78 
REYXEWS. 
THE PROGRESS OF ZOOLOGY. * 
N ONE but the working naturalist can estimate the value of a well- 
arranged treatise devoted to zoological bibliography. To the amateur 
such a volume as that which lies before us is but an enormous accumulation 
of dry names, which certainly gives a clue to the advance of a particular 
branch of science, but has little practical use. Yet is Dr. Gunther’s work 
one which will be highly prized, both in this country and abroad, by all 
engaged in original research. To the professional zoologist it will supply in- 
formation which, without it, he would require months of laborious study to 
obtain ; and for him it is especially intended. Those who are conversant with 
even the periodical literature of zoology know how difficult, if not impossible, 
it is to keep au courant with what is being done every year in the wide field 
of Natural History. Zoological literature increases day by day in extent and 
importance ; and were not some machinery devised to effect an easy mode 
of reference to the progress of our knowledge in each separate department, 
original inquiries could not be made without a fearful expenditure of time ; 
and we should often find that three or four zoologists had really worked out, in 
successive periods, precisely the same subject. These obstacles were thought 
of, and attempted to be met, long ago. Many years since Agassiz pub- 
lished his celebrated “ Bibliographia Zoologiae,” and, as it were, laid the 
foundation-stone of the building which Dr. Gunther and his collaborateurs 
have now completed. Plis treatise, which was published by the Ray Society, 
contains reference to all the memoirs on special and general Natural History 
which had appeared up to the date of its publication. It had, however, one 
serious defect — such a defect, in fact, as the catalogue of the British Museum 
has — the works were arranged in relation to the authors’ names, and these 
latter were alone grouped in alphabetical order. Hence Agassiz’s compilation, 
though of exceeding interest, in so far as it recorded the labours of dis- 
tinguished savants , was utterly valueless to the working naturalist. If one 
who was engaged in some special investigation required to know what had 
been achieved in that particular branch, he found the “Bibliographia 
Zoologiae ” of no use to him whatever. For, in order to find out what had 
been written, he should know the writers’ names — a knowledge, it will 
* a The Record of Zoological Literature,” 1864. Yol. I. Edited by 
Albert C. L. G. Gunther, M.A., Ph.D., &c. London : Yan Yoorst. 1865. 
