162 Rev. A. Irving — On the Permian and Trias. 



and in Eussia above, the dolomitic strata, therefore they ouglit to he 

 found in certain strata which in Germany lie above the Zechstein ; 

 true, they are not found there at present, but since they ought to be, 

 we will call these strata Permian, if you please. Further research 

 does not seem to have verified this exercise of the prophetic instinct. 



3. A great deal is made of the fact that specimens of a certain 

 equisetaceous plant are found in the "Bunter Schiefer." This is 

 quoted as Calamites " arenarius" (more correctly C. arenaceus). 

 Now, since Calamites is a recognized Palaeozoic type of plant-life, it 

 is argued that therefore the rocks of this horizon in Germany must 

 be considered Palaeozoic, and therefore Permian. Good authorities, 

 however, are doubtful if these are really specimens of Calamites at 

 all ; such high authorities as Mr. Etheridge and Prof. Morris have 

 expressed their doubts to me on this subject. But, even if this 

 preliminary question were to be answered in the affirmative, it 

 remains to be shown beyond a doubt that the specimens found were 

 not derivative. The genera Pecopteris and Tceniojpteris, undoubted 

 Carboniferous forms, are found high up in the German Trias ; yet 

 no one would think of establishing on such evidence a close relation- 

 ship between the Trias and the Carboniferous. 



It is no wonder that such special pleading failed to convert the 

 German school to the Murchisonian creed. The views thus pro- 

 pounded found, however, readier acceptance in England, notwith- 

 standing the primd facie objection, which must have occurred to 

 many, to adopting as the type of the series the form in which it is 

 developed in the most inaccessible parts of Europe. It was adopted 

 by Professor Hull in a paper read by him before the Geological 

 Society of London.' In this paper the author appears to consider 

 the absence, as he thought, of the Lower Bunter from the Odenwald 

 district, to which the paper chiefly refers, as evidence in favour of 

 the Permian classification adopted by Murchison. A reference, 

 however, to Credner's text-book (p. 494) shows that more recent 

 examination of that district has filled up the gap which Prof. Hull 

 supposed to exist there. 



In Siluria there is much vague talk about the tripartite division 

 of the Permian ; such a division is assumed to exist in Germany, 

 and it is argued therefore that it must hold good in English geology. 

 The author of the theory proceeds then to apply it to our English 

 rocks, without, so far as I can see, adducing any evidence in support 

 oi it from facts observed in the English rochs. In a paper read by him 

 before the Geological Society^ he manipulates the observations of 

 Prof. Harkness on the rocks of the Eden Valley, and on purely 

 theoretical grounds overrides the previous judgment of that able 

 geologist. In a paper some two years previous to the appearance of 

 Murchison's, to which reference is now made, Prof. Harkness^ had 

 expressed the opinion that the great group of sandstones known as 

 the " St. Bee's Sandstone " had more Triassic than Permian affinities, 

 and that it ought to be relegated to the Triassic system. Murchison 



1 Vide Q. J. G. S. vol. xiv. 



2 Vide Q.J.G.S. vol. xx. 3 j|j^ yoi. xviii. 



