296 CALAMITES. [CH. 



included in the Calamarieae, there has been no little confusion 

 in nomenclature. Facts as to the nature of the genus Cala- 

 mites have occasionally to he selected from writings containing 

 many speculative and erroneous views, but the data at our 

 disposal enable us to give a fairly complete account of the 

 morphology of this Palaeozoic plant. 



In the earliest works on fossil plants we find several figures 

 of Ga.lamites, which are in most cases described as those of fossil 

 reeds or grasses. The Herbarium diluvianum of Scheuchzer^ 

 contains a figure of a Calamitean cast which is described as 

 probably a reed. Another specimen is figured by Volkmann^ 

 in his Silesia suhterranea and compared with a piece of sugar- 

 cane. A similar flattened cast in the old Woodwardian col- 

 lection at Cambridge is described by Woodward' as " part of a 

 broad long flat leaf, appearing to be of some Iris, or rather an 

 Aloe, but 'tis striated without." Schulze^ one of the earlier 

 German writers, figured a Calamitean branch bearing verticils 

 of leaves, and described the fossil as probably the impression of 

 an Equisetaceous plant. It has been pointed out by another 

 German writer that the Equisetaceous character of Galamites 

 was recognised by laymen many years before specialists shared 

 this view. 



One of the most interesting and important of all the older 

 records of Galamites is that published by Suckow^ in 1784. 

 Suckow is usually quoted as the author of the generic name 

 Galamites ; he does not attempt any diagnosis of the plant, but 

 merely speaks of the specimens he is describing as " Calamiten." 

 The examples figured in this classic paper are characteristic 

 casts from the Coal-Measures of Western Germany. Suckow 

 describes them as ribbed stems, which were found in an oblique 

 position in the strata and termed by the workmen Jupiter's 

 nails ("Nagel"). Previous writers had regarded the fossils 

 as casts of reeds, but Suckow correctly points out that the 

 ribbed character is hardly consistent with the view that the 



1 Soheuchzer (1723), p. 19, PI. iv. fig. 1. 



■' Volkmanu (1720), p. 110, PI. xiii. fig. 7. 



' Woodward, J. (1728), Pt. ii. p. 10. * Schulze, C. F. (1755), PI. ii. fig. 1. 



= Suckow (1784), p. 363. 



