Contributions to the philosophy of zoology / by R. Knox. Pt. I., On the relation of species or race to genus or natural family : a question of transcendental anatomy.

  • Knox, Robert, 1791-1862.
Date:
1855
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Contributions to the philosophy of zoology / by R. Knox. Pt. I., On the relation of species or race to genus or natural family : a question of transcendental anatomy. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    5/10 (page 3)
    horse, zebra, ass, dog, wolf, fox, jacliall, pig, ox, man. The theory of variety, to a certain extent permanent, was next brought to bear on these difficult questions; the influence of domesticity was also in- voked, and even the fruitfulness of hybrid races was asserted; so that Natural History fast retrograded towards the silly hypothesis ascribed to Aristotle, who is supposed to have conjectured that the vast variety of animal forms with which Africa abounds is due to the arid nature of the country and its paucity of rivers and springs, thus bringing together animals of many species and genera; hence the varied character of Afiic's Fauna. The inadequacy of anatomy to distinguish species in every case was fully admitted by Cuvier himself. I also admit this practically, but with this reservation, that the minute anatomy of even the osteology of every species differs in .a certain degree, however slight, from every other; but such minute differences are not of much im- portance in the establishment of important principles, nor can they always be depended on. The nasal bones of the horse and ass differ in form from each other, more perhaps than any part of their respective osteology; but how insignificant is this difference, in a natural-history point of view, when compared with those external characters which mark the zebra, the horse, the ass, and quagga ! The same remarks apply to the lion and tiger, in respect of these very bones, the nasal, and their relations to the superior maxillary bones; to the white ox of Scotland and to the common domestic ox. The .nasal bones, the skeleton of the head, the character of the teeth, do not differ more regularly or constantly, nor to the same extent, in the horse, zebra and ass than they do in the races of man. The skeleton of the head of the Negro and Bosjesraan differ much more widely from the white races of man than those of the horse and lion differ from the corre- sponding structures in the tiger and zebra. I do not, therefore, admit, to the full extent, that anatomical characters ever fail to discriminate species; but I freely admit their occasional inadequacy to characterise or to lead to the determination of species in a practical sense. On the other hand, the facility with which this may be done, by a consideration of the external characters, is known to all the world. Science admits of no exaggeration ; Anatomy has done much for Natural History; much for Philosophy; still more for humanity, by purging the human mind of deep-rooted errors, of a gross and scandalous character, of forty centuries' growth. But Anatomy has its limits, notwithstanding, and these limits were admitted and defined by the Great Master himself