ON THE PROGRESS AND PRESENT STATE OF ORNITHOLOGY. I7l 



amendments in his 'Anatomie Comparee' in 1800. The main features of 

 his arrangement correspond with that which he afterwards adopted in his 

 ' Regne Animal.' About the same period also, Lacepede published a system, 

 arranged on a new plan and containing the definitions of several new genera. 

 Another outline of an improved ornithological system was published in 1806 

 by M. Dumeril in his ' Zoologie Analytique.' But these attempts at progress 

 seem to have been made before the scientific world was able to appreciate 

 them, and several years elapsed before their influence was generally felt. 



The logical and accurate Illiger was the next who endeavoured to intro- 

 duce sounder principles into ornithology ; his admirable ' Prodromus Syste- 

 matis Mammalium et Avium,' published in 1811, after long years of neglect, 

 has now become an almost indispensable handbook to the studier of Mam- 

 mals and Birds. But this young reformer died at an early age, and ornitho- 

 logy again relapsed under the drowsy sway of the Linnsean and Buffbnian 

 schools. 



The next eff'ort in advance was made in 1817, when Cuvier, having pre- 

 viously arranged the Paris Museum according to his own views of the natural 

 system, embodied the results in the ' Regne Animal.' In the ornithological 

 portion Cuvier was anticipated by Vieillot, who having access to the galleries 

 of the museum, is charged with having appropriated the labours of Cuvier 

 by attaching names of his own to the groups there pointed out. Be this as 

 it may, the 'Analyse d'une nouvelle Ornithologie Elementaire' of Vieillot, 

 and the ornithological portion of the ' Regne Anima,!' of Cuvier, contain 

 many new general) zations based upon highly important but previously neglected 

 structural characters, and their publication indicated a vigorous effort at 

 transferring the subject from the domain of authority to that of observation. 



Temminck, who in his 'Histoire des Pigeons et des Gallinaces,' 1813-15, 

 had introduced several new generic groups into the Rasorial order, published 

 in the second edition of his ' Manuel d'Ornithologie,' 1820, the outline of a 

 general system of ornithology, containing many important additions to the 

 arrangements of Cuvier and Vieillot. 



The method of De Blainville, completed in 1822, deserves notice, from his 

 having introduced as a new element of classification the structure of the 

 sternum and of the bones connected with it. The distinctive characters thus 

 deduced are now generally admitted as forming valuable auxiliaries in the 

 search after a natural arrangement. 



The improved methods of classification, thus originated on the continent, 

 made a gradual but slow progress into this country. Dr. Leach seems to 

 have been the first British naturalist who duly appreciated the labours of 

 Cuvier, and in the concluding volumes of Shaw's ' Zoology,' published under 

 his superintendence, the new generic groups of the continental authors were 

 successively introduced, and engrafted upon the stock of Linn^us and La- 

 tham. Dr. Horsfield also entered thoroughly into the spirit of the reformers 

 of zoology, and in his valuable memoir on the Birds of Java in the LinuEean 

 Transactions, vol. xiii., he adopted the arrangements of Cuvier and of Leach, 

 with many excellent additions of his own. Dr. Fleming's 'Philosophy of 

 Zoology,' 1822, also contributed to render the naturalists of Britain familiar 

 with the improved systems of the Cuvierian school. 



The late Mr. N. A. Vigors gave, in 1823, a great impulse to the study of 

 ornithology by his elaborate memoir in the Linnaean Transactions, vol. xiv., 

 on ' The Natural Affinities that connect the Orders and Families of Birds.' 

 This treatise abounds with original observations and philosophical inferences, 

 but unfortunately they are applied in support of a theory which the most 



