Page:Science vol. 5.djvu/108

 ; rvoT. v.. Nn. i«

��sciri-ely been conceived ; Imt (■(itiLiiim!il failure to correlate fosail iritb living farms, uveii after tlioruiigh HxamlnatioD of many tropical floras, liegan to ^ive Importance to this c|ueBtlon, and in the first year of the present century Baron von Schloiheiin com- ineuceil to ui^e for plants, what Uluinenbucli had for some years i]isUted upon for animals, that the fossil forms wera extinct, and belonged to another age of the world, characterized by a different kind of life. ifard as this doctrine then was for the l)eliefs of thti times, its manifest soundness caused it steadily to gain ground, and soon opened the way for the serious study of paleontology on a true scientilic basis.

The reaction against attempting to correlate fos- sil with living plants went too far, and the former nomenclature was completely abandoned. Judging all by the paleozoic forms, which had been the chief objects of study, all efforts to apply generic names even to those of the most recent formations were suspended, and resort was had to the terminologies of the mineralogists, particularly those of ft'aller. Walcli. and Sehrtiter. All vegetable remains were called phytolltlies. Impressiotu on the roi^ks were diitinguislied as phytotypoUtlies. Fossil leaves were named bibliolithes, and fossil fruits earpolithes. Not iiniU 1816 did any one venture to establish species under any of these heads. The Brst attempt of this nature was made in that year by the Rev. Beury Stelnhauer, whose now celebrated memoir, 'On fossil reliqula of unknown vegetables in the coal strata,' describes and figures ten species of Phytoilthus, as- signing to each an appropriate speciQc name. This may be regarded a4 the true birth of systematic paleobotany, — iin example of the humility of true science iks contrasted with the arrogant assumptions of Scheuchxer a century before.

It is remarkable that this initial paper by Sl«in' hauer was published in an American serial, the Pru- caediugs of the American philosophical society, at Philadelphia, and was contributed by an American ultizeu, aud memberof that society. Uut that It was founded OD any extensive study of the coal-plants uf . this country, us some bavt; staled, there is no inter- nal evidence. No American localities are mentioned; and the paper seems to deal throughout with British fossils and British coal-mines, wltli which the author was ])erfectiy familiar.

Scblutbeim, who in his 'flora der vorwelt." 1804, had not dared to go thus far, look a step in advance, two years later, in his ' Fetrefactenkunde.' He greatly enriched the terminology of the science, and described with true binomial designations seventy- eight species belonging lo seven genera of fossil

Count Kterober^'s 'Flora dor vorwelt' commenced to appear in parts at about this time, in which many new genera were created on thoroughly studied grounds; and in 1833 Adolphu Brungniart's elaborate paper on the ciassiQcatioii of fossil plants was pub- lished In the memoirs of the Paris museum of natu- ral history. Uut these contributions, though highly systematic, and by far the most important that had been made to the !icieuee. did not desceud to the

��question of spech^s, nor indienle ilie numljerof dl tinet forms. The next work, tliprefore, light is thrown upon this problem, was Brongnlarfi 'Prodrome,' which appeared in 1838. By this til the science of paleontology had been fairly llslied, and geognostic considerations had come to receive something like their due weight. The ancient floras were distinguished from the later ones, and Ihe approaching analogy of the latter to that own time was clearly perceived by Brongniart, who thus early prophetically declared tor the success!** development of liigher types, though this strenuously opposed by the English scliool a decade

In this work, and the large ireatise published the same year (' Bistoirc des v£g£tanifossiles*}, to which It forms nn introduction, an immense advance was i^lTeclfd in the systematic treatment of fossil plants. Not only was a lai^ number of spcciea recognlxed, lielonging to the extinct genera heretofore estab- lished, and many new genera created, but Llie iden- tity of many of the (ossli with liviug genera was boldly asserted, at len«t for the more recent forma- tions; and a long step was taken in the direction of correlating the extinct and living floras, and of demonstrating the fact of an uninterrupted series connecting the post with the present plant-life of the globe.

At that date Brongniart enumerates five hundred and one species of fossil plants, nearly half of which belonged to the first, or oldest, of his four periods, corresponding to the paleoxoic at modern geologiata, and of course chiefly from the coal-measures.

It is interesting to note here how much faster the science of fossil plants has advanced in this numeri- cal respect than that of botany proper; for, while more than a liundred living species were then known to Brongniart for every fossil species, only eighteen living planta are now known to one fossil plant And yet how rapid has been the growth of our knowledge in both sciences may be realised by eon- templating the fact that nearly Ave times as many living, and sixl«en times as many fossil, plants are recc^ilzed now as then.

A census of fossil phinls wa<t again taken In 1S4C, by Unger, in his 'Synopsis planlarum fosslllum,' in which he enumerates 1,048 species; and in the same year, by Gcippert, quite independently of the former work, in a paper published In Leunhard and Bronn's 'Neues jahrbucli fur raineralc^e,' in which I.T78 spedes are claimed. Sixty-eight thousand living species were then known to Giippert, or about thirty' eight living to one fossil species.

In 1840 Otippert again reviewed Ihe fossil flora, and published an exhaustive enumeration ia Broun's ' Index palaeontologicus,' He now finds 2,0B5 fossil apecies, to be compared with the CS.403 living species named In tbe same work, or less than thlrty-ftve living to one fossil species.

The third quarter of the present century was one of intense activity tor systematic vegetable palenu- tology. Tbe combined labors of Hcer, Saporta, Et- tingshausen. aud Lesquereux, with a large corps of

��i

��4

��� �