Nov. 4, 1869] 
NWATURE 
28) 
is meant, not merely to promote a friendly intercourse 
among scientific men, but to be a kind of propagandist 
for the advancement of science through the general com- 
munity. So we make a compromise between sober, 
serious, hard work for science on the one hand, and un- 
restrained festivities on the other. The German meetings 
keep less prominently before them the scientific culture of 
the world outside, and aim rather at the strengthening 
of the hands of the individual worker. 
From the papers read at the different sections ; from the 
discussion which they elicited ; and still more perhaps from 
the public addresses on subjects of general interest given 
to the whole assembled meeting ; one could gather some 
suggestive traits of the present current of thought in at 
least one great section of the cultivated society of Germany. 
What specially struck me was the universal sway which 
the writings of Darwin now exercise over the German 
mind. You see it on every side, in private conversation, 
in printed papers, in all the many sections into which such 
a meeting as that at Innsbruck divides. Darwin’s name 
is often mentioned, and always with the profoundest 
veneration. But even where no allusion is specially made 
to him, nay, even more markedly, where such allusion is 
absent, we see how thoroughly his doctrines have per- 
meated the scientific mind even in those departments of 
knowledge, which might seem at first sight to be furthest 
from natural history. ‘You are still discussing in Eng- 
land,” said a German friend to me, “ whether or not the 
theory of Darwin can be true. We have got a long way 
beyond that here. His theory is now our common starting 
point.” And so, as far as my experience went, I found it. 
But it isnot merely in scientific circles that the influence 
of Darwin is felt and acknowledged. I do not think it is 
generally known in England, that three years ago, when, 
after the disastrous war with Prussia, the Austrian Parlia- 
ment had assembled to deliberate on the reconsolidation 
of the empire, a distinguished member of the Upper 
Chamber, Professor Rokitansky, began a great speech, 
with this sentence :—“ The question we have first to 
consider is, Is Charles Darwin right or no?” Such a 
query would no doubt raise a smile in our eminently 
unspeculative houses of legislature. But surely never was 
higher compliment paid to a naturalist. A great empire 
lay in its direst hour of distress, and the form and method 
of its reconstruction was proposed to be decided by the 
truth or error of the theory of Darwin. “The two men,” 
said one able physician of Vienna to me (himself, by the 
way, a North-German), ‘who have most materially in- 
_fluenced German thought in this country are two English- 
men—George Combe and Charles Darwin.” 
There was another aspect of the tone of thought at 
Innsbruck, which could not but powerfully impress a 
Briton. Although we were assembled in the most ultra- 
Catholic province of Catholic Austria, there was the most 
unbridled freedom of expression on every subject. 
In an address on recent scientific progress, Helmholtz 
thus expressed himself—‘ After centuries of stagnation 
physiology and medicine have entered upon a blooming 
development, and we may be proud that Germany has 
been especially the theatre of this progress—a distinction 
for which she is indebted to the fact that among us, more 
than elsewhere, there has prevailed a fearlessness as to 
the consequences of the wholly known Truth. There are 
also distinguished investigators in England and in France, 
who share in the full energy of the development of the 
sciences, but they must bow before the prejudices of 
society, and of the Church, and if they speak out openly, 
can do so only to the injury of their social influence. 
Germany has advanced more boldly. She has held the 
belief, which has never yet been belied, that the full Truth 
carried with it the cure for any injury or loss which may 
here and there result from partial knowledge. For this 
superiority she stands indebted to the stern and dis- 
interested enthusiasm which, regardless alike of external 
advantages and of the opinions of society, has guided and 
animated her scientific men.” 
This liberty of expression, however, seemed sometimes 
apt to wear not a little the aspect of a mere wanton 
defiance of the popular creed. Yet it was always received 
with applause. 
In an address on the recent progress of anthropology, 
Karl Vogt gave utterance to what in our country would be 
deemed profanity, such as no man, not even the most 
free-thinking, would venture publicly to express. Yet it 
was received, first with a burst of astonishment at its 
novelty and audacity, and then with cries of approval and 
much cheering. I listened for some voice of dissent, but 
could hear none. When the address, which was certainly 
very eloquent, came to an end, there arose such a pro- 
longed thunder of applause as one never hears save after 
some favourite singer has just sung some well-known air. 
It was a true and hearty excore. Again and again the 
bravos were renewed, and not until some little time had 
elapsed could the next business of the meeting be taken 
up. Not far from where I was standing, sat a Franciscan 
monk, his tonsured head and pendent cowl being con- 
spicuous among the black garments of the savams. He 
had come, I daresay, out of curiosity to hear what the 
naturalists had to say on a question that interested him. 
The language he heard could not but shock him, and the 
vociferation with which it was received must have fur- 
nished material for talk and reflection in the monastery. 
ARCH. GEIKIE 
TRIASSIC DINOSAURIA 
We will probably interest geologists and paleontologists 
to know that a recent examination of the numerous 
remains of TZhecodontosauria in the Bristol Museum, 
enables me to demonstrate that these Triassic reptiles 
belong to the order Dznosauria, and are closely allied to 
Megalosaurus. The vertebre, humerus, and ilium, found 
in the Warwickshire Trias, which have been ascribed 
to Labyrinthodon, also belong to Dinosauria. The two 
skeletons obtained in the German Trias near Stuttgart, 
and described by Prof. Plieninger, some years ago, are 
also unquestionable Dzmosaurza; and, as Von Meyer is of 
opinion, probably belong to the genus Zevatosaurus, from 
the same beds. Von Meyers Plateosaurus, from the 
German Trias, is, plainly, as he has indicated it to be, a 
Dinosaurian. 
As Prof. Cope has suggested, it is very probable that 
Bathygnathus, from the Triassic beds of Prince Edward’s 
Island, is a Dinosaurian ; and I have no hesitation in 
expressing the belief, that the Deuterosaurus, from the 
Ural, which occurs in beds which are called Permian, but 
which appear to be Triassic, is also a Dinosaurian. It is 
also very probable that Riopalodon, which occurs in these 
rocks, belongs to the same order. If so, the close resem- 
blance of the South African Galesaurus to Rhopalodon, 
would lead me to expect the former to prove a Dinosaur. 
I have found an indubitable fragment of a Dinosaurian 
among some fossils, not long ago sent to me, from the 
reptiliferous beds of Central India, by Dr. Oldham, the 
Director of the Indian Geological Survey. Further, the 
determination of the Thecodonts as Dznosauria, leaves 
hardly any doubt that the little Avkzstrodon from these 
Indian rocks, long since described by me, belongs to the 
same group. 
But another discovery in the same batch of fossils from 
India, leaves no question on my mind that the Fauna of 
the beds which yield Labyrinthodonts and Dicynodonts in 
that country, represents the terrestrial Fauna of the Trias 
of Europe. I find, in fact, numerous fragments of a 
crocodilian reptile, so closely allied to the Be/odon of the 
German Trias, that the determination of the points of 
difference requires close attention, associated with a Hyfe- 
rodapedon, larger than those discovered in the Elgin Sand- 
stones, but otherwise very similar to it. 
