AUGUST 27, 1914] 
NATURE: 
661 
time of the second observation, as obtained by 
applying the run from the first observation, then 
AC will be the position line by the first observa- 
tion, AB the line of bearing of the sun at the 
second observation, and the distance from A to B 
the difference of 36 miles, the difference of the 
zenith distance as calculated, using the corrected 
True Meridian 
latitude and hour angle, and, as observed, then 
BC will be the line of position at the second ob- 
servation cutting the first position line at C. Drop 
a perpendicular CD on to the parallel of latitude, 
and the distance CD, and departure AD, are easily 
obtained by the traverse tables without any need 
of drawing the diagram to scale. 
THE FOSSIL INVERTEBRATES. 
Text-book of Palaeontology. Edited by Prof. 
C. R. Eastman. Adapted from the German of 
Prof. Karl A. von Zittel. Second Edition, re- 
vised and enlarged. Volume I. Pp. xi+839. 
(London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1913.) 
Price25s. net. 
HE appearance of a new edition of Zittel’s 
“Paleontology” is always something of 
an event in the paleontological world, more so, 
perhaps, than the publication of many a weighty 
monograph. For this is a work which appeals 
not only to the student, but to each expert in his 
own specialty. Some years ago one could say, 
“there are many text-books, but only one Zittel”’ ; 
but this is a tribute that can no longer be paid, 
since there are now two Zittels. One, the German 
edition, recently revised by Prof. Broili, but still 
evincing the cautious conservatism of the original 
distinguished author; the other, the American 
edition, retaining the preface and the illustrations 
of the “Grundziige,” but in almost all other re- 
spects a very different work. It is the first volume 
NO. 2339, VOL. 93] 
| cestors, through the cirripedia.” 
‘ of the second edition of this latter that is now 
before us. 
As in the previous edition, Prof. Eastman has 
managed to secure the cooperation of a number of 
well-known authorities, most of whose names 
(not always correctly given) appear in this 
connection for the first time. With the ex- 
ception of Dr. W. T. Calman and Dr. A. 
Handlirsch, all are citizens of the United States, 
and have therefore not been afraid to introduce 
drastic alterations. In this respect, however, 
there is considerable difference of treatment. 
While, for instance, the classification and account 
of the foraminifera have been entirely re-modelled 
by Dr. Cushman, the sections on radiolaria and 
sponges are almost unaltered, the latter still re- 
taining on p. 71 the misprint Ventriculites for 
Verticillites. Perhaps the editor was in this 
matter well advised, but Dr. Wayland Vaughan 
might have done more with the corals; he has 
made a few slight changes and introduced Duer- 
den’s views of the septal development in hexa- 
coralla, but he does not, except by a literature 
reference, direct attention to the important studies 
that have lately been made on our Carboniferous 
corals, and the student who turns up here the 
much-debated Archzeocyathus will be disappointed. 
In the hands of Dr. Ruedemann the graptolites 
are safe; but we look for something more than 
safety, at the least for some evolutionary scheme 
that shall enable the student to carry the leading 
facts in his head, and in this case the scheme 
would probably have the additional merit of truth. 
How different is Prof. Schuchert’s chapter on the 
brachiopoda (based on his previous valuable 
synopsis, but incorporating “the brilliant results 
of C. D. Walcott” and “the important work of 
S. S. Buckman”)! Here is evolution with a 
vengeance : the Orthide are defined as ‘“ progres- 
sive, divergent, and terminal Orthacea, derived 
out of the Eoorthine, etc.” True, the student will 
have to find out elsewhere than in this volume 
what is the precise meaning of these evolutionary 
terms; but the search will do him a world of 
good. 
If only a page can be spared for fossil jelly- 
fish, the doubtful forms should give place to those 
now well known, and the figure should be cf a 
better specimen. Under “ Vermes” some of Wal- 
cott’s Cambrian genera are illustrated, and there 
is a fresh note on alleged worm-tracks, but we 
meet with no great change until we reach the 
echinoderms. In revising this phylum four experts 
lent their aid, and the fact that Dr. A. H. Clark 
was one explains the suggestion “that the echino- 
derms are derived from acraniate crustacean an- 
After this it is 
