78 Review of the Development of Natural History as a Science. 



Hevieiv of the Develiypment of Natural Hidonj as a Science. 

 By W. W. Calkins. 



Said the great, the lamented Agassiz : "I have devoted my whole 

 life to the study of Nature, and yet a single sentence may express all 

 that I have done." This confession, coming from one who occupied the 

 very highest rank among the learned, and who desired no greater 

 epitaph than that of Teacher, reveals to us the simplicitj^ and grandeur 

 of the man. It suggests that the grace of modesty might be cultivated 

 by most people with great propriety. 



Since man was first created, he has been engaged in studying the 

 world of animate and inanimate objects around him. From the time 

 when Adam investigated the properties of a certain apple in the garden 

 of Eden, our race has been employed in the constant endeavor to 

 account for its own existence as well as that of other objects, by study- 

 ing the diverse plans underlying the whole. As the first rude efforts 

 seem to us like childish displays, so, when the present era shall become 

 antiquity, our attainments in knowledge will no doubt appear small 

 indeed, in comparison with the advances that shall mark the future 

 age. 



For two thousand years natural history has occupied a prominent 

 place among the sciences. Aristotle was the first prominent natural- 

 ist, and the founder of the science. As evidence of this we have 

 his "Hi-itory of Animals," a work which contains the full results of 

 ancient learning in this department, and surprises us by its minuteness 

 of detail and the knowledge of the subject which it evinces. One 

 other fact is also worthy of notice, that, considering the boasted 

 superiority of our present civilization, does not reflect favorably upon 

 our system of education. In Aristotle's time, two thousand years ago, 

 text-books of natural history were in common use, and the study was 

 pursued with vigor, while we are still without elementary works of 

 this kind adapted to the young beginner. Therefore, the knowledge 

 on this subject to be acquired in our schools is limited. We are, 

 however, gradually working up to the point where the systematic study 

 of natural history in the school will be indispensable and popular. 



After eighteen hundred years, Linnaeus resumed the work where 

 Aristotle left it, and until he appeared as the lawgiver of science, we 

 find that very little progress had been made in the study of natural 

 history. Pliny added but little to what had been done by Aristotle. 

 An mteUectual darkness, hanging like a pall over the middle ages, 

 followed the enlightened period of Koman and Grecian history, and gave 



