OCR Text |
Show 36 PROF. AGASSIZ ON THE SYNONYMY OF ECHINI. [J with the first livraison, containing the Salenies (1838). The special titlepage of this first monograph was preceded by a Preface, with separate paging in roman numerals. The cover of the second livraison (18lf) says " contenant les Scutelles ;" and nothing else relating to the contents is printed on it. The special titlepage of this second monograph (Scutelles) is, like that of the first livraison, preceded by an Introduction, the " short essay" in question, headed "Observations ...."; this has, like the Preface of the first monograph, a separate paging, but in arabic numerals. The contents of this so-called essay, in spite of the headin»*, show plainly enough that it was not considered at the time as a special essay, but that it was simply an Introduction to the livraison1. It was always so regarded by Professor Louis Agassiz ; he invariably spoke of it as ' 1'Introduction de la Monographie des Scutelles.' Nor was he alone in so regarding it; all writers on Echinoderms who have quoted these independent monographs (as I have done in the Revision) without reference to the number of the livraison, but entirely from the contents as printed on the cover, always quote this " essay " as ' Monographie des Scutelles (Introduction).' I have only followed their example and that of Professor Agassiz himself. It is, perhaps, unfortunate that this part of the ' Monographie des Scutelles' should be quoted in that way, on account of the Introduction following the special titlepage and dealing with the group of Scutellae in general. But it does not justify Mr. Bell in assuming that he corrects a grave error and gives information not to be found in the Revision. Mr. Bell states on p. 656 that he discovered only accidentally the history of this " essay," because he was fortunate enough to obtain an unbound copy of the four parts of the ' Monographies d'Echinodermes ' as originally published. It is rather strange that so exacting a critic as Mr. Bell should be dependent for his information (which is after all incomplete) upon a bookbinder. Notwithstanding all Mr. Bell has said or may say, the fact still remains that in July 1811 the name Tripneustes first appears, as is stated in the Chronological List of the Revision, and that it did not appear for the first time, as Mr. Bell maintains, in the Preface to Valentin's ' Anatomie du genre Echinus,' published in the following December. Mr. Bell will perhaps learn as he goes on that Professor Louis Agassiz omitted to recognize several of the genera first named by him in this same Introduction to the ' Monographie des Scutelles,' and * Separate copies of the Preface of the first livraison of the ' Monographies d'Echinodermes' were distributed as a prospectus, to obtain subscribers for the work; the heading on the titlepage being " Monographies d'Echinodermes (Extrait de la premiere livraison de cet ouvrage, qui renferme une Monographie des Salenies vivantes et fossiles)." In a like manner and for the same purpose separate copies of the " short essay" (Observations . . . .) were also distributed with a corresponding heading:-"( Extrait de la seconde livraison de cet ouvrage, qui renferme une Monographie des Scutelles vivantes et fossiles)." |