vi PREFACE. 



The book could not be called simply ' Palaeophytology,' since it does 

 not take in the whole of the subject. The reasons why it omits the 

 Angiosperms and confines itself to the consideration of the Thallophytes, 

 Archegoniatae, and Gymnosperms will be found in the introductory 

 chapter. And if I have at length decided to call it an ' Introduction 

 to Palaeophytology,' this title is after all only a way of getting out of 

 a difficulty, for it requires that the word palaeophytology should be 

 understood in a narrower and more botanical sense, and should mean the 

 doctrine of the old types of vegetable forms as distinguished from the 

 Angiosperms, which made their appearance in later times and introduced 

 the modern era. It is in this sense only that the title and the contents 

 correspond to one another. 



In choosing the woodcuts I have contented myself with those which 

 were most necessary. For figures of the countless extant remains of plants 

 the reader must have recourse, where they are not already known to him, 

 to the ' Pale"ontologie vegetale ' of W. Ph. Schimper, to Zittel's ' Handbuch 

 der Palaontologie,' and to Renault's ' Cours de botanique fossile.' It is 

 impossible to give a figure of every object, and I have therefore limited 

 myself for the most part to the representation of those which are of the 

 greatest interest to the botanist. The larger part of the woodcuts are new, 

 and are from drawings by Herr O. Peters, which were traced on the block 

 itself. I have especially to thank Herr Hofrath Schenk of Leipsic for very 

 kindly granting me the use of some figures from the volume of Zittel's 

 Handbuch which deals with plants. 



The mastering of the literature was, as I have said, one of the chief 

 difficulties encountered in the composition of this book. I have done my 

 best to overcome this difficulty, and I trust that I have taken into con- 

 sideration the most important of the publications which have appeared up 

 to the end of the year 1 886 ; still there may be some which I have over- 

 looked. Among later works I have been able to refer, at least for the 

 most essential points, only to W. C. Williamson's monograph of Stigmaria 

 ficoides ; this I could not have done but for the courtesy of the author, 

 who supplied me with proofs of the tables of figures before the work was 

 published. 



In order to avoid frequent repetitions of the citations, a list of the 

 literature has been compiled and placed at the end of the volume, arranged 

 in the alphabetical order of the authors' names. For the benefit of the less 

 experienced reader the titles of the most important works are distinguished 

 from the rest by being printed in italics. 



