The most recent of the French systems, that by Brongniart, seemed
to combine nearly all the requisites that could be desired in an
elementary treatise; and a translation of it would probably, ere
this, have been given to the American public, had we not been
led to expect the work of Professor Cleaveland, which, it was
anticipated, would at least possess one important advantage over
the work of Brongniart, and every other; it would exhibit, more
or less extensively, _American localities_, and give the leading
features of our natural mineral associations.
Thus it appears[8] that the work of Professor Cleaveland was
eminently needed; the science, at large, needed it; and to American
mineralogists it was nearly indispensable. It appeared too at a
very opportune moment. Had it come a few years sooner, it might
not have found many readers. Now it is sustained by the prevailing
curiosity, and diffused state of information regarding mineralogy;
and, in turn, no cause could operate more effectually to cherish
this curiosity, and to diffuse this information still more widely,
than this book. Professor Cleaveland is therefore entitled to our
thanks for undertaking this task; and, in this age of book-making,
it is no small negative praise if an author be acquitted of
_unnecessarily_ adding to the already onerous mass of books.
With respect to the PLAN of this work, Professor Cleaveland has,
with good judgment, availed himself of the excellencies of both the
German and French schools.
Mr. Werner, of Fribourg, in some sense not only the founder of
the modern German school of mineralogy, but almost of the science
itself, is entitled to our lasting gratitude for his system of
external characters, first published in 1774. In this admirable
treatise he has combined precision and copiousness, so that exact
ideas are attached to every part of the descriptive language, and
every character is meant to be defined.
It is intended that a full description of a mineral upon this
plan shall entirely exhaust the subject, and that although many
properties may be found in common among different minerals, still
every picture shall contain _peculiar_ features, not to be found
in any other. It would certainly appear, at first view, that this
method must be perfect, and leave nothing farther to be desired. It
has, however, been found in practice, that the full descriptions of
the Wernerian writers are heavy and dry; they are redundant also,
from the frequent repetition of similar properties; and from not
giving due prominence to those which are peculiar, and therefore
distinctive, they frequently fail to leave a distinct impression
of any thing on the mind, and thus, in the midst of what is called
by the writers of this school a full _oryctognostic picture_, a
student is sometimes absolutely bewildered.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account