CLASSIFICATION OF MAMMALIA. \*9 



" The anomalous species," he afterwards observes, " among 

 the viviparous quadrupeds with a multifid foot are the Hedge- 

 hog, the Armadillo, the Mole, the Shrew, the Tamandua, the 

 Bat, and the Sloth. The first five of these species agree with 

 the canine and vermine genera in their elongated muzzle, but 

 differ from them in the form and disposition of the teeth : the 

 Tamandua, indeed, is altogether destitute of teeth : the re- 

 maining two anomalous species have the muzzle shortened.' * 



Linnaeus, like Aristotle and Ray, founds his primary divi- 

 sions of the Class Mammalia on the locomotive organs ; but 

 his secondary divisions or orders are taken chiefly from modi- 

 fications of the dentary system. The following is the scheme 

 of his arrangement : — 



f Front teeth, none in either jaw Bruta. 



r * • ; / J Front teeth, cutters 2, laniaries Gltres. 



4 r unguiculate < Front teeth ^ cutters 4> i an i ar i es \ Primates. 



< \ L Front teeth, piercers (6, 2,10), laniaries 1 . . Ferjs. 



5 \ 77 If I ^' ron * teeth, in both upper and lower jaw. Bellu^e. 



< J n 9 u fle - j Front teeth, none in the upper jaw Pecora. 



S L Muticate . . Teeth variable Cete. 



(From the * Sy sterna Naturce,' ed. xvi. Holmise, p. 24.) 



On comparing the three preceding systems, it will be found 

 that the most important errors of arrangement have been com- 

 mitted, not by Aristotle, but by the modern naturalists. Both 

 Ray and Linnaeus have mistaken the character of the horny- 

 parts enveloping the toes of the elephant, which do not defend 

 the upper part merely, as is the case with claws, but embrace 

 the under parts also, forming a complete case or hoof. 



With respect to Linnaeus, however, it must be observed, that 

 although he has followed Ray in placing the elephant in the 

 unguiculate group of quadrupeds, he has not overlooked the 

 great natural divisions which the latter naturalist adopted from 

 Aristotle, as is evident from the Table above quoted. He 

 erred, perhaps, in not giving names to those primary di- 

 visions. 



From the manner in which Linnaeus has arranged his 

 Orders in this Table, it w T ould seem that he had the circular 

 progression of affinities in view. The Walrus among Bruta 

 connects the commencement of the chain with Cete, which 

 forms the last link ; but whether or not he had perceived the 

 affinity of Elephas to the G/ires, and intended it as the 

 transitional genus to that Order, as Cuvier has subsequently 

 shown, is less certain. 



We shall now proceed to the arrangement of the Mamma- 

 lia proposed by Cuvier in the last edition of the ' Regne Ani- 

 mal? and this is the more interesting, as, in giving the out- 



n2 



