ORNITHOLOGY 



25 



He was indeed thoroughly grounded in anatomy, 1 and 

 though undoubtedly the digestive organs of Birds have a 

 claim to the fullest consideration, yet Macgillivray himself 



subsequently became aware of the fact that there were 

 several other parts of their structure as important from 

 the point of view of classification. He it was, apparently, 

 who first detected the essential difference of the organs 

 of voice presented by some of the New- World Passerines 

 (subsequently known as Clamatores), and the earliest 

 intimation of this seems to be given in his anatomical 

 description of the Arkansas Flycatcher, Tyrannus vt rticalis, 

 which was published in 1838 (OrnithoL Biography, iv. p. 

 125), though it must be admitted that he did not — because 

 he then could not — perceive the bearing of their difference, 

 which was reserved to be shown by the investigation of a 

 still greater anatomist, and of one who had fuller facilities 

 for research, and thereby almost revolutionized, as will 

 presently be mentioned, the views of systematists as to 

 this Order of Birds. There is only space here to say that 

 the second volume of Macgillivray's work was published 

 in L839, and the third in 1840 ; but it was not until 1852 

 that the author, in broken health, found an opportunity of 

 issuing the fourth and fifth. His scheme of classification, 

 being as before stated partial, need not be given in detail. 

 Its great merit is that it proved the necessity of combin- 

 ing another and hitherto much-neglected factor in any 

 natural arrangement, though vitiated as so many other 

 schemes have been by being based wholly on one class of 

 characters. 



But a bolder attempt at classification was that made in 

 1838 by Blyth in the New Series (Mr Charlesworth's) of 

 the Magazine of Natural History (ii. pp. 256-268, 314- 

 319, 351-361, '420-426, 589-601; iii. pp. 76-84). It 

 was limited, however, to what he called Insessores, being 

 the group upon which that name had been conferred by 

 Vigors (Trans. Linn. Society, xiv. p. 405) in 1823 (see 

 above, p. 15), with the addition, however, of his Raptores, 

 and it will be unnecessary to enter into particulars con- 

 cerning it, though it is as equally remarkable for the insight 

 shewn by the author into the structure of Birds as for the 

 philosophical breadth of his view, which comprehends 

 almost every kind of character that had been at that time 

 brought forward. It is plain that Blyth saw, and perhaps 

 he was the first to see it, that Geographical Distribution 

 was not unimportant in suggesting the affinities and 

 differences of natural groups (pp. 258, 259) ; and, unde- 

 terred by the precepts and practice- of the hitherto 

 dominant English school of Ornithologists, he declared 

 that " anatomy, when aided by every character which the 

 manner of propagation, the progressive changes, and other 

 physiological data supply, is the only sure basis of classi- 

 fication." He was quite aware of the taxonomic value of 

 the vocal organs of some groups of Birds, presently to be 

 especially mentioned, and he had himself ascertained the 

 presence and absence of cmca in a not inconsiderable- 

 number of groups, drawing thence very justifiable infer- 

 ences. He knew at least the earlier investigations of 



1 This is ii"t the place to expatiate on Macgillivray's merits ; but the 

 writer may perhaps be excused for here uttering the opinion that, after 

 Willughby, Macgillivray was the greatest and most original ornith"- 

 logical genius save one (who did not live long enough to make his 

 powers widely known) that this island has produced. The exact 

 amount of assistance he afforded to Audubon in his Ornithological 

 Biography will probably never be ascertained ; but, setting aside " all 

 the anatomical descriptions, as well as the sketches by which they are 

 sometimes illustrated," that on the latter's own statement (op. cit., iv. , 

 Introduction, p. xxiii) are the work of Macgillivray, no impartial 

 reader can compare the style in which the History of British Birds is 

 written with that of the Ornithological Biography without recogniz- 

 ing the similarity of the two. On this subject some remarks of 

 Prof. Cones (Bull. Xutt. Ornithol. Club, 1880, p. 201) may well be 

 consulted. 



L'Herminier, and, though the work of Nitzsch, even if he 

 had ever heard of it, must (through ignorance of the 

 language in which it was written) have been to him a 

 sealed book, he had followed out and extended the hints 

 already given by Temminck as to the differences which 

 various groups of Birds display in their moult. With all 

 this it is not surprising to find, though the fart has been 

 generally overlooked, that Blyth's proposed arrangement 

 in many points anticipated conclusions that were subse- 

 quently reached, and were then regarded as fresh dis- 

 coveries. It is proper to add that at this time the greater 

 part of his work was carried on in conjunction with Mr 

 Bartlett, the present Superintendent of the Zoological Bartlett. 

 Society's Gardens, and that, without his assistance, Blyth's 

 opportunities, slender as they were compared with those 

 which others have enjoyed, must have been still smaller. 

 Considering the extent of their materials, which was limited 

 to the bodies of such animals as they could obtain from 

 dealers and the several menageries that then existed in or 

 near London, the progress made in what has since proved 

 to be the right direction is very wonderful. It is obvious 

 that both these investigators had the genius for recognizing 

 and interpreting the value of characters ; but their labours 

 do not seem to have met with much encouragement ; and 

 a general arrangement of the Class laid by Blyth before 

 the Zoological Society at this time 2 does not appear in its 

 publications, possibly through his neglect to reduce his 

 scheme to writing and deliver it within the prescribed 

 period. But even if this were not the case, no one need 

 be surprised at the result. The scheme could hardly fail 

 to be a crude performance — a fact which nobody would 

 know better than its author ; but it must have presented 

 much that was objectionable to the opinions then generally 

 prevalent. Its line to some extent may be partly made 

 out — very clearly, for the matter of that, so far as its 

 details have been published in the series of papers to 

 which reference has been given — and some traces of its 

 features are probably preserved in his Catalogue of the 

 specimens of Birds in the Museum of the Asiatic Society 

 of Bengal, which, after several years of severe labour, 

 made its appearance at Calcutta in 1849 ; but, from the 

 time of his arrival in India, the onerous duties imposed 

 upon Blyth, together with the want of sufficient books of 

 reference, seem to have hindered him from seriously con- 

 tinuing his former researches, which, interrupted as they 

 were, and born out of due time, had no appreciable effect 

 on the views of systematizers generally. 



Next must be noticed a series of short treatises communicated 

 by Johann Frtedrich Brandt, between the years 1836 and 1839, Brandt, 

 to the Academy of Sciences of St Petersburg, and published in its 

 Mimoires, In the year last mentioned the greater part of these 

 was separately issued under the title of Beitrage zur Kermtniss 

 der Naturgeschichte der Vogd. Herein the author first assigned 

 anatomical reasons for rearranging the Order Anseres of Linnaeus 

 and Natatores of Illiger, who, so long before as 1811, had proposed 

 a new distribution of it into six Families, the definitions of which, 

 as was his wont, he had drawn from external characters only. 

 Brandt now retained very nearly the same arrangement as his 

 predecessor ; but, notwithstanding that he could trust to the 

 firmer foundation of internal framework, he took at least two retro- 

 grade steps. First he failed to see the great structural difference 

 between the Penguins (which Illiger had placed as a group, 

 Impennes, of equal rank to his other Families) and the Auks, 

 Divers, and Grebes, l'ligojwtlrs — combining all of them to form a 

 " Typus " (to use his term! UHnatores ; and secondly he admitted 

 among the Natatores, though as a distinct "Typus" Podoidse,'the 

 genera Podoa and Fulica, which are now known to belong to the 

 Rallidm — the latter indeed (see Coot, vol. vi. p. 341) being but 

 very slightly removed from the Moor-hen (vol. xvi. p. 80S). At 

 the same time he corrected the error made by Illiger in associating 

 the Phalaropes (q. r. ) with these forms, rightly declaring their 



2 An abstract is contained in the Minute-book of the Scientific 

 Meetings of the Zoological Society, 26th June and 10th July 1838. 

 The Class was to contain fifteen Orders, but only three were dealt 

 with in any detail. 



XVIII. — 4 



