14 Dr Whewell's Inaugural Lecture. 



lection of things, however numerous and various, into classes, 

 is a work of no great difficulty, though when the collection 

 is great, it may require much time. For it might be said, 

 You have only to determine according to what resemblances 

 and what differences you will make your classes, and then 

 to go through the work, sticking to these. But any one who 

 has attended a little more to the science of classification, or 

 even who has made the attempt on any considerable scale, 

 knows that this is not so ; and that, except the scheme of 

 classes be very skilfully and very happily devised, it lands us 

 in intolerable incongruities, and even in impossibilities. In- 

 deed, without seeking any exemplification of this remark in 

 the classificatory sciences, which can throw on this subject 

 only a distant and doubtful light, we have experimental evi- 

 dence of the difficulty of classifying a great collection of the 

 products of art and industry, in the attempts which were 

 made to perform that task on the occasions of the French 

 Expositions in 1806, in 1819, in 1827, in 1834, and in 1844. 

 On the first occasion, the distribution adopted was entirely 

 geographical ; on the second, it was what was called an en- 

 tirely material or natural system, dividing the arts into 

 thirty-nine heads, the consequence of which is said to have 

 been great confusion. In 1827 a purely scientific arrange- 

 ment was attempted, into five great divisions, namely, che- 

 mical^ mechanical, physical, economical, and miscellaneous arts. 

 But this was deemed too artificial and abstract, and in 1834 

 M. Dupin made the division depend on the relation of the 

 arts to man, as being alimentary, sanitary, vestiary, domici- 

 liary, locomotive, sensitive, intellectual, preparative, social. 

 This analysis was also adhered to in 1839. In 1844 an at- 

 tempt was made to unite some features of the previous sys- 

 tems, and the objects were classified as woven, mineral, me- 

 chanical, mathematical, chemical, fine arts, ceramic, and mis- 

 cellaneous; which was still complained of as confused, but 

 which was, on the whole, retained in 1849. 



I do not think there is any presumption in claiming for 

 the classification which has been adopted in the Great Exhi- 

 bition of 1851 a more satisfactory character than we can 

 allow to any of those just mentioned, if we ground our opi- 



