The term _syngenetic_ has been used for mineral deposits formed by processes similar to those which have formed the enclosing rocks and in general simultaneously with them, and _epigenetic_ for those introduced into preëxisting rocks. In certain cases _syngenetic_ may be roughly synonymous with _primary_, and _epigenetic_ with _secondary_, and yet a primary ore may be epigenetic. For instance, zinc sulphides in the Mississippi valley limestones (pp. 54-55) are epigenetic, and yet are primary with reference to a later enrichment. The two sets of terms are meant to convey somewhat different ideas and are not interchangeable.
Ransome[4] has suggested, especially for vein and contact deposits, a series of names which has the considerable advantage of definiteness:--_hypogene ores_, formed in general by ascending non-oxidizing solutions, perhaps hot; _supergene ores_, formed in general by oxidizing and surface solutions, initially cold and downward moving; and _protores_, or metallized rock or vein substances which are too low in tenor to be classed as ores, but which would have been converted into ores had the enriching process been carried far enough. In this connection Ransome defines primary ore as unenriched material that can be profitably mined. In view of the general use of the terms primary and secondary as expressing a sequential relation of ore development, it is doubtful whether this more precise definition will supersede the older usage. Also it may be noted that commercial conditions might require, under these definitions, the designation of an ore as a protore at one time or place and as a primary ore at another. Hypogene ores are dominantly primary, and supergene ores are dominantly secondary, but either may include both primary and secondary ores.
The terms of these several classifications overlap, and seek to express different aspects of the same situation. While almost synonymous in certain applications they are not in others.
In this text the writer has certainly not escaped the difficulties in regard to names above referred to, nor in fact has he made any exceptional effort to do so. His chief purpose is to convey, in somewhat elementary terms, an understandable idea of the central features of economic geology. In the main, the most widely accepted terms are used. Almost at every turn it would be possible, in the interests of precision, to introduce qualifying discussions of names,--but at the expense of continuity and perspective in the presentation of the principal subject-matter. The writer does not wish to minimize the necessity for careful and precise nomenclature; but he regards it important that the student focus his attention on the central objective facts of the subject, and that he do not become misled by the sometimes over-strenuous advocacy of certain names or classifications in preference to others. If the facts are understood, he will ordinarily have no difficulty in judging the significance of the variety of names proposed to express these facts. If, on the other hand, the student approaches the subject with a ready-made set of names and definitions learned by rote, he is in danger of perceiving his facts from one angle only and through a distorted perspective.