1776. 8vo, pp. [xxiv], 594, [14]; without the four page dedication, which is sometimes present; with 109 naive woodcuts within text, and large woodcut vignette on final verso; lower corner of page 84 torn with loss of paper not text, and with neat discrete paper repairs to pp. 341-42, 359-60, 413-14 and 541-42, stain affecting pp. 433-437, the whole text lightly foxed and browned, with some occasional minor marginal dampstaining, otherwise clean; in contemporary half calf over marbled boards, spine in compartments with raised bands, ruled in gilt, with orange paper lettering label, spine slightly cracked, with both joints starting but holding firm, with slight loss to rear joint, covers a little scuffed, and recornered to style; with the bookplate of Lennart Ragnemark on front pastedown; a good copy. Second edition of this ‘introduction to the knowledge of animals’ by Magnus Orrelius (1717-1794), of particular appeal for the numerous charming woodcuts, which though perhaps not all original, are believed to have been done by the author himself. The work was first published anonymously in 1750-1751 in weekly parts as Historia animalium, and is considered to be Sweden’s first vernacular zoological handbook.
The Royal Swedish Academy was founded in 1739, on the initiative of Linnaeus amongst others. One of the aims was to promote the economic benefits of the natural sciences, a principle which naturally favoured botanical and zoological research, with the hope that the discovery of new animal and plant species could be of use to man. Up to this time, little had been written about the plant and animal kingdom, with most published being in Latin, and so a number of manuals and textbooks were published to fill this void, and disseminate knowledge more widely. Linnaeus himself, famously published his Fauna Svecica, the first Swedish natural fauna, in 1746, though this was once again published in Latin, and whilst ground-breaking, was not really a handbook for general use.
In October 1749, advertisements appeared in Stockholm for a work on the history of animals written ‘in the Swedish tongue’, to be published by subscription in parts to make it more affordable and cheaper to print. The anonymous author borrowed the title Historia Animalium from Conrad Gessner’s famous work. According to Martin Biinsow, when Linnaeus saw the advertisement he was greatly perturbed, fearing plagiarism of his popular lecture notes. ‘In a letter to the Academy of Sciences' secretary, Wargentin, Linné writes that, if there is plagiarism, he will withdraw not only from the fauna, but from all work. However, the great man could breathe a sigh of relief when the work started to come out. There was no question of any plagiarism, even if the author had picked up a lot of facts from Linné’ (Biinsow, I Var Herres Hage, Svensk zoologi i Kunskapskallan, p. 5 a google translation). Indeed, for this second edition, a letter of recommendation by Wargentin himself is included on the verso of the title-page – a sign of Academy approval no doubt.
The author, in fact, was Magnus Orrelius (1717-94), a member of the Moravian Brethren in Sweden, active as a writer, translator and woodcutter, though not part of traditional academic circles. From an impoverished background, and born as Mans Fanberg, he funded himself to study at Uppsala, at which point he changed his name. His poor financial situation meant that his studies were fragmented and he never took his degree. He worked as a personal tutor, and then as an accountant, but made most of his living as a writer, as well as penning a number of pamphlets and articles on social issues such as child-rearing, and population decline.
The Historia Animalium was his first work, and whilst it claimed to describe all animals existing on the globe, was confined principally to mammals, including man, Orrelius adopting Linnaeus’ classification and system. This second edition has been substantially revised and enlarged when it comes to the number of species described, but for cost reasons the descriptions were kept shorter and are limited, as previously, to mammals. As acknowledged in the preface, the work draws upon a number of sources, including Pliny, Aristotle, Olaus Magnus, as well Linnaeus. Whilst clearly aiming to be a serious scientific treatise, Orrelius often trying to distance himself from some earlier myths and legends, (notably the unicorn an Aristotelian invention according to Orrelius), the information provided is often of varying reliability. Far from being an objective commentator, his own moral judgements and opinions pervade the work, which often make for entertaining reading. His theological leanings ensure too, that in line with fellow 18^th century scholars, his work very much recognises and celebrates the wonders of Creation, stressing how an appreciation of the beauties of nature can lead to a greater understanding of God.
Focusing more upon behavioural traits than anatomical descriptions, Orrelius often imparts human qualities to the animals under discussion, seeing animals as images of human characteristics. About the ‘natt-människan, homo nocturnus, troglodytes’ (the orangutan, p. 41), Orrelius notes that ‘they speak in a whispering manner, think and draw conclusions like rational creatures, imagining that the whole globe was created for their sake, and that they once will come to his former power over the inhabitants of the earth’. He describes the ‘lurfwige bawianen’ of Sumatra (p. 51), as whilst not ugly, ‘is nevertheless terrifying in appearance, after that he always grinds his teeth, and gives signs of anger. It is sometimes the meanest and rudest of all animals’. Mammals from all corners of the globe are described, from Africa to America, including elephants, rhinocerus, whales, lions, camels, sloths, porcupines, domestic beasts such as dogs and cattle, as well as the walrus (p. 94) and the racoon (p. 262). The animals are frequently described as being greedy, or ferocious, or blood-thirsty, and though perhaps not believing in unicorns, he does subscribe to various traditional ‘forest’ myths, superstitions and beliefs.
The work includes 109 charming if somewhat naive woodcuts of mammals, believed to be the work of Orrelius himself. In discussing the first edition, Biinsow notes that a number of the woodcuts appear to have been copied for earlier works by Olaus Magnus, as well as Albrecht Dürer (notably his 1515 woodcut of a rhinocerus), and some from Johnston’s Historiae naturalis (1650-1654). It is interesting to note that all appear to have been revised and re-engraved for the present second edition, the similarities not nearly so obvious. Much less refined, they have a charming, naive quality. An important, if less well known contribution, to the zoological canon.