56 



CONCHOLOGY. 



History. 



Ancients 

 acquainted 

 with con- 

 cliology. 



Aristotle, 

 A. C. N. 

 -322. 



Fliny, 

 A. D. 80. 



VincMltius 



But we are not disposed to rest the claims of the sci- 

 ence of conchology to public favour, altogether on the 

 grounds wliich we have now stated. As objects of uti- 

 lity to man, shells deserve our notice. Many species 

 supply his table vith agreeable and nutritious dishes ; 

 otjiers form most enucing baits for catching fish, or fur- 

 nish materials for the manufacture of different kinds of 

 dress. The pearl is prized as an ornament, and the 

 Syrian purple is deservedly held in estimation. 



We must view shells likewise as the enemies of man, 

 and entitled to his consideration. Some are deleterious 

 to his constitution, while others defeat his plans. The 

 Bernacle, by adhering to the bottom of ships, impedes 

 their motion ; and the Teredo pierces then* planks, and 

 destroys them. 



When these circumstances are duly considered, the 

 science of conchology will appear of importance, as it un- 

 folds the history of objects of beauty, curiosity, and 

 utility. 



HISTORY OF CONCHOLOGY. 



Of ldte years, the study of conchology has been pur- 

 sued with eagerness by the most eminent naturalists. 

 Under their auspices, the science has assumed a consist- 

 ent and regular form. But let us not overlook the la- 

 bours of the ancients. They may justly claim the merit 

 of having first directed the mind to this subject, and we 

 add to their praise, for having sketched the outlines of 

 the plan, which has since been so successfully followed. 

 In the enlightened ages of Greece and Rome natural 

 history flourished, and the study of testaceous bodies 

 occupied the attention of the man of science, and afford- 

 ed recreation to the politician. 



Aristotle flourished 32 2 years hefore the birth of 

 Christ. His writings are precious monuments of his 

 wisdom, and justly entitle him to rank as the father 

 of natural history. He is the first who presented the 

 world with a system of conchology. The outlines of 

 his plan have been copied by succeeding conchologists. 

 To him we are indebted for the orders, univalves, and bi- 

 valves. He likewise added a third order, in wliich he 

 included the turbinated shells. Several of his genera are 

 still retained, such as Solen, Pinna, Nerita, and Pecten. 

 We grant, that he was acquainted with but few species, 

 and that he even admitted as such many of the opercula 

 of univalves ; but when we consider the period during 

 which he flourished, and the isolated nature of his la- 

 bours, and compare these with the information in na- 

 tural history which he possessed, we are astonished at 

 Ins sagacity and wisdom. 



Pliny lived in times more favourable for the cultivation 

 of science. The extensive shores of the Roman empire, 

 the Mediterranean, and the Red Sea, presented a fine field 

 to the enterprising conchologist. With all these advanta- 

 ges, little improvement was made by him in the science. 

 His knowledge of species was more extensive than that of 

 Aristotle, but his arrangement is unphilosophical, and 

 his descriptions are unsatisfactory. To him, however, 

 belonged some merit as a conchologist. He paid con- 

 siderable attention to the form and external aspect of 

 shells, in which he has been imitated by succeeding 

 sonchologists. 



We must now pass over the dark ages which suc- 

 ceeded Roman greatness, in which science was degra- 

 ded and ignorance deified. And when we arrive at the 

 conclusion of the fifteenth century, we find little to in- 

 terest or instruct us. Vincentius, in the year 1494, 

 ' published his Speculum Nature. In this work he treats 

 of the Murex, the Purpeura, and the Ostrea, but makes 



tory. 



no attempt at arrangement. He borrows freely from History, 

 his predecessors, Aristotle and Pliny, and supplies most 

 liberally, from his own stores, notices of the supersti- 

 tious absurdities of his day. 



Passing from the fifteenth to the sixteenth century, 

 the conchological labours of three authors principally 

 claim our notice. We here refer to the writings of Be- 

 lon, Rondeletius, and Gesner. Belon, so famous for B 5 ,on i' 

 his travels in the East, and who was among the first of 

 the learned men who travelled with the view of pro- 

 moting science, published, in the year 1553, at Paris, 

 an octavo volume, entitled, " De Aquatilibus." To his 

 descriptions of shells, he added a few tolerably faithful 

 wooden representations. 



Two years after the work of Belon had made its ap- Ron<!e!e- 

 pearance, Rondeletius, professor of physic at Montpe- tlu *' lj5i ^ 

 lier, presented the world with his Universa Aquatilium 

 Historia. His residence on the sea-coast afforded him 

 an opportunity of examining the shells of the Mediter- 

 ranean, an opportunity of which he seems to have 

 availed himself. Pie has described and figured up- 

 wards of an hundred testae ea. 



Conrad Gesner, in the year 1558, published his work, Gesner, 

 De Piscium et Aquatilium Ammuntium Historia. Inti- 1558. 

 mately acquainted with the knowledge of the ancients, 

 <md the observations of his immediate predecessors, 

 Gesner, in this work, communicated much valuable in- 

 formation. His descriptions, in general, are ample, and 

 his figures, though rude, are tolerably correct in the 

 outline. He added several new species from the In- 

 dian and Arabian seas. To the threefold division of 

 shells proposed by Aristotle, Gesner added a fourth, 

 which he termed Anomola. Into this class he placed 

 his genera of Balani, Penicellce marince. Tubuli marini, 

 and in company with these several crustaceous and mol- 

 luscous animals. 



During the seventeenth century, the science of con- Johnsto*, 

 chology received many important additions. Johnston, 1657 » 

 in the year 1657, published his Historia Naturalis de 

 E.rsanquinibus. Pie employs in this work the classifi- 

 cation of Aristotle, but divides the class Turbiuata into 

 two sections. The first section. In Anfraclum Torta, 

 includes the Nautilus, Bucciuum Murex ; and the se- 

 cond, In Orbrm Circumacta, contains the Trochi Neritce, 

 and a few others. 



In 161 6, Fabius Columna published his Aquatilium 

 et Terrestrium aliquot Animalium aliarttmqiu; Natura- 

 lism rerum Observations. This work contains descrip- 

 tions of several rare shells, with neat engravings. An 

 edition of this work was published in 1675, by John 

 Daniel Major, M. D. This naturalist, in imitation of Major, 

 Gesner, separated the genera Lepa% and Balanus from 1675. 

 the bivalves, and constituted them into a class by them- 

 selves, to which he gave the name of Pburvalvia. 



Nehemiah Grew, in the year lt>81, published his ca- o rew 

 talogue and description of the natural and artificial ra- 1681. 

 rities belonging to the Royal Society of London, and 

 preserved in Gresham College. We introduce this 

 work, not so much with the view of mentioning that it 

 was the earliest production of the kind which had ap- 

 peared in an English dress, as of noticing the classifica- 

 tion which he employed. To the divisions of shells 

 termed univalves and bivalves, he added the class Mid- 

 tivalvet, which Gesner had aimed at, and which Major 

 had formed. 



We close our account of the testaceological writings Lister, 

 of the seventeenth century, with noticing the labours of 1635. 

 our countryman Lister, a name deservedly held in high 

 estimation by all the lovere of science. Lirte-r com- 





