Origin of Species Variorum

Comparison with 1866

including the three genera still further to the right hand, which diverged at a still earlier period. And all these genera, descended from (A), form an order distinct from the genera descended from (I). So that we here have many species descended from a single progenitor grouped into genera; and the genera are subordinate to sub-families, families, and orders, all united into one great class. Thus, the grand fact in natural history of the subordination of group under group, which, from its familiarity, does not always sufficiently strike us, is in my judgment fully explained. No doubt organic beings, like all other objects, can be classed in groups in many ways, either artificially by single characters or more naturally by a number of characters. We know, for instance, that minerals and the elemental substances can be thus arranged; in this case there is of course no relation in their classification to genealogical succession, and no cause can .. be assigned for their falling into groups. But with organic beings the case is different, and the view above given explains their natural arrangement in group under group; and no other explanation has ever been attempted.

Naturalists try to arrange the species, genera, and families in each class, on what is called the Natural System. But what is meant by this system? Some authors look at it merely as a scheme for arranging together those living objects which are most alike, and for separating those which are most unlike; or as an artificial means for enunciating, as briefly as possible, general propositions,— that is, by one sentence to give the characters common, for instance, to all mammals, by another those common to all carnivora, by another those common to the dog-genus, and then by adding a single sentence, a full description is given of each kind of dog. The ingenuity and utility of this system are indisputable. But many naturalists think

including the three genera still farther to the right hand, which diverged at a still earlier period. And all these genera, descended from (A), form an order distinct from the genera descended from (I). So that we here have many species descended from a single progenitor grouped into genera; and the genera in sub-families, families, and orders, all in one great class. Thus, the grand fact ... of the natural subordination of all organic beings in groups under groups, which, from its familiarity, does not always sufficiently strike us, is in my judgment .. explained. No doubt organic beings, like all other objects, can be classed in many ways, either artificially by single characters or more naturally by a number of characters. We know, for instance, that minerals and the elemental substances can be thus arranged; in this case there is of course no relation to genealogical succession, and no cause can at present be assigned for their falling into groups. But with organic beings the case is different, and the view above given explains their natural arrangement in group under group; and no other explanation has ever been attempted.

Naturalists, as we have seen, try to arrange the species, genera, and families in each class, on what is called the Natural System. But what is meant by this system? Some authors look at it merely as a scheme for arranging together those living objects which are most alike, and for separating those which are most unlike; or as an artificial means for enunciating, as briefly as possible, general propositions,— that is, by one sentence to give the characters common, for instance, to all mammals, by another those common to all carnivora, by another those common to the dog-genus, and then, by adding a single sentence, a full description is given of each kind of dog. The ingenuity and utility of this system are indisputable. But many naturalists think