144 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society, 



tion of the animal remains which it contained. These com- 

 prised not only entire specimens of numerous small fishes, 

 but also large detached spines and scales, and, above all, 

 enormous conical teeth, some of which attained a length of 

 3f inches, and a width of 1^ inches at the base. These teeth 

 were really identical with some which Ure had forty years 

 previously recognised as belonging to a fish, but his figures 

 had long since been forgotten, and it was therefore not 

 astonishing that Dr Hibbert, whose practical knowledge as a 

 zoologist was perhaps not quite equal to his enthusiasm as a 

 collector, should have rushed to the conclusion that he had 

 unearthed the remains of a huge reptile. One of these teeth 

 was figured by Hibbert and considered as " Saurian," in a 

 paper read by him before the Koyal Society of Edinburgh on 

 17th February 1834. 



The dawn of a new era in fossil ichthyology had already 

 commenced, for in the year 1833 the first Zivraison of 

 Agassiz's " Eecherches sur les Poissons Fossiles " was given 

 to the world. 



We have already seen that, long before the publication of 



Ure's "History of Eutherglen," fossil fish-remains had in 



other countries attracted attention, and as years passed on 



towards the period at which we have now arrived, a goodly 



array of continental writers had published accounts and 



figures of fossil fishes from various strata. Of these may be 



mentioned : Mylius, Knorr and Walchner, Wolfart, Scheuch- 



zer, Volta, Bronn, Cuvier, and De Blainville; and a few 



also in England, such as Lhwyd, Mantell, and Sowerby, had 



made observations upon similar fossils which had come under 



their notice. Large collections, both public and private, had 



also been formed. But as yet no satisfactory basis had been 



found for the comparison of fossil with living forms, and the 



vast treasures which were to be added to our knowledge of 



the succession of ichthyic life on the globe were, it may be 



said, as yet entirely unknown. It was reserved for Agassiz 



to lay the first secure foundations for this knowledge, and to 



become, as he is so often and so worthily styled, the father 



of fossil ichthyology. 



Upon the studies to which he now directed his attention, 



