IV PREFACE. 



and Selby's ' Illustrations of Ornithology,' while Macgillivray and 

 Yarrell were publishing their works, which will be remembered and 

 consulted as long as naturalists feel an interest in British Birds. 



How much has transpired since then, which now almost reads as 

 ancient history ! In 1847 Hooker started for India on his memorable 

 journey, which ultimately produced the well-read ' Himalayan Journals.' 

 In 1848 Bates left England for Para, and the narrative of ' The 

 Naturalist on the Amazons ' may be said to have commenced. 1854 

 found Wallace at Singapore, and from that day the biological story of 

 1 The Malay Archipelago ' has been told, followed, and imitated. In 1843 

 South Africa was little known, and its Mammalia to be found in vast 

 herds by those who could penetrate the country. To-day the country is 

 open, but the Mammalia a vanishing quantity. Delegorgue completed 

 his journey — known to all naturalists — in 1844 ; the conclusion of the 

 zoological results of Sir Andrew Smith's expedition appeared in 1849 ; 

 Gordon Cumming did not tell his wonderful tale of the wild life of 

 the veld till 1850, before Mauch and Holub inaugurated the new era. 

 Central Africa was marked "desert," at least on school maps; to-day 

 we tabulate its fauna, and read Emin Pasha. And, last of all, with 

 national pride, we may refer to the Voyage of the ' Challenger,' and 

 the volumes devoted to its zoological results. 



But, greater than all, is the difference in our philosophical con- 

 ception of the teachings of Biology. In 1859 Darwin published his 

 ' Origin of Species,' and from that date modern biology will recognise 

 the commencement of a new period. As in San Francisco, it is said, 

 everything dates back to 1849, so our present zoological conceptions 

 take birth from 1859. 



Of the contributors to our first number probably J. W. Douglas is 

 now the only survivor. The aims and scope of the publication are 

 precisely the same as in 1843 — bionomic primarily. In philosophy 

 there is great change, but no new creed. It is undoubtedly the case 

 that a naturalist may exist without being an evolutionist ; it is equally 

 true that evolutionists can be found who are neither Lamarckians nor 

 Darwinists ; and it is certain that Darwinists are to be found in plenty 

 who are quite outside the school of neo-Darwinism, and who have no 

 desire to risk wrecking a great conception on speculative side issues. 

 Hence ' The Zoologist' welcomes all phases of thought, but stipulates 

 for facts rather than theories, argument more than advocacy. All 

 contributors may at least speculate on what our Journal may be made 

 for the cause of Zoology during the next century. The summing up 

 will then be in other hands. 



