6 THE HISTORY OF ORNITHOLOGY 



emphasized " descriptions and illustrations," and noted 26 or- 

 ders and 115 genera, and more than 1300 species of birds. 

 Jacques Schseffer, 1764, also proposed a system, he princi- 

 pally " divided birds according to their feet." P. S. Pallas, 

 1767-80, published a work called Spicilegia Zoologica, which, 

 with his other Ornithological writings, gave him great renown. 

 He belonged to what is called the Linn^ean School, and 

 described species rather than presented new classifications. 

 Then the Count Buffon, 1770, gave us, without classifica- 

 tion, his then famous popular bird-biographies. The name of 

 J. R. Forster, 1771, is often quoted as an Ornithological 

 writer of repute, but more as a describer of species and a com- 

 piler than as a systematic classifier. After Forster a very 

 important classification was proposed by J. Ant. Scopoli, 

 1777, based upon the " reticulation, scutellation, etc., of the 

 tarsal envelope." The name of Thomas Pennant, 1776-92' 

 was a household word one hundred years ago. He was an 

 Ornithological as well as a literary giant in his day. He is 

 still a peer in " Arctic Zoology," and especially in Ornithol- 

 ogy. His classification was followed in later years by Alex- 

 ander AVilson. 



We are often indebted to the Germans for some of our best 

 technical scientific discoveries. In the science of Ornithology 

 this is also true : and now a German, Elasius Merrem, 1786, 

 hands down to us a Very important factor in our systematic 

 classification, by bringing into prominence the shape of the 

 sternum : the " Aves Carinat.^: " having it prolonged and 

 keeled, and the " Aves Ratitje " having it flat and smooth. 

 These distinctions, first made prominent, were afterwards used 

 only as minor, though none the less interesting, features in the 

 formation of the higher divisions. Just why the peculiar ar- 

 rangement of Birds used by Dr. John Latham, 1782-99, 

 should have received so much attention, both at the time and 

 even to within quite a late date, does not readily appear. He 

 used, in the main, the system of Linnaeus with a few correc- 

 tions and additions of his own, and his general classification, 



