34 STUDY OF NATURAL HISTORY. 



and so disparaged by another, that we may fairly 

 enquire how far these conflicting opinions are 

 founded in truth. That he was not the inventor of 

 system, or of arrangement, even in his own age, is 

 abundantly evident from the facts already stated: 

 for the works of Lister and of Willughby were 

 unquestionably his guides. Nor can he be said to 

 have originated those large and comprehensive views 

 in zoology, which had long ago been opened, like 

 permanent lights in the firmament of science, by 

 the immortal Aristotle. Great as were his talents 

 and his genius, they were decidedly inferior to 

 those of the Grecian philosopher. Neither had he 

 at all times that accurate perception of affinities 

 which can be traced both in the systems of Aristotle 

 and of Willughby. His personal vanity, moreover, 

 was excessive, — surpassing all bounds, and all 

 instances upon record * ; and this led him to do 

 injustice towards some of those who were his con- 

 temporaries, no less than to Lister and Willughby, 

 who were the real founders of scientific classification, 

 and upon whose systems he framed his own. But, 

 when we have said thus much, we have said all that 

 can justly be charged against this illustrious natu- 

 ralist. That he possessed great genius cannot be 

 questioned, or he never could have conceived the 

 herculean task of arranging all Nature ; and without 

 sound judgment and unwearied zeal he never could 

 have accomplished his task. In his zoological 

 works there is every indication of a powerful, com- 

 prehensive mind, while in his botanical writings 



* Maton's Life of Lirmasus, pp. 500. 561 — 563. 



