climate and the reappearance of a flora almost identical with that now living in the same regions. This “inter-Glacial” flora, though so like that now found in the district, has interesting peculiarities. In England, for instance, it includes Acer monspessulanum, a southern maple which does not now extend nearer than central Europe, and Cotoneaster Pyracantha; also Najas graminea and N. minor, both southern forms not now native of Britain. Brassenia peltata, a water-lily found in the warmer regions almost throughout the world, except in Europe, occurs abundantly in north Germany, but not in Great Britain. Similar inter-Glacial deposits in Tirol contain leaves of Rhododendron ponticum.
Space will not permit us to enter into any full discussion of the recurrence of Glacial and inter-Glacial periods and the influence they may have had on the flora. It is evident, however, that if climatic alternations, such as those just described, are part of the normal routine that has gone on through all geological periods, and are not merely confined to the latest, then such changes must evidently have had great influence on the evolution and geographical distribution both of species and of floras. Whether this was so is a question still to be decided, for in dealing with extinct floras it is difficult to decide, except in the most general way, to what climatic conditions they point. We seem to find indications of long-period climatic oscillations in Tertiary times, but none of the sudden invasion of an Arctic flora, like that which occurred during more recent times. It should not be forgotten, however, that an Arctic flora is mainly distinguishable from a temperate one by its poverty and dwarfed vegetation, its deciduous leaves and small fruits, rather than by the occurrence of any characteristic genera or families. Careful and long-continued study would therefore be needed before we could say of any extinct dwarfed flora that it included only plants which could withstand Arctic conditions.
Authorities.—H. Conwentz, Monographie der baltischen Bernsteinbäume (Danzig, 1890), Die Flora des Bernsteins, vol. ii. (1886); Sir W. Dawson, Papers on the Cretaceous Plants of British North America, Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada (1883–1896); C. von Ettingshausen, “Die Kreideflora von Niederschöna in Sachsen,” Sitz. k. Akad. Wiss. Wien, math.-nat. Cl., vol. lv., Abth. i. (1867); “Report on . . . Fossil Flora of Sheppy,” Proc. Roy. Soc. xxix. 388 (1879); “Report on . . . Fossil Flora of Alum Bay,” ibid. xxx. 228 (1880); C. von Ettingshauscn and J. S. Gardner, “Eocene Flora,” vols. i. and ii., Palaeont. Soc. (1879–1886); W. M. Fontaine, “The Potomac or Younger Mesozoic Flora,” U.S. Geological Survey, Monograph xv. (1889); J. S. Gardner, Flora of Alum Bay, in “Geology of the Isle of Wight,” Mem. Geol. Survey (2nd ed., 1889); H. R. Goeppert and A. Menge, Die Flora des Bernsteins und ihre Beziehungen zur Flora der Tertiärformation und der Gegenwart, vol. i. (Danzig, 1883); O. Heer, Flora tertiaria Helvetiae (3 vols., Winterthur, 1855–1859); Flora fossilis arctica (7 vols., Zürich, 1868–1883), “Beiträge zur Kreideflora, — (1) Flora von Moletein in Mähren,” Neue Denkschr. allgem. schweiz. Gesell. Naturwiss., vol. xxiii. mém. 22 (Zürich, 1869–1872); Primaeval World in Switzerland (2 vols., 1876); F. H. Knowlton, “Catalogue of the Cretaceous and Tertiary Plants of North America,” Bull. U.S. Geol. Survey (No. 152, 1898), “Flora of the Montana Formation,” ibid., No. 163 (1900); Krasser, “Die fossile Kreideflora von Kunstadt in Mähren,” Beit. paleont. Geol. Oesterreich-Ungarns, Bd. v. Hft. 3 (1896); Leo. Lesquereux, “Contributions to the Fossil Flora of the Western Territories,” Rep. U.S. Geol. Survey of the Territories, vols. vi., vii., viii. (1877–1883), “The Flora of the Dakota Group,” U.S. Geological Survey, Monograph xvii. (1891); Meschinelli and Squinabol, Flora tertiaria italica (1892); this book contains a full bibliography relating to the Fossil Flora of Italy; J. S. Newberry, “The Flora of Amboy Clays,” U.S. Geological Survey, Monograph xxvi. (1895); Hosius and von der Marck, “Die Flora der westphälischen Kreideformation,” Palaeontographica, vol. xxvi. (1880), and supplement in ibid. vol. xxxi. (1883); A. G. Nathorst, “Glacialflora in Sachsen, am äussersten Rande des nordischen Diluviums,” Kongl. Vetenskaps-Akad. Forh., p. 519 (1894); Clement Reid, “Pliocene Deposits of Britain,” Mem. Geol. Survey (1890), Origin of the British Flora (1899); C. and E. M. Reid, “The Fossil Flora of Tegelen-sur-Meuse, near Venloo, in the Province of Limburg,” Verh. Kon. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam, 2e Sect. Dl. xiii. No. 6 (1907); “On the Pre-Glacial Flora of Britain,” Journ. Linn. Soc. (Botany), xxxviii. 206–227 (1908); G. de Saporta, “Prodrome d'une flore fossile des Travertins anciens de Sézanne,” Mém. soc. géol. France, 2nd series, vol. viii. p. 289 (1868); “Recherches sur les végetaux fossiles de Meximieux,” Archiv. Mus. hist. nat. Lyon, i. 131 (1876); Monde des plantes avant l'apparition de l'homme (1879); “Études sur la végetation du sud-est de la France à l'époque tertiare,” Ann. sci. nat. (1862–1888); Flore fossile du Portugal (Lisbon, 1894); G. de Saporta and A. F. Marion, “Essai sur l'état de la végetation a l'époque des marnes heersiennes de Gelinden,” Mém. cour. acad. roy. belgique, vol. xxxvii. No. 6 (1873), and vol. xli. No. 3 (1878); J. Velenovsky, “Die Flora der böhmischen Kreideformation,” in Beiträge zur Paleontologie Oesterreich-Ungarns und des Orients, vols, ii.-v. (1881–1885); Lester F. Ward, “Synopsis of the Flora of the Laramie Group,” 6th Report U.S. Geological Survey, pp. 399–558 (1885); “The Geographical Distribution of Fossil Plants,” 8th Report U.S. Geological Survey, pp. 663–960 (1889); “The Potomac Formation,” 15th Report U.S. Geological Survey, pp. 307–398 (1895); “Some Analogies in the Lower Cretaceous of Europe and America,” 16th Report U.S. Geological Survey, Pt. I., pp. 462–542 (1896); “The Cretaceous Formation of the Black Hills as indicated by the Fossil Plants,” 19th Report U.S. Geological Survey, Pt. II., pp. 521–946 (1899). (C. R.)
PALAEOGRAPHY (Gr. παλαιός, ancient, and γράφειυ, to
write), the science of ancient handwriting acquired from study
of surviving examples. While epigraphy is the science which
deals with inscriptions (q.v.) engraved on stone or metal or other
enduring material as memorials for future ages, palaeography
takes cognisance of writings of a literary, economic, or legal
nature written generally with stile, reed or pen, on tablets, rolls
or codices. The boundary, however, between the two sciences
is not always to be exactly defined. The fact that an inscription
occurs upon a hard material in a fixed position does not necessarily
bring it under the head of epigraphy. Such specimens of
writing as the graffiti or wall-scribblings of Pompeii and ancient
Rome belong as much to the one science as to the other; for
they neither occupy the position of inscriptions set up with
special design as epigraphical monuments, nor are they the
movable written documents with which we connect the idea
of palaeography. But such exceptions only slightly affect the
broad distinction just specified.
The scope of this article is to trace the history of Greek and Latin palaeography from the earliest written documents in those languages which have survived. In Greek palaeography we have a subject which is self-contained. The Greek character, in its pure form, was used for one language only; but the universal study of that language throughout Europe and the wide diffusion of its literature have been the cause of the accumulation of Greek MSS. in every centre of learning. The field of Latin palaeography is much wider, for the Roman alphabet has made its way into every country of western Europe, and the study of its various developments and changes is essential for a proper understanding of the character which we write.
Handwriting, like every other art, has its different phases of growth, perfection and decay. A particular form of writing is gradually developed, then takes a finished or calligraphic style and becomes the hand of its period, then deteriorates, breaks up and disappears, or only drags on an artificial existence, being meanwhile superseded by another style which, either developed from the older hand or introduced independently, runs the same course, and in its turn is displaced by a younger rival. Thus in the history of Greek writing we see the literary uncial hand passing from early forms into the calligraphic stage, and then driven out by the minuscule, which again goes through a series of important changes. In Latin, the literary capital and uncial hands give place to the smaller character; and this, after running its course and developing national characteristics in the different countries of the West, deteriorates and is superseded almost universally by the Italian hand of the Renaissance.
Bearing in mind these natural changes, it is evident that a style of writing, once developed, is best at the period when it is in general use, and that the oldest examples of that period are the simplest, in which vigour and naturalness of handwriting are predominant. On the other hand, the fine execution of a MS. after the best period of the style has passed cannot conceal deterioration. The imitative nature of the calligraphy is detected both by the general impression on the eye, and by uncertainty and inconsistencies in the forms of letters. It is from a failure to keep in mind the natural laws of development and change that early dates, to which they have no title, have been given to imitative MSS.; and, on the other
