various important subjects in Mineralogy. 209 
remains, after ail that is foreign to Natural History has been sub- 
tracted, is calculated to collect the productions of nature within 
a circle of general ideas, more comprehensive than those obtain- 
ed by immediate inspection or observation ; these ideas being 
required for discovering the objects in nature, for distinguish- 
ing and naming them, and for arriving at a clear perception of 
their nature, although they should not have come under our 
actual observation. Natural History, therefore, contains the 
whole compass of that information which renders it possible to 
apply to natural bodies what is taught in other sciences. Its 
province is to determine the objects treated of in other sciences ; 
and in this respect it may be said not to teach any thing of them 
itself. 
It might be supposed, that a science which does not teach 
any thing of the objects on which it is founded, could be of no 
value, and is unworthy of cultivation. There is little difficulty 
in refuting such an opinion, although it is as general as it is ill- 
founded ; and this even without reference to the most important 
part of Natural History, the philosophical consideration of its va- 
riety and unity, its regularity and consistency with itself. The 
knowledge of natural productions which is derived through the 
means of other sciences, loses its applicability, and consequently 
its value, if Natural History has not previously taught us to dis- 
tinguish from all others those bodies to which they refer, that 
is to say, to determine them according to its own peculiar me- 
thod and rules. For, although a person may possess knowledge 
of a mineral, yet if he cannot indicate with certainty the particu- 
lar species of which he possesses this knowledge, he has gained 
little more than if he were ignorant of it altogether. In this 
respect full justice has always been done to the efforts of the 
zoologist and botanist. The mineralogist alone has been less 
equitably treated, although he is placed exactly in the same cir- 
cumstances. Two reasons may even be found, which might serve 
in some measure to justify, or, at least, to excuse this proceed- 
ing. The first is, that Natural History itself was not known ; in 
fact, did not exist at all ; for, what had hitherto borne the name 
of Mineralogy, is not only perfectly different from the natural 
history of the mineral kingdom, but cannot even be said to be 
a science at all, because it does not possess those properties 
