204 NATURAL SCIENCE [September 
played a marvellous zeal in the hunting up ef ancient literature and 
the compilation of synonymies, but have not greatly assisted the 
student; others again have been dry lists of specimens, jotted down 
in haste and repented of at leisure, but having at least this merit, 
that they told us what material the Museum contained. 
The present volume seems to us to combine the advantages, with- 
out the defects, of those predecessors to which we have referred. The 
descriptions of the species are most carefully drawn up, each being 
based, where possible; on examination of the type-specimen itself, and 
following a uniform plan, which greatly facilitates comparison. A 
useful diagram explains the terms employed. The difficulty of 
describing the all-important suture-line has been avoided by giving 
a tracing made from an actual specimen, if possible the type. There 
are also woodcuts of specimens, many of them from original drawings 
by Miss G. M. Woodward. The references to literature, in the form 
of lists of synonyma, are carefully done, but occupy a disproportionate 
space. When a species has never received more than one specific 
name, eg., Prolecanites becheri, it seems unnecessary to trace this 
through all the obvious genera, such as Ammonites and Goniatites, to 
which it has been referred by older authors, including the compilers 
of text-books and nomenclators. The information is useful, but might 
be put in less compass. Finally, this is a true catalogue; every 
specimen in the Museum is mentioned in such a way that it can be 
identified, and the number under which it is entered in the Museum 
lists or registers is printed. Thus the foreign student can gauge pre- 
cisely the wealth of the collection, can tell whether what he wants to 
see is contained in it, and on reaching the Museum can ask for the 
definite specimen he requires. 
One or two improvements may be suggested for future volumes of 
this and other catalogues. The statements of locality are misleading: 
under each species comes a series of statements made with reference 
to the species in general, including the usual size attained. After 
“Size” follow “Form. and Loc.” These, however, refer not to the 
species, but to the particular specimens in the Museum. It would be 
better to give the general geological and geographical distribution of 
the species, and to refer to definite localities under the individual 
specimens, as is already done in cases where more than one locality 
is represented. It would be well to draw more forcible attention to 
the type-specimens, eg., by broad-faced type, also to distinguish 
cotypes, paratypes, and the rest. It is good to know the names of 
donors, especially when they are such men as J. E. Lee and John 
Rofe ; but it would also be good in other cases to know the names of 
those from whom specimens have been purchased, since these must 
often have been geologists of repute, whose statements of locality and 
the like would be of more value than those of an ordinary dealer or 
inefficient collector. It is sad to see how many specimens are entered 
with “ History unknown,” and of how many others “ Zransferred from 
Mus. Pract. Geol.” the necessary details are not recorded ; but this is 
no fault of Messrs Foord & Crick. 
A catalogue is not a text-book; nevertheless the Catalogues of 
the British Museum have come to be looked for by us outsiders as 
likely to introduce some improved system, and to unravel the tangle 
