RISE AND PROGRESS OF ZOOLOGY. 29 



V 



not to our present object to enquire into the merits 

 of Ray's botanical system, which takes for its 

 basis the old divisions of trees (arbores) and plants 

 (Jierbce). Suffice it to say, that although useful 

 and even excellent when compared to former me- 

 thods, this system has nothing very original in its 

 structure, nor does it make the least approach to 

 that masterly precision, which belongs to the ar- 

 rangement of Linnaeus. The merit of Ray, there- 

 fore, as a zoologist, must repose on his Historia 

 Insectorum*, published by Derham after his death. 

 That we may not be accused of undervaluing the 

 talents of this most amiable man, we shall quote the 

 words of one who was well qualified to speak on 

 the subject, and who was enthusiastic in his praise. 

 " The descriptions given in the Historia Insectorum, 

 especially considering the dark ages of this science 

 in which they were written, are masterpieces of 

 clearness and precision, and such as in general 

 render it tolerably easy to ascertain the articles they 

 belong to: but with respect to the arrangement 

 and distribution of its materials, the work is in both 

 these essential points unquestionably very far inferior 

 to that of Linnaeus ; and, indeed, in some particulars, 

 is not much superior to its predecessors. For, like 

 them, it also incongruously blends the Linnaean 

 class of Vermes with the genuine and natural one 

 of insects ! " f Having thus divested Ray of those 

 inappropriate honours with which his memory has 



* Historia Insectorum, autore Joanne Raio, &c. opus post- 

 humum Jussu, Regiae Societatis Londinensis editum. Londoni, 

 i710. 



+ Haworth, Review of Entomology. 



