NOMENCLATURE. - 9 
of ener differences, whether it be the unity which alone can undergo those modifications, and whether 
it be not the truth that those resulting varieties still bear traces of the original or archetype of all. 
It is owing to the facts. of the common unity of type, and the accompanying circumstances of the 
variations of figure, that every great thought which has sprung up in adornment of this great department 
of natural science is attributable, and all labour for the solution of this problem of most surpassing interest, 
namely, the origin of all variety of the skeleton fabrics which evince, nevertheless, among themselves the 
character of a general analogy of construction. The mysterious creations of figures in seeming differences 
from each other, at the same time that there is everywhere manifested ‘among them that original homology 
of: cast which combines them in one common type, and serves the observation with an instrument for 
establishing its generalisation under a single name descriptive of them all, leaves it to be inferred that this 
name can only be applied to that form in abstract, which is the archetype undergoing metamorphosis for the 
creation of all variety. | | | : | | 
The vertebrated axes of the skeleton figures of the four great animal classes have seemed to the 
comparative efeiomics as structures manifesting certain fixed and invariable characters, and upon fie 
presumption he has founded the generalised name of “ Vertebrated.” In his comparisons made upon these 
skeleton designs he has otherwise discovered an ever-moving metamorphosis among those other skeleton 
parts which he has named thorax, pelvis, scapulary and pelvic members. He has seen that the relative 
os na which these structures assume one to the other, and the presence or absence of the same, either 
coincides with, modifies, or cancels altogether the rules by which he has founded his nomenclature. He 
discovers, for example, that a oars is not a figure of constancy upon the skeleton form, neither is a 
lumbar spine, properly so called, that is to say, apcording to the human type ; also, that a costal thorax is 
projected from variable regions of that chain of bones which he has named the vertebral axis; and lastly, 
when he is forced to reflect upon those conditions of skeleton development in which the relative succession of 
the classified forms of the vertebra of the human spine are seen to vary so infinitely among spines of 
the animal classes, he must in truth be a fonder admirer of tines false readings which the human 
mind ‘establishes in interpretation of the natural work than of Nature herself, if he does not own that her 
Protean figures bespeak a profounder philosophy than can be set forth in words. — 
Does the name “Vertebrated” sufficiently characterise the skeleton forms of the four classes? Does 
- this name Vertebrated suitably and fully explain the proper conditions of development in which we 
discover the central axis of skeleton forms. to have hecntetrucke? Are the ell chains of those osseous 
forms named vertebre presented to the eye in fixed character ? Do we not rather find that the forms 
named vertebree escape our identification as subtly as if they had been still of soft, impressible, and plastic 
matter, which every chance was liable to turn from their proper selves and remodel according to the 
capricious: uncertainty of varying fancy ? | 
In what class of animals do we discover vertebre to be produced typical of vertebre in all other 
classes 2 In what individual skeleton form do we find the serial order of vertebrae to present itself as being 
composed of units homologous to each other as to quantity 4? What is the form of that vertebral bone which 
may be said never to change its character? Can such a form be found in the human cervix, or dorsum, 
or lumbar spine, or sacral, or caudal? And is it not an astounding: fact that when we happen to number. 
D 
