Wikisource

Page:EB1911 - Volume 20.djvu/347: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
→‎Proofread: ORNITHOLOGY
curly apostrophes; add some non-break spaces
Header (noinclude):Header (noinclude):
Line 1: Line 1:
{{rh|TAXONOMY]|{{x-larger|ORNITHOLOGY}}|{{x-larger|313}}}}
{{rh|TAXONOMY]|{{x-larger|ORNITHOLOGY}}|{{x-larger| 313}}}}
Page body (to be transcluded):Page body (to be transcluded):
Line 4: Line 4:
neglected. Upon these descriptions he was still engaged till
neglected. Upon these descriptions he was still engaged till
death, in 1837, put an end to his labours, when his place as
death, in 1837, put an end to his labours, when his place as
Naumann's assistant for the remainder of the work was taken by
Naumann’s assistant for the remainder of the work was taken by
Rudolph Wagner; but, from time to time, a few more, which
Rudolph Wagner; but, from time to time, a few more, which
he had already completed, made their posthumous appearance
he had already completed, made their posthumous appearance
Line 26: Line 26:
though their peculiarities were all duly described and recorded
though their peculiarities were all duly described and recorded
by his coadjutor, as some indeed had been long before by Cuvier
by his coadjutor, as some indeed had been long before by Cuvier
in his famous dissertation<ref>Cuvier's first observations on the subject seem to have appeared
in his famous dissertation<ref>Cuvier’s first observations on the subject seem to have appeared
in the ''Magazin encyclopédique'' for 1795 (ii. pp. 330, 358).
in the ''Magazin encyclopédique'' for 1795 (ii. pp. 330, 358).
</ref> on the organs of voice in birds
</ref> on the organs of voice in birds
(''Leçons d'anatomie comparée'', iv. 450-491). Nitzsch's name was
(''Leçons d’anatomie comparée'', iv. 450-491). Nitzsch’s name was
subsequently dismissed by Cuvier without a word of praise, and
subsequently dismissed by Cuvier without a word of praise, and
in terms which would have been applicable to many another and
in terms which would have been applicable to many another and
inferior author, while Temminck, terming Naumann's work an
inferior author, while Temminck, terming Naumann’s work an
“''ouvrage de luxe''”—it being in truth one of the cheapest for its
“''ouvrage de luxe''”—it being in truth one of the cheapest for its
contents ever published—effectually shut it out from the realms
contents ever published—effectually shut it out from the realms
Line 40: Line 40:
which it presented.
which it presented.


Now we must return to France, where, in 1827, L'Herminier,
Now we must return to France, where, in 1827, L’Herminier,
a Creole of Guadaloupe and a pupil of De Blainville's, contributed
a Creole of Guadaloupe and a pupil of De Blainville’s, contributed
⚫
{{EB1911 Shoulder Heading|L'Herminier.}}
to the ''Actes'' of the Linnaean Society of Paris for
to the ''Actes'' of the Linnaean Society of Paris for
that year (vi. 3-93) the “Recherches sur l'appareil
that year (vi. 3-93) the “Recherches sur l’appareil
sternal des Oiseaux,” which the precept and example
sternal des Oiseaux,” which the precept and example
of his master had prompted him to undertake, and Cuvier
of his master had prompted him to undertake, and Cuvier
⚫
{{EB1911 Shoulder HeadingSmall|L’Herminier.}}
had found for him the means of executing. A second and
had found for him the means of executing. A second and
considerably enlarged edition of this very remarkable treatise
considerably enlarged edition of this very remarkable treatise
Line 59: Line 59:
length, and so give a reason for the faith that was in him. There
length, and so give a reason for the faith that was in him. There
is no evidence, so far as we can see, of his having been aware
is no evidence, so far as we can see, of his having been aware
of Merrem's views; but like that anatomist he without hesitation
of Merrem’s views; but like that anatomist he without hesitation
divided the class into two great “coupes,” to which he gave,
divided the class into two great “coupes,” to which he gave,
however, no other names than “''Oiseaux normaux''” and “''Oiseaux''
however, no other names than “''Oiseaux normaux''” and “''Oiseaux''
''anomaux''”—exactly corresponding with his predecessor's
''anomaux''”—exactly corresponding with his predecessor’s
''Carinatae'' and ''Ratitae''— and, moreover, he had a great advantage
''Carinatae'' and ''Ratitae''— and, moreover, he had a great advantage
in founding these groups, since he had discovered, apparently
in founding these groups, since he had discovered, apparently
from his own investigations, that the mode of ossification in each
from his own investigations, that the mode of ossification in each
was distinct; for hitherto the statement of there being five
was distinct; for hitherto the statement of there being five
centres of ossification in every bird's sternum seems to have
centres of ossification in every bird’s sternum seems to have
been accepted as a general truth, without contradiction, whereas
been accepted as a general truth, without contradiction, whereas
in the ostrich and the rhea, at any rate, L'Herminier found that
in the ostrich and the rhea, at any rate, L’Herminier found that
there were but two such primitive points,<ref>This fact in the ostrich appears to have been known already to
there were but two such primitive points,<ref>This fact in the ostrich appears to have been known already to
Geoffroy St-Hilaire from his own observation in Egypt, but does not
Geoffroy St-Hilaire from his own observation in Egypt, but does not
Line 82: Line 82:
</ref> These are the forms
</ref> These are the forms
which composed the family previously termed ''Cursores'' by De
which composed the family previously termed ''Cursores'' by De
Blainville; but L'Herminier was able to distinguish no fewer
Blainville; but L’Herminier was able to distinguish no fewer
than thirty-four families of “''Oiseaux normaux'',” and the
than thirty-four families of “''Oiseaux normaux'',” and the
judgment with which their separation and definition were effected
judgment with which their separation and definition were effected
Line 90: Line 90:
more favourable for arriving at results than that which
more favourable for arriving at results than that which
was occupied by Merrem, to whom many of the most remarkable
was occupied by Merrem, to whom many of the most remarkable
forms were wholly unknown, while L'Herminier had at his
forms were wholly unknown, while L’Herminier had at his
disposal examples of nearly every type then known to exist.
disposal examples of nearly every type then known to exist.
But the latter used this privilege wisely and well—not, after
But the latter used this privilege wisely and well—not, after
Line 98: Line 98:
those of the anterior, as well as of the in some cases still
those of the anterior, as well as of the in some cases still
more important characters presented by the pre-sternal bones,
more important characters presented by the pre-sternal bones,
such as the furcula, coracoids and scapulae. L'Herminier thus
such as the furcula, coracoids and scapulae. L’Herminier thus
separated the families of “Normal Birds”:—
separated the families of “Normal {{nowrap|Birds”:—}}


{|{{Ts|ma|sm92|lh120}}
{|align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"
|-
|-
|&ensp;1. “Accipitres”—''Accipitres'', Linn.
|&numsp;1. “Accipitres”—''Accipitres'', Linn.
|-
|-
| 2. “Serpentaires”—''Gypogeranus'', Illiger.
| 2. “Serpentaires”—''Gypogeranus'', Illiger.
|-
|-
| 3. “Chouettes”—''Strix'', Linn.
| 3. “Chouettes”—''Strix'', Linn.
|-
|-
| 4. “Touracos”—''Opaetus'', Vieillot.
| 4. “Touracos”—''Opaetus'', Vieillot.
|-
|-
| 5. “Perroquets”—''Psittacus'', Linn.
| 5. “Perroquets”—''Psittacus'', Linn.
|-
|-
| 6. “Colibris”—''Trochilus'', Linn.
| 6. “Colibris”—''Trochilus'', Linn.
|-
|-
| 7. “Martinets”—''Cypselus'', Illiger.
| 7. “Martinets”—''Cypselus'', Illiger.
|-
|-
| 8. “Engoulevents”—''Caprimulgus'', Linn.
| 8. “Engoulevents”—''Caprimulgus'', Linn.
|-
|-
| 9. “Coucous”—''Cuculus'', Linn.
| 9. “Coucous”—''Cuculus'', Linn.
|-
|-
|10. “Couroucous”—''Trogon'', Linn.
|10. “Couroucous”—''Trogon'', Linn.
Line 145: Line 145:
|21. “Tinamous”—''Tinamus'', Latham.
|21. “Tinamous”—''Tinamus'', Latham.
|-
|-
|22. “Foulques on Poules d'eau”—''Fulica'', Linn.
|22. “Foulques on Poules d’eau”—''Fulica'', Linn.
|-
|-
|23. “Grues”—''Grus'', Pallas.
|23. “Grues”—''Grus'', Pallas.
Line 173: Line 173:


The preceding list is given to show the very marked agreement
The preceding list is given to show the very marked agreement
of L'Herminier's results compared with those obtained fifty
of L’Herminier’s results compared with those obtained fifty
years later by another investigator, who approached the subject
years later by another investigator, who approached the subject
from an entirely different, though still osteological, basis. Many
from an entirely different, though still osteological, basis. Many
of the excellencies of L'Herminier's method could not be pointed
of the excellencies of L’Herminier’s method could not be pointed
out without too great a sacrifice of space, because of the details
out without too great a sacrifice of space, because of the details
into which it would be necessary to enter; but the trenchant
into which it would be necessary to enter; but the trenchant
way in which he showed that the “Passereaux”—a group
way in which he showed that the “Passereaux”—a group
of which Cuvier had said, “Son caractère semble d'abord
of which Cuvier had said, “Son caractère semble d’abord
purement négatif,” and had then failed to define the
purement négatif,” and had then failed to define the
limits—differed so completely from every other assemblage, while
limits—differed so completely from every other assemblage, while
Line 188: Line 188:
are his merits in disposing of the groups of what are ordinarily
are his merits in disposing of the groups of what are ordinarily
known as water-birds, his indicating the affinity of the rails
known as water-birds, his indicating the affinity of the rails
(No. 22) to the cranes (No. 23), and the severing of the latter
(No. 22) to the cranes (No. 23), and the severing of the latter
from the herons (No. 24). His union of the snipes, sandpipers
from the herons (No. 24). His union of the snipes, sandpipers
and plovers into one group (No. 26) and the alliance, especially
and plovers into one group (No. 26) and the alliance, especially
dwelt upon, of that group with the gulls (No. 27) are steps
dwelt upon, of that group with the gulls (No. 27) are steps
which, though indicated by Merrem, are here for the first time
which, though indicated by Merrem, are here for the first time
clearly laid down; and the separation of the gulls from the
clearly laid down; and the separation of the gulls from the
petrels (No. 28)—step in advance already taken, it is true,
petrels (No. 28)—step in advance already taken, it is true,
by Illiger—is here placed on indefeasible ground. With all this,
by Illiger—is here placed on indefeasible ground. With all this,
perhaps on account of all this, L'Herminier's efforts did not
perhaps on account of all this, L’Herminier’s efforts did not
Footer (noinclude):Footer (noinclude):
Line 1: Line 1:


{{smallrefs|90%}}
{{smallrefs}}
Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:EB1911_-_Volume_20.djvu/347"