INSTANCES OF ANALOGY AND AFFINITY. 183 
semblance is consequently superficial. By affinity, on 
the other hand, we imply such a resemblance in those 
characters just mentioned, andsuch a strong similarity 
in the detail of the structure of two animals, that 
they are only kept distinct by a few peculiarities of 
secondary importance. ‘These two sorts of relations 
have been apparent since men first began to reason 
on the things they saw; but although admirably 
explained by one of our modern zoologists, they have 
been so confounded and obscured by the writings 
of most others, that some, bewildered by the loose- 
ness of the existing definitions, have gone so far as 
to deny their very existence. The following illus- 
tration, however, will render the distinctions here 
given, intelligible to the most unscientific reader. 
Let us compare, for this purpose, the full-bottomed 
monkey, or the Colobus polycomas of Geoffroy, with 
the African lion (Leo Africanus Sw.), and we are 
struck, at the first glance, with their mutual resem- 
blance: both have long manes, hanging over their 
shoulders; both have a slender tail ending in a 
tuft of hair; and both have the fur, in all other 
parts, short and compact. Had we no know. 
ledge that such a monkey really existed, and 
merely saw its figure, we might be tempted to think 
it was a bad representation of the lion. Strong, 
however, as this resemblance, at first sight, un- 
doubtedly is, we soon discover it is merely super- 
ficial. It is essentially, in fact, a monkey in the 
garb of a lion; without possessing any thing of the 
characteristic structure, the habits, or the economy 
of that quadruped which it represents: the relation 
ship, in short, is one of analogy only; for, were 
N 4 
