298 RESEARCH IN CHINA. 



The Carboniferous faunas of China, and indeed of eastern Asia generally 

 are but scantily known. The stations from which collections have been 

 obtained often lie at widely distant intervals and the collections themselves 

 have often been meager. A notable exception must of course be made in 

 favor of the splendid collections upon which was based Waagen's monograph 

 upon the fauna of the Product us limestone of the Salt Range. 1 Very consid- 

 erable also were some of the collections which furnished the data for Diener's 

 accounts of the Carboniferous faunas of the Himalaya. 2 The Carboniferous 

 faunas of Turkestan which Romanowsky described 3 were, however, for the 

 most part both scanty and poorly preserved. Several writers have reported 

 upon Carboniferous faunas from the Indian Archipelago: Bey rich in i865, 4 

 on fossils from the island of Timor; Martin in i88i, 5 also from Timor; 

 Rothpletz in 1892, 6 upon essentially the same fauna; Roemer in 1880, 7 upon 

 fossils from the west coast of Sumatra; and Fliegel, upon the same fauna, 

 in igoi. 8 



In the case of China itself we have the well-known account of Kayser 9 

 upon fossils collected by von Richthofen, chiefly from the single locality at 

 Lo-ping. Loczy has recently described 10 a number of faunas from different 

 stations and different horizons, none of them of very great extent. Freeh 

 also has discussed 11 a few local faunas in a rather cursory way. Professor 

 Fuetterer is reported to have obtained extensive paleontological collections 

 in eastern Asia, and treatises upon them appear to have been recently pub- 

 lished, or are about to be published forthwith, but I have been unable to 

 secure copies of such works, if they have been issued. Finally, Tscherny- 

 schew has given a list of Carboniferous fossils obtained near Vladivostock. 12 



It would perhaps be expected that the faunas of the present collection 

 would prove to be identical with those of the reports mentioned, but this 

 does not seem to be the case. Some of them are, to be sure, so limited as to 

 be scarcely adequate for paleontologic correlation. In a case to be mentioned 

 later there seem to be reasons of a geologic and geographic nature for believ- 

 ing that one of them was obtained from the same horizon as one of the local 

 faunas reported by Freeh, but the intrinsic evidence, while rather favorable 

 than otherwise to this correlation, based upon other data, was by no means 

 such as to establish it independently. 



In considering the geologic age of these faunas it will be better to begin 



'Mem. Geol. Surv. India, ser. 13, Salt Range Fossils, vol. I, 1887. 



2 Mem. Geol. Surv. India, ser. 15, Himalayan Fossils, vol. i, pt. 2, 1899; pt. 3, 1897; pt. 4, 1897; Pt- 5, 1903. 



3 Materialen zur Geologic von Turkestan, St. Petersburg, 1880. 



4 Abhand. Kon. Akad. Wissensch. Berlin, 1865, pp. 61-100, plates 1-3. 



'Sammlungen des Geologischen Reichs-Museums in Leiden, I, Beitrage zur Geologic Ost-Asiens und Aus- 



traliens, Leiden, 1881, pp. 1-64, plate 1-3. 

 ' Paleontographica, vol. 39, 1892, pp. 57-106, plates 9-10. 

 7 Paleontographica, vol. 27, 1880, pp. i-n, plates 1-3. 

 8 Paleontographica, vol. 48, 1901, pp. 91-136, plates 6-8. 

 9 Richthofen's China, vol. 4, Berlin, 1883. 

 "Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Reise des Grafen Bela Szechenyi in Ostasien, Bd. 3, 1898, pp. 41-132, 



with plates. 

 "Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologie, und Palaeontologie, vol. 2, 1895, p. 47; Ueber palaeozoische 



Saunen aus Asien und Nord Africa. 

 "Bull. Comite Geologique, St. Petersbourg, 1889, No. 22, pp. 353-359. 



