CORAL." 

 B}^ Dr. Louis Roule, 



Prnt'r.'<.'«ir (it the University of Toulouse, France. 



Will this beiiutiful iiiatoriul, whoso color is so \ ivid jind so pure, 

 ever ao-jiin come into fashion^ It has fallen into eoniplcte discredit, 

 easily supplanted by conniioii glass jewelry and cheap jH'arls, 3'et there 

 ar(> sions ot" its return. 



Recoonized and appreciated in ancient times, it was known to be 

 drt^dged from the depths of the sea, whence it appeared in the form of 

 hard, arborescent masses like petrified branches, that even in this 

 crude state showed color and l)loom. It was also known that it was 

 renewed by growth, for after several years it could again 1)e gathered 

 from a place that had previously been raked and worked. Its appear- 

 ance and growth seemed to indicate that it was really a tree — a special 

 sort of vegetable that grew at the bottom of the sea. It was classed 

 with other living forms of diverse characters: Gorgonias, Antipathes, 

 Madrepores, curious alga' encrusted with calcareous matter, and these 

 singular productions of nature were termed ''lithophytes," a name 

 that accurately expressed the prevailing ideas concerning their nature. 

 The}' were all nuich sought for. either as ornaments oi" as curiosities; 

 but coral was l)y far the most valued. Its puiplish tint, its hardness, 

 the luster and polish which it readily took on, gave it the preeminence. 



An Italian, Marsigli, who had ])een dri\en by political struggles 

 into exile on the coasts of Provence, and his friend Reyssonel, a phy- 

 sician of Marseilles, were the first to recognize, a century and a half 

 ago, the real nature of coral. Their observations, though accurate 

 and sagacious, were so at variance with the beliefs of that period that 

 Reaumur, to whom they were submitted, would not accept them, and 

 thought it charitable to advise their authors to be more circumspect. 

 According to them, coral was neither a stone nor a marine plant. 



! Translated by author's jiermission from La Nature, Paris, No. 1509, April 26, 1902. 



609 

 SM 1902^—39 



