a TRANSACTIONS OF THE [san. 25, 
thoughts for a short time in the consideration of this general 
subject. 
One of the most noticeable things about mineral names is the 
lack of uniformity in their terminations. While the large majority 
of them end in—ite, there are many in—ine, while ane, ase, ose, 
and several others have been often used. It is to be regretted that 
the termination ite has not been universally adopted, for it has been 
so far adopted as to be the generally accepted one for such names. 
It has the sanction of antiquity, for it was used by the old Greek 
writers in the forms—ites, or—itis, as in dewarcrys, hematite, and 
araBaorires, ‘alabaster.’ Such forms were also used by the Romans, 
and we have in Pliny siderites, ‘lodestone,’ steatitis, soapstone, 
molochites, ‘malachite,’ and many others. These forms are un- 
doubtedly the source of the termination ite now in use, as they are 
the earliest known terminations. Such names were given by the 
ancients as noting some property or use of the mineral, or some- 
times designating its source, or the locality from which it was de- 
rived ; aS payryres, a mineral from Magnesia. Or, to speak of those 
already mentioned, darirys is a mineral resembling blood, from 
the color of its powder ; daaGasrites, & Mineral from aon a vescal 
called an alabastron was cut, siderites, from oSypos, iron, because 
it contained it, steatitis, from ozéaros, ‘of fat,’ because it feels 
greasy, and molochites, from paadzy, ‘mallows,’ alluding to its green 
color. 
All scientific works were, written in Latin up to a very recent 
date, and as there was no chemistry to show differences in composi- 
tion, there was no real progress in mineralogy. External characters 
alone were used as means of distinguishing minerals from each 
other, and those that looked alike must necessarily be classed to- 
wether. Pliny’s names were sufficient for all the uses of science 
down to the 16th century. There had hardly been a name added, 
even by Agricola, whose large works were published 1529 to 1546. 
The name fluor is perhaps his only new one, and that he probably 
did not originate, but took from the vocabulary of the furnace-men, 
who used it in smelting their ores. Certain minerals in general use 
had their common names in various languages, but there were few 
of these. 
The use of the termination lite, in German lith, from the Greek 
xiG0s, ‘a Stone,’ ought here to be mentioned, as it was a genuine 
attempt to introduce a distinguishing mark for mineral names, 
and which, if successful, would have been of great benefit to mineral 
nomenclature, as bringing in the desirable element of uniformity. 
This also comes from antiquity, being found in the Greek. But it 
never came into general use, and in later vears is hardly used at all 
except for euphony. There is an erroneous impression that the ter- 
mination ite is derived from this, which, as we have seen, is not the 
case, being a much older form. 
Several attempts have been made to give systematic names to 
minerals on some such principle as is used in other branches of 
