132 -Reviews—Hall and Clarke—Paleoxoic Brachiopoda. 
which it was ousted by D’Orbigny’s Orthisina, are no resuscitation 
of “rusty rubbish,” but are simply a return to names that were 
actually used by scientific writers until, through ignorance or 
impudence, other names were substituted for them. Those critics 
who raise such an outcry over changes of nomenclature would often 
find, if only they would take the trouble to look into matters, that 
the names they take upon themselves to defend are but modern 
upstarts after all. In considering a question so vast and so far- 
reaching as this of nomenclature, we must take into account not 
merely our own short lives, nor even the poor hundred years that 
comprise the history of systematic zoology, but the centuries that 
are to come and the posterity for whom, if for anyone, we ourselves 
are working. The student of 2095, should he have occasion to 
consider the literary history of the name Leptena, will regard the” 
thirty years of its application to Plectambonites transversalis as 
nothing more than a temporary aberration. 
It would be impossible to indicate in these pages half the interest- 
ing deductions of the authors, deductions that derive very great 
importance from the extended nature of the facts and philosophical 
character of the arguments on which they are based. A slight 
sketch of some of their results with regard to the Inarticulata will, 
however, serve as an example of their method. 
Hitherto the muscle-scars have been taken as features of supreme 
classificatory importance, but the uncertainty and frequent obscurity 
of these characters lead the authors to subject them to the nature of 
the pedicle-passage, a point in which they agree with Dr. C. H. 
Beecher. In its early stages of shell-growth, Lingula recalls the 
features of obolelloid shells, a type that culminated before Lingula 
appeared on the scene; while Lingulella and Lingulepis, which 
precede Lingula, are actual links in which the shape of Lingula is 
combined with the narrow pedicle-slit and simple muscle-arrange- 
ment of the obolelloids. Our authors favour the opinion, which was 
beginning to lose ground, that Lingula has persisted from the 
Silurian to the present day; numerous branches, however, have 
been given off by the way. Thus, an increased secretion of shelly 
substance, or stereom, about the insertions of the muscular and 
parietal bands produced the median and lateral septa that characterize 
Dignomia and the more recent Glottidia. Obolella is another important 
genus from which other forms may be traced. In one direction, as 
just mentioned, it is connected with Lingula by way of Lingulella. 
Similar specialization of muscles, combined however with retention 
of the circular form, leads to Obolus, whence arise in different 
directions Leptobolus, Schmidtia, Paterula and Schizobolus. 
It has of late been forcibly impressed on us that the same 
structure may appear along differeut lines of development, and to 
this the Brachiopoda are no exception. On a priori grounds one 
would hardly be prepared to admit that the two divisions, Articulata 
and Inarticulata, represent divergent branches; one would’ rather 
imagine that the Articulata must have been derived from the 
Inarticulata at numerous points. We now know that in many 
