on Ancient Mofiutnenis. ^fc^.,.^ 163 



All these conditions change, if the animal be destined to 

 browse, instead of being carnivorous ; and to such an extent, 

 that the least articulation of bone, and the smallest epiphysis, 

 has a determinate character relative to the class, order, genus, 

 and species, to which they belong. So that whenever we possess 

 even the extremity of a bone well preserved, we can, by apply- 

 ing, and following out the rules of analogy, and of minute com- 

 parison, determine the place the being ought to occupy in the 

 animal series, almost as certainly as if we possessed the entire 

 individual. 



It is true the ancients knew not the necessity of the relation 

 of forms and organization, with the end for which the animal 

 was created ; or rather, they had not made it the basis of a 

 theory pregnant with important results. But since in every 

 thing that relates to the exact observation of nature, they had 

 apprehended ideas of it sufficiently just and precise, they never 

 swerved from it in practice. 



Nor were statuaries and painters the only individuals who 

 had indulged in this kind of meditation ; philosophers and poets 

 entertained ideas equally just regarding it. We have only to 

 read their writings to be convinced that they had discovered the 

 groundwork of the necessity of sensible affinities, to which mo- 

 dern geology owes the greater part of its discoveries, and of its 

 most beautiful results. 



We are surprised to find these relations so accurately pointed 

 out by a poet, whose elegance scarcely leads us to expect depth: 

 of thought, and very minute observation of nature. Anacrcon, 

 in his Ode on Woman, ever proves to us that he knew how to 

 ally things that were most opposed. Thus, he has well remark- 

 ed, that horses alone have solid feet, that carnivorous animals, 

 and especially lions, are the land animals that can, to the widest 

 extent, open their jaws, so presenting the greatest opening for 

 teeth ; these are his own expressions. He had moreover ob- 

 served that animals with horns had cloven feet, and that the 

 timid gUres are distinguished by their agihty of foot. Thus the 

 poet, in passing the different animals in review, characterizes 

 them by traits so precise, that each is indicated by the charac- 

 teristic sign of its kind. 



These ideas, accurate as they are, were probably put forth 



l2 



