Overview

Excerpt from Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 13 Individual meteorite falls have an importance more or less comparable to that of individual species. The phenomena of fall, shape, size, chemical composition, and structure are largely peculiar to each fall and for purposes of exact knowledge should be fully recorded. The pursuit of the study of meteorites since they first began to attract attention has, however, been very irregular. The phenomena of fall and the more obvious features of shape and size have usually attracted sufficient attention to be described at the time, but the more intimate details of structure and composition, if described at all, have usually been recorded in stray, scattered studies often published without regard to the earlier history of the meteorite. Moreover, the advance of knowledge regarding meteorites has led to the observation of many features which were overlooked by earlier investigators. This is especially true with regard to structure, the intimate details of which have received great amplification under modern methods. On the other hand, classification has permitted grouping of features which were once described independently. Thus iron meteorites once regarded as peculiar on account of the lack of Widmannstatten figures are now readily grouped as hexahedrites or ataxites. Unless, however, we have a careful continuous record of the knowledge regarding each fall the details are liable to be hopelessly lost and the fall becomes more or less mythical in character. Publications undertaking the preservation of such records have not been wanting hitherto. As early as 1803 Chladni prepared a chronological list of known meteorites and issued supplementary lists up to 1826. The first general catalogue which was at the same time descriptive, however, was published by Buchner in 1863. This catalogue gave a brief description of each fall, its bibliography, and a statement of the distribution of its specimens. The order of treatment was chronological, and there was a subgrouping into stone and iron meteorites, also of those seen to fall as distinguished from those found. Up to 1869 Buchner continued this work by means of appendixes, but at that time ceased his labors. Subsequent to this various lists of all meteorites were made, some of the most useful being those by Brezina, Meunier, Wadsworth, and Huntington, but none of them gave comprehensive accounts of all meteorites. The largest comprehensive work following Buchner's was that of Wulfing, published in 1897. This included all known meteorites, but the number of these had so largely increased since Buchner's time that his plan of giving an account of each meteorite was not followed. Wulfing confined his catalogue to a bibliography of each fall and a statement of the distribution of the specimens. Wulfing's work was performed with excellent judgment and thoroughness, and his catalogue has been of the greatest service in systematizing and advancing the study of meteorites. Although the plan of giving an account of each meteorite, its bibliography and distribution, would seem impracticable when, as is now the case, the number of known meteorites exceeds 600, yet the task was undertaken by Cohen. Volumes III, IV, and V of his Meteoritenkunde were intended to be made up in this way. Of these, only Volume III was completed at the time of his death. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com

Full Product Details

9781332288229

Table of Contents

Reviews

Author Information

Tab Content 6

Customer Reviews

Recent Reviews

Countries Available