man. Thus, any modifications
produced by natural selection in the wild boar would be
in the direction of making it stronger, or enabling it better
to resist cold, or rendering it fitter to cope with its natural
foes, or the like. Man, however, does not desire any

2 QO NATURAL HISTORY.

improvements of this kind in the domestic pig. He does
not, for example, wish to increase its muscular power
and consequent activity; because he wants it to fatten
readily, and vigorous exercise tends to keep an animal
lean. What is true of the pig is true of all our domestic
animals, though it is more evident in some than in others.
The variations, for instance, which separate the different
breeds of the dog from one another are exceedingly well
marked, and they are all variations which adapt particular
breeds for the special purposes for which man wants them.
On the other hand, the different breeds of the Goose differ
little from one another, or from their wild form (the Grey
Lag Goose), because man's demands from the goose are
few and simple, and are quite well answered by the
ordinary form of the species.

The causes of the above-mentioned peculiarities of
domesticated animals, as compared with wild ones, have
been fully expounded by Mr Darwin, and are readily
intelligible. As regards the first of them — namely, the
tendency to excessive variation shown by domestic animals
— the cause is to be found in the varied character and
artificial nature of the conditions under which they live.
Wild animals are exposed, as regards each species, to an
approximately uniform and unvarying set of conditions,
and the conditions are alike for all the individuals of the
species. Variation does not become excessive, because
the tendency of natural selection is to destroy all variations
which are not good for the individual itself in its natural
condition. On the other hand, domestic animals are
kept by their masters under veiy different sets of condi-
tions, as regards different individuals of the species, and

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 29 1

man at the same time prevents the law of natural selection
from rigidly exterminating those individuals which happen
to be born with variations which would be hurtful to the
species in a wild state. The fact that domesticated
animals exhibit peculiarities which are in no way adapta-
tions to their natural surroundings, but which are mere
adaptations to man's wants or tastes, is explained by
'artificial selection.' Man, namely, has as regards each
domestic animal an ideal of what he wants. It may be
that he has no consciousness of having any such ideal
before him, but it may be taken as certain that he
possesses it nevertheless. * Artificial selection ' consists
essentially in the choice which man exercises as to the
young of his domestic animals, in respect to which he
will allow to live, and which he will destroy. In the case
of the young of each of his domesticated animals, a man
sees some individuals having peculiarities which he thinks
will be useful to him, or which come nearest to the ideal
which he has formed of the animal, or of what the animal
ought to be. Such individuals he keeps, and permits to
have offspring; so that the peculiarities which induced
him to keep these individuals are perpetuated and handed
down to future generations, becoming in the process
intensified. On the contrary, all those individuals amongst
the young, which do not conform to man's ideal standard
of perfection, are either killed off on the spot, or are, at
any rate, prevented from leaving offspring behind them.
In this way, by a long-continued process of selecting the
particular individuals which he will allow to live and to
breed, man has succeeded in producing the numerous
domesticated varieties of animals. In the case of savage

2Q2 NATURAL HISTORY.

tribes of men, this selection is no doubt carried on un-
consciously, but among the breeders of cattle, or among
pigeon-fanciers, it is a strictly scientific process, carried on
consciously and deliberately, and according to rules, which
are none the less fixed that they are largely 'rules of
thumb,'

Those who wish to understand this most interesting
subject in all its bearings must turn to the pages of the
1 Origin of Species,' where it is fully treated by the hand of
the master. All that need be done here is to say one
word as to the relation between the known facts of ' artificial
selection ' on the one hand and the theory of the origin of
wild species by ' natural selection' on the other hand.
If it be admitted, namely, that our numerous varieties of
domesticated animals owe their peculiarities to the
* selection' exercised by man during the comparatively
brief period during which he has existed upon the earth,
it is not unreasonable to suppose that ' natural selection,'
operating through an infinitely longer period, and by
methods much more subtle and far-reaching, has produced
the different wild ' species ' of animals by modifications of
one or more aboriginal types. The unquestionable facts,
therefore, as to the production of our domesticated breeds
of animals from wild species by means of 'artificial
selection,' afford a strong presumption in favour of the
theory that our existing wild species have been produced
by the modification of pre-existing wild species through
the operation of 'natural selection.'

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION

(CONTINUED).

HAVING now given the briefest possible sketch of the
Theory of Natural Selection, as expounded by Mr Darwin,
it may be well to notice, with equal brevity, the leading
objections which have been urged against this theory by
various naturalists, and notably by Mr Mivart.* It may
also be as well to enumerate shortly the chief general
grounds upon which naturalists base the now generally
accepted belief that species have been produced from pre-
existing species by the action of some law of evolution,
apart from the question of the method or methods in
which this law operates.

Numerous difficulties admittedly have to be met, if we
attempt to apply the theory of natural selection (even
when combined with what Darwin has called 'sexual
selection') as the sole principle involved in the production
of 'species.' Many of these difficulties are of a special
nature, affecting special cases only, and they need no dis-
cussion here. It is possible that many of these special

* The Genesis of Species, by St George Mivart, 1871.

294 NATURAL HISTORY.

difficulties may disappear in the light of wider knowledge.
There are, however, certain general difficulties which
demand a moment's consideration, as indicating that
though we admit the action of ' natural selection ' to the
full, we must nevertheless look beyond and outside this
for the complete explanation of the existence and origin
of species. The general difficulties in question were per-
fectly recognised by Mr Darwin, and have been met by
him, as far as it is at present possible to meet them. The
principal are the following : *

(i) One of the most general, and certainly one of the
most serious of the difficulties in the way of the theory of
natural selection is 'the uselessness of many organs in
their incipient stage.' Hosts of structures (such as the
milk-glands of the Quadrupeds, or the whalebone plates in
the mouth of the Whalebone Whales) are exceedingly
useful to the animal when perfectly developed; but it is
inconceivable that they could have benefited the animal
when first they began to be developed. According to the
theory of the evolution of species in general, and the
theory of natural selection in particular, milk-glands did
not exist in the animal forms out of which the class of the
Mammals was evolved, nor did baleen-plates exist in the
ancestors of the Whalebone Whales. There must, there-
fore, have been a time when milk-glands and baleen-plates
respectively first came into existence, and it is impossible
to suppose that they were suddenly produced in complete
structural and functional perfection as we now see them.
On the contrary, they must, to begin with, have been mere

* An excellent resume of these objections is given by Mr Pascoe in his Notes on
Natural Selection and the Origin of Species, 1884.

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 295

rudimentary structures, functionally useless, and it can
only have been in the course of development during many
successive generations, that they assumed their present
perfection. Now there is absolutely no evidence to show
that the fine beginnings of structures can be useful or
profitable to the animal possessing them. They may be
harmless, but that is all that can be said. It is, however,
the very essence of the theory of natural selection, that
the law of the struggle for existence is powerless to pre-
serve or intensify any structures except such as are useful
to the individual. The fact that a structure may be useful
to the race is not enough, as final causes or ends are
wholly excluded from the theory of natural selection.
Upon the whole, the difficulty of accounting for the pre-
servation of incipient organs and structures by the action
of natural selection appears to constitute the most formid-
able of the arguments which have been urged against Mr
Darwin's views ; since it is a general difficulty, and strikes
at the very root of the theory of natural selection.

(2) A second general objection of great weight is that
unless 'many individuals should be similarly and simul-
taneously modified,' there would be little chance of any
useful variation which might have appeared in a species
being ultimately preserved and handed down. Any new
structure or organ, or any alteration in a pre-existing
structure, must be slowly produced, and pass through
an incipient stage. If, however, such a new structure, or
alteration in an old structure, appeared, to begin with, in
only one or two individuals of a species, it could hardly
be preserved, as it would be 'lost by subsequent inter-
crossing with ordinary individuals.' But it is hardly

296 NATURAL HISTORY.

probable that any variation would simultaneously appear
in many individuals of a species ; and we have at any rate
no evidence to show that this ever occurs.

(3) The theory of the origin of species by means
of natural selection, in the third place, implies that the
production of any given species from any pre-existing
species can only be effected by gradual modification,
and therefore through the intervention of a long series
of intermediate or transitional forms. Moreover, the
transitional forms by which we should pass from a given
species to the pre-existing species from which it was
developed, must, on the theory of natural selection, be
so closely related to one another as to render it difficult
to distinguish them. In other words, if we had before
us all the forms by which one species had been gradually
converted into another, we should not have the slightest
difficulty in recognising the distinctness of the individuals
forming the extreme terms of the series; but the
individuals standing between the extremes would pass
into one another by such fine gradations as to render
their separation almost or quite impossible. It seems
also clear that, in the modification of any one species
into any other, the total number of the individuals of
intermediate or transitional form must greatly exceed the
total number of individuals contained in the original
species and the new species put together. Now, if all
species of animals, living and extinct, have been produced
by gradual modification from pre-existing species, we
ought to find abundant evidence of the existence of the
infinite number of transitional forms postulated by the
theory of natural selection. In fact, as these transitional

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 297

forms must have greatly exceeded in total number the
combined number of individuals which are clearly
recognisable as distinct species, we ought to find more
abundant evidence of their existence than of the exist-
ence of the separate species. As a matter of fact, how-
ever, the study of extinct animals does not afford more
than very incomplete evidence as to the existence of
the numerous and closely graduated transitional forms
required by the theory of natural selection. It is true
that palaeontology has brought to light many forms of
animals which are distinctly intermediate in their char-
acters between groups which would otherwise stand far
apart. Thus, we have numerous extinct types which
bridge over the gap between the reptiles and the birds ;
and others which stand intermediate between the exist-
ing horses and their original five-toed ancestors. So far,
then, palaeontology unquestionably lends support to the
general theory of the evolution of species from pre-exist-
ing species. The theory of natural selection requires,
however, more than this. It requires that there should
be a series of intermediate types graduating into one
another by slight and hardly perceptible differences. In
some cases, as regards allied species of animals, such a
continuously graduated series can be shown to exist (in
some extinct Shell-fish, for example). In most cases,
however, it must be admitted that palaeontology has so
far failed to demonstrate the past existence of the
numerous and finely-graduated series of transitional forms
between different species absolutely demanded by the
theory of natural selection. Such transitional forms as
are known for the most part stand quite sharply distin-

298 NATURAL HISTORY.

guished from one another and from the types which they
connect. Mr Darwin has met this difficulty by pointing
to the great * imperfection of the palaeontological record/
the fossil forms known to us doubtless forming only an
insignificant fraction of those which once existed. This
argument is entitled to receive great weight ; but it does
not sufficiently account for the general absence of gradu-
ated intermediate forms. This, however, is a point which
cannot be further discussed here, and upon which each
investigator will decide, in one sense or the other, accord-
ing to the particular direction in which he may be led
by his studies.

(4) It is, again, assumed upon the theory of natural
selection, that 'variation' among the individuals of a
species is indefinite, both in amount and direction. It
would appear that the theory of the origin of species
by means of natural selection requires a belief in the
' omnifarious ' nature of individual variation. The action
of 'Natural Selection' would, of course, still go on, even
supposing variation to be strictly limited in amount;
but in this case it is hardly conceivable that our existing
species should owe their origin to natural selection, as
the principal or sole factor in their production. On
the contrary, it seems necessary to suppose that variation
affects, or may affect, all parts of the organism, and
that there are no limits to the extent of its operation,
though the single steps of the process are small in amount.
We have, however, no positive evidence which would
enable us to assert, as a scientific fact, that variation
is thus omnifarious and indefinite. The evidence actually
in our possession is admittedly small, because it only

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 299

extends back to the beginning of the human period ;
but, so far as it goes, it would rather support the view
that variation is limited and definite both in amount and
direction. The 'artificial selection,' for example, which
man has exercised in the case of his domestic animals
for some thousands of years, has not, so far, resulted in
the production of a single new 'species.' New 'varieties'
have been produced, but that is all; and we know that
these may appear suddenly (as in the instance of the
Black-shouldered Peacock), without the direct or indirect
action of man at all. Besides, if variation be indefinite,
it is difficult to account for the constantly-recurring pheno-
menon of the extinction of species — a phenomenon which
is, on any hypothesis, very difficult to satisfactorily explain.
So far as wild animals are concerned there is no direct
evidence to show that a single 'species' has come into
existence since the beginning of the historical period ; nor
is there any evidence to show that during the same period
a single wild species has become extinct, except only
where its extinction has been the result of the interposition
of man.

The points above enumerated are sufficient to show
that there are great difficulties in the way of accepting
' Natural Selection ' as the sole agent in the production of
species. That it is one agent, and an important one,
is a matter that does not admit of doubt. Under any
circumstances, however highly we may rate 'natural
selection' as an agent in the production of species, it
remains certain that we are still almost entirely ignorant
of the causes of the two fundamental laws which have

30O NATURAL HISTORY.

to do with the production of species — namely, the law of

variation and the law of inheritance. Our ignorance as

to both of these is freely and fully admitted by Mr

Darwin. The theory of natural selection does not profess

to explain why variations occur ; it only explains how

those variations which are useful to the individual are

preserved, and how those which are injurious are ' rigidly

destroyed.' Like all other hypotheses as to the origin

of species, it leaves us entirely in the dark as to the

causes of variability. The law of variation is therefore an

unknown law, lying behind the law of evolution, and

possibly beyond the limits of scientific investigation.

Similarly, the laws of inheritance are almost wholly

unknown. 'No one can say why the same peculiarity

in different individuals of the same species, or in different

species, is sometimes inherited and sometimes not so ;

why the child often reverts in certain characters to its

grandfather or grandmother or more remote ancestors;

why a peculiarity is often transmitted from one sex to

both sexes, or to one sex alone, more commonly but not

exclusively to the like sex' (' Origin of Species,' page 10).

That ' species ' have originated by modifications through

descent may now be taken as an accepted doctrine in

modern zoology. It is Mr Darwin's supreme merit to

have brought about this radical change in the views of

naturalists by the establishment of the law of 'natural

selection,' which for the first time rendered possible an

explanation of the method in which the modifications of

specific forms are caused. Whether or not natural

selection has been * the exclusive means of modification '

is a point upon which different naturalists hold different

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 301

opinions. Mr Darwin himself believed that it was at
any rate ' the most important ' means. Whatever may be
the view ultimately adopted as regards this point, there is
overwhelming evidence in favour of the belief in some
general law of evolution, by which all animal and vegetable
species have been produced. The evidence in favour of
this may be briefly stated as follows :

(1) All the animals belonging to each great primary
division of the Animal Kingdom are constructed upon one
fundamental plan, which is capable of endless modifica-
tions, but is never lost. Thus, to give one example, the
fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and quadrupeds, which
together constitute the ' sub-kingdom ' of the Vertebrate
Animals, are all built according to one common plan.
However unlike they may be to one another in the details
of their organisation, ' homologous' structures can be
traced throughout the ground-plan of them all. This
unity of plan in the types of life which compose each
sub-kingdom is, however, inexplicable upon any other
view than that it is the result of blood-relationship,
and depends upon descent from a common ancestor,
which possessed the essential structural characters dis-
tinctive of Vertebrates as a whole.

( 2 ) The animals composing each sub-kingdom are con-
structed upon the same plan, and the 'sub-kingdoms,'
taken as whole, stand therefore separate and apart.
But there exist transitional forms by which one ' sub-
kingdom is linked with another. Thus the singular
marine animals known as the Sea-squirts (Tunicata} form
a link between the true Shell-fish (MoUitsca) and the
Vertebrate Animals. In certain points, namely, in their

302 NATURAL HISTORY.

organisation, they approach the ordinary Shell-fish, while
in others they show a relationship with the lower
Vertebrates.

(3) It is a well-known embryological law that the
young animal in the early stages of its development
commonly possesses structures which it does not possess
in its adult state. It is also a well-known law that
structures which have only a temporary existence in the
embryo of one animal, are often found existing throughout
life in the adult of some other animal ; and that when
this occurs, the latter animal will occupy a lower position
in the animal scale than the former. Thus, the embryo of
the Quadrupeds possesses on each side of the neck a series
of transverse slits or fissures (the so-called 'visceral
clefts '), which lead down from the surface into the upper
part of the gullet (the ' pharynx'). In the adult Quad-
ruped no traces of these clefts are seen, only one of
them remaining at all (the opening of the ear), and that
only in a much modified form. On the other hand, the
embryo of the Fishes not only possesses these clefts, but
they are permanently retained, and are present therefore in
the adult, in which they become connected with the gills.
It seems, however, impossible to satisfactorily explain the
possession of visceral clefts by the mammalian embryo,
except upon the supposition that the Mammals and the
Fishes alike have descended from a common ancestor in
which these structures were present. The general fact,
therefore, that the embryos of animals so often possess
structures which are found in the adults of other animals,
is strongly in favour of the belief in the production of
animals by evolution from common ancestral types.

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 303

(4) This view is further borne out by the common
existence in adult animals of what are known as 'rudi-
mentary organs,' or, in other words, imperfectly developed
organs which are of no use to their possessor. Thus,
ordinary Snakes do not possess either the fore or hind
limbs ; but the Boas and Pythons possess rudimentary
hind-limbs in the form of a pair of horny spurs. Again,
the Whalebone Whales have no teeth; but they exist
nevertheless in the young animal, though they remain
buried in the jaw and never cut the gum. The same is
true of the upper front teeth in Ruminant animals, which
also do not cut the gum, and are therefore of no use to
the animal. Another instance may be taken from the
whales, which show no signs of hind-limbs externally, but
which for all that often have the rudiments of these
limbs hidden internally. The only satisfactory explana-
tion of the general nature of rudimentary structures which
it seems possible to give, is that they are structures which
existed in a fully-developed condition in the remote
ancestors of an animal, but which have gradually
dwindled down in size and have lost their function
through long-continued disuse. Sometimes rudimentary
organs may be 'nascent' structures — that is, structures
which in course of time may become functionally
useful to the animal; or sometimes they may merely
represent the atrophied condition of structures which
the embryo possessed ; but this does not affect the
above general explanation. Accepting this view, we
should judge that the whalebone whales were descended
from some type of Mammal which possessed teeth in
its jaws, and which was at the same time provided

304 NATURAL HISTORY.

with the hind-limbs as well as the fore-limbs. Similarly
it would be concluded that the ancestral type of the
Ruminants possessed well-developed upper front teeth;
and that the snakes, though now footless, were descended
from some reptilian type in which the limbs were present.
Rudimentary organs, therefore, strongly support the view
that the different forms of animals have been produced by
modification from older and different forms.

(5) Lastly, the known facts of Palaeontology offer the
strongest support to the general theory of the evolution of
animal forms from pre-existing species. Amongst extinct
species we are constantly meeting with types which stand
intermediate between groups otherwise more or less
remote. One of the most famous examples of this is
afforded by the fossil forms which link together the two
groups of the Reptiles and the Birds — two classes of
animals* now so little resembling each other, that no one
save a naturalist would ever suspect a relationship
between them. Thus the past has yielded up to us the
remains of true reptiles (the Deinosaurs) which walked
upon their hind-legs, like birds; other reptiles (the
Pterodactyles) possessed the hollow bones and the power
of genuine flight characteristic of the living birds; some
genuine birds (the Odontornithes\ finally, resembled the
Crocodiles in having the jaws furnished with numerous
pointed conical teeth. Another famous example of the
intermediate forms which palaeontology has brought to
light is that afforded by the extinct horse-like Quadrupeds
of the Tertiary period. It is well known that our present
Horse is peculiar in having only a single fully-developed
toe on each foot. This toe corresponds with the middle

THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION. 305

toe (or third toe) of an ordinary quadruped. If the
skeleton of the horse's foot be examined, it will be seen
that lying by the side of the great middle toe are two
little splint-like bones, one on each side, which are the

FEET OF FOSSIL EQUID^E.

'rudiments' of the index (or second) toe, and the ring toe
(or fourth toe). The horse, therefore, possesses a foot with
one complete toe and two incomplete ones; the outer-
most toe (the little or fifth toe), and the innermost toe
(the thumb or great toe, or first toe) having no repre-
sentatives at all. If, however, there be any truth in the
general doctrine of evolution, it may be taken as certain
that the horse has descended from a five-toed ancestor,
since the typical Mammals possess five digits to the foot.
Through the researches of Gaudry, Marsh, and others, it
may now be confidently asserted that the horse has
descended from a five-toed form. Thus, we meet with a
number of horse-like animals, all now extinct, in which we

find the foot, as we trace them backwards into the past, to

T

306 NATURAL HISTORY.

become progressively nearer and nearer to the normal
pentadactylous type. In comparatively modern strata,
we find the Hipparion, in which the two little splint-bones
of the living horses are so far developed that they project
externally and carry little hoofs at their ends. The foot
is, therefore, three-toed in the Hipparion, but the animal
still walked upon the great middle toe, and the lateral
toes were functionally useless, as they did not touch the
ground. In the still older Anchitherium, the two lateral
toes are sufficiently developed to touch the ground, but
the middle toe is still much the biggest, and is the toe
upon which the weight of the body is principally sup-
ported. In the still older Orohippus, the fore-feet are
four-toed, the fifth or little finger being now developed,
but the thumb is still wanting, and the hind-feet have only
three toes. Finally, in the Eohippus, the oldest type of
equine animal .yet discovered, the fore-foot possesses four
complete toes, with a rudimentary thumb (or first toe) in
addition, thus becoming morphologically five-toed. The
above gives, of course, an exceptionally striking instance
of how palaeontology enables us to trace the line of descent
of some particular living animal ; but there are innumer-
able instances in which fossil forms exhibit characters
which more or less extensively bridge over the gaps
separating groups apparently widely remote. Upon the
whole, therefore, the evidence of palaeontology, though
lending but a partial support to the theory of the origin of
species by means of natural selection alone, is overwhelm-
ingly in favour of a general theory of the evolution of
animals from other pre-existent types.

INDEX.

Amphibia, classification, by Linnaeus, 59.

Anaima, or animals without blood, 17.

Analogy, likenesses of, 173.

Anatomy, 8; Cuvier on, 140; value of
Cuvier's contributions to the science
of, 151.

Anchitherium, 306.

Anemones, sea, 190.

Animal kingdom according to Ray, 47 ;
defined by Linnaeus, 58 ; by Swainson,
i?5-

Ant-eater, spiny, 162, 166, 176.

Aptera, 60.

Aquatic animals, Ray's division of, 47.

Arachnida, the, of Cuvier, 146.

Arbutus, the, 214.

Arctic area, 215 ; plants and animals of,
in Britain, 219.

Aristotle, the father of zoology, 6 ;
History of Animals, 12; attitude to-
wards natural history, 13 ; observa-
tions on cuttle-fishes, 14 ; first created
a scientific method of treating the
animal kingdom, 15 ; his division of
animals, with and without blood, 17 ;
scientific prosecution of natural history
closed for centuries with his death, 18.

Armorican type of plants, 214 ; migra-
tion of, 221.

Articulata of Cuvier, 146, 147.

Artificial selection, as expounded by
Darwin, 289, 291 ; production of
domesticated breeds from wild species
by means of, 292 ; has not resulted in
the production of a new species, 299.

Ascidian molluscs, 139.

Ash mole, Elias, founder of Ashmolean
Museum, 68.

Asturian area, 214 ; flora of, 221, 222.

Aves, or birds, classification of, by
Linnaeus, 59.

Bell, Professor Thomas, 186.
Belon, 21.

Bewick, Thomas, account of his life, 109.
Birds, 47, 59, 231 ; air receptacles of,

79 ; Genera of, by Pennant, 103 ;

armed with spurs, 230.
Boar, the, 3, 101, 102, 230.
Box, the, 215.
British Museum, the, 64, 67 ; Sir Hans

Sloane's bequest, 69.
Brongniart, Alexander, 153.
Bryony, the, 215.
Buffon on the possible evolution of

species, 226 ; his Histoire Naturelle,

226 ; assists Lamarck, 240.

Carrion-crow, the, 50.

Catacombs, mummies found in, 157.

Cattiwake, the, 26.

Cetacea, 47, 49, 145.

Challenger Expedition, the, 212.

Chambers, Robert, and the authorship
of the Vestiges of Creation, 264 ;
the Vestiges more than an attempt
to explain the origin of species,
265 ; conclusions set forth therein, 266-
268 ; its chief merit the attack upon
the doctrine of the special creation of
species, 270; views of the author on
the origin of species, 271 ; rejects
Lamarck's views, 272; accepts con-
ception of a fundamental unity of
organisation among animals, 272 ;
theory of progressive development,
273.

Charlton, William, the collection of, 68.

Chough, the, 50.

Classification in natural history, 9.

Cod, prolific nature of the female, 281.

Ccelenterate animals, 176, 190.

Conchology, researches in, 188.

Cooper, Sir Astley, on John Hunter, 83.

Coral (deep-sea) zone, 211.

Corallines, essay on, 95.

Crocodiles, 304.

Crow family, Ray's names for the, 50.

3o8

NATURAL HISTORY.

Crustacea, 47 ; Cuvier on, 146.

Cuckoo, 80.

Cuvier, 136-167 ; scientific papers, 138,
139 ; his great scientific activity, 142 ;
work as a specialist in zoology, 142 ;
on the Mollusca and fishes, 142 ;
studies in palaeontology, 143 ; treatise
on the animal kingdom, 144 ; advances
which Cuvier effected in zoological
science, 145 ; studies of invertebrate
animals, 146 ; vertebrate animals, 147 ;
his grouping of the animal kingdom,
148, 149 ; recognised the true principle
of philosophical classification, 150;
contributions to morphology, 151 ;
chief founder of science of palaeonto-
logy, 152 ; investigations of tertiary
rocks, 154; controversy as to origin
of fossils, 154 ; a ' catastrophist,'
155 ; views on the origin of species,
155 ; on Lamarck's views, 157 ; gave
a scientific basis to palaeontology, 158;
established the law of correlation of
organs, 159 ; on the marsupials, 164.

Dalyell, Sir John Graham, 191.

Darwin, Charles, his birth and educa-
tion, 277; cruise in the Beagle, 278;
journal of researches, note, 278;
scientific labours and death, 279 ; list
of works by, 279, 280 ; established the
theory of natural selection, 280 ; bases
of theory, 281 ; variation, 283, 284 ;
his illustration of the giraffe, 285 ; his
theory of artificial selection, 287-292 ;
objections to his theory of natural
selection, 293.

Darwin, Erasmus, 223-235; intimately
connected with theory of origin of
species, 223 ; life of, 224 ; recog-
nised natural variations and the
principle of heredity, 227 ; on com-
munity of descent, 228 ; on probable
cause of modification of species, 229 ;
on transformations of animals, 229,
230, 231 ; concluded that all animals
have a common origin, 233 ; taught
the origin of species by descent with
modifications, 234. |

Deinosaurs, 304.

Development, science of, 8 ; doctrine of
progressive, 264-274.

Distribution of plants and animals ac-
cording to Forbes, 213, 214, 215, 216.
Dodo, stuffed specimen of, 68.
Donovan, Edward, and works by, 108.
Drury, the entomologist, 108.
Duck-mole, 162, 167, 176.
Duport, James, 22.

Eel, the electric, 79.

Elephant, supernatural qualities ascribed
to, 3 ; trunk of the, 230 ; Darwin's
calculations as to age, &c., 282.

Ellis, John, 93.

Embryology, 8, 151, 302.

Enaima, or animals with blood, 17.

Entomology, 189.

Eohippus, 306.

Equidae, feet of fossil, 305.

Evolution, 10 ; the key to biological
problems, 223 ; Lamarck's theory of,
223, 243 ; Buffon on, 226 ; facts of
palaeontology support theory, 304.

Fish- hawk described by Wilson, 128.

Fishes, 47 ; Willughby on, 43 ; Cuvier
and Giinther, 44; classified by Lin-
naeus, 60 ; Cuvier's researches in the
department of, 142.

Fleming, Rev. John, 184, 185.

Forbes, Edward, 184, 192-222; fond-
ness for natural history, 193 ; college
training, 195 ; abandons the study
of medicine, 197 ; foreign travel,
197 ; dredging expeditions, 198 ;
appointed naturalist to the Beacon,
199; professor of Botany in King's
College, 200 ; appointed to the Natural
History chair in Edinburgh, 202 ;
premature death, 203 ; his contribu-
tions to natural history, 203, 204;
studies of the British mollusca, 205 ;
researches into the distribution of
animals, 205 ; his belief in the fixity of
species, 206 ; theory as to genera, 208 ;
on the distribution of animals in the
sea, 209 ; four zones of depth, 210 ;
theory of the absence of life in deeper
parts of ocean disproved, 212 ; studies
in distribution of plants and animals,
213, 214, 215; theory of the distribu-
tion of plants and animals, 217; the
three floras, 220, 221.

INDEX.

3°9

Forskal, 55.

Fossils, Ray's theory of, 31 ; Lister on,

91 ; controversy as to origin of, 154.
Fregilus genus, 51.
Frog-fish, the, 231.

Gastric juice, John Hunter on, 78.

Genera of recent and fossil shells, 188.

Gentian, the blue, 215.

Geographical distribution of animals, 8.

Geology and its relations to palaeonto-
logy, 153-

Germanic type of vegetation, 216.

Gesner, 21.

Giraffe, the, Lamarck's theory as to,
252 ; an example of modification, 285.

Glacial period, migration of plants and
animals during the, 218, 219.

Goethe on mutability of species, 227.

Goose, different breeds of, 290.

Graptolites, 58.

Gronovius, 53.

Gulf-weed, note, 222.

Gunther, A., on Willughby's Ichthyology,
44 ; on Cuvier, 151.

Harris, Moses, 108.

Hasselquist, 55.

Hedgehog, Hunter's researches on, 81.

Heredity, 227.

Herring, migration of, 98, 99.

Hipparion, the, 306.

Hog, the, Pennant on, 100, 101 ; used as
a beast of draught, 102.

Home, Everard, 77-84 ; first conserva-
tor of the Hunterian Museum, 88 ;
destroys Hunter's unpublished observa-
tions, 89 ; publishes Lectures on Com-
parative Anatomy, 89.

Homology, likenesses of, 173.

Hooded-crow, 50.

Horse, descent from five-toed form, 305.

Hunter, John, founder of science of
comparative anatomy, and of Hunter-
ian Museum, 69-76 ; list of his
philosophical and zoological papers,
78, 79 ; correspondence with Jenner,
80; researches upon the cuckoo, 80;
on hedgehog, 81 ; work on the blood,
inflammation, and gun-shot wounds,
82 ; death, 85 ; personal appearance,
86 ; distinguishing character of his

mind, 86 ; museum his magnum opus,
86, 87.

Hunter, Dr William, a great anatomist,
71 ; his extensive museum, 72 ; excel-
lence as a lecturer and demonstrator,
83 ; controversy with John Hunter, 84.

Hunterian museum, 64, 69, 72, 86, 87;
bought by government and attached
to the College of Surgeons, 88; de-
scriptive catalogues of, 89.

Hydra, the, 94.

Hydra-tuba, 191.

Ichthyornis, 162.

Insects, 47, 60, 61 ; Ray on, 35 ; Wil-
lughby on, 45 ; classification of, by
Linnaeus, 60; Cuvier on, 146.

Invertebrates, Cuvier on, 146, 147 ;
Lamarck on, 241.

Jackdaw, the, 50.

Jardine, Sir William, 128, 184.

Jenner, Dr, a pupil of John Hunter, 77 ;

Hunter's correspondence with, 80.
Johnston, Dr George, 190.
Jussieu, Antoine de, 54; Bernard de,

94 ; botanical classification by, 238.

Kangaroo, pelvis of, 163 ; jaw of, 164.

Kentish Flora, the 221.

Kirby, Rev. William, 189.

Kittiwake, the, 26.

Koster, Mr, travels in Brazil, 170.

Lamarck, Chevalier de, 236-263 ; on the
origin of species, 155; order of his
botanical classification, 239; theory
of evolution, 243; saw the diffi-
culty of separating species from
varieties, 246; rejected the idea
of constancy of species, 247 ; views
on variation, 249 ; believed simpler
forms of life were evolved first,
250 ; agencies concerned in modifica-
tion, 251 ; thought that external con-
ditions had evoked a corresponding
structure, 252 ; instance of the giraffe,
252 ; climatic differences in animals,
256 ; recognised that the habitual use
of an organ leads to its corresponding
growth, 262.

Laminarian zone, 210.

3io

NATURAL HISTORY.

Latham, Dr John, 107.

Lewes, George Henry, 12-17.

Linnaeus or Linn£, Karl von, 46-52 ;
publication of Systema Naturce,
53; visits England, 53; scientific
labours, 55 ; position as a botanist
and zoologist, 56; his classification
the simplest and most complete up
till that time, 57 ; division of natural
objects into kingdoms, 58; great
merits of his classification, 61 ; intro-
duction of binomial system, 62 ; in-
dications of a farther expansion of
the Linnean nomenclature, 63.

Lister, Martin, 33, 90.

Littoral zone, the, 210.

Macgillivray, William, 187.

Macleay, W. S., 168.

Madder, wild, 214.

Maillet, Benedict de, 156.

Malacia, 47.

Malacostraca, 47.

Malthusian law of increase, 281.

Mammalia, division of, by Linnaeus, 58 ;
primates, 58 ; least satisfactory features
of this division, 59 ; Cuvier on osteo-
logy of, 151.

Mammals, 44, 47, 49.

Manatees, 49.

Marsupial quadrupeds, structure of, 164 ;
where found, 164 ; fossil, 166.

Mastodon, 143.

Megalonyx, 143.

Migration, animals and plants, 217-219.

Mivart, St George, objections to law of
natural selection, 293.

Mollusca, 47, 91, 187 ; Cuvier's researches
on, 139, 142, 147, 151 ; Forbes on, 204,
205.

Montagu, George, 107.

Morphological likenesses, 173.

Morphology, 8 ; 151.

Mullein, the, 215.

Museums, great, 64-89.

Natural History, beginnings of, 1-6; no
system previous to Aristotle, 7 ; only
the aggregate history of all known
species of animals, 7 ; departments
known as morphology or anatomy,
physiology, embryology, and geo-

graphical distribution of animals, 8 ;
of palaeontology, 9 ; of taxonomy, 9 ;
of evolution, 10 ; of psychology and
teleology, 10 ; scientific prosecution of,
came for centuries to a close at the
death of Aristotle, 18 ; contributions
of Pliny the Elder to, 18 ; awakening
in seventeenth century, 18, 21 ; arti-
ficial and natural classification, 47.
Natural Selection, theory of, 275; has
brought to light a whole series of
problems, 276 ; first established by
Darwin, 277, 281 ; bases of the
theory of, 281 ; operation of this law
in the case of the giraffe, 285 ; pre-
serves all favourable variations, 285;
destroys unfavourable variations, 286 ;
all species produced by, 287 ; many
domestic animals protected from this
law, 288, 291 ; theory requires that
there should be a series of inter-
mediate types graduating into one
another, 297 ; does not explain why
variations occur, 300 ; evidence in
favour of this law, 301-6.

Odontornithes, 304.
Oldenburg, Mr, 33.
Opossum, fossil, 164, 165.
Organisms, how produced, 272.
Organs, law of correlation of, 159-161.
Origin of species by means of Natural

Selection, 223-228, 292, 300 ; Darwin's

book on, 280.
Ornithology, 186.
Orohippus, 306.
Ostracoderma, 47.
Oviparous animals, 47.
dwen, Sir Richard, note, 88 ; publishes

descriptive catalogues of the Hunterian

Museum, 89 ; on Cuvier, 150 ; on the

correlation of organs, 161.

Palaeolithic men, 2.

Palaeontology, 9 ; Cuvier the chief
founder of, 152 ; relations of this science
to geology, 153 ; Cuvier gave scientific
bases to, 158 ; enables us to trace line
of descent of animals, 306.

Peacock, 3 ; black-shouldered, 299.

Pennant, Thomas, account of, 96 ; on the
migration of the herring, 98, 99 ; on the

INDEX.

common hog, 100, 101 ; on the wild
boar, 102 ; tours and publications,
102-106 ; on migration of swallow, 1 19.

Petiver, James, the collection of, 68.

Peyssonnel on zoophytes, 94.

Physiology, 8.

Pig, domestic, relieved from law of natural
selection, 288, 290.

Pigeon, an extinct, 68.

Pigmentum nigrum, in animals, 79.

Polypes, freshwater, 94 ; trumpet, 191.

Primates, 58.

Primrose, the, 215.

Protective resemblances among animals,
229-232.

Pterodactyles, 163, 304.

Quadrupeds, division of, by Linnseus,

58 ; primates, 58 ; embryo of, 302.
Quinary classification, the, 177.

Radiata, the, of Cuvier, 147.

Raven, 50.

Ray, John, 18; the chief representative
of natural sciences in pre-Linnean
period, 20 ; his birth and education,
22 ; tours, &c. , 24-33 '• History of
Insects, 35 ; character, 36 ; botani-
cal treatises by, 37; theological
treatises, 38 ; zoological treatises,
39; his classification of animals,
47, 48 ; his classification artificial,
48 ; separates animals which are
closely allied, 49.

Reaumur, 95.

Red Lion Club, the, note, 199.

Reindeer, 2.

Reptiles, 47 ; History of, 186.

Retrogression, 168-182.

Richardson, Sir John, 185.

Robinet on man and animals, 156.

Robinson, Dr Tancred, 33.

Rondeletius, 21.

Rook, the, 50.

Royal College of Surgeons, 88.

Ruminant animals, 303, 304.

Sainfoin, the, 215.
Sargassum, 222.

Sars, the Norwegian naturalist, 191.
Scallop, the Icelandic, found in the
Clyde, 219.

Scandinavian area, 215.

Scout, the, 26.

Sea-squirts, a link between the true
shell-fish and vertebrate animals, 301.

Selection, artificial, as expounded by
Darwin, 289.

Serpent worship, 4.

Sexual selection, theory of, 232.

Shaw, George, 108 ; chief works, 109.

Shells, Lister on, 91.

Sibbald, Sir Robert, 91-93.

Sloane, Sir Hans, 33, 54, 65; his
Catalogue of Jamaica Plants, 66;
founder of the British Museum, 67.

Smeathman, entomologist, 108.

Solan geese, 25.

Solander, 55.

Sowerbys, the, 188.

Sparrman, 55.

Species, Forbes on fixity of, 206 ;
natural groups of, 208 ; definition of,
244 ; transmutation of, 236-263 ;
old views as to, now given up
by naturalists, 236, 237; revolution
accomplished by Charles Darwin,
237; same principle of evolution
adopted by Lamarck, 237 ; earliest
definite theory of evolution in La-
marck's Philosophie Zoologique, 243 ;
many naturalists believed that species
of animals and plants were special crea-
tions, 243 ; general ideas that a species
consists of an assemblage of individuals,
244 ; difficult to decide between species
and a variety, 245 ; the physiological
test of, 245 ; Lamarck on, 246, 247 ;
only stable so long as their environ-
ment remains unchanged, 247 ;
agencies concerned in the modification
of, 251 ; giraffe theory, 252; old idea
that species produced as we now find
it, 254; notion of permanence of,
257; change in structure of organs
from use or disuse, 259, 263.

Spence, William, 189.

Spencer, Herbert, and the survival of
the fittest, 284.

Stag, use of horns of the, 230.

Star-fishes, 204.

St Paul's battoons, 33.

Stephens, James F., 189.

Swainson, William, 91, 168 ; travels

3I2

NATURAL HISTORY.

in South America, 170; issues his
Zoological Illustrations, 170; theory
of circular classification, 174-179; cir-
cular classification a mere figment, 182.

Swan, the, in folk-lore, 3.

Swine, nose of the, 230.

Systema Naturae, publication of, by
Linnseus, 53 ; described, 55 ; note, 57.

Tamarisk, the French, 214.

Taxonomy, 9.

Teleology, 10.

Terrestrial animals, 47.

Termites, 108.

Tessier, Abbe, 137.

Testacea, 47 ; Montagu on, 107.

Thylacinus, the, of Tasmania, 166.

Tongue, the use of, in cattle, 230.

Torpedo, John Hunter on, 78.

Tortoise, described by White, 114.

Totemism, 4.

Tradescant, John, museum of, 68.

Transmutation of Species, 236-263.

Trembley, Abraham, notice of, note, 94

Trout, gizzard or gillarroo, 79.

Trumpet-polype, 191.

Typical group of animals, 180, 181.

Ungulatse, 59.

Variation of Animals and Plants under
Domestication, by Darwin, 280.

Vegetables, definition, by Linnaeus, 58.

Vermes, classification, by Linnaeus, 61.

Veronica, the alpine, 215.

Vertebrata, the, 47 ; division of, by
Linnaeus, 56 ; Cuvier on, 147 ; re-
searches on, 153.

Vestiges of Creation, by R. Chambers,
264.

Viviparous animals, 47.

Wallace, Alfred Russell, joint-author
of the theory of natural selection, 281.

Westwood, Professor J. O., 189.

Whale, the, 79, 173, 303 ; Sibbald's, 93 ;
Cuvier on, 150.

White, Rev. Gilbert, no; account of
his life, in ; Natural History and
Antiqitities of Selborne, 112; account
of 'Timothy,' a tortoise, 114; on the
flight of birds, 116 ; on migration of
the swallow, 119.

Willows, the dwarf, 215.

Willughby, Francis, 20 ; friendship with
Ray* 39 I joint tour with Ray, 40 ;
early death, 41 ; editing of his scientific
notes by Ray, 42 ; his ornithology, 43 ;
his writings, 43-45.

Wilson, Alexander, 'the American orni-
thologist,' 121 ; pedlar and poet, 123;
emigrates to America, 124 ; life as a
schoolmaster, 125 ; introduced by
Bartram to the study of natural
history, 125; American Ornithology,
126-128 ; characteristics of, as a
naturalist, 128 ; his description of the*
osprey, 128.

Wolf, 3, 79.

Wombat, jaw of, 163.

Woodward, Samuel, conchologist, 188.

Yarrel, William, 187 ; his natural history
of birds and fishes, 187.

Zones of depth, the four, 210.

Zoologists, British, 90-135.

Zoology of the Voyage of the Beagle, by

Darwin, note, 278, 280.
Zoophytes, 94, 189 ; History of, 190.

THE END.

Edinburgh :
Printed by W. & R. Chambers.

14 DAY USE

RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED

r^f^,W7 H [I! 'W

jQ 11

This book is due on the last date stamped below, or

on the date to which renewed.
Renewed books are subject to immediate recall.

1 / \

Cubd 2

\» ,

MAY201S'

• • •«/ ,-, _, tr\r\f>.

MAY 2 8 196(J 1

1 MJ~L,

3

f^t^

| DEC 4. -ft

)i

NOV251969

LD 21-40m-5,'65

General Library