( 502 ) 
Supplement to the Historical Outline. 
O. Torell. 
The prize-subject of the Dutch Society of Sciences at Harlem 
(1865) ran as follows: 
“On sait, surtout par le travail de M. Roemer a Breslau, que 
plusieurs des fossiles, que Von trouve pres de Groningue appartien- 
nent aux memes espèces que ceux que on trouve dans les terrains 
siluriens de Tile de Gothland. Ce fait a conduit M. Rormer a la con- 
clusion, que le diluvium de Groningue a été transporté de cette ile 
de Gothland ; mais cette origine parait peu conciliable avec la direc- 
tion dans laquelle ce diluvium est déposé, direction qui indiquerait 
plutôt un transport de la partie méridionale de la Norvège. La 
Société désire voir décidée cette question par une comparaison exacte 
des fossiles de Groningue avec les minéraux et les fossiles des terrains 
siluriens et autres de cette partie de la Norvège, en avant égard 
aussi aux modifications que le transport d'un pays éloigné et ses 
suites ont fait subir à ces minéraux et a ces fossiles.” 
ToRELL’S answer to this question consists of two parts. The first 
part deals with the essential question and is entitled: “Essai sur la 
question proposée de la Société Hollandaise des Sciences à Harlem.” 
Here the author enumerates the Groningen fossils known to him with 
their geological occurrence and the literature on this subject. Hardly 
any new fossils are mentioned, so that this description is little 
more than a development of Rormer’s treatise of the Groningen 
fossils. Nor is this wonderful, because he, too, had received the 
greater part of this material from ConeN, whom he had paid a visit 
in 1865. No doubt there were among the collection sent to him by 
the museum of Natural History at Groningen, about which I have 
spoken in my first essay (36, p. XXXII), various fossils unknown 
to Rormer, but Torri seems not to have paid much attention to 
the determination of new fossils. From his enumeration he arrives 
at the conclusion that the sedimentary boulders might originate in 
Norway, but that there is not the least proof for it and that most 
likely the origin from Oesel-Gothland is much more probable. 
In the second part of this first essay, however, he deals with the 
rocks themselves. By a comparison with limestones from Norway 
and Gothland he is led to exclude the first region altogether and 
this result is further on supported by what the crystalline boulders 
teach, which are described next. The dispersion of the different 
erraties being examined, his conelusion with regard to the question 
which had been put runs; 
