Paleontological Discovery. 329 
logue of English fossils contained in the Ashmolean Museum. 
He opposed the vis plastica theory, and expressed the opinion 
that the spawn of fishes and other marine animals had been 
raised with the vapors from the sea, conveyed inland by clouds, 
and deposited by rain, had permeated into the interior of the 
earth, and thus produced the fossil remains we find in the 
rocks. About this time several important works were pub- 
lished in England by Dr. Martin Lister, which did much to 
infuse a true knowledge of fossil remains. He gave figures 
of recent shells side by side with some of the fossil forms, so 
that the resemblance became at once apparent. .The fossi 
species of shells he called “turbinated and bivalve stones,” 
and adds, “either these were terriginous, or, if otherwise, the 
animals which they so exactly represent have become extinct.” 
During the seventeenth century there was a considerable 
advance in the study of fossil remains. The discussions in 
entury, too, an 
description of fossils from particular localities and regions, in 
distinction from = collections of curiosities 
logue was published in 1652; Spener’s in 1663; and Septala’s 
im 1666. A description of the Mr 2 
mark was issued in 1669 ; Cottorp’s catalogue in 1674; and that 
of the renowned Kirscher in 1678. Dr. Grew gave an account 
in 1687 of the specimens in the Museum of Gresham’s College 
in England; and in 1695, Petiver of London published a cata- 
logue of his very extensive collection. A catalogue by Fred. 
Lauchmund, on‘the fossils of Hildeshein, appeared in 1669, 
and the fossils of Switzerland were described by John Jacob 
Wagner in 1689 Among similar works, were the dissertations 
riod.* He entered earnestly into the controv as to the 
origin of fossil remains, an ‘Ly dissecting a asks fetes the 
* De solido intra solidum naturaliter contento. 
