118 Analysis of Scientific Books. 
His rage for maintaining his system at all hazards, is equally proved 
by another decision in this very case of Pappenheim.’ He finds a 
figure in Knorr, but without a locality assigned; yet he determines 
that it must belong to this spot, because it seems to lie in a similar 
stone. Weshould be glad to know how any figure can represent a 
stone, so as to render its locality certain, or even probable, We are 
sure that no figure of Knorv’s is capable of distinguishing any one 
stone from another, far less the slates of Pappenhcim from the’ slates 
of Shropshire or America. If thus M. Blainville’s geology is stndied 
and ascertained, we cannot have too little of it. As to the general 
geology of this celebrated spot, it is derived here from the description 
of Reuss and Humboldt; and a worse piece of geological observation 
and reasoning, we will venture to say, was never printed. ‘That it is 
a fresh water formation appears almost certain, so far from being 
what is represented; and that the observers have confounded and 
misrepresented the relative positions of the fresh water and marine 
strata, is equally so, though we cannot here enter into the reasons for 
this opinion. 
As to the ichthyology, it is ofa piece with the geology, which is 
Jess pardonable, since the author’s claims in this department are more 
decided. The figure is that of a sturgeon, and yet he chooses to decide 
that it is an unknown pike, to which he gives the name of Esox acu- 
tirostris. Stromateeus and Pecilia, from the same place, are deter- 
mined on grounds as slender. The specific name of the latter is 
Dubia; and if we were inclined to make a very low jest, we should 
say that it was applicable to three fourths of the whole collection. 
Mons. Blainville has entered into considerable length on the subject 
of the celebrated fishes of Monte Bolea, and we are glad to say that in 
this part of his treatise he has been of real service to the cause in hand, 
It is, in truth, the most valuable, and we had almost said the only 
valuable part of his book. With the double advantage of the splendid 
work, published at Verona under Volta’s direction, and of the ecol- 
lection itself procured, (plundered, as ‘Ttaly asserts,) from Count Gaz- 
zola, he has been enabled to rectify the more glaring errors of the 
Italian naturalists, and to give somewhat like a rational list of the 
specimens. Out of Volta’s forty-four genera, including a hundred and 
five species, he has admitted only ninety-three species, and it is 
quite plain that they would allow of still farther purification. 
This subject, however, is so extensive that we dare not enter it. 
We have no room for a criticism on genera and species, which in- 
deed could not be rendered intelligible without the figures. But we 
are bound to say, on the geological question, that the Italian theory 
which collects these fishes from all parts of the world, is purely gra- 
tuitous; and thus while it is geologically impossible and groundless, 
it is contradicted icthyologically by the specimens themselves, which 
are now, in part, and in former times have probably all been, natives 
and residents of that sea which now washes the land in which their 
