m HISTOIIV OF 



ed, LinriKiis is the foremost; as with a studied brevitv his sys- 

 tem comprehends the greatest variety in the smallest space. 



According to him, the first distinction of animals is to be 

 taken from their internal structure. Some have the heart with 

 two ventricles, and hot red blood ; namely, quadrupeds and 

 birds. The quadrupeds are viviparous, and the birds oviparous. 



Some have the heart with but two ventricles, and cold red 

 blood ; namely, amphibia and fishes. The amphibia are furnish- 

 ed with lungs ; the fishes with gills. 



Some have the heart with one ventricle, and cold white 

 serum ; namely, insects and worms ; the insects have feelers ; 

 and the worms, holders. 



The distinctions of quadrupeds or animals with paps, as he 

 calls them, are taken from their teeth. He divides them into 

 «;ven orders ; to which he gives names that are not easy of 

 tr.inslation : Primates, or principles, with four cutting teeth in 

 each jaw ; Bruta, or brutes, with no cutting teeth ; Ferte, or 

 wild beasts, with generally six cutting teeth in each jaw ; Glires, 

 or dormice, with two cutting teeth, both above and below ; 

 Pecora, or cattle, with many cutting teeth ahove, and none be- 

 low ; Belluse, or beasts, with the fore-teeth blunt ; Cete, or those 

 of the whale kind, with cartilaginous teeth. I have but just 

 sketched out this system, as being, in its own nature, the closest 

 abridgment : it would take volumes to dilate it to its proper 

 length. The names of the different animals, and tlieir classes, 

 alone make two thick octavo volumes •, and yet nothing is given 

 but the slightest description of each. I have omitted all criti- 

 cism also upon the accuracy of tl;e preceding systems ; this has 

 been done both by BufTon and Dautienton, net with less truth 

 than humour ; for they had too much good sense not to see the 

 absurdity of multiplying the terms of science to no end, and dis- 

 appointing our curiosity rather with a catalogue of nature's varie- 

 ties, than a history of nature. 



Instead, therefore, of taxing the memoiy and teasing the pa- 

 tience with such a variety of divisions anil subdivisions, I will 

 take leave to class the productions of nature in the most obvious, 

 though not iti the most accurate, manner. In natural history, 

 of all other sciences, there is the least danger of obscurity. In 

 morals, or in metaphysics, every definition must be precise, be- 

 cause those sciences are built ui)oii definitions ; but it is other- 



