ASTARTE. 309 



The shell of Astarte is a symbol of change; and 

 although the genus may be distinguished from others, 

 this cannot be said of the species inter se. I do not 

 know a more puzzling study. What is true of the pic- 

 torial art is equally applicable to the science of classi- 

 fication in natural history. Ruskin treats the matter 

 thus : " Nearly all the gradations of nature are so 

 subtle, and between degrees of tint so slightly separated, 

 that no human hand can in any wise equal, or do any- 

 thing more than to suggest the idea of them." So it is 

 with the forms of organic nature. A net of chain work 

 conveys a very inadequate idea of the intricate way in 

 which all these forms are intermingled and blend one 

 with another. No method of systematic arrangement 

 that is possible for the wit of man to devise will serve to 

 decipher this complicated mystery. To read for the first 

 time a cuneiform inscription is mere child's play com- 

 pared with the solution of this enigma. All that we 

 can do is to observe carefully, and with fit reverence, 

 the works of our Creator, and to record faithfullv those 

 observations for the instruction or gratification of the 

 present and future generations. One cause of difficulty 

 in discriminating the species of Astarte has happily been 

 removed. This consisted in the inner margin of the 

 shell being notched in some kinds, and plain in others 

 which could not else be distinguished. Recluz in 1844 

 eliminated this supposed mark of specific difference by 

 uniting the A. triangularis and A. minutissima of Mon- 

 tagu ; Turton had more than twenty years previously 

 noticed that A. sulcata and A. Scotica presented only 

 the same criterion of separation ; and Forbes and Han- 

 ley confirmed the justice of that remark by showing 

 that these last two so-called species were identical. It 

 has been for some time the prevalent opinion that the 



