MINERALOGY. 



820 



was either entirely incorrect, or without reference to 

 the system in which the names were applied. The 

 nomenclature therefore required to be wholly remo- 

 delled, none deserving of the name having before 

 existed, the reason of which appears to have been 

 that mineralogy had not before been treated as a 

 science, but as an aggregate of various kinds of in- 

 formation, a sort of mixture which would admit every 

 kind of knowledge to be introduced, and in which 

 nothing could be placed wrong, because in such a dis- 

 position there could be no order. The order is the 

 highest idea expressed in the nomenclature of Mohs, 

 and in the selection of the names of the orders he has 

 invented but two whicli are entirely new, having em- 

 ployed as many designations from ancient mineralogy 

 as would answer the purpose. The names receive 

 their signification in agreement with the ideas of the 

 orders; thus pyrites embraces the minerals hitherto 

 called by that name. A mineral which may with 

 propriety bear the name of a metal must really be a 

 metal, or it must present the properties peculiar to 

 metals. Mica signifies a mineral which may be 

 cleaved with facility into thin, shining laminze ; the 

 order mica therefore contains only such species as 

 present cleavage in a high degree of perfection. The 

 name of the genus is a compound name, formed by 

 connecting another word with the name of the order. 

 Thus we have lead glance, augite spar, iron pyrites. 

 The generic name also refers to the properties of the 

 genus, and expresses, as much as possible, some 

 striking feature of its resemblance with other bodies. 

 Such is the name garnet-blende. The genus desig- 

 nated by this name belongs to the order blende ; the 

 individuals which it contains very often look like 

 garnet. The denomination of the species is produced 

 by the nearer restriction of the generic name by an 

 adjective. The adjective with which the species is 

 designated within its genus is taken from its natural 

 properties, and in general refers to one of those pro- 

 perties of the species which is most useful in dis- 

 tinguishing it from other species of the same genus ; 

 hence the systems of crystallization and the relation of 

 the cleavage are the most frequently employed,. ex- 

 amples of which are hexahedral, prismatic, rhombohe- 

 dral, iron pyrites ; rhombohedral, octahedral, dode- 

 cahedral, prismatic, iron ore, &c. 



The great advantage of the systematic nomencla- 

 ture is, that the names produce an image of the 

 objects to which they refer, which the trivial nomen- 

 clature can never do ; for example, if we hear the 

 name peritomous titanium ore, and have only an idea 

 of the order ore, this at once will produce a general 

 image of the species, which will be still more restrict- 

 ed if we have some idea of the genus titanium ore ; 

 but on the other hand, if we hear the name rutile, 

 and do not know the species itself to which it belongs, 

 we never can imagine any thing like a representation 

 of the object, though, for the rest, our knowledge 

 of mineralogy may be very extensive. The termino- 

 logy, the theory of the system, and the nomenclature, 

 form the constituents of theoretical mineralogy. 

 Practice, or the application of it to nature, requires 

 the characteristic, the object of which is, to furnish 

 us with the peculiar terms or marks, by which we 

 are able to distinguish objects from each other, so 

 far as they are comprehended in the ideas established 

 by the theory of the system. In order to find the 

 name of a mineral when its properties are ascertained, 

 we make use of the characteristic, which consists of 

 an assemblage of general ideas, corresponding to the 

 system, and expressed by single distinctive marks. 

 With these ideas are connected the names and deno- 

 minations as far as the nomenclature extends and 

 requires, not above the order, nor below the species ; 

 and they are by degrees transferred to the individual, 



in proportion as it enters within the compass of those 

 general ideas. The characteristic is only useful when 

 we have the mineral in our hands, and is not to be 

 studied to obtain a knowledge of the contents of the 

 mineral kingdom, since the characters of its classes, 

 orders, genera, and species, consisting of single 

 marks or properties, are not calculated to produce 

 representations or images of the objects to which 

 they refer. Physiography, the last head of scientific 

 mineralogy, consists of the assemblage of the general 

 descriptions, and is intended to produce a distinct 

 image of minerals. We cannot, by its assistance, 

 find the place of a given mineral in the system, or, 

 in other words, recognise it ; for it is independent of 

 that connexion, among minerals, upon which the 

 system is founded. Mohs was the first writer who 

 drew the line between the determinative and the 

 descriptive parts of mineralogy a distinction which 

 is of the utmost consequence to the perfection of the 

 science. 



The foregoing heads or departments of mineralogy 

 are all equally important and indispensable for con- 

 ferring upon the science the character of a whole, 

 though, in the application of the science, the parts 

 are used separately, and, in a measure, independently 

 of each other, according to the object in view. Those 

 who wish to determine an individual occurring in nu- 

 ture,will find the characteristic the most important de- 

 partment, for neither of the others can be of the least 

 use to them ; while those who intend to arrive at a 

 general conception of the species from knowing its 

 name, or one of the individuals belonging to it, will 

 find their views forwarded only by the physiography; 

 for neither the characteristic nor any other depart- 

 ment of mineralogy, contains any information an- 

 swering the purpose in view. Mineralogy, thus 

 developed, fulfills perfectly the demands which natural 

 history makes of its several departments. But it 

 enables us to answer no question which lies beyond 

 the limits of natural history. Nobody will ever be 

 able to infer from the mere natural-historical consi- 

 deration of a mineral, any thing with regard to its 

 chemical, geological, or economical properties. The 

 natural history system has its provinces exactly deter- 

 mined, within which it serves every purpose, but 

 admits of no application without ; and these com- 

 mendable properties are conferred upon mineralogy, 

 as the natural history of the mineral kingdom, solely 

 by making it correspond to the philosophical idea ot 

 a science. It contains merely natural-historical in- 

 formation ; i. e. such as proceeds from a comparison 

 of natural-historical properties, and all the rest is 

 foreign to it. The development of the whole, in 

 its single departments, is in itself systematical ; and 

 what it contains of real systems, the systems of crys- 

 tallization, and the mineral system itself, really 

 deserve that name ; because they are the result of 

 the application of one single idea to the whole 

 compass of a certain kind of information. The 

 science itself forms a whole, being intimately con- 

 nected in all its departments, and strictly separated 

 from all other sciences, which is a necessary conse- 

 quence of a systematic mode of treatment. The 

 method employed is so simple, that, on that very 

 account, it is immutable ; nor can there be any doubt 

 that other methods, compounded of different princi- 

 ples, from the want of consistency prevailing in their 

 different departments, will finally also be reduced to 

 this method. We conclude our abstract of the system 

 of Mohs, by presenting the reader with a list of the 

 genera, as represented in the translation of the Grun- 

 driss der Mineralogie, by Haidinger (Edin., 1825) . 



CLASS I. 



ORDER 1. Gar. 



Genera. I. Hydrogen. 2. Atmospheric air. 



