ON THE PROGRESS AND PRESENT STATE OF ORNITHOLOGY. 173 



translated into other languages, and it soon became the text-book for classifi- 

 cation in most of the museums of Europe. The ' Regne Animal' will ever 

 remain a monument of the industry of Cuvier and of his extraordinary powers 

 of generalization, but it would be vain to expect that all parts of so vast an 

 undertaking should be equally perfect, and it is therefore no matter for sur- 

 prise that the class of birds, which do not seem to have been a favourite 

 branch of Cuvier's studies, should present many defects in their arrangement. 

 Certain it is that, not to mention many proofs of haste in the citation of spe- 

 cies and of authors, the series of affinities is in this work often rudely broken 

 or arbitrarily united. In his arrangement of birds Cuvier seems to have too 

 closely followed the old authors, in adopting an isolated character as the 

 basis of his classification, a practice which inevitably leads to arbitrary and 

 artificial arrangements. He places, for example, the Tanagers, Philedons, 

 and Graculcc in the midst of the Dentirostres, Dacnis, Coracias and Para- 

 disea among the Conirostres, Sitta and Ticliodroma among the Tenuirostres, 

 Furnarius in Nectarinia, &c. Many of these defects were pointed out by 

 Prince C. L. Bonaparte in an admirable critique published at Bologna in 

 1830, entitled ' Osservazioni suUa seconda edizione del Regno Animale,' and 

 which is an indispensable appendage to Cuvier's work. Another valuable 

 accompaniment to the ' Regne Animal' is the series of plates published by 

 Gueria under the title of ' Iconographie du Regne Animal de Cuvier.' 



This slight preliminary sketch of the progress of ornithological classifica- 

 tion has now conducted us to a period when it becomes necessary to enter 

 into greater detail. 



I propose, as far as I am able, to notice all the more important ornitholo- 

 gical works which have been published since 1830, and which have contri- 

 buted to bring the subject to its present state, not indeed of perfection, but 

 what is more interesting to those engaged in it, oi progress. I must however 

 regret, that from the difficulties of obtaining access to many rare conti- 

 nental publications, especially to the almost innumerable annals of scientific 

 societies, this attempt at a general survey of the subject will unavoidably be 

 somewhat incomplete. I shall of course pass over such works as are devoid 

 oi scientific merit, as well as those mere compilations, which from their want of 

 any new or original matter tend only to diffuse and not to advance the science. 



In entering on so large a field it becomes necessary to subdivide the sub- 

 ject, which may be treated of under seven heads, viz — 1. General systematic 

 works. 2. Works descriptive of the Ornithology of particular regions. 

 3. Monographs of pai'ticular groups. 4. Miscellaneous descriptions of spe- 

 cies. 5. Pictorial Art as applied to Ornithology. 6. The Anatomy and 

 Physiology of Birds, and 7. Fossil Ornithology. 



1. General Systematic Works. 



Lesson, who in 1828 had published a useful little ' Manuel d'Ornithologie,' 

 based chiefly upon Cuvier's classification, brought out in 1 83 1 a more extended 

 work, entitled ' Traite d'Ornithologie.' This book, which professes to enu- 

 merate all the species of birds in the Paris Museum, is upon the whole a very 

 unsatisfactory performance, presenting all the marks of great haste and con- 

 sequent inattention. Many professed new species are named without being 

 described, others are described without being scientifically named ; no mea- 

 surements are given, and the descriptions are often so brief and obscure, that 

 it is impossible to determine a species by their means. The work, neverthe- 

 less, contains the definitions of many new generic groups which are now 

 adopted into our systems, and M. Lesson is therefore entitled to the credit of 



