4 F. A. BATHER, CKINOIDEA OF GOTLAND. 



from the standpoint of modern knowledge, while, to be hurnanly just, \ve should consider 

 the relations of the inan to his own tiine and to the knowledge of liis contemporaries. 

 HistoricaUy regarded this book of Angelin's is a magnificent production, and to duly 

 appreciate its worth it will be as well to glance at what was known of the Gotland Cri- 

 noids before its publication. 



It is unnecessary to give in tliis place an aecount of all observations by eighteenth 

 century naturalists; a short summary will be found in the bibliographicaJ note (p. 9) wbich 

 has not been made raore exhaustive than the importanee of the subject demanded. Cap- 

 pellek's letter is noteworthy, for he seems to have intended publishing an Opus de Stellis 

 marinis petrefactis, which should have contained figures of many Gotland Crinoids. Three 

 species, not named by him, were here published as an earnest of his frustrated intention. 

 Of these tig. 1 has been named by Angelin Abacocrinus Cappelleri; tig. 2 is stated by 

 the author to belong to the same species; lig. 3 has been referred by Angelin to Carpo- 

 crinus shnplex, Piiill. sp.; tig. 4 appears to be Carpocrinus ornatus, Ang. sp. If this 

 plate be a sample of what Cappellek was only prevented from giving through the bad 

 faith of a friends widow, we may almost regret the non-appearance of his Opus; the more 

 so when we reflect that for many years to come such learned and acute writers as J. T. 

 Klein, J. Walcii, C. F. Schultze, E. F. von Schlotheim, G. Wahlenberg, and even 

 the illustrious travellers to Gotland, Lixn;eus and Hisingeu, had to content themselves 

 with mere stem-fragments. Hisingeks subsequent discoveries are summed up in his Le- 

 tlnea. Suecica, where are tigured and described 9 recognisable species of Gotland Crinoidea, 

 none, however, bearing the narae of the genus to which it is now referred. G. von Hel- 

 mersen in 1859 published Trochocrinites (now Periechocrinus) gotlandieus of Panuer. In 

 Prof. G. Lindström's first list of Gotland fossils (1867) the nanie Hypanthocrinus decorus, 

 Piiill. is given to some species since referred elsewhere; while Pisocrinus sp. and Ichthyo- 

 crinus sp. are also added. This gives a total of 13 species, not all described, known to 

 come from Gotland, which might have been referred to 11 genera. 



Angelin's work contains 173 species of Gotland Crinoidea, referred b) 7 him to 42 

 genera. In Prof. Lindström's last list, where the Crinoids are arranged according to 

 Wachsmdth and >Springer's Revision of the Pahvocrinoidea, the species, somewhat altered 

 and shifted, number 175, while the number of genera has been increased to 44. These 

 numbers speak for themselves, and when it is remembered that of most species numerous 

 figures are given, many of morphologieal importanee, it will be conceded that the appea- 

 rance of this work marked a great advance in our knowledge of Silurian Crinoidea. 



Were Science less exacting, the blemishes 1 ani now forced to point out would 

 matter little; and it is of course very probable that, had Prof. Angelin lived to issue his 

 OAvn work, many obscurities would have been cleared up. 



The brcvity of the diagnoses and the absence of descri])tions has already been com- 

 mented on by the learned editors. On what is obvious to all it is unnecessary further 

 to dilate; nevertheless the descriptive zoologist may be once more reminded that cha- 

 racters of no apparent use to the systematist may have the deepest meaning for the mor- 

 phologist, and that structures so minute as to have at first escaped notice altogether have 

 often become the basis of subsequent classifications. 



