RISE AND PROGRESS OF ZOOLOGY. 11 
culties he must have had to contend with, he may 
justly be considered the reviver of natural history 
in the sixteenth century. Belon, it is true, seems 
to have paid very little attention to Aristotle, and to 
have been totally ignorant of the philosophy of his 
subject; yet his arrangement, so far from being 
despicable, is much more natural than has been 
generally supposed: this will at once appear from 
a glance at his system. Commencing with the land 
birds of prey, as the vultures, falcons, shrikes, and 
owls, he passes to the water birds of prey, as the 
cormorant, albatross, &c.; the wading order naturally 
follows, and from this he proceeds to the gallinaceous 
tribe, including the ostrich family. The two last 
chapters are devoted to the pigeons, crows, and 
thrushes, and all the smaller perching birds. Now 
if we look to this arrangement, not in regard to its 
details, but to the general character of its primary 
groups, we have, in fact, precisely the same disposi- 
tion as that which we now know to be the natural 
series. Here we find the modern orders of Faptores, 
Natatores, Grallatores, Rasores, and Insessores fol- 
lowing each other in the order of their true affinities, 
and exhibiting the circular disposition of the whole 
feathered creation. The chief objection to Belon’s 
arrangement is to be found in his details, where he 
places not only the plovers but the larks and bunt- 
ings within his gallinaceous division, instead of as- 
sociating them with his perching families. But what 
more could be expected in the infancy of science, 
and from the first who gave to it a definite form? 
In this branch of zoology, therefore, Belon must 
be considered as much the master of Willughby, as 
