INTRODUCTION. 15 



as they go. Alexander, it is said, gave him nine hundred 

 talents to collect materials, and put at his disposal several 

 thousand men, for hunting specimens and procuring infor- 

 mation. 



The Romans accomplished little in natural science, though 

 their military expeditions furnished unrivalled opportuni- 

 ties. Nearly three centuries and a half after Aristotle, Pliny 

 (A.D. 23-79) wrote his "Natural History." He was a volu- 

 minous compiler, not an observer : he added hardly one new 

 fact. He states that his work was extracted from over two 

 thousand volumes, most of which are now lost. 



During the Middle Ages, Natural History was studied in 

 the books of the ancients ; and at the close of the fifteenth 

 century it was found where Pliny had left it, with the addi- 

 tion of many vague hypotheses and silly fancies. Albertus 

 Magnus, of the thirteenth century, and Conrad Gesner and 

 Aldrovandus, of the sixteenth, were voluminous writers, not 

 naturalists. In the latter half of the sixteenth century, men 

 began to observe nature for themselves. The earliest note- 

 worthy researches were made on Fishes, by Rondelet (1507- 

 1556) andBelon (1517-1564), of France, and Salviani (1514- 

 1572), of Italy. They were followed by valuable observa- 

 tions upon Insects, by Redi (1626-1698), of Italy, and Swam- 

 merdam (1637-1680), of Holland ; and towards the end of 

 the same century, the Dutch naturalist, Leeuwenhoeck 

 (1632-1723), opened a new world of life by the use of the 

 microscope. 



But there was no real advance of Systematic Zoology till 

 the advent of the illustrious John Ray (1628-1705), of Eng- 

 land. His " Synopsis," published in 1693, contained the first 

 attempt to classify animals according to structure. Ray was 

 the forerunner of "the immortal Swede," Linnaeus (1707- 

 1778), "the great framer of precise and definite ideas of 

 natural objects, and terse teacher of the briefest and clearest 

 expressions of their differences." His chief merit was in de- 

 fining generic groups, and inventing specific names. 1 Scarce- 

 ly less important, however, was the impulse which he gave 

 to the pursuit of Natural History. The spirit of inquiry, 

 which his genius infused among the great, produced voyages 

 of research, which led to the formation of national museums. 



