578 



NA TURE 



[April 21, 1898 



upon what remains to be ascertained about mere frogs 

 and toads, the mind reverts to their mechanism of 

 accommodation for vision within and without the water, 

 our knowledge concerning which is an absolute blank. 

 If we may judge by analogy to the inanimate, displace- 

 ment of the lens of an altogether remarkable order must 

 take place, and there is thus opened up a line of in- 

 vestigation of absorbing interest alike in its morpho- 

 logical, physiological, and physical aspects, in which, to 

 say the least, there probably lies the explanation of the 

 remarkable series of accessory eye-muscles which these 

 animals possess. 



That a great deal remains to be done in the study 

 of these familiar creatures is certain. The author has 

 produced a masterly treatise upon their classification and 

 distribution, upon which he is now a leading authority. 

 He deals with a subject historically associated in a pro- 

 minent manner with the labours of English-speaking 

 zoologists, and tells us that he will be content if those 

 who use the book may derive from the perusal of its 

 pages one-tenth of the pleasure it has given him to 

 write them. His preface, in which this sentiment 

 occurs, is positively infectious in its enthusiasm, force of 

 personal example, and love of science for its own sake ; 

 and neither he nor we could desire more of his book than 

 that it might stimulate to action some one who should in 

 turn succeed him as a foremost authority upon the group 

 of animals with which it deals. 



Concerning the vestigial portions of the urinogenital 

 apparatus above referred to, the author, relying only 

 upon macroscopic characters and following Spengel, has 

 described the duct which in Alytes receives the vasa 

 efiferentia as Miillerian ; and he regards the vesicula 

 seminalis in all forms as a derivative of that. He omits 

 mention, however, of the vestigial Miillerian duct of the 

 male Rana, which, though exceedingly delicate, is usually 

 present ; and this is the more regrettable, since Marshall 

 proved microscopically that it skirts the outer border of 

 the vesicula as an independent tube. The relation- 

 ships of the vesicula to the so-called "ureter" in Rana, 

 and to the presumed Miillerian duct in Alytes, the alleged 

 homology of which has been challenged, are thus seen to 

 be identical, wherefore the latter would appear to repre- 

 sent the Wolffian duct proper, and the so-called " ureter " 

 of the Anura either a specialised portion of that, or an 

 independent duct arising from the kidney, as might well 

 be from the condition in Alytes and some Urodela. Com- 

 parative embryologists will not need to be reminded that 

 a precisely similar difficulty besets the interpretation of 

 the corresponding parts in the Elasmobranch fishes, and 

 as concerning the Anura more particularly the whole 

 matter, anomalous to an unparalleled degree on the 

 Spengelian interpretation, apparently harmonious and 

 exceptionally instructive by extension of Marshall's 

 observation, demands renewed microscopic inquiry. 

 Indeed, to the present writer it has long appeared that 

 the male genitalia of Alytes and Discoglossus, 2iS here 

 interpreted, conform to a type transitional between that 

 of the Urodela in which a fully- developed Wolffian body, 

 differentiated into a sexual and a renal portion, is pre- 

 sent, and of the higher Anura, in which the homologue 

 of the renal part receives the vasa efferentia, and to 

 NO, i486, VOL. 57] 



justify the conclusion that the latter condition is 

 secondary and associated with the suppression of the 

 sexual part. And if this be so, an additional argument 

 will have been furnished for the lowly affinities of the 

 Discoglossida;. G. B. H. 



PREHISTORIC CIVILISATION IN EGYPT. 

 Recherches sur les Origines de VEgypte. Ethnog7'aphie 

 Prehistorique et Tombeau Royal de N^gadah. Par 

 J. de Morgan. Avec la collaboration de MM. Wiede- 

 mann, Jdquier, et Fouquet. Pp. x -f 395. (Paris : 

 Leroux, 1897.) 



'"PHE large section of the scientific public which is 

 -L interested in prehistoric remains will, we are sure, 

 cordially welcome the second part of M. de Morgan's 

 work on " Les Origines de I'Egypte," which is now before 

 us. Every reader of the first part waited, we fear with 

 some impatience, for the supplementary facts which were 

 known to be forthcoming ; and now that they are in our 

 hands, it is more possible to judge of the general effect 

 of M. de Morgan's recent discoveries upon the sciences 

 of archaeology and anthropology. For some years past 

 the natives of Upper Egypt have been offering numbers 

 of curious objects for purchase to the tourist and wander- 

 ing Egyptologist, and the said objects were so remark- 

 able from artistic and other points of view, that more 

 than one archaeologist have pronounced them to be for- 

 geries. That these objects came from several different 

 places in Upper Egypt was quite certain, but it was hard 

 to believe the fact, and most people, whatever they said, 

 privately thought the statements of the natives to be 

 unbelievable. 



M. de Morgan was the first to find the solution of the 

 difficulty, and now he has triumphantly proved that these 

 strange objects do really come from a number of sites 

 which extend along the Nile Valley from Cairo on the 

 north to Wady Haifa on the south, and that they repre- 

 sent the remains of a people who occupied Egypt before 

 the Egyptians who have hitherto been known to us from 

 inscribed statues, temples, &c. In the second chapter 

 of the present volume of his work he gives a list of these 

 sites, and it may be considered the most important 

 section of his book ; it is much to be hoped that now 

 circumstances have obliged him to transfer the field of 

 his labours to Persia, others, whether they be English 

 or French, may take steps to examine by means of 

 systematic excavations the sites of which he has given 

 us such a full list. 



But though M. de Morgan has not been alone in making 

 researches concerning the history of the remote period 

 in which these sites were occupied, and though Messrs. 

 Petrie and Amdlineau have collected much information 

 from their excavations at Amrah, Ballas, and Nakada 

 it must not for one moment be imagined that all the 

 questions connected with the prehistoric people of Egypt , 

 can be answered, or all difficulties solved. Nor can it 

 be said whence this people came, or when they first , 

 occupied their stations in the Nile Valley ; at present it 

 is difficult even to find a name for them which will satisfy 

 both M. de Morgan and Mr. Petrie. M. de Morgan^ 

 basing his opinion upon anthropological evidence 



