Sect. III.] MbwiUibi^ij, 1S9 



meratioiis of iniiieral specimens ; and Brachmcl, of 

 Sweden, who threw much new light <*n this kiiig- 

 <lom of ndture, as it appeared in that ])art of 

 Europe. To these sueeeedtd Liiuueus. This gnat 

 man, about the year 17^0, proposed a new chissi- 

 fication of mineral bodies, and was tlie fir.st \\\ny 

 distributed them into classes, orders, <j^eneriiy and 

 species. But his arrangement was essentially de- 

 fective. He divided substances >\hoIly accordint^ 

 to their external appearances, such as .figure, co- 

 lour, hardness, and other sensible qualities, and, of 

 course, threw together the most heterogeneous and 

 opposite kinds. He devised sjjecific names, how- 

 ever, of great excellence ; and he is entitled to much 

 honour for his concise and elegant sketch of the 

 Saxa, which had been little noticed before. 



Linnajiis was followed by his countryman M'al- 

 ierius, -who, in 1747, published an important mine- 

 ralogical work, in which he adopted the Linna^an 

 system, with considerable alterations and improve- 

 ments, by himself and the learned Brov/al, bishop 

 of Abo"^. About the same time V'augel, a re- 

 spectable philosopher of Germany, presented to 

 the public a new system of mineralogy, of consi- 

 derable value. In 1748 appeared the voluminous 

 work of Dr. Hill, under the title oi System a Mine- 

 ralogi'cu?n, which v/as important, as it gave a gene- 

 ral account of the fossils of England ; but his per- 

 plexed and barbarous nomenclature rendered it 

 much less useful than it might otherwise have 



* See the Preface to Cronstedf:i Minerdoiy, by MagcU.UJ. 

 The above-mentioned work of Wallertus was published about 

 twenty-tive years nftonvardj, widi great and spli-nd:d ijnpro\c- 

 nient5. 



