1910.] 



Cuvier'ft Clafisrfication of 1800. 



65 



(9.) The genera are grouped under connnon names of typical forms 

 ("Makis," "Ours," "Civettes," "Chats," etc.), corresponding to the 

 modern suborders or families, which are also named from typical genera. 



(10.) Although in this classification there is no hint of the sharp separa- 

 tion between functional analogies and true homologies (so that we find 

 many erroneous associations: cf. Aye- Aye in Rodents, Marsupials with 

 Carnivores, " Kangurus" with Rodents, Manatus with Cetacea, Echidna 

 with Edentates, etc.), yet, with the rapidly expanding knowledge of structure, 

 certain old errors ie. g., Hyrax with Rodents, Cercoleptes with Lemurs, 

 Hydrochccrus with Ungulates) are corrected. 



(11.) The classification as a whole is a conservative development of 

 preceding systems and cannot be compared in originality (even if more 

 effective) with Linne's system. It relies upon a very narrow range of 

 characters, viz. : (a) the older criteria of foot structure for the main divisions 

 [equivalent to subclasses]; (b) dental characters for the main subdivisions 

 [equivalent to superorders] of Unguiculates; and (c) detailed foot structure 

 for the orders. 



Cuvier's Classification of 1800. 



E 



e 



