lllethods

6

of

Study

the results of his observations readily and simply in a manner intelligible to all otlr er students of Natural History. Linnaeus devised such a system, and to him we owe a most simple and comprehen sive scientific mode of designating animals

and plants.

It may

at first seem no advan

tage to give up the common names of the

vernacular and adopt the unfamiliar ones, but a word of explanation will make the object clear. Perceiving, for instance, the close relations

between

members

certain

of the larger groups, Linnaeus gave

to them

names that should be common to all, and generic names,—as we speak of Ducks, when we would designate in one word the Mallard, the Widgeon, which are called

Canvas-Back, etc.; but to these ge neric names he added qualifying epithets, the

called specific names, to indicate

the

dif

ferent kinds in each group. For example, the Lion, the Tiger, the Panther, the Do mestic Cat constitute such a natural group, which Linnaeus called Felis, Cat, indicat

ing the whole genus; but the species he designates as Felis catus, the Domestic Cat,—Felis lea, the Lion,—Felis tigris, the Tiger,—Felis panthera, the Panther. So he called all the Dogs Canis; but for the different kinds we have Canis familia ris, the Domestic Dog,— Canis lupus, the Wolf,— Canis culpes, the Fox, etc. In some families of the vegetable king dom we can appreciate cation

better the appli

of this nomenclature,

because we

have something corresponding

to it in the

vernacular. We have, for instance, one name for all the Oaks, but we call the dif ferent kinds Swamp Oak, Red Oak, White Oak, Chestnut Oak, etc. So Linnaeus, in his botanical nomenclature, called all the Oaks by the generic name Quercus, (char acterizing them by their fruit, the acorn, common Quercus

to all,) and bicolor,

qualified them

Qucrcus

rubra,

as

Quercus

His no of application, became at once exceedingly popular and

in Natural lfistory.

and this Latin nomenclature of double significance was adopted by all. Another advantage of this binominal Latin nomenclature consists in preventing

confusion,

frequently arising from the of the same name to designate differ ent animals in different parts of the world, —as, for instance, the name of Robin, used in America to designate a bird of the Thrush family, entirely different from the Robin of the Old World,—or of ditl’erent names for the same animal, as Pcrch or Chogset or Burgall for our Cunner. Noth ing is more to be deprecated than an over the confusion use

of technicalities, valuing the highly than the thing; but is some knowledge of this nomenclature necessary to every student of Nature. The improvements in science thus far were chiefly verbal. Cuvier now came forward and added a principle. He show ed that all animals are built upon a cer This was tain number of definite plans. of a momentous step, the significance to its full which is not yet appreciated appreciation name more

extent; for, had its importance been un derstood, the efforts of naturalists would have been directed toward a further illus tration of the distinctive characteristies of all the plans,—instead of which, the division of the animal kingdom into lar» ger and smaller groups chiefly attracted their attention, and has been carried too far by some of them. Linnmus began with six classes, Cuvier brought them up to nineteen, and at last the animal king dom was subdivided by subsequent inves tigators into twenty-eight classes. This multiplication of divisions, however, soon suggested an important question: How far are these divisions natural or inher ent in the objects themselves, and not dependent on individual views? While Linnaeus pointed out classes, or ders, genera, and species, other natural

alba, Qucrcus castanea, etc., etc.

ists had detected

menclature,

animals,

made

being so easy

him the great

of his century. names, because,

scientific

legislator

He insisted on Latin naturalist should

if every

use his own language, it must lead to great

[January,

called

other

families.

divisions

among

Lamarck, who

had been a distinguished botanist before he began his study of the animal kingdom, brought to his zoological researches his

Fami previous methods of investigation. lies in the vegetable kingdom had long