An history of the earth, and animated nature. With an introductory view of the animal kingdom / by Baron Cuvier. And a life of the author by W. Irving.
- Oliver Goldsmith
- Date:
- [1846-1847?]
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: An history of the earth, and animated nature. With an introductory view of the animal kingdom / by Baron Cuvier. And a life of the author by W. Irving. Source: Wellcome Collection.
22/1298
![young; to the order Pachydermata, or thick-skinned animals, such as the elephant, hoar, and rhinoceros; and to the genus Equus, composed of animals with solid hoofs, as the ass and zebra. Fj om these allied species it is finally distinguished by the term caballus. Thus, the scientific name of the horse is Equus caballus, terms derived from its genus and species. But, as different natural- ists often give different names to the same animal, it becomes necessary to add to these the name of the naturalist who first introduced the generic and specific dames. In the above example, we therefore write Equus caballus, Linn, for the celebrated naturalist Linnaeus. Such is the method indispensably required, in framing the arrangement of the almost unbounded objects of Natural History. We need scarcely caution our readers against the errors of the Realists, once the cause of so much contention in the schools. The individuals alone, or more properly the particles composing each individual, have a real existence in nature, while species, genera, &c. are but general words, in- vented by man, to express certain points of resemblance, which he perceives among their properties. There are two different principles observed in the formation of systems of arrangement, accord- ing as they are intended to be artificial or natural. The design of an artificial system is to enable the student to find the name of an object, whose properties are known, and to this alone its utility is, in general, confined. Thus, Linnams arranged plants, chiefly according to the number and situation of the stamens and pistils contained in their flowers. But, being founded on the comparison of only one single organ, the artificial method conveys no general knowledge of other properties, and fre- quently separates objects which ought never to be disjoined. It is altogether different with a natural method. Its divisions are not founded upon the consideration of a single organ, hut are derived from characters presented by all the parts of the object. Accordingly, the objects are dis- posed in such a manner, that each bears a greater affinity to that which immediately precedes and follows it, than to any other. When this method, therefore, is good, it is not confined to a mere list of names. If the subdivisions have not been selected arbitrarily, but rest upon real and per- manent relations, and upon the essential points of resemblance in objects, the natural method is the means of reducing the properties of beings to general laws, of express- ing them with brevity, and of fixing them permanently on the memory. To produce these results, objects must be assiduously compared under the guidance of another general principle, necessarily proceeding from that of the conditions of existence for- merly explained, called the subordination of characters, which we shall here briefly elucidate. The several parts of a being having a mutual adaptation, there are certain constitutional arrangements which are incompatible with others; again, there are some with which they are inseparably connected. When, therefore, certain peculiar- ities belong to an object, we may calculate with facility what can, and what cannot, co-exist with them. We, accordingly, distinguish by the terms important or leading characters, those parts, properties, or constitutional arrangements, having the greatest number of these relations of inconsistency, or of necessary co-existence ; or, in other words, which exercise upon the whole being the most marked influence. Others of minor importance are termed subordinate characters. The superiority of characters is sometimes determined in a satisfactory manner, by considering the nature of the organs described in the character. When this is impracticable, we must resort to simple observation; and, from the nature of a character, must infer such to be the most decided as are found the least liable to vary, when traced through a long series of beings, differing in degrees of resemblance. For this reason, we should select for the grand divisions, those characters which are at once important and permanent; and may reserve, with propriety, the subordinate and variable characters for the minor subdivisions of our system. There can be but one complete system, and that is, the natural method. Here species of the same genus, order, or class, resemble each other more than they do the species of any other corresponding division; the place of each object is decided by its relation to surrounding beings; [and the whole arrangement forms a type of that beauteous system of nature which, “ changed thro’ all, thro’ all remains the same.” Even Linnaeus, who framed the best artificial system ever presented to the world, observes, in his Philosoph. Bot. § 77, that natural historians should regard the natural method of arrangement as the ultimate aim of their labours. In a word, the natural method is the very soul of Natural History “ Unerring nature, still divinely bright, One clear, unchanged and universal light.”]](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b22014470_0022.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
