^8 The Life and Writings of Agassiz. 



all his pecuniary resources to make this publication worthy 

 of its name, the author found it impossible to continue it on 

 the plan projected. Nevertheless, science has been partly 

 indemnified by the publication of the Embryology of the 

 Salmon tribe, which forms the second number of the work. 



After the attention which German naturalists had given to 

 the study of this important and interesting branch of science, 

 Agassiz determined that his Fishes also should contribute 

 their share. He therefore employed his friend, M. Vogt (now 

 Professor of Zoology at the University of Giessen), who, 

 under his direction, elaborated this part of the work, which 

 is justly esteemed by all physiologists. A third part of the 

 same work, — the Anatomy of the Salmon, — the fruit of the 

 joint labours of MM. Agassiz and Vogt, has since appeared 

 in the Memoirs of the third volume of the Neufchatel Society, 

 with a large number of admirabl^^-executed plates. 



M. Agassiz had finished the publication of the " Fossil 

 Fishes." But though the book was finished, the subject was 

 not exhausted. Numerous contributions poured in from all 

 quarters. The study of the Devonian system, in particular, 

 had made known a whole ichthyological fauna of a peculiar 

 character. M. Agassiz was requested by the British Asso- 

 ciation to publish these interesting remains. This he did in 

 a First Supplement to the " Foissons Fossiles,^^ under the 

 name of the " Fishes of the Devonian System.'* About the 

 same time he presented to the British Association his Re- 

 port on the Fishes of the London Clay. 



After the publication of the " Fresh-water Fishes," there 

 appeared a work of a different character, and which of itself 

 would be sufficient to establish the reputation of a naturalist. 

 This is the *' Nomenclator Zodlogicu6\^ — an enumeration of 

 all the genera in the animal kingdom, with an indication of 

 the etymology of their names — of the authors by whom the 

 names were proposed — their date of publication — and the 

 family to which they should be referred. 



From the commencement of his career Agassiz had been 

 struck by the disorder that pervaded zoological nomenclature, 

 and the confusion resulting from the application of the same 

 name to totally different animals. To remedy this difficulty 



