1919.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 157 



ten years later, in his Etude Synonymigue sur les Mollusques des 

 Alpes-maritimes. He treated the author with great severity, calling 

 him a writer without judgment, an indefatigable but absurd inno- 

 vator, etc. 



It is evident that Antoine Risso was imperfectly acquainted with 

 the works of his predecessors, and that he attempted to cover too 

 wide a field, including plants, crustaceans, fish, mammals, birds, 

 geology, mineralogy, etc, etc. 



One cannot be a universal naturalist. If one desires to produce 

 authoritative work, it is necessary unless one is a genius of the first 

 order, to study but a single chapter of natural history, since the 

 field is too vast. The division of work is necessary even to those of 

 exceptional intelligence, and the subdivision of that which is now 

 regarded as a specialty will naturally be necessary in the future. 



In his synonymical study Bourguignat has used a criticism too 

 bitter and acrimonious. It is not the language which a master 

 should employ with regard to the errors of his predecessors. Drapar- 

 naud, the creator of French conchology, said truly that he who 

 opens the way has a right to indulgence, even if he has done poorly; 

 to glory if he has done well; and to gratitude when his successor 

 has done better than he. Risso was not conscious of the errors that 

 he committed. He must have been satisfied of the correct deter- 

 mination of his species, since in the introduction to his fourth volume 

 he realizes the importance of this point in citing the words of Cuvier 

 that "the precise determination of species and their distinctive 

 characters forms the fundamental basis on which all the investi- 

 gations in natural history should rest." 



The Risso collection remains in the possession of the son of the 

 nephew of the great naturalist at his estate of St. Roch at the gates 

 of Nice. It is visited by passing naturalists who experience serious 

 disappointment on discovering the absence or loss' of many speci- 

 mens mentioned and described as new by Risso. 



At the death of the eminent naturalist the person charged with 

 the care of his collections at St. Roch was, I have been told, com- 

 pletely ignorant of natural history; she made grave mistakes; mixed 

 exotic and native species, many among them bear no indication of 

 habitat, and a great number have become detached from their car- 

 tons and scattered through the cases. It is impossible now to recog- 

 nize the greater part of the specimens which served Risso as types. 



In his introduction to the fourth volume Risso states in a final 

 note (p. VII) that his new genera and species of shells will be de- 



