56 



It is certain that they were then much as they are to-day, with 

 a very long history behind them. The very meager catalogue 

 of monocotyledonous plants in Dr. Knowlton's work should 

 convince any one that no dependence can be placed on the ap- 

 parent absence of these organisms in particular beds. It is the 

 same with the higher herbaceous plants. Only two genera of 

 Composit^e are listed, both from the Florissant Miocene. One 

 of these is thought by Knowlton to be erroneously identified, 

 and although I was responsible for the determination, I now 

 believe he is right. There are no Campanulales at all except 

 at Florissant. Scrophulariaceae are represented by a lone Floris- 

 sant species. Who will maintain that these families did not 

 abound during Tertiary time? Their present diversity and 

 abundance prove that it must have been so. Thus the absence 

 of herbaceous fossils proves nothing, though we can reason about 

 the absence of trees which shed their leaves in abundance. 

 Undoubtedly, more minute and critical studies will reveal a 

 wealth of herbaceous fossils, at least as represented by flowers, 

 fruits and seeds. I have many such from Florissant, but have 

 set them aside hoping to make accurate generic determinations. 

 Such remains as these strain one's knowledge of botany to the 

 breaking point, but some day they will be deciphered. In a 

 work of such scope, there will always be some errors and omis- 

 sions, but in this case they seem to be astonishingly few. I found 

 three species omitted, all involving genera not in the list. These 

 are Firmianites aterrimus Ckll.,* Melica primava C. T. & Bierne 

 B. I^rues,t and Xantholithes propheticiis Ward.| Dr. Knowlton 

 writes me that Coniospermites should be Conospermites. Hicoria 

 antiquora should be antiquorum (a genitive plural). Carpolithe's 

 emarginatiis Perkins, from Vermont, is preoccupied by C. emargi- 

 natus Goepp. (Cardiocarpum emarginatum Goepp. & Berg.), 

 and may be called C. perkinsi n.n. There are a few errors in 

 the classification; thus Thrinax has somehow got into Araceae, 

 and Hedera into Vitaceae. 



* Amer. Journ. Science, Nov., 1909, p. 447. (Eocene, Green R., Wyo.) 

 t Bull. Wise. Nat. Hist. Soc, Oct., 1908 (received April, 1909), p. 171. (Mio- 

 cene, Florissant, Colo.) 



t Glimpses of the Cosmos, IV (1915), p. 150. (Laramie, Montana.) 



