280 



THE GEOLOGIST. 



Phaneropleurine, and Coelacanth Crossopterygidee, and lie leaves the 

 bearing of these unquestionable facts upon the great problems of zoo- 

 logical theory to be developed by every one for himself. The craniofacial 

 bones which Professor Huxley recognizes in the Devonian fishes are the 

 Supraoccipital, Frontal, Ethmoid, Epiotie, Parietal, Squamosal, Post- 

 frontal, Prefrontal, Supratemporal, Postorbital, Suborbital, Maxilla, Pre- 

 maxilla, Hyomandibular, Os quadratum, Suprascapula, Operculum, Sub- 

 operculum. Jugular, Spiracular Ossicles, and Supratemporal Ossicles. 



Plates are given, executed in the first style of art by Mr. Joseph Dinkel, 

 of Glyptolcemus Kinnairdi, PhaneroplewonAndersoni, which are described 

 by Professor Huxley. Sir P. Egerton figures Tristic/iopterus alatus, 

 Acanthodes Peacliii, Acanthodes coriaceus, A. MitcJielli, Climatius scutiger, 

 Diplacanthus gracilis, and Cheir acanthus latus. 



The importance of this communication on the palaeontological history of 

 fishes must be manifest to all of our readers, and we hope that a Table, 

 exhibiting the classification of Devonian fishes, showing the genera ranging 

 throughout the diiferent beds, and thus exhibiting at one view both the 

 classificatory and geological aspects of the question, may be speedily 

 given by the learned professor, whose work we have read with so much 

 pleasure and instruction. 



Revue de Geologie pour VAnnee 1860. By MM. Delesse and Laugel. 



We cannot better explain the object and scope of this work than by 

 quoting a portion of the preface. The authors say : — " Every day geology 

 extends its empire ; in all civilized conntries and their colonies, even in 

 the most remote, facts are collected with ardour which may serve to ex- 

 plain the history of the earth. It is characteristic of modern science, and 

 this observation is especially applicable to the natural sciences, not to pro- 

 gress simply by the efforts of some few men of genius, but likewise to re- 

 ceive constant impulse by the co-operation of a crowd of observers, some- 

 times as obscure as they are devoted. . . . Without a spirit in favour of any 

 particular system, without preconceived opinions, we shall endeavour to 

 present every year an impartial, faithful, and concise account of the geo- 

 logical labours undertaken in every country. We ought to restrict our- 

 selves within sufficiently narrow limits. If our work presents any omis- 

 sion, we beg that it may not be imputed to any wish of our own ; if it 

 contains any inaccuracies, we shall feel obliged by being informed of them. 

 We shall receive with gratitude all communications that may enable us to 

 improve a work, of which we do not wish to conceal from ourselves either 

 the difficulties or imperfection." The well-known industry and ability of the 

 authors should lead us to expect that this endeavour would be carried out 

 in a satisfactory manner, and we may say with confidence that this Eeview 

 for 1860 will be of great service to the students of geology. It must how- 

 ever be borne in mind that the authors have chiefiy devoted their atten- 

 tion to what has been done out of France, especially in England and Ger- 

 many; and that Ihoy do not pretend to give an account of the geological 

 memoirs m hich appear in the widely circulated French pubHcations. 



