| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: An Introduction to the Study of Meteorites - With a List of the Meteorites Represented in the Collection
Author: Fletcher, Lawrence
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "An Introduction to the Study of Meteorites - With a List of the Meteorites Represented in the Collection" ***
BRITISH MUSEUM (NATURAL HISTORY)
CROMWELL ROAD, LONDON, S.W.
* * * * *
MINERAL DEPARTMENT.
* * * * *
AN INTRODUCTION
TO THE
STUDY OF METEORITES,
WITH A LIST OF THE METEORITES REPRESENTED
IN THE COLLECTION.
BY
L. FLETCHER, M.A., F.R.S.,
KEEPER OF MINERALS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM;
FORMERLY FELLOW OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE AND MILLARD LECTURER
AT TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD.
* * * * *
TENTH EDITION.
* * * * *
[_This Guide-book can be obtained only at the Museum; written
applications should be addressed to "The Director, Natural History
Museum, Cromwell Road, London, S. W."_]
PRINTED BY ORDER OF THE TRUSTEES.
1908.
[_All rights reserved._]
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
DUKE STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E., AND GREAT WINDMILL STREET, W.
PREFACE.
In the accompanying list, the topographical arrangement has been
continued for those meteorites of which the circumstances of the fall
are without satisfactory record. This mode of arrangement brings near
together fragments which have been found in the same district at
different times; in some cases they belong to the same meteoritic fall.
As the dates of discovery of the masses and the dates of recognition
of meteoric origin, upon which other lists of meteorites are based,
have been stated very differently in the publications of the principal
museums, a reference in each instance to the best available report, and
a brief extract from it, are given.
Even as regards the dates of fall of the remaining meteorites there
has been much discrepancy in the various lists: every case in which
the date here given has been found to differ from that recorded in any
other list has been verified by reference to the published reports of
the fall.
For the convenience of collectors there has been added (page 107) an
alphabetical list of those meteorites of which specimens have been
first acquired since the issue of the last list (January 1, 1904).
L. FLETCHER.
_May 1, 1908._
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
ARRANGEMENT OF THE COLLECTION 7
HISTORY OF THE COLLECTION 8
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF METEORITES 17
LIST OF THE METEORITES REPRESENTED IN THE COLLECTION ON
MAY 1, 1908:--
I. Siderites or Meteoric Irons 66
II. Siderolites 91
III. Aerolites or Meteoric Stones 95
LIST OF RECENT ADDITIONS 107
LIST OF BRITISH METEORITES 107
APPENDIX TO THE LIST OF THE METEORITES:--
A. Native Iron (of terrestrial origin) 108
B. Pseudo-meteorites 109
LIST OF THE CASTS OF METEORITES 110
INDEX TO THE COLLECTION 111
[Illustration: Plan of the Mineral Gallery]
ARRANGEMENT OF THE COLLECTION.
By ascending the large staircase opposite to the Grand Entrance and
turning to the right, the visitor will reach a corridor leading to the
Department of Minerals.
From the entrance of the Gallery the large mass of meteoric iron,
weighing three and a half tons, found about 1854 at Cranbourne, near
Melbourne, Australia, and presented to the Museum in 1862 by Mr. James
Bruce, can be seen in the Pavilion at the opposite end of the Gallery.
The other meteorites will be found in the same room, the smaller
specimens in the four central cases, and the larger on separate stands.
The casts of meteorites are exhibited in the lower parts of the cases.
The specimens referred to in the 'Introduction to the Study of
Meteorites' are in case 4, and are arranged, as far as is practicable,
in the order of reference.
The remaining specimens are classified as:--
SIDERITES, consisting chiefly of metallic nickel-iron (panes
1a-2d):
SIDEROLITES, consisting chiefly of metallic nickel-iron and
stony matter, both in large proportions (panes 2e, 2f): and
AEROLITES, consisting chiefly of stony matter (panes 2g-3o).
At the beginning of each class are placed those meteorites of
which the fall has been observed.
The position of any meteorite in the cases may be found by reference
to the Index (p. 111) and to the second column of the List of the
Collection (p. 66).
HISTORY OF THE COLLECTION.
Until nearly fifty years after the establishment of the British Museum,
meteorite collections nowhere existed, for the reports of the fall of
stones from the sky were then treated as absurd, and the exhibition of
such stones in a public museum would have been a matter for ridicule;
a few stones, which had escaped destruction, were scattered about
Europe, and were in the possession of private individuals curious
enough to preserve bodies concerning the fall of which upon our globe
such reports had been given. Hence it happened that in 1807 not
more than four meteoric stones were in the British Museum: three of
them, _Krakhut_, _Wold Cottage_ and _Siena_, had been presented in
1802-3 by Sir Joseph Banks; the fourth was a stone of the _L'Aigle_
fall, presented in 1804 by Prof. Biot, the distinguished physicist.
A fragment of the mass met with by the traveller Pallas had been
presented by the Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg as early as
1776; this, and the fragments of _Otumpa_ and _Senegal River_, were
long regarded by scientific men as specimens of "native iron," and of
terrestrial origin.
In the year 1807, happily for the future development of the Mineral
Collection, Mr. Charles Konig (formerly König) was appointed
Assistant-keeper, and six years later was promoted to the Keepership
of the then undivided Natural History Department; it thus came about
that for thirty-eight years the senior officer of the Natural History
Department of the Museum was one who had an intense enthusiasm for
minerals and made them his own special study. It was in Mr. Konig's
time that Parliament voted (1810) a special grant of nearly £14,000
for the purchase of the minerals which had belonged to the Rt. Hon.
Charles Greville; with these passed into the possession of the Trustees
fragments of seven meteorites, including _Tabor_, which had been
acquired by Mr. Greville with the mineral cabinet of Baron Born. The
increase of the Natural History Collections was such that in 1827 the
Botanical, and in 1837 the Zoological, specimens were assigned to
special Departments, after which Mr. Konig, as Keeper of "Minerals
(including Fossils)," was left free to devote his attention to those
parts of Natural History to which he was more particularly attached.
During Mr. Konig's Keepership, though numerous and excellent mineral
specimens were acquired, no great effort was made to render the
meteorite collection itself complete; at his death in 1851, 70 falls
were represented by specimens. The following had been presented:--
_Stannern:_ by the Imperial Museum of Vienna, in 1814.
_Red River:_ by Prof. A. Bruce, in 1814.
_Mooresfort:_ by Mr. J. G. Children, F.R.S., in 1817, and by Dr. Blake,
in 1819.
_Adare:_ by Dr. Blake, in 1819.
The large _Otumpa_ iron, and a piece of the _Imilac_ siderolite: by Sir
Woodbine Parish, K.C.B., F.R.S., in 1826 and 1828 respectively.
_Bitburg:_ by Mr. Henry Heuland, in 1831.
_Krakhut:_ by Mr. Wm. Marsden, in 1834.
_Cold Bokkeveld_ meteorite: by Sir John Herschel, Bart., F.R.S., Sir
Thos. Maclear, F.R.S., and Mr. E. Charlesworth, in 1839 and 1845.
_Zacatecas:_ by Mr. T. Parkinson, in 1840.
_Akbarpur:_ by Captain P. T. Cautley, in 1843.
_Braunau_ and _Seeläsgen:_ by the Royal Society, in 1848.
After the death of Mr. Konig, Mr. G. R. Waterhouse, palæontologist,
was appointed Keeper of the composite Department. It was natural
that the palæontological side should then have its turn of special
development, and in fact the palæontological collections, already
important, increased from that time with great rapidity; the
mineralogical side, however, had additions made to it, though not
in the proportion allotted during the preceding years. During the
Keepership of Mr. Waterhouse (1851-7), only specimens of two additional
meteorites were added to the collection; one of them, _Madoc_, was
presented in 1856 by Sir Wm. E. Logan, F.R.S.; also additional
fragments of _Imilac_ were presented by Mr. W. Bollaert in 1857.
In the year 1857, a further division of the Natural History Collections
took place; the mineralogical and the palæontological specimens being
assigned to special Departments, and the Minerals placed in the
Keepership of Prof. Story-Maskelyne. Under him the Mineral Collection
was rendered as complete as possible in all its branches; and it is
owing entirely to the unflagging energy he displayed, both in the
search for, and in the acquisition of the best obtainable specimens,
that the Mineral Collection was brought to its present position of
general excellence. Perhaps the greatest relative advance was made
in the improvement of the Collection of Meteorites. Perceiving that
only half of the falls represented at Vienna were represented in the
British Museum, and that the difficulty of making a fairly complete
collection of such bodies must increase enormously as time goes on,
owing to the absorption of the specimens by public museums, Mr.
Maskelyne immediately after his appointment tried to fill up the gaps.
In the first place, the meteorite collections of Dr. A. Krantz, Mr. R.
P. Greg, and Mr. R. Campbell, and many meteorites belonging to Mr. W.
Nevill and Prof. C. U. Shepard, were acquired by purchase in 1861-2.
During the interval (1857-63), the whole or parts of many
meteorites were presented to the Museum:--
From Great Britain.--_Perth:_ by Mr. W. Nevill.
From Russia.--_Tula:_ by Dr. J. Auerbach of Moscow.
From India.--_Bustee_, _Dhurmsala_, _Durala_ and _Shalka:_ by
the Secretary of State for India.
_Assam_, _Butsura_, _Futtehpur_, _Khiragurh_, _Manegaum_,
_Mhow_, _Moradabad_, _Segowlie_ and _Umballa:_ by the
Asiatic Society of Bengal.
_Nellore_ and _Parnallee:_ by Sir W. T. Denison, K.C.B.
_Kusiali_ and _Pegu:_ by Dr. Thos. Oldham, F.R.S.
_Kaee:_ by Sir Thos. Maclear, F.R.S.
_Dhurmsala:_ by Mr. G. Lennox Conyngham.
From Australia.--The large _Cranbourne_ iron: by Mr. James Bruce.
From South America.--_Vaca Muerta:_ by Mr. W. Taylour Thomson.
_Imilac:_ by Mr. W. Bollaert.
An _Atacama_ iron: by Mr. Lewis Joel.
From North America.--_Tucson:_ by the Town Authorities of San Francisco.
During the same interval, exchanges were made with the museums of
Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Copenhagen, Heidelberg, and Göttingen, through
Professors Daubrée, Haidinger, Rose, Hoff, Bunsen, and Wöhler,
respectively: and also with the following private collectors:--Dr.
Abich of Dorpat, Dr. J. Auerbach of Moscow, Mr. R. P. Greg of
Manchester, Prof. C. U. Shepard of New Haven, U.S.A., and Dr. Sismonda
of Turin.
The result was that by the end of 1863 the number of meteoric falls
represented in the collection was 204, and thus had been almost trebled
during Mr. Maskelyne's first six years of office.
Meanwhile, although Mr. Maskelyne, with the help of a single assistant
(Mr. Thomas Davies), was then rearranging the general collection of
minerals according to a new system of classification, time was found
for a scientific examination of the meteorites thus being acquired.
At that time the Department was without a chemical laboratory, and
not even a blowpipe could be used, owing to the necessity of guarding
against a possible destruction of the Museum by fire. Hence recourse
was had to the microscope, and as early as 1861, a microscope fitted
with a revolving graduated stage and an eye-piece goniometer was
constructed, under the Keeper's directions, for the examination of thin
sections of meteorites with the aid of polarised light.
Working in this way, and with the simplest chemical tests, Mr.
Maskelyne was the first to announce in 1862 the discovery in the
Bustee meteorite of a mineral, unknown in terrestrial mineralogy,
to which he gave the name of Oldhamite, and in 1863, the more than
probable occurrence of Enstatite as an important meteoritic ingredient
(Nellore). This method of determining the mineral constituents of a
rock-section by means of the relation of the vibration-traces to known
crystallographic lines, thus first and of necessity employed for the
discrimination of the minerals in meteorites, is now in general use in
the investigation, not only of meteoritic, but of terrestrial rocks.
About the same time, from the Breitenbach meteorite were extracted
crystals of Bronzite, which yielded the first crystallographic elements
obtained for that mineral: the measurements were made and published by
Dr. Viktor von Lang, then assistant in the Department (1862-4) and now
Professor of Physics at Vienna.
The microscope was further applied to the mechanical separation of
the different mineral ingredients of a meteorite: and by picking out
in this toilsome manner the different mineral ingredients from the
crumbled material of the Bustee aerolite, and from the residue of the
Breitenbach siderolite left after the iron had been removed by mercuric
chloride, the several silicates contained in these meteorites were
isolated for future analysis. From the particles of colourless mineral
thus obtained from the Breitenbach meteorite, one kind was selected
in 1867, of which the crystals presented a zone of orthosymmetry
containing two optic axes, and yielded two similar cleavages in a zone
perpendicular to the former. This ingredient was afterwards (1869)
announced to consist wholly of silica, a substance which, before the
isolation of this mineral, was only known to occur as quartz, when
in crystals, and these belong to the hexagonal system: to the new
mineral Mr. Maskelyne later assigned the name of Asmanite. In 1868
was published by Vom Rath the discovery of a species of terrestrial
silica, the crystals of which were regarded as belonging to the
hexagonal system, though their angular elements were distinct from
those of quartz: this mineral, named by him Tridymite, has since been
found (1878) to present optical and other characters inconsistent with
true hexagonal symmetry, and is probably identical in its specific
characters with the meteoritic asmanite.
Further, another mineral occurring as minute gold-yellow octahedra in
the Bustee meteorite was recognised as new to mineralogy, and termed
Osbornite.
It was not till 1867, when a laboratory was fitted up outside the
Museum precincts, that it became possible to make a complete chemical
examination of these materials, which had been gradually prepared and
carefully picked for analysis. In that year the late Dr. Walter Flight
was appointed to assist in the laboratory-work of the Department,
and afterwards gave valuable help in the chemical analysis of the
above materials; the results were quite confirmatory of those already
obtained by aid of the microscope and the simple tests.
Since the great increase made during the first six years of Prof.
Maskelyne's Keepership, the Collection has continued to grow, though
necessarily at a less rapid rate.
Of the specimens added after 1863, the following have been presented:--
1864-7: _Manbhoom_, _Muddoor_ and _Pokhra:_ by Dr. Thos. Oldham,
F.R.S.
1864: _Agra:_ by Mr. Wm. Nevill.
1864: _Atacama_ (stone): by Mr. Alfred Lutschaunig.
1865-70: _Jamkheir_, _Lodran_, _Shytal_, _Supuhee_ and _Udipi:_
by the Secretary of State for India.
1865: _Nerft:_ by Prof. Grewingk.
1865: _Ski:_ by Prof. Kjerulf.
1867-70: _Goalpara_, _Gopalpur_, _Khetri_, _Moti-ka-nagla_,
_Pulsora_ and _Sherghotty:_ by the Trustees of the Indian
Museum. Calcutta.
1867-75: _Knyahinya_ and _Zsadány:_ by the Hungarian Academy of
Sciences.
1869: _Krähenberg:_ by Dr. Neumayer.
1871: _Searsmont:_ by Dr. A. C. Hamlin.
1873: Fragments of thirteen meteorites already represented: by
Mr. Benj. Bright.
1874: _Bethany_ (_Wild_): by the Trustees of the South African
Museum, Capetown.
1875: _Amana:_ by Dr. G. Hinrichs.
1876: _Shingle Springs:_ by Mr. E. N. Winslow.
1876: _Rowton:_ by the Duke of Cleveland.
1877: _Khairpur_ and _Jhung:_ by Mr. A. Brandreth.
1877: _Verkhne-Dnieprovsk:_ by Prof. Koulibini.
1878: _Cronstad:_ by Mr. John Sanderson.
1878: _Santa Catharina:_ by Prof. Daubrée.
1879: _Imilac_, _Mount Hicks_ and _Serrania de Varas:_ by Mr.
George Hicks.
1881: _Middlesbrough:_ by the Directors of the North Eastern
Railway.
1882: _Veramin:_ by the Shah of Persia.
1882: _Vaca Muerta:_ by Mr. F. A. Eck.
1883: _Ogi:_ by Naotaro Nabeshima, formerly Daimiô of Ogi,
Japan.
1885: _Ivanpah:_ by Mr. H. G. Hanks.
1885: _Youndegin:_ by the Rev. Charles G. Nicolay.
1885 _et seq_.: _Ambapur Nagla_, _Bishunpur_, _Bori_,
_Chandpur_, _Dokáchi_, _Donga Kohrod_, _Esnandes_, _Gambat_,
_Heidelberg_, _Kahangarai_, _Kodaikanal_, _Lalitpur_,
_Nagaria_, _Nammianthal_, _Nawalpali_, _Pirthalla_, _Sindhri_,
_Wessely_ and _Wöhler's iron:_ by the Director of the
Geological Survey of India.
1885: _Lucky-Hill:_ by the Governors of the Jamaica Institute.
1886: _Nenntmannsdorf:_ by Dr. H. B. Geinitz.
1886: _Jenny's Creek:_ by Mr. John N. Tilden.
1887: _Djati-Pengilon:_ by the Government of the Netherlands.
1887, 1906: _Albuquerque:_ by Dr. Richard Pearce.
1889: _Bhagur_ and _Kalambi:_ by the Bombay Branch of the Royal
Asiatic Society.
1890: _Bendegó River:_ by the Director of the National Museum,
Rio de Janeiro.
1891: _Dundrum:_ by the Board of Trinity College, Dublin.
1891: _Farmington:_ by Dr. G. F. Kunz.
1891-1903: _Barratta_ and _Thunda:_ by Prof. A. Liversidge,
F.R.S.
1894: _Makariwa:_ by Prof. G. H. F. Ulrich.
1894: _Bherai:_ by the Nawab of Junagadh, India.
1895: _Concepcion:_ by Mr. W. Taylor.
1896: _Madrid:_ by Don Miguel Merino of Madrid.
1897: _Cold Bokkeveld:_ by Mrs. Whitwell.
1899, 1906: _Caperr:_ by the Director of the La Plata Museum.
1899: _El Ranchito_ (Bacubirito): by Mr. O. H. Howarth.
1899: _Kokstad:_ by the Trustees of the South African Museum.
1899: _Zomba:_ by Sir A. Sharpe, C.B., K.C.M.G., Mr. J. F.
Cunningham, and Mr. J. McClounie.
1901: _Ness City:_ by Dr. H. A. Ward.
1903: _Caratash:_ by His Highness Kiamil Pasha.
1904: _Narraburra:_ by Mr. H. C. Russell, C.M.G., F.R.S.
1905: _Fukutomi, Oshima, Tanakami and Yon[=o]zu:_ by Dr. C.
Ishikowa.
1905: _Kota-Kota:_ by Mr. A. J. Swann.
1907: _Kangra:_ by Prof. W. N. Hartley, F.R.S.
1908: _Uwet:_ by the Governor of Southern Nigeria.
Since the same year (1863) meteoritic exchanges have been made with the
museums of Belgrade, Berlin, Blömfontein, Breslau, Calcutta, Calne,
Cambridge, Chicago (Field Columbian Museum), Christiania, Debreczin,
Dresden, Fremantle, Göttingen, Helsingfors, Munich, Odessa, Paris,
Pau, Rio de Janeiro, Rome, St. Petersburg (Institute of Mines), South
Africa, Stockholm, Sydney, Transylvania, Troyes, Utrecht, Vienna,
Washington, Wisconsin University, and Yale College; and also with the
following:--Dr. Abich of Dorpat, Dr. J. Auerbach of Moscow, Mr. S. C.
H. Bailey of Cortlandt-on-Hudson, U.S.A., Prof. Baumhauer of Haarlem,
Mr. C. S. Bement of Philadelphia, U.S.A., Dr. Breithaupt of Freiberg,
Dr. A. Brezina of Vienna, Mr. J. B. Gregory of London, Prof. C. T.
Jackson of Boston, U.S.A., Mr. Henry Ludlam of London, Prof. W. Mallet
of Virginia, U.S.A., Prof. Vom Rath of Bonn, Prof. C. U. Shepard of New
Haven, U.S.A., His Excellency Julien de Siemachko of St. Petersburg,
Prof. Lawrence Smith of Louisville, U.S.A., Mr. J. N. Tilden of New
York, U.S.A., and Dr. Henry A. Ward of Chicago, U.S.A.
In this way, by the generosity and self-denial of donors, by the
somewhat difficult method of exchange, and by purchase, it has been
possible to get together the fine representative collection of
meteorites now in the British Museum.
AN INTRODUCTION
TO THE
STUDY OF METEORITES.
* * * * *
_Most of the specimens here referred to are in Case 4 in the Pavilion
at the end of the Mineral Gallery._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: The fall of stones from the sky formerly discredited.]
1. Till the beginning of the nineteenth century, the fall of stones
from the sky was an event, the actuality of which neither men of
science nor people in general could be brought to credit. Yet such
falls have been recorded from the earliest times, and the records
have occasionally been received as authentic by a whole nation. In
most cases, however, the witnesses of such an event have been treated
with the disrespect usually shown to reporters of the extraordinary,
and have been laughed at for their supposed delusions: this is less
to be wondered at when we remember that the witnesses of the arrival
of a stone from the sky have usually been few in number, unaccustomed
to exact observation, frightened both by what they saw and by what
they heard, and have had a common tendency towards exaggeration and
superstition.
[Sidenote: Ancient records.]
2. De Guignes in his Travels states that, according to old Chinese
manuscripts, falls of stones have again and again been observed in
China; the earliest mentioned is one which happened about 644 B.C.
A stone, famous through long ages,[1] fell in Phrygia and was
preserved there for many generations. About 204 B.C. it was demanded
from King Attalus and taken with great ceremony to Rome. It is
described as "a black stone, in the figure of a cone, circular below
and ending in an apex above."
In his History of Rome, Livy tells of a shower of stones on the Alban
Mount, about 652 B.C., which so impressed the Senate that a nine days'
solemn festival was decreed; as the shower lasted for two days, it was
doubtless the result of volcanic action; other instances of the "rain
of stones" in Italy, mentioned by the same author, had possibly a
similar origin.
Plutarch relates the fall of a stone in Thrace about 470 B.C., during
the time of Pindar, and according to Pliny, the stone was still
preserved in his day, 500 years afterwards. The latter records two
other falls, one in Asia Minor, the other in Macedonia.
[Sidenote: Worship of meteoric stones.]
3. These falls from the sky, when credited at all, have been deemed
prodigies or miracles, and the stones have been regarded as objects for
reverence and worship. It has even been conjectured that the worship
of such stones was the earliest form of idolatry. The Phrygian stone,
mentioned above, was worshipped at Pessinus by the Phrygians and
Ph[oe]nicians as Cybele, "the mother of the gods," and its transference
to Rome followed the announcement by an oracle that possession of the
stone would secure to the State a continual increase of prosperity.
Similarly, the Diana of the Ephesians, "which fell down from Jupiter,"
and the image of Venus at Cyprus, appear to have been, not statues,
but conical or pyramidal stones. A stone, of which the history goes
back far beyond the seventh century, is still revered by the Moslems as
one of their holiest relics, and is preserved at Mecca built into the
northeastern corner of the Kaaba. The late Paul Partsch,[2] for many
years Keeper of Minerals in the Imperial Museum of Vienna, considered
that the meteoric origin of the Kaaba stone was sufficiently proved
by descriptions which had been submitted to him. A stone which fell
in Japan in the year 1741, [Sidenote: Pane 4c.] and was presented to
the British Museum in 1883, had long been made an annual offering in
a temple of Ogi at one of the Japanese religious festivals. It may
be added that a stone which lately fell in India[3] was decked with
flowers, daily anointed with ghee (clarified butter), and subjected to
frequent ceremonial worship and coatings of sandal-wood powder. The
stone was placed on a terrace constructed for it at the place where it
struck the ground, and a subscription was made for the erection of a
shrine.
[Sidenote: The oldest undoubted meteoric stone still preserved.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4c.]
4. The oldest undoubted sky-stone still preserved is that which was
long suspended by a chain from the vault of the choir of the parish
church of Ensisheim in Elsass, and is now kept in the Rathhaus of that
town. The following is a translated extract from a document which was
preserved in the church:--
"On the 16th of November, 1492, a singular miracle happened:
for between 11 and 12 in the forenoon, with a loud crash of
thunder and a prolonged noise heard afar off, there fell in
the town of Ensisheim a stone weighing 260 pounds. It was seen
by a child to strike the ground in a field near the canton
called Gisgaud, where it made a hole more than five feet deep.
It was taken to the church as being a miraculous object. The
noise was heard so distinctly at Lucerne, Villing, and many
other places, that in each of them it was thought that some
houses had fallen. King Maximilian, who was then at Ensisheim,
had the stone carried to the castle: after breaking off two
pieces, one for the Duke Sigismund of Austria and the other
for himself, he forbade further damage, and ordered the stone
to be suspended in the parish church."
[Sidenote: Scientific men begin to investigate the reports.]
5. Three French Academicians, one of whom was the afterwards renowned
chemist Lavoisier, presented to the Academy in 1772 a report on the
analysis of a stone said to have been seen to fall at Lucé on September
13, 1768. [Sidenote: Pane 4c.] As the identity of lightning with
the electric spark had been recently established by Franklin, they
were in advance convinced that "thunder-stones" existed only in the
imagination; and never dreaming of the existence of a "sky-stone" which
had no relation to a "thunder-stone," they somewhat easily assured
both themselves and the Academy that there was nothing unusual in the
mineralogical characters of the Lucé specimen, their verdict being that
the stone was an ordinary one which had been struck and altered by
lightning.
[Sidenote: Chladni argues that the bodies come from outer space.]
6. In 1794 the German philosopher Chladni, famed for his researches
into the laws of sound, brought together numerous accounts of the fall
of bodies from the sky, and called the attention of the scientific
world to the fact that several masses of iron, of which he specially
considers two, had in all probability come from outer space to this
planet.[4]
[Sidenote: The Pallas iron.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4c.]
One of them is the mass still known as the Pallas or Krasnojarsk
iron.[5] This irregular mass, weighing about 1500 lbs., of which the
greater part is in the Museum at St. Petersburg, was met with at
Krasnojarsk by the traveller Pallas in the year 1772, and had been
found in 1749 by a Cossack on the surface of the highest part of a
lofty mountain between Krasnojarsk and Abakansk in Siberia, in the
midst of a schistose district: it was regarded by the Tartars as a
"holy thing fallen from heaven." The interior is composed of a ductile
iron, which, though brittle at a high temperature, can be forged either
cold or at a moderate heat; its large sponge-like pores are filled with
an amber-coloured olivine; the texture is uniform, and the olivine
equally distributed; a vitreous varnish had preserved it from rust.
The fragment in the case, weighing about 7 lbs., was presented to the
Trustees in 1776 by the Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg.
[Sidenote: The Otumpa iron.]
[Sidenote: Separate stand.]
A second specimen referred to is that which in 1783 Don Michael Rubin
de Celis was sent by the Viceroy of Rio de la Plata to investigate;[6]
it had been found by Indians, searching for honey and wax, and trusting
to rain for drink, projecting about a foot above the ground near a
place called Otumpa, in the Gran Chaco Gualamba, South America, and was
at first thought to be the outcrop of an iron vein. Don Rubin de Celis
estimated the weight of this mass of malleable iron at thirty thousand
pounds, and reported that for a hundred leagues around there were
neither iron mines nor mountains nor even the smallest stones, and that
owing to the absence of water, there was not a single fixed habitation
in the country. There were several smaller masses at the locality;
one of them, weighing 1400 lbs., is shown on a separate stand in the
Pavilion: according to Sir Woodbine Parish, who presented it to the
Museum in 1826, it had been removed to Buenos Ayres at the beginning
of the struggle for Independence; it was a complimentary gift to Sir
Woodbine on the occasion of his being sent by Canning to acknowledge
the Independence of the State. A slice of this iron is shown in case 4c.
[Sidenote: Pane 4c.]
[Sidenote: Chladni's arguments.]
7. Chladni argued that these masses could not have been formed in
the wet way, for they had evidently been exposed to fire and slowly
cooled: that the absence of scoriæ in the neighbourhood, the extremely
hard and pitted crust, the ductility of the iron, and, in the case of
the Siberian mass, the regular distribution of the pores and olivine,
precluded the idea that they could have been formed where found,
whether by man, electricity, or an accidental conflagration: he was
driven to conclude that they had been formed elsewhere, and projected
thence to the places where they were discovered; and as no volcanoes
had been known to eject masses of iron, and as, moreover, no volcanoes
are met with in those regions, he held that the specimens referred to
must have actually fallen from the sky. Further, he sought to show that
the flight of a heavy body through the sky is the direct cause of the
luminous phenomenon known as a fire-ball.
[Sidenote: The fall of stones at Siena, in Tuscany.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4c.]
8. About seven o'clock on the evening of June 16, 1794, as if to direct
attention to Chladni's just published theory, there fell a shower of
stones at Siena, in Tuscany.
The event is described in the following letter, dated Siena, July 12,
1794, from the Earl of Bristol to Sir William Hamilton, K.B., F.R.S.,
at that time British Envoy-Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary at the
Court of Naples:--[7]
"In the midst of a most violent thunderstorm, about a dozen
stones of various weights and dimensions fell at the feet of
different persons, men, women and children. The stones are of
a quality not found in any part of the Siennese territory;
they fell about 18 hours after the enormous eruption of Mount
Vesuvius: which circumstance leaves a choice of difficulties
in the solution of this extraordinary phenomenon. Either these
stones have been generated in this igneous mass of clouds which
produced such unusual thunder, or, which is equally incredible,
they were thrown from Vesuvius, at a distance of at least 250
miles: judge, then, of its parabola. The philosophers here
incline to the first solution. I wish much, Sir, to know your
sentiments. My first objection was to the fact itself, but of
this there are so many eyewitnesses, it seems impossible to
withstand their evidence."
[Sidenote: The fall of a stone near Wold Cottage, Yorkshire.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4b.]
9. Soon afterwards there fell a stone in England itself. About three
o'clock in the afternoon of December 13, 1795, a labourer working
near Wold Cottage, a few miles from Scarborough, in Yorkshire,[8]
was terrified to see a stone fall about ten yards from where he was
standing. The stone, weighing 56 lbs., was found to have gone through
12 inches of soil and 6 inches of solid chalk rock. No thunder,
lightning, or luminous meteor accompanied the fall; but in the adjacent
villages there was heard an explosion likened by the inhabitants to
the firing of guns at sea, while in two of them the sounds were so
distinct of something singular passing through the air towards Wold
Cottage, that five or six people went to see if anything extraordinary
had happened to the house or grounds. No stone presenting the same
characters was known in the district. The stone is preserved in the
Museum Collection.
[Sidenote: Terrestrial origin still sought for.]
10. It seemed to be now impossible for any one to doubt the fall of
stones from the sky, but the reluctance of scientific men to grant an
extra-terrestrial origin to them is shown by the theories referred
to in the above letter to Sir William Hamilton, and is rendered even
more evident by the theory proposed in 1796 by Edward King, who
suggested that the stones had their origin in the condensation of a
cloud of ashes, mixed with pyritical dust and numerous particles of
iron, coming from some volcano. As the stones fell at Siena out of a
cloud coming from the North, while Vesuvius is really to the South,
he gravely suggested that in this case the cloud had been blown from
the South past Siena, and had then before its condensation into stone
been brought back by a change of wind. As to the fall of a stone near
Wold Cottage, he was not prepared either to believe or disbelieve the
witnesses until the matter had been more closely examined; but in
case the statements should prove worthy of credit, he points out the
possibility of the necessary dust-cloud having come from Mount Hecla in
Iceland.
[Sidenote: The fall of stones near Benares, in India.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4c.]
11. Later came a well-authenticated account of a more wonderful event
still. At 8 o'clock on the evening of December 19, 1798, many stones
fell at Krakhut, 14 miles from Benares, in India; the sky was perfectly
serene, not a cloud had been seen since December 11, and none was
seen for many days after. According to the observations of several
Europeans, as well as natives, in different parts of the country, the
fall of the stones was preceded by the appearance of a _ball of fire_,
which lasted for only a few instants, and was followed by an explosion
resembling thunder.
[Sidenote: Examination of stones by Howard.]
12. Fragments of the stones of Siena, Wold Cottage, and Krakhut, as
also of a stone said to have fallen on July 3, 1753, at Tabor, in
Bohemia, came into the hands of Edward Howard, and the comparative
results of a chemical and mineralogical investigation (the latter by
the Count de Bournon) of the stones from the above four places are
given in a paper read before the Royal Society of London, on February
25, 1802. Howard concludes as follows:--
[Sidenote: Pane 4c.]
"The mineralogical descriptions of the Lucé stone by the
French Academicians, of the Ensisheim stone by M. Barthold,
and of stones from the above four places (Siena, Wold Cottage,
Krakhut and Tabor) by the Count de Bournon, all exhibit a
striking conformity of character common to each of them, and
I doubt not but the similarity of component parts, especially
of the malleable alloy, together with the near approach of the
constituent proportions of the earth contained in each of the
four stones, will establish very strong evidence in favour
of the assertion that they have fallen on our globe. They
have been found at places very remote from each other, and at
periods also sufficiently distant. The mineralogists who have
examined them agree that they have no resemblance to mineral
substances properly so called, nor have they been described by
mineralogical authors."
[Sidenote: Could projectiles reach the earth from the moon?]
13. This paper aroused much interest in the scientific world, and,
though Chladni's view that such stones come from outer space was still
not generally accepted in France, it was there deemed more worthy of
consideration after Poisson[9] (following Laplace) had shown that a
body shot from the moon in the direction of the earth, with an initial
velocity of 7592 feet a second, would not fall back upon the moon, but
would actually, after a journey of sixty-four hours, reach the earth,
upon which, neglecting the resistance of the air, it would fall with a
velocity of about 31,508 feet a second.
[Sidenote: The fall of stones at L'Aigle, in France.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4c.]
14. Whilst the minds of the scientific men of France were in this
unsettled condition, there came a report that still another shower
of stones had fallen, this time in their own country, and within
easy reach of Paris. To settle the matter finally, if possible, the
physicist Biot, Member of the French Academy, was directed by the
Minister of the Interior to inquire into the event upon the spot. After
a careful examination of the stones and a comparison of the statements
of the villagers, Biot[10] was convinced that--
1. On Tuesday, April 26, 1803, about 1 P.M., there was a noise as
of a violent _explosion_ in the neighbourhood of L'Aigle, in the
department of Orne, followed by a rolling sound which lasted for
five or six minutes: the noise was heard for a distance of 75 miles
round.
2. Some moments before the explosion at L'Aigle, a _fire-ball_ in
quick motion was seen from several of the adjoining towns, though
not from L'Aigle itself.
3. There was absolutely no doubt that on the same day _many stones
fell_ in the neighbourhood of L'Aigle.
Biot estimated the number of the stones at two or three thousand; they
fell within an ellipse of which the larger axis was 6·2 miles, and the
smaller 2·5 miles; and this inequality might indicate not a single
explosion but a series of them. With the exception of a few little
clouds of ordinary character, the sky was quite clear.
The exhaustive report of Biot, and the completeness of his proofs,
compelled the whole of the scientific world to recognise the fall of
stones on the earth from outer space as an undoubted fact.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: The times and places of fall are independent of terrestrial
circumstances.]
15. Since that date many falls have been observed, and the attendant
phenomena have been carefully investigated. These observations teach
us that _meteorites_, as they are now called, fall at all times of
the day and night, and at all seasons of the year, while they favour
no particular latitudes: also they are found to be quite independent
of the weather, and in many cases have fallen when the sky has been
perfectly clear; even where stones have fallen in what has been called
a thunder-storm, we may reasonably suppose that in most cases the
luminous phenomenon has been mistaken for a variety of lightning, and
the loud noise for thunder.
[Sidenote: Velocity of meteorites.]
16. From observations of the path and the time of flight of the
luminous meteor, it is calculated that meteorites enter the earth's
atmosphere with absolute velocities ranging from 10 to 45 miles a
second: the velocity actually observed is that relative to a person
at rest on the earth's surface; for the determination of the absolute
velocity of the meteorite, the motion of the observer with the earth
(about 18 miles a second) must be allowed for. Let us attempt to follow
the course of a small compact body moving at such a rate. So long as
the body is traversing "empty space," the only heat it receives is that
sent direct from the sun and stars; in general, the meteorite will
thus be probably very cold, and, owing to its small size and want of
luminosity, it will be invisible to an observer on the earth's surface.
After the meteorite enters the earth's atmosphere a very speedy change
must take place. [Sidenote: The resistance of the air.] Assuming
the law of resistance of the air for a planetary velocity to be the
same as that deduced from experiments with artillery, the astronomer
Schiaparelli[11] has shown that if a ball of 8 inches diameter and
32-1/3 lbs. weight enter the atmosphere with a velocity of 44-3/4 miles
a second, its velocity on arriving at a point where the barometric
pressure is still only 1/760th of that at the earth's surface will have
been already reduced to 3-1/6 miles a second. From this it is clear
that the speed of the meteorite after the whole of the atmosphere has
been traversed will be extremely small, and comparable with that of
an ordinary falling body. From experiments made by Professor A. S.
Herschel, it has been calculated that the velocity of the meteorite
which fell at Middlesbrough, in Yorkshire, on March 14, 1881, was, on
striking the ground, only 412 feet a second. From the depth of the
hole (20 to 24 inches) made in stiff loam by the stone which fell at
Hvittis, in Finland, on October 21, 1901, it has been estimated by Mr.
Borgström that the meteorite had a velocity of 584 feet a second when
it reached the earth. He further calculates that the stone would have
acquired virtually the same velocity if it had been merely allowed to
fall, from a position of rest, under the action of gravity, through an
infinite atmosphere having the same density as at the earth's surface.
In the case of the Hessle fall, several stones fell on the ice, which
was only a few inches thick, and rebounded without either breaking the
ice or being broken themselves.
[Sidenote: Transformation of the energy.]
17. Further, Schiaparelli pointed out that, in the case imagined by
him, the energy already converted into heat would be sufficient to
raise 198,400 pounds of water from freezing point to boiling point
under the ordinary barometric pressure. The greater part of this heat
is, no doubt, carried off by the air through which the meteorite
passes; but still the wonder is, not that a meteorite is small on
reaching the earth's surface, but that any of it is left to "tell the
tale."
[Sidenote: The cloud, ball of fire and trail.]
This sudden generation of heat will cause fusion, and even luminosity,
of the outer material of the meteorite, and in some cases a combustion
of some of its constituents: the products of the thermal and mechanical
action sufficiently account for the _cloud_ from which the meteorite is
generally seen to emerge as a ball of fire, and also for the visible
trail often left behind. The ball of fire has often an apparent
diameter larger even than that of the moon, and is sometimes too bright
for the eye to gaze upon.
[Sidenote: The meteorite is only luminous in the first part of its
flight through the air.]
18. Owing to the quick reduction of speed, the luminosity will be
a feature of the higher, not the lower, part of the course. The
Orgueil meteorite of May 14, 1864, was so high when luminous that,
notwithstanding its almost easterly motion, it was seen over a space of
country ranging from the Pyrenees to the north of Paris, a distance of
more than 300 miles.
[Sidenote: The time of flight through the air is very brief.]
19. Next we may remark that the time of flight in the earth's
atmosphere will be very short, and reckoned only by seconds. Even when
the meteorite is wholly metallic, if we may judge from the time one end
of a poker may be held in the hand whilst the other end is in the fire,
the heat will not have had time to get far below the surface before the
body will have reached the ground. [Sidenote: Pane 4d.]
[Sidenote: The crust.]
As a matter of fact, meteorites are almost invariably found to be
covered with a _crust_ or varnish, such as would be caused by strong
heating, and its thinness shows the slight depth to which the heat has
had time to penetrate; in the case of the stones, the greater part
of the suddenly heated superficial material must chip off and be left
behind at all parts of the track of the meteor. The aspect of the crust
varies according to the mineral constitution of the meteorites: it is
generally black, and in most cases dull, as in High Possil, Zsadány and
Orgueil, [Sidenote: Pane 4d.] but sometimes shiny, as in Stannern, or
partly dull and partly shiny, as in Dyalpur; rarely, it is of a dark
grey colour, as in Mezö-Madaras and some of the stones which fell in
the neighbourhood of Mocs. In the case of the Pultusk meteorite of
January 30, 1868, several thousands of stones, [Sidenote: Panes 4efg.]
varying from the size of a man's head to that of a small nut, were
picked up, each covered with a crust: fifty-six of the stones of this
fall are shown in the case.
[Sidenote: The crust.]
20. The crust is not of equal thickness at every point; for, the
form of the meteorite being a result of oft-repeated fracture, the
constantly changing surface must be very irregular, and its different
parts must be heated to different temperatures and be exposed to
different amounts of mechanical action. Sometimes, owing to the motion
of the meteorite through the air, the crust is so marked as to indicate
the position of the meteorite in regard to its line of motion at a
certain part of its course; and this relation is rendered more clear
in some cases by evidence that melted material has been driven to the
back of the moving mass. The Nedagolla iron and the Goalpara stone
illustrate this peculiarity. [Sidenote: Pane 4h.]
[Sidenote: The pittings.]
21. Further, the surface of a meteorite is generally covered with
_pittings_, which have been compared in form to thumb-marks: stones
from the Supuhee, Futtehpur, [Sidenote: Pane 4h.] and Knyahinya falls
present good examples of this character. It is remarkable that pittings
bearing a close resemblance to those of meteorites have been observed
on the large partially burned grains of gunpowder, which have been
[Sidenote: Pane 4h.] picked up near the muzzle after the firing of the
35-ton and 80-ton guns at Woolwich. The pitting of the gunpowder grains
is attributed to unequal combustion, but that of meteorites seems
to be due not so much to inequality of combustibility as to that of
conductivity, fusibility and frangibility of the matter at the surface.
[Sidenote: Fragmentary form of meteorites.]
22. As picked up, complete and covered with crust, meteorites are not
spherical, nor have they any definite shape: in fact, they are always
irregular angular fragments, such as would be obtained on breaking up a
rock presenting no regularity of structure.
[Sidenote: Pane 4h.]
In the case of the Butsura fall of May 12, 1861,[12] fragments of the
stone were picked up three or four miles apart, and, wonderful to say,
it was possible to reconstruct with much certainty the portion of the
meteorite to which they once belonged: a model of the reconstructed
portion is shown in the case. Two of the fragments, [Sidenote: Pane 4a.]
in other respects fitting perfectly together, are even on the faces
of the junction now coated with a black crust, showing that one
disruption took place when the meteorite had a high velocity; two other
fragments found some miles apart fitted perfectly, and were neither
of them incrusted at the surface of fracture, thus indicating another
disruption at a time when the velocity of the meteorite had been so far
reduced that the material of the new faces was not blackened through
the generation of heat. Sometimes, as in the case of the meteorite of
Orgueil, the fragments reach the ground before the detonation is heard,
proving that the fracture has taken place at a part of the course where
the velocity of the meteorite was considerably greater than that of the
sound-vibrations (1100 feet a second).
[Sidenote: The detonations.]
23. The sudden condensation of air in front of the meteorite, the
consequent generation of heat and expansion of the outer shell, have
been held to account not only for the _break-up_ of the meteorite
into fragments, but partly also for the _crash like that of thunder_
which is a usual accompaniment of the fall. Others have referred this
noise solely to the sudden rush of air into the space traversed by
the meteorite in the early part of the course. It has, however, now
been discovered that the mere flight of a projectile through the air
with a velocity exceeding that of sound (1100 feet a second) is itself
sufficient to cause a loud detonation; neither explosion, like that
of a bomb-shell, nor simple fracture of the meteorite by reason of
pressure or sudden heat, is a necessary preliminary to the production
of the loud noise. It is found, in fact, that when a projectile is
fired with high initial velocity, say 2350 feet a second, an observer
near the path of the projectile begins to distinguish two detonations
as soon as his distance from the cannon reaches 500 feet; the first of
them, a sharp one, appears to come from that part of the projectile's
path which is nearest to the observer, and travels with the velocity
of the projectile; the later and duller one appears to come from
the cannon itself, and travels with the velocity of sound. If the
projectile is intercepted near the cannon, only a single detonation is
heard by an observer in the same position as before, and it travels
at the rate of 1100 feet a second. If the initial velocity of the
projectile is less than that of sound, only a single detonation is
heard, and it starts from the cannon.
The rolling sound, which follows the detonation of a meteorite, is due,
as in the case of thunder, to echoes from the ground and the clouds.
The detonations due to the different members of a swarm of meteorites
will combine to form a single detonation unless they are separated by
perceptible intervals of time.
[Sidenote: The sounds heard after the loud detonations.]
24. After the detonation, sounds are generally heard which have been
variously likened to the flapping of the wings of wild geese, the
bellowing of oxen, Turkish music, the roaring of a fire in a chimney,
the noise of a carriage on the pavement, and the tearing of calico:
these sounds are probably due to the whirling and oscillation of the
fragments while traversing the air, with small velocity, near the
observers, and correspond to the hiss or hum observed in the case of a
projectile travelling with a velocity less than that of sound.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: The chemical elements found in meteorites.]
25. As to the _kinds of elementary matter_[13] of which meteorites are
composed, about one-third, and those the most common, of the elements
at present recognised as constituents of the earth's crust have been
met with: no new elementary body has been discovered.
The most frequent or plentiful in their occurrence are:--
Aluminium
Calcium
Carbon
Iron
Magnesium
Nickel
Oxygen
Phosphorus
Silicon
Sulphur:
while, less frequently or in smaller quantities, are found:
Antimony
Arsenic
Chlorine
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Hydrogen
Lithium
Manganese
Nitrogen
Potassium
Sodium
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium.
[Sidenote: Elements present only in minute quantity.]
26. In addition to the above, the existence of minute traces of several
other elements has been announced; of these special mention may be made
of gallium, gold, iridium, lead, platinum and silver.
[Sidenote: Both simple and combined.]
27. Most of the above elements are present in the combined state;
the iron occurring chiefly in combination with nickel, and the
phosphorus almost always combined with both nickel and iron. Some of
them are found also in their elementary condition: perhaps hydrogen
and nitrogen; carbon, both as indistinctly crystallised diamond
and as graphitic carbon, the latter being generally amorphous, but
occasionally in cubic crystals (cliftonite); free phosphorus has been
found in Saline Township; free sulphur has been observed in one of the
carbonaceous meteorites, but may have been separated from the unstable
sulphides since the entry into our atmosphere.
[Sidenote: Some of the constituents are new to mineralogy.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4k.]
28. Of the constituents of meteorites, the following are by many
mineralogists regarded as being at present unrepresented among the
terrestrial minerals:--
_Cliftonite_, a cubic form of graphitic carbon,
_Phosphorus_,
_Various alloys of nickel and iron_,
_Moissanite_, silicide of carbon,
_Cohenite_, carbide of iron and nickel; corresponding
to Cementite, carbide of iron, found in artificial iron,
_Schreibersite_, phosphide of iron and nickel,
_Troilite_, proto-sulphide of iron,
_Oldhamite_, sulphide of calcium,
_Osbornite_, oxy-sulphide of calcium and titanium or zirconium,
_Daubréelite_, sulphide of iron and chromium,
_Lawrencite_, protochloride of iron,
_Asmanite_, a species of silica,
_Maskelynite_, a singly refracting mineral with the composition
of labradorite.
_Weinbergerite_, silicate intermediate in
chemical composition between pyroxene and nepheline.
[Sidenote: Nature of troilite, asmanite and maskelynite.]
Of the above, _Troilite_ is perhaps identical with some varieties of
terrestrial pyrrhotite: _Asmanite_, the form of silica obtained in 1867
by Prof. Maskelyne from the Breitenbach meteorite, was announced by him
in 1869 to be optically biaxal, and thus to belong to a crystalline
system different from the hexagonal to which both tridymite, then
just announced by Vom Rath, and quartz had been assigned. Later
investigations of tridymite have shown that its optical characters
and crystalline form are inconsistent with the hexagonal system of
crystallisation, and it is not impossible that asmanite and tridymite
may be specifically identical. It has been found that tridymite becomes
optically uniaxal at a moderate temperature, and its general characters
appear to be essentially identical with those of asmanite. According
to one view, _Maskelynite_ is the result of fusion of a plagioclastic
felspar; according to another, it is an independent species chemically
related to leucite.
[Sidenote: Compounds identical with terrestrial minerals.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4k.]
29. Other compounds are present, corresponding to the following
terrestrial minerals:--
Olivine and forsterite,
Enstatite and bronzite,
Diopside and augite,
Anorthite, labradorite and oligoclase,
Leucite,
Magnetite and chromite,
Pyrites,
Pyrrhotite,
Breunnerite.
Further, from one of the Lancé stones, chloride of sodium, and from the
carbonaceous meteorites, sulphates of sodium, calcium and magnesium,
have been extracted by means of water.
In addition to the above, there are several compounds or mixtures of
which the nature has not yet been satisfactorily ascertained.
[Sidenote: The rarity of quartz.]
30. Quartz, the most common of terrestrial minerals, is absent from the
stony meteorites; but in the undissolved residue of the Toluca iron
microscopic crystals have been found, some of which have important
characters identical with those of quartz, while others resemble
zircon. As mentioned above, free silica is present in the Breitenbach
meteorite as asmanite.
[Sidenote: The conditions under which these compounds can have been
formed.]
31. As to the _conditions_[14] under which such compounds can have been
formed, we may assert that they must have been very different from
those which at present obtain near the earth's surface: in fact, it is
impossible to imagine that phosphorus, the metallic nickel-iron and
the unstable sulphides can either have been formed, or have remained
unaltered, under circumstances in which water and atmospheric air have
played any prominent part. Still, what little we do know of the inner
part of our globe does not shut out the possibility of the existence
of similar elementary and compound bodies at great depths below the
surface. Daubrée,[15] after experiment, inclines to the belief that the
iron is due, in many cases at least, to reduction from an olivine rich
in diferrous silicates, and this view perhaps acquires some additional
probability from the fact that hydrogen and carbonic oxide are given
off when meteoric iron is heated: the existence, however, of such
siderolites as that of Krasnojarsk, which is rich both in metallic iron
and in orthosilicate of iron and magnesium (olivine), and yet presents
no traces of the intermediate metasilicate of iron and magnesium
(bronzite), offers a weighty objection to the general application of
this view.
[Sidenote: Classification.]
32. Meteorites may be conveniently arranged in three classes, which
pass more or less gradually into each other: the first includes all
those which consist mainly of iron, and have, therefore, been called
by Prof. Maskelyne aero-siderites (_aer_, air, and _sideros_, iron),
or, more shortly, _Siderites;_ the second is formed by those which are
composed chiefly of iron and stone, both in large proportion, and are
called aero-siderolites, or, shortly, _Siderolites;_ while those of
the third class, being almost wholly of stone, are called _Aerolites_
(_aer_, air, and _lithos_, stone).
[Sidenote: The siderites.]
33. In the Siderites the iron generally varies from 80 to 95 per
cent., and the nickel from 6 to 10 per cent.; in the Santa Catharina
siderite (of which the meteoric origin is somewhat doubtful) 34, and
in that of Oktibbeha County 60, per cent. of nickel have been found:
the nickel is alloyed with the iron, and several of the alloys have
been distinguished by special names. Owing to the presence of the
nickel, meteoric iron is often so white on a fractured surface as to
be mistaken for silver by its finder; it is also less liable to rust
than ordinary iron is. Troilite is frequently present as plates, veins
or large nodules, sometimes surrounded by graphite; schreibersite is
almost always found, and occasionally also daubréelite.
[Sidenote: Evolution of gases on heating.]
Further, various chemists have proved that hydrogen, nitrogen, marsh
gas, and the carbonic oxides are evolved when meteoric iron or stone
is heated; in one case a trace of helium was detected. Probably the
gases were not present in the occluded state, but resulted from the
decomposition or interaction of non-gaseous constituents during the
experiments.
[Sidenote: Figures produced by action of acids or bromine.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4l.]
34. The want of homogeneity and the structure of meteoric iron are
beautifully shown by the figures generally called into existence when
a polished surface is exposed to the action of acids or bromine; they
are due to the inequality of the action on thick or thin plates of
various constituents, [Sidenote: Etched figures.] the plates being
composed chiefly of two nickel-iron materials termed kamacite and
tænite. A third nickel-iron material, filling up the spaces formed
by the intersection of these plates of kamacite and tænite, is
termed plessite; it is probably not an independent substance but an
intergrowth of the first two kinds.
In the Agram iron, investigated by Widmanstätten in 1808, the plates
are parallel to the faces of the regular octahedron; such figures
are well shown by the exhibited slice of the Toluca iron; different
degrees of distinctness of such "Widmanstätten" figures are illustrated
by specimens of Seneca River, Zacatecas, Charcas, Burlington, Jewell
Hill, [Sidenote: Pane 4l.] Lagrange, Victoria West, Nelson County, and
Seeläsgen. The large Otumpa specimen, mounted on a separate pedestal,
furnishes a good example of the less distinct, and more or less
damascene, appearance presented by the etched surface of some meteoric
irons of octahedral structure.
The Braunau iron gives no "Widmanstätten" figures, but has cleavages
parallel to the faces of a cube; on etching it yields linear furrows
which were found (1848) by Neumann to have directions such as would
result from twinning of the cube about an octahedral face; as
illustrations of the "Neumann lines," etched specimens of Braunau and
Salt River are exhibited. [Sidenote: Pane 4l.]
For meteoric irons of cubic structure the percentage of nickel is lower
than 6 or 7; for those of octahedral structure it is higher than 6 or
7, and the plates of kamacite are thinner, and the structure therefore
finer, the higher the percentage of that metal. A considerable
number of meteoric irons, however, show no crystalline structure at
all, and have percentages of nickel both below and above 7; it has
been suggested that these masses have been metamorphosed, and that
crystalline structure was once present, but has disappeared as a result
of the meteorites having been heated, not merely superficially during
their passage through the earth's atmosphere, but throughout their mass
while travelling in outer space.
[Sidenote: Cooling of fused mixtures and of solutions.]
35. Though meteoric iron has been at some time, presumably, in a state
of fusion, and its present structure is a result of the particular
circumstances of the cooling of the liquid and afterwards solid
material, attempts to produce such structures by the cooling of fused
meteoric iron or artificial mixtures of nickel and iron have not yet
been successful. It will be useful, therefore, to consider briefly
some of the manifold changes which are found to take place during the
passage of fused mixtures and of solutions to the solid state, and
during the cooling of such solids to ordinary temperatures.
If a fused mixture of antimony and bismuth is allowed to cool,
the solid which first separates is neither pure antimony nor pure
bismuth, but a material which has a percentage composition depending
on, though not identical with, that of the original mixture. The
temperature for the beginning of the solidification is different for
different proportions of the two metals, and is intermediate between
622° and 268°, the solidifying temperatures of antimony and bismuth,
respectively; it approaches the latter more and more closely as the
percentage of the bismuth is increased. The solid first separated
is somewhat richer in antimony than the original mixture; the still
fused part, therefore, is somewhat richer in bismuth than before,
and does not begin to solidify till a lower temperature is reached;
the temperature thus gradually falls, instead of remaining constant,
during the solidification. In the cooling of such fused mixtures the
changing composition of the part still fused has for effect a changing
composition of the solid already separated; whence the slower the
cooling of the fused material, the greater is the homogeneity of the
final solid.
[Sidenote: Eutectic mixtures.]
A fused mixture of silver and copper behaves in a different way. When
the percentage weight of the silver is 72, and that of the copper,
therefore, is 28, solidification begins, not at a temperature between
960° and 1083°, the solidifying temperatures of silver and copper,
respectively, but at a temperature below both, namely, 770°. The
solid which first separates has the same percentage composition as
the original mixture; the part still fused has thus itself the same
percentage composition as before, and continues to solidify at the
same temperature, and in the same way, until the solidification is
complete. Such a mixture, having a definite composition and a definite
temperature of solidification, was for a time regarded as a definite
chemical compound with a complex chemical formula, but on microscopic
examination the resultant solid is found to be heterogeneous; minute
particles of the silver and copper are seen to lie side by side,
the particles being granular or lamellar in form according to the
circumstances of the cooling. If the percentage of silver is different
from 72, whether it be higher or lower, the solidification begins at
a higher temperature than 770°; whence the mixture containing 72 per
cent. of silver has been conveniently termed _eutectic_ (i.e. very
fusible); the term was suggested by Prof. F. Guthrie,[16] to whom our
knowledge of the existence of such mixtures is due.
[Sidenote: Cooling of fused mixtures and of solutions.]
36. When the silver is in excess of 72 per cent., the excess of silver
gradually collects together and solidifies at various parts of the
cooling fused mass; the still fused portion thus gradually becomes
poorer in that metal, and the temperature, instead of remaining
constant, gradually falls during the separation of the solid. At length
the percentage of silver in the fused portion falls to 72 per cent.
and the temperature to 770°; the solid which now begins to form is no
longer pure silver, but a material containing 72 per cent. of that
metal; and it continues to have the same percentage composition as the
surrounding liquid, and the temperature of solid and liquid to be 770°,
until the solidification is complete. The final solid thus consists of
blebs of silver scattered through a fine groundmass of eutectic mixture
of silver and copper. Similarly, if the copper is in excess of 28 per
cent., the final solid consists of blebs of copper scattered through a
fine groundmass of eutectic mixture of silver and copper.
If the two metals are copper and antimony, instead of copper and
silver, the results are more complicated; for the first two metals are
capable of combining together to form a definite chemical compound
represented by the formula Cu{2}Sb, and each of the metals forms
a eutectic mixture with the latter. According to the percentage
composition of the original mixture, the solid which first separates
during cooling from fusion may be either copper or antimony or the
compound Cu{2}Sb; the separation continuing, and the temperature
falling, until the first eutectic proportion and its corresponding
temperature are reached.
[Sidenote: Cooling of solutions.]
37. Analogous results are obtained during the cooling of solutions;
for instance, during the cooling of a solution of sodium chloride
(common salt) in water. A solution containing 23·5 per cent. of sodium
chloride begins to solidify at -22° C.; the separating solid is not
simple sodium chloride or simple ice, but has the same percentage
composition as the original solution, and thus the temperature remains
-22° until the whole material has become solid. On microscopic
examination the solid is seen to be heterogeneous, and to consist of
small particles of sodium chloride and ice lying side by side. If the
percentage of sodium chloride is different from 23·5, whether higher
or lower, solidification begins before the temperature has fallen to
-22°. The characters of this particular solution are thus closely
analogous to those of the eutectic mixtures described above. If the
sodium chloride exceeds 23·5 per cent., the excess of sodium chloride
begins to separate, and solidify, at various parts of the liquid, at
a temperature higher than -22°; it continues to separate, and the
temperature to fall, until the proportion of sodium chloride in the
residual liquid is reduced to 23·5 per cent. and the temperature to
-22°. Afterwards the separating solid has the same composition as
the residual liquid (23·5 per cent. of sodium chloride), and the
temperature remains constant, until the residual liquid has been wholly
transformed into a solid fine-grained mixture of sodium chloride
and ice. The final solid thus consists of large particles of sodium
chloride dispersed through a fine groundmass consisting of eutectic
mixture of sodium chloride and ice. Similarly, if the water is in
excess of 76·5 per cent., the final solid consists of large particles
of ice dispersed through a fine groundmass consisting of eutectic
mixture of sodium chloride and ice.
The results of the cooling of a solution of ferric chloride are still
more complicated; for this substance enters into chemical combination
with water, and in no fewer than four different proportions. The solid
which first separates from the cooling solution may thus, according to
the percentage of ferric chloride, be either ferric chloride or water,
or any one of the various compounds of the two; and to each pair of
compounds nearest to each other in composition corresponds a different
eutectic mixture and a different temperature for its formation.
[Sidenote: Cooling of solids.]
38. Some solid bodies, during cooling, show changes analogous to those
observed in solutions, and are therefore termed "solid solutions."
For instance, if a hot physically homogeneous solid obtained from the
fusion of iron with carbon is cooled, there may result a separation in
the solid of particles of either iron or cementite, the latter being
a chemical compound of iron and carbon represented by the formula
Fe{3}C; the particular substance separated depending on the percentage
composition of the original solid. This separation continues, and the
temperature falls, until the residual physically homogeneous material
contains 0·9 per cent. of carbon and the temperature is 690°; the
temperature then remains constant, although the body is surrounded by
a cooling medium, until this residual physically homogeneous material
has been wholly transformed into a fine-grained mixture of iron and
cementite, containing 0·9 per cent. of carbon. This particular kind of
mixture has been termed eutectic, though the transformation has taken
place, not by solidification from fusion, but in a body which was
already solid. Prof. Rinne has proposed for such cases the substitution
of the term _eutropic_, thus avoiding the suggestion of fusion. The
eutectic mixture of iron (or ferrite) and cementite is known as
pearlite.
[Sidenote: Overcooling.]
39. Just as water may be cooled so quietly that it is still liquid at
a temperature much below the normal freezing point, a mixture may be
cooled in such a way as to pass much below the eutectic (or eutropic)
point without the normal transformation taking place; it is then said
to be overcooled. The equilibrium, however, is very unstable, and
the transformation, once begun, takes place almost instantaneously
throughout the whole mass.
[Sidenote: Crystalline structure of artificial iron.]
40. A structure analogous to that shown by the Widmanstätten figures,
though on a finer scale, has been observed by Prof. J. O. Arnold and
Mr. A. McWilliam[17] in cast steel containing 0·4 per cent. of carbon;
the plates of iron (or ferrite) in the cast steel correspond to the
plates of kamacite in meteorites. Further, it has been found that the
plates in the cast steel disappear during the process of annealing;
similarly, there are no Widmanstätten figures, and the structure of the
material is granular, near the outer surface of an unweathered meteoric
iron; presumably as a result of the high temperature to which the outer
part of the mass has been raised during the passage of the meteorite
through the earth's atmosphere.
[Sidenote: Structure of meteoric irons.]
41. At present it is generally imagined that kamacite and tænite are
definite alloys, or perhaps solid solutions, of iron and nickel, the
former being poor in nickel (6 or 7 per cent.) and the latter rich
in that constituent (25 to 38 per cent.), that kamacite and tænite
separate in succession from the molten mass or solid solution until
the residual part is so rich in nickel that a eutectic (or eutropic)
proportion is reached; the residual material then forms plessite,
which, according to this view, is a eutectic (or eutropic) mixture of
kamacite and tænite. But it is difficult to understand how the thin
plates of tænite are deposited on the plates of kamacite, seeing that
they contain more nickel than kamacite and plessite, and yet have an
intermediate epoch of formation, prior to the epoch of formation of
that tænite which is a constituent of the plessite; one suggestion is
that the thin plates of tænite have been deposited on the plates of
kamacite owing to the temperature having fallen well below the eutectic
(or eutropic) point after the separation of the kamacite and before the
eutectic transformation of the residual material has taken place. And
Prof. Rinne[18] himself is of opinion that the Widmanstätten structure
has been wholly developed in meteoric iron after the solidification
of the mass; further, as the relations of the kamacite, tænite and
plessite to the enclosed troilite indicate that the troilite was solid
before the octahedral structure was developed, and as that mineral,
under normal circumstances, solidifies at about 950°, he infers that
the structure was developed below that temperature. In the case of the
Jewell (Duel) Hill meteorite it was discovered by Dr. Brezina that,
notwithstanding the pronounced octahedral structure, plates of troilite
are embedded, not in accidental positions nor between successive
octahedral layers, but parallel to the faces of the corresponding
cube; whence Prof. Rinne suggests that this iron, now of octahedral
structure, and possibly all others of a similar character, had a cubic
structure at the epoch when they entered upon the solid condition.
But, as both Prof. Rinne and Dr. Brezina[19] have pointed out, a fused
mixture of nickel and iron, cooling undisturbedly in outer space, may
have solidified at a temperature even below 950° and thus have been
much overcooled.
[Sidenote: Tænite possibly a eutectic mixture.]
42. In the course of a recent elaborate investigation of the changes of
the magnetic permeability of the Sacramento meteoric iron with changing
temperature, Mr. S. W. J. Smith[20] has been led to infer that the
magnetic behaviour can only be explained by imagining the meteorite
to consist largely of plates of nickel-iron, containing about 7 per
cent. of nickel (kamacite), separated from each other by thin plates of
a nickel-iron constituent (tænite), containing about 27 per cent. of
nickel and having different thermo-magnetic characters from those of
kamacite; he suggests, however, that tænite is not a definite chemical
compound, but is itself a eutectic (or eutropic) mixture, and consists
of kamacite and a nickel-iron compound containing not less than 37 per
cent. of nickel. And he points out that, while the tænite mechanically
isolated from meteorites for analysis has approximately the lower
percentage (27 per cent.), the tænite chemically isolated through the
prolonged action of dilute acid (which would remove much of the admixed
kamacite) has a higher percentage, which in several cases approximates
to 40 per cent.
[Sidenote: Few siderites have been seen to fall.]
43. The Siderites _actually observed to fall_, or found soon after a
luminous meteor had been seen, or a detonation heard, by people in
the neighbourhood, reach only the small number of nine; they are,
Agram, Charlotte, Braunau, Victoria West, Nedagolla, Rowton, Mazapil,
Cabin Creek, and N'Goureyma. The remaining specimens in collections
of Siderites are presumed to be of meteoric origin by reason of the
peculiarity of their appearance and chemical composition, and of the
characters of the material in which they have been found (Art. 7).
[Sidenote: Siderites of large size.]
The large Cranbourne meteorite, mounted in a special case in the
Pavilion, before rusting weighed 3-1/2 tons. The two largest known
were found in Western Greenland and Mexico, respectively, and are both
of very irregular shape. The Greenland mass is 11 feet long, 7-1/2
feet wide, and 6 feet thick, and its weight, which had been variously
estimated at from 50 to 100 tons, has been determined to be 36-1/2
tons; the mass had long been known to the Eskimos, and was inquired
after by Captain John Ross in 1818; it was shown by a native to
Lieutenant Peary in 1894, who afterwards transported it from Melville
Bay to New York; it is now preserved in the American Museum of Natural
History in that city. The Mexican mass is 13 feet long, 6 feet wide,
and 5 feet thick, and has an estimated weight of 50 tons; it is the
property of the Mexican Government, and is still lying at El Ranchito,
near Bacubirito, Province of Sinaloa.
[Sidenote: The iron found at Ovifak is probably of terrestrial origin.]
44. The difficulty of distinguishing an iron of terrestrial from one of
meteoric origin was rendered very evident by the prolonged controversy
as to the origin of the large masses of iron, containing one or two
per cent. of nickel, and weighing 9,000, 20,000, and 50,000 lbs.,
respectively, found in 1870 by Baron N. A. E. Nordenskiöld on the beach
at Ovifak, Disko Island, Western Greenland.
A careful examination of the rocks of the neighbourhood shows that
the basalt contains nickeliferous iron disseminated through it, and
that the large masses of iron, [Sidenote: Pane 4m.] at first thought
to be meteorites, are very probably of terrestrial origin, and have
been left exposed upon the seashore through the weathering of the
rock which originally enclosed them. Some of the malleable metallic
nodules extracted from the basalt were found to contain as much as
6·5 per cent. of nickel. In 1880 Professor K. J. V. Steenstrup[21]
found ferriferous basalt _in situ_ in three different parts of the
island. At Assuk (Asuk) the enclosed balls of iron reach a diameter of
nearly three-quarters of an inch. Some assert that the basalt and the
nickel-iron have been expelled together from great depths below the
earth's surface, while others consider that the nickel-iron is due to
the reduction of the iron-compounds in the basalt by the passage of the
lava through the beds of lignite and other vegetable matter found in
the vicinity.
[Sidenote: Other terrestrial irons.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4m.]
45. With the Ovifak iron in the case are shown other specimens of iron
which have been brought by various explorers from West Greenland, and
were formerly thought to have had a meteoric origin. The discovery of
ferriferous basalt, not only _in situ_ in several places, but also
deposited in a Greenlander's grave (1879) along with knives (similar
to those given to Captain John Ross in 1818) and the usual stone
tools, renders it clear that the Eskimos were not dependent solely on
meteorites for their metallic iron, as had long been supposed.
Mr. Skey announced in 1885 the discovery of terrestrial nickel-iron
in New Zealand. Grains of the alloy (Awaruite), containing as much as
67·6 per cent. of nickel, are found in the sand of the rivers flowing
from a range of mountains composed of olivine-enstatite rocks, in
places altered to serpentine: similar particles have been found in the
serpentine itself. Similarly, in the sand of the stream Elvo, near
Biella, in Piedmont, and of the river Fraser, British Columbia, grains
of nickel-iron containing 75 or 76 per cent. of nickel have been found:
and in the placer gravel of a stream in Josephine and Jackson Counties,
Oregon, U.S.A., large quantities of waterworn pebbles, which enclose
an alloy (Josephinite) of nickel and iron containing 72 per cent. of
the former metal, have been met with. Professor Andrews many years ago
established the presence of minute particles of metallic iron in some
basalts; Dr. Sauer has lately found a single nodule of malleable iron
of the size of a walnut in the basalt of Ascherhübel, in Saxony; Dr.
Hornstein has described large nodules of (nickel-free) iron found in
basalt in a quarry at Weimar, near Cassel; Dr. Beckenkamp has described
nodules of metallic iron found in clay at Dettelbach, near Würzburg;
and Dr. Johnston-Lavis has announced the find of an enclosure of
metallic iron in a leucitic lava of Monte Somma; Dr. Hoffmann has noted
the occurrence of minute spherules of brittle iron both in perthite
and quartzite in Ontario; Dr. Hussak has recorded the discovery of
metallic iron in an alluvium of Brazil, and Dr. Högbom has found it
associated with topaz, quartz, felspar, and other minerals, in limonite
from an unspecified place in South America; two minute grains of iron
were found by Mr. Osaka in the débris of an agglomerate at Nishinotake,
Japan.
[Sidenote: The stony matter of meteorites.]
46. The stony part of the siderolites and aerolites is almost entirely
crystalline, and in most cases presents a peculiar "chondritic" or
granular structure, the loosely coherent grains being composed of
minerals similar to those which enclose them, and containing in most
cases minute particles of iron and troilite disseminated through them:
glass-inclusions are found to be present. The minerals mentioned above
as occurring in meteorites are such as are very characteristic of the
more basic terrestrial rocks, such as dunite, lherzolite and basalt,
which have been expelled from considerable depths below the earth's
surface.
47. Several attempts to classify aerolites according to their
mineralogical constitution have been made, but it cannot be said that
any of them is very satisfactory; seeing that even in the same stone
there may be much difference in its parts, a perfect classification on
such a basis is scarcely to be hoped for.
[Sidenote: Chondritic aerolites.]
About eleven out of every twelve of the stony meteorites belong to a
division to which Rose[22] gave the name of _chondritic_ (_chondros_,
a grain): they present a very fine-grained but crystalline matrix or
paste, consisting of olivine and enstatite or bronzite, with more or
less nickel-iron, troilite, chromite, augite and anorthic felspar;
through this paste are disseminated round chondrules of various sizes
(up to that of a walnut) and with the same mineral composition as the
matrix; in some cases the chondrules consist wholly or in great part
of glass.[23] In mineral composition chondritic aerolites approximate
more or less to terrestrial lherzolites. Some meteorites consist
almost solely of chondrules, others contain only few; in some cases
the chondrules are easy separable from the surrounding material. Of
the chondritic division Knyahinya, Pegu, Muddoor, [Sidenote: Pane 4n.]
Seres, Judesegeri, Khiragurh, Utrecht and Nellore (pane 4p) afford good
illustrations.
[Sidenote: A carbonaceous group.]
A few meteorites belonging to this division are remarkable as
containing carbon in combination with hydrogen and oxygen. Of these
the Alais and Cold Bokkeveld meteorites [Sidenote: Pane 4n.] are good
examples: the former has a bituminous smell; it yields sulphates of
magnesium, calcium, sodium and potassium, if steeped in water.
[Sidenote: Aerolites without chondrules.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4o.]
48. The remaining aerolites are not chondritic, and they contain little
or no nickel-iron; of these we may specially mention for their mineral
composition the following:--
_Juvinas_ and _Stannern_, consisting essentially of anorthite and
augite.
_Petersburg_, consisting of anorthite, augite and olivine, with a
little chromite and nickel-iron: both Juvinas and Petersburg may be
compared to terrestrial basalt.
_Sherghotty_, consisting chiefly of augite and maskelynite.
_Angra dos Reis_, consisting almost wholly of augite; olivine is
present in small proportion.
_Bustee_, of diopside, enstatite and a little anorthic felspar, with
some nickel-iron, oldhamite and osbornite.
_Bishopville_, of enstatite and anorthic felspar, with occasional
augite, nickel-iron, troilite and chromite.
_Roda_, of olivine and bronzite.
_Chassigny_, consisting of olivine with enclosed chromite, and thus
mineralogically similar to a terrestrial dunite.
[Sidenote: Is there a periodic recurrence?]
49. The importance of the examination and classification of
meteorites, with a view to a possible recognition of _periodicity_
of fall of specimens presenting the same characters, need only be
mentioned to be appreciated: such a determination is, however, rendered
very difficult by the close similarity of structure and composition
presented by the great majority of the aerolites of the large
chondritic division.
[Sidenote: Few aerolites are known which have not been seen to fall.]
50. Attention has been already directed to the fact that although
many masses of meteoric iron, some of them like that of El Ranchito,
near Bacubirito, in Mexico, weighing very many tons, have been found
at various parts of the earth's surface, very few of them have been
actually observed to fall: in the case of the stony meteorites just
the opposite holds good, for they are never very large, and few are
known which have not an authenticated date of fall. This may be due to
the fact that a meteoric stone is less easily distinguished than is a
meteoric iron from ordinary terrestrial bodies, and will thus in most
cases remain unnoticed unless its fall has been actually observed;
while, further, a quick decomposition and disintegration must set in on
exposure to atmospheric influences. The smaller size of the meteoric
stones may be due to the greater ease with which they break up on the
sudden increase of temperature of their outer surface, consequent
on their entry into the earth's atmosphere. The largest meteoric
stone preserved in a Museum is one which fell as part of a shower at
Knyahinya, Hungary, in 1866: it weighs 647 lbs. and is at Vienna. A
larger stone (723 lbs.) fell at Tabory, Russia, in 1887, but was broken
to pieces by the impact on the earth; fragments of a still larger
single stone, weighing at least 1244 lbs., were found near together at
Long Island, Kansas, U.S.A., but the fall was not observed.
[Sidenote: The chondrules and their matrix.]
51. If we now examine minutely the structure of the meteoric stones,
it will be seen that almost all of them appear to be made up chiefly
of irregular angular fragments, and that some of them bear a close
resemblance to volcanic tuffs. In the large group of chondritic
aerolites, chondrules or spherules, some of which can only be seen
under the microscope while others reach the size of a walnut, are
embedded in a matrix, apparently made up of minute splinters such as
might result from the fracture of the chondrules themselves. In fact,
until recently, it was thought by some[24] that the chondrules owe
their form, not to crystallisation, but to friction, and that the
matrix was actually produced by the wearing down of the chondrules
through collision with each other either as oscillating components of
a comet or during repeated ejection from a volcanic vent of some small
celestial body. Chondrules have been observed, however, presenting
forms and crystalline surfaces incompatible with such a mode of
formation, and others have been described which exhibit features
resulting from mutual interference during their growth.
The crystallisation of the chondrules is independent of their form,
and must have started, not at the centre, but at various places
on their surfaces; Dr. Sorby[25] argued that some at least of the
chondrules must once have fallen as drops of fiery rain, and have
assumed their shape in an atmosphere heated to nearly their own
temperature. The chondritic structure is different from anything
which has been observed in terrestrial rocks, and the chondrules are
distinct in character from those observed in perlite and obsidian.
After much study, Dr. Brezina[26] lends his weighty support to the
hypothesis that the structural features of meteorites are the result
of a hurried crystallisation: and Prof. Wadsworth[27] accepts the same
interpretation.
[Sidenote: Some meteoric materials appear to have been altered since
their consolidation.]
[Sidenote: Pane 4o.]
52. Since the time of their consolidation some meteoric stones, as
Tadjera, appear to have been heated throughout their mass to a high
temperature: and in the case of Orvinio, Chantonnay, Juvinas, and
Weston, fragments are cemented together with a material having the
same composition as the fragments themselves, thus giving rise to
a structure resembling that of a volcanic breccia. Others seem to
have experienced a chemical change, for some of the chondrules in
Knyahinya and in Mezö-Madaras, when examined with the microscope, are
found to be surrounded by spherical and concentric aggregations of
minute particles of nickel-iron, perhaps due to the reducing action
of hydrogen at a high temperature. Others, as Château-Renard, Pultusk
and Alessandria, present what in terrestrial rocks would probably be
called faults: in some cases the fissures are seen to have been filled
with a fused material after the chondrules have been broken and one
side of the fissure has glided along the other. These peculiarities of
structure suggest that the small body which reaches the earth is only
a minute fragment of a much larger mass. It has been suggested that
the chondritic structure is of metamorphic origin, and a mere result
of enormous pressure on the stony material during the passage through
the earth's atmosphere; according to still another view, the structure,
though metamorphic, is of extra-terrestrial origin, and due to the
quick cooling of a tuff-like stone which has been partially melted, for
instance, by the heat from a neighbouring new star or by traversing the
hot vapours on the limits of an old one.
[Sidenote: Do meteorites reach our atmosphere as clouds of gas or dust?]
53. The idea that meteorites arrive at our own atmosphere, not as
fragments of rock, but as mere clouds of gas or dust, has been recently
revived and again discarded. According to this hypothesis, the air,
instead of dispersing the entering cloud, acts in the contrary way,
and in a few seconds of time presses the particles together to form
solid bodies. This idea is open to various objections, and in any case
one can scarcely understand how large masses of iron, presenting a
wonderful regularity of crystalline structure, can have been the result
of so hurried a process: and if we once grant that the irons enter the
atmosphere as solid bodies, it is difficult to believe that the same is
not the case with the stones.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: Where do meteorites come from?]
54. From the above it will be evident that the old hypotheses that
meteorites are terrestrial stones which have been struck by lightning,
or carried to the sky by a whirlwind, or are concretions in the
atmosphere, or are due to the condensation of a dust-cloud coming from
some volcano, or have been shot recently from terrestrial volcanoes,
are inconsistent with later observation; it may be granted that the
bodies reach our atmosphere from outer space. From what part or parts
of space do they come? Their general similarity of structure and
chemical composition, and more especially the presence of nickeliferous
iron in almost every one, suggest that most, if not all of them, have
had a common source, and that they are chips of a single celestial body.
[Sidenote: Probably not from the sun, nor from the moon, earth, or
other planet.]
55. Dr. Sorby suggested that they are probably ejected from the sun
itself, though this is difficult to reconcile with the fact that some
of them are easily combustible. Others, among whom we may mention
Laplace, have suggested that they come from volcanoes of the moon which
are now active; but the suggestion, although mathematically sound, has
no physical basis, for, so far as one can discover, active volcanoes
do not there exist: and Sir Robert Ball[28] has virtually excluded the
lunar volcanoes, which were active in times now long past, by pointing
out that if a projectile from the moon once misses the earth, its
chance of ever reaching the earth is too small to be worthy of mention.
It has further been shown that, although the explosive force necessary
to carry a projectile so far from one of the smaller planets that it
will not return, is not very large, yet the initial velocity requisite
to carry the body as far as the earth's orbit is so considerable,
and the chance of hitting the earth so slight, that a more probable
hypothesis is, to say the least, desirable. If these bodies have been
shot from volcanoes of any planet, Sir Robert Ball is himself inclined,
upon mechanical grounds alone, to believe that the projection was from
our own in bygone ages; for as such projectiles, having once got away
from the earth, would take up paths round the sun which would intersect
the earth's orbit, every one of them would have a chance of some time
or other meeting with the earth again at the point of intersection, and
of appearing as a meteorite. The size and initial velocity requisite
for the escape of a projectile through a lofty atmosphere would be
enormous: even then the difficulty would still remain that meteorites
generally differ, both in structure and material, from anything known
to have been ejected from existing terrestrial volcanoes. To meet
these difficulties, Sir Robert has speculatively suggested that the
matter was expelled before the surface of the earth became solid, and
at a time when there was as much activity in the terrestrial planet as
there is now in the material of the sun itself.
Nor is it probable that they are portions of a lost satellite of the
earth, or are due to a collision of two planets; for in each of these
cases we should expect to have received some of the larger fragments
which must at the same time have been produced.
Much light is thrown on the history of meteorites by the discovery of a
relationship with shooting stars and comets.
[Sidenote: Shooting or falling stars.]
56. The meteorite-yielding fireball, referred to in Art. 17, is not
the only luminous meteor, apart from lightning, with which we are
acquainted. On a clear dark night any one can see a star shoot now
and then across the firmament: it is estimated that on the average as
many as fourteen are visible to a single observer every hour. Are the
_shooting_, or, as they are often called, _falling stars_ products of
our own atmosphere, or do they, like the meteorites, come from outer
space? In 1794 Chladni, in the memoir already referred to, gave reasons
for believing that a meteoritic fireball and a shooting star are only
varieties of one phenomenon.
[Sidenote: The November star-showers.]
57. But long after the cosmic origin of meteorites had been generally
acknowledged, the atmospheric origin of the shooting stars was still
asserted, and it was not till the wondrous star-shower of November
12-13, 1833,[29] that the cosmic origin of any of the shooting stars
was finally established. During that night upwards of 200,000 shooting
stars, according to a rough estimate, were seen from a single place;
and the remarkable observation was made at various localities, widely
distributed over North America, that the apparent paths of the shooting
stars in the sky, when prolonged backwards, all passed through a point
in the constellation Leo: this point of radiation appeared to rotate
with the heavens during the eight hours for which the shower was
visible.
Hence it was manifest that the star-shower was independent of the
earth's rotation and must therefore have come from outer space; that
the radiation of the paths was only apparent and due to perspective;
and that, relatively to an observer, the flights of all the shooting
stars were really parallel to the direction of the apparent radiant
point.
On the same day of November in each of the three following years the
shower was repeated though on a less grand scale, and the constancy of
the radiant point was confirmed: similar small showers had been seen
also in 1831 and 1832 before the radiation had been noticed. Though in
the years immediately before and after 1831-6 no remarkable display
of November meteors took place, it was remembered that a similar
shower had been chronicled by Humboldt and by Ellicott, as observed by
them on November 12, 1799; and a study of ancient documents revealed
the fact that a grand star-shower had been recorded several times
in October and November since A.D. 902, the date having gradually
advanced, during that long space of time, from the middle of October
to the middle of November.[30] The only sufficient explanation of the
observed facts is that a swarm of isolated small bodies, solid and
non-luminous--meteorites in fact--is moving in an orbit round the sun,
completing the circuit in 33-1/4 years; the orbit intersects that of
the earth, and the earth meets the swarm at the place of intersection.
The isolated bodies or meteorites become luminous, as already explained
in Art. 17, after their entry into the earth's atmosphere. The swarm
can be only a few hundred thousand miles thick, for the earth,
travelling through space at the rate of 66,000 miles an hour, passes
through the densest part in 2 or 3 hours, and through the whole in
10 to 15 hours: its length, however, must be enormous, amounting to
hundreds of millions of miles; for, although the meteorites move with
a velocity of twenty miles a second, the swarm takes 5 or 6 years to
pass the place of intersection with the earth's orbit, thus causing
star-showers, more or less dense, during that number of years.
Contrary to expectation, no large November star-shower occurred either
in the year 1899 or in the years which have since elapsed.
Schiaparelli has shown that the unequal attraction of the sun for the
individuals of a swarm of meteorites moving round it would scatter
them along the orbit, and in the course of time produce a more or
less complete ring; if this intersects the earth's orbit an annual
star-shower must ensue.
[Sidenote: The August star-shower and its comet.]
58. A small annual star-shower occurs, in fact, on August 10-11,[31]
and has been observed since A.D. 830: it radiates from a point in the
constellation Perseus. Schiaparelli calculated in 1866 the orbit and
motion of the meteorites producing it, and was surprised to find that
the numbers corresponded exactly with those calculated for one of the
recently observed comets; in other words, a comet was moving in the
path of the meteorites, and at exactly the same speed. At the same time
Schiaparelli gave numbers defining the motions of the meteorites which
would cause the periodic November star-showers.
[Sidenote: Star-showers related to comets.]
59. Immediately afterwards, when the numbers calculated by Oppolzer
for the orbit of the comet discovered by Tempel were published, it was
seen that they were really identical with those already calculated
by Schiaparelli for the orbit of the meteorites of the November
star-shower, and that here again a comet and a swarm of meteorites were
moving in exactly the same path at exactly the same rate.
Almost immediately afterwards it was shown that the radiant points
of the small star-showers of April 20-21 and November 27-28 both
correspond to the orbits of known comets.
It was evident that these could not be accidental coincidences, and
that the comets and the attendant swarms of meteorites are closely
related to each other.
[Sidenote: Comets.]
60. An intimate connection between, if not complete identity of,
meteorites, shooting stars and comets, had indeed long been suspected.
Astronomers were convinced that comets, though occasionally of enormous
size, are always of extremely small mass, since they pass by the
earth and other planets without sensibly disturbing their motions;
the comet of 1770 passed through the system of Jupiter's satellites
without any perceptible action upon them: it has been calculated that
the mass of a small comet may be about eight pounds. Again, the light
of a comet, like that of a cloud or planet, was seen to be partially
polarised: hence part, at least, must be reflected sunlight, for the
plane of polarisation passes through the sun's place. Further, stars
of very small magnitude have been seen not only through the tail, but
even through the nucleus, of a comet without any apparent alteration
of position by refraction: hence it was inferred that a comet is not
a continuous mass, but consists of particles so far distant from each
other that a ray of light may pass through the comet without meeting
a single one of them. Such a constitution likewise accounts for the
absence of phases of the reflected light: for although only half of
each particle will be directly illuminated by the sun, the remaining
half will receive light irregularly reflected from the particles more
distant from the sun.
Among others, Chladni in 1817 had referred to the great similarity in
the motions of comets and meteorites: Olmsted, in 1834, had calculated
the orbit of a comet which would cause the November star-shower; his
results were wrong owing to the assumption that the shower was annual:
Cappocci, in 1842, gave reasons for believing that a meteorite is a
small comet: Reichenbach, in 1858, in a most elaborate paper,[32]
sought to prove that a comet is a swarm of meteorites; that each
chondrule of a meteorite had once been an individual of a cometary
swarm, and owes its rounded shape to frequent collision with its
fellows; that the rest of the stone consists of the broken splinters
thus produced; and that the brecciated aspect of many meteorites
is due to collisions in the denser part or nucleus of a comet. As
already pointed out in Art. 51, later modes of investigation have led
petrologists to reject this method of accounting for the rotundity of
the chondrules.
[Sidenote: Other star-showers.]
61. In addition to the few radiant points which correspond to swarms
moving in orbits identical with those of known comets, there are
numerous radiant points which have not yet been recognised as related
to existing comets, and may possibly be due to swarms produced by the
dispersal of comets along their orbits; indeed, it has been inferred
from observation of shooting stars that on the average there are no
fewer than fifty distinct radiant points, and therefore showers, for
any night of the year. But there are still others of which there is
yet no satisfactory explanation. A cometary swarm is thin, and is
passed through in a few hours; the stars are seen to radiate from the
corresponding point of the sky for only that length of time: but there
are other radiant points which have a duration of several months, and
this is the case notwithstanding the constantly changing direction of
the earth's motion in space.[33] Since the position of the radiant
point in the sky as seen by a terrestrial observer depends not only on
the direction in which the swarm is moving, but also on the velocity
and direction of motion of the observer through space, it is easily
seen that a radiant point having a fixed position during some months
corresponds to something quite distinct from a cometary swarm. It
has been suggested by Mr. W. F. Denning (1899) that in some cases a
long-continued radiant point may really be due, not to a single swarm,
but to successive swarms not physically associated with each other.
On the other hand, Professor H. H. Turner has shown that the average
effect of the earth's attraction on a meteorite passing near it is to
change only the _position_ in our orbit at which we meet the meteorite
(i.e. the time of year), not the relative-direction of motion or the
relative speed; hence, a swarm of such meteorites must be spread
out, in the course of ages, into a succession of rings, all of them
equally inclined to the earth's orbit, but intersecting it at different
places; the radiant point will then be of long duration. Professor
A. S. Herschel[34] made the suggestion that the radiant points of
long duration may have resulted from the passage, in bygone epochs,
of quickly moving streams of cosmical matter through a ring of small
bodies circulating, as satellites, round the earth.
[Sidenote: Daily and yearly maxima of shooting stars.]
62. The rotation of the earth round its axis is such that the part
furthest from the sun, for which it is therefore midnight, is moving
in the same direction as the earth in its orbit; whence, at the part
of the earth most forward in the orbit it is sunrise, and at the part
most backward it is sunset. Thus, as Schiaparelli pointed out, the
meteorites which enter the atmosphere in the first half of the night
are more or less following the earth in its orbit, and have their
velocity relative to the earth diminished by the earth's own motion
of translation; they are thus less likely to produce shooting stars
than those which enter the atmosphere in the second half of the night
and are travelling more or less oppositely to the earth as it moves in
its orbit, and have their relative velocity increased. Hence, if the
directions of flight of meteorites were uniformly distributed in space,
the number of shooting stars hourly visible at one place, a number
which would be constant if the earth were at rest, would gradually vary
during the night, reaching a maximum about 3 A.M.
Also, as the point in space towards which the earth is moving in
its orbit varies in height above the horizon during the year, being
highest in autumn and lowest in spring, the number of shooting stars
hourly visible at one place will gradually vary from night to night,
reaching a maximum in the former season and a minimum in the latter,
if the directions of flight of the meteorites be themselves uniformly
distributed in space.
[Sidenote: The breaking up of comets.]
63. The history of Biela's comet[35] is of great interest as throwing
light on the relationship of comets and swarms of meteorites. Though
already observed in 1772 and in 1806, this comet was not recognised
as periodic till it was seen by Biela in 1826, when its orbit was
determined. On its returns in 1832 and 1845 it was found in its
calculated positions, but in the latter year was seen to be double, a
small comet being visible beside a larger one. Vast changes took place
during the time the companions were visible. The smaller one grew both
in size and brightness, each threw out a tail, the smaller threw out
a second tail, afterwards the larger showed two nuclei and two tails,
then the smaller became the brighter of the two companions; next three
tails were shown by the primary, and three cometary fragments were
visible round its nucleus. On the next return, in 1852, the two comets
were farther apart, one being more than a million miles ahead of the
other. The next favourable return was to be in 1866, and the orbit was
by this time so well known that the positions of the two companions
could be calculated beforehand with great precision; owing to the
changes which had been visibly taking place, the arrival of the comets
was looked forward to with great interest by astronomers. But neither
in 1866, nor on the next occasion in 1872, were they to be seen in
their calculated positions, and a careful examination of the whole sky
failed to lead to their discovery.
The connexion between several comets and meteoritic swarms having
in the meantime been established, it was now surmised that Biela's
comet might have been scattered along part of its path, and that
some evidence of the dispersal might perhaps be obtained on the next
occasion, November 27, 1872, of the passage of the earth across the
comet's orbit. In fact the star-shower of that date, with a radiant
point corresponding to the orbit of Biela's comet, was observed to be
much more dense than usual, the stars shooting across the sky at the
rate of a thousand an hour for several hours.
[Sidenote: Passage of the earth through a comet.]
64. Klinkerfues, a German astronomer, was struck with the idea that if
this star-shower were really due to the passage of the earth through
a moving swarm of meteorites, the latter might possibly be visible
as it departed from our neighbourhood. The swarm having come from
a radiant point in the northern sky, after passing the earth would
need to be sought near the opposite point in the southern sky; he
telegraphed, therefore, to the Madras observatory, asking Pogson, the
astronomer, to search for the swarm in the direction opposite to the
radiant point. The search was successful; on two mornings a small comet
was distinctly seen, and on the second morning it showed a tail with
an apparent length equal to one-fourth the apparent diameter of the
moon. Bad weather came on, and the comet got away without being again
seen. The two Madras observations agree with a motion in the orbit
of Biela's comet, and show that the earth had passed excentrically
through the small comet seen by Pogson. This small comet was probably
a third fragment of Biela's, for it was 200 million miles behind the
calculated position of the first two. From these two observations it
is inferred that a swarm of meteorites, though only manifesting itself
by a star-shower when passing through the earth's atmosphere, at some
distance from us may be visible as a comet by reflected sunlight.
[Sidenote: Fall of a meteorite during a star-shower.]
65. A dense star-shower[36] recurred on the same day of the month
(November 27) in 1885, the principal part being over in six hours. The
hourly number visible at one place at the time of greatest density was
estimated at 75,000. In the densest part of the stream, the average
distance of the individuals from each other was about twenty miles.
During this star-shower a piece of iron weighing about 8 lbs. was seen
to fall at Mazapil in Mexico:[37] in external characters and chemical
composition it is similar to the other meteoric irons: the simultaneity
was probably accidental.
[Sidenote: The reason of its rarity.]
66. It may be asked why, if star-showers are caused by the entry of
solid bodies into our atmosphere from without, there is only one
authentic instance of material being actually seen to fall and being
picked up during such a shower. As it is absolutely beyond question
that star-showers do come from outer space, we can seek an explanation
only in the size or speed of the entering individuals, or in the nature
of their material. A sufficient reason is to be found in the small
size of the individuals; for the meteorites which actually reach the
ground rarely weigh more than a few pounds, and are often quite minute;
a small diminution of the original individual would thus ensure its
complete destruction before the planetary velocity was exhausted: that
the individuals of a swarm are extremely minute follows from the fact
that the total mass of the biggest swarm is small, while the number of
the individuals seems almost infinite.
[Sidenote: Large and small luminous meteors essentially similar.]
67. Between the small silent shooting star visible only with the
telescope and the large detonating meteorite-yielding fireball
there is every gradation; during the star-showers themselves many
fireballs of great size and brilliancy are seen, while the smaller
individuals appear in no way different from the solitary shooting star.
The luminous meteors, large and small, are in the upper atmosphere,
few higher than 100 miles, few lower than 30 miles from the earth's
surface; they all have velocities of the same order of magnitude,
comparable with that of the earth in its orbit; in each there must be
a solid body, as is proved by the long path in the sky, for attendant
gas or vapour would be immediately scattered or burnt; large and small
present similar varieties of colour, and leave similar luminous trails;
examination with the spectroscope teaches us that the light of the
meteors is such as would result from the ignition of such meteorites as
have actually reached the ground. The frequent absence of detonation
may likewise be due in many cases to the small size, or small relative
velocity, of the entering meteorite.
[Sidenote: The light of a comet.]
68. That part of the light of a comet is reflected sunlight is
confirmed by examination with the spectroscope, in which instrument is
seen a feeble continuous spectrum crossed by dark lines, identical with
those afforded by the direct light of the sun. But a comet is also more
or less self-luminous; for, in addition to the continuous spectrum,
there are bright flutings and bright lines to which much attention
has been given. The three ordinary bright flutings were found by Sir
William Huggins in 1868 to be identical with the spectrum obtained
when an electric spark is passed through olefiant gas, and they are
now recognised as due to carbon. The carbon is presumed to be combined
with hydrogen, sometimes also with nitrogen; in the case of comets
approaching very near the sun, the lines of sodium, and others which
have been supposed to be iron-lines, are seen.[38]
[Sidenote: Tait's suggestion.]
69. The discovery made by Schiaparelli proves, as already pointed out,
that there is a relationship between comets and meteoritic swarms;
Schiaparelli himself held the view that a comet and its attendant
swarms are merely of identical origin. In 1869[39] Tait discussed,
from a purely dynamical point of view, the question as to whether
the swarm of meteorites attending a comet may not really be part of
the comet itself; he showed that many cometary characters can be
mechanically explained on the assumption that comets are really swarms
of small meteorites, and pointed out that the self-luminosity may be
produced by the heating of the individuals through collision with each
other.
[Sidenote: Reproduction of the spectrum of a comet.]
70. Flutings exactly identical with those seen in the spectrum of a
comet were obtained by Professor A. W. Wright in 1875[40] on allowing
the electric glow to pass through a heated tube, in which, after the
introduction of fragments of the Iowa meteorite, the gaseous density
had been reduced by an air-pump. The bright lines, too, in the spectrum
of a comet, even when nearest to the sun, are found by Sir Norman
Lockyer to be identical with those yielded when the electric glow is
passed over ordinary meteorites at comparatively low temperatures; and
further, the changes in these lines as the comet approaches and recedes
from the sun are exactly those which take place on variation of the
temperature of the meteorites enclosed in the glow-tubes.
[Sidenote: A comet is perhaps a swarm of meteorites.]
71. From these facts it is inferred that a comet may be in every
instance a swarm of isolated large or minute meteorites, at a not very
high temperature, shining partly by reflected sunlight and partly by
the electric glowing of the gases evolved owing to the action of the
sun's heat on the meteorites: further, some of the heat may be due to
the clashing together of the meteorites, the grouping of which becomes
more and more condensed as the swarm approaches the sun.
The gases driven from the meteorites by the sun's heat would be quite
sufficient in quantity to form the tail of the comet: as pointed out by
Professor Wright, a meteorite like that which fell at Cold Bokkeveld
would furnish 30 cubic miles of gas measured at the pressure of our
own atmosphere, and in space itself this gas would expand to enormous
dimensions owing to the small mass and attraction of the meteoritic
swarm. We are still uncertain, however, as regards the actual physical
condition of the matter composing the tail of a comet.
[Sidenote: Saturn's rings are probably swarms of meteorites.]
72. Clerk-Maxwell proved, as long ago as 1857, that the stability
of the rings which revolve round the planet Saturn is inconsistent
with their being formed of continuous solid or liquid matter; and has
shown, by mechanical reasoning, that they must be revolving clouds of
small separate bodies, like cannon-shot, each moving as a satellite
and almost independent of the rest in its motion: determination of the
motions of the inner and outer parts of the ring-system made with the
help of the spectroscope supports this conclusion.
[Sidenote: Nebulæ.]
73. Reichenbach, in 1858, before the self-luminosity had been proved
by means of the spectroscope, had imagined a nebula to be a cloud of
isolated meteorites, illuminated by some neighbouring sun: Chladni,
long before, had supposed a nebula to be a cloud of phosphorescent
dust. But, in 1864, it was established by Sir William Huggins that
the light is due, not to reflection or phosphorescence, but to
incandescence, for the spectrum consists of bright lines such as are
yielded by glowing gas. Tait,[41] in 1871, suggested that the nebulæ
may be clouds of mutually impinging meteorites, mingled with glowing
gases developed by the impacts; he pointed out that the heat produced
by the clashing of the individuals of such an immense group as a nebula
evidently is would be quite adequate for the production of their light.
Sir Norman Lockyer finds that the bright lines (generally accompanied
by a certain amount of continuous spectrum) which have been observed
in nebular spectra are consistent with this suggestion, and regards
them as closely related to the low temperature lines obtained when
a gentle electric glow is passed over meteorite-fragments in a tube
containing gases given out by them, and of which the density has been
reduced by the air-pump; further, he points out that the nebular
spectrum is identical with that of the comets of 1866 and 1867 when
distant from the sun. According to this suggestion, a nebula and a
comet are of identical constitution, and a comet is merely a nebula
which has become entangled in the solar system. On the other hand, Sir
William Huggins has expressed (1891) the opinion that the spectrum of
the bright-line nebulæ is certainly not such as we should expect to
result from the collision of meteorites like those which have reached
the earth, and that it is suggestive of a high temperature; he points
out that the particles which have just been in collision may be at high
temperatures and yet the average temperature of all the particles may
be low.
[Sidenote: Stars.]
74. The examination and classification of the spectra of the stars has
likewise led to remarkable conclusions. Secchi, following Rutherfurd,
found that the stars could be distributed into classes according to the
characters of their spectra,[42] and his classification has since, with
little modification, been adopted by Vogel and Dunér, by whom several
thousand star-spectra have now been systematically mapped. The first
three classes are characterised by absorption, the fourth by radiation.
In the spectra of Class I the absorption is small and simple, the dark
lines being broad and few; the stars themselves are white: in one
division of this class, represented by Sirius and Vega, the principal
lines are due to hydrogen; in another important division, represented
by beta, gamma, delta, epsilon, zeta Orionis, lines of helium are very
pronounced.
In Class II the dark lines are thinner and more numerous; the stars are
bluish-white to reddish-yellow: to this class belong the Sun, Arcturus,
Capella.
The absorption in Class III manifests itself predominantly as flutings,
though there are also many thin lines: the stars are orange or red:
in one division (a) of this class the darkest part and the sharpest
edge of each fluting is towards the violet end of the spectrum, as in
Betelgeux; in a smaller division (b) the darkest part of each fluting
is towards the red end, as in star 152 Schjellerup; the fluting
absorption of the latter division being due to carbon.
The remaining Class IV is an extremely small one: the spectra are
characterised by bright lines: some of the lines are due to hydrogen,
and others to substances not yet recognised in terrestrial chemistry.
[Sidenote: Supposed cooling of all the stars.]
75. Soon after the classification suggested by Secchi had been
announced, it was surmised that the differences in the stars of the
first three classes might be due, not so much to differences of matter,
as to differences of temperature, and that a very hot star such as,
from its brightness and distance, its small and simple absorption, and
the development of the blue end of its spectrum, Vega is believed to
be, would, on getting older and colder, pass from Class I to Class II,
and thence to one or other of the divisions of Class III.
[Sidenote: New stars.]
76. In 1866 a star of 9th or 10th magnitude burst into greater
brilliancy and nearly reached the intensity of Vega; the spectrum
showed the presence of brilliantly glowing hydrogen. Almost as suddenly
the light went down again, and within a month returned to its original
brightness. Ten years later, another new star of the 3rd or 4th
magnitude appeared at a place in the sky where no star had been noticed
before; its spectrum showed numerous bright lines; gradually, in the
course of a year, it dwindled down to the 10th magnitude, then giving
the telescopic appearance and the spectrum of a nebula. Several other
new stars have since been observed, the most notable being Nova Persei,
which appeared in 1901. In each case, as the star faded, its spectrum
changed into that which is characteristic of the nebulæ.
The appearance of a new star has been generally attributed to the
collision of two bodies in space; Sir Norman Lockyer[43] has pointed
out that the rapidity of the change in the brilliancy, so different
from that of other stars, may be due to the smallness of the mass,
and that such a star may be produced by the collision of two swarms
of widely separated meteorites. He has shown that the changes in the
spectrum as such a star varies in brightness are confirmatory of this
view.
[Sidenote: The heat of the sun.]
77. That the heat of our own sun was originated by the falling together
of smaller bodies was, until lately, generally acknowledged;[44]
for the only other conceivable natural cause, known to exist from
independent evidence, namely, chemical combination, was quite
insufficient; the greatest amount of heat obtainable from the most
advantageous chemical combination of any of the then known elements,
having a total mass equal to that of the sun, would not cover the sun's
expenditure for more than three thousand years, while there is no
difficulty on the meteoritic explanation in providing a supply of heat
sufficient to cover the loss by radiation during 20,000,000 years. But
the discovery that compounds of radium maintain themselves at a higher
temperature than that of surrounding bodies and are only inappreciably
changed though continuously emitting an appreciable amount of heat,
shows that the meteoritic hypothesis as to the cause of the sun's high
temperature is not necessarily the true one: there may be an analogous
heat-yielding material in the sun.
In any case the present loss of the sun's heat by radiation is probably
not covered by the fall of bodies into the sun; for the requisite mass
would, if from distant regions, visibly affect the motions of the
planets by its attraction, and, even if circulating round the sun at no
great distance from it, would seriously disturb the motions of some of
the comets. Further, much heat will result from the shrinkage of the
volume of the solar aggregate.
[Sidenote: Evolution of the heavenly bodies.]
78. By study of the spectra, at various temperatures, of the elements
and compounds found in those meteorites which have reached our earth
and been preserved, Sir Norman Lockyer[45] has been led to support
the view that the stars are not at present all cooling down, but that
some, on the contrary, are rising in temperature; he suggests that many
of the stars, like the nebulæ, are constituted of separate meteorites
in continual relative motion, and become hotter and hotter through
contraction of the grouping, collision, and transformation of the
energy of position and motion into heat. This increase of temperature
must continue during successive ages, until the energy of position and
motion of the separate meteorites is wholly transformed, the separate
masses having then combined to form a single white hot body which will
gradually cool down to the state in which our own moon now is. If a
swarm of meteorites forming one nebula be subjected to the external
action of another moving swarm of meteorites, intermediate stages
resembling the conditions of Saturn and of the solar system may ensue.
According to this spectroscopic affirmation of the nebular theory, all
the heavenly bodies are constituted of the same kinds of elementary
matter, those in fact which are found in meteorites and our own earth,
and the difference is solely due to temperature; and a nebula in
its gradual passage to the lunar condition will show every phase of
spectrum observed in the stars as now existent.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: Meteorites present no evidence of life.]
79. Finally, it may be asked whether or not meteorites bring us any
tangible evidence of the existence of living beings outside our own
world. To this we may briefly answer, that while an organic origin can
scarcely be claimed for the graphite present in the meteoric irons,
there are no less than six meteoric stones which contain, though in
very minute quantity, carbon compounds of such a character that their
presence in a terrestrial body would be regarded as doubtlessly an
indirect result of animal or vegetable existence. On the other hand,
the stony matter is such that in a terrestrial body an igneous origin
would be assumed.
Professor Maskelyne has pointed out that these carbon compounds can be
completely removed without a preliminary pulverisation of the stone,
and thus seem to be contained merely in the pores; he suggested that
they may have been absorbed by the stones in their passage through an
atmosphere containing the compounds in a state of vapour. In any case,
it is impossible to prove that there is a necessary relation between
these compounds of carbon and the existence of living beings.
[Sidenote: Chondrules have been mistaken for organisms.]
80. In 1880[46] descriptions were given of sponges, corals, crinoids
and plants, found in several meteorites, chiefly in that of Knyahinya,
but the memoir has been generally regarded as an elaborate jest. The
chondrules with their excentrically radiating crystallisation are
there classified and named as sponges, corals and crinoids, while the
structure of meteoric iron, revealed by the Widmanstätten figures,
is regarded as a result of plant life. There can be no hesitation in
asserting that as yet no organised matter has been found in meteorites.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Remarks concerning stones said to have fallen from the clouds both
in these days and in ancient times: by Edward King. London, 1796.
Mémoire historique et physique sur les chutes des pierres: par P. M. S.
Bigot de Morogues. Orléans, 1812.
[2] Sitzungsber. d. k. Ak. d. Wiss. Wien. 1856, vol. 22, p. 393.
[3] Records of the Geological Survey of India. Calcutta, 1885, vol. 18,
p. 237.
[4] Ueber den Ursprung der von Pallas gefundenen und anderer ihr
ähnlicher Eisenmassen. Riga, 1794.
[5] Reise durch verschiedene Provinzen des russischen Reichs: von
P. S. Pallas. St. Petersburg, 1776, Part III., p. 411.
[6] Philosophical Transactions. London, 1788, vol. 78, part 1, pp. 37, 183.
[7] Philosophical Transactions. London, 1795, vol. 85, p. 103.
[8] _Ibid._, 1802, vol. 92, p. 174.
[9] Bulletin des Sciences par la Société Philomathique. Paris, 1803,
vol. 3, no. 71, p. 180.
[10] Mémoires de l'Institut National de France. 1806, vol. 7, part 1,
Histoire, p. 224.
[11] Principes de Thermodynamique: par Paul de Saint-Robert. Paris,
1870, p. 329.
[12] The Fall of Butsura: by Prof. Maskelyne. Phil. Mag. 1863, vol. 25,
p. 50.
[13] Die chemische Natur der Meteoriten: von C. Rammelsberg. Berlin,
1870-9. Météorites: par S. Meunier. Paris, 1884. Meteoritenkunde:
von E. Cohen. Stuttgart, 1894-1905.
[14] Some lecture-notes on meteorites: by Prof. Maskelyne. _Nature_, 1875,
vol. 12, pp. 485, 504, 520.
[15] Études synthétiques de géologie expérimentale. Paris, 1879. p. 517.
[16] Phil. Mag. 1884, ser. 5, vol. 17, p. 462.
[17] _Nature_, 1904, vol. 71, p. 32.
[18] Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, 1905, Band I, p. 122.
[19] Denksch. d. math-naturw. Klasse d. k. Ak. d. Wiss., 1905, Band 78,
p. 635.
[20] Philosophical Transactions, London, 1908, Ser. A, vol. 208, p. 21.
[21] Mineralogical Magazine. London, 1884, vol. 6, p. 1.
[22] Beschreibung und Eintheilung der Meteoriten. Berlin, 1864.
[23] Die mikroskopische Beschaffenheit der Meteoriten: von G. Tschermak.
Stuttgart, 1883-5.
[24] Pogg. Ann. 1858, vol. 105, p. 438: Phil. Mag. 1876, ser. 5, vol. 1,
p. 497.
[25] On the structure and origin of meteorites. _Nature_, 1877, vol.
15, p. 495.
[26] Die Meteoritensammlung d.k.k. min. Hofkabinetes in Wien. 1885, p. 19.
[27] Lithological Studies. Cambridge, U.S.A. 1884, p. 110.
[28] Speculations on the source of Meteorites. _Nature_, 1879, vol. 19,
p. 493.
[29] _Olmsted._ American Jour. Sc., 1834, ser. 1, vol. 25, p. 363.
[30] _Newton._ American Jour. Sc., 1864, ser. 2, vol. 37, p. 377; vol.
38, p. 53.
[31] Report Brit. Assoc., 1868, p. 394.
[32] Pogg. Ann., 1858, vol. 105, p. 438.
[33] Denning. _Nature_, 1885, vol. 31, p. 463.
[34] Monthly Notices of the Roy. Astron. Soc. 1899, vol. 59, p. 179.
[35] Newton. _Nature_, 1886, vol. 33, pp. 392, 418.
[36] _Newton._ American Jour. Sc., 1886, ser. 3, vol. 31, p. 409.
[37] _Hidden._ American Jour. Sc., 1887, ser. 3, vol. 33, p. 223.
[38] Presidential Address to the Brit. Assoc. for the Advancement of
Science, 1891.
[39] Proc. Roy. Soc., Edinb., 1869, vol. 6, p. 553.
[40] American Jour. Sc., 1875, ser. 3, vol. 10, p. 44.
[41] Proc. Roy. Soc., Edinb., 1871, vol. 7, p. 460.
[42] Lockyer. _Nature_, 1886, vols. 33 and 34.
[43] _Nature_, 1877, vol. 16, p. 413.
[44] Treatise on Natural Philosophy, by Thomson and Tait: _Cambridge_,
1883, vol. 1, part 2, p. 487.
[45] Proc. Royal Society, 1887, vol. 43, p. 117: 1888, vol. 44, Bakerian
lecture.
[46] Die Meteorite (Chondrite) und ihre Organismen: von Dr. O. Hahn.
Tübingen, 1880.
LIST OF THE METEORITES
REPRESENTED IN THE COLLECTION
ON MAY 1, 1908.
* * * * *
_The references in the second column correspond with numbers and
letters on the cases, and indicate the pane behind which the meteorite
will be found._
* * * * *
Weights under one gram are not given. 1,000 grams are equivalent to
2·205 avdp. lbs.
* * * * *
I. SIDERITES
or Meteoric Irons
(_consisting chiefly of nickeliferous iron, and enclosing
schreibersite, troilite, graphite, &c._).
* * * * *
A. FALL RECORDED.
[Arranged chronologically.]
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|No. |Pane. | Name of Meteorite and | Date of Fall. | Weight |
| | | Place of Fall. | |in grams.|
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
| 1 | 1c |AGRAM (Hraschina), Croatia, |May 26, 1751. | 282 |
| | |Austria. | | |
| | | | | |
| 2 | 1c |CHARLOTTE, Dickson County, |July 31, or} 1835. | 77 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |Aug. 1, } | |
| | | | | |
| 3 |1c, 4l|BRAUNAU (Hauptmannsdorf), |July 14, 1847. | 554 |
| | |Bohemia. | | |
| | | | | |
| 4 |1c, 4l|VICTORIA WEST, Cape Colony, | Fell in 1862. | 153 |
| | |South Africa. | | |
| | | | | |
| 5 |1c, 4h|NEDAGOLLA, Mirangi, |Jan. 23, 1870. | 4,280 |
| | |Vizagapatam, Madras, India. | | |
| | | | | |
| 6 | 1c |ROWTON, near Wellington, |April 20, 1876. | 3,109 |
| | |Shropshire. | | |
| | | | | |
| 7 | 1c |MAZAPIL, Zacatecas, Mexico. |Nov. 27, 1885. | 14 |
| | | | | |
| 8 | 1c |CABIN CREEK, Johnson County, |March 27, 1886. | 5 |
| | |Arkansas, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
| 9 | 1c |N'GOUREYMA, Djenne, Massina, |June 15, 1900. | 871 |
| | |North-West Africa. | | |
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
B. FALL NOT RECORDED.
[Arranged topographically.]
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|No. |Pane. | Name of Meteorite and | Report of Find. | Weight |
| | | Place of Find. | |in grams.|
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
| 10 | 1c |LA CAILLE, near Grasse, Alpes |Acad. Sci. | 374 |
| | |Maritimes, France. |Bordeaux, 1829, | |
| | | |p. 39. | |
| | |For about two centuries it was| | |
| | |in front of the church of La | | |
| | |Caille and was used as a seat:| | |
| | |its meteoric origin was | | |
| | |recognised by Brard in 1828. | | |
| | | | | |
| 11 | 1c |SÃO JULIÃO DE MOREIRA, Ponte |Comm. da commiss. | 728 |
| | |de Lima, Minho, Portugal. |d. trab. geol. de | |
| | | |Portugal, 1888, | |
| | |Known since 1883: described by|vol. 2, p. 14. | |
| | |Ben-Saude in 1888. | | |
| | | | | |
| 12 | 1a |OBERNKIRCHEN, near Bückeburg, |Pogg. Ann. 1863, | 34,700 |
| | |Schaumburg-Lippe, Germany. |vol. 120, p. 509. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in a quarry on the | | |
| | |Bückeberg 15 feet below the | | |
| | |surface, and thrown aside: | | |
| | |recognised as meteoric by | | |
| | |Wicke and Wöhler, in 1863. | | |
| | | | | |
| 13 | 1d |BITBURG, Rhenish Prussia. |Schweigg. Journ. | 1,349 |
| | | |1825, vol. 43, | |
| | |Dug up about 1807, taken to |p. 1. | |
| | |Trèves and put into a furnace:| | |
| | |afterwards thrown away with | | |
| | |the waste: later, fragments of| | |
| | |it having been recognised by | | |
| | |Gibbs as meteoric, the mass | | |
| | |was searched for by Nöggerath | | |
| | |and re-discovered in 1824. | | |
| | | | | |
| 14 |1d, 4l|SEELÄSGEN, Brandenburg, |Pogg. Ann. 1848, | 9,846 |
| | |Prussia. |vol. 73, p. 329; | |
| | | |1849, vol. 74, | |
| | |Found in draining a field: |p. 57. | |
| | |several years afterwards, in | | |
| | |1847, it was met with by | | |
| | |Hartig and recognised as | | |
| | |meteoric. | | |
| | | | | |
| 15 | 1d |SCHWETZ, Prussia. |Pogg. Ann. 1851, | 1,062 |
| | | |vol. 83, p. 594. | |
| | |Found in 1850 in making a | | |
| | |road; it was about 4 feet | | |
| | |below the surface: described | | |
| | |by Rose in 1851. | | |
| | | | | |
| 16 | 1d |NENNTMANNSDORF, Pirna, |Sitzungs-Ber. d. n.| 15 |
| | |Saxony. |G. Isis in Dresden,| |
| | | |1873, p. 4. | |
| | |Found in 1872 about 2 feet | | |
| | |below the surface: reported by| | |
| | |Geinitz in 1873. | | |
| | | | | |
| 17 | 1d |TABARZ, near Gotha, Germany. |Ann. Chem. Pharm. | 9 |
| | | |1855, vol. 96, p. | |
| | |Said to have been seen by a |286. | |
| | |shepherd to fall on Oct. 18, | | |
| | |1854: described in 1855 by | | |
| | |Eberhard, to whom the rust | | |
| | |seemed incompatible with a | | |
| | |recent fall. | | |
| | | | | |
| 18 | 1d |ELBOGEN, Bohemia. |Gilb. Ann. 1812, | 94 |
| | | |vol. 42, p. 197. | |
| | |Preserved for centuries at the| | |
| | |Rathhaus of Elbogen: its | | |
| | |meteoric origin was recognised| | |
| | |by Neumann in 1811. | | |
| | | | | |
| 19 | 1d |BOHUMILITZ, Prachin, Bohemia. |Verh. Ges. Mus. | 118 |
| | | |Böhm. April 3, | |
| | |Laid bare by heavy rain in |1830, p. 15. | |
| | |1829. | | |
| | | | | |
| 20 | 1d |LÉNÁRTO, Sáros, Hungary. |Gilb. Ann. 1815, | 2,018 |
| | | |vol. 49, p. 181. | |
| | |Found in 1814: described by | | |
| | |Tehel in 1815. | | |
| | | | | |
| 21 | 1d |ARVA (Szlanicza), Hungary. |Pogg. Ann. 1844, | 9,110 |
| | | |vol. 61, p. 675. | |
| | |Made known by Haidinger in | | |
| | |1844. | | |
| | | | | |
| 22 | 1d |NAGY-VÁZSONY, Veszprim, |Ann. d. k. k. | 69 |
| | |Hungary. |Naturh. Hofmus. | |
| | | |Wien, 1896, vol. | |
| | |Found in 1890: described by |10, pp. 284, 356. | |
| | |Brezina in 1896. | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| 23 | 1d |TULA (Netschaëvo), Russia. |Wien. Akad. Ber., | 1,076 |
| | | |1860 (1861), vol. | |
| | |Found in 1846 in making a |42, p. 507. | |
| | |road: it was 2 feet below the | | |
| | |surface: recognised as | | |
| | |meteoric by Auerbach in 1857. | | |
| | | | | |
| 24 | 1d |SAREPTA, Saratov, Russia. |Bull. Soc. Nat. | 283 |
| | | |Moscow, 1854, p. | |
| | |Found in 1854: reported by |504. | |
| | |Auerbach in the same year. | | |
| | | | | |
| 25 | 1d |VERKHNE-DNIEPROVSK, | | 24 |
| | |Ekaterinoslav, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1876. | | |
| | | | | |
| 26 | 1d |AUGUSTINOVKA, Ekaterinoslav, |Comptes Rendus, | 950 |
| | |Russia. |1893, vol. 116, p. | |
| | | |1151. | |
| | |Known before 1893; fragment | | |
| | |described by Meunier in that | | |
| | |year. | | |
| | | | | |
| 27 | 1d |BISCHTÜBE, Nikolaev, Turgai, |Bull. de la Soc. | 1,750 |
| | |Russia. |Imp. des Natur. de | |
| | | |Moscou, 1890, | |
| | |Found in 1888: described by |vol. 4, p. 187. | |
| | |Kislakovsky in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
| 28 | 1d |PETROPAVLOVSK (gold |Erman's Archiv f. | 12 |
| | |washings), Mrasa River, Tomsk,|wiss. Kunde von | |
| | |Asiatic Russia. |Russland, 1841, | |
| | | |vol. 1, p. 314. | |
| | |Found about 32 feet from the | | |
| | |surface: given to the Director| | |
| | |of the Kolyvani Works in 1841 | | |
| | |and described by Sokolovskji | | |
| | |in the same year. | | |
| | | | | |
| 29 | 1d |TOUBIL RIVER (Taiga), |Verhandl. russ.- | 490 |
| | |Petropavlovsk, Yeniseisk, |kais. min. Ges., | |
| | |Asiatic Russia. |1898, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |35, p. 233. | |
| | |Found in 1891: described by | | |
| | |Khlaponin in 1898. | | |
| | | | | |
| 30 | 1d |SSYROMOLOTOVO, Keshma, |Bull. Ac. Imp. des | 3 |
| | |Yeniseisk, Asiatic Russia. |Sc. de St. | |
| | | |Pétersb. 1874, | |
| | |Known since the year 1873: |vol. 19, p. 544. | |
| | |described by Göbel in 1874. | | |
| | | | | |
| 31 | 1e |VERKHNE-UDINSK (Niro |Pogg. Ann. 1865, | 2,904 |
| | |River), Transbaikal, Asiatic |vol. 124, p. 599. | |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1854: noted by | | |
| | |Buchner in 1865. | | |
| | | | | |
| 32 | 1e |NOCHTUISK, Jakutsk, | | 4 |
| | |Asiatic Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1876. | | |
| | | | | |
| 33 | 1b |NEJED (Wanee Banee |Mineralog. | 58,160 |
| | |Khaled), Central Arabia. |Magazine, 1887, | |
| | | |vol. 7, p. 179. | |
| | |Said to have been seen to | | |
| | |fall in 1863; probably this | | |
| | |is a mistake and the time of | | |
| | |fall unknown: described by | | |
| | |L. F. in 1887. | | |
| | | | | |
| 34 | 1e |KODAIKANAL, Palni |Proc. Asiatic Soc. | 2,355 |
| | |Hills, Madura, Madras, India. |of Bengal, 1900, | |
| | | |January, p. 2. | |
| | |Known since 1898: reported by |Tschermak's Min. | |
| | |Holland in 1900: described by |u. Petrog. Mitth. | |
| | |Berwerth in 1906. |1906, vol. 25, | |
| | | |p. 179. | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| 35 | 1e |TANOKAMI (-yama), |Jour. Geol. Soc. | 178 |
| | |Kurifuto-g[=o]ri, [=O]mi, |T[=o]ky[=o], 1900, | |
| | |Japan. |vol. 7, p. 85. | |
| | | |Beiträge zur | |
| | |Found about 1885: described |Mineralogie von | |
| | |by [=O]tsuki in 1900, and |Japan. | |
| | |Jimbo in 1906. |Herausgegeben von | |
| | | |T. Wada, 1906, | |
| | | |No. 2, p. 42. | |
| | | | | |
| 36 | 1e |UWET, Southern Nigeria, | | 6,948 |
| | |Africa. | | |
| | | | | |
| 37 | 1e |BETHANY, Great |Jour. Roy. Geog. | |
| | |Namaqualand, South Africa. |Soc. of London, | |
| | | | | |
| | |(a) Many large masses were |1838, vol. 8, p. | |
| | |reported by Alexander in 1838 |24. | |
| | |to be lying N.E. of Bethany | | |
| | |and near the Great Fish River.| | |
| | |{None of the fragments given | | |
| | |to Alexander seem to have | | |
| | |been placed in Museum | | |
| | |Collections.} L. F. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |(b) Bethany (Lion River). |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 388 |
| | |A large mass said to have |1853, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | |been found near Lion River, |15, p. 1. | |
| | |Great Namaqualand, was | | |
| | |described by Shepard in 1853.| | |
| | | | | |
| | |(c) Bethany (Wild). A large |Annals of the South| 1,434 |
| | |mass which had long been known|African Mus. 1900, | |
| | |to the missionaries of Bethany|vol. 2, part 2, p. | |
| | |was brought to Cape Town by |21. | |
| | |Wild in 1860: described by | | |
| | |cohen in 1900. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |(d) Bethany (Mukerop). Four |Jahreshefte des | 4,320 |
| | |large masses were met with in |Vereins für Vaterl.| |
| | |1899 at Mukerop, Gibeon, Great|Naturk. Württ., | |
| | |Namaqualand: described by |1902, vol. 58, p. | |
| | |Brezina and Cohen in 1902. |292. | |
| | | | | |
| | |(e) Bethany (Springbok |Mineralog. | 9 |
| | |River). A fragment (9 grams) |Magazine, 1904, | |
| | |found with the label "Spring |vol. 14, p. 28. | |
| | |Bok River," among Dr. H. J. | | |
| | |Burkart's minerals, after his | | |
| | |death in 1874. | | |
| | |{All the above masses may | | |
| | |have been transported at some | | |
| | |time or other from the place | | |
| | |indicated by Alexander; their | | |
| | |etched figures are similar.} | | |
| | |L. F. | | |
| | | | | |
| 38 | 1e |ORANGE RIVER District, South |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 95 |
| | |Africa. |1856, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |21, p. 213. | |
| | |Sent from the Orange River | | |
| | |District in 1855: described by| | |
| | |Shepard in 1856. | | |
| | | | | |
| 39 | 1e |HEX RIVER MOUNTAINS, |Ann. d.k.k. Naturh.| 245 |
| | |Cape Colony, South Africa. |Hofmus. Wien, | |
| | | |1896, vol. 10, pp. | |
| | |Found in 1882: described by |291, 349. | |
| | |Brezina in 1896. | | |
| | | | | |
| 40 | 1e |CAPE OF GOOD HOPE: between |Mag. für den | 342 |
| | |Sunday River and Bushman River|neuesten Zustand | |
| | |(west of Great Fish River), |der Naturkunde, von| |
| | |Cape Colony, South Africa. |J. H. Voigt, 1805, | |
| | | |vol. 10, p. 12. | |
| | |Known long before 1793: | | |
| | |mentioned in "Barrow's Travels| | |
| | |into the Interior of South | | |
| | |Africa," 1801, vol. i. p. 226:| | |
| | |full particulars were given in| | |
| | |1805 by von Dankelmann. | | |
| | | | | |
| 41 | 1e |KOKSTAD, Griqualand East, |Ann. South African | 243 |
| | |South Africa. |Mus. 1900, vol. 2, | |
| | | |p. 9. | |
| | |Known in 1878: described by | | |
| | |Cohen in 1900. | | |
| | | | | |
| 42 | 1e |PRAMBANAN, Surakarta, Java. |Arch. Néer. | 8 |
| | | |Haarlem, 1866, | |
| | |Known as early as 1797, and |vol. 1, p. 465. | |
| | |probably earlier: described by| | |
| | |Baumhauer in 1866. | | |
| | | | | |
| 43 | 1f |THUNDA, Windorah, Diamantina |Jour. and Proc. | 396 |
| | |District, Queensland, |Roy. Soc. of New | |
| | |Australia. |South Wales, 1887, | |
| | | |vol. 20, p. 73. | |
| | |Described by Liversidge in | | |
| | |1886. | | |
| | | | | |
| 44 | 1f |MUNGINDI, New South Wales, |Rec. Geol. Surv. of| 368 |
| | |Australia. |New South Wales, | |
| | | |1897, vol. 5, | |
| | |Found on the Queensland side |p. 121. Amer. Jour.| |
| | |of the borderin 1897: |Sc. 1898, ser. 4, | |
| | |mentioned by Card in 1897 and |vol. 5, p. 138. | |
| | |figured by Ward in 1898. | | |
| | | | | |
| 45 | 1f |BOOGALDI, Coonabarabran, New |Jour. and Proc. | 179 |
| | |South Wales. |Roy. Soc. New South| |
| | | |Wales, 1900, vol. | |
| | |Found in 1900: described by |34, p. 81; and | |
| | |Baker in 1900 and by |1903, vol. 36, | |
| | |Liversidge in 1902. |p. 341 | |
| | | | | |
| 46 | 1f |COWRA, Bathurst, New South |Records of the | 192 |
| | |Wales. |Geol. Survey of New| |
| | | |South Wales, 1897, | |
| | |Known since 1888: described |vol. 5, p. 51. | |
| | |by Card in 1897. | | |
| | | | | |
| 47 | 1f |NARRABURRA, Temora, New |Jour. and Proc. | 1918 |
| | |South Wales. |Roy. Soc. of New | |
| | | |South Wales, 1890, | |
| | |Found in 1855: described by |vol. 24, p. 81. | |
| | |Russell in 1890 and by Card |Rec. Geol. Surv. of| |
| | |in 1897. |New South Wales, | |
| | | |1897, vol. 5, p. | |
| | | |52. | |
| | | | | |
| 48 | 1f |NOCOLECHE, Wanaaring, New |Records of the | 687 |
| | |South Wales. |Australian Mus. | |
| | | |1897, vol. 3, p. | |
| | |Known in 1895: described |51. | |
| | |by Cooksey in 1897. | | |
| | | | | |
| 49 | 1f |RHINE VILLA, Rhine Valley, |Trans. of the Roy. | 193 |
| | |South Australia. |Soc. of South | |
| | | |Australia, 1901, | |
| | |Described by Goyder in 1901. |vol. 25, p. 14. | |
| | | | | |
| 50 | Sep. |CRANBOURNE, near Melbourne, |Wien. Akad. Ber. |3,500,000|
| |Stand,|Victoria, Australia. |1861, vol. 43, | |
| | 1f | |Abth. 2, p. 583. | |
| | |(a) Two large masses, found | | |
| | |nearly four miles apart, have | | |
| | |been known since 1854: | | |
| | |described by Haidinger in | | |
| | |1861. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |(b) A much smaller mass was |Sitzungsber. k. pr.| |
| | |found later at Beaconsfield, |Ak. d. Wiss. zu | |
| | |six miles from Cranbourne: |Berlin, 1897, vol. | |
| | |described by Cohen in 1897. |46, p. 1035. | |
| | | | | |
| | 1f |(c) {Fragments found in | | 214 |
| | |Abel's collection of minerals | | |
| | |with the label "Yarra Yarra | | |
| | |River--Date 1858" had probably| | |
| | |been detached from one of the | | |
| | |two masses of Cranbourne.} | | |
| | |L. F. | | |
| | | | | |
| 51 | 1e |YOUNDEGIN, 70 miles E. of |Mineralog. | 13,187 |
| | |York, Western Australia. |Magazine, 1887, | |
| | | |vol. 7, p. 121. | |
| | |Found in 1884: described by L.| | |
| | |F. in 1887. | | |
| | | | | |
| 52 | 1f |ROEBOURNE (200 miles |Records of the | 1,502 |
| | |south-east of), Western |Australian Mus. | |
| | |Australia. |1897, vol. 3, p. | |
| | | |59. Amer. Jour. Sc.| |
| | |Found in 1892: described by |1898, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | |Cooksey in 1897 and by Ward |5, p. 135 | |
| | |in 1898. | | |
| | | | | |
| 53 | 1f |MOUNT STIRLING, Western |Records of the | 1,888 |
| | |Australia. |Australian Mus. | |
| | | |1897, vol. 3, p. | |
| | |Known in 1892: described by |58. | |
| | |Cooksey in 1897. | | |
| | | | | |
| 54 | 1f |BALLINOO, Murchison River, |Records of the | 3,160 |
| | |Western Australia. |Australian Mus. | |
| | | |1897, vol. 3, p. | |
| | |Found in 1892: described by |55. Amer. Jour. Sc.| |
| | |Cooksey in 1897 and by Ward in|1898, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | |1898. |5, p. 136. | |
| | | | | |
| 55 | 1f |MOORANOPPIN, Western |Records of the | 261 |
| | |Australia. |Australian Mus. | |
| | | |1897, vol. 3, p. | |
| | |Found in or before 1893: |58. Amer. Jour. Sc.| |
| | |described by Cooksey in 1897 |1898, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | |and by Ward in 1898. |5, p. 140. | |
| | | | | |
| 56 | 4m |MELVILLE BAY, 35 miles east |Voyage of | |
| | |of Cape York, West Greenland |Discovery, &c., by | |
| | |(Ross's iron). |Captain John Ross. | |
| | | |London, 1819. | |
| | |Two knives or lance-heads with| | |
| | |bone handles given to Captain | | |
| | |John Ross in 1818 by the | | |
| | |Eskimos of Prince Regent's | | |
| | |Bay: one of them was figured | | |
| | |by Ross on page 102 of his | | |
| | |work. According to the | | |
| | |Eskimos, the iron had been | | |
| | |obtained from a neighbouring | | |
| | |mountain called Sowallick. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |The locality of the three |Northward over the | |
| | |large masses was shown by an |Great Ice, by R. E.| |
| | |Eskimo to Lieut. Peary in |Peary. London, | |
| | |1894: by him they were later |1898, vol. 2, p. | |
| | |transported to New York. |556. | |
| | | | | |
| 57 | 1f |MADOC, Hastings County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 205 |
| | |Ontario, Canada. |1855, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |19, p. 417. | |
| | |Found in 1854: described by | | |
| | |Hunt in 1855. | | |
| | | | | |
| 58 | 1f |WELLAND, Ontario, Canada. |Proc. Rochester | 466 |
| | | |Ac. of Sc. 1890, | |
| | |Ploughed up in 1888: described|vol. 1, p. 86. | |
| | |by Howell in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
| 59 | 1f |THURLOW, Hastings County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 189 |
| | |Ontario, Canada. |1897, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |4, p. 325. | |
| | |Found in 1888: described by | | |
| | |Hoffmann in 1897. | | |
| | | | | |
| 60 | 1f |IRON CREEK, Battle River, |Proc. and Trans. | 79 |
| | |North Saskatchewan, Canada. |Roy. Soc. of | |
| | | |Canada, 1887, vol. | |
| | |Removed about 1869: described |4, sec. 3, p. 97. | |
| | |by Coleman in 1886. | | |
| | | | | |
| 61 | 1h |LOCKPORT (Cambria), Niagara |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 5,329 |
| | |County, New York, U.S.A. |1845, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |48, p. 388. | |
| | |Turned up by plough: described| | |
| | |as meteoric by Silliman in | | |
| | |1845. | | |
| | | | | |
| 62 | 4l |SENECA RIVER, Cayuga County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 54 |
| | |New York, U.S.A. |1852, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |14, p. 439. | |
| | |Found in 1851, in digging a | | |
| | |ditch: described by Root in | | |
| | |1852. | | |
| | | | | |
| 63 |1g, 4l|BURLINGTON, Otsego County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 290 |
| | |New York, U.S.A. |1844, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |46, p. 401. | |
| | |Turned up by plough some time | | |
| | |previous to 1819, and | | |
| | |described by Silliman in 1844.| | |
| | | | | |
| 64 | 1g |PITTSBURG (Miller's Run), |Proc. Amer. Assoc. | 208 |
| | |Alleghany County, |Fourth Meeting, | |
| | |Pennsylvania, U.S.A. |held Aug. 1850, | |
| | | |vol. 4, p. 37. | |
| | |Described by Silliman in 1850:| | |
| | |date of find unknown. | | |
| | | | | |
| 65 | 1g |MOUNT JOY, Adams County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 730 |
| | |Pennsylvania, U.S.A. |1892, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |44, p. 415. | |
| | |Found in 1887: described by | | |
| | |Howell in 1892. | | |
| | | | | |
| 66 | 1g |EMMITTSBURG, Frederick | | 6 |
| | |County, Maryland, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1854. | | |
| | | | | |
| 67 | 1g |STAUNTON, Augusta County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,893 |
| | |Virginia, U.S.A. |1871, ser. 3, | |
| | | |vol. 2, p. 10. | |
| | |Five masses have been found. | | |
| | |Three masses, of which two at | | |
| | |least were found in 1869, were| | |
| | |described by Mallet in 1871. | | |
| | |A fourth was found about |Amer. Jour. Sc. | |
| | |1858-9, thrown away, used in |1878, ser. 3, | |
| | |the construction of a stone |vol. 15, p. 337. | |
| | |fence, then as an anvil; was | | |
| | |next built into a wall: in | | |
| | |1877 it was taken out, and its| | |
| | |meteoric nature was recognised| | |
| | |by Mallet. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |A fifth was described by Kunz |Amer. Jour. Sc. | |
| | |in 1887. |1887, ser. 3, | |
| | | |vol. 33, p. 58. | |
| | | | | |
| 68 | 1g |INDIAN VALLEY TOWNSHIP, |Tschermak's Min. | 82 |
| | |Floyd County, Virginia, U.S.A.|u. Petrog. Mitth. | |
| | | |1891, vol. 12, | |
| | |Found in 1887: described by |p. 182. | |
| | |Kunz and Weinschenk in 1891. | | |
| | | | | |
| 69 | 1g |GREENBRIER COUNTY (near the |Mineralog. | 2,238 |
| | |summit of the Alleghany |Magazine, 1887, | |
| | |Mountain, 3 miles north of |vol. 7, p. 183. | |
| | |White Sulphur Springs), West | | |
| | |Virginia, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found about 1880: described | | |
| | |by L. F. in 1887. | | |
| | | | | |
| 70 | 1g |JENNY'S CREEK, Wayne County, |Proc. Amer. Assoc. | 78 |
| | |West Virginia, U.S.A. |for the year 1885, | |
| | | |vol. 34, p. 246. | |
| | |The first piece was found | | |
| | |before the Spring of 1883 and | | |
| | |lost sight of; two other | | |
| | |pieces were found in 1883 and | | |
| | |1885 respectively: reported by| | |
| | |Kunz in 1885. | | |
| | | | | |
| 71 | 1h |SMITH'S MOUNTAIN, Rockingham |Rep. Geol. Surv. | 77 |
| | |County, N. Carolina, U.S.A. |N. Carolina, by | |
| | | |Kerr: Raleigh, | |
| | |Reported by Genth in 1875 to |1875, vol. 1, | |
| | |have been found in 1866. |app. C, p. 56. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Reported by Smith in 1877 to |Amer. Jour. Sc. | |
| | |have passed into the hands of |1877, ser. 3, | |
| | |Kerr about 1863. |vol. 13, p. 213. | |
| | | | | |
| | |No mention of date of find by |Minerals and | |
| | |Genth when describing the |Mineral Localities | |
| | |meteorite in 1885. |of North Carolina, | |
| | | |by Genth and Kerr: | |
| | | |Raleigh, 1885, | |
| | | |p. 15. | |
| | | | | |
| 72 | 1h |DEEP SPRINGS (farm), |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 170 |
| | |Rockingham County, N. |1890, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |Carolina, U.S.A. |40, p. 161. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Known since about 1846: | | |
| | |described by Venable in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
| 73 | 1h |GUILFORD COUNTY, N. Carolina, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 15 |
| | |U.S.A. |1830, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |17, p. 140; and | |
| | |Date of find unknown: first |1841, vol. 40, p. | |
| | |described by Shepard as |369. | |
| | |terrestrial in 1830, but in | | |
| | |1841 its meteoric origin was | | |
| | |recognised by him. | | |
| | | | | |
| 74 | 1h |LICK CREEK, Davidson County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 19 |
| | |North Carolina, U.S.A. |1880, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |20, p. 324. | |
| | |Found in 1879: described by | | |
| | |Hidden in 1880. | | |
| | | | | |
| 75 | 1h |LINNVILLE MOUNTAIN, Burke |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 21 |
| | |County, N. Carolina, U.S.A. |1888, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |36, p. 275. | |
| | |Found about 1882: described | | |
| | |by Kunz in 1888. | | |
| | | | | |
| 76 | 1h |ELLENBORO', Rutherford |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 52 |
| | |County, N. Carolina, U.S.A. |1890, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |39, p. 395. | |
| | |Found in 1880: described by | | |
| | |Eakins in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
| 77 | 1h |BRIDGEWATER, Burke County, N. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 51 |
| | |Carolina, U.S.A. |1890, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |40, p. 320. | |
| | |Found by a ploughman: | | |
| | |described by Kunz in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
| 78a|1h, 4l|JEWELL HILL, Walnut Mtns., |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 130 |
| | |Madison County, N. |1860, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | |Carolina, U.S.A. |30, p. 240; and | |
| | | |Orig. Res. in Min. | |
| | |(a) One was given to Smith |and Chem. by | |
| | |in 1854, and described by him |Lawrence Smith, | |
| | |in 1860. |1884, p. 409. | |
| | | | | |
| 78b| 1h |(b) A second was found in |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 12 |
| | |use in 1873, supporting a |1876, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |corner of a rail-fence: |12, p. 439. The | |
| | |described as from Duel Hill |Minerals and | |
| | |by Burton in 1876. The etched |Mineral Localities | |
| | |figures are different for the |of North Carolina, | |
| | |two masses. |by Genth and Kerr: | |
| | | |Raleigh, 1885, p. | |
| | | |14. | |
| | | | | |
| 79 | 1h |BLACK MOUNTAIN, 15 m. E. of |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 71 |
| | |Asheville, Buncombe County, |1847, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | |N. Carolina, U.S.A. |4, p. 82. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found about 1839, and | | |
| | |described by Shepard in 1847. | | |
| | | | | |
| 80 | 1h |ASHEVILLE (Baird's |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 111 |
| | |Plantation, 6 m. N. of), |1839, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | |Buncombe County, N. Carolina, |36, p. 81; and | |
| | |U.S.A. |1847, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |4, p. 79. | |
| | |Found loose in the soil: | | |
| | |described by Shepard in 1839. | | |
| | | | | |
| 81 | 1h |MURPHY, Cherokee County, N. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 1,521 |
| | |Carolina, U.S.A. |1899, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |8, p. 225. | |
| | |Found in 1899: described in | | |
| | |the same year by Ward. | | |
| | | | | |
| 82 | 1k |CHESTERVILLE, Chester |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,197 |
| | |County, S. Carolina, U.S.A. |1849, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |7, p. 449. | |
| | |Ploughed up several years | | |
| | |before 1849, when it was | | |
| | |described by Shepard. | | |
| | | | | |
| 83 | 1k |LAURENS COUNTY, S. Carolina, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 61 |
| | |U.S.A. |1886, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |31, p. 463. | |
| | |Found in 1857: described by | | |
| | |by Hidden in 1886. | | |
| | | | | |
| 84 | 1k |RUFF'S MOUNTAIN, Lexington |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 499 |
| | |County, S. Carolina, U.S.A. |1850, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |10, p. 128. | |
| | |Date of find not stated: | | |
| | |described by Shepard in 1850. | | |
| | | | | |
| 85 | 1k |LEXINGTON COUNTY, S. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 271 |
| | |Carolina, U.S.A. |1881, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |21, p. 117. | |
| | |Found in 1880: described by | | |
| | |Shepard in 1881. | | |
| | | | | |
| 86 | 1k |UNION COUNTY, Georgia, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 55 |
| | |U.S.A. |1854, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |17, p. 328. | |
| | |Found in 1853: described by | | |
| | |Shepard in 1854. | | |
| | | | | |
| 87 | 1k |WHITFIELD COUNTY (Dalton), |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 288 |
| | |Georgia, U.S.A. |1881, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |21, p. 286. | |
| | |First specimen found in 1877: | | |
| | |particulars of find, and | | |
| | |description, given by Hidden | | |
| | |in 1881. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |A second specimen was found |Amer. Jour. Sc. | |
| | |in 1879, and described by |1883, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |Shepard in 1883. |26, p. 337. | |
| | | | | |
| 88 | 1l |LOSTTOWN (2-1/2 m. S.W. of), |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 6 |
| | |Cherokee County, Georgia, |1868, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | |U.S.A. |46, p. 257. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Ploughed up in 1868: described| | |
| | |in the same year by Shepard. | | |
| | | | | |
| 89 | 1l |CANTON, Cherokee County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 330 |
| | |Georgia, U.S.A. |1895, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |50, p. 252. | |
| | |Ploughed up in 1894: described| | |
| | |by Howell in 1895. According | | |
| | |to Brezina, Canton and | | |
| | |Losttown probably belong to | | |
| | |the same fall. | | |
| | | | | |
| 90 | 1l |HOLLAND'S STORE, Chattooga |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 204 |
| | |County, Georgia, U.S.A. |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |34, p. 471. | |
| | |Found in 1887: described by | | |
| | |Kunz in the same year. | | |
| | | | | |
| 91 | 1l |FORSYTH COUNTY, Georgia (not |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 324 |
| | |N. Carolina), U.S.A. |1896, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |1, p. 208. | |
| | |Found about 1892: described by|Sitzungsber. k. pr.| |
| | |Schweinitz in 1896 and Cohen |Ak. d. Wiss. zu | |
| | |in 1897; the former gives the |Berlin, 1897, | |
| | |State as "N. Carolina." |p. 386. | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| 92 | 1l |LOCUST GROVE, Henry County, |Sitzungsber. k. pr.| 365 |
| | |Georgia, (? N. Carolina), |Ak. d. Wiss. zu | |
| | |U.S.A. |Berlin, 1897, p. | |
| | | |76. | |
| | |Found in 1857: described by | | |
| | |Cohen in 1897, who gives the | | |
| | |State as "N. Carolina." | | |
| | | | | |
| 93 | 1l |PUTNAM COUNTY, Georgia, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 112 |
| | |U.S.A. |1854, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |17, p. 331. | |
| | |Found in 1839: described by | | |
| | |Willet in 1854. | | |
| | | | | |
| 94 | 1l |CHULAFINNEE, Cleberne County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 60 |
| | |Alabama, U.S.A. |1880, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |19, p. 370. | |
| | |Ploughed up in 1873: described| | |
| | |by Hidden in 1880. | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| 95 | 1l |AUBURN, Lee (not Macon) |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 37 |
| | |County, Alabama, U.S.A. |1869, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |47, p. 230. | |
| | |Ploughed up some years before | | |
| | |1869, when it was described by| | |
| | |Shepard. | | |
| | | | | |
| 96 | 1l |SUMMIT, Blount County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 47 |
| | |Alabama, U.S.A. |1890, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |40, p. 322. | |
| | |Known since 1890: described | | |
| | |by Kunz in the same year. | | |
| | | | | |
| 97 | 1h |WALKER COUNTY, Alabama, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 22,040 |
| | |U.S.A. |1845, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |49, p. 344. | |
| | |Found in 1832: described by | | |
| | |Troost in 1845. | | |
| | | | | |
| 98 | 1l |CLAIBORNE (Lime Creek), |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 19 |
| | |Clarke County, Alabama, U.S.A.|1838, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |34, p. 332. | |
| | |Mentioned in 1834: described | | |
| | |by Jackson in 1838. | | |
| | | | | |
| 99 | 1l |TOMBIGBEE RIVER, Choctaw and |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 7,875 |
| | |Sumter Counties, Alabama, |1899, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | |U.S.A. |8, p. 153. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Various masses found about | | |
| | |1859 and afterwards: | | |
| | |described by Foote in 1899. | | |
| | | | | |
|100 | 1l |OKTIBBEHA COUNTY, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | -- |
| | |Mississippi, U.S.A. |1897, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |24, p. 293. | |
| | |Found in an Indian tumulus: | | |
| | |described by Taylor in 1857. | | |
| | | | | |
|101 | 1l |COCKE COUNTY (Cosby's Creek), |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 50,460 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |1840, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |38, p. 253. | |
| | |Described in 1840 by Troost: | | |
| | |date of find unknown. | | |
| | | | | |
|102 | 1l |BABB'S MILL, Green County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,127 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |1845, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |49, p. 342. | |
| | |Turned up by a plough: first | | |
| | |mentioned in 1842: described | | |
| | |by Troost in 1845. | | |
| | | | | |
|103 | 1l |TAZEWELL, Claiborne County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 336 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |1854, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |17, p. 325. | |
| | |Turned up by a plough in 1853:| | |
| | |described by Shepard in 1854. | | |
| | | | | |
|104 | 1l |WALDRON RIDGE, Claiborne |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 70 |
| | |County, Tennessee, U.S.A. |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |34, p. 475. | |
| | |Known since 1887: described | | |
| | |by Kunz in the same year. | | |
| | | | | |
|105 | 1l |CLEVELAND, Bradley County, |Proc. Ac. Nat. Sc. | 209 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |Philad. 1886, p. | |
| | | |366. | |
| | |This mass was acquired in 1867| | |
| | |by Lea, and described by Genth| | |
| | |in 1886. | | |
| | | | | |
|106 | 1l |JACKSON COUNTY, Tennessee, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 91 |
| | |U.S.A. |1846, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |2, p. 357. | |
| | |Date of find unknown: | | |
| | |described in 1846 by Troost. | | |
| | | | | |
|107 | 1m |CARTHAGE, Smith County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 24,610 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |1846, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |2, p. 356. | |
| | |Found about 1844: described | | |
| | |in 1846 by Troost. | | |
| | | | | |
|108 | 1l |CANEY FORK, De Kalb County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 4 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |1845, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | | |49, p. 341. | |
| | |Turned up by a plough, near | | |
| | |the mouth of the Caney Fork | | |
| | |("Caryfort"), date not | | |
| | |mentioned: described by | | |
| | |Troost in 1845. | | |
| | | | | |
|109 | 1l |SMITHVILLE, De Kalb County, |Proc. Amer. Ac. | 1,683 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |Arts & Sci. 1894: | |
| | | |new series, vol. | |
| | |Three masses were ploughed up |21, p. 251. | |
| | |in 1892-3: described by | | |
| | |Huntington in 1894. | | |
| | | | | |
|110 | 1l |MURFREESBORO', Rutherford |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,790 |
| | |County, Tennessee, U.S.A. |1848, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |5, p. 351. | |
| | |Found about 1847-8: described | | |
| | |in 1848 by Troost. | | |
| | | | | |
|111 | 1l |COOPERTOWN, Robertson County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 179 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |1861, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |31, p. 266. | |
| | |Sent to Smith in 1860: | | |
| | |described by him in 1861. | | |
| | | | | |
|112 | 1m |KENTON COUNTY (8 miles south |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,520 |
| | |of Independence), Kentucky, |1892, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |U.S.A. |44, p. 163. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1889: described by | | |
| | |Preston in 1892. | | |
| | | | | |
|113 |1m, 4l|LAGRANGE, Oldham County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 216 |
| | |Kentucky, U.S.A. |1861, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |31, p. 265. | |
| | |Found in 1860: described by | | |
| | |Smith in 1861. | | |
| | | | | |
|114 | 1m |FRANKFORT (8 miles S.W. of), |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 216 |
| | |Franklin County, Kentucky, |1870, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | |U.S.A. |49, p. 331. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1866: described | | |
| | |(1870) by Smith. | | |
| | | | | |
|115 | 1m, |SALT RIVER, about 20 miles |Proc. Amer. Assoc. | 524 |
| | 4l |below Louisville, Kentucky, |Fourth Meeting, | |
| | |U.S.A. |held Aug. 1850, | |
| | | |vol. 4, p. 36. | |
| | |Date of find not mentioned: | | |
| | |described by Silliman in 1850.| | |
| | | | | |
|116 |1m, 4l|NELSON COUNTY, Kentucky, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 4,341 |
| | |U.S.A. |1860, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |30, p. 240. | |
| | |Turned up by a plough in 1860:| | |
| | |described by Smith in the same| | |
| | |year. | | |
| | | | | |
|117 | 1m |CASEY COUNTY, Kentucky, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 45 |
| | |U.S.A. |1877, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |14, p. 246. | |
| | |Mentioned in 1877 by Smith. | | |
| | | | | |
|118 | 1m |SCOTTSVILLE, Allen County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 404 |
| | |Kentucky, U.S.A. |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |33, p. 500. | |
| | |Found in 1867: described by | | |
| | |Whitfield in 1887. | | |
| | | | | |
|119 | 1m |SMITHLAND, Livingston County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,545 |
| | |Kentucky, U.S.A. |1846, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |2, p. 357. | |
| | |Found about 1839-40, and | | |
| | |described in 1846 by Troost. | | |
| | | | | |
|120 | 1m |MARSHALL COUNTY, Kentucky, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 80 |
| | |U.S.A. |1860, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |30, p. 240. | |
| | |Described by Smith in 1860. | | |
| | | | | |
|121 | 1m |WAYNE COUNTY (near Wooster), |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 5 |
| | |Ohio, U.S.A. |1864, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |38, p. 385. | |
| | |Found about 1858: described | | |
| | |by Smith in 1864. | | |
| | | | | |
|122 | 1m |GRAND RAPIDS, Kent County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 1,135 |
| | |Michigan, U.S.A. |1884, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |28, p. 299. | |
| | |Found in 1883 about 3 feet | | |
| | |below the surface: reported | | |
| | |by Eastman in 1884. | | |
| | | | | |
|123 | 1m |REED CITY, Osceola County, |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 876 |
| | |Michigan, U.S.A. |U.S.A. of Sc., | |
| | | |1903, vol. 4, p. | |
| | |Found in 1895: described by |89. | |
| | |Preston in 1903. | | |
| | | | | |
|124 | 1m |HOWARD COUNTY (7 miles S.E. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 45 |
| | |of Kokomo), Indiana, U.S.A. |1873, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |5, p. 155; and | |
| | |Found in 1862 or 1870 at a |1874, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |depth of 2 feet: described by |7, p. 391. | |
| | |Cox in 1872 and by Smith in | | |
| | |1874. | | |
| | | | | |
|125 | 1m |PLYMOUTH, Marshall County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 445 |
| | |Indiana, U.S.A. |1895, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |49, p. 53. | |
| | |Found in 1893 by a ploughman: | | |
| | |described by Ward in 1895. | | |
| | | | | |
|126 | 1m |INDEPENDENCE COUNTY (about 7 |School of Mines | 372 |
| | |miles east of Batesville), |Quarterly, 1886, | |
| | |Arkansas, U.S.A. |vol. 7, No. 2, | |
| | | |Jan., p. 188. | |
| | |Found in 1884: described by | | |
| | |Hidden in 1886. | | |
| | | | | |
|127 | 1n |SOUTH-EAST MISSOURI, U.S.A. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 102 |
| | | |1869, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | |Found in 1863 in the Museum |47, p. 233. | |
| | |of St. Louis, labelled | | |
| | |"South-East Missouri": | | |
| | |reported by Shepard in 1869. | | |
| | | | | |
|128 | 1p |ST. GENEVIEVE COUNTY, |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 6,445 |
| | |Missouri, U.S.A. |of Sci., 1901, vol.| |
| | | |4, p. 65. | |
| | |Found in 1888: described by | | |
| | |Ward in 1901. | | |
| | | | | |
|129 | 1n |CENTRAL MISSOURI, U.S.A. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 988 |
| | | |1900, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | |Found about 1850-60: described|9, p. 285. | |
| | |by Preston in 1900. | | |
| | | | | |
|130 | 1n |BUTLER, Bates County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 389 |
| | |Missouri, U.S.A. |1875, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |10, p. 401. | |
| | |Turned up by a plough: long | | |
| | |afterwards came to the | | |
| | |knowledge of Broadhead, who | | |
| | |mentioned it in 1875. | | |
| | | | | |
|131 | 1n |BILLINGS, Christian County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 633 |
| | |Missouri, U.S.A. |1905, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |19, p. 240. | |
| | |Found in 1903: described by | | |
| | |Ward in 1905. | | |
| | | | | |
|132 | 1n |ARLINGTON, Sibley County, |Amer. Geologist, | 56 |
| | |Minnesota, U.S.A. |1896, vol. 18, p. | |
| | | |267. | |
| | |Found in 1894: described by | | |
| | |Winchell in 1896. | | |
| | | | | |
|133 | 1n |TRENTON, Washington County, |Smithson. Rep. for | 223 |
| | |Wisconsin, U.S.A. |1869: p. 417. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Turned up by a plough in 1858:| | |
| | |described by Dörflinger in | | |
| | |1868. | | |
| | | | | |
|134 | 1n |HAMMOND TOWNSHIP, St. Croix |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 62 |
| | |County, Wisconsin, U.S.A. |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |34, p. 381. | |
| | |Ploughed up in 1884: described| | |
| | |by Fisher in 1887. | | |
| | | | | |
|135 | 1n |ALGOMA, Kewaunee County, |Bull. Geol. Soc. | 18 |
| | |Wisconsin, U.S.A. |America, 1903, vol.| |
| | | |14, p. 97. | |
| | |Found in 1887: described by | | |
| | |Hobbs in 1902 (1903). | | |
| | | | | |
|136 | 1n |DAKOTA, U.S.A. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 224 |
| | | |1863, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | |Described in 1863 by Jackson. |36, p. 259. | |
| | | | | |
|137 | 1n |JAMESTOWN (15 or 20 miles |Proc. Amer. Ac. | 1,627 |
| | |south-east of), Stutsman |Arts & Sci. 1890, | |
| | |County, N. Dakota, U.S.A. |vol. 25 (new ser., | |
| | | |vol. 17), p. 229. | |
| | |Found in 1885: described by | | |
| | |Huntington in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
|138 | 1n |NIAGARA, Grand Forks County, |Jour. of Geology, | 17 |
| | |N. Dakota, U.S.A. |1902, vol. 10, p. | |
| | | |518. | |
| | |Found in 1879: described by | | |
| | |Preston in 1902. | | |
| | | | | |
|139 | 1n |NEBRASKA (25 m. N.W. of Fort |Trans. of St. Louis| 2,016 |
| | |Pierre), Dakota, U.S.A. |Acad. of Sc. | |
| | | |1857-60, vol. 1, p.| |
| | |Brought away in 1857: |711. | |
| | |described by Holmes in 1860. | | |
| | | | | |
|140 | 1n |CROW CREEK, Laramie County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 583 |
| | |Wyoming, U.S.A. |1888, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |36, p. 276. | |
| | |Found in 1887: described by | | |
| | |Kunz in 1888. | | |
| | | | | |
|141 | 1n |ILLINOIS GULCH, Deer Lodge |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 637 |
| | |County, Montana, U.S.A. |1900, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |9, p. 201. | |
| | |Found in 1899: described by | | |
| | |Preston in 1900. | | |
| | | | | |
|142 | 1n |TONGANOXIE, Leavenworth |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 260 |
| | |County, Kansas, U.S.A. |1891, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |42, p. 385. | |
| | |Found in 1886: described by | | |
| | |Bailey in 1891. | | |
| | | | | |
|143 | 1n |RUSSEL GULCH, Gilpin County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 245 |
| | |Colorado, U.S.A. |1866, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |42, p. 218. | |
| | |Found in 1863: described in | | |
| | |1866 by Smith. | | |
| | | | | |
|144 | 1n |BEAR CREEK, Denver, Colorado, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 52 |
| | |U.S.A. |1866, ser. 2, vol. | |
| | | |42, pp. 250, 286. | |
| | |Found in 1866: described by | | |
| | |Shepard in the same year. | | |
| | | | | |
|145 | 1n |FRANCEVILLE, El Paso County, |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 772 |
| | |Colorado, U.S.A. |of Sci., 1902, vol.| |
| | | |4, p. 75. | |
| | |Found in 1890: described by | | |
| | |Preston in 1902. | | |
| | | | | |
|146 | 1n |HAYDEN CREEK, Lemhi County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 79 |
| | |Idaho, U.S.A. |1900, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |9, p. 367. | |
| | |Known in 1895: described by | | |
| | |Hidden in 1900. | | |
| | | | | |
|147 | 1m |WILLAMETTE, Clackamas County, |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 976 |
| | |Oregon, U.S.A. |of Sci., 1904, vol.| |
| | | |4, p. 137. | |
| | |Found in 1902: described by |Amer. Mus. Jour. | |
| | |Ward in 1904 and by Hovey in |1906, vol. 6, p. | |
| | |1906. |105. | |
| | | | | |
|148 | 1o |CANYON CITY, Trinity County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 193 |
| | |California, U.S.A. |1885, ser. 8, vol. | |
| | | |29, p. 469; and | |
| | |Found in 1875: described by |1904 ser. 4, vol. | |
| | |Shepard in 1885 and by Ward |17, p. 383. | |
| | |in 1904. | | |
| | | | | |
|149 | 1o |OROVILLE, Butte County, | | 373 |
| | |California, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1893. | | |
| | | | | |
|150 | 1o |SHINGLE SPRINGS, El Dorado |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 84 |
| | |County, California, U.S.A. |1873, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |6, p. 18. | |
| | |Found 1869-70: described by | | |
| | |Silliman in 1873. | | |
| | | | | |
|151 | 1o |IVANPAH, San Bernardino |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 33 |
| | |County, California, U.S.A. |1880, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |19, p. 381 | |
| | |Described by Shepard in 1880, | | |
| | |shortly after its discovery. | | |
| | | | | |
|152 | 1o |SURPRISE SPRINGS, Bagdad, San |Mittheil. naturw. | 97 |
| | |Bernardino County, S. |Verein für | |
| | |California, U.S.A. |Neu-Vorpommern und | |
| | | |Rügen, 1902, | |
| | |Found in 1899: described by |Jahrg. 33, p. 29. | |
| | |Cohen in 1901. | | |
| | | | | |
|153 | Sep. |CAÑON DIABLO, Arizona, U.S.A. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 83,369 |
| |Stand,| |1891, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | 1n |Found in 1891: described by |42, p. 413. | |
| | |Foote in the same year. | | |
| | | | | |
|154 | 1n |WEAVER'S MOUNTAINS, | | 155 |
| | |Wickenburg, Arizona, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1898. | | |
| | | | | |
|155 | 1n |TUCSON, Arizona, U.S.A. |Mineralog. | 161 |
| | | |Magazine, 1890, | 282 |
| | |Two large masses, long |vol. 9, p. 16. | |
| | |preserved at Tucson, had been | | |
| | |transported to that town from | | |
| | |the Puerto de los Muchachos, | | |
| | |a pass about 20 or 30 miles | | |
| | |south of Tucson. Their | | |
| | |existence has been known for | | |
| | |centuries. One of them has | | |
| | |been termed the Signet or | | |
| | |Irwin-Ainsa iron, the other | | |
| | |the Carleton iron. | | |
| | | | | |
|156 | 1o |COSTILLA PEAK, Cimarron |Proc. Colorado | 1,595 |
| | |Range, New Mexico, U.S.A. |Scient. Soc. 1895, | |
| | | |vol. 5, p. 121. | |
| | |Found in 1881 by a | | |
| | |sheep-herder: described by | | |
| | |Hills in 1895. | | |
| | | | | |
|157 | 1o |CAPITAN RANGE, New Mexico, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 956 |
| | |U.S.A. |1895, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |50, p. 253. | |
| | |Found in 1893 by a | | |
| | |sheep-herder: described by | | |
| | |Howell in 1895. | | |
| | | | | |
|158a| 1o |GLORIETA MOUNTAIN, 1 m. N.E. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 1,528 |
| | |of Canoncito, Santa Fé County,|1885, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |New Mexico, U.S.A. |30, p. 235. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1884: described by | | |
| | |Kunz in 1885. | | |
| | | | | |
|158b| 1o |A specimen probably from this |Proc. Colorado | 61 |
| | |locality was sent in 1884 to |Scient. Soc. 1884, | |
| | |Denver from Albuquerque, New |vol. 1, p. 110; | |
| | |Mexico, as silver bullion: |1885, vol. 2, pp. | |
| | |described by Pearce and Eakins|14, 35. | |
| | |in 1884-5. | | |
| | | | | |
|159 | 1o |SACRAMENTO MOUNTAINS, Eddy |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 14,050 |
| | |County, New Mexico, U.S.A. |1897, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |3, p. 65. | |
| | |Known in 1896: described by | | |
| | |Foote in 1896 (1897). | | |
| | | | | |
|160 | 1o |LUIS LOPEZ, Socorro County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 425 |
| | |New Mexico, U.S.A. |1900, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |9, p. 283. | |
| | |Found in 1896: described by | | |
| | |Preston in 1900. | | |
| | | | | |
|161 | 1o |OSCURO MOUNTAIN, Socorro |Proc. Colorado | 494 |
| | |County, New Mexico, U.S.A. |Scient. Soc. 1897, | |
| | | |vol. 6, p. 30. | |
| | |Found in 1895: described by | | |
| | |Hills in 1897. | | |
| | | | | |
|162 | 1o |BRAZOS RIVER, Wichita County, |Trans. of St. Louis| 1,397 |
| | |Texas, U.S.A. |Acad. of Sc. | |
| | | |1857-60, vol. 1, p.| |
| | |Known to the Comanches for |622. | |
| | |many years: removed in 1836: |Amer. Jour. Sc. | |
| | |described by Shumard in 1860, |1884, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |and by Mallet in 1884. |28, p. 285. | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
|163 | 1o |DENTON COUNTY, Texas, U.S.A. |Trans. of St. Louis| 122 |
| | | |Acad. of Sc. | |
| | |After discovery it remained |1857-60, vol. 1, p.| |
| | |with a blacksmith for several |623. | |
| | |months; in 1859 it came into | | |
| | |the possession of Shumard, by | | |
| | |whom it was described in the | | |
| | |following year. | | |
| | | | | |
|164 | 1o |RED RIVER (Cross Timbers), |Amer. Min. Jour. by| 507 |
| | |Johnson County, Texas, U.S.A. |Bruce: 1814, vol. | |
| | | |1, pp. 124, 218. | |
| | |Mentioned in 1808 to Captain |Amer. Jour. Sc. | |
| | |Glass, and reported by Gibbs |1824, ser. 1, vol. | |
| | |in 1814. |8, p. 218. | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
|165 | 1n |CARLTON, Hamilton County, |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 6,180 |
| | |Texas, U.S.A. |of Sc., 1890, vol. | |
| | |Ploughed up in 1887-8: |1, p. 87. | |
| | |described by Howell in 1890. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | |
| | | |1890, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |40, p. 223. | |
| | | | | |
|166 | 1o |KENDALL COUNTY, San Antonio, |Ann. d. k. k. | 556 |
| | |Texas, U.S.A. |Naturhist. | |
| | | |Hofmuseums, 1887, | |
| | |Mentioned in 1887 by Brezina, |band II., Notizen, | |
| | |and fully described later by |p. 115; Cohen, | |
| | |Brezina and Cohen. |Meteoritenkunde, | |
| | | |1905, Heft III., p.| |
| | | |241. | |
| | | | | |
|167 | 1o |MART, McLennan County, |Proc. Washington | 430 |
| | |Texas, U.S.A. |Acad. Sci. 1900, | |
| | | |vol. 2, p. 51. | |
| | |Found in 1898: described by | | |
| | |Merrill and Stokes in 1899 | | |
| | |(1900). | | |
| | | | | |
|168 | 1o |SAN ANGELO, Tom Green |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 771 |
| | |County, Texas, U.S.A. |1898, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |5, p. 269. | |
| | |Found in 1897: described by | | |
| | |Preston in 1898. | | |
| | | | | |
|169 | 1o |FORT DUNCAN, Maverick |Mineralog. | 4,520 |
| | |County, Texas, U.S.A. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 116. | |
| | |Found in 1882: described by | | |
| | |Hidden in 1886: similar to | | |
| | |Coahuila; perhaps transported | | |
| | |from the same district by way | | |
| | |of Santa Rosa. | | |
| | | | | |
|170a| 2c |COAHUILA, Mexico. |Mineralog. |246,924 |
| | | |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | |Since 1837 many masses have |vol. 9, p. 107. | |
| | |been brought to Santa Rosa, | | |
| | |from a district of small area | | |
| | |about 90 miles north-west of | | |
| | |that town. An account of a | | |
| | |visit by Hamilton was | | |
| | |published by Shepard in 1866; | | |
| | |he designated the iron by the | | |
| | |name Bonanza: eight large | | |
| | |masses were removed to the | | |
| | |United States by Butcher in | | |
| | |1868. | | |
| | | | | |
|170b| 2c |SANCHEZ ESTATE, Coahuila, |Mineralog. | 572 |
| | |Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 113. | |
| | |Found in 1853 by Couch in use | | |
| | |as an anvil at Saltillo. It | | |
| | |was said to have been brought | | |
| | |to that town from the "Sancha | | |
| | |Estate," but had probably been| | |
| | |acquired still earlier at | | |
| | |Santa Rosa, and been got at | | |
| | |the north-west locality. | | |
| | | | | |
|171 | 2c |SIERRA BLANCA, Huejuquilla |Mineralog. | 15 |
| | |or Jimenez, Chihuahua, Mexico.|Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 149. | |
| | |The occurrence at Sierra | | |
| | |Blanca was recorded in 1784: | | |
| | |the only specimen known--that | | |
| | |from the Bergemann | | |
| | |collection--is now thought to | | |
| | |be of doubtful authenticity; | | |
| | |in its etched figures it is | | |
| | |like Toluca. | | |
| | | | | |
|172 | 2c |CONCEPCION: (Huejuquilla or |Mineralog. | 47 |
| | |Jimenez, Chihuahua, Mexico). |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 140. | |
| | |Masses of iron, some of them | | |
| | |probably belonging to one | | |
| | |fall, have been known for | | |
| | |centuries to exist near | | |
| | |Huejuquilla: the mass is said | | |
| | |to have been transported to | | |
| | |Concepcion from Sierra de las | | |
| | |Adargas in 1780. | | |
| | | | | |
|173 | 2c |CHUPADEROS, Chihuahua, |Mineralog. | 1,087 |
| | |Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 148. | |
| | |Mentioned to Bartlett in 1852.| | |
| | | | | |
|174 | 2c |CASAS GRANDES (de Malintzin), |Mineralog. | 989 |
| | |Chihuahua, Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 119. | |
| | |Reported by Tarayre in 1867. | | |
| | | | | |
|175 | 2c |MOCTEZUMA, Sonora, Mexico. | | 170 |
| | | | | |
|176 | 2c |ARISPE, Sonora, Mexico. |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 1,910 |
| | | |Sci. 1902, vol. 4, | |
| | |Found in 1898: described by |p. 79. Proc. | |
| | |Ward in 1902 and Wuensch in |Colorado Sci. Soc. | |
| | |1903. |1903, vol. 7, | |
| | | |p. 67. | |
| | | | | |
|177 | 2c |EL RANCHITO, Bacubirito, |Mineralog. | 1,085 |
| | |Sinaloa, Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 151. | |
| | |Found in 1871: described by | | |
| | |Castillo in 1889. | | |
| | | | | |
|178 | 1a |RANCHO DE LA PILA, Labor |Mineralog. | 44,220 |
| | |de Guadalupe, Durango, Mexico.|Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 153. | |
| | |Ploughed up in 1882: described| | |
| | |by Häpke in 1883. | | |
| | | | | |
|179 | 2c |CACARIA, Durango, Mexico. |Mineralog. | 310 |
| | | |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | |Reported by Castillo in 1889: |vol. 9, p. 154. | |
| | |described by Cohen in 1900. |Ann. d. k. k. | |
| | | |Naturh. Hofmus. | |
| | | |Wien, 1900, vol. | |
| | | |15, p. 359. | |
| | | | | |
|180 | 2b |SAN FRANCISCO DEL MEZQUITAL, |Mineralog. | 7,095 |
| | |Durango, Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 154. | |
| | |Brought from Mexico by General| | |
| | |Castelnau, and described in | | |
| | |1868 by Daubrée. The above is | | |
| | |the old name for the capital | | |
| | |of Mezquital. | | |
| | | | | |
|181 | 2c |BELLA ROCA, Sierra de San |Amer. Jour. Sci. | 3,537 |
| | |Francisco, Santiago |1889, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |Papasquiaro, Durango, Mexico. |37, p. 439. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Acquired by Ward in 1888: | | |
| | |described by Whitfield in | | |
| | |1889. | | |
| | | | | |
|182 | 2c |RODEO, Durango, Mexico. |Field Columbian | 409 |
| | | |Museum. Publication| |
| | |Found about 1852: described |101. Geol. series | |
| | |by Farrington in 1905. |1905, vol. 3, | |
| | | |No. 1. | |
| | | | | |
|183 |2c, 2p|DESCUBRIDORA, Catorce, San |Mineralog. | 4,474 |
| | |Luis Potosi, Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 157. | |
| | |Found before 1780, and | | |
| | |described by a committee in | | |
| | |1872. | | |
| | | | | |
|184 | 4l |CHARCAS, San Luis Potosi, |Mineralog. | 333 |
| | |Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 160. | |
| | |Mentioned in 1804 by | | |
| | |Sonneschmid; it was then at | | |
| | |the corner of the church, and | | |
| | |was said to have been brought | | |
| | |from San José del Sitio, 12 | | |
| | |leagues distant. In 1866 it | | |
| | |was removed to Paris. | | |
| | | | | |
|185 |2c, 4l|ZACATECAS, Mexico. |Mineralog. | 3,848 |
| | | |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | |Mentioned in 1792; it was said|vol. 9, p. 162. | |
| | |to have been found long before| | |
| | |near the Quebradilla Mine. | | |
| | | | | |
|186 | 1a |TOLUCA, Mexico. |Mineralog. |120,089 |
| | 2c | |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | 4l |Before 1776 it was known that |vol. 9, p. 164. | |
| | |masses of iron occurred in the| | |
| | |neighbourhood of Xiquipilco, | | |
| | |Valley of Toluca. | | |
| | | | | |
|187 | 2c |CUERNAVACA, Morelos, Mexico. |Mineralog. | 1,024 |
| | | |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | |Mentioned by Castillo in 1889.|vol. 9, p. 168. | |
| | | | | |
|188 | 2c |YANHUITLAN, Misteca alta, |Mineralog. | 316 |
| | |Oaxaca, Mexico. |Magazine, 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 9, p. 171. | |
| | |Mentioned by Del Rio in 1804. | | |
| | | | | |
|189 | 2c |APOALA, Oaxaca, Mexico. |Cohen, | 283 |
| | | |Meteoritenkunde, | |
| | |Found in 1889: mentioned by |1905, Heft III., | |
| | |Cohen in 1900. |p. 384. | |
| | | | | |
|190 | 2d |ROSARIO, Honduras, Central | | 126 |
| | |America. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1897. | | |
| | | | | |
|191 | Dr. |LUCKY HILL, St. Elizabeth, | | Rusted. |
| | |Jamaica. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1885 about 2 feet | | |
| | |below the surface. | | |
| | | | | |
|192 | 2d |SANTA ROSA (Tocavita), near |Ann. Chim. Phys. | |
| | |Tunja, Boyaca River, Colombia,|1824, vol. 25, p. | |
| | |S. America. |438. | |
| | | | | |
| | |(a) In 1824 Rivero and | | |
| | |Boussingault made known a | | |
| | |large mass of iron in use as | | |
| | |an anvil at Santa Rosa. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |In 1874 the mass was placed on|Amer. Jour. Sc. | 996 |
| | |a pillar in the market-place |1907, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | |of Santa Rosa (de Viterbo); |23, p. 1. | |
| | |in 1906 the town was visited | | |
| | |by Ward, who then obtained a | | |
| | |large piece of the mass. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |(b) With other small pieces | | 105 |
| | |it had been found on a | | |
| | |neighbouring hill, called | | |
| | |Tocavita, in 1810: Rivero and | | |
| | |Boussingault collected several| | |
| | |specimens themselves. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |The large mass and the other | | |
| | |small pieces have different | | |
| | |characters. | | |
| | | | | |
|193 | 2d |RASGATA, Colombia, S. America.|Ann. Chim. Phys. | 58 |
| | | |1824, vol. 25, p. | |
| | |Other masses of iron were seen|442. | |
| | |by Rivero and Boussingault at | | |
| | |Rasgata, and were said to have| | |
| | |been found there. | | |
| | | | | |
|194 | 2b |EL INCA MASS, from Pampa de |Neues Jahrb. f. | 6,235 |
| | |Tamarugal, Iquique, Chili. |Min. Festband, | |
| | | |1907, p. 227. | |
| | |Found in 1903: of "octahedral"| | |
| | |structure, described by Rinne | | |
| | |and Boeke in 1907. | | |
| | | |Festsch. zur Feier | |
| | |A fragment, having "cubic" |d. hundertjähr. | |
| | |structure, from a large mass |Bestehens d. | |
| | |lying at a place similarly |Gesellsch. Naturf. | |
| | |defined had been described by |Freunde zu Berlin, | |
| | |Rose in 1873. |1873, p. 33. | |
| | | | | |
|195 | 2d |TARAPACA, Chili, S. America. | | 14 |
| | | | | |
| | |Known since 1894. | | |
| | | | | |
|196 | 2d |LA PRIMITIVA, Desert of |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 78 |
| | |Tarapaca, Chili, S. America. |Sci. 1890, vol. 1, | |
| | | |p. 100. | |
| | |Known in 1888: mentioned by | | |
| | |Howell in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
|197 | 2a |MOUNT HICKS, Mantos Blancos, |Mineralog. | 9,015 |
| | |about 40 miles from |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |Antofagasta, Atacama, Chili. |vol. 8, p. 257. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found about 1876, and | | |
| | |described by L. F. in 1889. | | |
| | | | | |
|198 | 2d |SERRANIA DE VARAS, Atacama, |Mineralog. | 1,468 |
| | |Chili. |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | | |vol. 8, p. 258. | |
| | |Found about 1875, and | | |
| | |described by L. F. in 1889. | | |
| | | | | |
|199 | 2d |SAN CRISTOBAL, Antofagasta, |Sitzungsb. d. k. | 145 |
| | |Atacama, Chili. |preuss. Ak. d. | |
| | | |Wissens. zu Berlin,| |
| | |Known since 1896: described |1898, I., p. 607. | |
| | |by Cohen in 1898. | | |
| | | | | |
|200 | 2d |CACHIYUYAL, Atacama, Chili. |Mineralog. | 28 |
| | | |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |Found in 1874: described by |vol. 8, p. 259. | |
| | |Domeyko in 1875. | | |
| | | | | |
|201 | 2d |ILIMAË, Atacama, Chili. |Mineralog. | 39 |
| | |Known since 1870: described |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |by Tschermak in 1872. |vol. 8, p. 260. | |
| | | | | |
|202 | 2d |MERCEDITAS, 10 or 12 leagues |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 1,917 |
| | |east of Chañaral, Atacama, |of Sc. 1890, vol. | |
| | |Chili. |1, p. 99. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Known since 1884: described | | |
| | |by Howell in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
|203 | 2d |PAN DE AZUCAR, Atacama, | | 19,280 |
| | |Chili. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found about 67 miles from the | | |
| | |port of Pan de Azucar in 1887.| | |
| | | | | |
|204 | 2d |JUNCAL, Atacama, Chili. |Mineralog. | 72 |
| | | |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |Found in 1866 between Rio |vol. 8, p. 261. | |
| | |Juncal and the Salinas de | | |
| | |Pedernal: had possibly been | | |
| | |transported to that place: | | |
| | |described by Daubrée in 1868. | | |
| | | | | |
|205 | 2d |PUQUIOS, Copiapo, Atacama, |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 176 |
| | |Chili. |of Sc. 1890, | |
| | | |vol. 1, p. 89. | |
| | |Found about 1885: described | | |
| | |by Howell in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
|206 | 2d |THE JOEL IRON, Atacama, |Mineralog. | 1,144 |
| | |Chili. |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | | |vol. 8, p. 263. | |
| | |Found in 1858 in an | | |
| | |unspecified part of the | | |
| | |desert: described by L. F. | | |
| | |in 1889. | | |
| | | | | |
|207 | 2d |SIERRA DE LA TERNERA, |Tschermak's Min. | 5 |
| | |Atacama, Chili. |u. Petrog. Mitth. | |
| | | |1891, vol. 12, p. | |
| | |Described by Kunz and |184. | |
| | |Weinschenk in 1891. | | |
| | | | | |
|208 | 2d |BARRANCA BLANCA, between |Mineralog. | 11,910 |
| | |Copiapo and Catamarca, South |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |America. |vol. 8, p. 262. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1855, and described | | |
| | |by L. F. in 1889. | | |
| | | | | |
|209 | 2d |CHILI. |Mineralog. | 2 |
| | | |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |Owing to an interchange of |vol. 8, p. 256. | |
| | |labels, the specimen was | | |
| | |described in 1868 by Daubrée | | |
| | |as having been found in an | | |
| | |unspecified locality in Chili.| | |
| | |According to Domeyko it was | | |
| | |supposed to have been found in| | |
| | |the Cordillera de la Dehesa, | | |
| | |near Santiago. | | |
| | | | | |
|210 | 2d |ANGELAS (Oficina), Chili. | | 5,545 |
| | | | | |
|211 | Sep. |OTUMPA, Gran Chaco Gualamba, |Phil. Trans. 1788, |634,000 |
| |Stand,|Argentine Republic. |vol. 78, pp. 37, | |
| | 4c | |183. | |
| | |The occurrence of metallic |Mineralog. | |
| | |iron at this locality having |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |been reported, Don Rubin de |vol. 8, p. 229. | |
| | |Celis was sent in 1783 to | | |
| | |investigate the matter: his | | |
| | |report was published in 1788. | | |
| | | | | |
|212 | 2d |BENDEGÓ RIVER, Bahia, Brazil. |Phil. Trans. 1816, | 3,119 |
| | | |vol. 106, p. 270. | |
| | |Found in 1784: described by | | |
| | |Mornay in 1816. | | |
| | | | | |
|213 | 2d |SANTA CATHARINA (Morro do |Comptes Rendus, | 6,455 |
| | |Rocio), Rio San Francisco do |1877, vol. 85, p. | |
| | |Sul, Brazil. |84. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Discovered in 1875: described | | |
| | |by Lunay in 1877: it is | | |
| | |regarded by some mineralogists| | |
| | |as probably of terrestrial | | |
| | |origin. | | |
| | | | | |
|214 | 2d |CAPERR, Rio Senguerr, |Mineralog. | 313 |
| | |Patagonia. |Magazine, 1900, | |
| | | |vol. 12, p. 167. | |
| | |Known before 1869: described | | |
| | |by L. F. in 1899. | | |
| | | | | |
|215 | 2d |LOCALITY UNKNOWN (from Prof. |Ann. Chem. Pharm. | 30 |
| | |Wöhler's Collection). |1852, vol. 81, p. | |
| | | |253. | |
| | |Described by Wöhler in 1852. | | |
| | | | | |
|216 | 2d |LOCALITY UNKNOWN (from |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 5 |
| | |Smithsonian Museum . |1881, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |Collection) |22, p. 119. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Described by Shepard in 1881. | | |
| | | | | |
|217 | 2d |LOCALITY UNKNOWN (from United |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 47 |
| | |States National Museum |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |Collection). |34, p. 59. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Slice of a complete meteorite | | |
| | |which was found in a | | |
| | |collection of minerals formed | | |
| | |by the late Col. J. J. Abert: | | |
| | |described by Riggs in 1887. | | |
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
II. SIDEROLITES
(consisting chiefly of nickeliferous iron and silicates, both in large
proportion).
* * * * *
A. FALL RECORDED.
[Arranged chronologically.]
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|No. |Pane. | Name of Meteorite and | Date of Fall. | Weight |
| | | Place of Fall. | |in grams.|
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|218 | 2e |TANEY COUNTY, Missouri, U.S.A.|Fell about 1857-8. | 2,454 |
| | | | | |
| | |A fragment, sent from Taney | | |
| | |County, Missouri, about , | | |
| | |1857-8was described by Shepard| | |
| | |in 1860. | | |
| | | Amer. Jour. Sc. 1860, ser. | | |
| | | 2, vol. 30, p. 205. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |A fragment of a meteorite was | | |
| | |given to Cox by Judge Green of| | |
| | |Crawford County: no mention | | |
| | |of place or date of find. | | |
| | | Sec. Rep. Geol. Reconn. | | |
| | | Arkansas, 1860, p. 408. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Green's fragment was described| | |
| | |under the name of Newton | | |
| | |County(Arkansas) by Smith in | | |
| | |1865. | | |
| | | Amer. Jour. Sc. 1865, ser. | | |
| | | 2, vol. 40, p. 213. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |A large mass was obtained by | | |
| | |Kunz and reported by him in | | |
| | |1887 to have really fallen in | | |
| | |Taney County, Missouri, about | | |
| | |thirty years before, and to | | |
| | |have been afterwards taken to | | |
| | |Newton County, Arkansas. | | |
| | | Amer. Jour. Sc. 1887, ser. | | |
| | | 3, vol. 34, p. 467. | | |
| | | | | |
|219 | 2e |LODRAN (Lodhran), Mooltan, |Oct. 1, 1868. | 59 |
| | |Punjab, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|220 | 2a |ESTHERVILLE, Emmet County, |May 10, 1879. | 116,618 |
| | |Iowa, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|221 | 2e |VERAMIN, Teheran, Persia. |May, 1880. | 238 |
| | | | | |
|222 | 2e |MARJALAHTI, Viborgs Län, |June 1, 1902. | 2,990 |
| | |Finland. | | |
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
B. FALL NOT RECORDED.
[Arranged topographically.]
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|No. |Pane. | Name of Meteorite and | Report of Find. | Weight |
| | | Place of Find. | |in grams.|
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|223 | 2e |FINMARKEN, Norway. |Mittheil. naturw. | 1,306 |
| | | |Verein für | |
| | |Found in 1902: described by |Neu-Vorpommern | |
| | |Cohen in 1903. |und Rügen, Jahrg. | |
| | | |35, 1903, p. 1. | |
| | | | | |
|224 | 2e |HAINHOLZ, Minden, Westphalia. |Pogg. Ann. 1857, | 484 |
| | | |vol. 100, p. 342. | |
| | |Found in 1856: described by | | |
| | |Wöhler in 1857. | | |
| | | | | |
|225a| 2e |STEINBACH, Erzgebirge, Saxony.|Kurze Einleitung | 130 |
| | | |in einige Theile | |
| | |Reported as "native iron" by |der Bergwerks- | |
| | |J. G. Lehmann in 1751. |Wissenschaft, | |
| | | |1751, p. 79. | |
| | | | | |
|225b| 2e |RITTERSGRÜN, Erzgebirge, |Zeitsch. deutsch. | 694 |
| | |Saxony. |geol. Gesell. 1861,| |
| | | |vol. 13, p. 148. | |
| | |Found in (1833 or) 1847: |Der Eisenmeteorit | |
| | |reported by Breithaupt in |von Rittersgrün im | |
| | |1861. |sächsischen | |
| | | | | |
| | |According to Weisbach it was |Erzgebirge: von A. | |
| | |really found in 1833. |W.: Freiberg, 1876.| |
| | | | | |
|225c| 2e |BREITENBACH, Erzgebirge, |Phil. Trans. 1871, | 6,230 |
| | |Bohemia. |vol. 161, p. 359. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1861: described by |Berg-und hütt. | |
| | |Maskelyne in 1871. |Zeitung, 1862, | |
| | | |Jahrg. 21, p. 321. | |
| | |Steinbach, Rittersgrün, and | | |
| | |Breitenbach are within five | | |
| | |English miles of each other, | | |
| | |on the border of Saxony and | | |
| | |Bohemia; the siderolites | | |
| | |probably fell at the same | | |
| | |time. Breithaupt suggests that| | |
| | |this was the fall reported to | | |
| | |have taken place at | | |
| | |Whitsuntide in the year 1164: | | |
| | |Buchner (p. 124) suggests a | | |
| | |fall which took place between | | |
| | |1540 and 1550. | | |
| | | | | |
|226 | 2e |BRAHIN, Minsk, Russia. |Bull. des. Sc. par | 22 |
| | | |la Soc. philom., | |
| | |Found in 1809, 1810 or 1820. |_Paris_, 1823, p. | |
| | | |86. Partsch's Die | |
| | | |Meteoriten zu Wien.| |
| | | |1843, p. 90. | |
| | | |Erman's Archiv. f. | |
| | | |wiss. Kunde von | |
| | | |Russland, 1846, | |
| | | |vol. 5, p. 183. | |
| | | | | |
|227 |2e, 4c|THE PALLAS IRON. |Reise d. versch. | 3,365 |
| | | |Prov. d. russ. | |
| | |Found in 1749 between the Ubei|Reichs: von P. S. | |
| | |and Sisim rivers, Yeniseisk, |Pallas. St. | |
| | |Asiatic Russia, and |Petersburg, | |
| | |transported to Krasnojarsk: |1776. Part iii. | |
| | |reported by Pallas in 1776. |p. 411. | |
| | | | | |
|228 | 2e |PAVLODAR, Semipalatinsk, | | 58 |
| | |Asiatic Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1885. | | |
| | | | | |
|229 | 2e |SENEGAL RIVER, West Africa. |Allgemeine Historie| 396 |
| | | |der Reisen zu | |
| | |"Native Iron" was found by |Wasser und Lande: | |
| | |Compagnon in 1716 to be in |von J. J. Schwabe. | |
| | |very common use in many parts |Leipzig, 1748, vol.| |
| | |of the kingdoms of Bambuk and |2, Book 5, Ch. 13, | |
| | |Siratik. |p. 510. | |
| | | | | |
|230 | 2e |MOUNT DYRRING, Bridgman, |Records of the | 248 |
| | |Singleton District, New South |Geol. Survey of | |
| | |Wales. |N. S. Wales, 1903, | |
| | | |vol. 7, p. 218. | |
| | |Found in 1902: described by | | |
| | |Card in 1903. | | |
| | | | | |
|231 | 2e |POWDER MILL CREEK, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 1,167 |
| | |Cumberland County, Tennessee, |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |U.S.A. |34, pp. 387, 476. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1887: described in | | |
| | |the same year by Whitfield | | |
| | |and Kunz. | | |
| | | | | |
|232 | 2e |EAGLE STATION, Carroll |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 708 |
| | |County, Kentucky, U.S.A. |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |33, p. 228. | |
| | |Found in 1880, and described | | |
| | |by Kunz in 1887. | | |
| | | | | |
|233 | 2e |BRENHAM TOWNSHIP, Kiowa |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,008 |
| | |County, Kansas, U.S.A. |1890, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |40, p. 312. | |
| | |Found about 1886: described | | |
| | |by Kunz in 1890. | | |
| | | | | |
|234 | 2e |ADMIRE, Lyon County, Kansas, |Proc. U.S. Nat. | 1,076 |
| | |U.S.A. |Mus. 1902, vol. 24,| |
| | | |p. 907. | |
| | |Found about 1892: described | | |
| | |by Merrill in 1902. | | |
| | | | | |
|235 | Sep. |IMILAC, Atacama, Chili. |Mineralog. | 212,136 |
| |Stand,| |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | 2f |Known in 1822: probably the |vol. 8, p. 243. | |
| | |specimen found at Campo de | | |
| | |Pucará in 1879 had been | | |
| | |carried at some time or other | | |
| | |from Imilac. | | |
| | | | | |
|236 | 2f |ILIMAES, 12 leagues south of |Proc. Roch. Acad. | 266 |
| | |Taltal, Atacama, Chili. |of Science, 1906, | |
| | | |vol. 4, p. 225. | |
| | |Found about 1874-5: described | | |
| | |by Ward in 1906. | | |
| | | | | |
|237 | 2f |VACA MUERTA, Atacama, Chili. |Mineralog. | 7,285 |
| | | |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |Mentioned in 1861, and |vol. 8, p. 234. | |
| | |described in 1864 by Domeyko | | |
| | |as found at Sierra de Chaco. | | |
| | |Specimens probably got from | | |
| | |the same place are known by | | |
| | |various names (Mejillones, | | |
| | |Jarquera or Janacera Pass, | | |
| | |&c.). | | |
| | | | | |
|238 | 2f |LLANO DEL INCA, 35 leagues |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 376 |
| | |S.E. of Taltal, Atacama, |of Sci. 1890, vol. | |
| | |Chili. |1, p. 93. | |
| | | | | |
|239 | 2f |DOÑA INEZ, Atacama, Chili. | _Ibid_. | 1,015 |
| | | | | |
| | |The meteorites of Llano del | | |
| | |Inca and Doña Inez were found | | |
| | |in these localities in 1888, | | |
| | |and were described by Howell | | |
| | |in 1890: "polished sections of| | |
| | |the two meteorites are in many| | |
| | |cases not distinguishable," | | |
| | |and Howell is inclined to | | |
| | |think that they belong to a | | |
| | |single fall. (Some of the | | |
| | |polished faces are not to be | | |
| | |distinguished from those of | | |
| | |Vaca Muerta.) L. F. | | |
| | | | | |
|240 | 2f |COPIAPO, Chili. |Mineralog. | 769 |
| | | |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | |Numerous masses of this type |vol. 8, p. 255. | |
| | |have been brought to Copiapo | | |
| | |since 1863: some of them, | | |
| | |owing to an interchange of | | |
| | |labels, have been supposed to | | |
| | |come from the Sierra de la | | |
| | |Dehesa (Deesa), near Santiago.| | |
| | | | | |
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
III. AEROLITES
or Meteoric Stones
(consisting generally of one or more silicates, and interspersed
particles of nickeliferous iron, troilite, &c.).
* * * * *
A. FALL RECORDED.
[Arranged chronologically.]
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|No. |Pane. | Name of Meteorite and | Date of Fall. | Weight |
| | | Place of Fall. | |in grams.|
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
| | | | | |
|241 | 4c |ENSISHEIM, Elsass, Germany. | Nov. 16, 1492 | 458 |
| | | | | |
|242 | 2g |SCHELLIN, near Stargard, | April 11, 1715 | -- |
| | |Pomerania, Prussia. | | |
| | | | | |
|243 | 2g |PLESCOWITZ, near Reichstadt, | June 22, 1723 | 25 |
| | |Bohemia. | | |
| | | | | |
|244 | 4c |OGI (Haruta), Hizen, Kiusiu, | June 8, 1741 | 4,175 |
| | |Japan. | | |
| | | | | |
|245 | 4c |TABOR (Krawin, Plan, Strkow), | July 3, 1753 | 151 |
| | |Bohemia. | | |
| | | | | |
|246 | 2g |LUPONNAS, Ain, France. | Sept. 7, 1753 | 7 |
| | | | | |
|247 | 2g |ALBARETO, Modena, Italy. | July 1766 | 52 |
| | | | | |
|248 | 4c |LUCÉ (Maine), Sarthe, France. | Sept. 13, 1768 | 5 |
| | | | | |
|249 | 2g |MAUERKIRCHEN, Upper Austria. | Nov. 20, 1768 | 302 |
| | | | | |
|250 | 2g |SENA, Sigena, Aragon, Spain. | Nov. 17, 1773 | 0·7|
| | | | | |
|251 | 2g |EICHSTÄDT, Wittmess, Bavaria. | Feb. 19, 1785 | 47 |
| | | | | |
|252 | 2g |KHARKOV (Jigalowka, Bobrik), | Oct. 12 (not 13),| 437 |
| | |Russia. | 1787 | |
| | | | | |
|253 | 2g |BARBOTAN, Landes, France. | July 24, 1790 | 782 |
| | | | | |
|254 | 4c |SIENA, Cosona, Italy. | June 16, 1794 | 123 |
| | | | | |
|255 | 4b |WOLD COTTAGE, Thwing, | Dec. 13, 1795 | 20,682 |
| | |Yorkshire. | | |
| | | | | |
|256 | 2g |BJELAJA ZERKOV, Kiev, Russia. |Jan. 15 or 16, 1796| 9 |
| | | | | |
|257 | 2g |SALLES, near Villefranche, |March 8 or 12, 1798| 165 |
| | |Rhône, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|258 |2g, 4c|KRAKHUT, Benares, India. | Dec. 19, 1798 | 510 |
| | | | | |
|259 |2h, 4c|L'AIGLE, Orne, France. | April 26, 1803 | 2,201 |
| | | | | |
|260 | 2h |APT (Saurette), Vaucluse, | Oct. 8, 1803 | 37 |
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|261 | 2h |MÄSSING (St. Nicholas), | Dec. 13, 1803 | -- |
| | |Bavaria. | | |
| | | | | |
|262 | 2h |DARMSTADT, Hesse, Germany. | Fell before 1804 | 1·6|
| | | | | |
|263 | 4d |HIGH POSSIL, near Glasgow, | April 5, 1804 | 91 |
| | |Scotland. | | |
| | | | | |
|264 | 2h |HACIENDA DE BOCAS, San Luis | Nov. 24, 1804 | -- |
| | |Potosi, Mexico. | | |
| | | | | |
|265 | 2h |DORONINSK, Irkutsk, Asiatic | April 6, 1805 | 9 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|266 | 2h |ASCO, Corsica. | Nov. 1805 | -- |
| | | | | |
|267 | 4n |ALAIS, Gard, France. | March 15, 1806 | 13 |
| | | | | |
|268 | 2h |TIMOCHIN, Juchnov, Smolensk, | March 25, 1807 | 139 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|269 |2h, 4o|WESTON, Fairfield County, | Dec. 14, 1807 | 1,034 |
| | |Connecticut, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|270 | 2h |BORGO SAN DONINO, Cusignano, | April 19, 1808 | 9 |
| | |Parma, Italy. | | |
| | | | | |
|271 | 2h} |STANNERN: Iglau, Moravia, | | |
| | } |Austria. | | |
| | 4d} |(a) Stannern, |} May 22, 1808 |{ 1,568 |
| | 4o} |(b) Langenpiernitz. |} |{ 13 |
| | | | | |
|272 | 2h |LISSA, Bunzlau, Bohemia. | Sept. 3, 1808 | 169 |
| | | | | |
|273 | 2h |MORADABAD, North-West | Fell in 1808 | 17 |
| | |Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|274 | 2h |KIKINO, Viasma, Smolensk, | Fell in 1809 | 28 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|275 | 2h |MOORESFORT, County Tipperary, | Aug. 1810 | 243 |
| | |Ireland. | | |
| | | | | |
|276 | 2h |CHARSONVILLE: Meung, Loiret, | | |
| | |France. | | |
| | |(a) Charsonville, |} |{ 76 |
| | |(b) Bois de Fontaine, |} Nov. 23, 1810 |{ 1,250 |
| | |(c) Fragment of a stone |} |{ 20 |
| | |labelled Chartres. |} |{ |
| | | | | |
|277 | 2h |KULESCHOVKA, Poltava, Russia. | March 12, 1811 | 58 |
| | | | | |
|278 | 2h |BERLANGUILLAS, near Burgos, | July 8, 1811 | 26 |
| | |Spain. | | |
| | | | | |
|279 | 2k |TOULOUSE (Grenade), Haute | April 10, 1812 | 31 |
| | |Garonne, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|280 | 2k |ERXLEBEN, Magdeburg, Prussia. | April 15, 1812 | 31 |
| | | | | |
|281 |2k, 4o|CHANTONNAY, Vendée, France. | Aug. 5, 1812 | 1,352 |
| | | | | |
|282 | 2k |ADARE (Faha, &c.), County | Sept. 10, 1813 | 161 |
| | |Limerick, Ireland. | | |
| | | | | |
|283 | 2k |LUOTOLAKS, Viborg, Finland. | Dec. 13, 1813 | 20 |
| | | | | |
|284 | 2k |GURRAM KONDA, between | Fell in 1814 | 9 |
| | |Punganur and Kadapa, Madras, | | |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|285 | 2k |BACHMUT (Alexejevka), | Feb. 15, 1814 | 41 |
| | |Ekaterinoslav, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|286 | 2k |AGEN, Lot-et-Garonne, France. | Sept. 5, 1814 | 40 |
| | | | | |
|287 | 2k |CHAIL, Allahabad, North-West | Nov. 5, 1814 | -- |
| | |Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|288 | 2k |DURALA, N.W. of Kurnal, | Feb. 18, 1815 | 12,000 |
| | |Punjab, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|289 | 4o |CHASSIGNY, Haute Marne, | Oct. 3, 1815 | 40 |
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|290 | 2k |ZABORZIKA, Czartorya, | April 11 (not | 16 |
| | |Volhynia, Russia. | 10), 1818 | |
| | | | | |
|291 | 4n |SERES, Macedonia, Turkey. | June 1818 | 399 |
| | | | | |
|292 | 2k |SLOBODKA, Juchnov, Smolensk, | Aug. 10, 1818 | 27 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|293 | 2l |JONZAC, Charente Inférieure, | June 13, 1819 | 9 |
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|294 | 2l |POHLITZ, near Gera, Reuss, | Oct. 13, 1819 | 87 |
| | |Germany. | | |
| | | | | |
|295 | 2l |LIXNA (Lasdany), Dünaburg, | July 12, 1820 | 58 |
| | |Vitebsk, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|296 | 4o |JUVINAS, near Libonnez, | June 15, 1821 | 940 |
| | |Ardèche, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|297 | 2l |ANGERS, Maine-et-Loire, | June 3, 1822 | 22 |
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|298 | 2l |AGRA (Kadonah), India. | Aug. 7, 1822 | 38 |
| | | | | |
|299 | 2l |EPINAL (La Baffe), Vosges, | Sept. 13, 1822 | 1·6|
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|300 |2l, 4h|FUTTEHPUR (Fatehpur): N. West | | |
| | |Provinces, India. | | |
| | |(a) Futtehpur |}Nov. 30, 1822 |{ 1,286 |
| | |(b) Bithur. |} |{ 136 |
| | | | | |
|301 | 2l |UMBALLA (40 miles S.W. of), | Fell in 1822-3 | 20 |
| | |Punjab, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|302 | 2l |NOBLEBOROUGH, Lincoln County, | Aug. 7, 1823 | -- |
| | |Maine, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|303 | 2l |RENAZZO, Cento, Ferrara, | Jan. 15, 1824 | 15 |
| | |Italy. | | |
| | | | | |
|304 | 2l |ZEBRAK (Praskoles), near | Oct. 14, 1824 | 83 |
| | |Horzowitz, Bohemia. | | |
| | | | | |
|305 | 2l |NANJEMOY, Charles County, | Feb. 10, 1825 | 325 |
| | |Maryland, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|306 | 2l |HONOLULU, Hawaii, | Sept. 27, 1825 | 81 |
| | |Sandwich Islands. | | |
| | | | | |
|307 | 2m |PAVLOGRAD (Mordvinovka), | May 19, 1826 | 161 |
| | |Ekaterinoslav, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|308 | 2m |MHOW, Azamgarh District, | Feb. 16, 1827 | 163 |
| | |North-West Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|309 | 2m |DRAKE CREEK, Nashville, | May 9, 1827 | 19 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|310 | 2m |BIALYSTOCK (Jasly), Grodno, | Oct. 5, 1827 | 4 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|311 | 2m |RICHMOND, Henrico County, | June 4, 1828 | 169 |
| | |Virginia, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|312 | 2m |FORSYTH, Georgia, U.S.A. | May 8, 1829 | 72 |
| | | | | |
|313 | 2m |DEAL, near Long Branch, | Aug. 14, 1829 | -- |
| | |New Jersey, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|314 | 2m |KRASNOI-UGOL, Rjäsan, Russia. | Sept. 9, 1829 | 5 |
| | | | | |
|315 | 2m |LAUNTON, Bicester, | Feb. 15, 1830 | 1,023 |
| | |Oxfordshire. | | |
| | | | | |
|316 | 2m |PERTH (North Inch of), | May 17, 1830 | 1·5|
| | |Scotland. | | |
| | | | | |
|317 | 2m |VOUILLÉ, near Poitiers, | May 13, 1831 | 61 |
| | |Vienne, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|318 | 2m |WESSELY (Znorow), Hradisch, | Sept. 9, 1831 | 3 |
| | |Moravia, Austria. | | |
| | | | | |
|319 | 2m |BLANSKO, Brünn, Moravia, | Nov. 25, 1833 | -- |
| | |Austria. | | |
| | | | | |
|320 | 2m |OKNINY, Kremenetz, Volhynia, | Jan. 8, 1834 | 7 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|321 | 2m |CHARWALLAS (Chaharwala), near | June 12, 1834 | 37 |
| | |Hissar, Delhi, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|322 | 2m |MASCOMBES, Corrèze, France. | Jan. 31, 1835 | 5 |
| | | | | |
|323 | 2m |ALDSWORTH, near Cirencester, | Aug. 4, 1835 | 520 |
| | |Gloucestershire. | | |
| | | | | |
|324 | 2m |AUBRES, Nyons, Drôme, France. | Sept. 14, 1836 | 487 |
| | | | | |
|325 | 2m |MACAO, Rio Grande do Norte, | Nov. 11, 1836 | 6 |
| | |Brazil. | | |
| | | | | |
|326 | 2m |YON[=O]ZU, Nishikambara, | July 14, 1837 | 34 |
| | |Echigo, Japan. | | |
| | | | | |
|327 | 2m |NAGY-DIWINA, near Budetin, | July 24, 1837 | 3 |
| | |Trentschin, Hungary. | | |
| | | | | |
|328 | 2m |ESNANDES, Charente | Aug. 1837 | 2 |
| | |Inférieure, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|329 | 2n |KAEE, Sandee District, Onde, | Jan. 29, 1838 | 209 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|330 | 2n |AKBARPUR, Saharanpur, | April 18, 1838 | 1,569 |
| | |North-West Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|331 | 2n |CHANDAKAPUR, Berar, India. | June 6, 1838 | 760 |
| | | | | |
|332 | 2n |MONTLIVAULT, Loir-et-Cher, | July 22, 1838 | 11 |
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|333 |2n, 4n|COLD BOKKEVELD, Cape Colony. | Oct. 13, 1838 | 1,079 |
| | | | | |
|334 | 2n |LITTLE PINEY (Pine Bluff), | Feb. 13, 1839 | 104 |
| | |Pulaski County, Missouri, | | |
| | |U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|335 | 2n |KARAKOL, Ajagus, Kirghiz | May 9, 1840 | 24 |
| | |Steppes, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|336 | 2n |UDEN (Staartje), | June 12, 1840 | -- |
| | |North Brabant, Netherlands. | | |
| | | | | |
|337 | 2n |CERESETO, near Ottiglio, | July 17, 1840 | 124 |
| | |Alessandria, Piedmont, Italy. | | |
| | | | | |
|338 | 2n |GRÜNEBERG, Heinrichsau, | March 22, 1841 | 30 |
| | |Prussian Silesia. | | |
| | | | | |
|339 | 2n |CHÂTEAU-RENARD, Triguères, | June 12, 1841 | 3,250 |
| | |Loiret, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|340 | 2n |MILENA, Warasdin, Croatia, | April 26, 1842 | 147 |
| | |Austria | | |
| | | | | |
|341 | 2n |AUMIÈRES, Lozère, France. | June 3, 1842 | 43 |
| | | | | |
|342 | 4o |BISHOPVILLE, Sumter County, | March 25, 1843 | 509 |
| | |S. Carolina, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|343 |2m, 4n|UTRECHT (Blaauw-Kapel), | June 2, 1843 | 186 |
| | |Netherlands. | | |
| | | | | |
|344 | 2n |MANEGAUM (Manegaon), near | June 29, 1843 | 11 |
| | |Eidulabad, border of | | |
| | |Khandeish, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|345 | 2n |KLEIN-WENDEN, near | Sept. 16, 1843 | 5 |
| | |Nordhausen, Erfurt, Prussia. | | |
| | | | | |
|346 | 2n |CERRO COSINA, near Dolores | Jan. 1844 | 42 |
| | |Hidalgo, San Miguel, | | |
| | |Guanaxuato, Mexico. | | |
| | | | | |
|347 | 2n |KILLETER, County Tyrone, | April 29, 1844 | 101 |
| | |Ireland. | | |
| | | | | |
|348 | 2n |FAVARS, Aveyron, France. | Oct. 21, 1844 | 6 |
| | | | | |
|349 | 2n |LE TEILLEUL (La Vivionnère), | July 14, 1845 | 2 |
| | |Manche, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|350 | 2n |MONTE MILONE (now called | May 8, 1846 | 8 |
| | |Pollenza), Macerata, Italy. | | |
| | | | | |
|351 | 2n |CAPE GIRARDEAU, Missouri, | Aug. 14, 1846 | 78 |
| | |U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|352 | 2n |SCHÖNENBERG, Mindelthal, | Dec. 25, 1846 | 42 |
| | |Schwaben, Bavaria. | | |
| | | | | |
|353 | 2o |LINN COUNTY (Hartford), | Feb. 25, 1847 | 942 |
| | |Iowa, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|354 | 2o |CASTINE, Hancock County, | May 20, 1848 | 2 |
| | |Maine, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|355 | 2o |MARMANDE (Montignac), | July 4, 1848 | 4 |
| | |Aveyron, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|356 | 2o |SKI, Amt Akershuus, Norway. | Dec. 27, 1848 | 5 |
| | | | | |
|357 | 2o |CABARRAS COUNTY (Monroe), N. | Oct. 31, 1849 | 385 |
| | |Carolina, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|358 | 2o |KESEN(-mura), Kesen-g[=o]ri, | June 12, 1850 | 1,280 |
| | |Rikuzen, Japan. | | |
| | | | | |
|359 | 2o |SHALKA, Bancoorah, Bengal, | Nov. 30, 1850 | 1,132 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|360 | 2o |GÜTERSLOH, Westphalia, | April 17, 1851 | 109 |
| | |Prussia. | | |
| | | | | |
|361 | 2o |QUINÇAY, Vienne, France. | Summer, 1851 | 10 |
| | | | | |
|362 | 2o |NULLES, Catalonia, Spain. | Nov. 5, 1851 | 27 |
| | | | | |
|363 | 4p |NELLORE (Yatur), Madras, | Jan. 23, 1852 | 10,400 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|364 |2o, 4d|MEZÖ-MADARAS, Transylvania. | Sept. 4, 1852 | 733 |
| | | | | |
|365 | 2o |BORKUT, Marmoros, Hungary. | Oct. 13, 1852 | 40 |
| | | | | |
|366 | 4o |BUSTEE (Basti), between | Dec. 2, 1852 | 1,398 |
| | |Goruckpur and Fyzabad, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|367 | 2o |GIRGENTI, Sicily. | Feb. 10, 1853 | 233 |
| | | | | |
|368 | 2o |SEGOWLIE, Bengal, India. | March 6, 1853 | 1,205 |
| | | | | |
|369 | 2o |DURUMA, Wanikaland, E. Africa.| Fell in 1853 | -- |
| | | | | |
|370 | 2o |LINUM, Brandenburg, Prussia. | Sept. 5, 1854 | 2 |
| | | | | |
|371 | 3c |OESEL (Gesinde Kaande, near | May 11, 1855 | 15 |
| | |Piddul), Baltic Sea. | | |
| | | | | |
|372 | 3c |GNARRENBURG (Bremervörde), | May 13, 1855 | 808 |
| | |Hanover. | | |
| | | | | |
|373 | 3c |ST. DENIS-WESTREM, near | June 7, 1855 | 1·3|
| | |Ghent, Belgium. | | |
| | | | | |
|374 | 4o |PETERSBURG, Lincoln County, | Aug. 5, 1855 | 52 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|375 | 3c |TRENZANO, Brescia, Italy. | Nov. 12, 1856 | 157 |
| | | | | |
|376 |3c, 3a|PARNALLEE, Madras, India. | Feb. 28, 1857 | 60,941 |
| | | | | |
|377 | 3c |HEREDIA, San José, Costa | April 1, 1857 | 53 |
| | |Rica. | | |
| | | | | |
|378 | 3c |STAVROPOL, north side of the | April 5, 1857 | 22 |
| | |Caucasus, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|379 | 3c |KABA, Debreczin, Hungary. | April 15, 1857 | 104 |
| | | | | |
|380 | 3c |LES ORMES, near Joigny, | Oct. 1, 1857 | 12 |
| | |Yonne, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|381 | 3c |OHABA (Veresegyhaza), near | Oct. 11, 1857 | 39 |
| | |Karlsburg, Transylvania. | | |
| | | | | |
|382 | 4n |PEGU (Quenggouk), British | Dec. 27, 1857 | 654 |
| | |Burmah. | | |
| | | | | |
|383 | 3c |KAKOWA, Temeser Banat, | May 19, 1858 | 160 |
| | |Hungary. | | |
| | | | | |
|384 | 3c |AUSSON: Haute Garonne, France.| | |
| | |(a)Ausson, |} Dec. 9, 1858 |} 367 |
| | |(b)Clarac, |} |} 110 |
| | | | | |
|385 | 3c |MOLINA, Murcia, Spain. | Dec. 24, 1858 | 6 |
| | | | | |
|386 | 3d |HARRISON COUNTY, Indiana, | March 28, 1859 | 38 |
| | |U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|387 | 3d |PAMPANGA (Mexico), Philippine | April 4, 1859 | 1·8|
| | |Islands. | | |
| | | | | |
|388 | 3d |BEUSTE, near Pau, | May 1859 | 40 |
| | |Basses-Pyrénées, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|389 | 3d |BETHLEHEM, near Albany, New | Aug. 11, 1859 | -- |
| | |York, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|390 | 3d |ALESSANDRIA (San Giuliano | Feb. 2, 1860 | 35 |
| | |Vecchio), Piedmont, Italy. | | |
| | | | | |
|391 | 4n |Khiragurh, S.E. of Bhurtpur, | March 28, 1860 | 353 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|392 |3d, 3b|NEW CONCORD, Muskingum | May 1, 1860 | 19,724 |
| | |County, Ohio, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|393 | 3d |KUSIALI, Kumaon, India. | June 16, 1860 | 4 |
| | | | | |
|394 | 3c |DHURMSALA (Dharmsala), | July 14, 1860 | 12,410 |
| | |Kangra, Punjab, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|395 | 4h |BUTSURA (Batsura): Bengal, | | |
| | |India. | | |
| | |(Qutahar Bazaar) |} |{12,980 |
| | |(Chireya) |}May 12, 1861 |{ 843 |
| | |(Piprassi) |} |{ 5,095 |
| | |(Bulloah) |} |{ 158 |
| | | | | |
|396 | 3d |CANELLAS, near Barcelona, | May 14, 1861 | 1·5|
| | |Spain. | | |
| | | | | |
|397 | 3d |GROSNAJA (Mikenskoi), Banks | June 28, 1861 | 167 |
| | |of the Terek, Caucasus, | | |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|398 | 3d |KLEIN-MENOW, Alt-Strelitz, | Oct. 7, 1862 | 1,132 |
| | |Mecklenburg, Germany. | | |
| | | | | |
|399 | 3d |PULSORA, N.E. of Rutlam, | March 16, 1863 | 48 |
| | |Indore, Central India. | | |
| | | | | |
|400 | 3d |BUSCHHOF (Scheikahr Stattan), | June 2, 1863 | 98 |
| | |Courland, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|401 | 3d |PILLISTFER (Aukoma), Livland, | Aug. 8, 1863 | 157 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|402 | 3d |SHYTAL (Shaital), 40 miles | Aug. 11, 1863 | 462 |
| | |north of Dacca, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|403 | 3d |TOURINNES-LA-GROSSE, | Dec. 7, 1863 | 203 |
| | |Tirlemont, Belgium. | | |
| | | | | |
|404 | 3d |MANBHOOM, Bengal, India. | Dec. 22, 1863 | 123 |
| | | | | |
|405 | 3d |NERFT, Courland, Russia. | April 12, 1864 | 69 |
| | | | | |
|406 |3d, 4d|ORGUEIL, near Montauban, | May 14, 1864 | 612 |
| | |Tarn-et-Garonne, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|407 | 3d |DOLGOVOLI, Volhynia, Russia. | June 26, 1864 | 3 |
| | | | | |
|408 | |SUPUHEE: Goruckpur District | | |
| | |India. | | |
| | 3e |(a) Mouza Khoorna, Sidowra, |} |{ 4,060 |
| | 4h |(b) Bubuowly Indigo Factory, |}Jan. 19, 1865 |{ 214 |
| | |Supuhee, |} |{ |
| | | | | |
|409 | 3e |VERNON COUNTY, Wisconsin, | March 26, 1865 | 52 |
| | |U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|410 | 3e |GOPALPUR, Jessore, India. | May 23, 1865 | 147 |
| | | | | |
|411 | 3e |DUNDRUM, Tipperary, Ireland. | Aug. 12, 1865 | 245 |
| | | | | |
|412 | 3e |AUMALE (Senhadja), | Aug. 25, 1865 | 34 |
| | |Constantine, Algeria. | | |
| | | | | |
|413 |4k, 4o|SHERGHOTTY (Umjhiawar), near | Aug. 25, 1865 | 117 |
| | |Gya, Behar, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|414 | 4n |MUDDOOR, Mysore, India. | Sept. 21, 1865 | 407 |
| | | | | |
|415 | 3e |UDIPI (Yedabettu), South | April 1866 | 3,320 |
| | |Canara, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|416 | 3e |POKHRA, near Bustee, | May 27, 1866 | 46 |
| | |Goruckpur, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|417 | 3e |ST. MESMIN, Aube, France. | May 30, 1866 | 110 |
| | | | | |
|418 | 3d, |KNYAHINYA, near Nagy-Berezna, | June 9, 1866 | 11,325 |
| | 4d, |Hungary. | | |
| | 4h, | | | |
| | 4n | | | |
| | | | | |
|419 | 3e |JAMKHEIR, Ahmednuggur, | Oct. 5, 1866 | 16 |
| | |Bombay. | | |
| | | | | |
|420 | 3e |CANGAS DE ONIS (Elgueras), | Dec. 6, 1866 | 97 |
| | |Asturias, Spain. | | |
| | | | | |
|421 | 3e |KHETRI (Saonlod, Sankhoo, | Jan. 19, 1867 | 13 |
| | |Phulee, &c.), Rajpootana, | | |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|422 | 4o |TADJERA, near Guidjel, Setif, | June 9, 1867 | 39 |
| | |Algeria. | | |
| | | | | |
| | 3e, |{ PULTUSK (Siedlce, Gostkóv, | Jan. 30, 1868 | 18,029 |
|423 | 4e-g |{ &c.), Poland. | | |
| | 3e |{ LERICI, Spezia, Italy. | Jan. 30, 1868 | 8 |
| | | | | |
|424 |3e, 4d|DANIEL'S KUIL, Griqualand, | March 20, 1868 | 446 |
| | |South Africa. | | |
| | | | | |
|425 | 3e |SLAVETIC, Agram, Croatia, | May 22, 1868 | 20 |
| | |Austria. | | |
| | | | | |
|426 | 3e |ORNANS, Doubs, France. | July 11, 1868 | 1,019 |
| | | | | |
|427 | 3e |SAUGUIS, St. Étienne, | Sept. 7, 1868 | 16 |
| | |Basses-Pyrénées, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|428 | 3e |DANVILLE, Morgan County, | Nov. 27, 1868 | 27 |
| | |Alabama, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|429 | 3e |FRANKFORT (4 miles S. of), | Dec. 5, 1868 | 32 |
| | |Franklin County, Alabama, | | |
| | |U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|430 | 3e |MOTI-KA-NAGLA, Ghoordha, | Dec. 22, 1868 | 407 |
| | |Bhurtpur, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|431 | 4o |ANGRA DOS REIS, Rio de | Jan. 1869 | 6 |
| | |Janeiro, Brazil. | | |
| | | | | |
|432 |3e, 4d|HESSLE, near Upsala, Sweden. | Jan. 1, 1869 | 909 |
| | | | | |
|433 | 3e |KRÄHENBERG, Zweibrücken, | May 5, 1869 | 10 |
| | |Rhenish Bavaria. | | |
| | | | | |
|434 | 3e |CLÉGUÉREC (Kernouvé), | May 22, 1869 | 9,231 |
| | |Morbihan, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|435 | 3e |TJABÉ, Padangan, Java. | Sept. 19, 1869 | 134 |
| | | | | |
|436 | 3e |STEWART COUNTY (12 miles S.W. | Oct. 6, 1869 | 17 |
| | |of Lumpkin), Georgia, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|437 | 3f |IBBENBÜHREN, Westphalia, | June 17, 1870 | 3 |
| | |Prussia. | | |
| | | | | |
|438 | 3f |CABEZA DE MAYO, Murcia, | Aug. 18, 1870 | 3 |
| | |Spain. | | |
| | | | | |
|439 | 4o |RODA (4 miles from), Huesca, | Spring 1871 | 7 |
| | |Spain. | | |
| | | | | |
|440 | 3f |SEARSMONT, Waldo County, | May 21, 1871 | 51 |
| | |Maine, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|441 | 3f |LABOREL, Drôme, France. | June 14, 1871 | 291 |
| | | | | |
|442 | 3f |BANDONG, Java. | Dec. 10, 1871 | 14 |
| | | | | |
|443 | 4d |DYALPUR, Sultanpur, Oude, | May 8, 1872 | 269 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|444 | 3f |TENNASILM (Sikkensaare), | June 28, 1872 | 15 |
| | |Esthonia, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|445 | 3f |LANCÉ: {Authon and Lancé, |} | |
| | | {Vendôme, |}July 23, 1872 | 332 |
| | | {Loir-et-Cher, France. |} | |
| | | | | |
|446 | 4o |ORVINIO, near Rome, Italy. | Aug. 31, 1872 | 63 |
| | | | | |
|447 | 3f |JHUNG (Jhang), Punjab, India. | June 1873 | 1,770 |
| | | | | |
|448 | 3f |KHAIRPUR, 35 miles east of | Sept. 23, 1873 | 3,286 |
| | |Bhawalpur, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|449 | 3f |SANTA BARBARA, Rio Grande do | Sept. 26, 1873 | 1·7|
| | |Sul, Brazil. | | |
| | | | | |
|450 | 3f |ALEPPO, Syria. | Fell about 1873 | 77 |
| | | | | |
|451 | 3f |SEVRUKOVO, near Belgorod, | May 11, 1874 | 20 |
| | |Kursk, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|452 | 3f |NASH COUNTY (near Castalia), | May 14, 1874 | 29 |
| | |N. Carolina, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|453 | 3f |VIRBA, Vidin, Turkey. | May 20, 1874 | 38 |
| | | | | |
|454 | 3f |KERILIS, Mael Pestivien, | Nov. 26, 1874 | 74 |
| | |Côtes-du-Nord, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|455 | 3f |AMANA (Colony) [Homestead, | Feb. 12, 1875 | 3,800 |
| | |West Liberty], Iowa County, | | |
| | |Iowa, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|456 | 3f |SITATHALI (Nurrah), S.E. of | March 4, 1875 | 600 |
| | |Raepur, Central Provinces, | | |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|457 | 4d |ZSADÁNY, Temeser Banat, | March 31, 1875 | 25 |
| | |Hungary. | | |
| | | | | |
|458 | 3f |NAGARIA, Fathabad, Agra, | April 24, 1875 | 13 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|459 | 3f |MORNANS, Bourdeaux, Drôme, | Sept. 1875 | 973 |
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|460 | 4n |JUDESEGERI, Kadaba Taluk, | Feb. 16, 1876 | 114 |
| | |Mysore, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|461 | 3g |VAVILOVKA, Kherson, Russia. | June 19, 1876 | 10 |
| | | | | |
|462 | 3g |STÄLLDALEN, Nya Kopparberg, | June 28, 1876 | 1,575 |
| | |Orebro, Sweden. | | |
| | | | | |
|463 | 3g |ROCHESTER, Fulton County, | Dec. 21, 1876 | 8 |
| | |Indiana, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|464 | 3g |WARRENTON, Warren County, | Jan. 3, 1877 | 82 |
| | |Missouri, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|465 | 3g |CYNTHIANA (9 miles from), | Jan. 23, 1877 | 154 |
| | |Harrison County, Kentucky, | | |
| | |U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|466 | 3g |HUNGEN, Hesse, Germany. | May 17, 1877 | 5 |
| | | | | |
|467 | 3g |JODZIE (Yodzé), Ponevej, | June 17, 1877 | 1·6|
| | |Kovno, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|468 | 3g |SOKO-BANJA (Sarbanovac), N.E. | Oct. 13, 1877 | 1,995 |
| | |of Alexinatz, Servia. | | |
| | | | | |
|469 | 3g |CRONSTAD, Orange River | Nov. 19, 1877 | 1,228 |
| | |Colony, S. Africa. | | |
| | | | | |
|470 | 3g |BHAGUR (Dhulia), India. | Nov. 27, 1877 | 6 |
| | | | | |
|471 | 3h |TIESCHITZ, Prerau, Moravia. | July 15, 1878 | 17 |
| | | | | |
|472 | 3h |MERN, Præsto, Denmark. | Aug. 29, 1878 | 39 |
| | | | | |
|473 | 3h |DANDAPUR, Goruckpur, India. | Sept. 5, 1878 | 2,370 |
| | | | | |
|474 | 3h |RAKOVKA, Tula, Russia. | Nov. 20, 1878 | 372 |
| | | | | |
|475 | 2h |LA BÉCASSE, Dun le Poëlier, | Jan. 31, 1879 | 19 |
| | |Indre, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|476 | 3h |ITAPICURU-MIRIM, Maranhão, | March 1879 | 6 |
| | |Brazil. | | |
| | | | | |
|477 | 3h |GNADENFREI, Prussian Silesia. | May 17, 1879 | 54 |
| | | | | |
|478 | 3h |NAGAYA, Entre Rios, Argentine | July 1, 1879 | 31 |
| | |Republic. | | |
| | | | | |
|479 | 3h |TOMATLAN (Gargantillo), | Sept. 17, 1879 | 135 |
| | |Jalisco, Mexico. | | |
| | | | | |
|480 | 3h |KALAMBI (Kalumbi), Bombay, | Nov. 4, 1879 | 28 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|481 | 3h |TAKENOUCHI (-mura), | Feb. 18, 1880 | 2 |
| | |Yabu-g[=o]ri, Tajima, Japan. | | |
| | | | | |
|482 | 3h |MIDDLESBROUGH (Pennyman's | March 14, 1881 | 22 |
| | |Siding), Yorkshire. | | |
| | | | | |
|483 | 3h |PACULA, Jacala, Hidalgo, | June 18, 1881 | 28 |
| | |Mexico. | | |
| | | | | |
|484 | 3h |GROSS-LIEBENTHAL, 12 miles | Nov. 19, 1881 | 62 |
| | |S.S.W. of Odessa, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|485 | 3h, |MOCS, Kolos, Transylvania. | Feb. 3, 1882 | 14,677 |
| | 3k, | | | |
| | 4d | | | |
| | | | | |
|486 | 3k |FUKUTOMI (-mura), | March 19, 1882 | 230 |
| | |Kijima-g[=o]ri, Hizen, Japan. | | |
| | | | | |
|487 | 3k |PAVLOVKA, Balachev, Saratov, | Aug. 2, 1882 | 78 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|488 | 3k |PIRGUNJE, Dinagepur, India. | Aug. 29, 1882 | 732 |
| | | | | |
|489 | 3k |SAINT CAPRAIS-DE-QUINSAC, | Jan. 28, 1883 | 9 |
| | |Gironde, France. | | |
| | | | | |
|490 | 3k |ALFIANELLO, Brescia, Italy. | Feb. 16, 1883 | 2,515 |
| | | | | |
|491 | 3k |NGAWI, Madioen, Java. | Oct. 3, 1883 | 51 |
| | | | | |
|492 | 3l |PIRTHALLA, Hissar District, | Feb. 9, 1884 | 427 |
| | |Punjab, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|493 | 3l |DJATI-PENGILON, Alastoeva, | March 19, 1884 | 469 |
| | |Java. | | |
| | | | | |
|494 | 3l |TYSNES (Midt-Vaage), | May 20, 1884 | 895 |
| | |Hardanger Fiord, Norway. | | |
| | | | | |
|495 | 3l |CHANDPUR, 5 miles N.W. of | April 6, 1885 | 490 |
| | |Mainpuri, North-West | | |
| | |Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|496 | 3l |NAMMIANTHAL, South Arcot, | Jan. 27, 1886 | 1,615 |
| | |Madras, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|497 | 3l |ASSISI, Perugia, Italy. | May 24, 1886 | 153 |
| | | | | |
|498 | 3l |ALATYR (Novo-Urei), | Sept. 4, 1886 | 22 |
| | |Karamzinka, Petrovka, Nijni | | |
| | |Novgorod, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|499 | 3p, |OSHIMA (-mura) [Yenshigahara, | Oct. 26, 1886 | 31,354 |
| | |Oynchimura], Kitaisa-g[=o]ri, | | |
| | |Satsuma, Kiusiu, Japan. | | |
| | | | | |
|500 | 3l |BIELOKRYNITSCHIE, Zaslavl, | Jan. 1, 1887 | 53 |
| | |Volhynia, Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|501 | 3l |LALITPUR (Jharaota), | April 7, 1887 | 82 |
| | |North-West Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|502 | 3l |TABORY, Ochansk, Perm, | Aug. 30, 1887 | 1,012 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|503 | 3l |LUNDSGÅRD, Ljungby, Sweden. | April 3, 1889 | 214 |
| | | | | |
|504 | 3l |MIGHEJA, Olviopol, | June 21, 1889 | 234 |
| | |Elizabetgrad, Kherson, South | | |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|505 | 3l |ERGHEO, Brava, Somaliland. | July 1889 | 926 |
| | | | | |
|506 | 3l |JELICA, Servia. | Dec. 1, 1889 | 1,879 |
| | | | | |
|507 | 3m |COLLESCIPOLI (Antifona), | Feb. 3, 1890 | 341 |
| | |Terni, Italy. | | |
| | | | | |
|508 | 3m |BALDOHN, Misshof, Courland, | April 10, 1890 | 134 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|509 | 3m |WINNEBAGO COUNTY (Forest | May 2, 1890 | 2,556 |
| | |City), Iowa, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|510 | 3m |KAHANGARAI, Tirupatúr, Salem, | June 4, 1890 | 122 |
| | |Madras, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|511 | 3m |NAWAPALI, Sambalpur District, | June 6, 1890 | 21 |
| | |Central Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|512 | 3m |FARMINGTON, Washington | June 25, 1890 | 802 |
| | |County, Kansas, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|513 | 3m |INDARCH, Elissavetpol, | April 7, 1891 | 393 |
| | |Transcaucasia. | | |
| | | | | |
|514 | 3m |CROSS ROADS, Wilson County, | May 24, 1892 | 11 |
| | |N. Carolina, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|515 | 3m |GUAREÑA, Badajoz, Spain. | July 20, 1892 | 69 |
| | | | | |
|516 | 3m |BATH, S. Dakota, U.S.A. | Aug. 29, 1892 | 2,119 |
| | | | | |
|517 | 3m |PRICETOWN, Highland County, | Feb. 13, 1893 | 10 |
| | |Ohio, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|518 | 3m |BHERAI, Junagadh, Kathiawar, | April 28, 1893 | 17 |
| | |Bombay. | | |
| | | | | |
|519 | 3m |BEAVER CREEK, West Kootenai | May 26, 1893 | 685 |
| | |District, British Columbia. | | |
| | | | | |
|520 | 3m |ZABRODJE, Wilna, Russia. | Sept. 22, 1893 | 3 |
| | | | | |
|521 | 3m |FISHER, Polk County, | April 9, 1894 | 603 |
| | |Minnesota, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|522 | 3m |BORI, Badnúr, Betul District, | May 9, 1894 | 1,270 |
| | |Central Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|523 | 3m |SAVTSCHENSKOJE, Kherson, | July 27, 1894 | 62 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
|524 | 3m |BISHUNPUR (and Parjabatpur), | April 26, 1895 | 392 |
| | |Mirzapur District, North-West | | |
| | |Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|525 | 3m |NAGY-BOROVÉ, Liptau, Hungary. | May 9, 1895 | 53 |
| | | | | |
|526 | 3m |AMBAPUR NAGLA, Sikandra Rao | May 27, 1895 | 1,075 |
| | |Tahsil, Aligarh District, | | |
| | |North-West Provinces, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|527 | 3m |MADRID, Spain. | Feb. 10, 1896 | 18 |
| | | | | |
|528 | 3m |OTTAWA, Franklin County, | April 9, 1896 | 90 |
| | |Kansas, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|529 | 3m |LESVES, Namur, Belgium. | April 13, 1896 | 56 |
| | | | | |
|530 | 3n |KANGRA (Valley), North | Before Aug. 1897 | 395 |
| | |Eastern Punjab, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|531 | 3n |MEUSELBACH, Thuringia, | May 19, 1897 | 19 |
| | |Germany. | | |
| | | | | |
|532 | 3n |LANÇON, Bouches-du-Rhône, | June 20, 1897 | 199 |
| | |France. | | |
| | | | | |
|533 | 3n |ZAVID, District Zwornik, | Aug. 1, 1897 | 267 |
| | |Bosnia. | | |
| | | | | |
|534 | 3n |HIGASHIKOEN, Fukuoka, | Aug. 11, 1897 | 32 |
| | |Chikuzen, Japan. | | |
| | | | | |
|535 | 3n |GAMBAT, Khairpur State, Sind, | Sept. 15, 1897 | 1,752 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|536 | 3n |SALINE TOWNSHIP, Sheridan | Nov. 15, 1898(?)| 172 |
| | |County, Kansas, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|537 | 3n |ZOMBA, British Central | Jan. 25, 1899 | 2,413 |
| | |Africa. | | |
| | | | | |
|538 | 3n |BJURBÖLE, Borgå, Finland. | March 12, 1899 | 153 |
| | | | | |
|539 | 3n |ALLEGAN, Michigan, U.S.A. | July 10, 1899 | 763 |
| | | | | |
|540 | 3n |DONGA KOHROD, Bilatpur, | Sept. 23, 1899 | 39 |
| | |India. | | |
| | | | | |
|541 | 3n |SINDHRI, Thar and Parkar | June 10, 1901 | 1,199 |
| | |District, Bombay, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|542 | 3n |ANDOVER, Oxford County, | Aug. 5, 1901 | 20 |
| | |Maine, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|543 | 3n |HVITTIS, Åbo Län, Finland. | Oct. 21, 1901 | 159 |
| | | | | |
|544 | 3n |PALÉZIEUX, Lausanne, | Nov. 30, 1901 | 29 |
| | |Switzerland. | | |
| | | | | |
|545 | 3n |MOUNT BROWNE, Evelyn County, | July 17, 1902 | 148 |
| | |New South Wales. | | |
| | | | | |
|546 | 3n |CARATASH, Smyrna, Asia Minor. | Aug. 22, 1902 | 8 |
| | | | | |
|547 | 3n |CRUMLIN, County Antrim, | Sept. 13, 1902 | 3,860 |
| | |Ireland. | | |
| | | | | |
|548 | 3n |BATH FURNACE, Bath County, | Nov. 15, 1902 | 1,013 |
| | |Kentucky, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|549 | 3n |UBERABA, Minas Geraes, | June 29, 1903 | 52 |
| | |Brazil. | | |
| | | | | |
|550 | 3o |DOKÁCHI, Dacca District, | Oct. 22, 1903 | 622 |
| | |Bengal, India. | | |
| | | | | |
|551 | 3n |SHELBURNE, Grey County, | Aug. 13, 1904 | 1791 |
| | |Ontario, Canada. | | |
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
B. FALL NOT RECORDED.
[Arranged topographically.]
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
|No. |Pane. | Name of Meteorite and | Report of Find. | Weight |
| | | Place of Find. | |in grams.|
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
| | | | | |
|552 | 3o |MAINZ, Hesse, Germany. |Jahrb. d. Ver. für | 33 |
| | | |Naturk. im Nassau, | |
| | |Described in 1857 by |1857, p. 405. | |
| | |Seelheim: it had been turned | | |
| | |up by a plough some years | | |
| | |before. | | |
| | | | | |
|553 | 3o |OCZERETNA, Lipovitz, Kiev, | | 109 |
| | |Russia. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in the summer of 1871. | | |
| | | | | |
|554 | 3o |ASSAM, India. |Proc. Asiatic Soc. | 539 |
| | | |Bengal, June, 1846,| |
| | |Found in 1846 in the refuse |pp. xlvi, lxxvi. | |
| | |of the "Coal and Iron " | | |
| | |Committee's collections, | | |
| | |probably obtained from Assam. | | |
| | | | | |
|555 | 4h |GOALPARA, Assam, India. |Wien. Akad. Ber. | 1,187 |
| | | |1869, vol. 59, part| |
| | |Found among some specimens |2, p. 665. | |
| | |obtained from the | | |
| | |neighbourhood of Goalpara: | | |
| | |described by Haidinger in | | |
| | |1869. | | |
| | | | | |
|556 | 3o |KOTA-KOTA, Marimba District, | | 333 |
| | |British Central Africa. | | |
| | | | | |
|557 | 3o |WARBRECCAN, Windorah, | | 61,223 |
| | |Diamantina District, | | |
| | |Queensland. | | |
| | | | | |
|558 | 3o |BARRATTA, Deniliquin, New |Trans. Roy. Soc. | 2,724 |
| | |South Wales. |of New South Wales,| |
| | | |1872, vol. 6, | |
| | |One person thought he saw it |p. 97. | |
| | |fall in the month of May, | | |
| | |about 1860: another reports | | |
| | |that he saw the mass lying on | | |
| | |the ground in 1845. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Two other masses were |Jour. and Proc. | |
| | |describedby Liversidge in |Roy. Soc. New South| |
| | |1902. |Wales, 1902, vol. | |
| | | | 36, p. 350. | |
| | | | | |
|559 | 3o |GILGOIN, New South Wales: |Jour. & Proc. Roy. | 1,975 |
| | |described by Russell in 1889. |Soc. New South | |
| | | |Wales, 1889, vol. | |
| | | |23, p. 47. | |
| | | | | |
| | |A second mass, found later, |Jour. & Proc. Roy. | |
| | |was described by Liversidge |Soc. New South | |
| | |in 1902. |Wales, 1902, vol. | |
| | | |36, p. 354. | |
| | | | | |
|560 | 3o |MAKARIWA, Invercargill, New |Proc. Roy. Soc., | 62 |
| | |Zealand. |1893, vol. 53, p. | |
| | | |54: Mineralog. | |
| | |Found in clay, about 2-1/2 ft.|Magazine, 1894, | |
| | |from the surface, in 1879: |vol. 10, p. 287. | |
| | |described by Ulrich and L. F. | | |
| | |in 1893-4. | | |
| | | | | |
|561 | 3o |TOMHANNOCK CREEK, Rensselaer |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 21 |
| | |County, New York, U.S.A. |1887, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |34, p. 60: | |
| | |Found about the year 1863: |Ann. d.k.k. Naturh.| |
| | |described by Bailey in 1887: |Hofmus. Wien, 1896,| |
| | |Brezina points out a close |vol. 10, p. 251. | |
| | |likeness of this stone, and | | |
| | |also of "Yorktown," to those | | |
| | |of Amana. | | |
| | | | | |
|562 | 3o |MORRISTOWN, Hamblen County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 560 |
| | |Tennessee, U.S.A. |1893, ser. 3; vol. | |
| | | |46, p. 283. | |
| | |Found in 1887: described by | | |
| | |Eakins in 1893. | | |
| | | | | |
|563 | 3o |ELM CREEK, Admire, Lyon |Amer. Jour. Sci. | 912 |
| | |County, Kansas, U.S.A. |1907 ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |23, p. 379. | |
| | |Found in 1906: described by | | |
| | |Howard in 1907. | | |
| | | | | |
|564 | 3o |WACONDA, Mitchell County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 369 |
| | |Kansas, U.S.A. |1876, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |11, p. 473: Trans. | |
| | |Found in 1873 in the grass, |Kansas Ac. Sc. | |
| | |upon the slope of a ravine: |1876, vol. 5, p. | |
| | |described by Shepard and by |12. | |
| | |Patrick in 1876. | | |
| | | | | |
|565 | 3o |PRAIRIE DOG CREEK, Decatur |Tschermak's Min. | 529 |
| | |County, Kansas, U.S.A. |und Petrog. Mitth. | |
| | | |1894-5, vol. 14, p.| |
| | |Reported and described by |471. | |
| | |Weinschenk in 1895. | | |
| | | | | |
|566 | 3o |LONG ISLAND, Phillips County, | _Ibid_. | 1,288 |
| | |Kansas, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
| | |Reported and described by | | |
| | |Weinschenk in 1895. | | |
| | | | | |
|567 | 3o |OAKLEY, Logan County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 2,495 |
| | |Kansas, U.S.A. |1900, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |9, p. 410. | |
| | |Found in 1895: described by | | |
| | |Preston in 1900. | | |
| | | | | |
|568 | 3o |KANSADA, Ness County, | | 2,005 |
| | |Kansas, U.S.A. Found in 1894. | | |
| | | | | |
|569 | 3o |NESS CITY, Ness County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 667 |
| | |Kansas, U.S.A. |1899, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | | 7, p. 233. | |
| | |Found in 1898: described by | | |
| | |Ward in 1899. | | |
| | | | | |
|570 | 3o |UTAH, U.S.A. |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 4 |
| | | |1886, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | |Found in 1869 on the open |32, p. 226. | |
| | |prairie between Salt Lake City| | |
| | |City and Echo, Utah: described| | |
| | |by Dana and Penfield in 1886. | | |
| | | | | |
|571 | 3o |MCKINNEY, Collin County, | | 290 |
| | |Texas, U.S.A. | | |
| | | | | |
|572 | 3o |BLUFF, 3 miles S. W. of La |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 12,565 |
| | |Grange, Fayette County, Texas.|1888, ser. 3, vol. | |
| | | |36, p. 113. | |
| | |Found about 1878, and | | |
| | |described by Whitfield and | | |
| | |Merrill in 1888. | | |
| | | | | |
|573 | 3o |PIPE CREEK, Bandera County, |Trans. of New York | 822 |
| | |Texas, U.S.A. |Ac. of Sc., 1888-9,| |
| | | |vol. 8, p. 186. | |
| | |Found in 1887: described by | | |
| | |Ledoux in 1888-9. | | |
| | | | | |
|574 | 4a |ESTACADO, Hale County, |Amer. Jour. Sc. | 17,103 |
| | |Texas, U.S.A. |1906, ser. 4, vol. | |
| | | |22, p. 55. | |
| | |Found in 1902: described by | | |
| | |Howard in 1906. | | |
| | | | | |
|575 | 3o |COBIJA, Tocopilla, |Proc. Rochester Ac.| 252 |
| | |Antofagasta, Chili, S. |Sci. 1906, vol. 4, | |
| | |America. |p. 229. | |
| | | | | |
| | |Found in 1902: described by | | |
| | |Ward in 1906. | | |
| | | | | |
|576 | 3o |THE LUTSCHAUNIG STONE, |Mineralog. | 92 |
| | |Atacama, Chili. |Magazine, 1889, | |
| | | |vol. 8, p. 234. | |
| | | | | |
|577 | 3o |CARCOTE, Atacama, Chili, S. |Neues Jahrb. f. | 2 |
| | |America. |Min., 1889, vol. 2,| |
| | | |p. 173. | |
| | |Known since 1888: described | | |
| | |by Sandberger in 1889. | | |
| | | | | |
|578 | 3o |SANTIAGO, Chili. | | 301 |
| | | | | |
|579 | 3o |MINAS GERAES (?), Brazil. |Revista do | 65 |
| | | |Observatorio, Rio | |
| | |Found without label among |de Janeiro, 1888. | |
| | |specimens which may have been | | |
| | |brought from Minas Geraes: | | |
| | |mentioned by Derby in 1888. | | |
| | | | | |
|580 | 3o |INDIO RICO, Buenos Ayres, |Anales de la | 1·5|
| | |Argentina. |Sociedad Científica| |
| | | |Argentina, 1887, | |
| | |Described by Kyle in 1887. |vol. 24, p. 128. | |
+----+------+------------------------------+-------------------+---------+
LIST OF RECENT ADDITIONS.
(_Meteorites for the First Time Included in the List._)
ANGELAS No. 210 MERN No. 472
BILLINGS No. 131 NARRABURRA No. 47
BOOGALDI No. 47 RODEO No. 182
CANYON CITY No. 148 SANTIAGO No. 578
COBIJA No. 575 SHELBURNE No. 551
DOKÁCHI No. 550 TANOKAMI No. 35
EL INCA No. 194 UBERABA No. 549
ELM CREEK No. 563 UWET No. 36
ESTACADO No. 574 WARBRECCAN No. 557
ILIMAES No. 236 WEAVER'S MOUNTAINS No. 154
KANGRA No. 530 WILLAMETTE No. 147
KOTA-KOTA No. 556 YON[=O]ZU No. 326
* * * * *
LIST OF BRITISH METEORITES.
Of the preceding meteorites the following have fallen within the
British Isles:--
Name. Date of Fall.
1. In England--WOLD COTTAGE December 13, 1795
LAUNTON February 15, 1830
ALDSWORTH August 4, 1835
ROWTON April 20, 1876
MIDDLESBROUGH March 14, 1881
2. In Scotland--HIGH POSSIL April 5, 1804
PERTH May 17, 1830
3. In Ireland--MOORESFORT August, 1810
ADARE September 10, 1813
KILLETER April 29, 1844
DUNDRUM August 12, 1865
CRUMLIN September 13, 1902
One of them, Rowton, is a meteoric iron; the rest are meteoric stones.
APPENDIX A.
* * * * *
NATIVE IRON (of terrestrial origin).
(Pane 4m.)
+----------------------------------------------+----------------------+
| Name of Iron and Place of Find. | Report of Find. |
+----------------------------------------------+----------------------+
|NIAKORNAK, Jakobshavn District, West |Oversigt over det |
|Greenland. (Rink's iron). |koniglike danske |
| |vidensk. selsk. forh. |
|Part of a lump obtained (1848-50) by Dr. |1854, p. 1. |
|Rink from a Greenlander who lived at | |
|Niakornak: it had been found not far from | |
|his home, lying loose on a pebble-strewn | |
|plain near the coast. | |
| | |
| | |
|JAKOBSHAVN, West Greenland (The Pfaff-Öberg |Geological Magazine, |
|iron). |1872, vol. 9, |
| |p. 520. |
|Part of a lump given by Dr. Pfaff | |
|of Jakobshavn to Dr. Öberg in 1870: | |
|it was said to have been found in the | |
|neighbourhood (perhaps near Niakornak). | |
| | |
| | |
|OVIFAK, Disko Island, West Greenland. |Geological Magazine, |
| |1872, vol. 9, |
|Found by Baron N. A. E. Nordenskiöld |p. 460. |
|in 1870. | |
| | |
| | |
|NEW ZEALAND (Jackson's Bay). |Trans. and Proc. of |
| |New Zealand Institute,|
|Found in 1885, and described by Skey |1885, vol. 18, |
|in the same year (Awaruite). |p. 401. |
| | |
| | |
|SOUTH AMERICA. |Bull. of the Geol. |
| |Instit. of the Univ. |
|Found in an old collection; described |of Upsala, 1902, |
|by Högbom in 1902. |vol. 5, p. 277. |
+----------------------------------------------+----------------------+
APPENDIX B.
* * * * *
PSEUDO-METEORITES
WHICH HAVE BEEN DESCRIBED AS METEORITES.
(In Drawers.)
AACHEN, Rhenish Prussia.
BRAUNFELS, Coblenz.
CAMPBELL COUNTY, Tennessee, U.S.A.
CANAAN, Connecticut, U.S.A.
COLLINA DI BRIANZA, Milan, Italy.
CONCORD, New Hampshire, U.S.A.
GROSS-KAMSDORF, Saxony.
HAYWOOD COUNTY, N. Carolina, U.S.A.
HEIDELBERG, Germany.
HEMALGA, Desert of Tarapaca, S. America.
HOMMONEY CREEK, Buncombe County, N. Carolina, U.S.A.
IGAST, Livland, Russia.
KAMTSCHATKA, Asiatic Russia.
LEADHILLS, Lanarkshire, Scotland.
LONG CREEK, Jefferson County, New York, U.S.A.
MAGDEBURG, Prussia.
NAUHEIM, Giessen, Germany.
NEW HAVEN, Connecticut, U.S.A.
NEWSTEAD, Roxburghshire, Scotland.
NÖBDENITZ, Saxon Altenburg.
RICHLAND, S. Carolina, U.S.A.
RUTHERFORDTON, N. Carolina, U.S.A.
ST. AUGUSTINE'S BAY, Madagascar.
SCRIBA, Oswego County, New York, U.S.A.
SOUTH AMERICA.
STERLITAMAK, Russia.
VOIGTLAND, Saxony.
WATERLOO, New York, U.S.A.
LIST OF THE CASTS OF METEORITES.
Meteorites are generally represented in collections by mere fragments
of the original specimens, which often fail to give any idea of the
original size and shape. Before division of a specimen a cast of it is
sometimes prepared, and a representation of the size and shape is thus
preserved.
Casts of most of the following meteorites are exhibited in the lower
parts of the cases:--
_Akburpur._
_Amana._
Assisi.
_Barranca Blanca._
_Babb's Mill._
Barratta.
Beuste.
Bingera.
_Bithur._
Boogaldi.
Braunau.
_Breitenbach._
Buschhof.
_Bustee._
_Butsura._
Cabin Creek.
Cachiyuyal.
Caperr.
Chandakapur.
_Charlotte._
Chulafinnee.
_Cronstad._
_Crumlin._
Daniel's Kuil.
Dolgovoli.
Donga Kohrod.
Dundrum.
_Durala._
Goalpara.
Gopalpur.
Ibbenbühren.
_Jelica._
_Jhung._
_Kaee._
_Khiragurh._
Klein-Menow.
Launton.
Lick Creek.
Linum.
Mazapil.
_Mhow._
_Middlesbrough._
Mooresfort.
_Mouza Khoorna._
Nagy-Diwina.
Nash County.
_Nedagolla._
_Nejed._
_Nellore._
Nerft.
Newstead.
New Zealand.
_Obernkirchen._
_Ogi._
_Parnallee._
Petersburg.
Pillistfer.
Pulsora.
_Rancho de la Pila._
Rittersgrün.
Roebourne.
_Rowton._
St. Denis-Westrem.
Sarepta.
_Segowlie._
Shytal.
Sindhri.
_Sitathali._
Ski.
_Udipi._
Virba.
_Warbreccan._
_Wittekrantz._
The Trustees possess moulds of those meteorites in the preceding list
of which the names are printed in italics, and casts may be obtained
on payment of the necessary expenses. Applications should be made in
writing to the formatori, D. Brucciani & Co., 254 Goswell Road, London,
E.C.
INDEX
TO THE METEORITES REPRESENTED IN THE COLLECTION ON MAY 1, 1908.
* * * * *
_The names adopted for the meteorites are printed in capitals: the other
names are synonyms._
_The numbers correspond with those of the first column of the meteorite
list._
No.
AACHEN, (pseudo-meteorite).
ABERT IRON (unknown locality), 217
ADARE, 282
ADMIRE, 234
Aeriotopos_v._BEAR CREEK, 144
AGEN, 286
AGRA, 298
Agra _v._ KHIRAGURH, 391
AGRAM, 1
Aigle _v._ L'AIGLE, 259
Ainsa iron _v._ TUCSON, 155
AKBARPUR, 330
Akershuus _v._ SKI, 356
ALAIS, 267
ALATYR, 498
ALBARETO, 247
Albuquerque _v._ GLORIETA MOUNTAIN, 158b
ALDSWORTH, 323
ALEPPO, 450
ALESSANDRIA, 390
Alexejevka _v._ BACHMUT, 285
Alexinatz _v._ SOKO-BANJA, 468
ALFIANELLO, 490
ALGOMA, 135
Allahabad _v._ FUTTEHPUR, 300
ALLEGAN 539
Allen County _v._ SCOTTSVILLE, 118
AMANA, 455
AMBAPUR NAGLA, 526
ANDOVER, 542
ANGELAS, 210
ANGERS, 297
ANGRA DOS REIS, 431
Antifona _v._ COLLESCIPOLI, 507
APOALA, 189
APT, 260
ARISPE, 176
ARLINGTON, 132
ARVA, 21
ASCO, 266
ASHEVILLE, 80
Asheville _v._ BLACK MOUNTAIN, 79
ASSAM, 554
ASSISI, 497
AUBRES, 324
AUBURN, 95
Augusta County _v._ STAUNTON, 67
AUGUSTINOVKA, 26
Aukoma _v._ PILLISTFER, 401
AUMALE, 412
AUMIÈRES, 341
AUSSON, 384
Authon _v._ LANCÉ, 445
BABB'S MILL, 102
BACHMUT, 285
Bacubirito _v._ EL RANCHITO, 177
Bahia _v._ BENDEGÓ RIVER, 212
Baird's Farm _v._ ASHEVILLE, 80
Baird's Plantation _v._ ASHEVILLE, 80
BALDOHN, 508
BALLINOO, 54
Bambuk _v._ SENEGAL RIVER, 229
Bancoorah _v._ SHALKA, 359
BANDONG, 442
BARBOTAN, 253
BARRANCA BLANCA, 208
BARRATTA, 558
Basti _v._ BUSTEE, 366
Bates County _v._ BUTLER, 130
BATH, 516
BATH FURNACE, 548
Batsura _v._ BUTSURA, 395
Beaconsfield _v._ CRANBOURNE, 50b
BEAR CREEK, 144
BEAVER CREEK, 519
Bécasse _v._ LA BÉCASSE, 475
Behar _v._ SHERGHOTTY, 413
Belaja-Zerkov _v._ BJELAJA ZERKOV, 256
Belgorod _v._ SEVRUKOVO, 451
BELLA ROCA, 181
BENDEGÓ RIVER, 212
Benares _v._ KRAKHUT, 258
Berar _v._ CHANDAKAPUR, 331
Beraun _v._ ZEBRAK, 304
BERLANGUILLAS, 278
BETHANY, 37
BETHLEHEM, 389
BEUSTE, 388
BHAGUR, 470
BHERAI, 518
Bhurtpur _v._ MOTI-KA-NAGLA, 430
BIALYSTOCK, 310
BIELOKRYNITSCHIE, 500
BILLINGS, 131
BISCHTÜBE, 27
BISHOPVILLE, 342
BISHUNPUR, 524
Bissempore _v._ SHALKA, 359
BITBURG, 13
Bithur _v._ FUTTEHPUR, 300
BJELAJA ZERKOV, 256
BJURBÖLE, 538
Blaauw-Kapel _v._ UTRECHT, 343
BLACK MOUNTAIN, 79
BLANSKO, 319
BLUFF, 572
Bocas _v._ HACIENDA DE BOCAS, 264
Bogota _v._ RASGATA, 193
BOHUMILITZ, 19
Bois de Fontaine _v._ CHARSONVILLE, 276
Bokkeveldt _v._ COLD BOKKEVELD, 333
Bolson de Mapimi _v._ COAHUILA, 170a
Bolson de Mapimi _v._ SANCHEZ ESTATE, 170b
Bonanza iron _v._ COAHUILA, 170a
BOOGALDI, 45
BORGO SAN DONINO, 270
BORI, 522
BORKUT, 365
BRAHIN, 226
BRAUNAU, 3
BRAUNFELS (pseudo-meteorite).
BRAZOS RIVER, 162
BREITENBACH, 225c
Bremervörde _v._ GNARRENBURG, 372
BRENHAM TOWNSHIP, 233
BRIDGEWATER, 77
Bubuowly _v._ SUPUHEE, 408
Budetin _v._ NAGY-DIWINA, 327
Bückeburg _v._ OBERNKIRCHEN, 12
Bueste _v._ BEUSTE, 388
Bugaldi _v._ BOOGALDI, 45
Bunzlau _v._ LISSA, 272
BURLINGTON, 63
BUSCHHOF, 400
BUSTEE, 366
Butcher iron _v._ COAHUILA, 170a
BUTLER, 130
BUTSURA, 395
CABARRAS COUNTY, 357
CABEZA DE MAYO, 438
CABIN CREEK, 8
CACARIA, 179
CACHIYUYAL, 200
Caille _v._ LA CAILLE, 10
Callac _v._ KERILIS, 454
Cambria _v._ LOCKPORT, 61
CAMPBELL COUNTY, (pseudo-meteorite).
Campo del Cielo _v._ OTUMPA, 211
Campo de Pucará _v._ IMILAC, 235
CANAAN (pseudo-meteorite).
Canara _v._ UDIPI, 415
CANELLAS, 396
CANEY FORK, 108
CANGAS DE ONIS, 420
CAÑON DIABLO, 153
CANTON, 89
CANYON CITY, 148
CAPE GIRARDEAU, 351
CAPE OF GOOD HOPE, 40
CAPERR, 214
CAPITAN RANGE, 157
Caracoles _v._ IMILAC, 235
CARATASH, 546
Carcoar _v._ COWRA, 46
CARCOTE, 577
Carleton iron _v._ TUCSON, 155
CARLTON, 165
Carroll County _v._ EAGLE STATION, 232
CARTHAGE, 107
Caryfort _v._ CANEY FORK, 108
Casale _v._ CERESETO, 337
CASAS GRANDES, 174
CASEY COUNTY, 117
Castalia _v._ NASH COUNTY, 452
CASTINE, 354
Catorze _v._ DESCUBRIDORA, 183
CENTRAL MISSOURI, 129
CERESETO, 337
CERRO COSINA, 346
CHAIL, 287
CHANDAKAPUR, 331
CHANDPUR, 495
CHANTONNAY, 281
CHARCAS, 184
Charkow _v._ KHARKOV, 252
Charleston _v._ JENNY'S CREEK, 70
CHARLOTTE, 2
Charlottetown _v._ CABARRAS COUNTY. 357
CHARSONVILLE, 276
Chartres _v._ CHARSONVILLE, 276
CHARWALLAS, 321
CHASSIGNY, 289
CHÂTEAU-RENARD, 339
Cherokee Mills _v._ CANTON, 89
Cherson _v._ VAVILOVKA, 461
CHESTERVILLE, 82
CHILI, 209
Christian County _v._ BILLINGS, 131
CHULAFINNEE, 94
CHUPADEROS, 173
Cirencester _v._ ALDSWORTH, 323
CLAIBORNE, 98
Claiborne County _v._ TAZEWELL, 103
Clarac _v._ AUSSON, 384
Clarke County _v._ CLAIBORNE, 98
Claywater Stone _v._ VERNON COUNTY. 409
Cleberne County _v._ CHULAFINNEE, 94
CLÉGUÉREC, 434
CLEVELAND, 105
COAHUILA, 170a
COBIJA, 575
COCKE COUNTY, 101
COLD BOKKEVELD, 333
Colfax _v._ ELLENBORO', 76
COLLESCIPOLI, 507
COLLINA DI BRIANZA (pseudo-meteorite).
Commune des Ormes _v._ LES ORMES. 380
CONCEPCION, 172
CONCORD (pseudo-meteorite)
Coneyfork _v._ CANEY FORK, 108
COOPERTOWN, 111
COPIAPO, 240
Cosby's Creek _v._ COCKE COUNTY, 101
Cosona _v._ SIENA, 254
Cossipore _v._ MANBHOOM, 404
Costa Rica _v._ HEREDIA, 377
COSTILLA PEAK, 156
COWRA, 46
CRANBOURNE, 50
Crawford County _v._ TANEY COUNTY. 218
CRONSTAD, 469
CROSS ROADS, 514
Cross Timbers _v._ RED RIVER, 164
CROW CREEK, 140
CRUMLIN, 547
CUERNAVACA, 187
Cusignano _v._ BORGO SAN DONINO, 270
CYNTHIANA, 465
Czartorya _v._ ZABORZIKA, 290
Dacca _v._ SHYTAL, 402
DAKOTA, 136
Dalton _v._ WHITFIELD COUNTY, 87
DANDAPUR, 473
DANIEL'S KUIL, 424
DANVILLE, 428
DARMSTADT, 262
Davis Strait _v._ MELVILLE BAY, 56
DEAL, 313
Debreczin _v._ KABA, 379
Decatur County _v._ PRAIRIE DOG CREEK. 565
DEEP SPRINGS, 72
Deesa _v._ COPIAPO, 240
De Kalb County _v._ CANEY FORK, 108
DENTON COUNTY, 163
Denver _v._ BEAR CREEK, 144
DESCUBRIDORA, 183
Dhulia _v._ BHAGUR, 470
DHURMSALA, 394
Dickson County _v._ CHARLOTTE, 2
Disko Island _v._ OVIFAK (telluric).
DJATI-PENGILON, 493
DOKÁCHI, 550
Dolgaja Wolja _v._ DOLGOVOLI, 407
DOLGOVOLI, 407
DOÑA INEZ, 239
DONGA KOHROD, 540
Dooralla _v._ DURALA, 288
DORONINSK, 265
DRAKE CREEK, 309
Duel Hill _v._ JEWELL HILL, 78b
DUNDRUM, 411
DURALA, 288
DURUMA, 369
DYALPUR, 443
EAGLE STATION, 232
East Tennessee _v._ CLEVELAND, 105
Echigo _v._ YON[=O]ZU, 325
Echo _v._ UTAH, 570
EICHSTÄDT, 251
Eifel _v._ BITBURG, 13
ELBOGEN, 18
Elgueras _v._ CANGAS DE ONIS, 420
EL INCA, 194
ELLENBORO', 76
ELM CREEK, 563
Elmo _v._ INDEPENDENCE COUNTY, 126
EL RANCHITO, 177
Emmet County _v._ ESTHERVILLE, 220
EMMITTSBURG, 66
ENSISHEIM, 241
EPINAL, 299
ERGHEO, 505
ERXLEBEN, 280
Eschigo _v._ YON[=O]ZU, 326
ESNANDES, 328
ESTACADO, 574
ESTHERVILLE, 220
Faha _v._ ADARE, 282
FARMINGTON, 512
Fatchpur _v._ FUTTEHPUR, 300
FAVARS, 348
Fayette County _v._ BLUFF, 572
Fekete _v._ MEZÖ-MADARAS, 364
FINMARKEN, 223
FISHER, 521
Fish River _v._ Great Fish River, 37a
Floyd, County _v._ INDIAN VALLEY TOWNSHIP, 68
Fomatlan _v._ TOMATLAN, 479
Forest City _v._ WINNEBAGO COUNTY, 509
FORSYTH, 312
FORSYTH COUNTY, 91
FORT DUNCAN, 169
Fort Pierre _v._ NEBRASKA, 139
FRANCEVILLE, 145
FRANKFORT (Alabama), 429
FRANKFORT (Kentucky), 114
Franklin County _v._ FRANKFORT, 114, 429
Fürstenburg _v._ KLEIN-MENOW, 398
FUKUTOMI, 486
Fulton County _v._ ROCHESTER, 463
FUTTEHPUR, 300
GAMBAT, 535
Gargantillo _v._ TOMATLAN, 479
Garz _v._ SCHELLIN, 242
Gera _v._ POHLITZ, 294
Ghazeepore _v._ MHOW, 308
Ghent _v._ ST. DENIS-WESTREM, 373
Ghoordha _v._ MOTI-KA-NAGLA, 430
GILGOIN, 559
GIRGENTI, 367
GLORIETA MOUNTAIN, 158a, 158b
GNADENFREI, 477
GNARRENBURG, 372
GOALPARA, 555
GOPALPUR, 410
Gran Chaco _v._ OTUMPA, 211
GRAND RAPIDS, 122
Great Fish, River _v._ BETHANY, 37a
Great Fish, River _v._ CAPE OF GOOD HOPE, 40
Great Namaqualand _v._ BETHANY, 37
GREENBRIER COUNTY, 69
Green County _v._ BABB'S MILL, 102
Grenade _v._ TOULOUSE, 279
Griqualand _v._ DANIEL'S KUIL, 424
GROSNAJA, 397
Gross-Diwina _v._ NAGY-DIWINA, 327
GROSS-KAMSDORF, (pseudo-meteorite)
GROSS-LIEBENTHAL, 484
GRÜNEBERG, 338
GUAREÑA, 515
Guernsey County _v._ NEW CONCORD, 392
GÜTERSLOH, 360
GUILFORD COUNTY, 73
GURRAM KONDA, 284
HACIENDA DE BOCAS, 264
HAINHOLZ, 224
Hamblen County _v._ MORRISTOWN, 562
Hamilton County _v._ CARLTON, 165
HAMMOND TOWNSHIP, 134
HARRISON COUNTY, 386
Hartford _v._ LINN COUNTY, 353
Hauptmannsdorf _v._ BRAUNAU, 3
Hawaii _v._ HONOLULU, 306
HAYDEN CREEK, 146
HAYWOOD COUNTY, (pseudo-meteorite).
HEIDELBERG (pseudo-meteorite).
Heinrichsau _v._ GRÜNEBERG, 338
HEMALGA (pseudo-meteorite).
HEREDIA, 377
HESSLE, 432
HEX RIVER MOUNTAINS, 39
HIGASHIKOEN, 534
HIGH POSSIL, 263
HOLLAND'S STORE, 90
Homestead _v._ AMANA, 455
HOMMONEY CREEK (pseudo-meteorite).
HONOLULU, 306
Horzowitz _v._ ZEBRAK, 304
HOWARD COUNTY, 124
Hraschina _v._ AGRAM, 1
Huesca _v._ RODA, 439
HUNGEN, 466
HVITTIS, 543
IBBENBÜHREN, 437
IGAST (pseudo-meteorite).
Iglau _v._ STANNERN, 271
Iharaota _v._ LALITPUR, 501
Ihung _v._ JHUNG, 447
ILIMAË, 201
ILIMAES, 236
ILLINOIS GULCH, 141
IMILAC, 235
INDARCH, 513
INDEPENDENCE COUNTY, 126
INDIAN VALLEY TOWNSHIP, 68
INDIO RICO, 580
Iowa _v._ AMANA, 455
Iquique _v._ EL INCA, 194
IRON CREEK, 60
Irwin-Ainsa iron _v._ TUCSON, 155
ITAPICURU-MIRIM, 476
IVANPAH, 151
JACKSON COUNTY, 106
JAKOBSHAVN (telluric).
Jamaica _v._ LUCKY HILL, 191
JAMESTOWN, 137
JAMKHEIR, 419
Janacera Pass _v._ VACA MUERTA, 237
Japan _v._ OGI, 244
Jarquera _v._ VACA MUERTA, 237
Jasly _v._ BIALYSTOCK, 310
JELICA, 506
JENNY'S CREEK, 70
JEWELL HILL, 78
Jharaota _v._ LALITPUR, 501
JHUNG, 447
Jigalowka _v._ KHARKOV, 252
JODZIE, 467
JOEL IRON, 206
Johanngeorgenstadt _v._ STEINBACH, 225a
JONZAC, 293
Juchnow _v._ TIMOCHIN, 268
JUDESEGERI, 460
JUNCAL, 204
JUVINAS, 296
Kaande _v._ OESEL, 371
KABA, 379
Kadonah _v._ AGRA, 298
KAEE, 329
KAHANGARAI, 510
Kakangarai _v._ KAHANGARAI, 510
KAKOWA, 383
KALAMBI, 480
KAMTSCHATKA (pseudo-meteorite).
KANGRA, 530
KANSADA, 568
KARAKOL, 335
Karand _v._ VERAMIN, 221
Karlsburg _v._ OHABA, 381
Kathiawar _v._ BHERAI, 518
KENDALL COUNTY, 166
KENTON COUNTY, 112
KERILIS, 454
Kernouvé _v._ CLÉGUÉREC, 434
KESEN, 358
KHAIRPUR, 448
KHARKOV, 252
Kheragur _v._ KHIRAGURH, 391
KHETRI, 421
KHIRAGURH, 391
KIKINO, 274
Kiowa County _v._ BRENHAM TOWNSHIP, 233
KILLETER, 347
KLEIN-MENOW, 398
KLEIN-WENDEN, 345
Knasta _v._ BIALYSTOCK, 310
Knoxville _v._ TAZEWELL, 103
KNYAHINYA, 418
KODAIKANAL, 34
Köstritz _v._ POHLITZ, 294
Kokomo _v._ HOWARD COUNTY, 124
KOKSTAD, 41
KOTA-KOTA, 556
Koursk _v._ SEVRUKOVO, 451
KRÄHENBERG, 433
KRAKHUT, 258
KRASNOI-UGOL, 314
Krasnojarsk _v._ PALLAS IRON, 227
Krasnoslobodsk _v._ ALATYR, 498
Krawin _v._ TABOR, 245
KULESCHOVKA, 277
KUSIALI, 393
La Baffe _v._ EPINAL, 299
LA BÉCASSE, 475
LABOREL, 441
LA CAILLE, 10
LAGRANGE, 113
L'AIGLE, 259
Laissac _v._ FAVARS, 348
LALITPUR, 501
LANCÉ, 445
LANÇON, 532
Langenpiernitz _v._ STANNERN, 271
Langres _v._ CHASSIGNY, 289
LA PRIMITIVA, 196
Lasdany _v._ LIXNA, 295
LAUNTON, 315
LAURENS COUNTY, 83
La Vivionnère _v._ LE TEILLEUL, 349
LEADHILLS (pseudo-meteorite).
Lebedin _v._ KHARKOV, 252
LÉNÁRTO, 20
LERICI, 423
LES ORMES, 380
LESVES, 529
LE TEILLEUL, 349
LEXINGTON COUNTY, 85
Lexington County _v._ RUFF'S MOUNTAIN, 84
Libonnez _v._ JUVINAS, 296
Liboschitz _v._ PLESCOWITZ, 243
LICK CREEK, 74
Lime Creek _v._ CLAIBORNE, 98
Limerick _v._ ADARE, 282
LINN COUNTY, 353
LINNVILLE MOUNTAIN, 75
LINUM, 370
Lion River _v._ BETHANY, 37b
Liponnas _v._ LUPONNAS, 246
LISSA, 272
LITTLE PINEY, 334
Livingston County _v._ SMITHLAND, 119
LIXNA, 295
Ljungby _v._ LUNDSGÅRD, 503
LLANO DEL INCA, 238
LOCKPORT, 61
LOCUST GROVE, 92
LODRAN, 219
LONG CREEK (pseudo-meteorite).
LONG ISLAND, 566
Lontolax _v._ LUOTOLAKS, 283
LOSTTOWN, 88
Louisiana _v._ RED RIVER, 164
Louvain _v._ TOURINNES-LA-GROSSE, 403
LUCÉ, 248
LUCKY HILL, 191
LUIS LOPEZ, 160
Lumpkin _v._ STEWART COUNTY, 436
LUNDSGÅRD, 503
LUOTOLAKS, 283
LUPONNAS, 246
LUTSCHAUNIG STONE, 576
MACAO, 325
Macayo _v._ MACAO, 325
Macedonia _v._ SERES, 291
Macerata _v._ MONTE MILONE, 350
Macon County _v._ AUBURN, 95
Madagascar _v._ ST. AUGUSTINE'S BAY (pseudo-meteorite).
Maddur taluk _v._ MUDDOOR, 414
Madioen _v._ NGAWI, 491
MADOC, 57
MADRID, 527
Mael Pestivien _v._ KERILIS, 454
Maêmê _v._ OSHIMA, 499
MÄSSING, 261
Magdalena _v._ LUIS LOPEZ, 160
MAGDEBURG (pseudo-meteorite).
Magdeburg _v._ ERXLEBEN, 280
Magura _v._ ARVA, 21
MAINZ, 552
MAKARIWA, 560
Mánbazar pargama _v._ MANBHOOM, 404
MANBHOOM, 404
MANEGAUM, 344
Mantos Blancos _v._ MOUNT HICKS, 197
Marimba District _v._ KOTA-KOTA, 556
Marion _v._ LINN COUNTY, 353
MARJALAHTI, 222
MARMANDE, 355
Marmoros _v._ BORKUT, 365
MARSHALL COUNTY, 120
MART, 167
Maryland _v._ NANJEMOY, 305
MASCOMBES, 322
Mau _v._ MHOW, 308
MAUERKIRCHEN, 249
Mauléon _v._ SAUGUIS, 427
MAZAPIL, 7
MCKINNEY, 571
Medwedewa _v._ PALLAS IRON, 227
Mejillones _v._ VACA MUERTA, 237
Melbourne _v._ CRANBOURNE, 50
MELVILLE BAY, 56
Menow _v._ KLEIN-MENOW, 398
MERCEDITAS, 202
MERN, 472
MEUSELBACH, 531
Mexico _v._ PAMPANGA, 387
MEZÖ-MADARAS, 364
MHOW, 308
MIDDLESBROUGH, 482
Midt-Vaage _v._ TYSNES, 494
Mighei _v._ MIGHEJA, 504
MIGHEJA, 504
Mikenskoi _v._ GROSNAJA, 397
Miljana _v._ MILENA, 340
MILENA, 340
Milwaukee _v._ TRENTON, 133
MINAS GERAES, 579
Misshof _v._ BALDOHN, 508
Missouri _v._ SOUTH-EAST MISSOURI, 127
Misteca _v._ YANHUITLAN, 188
MOCS, 485
MOCTEZUMA, 175
Modena _v._ ALBARETO, 247
MOLINA, 385
Monroe _v._ CABARRAS COUNTY, 357
Montauban _v._ ORGUEIL, 406
MONTE MILONE, 350
Montignac _v._ MARMANDE, 355
MONTLIVAULT, 332
Montréjean _v._ AUSSON, 384
Mooltan _v._ LODRAN, 219
MOORANOPPIN, 55
MOORESFORT, 275
MORADABAD, 273
Morbihan _v._ CLÉGUÉREC, 434
Mordvinovka _v._ PAVLOGRAD, 307
MORNANS, 459
MORRISTOWN, 562
Morro do Rocio _v._ SANTA CATHARINA. 213
Moteeka Nugla _v._ MOTI-KA-NAGLA, 430
MOTI-KA-NAGLA, 430
MOUNT BROWNE, 545
MOUNT DYRRING, 230
MOUNT HICKS, 197
MOUNT JOY, 65
MOUNT STIRLING, 53
Mount Zomba _v._ ZOMBA, 537
Mouza Khoorna _v._ SUPUHEE, 408
MUDDOOR, 414
Mukerop _v._ BETHANY, 37d
MUNGINDI, 44
Murcia _v._ CABEZA DE MAYO, 438
Murcia _v._ MOLINA, 385
MURFREESBORO', 110
MURPHY, 81
Muskingum County _v._ NEW CONCORD. 392
NAGARIA, 458
NAGAYA, 478
NAGY-BOROVÉ, 525
NAGY-DIWINA, 327
NAGY-VÁZSONY, 22
NAMMIANTHAL, 496
NANJEMOY, 305
Napoléonsville _v._ CLÉGUÉREC, 434
NARRABURRA, 47
NASH COUNTY, 452
Nashville _v._ DRAKE CREEK, 309
NAUHEIM (pseudo-meteorite).
NAWAPALI, 511
NEBRASKA, 139
NEDAGOLLA, 5
NEJED, 33
NELLORE, 363
NELSON COUNTY, 116
NENNTMANNSDORF, 16
NERFT, 405
NESS CITY, 569
Ness County _v._ KANSADA, 568
Ness County _v._ NESS CITY, 569
Netschaëvo _v._ TULA, 23
Newberry _v._ RUFF'S MOUNTAIN, 84
NEW CONCORD, 392
NEW HAVEN (pseudo-meteorite).
NEWSTEAD (pseudo-meteorite).
Newton County _v._ TANEY COUNTY, 218
NEW ZEALAND (telluric).
NGAWI, 491
N'GOUREYMA, 9
NIAGARA, 138
NIAKORNAK (telluric).
Nidigullam _v._ NEDAGOLLA, 5
NOBLEBOROUGH, 302
NOCHTUISK, 32
NOCOLECHE, 48
NÖBDENITZ (pseudo-meteorite).
North Inch of Perth _v._ PERTH. 316
Novo-Urei _v._ ALATYR, 498
NULLES, 362
Nurrah _v._ SITATHALI, 456
OAKLEY, 567
Oaxaca _v._ YANHUITLAN, 188
OBERNKIRCHEN, 12
Ocatitlan _v._ TOLUCA, 186
OCZERETNA, 553
OESEL, 371
Oficina Angelas _v._ ANGELAS, 210
OGI, 244
OHABA, 381
OKNINY, 320
OKTIBBEHA COUNTY, 100
Oldham County _v._ LAGRANGE, 113
ORANGE RIVER, 38
ORGUEIL, 406
Orléans _v._ CHARSONVILLE, 276
Ormes _v._ LES ORMES, 380
ORNANS, 426
OROVILLE, 149
ORVINIO, 446
OSCURO MOUNTAIN, 161
OSHIMA, 499
Oswego County _v._ SCRIBA (pseudo-meteorite).
Otsego County _v._ BURLINGTON, 63
OTTAWA, 528
Ottiglio _v._ CERESETO, 337
OTUMPA, 211
Oude _v._ KAEE, 329
OVIFAK (telluric).
Oynchimura _v._ OSHIMA, 499
PACULA, 483
PALÉZIEUX, 544
PALLAS IRON, 227
Pampa de Tamarugal _v._ EL INCA. 194
PAMPANGA, 387
PAN DE AZUCAR, 203
Parma _v._ BORGO SAN DONINO, 270
PARNALLEE, 376
PAVLODAR, 228
PAVLOGRAD, 307
PAVLOVKA, 487
PEGU, 382
Penkarring Rock _v._ YOUNDEGIN, 51
Pennyman's Siding _v._ MIDDLESBROUGH. 482
PERTH, 316
PETERSBURG, 374
PETROPAVLOVSK, 28
Pfaff-Öberg _v._ JAKOBSHAVN (telluric).
Philippine Islands _v._ PAMPANGA, 387
Phillips County _v._ LONG ISLAND, 566
PILLISTFER, 401
Pine Bluff _v._ LITTLE PINEY, 334
PIPE CREEK, 573
PIRGUNJE, 488
PIRTHALLA, 492
PITTSBURG, 64
PLESCOWITZ, 243
Ploschkowitz _v._ PLESCOWITZ, 243
PLYMOUTH, 125
POHLITZ, 294
POKHRA, 416
Politz _v._ POHLITZ, 294
Poltawa _v._ KULESCHOVKA, 277
Poltawa of Partsch _v._ SLOBODKA, 292
POWDER MILL CREEK, 231
Prachin _v._ BOHUMILITZ, 19
PRAIRIE DOG CREEK, 565
PRAMBANAN, 42
Praskoles _v._ ZEBRAK, 304
PRICETOWN, 517
Pulaski _v._ LITTLE PINEY, 334
PULSORA, 399
PULTUSK, 423
PUQUIOS, 205
Pusinsko Selo _v._ MILENA, 340
PUTNAM COUNTY, 93
Quenggouk _v._ PEGU, 382
QUINÇAY, 361
Raepur _v._ SITATHALI, 456
RAKOVKA, 474
Ranchito _v._ EL RANCHITO, 177
RANCHO DE LA PILA, 178
RASGATA, 193
RED RIVER, 164
REED CITY, 123
Reichstadt _v._ PLESCOWITZ, 243
RENAZZO, 303
Rhine Valley _v._ RHINE VILLA, 49
RHINE VILLA, 49
RICHLAND (pseudo-meteorite).
RICHMOND, 311
Rink's iron _v._ NIAKORNAK (telluric).
RITTERSGRÜN, 225b
Robertson County _v._ COOPERTOWN, 111
ROCHESTER, 463
Rockwood _v._ POWDER MILL CREEK, 231
RODA, 439
RODEO, 182
ROEBOURNE, 52
Roki[)c]ky _v._ BRAHIN, 226
Roquefort _v._ BARBOTAN, 253
ROSARIO, 190
Ross's iron _v._ MELVILLE BAY, 56
ROWTON, 6
Roxburghshire, _v._ NEWSTEAD (pseudo-meteorite).
RUFF'S MOUNTAIN, 84
RUSSEL GULCH, 143
Rutherford County _v._ MURFREESBORO', 110
RUTHERFORDTON, (pseudo-meteorite).
Rutlam _v._ PULSORA, 399
Saboryzy _v._ ZABORZIKA, 290
SACRAMENTO MOUNTAINS, 159
Saharanpur _v._ AKBARPUR, 330
ST. AUGUSTINE'S BAY (pseudo-meteorite).
ST. CAPRAIS-DE-QUINSAC, 489
ST. DENIS-WESTREM, 373
ST. GENEVIEVE COUNTY, 128
St. Julien _v._ ALESSANDRIA, 390
ST. MESMIN, 417
St. Nicholas _v._ MÄSSING, 261
Saintonge _v._ JONZAC, 293
SALINE TOWNSHIP, 536
SALLES, 257
Saltillo _v._ SANCHEZ ESTATE, 170b
Salt Lake City _v._ UTAH, 370
SALT RIVER, 115
Sáluká _v._ SHALKA, 359
SAN ANGELO, 168
San Bernardino County _v._ IVANPAH. 151
SANCHEZ ESTATE, 170b
SAN CRISTOBAL, 199
SAN FRANCISCO DEL MEZQUITAL, 180
San Francisco Pass _v._ BARRANCA BLANCA, 208
San José _v._ HEREDIA, 377
San Pedro _v._ IMILAC, 235
SANTA BARBARA, 449
SANTA CATHARINA, 213
SANTA ROSA, 192
Santa Rosa _v._ COAHUILA, 170a
Santa Rosa _v._ SANCHEZ ESTATE, 170b
SANTIAGO, 578
SÃO JULIÃO DE MOREIRA, 11
Saonlod _v._ KHETRI, 421
Sarbanovac _v._ SOKO-BANJA, 468
SAREPTA, 24
Saskatchewan _v._ IRON CREEK, 60
SAUGUIS, 427
Saurette _v._ APT, 260
SAVTSCHENSKOJE, 523
Scheikahr Stattan _v._ BUSCHHOF, 400
SCHELLIN, 242
Schie _v._ SKI, 356
Schobergrund _v._ GNADENFREI, 477
SCHÖNENBERG, 352
SCHWETZ, 15
SCOTTSVILLE, 118
SCRIBA (pseudo-meteorite).
SEARSMONT, 440
SEELÄSGEN, 14
SEGOWLIE, 368
SENA, 250
SENECA RIVER (or Falls), 62
SENEGAL RIVER, 229
Senhadja _v._ AUMALE, 412
SERES, 291
SERRANIA DE VARAS, 198
Sevier County _v._ COCKE COUNTY, 101
SEVRUKOVO, 451
Shahpur _v._ FUTTEHPUR, 300
Shaital _v._ SHYTAL, 402
SHALKA, 359
SHELBURNE, 551
SHERGHOTTY, 413
SHINGLE SPRINGS, 150
SHYTAL, 402
Sidowra _v._ SUPUHEE, 408
SIENA, 254
SIERRA BLANCA, 171
Sierra de Chaco _v._ VACA MUERTA, 237
Sierra de Deesa _v._ COPIAPO, 240
SIERRA DE LA TERNERA, 207
Signet iron _v._ TUCSON, 155
Sikkensaare _v._ TENNASILM, 444
Silver Crown _v._ CROW CREEK, 140
SINDHRI, 541
Siratik _v._ SENEGAL RIVER, 229
SITATHALI, 456
SKI, 356
SLAVETIC, 425
SLOBODKA, 292
SMITHLAND, 119
SMITH'S MOUNTAIN, 71
SMITHSONIAN IRON (unknown locality). 216
SMITHVILLE, 109
Socrakarta _v._ PRAMBANAN, 42
SOKO-BANJA, 468
SOUTH AMERICA (telluric).
South Arcot _v._ NAMMIANTHAL, 496
South Canara _v._ UDIPI, 415
SOUTH-EAST MISSOURI, 127
Sowallick Mountain _v._ MELVILLE BAY. 56
Springbok River _v._ BETHANY, 37d
SSYROMOLOTOVO, 30
Staartje _v._ UDEN, 336
STÄLLDALEN, 462
STANNERN, 271
STAUNTON, 67
STAVROPOL, 378
STEINBACH, 225a
STERLITAMAK (pseudo-meteorite).
STEWART COUNTY, 436
Stinking Creek _v._ CAMPBELL COUNTY (pseudo-meteorite).
Stutsman County _v._ JAMESTOWN, 137
SUMMIT, 96
SUPUHEE, 408
Surakarta _v._ PRAMBANAN, 42
SURPRISE SPRINGS, 152
Szadany _v._ ZSADÁNY, 457
Szlanicza _v._ ARVA, 21
TABARZ, 17
TABOR, 245
TABORY, 502
TADJERA, 422
Taiga _v._ TOUBIL RIVER, 29
TAKENOUCHI, 481
Tamarugal _v._ EL INCA, 194
TANEY COUNTY, 218
TANOKAMI, 35
TARAPACA, 195
Tarapaca Desert _v._ HEMALGA (pseudo-meteorite).
TAZEWELL, 103
Teilleul _v._ LE TEILLEUL, 349
TENNASILM, 444
Terni _v._ COLLESCIPOLI, 507
Texas _v._ RED RIVER, 164
THUNDA, 43
THURLOW, 59
TIESCHITZ, 471
TIMOCHIN, 268
Tipperary _v._ MOORESFORT, 275
TJABÉ, 435
Tocavita _v._ SANTA ROSA, 192b
TOLUCA, 186
TOMATLAN, 479
TOMBIGBEE RIVER, 99
TOMHANNOCK CREEK, 561
TONGANOXIE, 142
TOUBIL RIVER, 29
TOULOUSE, 279
TOURINNES-LA-GROSSE, 403
TRENTON, 133
TRENZANO, 375
Triguères _v._ CHÂTEAU-RENARD, 339
TUCSON, 155
Tucuman _v._ OTUMPA, 211
TULA, 23
Turuma _v._ DURUMA, 369
TYSNES, 494
UBERABA, 549
UDEN, 336
UDIPI, 415
UMBALLA, 301
Umjhiawar _v._ SHERGHOTTY, 413
UNION COUNTY, 86
UTAH, 570
UTRECHT, 343
UWET, 36
VACA MUERTA, 237
Varas _v._ SERRANIA DE VARAS, 198
VAVILOVKA, 461
Venagas _v._ DESCUBRIDORA, 183
VERAMIN, 221
Veresegyhaza _v._ OHABA, 381
VERKHNE-DNIEPROVSK, 25
VERKHNE-UDINSK, 31
VERNON COUNTY, 409
VICTORIA WEST, 4
VIRBA, 453
VOIGTLAND (pseudo-meteorite).
VOUILLÉ, 317
WACONDA, 564
WALDRON RIDGE, 104
WALKER COUNTY, 97
WARBRECCAN, 557
WARRENTON, 464
Washington _v._ FARMINGTON, 512
WATERLOO (pseudo-meteorite).
WAYNE COUNTY, 121
WEAVER'S MOUNTAINS, 154
WELLAND, 58
Werchne _v._ VERKHNE
WESSELY, 318
West Liberty _v._ AMANA, 455
WESTON, 269
WHITFIELD COUNTY, 87
Wichita County _v._ BRAZOS RIVER, 162
Wild _v._ BETHANY, 37c
WILLAMETTE, 147
WINNEBAGO COUNTY, 509
Witim _v._ VERKHNE-UDINSK, 31
Wittmess _v._ EICHSTÄDT, 251
WÖHLER'S IRON (unknown locality), 215
WOLD COTTAGE, 255
Xiquipilco _v._ TOLUCA, 186
YANHUITLAN, 188
Yarra Yarra River _v._ CRANBOURNE, 50c
Yatur _v._ NELLORE, 363
Yenshigahara _v._ OSHIMA, 499
Yodzé _v._ JODZIE, 467
YON[=O]ZU, 326
Yorktown _v._ TOMHANNOCK CREEK, 561
YOUNDEGIN, 51
ZABORZIKA, 290
ZABRODJE, 520
ZACATECAS, 185
ZAVID, 533
ZEBRAK, 304
Ziquipilco _v._ TOLUCA, 186
Znorow _v._ WESSELY, 318
ZOMBA, 537
ZSADÁNY, 457
THE END.
BRITISH MUSEUM (NATURAL HISTORY)
CROMWELL ROAD, LONDON, S.W.
* * * * *
GUIDE BOOKS.
A GENERAL GUIDE to the British Museum (Natural History). 58 Woodcuts,
2 Plans, and 2 Views of the Building. 8vo. 3d.
ZOOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT.
Guide to the Galleries of Mammals (other than Ungulates). 52 Woodcuts
and 4 Plans. 8vo. 6d.
---- Great Game Animals (Ungulata). 53 Illustrations. 8vo. 1s.
---- Horse Family (Equidæ). 26 Illustrations. 8vo. 1s.
---- Domesticated Animals (other than Horses). 24 Illustrations. 8vo. 6d.
---- Gallery of Birds. 24 Plates and 7 Woodcuts. Royal 8vo. 2s. 6d.
---- ---- Part I. General Series. Royal 8vo. 6d.
---- ---- Part II. Nesting Series of British Birds. 4 Plates. Royal
8vo. 4d.
---- Gallery of Reptilia and Amphibia. 76 Illustrations. 8vo. 6d.
---- Gallery of Fishes. 96 Illustrations. 8vo. 1s.
---- Exhibited Series of Insects. 62 Illustrations. 8vo. 1s.
---- Shell and Star-fish Galleries. 125 Woodcuts and 1 Plan. 8vo. 6d.
---- Coral Gallery (Protozoa, Porifera or Sponges, Hydrozoa, and
Anthozoa). 90 Illustrations and 1 Plan. 8vo. 1s.
[_Guides to other sections are in preparation._]
GEOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT.
A Guide to the Fossil Mammals and Birds. 6 Plates and 88 Woodcuts. 8vo. 6d.
---- Fossil Reptiles and Fishes. 8 Plates and 116 Woodcuts. 8vo. 6d.
---- Fossil Invertebrate Animals. 7 Plates and 96 Text-figures. 8vo. 1s.
---- Elephants (Recent and Fossil). 31 Text-figures. 8vo. 6d.
MINERAL DEPARTMENT.
A Guide to the Mineral Gallery. Plan. 8vo. 1d.
The Student's Index to the Collection of Minerals. Plan. 8vo. 2d.
An Introduction to the Study of Minerals, with a guide to the Mineral
Gallery. 41 Woodcuts. Plan. 8vo. 6d.
---- Study of Rocks. Plan. 8vo. 6d.
---- Study of Meteorites, with a List of the Meteorites represented in
the Collection. Plan. 8vo. 6d.
BOTANICAL DEPARTMENT.
List of British Seed-plants and Ferns. 8vo. 4d.
Guide to Sowerby's Models of British Fungi. 93 Woodcuts. 8vo. 4d.
Guide to the British Mycetozoa. 45 Woodcuts. 8vo. 3d.
SPECIAL GUIDES.
No. 1. Guide to an Exhibition of Old Natural History Books. 8vo. 3d.
No. 2. Books and Portraits illustrating the History of Plant
Classification. 4 Plates. 8vo. 4d.
No. 3. Memorials of Linnæus. 2 Plates. 8vo. 3d.
_The Guide-Books can be obtained only at the Natural History Museum.
Written communications respecting them should be addressed to_
THE DIRECTOR.
* * * * *
LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
DUKE STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E., AND GREAT WINDMILL STREET, W.
BRITISH MUSEUM
(NATURAL HISTORY).
* * * * *
DAYS AND HOURS OF ADMISSION.
* * * * *
The Exhibition Galleries are open to the Public, free, every
week-day, in
January, from 10 A.M. till 4 P.M.
February, 1st to 14th, from 10 A.M. till 4.30 P.M.
February, 15th to end, from 10 A.M. till 5 P.M.
March, from 10 A.M. till 5.30 P.M.
April to August, from 10 A.M. till 6 P.M.
September, from 10 A.M. till 5.30 P.M.
October, from 10 A.M. till 5 P.M.
November and December, from 10 A.M. till 4 P.M.
Also, from May 1st to the middle of July, on Mondays and
Saturdays only, till 8 P.M.,
and from the middle of July to the end of August, on Mondays
and Saturdays only, till 7 P.M.
The Museum is also open on Sunday afternoons throughout
the year.
The Museum is closed on Good Friday and Christmas Day.
BY ORDER OF THE TRUSTEES.
LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
DUKE STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E., AND GREAT WINDMILL STREET, W.
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES:
The italics used for pane numbers in side notes and the catalogue have
not been marked with underline characters to improve the readability
of the text. The printed edition also contains some diacriticals
and subscripts that are represented in this e-text as follows;
1. A macron is represented by an =, e.g. [=o]
2. A breve is represented by a ), e.g., [)c]
3. [oe] represents an oe ligature
4. A subscript in a chemical formula is surrounded by {}, e.g. Cu{2}Sb
The printed edition had the adopted names for meteorites in the various
lists in bold, this e-text has instead reproduced them in upper case.
In the printed edition where a numbered section continues onto a new
page the sidenotes from the previous page are sometimes repeated at the
top of the new page. This e-text instead only repeats the sidenote if a
new numbered section without a sidenote follows.
In one of the list of meteorites the typesetter occasionally used large
curly brackets (e.g No. 271, 276, 300, 384, 395, 408, 423, 445) to
collect together the names of multiple falls of meteorites and the
location. Instead this e-text has the location following the adopted
name for the meteorite, with the multiple falls listed below without
curly brackets.
page Original text Replaced with
all Ditto marks Repeated the actual text
66-106 The various lists of Standardised by placing a
meteorites were inconsistent full stop at the end of every
in the use of a full stop at place of fall.
the end of the place of fall.
68 1750 1,750
69 6948 6,948
104 1791 1,791
112 Batsúra Batsura
114 HAYWOOD COUNTY, HAYWOOD COUNTY,
pseudo-meteorite) (pseudo-meteorite)
116 Montauban v ORGUEIL, 406 Montauban v. ORGUEIL, 406
119 Senhadja v AUMALE, 412 Senhadja v. AUMALE, 412
120 Werchne v. Verkhne Werchne v. VERKHNE
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "An Introduction to the Study of Meteorites - With a List of the Meteorites Represented in the Collection" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.