140 AIDS IN ESTABLISHING THE PERMIAN SYSTEM. 
Flora which we collected in Russia, and to his views we shall appeal, in a review 
of the Permian organic remains, with which the ensuing chapter will be con- 
cluded. In the mean time it may he affirmed that the existence of plants, approach- 
ing latliei to Carboniferous types than to those of theTriassic period (which is the 
opinion of M. Brongniart), is in harmony with the evidences derived from the 
animal remains, which, whether Mollusca, fishes or Saurians, constitute a group 
perfectly analogous to that which occupies the same geological horizon in Western 
Europe. 
Such then is our apology for the introduction of a new synonym, and in the en- 
suing chapters we shall support our reasons for its use. To render, however, 
the term Permian acceptable to German and English readers, we have placed the 
words Zechstein and Magnesian Limestone as equivalents in the Table and Map, 
thus to point out, that beds similar in structure to them, form part of the diver- 
sified “ Permian System.” 
In our first announcement of this system we believed that it might comprehend 
the rohte-todte-liegende of Germany 1 ; but we have since seen reason to modify 
this view, and to exclude (for the present) that German deposit from our Russian 
natural group. For, if the rohte-todte-liegende should be found to contain (and 
we believe this to be the case) some of the same species of plants as the coal-fields 
of the surrounding countries, that deposit must certainly be considered the repre- 
sentative of the Carboniferous system in that portion of Northern Germany, where 
no other coal-fields exist. At all events, English geologists have not yet been able 
to point out any natural distinctions between the plants of their Lower Red Sand- 
stone and those of the subjacent coal measures ; and as the identification of this red 
sandstone with the rohte-todte-liegende has been admitted, we are compelled to 
avow, that a deposit so characterized can form no part of a system in which the 
plants belong to a peculiar type. In a word, therefore, our Permian system em- 
1 See Mr. Murchison’s Letter to Dr. Fischer, Moscow, Sept. 1841, when the term “ Permian” was 
first proposed ; also Phil. Mag. vol. xix. p. 417. In suggesting this name, we had, we confess, forgotten 
that our distinguished friend M. D’Omalius D’Halloy had employed the word “ Peneen ” to characterize 
all the strata between the “ terrein houiller” and the “ hunter sandstein.” We adhere, however, to our 
geographical name, not only because it was adopted on the same principle which led to the use of “ Silu- 
rian and Devonian,” but also from our having found in the Permian deposits undescribed organic remains 
and much mineral wealth (copper, sulphur, salt, &c.) ; thus rendering the word “ Peneen ” or “ sterile ” 
quite inapplicable in the present state of our knowledge. 
