INTRODUCTION 103 



and merely to copy his diagrammatic expression of the relationships 

 between different groups taken in horizontal section across the tree's main 

 branches, as shewn on the next page.^ 



While toiling at his gigantic task Prof. Fiirbringer was in frequent 

 communication with his friend Dr. Gadow, at that time engaged in 

 completing the Ornithology of what is known as Bronn's Thier-Reich. 

 This harmonious intercourse naturally had an effect on the opinions of 

 each. On the termination of the former's labours the latter, profiting of 

 course by them, continued his own investigations in order to work out 

 the systematic part of his subject, and they led to conclusions which, 

 though for the most part agreeing with those of his predecessor, as might 

 be expected when both were the results of morphological research, 

 differed from them in several rather important particulars. In 1892 

 Dr. Gadow contributed to the Proceedings of the Zoological Society (pp. 

 229-256) a highly condensed summary of his views ' On the Classification 

 of Birds,' which in the following year he elaborately set forth, with some 

 slight modifications, in the Systematic portion of the work above named 

 (pp. 61-282). This Classification is based on the examination, mostly 

 autoptic, of a far greater number of characters than any that had pre- 

 ceded it, and, moreover, they were chosen in a different way, discern- 

 ment being exercised in sifting and weighing them, so as to determine, 

 so far as possible, the relative value of each, according as that value may 

 vary in different groups, and not to produce a mere mechanical "key" 

 after the fashion become of late years so common. Whether the upshot 

 of it all has been to establish a Natural Classification, one indicating the 

 true descent and the real affinities of the several groups known, time 

 alone will shew ; but that this latest attempt has been made according 

 to the best method few will doubt. Dr. Gadow recognizes two Sub- 

 as the paradigm, and the whole has been preyed upon hy one of the most successful 

 of modern plagiarists. 



^ It is difficult to take as seriously as they were intended the two alternative 

 methods simultaneously presented in 1890, by the late Mr. Seebohm {Classification 

 of Birds, London : 8vo), while a somewhat modified arrangement of certain groxips 

 was offered in his Birds of the Japanese Empire, which appeared a few months later ; 

 but hesitation on that score was removed by his publication in 1895 of a fourth 

 scheme called a Supplement, though really subverting its predecessors. In each of 

 these works the language of science is professed, but the author's natural inability to 

 express himself with precision, or to appreciate the value of differences, is everywhere 

 apparent, even when exercising his wonted receptivity of the work of others, and 

 especially of Dr. Stejneger and Prof. Fiirbringer. Nevertheless the first of these 

 works formed the basis of Dr. Sharpe's arrangement {Reviexo of Recent Attempts to 

 Classify Birds, pp. 55-90) propounded in 1891 to the International Ornithological 

 Congress held that year at Buda-Pest, and shortly after followed, with some slight 

 alteration, in his Catalogue of the osteological specimens of Birds in the Museum of 

 the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Dr. Sharpe, however, is not the only 

 disciple of Mr. Seebohm, whose method commanded the admiration of Prof. 

 Mivart in his handy volume {Birds : The Elements of Ornithology. Loudon : [1892] 

 p. 255), which is pronounced by Mr. Headley {The Structure and Life of Birds. 

 London : 1895, p. 390) to be " The best book for beginners." 



The year 1891 saw also the Nouvelle Classification proposte pour les Oiseaux by 

 Dr. Alphonse Dubois {Mem. Soc. Zool. de la France, iv. pp. 96-116), grounded 

 mainly on the work of Sundevall, though modified by Huxley's views. The author 

 had the advantage of knowing Prof. Fiirbringer's scheme ; but hardly of appreciat- 

 ing the morphological considerations on which it was based. The chief peculiarity of 

 Dr. Dubois's plan is a revival of Bonaparte's notion as to the primacy of the Psittaci. 



