Reviews-—D Archiac’s Paleontologie. 81 
book is ‘diffus, sans méthode, présente les faits sans ordre, des répé- 
titions et des contradictions fréquentes,’ and so on for several lines ; 
all for the purpose of glorifying, by contrast M. Godron’s work, ‘ De 
Vespéce et des races, dans les étres organisés, et spécialement de 
Punité de ’espéce humaine.’ 
M. d’Archiac has a passion for history; he calculates everything 
by means of an Historiometer ; M. Godron’s book is praised, avowedly, 
because it is historical, and Mr. Darwin’s is denounced, apparently, 
because it is original. History and tradition, routine and red-tape, 
furnish the ruling principle of our author’s criticism, and form the 
standard of excellence to which everything is reduced. 
The bad taste and scientific worthlessness of the chain of invec- 
tives we have noticed are so apparent, that they will not deter 
us from recommending the book to a student, as a good prepara- 
tion for the study of Paleontology; for it contains much that is 
valuable, though nothing, except the said invectives, very original. 
The chapter on Fossilization consists of a very useful résumé of 
known facts, as also do those on the Antiquity of Man, and on 
Coral-reefs and -islands: while the exposition of Professor Dana’s 
system of isocrymal lines is particularly good, being both clear and 
concise. 
M. @’Archiac’s observations on geological nomenclature are, for 
the most part, very just; at the same time they are occasionally 
amusing, as he does not see that in always endeavouring to discover 
the faults and frailties of other authors, by subjecting their remarks 
to the test of a reductio ad absurdum, and in descanting on the 
vanity of sages and sciences, he not unfrequently exposes his own. 
The terms ‘formation,’ ‘period,’ ‘epoch,’ &c., have been used in a 
very loose manner by most writers, and the author endeavours to 
remedy this evil by giving to each a definite signification ; he would 
thus speak of the Secondary epoch and rocks (terrains); of the 
Cretaceous period and formation; of the Neocomian group; and of 
the Atherfield stage (étage). This attempt is very praiseworthy, 
and we hope it may succeed ; but it would have been much more 
admirable if he had not prefaced it with one of his tirades against 
everything and everybody, characterizing the ordinary Manuals as 
published for the purpose of reproducing only ‘the discoveries and 
opinions of the author and his friends,’ and where ‘the science of 
the geologists of the five parts of the world is found concentrated 
in one single head—that of the author.’ 
We would fain have noticed this book more favourably ; but the 
abundance of invective intermixed with his criticisms has com- 
pelled us to be more searching in ours than our politeness to the 
author of such a work, new in scope, and likely to prove of immense 
value to students, would otherwise have allowed us to be. It is 
these personal remarks, which are far too frequent among us, that 
have inculcated the idea, so prevalent with the general public, that 
the science of geology rests on no certain basis, and that geologists 
themselves do little else than quarrel about what none of them can 
prove. 
VOL. L. — NO. nN. G 
