196 
NATURE 
[JUNE 29, 1899 
grapher to an explorer in a forest “who finds no open way 
to travel, but must laboriously hunt for his specimens . . . 
as they lie scattered, unclassified, and, all too often, con- 
cealed.” These words were spoken in 1895, but now the 
two bulky volumes before us show that the biologist need 
not lose hope in the ever thickening jungle of literature. 
They form a thoroughly competent biological record for 
two years, and, whatever may be their defects in detail, 
they deserve a hearty welcome. If Prof. Delage’s under- 
taking is supported as it should be, not only by sub- 
scribers, but by co-operators, it should do much in the 
future to widen the interest of naturalists in the great 
problems of biology, to raise the standard of biological 
scholarship, and to curb the ‘impatience of those who 
hasten to ill-advised reiteration of tales many times told. 
This “biological record” does not compete with its 
seniors—the Zoological Record, the Naples /ahres- 
bericht, and others akin, nor with the Zurich Concilium 
over which Dr. Field presides, nor with the Journal of 
the Royal Microscopical Society, the Zoologisches Central- 
blatt, and their like, for, as the title indicates, it aims at 
recording and summarising and appreciating those 
papers which deal with or have a bearing on genera] 
biological problems. It is a record for biologists, not for 
systematists, anatomists, physiologists, embryologists, 
and paleontologists, who have their own “resources ”— 
though none would be the worse of availing himself of 
this also. 
The task is somewhat similar to that which has been 
attempted for many years in the first part (General Sub- 
jects) of the Zoological Record, and in the corresponding 
portion of the Naples /ahresbericht; but there are 
several notable differences. The meshes of the net used 
by L’Année Biologigue are finer than in the others ; it is 
botanical and anthropological as well as zoological ; and 
there are more or less adequate signed summaries of all 
the important papers recorded. On the other hand, it is 
only fair to notice that the Records which are issued from 
the Zoological Society of London, by the Naples station, 
and by the botanists, come much more nearly up to time. 
Thus, we must be ungrateful enough to observe that the 
third volume of L’ Année Biologigue dealing with 1897 is 
not yet to hand; and it is of course obvious that the 
editors of the later records have the advantage, which 
no one grudges, of being able to utilise the labours of 
their more up-to-date predecessors. 
What the editors understand by the term “ biological” 
is at once seen from the table of contents, which includes 
about a score of subjects: the cell; the sex-cells and 
fertilisation ; parthenogenesis; asexual reproduction ; 
ontogeny; teratogeny ; regeneration; grafting; sex ; 
polymorphism, metamorphosis, and alternation of genera- 
tions ; latent characters ; correlation ; death, immortality, 
and the germ-plasm; general morphology and _ physi- 
ology ; heredity ; variation; origin of species; geo- 
graphical distribution; nervous system and mental 
functions ; and general theories. It is easy to criticise, 
but it seems to us that this classification is unwieldy, 
and it has certainly led to an unnecessary amount of 
repetition. We notice, for instance, at least one case 
where the same paper has been summarised twice at 
considerable length by different recorders, which, how- 
ever interesting, is luxurious. 
NO. 1548, VOL. 60] 
Prof. Yves Delage and Dr. Georges Poirault deserve 
the gratitude of all biologists for their monumental 
record, though perhaps only bibliographers will ade- 
quately appreciate the magnitude of the labour involved. 
It is of course a co-operative work, organised from the 
contributions of a large body of workers in Europe and 
America, and, as our own share has been a minimal one, 
we are bold to say that the co-operators also deserve 
some gratitude for their labour of love. An interesting 
and valuable feature is the general discourse which pre- 
cedes most of the sections, sometimes rising to the 
dimensions of a comprehensive essay, as in the case of 
correlation, phagocytosis, and geographical distribution. 
There seems, indeed, just a hint of overdoing this part of 
the record. 
Every one will agree that the prime and indispensable 
virtue of any bibliography is accuracy, and in this respect 
we must in honesty say that there is still room for im- 
provement in L’ Année Biologigue. We took the trouble 
tm cscrect three pages in the first volume, and the result 
is certainly not beautiful to look upon. We hasten, 
however, to add that the inaccuracies affect the letter 
rather than the spirit of the bibliographer’s laws, and 
that the second volume has attained to a high standard, 
We ourselves well know how insidiously mistakes creep 
in, and we are in no mood for fault-finding, yet it must 
be remembered that accuracy comes first in the criteria 
of bibliographic work. With a task so huge, the only 
hope is that there may be more generous co-operation. 
Surely some of those who make game of a busy recorder’s 
mistakes might sometimes remember that amelioration 
for the future will be furthered by the simple device of 
sending in copies of their works to be at hand both 
in the compilation and in the proof-reading of the 
record. 
Since the volumes before us were published, we have 
thoroughly tested their usefulness, and, frankly, we cannot 
but be surprised if every serious biologist does not agree 
with us in calling them indispensable. As for those gay 
knights-errant who care not for any of these biblio- 
graphies, we can only regret that they thereby do in- 
justice to their genius. 
And, finally, we should say in welcoming this biological 
record, that as there is a social as well as a scientific 
aspect of bibliography, it seems to us a matter for genuine 
congratulation that the editors have endeavoured to place 
their record upon an international basis—an endeavour 
which will, we hope, eventually have further development 
in an increasing recognition of the cosmopolitanism of 
science. AEDs 
OUR BOOK SHELF. 
A Short History of Astronomy. By Arthur Berry, 
M.A. Pp. xxxi + 440. (London: John Murray, 
1899.) 
READERS of this volume will probably be divided into 
two classes, those who are pleased with any description 
of a subject, however disconnected, and those who wish 
the whole of the ground to be covered, even though many 
details may only be slightly touched upon. To the former 
the book will offer much pleasant reading, but it is likely 
that the latter will be disappointed with the treatment of 
the matter as it is here presented. 
