380 Reviews — Geology and Races of India. 



mation, when we find it asserted that the oldest rocks of the Hima- 

 layas are not of greater antiquity than the Eocene period (p. 332), 

 though this is directly contradicted in a quotation at p. 334, and the 

 late Dr. Stoliczka, Major Godwin-Austen, etc., have recorded their 

 discoveries of Silurian, Carboniferous, Triassic, and other fossils 

 in the Himalayan ranges. Again, he speaks freely of the Paleozoic 

 rocks of Central India, large tracts of which contain no known fossils 

 older than a presumably Jurassic or Cretaceous period, while other 

 enormous spaces are occupied either by crystalline rocks or by layers 

 of bedded trap forming whole ranges of mountains or plateaux like 

 the Deccan, containing, but rarely, in intercalated strata, fossils of 

 Tertiary age (!). Nor is he altogether happy in his conception of a 

 skeleton series of Palaeozoic ranges filled in between by deposits of 

 various following ages, resulting from enormous volcanic action (!); the 

 upheaval, contortion, and twisting of the plutonic rocks being 

 attributed to "eruptive powers" — while the Cambrian and Silurian 

 series of Central India (!) are mentioned, but we are not told where 

 they may be found, or on what evidence their assumed age is based. 



After this an imaginary and imposing volcanic upheaval of the 

 Deccan is spoken of as pre-Miocene, while above certain coarse marine 

 formations of that age there is a newer great Trappean "effusion" 

 referred to, the real existence of which would be even more difficult 

 to prove than the production therefrom (p. 333) of recent Kegur and 

 Kunkur or Travertine, or the eruption of felspathic traps of Oolitic 

 age through the Kegur of the Carnatic(!) (p. 336). 



However far a careless writer might be excused for conveying 

 rather mixed ideas of a subject he was unacquainted with, derived 

 from many sources of differing degrees of accuracy, or perhaps in 

 some cases of inaccuracy, there can be no apology for the inconsecu- 

 tive and contrary assertions, — in one place that the rocks of the pen- 

 insula are intensely disturbed, and in another that the beds south of 

 the Ganges Valley are not in any way contorted or crushed (!). It will 

 be new to any one slightly acquainted with Indian geology to learn 

 " that the geology of the Punjab is wholly Tertiary and Alluvial," 

 and that " all indications of Primary or Palaeozoic rocks are entirely 

 absent " — it having been recorded long ago in the publications of 

 the Geological Society of London (not to mention Indian authorities) 

 that the great Salt Eange of that district contains highly fossiliferous 

 Carboniferous limestones and other pre-Tertiary formations. The 

 old error of the province of Kutch being " remarkable for its craters 

 and other evidences of recent volcanic action," is repeated, and 

 a partial upheaval from the sea is stated for the " Eunn," although 

 tolerably recent information upon these points is available in a 

 published form. The economic subjects of Indian coal and iron are 

 noticed, the first in some detail ; but nothing is said of the great salt 

 deposits of the north. 



Discrepancies as gross as these throughout the geological 

 portion of the article leave the impression that the writer was 

 either feebly acquainted with geological subjects, or has most 

 imperfectly collected the materials of which his paper is made up, 



