44 GEOLOGICAL MEMOIRS. 
Schwarzwald, fillmg im great part the interval between it and the 
Odenwald, whence it passes, mtersected by the Main, towards Fran- 
conia, Thuringia and the rest of north-western Germany, where it is 
more often interrupted by the overlying keuper than in south-western 
Germany, in Alsace and in Lorraine. It appears in a more isolated 
manner in the vicinity of Berlm, and in Upper Silesia and south- 
western Poland is distinguished for its metallic wealth as in other 
places for containing salt. 
The muschelkalk was long considered as poor in fossil bones, and 
in the older works little is to be found on the subject. Bittner (1710), 
Lerche (1730) and Schreber notice teeth, ribs and vertebree of sau- 
rians, together with bones of land animals, from the muschelkalk of 
Thuringia, and particularly from the districts of Hornburg, Schraplau, 
Obhausen, Weidenbach, Farrenstedt, Querfurth and Gatterstedt. 
Freiesleben’s statements are derived from these authors. Blumen- 
bach* was probably induced by some bones of reptiles to affirm that 
Ornitholites or petrified birds were found im the muschelkalk of the 
Heimberg near Gottingen. Even in the year 1823 Humboldt+- 
believed, not indeed that the muschelkalk itself, but that the brecciated 
rock and marl resting upon it, contamed remains of quadrupeds, birds 
and fishes. The foundation for these statements was probably the 
very inconsiderable remains which were then known from Querfurth, ~ 
Hsperstadt and Gottingen. It was only when the publication of 
Cuvier’s work on fossil osteology was nearly concluded, that the . 
muschelkalk near Limeville began to exhibit its wealth in osseous 
remains, and these were likewise discovered about the same time in 
this deposit near Bayreuth. Attention was then also directed to bones 
found im the muschelkalk of Schwabia, im the vicinity of Jena, mm 
Upper Silesia and in Poland. But an accurate examimation of these 
remains was still wanting. Schlotheim saw im them seals and dol- 
phins; Cuvier thought he recognised the Plesiosaurus, an unknown 
Saurus and some gigantic tortoises; Jager ascribed these bones to 
the Plesiosaurus and Ichthyosaurus; Gaillardot the younger eom- 
pared them with the crocodile, monitor, Ichthyosaurus, Plesiosaurus, 
Testudo Trionyx and a new genus of tortoise. I also, so long as 
Cuvier’s view regarding the Limeville remains was the only basis to 
be depended on, considered the animals as related to the Plesiosaurus 
and the Tortoises ; and even Miinster was of the same opinion till he 
succeeded in finding a more perfect specimen of the skeleton of the 
animal, when the error which led to these views was evident. A 
more accurate investigation of these remains has shown that the mus- 
chelkalk contains neither birds nor mammals; the bones are not even 
those of Chelonia, but belong to saurians which are peculiar to the 
trias formation. ; 
The lowest member of the trias is the bunter sandstone, which owes 
its name to Werner. The ‘ grés bigarré,’ ‘ grés a oolithes de Nebra,’ 
‘sandstone of Nebra,’ of Humboldt; the ‘ Vosges sandstone’ of De 
Beaumont comprise the same formation. Beaumont, and especially 
* Naturgesch. 3°© Aufl. S. 653. + Geognostischer Versuch, $7275. 
