.\ 
 
 
 
 rS-^- 
 
(Darnell UninerBitg ffitbrarg 
 
 JItltaca. S9em lortt 
 
 BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE 
 
 FISKE ENDOWMENT FUND 
 
 THE BEQUEST OF 
 
 WILLARD FISKE 
 
 LIBRARIAN OF THE UNIVERSITV 1868-1883 
 
 1905 
 
Cornell University Library 
 QL 26.N62 
 
 Lives and labours of leading naturalists 
 
 lliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 
 3 1924 003 392 804 
 
The original of tliis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924003392804 
 
LEADING NATURALISTS 
 
C £ic 
 
 FROM A PHOTOCJRAPH BV ELI.IOTT AND FRY. 
 
LIVES AND LABOURS 
 
 LEADING NATURALISTS 
 
 h! ALLEYNK NICHOLSON, M.D., D.Sc. 
 
 REGIUS PROFESSOR OF NATURAL HISTORY IN THE 
 UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN 
 
 W. & R. CHAMBERS, Limited 
 
 LONDON AND EDINBURGH 
 
 1894 
 
Edinburgh : 
 Printed by W. & R. Chambers, Limited. 
 
In the present work the Author has endeavoured 
 to give a brief and general outHne 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 
 
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. 
 
i^ PAGE 
 
 INTRODUCTION I 
 
 ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD 5 
 
 RAY AND WILLUGHBY 21 
 
 RAY AND WILLUGHBY — continued. 37 
 
 LINN^US AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION 46 
 
 THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN — 
 
 Sir Hans Sloane 64 
 
 John Hunter 69 
 
 BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS 90 
 
 BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS — continued. 107 
 
 The Rev. Gilbert White no 
 
 Alexander Wilson 121 
 
 CUVTER 136 
 
 RETROGRESSION — Swainson and the Circular Classification 168 
 
 BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS — continued. 183 
 
 EDWARD FORBES 192 
 
 THE DAWN OP 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 
 
f o;| ILIST OF ILLUSTRATIUNS li 
 
 PAGE 
 
 DARWIN Frontispiece 
 
 ARISTOTLE 5 
 
 THE CICADA 19 
 
 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 2x6 
 
 FEET OF FOSSIL EQUID^E S^S 
 
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 
 
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 Palago- 
 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 diflfusion 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 liis great woric 
 on the ' History of Animals ' (Ili;; t« ZSa 'Ino^ia.) about 340 B.C. As regards the 
 nature and value of the scientific writings of Aristotle, the following may be 
 consulted : ' Aristoteles Thierkunde,' Jflrgen 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 : 
 
5 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 
 Paleontology. 
 
 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 
 
lO 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 paleeonto- 
 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. II 
 
 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 obHvious 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 other 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 Nalurelles,' 1841, torn, i., p. 146. 
 
 t 'Aristotle, a Chapter from the History of Science,' 1864, p. 271, 
 
ARISTOTELIAN PERIOD. 1 3 
 
 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 modem 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. I 5 
 
 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 Zoologie,' 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 modem 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 
 
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 Httle 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. 1 9 
 
 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 tliis 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 inchoatutn : tandem Tho. Moufeti Londin^tis, 
 opera sumptibusque maximis concinnatum, auctum, perfectum : et ad vivum expres- 
 sis iconibus illustratum. Londini ex officina typographica 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. 
 
JOHN RA.Y. 
 
RAY AND WILLUGHBY. 
 
 The seventeenth century has been characterised — of 
 course from the point of view of a naturahst — as 
 ' the dawn of the Golden Age.' The torch of zoo- 
 logical discovery lighted by Aristode, 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 bom on the 29th 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 hfe 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 
 1661 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, 
 
 TA-NTALLON 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 19th, 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 gi-eat 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 laclc, 
 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 130/. 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 
 msike 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 100,000/. 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. 3 1 
 
 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 
 modem 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 Nurnberg had been incorporated 
 with the kingdom of Bavaria. 
 
32 NATURAL HISIORY. 
 
 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), ^"d his well-known 
 'Collection of Unusual or Local Enghsh 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 Sloane, 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 baitoons 
 [peculiar stones found in Malta], ' the Trochites of mush- 
 rooms, maize, the bleeding of trees and motion of their 
 
 C 
 
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 ; in 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 WILLUGHBV. 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; 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. "jtk, 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 17th 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 Cyclopsedia ' ), 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. It 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, finding 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. 4 1 
 
 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. AMllughby 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 
 
 * ' Omithologia, sive de Avibus, Libri tres : in quibus Aves omnes hactenus cogniese, 
 in Methodum naturis suis convenisntum rcdactae, accurate describuntur. Descrip- 
 tiones iconibus elegantissimis et vivarum avium simillimis sen 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 
 tliat 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 17 13, after Ray's death, and consisted of 
 two parts, one dealing with birds, and the other with 
 .£shes, 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 17 10, at the expense of the Royal Society, 
 under the title, '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 
 '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. 
 
rf 
 
 ' '' II II 
 
 ilffl* 
 
 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^US AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 47 
 
 necessarily, altogether of what is called an ' 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 (= Vertehrata). 
 
 1. Respiring by lungs, and having a heart fiirnished 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 Anuak'LS {= Invertebrate animals). 
 
 I Malacia, or Mollusca. 
 
 1. Of large size } 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^US 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 tho. 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, 
 
 D 
 
so 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 an 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 corax. 
 
 2. Carrion-crow Cornix Corvus corone. 
 
 3. Rook Cornix frugilega Corvus frugilega. 
 
 4. Hooded-crow Cornix cinerea frugilega. ..Corvus cornix. 
 
 5. Jackdaw Monedula Corvus vtonedula. 
 
 6. Chough Coracias Fregilus gramlus. 
 
LINN^US AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 5 1 
 
 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 Fregilus. 
 
 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 Linnd — 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, Linnsus 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 
 Linnasus in 1738, three years after the death of Artedi. In the close friendship 
 which subsisted between Linnseus 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. 
 
LINN^US AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. S3 
 
 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 Linnjeus 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 Morseus. 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 Naturse.' 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 Moreeus, 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 ; 
 
LINN^US 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. 
 Linnseus 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. 
 
S6 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 
 
LINN^US AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 57 
 
 attached, and by the possession or absence of which 
 different groups were defined and kept apart. It is to be 
 remembered, however, that though the classification of 
 Linn^us 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 nature, or the total assemblage of all natural 
 
 * The * Systema Naturse 'bears the full title, ' Systema Naturas, 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 Liimasus, 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 Gmehn, 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 aUve, but also possess sensibility 
 and the power of voluntary movement. With Linnseus'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,' ot 
 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 
 
LTNN^US 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 
 Linnseus, in the twelfth edition of the ' Systema Naturse,' 
 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 
 Ungiilata, and disposed of them by establishing three 
 orders (the Bruta, Pecora, and Bellucz), in which they 
 were placed in unnatural juxtaposition with forms in no 
 way related to them. 
 
 (2) Aves, or Birds. — Linnsus divided the birds into 
 six orders, comprising less than a thousand species. 
 His classification was a decided advance in clearness and 
 general applicabiUty 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 Linnsus understood 
 the animals which we now know as the Reptiles, such 
 as lizards, turdes, crocodiles, and serpents. At the 
 same time he placed with these the animals which 
 modern naturalists call Amphibia, namely, the frogs, toads, 
 
6o 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 
 
LINNiEUS AND THE LINNEAN CLASSIFICATION. 6 1 
 
 perhaps no part of his zoological system which has 
 sufifered less alteration at the hands of later systematists, 
 that is, as regards its broad features. 
 
 (6) Vermes. — Under this head, Linnseus 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 Linnseus 
 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 Vermes — 
 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. Linnseus, 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 Canis 
 lupus respectively. The cat and the tiger, again, are 
 two species of the genus Felis, and they therefore stand 
 as the Felis catus and the Felis 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. 
 
V -:"> Aiy '■^ 
 
 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 Sloan e ; 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 MontpelUer. 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 
 
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 19th 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 Sloane 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 15th 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 
 
70 
 
 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 
 bom at Long Calderwood, in the parish of Easter 
 Kilbride, on the 14th 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. 7t 
 
 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 histoRV. 
 
 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 17 18, 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 ; 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 op 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 
 
 * Drcwry Ottley. 
 
7 6 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 roan 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 177 1, 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 Earl's 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 
 stomachiais) of Ireland. 
 
 In 177s, he pubhshed 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 1777, he 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 CEconomy,' 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 pigmentiim 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 
 CEconomy,' 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, 
 
 F 
 
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. 
 
86 NATURAL HISTORY. 
 
 According to Ottley, John Hunter was in person ' about 
 the middle stature, of a vigorous and robust frame, and 
 free from corpulency ; his shoulders were high, and his 
 neck short. His features were rather large and strongly 
 marked; his eyebrows projecting, his eyes of a light 
 colour, his cheeks high, and his mouth rather under- 
 hung. In dress he was plain and gentleman-like, and 
 his hair, which in youth was of a reddish-yellow and in 
 his latter years white, he wore curled behind. 
 
 'On considering what was the distinguishing character 
 of Hunter's mind, we perceive that it was rather that 
 of general strength and vigour, than of a marked pre- 
 dominance of any one faculty especially adapting it 
 for excellence in some particular kind of pursuit. 
 Johnson says, " a true genius is a mind of large 
 general powers, accidentally determined to some par- 
 ticular direction ;" a definition which, though certainly 
 not universally true, seems thoroughly descriptive of 
 Hunter's mind. To talents for observation naturally 
 acute, and heightened to an extraordinary degree by 
 constant practice, Hunter added strong reasoning powers 
 and a sound judgment, and an imagination which, though 
 not brilliant, was sufficiently active to aid him in his 
 researches, while it rarely drew him far aside from the 
 sure paths of induction into the regions of hypothesis.' 
 
 Sufficient has been said to prove the variety and value 
 of John Hunter's contributions to surgery, physiology, 
 anatomy, and natural history. It remains only to say a 
 few words about his museum, which constituted in some 
 respects the most splendid monument of his genius. 
 Hunter's museum was in truth his magnum opus ; and to 
 
THE GREAT MUSEUMS OF BRITAIN. 87 
 
 it lie had devoted all the energy, and often more than all 
 the money, that he had to spare. From the beginning of 
 his career in London, he had sedulously collected speci- 
 mens, or made ' preparations,' with a view of bringing 
 together a series of examples illustrative of the anatomy 
 and physiology of animals. To illustrate the phenomena 
 of life through the entire series of animal forms, may be 
 regarded as the primary object of his collection ; but he 
 also accumulated a great series of specimens illustrative 
 of morbid processes or injuries ; and ultimately he added 
 to his museum an extensive collection of fossils. He 
 was himself a splendid manipulator, and he had the 
 advantage for many years of being helped by trained 
 and devoted assistants. The ' preparations ' of which 
 his museum so largely consisted were therefore often of 
 great beauty; and in many instances the value of the 
 collection was enhanced by the addition of the drawings 
 of skilled artists, many of these depicting structures which 
 were incapable of preservation, and which could only 
 be examined in the fresh state. Finally, at the time of 
 Hunter's death, the museum possessed a most voluminous 
 series of manuscripts, these embracing not only written 
 catalogues or notes on the objects contained in the 
 collection, but also unpublished writings by Hunter 
 himself, descriptive of his dissections of animals, or 
 dealing with physiological or zoological observations 
 which he had made, but which he had not been able to 
 give to the world. 
 
 By his will, Hunter directed that the museum should be 
 offered to the British government on reasonable terms, and 
 that, if they refused the offer, the collection was to be sold 
 
OS 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 tcjl ake 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 ^^15,000) 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 beHeve 
 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 
 Bibliotlicca Britatmica, 
 
BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 91 
 
 principally upon two of these, both dealing mainly with 
 shells — namely, his ' Historia Animalium Angliae,' and his 
 ' Historiae 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 Linnseus 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 lUus- 
 trata sive Prodromus Historic 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 naturahsts 
 
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 17 lo, 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 Hfe-history of the 
 Hydra or fresh-water polype ( ' Mdmoires pour servir & I'histoire d'un Genre de 
 Polypes d'eau douce, k bras en forme de cornes,' 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 ih 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 
 
96 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 14th of June 1726, at Downing in FHntshire. 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 
 modem knowledge, the herring is a local fish inhabit- 
 ing the German Ocean, tlie 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 
 
100 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 diflference 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. 
 
 ' The parts of this animal are finely adapted to its way 
 
BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. lOl 
 
 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. Linrueus 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 apphed 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. 
 
 ' The wild boar was formerly a native of our country, 
 as appears from the laws of Jloel 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 ol 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. IO3 
 
 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 inond'ee 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 177 1 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 
 '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 senectus ; 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 
 
Io6 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 ' R^gne 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 18 13. The other 
 work was the ' Testacea Britannica, an Account of all the 
 Shells hitherto discovered in Britain,' in two volumes 
 quarto, pubHshed 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 
 ' 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), a-nd 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. 
 
no 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 
 Selbome,' 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 ' Selbome.' 
 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 ' Selbome ' 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 modem 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. Ill 
 
 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 i8th 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. 1 13 
 
 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 : ' 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.' 
 
 H 
 
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. US 
 
 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. II7 
 
 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 Gallinas 
 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. 1 19 
 
 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 latcbra 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 
 qucBstio 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 
 countr)', 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 
 
I20 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 and the neighbouring countries. 
 
 ' Some of our own countrymen have given credit to the 
 submersion of swallows; and Klein patronises the doctrine 
 strongly, givipg 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. 
 
 ' 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. Litde 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 
 
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 Lochwlnnoch, where his 
 
BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. I 23 
 
 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. I25 
 
 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 tlie western bank of the Schuyl- 
 kill, and was a good naturalist Bartram introduced 
 AVilson 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 i8o6, to 
 join him in the production of such a work; but tlie latter 
 
 * William Bartram was the son of Jolin Bartram, M.D., a naturalist. He was 
 the author of 'Travels in North and South Carolina,' &&, 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. I 27 
 
 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 tlie 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 
 naturaUst 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. 
 
Missing Page 
 
BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 
 
 129 
 
 FISH-HAWK, FROM WILSON'S ' 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 21st of March, 
 and retiring to the south about the 2 2d 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. I3I 
 
 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, pUed to the height of 
 three or four feet, and firom two to three feet in breadth ; 
 these were intermixed with corn-stalks, sea-weed, pieces 
 of wet turf in large quantities, mullein stalks, and Uned 
 with dry sea^ass; 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 difierent ^gs, fi-om 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 
 
Missing Page 
 
134 NATURAL HISTORY. 
 
 judgment and exertion he beats to windward, not in a 
 direct line, that is, in the wimTs e}>e, but making several 
 successive tacks to gain his purpose. This will appear 
 the more striking, when we consider tlie 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; die remainder weighed six pounds. 
 Another fish-hawk was passing Mr Beasley's, at tlie same 
 place, with a large flounder in his grasp, whicli struggled 
 and shook him so, that he dropt it on tlie 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, eitlier on tlie 
 land or in tlie 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 pre)', 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 tliough he sometimes succeeds 
 in extricating himself, after being taken three or four 
 times down, yet oflener botli parties perish. The 
 bodies of sturgeon and several other large fish, with tliat 
 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 otV. 
 
BRITISH ZOOLOGISTS. 135 
 
 times been found dead on the shore, cast up by the 
 waves.' 
 
 To the above excerpt from WDson'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 sotmd. 
 
 The geese are gone, the gnlls are flyii^ ; 
 
 The hening-shoals swarm thick aroasd. 
 
 The n^s are Izzuczei, the boats are flying ; 
 Yo, ho, my hearts ! let 's seek the deep. 
 Raise Iii^ the son^ and cheerly wish iirr, 
 ScU as the bending net we sweep, 
 
 • God ';:1=53 the n =h-niwk and the fisher ! ' 
 
 She brings as fish, she brings ns spring. 
 Good riTne^ij lair weather, warmth and plenty, 
 Fine store of gtuH, trout, hening, ling, 
 Sheepshead and dram, and old-wives dainty, 
 
 Yo, ho, my hearts ! let 's seek the deep. 
 
 Ply ereiy oar, and cheerly wish her. 
 
 Still as the bending net we sweep, 
 
 'God bless the fish-hawk and the fisher !' 
 
 She rears her yoang on yoriier tree^ 
 She leaves her fgttlif nl mate to minti 'em, 
 like OS, for fish, she sails to sea. 
 And, phraging, shows us where to find 'em. 
 
 Yo, ho, my hearts ! let 's seek the deep. 
 
 Ply every oar, and cheerly wish her, 
 
 \Viile the slow bending net we sweep, 
 
 * God bless the fish-hawk and the fisher I * 
 
=^? 1^- -x?^ ^^5^ S'^ A -v^^: 
 
 C U \' 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 ^"ast improvements eflected in 
 scientific zoology by the genius of the illustrious Cuvier. 
 Georges Cuvier was bom on the 2;d of August 1769, at 
 Montbeliard, in the department of Doubs, then belonging 
 to Wiirtemberg. His father vras a retired military man, 
 and was descended from a Protestant family, which h.ui 
 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 tlie academy of Stuttgart — tlie 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 tlie age of eighteen. A short space of time sub- 
 sequent to his lea«ng the academy of Stuttgart was spent 
 as 'sous-lieutenant' in the Swiss regiment of Ch.Ueauvieux; 
 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'He'ric)-, who 
 
CTJVIEie. 
 
Missing Page 
 
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 Mus^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 
 MoUusca (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 Lac^pfede 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 I'Histoire naturelle des 
 Animaux.' This volume contained, in an abbreviated form, 
 the course of lectures which he delivered at the ' 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 Collbge de France was thus rendered 
 vacant; Cuvier being appointed his successor in 1800. 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 compar^e,' 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, 181 1, 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 iloges 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 Progrfes 
 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 (181 4), 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 Comitd de ITnterieur. In 
 1824, he was made Grand Officer of the Legion d'Hon- 
 neur ; and in the beginning of 1 83 2 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 13th 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* '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 " M^moires pour servir k 
 I'Histoire et k I'Anatomie des Mollusques," published in 
 one volume at Paris in 1817. In the department of fishes, 
 Cuvier's researches, begun in 180 r, 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 'Encyclopaedia 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. 
 Palseontology 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 181 2, 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 ( ' Rfegne Animal distribufe d'aprfes 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 Linnasus in a second 
 'class,' which he termed Vermes. The Vermes of Lin- 
 naeus constituted, however, an entirely miscellaneous 
 
 ; 
 
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 ' Molluscs,' the barnacles and acorn-shells 
 (Cirripedes) being, however, erroneously included among 
 the true shellfish. The Articulata of Cuvier comprised 
 the Ringed Worms (AnneHdes), 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 (Acalephffi) ; (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 
 Linnseus. 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 
 defined 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 Ccelenterate 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 Linnseus, 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, Linn^us 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 'Legons d'Anatomie comparde' 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 'Palsontology ;' 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 
 paleontologists 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 pal^ozoology 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 palaeontological 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 mindralogique 
 
X54 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 naturx 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 sliowed, 
 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 ' 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 
 ' 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 
 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 I'etre,' 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. IS7 
 
 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 
 palasontology. 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 
 
 palseontologist 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 palseontological 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, liave 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 palseontology is easy tp 
 
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 Odo?itormthes). The same distinguished observer has 
 also brought to light an extinct bird {Ichthyornis), in 
 
CUVIER. 
 
 163 
 
 I. Lower jaw of Wombat, showing the * inflected ' angle of the jaw. 
 K. Pelvis of a Kangaroo, showing the ' marsupial bones ' {7«), 
 
 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 gypsmnan), showing the 
 * marsupial bones ' attached to the brim of the pelvis (?«^. 
 
 It is needless to add that this demonstration of the value 
 of the law of the correlation of organs in pateontological 
 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 
 Thylacinus 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. l6y 
 
 Structures (B), though the latter may be present without 
 the former. When, therefore, we find a lower jaw having 
 its angle '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 
 1 819. 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.* 
 
 WiUiam Swainson was born in October 1789, his father 
 
 * ' Cabinet Cyclopaedia : Uiography 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 
 
lyo 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 incUnation.' 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 London, where he worked hard 
 for two or three years, and followed up his former attempt 
 
RETROGRESSION. 1 7 ' 
 
 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 Cyclopsedia 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. 1-73 
 
 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 sufiSciently recognise the causes 
 of the distinction between them. As modem 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. 1 75 
 
 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 naturaUsts) 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. 1 7 7 
 
 eater. Or, if we pass in the otiier 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 versL 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 ' circularists,' 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 
 
 L 
 
178 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 : 
 
 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 tjrpes 
 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. 
 
 analogies between the circular system of the birds and 
 that of the Mammals : 
 
 Primary Types. 
 I. Typical 
 
 Orders 
 of Mammals. 
 
 2. Sub-typical., 
 
 3. Aberrant 
 
 (aquatic 
 group). 
 
 4. Aberrant 
 
 (suctorial 
 group). 
 
 5. Aberrant 
 
 (rasorial 
 group). 
 
 Orders of Birds. Typical Characters. 
 
 .Insessores Organs of prehension Quadrumana 
 
 (Perchers). and general struc- (Monkeys), 
 ture highly de- 
 veloped. 
 
 Carnivorous, claws re- Ferce (Beasts of 
 tractile. Prey). 
 
 .Raptores 
 (Birds of 
 Prey). 
 
 Natatores 
 (Swimmers) 
 
 Cmllatores 
 (Waders). 
 
 Live and feed in the Ca'a^^a (Whales, 
 
 water. Feet short. Dolphins, &c.) 
 or none. 
 
 Jaws much prolonged ; Glires (Rodents 
 
 burrow for their and most 
 
 food. Marsupials). 
 
 Rasores Head with crests of Ungulata 
 
 (Scratchers). horn or feathers ; (Hoofed 
 
 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. ' 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 
 
102 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 'Rfegne 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 Fhsk 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 Crustacea' 
 
 (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 Anatidse' (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. 1 87 
 
 scientific zoologist, but through that most dehghtful 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 
 pubHshed 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 1 841 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. j 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 
 
I OS 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 bom 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 bom 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 
 
rgo 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 Coelenterate 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 (AUman, 
 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. 
 
 191 
 
 The other work alluded to above is the 'Rare and 
 Remarkable Animals of Scotland,' by Sir John Graham 
 Dalyell. This handsome work, pubhshed in 1847 by 
 Van Voorst, in two quarto volumes, deals with the 
 Coelenterate 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. 
 
 sf)^ 
 
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 
 
a^ 
 
 £/w^.t.*.^-y7^^^ 
 
EDWARD FORBES. 1 93 
 
 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 12th 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. 
 
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. 1 95 
 
 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 183 1, 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. 1 97 
 
 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 
 1837-38 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 to give themselves up wholly to fun and merriment, approbation of the songs 
 or speeches being expressed by roars and growls. 
 
200 NATURAL HISTORY. 
 
 Minor. A narrative of this, written in conjunction with 
 his friend and companion, Captain (then Lieutenant) 
 Spratt, was subsequently pubhshed under the title of 
 ' Travels in Lycia ' ( 1 847 ) . 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 .;^2oo 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. 20I 
 
 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. Ashworth. In 185 1, 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 ) ' On the Morphology of the reproductive system of the 
 Sertularian Zoophyte.' This memoir was published in the 
 ' Annals and Magazine of Natural History ' in 1 844, 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 ' polypi tes.' 
 
 (2) 'On the Pulmograde Medusae of the British Seas,' 
 pubhshed in the 'Annals and Magazine of Natural History' 
 in 1846. 
 
 (3) 'A Monograph of the Naked-eye Medusas,' 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 ) '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 Cystidese 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 palseontological 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 Palseontographical Society in 
 1852. 
 
 Thirdly, in the department of the ShellfisTi {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 MoUusca,' 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 palseontological 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 beheved — 
 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 modem 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 
 unlikeness 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 ^gean 
 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 
 
2IO 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 AigcB 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. 2 I I 
 
 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 ^gean 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 ' ( ' 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. 
 
2 14 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 ' Asturlan 
 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 mediterrama), 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 {Rubiaperegrina), 
 the French Tamarisk {Tamarix gallica), and various other 
 peculiar forms. 
 
 (III.) A third area comprises the south-east of England, 
 
EDWARD FORBES. 215 
 
 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 alpind), 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. 21 7 
 
 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 : 
 
 (i) 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 '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. 
 
 Modem 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. 219 
 
 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, finding suitable life-conditions, 
 established themselves far south of their former limits. 
 Thus, during this period the Icelandic Scallop {Fecten 
 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 
 
2 22 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. 
 
 * The Gulf-weed {Sargassum bacctferum) 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 Sargassiim which are 
 essentially littoral seaweeds, or live in shallow water near the shore. Eminent 
 botanical authorities, therefq£e, 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 ' Philosophie Zoologique ' jn 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 being.s, it is necessary 
 
2-4 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 12th 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 Krausc'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,' 1883. 
 
 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 
 1 7 90. ' 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 
 modem 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.' 
 
 
 
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 
 'Zoonomia' 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. Bufifon, 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. 2 27 
 
 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 modem theories of the evolution of 
 species. His views on this question are mostly contained 
 in the section of the 'Zoonomia' 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 ci. 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. 
 
23° 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. 23 1 
 
 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, for 
 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-urchinj. 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 histoRV. 
 
 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 
 'linal 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, tlierefore, 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 !r{<i/T»» uov, or first great egg, produced by night — that 
 is, whose origin is involved in obscurity, and animated 
 by Efos, 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 
 Linnsus, 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 
 Vertfebres.' 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 i8th 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 'Systfeme analytique des Connais- 
 sances positives de I'Homme' 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 i8oi, then 
 in the 'Philosophie Zoologique' in 1809, and finally in 
 the introduction to the 'Animaux sans Vertfebres' 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 Canis lupus of Linnseus. 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. 
 
 ' The same thing happens in the case of animals which 
 have been forced to change their climate, their maimer 
 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 stabiUty 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 espfeces 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 Palceotheria, 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 ' Philosophie 
 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 fiirther 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 ^lace 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 efforts 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 
 arniversary address to the Linnean Society for 1884, in which an excellent 
 summary of Lamarck's philosophico-zoological views is given. 
 
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 cgntinufil 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 
 
26o 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 j 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. 26 1 
 
 of the organ to do the work demanded from it. It is, 
 moreover, certain that pari passu with the change of 
 fuTidion 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. 
 
m 
 
 
 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 1S84 ( 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, h 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 
 
2 68 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 wa^ replenished with its 
 worlds.' 
 
 It wUl be seen from the above characteristic quotation 
 that the theory of the ' special creation ' of the difierent 
 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 DOCTRiN'E OF progressi\t: develop:mext. 2(19 
 
 been separately produced, and were immutable. AVe 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 natiuul 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 beginnmg 
 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 ordinan- ideas respecting natural 
 law were more just, the difficulty might be lessened. It 
 cannot be suflSciently 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 impHes 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 
 ' 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. 27 1 
 
 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, Jirsf, 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.' 
 
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. 
 
XK -^-^^^ 
 
 rrr^m 
 
 -^^im^ 
 
 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 
 
2j6 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 vmy in which others m.iy yet 
 be solved at some future date. 
 
 As has been seen, the theor}' that the present state of 
 the natural world was the result of its evolution from 
 a former state did not originate with Darwia. 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 l.ist, had put forth 
 similar ideas. Lamarck's \-iews, 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 ^•iews as to the 
 nature of ' species ' by the publication of the ' Philo- 
 sophie Zoologique.' To Darwin is incontestabl)- due the 
 pre-eminent merit of having established a theory which 
 
THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTIOX. 277 
 
 satisfactorily explains the method in which species have 
 been produced by evolution from other previously existing 
 forms. Xo 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. 
 ' Xatural 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 estabUshing his great theory. Charles Darwin 
 was bom at Shrewsbury, on the 12th of February i8og. 
 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 liis 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 scientitic studies. This result was also in large part 
 due to the intercourse which he enjoyed with Professor 
 Henslow, the well-known botanist. 
 
 In 1 83 1, 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.' 
 
 \ 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. Beagle^ 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. 
 
Missing Page 
 
28o NATURAL HISTORY. 
 
 tions (such as those on cleavage and foUation, 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 FertiH^ation 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- 
 hne. 
 
 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 
 
z82 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) Somu of the variations which occur in the in- 
 dividuals composing any species, aic favourable U> the 
 species ; some are unfavourable. That is to say, some 
 variations will cither 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 die 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 a// individuals have in maintaining dieir 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, cateris 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 lias 
 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 
 arc 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 i-unditions upon die stuicttire 
 
THE THEORY OT NATtTRAL SELECTION. 2i-_ 
 
 of animak. If we suppose, namely, tiiat the giraffe, to 
 begin with, possessed a neck of no more than normal 
 length, and lived prindpally upon the ordinary terrestrial 
 herbage; and if we further suppose a severe and pro- 
 tracted drought to occur in the region inhabited by 
 the giraffra, 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 
 tills 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, wiU show how the possession 
 of a fevourable 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, 
 fevourable variations or peculiarities which preserve ahve 
 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 
 unfevotirable 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 
 
2»S 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 THECRY OF KATVR-iL SELECTION. jSj 
 
 subject under the head of what he has called ' artificial 
 select on ;' and a few words may be said here as to what 
 he understands by this name. Our domesticated animals, 
 as is well known, hare in all cas^ originated from wild 
 species, which have gradually been brought under the 
 influence and dominion of man. The same is true of all 
 OUT domesticated, or rather cultivated, plants. la 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 sj)ecies from which the domestic 
 foraa was derived. In other cases, the domesticated 
 aTiimal<; have Undergone changes so great that we can no 
 longer point with cenainty to the wild fomos in which they 
 originated. In some cases, it may be, the wild form is no 
 lonrer in existence. In aU cases, however, our domestic 
 animals show, more or less conspicjously, two remarkable 
 characteristics or tendencies. One of these is that they 
 exhibit more numerotis and more marked ' varieties ' than 
 is the cas^ as a rale, 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 
 disrinctive 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 reqnirements of man. Thus, any modifications 
 produced by natural selection ia 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, ilan, however, does not desire any 
 
2f)0 NATURAL HISTORY. 
 
 improvements of this kind in llic doinoslic pig. lie does 
 not, for (jxiiniijlc, 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 eviiieiit in some than in otiiers. 
 The variations, for instance, whi( h separate the different 
 breeds of tlie dog from one another are exceedingly well 
 mari<e(l, and they are all variations which ada[jt ])articular 
 breeds for the special purposes for wliich man wants them. 
 On the other hand, the dilTerent breeds of tlie (Joose differ 
 little from one another, or from their wild form (the Grey 
 Lag Goose), because man's demands from the goose are 
 *"¥ and simple, and are quite well answered by the 
 crdinary form of tlie species. 
 
 ': ic causes of the above-mentioned peculiarities of 
 nppesticated animals, as compared with wild ones, have 
 oftea fully expounded by Mr Darwin, and are readily 
 mieiligible. As regards tlie first of them — namely, tlie 
 tendency to excessive variation shown iiy domestic animals 
 — the cause is to lie found in the varied < haracter and 
 artificial nature of the conditions under whicli 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 iiiilividiial itself in its natural 
 condition. On the other hand, domestic animals are 
 ke])t by their masters under very dilfcrcnt sets of condi- 
 tions, as regards (lifleient individuals of the species, and 
 
Missing Page 
 
292 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 
 ' 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.' 
 
Missing Page 
 
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 r^siimd of these objections is given by Mr Pascoe in his Notes on 
 Natural Selection and the Origin of Species, 1884. 
 
296 tfATURAL 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 j 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 
 
Missing Page 
 
THE THEOEY OF KATURAL SELECTIOK. 2'-' 
 
 forms must have greit.y exceeded in total nuinber the 
 comLiEed riumber of indii-iduals which are dearly 
 recognisable as distinct species, we ought to find in-.re 
 abundant evidence of their existence than of the exist- 
 ence of the separate ipecies. As a maXtei of fact, hov^- 
 ever, the study of extinct animals does not affoid re ore 
 than -very incomplete evidence as to the existence of 
 the numerous and closely gradaated transitiorial foriis 
 reo'iired by the theory of narira; selection. It is true 
 that pabeontoiogi' has broi:ght to light many forms of 
 animals which are distinctly intermediate in their char- 
 acters between groups which woald otherwise stand far 
 apart Thus, v,e have ntunerous extinct lyj^es v. hi oh 
 bridge over the gap between the reptiles and the birds; 
 and otheR which stand intermediate between the exist- 
 ing horses and their original five-toed ancestors. So far, 
 then, palaeontology ttriquestionably lends support to the 
 general theory of the ev^lation of species fi-om pre-exist- 
 ing species. Tne theory of natural selection requires. 
 however, more than this. It requires that there should 
 be a series of intermediate types gradaatlng into one 
 another by slight and hardly perceptible difiierences. In 
 some cases, as regards allied species of animals, such a 
 continuously graduated series can be shown to ex.st (in 
 some extinct SheU-fish, for example). In most cases, 
 however, it must be admitted that palaeontology has so 
 far fmied to demonstrate the past existence of the 
 numerous and finely-graduated series of transitional forms 
 betsi-een different species absolutely demanded by the 
 theory of nateral 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 genera/ absence of gradu- 
 ated intermediate fonns. 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 
 
300 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 lo). 
 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 
 
Missing Page 
 
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 sHts 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, 
 tlie 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 aflect 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. 
 
 (s) 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 palseontology 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^, 
 
 '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 
 
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 sufficiendy 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 Eohippiis, 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. 
 
Amphibia, classification, by Linnseus, 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, 
 175- 
 
 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, 2x9. 
 
 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. 
 
 Ashmole, 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, 6g. 
 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. 
 
 CAai/en£-er Kxpedition, 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. 
 
 Coelenterate 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, 
 Z30, 231 ; concluded that all animals 
 have a common origin, 233 ; taught 
 the origin of species by descent with 
 modifications, 334. 
 
 Deinosaurs, 304. 
 
 Development, science of, 8; doctrine of 
 progressive, 264-274. 
 
 Distribution of plants and animals ac- 
 cording to Forbes, 2x3, 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, isi, 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 Gunther, 44 ; classified by Lia- 
 nseus, 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, 
 Z97 ; 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 getura, 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. 
 
Missing Page 
 
310 
 
 NATURAL HISTORY. 
 
 Latham, Dr John, 107. 
 
 Lewes, George Henry, 12-17. 
 
 Linnsus or Linn£, Karl von, 46-52 ; 
 publication of Systetna 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 zonej 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. 
 
 MoUusca, 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. 
 
 Odontomithes, 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. 
 Owen, Sir Richard, tioie^ 88 ; publishes 
 
 descriptive catalogues of the Hunterian 
 
 Museum, 8g ; on Cuvier, 150 ; on the 
 
 correlation of organs, 161. 
 
 Palaeolithic men, z. 
 
 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. 
 
 311 
 
 common hog, 100, loi ; on the wild 
 boar, I03 ; tours and publications, 
 102-106; on migration of swallow, 119. 
 
 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. 
 
 Pigmeniujn nigrum, in animals, 79. 
 
 Polypes, freshwater, 94 ; trumpet, igi. 
 
 Primates, 58. 
 
 Primrose, the, 215. 
 
 Protective resemblances among animals, 
 229-232. 
 
 Pterodactyles, 163, 304. 
 
 Quadrupeds, division of, by Linnaeus, 
 
 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, 2o ; his birth and education, 
 22 ; tours, &c. , 24-33 '• History 0/ 
 l7tsects, 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, z. 
 
 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, log. 
 
 Shells, Lister on, 91. 
 
 Sibbald, Sir Robert, 91-93. 
 
 Sloane, Sir Hans, 33, 54, 65 ; his 
 Catalogiie 0/ 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 Philosopkie Zoologigue, 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., i8g. 
 Swainson, William, 91, 168 ; travels 
 
312 
 
 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. 
 
 Sysiema Natiim, publication of, by 
 Linnaeus, 53 ; described, 55 ; ;w/f, 57. 
 
 Tamarisk, the French, 214. 
 
 Taxonomy, g. 
 
 Teleology, 10. 
 
 Terrestrial animals, 47. 
 
 Termites, 108. 
 
 Tessier, Abb^, 137. 
 
 Testacea, 47 ; Montagu on, 107. 
 
 Thylacinus, the, of Tasmania, i66. 
 
 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, rgi. 
 
 Typical group of animals, 180, 181. 
 
 Ungulatae, 59. 
 
 Variation of Animals and Plants under 
 Dontesticaiion, by Darwin, 280. 
 
 Vegetables, definition, by Linnaeus, 58. 
 
 Vermes, classification, by Linnaeus, 61. 
 
 Veronica, the alpine, 215. 
 
 Vertebrata, the, 47 ; division of, by 
 Linnasus, 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, z8i, 
 
 Westwood, Professor J. O., 189. 
 
 Whale, the, 79, 173, 303 ; Sibbald's, 93 ; 
 Cuvier on, 150. 
 
 White, Rev. Gilbert, no; account of 
 his life, III ; Natural History and 
 Antiquities of Selborne, 112; account 
 of 'Timothy,' a tortoise, 114; on the 
 flight of birds, xi6; on migration of 
 the swallow, rig. 
 
 Willows, the dwarf, 2x5. 
 
 Willughby, Francis, 20 ; friendship with 
 R^y» 39 '> 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, 1S8. 
 
 Yarrel, William, 187 ; his natural history 
 of birds and fishes, 1S7. 
 
 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 igo. 
 
 Edinburgh :^ 
 printed by W. & R. Chambers, Limited.