Crystallogensis. — Hensoldt. 307 
iodical announcements of advertising opticians and their 
dupes, of pretended wonderful improvements — and consider- 
ing the almost insurmountable difheulties encountered in this 
direction, the writer cannot but express his doubts whether 
the question of the size and shape of the primary molecules 
will ever be solved by direct observation. 
Two prevailing opinions, however, originated by the fore- 
most observers of half a centur}^ ago, deserve our consideration. 
According to the deductions of Haiiy, molecules and their 
constituent atoms are angular in form, while according to 
Wollaston, Hooke, Brewster and others they are more or less 
spherical. If we bear in mind the fact that all true crystals pre- 
sent angular outlines, which are persistently manifested even 
under the most adverse circumstances, and often strikingly re- 
peated in their cleavage products, we may, at first, feel tempt- 
ed to adopt the views of Haiiy. AVhat could be more natural 
and reasonable than the supposition that the fundamental 
form of a crystal is determined by that of its component parti- 
cles : in other words that an octahedron of magnetite is an ag- 
gregate of innumerable minute octahedrons and a rhombohe- 
dron of Iceland spar built up of innumerable calcite rhombohe- 
drons? There we have an hypothesis which accounts, in the 
most plausible and delightful manner for almost everything, 
except its own wonderful premises and these are, at once, its 
fatal stumbling block. The conception of a world composed 
of cubical, octahedral and dodecahedral molecules — not to 
mention the rest of holohedral forms of the six crystallograph- 
ic systems — is, to say the least original, but a theory which, 
in order to explain one mystery, deliberately introduces an- 
other and far greater one, cannot be regarded as very satisfac- 
tory. This kind of philosophy reminds one of the Atharva- 
Veda tradition,in reference to tho"foundations of the universe," 
expressed in stone on many a Hindoo temple. We there be- 
hold the figure of an elephant, carying on its back a huge disk, 
which represents the world. The elephant, again, is sup- 
ported by a still more gigantic tortoise. The speculative Hin- 
doo is not so much interested in the question of the world's 
creation as in the problem of its foundation or su]iport, 
"What does the world rest on?" I once asked a Bralimin. 
"An elephant." And the elephant? "On a tortoise." And the 
tortoise? "Well — (after considerable hesitation) that supports 
