CATALOGUE OF THE METEORITES OF NORTH AMERICA, 



TO JANUARY 1, 1909. 



By Oliver Cummings Faeeington. 



INTRODUCTION. 



Individual meteorite falls have an importance more or less comparable to that of individual 

 species. The phenomena of fall, shape, size, chemical composition, and structure are largely 

 peculiar to each fall and for purposes of exact knowledge should be fully recorded. The pursuit 

 of the study of meteorites since they first began to attract attention has, however, been very 

 irregular. The phenomena of fall and the more obvious features of shape and size have usually 

 attracted sufficient attention to be described at the time, but the more intimate details of struc- 

 ture and composition, if described at all, have usually been recorded in stray, scattered studies 

 often published without regard to the earlier history of the meteorite. Moreover, the advance 

 of knowledge regarding meteorites has led to the observation of many features which were 

 overlooked by earlier investigators. This is especially true with regard to structure, the inti- 

 mate details of which have received great amplification under modern methods. On the other 

 hand, classification has permitted grouping of features which were once described independently. 

 Thus iron meteorites once regarded as peculiar on account of the lack of Widmannstatten figures 

 are now readily grouped as hexahedrites or ataxites. Unless, however, we have a careful con- 

 tinuous record of the knowledge regarding each fall the details are liable to be hopelessly lost 

 and the fall becomes more or less mythical in character. 



Publications undertaking the preservation of such records have not been wanting hitherto. 

 As early as 1S03 Chladni prepared a chronological list of known meteorites * and issued sup- 

 plementary lists up to 1826. The first general catalogue which was at the same time descriptive, 

 however, was published by Buchner 2 in 1863. This catalogue gave a brief description of each 

 fall, its bibliography, and a statement of the distribution of its specimens. The order of treat- 

 ment was chronological, and there was a subgrouping into stone and iron meteorites, also of 

 those seen to fall as distinguished from those found. Up to 1869 Buchner continued this work 

 by means of appendixes, but at that time ceased his labors. Subsequent to this various lists of 

 all meteorites were made, some of the most useful being those by Brezina, Meunier, Wadsworth, 

 and Huntington, but none of them gave comprehensive accounts of all meteorites. 



The largest comprehensive work following Buchner's was that of Wulfing, published in 

 1897. 3 This included all known meteorites, but the number of these had so largely increased 

 since Buchner's time that his plan of giving an account of each meteorite was not followed. 

 Wulfing confined his catalogue to a bibliography of each fall and a statement of the distribution 

 of the specimens. Wulfing's work was performed with excellent judgment and thoroughness, 

 and his catalogue has been of the greatest service in systematizing and advancing the study of 

 meteorites. 



Although the plan of giving an account of each meteorite, its bibliography and distribution, 

 would seem impracticable when, as is now the case, the number of known meteorites exceeds 

 600, yet the task was undertaken by Cohen. Volumes III, IV, and V of his Meteoritenkunde 

 were intended to be made up in this way. Of these, only Volume III was completed at the time 

 of his death. This described in full 96 iron meteorites, comprising the classes of ataxites, 



i Gilb. Ann, Bd. 15, p. 307-8. ' Die Meteoriton in Sammlungen. Leipzig, 1863. a Die Meteoriten in Sammlungen. Tubingen, 1S97. 



7 



