Following the publication of Part One of Linnaeus's Systema Naturae in 1758, containing a mere 4,378 animal species, systematic debate was fuelled by the deluge of species that were discovered when European naturalists started to explore the globe through imperialist expansions. The naming and the systematic arranging of this multitude of insects, mammals and birds suffered from lack of consensus. The road to agreement would be (and still is) long, winding and wobbly. Surprisingly – or maybe not so – this is not reflected in the historiography of the period. Fortunately, we now have a substantial monograph exploring the emergence of systematics in the period between 1800 and 1850 through the life and career of Coenraad Jacob Temminck (1778–1858), which enables us to form a coherent picture of this turbulent period. Bird lovers might know Temminck from his stint – Temminck's stint, that is, the tiny wader, which periodically graces the shores of Western Europe. But Coenraad Jacob Temminck was also a revered, self-taught naturalist and systematist who attained a high standard when it came to describing and naming specimens. He was responsible for describing 194 species spread over several continents and animal phyla. His name is honoured in the taxa of several species.
Gassò obtained her master's degree in biology at the University of Barcelona and in 2019 her doctorate in philosophy at the University of Leiden, with a dissertation titled ‘Temminck's order: debates on zoological classification: 1800–1850’, and this monograph is an adaptation of her dissertation. Her style is engaging and the book contains enough information, supported by ample source references, to make the reader want to know more. The presence of explicatory footnotes at the end of the book is a valuable addition. The introduction contains a useful summary of its chapters. The book itself is arranged in two parts: four chapters focusing on the life and career of Temminck and three on the broader history of emerging systematics in the first half of the nineteenth century through the work of Temminck.
Temminck was born in a well-to-do Amsterdam merchant family. The presence of a substantial aviary and bird collection at home and the visits of well-known naturalists, such as Alexander von Humboldt and François Levaillant, formed the background of his youth and education, and having such a large collection at home made him acquainted with its management. In 1804 Temminck started to catalogue the 839 species in his collection. He did so with the help of Levaillant, who also contributed to the collection. Between 1807 and 1811 he published a series on gallinaceous birds and in 1813 a handbook on European birds, and even though the author lacked a formal academic education all were thorough scientific works. Temminck and his wife travelled throughout Europe visiting naturalist friends and forging new friendships that turned out to be valuable when Temminck was building a collection as museum director. From 1816 on, Temminck contrived to set up a national museum. Contemporary universities also had depositories of specimens – mainly for the purpose of comparative anatomy and physiology – and the university of Leiden was willing to house the national collection, including Temminck's own. Temminck argued successfully that having both academic and collection responsibilities would be too much for the current professor, a trap Temminck fell into when trying to keep up with his publications when director.
On 9 August 1820, the National Museum of Natural History was a fact and Temminck its first director. The museum, a precursor of the current Naturalis Biodiversity Centre in Leiden, was one of the important national collections in Europe at the time. Temminck explicitly moulded the museum into a place where a large variety of specimens of the same or similar species could be consulted in order to define their place in the taxonomic system. ‘Species’, according to Temminck, were varieties of a ‘genus’ and ‘genus’ was an expression of a ‘type’, a basic form which he connected to different latitudes. Like other systematists, he tried to reconcile a world containing an overwhelming variety of species with his belief in a divine creation. Georges Cuvier, too, believed in the fixity of forms, while the Comte de Buffon and Jean Baptiste Lamarck allowed for change due to circumstances and so prepared the way for Darwin.
Temminck was not always successful in his efforts to publish his findings. The cooperation with the talented artist Pauline de Courcelles came to an end when she decided to publish his work on gallinaceous birds by herself. The number of journals grew rapidly and by the time Temminck finally published his hefty monographs others had already overtaken him. Because published names had to be in Latin, Temminck, writing in French, missed out, even though he was often the first to describe the species. Until the Strickland Code was published in 1843 by the British Association for the Advancement of Science, giving names to species was a prerogative of the individual systematist. This resulted in lengthy – not always pleasant – disputes with the naturalists Louis Vieillot and Nicholas Vigors.
It is striking that publications on this subject are scarce. Systematics never was a glamorous subject, even though it is undeniably important. Most publications that focus on this period concern individual naturalists and an illustrative commentary on pre-Darwinian debate is hard to find. However, Temminck's role is described in Ornithology as a Scientific Discipline: 1760–1850 (1982) by Paul Farber. This welcome addition to the literature on systematics is well written and well designed, with some beautiful reproductions of the species Temminck described. It takes the reader into the often unchartered territories of early nineteenth-century systematics. Starting with the conclusion is a convenient way to approach the book. Gasso puts early nineteenth-century systematics into perspective not only by providing the reader with an account of the debates and differences between Temminck, Vigors, Buffon and Cuvier, but also by setting them against the background of contemporary politics.
