Notwithstanding this limitation, for many the word _curieux_ has the widest meaning and includes all kinds of collectors. Trevoux’ definition “_res singulares, eximiæ raræ_” with Millin’s broadening comment “_tout ce qui peut piquer la curiosité par la singularité des formes ou des usages_” (all that may excite curiosity in strangeness of form or use), is the proper one, regardless of Mme. de Genlis, who as late as 1818 goes back to the old meaning and includes under _curiosité_ the entirely scientific Natural History collections. It must be said that the distinction between scientific and artistic pursuits is not always clearly defined. Science mingles with art with undisputed right, and scientific pursuits at times have artistic interest. The two seem either to alternate their rights or share them in the fields that lie between. In the artistic field, or rather in that which tallies with Millin’s definition of _la curiosité_ there are two quite typical classes even though they cannot be separated by a sharp line of delimitation on account of linking subdivisions. The one includes the art collector alone and the searcher for the beautiful, the other those gathering the rest, things which for “strangeness of form or use” present a certain interest to the collector. There is no doubt that those of the first class possess the impulsiveness that generally characterizes intuitive and non-learned experience in art, and those of the second combine artistic and scientific interests. The one has a tendency to consider and value objects in a different manner from the other: the artistic temperament has a penchant for synthesis, the scientific is inclined towards analytic methods. While the collector of the first class has a direct purpose--the search for what is artistically fine, the other is less absolute, and for him objects have what may be called a relative value, the value of the series. In collecting coins or medals, the latter more especially, art plays an undisputed part, but science claims the right of classification, thus placing a relative value of no secondary importance. As a consequence, for instance, a medallist is likely to speak of the rare in place of the fine, or at times use one word for the other. It may be that in the eyes of a numismatist a sample of inferior art acquires great value through its rarity and through the place that it may occupy in the series of his collection. There are some collections consequently in which the best artistic samples are forced to play a secondary part, the object of the collection being classification, just as shells, minerals and other purely scientific gatherings would be arranged.