441

ever, obvious, from its having no correspondent depression at theopposite end. I might adduce other bodies, bearing a very similarappearance, at least in their forms, with oranges, apples, figs, &c.which have originally been of marine growth; having been alcyonia,sponges, and similar productions. Among these may be also placeda silicious fossil body, resembling, on its external surface, an enor-mously large nutmeg; but having been cut and polished, severallines are shown, passing like radii from the centre to the circum-ference, yielding a very uncommon and beautiful appearance.There appears to be very little doubt of its being the same kind ofbody as is depicted by Scheuchzer, as a petrified nutmeg *.

As an additional proof of the propriety of receiving the earlieraccounts of the petrifaction of the seeds of plants, and particularlyof grain, with considerable caution, I must refer you to the fossilrepresented PI. III. Fig. 6 . A small specimen of this fossil is ac-curately depicted by Swedenborg , and described as resembling aspecies of Indian corn; “ Speciem praebet spicae tritiei Indici (mais)dicti, nisi forma esset plana -j-.”

Thus Scheuchzer also figures a fossil which he not only describesas an ear of corn, but reasons from its figure and fulness; andthence derives arguments in favour of his opinion that the delugetook place in the month of May But Mr. Walch remarks, withmuch propriety, that the body figured by Scheuchzer has muchmore the appearance of a zoophyte, the rays of which are dividedby transverse lines, marking their separation into distinct vertebrae.Of the spica secalina et graminis panici, mentioned by Dr. Richard-son §, we can form no just opinion, as we receive no aid from eitherdescription, or figure; and with respect to the ear of barley, a figure

* Herbar. Diluv. Tab. XIII. Fig. 2.

t Emanuel Swedenborgii Miscellanea observata circa Res naturales, &c. pag. 15.t Herb. Diluv. PI. I. Fig. 1. p. 7. § Ichnograph. Lithophyl. Brit. p. 108.

3 L

VOL. I.