Produced by MFR, Josep Cols Canals, John Campbell and the
Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
(This file was produced from images generously made
available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)









  TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

  Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.

  Footnote anchors are denoted by [number], and the footnotes have been
  placed at the end of the book.

  A superscript is denoted by ^x or ^{xx}, for example Edin^r or 1^{st}.

  Basic fractions are displayed as ½ ⅓ ¼ etc; other fractions are shown
  in the form a/b, for example 9/10.

  Some minor changes to the text are noted at the end of the book.




  ESSAY

  ON THE

  THEORY OF THE EARTH.

  [Illustration: FRONTISPIECE
  _Page 518_        _W. H. Lizars Sc._
  VERTICAL SECTION OF THE CAVERN AT GAYLENREUTH IN FRANCONIA]




  ESSAY

  ON THE

  THEORY OF THE EARTH.


  BY BARON G. CUVIER,

  PERPETUAL SECRETARY OF THE FRENCH INSTITUTE, PROFESSOR AND
  ADMINISTRATOR OF THE MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY,
  _&c. &c._


  WITH

  GEOLOGICAL ILLUSTRATIONS,

  BY

  PROFESSOR JAMESON.


  FIFTH EDITION,

  TRANSLATED FROM THE LAST FRENCH EDITION, WITH NUMEROUS
  ADDITIONS BY THE AUTHOR AND TRANSLATOR.


  WILLIAM BLACKWOOD, EDINBURGH; AND
  T. CADELL, STRAND, LONDON.

  MDCCCXXVII.




_Printed by P. Neill._




PREFACE

TO THE

FIFTH EDITION.


Geology, now deservedly one of the most popular and attractive of
the physical sciences, was, not many years ago, held in little
estimation; and even at present, there are not wanting some who
do not hesitate to maintain, that it is a mere tissue of ill
observed phenomena, and of hypotheses of boundless extravagance.
The work of CUVIER now laid before the public, contains in itself
not only a complete answer to these ignorant imputations, but
also demonstrates the accuracy, extent, and importance of many of
the facts and reasonings of this delightful branch of Natural
History. Can it be maintained of a science, which requires for its
successful prosecution an intimate acquaintance with Chemistry,
Natural Philosophy and Astronomy,--with the details and views of
Zoology, Botany, and Mineralogy, and which connects these different
departments of knowledge in a most interesting and striking
manner,--that it is of no value? Can it be maintained of Geology,
which discloses to us the history of the first origin of organic
beings, and traces their gradual development from the monade to man
himself,--which enumerates and describes the changes that plants,
animals, and minerals--the atmosphere, and the waters of the
globe--have undergone from the earliest geological periods up to our
own time, and which even instructs us in the earliest history of the
human species,--that it offers no gratification to the philosopher?
Can even those who estimate the value of science, not by intellectual
desires, but by practical advantages, deny the importance of
Geology, certainly one of the foundations of agriculture, and
which enables us to search out materials for numberless important
economical purposes?

Geology took its rise in the Academy of Freyberg, with the
illustrious WERNER, to whom we owe its present interesting condition.
This being the case, we ought not, (as is at present too much the
practice), amidst the numerous discoveries in the mineral kingdom
which have been made since the system of investigation of that
great interpreter of nature was made known, forget the master, and
arrogate all to ourselves. In this Island, Geology first took firm
root in the north: in Edinburgh the Wernerian geognostical views and
method of investigation, combined with the theory of HUTTON, the
experiments and speculations of HALL, the illustrations of PLAYFAIR,
and the labours of the Royal and Wernerian Natural History Societies,
excited a spirit of inquiry which rapidly spread throughout the
Empire; and now Great Britain presents to the scientific world
a scene of geological acuteness, activity, and enterprise, not
surpassed in any other country.

On the Continent the writings of CUVIER, distinguished equally by
purity and beauty of style, and profound learning, have proved
eminently useful in aiding the progress of Geology. In this country
CUVIER was first made known as a geologist by the publication of the
present essay, which, from its unexampled popularity, has made his
name as familiar to us as that of the most distinguished of our own
writers.

      ROBERT JAMESON.

  COLLEGE MUSEUM, EDINBURGH,
  _25th November 1826_.




ADVERTISEMENT

TO

FOURTH EDITION.


This Fourth Edition of the celebrated Essay on the Theory of the
Earth, contains, besides many additional facts and statements in
regard to the Natural History of the Earth, also learned discussions
by CUVIER, on the newness of the present continents, as confirmed by
the history of nations; and on the proofs regarding the antiquity
of nations alleged to be contained in their astronomical and other
monuments.

      ROBERT JAMESON.

  COLLEGE MUSEUM, EDINBURGH,
  _2d April 1822_.




  Fossil organic remains are the relics of a primeval world long
  since gone past, proclaiming with a loud voice the instability
  of earthly affairs, and impressing upon the minds of those who
  seriously consider them, sentiments of piety and feelings of
  devotion. If the antiquary digs from among the ruins of Herculaneum
  a piece of ancient money, a vase, or a statue, we rejoice with
  him, in finding the mode of life, the manners and arts of an
  ancient people, placed before our eyes: If he finds an old record,
  illustrative of the history of his country, however limited in
  extent that country may be, we are grateful to him for the particle
  of knowledge he has added to our store; but if, among the ruins
  of the common country of the human race, we linger at the great
  sepulchre of animated beings destroyed by the hand of fate, who
  can look upon it without sentiments of piety! It is not here the
  statues of Polycletus that we admire, but the admirable monuments
  of the workmanship of Nature, taken from the ruins of the great
  Herculeum overwhelmed by the ocean, that we look upon with feelings
  of the deepest wonder and devotion.




PREFACE

TO THE

THIRD EDITION.


The attention of naturalists was early directed to the investigation
of the fossil organic remains so generally and abundantly distributed
throughout the strata of which the crust of the Earth is composed.
It is not, as some writers now imagine, entirely a modern study;
for even so early as the time of Leibnitz, we find that philosopher
drawing and describing fossil bones. After this period it continued
to interest individuals, and engage the particular attention of
societies and academies. The Royal Society of London, by the Memoirs
of Sloane, Collinson, Lister, Derham, Baker, Grew, Hunter, Jacobs,
Plott, Camper, and many others, afforded satisfactory proofs of the
importance attached to this branch of Natural History by philosophers
in England; and the Memoirs of M. Graydon, in the Transactions of
the Royal Irish Academy, shew that it was not entirely neglected
in Ireland. On the continent of Europe the natural history of
petrifactions was also much studied, as appears from the Memoirs of
Hollman, Beckman, and Blumenbach, in the Transactions of the Royal
Society of Gottingen;--of Gmelin, Pallas, Herrmann, Chappe, in the
Memoirs of the Imperial Academy of Sciences of Petersburg;--of
Geoffroi, Buffon, Daubenton, Faujas St Fond, and others of the old
French Academy of Sciences;--of Astruc and Riviere, of the Royal
Academy of Sciences of Montpellier;--of Collini of the Academia
Theodoro-Palatina, at Manheim, &c. But the geognostical relations
of the rocks in which these organic remains are contained were but
ill understood, until Werner pointed out the mode of investigating
them. His interesting and important views were circulated from
Freyberg, by the writings and conversations of his pupils, and have
contributed materially to the advancement of this branch of Natural
History in Germany, France, and also in Great Britain. Petrifactions
are no longer viewed as objects of mere curiosity, as things isolated
and unrelated to the rocks of which the crust of the Earth is
composed; on the contrary, they are now considered as one of the
most important features in the strata of all regions of the earth.
By the regularity and determinate nature of their distribution, they
afford characters which assist us in discriminating not only single
beds, but also whole formations of rocks; and in this respect they
are highly interesting to the geognostical inquirer. To the geologist
this beautiful branch of Natural History opens up numerous and
uncommonly curious views of nature in the mineral kingdom: it shews
him the commencement of the formation of organic beings,--it points
out the gradual succession in the formation of animals, from the
almost primeval coral near the primitive strata, through all the
wonderful variety of form and structure observed in shells, fishes,
amphibious animals, and birds, to the perfect quadruped of the
alluvial land; and it makes him acquainted with a geographical and
physical distribution of organic beings in the strata of the globe,
very different from what is observed to hold in the present state
of the organic world. The zoologist views with wonder and amazement
those hosts of fossil animals, sometimes so similar to the present
living species, at other times so far removed from them in form and
structure. He compares the fossil orders, genera and species, with
those now inhabiting the earth’s surface, or living in its waters,
and discovers that there is a whole system of animals in a fossil
state different from the present. Even the physiologist, in the
various forms, connections, and relations of the parts of those
animals, obtains new facts for his descriptions and reasonings.
Such, then, being the nature of this branch of Natural History, it
is not surprising that, when once understood, it should have many
and zealous cultivators, and occupy the talents of men of learning
and sagacity. In our time, Cuvier, the celebrated Professor of
Natural History in Paris, has eminently distinguished himself by his
numerous discoveries, accurate descriptions, and rational views, on
this subject. His great work on Fossil Organic Remains, of which a
new edition is now in progress, is the most splendid contribution to
Natural History furnished by any individual of this age.

The Essay on the Theory of the Earth, now translated, is the
introductory part of the great work of Cuvier. The subject of
the _deluge_ forms a principal object of this elegant discourse.
After describing the principal results at which the theory of the
earth, in his opinion, has arrived, he next mentions the various
relations which connect the history of the fossil bones of land
animals with these results; explains the principles on which is
founded the art of ascertaining these bones, or, in other words, of
discovering a genus, and of distinguishing a species, by a single
fragment of bone: and gives a rapid sketch of the results to which
his researches lead, of the new genera and species which these have
been the means of discovering, and of the different formations in
which they are contained. Some naturalists, as Lamarck, having
maintained that the present existing races of quadrupeds are mere
modifications or varieties of those ancient races which we now find
in a fossil state, modifications which may have been produced by
change of climate, and other local circumstances, and since brought
to the present great difference, by the operation of similar causes
during a long succession of ages,--Cuvier shews that the difference
between the fossil species and those which now exist, is bounded by
certain limits; that these limits are a great deal more extensive
than those which now distinguish the varieties of the same species,
and consequently, that the extinct species of quadrupeds are not
varieties of the presently existing species. This very interesting
discussion naturally leads our author to state the proofs of the
recent population of the world; of the comparatively modern origin
of its present surface; of the deluge, and the subsequent renewal of
human society.

In order to render this Essay more complete and satisfactory, I have
illustrated the whole with an extensive series of observations,
and have arranged them in such a manner that they will be readily
accessible, not only to the naturalist, but also to the general
reader.

Since the publication of the former edition of this Essay, many
curious discoveries have been made in regard to fossil organic
remains:--some of these are included in the Illustrations at the end
of the Essay, others want of room forces us to omit.

      R. JAMESON.

  COLLEGE OF EDINBURGH,
  _19th April 1817_.




CONTENTS.


        Page

  PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS,      1

  Plan of the Essay,      4

  First Appearance of the Earth,      6

  First Proofs of Revolutions on the Surface of the Globe,      6

  Proofs that such Revolutions have been numerous,      10

  Proofs that these Revolutions have been sudden,      14

  Proofs of the Occurrence of Revolutions before the Existence
  of Living Beings,      16

  Examination of the Causes which act at present on the Surface
  of the Globe,      23

  Of Slips, or Falling Down of the Materials of Mountains,       25

  Of Alluvial Formations,      26

  Of the Formation of Downs,      28

  Of the Formation of Cliffs, or Steep Shores,      29

  Depositions formed in Water,      30

  Of Stalactites,      31

  Of Lithophytes,      32

  Of Incrustations,      32

  Of Volcanoes,      34

  Constant Astronomical Causes,      36

  Older Systems of Geologists,      38

  More Recent Systems,      41

  Diversities of all the Systems,      44

  Causes of these Differences,      46

  Nature and Condition of the Problem,      46

  Progress of Mineral Geology,      49

  Importance of Fossil Remains in Geology,       51

  High importance of the Fossil Bones of Quadrupeds,      53

  Small probability of discovering new Species of large
  Quadrupeds,       56

  Inquiry respecting the Fabulous Animals of the Ancients,       69

  Difficulty of determining the Fossil Bones of Quadrupeds,       82

  Principle by which this determination is effected,        83

  View of the general Results of these Researches,      94

  Relations of the Species of Fossil Animals, with the Strata in
  which they are found,        95

  Proofs that the extinct Species of Quadrupeds are not Varieties
  of the presently existing Species,      102

  Proofs that there are no Fossil Human Bones,      114

  Physical Proofs of the Newness of the present Continents,       121

  Additions of Land by the action of Rivers,        123

  Progress of Downs,        133

  Peat-mosses and Slips,       135

  The History of Nations confirms the Newness of the
  Continents,      137

  The very remote Antiquity attributed to certain Nations is
  not supported by History,       149

  The Astronomical Monuments left by the Ancients do not
  bear the excessively remote Dates which have been attributed
  to them,       201

  Table of the Extent of the Zodiacal Constellations, as they
  are designed upon our Globes, and of the Times required by
  the Colures to traverse them,       212

  Construction and Use of the Table,       216

  The Zodiac is far from bearing in itself a certain and
  excessively remote date,       230

  Exaggerations relative to the Antiquity of certain Mining
  Operations,       238

  General Conclusion relative to the Period of the last
  Revolution,      239

  Further Researches to be made in Geology,       240

  Recapitulation of the Observations upon the Succession of
  the Tertiary Formations,       243

  Table of Geological Formations in the Order of their
  Superposition; by M. A. de Humboldt,       249

  Enumeration of the Fossil Animals recognized by the Author,       253

    Ichthyosaurus,       255
    Plesiosaurus,       256
    Crocodile,       258
    Megalosaurus,       259
    Pterodactylus,       261
    Iguanodon,       263
    Mosasaurus,       264
    Dolphin,       ib.
    Lamantin,       265
    Morse,       265
    Palæotherium,       266
    Lophiodon,       268
    Anoplotherium,       270
    Anthracotheria,       272
    Cheropotamus,       ib.
    Adapis,        273
    Vespertilio,       274
    Ziphius,       280
    Mammoth,       280
    Mastodon,       281
    Hippopotamus,       283
    Rhinoceros,       ib.
    Elasmotherium,       285
    Horse,        285
    Fossil Elk,        286
    Megatherium,       289
    Megalonyx,       290
    Bear,       291
    Man,       294


  APPENDIX.

  On the Birds to which the name of Ibis was given by the
  Ancient Egyptians,       299




GEOLOGICAL ILLUSTRATIONS

BY PROFESSOR JAMESON.


        Page

  On the Subsidence of Strata,       333

  Deluge,       334

  Formation of Primitive Mountains,       335

  On the Distribution of Boulder-Stones in Scotland, Holland,
  Germany, Switzerland and America,       344

  On the Alluvial Land of the Danish Islands in the Baltic
  and on the Coast of Sleswigh,       354

  On the Sand-Flood,       368
      Sand-Flood in Morayshire,       369
      Sand-Flood in the Hebrides, &c.        372
      Moving Sands of the African Deserts,       375

  Action of the Sea upon Coasts,       378

  On the Growth of Coral Islands,       379

  On the Level of the Baltic,       398

  Fossil Remains of the Human Species,       406

  Account of the displacement of that part of the Coast of
  the Adriatic which is occupied by the Mouths of the Po,       410

  On the Universal Deluge,       417

  On the action of Running Waters,       437

  Connection of Geology with Agriculture and Planting,       453

  Account of the Fossil Elk of Ireland,       486

  Account of the Living Species of Elephant, and of the
  Extinct Species of Elephant or Mammoth,       508

  Account of the Caves in which Bones of Carnivorous Animals
  occur in great quantities,       516

  Cave containing Bones at Adelsberg, in Carniola,       540

  Tabular View of the Genera of Fossil Mammifera, Cetacea,
  Aves, Reptilia, and Insecta,--with their Geognostical Number
  and Distribution,       547

  Tabular View of the Classes, Orders, or Families of Animals,
  occurring in a Living or Fossil State, with their Geognostical
  Distribution,       550




LIST OF PLATES.


  The Frontispiece exhibits a vertical section of the Bone-Caves
  of Gaylenreuth, in Franconia.

  Plate I. is a plan shewing the relative position of the Tertiary
  Mineral Formations around Paris.

  II. is illustrative of the Succession of the Secondary Formations,
  and of the Distribution of Petrifactions.

  II _a_. Extraordinary Fossil Animal named Pterodactylus
  longirostrus, found near Aichstedt, in Germany.

  III. Figure of an Ibis in a Temple in Upper Egypt.

  IV. Skeleton of an Ibis from a Mummy found at Thebes.

  V. Numenius Ibis, supposed true Ibis of the Egyptians.

  VI. Fossil Human Skeleton found in Guadaloupe.

  VII. Cervus megaceros, Irish Elk in the Museum of the Royal
  Dublin Society.

  VIII. Fig. 1. Head and Horn of the Fossil Irish Elk. It represents
  a larger view of the head, in which the different markings are
  delineated, and the expansion of the horns shewn in a front
  view. In this is also seen the peculiar forked appearance of the
  sur-antler.

  Fig. 2. The portion of cast horn mentioned at p. 501, having the
  smooth convex surface at the root.

  Fig. 3. An internal and external view of the perforated rib,
  described in p. 504.

  IX. Cervus megaceros, Irish or Isle of Man Elk in the Royal Museum
  of the University of Edinburgh.


[Illustration:

  _PLATE I._       _Page 248._

  _PLAN_

  Shewing the relative position of the MINERAL FORMATIONS around _PARIS_

  _10_ _Upper fresh water formation--Millstone--Flint--Limestone._

  _9_ _Millstone without Shells._

  _8_ _Upper marine Sandstone._

  _7_ _Sandstone & Sand without Shells._

  _6_ _Bed of Oysters._

  _5_ _Gypsum & Marl containing Bones of Animals._

      _Lower fresh water formation_

      _Lower marine Sandstone_

  _4_ _Siliceous Limestone without Shells._

  _3_ _Coarse marine Limestone._

  _2_ _Plastic Clay & Lower Sand._

  _II._ _Alluvial._

  _1_ _Chalk & Flint._


  _W. H. Lizars Sc. Edin^r._

  _Edinburgh Published by W^m. Blackwood 1827._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE II._        _Page 253._

  _SECTION_

  _Illustrative of the succession of the_ SECONDARY FORMATIONS
  _and of the distribution of PETRIFACTIONS_.

  _Primitive Rocks_
      _No Fossil Organic Remains._

  _Transition Rocks_
      _First Appearance of Fossil Shells and Corals._

  _1^{st} Sandstone or Old Red Sandstone & Old Red Conglomerate_
      _Fossil Wood; Fossil Fishes?_

  _1^{st} Limestone or Mount^n Limestone_
      _Fossil Corals & Shells._

  _2^d Sandstone or Coal Formation_
      _Impressions of Plants principally Monocotyledonous, many with
      a Tropical aspect._

  _New Red Conglomerate_

  _2^d Limestone or Magnesian Limestone_
      _First appearance of Fossil Fishes and of Fossil Oviparous
      Quadrupeds._

  _3^d Sandstone or New Red Sandstone_
      _Fossil Shells, Corals & Vegetables._

  _3^d or Shell Limestone_
      _Fossil Shells._

  _4^{th} Sandstone or variegated Marl_
      _Fossil Plants and Shells._

  _4^{th} Limestone or Java Oolite & Lias Limestones_
      _Fossil Shells, Corals, Crustacæ, Lacertæ, Turtles. Fishes and
      Vegetables._

  _5^{th} Sandstone or Green Sand or Quader Sandstone_
      _with Coal, Fishes, Lacertæ & Emydes._

  _5^{th} Limestone & Chalk_
      _Fossil Shells, Corals, Lacertæ, Turtles & Fishes._

  _Brown Coal Formation_
      _Crocodiles &c. also Dictyledonous Plants._

  _Hertfordshire Puddingstone_
      _Crocodiles &c. also Dictyledonous Plants._

  _Paris Formation_
      _First appearance of Fossil Remains of Birds & Mammiferous
      Animals._

  _Diluvial Formation_
      _Remains of extinct species of Elephant, Rhinoceros,
      Hippopotamus, Tapir, Deer, Hyena, Bear &c._

  _Post Diluvial Formation_
      _Fossil Remains of the Human Species first appear in this
      formation._


  _Edinburgh Published by W^m Blackwood 1827._

  _W. H. Lizars Sc._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE. II. a_        _Page 261._

  Extraordinary animal, named PTERODACTYLUS LONGIROSTRIS found near
  Aichstedt in Germany.

  _Edinburgh Published by W^m. Blackwood 1827._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE III._      _Page 318._

  FIGURE OF AN IBIS
  _in one of the Temples in UPPER EGYPT_.

  _Beak, half the natural size of a mummy Ibis._

  _Eng^d. by W. H. Lizars._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE IV._      _Page 307._

  SKELETON OF AN IBIS
  _extracted from a Mummy found at THEBES in EGYPT_.

  _Eng^d. by W. H. Lizars Edin^r._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE V._      _Page 309._

  NUMENIUS IBIX

  _Supposed to be the true Ibix of the EGYPTIANS._

  _Eng^d. by W. H. Lizars Edin^r._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE VI._       _Page 406._

  _FOSSIL_

  HUMAN SKELETON
  _FOUND IN GUADALOUPE_

  _Edinburgh Published by W^m. Blackwood 1827._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE VII._      _Page 486._

  CERVUS MEGACEROS.
  _IRISH ELK._
  in the MUSEUM of the ROYAL DUBLIN SOCIETY.

  _W. H. Lizars Sc._

  _Edinburgh Published by W. Blackwood 1827._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE VIII._      _Page 492._

  HEAD AND HORNS
  _of the_ IRISH ELK.

  _Fig. 1._
  _Fig. 2._
  _Fig. 3._

  _W. H. Lizars Sc._

  _Edinburgh Published by W. Blackwood 1827._]


[Illustration:

  _PLATE IX._      _Page 506._

  CERVUS MEGACEROS,
  _ISLE OF MAN OR IRISH ELK_.
  _Royal Museum, College, Edinburgh._

  _W. H. Lizars Sc._

  _Published by W. Blackwood. Edin^r. 1827._]




ESSAY

ON THE

THEORY OF THE EARTH.


PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS.

In my work on Fossil Bones, the object which I proposed was to
discover to what animals the osseous remains, with which the
superficial strata of the globe are filled, may have belonged. In
pursuing this object, I had to follow a path in which but little
progress had hitherto been made. As an antiquary of a new order, I
was obliged at once to learn the art of restoring these monuments
of past revolutions to their original forms, and to discover
their nature and relations; I had to collect and bring together
in their original order, the fragments of which they consisted;
to reconstruct, as it were, the ancient beings to which these
fragments belonged; to reproduce them with all their proportions
and characters; and, lastly, to compare them with those which now
live at the surface of the globe:--an art almost unknown, and which
presupposed a science whose first developments had scarcely yet been
traced, that of the laws which regulate the co-existence of the
forms of the different parts in organised beings. I had therefore to
prepare myself for these inquiries, by others of a far more extensive
kind, respecting the animals which still exist. Nothing, except an
almost complete review of creation in its present state, could give
a character of demonstration to the results of my investigation into
its ancient state; but, from this review, I had at the same time to
expect a great body of rules and affinities not less satisfactorily
demonstrated; and it became obvious, that, in consequence of this
essay upon a small portion of the theory of the earth, the whole
animal kingdom would necessarily be in some measure subjected to new
laws.

Thus I was encouraged in this twofold investigation, by the equal
interest which it promised to possess, both with regard to the
general science of anatomy, the essential basis of all those which
treat of organised bodies, and with regard to the physical history of
the globe, the foundation of mineralogy, geography, and even, it may
be said, of the history of Man, and of all that it most concerns him
to know with regard to himself.

If it be so interesting to us to follow, in the infancy of our
species, the almost obliterated traces of extinct nations, why should
it not also be so, to search, amid the darkness of the infancy of the
Earth, for the traces of revolutions which have taken place anterior
to the existence of all nations? We admire the power by which the
human mind has measured the motions of the celestial bodies, which
nature seemed to have concealed for ever from our view. Genius and
science have burst the limits of space; and observations, explained
by just reasoning, have unveiled the mechanism of the universe. Would
it not also be glorious for man to burst the limits of time, and, by
means of observations, to ascertain the history of this world, and
the succession of events which preceded the birth of the human race?
Astronomers have undoubtedly advanced more rapidly than naturalists;
and the present period, with respect to the Theory of the Earth,
bears some resemblance to that in which some philosophers fancied
that the heavens were formed of polished stones, and that the moon
was of the size of the Peloponnesus; but after ANAXAGORAS, came
COPERNICUS and KEPLER, who pointed the way to NEWTON; and why should
not natural history also one day have its Newton?




_Plan of this Essay._


What I especially propose to present in this discourse, is the plan
and the result of my labours regarding Fossil Bones. I shall also
attempt to trace a rapid sketch of the efforts that have been made up
to the present day, to restore the history of the revolutions of the
globe. The facts which I have been enabled to discover, form, without
doubt, only a small portion of those which would be necessary to
complete this ancient history; but several of them lead to decisive
consequences, and the rigorous manner in which I have proceeded in
their determination, affords me reason to think that they will be
regarded as points definitively fixed, and which in their aggregate
will form an epoch in science. Lastly, I trust their novelty will be
a sufficient excuse for me, if I claim for them the earnest attention
of my readers.

My object will first be to shew by what relations the history of
the fossil bones of terrestrial animals connects itself with the
theory of the earth, and for what reasons a peculiar importance is
to be attributed to it, with reference to this subject. I shall then
unfold the principles upon which is founded the art of determining
these bones, or, in other words, of recognizing a genus, and of
distinguishing a species, by a single fragment of bone,--an art, on
the certainty of which depends that of my whole work, I shall give a
rapid account of the new species, and of genera previously unknown,
which the application of these principles has led me to discover, as
well as the different kinds of deposits in which they are contained.
And as the difference between these species and those which exist
at the present day is bounded by certain limits, I shall show that
these limits much exceed those which now distinguish the varieties of
the same species. I shall therefore make known to what extent these
varieties may go, whether from the influence of time, or from that of
climate, or, lastly, from that of domestication.

In this way I shall be enabled to conclude, and to induce my readers
to conclude with me, that great events were necessary to produce
the more considerable differences which I have discovered. I shall
next mention the particular modifications which my researches must
necessarily introduce into the hitherto received opinions regarding
the revolutions of the globe; and, lastly, I shall inquire how far
the civil and religious history of different nations corresponds
with the results of observation with regard to the physical history
of the Earth, and with the probabilities which these observations
afford concerning the period at which societies of men may have found
fixed places of abode, and fields susceptible of cultivation, and at
which, therefore, they may have assumed a durable form.




_First Appearance of the Earth._


When the traveller passes over those fertile plains where gently
flowing streams nourish in their course an abundant vegetation, and
where the soil, inhabited by a numerous population, adorned with
flourishing villages, opulent cities, and superb monuments, is never
disturbed, except by the ravages of war, or by the oppression of
the powerful, he is not led to suspect that Nature also has had her
intestine wars, and that the surface of the globe has been broken
up by revolutions and catastrophes. But his ideas change as soon as
he digs into that soil which now presents so peaceful an aspect, or
ascends to the hills which border the plain; his ideas are expanded,
if I may use the expression, in proportion to the expansion of the
view, and begin to embrace the full extent and grandeur of those
ancient events, when he climbs the more elevated chains, whose base
is skirted by these hills, or when, by following the beds of the
torrents which descend from those chains, he penetrates, as it were,
into their interior.




_First proofs of Revolutions on the surface of the Globe._


The lowest and most level parts of the earth, exhibit nothing,
even when penetrated to a very great depth, but horizontal strata
composed of substances more or less varied, and containing almost
all of them innumerable marine productions. Similar strata, with the
same kind of productions, compose the lesser hills to a considerable
height. Sometimes the shells are so numerous as to constitute of
themselves the entire mass of the rock; they rise to elevations
superior to the level of every part of the ocean, and are found in
places where no sea could have carried them at the present day, under
any circumstances; they are not only enveloped in loose sand, but are
often inclosed in the hardest rocks. Every part of the earth, every
hemisphere, every continent, every island of any extent, exhibits the
same phenomenon.

The times are past when ignorance could maintain, that these remains
of organized bodies are mere sportings of nature, productions
generated in the womb of the Earth, by its own creative powers; and
the efforts made by some metaphysicians of the present day, will
not probably succeed in bringing these exploded opinions again into
repute. A scrupulous comparison of the forms of these remains, of
their texture, and often even of their chemical composition, does
not disclose the slightest difference between the fossil shells and
those which still inhabit the sea: the preservation of the former is
not less perfect than that of the latter; most commonly we neither
observe detrition nor fracture in them, nothing, in short, that
announces a violent removal from their original places; the smallest
of them retain their sharpest ridges, and their most delicate spines.
They have, therefore, not only lived in the sea, but they have also
been deposited by it. It is the sea which has left them in the places
where they are now found. But this sea has remained for a certain
period in those places; it has covered them long enough, and with
sufficient tranquillity to form those deposits, so regular, so thick,
so extensive, and partly also so solid, which contain those remains
of aquatic animals. The basin of the sea has therefore undergone
one change at least, either in extent, or in situation. Such is
the result of the very first search, and of the most superficial
examination.

The traces of revolutions become still more apparent and decisive,
when we ascend a little higher, and approach nearer to the foot of
the great chains. There are still found many beds of shells; some
of these are even thicker and more solid; the shells are quite as
numerous, and as well preserved, but they are no longer of the
same species. The strata which contain them are not so generally
horizontal; they assume an oblique position, and are sometimes almost
vertical. While in the plains and low hills it was necessary to dig
deep, in order to discover the succession of the beds, we here
discover it at once by their exposed edges, as we follow the valleys
that have been produced by their disjunction. Great masses of debris
form at the foot of the cliffs, rounded hills, the height of which is
augmented by every thaw and tempest.

These inclined strata, which form the ridges of the secondary
mountains, do not rest upon the horizontal strata of the hills
which are situate at their base, and which form the first steps in
approaching them; but, on the contrary, dip under them, while the
hills in question rest upon their declivities. When we dig through
the horizontal strata in the vicinity of mountains whose strata
are inclined, we find these inclined strata re-appearing below;
and even sometimes, when the inclined strata are not too elevated,
their summit is crowned by horizontal ones[1]. The inclined strata
are therefore older than the horizontal strata; and as they must
necessarily, at least the greater number of them, have been formed in
a horizontal position, it is evident that they have been raised[2],
and that this change in their direction has been effected before the
others were superimposed upon them[3].

Thus the sea, previous to the deposition of the horizontal strata,
had formed others, which, by the operation of problematical causes,
were broken, raised, and overturned in a thousand ways; and, as
several of those inclined strata which it had formed at more remote
periods, rise higher than the horizontal strata which have succeeded
them, and which surround them, the causes by which the inclination
of these beds was effected, had also made them project above the
level of the sea, and formed islands of them, or at least shoals and
inequalities; and this must have happened, whether they had been
raised by one extremity, or whether the depression of the opposite
extremity had made the waters subside. This is the second result, not
less clear, nor less satisfactorily demonstrated, than the first, to
every one who will take the trouble of examining the monuments on
which it is established.




_Proofs that such revolutions have been numerous._


But it is not to this subversion of the ancient strata, nor to this
retreat of the sea after the formation of the new strata, that the
revolutions and changes which have given rise to the present state of
the Earth are limited.

When we institute a more detailed comparison between the various
strata and those remains of animals which they contain, we presently
perceive, that this ancient sea has not always deposited mineral
substances of the same kind, nor remains of animals of the same
species; and that each of its deposits has not extended over the
whole surface which it covered. There has existed a succession of
variations; the former of which alone have been more or less general,
while the others appear to have been much less so. The older the
strata are, the more uniform is each of them over a great extent; the
newer they are, the more limited are they, and the more subject to
vary at small distances. Thus the displacements of the strata were
accompanied and followed by changes in the nature of the fluid, and
of the matters which it held in solution; and when certain strata, by
making their appearance above the waters, had divided the surface of
the seas by islands and projecting ridges, different changes might
take place in particular basins.

Amidst these variations in the nature of the general fluid, it
is evident, that the animals which lived in it could not remain
the same. Their species, and even their genera, changed with the
strata; and, although the same species occasionally recur at small
distances, it may be announced as a general truth, that the shells
of the ancient strata have forms peculiar to themselves; that they
gradually disappear, so as no longer to be seen at all in the recent
strata, and still less in the presently existing ocean, in which
their corresponding species are never discovered, and where several,
even of their genera, do not occur: that, on the contrary, the shells
of the recent strata are similar, in respect to their genera, to
those which exist in our seas; and that, in the latest and least
consolidated of these strata, and in certain recent and limited
deposits, there are some species which the most experienced eye could
not distinguish from those which are found in the neighbouring seas.

There has, therefore, been a succession of variations in the economy
of organic nature, which has been occasioned by those of the fluid
in which the animals lived, or which has at least corresponded with
them; and these variations have gradually conducted the classes of
aquatic animals to their present state, till, at length, at the time
when the sea retired from our continents for the last time, its
inhabitants did not differ much from those which are found in it at
the present day.

We say for the _last_ time, because, if we examine with still greater
care those remains of organised bodies, we discover, in the midst
of even the oldest strata of marine formation, other strata replete
with animal or vegetable remains of terrestrial or fresh-water
productions; and, amongst the more recent strata, or, in other
words, those that are nearest the surface, there are some in which
land animals are buried under heaps of marine productions. Thus, the
various catastrophes which have disturbed the strata, have not only
caused the different parts of our continents to rise by degrees from
the bosom of the waves, and diminished the extent of the basin of
the ocean, but have also given rise to numerous shiftings of this
basin. It has frequently happened, that lands which have been laid
dry, have been again covered by the waters, in consequence either
of their being ingulphed in the abyss, or of the sea having merely
risen over them. The particular portions also, of the Earth, which
the sea abandoned in its last retreat,--those which are now inhabited
by man and terrestrial animals,--had already been once laid dry,
and had then afforded subsistence to quadrupeds, birds, plants, and
land productions of all kinds: the sea which left it had, therefore,
covered it at a previous period[4].

The changes in the level of the waters have not, therefore, consisted
solely in a more or less gradual, or more or less general retreat;
there have been various successive irruptions and retreats, the final
result of which, however, has been a universal depression of the
level of the sea.




_Proofs that these Revolutions have been sudden._


It is of much importance to remark, that these repeated irruptions
and retreats of the sea have neither all been slow nor gradual;
on the contrary, most of the catastrophes which have occasioned
them have been sudden; and this is especially easy to be proved,
with regard to the last of these catastrophes, that which, by a
two-fold motion, has inundated, and afterwards laid dry, our present
continents, or at least a part of the land which forms them at the
present day. In the northern regions, it has left the carcases of
large quadrupeds which became enveloped in the ice, and have thus
been preserved even to our own times, with their skin, their hair,
and their flesh. If they had not been frozen as soon as killed,
they would have been decomposed by putrefaction. And, on the other
hand, this eternal frost could not previously have occupied the
places in which they have been seized by it, for they could not
have lived in such a temperature. It was, therefore, at one and the
same moment that these animals were destroyed, and the country
which they inhabited became covered with ice. This event has been
sudden, instantaneous, without any gradation; and what is so clearly
demonstrated with respect to this last catastrophe, is not less so
with reference to those which have preceded it. The breaking to
pieces, the raising up and overturning of the older strata, leave
no doubt upon the mind that they have been reduced to the state in
which we now see them, by the action of sudden and violent causes;
and even the force of the motions excited in the mass of waters, is
still attested by the heaps of debris and rounded pebbles which are
in many places interposed between the solid strata. Life, therefore,
has often been disturbed on this earth by terrible events. Numberless
living beings have been the victims of these catastrophes; some,
which inhabited the dry land, have been swallowed up by inundations;
others, which peopled the waters, have been laid dry, from the bottom
of the sea having been suddenly raised; their very races have been
extinguished for ever, and have left no other memorial of their
existence than some fragments, which the naturalist can scarcely
recognize.

Such are the conclusions to which we are necessarily led by the
objects that we meet with at every step, and which we can always
verify, by examples drawn from almost every country. These great
and terrible events are every where distinctly recorded, so as to be
always legible by the eye skilled to decypher their history in the
monuments which they have left behind.

But what is still more astonishing and not less certain, _life_ has
not always existed upon the globe; and it is easy for the observer
to distinguish the point at which it has begun to deposit its
productions.




_Proofs that there have been Revolutions anterior to the existence of
living beings._


If we ascend to higher points of elevation, and advance towards the
great ridges, the craggy summits of the mountain chains, we shall
presently find those remains of marine animals, those innumerable
shells, of which we have spoken, becoming more rare, and at length
disappearing altogether. We arrive at strata of a different nature,
which contain no vestiges of living beings. Nevertheless, their
crystallization, and even their stratification, shew that they have
been also in a liquid state at their formation; their inclined
position, and the cliffs into which they are broken, shew that they
also have been forcibly moved from their original places; the oblique
manner in which they dip under the shelly strata, that they have been
formed previously to these latter; and lastly, the height to which
their rugged and bare peaks rise above all these shelly strata, that
their summits had already emerged from the waters, when the shelly
strata were forming.

Such are those celebrated Primitive Mountains which traverse our
continents in different directions, raising themselves above the
clouds, separating the basins of rivers from one another, affording,
in their perennial snows, reservoirs which feed the springs, and
forming, in some measure, the skeleton, and as it were the rough
framework, of the Earth.

The eye perceives from afar, in the indentations with which their
ridge has been marked, and in the sharp peaks with which it is
bristled, indications of the violent manner in which they have been
elevated. Their appearance, in this respect, is very different from
that of those rounded mountains, and hills with long flat surfaces,
whose less ancient masses have always remained in the situation in
which they were quietly deposited by the waters of more recent seas.

These indications become more obvious as we approach. The valleys
have no longer those gently-sloping sides, those salient and
re-entering angles corresponding on either side to each other, which
seem to denote the beds of ancient streams. They widen and they
contract without any general rule; their waters, at one time, expand
into lakes; at another, fall in torrents; and sometimes their rocks,
suddenly approaching from each side, form transverse dikes, over
which the waters tumble in cataracts. The dissevered strata, while
they shew on one side their edges perpendicularly raised, on the
other present large portions of their surface lying obliquely; they
do not correspond in height, but those which, on one side, form the
summit of the cliff, often dip underneath on the other, and are no
longer visible.

Yet, amidst all this confusion, distinguished naturalists have
been able to demonstrate, that there still reigns a certain order,
and that those immense deposits, broken and overturned though they
be, observe a regular succession with regard to each other, which
is nearly the same in all the great mountain chains. According to
them, Granite, of which the central ridges of the greater number of
these chains consist, and which thus surmounts every other rock,
is also the rock which is found deepest in the solid crust of the
globe. It is the most ancient of those which we have found means of
examining in the place assigned them by nature; and we inquire not
at present, whether it owes its origin to a general fluid, which
formerly held every thing in solution, or may have been the first
consolidated by the cooling of a great mass in fusion, or even in a
state of vapour[5]. Foliated rocks rest upon its sides, and form
the lateral ridges of these great chains; schists, porphyries,
sandstones, and talcose rocks, intermingle with their strata; lastly,
granular marbles, and other limestones destitute of shells, resting
upon the schists, form the outer ridges, the lower steps as it were,
the counterforts, of these chains, and are the last formations, by
which this unknown fluid, this sea without inhabitants, would seem to
have prepared materials for the mollusca and zoophytes, which were
presently to deposite upon these foundations vast heaps of their
shells and corals.

We even find the first productions of these mollusca and zoophytes
appearing in small numbers, and scattered at greater or less
distances, in the last strata of these primitive formations, or in
that portion of the crust of the globe to which geologists have
given the name of Transition rocks. Here and there we meet with beds
containing shells, interposed between certain granites of later
formation than the others, between schists of various kinds, and
between some newer beds of granular marbles. Life, which was in
the end to obtain entire possession of the globe, seems, in these
primordial times, to have struggled with the inert nature which
formerly predominated; and it was not until a considerable time
after, that it obtained the ascendancy over it, and acquired for
itself the exclusive right of continuing and elevating the solid
envelope of the Earth.

Hence, it is impossible to deny, that the masses which now constitute
our highest mountains, have been originally in a liquid state; and
that they have for a long time been covered by waters in which
no living beings existed. Thus, it has not been only since the
appearance of life that changes have been operated in the nature of
the matters which have been deposited; for the masses formed previous
to that event, have varied, as well as those which have been formed
since. They have also experienced violent changes in their position,
and a part of these changes must have taken place at the period when
these masses existed by themselves, and were not covered over by
the shelly masses. The proof of this lies in the overturnings, the
disruptions, and the fissures, which are observable in their strata,
as well as in those of more recent formations, and which are in the
ancient strata even in greater number and better defined.

But these primitive masses have also undergone other revolutions
since the formation of the secondary strata, and have, perhaps,
given rise to, or at least have partaken of, some of those changes
which these strata themselves have experienced. There are actually
considerable portions of the primitive formations uncovered, although
placed in lower situations than many of the secondary formations;
and we cannot conceive how it should have so happened, unless the
primitive strata in those places had forced themselves into view,
after the secondary strata had been formed. In certain countries, we
find numerous large blocks of primitive substances scattered over
the surface of secondary formations, and separated by deep valleys,
or even by arms of the sea, from the peaks or ridges from which they
must have been derived. We must necessarily conclude, therefore,
either that these blocks have been ejected by eruptions, or that the
valleys (which must have stopped their course) did not exist at the
time of their being transported; or, lastly, that the motions of the
waters by which they were transported, exceeded in violence any thing
that we can imagine at the present day[6].

Here, therefore, we have a collection of facts, a series of epochs,
anterior to the present time, of which the successive steps may
be perfectly ascertained, although the duration of their intervals
cannot be defined with precision. They are so many fixed points,
which serve to regulate and direct our inquiries respecting this
ancient chronology.




_Examination of the Causes which act at present on the surface of the
Globe._


Let us now examine those changes which are taking place at the
present day upon the globe, investigating the causes which still act
in its surface, and endeavouring to determine the possible extent
of their effects. This portion of the history of the Earth is so
much the more important, that it has long been considered possible
to explain the more ancient revolutions on its surface by means of
these still existing causes; in the same manner as it is found easy
to explain past events in political history, by an acquaintance
with the passions and intrigues of the present day. But we shall
presently see, that unfortunately the case is different in physical
history:--the thread of operations is here broken; the march of
Nature is changed; and none of the agents which she now employs,
would have been sufficient for the production of her ancient works.

There still exist, however, four causes in full activity, which
contribute to alter the surface of our continents. These are, rains
and thaws, which waste down the steep mountains, and precipitate the
fragments to their bottoms; running waters, which carry off these
fragments, and deposit them in places where their current is abated;
the sea, which undermines the foundations of elevated coasts, forming
steep cliffs, and which throws up great banks of sand upon the low
coasts; and, lastly, volcanoes, which pierce through the solid strata
from below, elevate these strata, or spread over the surface vast
quantities of ejected matter[7].




_Of Slips, or Falling down of the Materials of Mountains._


In every place where the broken strata present their edges on abrupt
surfaces, there fall down to their base, every spring, and even after
every storm, fragments of their materials, which are rounded by
rolling upon each other. These collected heaps gradually assume an
inclination determined by the laws of cohesion, and thus form, at the
bottom of the cliff, taluses, of greater or less elevation, according
as the fragments which have fallen are more or less abundant.
These taluses constitute the sides of the valleys in all elevated,
mountainous regions, and are covered with a rich vegetation, whenever
the fragments from the upper parts begin to fall less abundantly;
but their want of solidity subjects themselves also to slips, when
they are undermined by rivulets. On these occasions, towns, and rich
and populous districts, are sometimes buried under the ruins of a
mountain; the courses of rivers are interrupted, and lakes are formed
in places which were before the abodes of fertility and cheerfulness.
Fortunately these great slips happen but seldom, and the principal
use of those hills of debris, is to furnish materials for the ravages
of torrents.




_Alluvial Formations[8]._


The rains which fall, the vapours which are condensed, and the
snows which are melted, upon the ridges and summits of mountains,
descend, by an infinite number of rills, along their slopes, carrying
with them some portions of the materials of which these slopes are
composed, and tracing slight furrows by their passage. These rills
soon unite in the deeper gutters with which the surface is marked,
run off by the deep valleys which intersect their bottom, and thus
form streams and rivers, which carry back to the sea the waters it
had formerly supplied to the atmosphere. On the melting of the snows,
or when a storm takes place, these mountain torrents become suddenly
swollen, and rush down the declivities with a velocity proportioned
to their steepness. They dash violently against the bases of those
taluses of fallen fragments which cover the sides of all the high
valleys, carrying off the already rounded fragments of which they are
composed, and which thus become smoothed, and still farther polished,
by attrition. But in proportion as they reach the more level valleys,
where their violence is diminished, or when they arrive at more
expanded basins, where their waters are permitted to spread, they
throw out upon their banks the largest of those stones which they had
rolled down. The smaller fragments are deposited still lower; and
nothing reaches the great canal of the river excepting the minutest
particles, or the most impalpable mud. It often happens, also, that
before these streams unite to form great rivers, they have to pass
through large and deep lakes, in which their mud is deposited, and
from which their waters come forth limpid.

The lower rivers, and all the streams which descend from the less
elevated mountains and hills, also produce effects, upon the
districts through which they flow, more or less analogous to those of
the torrents from the higher mountains. When these rivers are swollen
by great rains, they attack the base of the earthy or sandy hills
which they meet with in their course, and carry their fragments to be
deposited upon the lower grounds, and which are thus, in some degree,
raised by each succeeding inundation. Finally, when the rivers reach
great lakes or the sea, and when that rapidity, which carried off
and kept in suspension the particles of mud comes to cease entirely,
these particles are deposited at the sides of their mouths, where
they form low grounds, by which the shores are prolonged. And if
these shores are such, that the sea also throws up sand upon them,
and thus contributes to their increase; there are created, as it
were, provinces, and even entire kingdoms, which usually become the
most fertile, and speedily the richest, in the world, if their rulers
permit human industry to exert itself in peace.




_Formation of Downs._[9]


The effects which the sea produces, without the co-operation of
rivers, are much less beneficial. When the coast is low, and the
bottom sandy, the waves push the sand toward the shore, where, at
every reflux of the tide, it becomes partially dried; and the wind,
which almost always blows from the sea, drifts it upon the beach.
Thus are formed those hillocks of sand, named Downs, which, if the
industry of man does not fix them by suitable plants, move slowly,
but invariably, toward the interior of the country, and overwhelm
fields and dwellings, because the same wind that raises the sand of
the beach upon the down, throws that of its summit in the opposite
direction from the sea. When the nature of the sand, and that of the
water which is raised with it, are such as to form a durable cement,
the shells and bones, thrown upon the beach, become incrusted with
it. Pieces of wood, trunks of trees, and plants growing near the
sea, are enveloped in these aggregates; and thus are produced what
might be denominated _indurated downs_, such as we see upon the
coasts of New Holland, and of which a precise idea may be formed from
the description given of them by Peron[10].




_Formation of Cliffs or Steep Shores._


On the other hand, when the coast is high, the sea, which is thus
prevented from throwing up any thing, exercises a destructive
action upon it. Its waves, by sapping the foundation, cause the
superincumbent portion of the face of the cliff, thus deprived of
support, to be incessantly falling down in fragments. These fragments
are tumbled about by the billows, until the softer and more divided
parts disappear. The harder portions, from being rolled in contrary
directions, assume the form of boulders and pebbles; and these, at
length, accumulate in sufficient quantity to form a rampart, by which
the bottom of the cliff is protected against farther depredations.

       *       *       *       *       *

Such is the action of water upon the solid land; and we see, that
it consists almost entirely in reducing it to lower levels, but
not indefinitely. The fragments of the great mountain ridges are
carried down into the valleys; their finer particles, together with
those of the lower hills and plains, are borne to the sea; alluvial
depositions extend the coasts at the expence of the high grounds.
These are limited effects, to which vegetation in general puts a
stop, and which, besides, presuppose the existence of mountains,
valleys, and plains, in short, all the inequalities of the globe; and
which, therefore, cannot have given rise to these inequalities. The
formation of downs is a phenomenon still more limited, both in regard
to height and horizontal extent; and has no relation whatever to that
of those enormous masses into the origin of which it is the object of
geology to inquire.[11]




_Depositions formed in Water._


Although we cannot obtain a precise knowledge of the action exerted
by water within its own bosom, it is yet possible to determine its
limits to a certain degree.

Lakes, pools, marshes, and sea-ports, into which rivulets discharge
their waters, more especially when these descend from near and steep
hills, deposit large quantities of mud, which would at length fill
them up entirely, if care were not taken to clean them out. The sea
also throws quantities of slime and sediment into harbours and
creeks; into all places, in short, where its waters are more tranquil
than ordinary. The currents also heap up at their meeting, or throw
out at their sides, the sand which they are continually raising from
the bottom of the sea, forming it into banks and shallows.




_Stalactites._


Certain waters, after dissolving calcareous substances by means of
the superabundant carbonic acid with which they are impregnated,
allow these substances to crystallize after the acid has evaporated;
and, in this manner, form stalactites, and other concretions. There
are strata, confusedly crystallized in fresh water, which are
sufficiently extensive to be compared with some of those which have
been deposited by the ancient sea. The famous Travertine quarries
of the neighbourhood of Rome, and the rocks of the same substance,
which are formed, and continually varied in figure, by the river
of Teverona, are generally known. These two modes of action may be
combined; the deposits accumulated by the sea may be solidified by
stalactite. Thus, when springs abounding in calcareous matter, or
containing some other substance in solution, happen to fall into
places where these deposits are formed, we then find aggregates in
which marine and fresh-water productions may be blended. Of this
description are the banks in the island of Guadeloupe, which, along
with human skeletons, present land and sea shells mingled together.
Of the same nature also is the quarry described by Saussure, in the
neighbourhood of Messina, in which the sandstone is seen forming by
the consolidation of the sand thrown up by the sea.




_Lithophytes._


In the torrid zone, where lithophytes of many species abound, and are
propagated with great rapidity, their strong trunks are interwoven
and accumulated so as to form rocks and reefs; and rising even to
the surface of the water, shut up the entrance of harbours, and lay
frightful snares for navigators. The sea, throwing up sand and mud
upon the tops of these shoals, sometimes raises their surface above
its own level, and forms islands, which are soon covered with a rich
vegetation.




_Incrustation._


It is also possible, that, in particular places, large quantities
of the animals inhabiting shells, leave their stony coverings when
they die, and that these, cemented together by slime of greater or
less consistence, or by other cementing substances, form extensive
deposits or shell banks. But we have no evidence that the sea can now
incrust those shells with a paste as compact as that of the marbles,
the sandstones, or even the coarse limestone (calcaire grossier) in
which we see the shells of our strata enveloped. Still less do we any
where find the sea depositing those more solid and more siliceous
strata which have preceded the formation of the shelly strata.

In short, all these causes united, would not change, in an
appreciable degree, the level of the sea; nor raise a single stratum
above its surface; and still less would they produce the smallest
hillock upon the surface of the earth.

It has been asserted that the sea has undergone a general diminution
of level; and proofs of this are said to have been discovered in some
parts of the shores of the Baltic.[12] But whatever may be the causes
of these appearances, we are certain that they are not general in
their operation; and that, in the greater number of harbours, where
any alteration of the level would be a matter of so much interest,
and where fixed and ancient works afford so many means of measuring
its variations, the mean level of the sea is constant. There
has, therefore, never been a universal lowering, nor a universal
encroachment, of the waters of the ocean. In some places, indeed,
such as Scotland, and various parts of the Mediterranean, evidence
has been thought to have been found, that the sea has risen, and that
it now covers shores which were formerly above its level[13].




_Volcanoes._


The action of volcanoes is still more limited, and more local, than
any of those which have yet been mentioned. Although we have no
precise idea of the means by which nature keeps up these violent
fires at such great depths, we can judge decidedly, by their effects,
of the changes which they may have produced at the surface of the
globe. After a volcano has announced itself, by some shocks of an
earthquake, it forms for itself an opening. Stones and ashes are
thrown to a great distance, and lava is vomited forth. The more fluid
part of the lava flows in long streams, while the less fluid portion
stops at the edges of the opening, raises its margins all round, and
forms a cone, terminated by a crater. Thus volcanoes accumulate upon
the surface matters which were previously buried in the bowels of
the earth, after modifying their nature, and raise themselves into
mountains. By these means, they have formerly covered some parts of
our continent, and have also suddenly produced islands in the middle
of the sea. But these mountains and islands have always been composed
of lava, and all their materials have undergone the action of fire:
they are disposed as matters should be, which have flowed from an
elevated point. Volcanoes, therefore, neither raise nor overturn the
strata through which their apertures pass; and if some causes acting
from those depths have contributed, in certain cases, to raise up
large mountains, they cannot have been volcanic agents of the same
nature as those which exist at the present day.

       *       *       *       *       *

Thus, we repeat, it is in vain that we search, among the powers
which now act at the surface of the earth, for causes sufficient
to produce the revolutions and catastrophes, the traces of which
are exhibited by its crust: And if we have recourse to the constant
external forces with which we are as yet acquainted, we shall have no
greater success.




_Constant Astronomical Causes._


The pole of the earth moves in a circle around the pole of the
ecliptic, and its axis is more or less inclined to the plane of
the ecliptic; but these two motions, the causes of which are now
ascertained, are much too limited for the production of effects like
those whose magnitude we have just been stating. At any rate, their
excessive slowness would render them altogether inadequate to account
for catastrophes which, as we have shewn, must have been sudden.

The same reasoning applies to all other slow motions which have been
conceived as causes of the revolutions in question, chosen doubtless
in the hope that their existence could not be denied, because it
might always be easy to hold out that their very slowness rendered
them imperceptible. But whether they be true or not is of little
importance, for they explain nothing, as no cause acting slowly could
have produced sudden effects.

Admitting that there has been a gradual diminution of the waters;
that the sea has transported solid matters in all directions;
that the temperature of the globe is either diminishing or
increasing;--none of these causes could have overturned our strata;
enveloped in ice large animals, with their flesh and skin; laid dry
marine testacea, the shells of which are, at the present day, as
well preserved as if they had been drawn up alive from the sea; and,
lastly, destroyed numerous species, and even entire genera.

These considerations have struck most naturalists; and among those
who have endeavoured to explain the present state of the globe,
hardly any one has attributed it entirely to the agency of slow
causes, still less to causes operating under our eyes. The necessity
to which they are thus reduced, of seeking for causes different
from those which we see acting at the present day, is the very
circumstance that has forced them to make so many extraordinary
suppositions, and to lose themselves in so many erroneous and
contradictory speculations, that the very name of their science, as
I have elsewhere remarked, has long been a subject of ridicule to
prejudiced persons, who have only looked to the systems which it
has been the means of hatching, and have forgotten the extensive
and important series of authentic facts which it has brought to
light[14].




_Older Systems of Geologists._


During a long time, two events or epochs only, the Creation and
the Deluge, were admitted as comprehending the changes which have
been operated upon the globe; and all the efforts of geologists
were directed to account for the present existing state of things,
by imagining a certain original state, afterwards modified by the
deluge, of which also, as to its causes, its operations, and its
effects, each entertained his own theory.

Thus, according to one[15], the earth was at first invested with
an uniform light crust, which covered the abyss of the sea; and
which being broken up for the production of the deluge, formed the
mountains by its fragments. According to another[16], the deluge was
occasioned by a momentary suspension of cohesion among the particles
of mineral bodies; the whole mass of the globe was dissolved, and
the paste thus formed became penetrated with shells. According to a
third[17], God raised up the mountains for the purpose of allowing
the waters, which had produced the deluge, to run off; and selected
those places in which there was the greatest quantity of rocks,
without which the mountains could not have supported themselves. A
fourth[18] created the earth from the atmosphere of one comet, and
deluged it by the tail of another: The heat which it retained from
its origin, was what, in his opinion, excited the whole of the living
beings upon it to sin; for which they were all drowned, excepting the
fishes, whose passions were apparently less vehement.

It is evident, that, even while confined within the limits prescribed
by the Book of Genesis, naturalists might still have a pretty wide
range: they soon found themselves, however, in too narrow bounds; and
when they had succeeded in converting the six days of creation into
so many indefinite periods, the lapse of ages no longer forming an
obstacle to their views, their systems took a flight proportioned to
the periods which they could then dispose of at pleasure.

Even the great Leibnitz amused himself, like Descartes, by conceiving
the earth to be an extinguished sun[19], a vitrified globe, upon
which the vapours falling down again, after it had cooled, formed
seas, which afterwards deposited the limestone formations.

By Demaillet the whole globe was conceived to have been covered
with water for many thousands of years. He supposed this water
had gradually retired; that all the land animals were originally
inhabitants of the sea; that man himself commenced his career as a
fish; and he asserts, that it is not uncommon, even now, to meet with
fishes in the ocean, which are still only half converted into men,
but whose descendants will in time become perfect human beings[20].

The system of Buffon is merely an extension of that of Leibnitz, with
the addition only of a comet, which, by a violent blow, struck off
from the sun the liquefied mass of the earth, together with those of
all the other planets at the same instant. From this supposition,
he was enabled to assume positive dates, as, from the present
temperature of the earth, it could be calculated how long it had
taken to cool down so far; and, as all the other planets had come
from the sun at the same time, it could also be calculated how many
ages are still required for cooling the greater ones, and to what
degree the smaller are already frozen[21].




_More recent Systems._


In our own times, men of still bolder imaginations have exercised
their minds upon this great subject. Some writers have revived
and greatly extended the ideas of Demaillet. They suppose that
every thing was originally fluid; that this fluid gave existence
to animals, which were at first of the most simple kind, such as
the monads and other infusory and microscopic species; that, in
process of time, and by assuming different habits, the races of
animals became complicated, and assumed that diversity of nature
and character in which they now appear. By means of those various
races of animals, part of the waters of the sea have gradually been
converted into calcareous earth; while the vegetables, concerning the
origin and metamorphoses of which these writers are totally silent,
have, on their part, converted a portion of the same water into clay:
These two earths, on being stripped of the characters which life had
impressed upon them, are resolved, by a final analysis, into silex;
and hence the reason that the oldest mountains are more siliceous
than the rest. All the solid parts of the earth, therefore, owe
their existence to life, and, without life, the globe would still be
entirely liquid[22].

Other writers have preferred the ideas of Kepler, and, like that
great astronomer, have considered the globe itself as possessed of
vital faculties. According to them a vital fluid circulates in it;
a process of assimilation goes on in it, as well as in animated
bodies; every particle of it is alive; it possesses instinct and
volition, even to the most elementary molecules, which attract and
repel each other according to sympathies and antipathies. Each kind
of mineral has the power of converting immense masses into its own
nature, as we convert our food into flesh and blood. The mountains
are the respiratory organs of the globe, and the schists its organs
of secretion; it is by these latter that it decomposes the water of
the sea, in order to produce the matters ejected by volcanoes. The
veins are carious sores, abscesses of the mineral kingdom; and the
metals are products of rottenness and disease, which is the reason
that almost all of them have so bad a smell[23].

More recently still, a philosophy, which substitutes metaphor for
reasoning, and proceeds on the system of absolute identity or of
pantheism, attributes the production of all phenomena, or which,
in the eyes of its supporters, is the same thing, all beings, to
polarization, such as is manifested by the two electricities; and
denominating every kind of opposition or difference, whether of
situation, of nature, or of function, by the title of Polarisation,
opposes to each other, in the first place, God and the universe;
then, in the universe, the sun and the planets; next, in each planet,
the solid and the liquid; and, pursuing this course, changing its
figures and allegories according to its necessities, at length
arrives at the last details of organic species[24].

It must, however, be observed, that these are what may be termed
extreme examples, and that all geologists have not carried the
extravagance of their conceptions to such a length as those which
we have just cited. Yet, among those who have proceeded with
more caution, and have not searched for geological causes beyond
the limits of physical and chemical science, much diversity and
contradiction still prevail.




_Diversities of all the Systems._


According to one system, every thing has been successively
precipitated by crystallization, and deposited nearly as it exists at
present; but the sea, which covered all, has gradually retired[25].

According to another, the materials of which the mountains consist,
are incessantly worn down and carried off by the rivers to be
deposited at the bottom of the sea, where they are heated under an
enormous pressure, and form strata, which are one day to be violently
lifted up by the heat which consolidates them[26].

A third supposes the fluid divided into a multitude of lakes, placed,
like the seats of an amphitheatre, above each other, which, after
having deposited our shelly strata, have successively broken their
dikes, to descend and fill the basin of the ocean[27].

According to a fourth, tides of seven or eight hundred fathoms depth
have carried off, from time to time, the matter lying at the bottom
of the sea, and have thrown it, in the form of mountains and hills,
upon the original valleys or plains of the continent[28].

A fifth makes the various fragments of which the earth is composed,
fall successively from heaven, in the manner of meteoric stones,
bearing the impress of their foreign origin in the unknown beings
whose remains they contain[29].

A sixth represents the globe as hollow, and places within it a
loadstone nucleus, which is transported from one pole to the other,
by the attraction of comets, carrying along with it the centre of
gravity, and the mass of waters at the surface; thus alternately
drowning the two hemispheres[30].

We might mention twenty other systems, as different from one another
as those enumerated. And to prevent mistake, we may here state, that
our intention is not captiously to criticize or find fault with their
authors; on the contrary, we admit that these ideas have generally
been conceived by men of intellect and knowledge, who were not
ignorant of facts, several of whom had even travelled extensively for
the purpose of examining them, and who, in this manner, made numerous
and important additions to science.




_Causes of these differences._


Whence comes it, then, that there should be so much contrariety
in the solutions of the same problem, that are given by men who
proceed upon the same principles? May not this have been occasioned
by the conditions of the problem never having been all taken
into consideration at once; by which it has remained hitherto
indeterminate, and susceptible of many solutions,--all equally good,
when such or such conditions are abstracted; and all equally bad,
when a new condition comes to be known, or when the attention is
directed to some condition which had been formerly neglected?




_Nature and Conditions of the Problem._


To quit the language of mathematics, it may be asserted, that almost
all the authors of these systems, confining their attention to
certain difficulties which struck them more forcibly than others,
have endeavoured to solve these in a manner more or less plausible,
and have left unnoticed others, equally numerous, and equally
important. For example, the only difficulty with one consisted in
explaining the changes that had taken place in the level of the
sea; with another, it consisted in accounting for the solution of
all terrestrial substances in one and the same menstruum; and with
a third, in shewing how animals that were believed to be natives of
the torrid zone could live in the frigid zone. Exhausting all the
powers of the mind upon these questions, they conceived that they
had done every thing that was necessary when they had contrived some
method of answering them; and yet, while they neglected all the other
phenomena, they did not always think of determining with precision
the measure and limits of those which they had endeavoured to explain.

This is peculiarly the case with regard to the secondary formations,
which constitute, however, the most important and most difficult part
of the problem. During a long time, all that was done with respect
to these, consisted of feeble attempts to determine the order of
superposition of their strata, and the connections of these strata
with the species of animals and plants whose remains they contain.

Are there certain animals and plants peculiar to certain strata, and
not found in others? What are the species that appear first in order,
and what those which succeed? Do these two kinds of species sometimes
accompany each other? Are there alternations in their appearance;
or, in other words, do the first reappear a second time, and do the
others then disappear? Have these animals and plants all lived in the
places where their remains are found, or have they been transported
thither from other places? Do they all live at the present day in
some part of the earth, or have they been partially or totally
destroyed? Is there any constant connection between the antiquity of
the strata and the resemblance, or non-resemblance, of the fossils
contained in them to the animals and plants which now exist? Is there
any connexion, in regard to climate, between the fossils and such
living beings as resemble them most? May it be concluded, that the
transportation of these living beings, if such a thing ever happened,
has taken place from north to south, or from east to west; or were
they irregularly scattered and mingled together; and can the epochs
of these transportations be determined by the characters which they
have impressed upon the strata?

What can be said regarding the causes of the existing state of the
globe, if no reply can be made to these questions,--if there be no
sufficient grounds to determine the choice between answering in the
affirmative or negative? It is but too true, that, for a long time,
none of these points was satisfactorily determined; and scarcely
even would geologists seem to have had any idea of the propriety of
clearing them up before constructing their systems.




_Reason for which the Conditions of the Problem have been neglected._


The reason of this strange procedure will be discovered, when
we reflect, that all geologists have hitherto been, either mere
cabinet naturalists, who had themselves paid little attention to the
structure of mountains, or mere mineralogists, who had not studied
in sufficient detail the innumerable varieties of animals, and the
infinite complication of their various parts. The former of these
have only constructed systems: the latter have furnished excellent
observations, and have laid the foundation of true geological
science; but have been unable to complete the edifice.




_Progress of Mineral Geology._


The purely mineral part of the great problem of the Theory of the
Earth has been investigated with admirable care by Saussure, and has
been since carried to an astonishing degree of development by Werner,
and by the numerous enlightened pupils of his school.

The former of these celebrated men, by a laborious investigation
of the most inaccessible districts, continued for twenty years, in
which he examined the Alps on all sides, and penetrated through
all their defiles; has laid open to our view the entire disorder
of the primitive formations, and has distinctly traced the limits
by which they are distinguished from the secondary formations. The
other, taking advantage of the numerous excavations made in the most
ancient mining district in the world, has fixed the laws by which the
succession of the strata are regulated, pointing out the relative
antiquity of these strata, and tracing each of them through all its
metamorphoses. It is from him, and from him alone, that we date the
commencement of real geology, in so far as concerns the mineral
nature of the strata: but neither he nor Saussure have determined the
fossil organic species occurring in each kind of stratum, with the
accuracy which has become necessary, now that the number of animals
already known is so great.

Other naturalists, it is true, have examined the the fossil remains
of organised bodies; they have collected and figured them by
thousands, and their works will serve as so many precious collections
of materials. But, considering these animals and plants more with
reference to their own nature, than as connected with the theory of
the earth; or regarding these petrifactions as curiosities, rather
than as historical documents; or, lastly, contenting themselves with
practical explanations regarding the position of each fragment,
they have almost always neglected to investigate the general laws
affecting the geological position of organic remains, or their
connection with the strata.




_Importance of Fossil Remains in Geology._


And yet, the idea of such an investigation was very natural; for
it is abundantly obvious, that it is to these fossil remains alone
that we owe even the commencement of a theory of the earth, and
that, without them, we should perhaps never have even suspected that
there had existed any successive epochs, and a series of different
operations, in the formation of the globe. By them alone we are,
in fact, enabled to ascertain, that the globe has not always had
the same external crust; because, we are thoroughly assured, that
the plants and animals must have lived at the surface before they
had thus come to be buried deep beneath it. It is only by analogy
that we have been enabled to extend to the primitive formations,
the conclusion which is furnished directly for the secondary by the
organic remains which they contain; and if there had only existed
formations in which no fossil remains were inclosed, it could
never have been shewn that these formations had not all been of
simultaneous origin.

It is also by means of the organic remains, slight as is the
knowledge we have hitherto acquired of them, that we have been
enabled to discover the little that we yet know respecting the nature
of the revolutions of the globe. From them we have learned, that
the strata in which they are buried have been quietly deposited in
a fluid; that their variations have corresponded with those of the
fluid in question; that their being laid bare has been occasioned by
the transportation of this fluid to some other place; and that this
circumstance must have befallen them more than once. Nothing of all
this could have been known with certainty, had no fossil remains
existed.

The study of the mineral part of geology, though not less necessary,
and even of much more utility to the practical arts, is yet much less
instructive with reference to the object of our present inquiry.

We remain in utter ignorance respecting the causes which have given
rise to the variety in the mineral substances of which the strata are
composed. We are even ignorant of the agents which may have held some
of these substances in solution; and it is still disputed, respecting
several of them, whether they have owed their origin to water or to
fire. After all, philosophers are only agreed on one point, which is,
that the sea has changed its place; and how should this have been
known, unless by means of the fossil remains?

The organic remains, therefore, which have given rise to the
theory of the earth, have, at the same time, furnished it with its
principal illustrations;--the only ones, indeed, that have as yet
been generally acknowledged.

It is this consideration which has encouraged us to investigate the
subject. But the field is vast; and it is but a very small portion
of it that could be cultivated by the labour of a single individual.
It was necessary, therefore, to select a particular department; and
the choice was soon made. The class of fossil remains which forms
the subject of this work, engaged our attention at the very outset,
because it appeared to us to be that which is the most fertile in
precise results, and yet, at the same time, less known, and richer in
new objects of research[31].




_High importance of the Fossil Bones of Quadrupeds._


It is obvious, in fact, that the fossil bones of quadrupeds must lead
to more accurate conclusions than any other remains of organized
bodies, and that for several reasons.

In the first place, they indicate much more clearly the nature of
the revolutions to which they have already been subjected. Shells
certainly announce the fact, that the sea has once existed in the
places where they have been formed; but the changes which have taken
place in their species, when rigorously inquired into, may have
arisen from slight changes in the nature of the fluid in which they
lived, or merely in its temperature. They may even have been produced
by causes still more accidental. We can never be perfectly assured
that certain species, and even genera, inhabiting the bottom of the
sea, and occupying certain fixed spaces, for a longer or shorter
time, may not have been driven away and supplanted by other species
or genera.

In regard to quadrupeds, on the contrary, every thing is precise. The
appearance of their bones in strata, and still more of their entire
carcases, announces, either that the stratum itself which contains
them has, at a former period, been laid dry, or, at least, that dry
land must have existed in its neighbourhood. Their disappearance
renders it certain, that this stratum has been inundated, or that the
dry land in question has ceased to exist. It is from them, therefore,
that we learn with perfect certainty the important fact of repeated
irruptions of the sea, which the shells and other marine productions
could not of themselves have proved; and it is by a careful
investigation of them, that we may hope to ascertain the number and
the epochs of these irruptions.

Secondly, The nature of the revolutions which have altered the
surface of the globe, must have exerted a more powerful action
upon terrestrial quadrupeds, than upon marine animals. As these
revolutions have consisted chiefly of changes in the bed of the
sea, and as the waters must have destroyed all the quadrupeds which
they reached, if their irruption was general, it would necessarily
have destroyed the entire class; or if it only overwhelmed certain
continents at one time, it would at least have destroyed the species
peculiar to those continents, without having the same effect upon the
marine animals. On the other hand, millions of aquatic animals would
have been left dry, or buried under newly-formed strata, or thrown
violently on the coasts; while their races would still have been
preserved in some more peaceful parts of the sea, whence they might
again be propagated after the agitation of the waters had ceased.

Thirdly, This more complete action is also more easily ascertained.
It is more easy to demonstrate its effects, because, the number of
quadrupeds being limited, and the greater part of their species, at
least the large ones, being known, we have more means of determining
whether fossil bones belong to them, or to a species that is now
lost. As, on the other hand, we are very far from being acquainted
with all the testaceous animals and fishes which inhabit the sea,
and as we are still probably ignorant of the greater number of those
which live in deep water, it is impossible to know with certainty,
whether a species which occurs in a fossil state, may not still exist
somewhere alive. And hence, we see naturalists persisting in giving
the name of pelagic shells, that is to say, shells inhabiting the
open sea, to the belemnites, cornua-ammonis, and other testaceous
remains, which have hitherto been found only in the older strata;
meaning by this, that if they have not yet been discovered in a
living state, it is because they inhabit the depths of the sea, far
beyond the reach of our nets.




_Small probability of discovering New Species of large Quadrupeds._


Naturalists, certainly, have not yet explored all the continents, nor
do they even know all the quadrupeds which inhabit the countries that
they have explored. New species of this class are discovered from
time to time; and those who have not examined with attention all the
circumstances belonging to these discoveries, might also imagine that
the unknown quadrupeds, whose bones are found in our strata, may
remain to this day concealed, in some islands not yet discovered by
navigators, or in some of the vast deserts which occupy the middle of
Asia, Africa, the two Americas, and New Holland.

However, if we carefully examine what kinds of quadrupeds have been
recently discovered, and in what circumstances they have been found,
we shall see that there is little hope of our ever finding alive
those which have hitherto been observed only in a fossil state.

Islands of moderate extent, and at a considerable distance from
the continents or large islands, possess very few quadrupeds, and
these, for the greater part, of diminutive size. When they happen
to contain any of the larger species, these must have been carried
to them from other countries. Bougainville and Cook found no other
large quadrupeds than hogs and dogs in the South Sea Islands; and the
largest species of the West India Islands was the _agouti_.

It is true that the great continents, such as Asia, Africa, the two
Americas, and New Holland, possess large quadrupeds, and, generally
speaking, contain species peculiar to each; insomuch, that whenever
large countries of this description have been discovered, which
their situation has kept isolated from the rest of the world, the
class of quadrupeds which they contained has been found entirely
different from any that existed elsewhere. Thus, when the Spaniards
first penetrated into South America, they did not find a single
species of quadruped the same as any of Europe, Asia, or Africa.
The puma, the jaguar, the tapir, the cabiai, the llama, the vicuna,
the sloths, the armadilloes, the opossums, and the whole tribe of
sapajous, were to them entirely new animals, of which they had no
idea. Similar circumstances have recurred in our own time, when
the coasts of New Holland and the adjacent islands were first
explored. The various species of kangaroo, phascolomys, dasyurus, and
perameles, the flying phalangers, the ornithorynchi and echidnæ, have
astonished naturalists by the strangeness of their conformations,
which presented proportions contrary to all former rules, and were
incapable of being arranged under any of the systems then in use.

If there yet remained some great continent to be discovered, we might
still hope to become acquainted with new species, among which there
might be found some having more or less similarity to those of which
we have discovered the remains in the bowels of the earth. But it is
sufficient to cast a glance over the map of the world, and see the
innumerable directions in which navigators have traversed the ocean,
in order to be satisfied that there remains no other large land to
be discovered, unless it may be situated towards the South Pole,
where the existence of life would necessarily be precluded by the
accumulation of ice.

Hence, it is only from the interior of the large divisions of the
world, that we can have any hope of still procuring quadrupeds
hitherto unknown. But a little reflection will be sufficient to
convince us, that our expectations from this source have as little
foundation as from that of the islands.

Doubtless, the European traveller cannot easily traverse vast extents
of countries, which are either destitute of inhabitants, or are
peopled only with ferocious tribes; and this is more especially true
with regard to Africa. But there is nothing to prevent the animals
themselves from roaming over these countries in all directions, and
penetrating to the coasts. Even when there may be great chains of
mountains between the coasts and the deserts of the interior, they
must always be broken in some places to allow the rivers to pass
through; and, in these burning deserts, the quadrupeds naturally
follow the banks of rivers. The inhabitants of the coasts also ascend
these rivers, and soon become acquainted with all the remarkable
species which exist even to their sources, either from personal
observation, or by means of intercourse with the inhabitants of
the interior. At no period, therefore, could civilized nations have
frequented the coast of a large country for any considerable length
of time, without gaining some tolerable knowledge of such of the
animals which it contained as were remarkable for their size or
configuration.

This reasoning is confirmed by well known facts. Although the
ancients never passed the mountains of Imaus, or crossed the Ganges,
in Asia; and, although they never penetrated very far beyond Mount
Atlas, in Africa; yet were they, in reality, acquainted with all the
large animals of these two divisions of the world; and, if they have
not distinguished all the species, it was not because they had not
seen them, or heard them spoken of by others, but because the mutual
resemblances of some of these species caused them to be confounded
together. The only important exception which can be opposed to this
assertion, presents itself in the Tapir of Malacca, recently sent
home from India by two young naturalists, pupils of mine, Messrs
Duvaucel and Diard, and which in fact is one of the most interesting
discoveries with which Natural History has been enriched in these
latter times.

The ancients were perfectly acquainted with the Elephant; and the
history of that quadruped is given more accurately by Aristotle than
by Buffon. They were not even ignorant of some of the differences
which distinguish the elephants of Africa from those of Asia[32].

They knew the two-horned Rhinoceros, which has never been seen alive
in modern Europe. Domitian exhibited it at Rome, and had it stamped
on his medals, which have been very well described by Pausanias.

The one-horned Rhinoceros, distant as was its country, was equally
known to them. Pompey shewed one at Rome; and Strabo has accurately
described another which he saw at Alexandria[33].

The Rhinoceros of Sumatra described by Mr Bell; and that of Java,
discovered and sent home by Messrs Duvaucel and Diard, do not appear
to inhabit the continent. Hence, it is not surprising, that the
ancients should have been ignorant of them; besides, they probably
would not have distinguished them from the others.

The Hippopotamus has not been so well described as the preceding
animals; yet very exact representations of it have been left by the
Romans in their monuments relative to Egypt, such as the statue of
the Nile, the Palestrine pavement, and a great number of medals.
In fact, this animal was repeatedly seen by the Romans; having been
exhibited by Scaurus, Augustus, Antoninus, Commodus, Heliogabalus,
Philip, and Carinus[34].

The two species of Camel, the Bactrian and Arabian, are both very
well described and characterized by Aristotle[35].

The Giraffe, or Camelopard (Camel-Leopard), was also well known to
the ancients. A live one was shewn at Rome, in the circus, during
the dictatorship of Julius Cæsar, in the year of Rome 708; and ten
of them were exhibited together by Gordian III. all of which were
killed at the secular games of Philip[36], a circumstance which
may well surprise the moderns, who have only witnessed a single
individual, which was sent by the Soldan of Egypt to Laurentius de
Medicis, in the fifteenth century, and is painted in the frescoes of
Poggio-Cajano.

If we read with attention the descriptions of the Hippopotamus,
given by Herodotus and Aristotle, and which are supposed to have
been borrowed from Hecatæus of Miletum, we shall find, that they
must have been made up from two different animals, one of which
was perhaps the true hippopotamus, and the other was assuredly the
Gnou[37], a quadruped, of which our naturalists begin to take notice
only about the end of the eighteenth century. It is the same animal
of which fabulous accounts were given by Pliny and Ælian, under the
name of _catoblepas_ and _catablepon_[38].

The Ethiopian Boar of Agatharchides, which is described as having
horns, is precisely the Ethiopian Boar of modern times, the enormous
tusks of which deserve the name of horns nearly as much as those of
the elephant[39].

The Bubalus and Nagor are described by Pliny[40]; the Gazelle by
Ælian[41]; the Oryx by Oppian[42]; the Axis, so early as the time of
Ctesias[43]; and the Algazel, and Corinne, are accurately figured
upon the Egyptian monuments[44].

Ælian has well described the _Bos grunniens_ or Yak, under the name
of the ox having a tail which serves for a fly-flapper[45].

The Buffalo was not domesticated by the ancients; but the Indian Ox,
of which Ælian speaks[46], and which had horns large enough to hold
three amphoræ, was assuredly that variety of the buffalo which is
now called the _arnee_. And even the wild ox with depressed horns,
which is mentioned by Aristotle as inhabiting Arachosia, a province
of ancient Persia, could be nothing else than the common buffalo[47].

The ancients were acquainted with the hornless variety of the ox[48],
and with the African oxen, whose horns, being only attached to the
skin, moved with it[49]. They also knew the Indian oxen, which
equalled the horse in speed[50]; and those which were so small as
not to exceed a he-goat in size[51]. Nor were the broad-tailed sheep
unknown to them[52],--nor those of India, which were said to be as
large as asses[53].

Although the accounts left us by the ancients, respecting the
Aurochs, the Rein-deer, and Elk, are all mingled with fable, they
are yet sufficient to prove that these animals were in some degree
known to them, but that the reports which had reached them, had been
communicated by ignorant people, and had not been corrected by a
judicious examination[54]. These animals still inhabit the countries
which the ancients assigned to them; and have only disappeared in
such of them as have been too much cultivated for their habits. The
aurochs[55] and elk still exist in the forests of Lithuania, which
were formerly continuous with the great Hercynian Forest. The former
of these animals still occurs in the northern parts of Greece, as
it did in the days of Pausanias. The rein-deer inhabits the snowy
regions of the north, where it always had its abode; it changes
its colour, not at pleasure, but according to the change of the
seasons. It was in consequence of mistakes scarcely excusable, that
it was imagined to have occurred in the Pyrenees in the fourteenth
century[56].

Even the White Bear had been seen in Egypt while under the
Ptolemies[57].

Lions and Panthers were common at Rome, where they were presented
by hundreds in the games of the Circus. Even several Tigers were
exhibited there, as well as the Striped Hyena and the Crocodile
of the Nile. In the ancient mosaics preserved at Rome, there are
excellent representations of the rarest of these animals. Among
others, the striped hyena is seen represented with accuracy in a
fragment preserved in the Museum of the Vatican; and, while I was
at Rome in 1809, a mosaic pavement, composed of natural stones,
arranged in the Florentine manner, was discovered in a garden beside
the triumphal arch of Galienus, which represented four Bengal tigers
executed in a superior manner.

In the Museum of the Vatican, there is deposited the figure of a
crocodile in basalt, which is almost a perfect representation of that
animal[58].

It cannot in the least be doubted, that the _Hippotigris_ was the
Zebra, which, however, is only found in the southern parts of
Africa[59].

It would be easy to shew that almost all the more remarkable
species of Apes and Monkeys have been distinctly indicated by the
ancients, under the names of _Pitheci_, _Sphinxes_, _Satyri_, _Cebi_,
_Cynocephali_, and _Cercopitheci_[60].

They even knew, and have described several species of Glires
of inconsiderable size, when these animals presented any thing
remarkable in their conformation or properties[61]. But the small
species are of no importance with reference to the object in view;
and, it is sufficient for our purpose to have shewn, that all the
large species, which possess any remarkable character, and which we
know to inhabit Europe, Asia, and Africa, at the present day, were
known to the ancients; whence we may fairly conclude, that their
silence in respect to the small quadrupeds, and their neglect in
distinguishing the species which very nearly resemble each other,
as the various species of antelopes, and of some other genera,
were occasioned by want of attention and ignorance of methodical
arrangement, rather than by any difficulty proceeding from climate.
We may also conclude, with equal certainty, that, as the lapse
of eighteen or twenty centuries, together with the advantages
of circumnavigating Africa, and of penetrating into India, have
added nothing in this department to the information left us by the
ancients, there is no probability that succeeding ages will add much
to the knowledge of our posterity.

But perhaps some persons may be disposed to employ an opposite
train of argument, and to allege that the ancients were not only
acquainted with as many large quadrupeds as we are, as has already
been shewn, but that they have described several others which we do
not now know,--that we act rashly in considering these animals as
fabulous,--that we ought to search for them before concluding that we
have exhausted the history of the present animal creation,--and, in
fine, that among those animals which we presume to be fabulous, we
may, perhaps, discover, when we become better acquainted with them,
the originals of those bones of unknown animals which we discover
buried in the earth. Some may even conceive, that those various
monsters, which constitute the essential ornaments of the history of
the heroic ages of almost all countries, are precisely those very
species which it was necessary to destroy, in order to allow the
establishment of civilization. Thus the Theseuses and Bellerophons
of ancient times had been more fortunate than all the nations of our
days, which have only been able to drive back the noxious animals,
but have never yet succeeded in exterminating a single species.




_Inquiry respecting the Fabulous Animals of the Ancients._


It is easy to reply to the foregoing objection, by examining
the descriptions of these unknown beings, and by inquiring into
their origins. The greater number of them have an origin purely
mythological, and of this origin their descriptions bear unequivocal
marks; for in almost all of them we see merely parts of known animals
united by an unbridled imagination, and in contradiction to all the
laws of nature.

Those which were invented or arranged by the Greeks, have at least
the merit of possessing elegance in their composition. Like those
arabesques which decorate the remains of some ancient buildings,
and which have been multiplied by the fertile pencil of Raphael, the
forms which they combine, however repugnant to reason they may be,
present agreeable contours. They are the fantastic productions of
playful genius; perhaps emblematic representations in the oriental
taste, in which were supposed to be concealed under mystical images
certain propositions in metaphysics or in morals. We may excuse those
who employ their time in attempts to discover the wisdom concealed in
the sphinx of Thebes, the pegasus of Thessaly, the minotaur of Crete,
or the chimera of Epirus; but it would be absurd to expect seriously
to find such productions in nature. As well might we search for the
animals described in the Book of Daniel, or for the beast of the
Apocalypse.

Neither may we look for the mythological animals of the Persians,
creatures of a still bolder imagination: the _martichore_, or
man-destroyer, bearing a human head on the body of a lion, terminated
by the tail of a scorpion[62]; the _griffon_, guardian of treasures,
half eagle, half lion[63]; the _cartazonon_, or wild ass, armed with
a long horn on its forehead[64].

Ctesias, who has described these as real animals, has been looked
upon by many authors as an inventor of fables; whereas he has merely
attributed an actual existence to emblematical figures. These
imaginary compositions have been seen in modern times sculptured upon
the ruins of Persepolis[65]. What they were intended to signify we
shall probably never know; but of this much we are certain, that they
do not represent actual beings.

Agatharchidas, another fabricator of animals, drew his information in
all probability from a similar source. The ancient Egyptian monuments
still furnish us with numerous fantastic representations, in which
the parts of different species are combined: gods are often figured
with a human body and the head of an animal, and animals are seen
with human heads; thus giving rise to the cynocephali, sphinxes, and
satyrs of ancient naturalists. The custom of representing in the same
painting men of very different sizes, of making the king or the
conqueror gigantic, the subjects or the conquered three or four times
smaller, must have given rise to the fable of the pigmies. It was in
some corner of one of these monuments that Agatharchidas must have
seen his carnivorous bull, which, with mouth extending from ear to
ear, devoured every other animal[66]. Certainly no naturalist would
admit the existence of such an animal; for nature never combines
either cloven hoofs or horns with teeth adapted for devouring animal
food.

There may perhaps have been many other figures equally strange,
either among such of these monuments as have not been able to resist
the ravages of time, or in the temples of Ethiopia and Arabia, which
have been destroyed by the religious zeal of the Mahometans and
Abyssinians. The monuments of India teem with such figures; but the
combinations in these are too extravagant to have deceived any one.
Monsters with a hundred arms, and twenty heads all different from
one another, are far too absurd to be believed. Nay, the inhabitants
of Japan and China also have their imaginary animals, which they
represent as real, and which figure even in their religious books.
The Mexicans had them. In short, they are the fashion among all
nations, whether at the periods when their idolatry has not yet
been refined, or when the import of these emblematical combinations
has been lost. But who would dare to affirm that he had found those
productions of ignorance and superstition in nature? And yet it may
have happened that travellers, influenced by a desire of making
themselves famous, might pretend that they had seen those strange
beings, or that, deceived by a slight resemblance, into which they
were too careless to enquire, they may have taken real animals for
them. In the eyes of such people, large baboons or monkeys may have
appeared true cynocephali, sphinxes, or men with tails. It is thus
that St Augustin may have imagined he had seen a satyr.

Some real animals, inaccurately observed and described, may have
given rise to monstrous ideas, which, however, have had their
foundation in some reality. Thus, we can have no doubt of the
existence of the hyena, although that animal has not its neck
supported by a single bone[67], and although it does not change its
sex every year, as Pliny alleges[68]. Thus, also, the carnivorous
bull is perhaps nothing else than a two-horned rhinoceros erroneously
described. M. de Weltheim affirms with probability, that the
auriferous ants of Herodotus are _corsacs_.

One of the most famous amongst these fabulous animals of the
ancients, is the _unicorn_. Even to our own time people have
obstinately persisted in searching for it, or, at least, in seeking
arguments to prove its existence. Three separate animals are
frequently mentioned by the ancients as having only one horn in the
middle of the forehead. The _African oryx_, having cloven hoofs, the
hair placed in the contrary direction to that of other animals[69],
equal in size to the bull[70] or even the rhinoceros[71], and said
to resemble deer and goats in form[72]; the _Indian ass_, having
solid hoofs; and the _monoceros_, properly so called, whose feet
are sometimes compared to those of the lion[73], and sometimes to
those of the elephant[74], and which is therefore considered as
having divided feet. The one-horned horse[75] and one-horned bull are
doubtless both to be referred to the Indian ass, for even the latter
is described as having solid hoofs[76]. I would ask, If these animals
exist as distinct species, should we not at least have their horns in
our collections? And what single horns do we possess, excepting those
of the rhinoceros and narwal?

How is it possible, after this, to refer to rude figures traced by
savages upon rocks[77]? Ignorant of perspective, and wishing to
represent a straight horned antelope in profile, they could only give
it a single horn, and thus they produced an oryx. The oryxes, too,
that are seen on the Egyptian monuments, are probably nothing more
than productions of the stiff style, imposed upon the artists of
that country by their religion. Many of their profiles of quadrupeds
shew only one fore and one hind leg; and this being the case, why
should they have shewn two horns? It may perhaps have chanced that
individuals have been taken in the chace, which had accidentally
lost one of their horns, as pretty frequently happens to the chamois
and saiga: and this would have been sufficient to confirm the error
produced by these representations. It is probably in this way that
the unicorn has recently been reported to be found in the mountains
of Thibet.

All the ancients, however, have not represented the oryx as having
only one horn. Oppian expressly gives it several[78], and Ælian
mentions oryxes which had four[79]. Finally, if this animal was
ruminant and cloven-hoofed, we know assuredly that its frontal bone
must have been longitudinally divided into two, and that it could
not, as is very justly remarked by Camper, have had a horn placed
upon the suture.

But it may be asked, What two-horned animal could have given the
idea of the oryx, and presented the characters which it is described
as possessing with regard to its conformation, even independent of
the notion of a single horn? To this I reply, with Pallas, that it
was the straight horned antelope, the _Antilope oryx_ of Gmelin,
improperly named _pasan_ by Buffon. It inhabits the deserts of
Africa, and must approach the confines of Egypt. It is this animal
which the hieroglyphics appear to represent. Its form is nearly
that of the stag; its size equals that of the bull; the hair of
its back is directed toward the head; its horns form exceedingly
formidable weapons, pointed like javelins, and hard as iron; its hair
is whitish, and its face is marked with spots and streaks of black.
Such is the description given of it by naturalists; and the fables
of the Egyptian priests, which have occasioned the insertion of its
figure among their hieroglyphics, do not require to have been founded
in nature. Supposing, therefore, that an individual of this species
had been seen which had lost one of its horns by some accident, it
might have been taken as a representative of the whole race, and
erroneously adopted by Aristotle, and copied by his successors. All
this is possible, and even natural, and yet proves nothing with
regard to the existence of a single-horned species.

In regard to the Indian ass, if we attend to the properties ascribed
to its horns as an antidote against poison, we shall see that they
are precisely the same as those which the eastern nations attribute
at the present day to the horn of the rhinoceros. When this horn was
first imported into Greece, the animal to which it belonged might
still have been unknown. In fact, Aristotle makes no mention of the
rhinoceros, and Agatharchides was the first who described it. In
the same manner, ivory was in use among the ancients long before
they were acquainted with the elephant. It is even possible that
some of their travellers might have given to the rhinoceros the name
of _Indian ass_, with as much propriety as the Romans denominated
the elephant the _bull of Lucania._ Every thing, moreover, that
is said of the strength, size, and ferocity of this wild ass of
theirs, corresponds very well with the rhinoceros. In succeeding
times, naturalists, who had now become better acquainted with the
rhinoceros, finding this denomination of _Indian ass_ in the writings
of authors who had preceded them, might have taken it, from want
of proper examination, for that of a distinct animal; and from the
name, they would have concluded the animal should have solid hoofs.
There is, indeed, a full description of the Indian ass given by
Ctesias[80], but we have seen above that it had been taken from the
bas-reliefs of Persepolis, and must therefore go for nothing in the
real history of the animal.

When there afterwards appeared more exact descriptions of an animal
having a single horn only, but with several toes, a third species
would have been made out, to which they gave the name of _monoceros_.
These double references applied to the same species, are more
frequent among ancient naturalists, because most of their works which
have come down to us were mere compilations; even because Aristotle
himself has frequently mingled facts borrowed from others with those
which he had observed himself; and because the habit of critical
examination was then as little known among naturalists as among
historians.

From all these reasonings and digressions, it may be fairly
concluded, that the large animals of the old continent with which we
are now acquainted, were known to the ancients; and that the animals
described by the ancients, and which are now unknown, were fabulous.
It also follows, that the large animals of the three principal parts
of the then discovered world could not have been long in being known
to the nations which frequented their coasts.

It may also be concluded, that no large species remains to be
discovered in America. If there were any, there can be no reason
why we should not be acquainted with it; and in fact none has been
discovered there during the last hundred and fifty years. The tapir,
the jaguar, the puma, the cabiai, the llama, the vicuna, the red
wolf, the buffalo or American bison, the ant-eaters, sloths and
armadilloes, are as well described by Margrave and Hernandez as by
Buffon; it may even be said that they are better, for Buffon has
confused the history of the ant-eaters, mistaken the jaguar and
red wolf, and confounded the bison of America with the aurochs of
Poland. Pennant, it is true, was the first naturalist who clearly
distinguished the small musk ox; but it was long before made mention
of by travellers. The cloven-footed horse of Molina, has not been
described by the early Spanish travellers; but its existence is
more than doubtful, and the authority of Molina is too suspicious
to authorise our adopting it. It might be possible to characterise
more accurately than has been done the different species of deer
belonging to America and India; but the case is with respect to these
animals as it was among the ancients with respect to the antelopes;
it is the want of a good method for distinguishing them, and not
of opportunities of seeing them, that has left them so imperfectly
known to us. It may, therefore, be said, that the Mouflon of the Blue
Mountains is the only American quadruped of any considerable size of
which the discovery is altogether modern; and even it is perhaps only
an argali that may have crossed upon the ice from Siberia.

How should it be thought, after this, that the huge _mastodons_ and
gigantic _megatheria_, whose bones have been discovered under ground
in North and South America, still exist alive on that continent? How
should they have escaped those wandering tribes which continually
traverse the country in all directions, and which are themselves
aware that these animals no longer exist, since they have invented a
fabulous account of their destruction, alleging that they were killed
by the Great Spirit, to prevent them from extirpating the human
race. But it is evident that this fable has been occasioned by the
discovery of the bones, like that of the inhabitants of Siberia with
respect to their mammoth, which they pretend to live under ground
like the mole, and, like all those of the ancients, about the graves
of giants, who were thought by them to have been buried wherever the
bones of elephants were discovered.

Thus it may safely be concluded, that if, as we have just said, none
of the large species of quadrupeds whose remains are at the present
day found in regular mineral strata, bear resemblance to any of the
known living species, this is not the effect of mere chance, nor
because those species of which we possess nothing but the bones,
are still concealed in the deserts, and have hitherto eluded the
observation of travellers. On the contrary, this phenomenon must be
regarded as resulting from general causes; and its investigation may
be considered as affording one of the best means for discovering the
nature of these causes.




_Difficulty of determining the Fossil Bones of Quadrupeds._


If this study is more satisfactory in its results than that of other
fossil remains of animals, it is also beset with more numerous
difficulties. Fossil shells usually present themselves in an entire
state, and with all the characters requisite for comparing them with
their analogous species, preserved in the collections or figured in
the works of naturalists. Even fishes present their skeleton more
or less entire; the general form of their body is almost always
distinguishable, and most commonly, also, their generic and specific
characters, which are drawn from their solid parts. In quadrupeds,
on the contrary, even should the skeleton be found entire, it would
be difficult to apply to it characters derived, for the most part,
from the hair, the colours, and other marks which have disappeared
previous to their incrustation. It is even excessively rare to find a
fossil skeleton approaching in any considerable degree to a complete
state. The strata, for the most part, only contain separate bones,
scattered confusedly, and almost always broken, and reduced to
fragments; and these constitute the only resources of knowledge to
the naturalist in this department. It may also be stated, that most
observers, deterred by these difficulties, have passed slightly over
the fossil bones of quadrupeds; have classed them in a vague manner,
according to superficial resemblances, or have not even ventured
to assign them a name; so that this part of the history of fossil
remains, although the most important and most instructive of all, is,
at the same time, that which has been the least cultivated[81].




_Principle by which this determination is effected._


Fortunately, comparative anatomy possesses a principle, which, when
properly developed, enables us to surmount all the obstacles. This
principle consists in the mutual relation of forms in organised
beings, by means of which, each species may be determined, with
perfect certainty, by any fragment of any of its parts.

Every organised being forms a whole,--a peculiar system of its own,
the parts of which mutually correspond, and concur in producing
the same definitive action, by a reciprocal reaction. None of
these parts can change in form, without the others also changing;
and consequently, each of them, taken separately, indicates and
ascertains all the others.

Thus, if the intestines of an animal are so organised as to be
fitted for the digestion of flesh only, and that flesh recent, it
is necessary that its jaws be so constructed as to fit them for
devouring live prey; its claws for seizing and tearing it; its teeth
for cutting and dividing it; the whole system of its organs of
motion, for pursuing and overtaking it; and its organs of sense for
discovering it at a distance. It is even requisite that nature have
placed in its brain the instinct necessary for teaching it to conceal
itself, and to lay snares for its victims.

Such are the general conditions which nature imposes upon the
structure of carnivorous animals; and which every animal of this
description must indispensably combine in its constitution, for
without them its race could not subsist. But subordinate to these
general conditions, there exist others, having relation to the size,
the species, and the haunts of the prey for which the animal is
adapted; and from each of these particular conditions, there result
modifications of detail in the forms which arise from the general
conditions. Thus not only the class, but the order, the genus, and
even the species, are found expressed in the form of each part.

In fact, in order that the jaw may be able to seize, it must have
a certain form of condyle; that the resistance, the moving power,
and the fulcrum, should have a certain relative position in regard
to each other; and that the temporal muscles should be of a certain
size; the hollow or depression, too, in which these muscles are
lodged, must have a certain depth; and the zygomatic arch, under
which they pass, must not only have a certain degree of convexity,
but it must be sufficiently strong to support the action of the
masseter.

In order that the animal may be able to carry off its prey, it must
have a certain degree of vigour in the muscles which elevate the
head; whence there results a determinate form in the vertebræ from
which these muscles take their rise, and in the occiput into which
they are inserted.

In order that the teeth may be able to cut flesh, they must be
sharp-edged, and must be so in a greater or less degree, according
as they have flesh more or less exclusively to cut. Their base will
be solid, according to the quantity and size of the bones which they
have to break. The whole of these circumstances must necessarily
influence the development and form of all the parts which contribute
to move the jaws.

In order that the paws may be able to seize the prey, there must be
a certain degree of mobility in the toes, and a certain degree of
strength in the claws, from which there will result determinate forms
in all the phalanges, and a corresponding distribution of muscles and
tendons. The fore-arm, or cubitus, must possess a certain facility
of turning, from which there will also result determinate forms in
the bones of which it is composed. But the bones of the cubitus
being articulated to the humerus, a change in the proportions of the
former, will necessarily induce a corresponding change in the latter.
The shoulder-bones must have a certain degree of firmness in such
animals as make use of their fore-legs for seizing, and from this
there must also result a certain peculiarity in their form. The play
of all these parts will require certain proportions in all their
muscles, and the impressions made by these muscles so proportioned,
will determine still more particularly the forms of the bones.

It is easy to see that similar conclusions may be drawn with regard
to the posterior extremities which contribute to the rapidity of
the general motions; with regard to the composition of the trunk,
and the forms of the vertebræ, which exert an influence upon the
facility and flexibility of these motions; and, lastly, with regard
to the forms of the bones of the nose, of the orbit, and of the
ear, the connection of which with the perfection of the senses of
smell, sight, and hearing, is evident. In a word, the form of the
tooth regulates the forms of the condyle, of the scapula, and of the
claws, in the same manner as the equation of a curve regulates all
its properties; and as, by taking each property separately for the
base of a particular equation, we find both the ordinary equation,
and all the other properties whatever; so, the claw, the scapula, the
condyle, the femur, and all the other bones taken separately, give
the tooth, or are reciprocally given by it; and thus, by commencing
with any one of these bones, a person who possesses an accurate
knowledge of the laws of organic economy, may reconstruct the whole
animal.

This principle seems sufficiently evident, in the general acceptation
in which it is here taken, and does not require any fuller
demonstration; but when it comes to be applied, there will be found
many cases where our theoretical knowledge of the relations of forms
will not be sufficient, unless it be supported by observation and
experience.

For example, we are well aware, that hoofed animals must all be
herbivorous, since they have no means of seizing prey. It is also
evident, that, having no other use to make of their fore-legs than
to support their body, they do not require a shoulder so vigorously
organised as that of carnivorous animals; they have, therefore, no
acromion or clavicle, and their shoulder-blades are narrow. Having
also no occasion to turn their fore-arm, their radius is united to
the ulna by ossification, or at least articulated by a ginglimus
or hinge-joint, and not by arthrodia or ball and socket, to the
humerus. Their food being herbaceous, will require teeth furnished
with flat surfaces, for bruising seeds and plants. The crown of the
teeth must also be unequal, and, for this purpose, must be composed
of parts alternately consisting of bone and of enamel. Teeth of
this structure necessarily require horizontal motions to enable
them to triturate the food; and hence the condyle of the jaw cannot
be so strictly confined within its articulating cavity as in the
carnivorous animals, but must be flattened, and thus correspond with
a more or less flattened surface of the temporal bones. Further, the
temporal fossa, which will only have a small muscle to contain, will
be narrower, and not so shallow, as that of carnivorous animals.
All these circumstances are deducible from each other, according to
their greater or less generality, and in such a manner, that some of
them are essential and exclusively peculiar to hoofed animals, while
others, although equally necessary in these animals, are not entirely
peculiar to them, but may occur in other animals also, where the rest
of the conditions will permit their existence.

If we proceed to consider the orders or subdivisions of the class of
hoofed animals, and examine what modifications the general conditions
undergo, or rather what particular conditions are conjoined with
them, according to the respective characters of these orders, the
reasons of these subordinate conditions begin to appear less obvious.
We can still easily conceive, in general, the necessity of a more
complicated system of digestive organs in those species which have
a more imperfect masticatory system; and hence we may presume, that
these latter must be rather ruminating animals, in which there is
wanting such or such an order of teeth; and may also deduce from the
same consideration, the necessity of a certain form of the œsophagus,
and of corresponding forms in the vertebræ of the neck, &c. But I
doubt whether it would have been discovered, independently of actual
observation, that the ruminating animals should all have cloven
hoofs, and that they should be the only animals having them; that
there should be horns on the fore-head in this class alone; or that
such of them as have sharp canine teeth, should, in general, have no
horns.

However, since these relations are constant, we may be assured that
they have a sufficient cause; but as we are not acquainted with that
cause, we must supply the defect of theory by means of observation,
and in this way establish empirical laws which become nearly as
certain as those deduced from rational principles, when founded
upon observations, the authenticity of which is proved by frequent
repetition. Hence, at the present day, any one who observes only the
print of a cloven foot, may conclude that the animal which left this
impression ruminates; and this conclusion is quite as certain as
any other in physics, or in moral philosophy. This simple footmark,
therefore, indicates at once to the observer the forms of the teeth,
of the jaws, of the vertebræ, of all the bones of the legs, thighs,
shoulders, and pelvis of the animal which had passed. It is a surer
mark than all those of Zadig. That there are secret reasons, however,
for all these relations, is what observation alone is sufficient to
shew, independently of any general principles of philosophy.

In fact, when we construct a table of these relations, we remark
not only a specific constancy, if the expression may be allowed,
between a particular form of a particular organ, and some other form
of a different organ; but we also perceive a classic constancy of
conformation, and a corresponding gradation, in the development of
these two organs, which demonstrate their mutual influence, almost as
well as the most perfect deduction of reason.

For example, the dentary system of the hoofed animals, which are not
ruminant, is in general more perfect than that of the cloven-footed
or ruminating animals, because the former have either incisors, or
canine teeth, and almost always both in each jaw; and the structure
of their foot is in general more complicated, because they have more
toes or claws, or their phalanges less enveloped in the hoof,--or a
greater number of distinct bones in the metacarpus and metatarsus--or
more numerous tarsal bones--or a fibula more distinct from the
tibia--or, lastly, that all these circumstances are often united in
the same species of animals.

It is impossible to assign reasons for these relations; but we are
certain that they are not the effects of chance, because, whenever a
cloven-footed animal manifests, in the arrangement of its teeth some
tendency to approach the animals we now speak of, it also manifests
a similar tendency in the arrangement of its feet. Thus the camels,
which have canine teeth, and even two or four incisors in the upper
jaw, have an additional bone in the tarsus, because their scaphoid
bone is not united to the cuboid, and they have very small hoofs,
with corresponding phalanges. The musk animals, whose canine teeth
are much developed, have a distinct fibula along the whole length
of their tibia; while the other cloven-footed animals have only, in
place of a fibula, a small bone articulated at the lower end of the
tibia. There is, therefore, a constant harmony between two organs
apparently having no connection; and the gradations of their forms
preserve an uninterrupted correspondence, even in those cases in
which we cannot account for their relations.

Now, by thus adopting the method of observation as a supplementary
means, when theory is no longer able to direct our views, we arrive
at astonishing results. The smallest articulating surface of bone, or
the smallest apophysis, has a determinate character, relative to the
class, the order, the genus, and the species to which it belonged;
insomuch, that when one possesses merely a well preserved extremity
of a bone, he can, by careful examination, and the aid of a tolerable
analogical knowledge, and of accurate comparison, determine all these
things with as much certainty as if he had the entire animal before
him. I have often made trial of this method upon portions of known
animals, before reposing full confidence upon it, in regard to fossil
remains; and it has always proved so completely satisfactory, that
I have no longer any doubts regarding the certainty of the results
which it has afforded me.

It is true, that I have enjoyed all the advantages which were
necessary for the undertaking; and that my favourable situation, in
the Museum of Natural History at Paris, and assiduous research for
nearly thirty years, have procured me skeletons of all the genera
and sub-genera of quadrupeds, and even of many species in some
genera, and of several varieties of some species. With such means,
it was easy for me to multiply my comparisons, and to verify in all
their details the applications which I have made of the various laws
deducible from such circumstances as have been stated.

We cannot here enter into a more lengthened detail of this method,
and must refer to the large work on Comparative Anatomy, in which all
its rules will be found. In the mean time, an intelligent reader may
gather a great number of these from the work upon Fossil Bones, if he
take the trouble of attending to all the applications of them which
we have there made. He will see, that it is by this method alone that
we are guided, and that it has almost always sufficed for referring
each bone to its species, when it was a living species--to its genus,
when it was an unknown species--to its order, when it was a new
genus--and to its class, when it belonged to an order not hitherto
established--and to assign it, in the three last cases, the proper
characters for distinguishing it from the nearest resembling orders,
genera, and species. Before the commencement of our researches,
naturalists had done no more than this with regard to animals, which
they had the opportunity of examining in their entire state. Yet, in
this manner, we have determined and classed the _remains_ of more
than a hundred and fifty mammiferous and oviparous quadrupeds.




_View of the General Results of these Researches._


Considered with regard to species, upwards of ninety of these animals
are most assuredly hitherto unknown to naturalists; eleven or twelve
have so perfect a resemblance to species already known, that the
slightest doubt cannot be entertained of their identity; the others
exhibit many traits of resemblance to known species, but their
comparison has not yet been made with sufficient precision to remove
all doubts.

Considered with regard to genera, of the ninety hitherto unknown
species, there are nearly sixty that belong to new genera. The other
species rank under genera or subgenera already known.

It may not be without use, also, to consider these animals with
regard to the classes and orders to which they belong. Of the hundred
and fifty species, about a fourth part are oviparous quadrupeds, and
all the rest mammifera. Of these last, more than the half belong to
non-ruminant hoofed animals.

Notwithstanding what has been done, it would still be premature to
establish upon these numbers any conclusion relative to the theory
of the earth, because they are not in sufficient proportion to the
numbers of genera and species which may be buried in the strata of
the earth. Hitherto the bones of the larger species have been chiefly
collected, these being more obvious to agricultural labourers; while
the bones of the smaller species are usually neglected, unless when
they chance to fall into the hands of a naturalist, or when some
particular circumstance, such as their excessive abundance in certain
places, attracts the attention even of the common people.




_Relations of the Species of Fossil Animals with the Strata in which
they are found._


The most important consideration, that which, in fact, is the chief
object of all my researches, and which establishes their legitimate
connection with the Theory of the Earth, is to ascertain in what
strata each species is found, and whether there may be some general
laws, relative either to the zoological subdivisions, or to the
greater or less resemblance of the species to those of the present
day.

The laws which have been recognised with respect to these relations
are very distinct and satisfactory.

In the first place, it is clearly ascertained that the oviparous
quadrupeds appear much more early than the viviparous; that they are
even more abundant, larger, and more varied, in the ancient strata
than at the surface of the globe, as it exists at present.

The Ichthyosauri, the Plesiosauri, several species of Tortoise, and
several species of Crocodile, are found beneath the chalk, in the
deposits commonly called _Jura formations_. The Monitors of Thuringia
would be still older, if, according to the Wernerian School, the
copper-slate in which they are contained, along with a great variety
of fishes supposed to have belonged to fresh-water, is to be placed
among the oldest beds of the secondary formations. The enormous
crocodiles and the great tortoises of Maestricht, are found in the
chalk formation itself; but these are marine animals.

This earliest appearance of fossil bones seems, therefore, already
to indicate, that dry lands and fresh waters had existed before the
formation of the chalk deposits. But neither at this period, nor
while the chalk was forming, nor even long after, have any bones of
land-mammifera been encrusted; or, at least, the small number of
these, which are alleged to have been found in strata of these dates,
forms but a trifling exception.

We begin to find bones of marine mammifera, namely, of lamantins and
seals, in the coarse shelly limestone which covers the chalk in the
neighbourhood of Paris; but there are still no bones of terrestrial
mammifera.

Notwithstanding the most assiduous investigation, I have not been
able to discover any distinct trace of this class in any of the
deposits preceding those which rest upon the coarse limestone.
Certain lignites and molasses do in fact contain them; but I am very
doubtful whether these deposits are all, as is commonly supposed,
anterior to that limestone. The places where these bones have
been found are so limited, both in extent and in number, as to
induce us to suppose some irregularity, or some repetition of the
formation containing them. On the contrary, the moment we arrive
at the deposits which rest upon the coarse limestone, the bones of
land-animals present themselves in great abundance.

As it is reasonable to believe that shells and fishes did not exist
at the period of the formation of primitive rocks, we are also led
to conclude that the oviparous quadrupeds began to exist along with
the fishes, and at the commencement of the period during which the
secondary rocks were formed; but that the land-quadrupeds did not
appear upon the earth, at least in any considerable number, till
long after, and until the coarse limestone strata, which contain the
greater number of our genera of shells, although of species different
from ours, had been deposited.

It is remarkable that those coarse limestone strata which are used
at Paris for building, are the last formed strata which indicate a
long and quiet continuance of the sea upon our continents. Above
them, indeed, there are found formations containing shells and other
marine productions; but these consist of collections of transported
matters, sand, marls, sandstones, and clays, which rather indicate
transportations that have taken place with more or less violence,
than strata formed by tranquil deposition; and, if there be some
rocky and regular strata of pretty considerable magnitude, beneath or
above these transported matters, they generally exhibit indications
of having been deposited from fresh water.

Almost all the known bones of viviparous quadrupeds, therefore, have
been found either in those fresh-water formations, or in the alluvial
formations; and consequently there is every reason to conclude that
these quadrupeds have only begun to exist, or, at least, to leave
their remains in the strata of our earth, after the last retreat of
the sea but one, and during the state of things that preceded its
last irruption.

But there is also an order in the disposition of these bones with
regard to each other; and this order further announces a very
remarkable succession in the appearance of the different species.
All the genera which are now unknown, the Palæotheria, Anaplotheria,
&c., with the position of which we are thoroughly acquainted, belong
to the oldest of the formations of which we are now speaking, those
which rest immediately upon the coarse limestone. It is chiefly these
genera which occupy the regular beds that have been deposited from
fresh-water, or certain alluvial beds of very ancient formation,
generally composed of sand and rolled pebbles, and which were perhaps
the earliest alluvium of that ancient world. Along with these there
are also found some lost species of known genera, but in small
numbers, and some oviparous quadrupeds and fishes, which appear to
have been all inhabitants of fresh-water. The beds which contain them
are always more or less covered by alluvial beds, containing shells,
and other marine productions.

The most celebrated of the unknown species, which belong to known
genera, or to genera closely allied to those which are known, such as
the fossil elephants, rhinoceroses, hippopotami, and mastodons, do
not occur along with those more ancient genera. It is in the alluvial
formations alone that they are discovered, sometimes accompanied
with marine shells, and sometimes with fresh-water shells, but never
in regular stony beds. Every thing that is found along with these
species is either unknown like themselves, or at least doubtful.

Lastly, the bones of species which are apparently the same as those
that are still found alive, are never discovered, except in the last
alluvial deposits formed on the sides of rivers, or on the bottoms
of ancient pools or marshes now dried up, or in the substance of beds
of peat, or in the fissures and caverns of some rocks; or, lastly, at
small depths below the surface, in places where they may have been
buried by the falling down of debris, or even by the hand of man; and
their superficial position renders these bones, although the most
recent of all, almost always the worst preserved.

It must not, however, be thought that this classification of the
various geological positions of fossil remains, is as certain as that
of the species, or that it is equally capable of demonstration. There
are numerous reasons which prevent this from being the case.

In the first place, all my determinations of species have been made
upon the bones themselves, or by means of good figures; whereas it
has been impossible for me personally to examine all the places in
which these bones have been discovered. I have very frequently been
obliged to content myself with vague and ambiguous accounts, given by
people who were not themselves well aware of what it was necessary to
observe; and, more frequently still, I have been unable to procure
any information whatever on the subject.

Secondly, these repositories of organic remains are subject to
infinitely greater doubts, than the bones themselves. The same
formation may appear recent in places where it shews itself at the
surface, and ancient in those where it is covered by the beds which
have succeeded it. Ancient formations may have been transported by
partial inundations, and thus have covered recent bones; they may
have fallen upon them by crumbling, and thus have enveloped and
mingled them with the productions of the ancient sea, which they
previously contained. Bones of ancient periods may have been washed
out by the waters, and afterwards enveloped in recent alluvial
formations. Lastly, recent bones may have fallen into the fissures
or caverns of ancient rocks, and been enveloped by stalactites or
other incrustations. In every individual instance, therefore, it
becomes necessary to analyze and appreciate all those circumstances
which might disguise the real origin of fossil remains; and it rarely
happens that people who have collected bones have been themselves
aware of this necessity, the consequence of which has been, that the
true characters of their geological position have been almost always
neglected or misunderstood.

Thirdly, there are some doubtful species, which must occasion more
or less uncertainty in the results of our researches, until they
have been clearly ascertained. Thus the horses and buffaloes that
occur along with the elephants, have not yet received appropriate
specific characters; and such geologists as are disinclined to adopt
the different epochs which I have endeavoured to establish with
regard to fossil bones, may, for many years to come, draw from thence
an argument against my system, so much the more convenient as it is
contained in my own work.

But allowing that these epochs are liable to some objections, from
such as may only consider some particular case, I am not the less
satisfied, that those who shall take a comprehensive view of the
phenomena, will not be checked by such inconsiderable and partial
difficulties, and will be led to conclude, as I have done, that
there has been at least one, and very probably two, successions in
the class of quadrupeds, previous to that which at the present day
peoples the surface of the earth.




_Proofs that the Extinct Species of Quadrupeds are not varieties of
the presently existing Species._


I now proceed to the consideration of another objection, one, in
fact, which has already been urged against me.

Why may not the presently existing races of land quadrupeds, it has
been asked, be modifications of those ancient races which we find in
a fossil state; which modifications may have been produced by local
circumstances and change of climate; and carried to the extreme
difference which they now present, during a long succession of ages?

This objection must appear strong to those especially who believe
in the possibility of indefinite alteration of forms in organised
bodies; and who think that, during a succession of ages, and by
repeated changes of habitudes, all the species might be changed into
one another, or might result from a single species.

Yet to these persons an answer may be given from their own system. If
the species have changed by degrees, we ought to find traces of these
gradual modifications. Thus, between the palæotheria and our present
species, we should be able to discover some intermediate forms; and
yet no such discovery has ever been made.

Why have not the bowels of the earth preserved the monuments of so
strange a genealogy, if it be not because the species of former times
were as constant as ours; or, at least, because the catastrophe which
destroyed them, had not left them sufficient time for undergoing the
variation alleged?

In order to reply to those naturalists who acknowledge that the
_varieties_ of animals are restrained within certain limits fixed by
nature, it would be necessary to examine how far these limits extend.
This is a very curious inquiry,--highly interesting in itself, under
a variety of relations, and yet one that has been hitherto very
little attended to.

Before entering upon this inquiry, it is proper to define what is
meant by a _species_, so that the definition may serve to regulate
the employment of the term. A species, therefore, may be defined,
as comprehending _the individuals which descend from each other,
or from common parents, and those which resemble them as much as
they resemble each other_. Thus, we consider as _varieties_ of a
species, only the races more or less different which may have sprung
from it by generation. Our observations, therefore, regarding the
differences between the ancestors and descendants, afford us the
only certain rule by which we can judge on this subject; all other
considerations leading to hypothetical conclusions destitute of
proof. Now, considering the _varieties_ in this view, we observe
that the differences which constitute it, depend upon determinate
circumstances, and that their extent increases in proportion to the
intensity of these circumstances.

Thus, the most superficial characters are the most variable: the
colour depends much upon the light; the thickness of the fur upon the
heat; the size, upon the abundance of food. But in a wild animal,
even these varieties are greatly limited by the natural habits of the
animal itself, which does not voluntarily remove far from the places
where it finds, in the necessary degree, all that is requisite, for
the support of its species, and does not even extend its haunts to
any great distance, unless it also finds all these circumstances
conjoined. Thus, although the wolf and the fox inhabit all the
climates from the torrid to the frigid zone, we hardly find any other
difference among them, in the whole of that vast space, than a little
more or a little less beauty in their fur. I have compared skulls of
foxes from the northern countries and from Egypt, with those of the
foxes of France, and have found no difference but such as might be
expected in different individuals. Such of the wild animals as are
confined within narrower limits, vary still less, especially those
which are carnivorous. The only difference between the hyena of
Persia and that of Morocco, consists in a thicker or a thinner mane.

The wild herbivorous animals feel the influence of climate somewhat
more extensively, because there is added to it in their case, the
influence of the food, which may happen to differ both as to quantity
and quality. Thus, the elephants of one forest are often larger than
those of another; and their tusks are somewhat longer in places where
their food may happen to be more favourable for the production of the
matter of ivory. The same may take place with regard to the horns
of rein-deer and stags. But let us compare two elephants the most
dissimilar, and we shall not discover the slightest difference in the
number and articulations of the bones, the structure of the teeth, &c.

Besides, the herbivorous species, in the wild state, seem more
restrained from dispersing than the carnivorous animals, because the
sort of food which they require, combines with the temperature to
prevent them.

Nature also takes care to guard against the alteration of the
species, which might result from their mixture, by the mutual
aversion with which it has inspired them. It requires all the
ingenuity and all the power of man to accomplish these unions, even
between species that have the nearest resemblances. And, when the
individuals produced by these forced conjunctions are fruitful, which
is very seldom the case, their fecundity does not continue beyond a
few generations; and would not probably proceed so far, without a
continuance of the same cares which excited it at first. Thus, we
never see in our woods individuals intermediate between the hare and
the rabbit; between the stag and the doe; or between the martin and
the pole-cat.

But the power of man changes this order; it discloses all those
variations, of which the type of each species is susceptible;
and from them derives productions which the species, if left to
themselves, would never have yielded.

Here the degree of the variations is still proportional to the
intensity of their cause, which is slavery. It is not very high in
the semi-domesticated species, such as the cat. A softer fur; more
brilliant colours; greater or less size; these form the whole extent
of the variations in this species; for the skeleton of an Angora cat
differs in no regular and constant circumstance from that of a wild
cat.

In the domesticated herbivorous animals, which we transport into
all kinds of climates, and subject to all kinds of management, both
with regard to labour and nourishment, we certainly obtain greater
variations; but still they are all merely superficial. Greater
or less size; longer or shorter horns, or even the want of these
entirely; a hump of fat, larger or smaller, on the shoulder; these
form the differences between the various races of the common ox or
bull; and these differences continue long, even in such breeds as
have been transported from the countries in which they were produced,
when proper care is taken to prevent crossing.

Of this nature are also the innumerable varieties of the common
sheep, which consist chiefly in differences of their fleeces, as the
wool which they produce is an important object of attention. These
varieties, although not quite so perceptible, are yet sufficiently
marked among horses. In general, the forms of the bones vary little;
their connections and articulations, and the forms of the large
grinding teeth, never vary at all.

The small size of the tusks in the domestic hog, compared with the
wild boar’s, and the junction of its cloven hoofs into one in some
races, form the extreme point of the differences which we have
produced in the domesticated herbivorous quadrupeds.

The most remarkable effects of the influence of man are manifested
in the animal which he has reduced most completely under subjection,
the dog,--that species so entirely devoted to ours, that even the
individuals of it seem to have sacrificed to us their will, their
interest, and inclination. Transported by man into every part of
the world, subjected to all the causes capable of influencing their
development, regulated in their sexual intercourse by the pleasure of
their masters, dogs vary in colour; in the quantity of their hair,
which they sometimes even lose altogether, and in its nature; in
size, which varies as one to five in the linear dimensions, amounting
to more than a hundred fold in bulk; in the form of the ears, nose,
and tail; in the proportional length of the legs; in the progressive
development of the brain in the domestic varieties, whence results
the form of their head, which is sometimes slender, with a lengthened
muzzle and flat forehead, and sometimes having a short muzzle and a
protuberant forehead; insomuch that the apparent differences between
a mastiff and a water-spaniel, and between a greyhound and a pug,
are more striking than those that exist between any two species of
the same natural genus in a wild state. Finally, and this may be
considered as the maximum of variation hitherto known in the animal
kingdom, there are races of dogs which have an additional toe on the
hind foot, with corresponding tarsal bones; as there are, in the
human species, some families that have six fingers on each hand. Yet,
in all these varieties, the relations of the bones remain the same,
nor does the form of the teeth ever change in any perceptible degree;
the only variation in respect to these latter being, that, in some
individuals, one additional false grinder appears, sometimes on the
one side, and sometimes on the other[82].

Animals, therefore, have natural characters, which resist every kind
of influence, whether natural or produced by human interference, and
nothing indicates that, with regard to them, time has more effect
than climate and domestication.

I am aware that some naturalists lay great stress upon the thousands
of ages which they call into action by a dash of the pen; but, in
such matters, we can only judge of what a long period of time might
produce, by multiplying in idea what a less time produces. With
this view, I have endeavoured to collect the most ancient documents
relating to the forms of animals; and there are none which equal,
either in antiquity or abundance, those that Egypt furnishes. It
affords us, not only representations of animals, but even their
identical bodies embalmed in its catacombs.

I have examined with the greatest attention the figures of quadrupeds
and birds sculptured upon the numerous obelisks brought from Egypt to
ancient Rome. All these figures possess, in their general character,
which alone could be the object of attention to an artist, a perfect
resemblance to the species represented, such as we see them at the
present day.

On examining the copies made by Kirker and Zoega, we find that,
without preserving every trait of the originals in its perfect
purity, they have given figures which are easily recognised. We
readily distinguish the ibis, the vulture, the owl, the falcon, the
Egyptian goose, the lapwing, the landrail, the aspic, the cerastes,
the Egyptian hare with its long ears, and even the hippopotamus; and,
among the numerous monuments engraved in the great work on Egypt, we
sometimes observe the rarest animals, the algazel, for example, which
was not seen in Europe until within these few years[83].

My learned colleague, M. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, strongly convinced
of the importance of this research, carefully collected in the tombs
and temples of Upper and Lower Egypt as many mummies of animals as
he could. He has brought home cats, ibises, birds of prey, dogs,
monkeys, crocodiles, and the head of an ox, in this state; and there
is certainly no more difference to be perceived between these mummies
and the species of the same kind now alive, than between the human
mummies and the skeletons of men of the present day. A difference
may, indeed, be found between the mummies of the ibis and the bird
which naturalists have hitherto described under that name; but I have
cleared up all doubts on this matter, in a Memoir upon the Ibis,
which will be found at the end of this Essay, and in which I have
shewn that it is still at the present day the same as it was in the
time of the Pharaohs. I am aware that, in these, I only cite the
monuments of two or three thousand years; but this is the most remote
antiquity to which we can resort in such a case.

There is nothing, therefore, to be derived from all the facts
hitherto known, that could, in the slightest degree, give support
to the opinion that the new genera which I have discovered or
established among the fossil remains of animals, any more than those
which have in like manner been discovered or established by other
naturalists, the _palæotheria_, _anoplotheria_, _megalonyces_,
_mastodonta_, _pterodactyli_, _ichthyosauri_, &c. might have been
the sources of the present race of animals, which have only differed
from them through the influence of time or climate. Even if it should
prove true, which I am far from believing to be the case, that the
fossil elephants, rhinoceroses, elks, and bears, differ no more from
those at present existing, than the present races of dogs differ from
one another, this would not furnish a sufficient reason for inferring
the general identity of the species, because the races of dogs have
been subjected to the influence of domestication, which these other
animals neither did nor could experience.

Farther, when I maintain that the rocky beds contain the bones of
several genera, and the alluvial strata those of several species
which no longer exist, I do not assert that a new creation was
required for producing the species existing at the present day. I
only say that they did not originally inhabit the places where we
find them at present, and that they must have come from some other
part of the globe.

Let us suppose, for instance, that a great irruption of the sea were
now to cover the continent of New Holland with a coat of sand or
other debris; it would bury the carcases of animals belonging to the
genera _Kangurus_, _Phascolomys_, _Dasyurus_, _Perameles_, flying
phalanger, echidna, and ornithorynchus, and it would entirely destroy
the species of all these genera, since none of them exist now in any
other country.

Were the same revolution to lay dry the numerous narrow straits which
separate New Holland from the continent of Asia, it would open a
road to the elephants, rhinoceroses, buffaloes, horses, camels, and
tigers, and to all the other Asiatic quadrupeds, which would come to
people a land where they had been previously unknown.

Were some future naturalist, after having made himself well
acquainted with this new race of animals, to search below the surface
on which they live, he would find remains of quite a different
nature.

What New Holland would be, under the circumstances which we have
supposed, Europe, Siberia, and a large portion of America, now
actually are. And, perhaps, when other countries shall have been
examined, and New Holland among the rest, it will one day be found
that they have experienced similar revolutions, I might almost say,
mutual changes, of productions. For, if we push the supposition
farther, and, after the supply of Asiatic animals to New Holland,
admit a second revolution, which destroyed Asia, their original
country, those naturalists who might observe them in New Holland,
their second country, would be equally at a loss to know whence
they had come, as we now are to find out the origin of the races of
animals that inhabit our own countries.

I now proceed to apply this manner of reasoning to the human species.




_Proofs that there are no Fossil Human Bones._


It is certain that no human bones have yet been found among fossil
remains; and this furnishes an additional proof that the fossil races
were not mere varieties of known species, since they could not have
been subjected to human influence.

When I assert that human bones have never been found among fossil
organic remains, (I must be understood to speak of fossils or
petrifactions, properly so called), or, in other words, in the
regular strata of the surface of the globe; for in peat-bogs
(_tourbières_), and alluvial deposits, as in burying-grounds, human
bones might as well be found as bones of horses, or other common
species. They might equally be found in fissures of rocks, and in
caverns, where they may have been covered over by stalactite; but in
the beds which contain the ancient races, among the _palæotheria_,
and even among the elephants and rhinoceroses, the smallest portion
of a human bone has never been discovered. Many of the labourers in
the gypsum quarries about Paris, believe that the bones which occur
so abundantly in them, are in a great part human; but I have seen
several thousands of these bones, and I may safely affirm that not
one of them has ever belonged to our species. I have examined at
Pavia the groups of bones brought by Spallanzani from the Island
of Cerigo; and, notwithstanding the assertion of that celebrated
observer, I equally affirm, that there is not one among them that
could be shewn to be human. The _homo diluvii testis_ of Scheuchzer
has been restored, in my first edition, to its true genus, which
is that of the salamanders; and, in a more recent examination of
it at Haarlem, allowed me by the politeness of Mr Van Marum, who
permitted me to uncover the parts enveloped in the stone, I obtained
complete proof of what I had before announced. Among the bones found
at Canstadt, the fragment of a jaw, and some articles of human
manufacture, were found; but it is known that the ground was dug up
without any precaution, and that no notes were taken of the different
depths at which each article was discovered. Every where else, the
fragments of bone alleged to be human, are found, on examination, to
belong to some animal, whether these fragments have been examined
themselves, or merely through the medium of figures. Very recently,
some were pretended to have been discovered at Marseilles, in a
quarry that had been long neglected;[84] but they have turned out to
be impressions of _tuyaux marines_.[85] Such real human bones as have
been exhibited as fossil, belonged to bodies that had fallen into
fissures, or had been left in the old galleries of mines, or that
had been incrusted; and I extend this assertion even to the human
skeletons discovered at Guadaloupe, in a rock formed of fragments of
madrepore, thrown up by the sea, and united by water impregnated
with calcareous matter.[86] The human bones found near Kœstriz, and
pointed out by M. de Schlotheim, had been announced as taken out of
very old beds; but this estimable naturalist is anxious to make known
how much this assertion is still subject to doubt.[87] The same has
been the case with the articles of human fabrication. The pieces of
iron found at Montmartre are fragments of the tools which the workmen
use for putting in blasts of gunpowder, and which sometimes break in
the stone[88].

Yet human bones preserve equally well with those of animals, when
placed in the same circumstances. In Egypt, no difference is remarked
between the mummies of men and those of quadrupeds. I picked up,
from the excavations made some years ago in the ancient church of St
Genevieve, human bones that had been interred below the first race,
which may even have belonged to some princes of the family of Clovis,
and which still retained their forms very perfectly[89]. We do not
find in ancient fields of battle that the skeletons of men are more
wasted than those of horses, except in so far as they may have been
influenced by size; and we find among fossil remains the bones of
animals as small as rats, still perfectly preserved.

Every circumstance, therefore, leads to the conclusion, that the
human species did not exist in the countries in which the fossil
bones have been discovered, at the epoch of the revolutions by which
these bones were covered up; for there cannot be a single reason
assigned, why men should have entirely escaped from such general
catastrophes, or why their remains should not be now found like those
of other animals. I do not presume, however, to conclude that man did
not exist at all before this epoch. He might then have inhabited some
narrow regions, whence he might have repeopled the earth after those
terrible events. Perhaps also, the places which he inhabited may have
been entirely swallowed up in the abyss, and his bones buried at the
bottom of the present seas, with the exception of a small number of
individuals, which have continued the species.

However this may be, the establishment of man in those countries in
which we have said that the fossil remains of land animals are found,
that is to say, in the greatest part of Europe, Asia, and America,
has necessarily been posterior, not only to the revolutions which
have covered up these bones, but also to those which have laid bare
the strata containing them, and which are the last that the globe
has undergone. Hence it clearly appears, that no argument in favour
of the antiquity of the human species in these different countries
can be derived either from those bones themselves, or from the more
or less considerable masses of rocks or of earthy materials by which
they are covered.




_Physical Proofs of the Newness of the Present Continents._


On the contrary, by a careful examination of what has taken place
on the surface of the globe, since it has been laid dry for the
last time, and its continents have assumed their present form, at
least in the parts that are somewhat elevated, it may be clearly
seen that this last revolution, and consequently the establishment
of our existing societies, could not have been very ancient. This
result is one of the best established, and, at the same time, one
of the least attended to in rational geology; and it is so much the
more valuable, that it connects natural and civil history in one
uninterrupted series.

When we measure the effects produced in a given time by causes still
acting, and compare them with those which the same causes have
produced since they have begun to act, we are enabled to determine
nearly the instant at which their action commenced; which is
necessarily the same as that in which our continents assumed their
present form, or that of the last sudden retreat of the waters.

It must, in fact, have been since this last retreat of the waters,
that our present steep declivities have begun to disintegrate, and
to form heaps of debris at their bases; that our present rivers
have begun to flow, and to deposit their alluvial matters; that our
present vegetation has begun to extend itself, and to produce soil;
that our present cliffs have begun to be corroded by the sea; that
our present downs have begun to be thrown up by the wind: just as
it must have been since this same epoch, that colonies of men have
begun, for the first or second time, to spread themselves, and to
form establishments in places fitted by nature for their reception.
I do not here take the action of volcanoes into account, not only
because of the irregularity of their eruptions, but because we have
no proofs of their not having been able to exist under the sea; and
because, on that account, they cannot serve us as a measure of the
time which has elapsed since its last retreat.




_Additions of Land by the Action of Rivers._


MM. Deluc and Dolomieu have most carefully examined the progress
of the formation of new ground by means of matters washed down by
rivers; and although exceedingly opposed to each other on many points
of the Theory of the Earth, they agree in this. These formations
augment very rapidly; they must have increased still more rapidly at
first, when the mountains furnished more materials to the rivers, and
yet their extent is still inconsiderable.

Dolomieu’s Memoir respecting Egypt[90] tends to prove, that the
tongue of land on which Alexander caused his city to be built,
did not exist in the days of Homer; that they were then able to
navigate directly from the island of Pharos into the gulf afterwards
called _Lake Mareotis_; and that this gulf was then, as indicated
by Menelaus, from fifteen to twenty leagues in length. It had,
therefore, only required the nine hundred years that elapsed between
the time of Homer and that of Strabo, to bring things to the state
in which this latter author describes them, and to reduce the gulf
in question to the form of a lake, of six leagues in length. It is
more certain, that, since that time, things have changed still more.
The sand thrown up by the sea and winds have formed, between the
island of Pharos and the site of ancient Alexandria, a tongue of land
two hundred fathoms in breadth, upon which the modern city has been
built. It has blocked up the nearest mouth of the Nile, and reduced
the lake Mareotis to almost nothing; while, during the same period,
the alluvial matter carried down by the Nile, has been deposited
along the rest of the shore, and has greatly increased its extent.

The ancients were not ignorant of these changes. Herodotus says,
that the Egyptian priests regarded their country as a gift of the
Nile. It is only in a manner, he adds, within a short period, that
the Delta has appeared[91]. Aristotle observes, that Homer speaks of
Thebes as if it had been the only great city in Egypt; and nowhere
makes mention of Memphis[92]. The Canopian and Pelusian mouths of
the Nile were formerly the principal ones; and the coast extended in
a straight line from the one to the other; and in this manner it
still appears in the charts of Ptolemy. Since then, the water has
been directed into the Bolbitian and Phatnitic mouths; and it is at
these entrances into the sea that the greatest depositions have been
formed, which have given the coast a semicircular outline. The cities
of Rosetta and Damieta, which were built upon these mouths, close
to the edge of the sea, less than a thousand years ago, are now two
leagues distant from it. According to Demaillet[93], it would only
have required twenty-six years to form a promontory of half a league
in extent before Rosetta.

An elevation is produced in the soil of Egypt, at the same time
that this extension of its surface takes place, and the bed of the
river rises in the same proportion as the adjacent plains, which
makes the inundations of every succeeding century pass far beyond
the marks which it had left during the preceding ones. According
to Herodotus, a period of nine hundred years was sufficient to
establish a difference of level amounting to ten or twelve feet. At
Elephantia[94], the inundation at present exceeds by seven feet the
greatest heights which it attained under Septimus Severus, at the
commencement of the third century. At Cairo, before it is judged
sufficient for the purpose of irrigation, it must exceed, by three
feet and a half, the height which was necessary in the ninth century.
The ancient monuments of this celebrated land have all their bases
more or less buried in the soil. The mud left by the river even
covers, to a depth of several feet, the artificial mounds on which
the ancient towns were built[95].

The delta of the Rhone is not less remarkable for its increase.
Astruc gives a detailed account of it in his Natural History of
Languedoc; and proves, by a careful comparison of the descriptions of
Mela, Strabo and Pliny, with the state of the places as they existed
at the commencement of the eighteenth century, taking into account
the statements of several writers of the middle age, that the arms
of the Rhone have increased three leagues in length in the course
of eighteen hundred years; that similar additions of land are made
to the west of the Rhone; and that a number of places, which were
situated, six or eight hundred years ago, at the edge of the sea or
of large pools, are now several miles distant from the water.

Any one may observe in Holland and Italy, with what rapidity the
Rhine, the Po, and the Arno, since they have been confined within
dikes, raise their beds, advance their mouths into the sea, forming
long promontories at their sides; and judge, from these facts, how
small a number of ages was required by these rivers to deposit the
low plains which they now traverse.

Many cities, which were flourishing sea-ports at well known periods
of history, are now some leagues inland; and several have even been
ruined, in consequence of this change of position. The inhabitants of
Venice find it exceedingly difficult to preserve the _lagunes_, by
which that city is separated from the continent; and notwithstanding
all their efforts, it will be inevitably joined to the mainland[96].

We know, from the testimony of Strabo, that Ravenna stood among
lagunes in the time of Augustus, as Venice does now; but at present
Ravenna is a league distant from the shore. Spina had been built by
the Greeks at the edge of the sea; yet in Strabo’s time it was ninety
stadia from it, and is now destroyed. Adria in Lombardy, which gave
name to the Adriatic sea, and of which it was, somewhat more than
twenty centuries ago, the principal port, is now six leagues distant
from it. Fortis has even rendered it probable that, at a more remote
period, the Euganian Mountains may have been islands.

M. de Prony, a learned member of the Institute, and inspector-general
of bridges and roads, has communicated to me some observations which
are of the greatest importance, as explaining those changes that
have taken place along the shores of the Adriatic[97]. Having been
directed by government to investigate the remedies that might be
applied to the devastations occasioned by the floods of the Po, he
ascertained that this river, since the period when it was shut in
by dikes, has so greatly raised the level of its bottom, that the
surface of its waters is now higher than the roofs of the houses in
Ferrara. At the same time, its alluvial depositions have advanced so
rapidly into the sea, that, by comparing old charts with the present
state, the shore is found to have gained more than six thousand
fathoms since 1604, giving an average of a hundred and fifty or a
hundred and eighty, and in some places two hundred feet yearly.
The Adige and the Po, are at the present day higher than the whole
tract of land that lies between them; and it is only by opening
new channels for them in the low grounds, which they have formerly
deposited, that the disasters which they now threaten may be averted.

The same causes have produced the same effects along the branches of
the Rhine and the Meuse; and thus the richest districts of Holland
have continually the frightful view of their rivers held up by
embankments at a height of from twenty to thirty feet above the level
of the land.

M. Wiebeking, director of bridges and highways in the kingdom of
Bavaria, has written a memoir upon this subject, so important as to
be worthy of being properly understood, both by the people and the
government, in all countries where these changes take place. In this
memoir, he shews that the property of raising the level of their beds
is common in a greater or less degree to all rivers.

The additions of land that have been made along the shores of the
North Sea, have not been less rapid in their progress than in
Italy. They can be easily traced in Friesland and in the country
of Groningen, where the epoch of the first dikes, constructed by
the Spanish governor Gaspar Roblès, is well known to have been in
1570. An hundred years afterwards, land had already been gained,
in some places, to the extent of three quarters of a league beyond
these dikes; and even the city of Groningen, partly built upon the
old land, on a limestone which does not belong to the present sea,
and in which the same shells are found as in the coarse limestone
of the neighbourhood of Paris, is only six leagues from the sea.
Having been upon the spot, I am enabled to adduce my own testimony
in confirmation of facts already well known, and which have been so
well stated by M. Deluc[98]. The same phenomenon may be as distinctly
observed along the coasts of East Friesland, and the countries of
Bremen and Holstein, as the period at which the new grounds were
inclosed for the first time is known, and the extent that has been
gained since can be measured. This new alluvial land, formed by the
rivers and the sea, is of astonishing fertility, and is so much
the more valuable, as the ancient soil of these countries, being
covered with heaths and peat-mosses, is almost everywhere unfit
for cultivation. The alluvial lands alone produce subsistence for
the many populous cities that have been built along these coasts,
since the middle age, and which perhaps would not have attained
their present flourishing condition, without the aid of the rich
deposits which the rivers had prepared for them, and which they are
continually augmenting.

If the size which Herodotus attributes to the Sea of Asoph, which he
makes equal to the Euxine[99], had been less vaguely indicated, and
if we knew precisely what he meant by the Gerrhus[100], we should
there find strong additional proofs of the changes produced by
rivers, and the rapidity with which they are made; for the alluvial
depositions of rivers alone have, since the time of Herodotus, that
is to say, in the course of two thousand and two or three hundred
years, reduced the Sea of Asoph[101] to its present comparatively
small size, shut up the course of the Gerrhus, or that branch of
the Dnieper which had formerly joined the Hypacyris, and discharged
its waters along with that river into the gulf called Carcinites,
now the Olu-Degnitz, and reduced the Hypacyris itself to almost
nothing[102]. We should possess proofs no less strong of the same
kind, could we be certain that the Oxus or Sihoun, which at present
discharges itself into the lake Aral, formerly reached the Caspian
Sea. But we are in possession of facts sufficiently conclusive on
the point in question, without adducing such as are doubtful, and
without being exposed to the necessity of making the ignorance of the
ancients in geography the basis of our physical propositions.[103]




_Progress of the Downs._


The downs or hillocks of sand which the sea throws up on low coasts,
when its bottom is sandy, have already been mentioned. Wherever human
industry has not succeeded in fixing these downs, they advance as
irresistibly upon the land as the alluvial depositions of the rivers
advance into the sea. In their progress inland, they push before them
the large pools formed by the rain which falls upon the neighbouring
grounds, and whose communication with the sea is intercepted by them.
In many places they proceed with a frightful rapidity, overwhelming
forests, buildings, and cultivated fields. Those upon the coast of
the Bay of Biscay[104] have already overwhelmed a great number of
villages mentioned in the records of the middle age; and at this
moment, in the single Department of the _Landes_, they threaten
ten with inevitable destruction. One of these villages, named
Mimisan, has been struggling against them these twenty years, with
the melancholy prospect of a sand-hill of more than sixty feet
perpendicular height visibly approaching it.

In 1802, the pent up pools overwhelmed five fine farming
establishments at the village of St Julian[105]. They have long
covered up an ancient Roman road leading from Bourdeaux to Bayonne,
and which could still be seen forty years ago, when the waters
were low[106]. The Adour, which is known to have formerly passed
Old Boucaut, to join the sea at Cape Breton, is now turned to the
distance of more than two thousand yards.

The late M. Bremontier, inspector of bridges and highways, who
conducted extensive operations upon these downs, estimated their
progress at sixty feet yearly, and in some places at seventy-two
feet. According to this calculation, it will only require two
thousand years to enable them to reach Bourdeaux; and, from their
present extent, it must have been somewhat more than four thousand
years since they began to be formed[107].

The overwhelming of the cultivated lands of Egypt, by the sterile
lands of Libya, which are thrown upon them by the west wind, is
a phenomenon of the same nature with the downs. These sands have
destroyed a number of cities and villages, whose ruins are still to
be seen; and this has happened since the conquest of the country
by the Mahometans, for the summits of the minarets of some mosques
are seen projecting beyond the sand[108]. With a progress so rapid,
they would, without doubt, have filled up the narrow parts of the
valley, if so many ages had elapsed since they began to be thrown
into it[109]; and there would no longer remain any thing between
the Libyan chain and the Nile. Here, then, we have another natural
chronometer, of which it would be as easy as interesting to obtain
the measure.




_Peat-Mosses and Slips._


The turbaries, or peat-mosses, which have been found so generally
in the northern parts of Europe, by the accumulation of the remains
of _sphagna_ and other aquatic mosses, also afford a measure of
time. They increase in height in proportions which are determinate
with regard to each place. They thus envelope the small knolls of
the lands on which they are formed; and several of these knolls have
been covered over within the memory of man. In other places the
peat-mosses descend along the valleys, advancing like glaciers, but
differing from them in this respect, that, while the glaciers melt
at their lower part, the progress of the peat is impeded by nothing.
By sounding their depth down to the solid ground, we may estimate
their age; and we find, with regard to these peat-mosses, as with
regard to the downs, that they cannot have derived their origin from
an indefinitely remote period. The same observation may be made with
regard to the slips or fallings, which take place with wonderful
rapidity at the foot of all steep rocks, and which are still very far
from having covered them. But as no precise measures have hitherto
been applied to these two agents, we shall not insist upon them at
greater length[110].

From all that has been said, it may be seen that nature uniformly
speaks the same language, everywhere informing us that the present
order of things cannot have commenced at a very remote period. And,
what is very remarkable, mankind everywhere speaks as nature, whether
we consult the received traditions of the various nations, or examine
their moral and political state, and the intellectual attainments
which they had made at the period when their authentic records
commence.




_The History of Nations confirms the Newness of the Continents._


In fact, although, at the first glance, the traditions of some
ancient nations, which extend their origin to so many thousands
of ages, appear strongly to contradict this newness of the world,
as it exists at present; yet when we examine these traditions
more carefully, we soon perceive that they are not sufficiently
authenticated. We are, on the contrary, quickly convinced, that true
history, deserving that name, and all that has been preserved of
positive documents regarding the first establishment of nations,
confirm what has been announced by the natural monuments already
mentioned.

The chronology of none of the western nations can be traced in a
continuous line farther back than 3000 years. None of them afford us,
previous to that period, nor even two or three centuries after, a
series of facts connected with any degree of probability. The north
of Europe possesses no authentic records which bear a remoter date
than that of its conversion to Christianity. The history of Spain,
of Gaul, and of England, commences only at the period when these
countries were conquered by the Romans; that of northern Italy is,
at the present day, almost unknown. The Greeks acknowledge that they
did not possess the art of writing, until it was taught them by the
Phœnicians, fifteen or sixteen centuries before the Christian era;
even for a long time after, their history is full of fables; and they
do not assign a more remote date than 300 years farther back, to
their uniting into distinct tribes. Of the history of Western Asia,
we have only a few contradictory extracts, which do not, with any
connection, give a greater antiquity than twenty-five centuries[111];
and even if we admit the few historical details which refer to more
remote periods, it can scarcely be extended to forty[112].

_Herodotus_, the first profane historian whose works have been
transmitted to us, has not a greater antiquity than 2300 years[113].
The historians, prior to him, whom he may have consulted, do not
date a century before him[114]. We may even judge of what they were
by the extravagances handed down to us, extracted from the works
of _Aristæus_ of Proconnesus, and some others. Before them we have
only poets; and _Homer_, the most ancient that we possess, Homer
the immortal master and model of all the West, flourished only
twenty-seven or twenty-eight centuries before the present time.

When these first historians speak of ancient events, whether
occurring in their own nation, or in neighbouring countries, they
only cite oral traditions, and not public works. It was not until
a long time after them, that pretended extracts were given from the
Egyptian, Phenician, and Babylonian annals. _Berosus_ wrote only in
the reign of Seleucus Nicanor; _Hieronymus_ in that of Antiochus
Soter, and _Manetho_ under Ptolemy Philadelphia; the whole three
having flourished only in the third century before the Christian era.
That _Sanconiatho_ was an author real or supposed, was not known
till Philo of Byblos had published a translation of his work in the
reign of Adrian, in the second century before Christ; and, when he
did become known, there was nothing found in his account of the early
ages, as in those of all the authors of this kind, but a puerile
theogony, or metaphysical doctrines, so disguised under the form of
allegory as to be unintelligible.

One nation alone has preserved annals written in prose before the
period of Cyrus, namely, the Jewish people. The part of the Old
Testament which is known by the name of the _Pentateuch_, has existed
in its present form, at least since the separation of the ten tribes
under Jeroboam, since it was received as authentic by the Samaritans
equally as the Jews, which assures us that its actual antiquity is
upwards of 2800 years. Besides this, we have no reason to doubt the
book of Genesis having been composed by Moses himself, which gives
it an antiquity of 500 years more, or of thirty-three centuries;
and it is only necessary to read it, to perceive that it has in part
been composed of fragments of previously existing works. We cannot,
therefore, hesitate to admit, that this is the most ancient writing
which has been transmitted to modern times in the West[115].

Now, this work, and all those which have been composed since,
whatever strangers their authors might be to Moses and his people,
speak of the nations on the shores of the Mediterranean as of recent
origin; they represent them as still in a half savage state some
ages before. And, further, they all speak of a general catastrophe,
an irruption of the waters, which occasioned an almost total
regeneration of the human race; and to this epoch they do not assign
a very remote antiquity. Those texts of the Pentateuch, which extend
this epoch the longest, do not place it farther back than twenty
centuries before Moses, and hence not more than 5400 years before the
present day[116].

In the poetical traditions of the Greeks, from which is derived
the whole of our profane history with reference to those remote
ages, there is nothing which contradicts the Jewish annals. On the
contrary, they have a wonderful agreement with them, by the epoch
which they assign to the Egyptian and Phenician colonies, by which
the first germs of civilization were carried into Greece. We find
that, about the same period when the Israelites took their departure
from Egypt, to carry into Palestine the sublime doctrine of the unity
of God, other colonies issued from the same country, to carry into
Greece a religion less pure, at least in its external character,
whatever might have been the secret doctrines which it reserved for
the initiated; while others, again, came from Phenicia, and imparted
to the Greeks the art of writing, and whatever was connected with
navigation and commerce[117].

It is undoubtedly far from being the case, that we have had since
that time a connected history, since we still find, for a long
period after these founders of colonies, a multitude of mythological
events, and adventures, in which gods and heroes are concerned; and
these chiefs are connected with authentic history only by means of
genealogies evidently fictitious[118]. And, it is still more certain,
that whatever preceded their arrival, could only have been preserved
in very imperfect traditions, and supplied by mere fictions, similar
to those of our monks of the middle age regarding the origin of the
European nations.

Thus, not only should we not be surprised to find, even in ancient
times, many doubts and contradictions respecting the epochs of
Cecrops, Deucalion, Cadmus and Danaus; and not only would it be
childish to attach the smallest importance to any opinion whatever,
regarding the precise dates of Inachus[119] or Ogyges[120]; but, if
any thing ought to surprise us, it is this,--that an infinitely more
remote antiquity had not been assigned to those personages. It is
impossible that there has not been in this case some effect of the
influence of received traditions, from which the inventors of fables
were not able to free themselves. One of the dates assigned to the
deluge of Ogyges, even agrees so much with one of those which have
been attributed to the deluge of Noah, that it is almost impossible
it should not have been derived from some source, where this latter
deluge had been the one intended to be spoken of[121].

As to Deucalion, whether this prince be regarded as a real or
fictitious personage, however little we enter into the manner in
which his deluge has been introduced into the poems of the Greeks,
and the various details with which it becomes successively enriched,
we perceive that it was nothing else than a tradition of the great
cataclysm, altered and placed by the Hellenians in the period which
they also assigned to Deucalion, because he was regarded as the
founder of their nation, and because his history is confounded with
that of all the chiefs of the renewed nations[122].

Each of the different colonies of Greece, that had preserved
isolated traditions, commenced them with a particular deluge of
its own, because some remembrance of the general deluge common to
all the nations, was preserved among each of the tribes; and, when
it was afterwards attempted to reduce these various traditions to
a common chronology, different events were imagined to have been
recorded, from the circumstance that dates, in reality uncertain, or
perhaps altogether false, although considered as authentic in the
countries where they originated, were not found to agree with each
other. Thus, in the same manner that the Hellenes had a deluge of
Deucalion, because they regarded him as the founder of their nation,
the Autochtones of Attica had one of Ogyges, because it was with him
that their history commenced. The Pelasgi of Arcadia had that which,
according to later authors, compelled Dardanus to retire towards
the Hellespont.[123] The island of Samothracia, one of those in
which a succession of priests had been more anciently established,
together with a regular worship and connected traditions, had also
a deluge, which passed for the most ancient of all[124], and which
was attributed to the bursting of the Bosphorus and the Hellespont.
Some idea of a similar event was preserved in Asia Minor[125], and in
Syria[126], and to this the Greeks would afterwards naturally attach
the name of Deucalion[127].

But none of these traditions assign a very remote antiquity to
this cataclysm; and there is none of them that does not admit of
explanation, in so far as its date and other circumstances are
concerned, from the variations to which narratives, that are not
fixed by writing, must be continually liable.




_The very remote Antiquity attributed to certain Nations is not
supported by History._


Those who would attribute to the continents and the establishment
of nations, a very remote antiquity, are therefore obliged to have
recourse to the Indians, Chaldeans, and Egyptians, three nations,
in fact, which appear to have been the most anciently civilized of
the Caucasian Race, and having a remarkable similarity, not only in
their temperament, and in the climate and nature of the countries
which they occupied, but also in their political and religious
constitution, but whose testimony this almost identical constitution
ought to render equally suspected[128].

These three nations agreed in having each a hereditary caste, to
which the care of religion, laws, and science, was exclusively
consigned. In all of them, this caste had its allegorical language
and secret doctrines; and in all it reserved to itself the privilege
of reading and explaining the sacred books, the whole doctrines of
which had been revealed by the gods themselves.

We can easily conceive what history would necessarily come to in such
hands; but, without having recourse to any great efforts of reason,
we may learn it from the fact itself, by examining what it has come
to in the only one of these three nations which still exists,
namely, the Indians.

The truth is, that history does not exist at all among them. In the
midst of that infinity of books on mystical theology and abstract
metaphysics which the Brahmins possess, and many of which have been
made known to us by the ingenious perseverance of the English, we
find no connected account of the origin of their nation, or of the
vicissitudes of their society. They even pretend that their religion
prohibits them from recording the events of the present time, their
age of misfortune[129].

According to the Vedas, the first revealed works, on which are
founded the whole religious opinions of the Hindoos, the literature
of this people, like that of the Greeks, had its origin at two
great epochs; the Ramaian and the Mahabarat,--a thousand times
more monstrous in their wonders than the Iliad and Odyssey, but
in which we also perceive some traces of a metaphysical doctrine
of that description generally termed sublime. The other poems,
which, together with the two mentioned, compose the great body of
the Pouranas, are nothing else than metrical legends or romances,
written at different periods, and by different authors, and not
less extravagant in their fictions than the great poems. It has been
imagined that, in some of these writings, events and names of men
bearing some resemblance to those spoken of by the Greeks and Latins,
might be discovered; and it is chiefly from these resemblances of
names that Mr Wilfort has attempted to extract from the Pouranas
a kind of concordance with our ancient chronology of the west; a
concordance which, in every line, betrays the hypothetical nature of
its basis, and which, moreover, can only be admitted by absolutely
rejecting the dates given in the Pouranas themselves[130].

The list of kings which the Indian pundits or doctors pretend to have
compiled according to these Pouranas, are nothing but mere catalogues
without any details, or adorned with absurd ones, like those of the
Chaldeans and Egyptians, and like those which Trithemus and Saxo
Grammaticus have made up for the northern nations[131]. These lists
are far from corresponding; none of them supposes a history, or
registers, or records; the very basis on which they rest may have
been purely imagined by the poets from whose works they have been
extracted. One of the pundits who furnished Mr Wilfort with them,
acknowledged that he had arbitrarily filled up the spaces between
the celebrated kings with imaginary names[132], and avowed that his
predecessors had done the same. If this be true of the lists obtained
by the English at the present day, how should it not be so of those
given by Abou-Fazel, as extracts from the annals of Cachmere[133],
and which, besides, full of fables as they are, do not extend farther
back than 4300 years, of which more than 1200 are occupied with names
of princes whose reigns, in as far as regards their duration, remain
undetermined.

Even the era, accordingly, from which the Indians count their years
at the present day, which commences fifty-seven years before Christ,
and which bears the name of a prince called _Vicramaditjia_, or
_Bickermadjit_, bears it only by a sort of convention; for we find,
according to the synchronisms attributed to Vicramaditjia, that there
may have been at least three, and perhaps so many as eight or nine,
princes of this name, who have all similar legends, and who have all
waged war with a prince named _Saliwahanna_; and, further, we cannot
well make out whether this period, the fifty-seventh year before the
Christian era, is that of the birth, reign, or death of the hero
whose name it bears.[134]

Lastly, the most authentic books of the Indians, contradict, by
intrinsic and very obvious characters, the antiquity attributed to
them by the pundits. Their _vedas_, or sacred books, alleged by
them to have been revealed by Brama himself from the beginning of
the world, and arranged by _Viasa_ (a name which signifies nothing
else than collector), at the commencement of the present age, if we
judge of them by the calendar which is found annexed, and to which
they refer, as well as by the position of the colures indicated by
this calendar, may extend to 3200 years, or about the epoch of
Moses.[135] Nay, perhaps those who give credit to the assertion of
Megasthenes[136], that in his time the Indians were not acquainted
with the art of writing, who reflect that none of the ancients
has made mention of their superb temples, those immense pagodas,
the remarkable monuments of the religion of the Brahmins, and who
are aware that the epochs of their astronomical tables have been
calculated backwards, and ill calculated, and that their treatises of
astronomy are modern and antedated, will be inclined still farther to
reduce the pretended antiquity of the Vedas.

Yet even in the midst of all the Brahminical fictions, circumstances
occur, whose agreement with the result of the historical monuments of
more western countries cannot but astonish us. Thus, their mythology
consecrates the successive devastations which the surface of the
globe has already undergone, or is yet destined to undergo; and it
is only to a period somewhat less than 5000 years, that they refer
the last catastrophe.[137] One of these revolutions, which is in
reality placed much farther from us, is described in terms nearly
corresponding with those of Moses[138]. Mr Wilfort even assures us,
that, in another event of the same mythology, a conspicuous place is
held by a personage who resembles Deucalion, in his origin, name, and
adventures, and even in the name and adventures of his father[139].
It is a circumstance equally worthy of remark, that, in the lists
of their kings, imperfect and unauthentic as they are, they date the
commencement of their first human sovereigns (those of the race of
the sun and moon), at an epoch which is nearly the same as that from
which Ctesias, in his singularly constructed list, commences the
reign of his Assyrian kings[140].

This deplorable state of historical knowledge was necessarily
the result of the system of a people, among whom the exclusive
privilege of writing, of preserving, and of explaining the books,
was given to the hereditary priests of a religion monstrous in
its ritual, and cruel in its maxims. Some legend made up for the
purpose of establishing a place of pilgrimage, inventions adapted
to impress more deeply a respect for their caste, must have
interested these priests more than any historical truths. Of the
sciences, they might have cultivated astronomy, which would give
them credit as astrologers; mechanics, which would assist them in
raising their monuments, those signs of their power, and objects of
the superstitious veneration of the people; geometry, the basis of
astronomy, as well as of mechanics, and an important auxiliary to
agriculture in those vast plains of alluvial formation, which could
only be rendered healthy and fertile by the aid of numerous canals.
They might have encouraged the mechanical or chemical arts, which
supported their commerce, and contributed to their luxury, and the
magnificence of their temples. But history, which informs men of
their mutual relations, would be regarded by them with dread.

What we see in India, we might therefore expect to find in general,
wherever sacerdotal races, constituted like those of the Brahmins,
and established in similar countries, assumed the same empire over
the mass of the people. The same causes produce the same effects;
and, in fact, we have only to glance over the fragments of Egyptian
and Chaldean traditions which have been preserved, to be convinced
that there is no more historical authenticity in them than in those
of the Indians.

In order to judge of the nature of the chronicles which the Egyptian
priests pretended to possess, it is only necessary to review the
extracts which have been given by themselves at different periods,
and to different individuals.

Those of _Sais_, for example, informed Solon, about 550 years before
Christ, that, as Egypt was not subject to deluges, they had preserved
not only their own annals, but those of other nations also; that the
cities of Athens and Sais had been built by Minerva, the former 9000
years before, the latter only 8000; and to these dates they added
the well known fables respecting the Atlantes, and the resistance
which the ancient Athenians opposed to their conquests, together with
the whole romantic description of the Atlantis[141], a description
in which we find events and genealogies similar to those of all
mythological romances.

A century later, about 450 years before Christ, the priests of
Memphis gave entirely different accounts to Herodotus[142]. Menes,
the first king of Egypt, according to them, had built Memphis, and
inclosed the Nile within dikes, as if it were possible that the first
king of a country could perform operations of this kind. Between
this prince and Mœris, who, according to them, reigned 900 years
before the period at which this account was given (1350 years before
Christ), they had a succession of three hundred and thirty other
kings.

After these kings came Sesostris, who extended his conquests as far
as Colchis[143]; and altogether, there were, to the time of Sethos,
three hundred and forty-one kings, and three hundred and forty-one
chief priests, in three hundred and forty-one generations, during a
space of 11,340 years. And, in this interval, as if to insure the
authenticity of their chronology, these priests asserted that the
sun had risen twice where he sets, without any change having taken
place in the climate or productions of the country, and without any
of the gods having at that time, or before, made their appearance and
reigned in Egypt.

To this fable, which, despite of all the pretended explanations that
have been given of it, evinces so gross an ignorance of astronomy,
they added, regarding Sesostris, Phero, Helenius, and Rhampsinitus,
the kings who built the pyramids, and an Ethiopian conqueror named
_Sabacos_, a set of tales equally absurd.

The priests of Thebes did better: they shewed Herodotus, and they
had before shewn to Hecatæus, three hundred and forty-five colossal
figures of wood, which represented three hundred and forty-five high
priests, who had succeeded to each other from father to son, all
men, all born the one of the other, but who had been preceded by
gods[144]. Other Egyptians told him that they had exact registers,
not only of the reign of men, but also of that of gods. They reckoned
17,000 years from Hercules to Amases, and 15,000 from Bacchus. Pan
had even been prior to Hercules[145]. These people evidently took for
history some allegories relating to pantheistic metaphysics, which
formed, unknown to them, the basis of their mythology.

It is only from the time of Sethos that Herodotus commences the
part of his history which is somewhat rational; and it is worthy of
remark, that this part begins with an event which agrees with the
Hebrew annals, the destruction of the army of the King of Assyria,
_Sennacherib_[146]; and this agreement continues under Necho[147],
and under Hophra or Apries.

Two centuries after Herodotus (about 260 years before Christ)
Ptolemy Philadelphus, a prince of a foreign race, wished to become
acquainted with the history of the country which events had called
him to govern. A priest, called Manetho, was employed to write it
for him. It was not from registers or archives that he pretended to
compile this work, but from the sacred books of Agathodæmon, the son
of the second Hermes, and the father of Tat, who had copied it upon
pillars erected before the flood by Tot or the first Hermes, in the
Seriadic land[148]. And this second Hermes, this Agathodæmon, this
Tat, are personages of whom nothing had ever been said before, any
more than of the Seriadic land, or of its pillars. The deluge itself
was an event entirely unknown to the Egyptians of preceding times,
and concerning which Manetho says nothing in what remains of his
dynasties. The product resembles its source; not only is the whole
full of absurdities, but they are absurdities peculiar to the work,
and utterly irreconcilable with those which the priests of older
times had related to Solon and Herodotus.

It is Vulcan who commences the series of divine kings. He reigns
9000 years; the gods and demi-gods reign 1985 years. The names, and
successions, and dates of Manetho are utterly unlike any thing that
was published before or after him; and from the discrepancy of the
extracts given by Josephus, Julius Africanus, and Eusebius, we may
infer that his narratives were as obscure and confused in themselves,
as they were discordant with those of other authors. Even the
duration of the respective reigns of his human kings is not settled.
According to Julius Africanus, it extended to 5101; according to
Eusebius, to 4723; and according to Syncellus, to 3555 years. It
might be thought that the differences in the names and cyphers arose
from the inaccuracy of copyists; but Josephus quotes a passage at
length, the details of which are manifestly in contradiction with the
extracts of his successors.

A chronicle, named the _ancient_[149], and which some consider
anterior, others posterior, to Manetho, gives still different
calculations. The total duration of its kings is 36,525 years, of
which the sun reigned 30,000, the other gods 3984, and the demi-gods
217; there remaining for those of the human race only 2339 years.
There are thus also but 113 generations, in place of the 340 of
Herodotus.

A learned man of an order different from that of Manetho, the
astronomer Eratosthenes, discovered and published, in the reign
of Ptolemy Euergetes, about 240 years before Christ, a particular
list of thirty-eight kings of Thebes, commencing with Menes, and
continuing for a space of 1024 years; of which we have an extract
that Syncellus has copied from Apollodorus[150]. Scarcely any of the
names found in this list correspond with those of the others.

Diodorus went to Egypt in the reign of Ptolemy Auletes, about sixty
years before Christ, consequently two centuries after Manetho, and
four after Herodotus. He also collected from the narratives of the
priests a history of the country, and his account is again quite
different from those of his predecessors[151]. It is no longer
Menes who built Memphis, but Uchoræus; and long before his time
Busiris the second had built Thebes. The eighth ancestor of Uchoræus,
Osymandyas, possessed himself of Bactria, and crushed rebellions in
it. Long after him, Sesoosis made still more extensive conquests,
having proceeded as far as the Ganges, and returned by Scythia and
the Tanais. Unfortunately these names of kings are unknown to all the
preceding historians, and none of the nations which they conquered
have preserved the slightest traces of them. As to the gods and
heroes, their reign, according to Diodorus, extended through a space
of 18,000 years, while that of the human sovereigns was 15,000. Four
hundred and seventy of the kings were Egyptians, and four Ethiopians,
without reckoning the Persians and Macedonians. The fables, besides,
with which the whole is intermingled, do not yield in childishness to
those of Herodotus.

In the eighteenth year of the Christian era, Germanicus, the nephew
of Tiberius, led by the desire of becoming acquainted with the
antiquities of this celebrated land, went over to Egypt, at the
risk of incurring the displeasure of a prince so suspicious as his
uncle, and proceeded up the Nile as far as Thebes. It was no more
Sesostris or Osymandyas, of whom the priests spoke to him as a
conqueror, but Rhamses, who, at the head of 700,000 men, had invaded
Libya, Ethiopia, Media, Persia, Bactria, Scythia, Asia-Minor, and
Syria[152].

Lastly, in the celebrated article of Pliny upon the obelisks[153],
we find names of kings which are not to be seen elsewhere; Sothies,
Mnevis, Zmarreus, Eraphius, Mestires, a Semenpserteus, contemporary
of Pythagoras, &c. A Ramises, who might be thought the same as
Rhamses, is there made to live at the time of the siege of Troy.

I am not sure whether it has been attempted to reconcile these
discordant lists by the supposition that the kings have borne several
names. For my own part, when I consider not only the discrepancy of
these various accounts, but, above all, the mixture of authentic
facts, attested by vast monuments, and of puerile extravagancies,
it appears to me much more natural to conclude, that the Egyptian
priests possessed no real history whatever; that, inferior still to
those of India, they had not even suitable and connected fables;
that they preserved only lists more or less defective of their kings,
and some remembrances of the more distinguished among them, of those
especially who had taken care to have their names inscribed upon the
temples and other great edifices which adorned their country; but
that these remembrances were confused, that they rested merely upon
the traditional explanation which was given to the representations
painted or sculptured upon the monuments; explanations founded
solely upon hieroglyphical inscriptions, conceived, like that which
has been handed down to us[154], in very general terms, and which,
passing from mouth to mouth, were altered, as to their details, at
the pleasure of those who communicated them to strangers; and that it
is consequently impossible to rest any proposition relative to the
antiquity of the presently existing continents, upon the shreds of
these traditions, so incomplete even in their own times, and become
utterly unintelligible under the pen of those who have been the means
of transmitting them to us.

Should this assertion require other proofs, they would be found
in the list of the sacred works of Hermes, which were carried
by the Egyptian priests in their solemn processions. Clement of
Alexandria[155] names them all to the number of forty-two, and there
is not even found among them, as is the case with the Brahmins, one
epic poem, or one book, which has the pretension to be a narrative,
or to fix in any way a single great action or a single event.

The interesting researches of M. Champollion the younger, and
his astonishing discoveries regarding the language of the
hieroglyphics[156], far from overturning these conjectures, on the
contrary, confirm them. This ingenious antiquary has read, in a
series of hieroglyphic paintings in the temple of Abydos[157], the
prenomens of a certain number of kings placed in regular succession
one after another; and a part of these prenomens (the last ten)
recurring on various other monuments, accompanied with proper names,
he has concluded that they are those of kings who bore those proper
names, and this has afforded him nearly the same kings, and in
the same order, as those of which Manetho composes his eighteenth
dynasty, that which expelled the shepherds. The concordance, however,
is not complete: in the painting of Abydos, six of the names that
appear in Manetho’s list are wanting; there are some, again, which
bear no resemblance; and, lastly, there unfortunately occurs a
blank before the most remarkable of all, the Rhamses, who appears
the same as the king represented on many of the finest monuments,
with the attributes of a great conqueror. It would be, according
to M. Champollion, in the list of Manetho, the Sethos, the chief
of the nineteenth dynasty, who, in fact, is indicated as powerful
in ships and in cavalry, and as having carried his arms into
Cyprus, Media and Persia. M. Champollion thinks, with Marsham and
many others, that it is this Rhamses, or this Sethos, who is the
Sesostris, or the Sesoosis of the Greeks; and this opinion possesses
some probability, in this respect, that the representations of the
victories of Rhamses, probably carried over the wandering tribes in
the vicinity of Egypt, or at the most into Syria, have given rise
to those fabulous ideas of vast conquests attributed, by some other
confusion, to a Sesostris. But, in Manetho, it is in the twelfth
dynasty, and not in the eighteenth, that a prince bearing the name
of Sesostris is inscribed, who is noted as having conquered Asia
and Thrace[158]. Marsham also asserts, that this twelfth dynasty
and the eighteenth make but one[159]. Manetho could not himself,
therefore, have understood the lists which he copied. Lastly, if
we admit in their full degree, both the historical truth of this
bas-relief of Abydos, and its accordance, whether with the part of
Manetho’s lists that seems to correspond to it, or with the other
hieroglyphic inscriptions, this consequence would result, that the
pretended eighteenth dynasty, the first regarding which the ancient
chronologists begin to manifest some agreement, is also the first
which has left traces of its existence upon monuments. Manetho may
have consulted this document and others of a like nature; but it
is not the less obvious, that a mere list, a series of names or of
portraits, as he has throughout, is far from being a history.

Ought not this, then, which is proved and demonstrated with respect
to the Indians, and which I have rendered so probable with respect
to the inhabitants of the valley of the Nile, be presumed also to
be the case with those of the valleys of the Euphrates and Tigris?
Established, like the Indians[160] and Egyptians, upon a much
frequented route of commerce, in vast plains, which they had been
obliged to intersect with numerous canals; instructed, like them,
by hereditary priests, the pretended depositaries of secret books,
the privileged possessors of the sciences, astrologers, builders
of pyramids, and other great monuments[161]; should they not also
resemble them in other essential points? Should not their history
be equally a mere collection of legendary tales? I venture almost
to assert, that not only is this probable, but that it is actually
demonstrated.

Up to this period neither Moses nor Homer speak of any great empire
in Upper Asia. Herodotus[162] gives to the supremacy of the Assyrians
a duration of only 520 years, and does not attribute to their origin
a greater antiquity than about eight centuries before his own time.
After having been at Babylon, where he consulted the priests, he had
not even learnt the name of Ninus as king of the Assyrians, and does
not mention him otherwise than as the father of Agro[163], the first
Lydian king of the family of the Heraclides. Notwithstanding, he
makes him the son of Belus: so much confusion had there been in the
traditions. Though he speaks of Semiramis as one of the queens who
left great monuments in Babylon, he only places her seven generations
before Cyrus.

Hellanicus, who was cotemporary with Herodotus, far from allowing
that Semiramis had built any thing at Babylon, attributes the
foundation of that city to Chaldæus, the fourteenth successor
of Ninus[164]. Berosus, a Babylonian and a priest, who wrote
scarcely a hundred and twenty years after Herodotus, gives an
astounding antiquity to Babylon; but it is to Nabuchodonosor, a
prince comparatively very modern, that he attributes the principal
monuments[165]. Regarding even Cyrus, a prince so remarkable, and
whose history must have been so well known and so popular, Herodotus,
who only lived a hundred years after him, owns that, in his time,
there already existed three different opinions; and, in fact, sixty
years later, Xenophon gives a biography of this prince quite at
variance with that of Herodotus.

Ctesias, who was nearly cotemporary with Xenophon, pretends to have
extracted from the royal archives of the Medes, a chronology which
carries back the origin of the Assyrian monarchy upwards of 800
years, putting at the head of their kings, that same Ninus, the son
of Belus, whom Herodotus had made one of the Heraclides; and, at the
same time, he attributes to Ninus and Semiramis conquests towards
the west, of an extent absolutely incompatible with the Jewish and
Egyptian history of the times in question[166].

According to Megasthenes, it was Nabuchodonosor who made these
incredible conquests. He pushed them by way of Libya, as far as
Spain[167]. We find that, in the time of Alexander, Nabuchodonosor
had completely usurped the reputation which Semiramis had possessed
in the time of Artaxerxes. But we must suppose, without doubt, that
Semiramis and Nabuchodonosor had conquered Ethiopia and Libya, much
in the same way as the Egyptians made India and Bactria to be subdued
by Sesostris or Osymandias.

It would lead to no result were we now to examine the different
accounts respecting Sardanapalus, in which a celebrated writer
imagined he had found proofs of the existence of three princes of
that name, who were all victims of similar misfortunes[168]; much in
the same way as another writer found in the Indian Vicramaditjia,
at least three princes, who were equally the heroes of similar
adventures.

It is apparently from the want of agreement in all these accounts,
that Strabo thought himself justified in saying, that the authority
of Herodotus and Ctesias was not equal to that of Homer or
Hesiod[169]. Nor has Ctesias been more happy in transcribers than
Manetho; and it is very difficult, at the present day, to harmonize
the extracts made from his writings by Diodorus, Eusebius, and the
Syncelle.

Since there existed such a state of uncertainty in the fifth century
before the Christian era, how should it be imagined that Berosus had
been able to clear it up in the third century before that era; or how
should we repose more confidence in the 430,000 years which he puts
before the deluge, or the 35,000 years which he places between the
deluge and Semiramis, than in the registers of 150,000 years, which
he boasts of having consulted[170].

Structures raised in remote provinces, and bearing the name of
Semiramis, have been spoken of; and columns erected by Sesostris[171]
have been pretended to have been seen in Asia Minor, in Thrace.
But, in the same way, in Persia, at the present day, the ancient
monuments, perhaps even some of the above, bear the name of Roustan;
and in Egypt or Arabia, they bear the names of Joseph or Solomon.
This is an ancient custom among the eastern nations, and probably
among all ignorant people. The peasants of our own country give the
name of Cæsar’s Camp to all the remains of Roman entrenchments.

In a word, the more I consider the subject, the more I am persuaded
that there existed no ancient history at Babylon or Ecbatan, more
than in Egypt and India. And, in place of reducing mythology to
history, with Evhemere and Bannier, I am of opinion that a great part
of history should be referred to mythology.

It is only at the epoch of what is commonly called the Second Kingdom
of Assyria, that the history of the Assyrians and Chaldeans begins to
become more intelligible; and this epoch is also that at which the
history of the Egyptians undergoes a similar change, when the kings
of Nineveh, of Babylon, and of Egypt, commence their conflicts on the
theatre of Syria and Palestine.

It appears, nevertheless, that the authors of these countries, or
those who had consulted the traditions regarding them, Berosus, and
Hieronymus, and Nicholas de Damas, agreed in speaking of a deluge.
Berosus has even described it with circumstances so similar to those
detailed in the book of Genesis, that it is almost impossible what he
says of it should not have been derived from the same sources, even
although he removes its epoch a great number of ages back,--insomuch,
at least, as we may judge of it, by the confused extracts which
Josephus, Eusebius, and Syncellus, have preserved of his writings.
But we must remark, and with this observation we shall conclude what
we have to say with regard to the Babylonians, that these numerous
ages, and this long series of kings, placed between the deluge and
Semiramis, are a new thing, entirely peculiar to Berosus, and
of which Ctesias, and those who have followed him, had no idea,
and which has not even been adopted by any of the profane authors
posterior to Berosus. Justin and Velleius consider Ninus as the first
of the conquerors, and those who, contrary to all probability, place
him highest, only refer him to a period of forty centuries before the
present time[172].

The Armenian authors of the middle age nearly agree with one of
the texts of Genesis, when they refer the deluge to a period of
4916 years from their own time; and it might be thought that
having collected the old traditions, and perhaps extracted the old
chronicles of their country, they form an additional authority in
favour of the newness of the nations. But when we reflect that their
historical literature commences only in the fifth century, and that
they were acquainted with Eusebius, we perceive that they must have
accommodated themselves to his authority, and to that of the Bible.
Moses of Chorene expressly professes to have followed the Greeks, and
we see that his ancient history is moulded after Ctesias[173].

However, it is certain, that the tradition of the deluge existed
in Armenia long before the conversion of its inhabitants to
Christianity; and the city, which, according to Josephus, was called
_the Place of the Descent_, still exists at the foot of Mount Ararat,
and bears the name of _Nachid-chevan_, which, in fact, has the same
signification.[174]

Along with the Armenians, we include the Arabians, Persians, Turks,
Mongolians, and Abyssinians, of the present day. Their ancient
books, if they ever had any, no longer exist. They have no ancient
history, but that which they have recently made up, and which they
have modelled after the Bible; hence, what they say of the deluge is
borrowed from Genesis, and adds nothing to the authority of that book.

It were curious to inquire what had been the opinion of the ancient
Persians upon this subject, before it was modified by the Christian
and Mahomedan creeds. We find it deposited in their Boundehesh, or
Cosmogony, a work of the time of Sassanides, (but evidently extracted
or translated from more ancient works), and which was discovered
by Anquetil du Perron, among the Parsis of India. According to it,
the total duration of the world could only be 12,000 years; hence
it cannot still be very old. The appearance of _Cayoumortz_ (the
bull-man, the first of the human race), is preceded by the creation
of a great water.[175]

For the rest, it would be as useless to expect a regular history of
ancient times from the Parsis, as from the other eastern nations. The
Magi have left none, any more than the Brahmins or Chaldeans. Of this
there is nothing more required for proof than the uncertainty which
exists regarding the epoch of Zoroaster. It is even asserted, that
the little history they may have possessed, that which relates to the
Achemenides, the successors of Cyrus to Alexander, had been expressly
altered, and this in consequence of an official order to that purpose
from a monarch named Sassanides[176].

In order to discover authentic dates of the commencement of empires,
and traces of a general deluge, we must therefore go beyond the
great deserts of Tartary. Toward the east and north we find another
race of men, who differ from us as much in their institutions and
manners as in their form and temperament. Their language consists
of monosyllables, and they make use of arbitrary hieroglyphics in
writing. They have only a political system of morals, without
religion; for the superstitions of Fo were imported among them from
India. Their yellow skin, their prominent cheeks, their narrow and
oblique eyes, and their scanty beard, render them so different from
us, that one is tempted to believe that their ancestors and ours had
escaped the great catastrophe on two different sides. But however
this may be, the epoch which they assign to their deluge is nearly
the same as ours.

The Chou-king is the most ancient of the Chinese books[177]; it is
said to have been compiled by Confucius, about 2255 years ago, from
fragments of more ancient works. Two hundred years afterwards, a
general persecution of the men of letters, and destruction of the
books, is said to have taken place under the emperor Chi-Hoang-ti,
whose object in this was to destroy the traces of the feudal
government established under the dynasty which preceded his. Forty
years after, under the dynasty which had overturned that to which
Chi-Hoang-ti belonged, a portion of the Chou-king was restored from
memory by an old literatus, and another was discovered in a tomb; but
nearly the half of it was for ever lost. Now, this book, the most
authentic which the Chinese possess, commences the history of their
country with the reign of an emperor named _Yao_, whom it represents
to us as occupied in removing the waters, _which, having risen to
the skies, still bathed the foot of the higher mountains, covered
the less elevated hills_, and rendered the plains impassable[178].
According to some, the reign of Yao was 4163 years before the present
time; according to others, 3943. The discrepancy in the opinions
regarding this epoch even amounts to 284 years.

A few pages farther on we find one _Yu_, a minister and engineer,
re-establishing the courses of the waters, raising embankments,
digging canals, and regulating the taxes of all the provinces in
China, that is to say, in an empire extending 600 leagues in all
directions. But the impossibility of such operations, after such
events, shews clearly that the whole is nothing else than a moral and
political romance[179].

More modern Chinese historians have added a series of emperors
before Yao, but with a multitude of fabulous circumstances, without
venturing to assign them fixed epochs. These writers are at
perpetual variance with each other, even regarding the number and
names of their emperors, and are not universally approved by their
countrymen. Fouhi, with the body of a serpent, the head of an ox, and
the teeth of a tortoise, together with his successors, who are not
less monstrous, are altogether absurd, and have no more existed than
Enceladon and Briareus.

Is it possible that mere chance could have produced so striking a
result, as to make the traditional origin of the Assyrian, Indian,
and Chinese monarchies agree in being referred to an epoch of nearly
4000 years from the present period? Would the ideas of nations which
have had so little communication with each other, and whose language,
religion, and laws are altogether different, have corresponded upon
this point, had they not been founded upon truth?

We could not expect precise dates from the natives of America, who
had no real writings, and whose oldest traditions extended only to
a few centuries before the arrival of the Spaniards. And yet, even
among them, traces of a deluge are imagined to be found in their rude
hieroglyphics. They have their Noah, or Deucalion, as well as the
Indians, Babylonians, and Greeks[180].

The Negroes, the most degraded race among men, whose forms approach
the nearest to the brutes, and whose intellect has not yet arrived
at the institution of regular governments, or at any thing having
the least appearance of systematic knowledge, have preserved no
sort of annals or traditions. They cannot, therefore, afford us any
information on the subject of our present researches, though all
their characters clearly shew us that they have escaped from the
great catastrophe, at another point than the Caucasian and Altaic
races, from which they had perhaps been separated for a long time
previous to the occurrence of that catastrophe.

But if the ancients, it is argued, have left no history, their long
existence as nations is not the less attested by the advances which
they have made in astronomy, by observations whose date is easily
determined, and even by monuments which still remain, and which
themselves bear their dates. Thus, the length of the year, such as
the Egyptians are supposed to have determined it, according to the
heliacal rising of Sirius, proves correct for a period comprised
between the year 3000 and the year 1000 before Christ, a period to
which the traditions of their conquests and of the great prosperity
of their empire also refer. This accuracy proves to what perfection
they had carried their observations, and shews that they had for
many ages applied themselves to such investigations.

In order to determine the force of this argument, it is necessary
that we should here enter upon some explanations.

The solstice is the moment of the year at which the rise of the
Nile commences, and that which the Egyptians must have observed
with most attention. Having, at the beginning, made, from imperfect
observations, a civil or sacred year of three hundred and sixty-five
days complete, they would preserve it from superstitious motives,
even after they had perceived that it did not agree with the natural
or tropical year, and did not bring back the seasons to the same
days[181]. However, it was this tropical year which it behoved them
to mark for the purpose of directing them in their agricultural
operations.

They would, therefore, have to search in the heavens for an apparent
sign of its return, and they imagined they had found this sign when
the sun returned to the same position, relatively to some remarkable
star. Thus they applied themselves, like almost all nations who
are beginning this inquiry, to observe the heliacal risings and
settings of the stars. We know that they chose particularly the
heliacal rising of Sirius, at first, doubtless, on account of the
beauty of the star; and, especially, because, in those ancient times,
this rising of Sirius being nearly coincident with the solstice,
and indicative of the inundation, was to them the most important
phenomenon of this kind. Hence it was that Sirius, under the name of
Sothis, occupied so conspicuous a place in their mythology, and in
their religious ceremonies. Supposing, therefore, that the return of
the heliacal rising of Sirius and the tropical year were of the same
duration, and believing, at length, that this duration was 365 days
and a quarter, they would imagine a period after which the tropical
year and the old year, the sacred year of 365 days only, would return
to the same day; a period which, according to these incorrect data,
was necessarily 1461 sacred years, and 1460 of those improved years
to which they gave the name of years of Sirius.

They took for the point of departure of this period, which they named
the Sothiac or great year, a civil year, the first day of which was,
or had been, also that of a heliacal rising of Sirius; and it is
known, from the positive testimony of Censorinus, that one of these
great years had ended in the 138th year of the Christian era[182].
It had consequently commenced in the 1322d before Christ, and that
which preceded it in the 2782d. In fact, the calculations of M.
Ideler shew, that Sirius was heliacally risen on the 20th July of the
Julian year 139, a day which corresponded that year to the first of
Thot, or the first day of the Egyptian sacred year[183].

But not only is the position of the sun, with relation to the stars
of the ecliptic, or the sidereal year different from the tropical
year, on account of the precession of the equinoxes. The heliacal
year of a star, or the period of its heliacal rising, especially when
it is distant from the ecliptic, differs still from the sidereal
year, and differs in various degrees according to the latitudes of
the places where it is observed. What is very singular, however,
and the observation has already been made by Bainbridge[184] and
Father Petau[185], it happens, by a remarkable concurrence in the
positions, that, in the latitude of Upper Egypt, at a certain epoch,
and during a certain number of ages, the year of Sirius was really
within very little of 365 days and a quarter; so that the heliacal
rising of this star returned in fact to the same day of the Julian
year, the 20th July, in the year 1322 before, and the year 138 after
Christ[186].

From this actual coincidence, at this remote period, M. Fourier, who
has confirmed all these accounts by new calculations, concludes,
that, since the length of the year of Sirius was so perfectly known
to the Egyptians, they must have determined it by observations made
during a long series of years, and conducted with great accuracy;
observations which must be referred to at least 2500 years before the
present time, and which could not have been made long before or long
after this interval of time[187].

This result would assuredly be very striking, had it been directly,
and by observations, made upon Sirius itself, that they had fixed
the length of the year of Sirius. But experienced astronomers affirm
it to be impossible that the heliacal rising of a star could afford
a sufficient foundation for exact observations on such a subject,
especially in a climate where _the circumference of the horizon
is constantly so much loaded with vapours, that, in clear nights,
stars of the second or third magnitude can never be seen within some
degrees of the verge of the horizon, and that the sun itself is
completely obscured at its rising and setting_.[188] They maintain,
that, if the length of the year had not been otherwise ascertained,
there would have been a mistake of one or two days.[189] They have no
doubt, therefore, that this duration of 365 days and a quarter, is
that of the tropical year inaccurately determined by the observation
of the shadow, or by that of the point where the sun rose each day,
and through ignorance identified with the heliacal year of Sirius; so
that it would be mere chance which had fixed with so much accuracy
the duration of this latter for the period of which we speak.[190]

Perhaps it will also be judged, that men capable of making
observations so exact, and which they had continued during so long
a period, would not have attributed so much importance to Sirius,
as to pay him religious homage; for they would have seen that the
relations of the rising of this star with the tropical year, and with
the inundation of the Nile, were merely temporary, and took place
only in a determinate latitude. In fact, according to M. Ideler’s
calculations, in the year 2782 before Christ, Sirius appeared in
Upper Egypt, on the second day after the solstice; in 1322, on the
third; and in the year 139 after Christ, on the twenty-sixth.[191] At
the present day, its heliacal rising is more than a month after the
solstice. The Egyptians would therefore set themselves by preference
to finding the period, which would bring about the coincidence of
the commencement of the sacred year, with that of the true tropical
year, and then they would discover that their great period must have
been 1508 sacred years, and not 1461.[192] Now, we assuredly do not
find any traces of this period of 1508 years in antiquity.

In general, we may defend ourselves with the idea, that, if the
Egyptians had possessed so long a series of observations, and of
accurate observations too, their disciple Eudoxus, who studied among
them for thirteen years, would, on his return, have brought into
Greece a system of astronomy more perfect, and maps of the heavens
less erroneous, and more coherent in their different parts.[193] How
should it happen that the precession of the equinoxes was not known
to the Greeks, but through the works of Hipparchus, if it had been
marked in the registers of the Egyptians, and inscribed in characters
so manifest upon the ceilings of their temples? And how comes it
that Ptolemy, who wrote in Egypt, should not have deigned to avail
himself of any of the observations of the Egyptians?[194]

Farther, Herodotus, who lived so long with them, says nothing of
those six hours which they added to the sacred year, nor of that
great Sothian period which resulted. On the contrary, he says
expressly that the Egyptians, making their year of 365 days, the
seasons returned to the same point, so that in his time the necessity
of this quarter of a day does not appear to have been suspected.[195]
Thalles, who had visited the priests of Egypt, less than a century
before Herodotus, did not, in like manner, make known to his
countrymen, any other than a year of 365 days only.[196] And, if we
reflect that all the colonies which migrated from Egypt, fourteen or
fifteen centuries before Christ, the Jews and the Athenians, carried
with them the lunar year, it will perhaps be inferred that the year
of 365 days itself had not existed in Egypt in these remote ages.

I am aware that Macrobius[197] gives the Egyptians a solar year of
365¼ days; but this author, who is comparatively modern, and who
lived at a long period after the establishment of the fixed year
of Alexandria, must have confounded the epochs. Diodorus[198] and
Strabo[199] only attribute such a year to the Thebans; they do not
say that it was in general use, and they themselves did not live till
long after Herodotus.

Thus the Sothian or great year must have been a comparatively recent
invention, since it results from the comparison of the civil year
with this pretended heliacal year of Sirius; and it is for this
reason that it is only spoken of in the works of the second and third
century after Christ[200], and that Syncellus alone, in the ninth,
seems to cite Manetho as having made mention of it.

Notwithstanding all that is said to the contrary, the same opinion
must be formed of the astronomical knowledge of the Chaldeans. It is
natural enough to think, that a people who inhabited vast plains,
under a sky perpetually serene, must have been led to observe the
course of the stars, even at a period when they still led a wandering
life, and when the stars alone could direct their courses during
the night; but since what period were they astronomers, and to what
perfection did they carry the science? Here rests the question. It is
generally allowed that Callisthenes sent to Aristotle observations
made by them, and which referred to a period of 2200 years before
Christ; but this fact is related only by Simplicius[201], as stated
upon the authority of Porphyry, and 600 years after Aristotle.
Aristotle himself says nothing on the subject, nor has any creditable
astronomer spoken of it. Ptolemy mentions and makes use of ten
observations of eclipses really made by the Chaldeans; but they do
not refer to an earlier period than that of Nabonassar (721 years
before Christ); they are inaccurate also; the time is expressed only
in hours and half-hours, and the shadow only in halves or fourths of
the diameter. Notwithstanding, as they had fixed dates, the Chaldeans
must have had some knowledge of the true length of the year, and some
means of measuring time. They appear to have known the period of
eighteen years, which brings back the eclipses of the moon in the
same order; a piece of knowledge which the mere inspection of their
registers would promptly afford them; but it is certain that they
could neither explain nor predict eclipses of the sun.

It is from not having sufficiently understood a passage of Josephus,
that Cassini, and after him Bailly, have imagined that they
discovered in it a luni-solar period of 600 years, which had been
known from the time of the first patriarchs[202].

Thus every thing leads us to believe that the great reputation of the
Chaldeans was given them at a more recent period, by their unworthy
successors, who, under the same name, sold their horoscopes and
predictions throughout the whole Roman empire, and who, in order to
procure themselves more credit, attributed to their rude ancestors
the honour of the discoveries of the Greeks.

With regard to the Indians, every body knows that Bailly, believing
that the epoch which is used as a period of departure in some of
their astronomical tables had been actually observed, has attempted
to draw from thence a proof of the great antiquity of the science
among this people, or at least among the nation which had bequeathed
them its knowledge. But the whole of this system, invented with so
much labour, falls to the ground of itself, now that it is proved
that this epoch has been adopted but of late, from calculations made
backwards, and even false in their results.[203]

Mr Bentley has discovered that the tables of Tirvalour, on which the
assertion of Bailley especially rested, must have been calculated
about 1281 of the Christian era, or 540 years ago, and that the
Surya-Siddhanta, which the Brahmins regard as their oldest scientific
treatise on astronomy, and which they pretend to have been revealed
upwards of 20,000,000 of years ago, could not have been composed at
an earlier period than about 760 years from the present day[204].

Solstices and equinoxes indicated in the Pouranas, and calculated
according to the positions which seem to be attributed to them by the
signs of the Indian zodiac, such as they are supposed to be, have
acquired the character of an enormous antiquity. A more attentive
examination of these signs or nacchatras has lately convinced M.
de Paravey that reference is only made to solstices of 1200 years
before the Christian era. This author at the same time admits, that
the place of the solstices is so inaccurately fixed, that this
determination of their date must be received with a latitude of 200
or 300 years. They are in the same predicament as those of Eudoxus
and of Tcheoukong[205].

It is ascertained that the Indians do not make observations, and that
they are not in possession of any of the instruments necessary for
that purpose. M. Delambre indeed admits, with Bailly and Legentil,
that they have processes of calculation, which, without proving the
antiquity of their astronomy, shew at least its originality[206];
and yet this conclusion can by no means be extended to their sphere;
for, independently of their twenty-seven nacchatras or lunar houses,
which strongly resemble those of the Arabians, they have the same
twelve constellations in the zodiac as the Egyptians, Chaldeans,
and Greeks[207]; and, if we refer to Mr Wilfort’s assertions, their
extra-zodiacal constellations are also the same as those of the
Greeks, and bear names which are merely slight alterations of their
Greek names[208].

It is to Yao that the introduction of astronomy into China is
attributed. He is represented, in the Chou-king, as sending
astronomers toward the four cardinal points of his empire, to
examine what stars presided over the four seasons, and to regulate
the operations to be carried on at each period of the year[209], as
if their dispersion was necessary for such an undertaking. About
200 years later, the Chou-king speaks of an eclipse of the sun, but
accompanied with ridiculous circumstances, as in all the fables of
this kind; for the whole Chinese army, headed by a general, is made
to march against two astronomers, because they had not properly
predicted it[210]; and it is well known that, more than 2000 years
after, the Chinese astronomers possessed no means of accurately
predicting the eclipses of the sun. In 1629 of our era, at the time
of their dispute with the Jesuits, they did not even know how to
calculate the shadows.

The real eclipses, recorded by Confucius in his Chronicle of the
kingdom of Lou, commence only 1400 years after this, in the 776th
before Christ, and scarcely half a century earlier than those of the
Chaldeans related by Ptolemy. So true is it, that the nations which
escaped at the same time from the general catastrophe, also arrived
about the same period, when their circumstances have been similar,
at the same degree of civilization. Now, it might be thought, from
the identity of the names of the Chinese astronomers in different
reigns (they appear, according to the Chou-king, to have all been
named _Hi_ and _Ho_), that, at this remote epoch, their profession
was hereditary in China, as it was in India, Egypt, and Babylon.

The only Chinese observation of any antiquity, which has nothing in
itself to prove its want of authenticity, is that of the shadow made
by _Tcheou-kong_ about 1100 years before Christ; and even it is far
from being correct[211].

Hence our readers may conclude, that the inferences drawn from the
alleged perfection of astronomical science among ancient nations, is
not more conclusive in favour of the excessive antiquity of those
nations, than the testimonies which they have adduced in reference to
themselves.

But had this astronomy been more perfect, what would it prove?
Has the progress been calculated which this science ought to make
among nations who were not in any degree in possession of others;
to whom the serenity of the sky, the necessities of the pastoral or
agricultural life, and their superstitious ideas, would render the
stars an object of general attention; where colleges, or societies
of the most respectable men among them, were charged with keeping a
register of interesting phenomena, and transmitting their memory; and
where, from the hereditary nature of the profession, the children
were brought up from the cradle in the knowledge of facts ascertained
by their parents? Supposing that, among the numerous individuals of
whom the cultivation of astronomy was the sole occupation, there
should happen to be one or two possessed of extraordinary talents
for geometry, all the knowledge acquired by these nations might be
attained in a few centuries.

Since the time of the Chaldeans, real astronomy has only had two
eras, that of the Alexandrian school, which lasted 400 years, and
that of our own times, which has not existed so long. The learned
period of the Arabians scarcely added any thing to it; and the other
ages have been mere blanks with regard to it. Three hundred years did
not intervene between Copernicus and the author of the _Mecanique
Céleste_; and can it be believed that the Indians required thousands
of years to arrive at their crude theories?




_The Astronomical Monuments left by the Ancients do not bear the
excessively remote dates which have been attributed to them._


Recourse has therefore been had to arguments of another kind. It
has been pretended that, independently of the knowledge which these
nations may have acquired, they have left monuments which bear a date
fixed by the state of the heavens which they represent, and one that
refers to a very remote antiquity. The zodiacs sculptured in two
temples of Upper Egypt, are adduced as furnishing proofs perfectly
demonstrative of this assertion. They present the same figures of
the zodiacal constellations as are employed at the present day,
but distributed in a manner peculiar to themselves. The state of
the heavens at the period when these monuments were delineated, is
imagined to have been represented by this distribution, and it has
been thought that it would be possible from it to infer the precise
period at which the edifices containing them were erected[212].

But to arrive at the high antiquity which is supposed to be deducible
from this, it must, in the _first_ place, be supposed, that their
division has a determinate relation to a certain state of the
heavens, dependent upon the precession of the equinoxes, which causes
the colures to make the tour of the zodiac in 26,000 years; that
it indicated, for example, the position of the solstitial point;
and, _secondly_, that the state of the heavens represented was
precisely that which took place at the period when the monument was
erected,--two suppositions which themselves, as is evident, suppose
a great number of others.

In point of fact, are the figures of these zodiacs the
constellations,--the true groups of stars which at present bear the
same names, or merely what astronomers call signs, that is to say,
divisions of the zodiac proceeding from one of the colures, whatever
place this colure occupies? Is the point at which these zodiacs
have been divided into two bands, necessarily that of a solstice?
Is the division of the side next the entrance, necessarily that of
the summer solstice? Does this division indicate, even in general, a
phenomenon dependent upon the precession of the equinoxes? Does it
not refer to some period the rotation of which would be less; for
example, to the moment of the tropical year when such or such sacred
years of the Egyptians commenced, which, being shorter than the true
tropical year by nearly six hours, would make the tour of the zodiac
in 1508 years? Lastly, whatever signification it may have had, has it
been intended by it to mark the time when the zodiac was sculptured,
or that when the temple was built? Has not the object been to record
a previous state of the heavens at some period which was interesting
in a religious point of view, whether it had been actually observed,
or inferred from a retrograde calculation?

From the mere announcement of such questions, it will be perceived
how complicated they necessarily are, how much subject to
controversy any solution that might be adopted on this subject would
be, and how little qualified to serve as a solid proof, for the
solution of another problem, such as the antiquity of the Egyptian
nation. And it may be said, with regard to those who have attempted
to infer a date from these data, that there have arisen as many
opinions as there have been authors.

The learned astronomer Mr Burkhard, from a first examination, judged
that, at Dendera, the solstice is marked by the Lion; which would
make it two signs less remote than at the present day, and the
temple at least 4000 years old[213]. He gave, at the same time an
antiquity of 7000 years to that of Esne, although it is not known
how he had purposed to reconcile these numbers with what we know
of the precession of the equinoxes. The late M. Lalande, seeing
that the Cancer was repeated on the two bands, imagined that the
solstice passed to the middle of that constellation; but as this
was the case also in the sphere of Eudoxus, he concluded that some
Grecian artist might have represented this sphere on the ceiling of
an Egyptian temple, without knowing that it represented a state of
the heavens which no longer existed[214]. This, as is seen, was a
conclusion very different from that of Mr Burkhard. Dupuis was the
first who thought it necessary to search for proofs of the idea,
in some measure confidently adopted, that it was the solstice that
was denoted. He found them, with reference to the great zodiac of
Dendera, in the globe on the top of the pyramid, and in several
emblems placed near different signs, and which he imagined, sometimes
according to the opinion of ancient authors, such as Plutarch, Horus
Apollo, or Clement of Alexandria, sometimes according to his own
conjectures, ought to be regarded as representing phenomena which
had been really those of the seasons affected at each sign. As for
the rest, he maintained that this state of the heavens affords the
date of the monument, and that it is the original, and not a copy, of
the sphere of Eudoxus, that was represented at Dendera, which would
refer it to a period of 1468 years before Christ, or to the reign of
Sesostris. The number of nineteen boats, however, placed under each
band, furnished him with the idea that the solstice might probably
have been at the nineteenth degree of the sign, which would make it
288 years older[215].

Mr Hamilton[216] having remarked, that, at Dendera, the Scarabæus
belonging to the side of the ascending signs is smaller than that of
the other side, an English author[217] has concluded from this that
the solstice may have been nearer its actual point than the middle
of the Cancer, which would carry us back to a period of 1000 or 1200
years before Christ.

The late M. Nouet, judging that the globe, the rays, and the horned
head, or head of Isis, represent the heliacal rising of Sirius,
supposed that it was intended to mark an epoch of the Sothian
period, but that it was intended to mark it by the place which the
solstice occupied. Now, in the last but one of these periods, that
which elapsed between 2782 and 1322 before Christ, the solstice had
passed from 30° 48′ of the constellation of the Lion to 13° 34′ of
Cancer. At the middle of this period, it was therefore at 23° 34′ of
cancer. The heliacal rising of Sirius happened then some days after
the solstice; and this is nearly what has been indicated, according
to M. Nouet, by the repetition of the Scarabæus, and by the figure
of Sirius with the rays of the sun placed at the commencement of the
band to the right. Calculating upon this basis, he concludes that the
temple of Dendera was built 2052 years before Christ, and that of
Esne 4600[218].

All these calculations, even admitting that the division marks the
solstice, would still be susceptible of many modifications; and, at
first, it appears that their authors have supposed the constellations
all of thirty degrees like the signs, and have not reflected that
it is far from being the case that they are thus equal, at least
as they are represented at the present day, and as the Greeks have
transmitted them to us. In reality, the solstice, which is at present
on this side of the first stars of the constellation of Gemini,
could only have left the first stars of the constellation of Cancer
forty-five years before Christ, and had left the constellation of Leo
only 1260 years before the same era.

       *       *       *       *       *

My distinguished and learned colleague, M. Delambre, has favoured me
with the following table and remarks, which illustrate what has been
above said.




_TABLE of the Extent of the Zodiacal Constellations, as they are
designed upon our Globes, and of the Times required by the Colures
to traverse them._


  +------------------------------------------------------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      ARIES.                          |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |  Stars.  |Longitudes in 1800.|Year of the|Year of the|
  |          |                   | Equinox.  | Solstice. |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |    γ     | 1^s   0° 23′ 40″  |    -389   |    6869   |
  |    β     | 1     1  10  40   |    -441   |    6921   |
  |    α     | 1     4  52   0   |    -710   |    7190   |
  |    η     | 1     5  18  50   |    -742   |    7222   |
  |   2 θ    | 1     6  14  16   |    -810   |    7290   |
  |    ζ     | 1    19   8  50   |   -1739   |    8219   |
  |  τ tail. | 1    20  51   0   |   -1862   |    8342   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      20  27  20   |    1473   |    1473   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      TAURUS.                         |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |    ξ     | 1^s  19°  6′  0″  |   -1735   |   -8215   |
  |    η     | 1    27  12   0   |   -2318   |   -8798   |
  |    α     | 2     6  59  40   |   -3024   |   -9504   |
  |    β     | 2    19  47   0   |   -3944   |  -10424   |
  |    ζ     | 2    22   0   0   |   -4104   |  -10584   |
  | a Coch.  | 2    24  42  40   |   -4300   |  -10780   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      35  36  40   |    2565   |    2565   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      GEMINI.                         |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |  Propus. | 2^s  28°  9′ 20″  |   -4547   |  -11027   |
  |    η     | 3     0  39   0   |   -4727   |  -11207   |
  |    γ     | 3     6  18  40   |   -5134   |  -11614   |
  |    δ     | 3    15  44   0   |   -5813   |  -12293   |
  |  Castor. | 3    17  27  30   |   -5937   |  -12417   |
  |  Pollux. | 3    20  28   9   |   -6154   |  -12634   |
  |    φ     | 3    22  27  10   |   -6926   |  -12776   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      24  17  40   |    1749   |    1749   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+

  +------------------------------------------------------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      CANCER.                         |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |  Stars.  |Longitudes in 1800.|Year of the|Year of the|
  |          |                   | Equinox.  | Solstice. |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   1 ω    | 3^s  24° 21′ 55″  |    6475   |     +45   |
  |    ζ     | 3    28  32   0   |    6734   |    -254   |
  |    β     | 4     1  28  20   |    6906   |    -426   |
  |    γ     | 4     4  45   0   |    7182   |    -702   |
  |   1 α    | 4    10  18  50   |    7583   |   -1103   |
  |   2 α    | 4    10  50  36   |    7621   |   -1141   |
  |    χ     | 4    13  23   0   |    7804   |   -1324   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      19   1   5   |    1369   |    1369   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      LEO.                            |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |    χ     | 4^s  12° 30′  0″  |   -7740   |   -1260   |
  |    α     | 4    27   3  10   |   -8788   |   -1908   |
  |    δ     | 5     8  30   0   |   -9612   |   -3132   |
  |    β     | 5    18  50  55   |  -10357   |   -3877   |
  |   ...    | ..  ... ... ...   |   .....   |   .....   |
  |   ...    | ..  ... ... ...   |   .....   |   .....   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      36  20  55   |    2617   |    2617   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      VIRGO.                          |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |    ω     | 5^s  19°  2′ 22″  |  -10371   |   -3891   |
  |    β     | 5    24  19   0   |  -10750   |   -4271   |
  |    η     | 6     2   2  40   |  -11307   |   -4827   |
  |    δ     | 6     8  41  40   |  -11786   |   -5306   |
  |    α     | 6    21   3  15   |  -12676   |   -6196   |
  |    λ     | 7     4   9  50   |  -13620   |   -7140   |
  |    μ     | 7     7  17  40   |  -13845   |   -7365   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      48  15  18   |    3474   |    3474   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Mean   |                   |           |           |
  |   Dur.   |      30   0   0   |    2160   |           |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+

  +------------------------------------------------------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      LIBRA.                          |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |  Stars.  |Longitudes in 1800.|Year of the|Year of the|
  |          |                   |  Equinox. | Solstice. |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   1 α    | 7^s  11°  0′ 44″  |  -14113   |   -7633   |
  |   2 α    | 7    12  18   0   |  -14246   |   -7926   |
  |    β     | 7    16  35   0   |  -14514   |   -8034   |
  |    γ     | 7    22  20  34   |  -14929   |   -8449   |
  | γ Scorp. | 7    27  41   0   |  -15312   |   -8832   |
  |    ξ     | 7    28  30  15   |  -15372   |   -8892   |
  |   ...    | ..  ... ... ...   |   .....   |   .....   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      17  29  31   |     1259  |    1259   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      SCORPIO.                        |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   1 Α    | 7^s  28° 50′  6″  |  -15396   |   -8916   |
  |    β     | 8     0  23  48   |  -15508   |   -9028   |
  |    α     | 8     6  57  38   |  -15980   |   -9500   |
  |    ζ     | 8    12  35  30   |  -16387   |   -9907   |
  |    λ     | 8    21  47  27   |  -17049   | -105569   |
  |   ...    | ..  ... ... ...   |   .....   |   .....   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      22  57  21   |    1653   |    1653   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                     SAGITTARIUS.                     |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   γ      | 7^s  28° 28′ 20″  |  -17530   |  -11050   |
  |   λ      | 9     3  32  56   |  -17895   |  -11415   |
  |   ζ      | 9    10  50  28   |  -18421   |  -11941   |
  |   ψ      | 9    14  15  15   |  -18667   |  -12187   |
  |   ω      | 9    23   2  19   |  -19299   |  -12819   |
  |   g      | 9    25  39  25   |  -19487   |  -13007   |
  |  ...     | ..  ... ... ...   |   .....   |   .....   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |      27  11  50   |    1957   |    1957   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+

  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      CAPRICORN.                      |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |  Stars.  |Longitudes in 1800.|Year of the|Year of the|
  |          |                   |  Equinox. | Solstice. |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |  1^{er}  |  9^s  29° 39′ 15″ |  -19775   |  -13295   |
  |   2 α    | 10     1   3  58  |  -19877   |  -13397   |
  |    β     | 10     1  15  30  |  -19891   |  -13411   |
  |    ι     | 10    14  53  30  |  -20872   |  -14392   |
  |    γ     | 10    18  59  28  |  -21166   |  -14586   |
  |    μ     | 10    23   1  12  |  -21458   |  -14978   |
  |    ν     | ..   ... ... ...  |   .....   |   .....   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |       23  21  17  |    1683   |   1683    |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      AQUARIUS.                       |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |    ε     | 10^s   8° 56′  0″ |  -20444   |  -13964   |
  |    β     | 10    20  36  30  |  -21285   |  -14805   |
  |    α     | 11     0  34   0  |  -22001   |  -15521   |
  |    ζ     | 11     6   7   0  |  -22400   |  -15920   |
  |   2 ψ    | 11    13  56  12  |  -22963   |  -16483   |
  |   5 Α    | 11    18   3  28  |  -23260   |  -16780   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |       39   7  28  |    2816   |    2816   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |                                                      |
  |                      PISCES.                         |
  |                                                      |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |    β     | 11^s  15° 49′  0″ |   23095   |   16615   |
  |    λ     | 11    23  49   0  |   23675   |   17195   |
  |    δ     | 12    11  22   0  |   24939   |   18459   |
  |    σ     | 12    24  26   0  |   25879   |   19399   |
  |    α     | 12    26  34  58  |   26034   |   19554   |
  |          |...   ... ... ...  |   .....   |   .....   |
  |          |...   ... ... ...  |   .....   |   .....   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |   Dur.   |       40  45  58  |    2939   |    2939   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+
  |          |                   |       0°  |    270^s  |
  |Sirius    |  3    11  20  10  |   -5487   |  -18447   |
  +----------+-------------------+-----------+-----------+




_Construction and Use of the Table._


“The longitudes of the stars, for 1800, have been taken from the
Berlin Tables, and are those of Lacaille, Bradley, or Flamstead. The
first and the last of each constellation have been taken, as well as
some of the brightest of the intermediate stars. The third column
indicates the year in which the longitude of the star was 0′, that
is to say, that in which the star was in the equinoxial colure of
spring. The last column indicates the year when the star was in the
solstitial colure, whether of winter or of summer.

“For Aries, Taurus, and Gemini, the winter solstice has been chosen;
for the other constellations the summer solstice has been chosen,
for the sake of not receding into too remote antiquity, and of not
approaching too near modern times. It will be easy to find the
opposite solstice, by adding the semiperiod of 12,960 years. The same
rule will serve for finding the time when the star has been, or will
be, at the autumnal equinox.

“The sign - indicates the years before our era, the sign + the
year of our era; and the last line, at the end of each sign under
the title of _duration_, gives the extent of the constellation in
degrees, and the time which the equinox, or the solstice, occupies in
traversing the constellation from one end to the other.

“The precession of 50″ yearly has been supposed, this being the
result of the comparison of the catalogue of Hipparchus with the
modern catalogues. We have thus the advantage of round numbers, and a
general accuracy that may be relied upon. The entire period is thus
25,920 years; the semiperiod, 12,960 years; the quarter period, 6480
years; the twelfth, or a sign, 2160 years.

“It is to be remarked, that the constellations leave empty spaces
between them, and that sometimes they encroach upon each other. Thus,
between the last star of Scorpio, and the first of Sagittarius,
there is an interval of 6⅔ degrees. On the other hand, the last
of Capricorn is more advanced by 14° in longitude, than the first
of Aquarius. Hence, even independently of the inequality of the
sun’s motion, the constellations would afford a very unequal and
very erroneous measure of the year and its months. The signs of 30°
furnish a more convenient and less defective one. But the signs are
merely a geometrical conception; they can neither be distinguished
nor observed; and they are continually changing place from the
retrogradation of the equinoxial point.

“We have at all times been able to determine, in a rough manner,
the equinoxes and solstices; at the long run it has been remarked,
that the appearance of the heavens was no longer exactly the same
that it anciently was at the times of the equinoxes and solstices.
But we have never been able to observe exactly the heliacal rising
of a star, being always necessarily some days wide of it; and people
frequently speak of it, without possessing a fixed datum on which
to count. Before Hipparchus, we find nothing, either in books or
in traditions, that can be submitted to calculation; and it is
this which has given rise to so many systems. Controversies have
arisen without a sufficient knowledge of the subject. Those who are
not astronomers may form ideas as beautiful as they please of the
knowledge of the Chaldeans, Egyptians, &c.; no real inconvenience
will result. The enterprise and knowledge of the moderns may be lent
to these nations, but nothing can be borrowed from them; for they
have either had nothing, or they have left nothing. Astronomers will
never derive from the ancients any thing that can be of the slightest
utility. Let us leave to the learned their vain conjectures, and
confess our utter ignorance respecting things of little use in
themselves, and of which no monument remains.

“The limits of the constellations vary according to the authors which
we consult. We find these limits extend or contract, as we pass
from Hipparchus to Tycho, from Tycho to Hevelius, from Hevelius to
Flamstead, Lacaille, Bradley, or Piazzi.

“I have said elsewhere, the constellations are good for nothing,
unless at the most to enable us to mark the stars with more ease;
whereas the stars in particular afford fixed points to which we
can refer the motions, whether of the colures or of the planets.
Astronomy commenced only at the period when Hipparchus made the first
catalogue of the stars, measured the revolution of the sun, that of
the moon, and their principal inequalities. The rest presents nothing
but darkness, uncertainty, and gross error. The time would be lost
that were occupied in attempting to reduce this chaos to order.

“I have given, with the exception of a few particulars, the whole
of my opinion on this subject. I am nowise anxious about making
converts, for it gives me little concern whether my ideas be adopted
or not; but, if my reasons be compared with the reveries of Newton,
Herschell, Bailly, and so many others, it is not impossible but that,
in time, these more or less brilliant chimeras will no longer be
relished.

“I have attempted to determine the extent of the constellations,
according to the catasterisms of Eratosthenes; but the thing is
really impossible. The matter would be still worse were we to
consult Hygin, and especially Firmicus. The following is what I have
made out from Eratosthenes.

  CONSTELLATIONS.   DURATIONS.
                     Years.
  Aries,              1747
  Taurus,             1826
  Gemini,             1636
  Cancer,             1204
  Leo,                2617
  Virgo,              3307
  The Talons,         1089[219]
  Scorpio,            1823
  Sagittarius,        2138
  Capricorn,          1416
  Aquarius,           1196
  Pisces,             2936

“As to the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Chinese, and Indians, there is no
want of reveries among them. One can absolutely make nothing of
them. My opinion with regard to them may be seen in the preliminary
discourse of my History of the Astronomy of the Middle Age, p. xvii
and xviii. See also the note affixed to the Report on the Memoirs of
M. de Paravey, vol. viii. of the Nouvelles Annales des Voyages, and
republished by M. de Paravey in his Summary of his Memoirs upon the
Origin of the Sphere, p. 24, 31-36. See further the Analysis of the
Mathematical Labours of the Academy in 1820, p. 78 and 79.

      “DELAMBRE.”

       *       *       *       *       *

It would still have to be ascertained at what period the observers
ceased to place the constellation in which the sun entered after the
solstice, at the head of the descending signs, and whether this was
done as soon as the solstice had retrograded sufficiently to touch
the preceding constellation.

Thus MM. Jollois and Devilliers,--to whose unremitting zeal we are
indebted for an accurate knowledge of these famous monuments, always
considering the division towards the entrance of the porch as the
solstice, and judging that the Virgin must have been regarded as the
first of the descending constellations, insomuch as the solstice had
not receded at least so far as the middle of the constellation of the
Lion; and, believing that they saw farther, as we have mentioned,
that the Lion is divided in the great zodiac of Esne, have not
given to that zodiac a more remote antiquity than 2160 years before
Christ.[220]

Mr Hamilton, who was the first that observed this division of the
sign of the Lion, in the zodiac of Esne, reduced the distance of
the period at which the solstice occurred there, to 1400 years
before Christ. A great many other opinions have appeared on the same
subject. M. Rhode, for example, has proposed two. The first refers
the zodiac of the portico of Dendera to a period of 591 years before
Christ; the second, to 1290[221]. M. Latreille has fixed the period
of this zodiac at 670 years before Christ; that of the planisphere at
550; that of the zodiac of the great temple of Esne at 2550; and that
of the small one at 1760.

But a difficulty inherent in all the dates, which proceed on the
double supposition, that the division marks the solstice, and that
the position of the solstice marks the epoch of the monument, is the
unavoidable consequence that the zodiac of Esne must have been at
least 2000, and perhaps 3000, years[222] older than that of Dendera,
a consequence which evidently involves the supposition in ruin;
for no one, in any degree acquainted with the history of the arts,
could believe, that two edifices, so similar in their style of
architecture, could have been erected at periods so remote from each
other.

The feeling of this impossibility, joined always to the belief that
this division of the zodiacs indicates a date, has given rise to
another conjecture, namely, that the intention had been to mark the
particular sacred year of the Egyptians, in which the monument had
been erected. As these sacred years consisted only of 365 days, if
the sun, at the commencement of one occupied the commencement of a
constellation, he would be nearly six hours later in returning to the
commencement of the following year, and, after 121 years, he would
only be at the commencement of the preceding sign. It seems natural
enough that the builders of a temple might wish to indicate about
what period of the great, or Sothian year, it had been erected; and
the indications of the sign, by which the sacred year then commenced,
was a good enough means. It will be perceived, that, calculating upon
this assumption, there will be an interval of from 120 to 150 years
between the temple of Esne and that of Dendera. But, in his mode of
solving the problem, there remained to be determined in which of the
great years these buildings had been erected, whether in that which
ended in the year 138 after, or in that which ended in 1322 before
Christ, or in some other.

The late Visconti, who was the first author of this hypothesis,
taking the sacred year, whose commencement corresponded with the sign
of the Lion, and judging from the resemblance of the signs, that they
had been represented at a period when the opinions of the Greeks were
not unknown to the Egyptians, was naturally led to make choice of the
end of the last great year, or the space that elapsed between the
year 12 and the year 138 after Christ[223], which appeared to him to
accord with the Greek inscription, of which, however, he knew little
more than that it was said to make mention of one of the Cæsars.

M. Testa, seeking the date of the monument in another order of ideas,
went so far as to suppose that since the Virgin is seen at Esne, at
the head of the zodiac, it was meant thereby to represent the era of
the battle of Actium, such as it had been established with regard
to Egypt, by a decree of the senate, mentioned by Dion Cassius,
and which commenced in the month of September, the day on which
Alexandria was taken by Augustus.[224]

M. de Paravey considered these zodiacs in a new point of view, which
embraced at once both the revolution of the equinoxes, and that of
the great year. Supposing that the circular planisphere of Dendera
must have been set to the east, and that the axis from north to
south is the line of the solstices, he found the summer solstice at
the second of the Twins, and that of winter at the buttock of the
Sagittary, while the line of the equinoxes would have passed through
the Fishes and the Virgin, from which he obtained for date the first
century of our era.

According to this method, the division of the zodiac of the portico
could no longer refer to the colures, and the mark of the solstice
must be sought for elsewhere. M. de Paravey having remarked that
there are between all the signs figures of women bearing a star upon
their heads, and marching in the same direction, and observing that
the one which comes after the twins, is alone turned in a direction
contrary to the others, judged that it indicates the _conversion_ of
the sun or the tropic, and that this zodiac corresponds in this way
with the planisphere.

By applying the idea of easting to the small zodiac of Esne, the
solstices would be found between the Twins and the Bull, and between
the Scorpion and Sagittary; they would even be marked by the change
of direction of the Bull, and by the winged Rams placed across at
these two places. In the great zodiac of the same city, the marks
would be the cross position of the Bull, and the reversed one of
the Sagittary. There would thus be but a portion of a constellation
traversed between the dates of Esne and those of Dendera, but even
this would be still too long for buildings so closely resembling each
other.

An operation of the late M. Delambre upon the circular planisphere
appears to confirm these conjectures, detracting from its remote
antiquity; for, on placing the stars upon Hipparchus’s projection,
according to the theory of that astronomer, and according to the
positions which he has given them in his catalogue; and augmenting
all the longitudes, so that the solstice might pass through the
second of the Twins, he nearly reproduced this planisphere; and
“the resemblance,” says he, “would have been still greater, had
the longitudes been adopted such as they are in the catalogue of
Ptolemy, for the year 123 of our era. On the contrary, by referring
to twenty-five or twenty-six centuries back, the right ascensions and
the declinations will be considerably changed, and the projection
will assume quite a different figure[225]. All our calculations,”
adds this great astronomer, “lead us to this conclusion, that the
sculptures are posterior to the epoch of Alexander.”

In reality, the circular planisphere having been brought to Paris by
the care of MM. Saunier and Lelorrain, M. Biot, in a work founded
upon precise measurements and calculations full of ingenuity, has
determined that it represents, according to an exact geometrical
projection, the state of the heavens, such as it was 700 years before
Christ; but he by no means concludes that it had been sculptured at
that period[226].

In fact, all these efforts of intellect and science, in so far as
they concern the epoch of the monuments, have become superfluous,
since finishing where they should naturally have begun, if the first
observers had not been blinded by prejudice, people have taken the
trouble of copying and restoring the Greek inscriptions engraved upon
these monuments, and especially since M. Champollion has discovered
the method of decyphering those which are expressed in hieroglyphics.

It is now certain, and the Greek inscriptions agree with the
hieroglyphical inscriptions in proving it, it is certain, we say,
that the temples in which zodiacs have been sculptured, were built
during the time when Egypt was subject to the Romans. The portico
of the temple of Dendera, according to the Greek inscription of its
frontispiece, is consecrated to the safety of Tiberius[227]. On the
planisphere of the same temple we read the title of _Autocrator_ in
hieroglyphical characters[228]; and it is probable that it refers to
Nero. The small temple of Esne, that of which the origin has been
placed on the lowest calculation between 2700 and 3000 years before
Christ, has a column sculptured and painted in the sixth year of
Antonine, 147 years after Christ, and it is painted and sculptured in
the same style as the zodiac which is near it[229].

Further, we have a proof that this division of the zodiac, in such
or such sign, has no reference to the precession of the equinoxes,
or to the displacement of the solstice. A mummy case, lately brought
from Thebes by M. Caillaud, and containing, according to the very
legible Greek inscription upon it, the body of a young man who died
in the ninth year of Trajan, 116 years after Christ[230], presents a
zodiac divided at the same point as those of Dendera[231]; and all
the appearances indicate that this division marks some astrological
theme relative to the individual, a conclusion which may probably
be equally applied to the division of the zodiacs contained in the
temples. It may mark either the astrological theme of the time of
their erection, or that of the prince to whose safety they had
been consecrated, or such another epoch with relation to which the
position of the sun would have appeared of importance to be noticed.

Thus are dissipated for ever the conclusions which people had drawn
from some ill explained monuments, against the newness of the
continents and nations; and we might have dispensed with treating of
them so much in detail had they not been so recent, and had they not
made sufficient impression still to retain their influence over the
minds of some individuals.




_The Zodiac is far from bearing in itself a certain and excessively
remote date._


But there are writers who have maintained that the zodiac bears in
itself the date of its invention, because the names and figures
given to its constellations are an index of the position of the
colures at the time when it was invented; and this date, according
to several, is so evident and so remote, that it is quite a matter
of indifference whether the representations which we possess of this
circle are more or less ancient.

They do not attend to the circumstance that, in this sort of
argument, there is a complication of three suppositions equally
uncertain: the country in which the zodiac is presumed to have been
invented, the signification which is supposed to have been given
to the constellations which occupy it, and the position in which
the colures were with relation to each constellation, when this
signification was attributed to it. According as other allegories
have been imagined, or as these allegories are admitted to have
referred to the constellation of which the sun occupied the first
degrees, or to that of which it occupied the middle, or to that
into which it began to enter, that is to say, of which it occupied
the last degrees; or, lastly, to that which was opposite to him,
and which rose at night; or according as the invention of these
allegories is placed in a different climate, must the date of the
zodiac also be changed. The possible variations in this respect might
comprehend so much as the half of the revolution of the fixed stars,
that is to say, 13,000 years, and even more.

In this manner Pluche, generalizing some indications of the ancients,
has imagined, that the Ram announces the commencement of the sun’s
elevation, and the vernal equinox; that the Cancer indicates his
retrogradation to the summer solstice; that the Balance, the sign of
equality, marks the autumnal equinox[232]; and that the Capricorn, a
climbing animal, indicates the winter solstice, after which the sun
returns to us. According to this method, by placing the inventors
of the zodiac in a temperate climate, we should have rains under
Aquarius, the dropping of lambs and kids under the Gemini, violent
heats under the Lion, gathering of the harvest under the Virgin,
the time of hunting under the Sagittary, &c.; and the emblems would
be appropriate enough. If we should then place the colures at the
commencement of the constellations, or at least the equinox at the
first stars of Aries, we should, in the first instance, arrive at
a period of only 389 years before Christ, an epoch evidently too
modern, and which would render it necessary to recur to a complete
equinoxial period, or 26,000 years. But if the equinox be supposed to
pass through the middle of the constellation, a period of about 1000
or 1200 years higher is obtained, 1600 or 1700 years before Christ;
and this is what several celebrated men have believed to be the true
epoch of the invention of the zodiac, the honour of which they have,
for other reasons not sufficiently weighty, conferred upon Chiron.

But Dupuis, who required for the origin which he endeavoured to
attribute to all religions, that astronomy, and, in particular, the
figures of the zodiac should in some measure have preceded all other
human institutions, has sought another climate for the purpose of
finding other explanations for the emblems, and for that of deducing
another epoch from them. If, assuming the Balance as an equinoxial
sign, but supposing it at the vernal equinox, it be presumed that
the zodiac has been invented in Egypt, other sufficiently plausible
explanations might in fact be found for the climate of that
country.[233] The Capricorn, an animal with the tail of a fish,
would mark the commencement of the rise of the Nile at the summer
solstice; the Aquarius and Fishes, the progress and diminution of
the inundation; the Bull, the time of labouring; the Virgin, the
time of reaping; and they would mark them at the periods when these
operations actually took place. In this system, the zodiac would have
15,000 years[234] for a sun supposed at the first degree of each
sign, more than 16,000 for the middle, and 4000 only, on supposing
that the emblem has been given to the sign at the opposite of which
the sun was[235]. It is to the 15,000 years that Dupuis has attached
himself; and it is upon this date that he has founded the whole
system of his celebrated work.

There are not wanting those, however, who, admitting that the zodiac
has been invented in Egypt, have imagined allegories applicable
to later times. Thus, according to Mr Hamilton, the Virgin would
represent the land of Egypt when not yet fecundated by the
inundation; the Lion, the season when that country is most liable to
be overrun by ferocious animals, and so on[236].

The high antiquity of 15,000 years would besides induce this absurd
consequence, that the Egyptians, those men who represented every
thing by emblems, and who must have attached a great importance to
the circumstance that these emblems were conformable to the ideas
which they were intended to represent, had preserved the signs
of the zodiac thousands of years after they no longer in any way
corresponded with their original signification.

The late M. Remi Raige endeavoured to support the opinion of Dupuis
by an argument of an entirely new kind[237]. Having remarked that
significations more or less analogous to the figures of the signs of
the zodiac, might be found for the Egyptian names of the months, on
explaining them by the oriental languages, and finding in Ptolemy
that _epifi_, which signifies _capricorn_, commences at the 20th of
June, and therefore comes immediately after the summer solstice, he
concluded from thence, that, at the beginning, Capricorn itself was
at the summer solstice, and so of the other signs, as Dupuis had
supposed.

But, independently of all that there is merely conjectural in these
etymologies, Raige did not perceive that it was simply by chance
that, five years after the battle of Actium, in the year 25 before
Christ, at the establishment of the fixed year of Alexandria, the
first day of _Thoth_ was found to correspond with the 29th of the
Julian August, and continued to correspond since that time. It is
only from this epoch that the Egyptian months commenced at fixed days
of the Julian year, and only at Alexandria: even Ptolemy did not the
less continue to employ in his Almagest the ancient Egyptian year
with its vague months[238].

Why might not the names of the signs have been given to the months
at some epoch, or the names of the months to the signs, in the
same arbitrary manner in which the Indians have given to their
twenty-seven months twelve names, selected from among those of their
lunar houses, for reasons which it is impossible at the present day
to determine[239]? The absurdity which there would have been in
preserving for the constellations, during 15,000 years, figures and
symbolical names which no longer presented any relation with their
position, would have been more evident had it been carried so far as
to preserve to the months those same names which were incessantly in
the mouths of the people, and whose inaptitude would be every moment
perceived.

And what, besides, would all these systems come to, had the figures
and the names of the zodiacal constellations been given to them
without any relation to the course of the sun; as their inequality,
the extension of several of them beyond the zodiac, and their
manifest connection with the neighbouring constellations, seem to
demonstrate was the case[240].

What would still happen, if, as Macrobius expressly says[241], each
sign must have been an emblem of the sun, considered in some one of
its effects or of its general phenomena, and without reference to the
months when it passes, whether into the sign, or to its opposite?

Lastly, What if the names had been given in an abstract manner
to the divisions of space or time, as they are now given by
astronomers to what they call the signs, and had not been applied
to the constellations or groups of stars, but at a period
determined by chance, so that nothing could be concluded from their
signification[242]?

In these suggestions there is, without doubt, enough to give an
ingenuous mind a distaste for seeking to find in astronomy proofs
of the antiquity of the nations. But were these alleged proofs as
certain as they are vague and destitute of any satisfactory result,
what could be concluded from them against the great catastrophe,
which has left monuments amply demonstrative in other respects of
its existence? All that can be admitted in this matter is, what some
moderns have thought, that astronomy was among the number of the
sciences preserved by those whom this catastrophe dispersed.




_Exaggerations relative to the Antiquity of certain Mining
Operations._


The antiquity of certain mining operations has also been much
exaggerated. A very late writer has imagined, that the mines of the
island of Elba, judging from the rubbish carried out of them, must
have been wrought for more than 40,000 years; but another author,
who has also examined this rubbish with attention, has reduced the
period in question to a little more than 5000 years,[243] and this
even on the supposition that the ancients did not extract annually
more than a fourth part of the quantity of ore now wrought. But what
reason could there be to suppose that the Romans, for example, who
consumed so much iron in their armies, derived so little advantage
from these mines? Moreover, if these mines had been wrought for even
4000 years only, how should iron have been so little known in the
times of remote antiquity?




_General Conclusion relative to the Period of the last Revolution._


I agree, therefore, with MM. Deluc and Dolomieu, in thinking, that
if any thing in geology be established, it is, that the surface of
our globe has undergone a great and sudden revolution, the date of
which cannot be referred to a much earlier period than five or six
thousand years ago; that this revolution overwhelmed and caused to
disappear the countries which were previously inhabited by man, and
the species of animals now best known; that, on the other hand, it
laid dry the bottom of the last sea, and formed of it the countries
which are at the present day inhabited; that it is since the
occurrence of this revolution that the small number of individuals
dispersed by it have spread and propagated over the newly exposed
lands, and, consequently, that it is since this epoch only, that
human societies have assumed a progressive march, that they have
formed establishments, raised monuments, collected natural facts, and
invented scientific systems.

But the countries which are at present inhabited, and which the last
revolution laid dry, had already been previously inhabited, if not
by men, at least by land animals, and, therefore, one preceding
revolution at least had put them under water; and if we may judge by
the different orders of animals the remains of which are observed in
them, they had perhaps been subjected to two or three irruptions of
the sea.




_Further Researches to be made in Geology._


These alternations now appear to me to form the problem in geology
that it is of most importance to solve, or rather to define and
circumscribe within due limits; for, in order to resolve it
satisfactorily, it would be necessary to discover the cause of these
events,--an undertaking which presents a difficulty of quite a
different kind.

I repeat it, we see pretty clearly what is going on at the surface
of the continents in their present state; we have formed a tolerable
conception of the uniform progress and regular succession of the
primitive formations, but the study of the secondary formations has
been little more than merely commenced. That wonderful series of
unknown zoophytes and marine mollusca, succeeded by reptiles and
fresh-water fishes equally unknown; and these again replaced, in
their turn, by other zoophytes and mollusca, more nearly related
to those of the present day; those land animals, and those equally
unknown fresh water mollusca and other animals which next occupied
the surface, to be again displaced but by mollusca and other animals
similar to those of our present seas; the relations of these
diversified beings to the plants the remains of which accompany
theirs, the connection of these two kingdoms with the mineral
strata in which they are deposited; the greater or less uniformity
existing between these different orders of beings in the different
basins;--these are phenomena which appear to me imperiously to demand
the attention of philosophers.

Rendered interesting by the variety of the products of the partial
or general revolutions of this epoch, and by the abundance of the
various species that figure alternately on the stage, this study
is divested of the dryness of that of the primordial formations,
and does not, like it, almost necessarily launch into hypotheses.
The facts are so direct, so curious, and so evident, that they are
sufficient, so to speak, to satisfy the most ardent imagination;
and the conclusions to which they lead from time to time, however
scrupulous the observer may be, having nothing vague in them, are
equally free of any thing arbitrary. In fine, it is in those events
that approach nearer to our own times, that we may hope to find some
traces of more ancient events, and of their causes; if, indeed, after
so many fruitless attempts as have been already made, one may be
permitted to flatter himself with such a hope.

These ideas have haunted, I may almost say have tormented me, during
my researches among fossil bones, the results of which I have
lately presented to the public; researches which embrace but a very
small part of those phenomena of the age preceding the last general
revolution of the globe, and which are yet intimately connected with
all the others. It was almost impossible that the desire should not
arise of investigating the general mass of these phenomena, at least
as they occur in a limited space around us. My excellent friend, M.
Brongniart, in whose mind other studies excited the same desire,
had the complaisance to associate me with himself in the task; and
it is thus that we have laid the first foundations of our labours
upon the environs of Paris. But this work, while it still bears my
name, has become almost entirely that of my friend, from the infinite
attention which he has bestowed, since the first conception of our
plan, and since our journeys, upon the profound investigation of
the objects, and the perfecting and arranging of the whole. I have
placed it, with M. Brongniart’s consent, in the second part of my
“Recherches,” in that in which I treat of the fossil bones of our
neighbourhood. Although apparently relating only to a rather limited
extent of country, it affords numerous results, which are applicable
to geology in general, and, in this point of view, it may be
considered as intimately connected with the present discourse; at the
same time, that it is, without a doubt, one of the best ornaments of
my work[244].

In it there is presented the history of the most recent changes
that have taken place in a particular basin, and it descends so
far as the Chalk formation, the extent of which over the globe is
vastly more considerable than that of the materials of the basin
of Paris. The chalk, which has been considered so modern, is thus
found to be advanced in antiquity among the ages of the great period
preceding the last catastrophe. It forms a sort of limit between the
most recent formations, those to which the name of _Tertiary_ may
be reserved, and the formations which are named _Secondary_, which
have been deposited before the Chalk, but after the Primitive and
Transition formations.




_Recapitulation of the Observations upon the Succession of the
Tertiary Formations._


The most superficial strata, those deposits of mud and clayey sand,
mixed with rolled pebbles, that have been transported from distant
countries, and filled with bones of land animals, the species of
which are for the most part unknown, or at least foreign to the
country in which they are found, seem especially to have covered
all the plains, filled the bottom of all the caverns, and choked up
all the fissures of rocks that have come in their way. Described
with particular care by Mr Buckland, under the name of _diluvium_,
and very different from those other beds equally consisting of
transported matters, continually deposited by torrents and rivers,
which contain only bones of animals that still live in the country,
and distinguished by the name of _alluvium_, the former are now
considered by all geologists as exhibiting the most obvious proof of
the immense inundation which has been the last of the catastrophes of
our globe[245].

Between this diluvium and the chalk, are the formations alternately
filled with fresh water and salt water productions, which mark the
irruptions and retreatings of the sea, to which this part of the
globe has been subjected, since the deposition of the chalk-strata:
first, marls and buhrstones, or cavernous quartz, filled with
fresh-water shells, similar to those of our marshes and pools; under
them marls, sandstones, and limestones, all the shells of which are
marine, such as oysters, &c.

At a greater depth are found fresh water formations of an older date,
and particularly those famous gypsum deposits of the neighbourhood
of Paris, which have afforded so much facility in ornamenting the
buildings of that great city, and in which we have discovered whole
genera of land-animals, of which no traces had been elsewhere
perceived.

They rest upon those not less remarkable beds of limestone, of
which our capital is built, in the more or less compact texture of
which the patience and sagacity of our naturalists, and of several
ardent collectors, have already detected more than 800 species of
shells, all of them marine, but the greater part unknown in the
presently-existing sea. They also contain only bones of fishes, and
of cetacea and other marine mammifera.

Under this marine limestone there is another fresh water deposit,
formed of clay, in which there are interposed large beds of lignite
(brown coal), or that sort of fossil-coal which is of more recent
origin than the common or black coal. Among shells, which are always
of fresh water origin, there are also found bones in the deposit;
but, what is remarkable, bones of reptiles, and not of mammifera. It
is filled with crocodiles and tortoises, but the genera of extinct
mammifera which the gypsum contains, are not found in it: they
evidently did not exist in the country when these clays and lignites
were formed.

This fresh water formation, the oldest which has been distinguished
in our neighbourhood, and which supports all the formations which we
have just enumerated, is itself supported and embraced on all sides
by the chalk, an immense formation, both as to thickness and extent,
which shews itself in very distant countries, such as Pomerania and
Poland; but which, in our vicinity, reigns with a sort of continuity
in Berri, Champagne, Picardy, Upper Normandy, and a part of England,
and thus forms a great circle, or rather a great basin, in which the
deposits of which we have been speaking are contained, but of which
they also cover the edges in the places where they were less elevated.

In fact, it is not in our basin only that these various formations
have been deposited. In the other countries where the surface of
the chalk presented similar cavities for them; in those even where
there was no chalk, and where the older formations alone presented
themselves as supports, circumstances often led to the formation
of deposits more or less similar to ours, and containing the same
organic bodies.

Our formations containing fresh-water shells, have been seen in
England, in Spain, and even so far as the confines of Poland.

The marine shells interposed between them, have been found along the
whole course of the Appenines.

Some of the quadrupeds of our gypsum deposits, our palæotheria, for
example, have also left their bones in certain gypseous formations of
the Velai, and in the molasse quarries of the south of France.

Thus the partial revolutions which have taken place in our
neighbourhood, between the period of the chalk and that of the great
inundation, and during which the sea threw itself upon our districts
or retired from them, had also taken place in a multitude of other
countries. It seems as if the globe had undergone a long series
of changes by which variations were produced, probably in close
succession, as the deposits which they have left nowhere shew much
thickness or solidity. The chalk has been produced by a more tranquil
and more continuous sea; it contains only marine productions, among
which there are, however, some very remarkable vertebrate animals,
but all of the class of reptiles and fishes; large tortoises, vast
lizards, and other similar animals.

The formations anterior to the chalk, and in the hollows of which the
chalk is itself deposited, as the formations of our neighbourhood
are in its hollows, form a great part of Germany and England; and the
efforts which the naturalists of these two countries have recently
made according with ours, and proceeding upon the same principles,
combined with those which had been previously tried by the school of
Werner, will soon leave nothing to be desired with respect to our
knowledge of them. Messrs de Humboldt and de Bonnard in France and
Germany, and Messrs Buckland and Conybeare in England, have furnished
the most complete and most instructive accounts of them.

       *       *       *       *       *

The subjoined table, in which not only the secondary formations have
been arranged, but the whole series of strata, from the oldest known
to the most modern and most superficial, has been politely furnished
me by M. de Humboldt, to adorn my work. It may be considered as an
epitome of the labours of geologists up to the present period[246].




_TABLE of Geological Formations in the order of their superposition._
By M. Al. de Humboldt.


             +---------------------------------------------+--
             |  Alluvial Deposits.                         |
             +---------------------------------------------+
             |  Lacustrine Formation with Buhrstones.      |
             +---------------------------------------------+
             |  Fountainbleau sandstone and sand.          |
             +---------------------------------------------+
             |  Gypsum with bones. Siliceous Limestone.    | _Tertiary_
             +---------------------------------------------+
             |  Coarse Limestone.                          |_Formations._
             |  (London Clay.)                             |
             +---------------------------------------------+
             |  Tertiary sandstone with lignites.          |
             +---------------------------------------------+
             |  (Plastic clay,--Molasse,--Nagelfluhe.)     |
  +----------+---------------------------------------------+----------+
  |                  white.                                           |
  |     Chalk.       tufaceous.                 _Ananchites._         |
  |                  chloritic.                                       |
  +-----+--------------------------------------------------+----------+
        |Green sand.                                       |
        |Weald clay. (Secondary Sandstone with _lignites_.)| _Secondary_
        |Iron Sand.                                        |
  +-----+--------------------------------------------------+----------+
  |  _Ammonites._    Jura Limestone.     Slaty beds with fishes and   |
  |  _Planulites._                         crustacea.                 |
  +-----------------------------------------+Coral rag.               |
  |  Quadersandstein, or white sandstone,   |Dive clay.               |
  |  sometimes above the lias.              |Oolites and Caen         |
  +-----------------------------------------+  limestone.             |
  |      Muschelkalk.                       |Marly or calcareous lias |
  |      _Ammonites nodosus._               |  with _Gryphæa arcuata_.|
  +-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
  |  Marls with fibrous gypsum.   Saliferous variegated sandstone.    |
  |  Arenaceous beds.                                                 |
  +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
  |  _Productus aculeatus._                                           |
  |     Magnesian limestone.    Zechstein.     (Alpine limestone.)    |
  |                           Copper slate.                           |
  +-------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
  |Quartziferous|  Co-ordinate formations of porphyry,   |
  |Porphyry.    |   red sandstone, and coal.             | _Formations._
  +-------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
  |                     _Transition Formations._                      |
  |                                                                   |
  |    Slates with Lydian-stone, greywacke, diorites, euphotides.     |
  |    Limestones with orthoceratis, trilobites and euomphalites.     |
  +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
  |                      _Primitive Formations._                      |
  |                                                                   |
  |    Clayslates (Thonschiefer).                                     |
  |    Micaslates.                                                    |
  |    Gneiss.                                                        |
  |    Granites.                                                      |
  +-------------------------------------------------------------------+

Under the chalk are found deposits of green sand, of which its lower
strata contains some organic remains. Beneath this are ferruginous
sands. In many countries both of these deposits are agglutinated into
beds of sandstone, in which lignites, amber, and remains of reptiles,
are also observed.

Under this, we find the great mass of strata which compose the Jura
chain, and that of the mountains by which it is continued into Suabia
and Franconia, the principal ridges of the Apennines, and multitudes
of beds in France and England. It consists of limestone-schists,
rich in fishes and crustacea; vast beds of oolites, or of a granular
limestone; grey marly limestones, with pyrites, characterised by
the presence of ammonites, of oysters with recurvate valves, named
Gryphææ, and of reptiles, which are remarkable on account of their
forms and structures.

Large beds of sand and sandstone, often presenting vegetable
impressions, support all these Jura deposits, and are themselves
supported by a limestone, the innumerable shells and zoophytes
contained in which induced Werner to give it the much too general
name of _Shell-limestone_, and which is separated by other beds of
sandstone, of the kind denominated _variegated_ sandstone, from a
still older limestone, which has been not less improperly called
_Alpine limestone_, because it composes the High Alps of the Tyrol;
but which also shews itself at the surface in the eastern provinces
of France, and in the whole southern part of Germany.

In this shell-limestone are deposited great masses of gypsum and rich
beds of salt; and under it are found the thin beds of copper-slates
so rich in fishes, among which there are also fresh-water reptiles.
The copper-slate rests upon a red sandstone, to the epoch of which
belong those famous deposits of coal, which supply the present
inhabitants of the civilized countries of Europe with fuel, and are
the remains of the first vegetable productions with which the face
of the globe was adorned. We learn from the trunks of ferns, whose
impressions they have preserved, how different these ancient forests
have been from ours.

We then quickly come to those transition formations, in which
primeval nature, nature dead and purely mineral, seems to have
disputed the empire with organising nature. Black limestones, and
schists which present only crustacea and shells of kinds now extinct,
alternate with remains of primitive formations, and announce our
having arrived at those formations, the oldest with which we are
acquainted, those ancient foundations of the present envelop of the
globe, the marbles and primitive slates, the gneisses, and, lastly,
the granites.

Such is the precise enumeration of the successive masses with which
nature has enveloped the globe. The positive geological information
presented by it, has been obtained, by combining the knowledge
furnished by mineralogy with that presented by the sciences connected
with organic existence. This order, so new and so interesting
in facts, has only been acquired by geology, since it preferred
positive knowledge, furnished by observation, to fanciful systems,
contradictory conjectures regarding the first origin of the globe,
and all those phenomena, which, having no resemblance to what
actually takes place in nature, could neither find in it, for their
explanation, materials nor touchstone. A few years ago, the greater
number of geologists might have been compared to historians, who,
in writing the history of France, should have interested themselves
only about the events which had taken place among the Gauls before
the time of Julius Cesar. In composing their romances, however, these
historians would have taken advantage of their knowledge of posterior
facts; and the geologists of whom I speak, absolutely neglected the
posterior facts, which could alone have reflected some light upon the
darkness of preceding times.




_Enumeration of the Fossil Animals recognised by the Author._


In concluding this discourse, there only remains for me now to
present the result of my own researches, or, in other words, a
general account of my great work. I shall enumerate the animals which
I have discovered, in the inverse order of that which I have followed
in my enumeration of the formations. By proceeding deeper and deeper
into the series of strata, I there rose in the series of epochs. I
shall now take the oldest formations,--make known the animals which
they contain,--and, passing from one epoch to another, point out
those which successively make their appearance in proportion as we
approach the present time.

We have seen that zoophytes, mollusca, and certain crustacea, begin
to appear in the Transition formations; perhaps there may even at
that period be bones and skeletons of fishes; but we do not by any
means observe at so early a period remains of animals which live on
land, and respire air in its ordinary state.

The great beds of coal, and the trunks of palms and ferns of which
they preserve the impressions, although they afford evidence of the
existence of dry land, and of a vegetation no longer confined to the
waters, do not yet shew bones of quadrupeds, not even of oviparous
quadrupeds.

It is only a little above this, in the bituminous copper-slates, that
we see the first traces of them; and, what is very remarkable, the
first quadrupeds are reptiles of the family of lizards, very much
resembling the large monitors which live at the present day in the
torrid zone. Several individuals of this kind have been found in the
mines of Thuringia[247], among innumerable fishes of a genus now
unknown, but which, from its relations to the genera of our days,
appears to have lived in fresh water. Every body knows that the
monitors are also fresh water animals.

A little higher is the limestone called Alpine, and resting upon it
the shell-limestone, so rich in entrochites and encrinites, which
forms the basis of a great part of Germany and Lorraine.

In it have been found skeletons of a very large sea-tortoise, the
shells of which might have been from six to eight feet in length; and
those of another oviparous quadruped of the family of lizards, of a
large size, and with a very sharp muzzle[248].

Rising still through sandstones, which present only vegetable
impressions of large arundinaceæ, bamboos, palms, and other
monocotyledonous plants, we come to the different strata of the
deposit which has been named the Jura limestone, on account of its
forming the principal nucleus of that chain of mountains.

It is here that the class of Reptiles assumes its full development,
and shews itself under the most varied forms and gigantic sizes.

The middle part, which is composed of oolites and lias, or of grey
sandstone containing gryphites, contains the remains of two genera,
the most extraordinary of all, which have combined the characters of
the class of oviparous quadrupeds with organs of motion similar to
those of the cetacea.

The _ichthyosaurus_[249], discovered by Sir Everard Home, has the
head of a lizard, but prolonged into an attenuated muzzle, armed with
conical and pointed teeth; enormous eyes, the sclerotica of which is
strengthened by a frame consisting of bony pieces; a spine composed
of flat vertebræ, of a depressed circular form, and concave on both
surfaces like those of fishes; slender ribs; a sternum and clavicles
like those of lizards and ornithorynchi; a small and weak pelvis;
and four limbs, of which the humeri and femurs are short and thick,
while the other bones are flattened, and closely set like the stones
in a pavement, so as to form, when enveloped with the skin, fins of a
single piece, almost incapable of bending; analogous, in short, both
as to use and organization, to those of cetacea. These reptiles have
lived in the sea; on shore, they could only at most have crept in the
hobbling manner of seals; at the same time after they have respired
elastic air.

The remains of four species have been found:

The most extensively distributed (_I. communis_) has blunt conical
teeth; its length sometimes exceeds twenty feet.

The second (_I. platyodon_), which is at least as large as the
former, has compressed teeth, with round and bulging roots.

The third (_I. tenuirostris_), has slender and pointed teeth, and the
muzzle thin and elongated.

The fourth (_I. intermedius_), is, as its name implies, intermediate
between the last species and the common, with respect to the form of
its teeth. The two latter species do not attain half the size of the
two first.

The _plesiosaurus_, discovered by Mr Conybeare, must have appeared
still more monstrous than the ichthyosaurus. It had the same limbs,
but somewhat more elongated and more flexible; its shoulder and
pelvis were more robust; its vertebræ had more of the forms and
articulations of the lizards; but what distinguished it from all
oviparous and viviparous quadrupeds, was a slender neck as long as
its body, composed of thirty and odd vertebræ, a number greater than
that of the neck of any other animal, rising from the trunk like the
body of a serpent, and terminating in a very small head, in which all
the essential characters of that of the lizard family are observed.

If any thing could justify those hydras and other monsters, the
figures of which are so often presented in the monuments of the
middle ages, it would incontestibly be this plesiosaurus.[250]

Five species are already known, of which the most generally
distributed (_P. dolichodeirus_) attains a length of more than twenty
feet.

A second species (_P. recentior_), found in more modern strata, has
the vertebræ flatter.

A third (_P. carinatus_) shews a ridge on the under surface of its
vertebræ.

A fourth, and lastly a fifth (_P. pentagonus_ and _P. trigonus_),
have the ribs marked with five and three ridges.[251]

These two genera are found everywhere in the lias: they were
discovered in England, where this rock is exposed in cliffs of great
extent; but they have also been found since in France and Germany.

Along with these had lived two species of Crocodiles, the bones
of which are also found deposited in the lias, among ammonites,
terebratulæ, and other shells of that ancient sea. We have skeletons
of them in our cliffs at Honfleur, where the remains are found, from
which I have drawn up their characters.[252]

One of these species, the _Long-beaked Gavial_, has the muzzle
longer, and the head more narrow, than the gavial or long-beaked
crocodile of the Ganges; the bodies of its vertebræ are convex
before, while in our crocodiles of the present day they are so
behind. It has been found in the lias deposits of Franconia, as well
as in those of France.

A second species, the _Short-beaked Gavial_, has the muzzle of
ordinary length, less attenuated than the gavial of the Ganges, but
more so than our crocodiles of St Domingo. Its vertebræ are slightly
concave at each of their extremities.

But these crocodiles are not the only ones which have been deposited
in the strata of these secondary limestones.

The beautiful oolite quarries of Caen have presented a very
remarkable one, the muzzle of which is as long and more pointed than
that of the long-beaked gavial, and its head more dilated behind,
with wider temporal fossæ. Its stony scales, marked with small
round cavities, must have rendered it the best defended of all the
crocodiles.[253] Its lower teeth are alternately longer and shorter.

There is still another in the oolite of England; but there have only
been found some portions of its cranium, which do not suffice to
afford a complete idea of it.[254]

Another very remarkable genus of reptiles, the remains of which,
although they are also found beyond the limits of the lias
concretion, are especially abundant in the oolite and upper sands, is
the _megalosaurus_, justly so named, for, along with the forms of the
lizards, and particularly of the monitors, of which it has also the
sharp-edged and dentated teeth, it presents so enormous a size, that
if we suppose it to have possessed the proportions of the monitors,
it must have exceeded seventy feet in length. It was, in fact, a
lizard of the size of a whale.[255] It was discovered by Mr Buckland
in England; but we have it also in France; and in Germany there are
found bones, if not of the same species, at least of a species which
can be referred to no other genus. It is to M. Sœmmering that we owe
the first description of this last. He discovered the bones in strata
lying above the oolite, in those limestone-schists of Franconia, long
celebrated for the numerous fossil remains which they furnished to
the cabinets of the curious, and which will be still more celebrated
for the services which their employment in lithography render to the
arts and sciences.

The crocodiles continue to make their appearance in these schists,
and always of the long-muzzled or rostrated kind. M. de Sœmmering
has described one (the _Crocodilus priscus_), the entire skeleton of
a small individual of which was found nearly in as good a state of
preservation, as it could have been in our cabinets.[256] It is one
of those which most resemble the present gavial of the Ganges; the
anterior or united part of its lower jaw, however, is less elongated;
its lower teeth are alternately and regularly longer and shorter. It
has ten vertebræ in the tail.

But the most remarkable animals which these limestone slates contain,
are the flying lizards, which I have named _Pterodactyli_.

They are reptiles whose principal characters are, a very short tail,
a very long neck, the muzzle much elongated, and armed with sharp
teeth; the legs also long, and one of the toes of the anterior
extremity excessively elongated, having probably served for the
attachment of a membrane adapted for supporting them in the air,
accompanied with four other toes of ordinary size, terminated by
hooked claws. One of these strange animals, whose appearance would be
frightful did they occur alive at the present day, may have been of
the size of a thrush[257], the other of that of a common bat[258];
but it would appear from some fragments that larger species had
existed[259].

A little above the limestone slates is found the nearly homogeneous
limestone of the Jura ridges. It also contains bones, but always of
reptiles, crocodiles, and fresh-water tortoises, of which a vast
quantity is found in particular in the neighbourhood of Soleure.
They have been very carefully searched for by M. Hugi; and, from the
fragments which he has already collected, it is easy to recognise
a considerable number of Fresh-water Tortoises, or Emydes, which
further discoveries can alone determine, but of which several are
already distinguished by their size and peculiar forms, from all the
species hitherto known[260].

It is among these innumerable oviparous quadrupeds, of all sizes and
forms; in the midst of these crocodiles, tortoises, flying reptiles,
huge megalosauri, and monstrous plesiosauri, that some small
Mammifera are said to make their appearance for the first time; and
the assertion is so far authenticated by the occurrence of jaws, and
some other bones discovered in England, which undoubtedly belong to
this class of animals, and particularly to the family of Didelphides,
or to that of the Insectivora.

It may, however, be supposed, that the stoney matters which encrust
these bones, owe their origin to some local recomposition, posterior
to the original formation of the strata. However this may be, it is
still found for a long time that the class of Reptiles predominates.

The ferruginous sands, placed in England above the chalk, contain
abundance of crocodiles, tortoises, megalosauri, and especially a
reptile which presents a character quite peculiar, in as much as its
teeth appear worn, like those of our herbivorous mammifera.

To Mr Mantell of Lewes, in Sussex, we are indebted for the
discovery of this latter animal, as well as of other large reptiles
belonging to the sands lying beneath the chalk. He has named it
_Iguanodon_[261].

In the chalk itself there are only reptiles to be seen: there are
found in it remains of tortoises and crocodiles. The famous tufaceous
quarries of the mountain of St Peter, near Maestricht, which belong
to the chalk formation, along with very large sea tortoises, and a
multitude of marine shells and zoophytes, have afforded a genus of
lizards not less gigantic than the megalosaurus, which has become
celebrated by the researches of Camper, and the figures which Faujas
has given of its bones, in his history of that mountain.

It was upwards of five and twenty feet long; its large jaws were
armed with very strong conical teeth, a little arcuate, and marked
with a ridge, and it had also some of these teeth in the palate.
Upwards of a hundred and thirty vertebræ were counted in its spine;
they were convex before, and concave behind. Its tail was deep and
flat, and formed a large vertical oar (or organ of swimming).[262] Mr
Conybeare has recently proposed to name it _Mosasaurus_.

The clays and lignites which cover the upper part of the chalk, I
have only found to contain crocodiles[263]; and I have every reason
to think that the lignites which in Switzerland have afforded beaver
and mastodon bones, belong to a later epoch. Nor has it been at an
earlier period than that of the coarse limestone which rests upon
these clays that I have begun to find bones of mammifera; and still
do they all belong to marine mammifera, to dolphins of unknown
species, lamantins and morses.

Among the dolphins, there is one, the muzzle of which, more elongated
than that of any known species, has the lower jaw united in a
considerable part of its length, nearly as in a gavial. It was found
near Dax by the late president of Borda[264].

Another species, from the cliffs of the Department de l’Orne, has the
muzzle also long, but somewhat differently shaped[265].

The entire genus of lamantins is at the present day confined to
the seas of the torrid zone; and that of the morses, of which only
a single living species is known to exist, is limited to the frozen
ocean. Yet we find skeletons of these two genera side by side in the
coarse limestone strata of the middle of France; and this association
of species, the nearest allied to which are, at the present day,
found in opposite zones, will again make its appearance more than
once as we proceed.

Our fossil lamantins differ from those known to exist at present, in
having the head more elongated, and of a different form[266]. Their
ribs, which are easily recognised by their being of a thick and
rounded form, and of dense texture, are not of rare occurrence in our
different provinces.

With regard to the fossil morse, small fragments only have as yet
been found of it, which are insufficient for characterising the
species[267].

It is only in the strata that have succeeded the coarse limestone,
or, at most, those which may have been of contemporaneous formation
with it, but deposited in fresh-water lakes, that the class of land
mammifera begins to shew itself in any quantity.

I consider as belonging to the same period, and as having lived
together, but perhaps in different spots, the animals whose bones are
deposited in the molasse and old gravel beds of the south of France;
in the gypsums mixed with limestone, such as those of Paris and Aix;
and in the fresh-water marly deposits covered with marine beds, of
Alsace, the country of Orleans and of Berry.

This animal population possesses a very remarkable character in
the abundance and variety of certain genera of pachydermata, which
are entirely awanting among the quadrupeds of our days, and whose
characters have more or less resemblance to those of the tapirs, the
rhinoceroses, and camels.

These genera, the entire discovery of which is my own, are the
_palæotheria_, _lophiodonta_, _anaplotheria_, _anthracotheria_,
_cheropotami_, and _adapis_.

The _Palæotheria_ have resembled the tapirs in their general form,
and in that of the head, particularly in the shortness of the bones
of the nose, which announces that they have had a small proboscis
like the tapirs, and, lastly, in their having six incisors and two
canine teeth in each jaw; but they have resembled the rhinoceros in
their grinders, of which those of the upper jaw have been square,
with prominent ridges of various configuration, and those of the
lower jaw in the form of double crescents, as well as in their feet,
all of which have been divided into three toes, while in the tapirs
the fore feet have four.

It is one of the most extensively diffused genera and most numerous
in species that occur in the deposits of this period.

Our gypsum quarries in the neighbourhood of Paris are full of them.
Bones of seven distinct species are found there. The first (_P.
magnum_) is as large as a horse. The three next are of the size of a
hog, but one of them (_P. medium_) has narrow and long feet, another
(_P. crassum_) has the feet broader, and a third (_P. latum_) has
them still broader, and especially shorter. The fifth species (_P.
curtum_), which is of the size of a sheep, is much lower, and has
the feet still broader and shorter in proportion than the last. The
sixth (_P. minus_) is of the size of a small sheep, and has long and
slender feet, the lateral toes of which are shorter than the rest.
The seventh (_P. minimum_), which is not larger than a hare, has also
the feet slender[268].

Palæotheria have also been found in other districts of France: at Puy
in Valey, in strata of gypseous marl, a species (_P. velaunum_)[269],
much resembling (_P. medium_), but differing from it in the form of
its lower jaw; in the neighbourhood of Orleans, in strata of marly
rock, a species (_P. aurelianense_)[270], which is distinguished from
the others by having the re-entering angle of the crescent of its
lower grinders split into a double point, and by some differences
in the necks of the upper grinders; near Issel, in a bed of gravel
or molasse, along the declivities of the Black Mountain, a species
(_P. isselanum_)[271], which has the same characters as the Orleans
species, but is of smaller size. It is more particularly, however, in
the molasse of the Department of the Dordogne, that the palæotherium
occurs not less abundantly than in our gypsum deposits in the
neighbourhood of Paris.

The Duke Decaze has discovered in the quarries of a single field,
bones of three species which appear different from all those of our
neighbourhood[272].

The _Lophiodons_ approach still somewhat nearer to the tapirs than
the palæotheria do, inasmuch as their lower false grinders have
transverse necks like those of the tapirs.

They differ, however, from these latter, in having the fore ones more
simple, the backmost of all with three necks, and the upper ones
rhomboidal, and marked with ridges very much resembling those of the
rhinoceros.

We are still ignorant what the form of their snout, and the number
of their toes, may have been. I have discovered not less than twelve
species of this genus, all in France, deposited in marly rocks of
fresh-water formation, and filled with lymneæ and planorbes, which
are shells peculiar to pools and marshes.

The largest species is found near Orleans, in the same quarry as the
palæotheria; it approaches the rhinoceros.

There is a smaller species in the same place; a third occurs at
Montpellier; a fourth near Laon; two near Buchsweiler in Alsace;
five near Argenton in Berry; and one of the three occurs again near
Issel, where there are also two others. There is also a large one
near Gannat[273].

These species differ from each other in size, the smallest being
scarcely so large as a lamb of three months, and in various
circumstances connected with the form of their teeth, which it would
be too tedious and minute to detail here.

The _Anoplotheria_ have hitherto been discovered nowhere but in
the gypsum quarries of the neighbourhood of Paris. They have two
characters which are observed in no other animal; feet with two
toes, the metacarpal and metatarsal bones of which are separate in
their whole length, and do not unite into a single piece, as in the
ruminantia; and teeth placed in a continuous series without any
interruption. Man alone has the teeth so placed in mutual contiguity,
without any interval. Those of the anaplotheria consist of six
incisors in each jaw, a canine tooth and six grinders on each side,
both above and below; their canine teeth are short and similar to
the outer incisors. The three first grinders are compressed; the
four others are, in the upper jaw, square, with transverse ridges,
and a small cone between them; and, in the lower jaw, in the form of
a double crescent, but without neck at the base. The last has three
crescents. Their head is of an oblong form, and does not indicate
that the muzzle has terminated either in a proboscis or a snout.

This extraordinary genus, which can be compared to nothing in living
nature, is subdivided into three subgenera: the _Anaplotheria_,
properly so called, the anterior molares of which are still pretty
thick, and the posterior ones of the lower jaw have their crescents
with a simple ridge; the _Xiphodons_, of which the anterior molares
are thin and sharp on the edges, and the under posterior, have,
directly opposite the concavity of each of their crescents, a point,
which, on being worn, also assumes the form of a crescent, so that
then the crescents are double as in the ruminantia; lastly, the
_Dichobunes_, the outer crescents of which are also pointed at the
beginning, and which have thus points disposed in pairs upon their
lower posterior grinders.

The most common species in our gypsum quarries (_An. commune_), is
an animal of the height of a boar, but much more elongated, and
furnished with a very long and very thick tail, so that altogether it
has nearly the proportion of the otter, but larger. It is probable
that it was well fitted for swimming, and frequented the lakes in the
bottom of which its bones have been incrusted by the gypsum which was
deposited there. We have one a little smaller, but in other respects
pretty similar (_An. secundarium_.)

We are as yet acquainted with only one _xiphodon_, which, however,
is a very remarkable animal: it is that which I have named _An.
gracile_. It is slender, and delicately formed, like the prettiest
gazelle.

There is one _dichobune_, nearly of the size of a hare, to which
I have given the name of _An. leporinum_. Besides its subgeneric
characters, it differs from the anaplotheria and xiphodons, in having
two small and slender toes on each foot, at the sides of the two
large toes.

We do not know if these lateral toes exist in the two other
dichobunes, which are small, and scarcely exceed in size the common
Guinea pig[274].

The genus of _Anthracotheria_ is in some degree intermediate between
the palæotheria, anaplotheria, and hogs. I have named it so, because
two of its species have been found in the lignites of Cadibona, near
Savone. The first approached the rhinoceros in size; the second was
much smaller. They have also been found in Alsace, and in the Vélay.
Their grinders are similar to those of the anaplotheria; but they
have projecting canine teeth[275].

The genus _Cheropotamus_ is found in our gypsum deposits, where it
accompanies the palæotheria and anaplotheria, but where it is of
much rarer occurrence. Its posterior grinders are square above,
rectangular below, and have four large conical eminences surrounded
with smaller ones. The anterior molares are short cones, slightly
compressed, and with two roots. Its canine teeth are small. Neither
its incisors nor its feet are yet known. I possess only one species,
which is of the size of a Siam hog[276].

The genus _Adapis_ has also but one species, which is at most of the
size of a rabbit: it is also from our gypsum quarries, and must have
been nearly allied to the anaplotheria[277].

We have thus nearly forty species of pachydermata belonging to genera
now entirely extinct, and presenting forms and proportions to which
there is nothing that can be compared in the present animal kingdom,
excepting two tapirs and a daman.

This large number of pachydermata is so much the more remarkable,
that the ruminantia, which are at present so numerous in the genera
of deer and antelopes, and which attain so great a size in those of
the oxen, giraffes, and camels, scarcely make their appearance in the
deposits of which we are speaking.

I have not seen the slightest trace of them in our gypsum quarries;
and all that has come to my hands consists of some fragments of a
deer, of the size of the roe, but of a different species, collected
among the palæotheria of Orleans[278]; and of one or two other small
fragments, from Switzerland, which, however, are perhaps of doubtful
origin.

But our pachydermata have not for all this been the only inhabitants
of the countries in which they lived. In our gypsum deposits, at
least, we find along with them carnivora, glires, several sorts of
birds, crocodiles, and tortoises; and these two latter genera also
accompany them in the molasse sandstones and marly deposits of the
middle and south of France.

At the head of the carnivora, I place a Bat, very recently
discovered at Montmartre, and which belongs to the proper genus
Vespertilio[279]. The existence of this genus, at an epoch so remote,
is so much the more surprising, that, neither in this formation, nor
in those which have succeeded it, have I seen any other trace, either
of cheiroptera or of quadrumana: no bone or tooth of either monkey
or maki has ever presented itself to me, in the course of my long
researches.

Montmartre has also furnished the bones of a fox different from ours,
and which also differs from the jackals, isatises, and the various
species of foxes peculiar to America[280]; those of a carnivorous
animal allied to the raccoons and coaties, but larger than any known
species[281]; those of a particular species of civet[282]; and of
two or three other carnivora, which it has not been possible to
determine, from the want of tolerably complete portions.

What is still more remarkable, is, that there are skeletons of a
small sarigue, allied to the marmose, but different, and consequently
of an animal belonging to a genus which is at the present day
confined to the New World[283]. Skeletons of two small glires, of the
genus myoxus[284], and a skull belonging to the genus sciurus[285],
have also been collected.

Our gypsum deposits are more fertile in bones of birds than any
of the other strata either anterior or posterior to it. Entire
skeletons, and parts of at least ten species belonging to all the
orders, are found there[286].

The crocodiles of the period in question approach our common
crocodiles in the form of the head, while, in the deposits of the
Jura period, we find only species allied to the gavial.

A species has been found at Argenton, which is remarkable for its
compressed, sharp teeth, having their edges dentated like those of
certain monitors[287]. Some remains of it also occur in our gypsum
quarries[288].

The tortoises of this period are all fresh-water ones: some of
them belong to the subgenus _Emys_; and there are species, both at
Montmartre[289], and still more especially in the molasse sandstones
of the Dordogne[290], which are larger than any living species known;
the others are Trionyces or soft tortoises[291]. This genus, which
is easily distinguished by the vermiculate surface of the bones of
its shell, and which at present exists only in the rivers of warm
countries, such as the Nile, the Ganges, and the Orinoko, has
been very abundant in the places where the palæotheria lived. Vast
quantities of its remains are found at Montmartre[292], and in the
molasse sandstones of the Dordogne, and the other gravel deposits of
the south of France.

The fresh-water lakes, around which these various animals have lived,
and which had received their bones, nourished, besides the tortoises
and crocodiles, some fishes and testaceous mollusca. All that have
been collected of these two classes of animals, are as foreign to
our climate, and even as much unknown in our present waters, as the
palæotheria, and other quadrupeds which were coeval with them[293].

The fishes have even in part belonged to unknown genera.

Hence, it cannot be doubted that this race of inhabitants, which
might be termed the population of the middle age, this first great
production of mammifera, has been entirely destroyed; and, in fact,
in all places where remains of them have been discovered, there are
great deposits of marine formation above them, so that the sea has
overwhelmed the countries which these races inhabited, and has
rested upon them during a long period of time.

Have the countries inundated by it at this period been of great
extent? This is a question which the examination of those ancient
deposits formed in their lakes do not enable us to answer.

To this period I refer the gypsum beds of Paris and those of Aix,
several quarries of marly stones, and the molasse sandstones,
at least those of the south of France. I am of opinion that we
should also refer to it the portions of the molasse sandstones of
Switzerland, and of the lignites of Liguria and Alsace, in which
quadrupeds are found of the families enumerated above; but I do
not find that any of these animals have been also found in other
countries. The fossil bones of Germany, England, and Italy, are all
either older or newer than those of which we have been speaking, and
belong either to those ancient races of reptiles of the juraic and
copper-slate formations, or to the deposits of the last universal
inundation, the diluvial formations.

We are, therefore, authorised to believe, until the contrary be
proved, that at the period when these numerous pachydermata lived,
the globe had only presented for their habitation a small number of
plains sufficiently fertile for them to multiply there, and that
perhaps these plains were insulated regions, separated by pretty
large spaces of elevated chains, in which we do not find that our
animals have left any traces of their existence.

The researches of M. Adolphe Brongniart have also made known to us
the nature of the vegetables which covered those countries. In the
same strata with our palæotheria, there have been found trunks of
palms, and many others of those beautiful plants whose genera now
only grow in warm climates. Palms, crocodiles, and trionyces always
occur in greater or less abundance wherever our ancient pachydermata
are found[294].

The sea which had covered these lands and destroyed their animals,
left large deposits, which still form at the present day, at no great
depth, the basis of our great plains: it had then retired anew, and
left immense surfaces to a new population, whose remains are found in
the sandy and muddy deposits of all countries known.

It is to this deposition from the sea, made in a state of quiet,
that certain fossil cetacea, very much resembling those of our own
days, should, in my opinion, be referred;--a dolphin, allied to
our epaulard[295], and a whale very like our rorquals[296], both
discovered in Lombardy by M. Cortesi; a large head of a whale found
within the very precincts of Paris[297], and described by Lamanon
and Daubenton; and an entirely new genus, which I have discovered
and named _Ziphius_, and which already contains three species. It is
allied to the cachalots and hyperoodons[298].

In the extinct population which fills our alluvial and superficial
strata, and which has lived upon the deposit just alluded to,
there are no longer either palæotheria or anaplotheria, or, in in
fact, any of those singular genera. The pachydermata, however,
still predominate; and these are of a gigantic size, elephants,
rhinoceroses, and hippopotami, accompanied with innumerable horses
and several large ruminantia. Carnivorous animals of the size of
the lion, tiger, and hyena, had desolated this new animal kingdom.
In general, its character, even in the extreme north, and on the
edges of the present frozen ocean, was similar to that which the
torrid zone alone now presents, and yet there was no species in it
absolutely the same as any of those which are found alive at the
present day.

The most remarkable of these animals is the species of elephant named
_mammoth_ by the Russians (the _Elephas primigenius_ of Blumenbach),
which was fifteen or eighteen feet high, and was covered with coarse
red wool, and long, stiff, black hairs, which formed a mane along
its back. Its enormous tusks were implanted in alveolæ longer than
those of the elephants of the present day; but in other respects it
was pretty similar to the Indian elephant[299]. It has left thousands
of its carcases from Spain to the shores of Siberia, and it has been
found in the whole of North America; so that it had been distributed
on both sides of the Atlantic, if, indeed, that ocean had existed
in its time, in the place which it occupies at present. It is well
known that its tusks are still so well preserved in cold countries,
as to be applied to the same uses as fresh ivory; and, as we have
already remarked, individuals of it have been found with their flesh,
skin, and hair, which had remained frozen since the last general
catastrophe. The Tartars and Chinese have imagined it to be an animal
which lives under ground, and perishes whenever it perceives the
light.

After the mammoth, and almost its equal in size, came also in the
countries which form the two presently existing continents, the
_narrow toothed mastodon_, which resembled the elephant, and was
armed like it with enormous tusks, but with tusks covered with
enamel, shorter legs, and whose mamillated grinders, invested with a
thick and shining enamel, have long furnished what has been called
occidental turquoise[300].

Its remains, which are pretty common in the temperate parts of
Europe, are not so much so towards the north; but it has also been
found in the mountains of South America, along with two allied
species.

In North America immense quantities of the remains of the _great
mastodon_ have been found, a species larger than the preceding, as
high in proportion as the elephant, with equally huge tusks, and
whose grinders, which are covered over with bristling points, made it
long be considered as a carnivorous animal[301].

Its bones were of a large size, and very solid. Even its hoofs
and stomach are said to have been found in a sufficient state of
preservation to be recognisable; and it is asserted that the stomach
was filled with bruised branches of trees. The Indians imagine that
the whole race was destroyed by the gods, to prevent them from
destroying the human species.

Along with these enormous pachydermata, lived the two somewhat
inferior genera of the rhinoceroses and hippopotami.

The Hippopotamus of this period was pretty common in the countries
which now form France, Germany and England, and was particularly so
in Italy. It so closely resembled the present African species, that
it is only by an attentive comparison that it can be distinguished
from it[302].

There was also at this time a small species of hippopotamus of the
size of the wild boar, to which there is nothing similar at present
existing.

There were at least three species of Rhinoceros of large size, all of
them two-horned.

The most common species in Germany and England (my _Rh.
tichorhinus_), and which, like the elephant, is found even to the
shores of the frozen sea, where it has also left entire individuals,
had the head elongated, the bones of the nose very robust and
supported by an osseous and not merely cartilaginous septum narium,
and, lastly, wanted incisors[303].

Another species, of rarer occurrence, and peculiar to more temperate
climates (_Rh. incisivus_)[304], had incisors like our present
rhinoceroses of the East Indies, and, in particular, resembled that
of Sumatra[305]; its distinctive characters are derived from some
differences in the form of the head.

The third species (_Rh. leptorhinus_) had no incisors, like the first
and like the present rhinoceros of the Cape; but it was distinguished
by a more pointed muzzle and more slender limbs[306]. The bones of
this species have been found more especially in Italy, in the same
strata with those of elephants, mastodons, and hippopotami.

There is a fourth species still (_Rh. minutus_), furnished, like
the second, with incisors, but of a much smaller size, and scarcely
larger than a hog[307]. It was undoubtedly rare, for the remains of
it have only as yet been found in some places in France.

To those four genera of large pachydermata, is added a Tapir, which
equalled them in size, and was consequently twice, perhaps three
times, as large in its linear dimensions as the American Tapir[308].
Its teeth have been found in several parts of France and Germany;
and almost always accompanying those of rhinoceroses, mastodons, or
elephants.

Along with these there is still associated, but as it would seem in a
very small number of places, a large pachydermatous animal, of which
the lower jaw alone has been found, and whose teeth are of the form
of double crescents, and undulated. M. Fischer, who discovered it
among bones from Siberia, has named it _Elasmotherium_[309].

The Horse genus also existed in those times[310]. Its teeth accompany
in thousands the remains of the animals which we have just mentioned,
in almost all their localities; but it is not possible to say
whether it was one of the species now existing or not, because the
skeletons of these species are so like each other, that they cannot
be distinguished by the mere comparison of isolated fragments.

The Ruminantia were now greatly more numerous than at the epoch of
the Palæotheria; their numerical proportion must even have differed
very little from what it is at present; but we are certain of several
species which were different.

This may, in particular, be said with much certainty of a deer
exceeding even the elk in size, which is common in the marl deposits
and peat-bogs of Ireland and England, and of which remains have also
been dug up in France, Germany, and Italy, where they were found in
the same strata with bones of elephants. Its wide, palmated, and
branched horns, measure so much as twelve or fourteen feet from one
point to the other, following the curvatures[311].

The distinction is not so clear with regard to the bones of deer
and oxen, which have been collected in certain caverns, and in
the fissures of certain rocks. They are sometimes, and especially
in the caverns of England, accompanied with bones of elephants,
rhinoceroses, and hippopotami, and with those of a hyena, which also
occurs in several strata of transported matter, along with these same
pachydermata. They are consequently of the same age; but it remains
not the less difficult to say in what respect they differ from the
oxen and deer of the present day.

The fissures of the rocks of Gibraltar, Cette, Nice, Uliveta near
Pisa, and other places on the shores of the Mediterranean, are
filled with a red and hard cement, which envelopes fragments of rock
and fresh-water shells, and numerous bones of quadrupeds, the greater
part fractured. These concretions are termed osseous brecciæ. The
bones which they contain sometimes present characters sufficient to
prove that they have belonged to unknown animals, or at least to
animals foreign to Europe. There are found, for example, four species
of deer, three of which have characters in their teeth, which are
only observed in the deer of the Indian Archipelago.

There is a fifth near Verona, the horns of which exceed in magnitude
those of the Canadian deer[312].

There also occur, in certain places, along with bones of
rhinoceroses, and other quadrupeds of this period, those of a deer so
much resembling the reindeer, that it would be difficult to assign
distinctive characters to it; a circumstance which is so much the
more extraordinary, that the reindeer is at the present day confined
to the coldest regions of the north, while the whole genus of
rhinoceroses belongs to the torrid zone.[313]

There exist in the strata of which we speak, remains of a species
very similar to the fallow-deer, but a third larger,[314] and
prodigious quantities of horns, very much resembling those of
our present stag[315], as well as bones, very like those of the
aurochs[316] and domestic ox[317], two very distinct species, which
had been erroneously confounded by the naturalists who preceded us.
The entire heads, however, resembling those of these two animals, as
well as that of the musk-ox of Canada[318], which have often been
extracted from the earth, do not come from localities sufficiently
well determined to enable us to assert that these species had been
contemporaries of the great pachydermata, of which we have made
mention above.

The osseous brecciæ of the shores of the Mediterranean have also
afforded two species of _Lagomys_,[319] animals, the genus of
which exists at the present day only in Siberia; two species of
rabbits[320], lemmings, and rats of the size of the water-rat and
domestic mouse[321]. In the caves of England two species are also
found[322].

The osseous brecciæ even contain bones of shrew-mice and lizards[323].

In certain sandy strata of Tuscany, there are teeth of a
porcupine[324], and in those of Russia heads of a species of beaver,
larger than ours, which M. Fischer has named _Trogontherium_[325].

But it is more particularly in the class Edentata that these races
of animals belonging to the period before the last assume a size
much superior to that of their present congeners, and even rise to a
magnitude altogether gigantic.

The _Megatherium_ unites a part of the generic characters of the
armadilloes, with some of those of the sloths, and is in size equal
to the largest rhinoceros. Its claws must have been of a monstrous
length, and prodigious strength; its whole skeleton possesses an
excessive solidity. It has only as yet been found in the sandy strata
of North America[326].

The _Megalonyx_ has been very similar to it in its characters, but
has been somewhat less; its claws much longer and sharper in the
edges. Some bones and entire toes of it have been found in certain
caves in Virginia, and in an island on the coast of Georgia[327].

These two enormous edentata have only hitherto presented their
remains in America; but Europe possesses one of the same class which
does not yield to them in magnitude. It is only known by a single
terminal joint of a toe, but this fragment is sufficient to assure us
that it was very similar to a pangolin or manis, but to a pangolin
of nearly twenty-four feet in length. It lived in the same districts
as the elephants, rhinoceroses, and gigantic tapirs; for its bones
have been found along with theirs in a sandy deposit in the county of
Darmstadt, not far from the Rhine[328].

The osseous brecciæ also contain, but very rarely, bones of
carnivora[329], which are much more numerous in caverns, that is to
say, in cavities wider and more complicated than the fissures or
veins containing osseous brecciæ. The Jura chain in particular, is
celebrated for them in the part of it which extends into Germany,
where, for ages past, incredible quantities have been removed and
destroyed, on account of certain medical virtues which had been
attributed to them, and yet there still remains enough to fill the
mind with astonishment. The principal part of these remains consists
of bones of a very large species of bear (_Ursus spelæus_), which
is characterised by a more prominent forehead than that of any of
our living bears[330]. Along with these bones are found those of
two other species of bear (_U. arctoideus_ and _U. priscus_)[331];
those of a hyena (_H. fossilis_), allied to the spotted hyena of the
Cape, but differing from it in the form of its teeth and head[332];
those of two tigers or panthers[333], of a wolf[334], a fox[335],
a glutton[336], as well as of weasels, viverræ, and other small
carnivora[337].

Here, also, may be observed that singular association of animals,
the species resembling which live at the present day in climates so
widely separated from each other as the Cape, the country of the
spotted hyena, and Lapland, the country of our present gluttons. In
like manner we have seen in a cave in France, a rhinoceros and a
reindeer by the side of each other.

Bears are of rare occurrence in alluvial strata. Remains of the large
species of the caves (_U. spelæus_), are said, however, to have been
found in Austria and Hainaut; and in Tuscany there are bones of a
particular species, remarkable for its compressed canine teeth (_U.
cultridens_)[338]. The hyenas are more frequently met with. We have
remains of them in France, found along with bones of elephants and
rhinoceroses. A cave has lately been discovered in England, which
contained prodigious quantities of them, where they were found of
every age, and of which the soil presented even their excrements
in a sufficient state of preservation to be easily recognised. It
would appear that they had long lived there, and that it had been by
them that the bones of elephants, rhinoceroses, hippopotami, horses,
oxen, deer, and various animals of the class of glires, which are
found along with them, and which bear evident marks of their teeth,
had been dragged into the cave. But what must have been the soil of
England, when these enormous animals lived upon it, and constituted
the prey of ferocious beasts! These caves contain also bones of
tigers, wolves and foxes; but the remains of bears are of excessively
rare occurrence in them[339].

However this may be, we see that, at the epoch of the animal
population which we are now passing under review, the class of
carnivora was numerous and powerful. It reckoned three bears with
round canine teeth, one with compressed canini, a large tiger or
lion, another feline animal, of the size of the panther, a hyena, a
wolf, a fox, a glutton, a martin or pole-cat, and a weasel.

The class of glires, composed in general of weak and small species,
has been little observed by the collectors of fossil remains; and,
in all cases, where the bones of these animals have been found in
the strata or deposits of which we speak, they also have presented
unknown species. Such, in particular, is a species of Lagomys found
in the osseous brecciæ of Corsica and Sardinia, somewhat resembling
the Lagomys alpinus of the high mountains of Siberia: so true is it
that it is not always in the torrid zone only, that we are to seek
for the animals which resemble those of this period.

These are the principal animals, the remains of which have been
found in that mass of earth, sand, and mud,--that _Diluvium_, which
everywhere covers our large plains, fills our caverns, and chokes
up the fissures in many of our rocks. They incontestibly formed the
population of the continents, at the epoch of the great catastrophe
which has destroyed their races, and which has prepared the soil, on
which the animals of the present day subsist.

Whatever resemblance certain of these species bear to those of our
days, it cannot be disputed that the general mass of this population
had a very different character, and that the greater part of the
races which composed it have been utterly destroyed.

What astonishes us is, that, among all these mammifera, the greater
number of which have their congeners at the present day in the
warm parts of the globe, there has not been a single quadrumanous
animal,--that there has not been collected a single bone or a single
tooth of an ape or monkey, not so much even as a bone or a tooth
belonging to an extinct species of these animals.

Nor is there any trace of man. All the bones of our species that have
been found along with those of which we have been speaking, have
occurred accidentally[340], and their number besides is exceedingly
small, which assuredly would not have been the case, if men had then
been settled in the countries which these animals inhabited.

Where, then, was the human race at this period? Did the last and most
perfect of the works of the Creator nowhere exist? Did the animals
which now accompany him upon the globe, and of which there are no
traces among these fossil remains, surround him? Were the countries
in which he lived with them swallowed up, when those which he now
inhabits, and whose former population may have been destroyed by a
great inundation, were laid dry again? These are questions which the
study of fossil remains does not enable us to solve, and in this
discourse we must not apply for information to other sources.

This much is certain, that we are now at least in the midst of a
fourth succession of land animals,--that, after the age of reptiles,
the age of palæotheria, the age of mammoths, and that of mastodons
and megatheria, has come the age in which the human species, aided
by some domestic animals, peaceably governs and fertilizes the earth,
and that it is only in the deposits formed since the commencement of
this age, in alluvial matters, peat-bogs, and recent concretions,
that bones are found in the fossil state, which belong all of them to
known and still living animals.

Such are the human skeletons of Guadaloupe, imbedded in a species
of travertine formed of land shells, slate, and fragments of shells
and madrepores of the neighbouring sea; the bones of oxen, deer,
roes, and beavers, common in peat-bogs, and all the bones of men and
domestic animals found in the mud and sand deposited by rivers, in
burying grounds, and upon ancient fields of battle.

None of these remains belong either to the great deposit formed at
the time of the last catastrophe, nor to those of preceding ages.




APPENDIX.




APPENDIX.


_On the birds to which the name of Ibis was given by the ancient
Egyptians._

Every body has heard of the Ibis, a bird to which the ancient
Egyptians rendered a religious homage; which they reared within the
precincts of their temples; allowed to wander unmolested through
their towns; whose murderer, even although he had involuntarily
become so, was punished with death[341]; which they embalmed with as
much care as their parents;--a bird to which they attributed a virgin
purity; an inviolable attachment to their country, of which it was
the emblem, an attachment so great that it suffered itself to die of
hunger when it was transported elsewhere;--a bird which possessed
instinct enough to know the increase and waning of the moon, and
to regulate accordingly the quantity of its daily food, and the
development of its young; which arrested at the frontiers of Egypt
the serpents which would otherwise have carried destruction into that
sacred land[342], and which inspired them with such terror that they
dreaded its very feathers[343];--a bird, in fine, whose form the gods
would have assumed, had they been forced to adopt a mortal figure,
and into which Mercury was really transformed, when he had a mind to
traverse the earth, and instruct men in the sciences and arts.

No other animal could have been so easy to recognize as this; for
there is no other of which the ancients have left us at once, as
of the ibis, excellent descriptions, accurate and even coloured
figures, and the body itself preserved with its feathers, under the
triple envelope of a preservative bitumen, thick and close folds of
linen, and solid and well varnished vases. And yet, of all the modern
authors who have spoken of the ibis, there is but one, the celebrated
Bruce, a traveller more famous for his courage than for the justness
of his opinions in natural history, who has not blundered respecting
the true species of this bird; and his ideas with regard to this
subject, however accurate they were, have not even been adopted by
naturalists[344].

After several changes of opinion respecting the ibis, it was
seemingly agreed, at the period when I published the first edition
of this work, to give the name of Ibis to a bird a native of Africa,
almost of the size of the stork, with white plumage, having the
quills black, perched upon long red legs, armed with a long arched
beak, of a pale yellow colour, sharp at its edges, rounded at its
base, and notched at its point, and whose face is covered with a red
skin destitute of feathers, which do not extend farther forward than
the eyes.

Such is the Ibis of Perrault[345], the Ibis candida of Brisson[346],
the Ibis blanc d’Egypte of Buffon[347], and the Tantalus Ibis of
Linnæus, in his twelfth edition. It was to this same bird, also, that
Blumenbach, while he avowed that it is of very rare occurrence at the
present day, at least in Lower Egypt, asserted that the Egyptians
rendered divine honours[348]; and yet this naturalist had possessed
opportunities of examining bones of the true ibis in a mummy which he
opened in London[349].

I also participated in the error of those celebrated men whom I have
just mentioned, until the moment when I was enabled to examine some
mummies of the ibis by myself. This pleasure was procured for me,
for the first time, by the late M. Fourcroy, to whom M. Grobert,
Colonel of Artillery, on his return from Egypt, had given two of
these mummies, both taken from the pits of Saccara. On carefully
exposing them, we perceived that the bones of the embalmed bird
were much smaller than those of the _Tantalus ibis_ of naturalists;
that they did not much exceed those of the curlew in size, that its
beak resembled that of the latter, being only a little shorter in
proportion to its thickness, and not at all that of the tantalus;
and, lastly, that its plumage was white with the quills marked with
black, as the ancients have described it.

We are therefore convinced, that the bird which the ancient Egyptians
embalmed, was by no means the Tantalus ibis of naturalists, that it
was smaller, and that it was to be sought for in the curlew genus. We
found, after some inquiries, that the mummies of the ibis which had
been opened before by different naturalists, were similar to ours.
Buffon says expressly that he examined several of them; that the
birds which they contained had the beak and size of curlews; and yet
he has blindly followed Perrault in taking the African tantalus for
the ibis. One of those mummies opened by Buffon still exists in the
museum; it is similar to those which we have examined.

Dr Shaw, in the supplement to his Travels[350], describes and figures
with care the bones of a similar mummy. The beak, he says, was six
English inches in length, similar to that of the curlew, &c. In a
word, its description agrees entirely with ours.

Caylus, in his Collection of Antiquities, vol. vi. pl. xl. fig. 1.,
gives a representation of the mummy of an ibis, the height of which,
with its bandages, is only one foot seven inches four lines, although
he says expressly that the bird was placed upon its feet with the
head straight out, and that it had no part inflected in its embalment.

Hasselquist, who took a small white and black heron for the ibis,
gives, as his principal reason, that the size of this bird, which is
that of a crow, corresponds very well with that of the mummies of the
ibis[351]. How, then, could Linnæus have given the name of ibis to a
bird as large as a stork? How, especially, could he have considered
this bird to be the same as the Ardea ibis of Hasselquist, which,
besides its smallness, had the beak straight? And how has this latter
error of synonymy been preserved to this very day in the _Systema
Naturæ_?

A short time after this examination, which was made in the presence
of M. Fourcroy, M. Olivier had the politeness to shew us the bones
which he had taken from two mummies of the ibis, and to open along
with us two others. These bones were found similar to those of
Colonel Grobert’s mummies; one of the four only was smaller, but it
was easy to judge by the epiphyses that it had belonged to a young
individual.

The only figure of the beak of an embalmed ibis, which does not
entirely agree with the objects which we have had under our eyes,
is that of Edwards (pl. cv.); it is a ninth part larger, and yet we
do not doubt its accuracy, for M. Olivier shewed us also a beak an
eighth or a ninth longer than the others, or in the proportion of
180 to 165, which had been equally taken from a mummy. This beak
only shews that there were among the ibises individuals larger than
others; but it proves nothing in favour of the tantalus, for it has
not at all the form of the beak of that animal. Its beak is perfectly
similar to that of the curlews; and besides, the beak of the tantalus
is a third longer than that of our largest embalmed ibises, and
two-fifths longer than that of the smallest.

We have ascertained further, that similar variations with regard to
the size of the beak exist in our European curlews, according to the
age and sex. They are still more strongly marked in the green curlew
of Italy, and in our godwits; and this variation appears to be a
property common to most of the species of the family of scolopaceous
birds.

Lastly, our naturalists returned from the expedition to Egypt with
a rich harvest of objects, as well ancient as recent. My learned
friend M. Geoffroy St Hilaire, in particular, had occupied himself
with the greatest care in collecting mummies of all descriptions, and
had brought with him a great number of those of the ibis, both from
Saccara and Thebes.

The former were in the same state as those which M. Grobert had
brought, that is to say, their bones had undergone a sort of half
burning, and were without consistence; they broke on the slightest
touch, and it was very difficult to obtain any entire, and still more
so to detach them for the purpose of making a skeleton.

The bones of those brought from Thebes were much better preserved,
either on account of the greater heat of the climate, or from the
more efficacious means employed for their preparation; and M.
Geoffroy having sacrificed some of them to me, M. Rousseau, my
assistant, succeeded, by dint of patience and address, and by the
employment of ingenious and delicate methods of procedure, in making
up an entire skeleton, by stripping all the bones, and connecting
them with a very fine wire. This skeleton is deposited in the
anatomical galleries of the museum, of which it forms one of the
most beautiful ornaments, and we have represented it in Pl. iv.

It is likely that this mummy must have been that of a bird kept in a
state of domesticity in the temples, for its left humerus has been
broken and joined again. It is probable that a wild bird, whose wing
had been broken, would have perished before it had healed, from its
being unable to pursue its prey, or to escape from its enemies.

This skeleton puts it in our power to determine, without any
uncertainty, the characters and proportions of the bird. We see
clearly that it was in all points a true curlew, a little larger than
the common curlew of Europe, but having the beak thicker and shorter.
The following is a comparative table of the dimensions of the two
birds, taken, for the ibis, from the skeleton of the mummy of Thebes,
and for the curlew, from a skeleton which previously existed in our
anatomical galleries. We have added those of parts of the Saccara
ibises, which we succeeded in obtaining entire.

  +-----------------------+-------------+------------+----------------+
  |                       | Skeleton of |Skeleton of |Saccara Ibises. |
  |        Parts.         |an Ibis from |the Curlew. +-------+--------+
  |                       |   Thebes.   |            |Larger.|Smaller.|
  +-----------------------+-------------+------------+-------+--------+
  |Head and beak together,|    0.210    |    0.215   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Head alone,            |    0.047    |    0.040   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |The 14 vertebræ of     |    0.192    |    0.150   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |  the neck together,   |             |            |       |        |
  |Back,                  |    0.080    |    0.056   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Sacrum,                |    0.087    |    0.070   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Coccyx,                |    0.037    |    0.035   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Femur,                 |    0.078    |    0.060   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Tibia,                 |    0.150    |    0.112   |  ...  | 0.095  |
  |Tarsus,                |    0.102    |    0.090   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Middle-toe,            |    0.097    |    0.070   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Sternum,               |    0.092    |    0.099   |  ...  |  ...   |
  |Clavicle,              |    0.055    |    0.041   |  ...  | 0.04   |
  |Humerus,               |    0.133    |    0.106   | 0.124 |  ...   |
  |Fore-arm,              |    0.153    |    0.117   | 0.144 | 0.114  |
  |Hand,                  |    0.125    |    0.103   |  ...  |  ...   |
  +-----------------------+-------------+------------+----------------+

It appears by this table, that the animal of Thebes was larger than
our curlew; that one of the Saccara ibises was intermediate in size
between that of Thebes and our common curlew, and that the other was
smaller than this latter bird. It is also seen that the different
parts of the body of the ibis do not observe the same proportions
between each other, as those of the curlew. The beak of the former,
for example, is in particular shorter, although all the other parts
are longer, &c.

However, these differences of proportions do not exceed what might
be expected in species of the same genus: the forms and characters
which may be considered as generic, are absolutely the same.

We must therefore search for the true ibis, not among those
tantaluses of large size and sharp beak, but among the curlews; and,
let it be observed, that, by the name _curlew_, we intend to signify,
not the artificial genus formed by Latham and Gmelin, of all the
wading birds which have the beak curved downwards, but a natural
genus, to which we shall give the name of _Numenius_, and which will
comprehend all the waders with beaks curved downwards, soft and
rounded, whether their head be bare or clothed with feathers. It is
the genus _courlis_, such as Buffon imagined it[352].

A glance over the collection of birds belonging to the royal cabinet,
has enabled us to distinguish a species, which is neither named nor
described in the works of systematic writers, excepting perhaps by
Dr Latham; and which, when carefully examined, will be found to
correspond with all that the ancients, the monuments and mummies,
indicate as characteristic of the ibis.

We here present a figure of it, Plate V. It is a bird somewhat larger
than the curlew; its beak is arcuate like that of the curlew, but
a little shorter, and sensibly thicker in proportion, somewhat
compressed at its base, and marked on each side with a groove,
which, proceeding from the nostril, is continued to the extremity;
while, in the curlew, there is a similar groove, which disappears
before arriving at the middle of the beak; the colour of the beak is
more or less black; the head, and the two upper thirds of the neck,
are entirely destitute of feathers, and the skin of these parts is
black. The plumage of the body, wings, and tail, is white, with the
exception of the ends of the large quills of the wing, which are
black; the four last secondary quills have the barbs singularly long,
attenuated, and hanging down over the ends of the wings, when the
latter are folded; their colour is a beautiful black, with violet
reflections. The feet are black, the legs are thicker, and the toes
much longer in proportion than those of the curlew; the membranes
between the bases of the toes are also more extended; the leg is
entirely covered with small polygonal, or what is called reticulated
scales, and the base of the toes itself has only similar scales;
while, in the curlew, two-thirds of the leg, and the whole length of
the toes, are scutulate, that is to say, furnished with transverse
scales. There is a reddish tint under the wing, toward the top of the
thigh, and on the anterior large wing coverts; but this tint appears
to be an individual character, or the result of an accident, for
it does not occur in other individuals that are in other respects
entirely similar.

This first individual came from the collection of the Stadtholder,
and its native country was unknown. The late M. Desmoulins, assistant
naturalist to the Museum, who had seen two others, asserted that
they came from Senegal; one of them must even have been brought by
M. Geoffroy de Villeneuve: but we shall see, as we proceed, that
Bruce[353] found this species in Abyssinia, where it was named
_Abou-Hannes_ (Father John); and that M. Savigny saw it in abundance
in Lower Egypt, where it was called _Abou-Mengel_ (Father of the
Sickle). It is probable that the moderns will give no credit to the
assertion of the ancients, that the ibis never left Egypt without
perishing[354]. This assertion would, besides, be as contrary to the
Tantalus Ibis as to our common Curlew; for the individuals which we
have in Europe came from Senegal. It was from thence that M. Geoffroy
de Villeneuve had brought the individual in the Museum of Natural
History. It is even much rarer in Egypt than our curlew; for, since
Perrault, nobody mentions having seen it there, or having received
it from that country. An individual without the reddish tint, but in
other respects perfectly similar to the first, was brought home by M.
de Labillardiere, in his voyage to Australasia made along with M.
d’Entrecasteux.

We afterwards learned, that, when young, these birds have the head
and neck furnished with feathers in the part which, as they advance
in age, is to become bare; and that the scapulars are less elongated,
and of a paler and duller black. It is in this state that one was
brought to us from Australasia by the late Peron, which, in other
respects, differs from ours, and from that of M. Labillardiere,
only in having some black markings on the alula and first large
coverts, and in which the head and upper part of the neck are covered
with blackish feathers. It was also a youngish individual which M.
Savigny brought from Egypt, and which is figured in his memoir upon
the Ibis, Plate I.; and in the great work on Egypt, under the head
Birds, Pl. VII. The feathers of the head and back part of the neck
are rather grey than black; those of the fore part of the neck are
white. Lastly, Bruce’s figure (Atlas, Plate XXXV.) is also taken from
a young individual observed in Abyssinia, and almost similar to that
of M. Savigny.

We have received from Pondicherry, by M. Leschenault, an individual
similar to that of Peron, but in which, the head only, and a small
part of the back of the neck, are furnished with blackish feathers;
all the rest is covered with white feathers. But it is not the less
certain, that all these birds have the head and the neck bare when
they are full grown.

The late M. Macé sent from Bengal to the Museum several individuals
of a species very nearly allied to this, which has the beak a little
longer, and less arched, of which the first quill only has a little
black on the two edges of its point, and of which the secondary
quills are also somewhat attenuated, and slightly tinged with reddish.

It appears, according to M. Savigny, p. 25, that M. Levaillant
observed another still, which has the secondary quills similarly
elongated, but of which the neck always retains its feathers, and
whose face is of a red colour.

The same M. Macé also sent us a tantalus, very much resembling that
which has been regarded by naturalists as the ibis, but of which the
small wing-coverts, and a broad band at the lower part of the breast,
are black, and speckled with white. The last secondary quills are
elongated, and tinged with rose-colour. It is known that, in the
Tantalus ibis of naturalists, the small wing-coverts are speckled
with purplish red, and that the whole under part of the body is white.

We give here a table of the parts of some of these birds, which could
be accurately measured in stuffed individuals. By comparing them
with those of the skeletons of embalmed ibises, one may judge if
it were possible to believe for a single moment that these mummies
belonged to the tantalus.

  +-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+---------------------+
  |                       |Length of the beak, from its commissure to   |
  |                       |the tip,                                     |
  |                       |       |Length of the naked part of the leg, |
  |  PARTS OF THE BODY.   |       |       |Length of the tarsus,        |
  |                       |       |       |       |Length of the middle |
  |                       |       |       |       |toe,                 |
  +-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+---------------------+
  |Tantalus Ibis of       |       |       |       |                     |
  |  Naturalists.         | 0.210 | 0.130 | 0.190 | 0.105               |
  |Macé’s Indian          |       |       |       |                     |
  |  Tantalus.            | 0.265 | 0.150 | 0.250 | 0.115               |
  |Numenius Ibis the true |       |       |       |                     |
  |  Ibis of the Ancients.| 0.125 | 0.041 | 0.085 | 0.080               |
  |Numenius Ibis, measured|       |       |       |                     |
  |  by M. Savigny.       | 0.154 | 0.056 | 0.097 | 0.092               |
  |Macé’s Numenius.       | 0.148 | 0.055 | 0.095 | 0.083               |
  |Labillardiere’s        |       |       |       |                     |
  |  Numenius.            | 0.165 | 0.040 | 0.084 | 0.086               |
  |Peron’s Numenius.      | 0.131 | 0.034 | 0.080 | 0.078               |
  |Leschenault’s Numenius.| 0.132 | 0.044 | 0.093 | 0.086               |
  +-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+---------------------+

Let us now examine the books of the ancients and their monuments;
let us compare what they have said of the ibis, or the figures of it
which they have traced, with the bird which we have been describing;
and we shall see all our difficulties vanishing, and all the
testimonies according with what is best of all for the purpose, the
body itself of the bird preserved in the mummy.

“The most common ibises,” says Herodotus, (Euterpe, No. 76.) “have
the head and the fore-part of the neck bare, the plumage white,
excepting on the head, the nape, the ends of the wings and of the
rump, which are black.[355] Their beak and feet are similar to those
of the other ibises.”

How does it happen that the travellers of our times do not make so
good descriptions of the birds which they observe as that which
Herodotus has made of the ibis? How could this description have been
applied to a bird which has only the face bare, and which has that
part of a red colour, to a bird which has the rump white, and not
covered over at least as ours by the black feathers of the wings?

And yet this latter character was essential to the ibis. Plutarch (De
Iside et Osiride) says, that the manner in which the white was cut
by the black in the plumage of this bird, presented the form of a
lunar crescent. It is, in fact, by the union of the black of the last
quills, with that of the two ends of the wings, that there is formed,
in the white, a large semicircular notch, which gives to the white
the figure of a crescent.

It is more difficult to explain what he has intended to say, in
averring that the feet of the ibis form an equilateral triangle with
its beak. But we can understand the assertion of Ælian, that when
it draws in its head and neck among its feathers, it represents, in
some measure, the figure of a heart.[356] It was on account of this,
according to Horus Apollo (c. 35.), the emblem of the human heart.

From what Herodotus says of the nakedness of the throat, and of the
feathers which covered the upper part of the neck, he appears to have
had under his eyes a middle aged individual; but it is not the less
certain, that the Egyptians also knew very well the individuals with
the neck entirely bare. We see such represented from sculptures in
bronze, in Caylus’s Collection of Egyptian Antiquities (vol. i. pl.
x. no. 4., and vol. v. pl. xi. no. 1.) This last figure is even so
like our bird represented in pl. v., that it might be said that it
was taken from it.

The paintings of Herculaneum no longer leave any doubt on the
subject. Plates 138 and 140 of David’s edition, and vol. ii. p. 315,
pl. 59, and p. 321, pl. 60 of the original edition, which represent
Egyptian ceremonies, shew several ibises walking in the court of
the temples. The characteristic blackness of the head and neck are
in particular recognised, and it is easily seen from the proportion
which their figure bears to the persons in the painting, that it must
have been a bird of half a metre at the most, and not of a metre, or
thereabouts, like the Tantalus ibis.

The mosaic of Palestine, also presents in its middle part several
ibises perched upon buildings. They differ in nothing from those of
the paintings of Herculaneum. A Sardonyx of Dr Mead’s Collection,
copied by Shaw, App. pl. v., and representing an ibis, seems to be
a miniature of the bird which we have described. A medal of Adrian,
in large bronze, represented in the Farnesian Museum, vol. vi.
pl. xxviii. fig. 16, and another of the same emperor, in silver,
represented in vol. iii. pl. vi. fig. 9, afford figures of the ibis,
which, notwithstanding their smallness, are pretty like our bird.

With regard to the figures of the ibis, sculptured upon the plinth
of the statue of the Nile, at Belvedere, and upon the copy of it at
the garden of the Tuileries, they are not sufficiently finished to
serve as proofs; but among the hieroglyphics of which the Institute
of Egypt has caused impressions to be made upon the spot, there are
several which distinctly represent our bird. In plate iii. fig.
1, we give one of these impressions which M. Geoffroy has had the
politeness to communicate to us.

We insist particularly on this latter figure, because it is the most
authentic of all, having been made at the time, and on the spot where
the ibis was worshipped, and being cotemporary with its mummies;
while those which we have cited above, having been made in Italy, and
by artists who did not profess the Egyptian worship, might have been
less faithful.

We owe to Bruce the justice of saying, that he recognised the bird
which he describes under the name of _Abou-Hannes_, as the true
ibis. He says expressly, that this bird appeared to him to resemble
that which the mummy pitchers contained; and further, that this
Abou-Hannes, or _Father John_, is very common on the banks of the
Nile, while he never saw there the bird represented by Buffon, under
the name of the White Ibis of Egypt.

M. Savigny, one of the naturalists of the expedition to Egypt,
equally asserts his not having seen the _Tantalus_ in that country,
but he obtained a great number of our _Numenius_ near the Lake
Menzale, in Lower Egypt, and carried their skins with him.

The Abou-Hannes has been placed by Latham, in his _Index
Ornithologicus_, under the name of _Tantalus Æthiopicus_; but he does
not speak of Bruce’s conjecture respecting its identity with the
ibis. The travellers before and after Bruce appear to have all been
in error. Belon thought that the white ibis was the stork, in which
he evidently contradicted all testimony on that head. No person has
adopted his opinion in this matter, excepting the apothecaries, who
have taken the stork for an emblem, because they have confounded it
with the ibis, to which the invention of clysters is attributed[357].

Prosper Alpinus, who relates that this invention is due to the
ibis, gives no description of this bird in his Medicine of the
Egyptians[358]. In his Natural History of Egypt, he speaks of it only
after Herodotus, to whose account he only adds, without doubt from a
passage of Strabo, which I shall mention farther on, that that bird
resembles the stork in size and figure. He mentions his having been
informed that white and black ones occurred in abundance on the edges
of the Nile; but it is evident from his very expressions, that he did
not believe it had been seen there[359].

Shaw says of the ibis,[360] that it is at the present day excessively
rare, and that he has never seen it. His _Emseesy_, or ox-bird, which
Gmelin very improperly refers to the Tantalus Ibis, is of the size
of the curlew, with the body white, and the beak and feet red. It
frequents the meadows, where it follows the cattle; its flesh is not
well tasted, and corrupts quickly. It is easy to see that this is not
the Tantalus, and still less the Ibis of the ancients.

Hasselquist was not acquainted with the white Ibis nor with the black
one, his _Ardea Ibis_ is a small heron, which has the beak straight.
Linnæus had acted very properly in placing it among the herons, in
his tenth edition; but he erred, as I have said, in transporting it
afterwards as a synonym to the genus _Tantalus_.

Demaillet[361] conjectures that the ibis might be the bird peculiar
to Egypt, and which was named Pharaoh’s Fowl (_Chapon de Pharaon_),
and at Aleppo _Saphan-bacha_. It devours serpents. There are of them
white, and white and black; and it follows, for more than a hundred
leagues, the caravans which go from Cairo to Mecca, for the purpose
of feeding upon the carcases of animals which are killed during the
journey, while at any other time there is not one seen along this
route. But the author does not consider this conjecture as certain;
he even says, that we must give up understanding the ancients, when
they have spoken so as not to be understood. He ends with concluding,
that the ancients have perhaps indiscriminately comprehended under
the name of Ibis, all birds which rendered to Egypt the service of
clearing it of the dangerous reptiles which this climate produces
in abundance, such as the vulture, the falcon, the stork, the
sparrowhawk, &c.

He had reason not to regard his Pharaoh’s fowl as the ibis; for,
although its description is very imperfect, and although Buffon
fancied he recognised the ibis in it, it is easy to judge, as well
as by what Pokocke says of it, that this bird must be a carnivorous
one; and, in fact, we see from Bruce’s figure (Vol. v. p. 191. of
the French edition), that Pharaoh’s fowl is nothing else than the
_rachama_ or the small white vulture with black wings (_Vultur
perenopterus_, Linn.)--a bird very different from what we have proved
above to be the ibis.

Pokocke says that it appears, from the descriptions which are given
of the ibis, and from the figures which he has seen of it in the
temples of Upper Egypt, that it was a species of Crane. I have seen,
he adds, a number of these birds in the islands of the Nile; they
were for the most part greyish[362]. These few words suffice to prove
that he did not know the ibis better than the others.

The learned have not been more happy in their conjectures than the
travellers. Middleton refers to the ibis, a bronze figure of a
bird, of which the beak is arched, but short, the neck very long,
and the head furnished with a small crest, a figure which never had
any resemblance to the bird of the Egyptians[363]. This figure is,
besides, not at all in the Egyptian style, and Middleton himself
agrees that it must have been made at Rome. Saumaise upon Solinus
says nothing that relates to the present question.

As to the black ibis, which Aristotle places only near Pelusium[364];
it was long thought that Belon alone had seen it[365]. The bird which
he describes under this name is a species of curlew, to which he
attributes a head similar to that of the cormorant, that is to say,
apparently bald, a red beak, and feet of the same colour; but as he
does not speak of the ibis in his journey[366], I suppose that it was
only in France that he made this reference, and by comparison with
mummies of the Ibis. What is certain is, that this curlew, with the
beak and feet red, was not known in Egypt[367], but that our green
curlew of Europe (_Scolopax Falcinellus_, Linn. Pl. Enl. 819.) is
seen very commonly there, that it is even more abundant than the
white numenius[368]; and, as it resembles it in form and size, and,
further, as its plumage may appear black, it can by no means be
doubted that it was the true black ibis of the ancients. M. Savigny
also made a drawing of it in Egypt, but from a young individual
only[369]. Buffon’s figure is from an adult bird; but its colours are
too pale.

The error which prevails at present respecting the white ibis began
with Perrault, who was also the first naturalist who made known the
Tantalus ibis of the present day. This error, adopted by Brisson
and Buffon, passed into the twelfth edition of Linnæus, where it is
blended with that of Hasselquist, which had been inserted in the
tenth, forming with it a compound altogether monstrous.

It was founded on the idea, that the ibis was essentially a bird that
destroyed serpents, and upon this very natural conclusion, that, in
order to enable it to devour these reptiles, it was necessary for it
to have a sharp beak, more or less resembling that of the heron. This
idea is even the only good objection that can be made against the
identity of our bird to the ibis. How, it is urged, could a bird with
a weak bill, a curlew, devour those dangerous reptiles?

It may be replied, that positive proofs, such descriptions, figures,
and mummies, ought always to preponderate over accounts of habits
too often imagined without any other motive than to justify the
different worships rendered to animals. It might be added, the
serpents from which the ibis delivered Egypt, are represented to
us as very venomous, but not as very large. I have even obtained a
direct proof that the birds preserved as mummies, which have had a
beak precisely similar to that of our bird, were true serpent eaters;
for I found in one of their mummies the still undigested remains
of the skin and scales of serpents, which I have deposited in our
anatomical galleries.

But, at the present day, M. Savigny, who has observed, in a living
state, and more than once dissected our white numenius, the bird
which every thing concurs to prove to have been the ibis, asserts
that it only eats worms, fresh water shells, and other small animals
of that sort. Supposing this fact to have no exception, all that can
be concluded from it is, that the Egyptians, as has happened more
than once to them and others, had invented a false reason for an
absurd worship. It is true that Herodotus says, he saw, in a place
on the borders of the desert[370], near Buto, a narrow gorge, in
which a multitude of bones were heaped up, which he was informed
were remains of winged serpents, that were seeking to penetrate into
Egypt in spring, and that the ibises had arrested their passage. But
he does not say that he had witnessed their combats, or that he had
seen those winged serpents in their entire state. The whole of his
testimony, therefore, reduces itself to this, that he had observed a
heap of bones, which may very well have been those of the multitude
of reptiles and other animals which the inundation destroyed every
year, and whose bodies it would naturally carry to the places where
it was stopped, to the borders of the desert, and which must by
preference have accumulated in a narrow gorge.

However, it is equally from this idea of the combats of the ibis with
serpents, that Cicero gives that bird a horny and strong beak[371].
Having never been in Egypt, he imagined that this must have been the
case by mere analogy.

I am aware that Strabo says somewhere, that the ibis resembles the
stork in form and size[372], and that this author ought to have
known it well, since he asserts that in his time the streets and
cross-ways of Alexandria were so filled with them, that they proved a
great inconvenience; but he must have spoken of it from memory. His
testimony cannot be received when he contradicts all the rest, and
especially when the bird itself is there to refute him.

In like manner, I shall not trouble myself about the passage where
Ælian[373] relates, according to the Egyptian embalmers, that the
intestines of the ibis are eighty-six cubits long. The Egyptian
priests of all classes have been guilty of so many extravagancies
with regard to Natural History, that no great importance can be
attributed to what one of their lowest classes might aver.

An objection might still be drawn against my opinion from the long
attenuated and black feathers which cover the rump of our bird,
and of which some traces also are seen in Bruce’s figure of the
Abou-Hannes. The ancients, it might be said, do not speak of them in
their descriptions, and their figures do not exhibit them. But I have
more on my side, in respect to this matter, than a written testimony
or a figured representation. I have found precisely the same feathers
in one of the Saccara mummies; I kept them carefully as being at
once a singular monument of antiquity and a peremptory proof of the
identity of species. These feathers having an uncommon form, and not
occurring, I believe, in any other curlew, leave, in fact, no doubt
respecting the accuracy of my opinion.

I conclude this memoir with a view of its results:

1. The Tantalus Ibis of Linnæus ought to constitute a separate genus,
along with the _Tantalus Loculator_. Their character would be:
_Rostrum læve, validum, arcuatum, apice utrinque emarginatum_.

2. The other Tantali of the last editions should form a genus with
the common curlews, to which the name of _Numenius_ might be given.
The character of the genus would be: _Rostrum teres, gracile,
arcuatum, apice mutico_. For the special character of the subgenus
of the Ibises, there should be added: _Sulco laterali per totam
longitudinem exarato_.

3. The white ibis of the ancients is not the ibis of Perrault and
Buffon, which is a _Tantalus_; nor the ibis of Hasselquist, which is
an _Ardea_; nor the ibis of Maillet, which is a _Vulture_; but it is
a bird of the genus Numenius, and of the sub-genus Ibis, which has
hitherto been described and figured only by Bruce, under the name of
_Abou-Hannes_. I give it the name of NUMENIUS IBIS, _albus, capite
et collo adulti nudis, remigum apicibus, rostro et pedibus nigris,
remigibus secondariis elongatis nigro-violaceis_.

4. The black ibis of the ancients is probably the bird which we
know in Europe under the name of Green Curlew, or the _Scolopax
Falcinellus_ of Linnæus. It also belongs to the genus Numenius, and
to the sub-genus Ibis.

5. The _Tantalus Ibis_ of Linnæus, in the present state of synonymy,
comprehends four species of three different genera, namely,

1. A Tantalus, the ibis of Perrault and Buffon;

2. An Ardea, the ibis of Hasselquist;

3. and 4. Two Numenii, the ibis of Belonius, and the ox-bird of Shaw.

From this example, and so many others, one may judge of the state in
which the _Systema Naturæ_ still exists, which it would be of so much
advantage to purge by degrees of the errors with which it abounds,
and which would seem to be every day increasing, by the addition of
species, characters, and synonyms, made without selection and without
critical examination.

The general conclusion of the whole investigation is, that the Ibis
still exists in Egypt, as it did in the days of the Pharaohs, and,
that it was owing to the inaccuracy of naturalists that the species
was for some time thought to be extinct, or to have been altered in
its forms.




GEOLOGICAL ILLUSTRATIONS,

BY

PROFESSOR JAMESON.


_In Civil History records are consulted, medals examined, and antique
inscriptions deciphered, in order to determine the epochs of human
revolutions, and verify moral events; so in Natural History we must
search the archives of the world; draw from the bowels of the earth
the monuments of former times; collect the fragments, and gather into
one body of proofs all the indices of physical changes, which may
enable us to retrace the different ages of nature. It is thus only
that we can fix some points in the immensity of space, and mark the
progressive stages in the eternal march of time._




ILLUSTRATIONS.


NOTE A and B, p. 9.

_On the Subsidence of Strata._

M. Cuvier adopts the opinion of De Luc, that all the older strata
of which the crust of the earth is composed, were originally in
an horizontal situation, and have been raised into their present
highly-inclined position, by subsidences that have taken place over
the whole surface of the earth.

It cannot be doubted, that subsidences, to a considerable extent,
have taken place; yet we are not of opinion that these have been so
general as maintained by these geologists. We are rather inclined to
believe, that the present inclined position of strata is in general
their original one;--an opinion which is countenanced by the known
mode of connection of strata, the phenomena of veins, particularly
contemporaneous veins, the crystalline nature of every species of
older rock, and the great regularity in the _direction_ of strata
throughout the globe.

The transition and flœtz-rocks also are much more of a chemical or
crystalline nature than has been generally imagined. Even sandstone,
one of the most abundant of the flœtz-rocks, occasionally occurs in
masses, many yards in extent, which individually have a tabular or
stratified structure; but, when viewed on the great scale, appear to
be great massive distinct concretions. These massive concretions,
with their subordinate tabular structures, if not carefully
investigated, are apt to bewilder the mineralogist, and to force him
to have recourse to a general system of subsidence or elevation of
the strata, in order to explain the phenomena they exhibit.


NOTE C, p. 13.

DELUGE.

There are many facts, some of which are recorded in the Bible, that
are hostile to Cuvier and De Luc’s opinions stated in the text,
viz. that the bed of the ocean was changed at the flood, or last
great catastrophe; and that the land, formerly occupied by animals,
was henceforth given up to fishes and other marine tribes. We are
told, for example, that the dove, which was sent forth from the ark,
found an olive-tree, whence it plucked a leaf, to carry back to the
patriarch, as a proof that the waters of the deluge were subsiding;
and we also find that the Assyrian rivers, which originally marked
the situation of Eden, retained the same geographical relations after
the earth had been repeopled. The natural history of the fossil
organic remains contained in alluvial deposits, is also in opposition
to the opinion of De Luc.


NOTE D, p. 19.

FORMATION OF PRIMITIVE MOUNTAINS.

Mitscherlich, in a memoir read before the Royal Academy of Berlin,
but not yet published, enters fully into the illustration of the
igneous origin of mountains, especially those of the primitive class,
deducible from his experiments on the formation of minerals by
fusion. As the view is interesting, we shall here give a short sketch
of it.

Have the primitive mountains of our globe, whose form necessarily
supposes a fluid state, been dissolved in water; or has the
temperature of our earth been raised to such a degree, that the
substances of which our primitive mountains are formed have become
fluid? This question has been differently answered, and the solutions
given have been attempted to be supported in proportion as the
observation of geological facts, and the inquiries instituted
with reference to the chemical combinations which compose the
earth, have been developed. New observations, and the discovery of
unknown laws in chemistry and mineralogy, must, at the same time,
open a new field for speculation and observation in geology. Of
the discoveries of our own times, there certainly is none which
has exercised a greater influence upon mineralogy than that of
determinate proportions, and especially the result of the researches
of Berzelius, that the chemical combinations which nature produces,
are formed according to the laws which he has discovered with regard
to artificial combinations; a result which has entirely changed the
aspect of this science, and has elicited a new system of mineralogy,
in which the natural-chemical combinations are ranked with those
which are artificial; which affords a confirmation to the laws of
crystallography, as being the same in both cases.

It has been objected to the truth of the position, that the laws
of natural combinations are the same as those which artificial
combinations follow; that chemistry can decompose minerals; but
that, in the formation of these combinations, natural laws have
been in activity, which art would in vain attempt to reproduce: but
this objection is groundless. The chemical affinity which acts in
artificial combinations is a power of nature, as well as the affinity
which regulates the composition of natural combinations: chemical
affinity, in general, is a quality of matter. In this objection,
modifying circumstances have been confounded with laws. The chemist
would very easily refute the objection, if he could compose minerals
of their elements, and produce artificial combinations similar in all
their characters to minerals themselves. From such researches, there
would, at the same time, be diffused a new light upon geological
investigations. In this manner many phenomena would be reproduced,
which have taken place at the formation of the earth; geological
observations would be repeated by experiments, which might be varied
at pleasure, for confirming these observations; and the recurrence
in nature itself would be sought of those phenomena which have been
produced in the laboratory;--inquiries, which are, however, of great
importance, because they may be arbitrarily disposed and arranged
according to the theory in view.

The importance of such attempts shew the value of any experiments
that go to prove the formation of minerals by artificial means; and
Mitscherlich has been very successful in detecting several mineral
species formed artificially.

Berzelius has shown, in his Chemical System of Mineralogy, that the
greater part of the chemical combinations of which our Earth is
composed, and especially the primitive mountains, are analogous to
salts and double salts; and that, in these combinations, the silica,
carbonic acid, and oxide of iron, act the part of acids; the silica
combines with the alumina, lime, magnesia, protoxide and peroxide
of iron, protoxide of manganese, potash and soda, forming, with
these bases, either simple salts, or double salts, in proportions
determined by the different degrees of saturation; the carbonic acid
is combined with the lime and manganese, and the peroxide of iron
with the protoxide.

The object which should be proposed in these attempts, of which we
speak, is to investigate the relation of these bases to the three
acids. We find ourselves fortunately seconded in this attempt by
a branch of national industry; for the complete extraction of the
greater number of metals depends upon the relation of the silica to
the above-mentioned bases, the degrees of saturation in which the
silica may occur with them, the greater or less degree of affinity
with which these bases combine with the silica, and, lastly, the
chemical qualities of the combination formed. It is necessary for
the metallurgist that he endeavour, in order to attain his object
completely, to produce, in proportion as the minerals differ,
different chemical combinations of the substances which compose
these minerals; but always in determinate proportions, either by
adding a foreign substance, or by regulating the fusion by the choice
of minerals. The combinations which the metallurgist thus produces,
are ordinarily minerals which have already been found in nature,
sometimes even new species.

During a journey in Sweden, Mitscherlich observed at Fahlun, where
he made inquiries regarding the ores, the scoriæ, and in general
regarding the extraction of copper, in order to form a correct idea
of this operation, not only some well-formed crystals in the scoriæ;
but also found that the whole mass of the slag had a crystalline
texture; and that the crystals, and the joints of the slags which had
a lamellar texture, remained the same at different periods of fusion,
provided only that the manner of operating of the metallurgist
remained the same. The examination of the crystalline figure of the
slag proved, that it was that of a mineral which has a composition
analogous to that of the slag. After having made this observation, he
found in almost every foundery which he visited in Sweden, different
crystalline combinations, which resembled minerals. Thus he found at
Fahlun, silicate and bisilicate of protoxide of iron; at Garpenberg,
mica, and several times augite and chrysolite. These combinations
have not only the same crystalline figures, but also all the other
characters of the corresponding minerals.

I have pursued these inquiries, says Mitscherlich, since my return
from Sweden; I have analysed the productions which I have found, and
the analysis has confirmed what the exterior had led to anticipate. I
have also augmented my observations by journeys in various districts
of Germany; and farther, I have been seconded in my researches by my
friends; so that I now possess upwards of forty different species of
crystallized chemical combinations produced by fusion, the greater
number of which are minerals already known; some are new species,
which have not hitherto been met with in nature.

The occurrence of mica, which forms a predominant constituent part of
our primitive mountains, as an artificial production, gave rise to
the following geological speculations.

The artificial production by fusion, of the minerals which compose
our primitive rocks, appears, according to Mitscherlich, to place
beyond doubt the theory that our primitive mountains were formerly
a melted mass. Such a state of fluidity, he continues, affords an
easy explanation of the figure of the Earth, of the increase of
temperature as we proceed into its interior, of hot springs, and of
many other phenomena. With respect to this theory, we may refer to M.
Laplace, who is convinced of its plausibility, without grounding his
belief upon the reasons which chemistry presents. I propose, however,
to make mention of a few facts, in order to shew with what facility
many chemical phenomena in geology may be explained by following this
theory.

Primitive mountains are generally distributed over the surface of the
earth: it necessarily follows that the bodies which have composed
the surface of the earth have participated of the temperature which
the primitive mountains have had at the period when they were in a
fluid state. The temperature at which water boils depends upon the
pressure of the atmosphere; and if the temperature of the earth
increases, we only require to diminish the mean height of the sea
32 feet, in order to have a pressure of an atmosphere more; and it
is by this pressure that the degree of temperature at which water
boils will also be raised higher. M. Laplace judges from the height
of the sea during flowing and ebbing, that the mean depth of the
sea is about 96,000 feet. Supposing three-fourths of this mass of
water were converted into vapour, the pressure of this vapour would
be nearly equal to 2250 atmospheres; and this pressure would so
augment the degree of heat at which water enters into ebullition,
that the primitive mountains might be in a state of fusion, without
the water with which they are covered being heated to the boiling
point; for the water which is not converted into vapour, and whose
quantity is a fourth of the whole mass of vapour, according to the
supposition which we have made, would cover the whole earth, because
water expands in increasing proportion if the temperature be raised,
and because the expansion of water is much greater than that of the
mass of our primitive mountains; and, consequently, according to
this supposition, our primitive mountains are formed, covered with
red hot water. The great pressure of so many atmospheres necessarily
modifies the reciprocal affinities of the substances which compose
the primitive mountains.

Primitive mountains are distinguished from volcanic productions in
this, that the lime and magnesia, which in them are combined with
carbonic acid, form with the silex silicates and bisilicates. It
is necessary that the silex, which, under the ordinary pressure,
and at an elevated temperature, expels the carbonic acid, exercise
no influence under the pressure of so many atmospheres; and it is
not surprising that crystals of quartz occur in Carrara marble.
In volcanic productions, this pressure no longer exists, and we
should find among these the same phenomena which our laboratories
and metallurgic operations present. Following this theory, the
circumstances that primitive mountains contain gypsum and carbonates,
and that water occurs in quartz, very readily admit of explanation.
And with regard to this latter phenomenon, the observations detailed
by Sir Humphry Davy afford an additional confirmation of the theory
in question.

We may explain in the same manner another phenomenon, which is more
in connection with the present state of our globe. Many observations
shew that the sea stood formerly at a much higher level than it does
at present. The water of the sea expands, if the temperature be
elevated more than the land. Admitting that the surface of the earth
has a temperature of 80° of Reaumur, and that the mean depth of the
sea may be 96,000 feet, the height of the sea would then be 4000 feet
higher than it is at present. If we suppose, as may be done without
committing any great error, that the expansion of the primitive
mountains is equal to that of glass, and that they have been at a
temperature of 200°, and even at a much lower one, the water of the
sea would cover the secondary mountains, in which we find the remains
of marine animals. This explanation of the former height of the sea
appears very simple, because the elevated temperature of the earth
may have resulted either from its original state of fluidity, or from
a geological revolution, which has destroyed, at the same time, the
organic beings of a former period.

If primitive mountains and volcanic formations have been fluid, and
have crystallised on cooling, it is necessary that we should retrace
in them the same phenomena and the same laws which we still observe
at the present time. If a fluid body become solid by cooling, these
phenomena are differently modified, according to the chemical nature
of the bodies, and according to the crystalline forms which they
acquire on cooling; but the laws remain always the same. Mitscherlich
says, I am in possession of some specimens which explain several
of the phenomena so often shewn by basalt and volcanic formations.
I do not possess artificial basalt resembling the natural columnar
kind; yet the slags obtained at the furnaces of Sahla resemble basalt
so perfectly, as to deceive the most experienced eye, especially
as their cavities contain crystals of augite. But I have found at
Fahlun a bisilicate of protoxide of iron, which has in consequence
a composition analogous to that of basalt, and which has distinct
joints. In this slag we perceive that the joints, which are
parallel to the axis of the prism and to the lateral planes of the
crystals, are always perpendicular to the plane of cooling. This is
particularly observable in a specimen which was obtained by melting
the slag in a mould; on crystallizing it had several planes of
cooling, and the joints are parallel to each of these planes. The
planes of separation in basalt present exactly the same phenomenon as
this slag.

The phenomena which take place when a fluid body crystallizes may be
observed in sulphur, better than in any other body. All fluid bodies,
however, and even water, on freezing, present the same phenomena.

If a fluid body has cooled to the point at which it begins to become
solid, for example, sulphur, in a round vessel, a crust of sulphur is
not formed upon the surface of the cooled vessel, and another crust
upon the surface of the sulphur itself, as might be expected; on the
contrary, if a crystal be formed upon a point of the inner surface of
the vessel, the crystal enlarges by growing in the direction of its
axis, and the mass which surrounds the crystal remains liquid, and
sometimes cools, without the molecules arranging themselves in the
same manner as the crystal already formed. On examining the cooled
mass, we observe that it shews a lamellar texture where the crystal
was formed, and that the mass which surrounded it does not shew this
texture in the same degree. This explains how veins of large-granular
granite traverse a small-granular granite, as well as other phenomena
of the same nature.

This observation also affords an explanation of another phenomenon.
If the half of the liquid mass has become solid, and if the fluid
part be poured off, we obtain isolated crystals, which have been
formed in the fluid mass. If the fluid part be not poured off,
and be permitted to cool slowly, it contracts, as is the case
with most bodies, and the contraction produces the same effect as
the decantation; small cavities will be formed, and these will be
traversed and covered over with distinct crystals. We also observe
this phenomenon in the geodes of primitive and volcanic mountains, in
which the crystals they contain are of the same minerals as those of
which the mountains themselves are composed.


NOTE E, p. 23.

ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF BOULDER STONES IN SCOTLAND, HOLLAND, GERMANY,
SWITZERLAND, AND AMERICA.

Numerous large blocks are met with in almost every country of Europe,
and frequently far removed from their original situations. This is
frequently the case in Scotland: thus, in the Edinburgh district,
we have numerous blocks of primitive rocks, of which no fixed rocks
occur nearer than in our Highland mountains.

In the north of Holland, Germany, and the countries bordering on
the Baltic, enormous fragments of granite and syenite are scattered
within certain limits. According to Humboldt, it seems to be now
proved, that they have been carried southward, with a distribution
like that of radii from a centre, from the Scandinavian peninsula,
during some of the ancient revolutions of our globe, and that they
have not originally belonged to the granitic chains of the Hartz and
Saxony, which they approach without, however, actually attaining
their basis[374]. Born, says Humboldt, on the sandy plains of the
Baltic, and until the age of eighteen, not knowing any other rock
than these scattered blocks, I could not but feel curious to know
whether the new world presented any thing of a similar nature. I
was surprised not to find a single block of this description in the
_Llanos_ of Venezuela, although the immense plains were immediately
bordered to the south by a group of mountains entirely granitic[375],
and which presents, in its broken and almost columnar peaks, traces
of the most violent action[376]. Towards the north, the granitic
chain of the Silla of Caracas and of Portocabello is separated from
the Llanos, by a range of mountains which are schistose between
Villa de Cura and Parapara, and calcareous between the Bergantin and
Caripe. I was equally struck with the same absence of blocks upon the
banks of the Amazon. La Condamine had already affirmed, that from
the Pongo of Manseriche to the strait of Pauxis, not the smallest
stone was to be observed. Now, the basin of the Rio Nigro and of
the Amazon is also but a Llano, a plain like those of Venezuela and
Buenos Ayres, the difference consisting only in the state of the
vegetation. The two Llanos, situated at the northern and southern
extremities of South America, are covered with gramineæ; they are
Savannas destitute of trees. The intermediate Llano, that of the
Amazon, exposed to almost continual equatorial rains, is a thick
forest. I do not remember to have heard that the Pampas of Buenos
Ayres or the Savannas of the Missouri[377] and New Mexico contain
granitic blocks. The absence of this phenomenon appears general in
the new world. It is probably equally so in the Sahara in Africa;
for we must not confound rocky masses which pierce the soil in the
midst of the desert, and of which mention has often been made by
travellers, with mere scattered fragments. These facts seem to prove,
that the blocks of Scandinavian granite, which cover the sandy plains
on the southern side of the Baltic, in Westphalia, and in Holland,
are owing to a particular debacle which proceeded from the north,
to a purely local catastrophe. The old conglomerate (grès rouge),
which covers a great part of the Llanos of Venezuela and of the basin
of the Amazon, contains, without doubt, fragments of those same
primitive rocks of which the neighbouring mountains are composed;
but the convulsions of which these mountains present undoubted
evidences, do not seem to have been accompanied with circumstances
favourable to the transportation of great blocks. This geognostic
phenomenon is so much the more unexpected, that nowhere in the world
does there exist a plain so continuous, and which is prolonged with
fewer interruptions to the abrupt declivity of a purely granitic
cordillera. Before my departure from Europe, says Humboldt, I had
already been struck with the observation that there are no primitive
blocks in Lombardy, nor in the great plain of Bavaria, which is the
bottom of an ancient lake, having an elevation of 250 fathoms above
the level of the ocean. This plain is bounded on the north by the
granites of the Upper Palatinate, and on the south by the alpine
limestones, transition clay-slates, and mica-slates of the Tyrol.

Boulders, or loose blocks of alpine rocks, are found in the lower
part of the Alpine valleys, which terminate in the great principal
valley that stretches between the Alps and the Jura, from the Lake
of Geneva to the Lake Constance; and are also found almost every
where in this great principal valley. They are sometimes met with
4000 feet above the level of the sea, on the side of the Jura, facing
the Alps, and also in considerable numbers in many of the valleys of
the Jura itself. These blocks occur only on the surface, never in any
solid rock, and no one ever met with them in the subjacent strata of
sandstone, marl, or conglomerate of the hills and valleys, interposed
between the Alps and the Jura; but they are sometimes found deep in
the soil, or imbedded or surrounded with the debris formed by rivers.

The traveller is often surprised by the enormous magnitude of these
loose blocks, some of them being calculated to contain 50,000 cubic
feet. The smaller masses are distinguished from those brought down by
rivers, by their position, that is, their occurring on heights and
acclivities, where no river could ever have run. They may also be
confounded with blocks from decaying conglomerate; hence it is proper
to be on our guard, not only to distinguish these blocks from those
derived from conglomerate rocks, but also from the rolled masses
belonging to river courses.

The height at which they are found does not appear to have any
relation to their magnitude, for we often find very large blocks at
considerable heights, and also in deep valleys; and we also meet with
small masses as well in the bottoms of valleys, as high up on the
mountains.

They occur sometimes in heaps, or dispersed in single blocks; but
these relations have no connection with their magnitude, because we
often find large and small masses in the same heap, and single,
large, and small, blocks on mountain summits, and in the bottoms of
valleys. The smaller blocks are more or less rounded, but seldom
so much so as the boulders of rivers, which have been exposed to
long continued friction. The larger blocks are indeed angular, but
not sharp edged. But in examining this relation, we must carefully
distinguish whether or not the angles or edges are original, or have
been produced by subsequent, natural, or artificial causes. Very
often masses of this description are blasted with gunpowder, either
with the view of clearing the fields, or of obtaining stones for
building; and these, if left on the ground, may lead into error.

These blocks vary in their nature, some being of the primitive class,
while others belong to those of the transition and secondary classes.
In general, they appertain to rock formations, situated nearer to the
central alpine chains than those of the places where they are found.
Thus, no rocks of the transition class occur in gneiss valleys; no
alpine limestone in transition valleys; and, in general, nowhere
but in Jura, do blocks of Jura limestone make their appearance.
Therefore, all the loose blocks of rocks between the Jura and the
Alps, belong to the strata of the high chains of the Alps.

But these blocks have different characters in different districts.
The loose blocks which occur in the river basin of the Rhone, and
the Lake of Geneva, are quite different from those which lie strewed
about in the river basin of the Rhine. These, again, are equally
different from the loose blocks of the river basin of the Aare,
as those of the Aare are from the blocks of the Lake of Zurich,
and the valley of Limmat; and these in their turn are equally well
distinguished from the great accumulations in the valley of the
Reuss. It rarely happens that intermixtures take place among these
different accumulations of debris, and this is a circumstance which
must be attended to in our investigation.

It results from an accurate comparison of these loose blocks with
those mountain rocks which occur in extensive chains in the high
Alps; that the loose blocks of every known river basin agree with
the rocks which form the sides of the upper parts of those high
Alpine valleys, which are in immediate connection with these great
water basins. Thus the loose blocks of the water basin of the Rhine
are similar to the rocks of Bundten. We find in the Lake of Zurich,
and in the Limmat valley, the rocks of the Glarner land in loose
blocks. The debris in the basin of the Reuss consists of rocks of the
mountains from which the Reuss takes its rise. The loose blocks of
the water basin of the Aare are similar to the mountain rocks of the
high Alps of Bern; and the loose blocks, found in the course of the
Rhone, occur in fixed rocks in the Vallais.

It thus appears that the loose blocks are by no means irregularly
dispersed over the great valley between the Alps and the Jura, but
are distributed in the direction of distinct water basins. It also
appears, that the loose blocks are not irregularly distributed in
these different basins; on the contrary, that, in some parts of the
basin, they are accumulated in great numbers; in other places they
are rare, and in some situations none occur.

From the preceding observations, we may obtain some hints of
importance in respect of the cause of this remarkable phenomenon.
These loose blocks already occur in the alpine valleys, which open
into the great valley, between the Alps and the Jura. They are found
more abundantly in the wide parts of valleys immediately below the
narrow or contracted passes, and few occur in the narrow, steep, and
rocky parts of the valleys.

Loose blocks are found, at a greater or less height, in the smaller
lateral valleys that open into the transverse alpine valleys, which
terminate in the great valley between the Alps and the Jura. If these
lateral valleys form passes (which lead over into other valleys by
a lowering of the high mountain chain), which are not more than
4000 feet above the level of the sea, loose blocks occur, not only
in these passes, but also more or less widely distributed in the
opposite valleys. In the great principal valley which stretches
between the Alps and the Jura, from the Lake of Geneva to beyond the
Lake Constance, we find these loose blocks dispersed over all the
hills whose elevation is not more than 3000 feet above the level of
the sea; but even here the distribution of the blocks is not entirely
irregular. The largest are found on such hills and acclivities as are
opposite the mouths of the alpine valleys, in the great principal
valley. The blocks are frequently found higher on such acclivities,
than on the sides of those valleys which may be considered as a
continuation of the alpine valleys. The loose blocks are found every
where on that acclivity of the Jura range which is opposite to the
Alps, and they are found highest and largest in those places which
are directly opposite the mouths of the alpine valleys. In such
places, the blocks again attain an elevation of nearly 4000 feet
above the level of the sea; whereas, in the intermediate places,
which are most remote from the places opposite the mouths of the
alpine valleys, the blocks seldom reach at a height of 2000 feet
above the level of the sea.

In those places where the Jura chain branches into the great valley
between the Jura and the Alps, loose blocks are found in the valleys
behind the projecting chains. The Jura range is sometimes intersected
in places opposite to the Alps; and it is remarked, that loose blocks
are met with in the valleys behind these intersected portions of
the range; and that, when loose blocks occur in the Jura range, at
a distance from the Alps, it is only in such places as are directly
opposite to the intersected portions of the chain opposite to the
Alps.

The circumstance of the non-occurrence of these blocks in the
sandstone, marl, and nagelfluh, which occupy the great valley between
the Alps and the Jura, proves that that revolution of our globe, by
which these were dispersed, took place after the formation of these
rocks, and may therefore have belonged to one of the latest changes
which have contributed to the present form of the earth’s surface.

When we compare the relations of the alluvium of the rivers in
valleys with those of the loose blocks, their similarity must strike
every one. Thus, rolled masses are seldom deposited in those places
where a river forces its way through a narrow passage; but where an
expansion takes place, owing to the distance of the banks increasing,
the rolled masses are sometimes accumulated in whole banks. The same
loose blocks seldom occur in the narrow passages of the transverse
valleys in the Alps; but as soon as widenings of the valleys take
place below these narrowings, the blocks occur in abundance.

If, during a flood, a rupture takes place in the banks of a river,
where it is contracted, a part of the stream will flow out by the
lateral opening, and carry along with it rolled masses, even when the
opening in the bank does not reach to the bottom of the bed of the
river; for the mountain stream, loaded with boulders, carries them
not merely in single masses along its bottom, but the flood-water
of the stream generally attacks large sandbanks, or older beds of
rolled masses, and carries along with it, accompanied with a terrible
noise, whole masses, forces them over the lower banks, or through the
chasm in the bank, and often deposites them several feet high, on an
immediately succeeding widening of the river’s course.

In the same manner, we observe loose blocks deposited on high
situations in the lateral valleys of the great transverse valleys,
and dispersed over the passes into the neighbouring valleys. The
height of the lateral deposites of loose blocks, and their position
in the passes, and their passing into neighbouring valleys, are facts
which assist us in judging of the extent of the power that may have
acted during their transportation.

The striking agreement observable in the phenomena of the
distribution of the loose blocks from the interior Alpine valleys to
the interior valleys of the Jura, with those in the rolled masses
carried along by rivers, must lead every one, who reflects on this
interesting phenomenon, to the hypothesis, that these blocks may have
been deposited in their present situations by an overwhelming flood,
which burst from the Alps. It is true that this opinion is liable to
many objections; but still it contains a more plausible explanation
of the phenomenon than any other with which we are acquainted.

The loose blocks, in the different river-districts, being in general
separated from each other, or if any intermixture takes place of the
rolled masses of one valley with that of another, it being only on
their edges, it is highly probable that the floods which burst from
these valleys, and carried along with them the masses of rocks, may
have been simultaneous, by which the flow of the one basin would
bound and limit that of the other, and thus prevent the water-flood
of one basin flowing into the neighbouring ones.

The contemporaneous occurrence of these different floods from the
Alpine valleys, can alone, on this hypothesis, explain why this
aqueous flood was so generally and so highly accumulated in the great
valleys between the Alps and the Jura, as to reach the height of most
of the sandstone mountains, and to a great elevation in the Jura,
where many blocks are found deposited. But if the contemporaneous
occurrence of these floods is proved by the facts already enumerated,
to what cause are we to refer this simultaneous bursting of floods of
water from so many Alpine valleys?

We observe, on the north-western side of the chain of the Alps,
numerous openings, which, by their structure, seem to point out the
action of violent floods. Let us suppose the numerous valleys, in the
districts already described, closed at their present entrances, or
openings, as would seem from their structure to have been formerly
the case; the consequence of this arrangement would be the filling
of the Alpine valleys with water, to the height of the lowest passes
among the mountains, and thus an enormous accumulation of water
would take place. This great body of water, if let loose at once, by
the bursting of the lower extremities of the valleys, would form a
flood which would sweep across the sandstone mountains, between the
Alps and the Jura range, and even ascend high on the Jura itself.
This flood of water, moving, probably, at the rate of 200 feet in a
second, and loaded with debris of rocks, would carry masses, even
these having a magnitude of 50,000 cubical feet, some thousand feet
high, on the Jura range[378]. Geologists maintain, that the blocks
or boulders met with in other countries, and arranged as those in
Switzerland, have been deposited where we now find them, by the
bursting of lakes; while those found on the shores of the Baltic, are
conjectured to have been transported by a great rush of water caused
by the sudden elevation of the land of Scandinavia. Another opinion
has its advocates, which maintains that these boulders have been
spread over different countries by the waters of the _deluge_.


NOTE F, p. 26.

ON THE ALLUVIAL LAND OF THE DANISH ISLANDS IN THE BALTIC, AND ON THE
COAST OF SLESWIGH.

In this section, Cuvier gives a clear and distinct account of several
kinds of alluvial formations. M. De Luc, in the first volume of his
Geological Travels, describes the alluvial formations that cover
and bound many of the islands in the Baltic, and upon the coast of
Denmark, and gives so interesting an account of the modes followed by
the inhabitants, in preserving these alluvial deposites, that we feel
pleasure in communicating it to our readers.

  “During my stay at Husum, I had the advantage of passing my
  evenings very agreeably and profitably at the house of M.
  Hartz, with his own family, and two Danish officers, Major
  Behmann, commandant at Husum, and Captain Baron de Barackow. The
  conversation often turned on the objects of my excursions, and
  particularly on the natural history of the _coasts_ and of the
  _islands_; respecting which, M. Hartz obligingly undertook to
  give me extracts from the chronicles of the country. This led
  us to speak of the Danish islands; and those officers giving me
  such descriptions of them, as were very interesting to my object,
  I begged their permission to write down, in their presence, the
  principal circumstances which they communicated to me. These will
  form the first addition to my own observations; I shall afterwards
  proceed to the information which I obtained from M. Hartz.

  The two principal islands of the Danish Archipelago, those of
  Funen and Seeland (or Zeeland), as well as some small islands
  in the Kattegate, namely, Lenoe, Anholt, and Samsoe, are hilly,
  and principally composed of _geest_[379]; and in these are found
  _gravel_ and _blocks of granite_, and of other stones of that
  class, exactly in the same manner as in the country which I have
  lately described, and its _islands_ in the North Sea. On the
  borders of the two first of these Danish islands, there are also
  _blocks_ in the sea; but only in front of _abrupt_ coasts, as is
  the case with the islands of Poel and Rugen, and along the coasts
  of the Baltic. The lands added to these islands of _geest_ are in
  most part composed of the _sand_ of the sea, the land-waters there
  being very inconsiderable; and to the south of them have been
  formed several islands of the same nature, the chief of which are
  Laland and Falster, near Seeland. These, like the marsh islands
  in the North Sea, are sand-banks accumulated by the waves, and,
  when covered with grass, continuing to be farther raised by the
  sediments deposited between its blades. In the Baltic, where there
  are no sensible tides, such islands may be inhabited without dikes,
  as well as the extensions of the coasts; because, being raised to
  the highest level of that sea, while their declivity under water
  is very small, and being also more firm in their composition, the
  waves die away on their shores; and if, in any extraordinary case,
  the sea rises over them, it leaves on them fresh deposits, which
  increase their heights. These soils are all perfectly _horizontal_,
  like those added to the coasts of the Continent.

  Some of these islands approach entirely, or in part, to the nature
  of that of Rugen. This island of Seeland, on that side which is
  called Hedding, has a promontory composed of strata of _chalk_
  with its flints. The island of Moen (or Mona), on the south of
  the latter, has a similar promontory near Maglebye and Mandemark;
  and the island of Bornholm, the easternmost of those belonging
  to Denmark, contains strata of _coal_, covered by others of
  _sandstone_. Phenomena like these, evident symptoms of the most
  violent catastrophes at the bottom of the ancient sea, proceeding,
  as I think I have clearly shewn, from the subsidence and angular
  motions of large masses of strata, which must have forced out the
  interior fluids with the utmost impetuosity, it is not surprising
  that so many fragments of the lowermost strata are found dispersed
  over this great theatre of ruins.

  I now proceed to the details which I received from M. Hartz;
  beginning by a specific designation of the _islands_ dependent on
  the province of Sleswigh, such as they are at present, belonging
  to the three classes already defined. To commence from the north;
  Fanoe, Rom, Sylt, and Amrom, were originally _islands_ of the
  same nature as the neighbouring continent, but have been since
  extended by _marsches_[380]. The soil of these islands, with its
  gravel and blocks of primordial stones, was at first barren, as
  the _geest_ is naturally every where; but is become fertile by
  manure, of which there has been no deficiency, since those grounds
  have been surrounded with _marsch_, where the cattle are kept in
  stables during the winter. In the island of Sylt, there are spaces
  consisting of _moor_, but its head of land, which extends on the
  south as far as Mornum, is composed entirely of _marsch_, and is
  bordered with _dunes_ towards the open sea, because, the sediments
  of the rivers not reaching any farther, the _sea-sand_ impelled
  against it by the waves remains pure, and is thus raised by the
  winds in hillocks on the shore. The shallow bottom of the sea,
  between this island and that of Fora, is of _geest_: at low water,
  it may be passed over on foot; and there are found on it gravel
  and blocks of _granite_. But on the same side of Fora there is a
  great extent of _marsch_, beginning from St Laurencius. Among the
  islands consisting entirely of _marsch_ and surrounded with dikes,
  the most considerable are Pellworm and Nord Strand; and among the
  Halligs, or those inhabited without dikes, the chief are Olant,
  Nord-marsh, Langne, Groode, and Hooge.

  Such are the islands on this coast, in their present state, now
  rendered permanent by the degree of perfection at which the
  art of dike-making is arrived. But, in former times, though
  the _original_ land was never attacked by the _sea_, which, by
  adding to it _new lands_, soon formed a barrier against its own
  encroachments, the latter, and the _islands_ composed of the same
  materials, were subject to great and sudden changes, very fatal
  to those who were engaged to settle on them by the richness of
  their soil, comparatively with the continental. The inhabitants,
  who continued to multiply on them during several generations, were
  taught, indeed, by experience, that they might at last be invaded
  by the element which was incessantly threatening them; but having
  as yet no knowledge of natural causes, they blindly considered
  those that endangered them as supernatural, and for a long time
  used no precautions for their own security. They were ignorant of
  the dreadful effects of a certain association of circumstances,
  rare indeed, but, when occurring, absolutely destructive of these
  _marsches_. This association consists of an extraordinary elevation
  of the level of the North Sea, from the long continuance of certain
  winds in the Atlantic, with a violent storm occurring during the
  tides of the new or full moon; for then the sea rises above the
  level of all the _marsches_; and before they were secured against
  such attacks, the waves rolling over them, and tearing away the
  grass which had bound their surface, they were reduced to the state
  of mere banks of sand and mud, whence they had been drawn, by the
  long course of ordinary causes. Such were the dreadful accidents
  to which the first settlers on these lands were exposed; but no
  sooner were they over, than ordinary causes began again to act; the
  sand-banks rose; their surface was covered with grass; the coast
  was thus extended, and new islands were formed; time effaced the
  impression of past misfortunes; and those among the inhabitants of
  these dangerous soils, who had been able to save themselves on the
  coast, ventured to return to settle on them again, and had time to
  multiply, before the recurrence of the same catastrophes.

  This has been the general course of events on all the coasts of the
  North Sea, and particularly on those of the countries of Sleswigh
  and Holstein. It is thus that the origin and progress of the _art
  of dikes_ will supply us with a very interesting _chronometer_ in
  the history of the continent and of man, particularly exemplified
  in this part of the globe. A Lutheran clergyman, settled in the
  island of Nord Strand, having collected all the particulars of
  this history which the documents of the country could afford,
  published it in 1668, in a German work, entitled _The North Frisian
  Chronicle_. It was chiefly from this work, and from the _Chronicle
  of Dankwerth_, that M. Hartz extracted the information which he
  gave to me, accompanied by two maps, copied for me, by one of his
  sons, from those of Johannes Mayerus, a mathematician; they bear
  the title of _Frisia Cimbrica_; one of them respecting the state of
  the _islands_ and of the _coast_, in 1240, as it may be traced in
  the chronicles, and the other, as it was in 1651.

  According to these documents, the first inhabitants of the
  _marsches_ were _Frisii_ or _Frisians_, designated also under
  the names of _Cimbri_ and _Sicambri_: the latter name, M.
  Hartz conjectures, might come from the ancient German words
  _Seekampfers_, i. e. _Sea-warriors_; the _Frisians_ being very
  warlike. These people appear to have had the same origin with
  those, who, at a rather earlier period, took possession of the
  _marsches_ of Ost-Frise (East-Friesland), and of that Friesland
  which forms one of the United Provinces; but this common origin
  is very obscure. Even at the present day, the inhabitants of the
  _marsches_, from near Husum to Tondern, or Tunder to the North,
  though themselves unacquainted with it, speak a language which
  the other inhabitants of the country do not understand, and which
  is supposed to be Frisian. It is the same at a village in the
  peninsula of Bremen, by which I have had occasion to pass.

  The _Sicambri_ or _North Frisians_, are traced back to some
  centuries before the Christian era. At the commencement of that
  era, they were attacked by Frotho, King of Denmark, and lost
  a battle, under their king Vicho, near the river Hever. Four
  centuries afterwards they joined the troops of Hengist and Horsa.
  In the year 692, their king Radebot resided in the island of
  Heiligeland. Charles Martel subdued them in 732; and some time
  afterwards they joined Charlemagne against Gottric, King of
  Denmark. These are some of the circumstances of the history of this
  Frisian colony, recorded in the chronicles of which I have spoken;
  but the history here interesting to us is that of the lands whereon
  they settled.

  It appears that these people did not arrive here in one body,
  but successively, in the course of many years: they spread
  themselves over various parts of the coasts of the North Sea, and
  even a considerable way up the borders of the Weser and the Elbe;
  according to documents which I have mentioned in my _Lettres sur
  l’Histoire de la Terre et de l’Homme_. These new settlers found
  large _marsches_, formed, as well in the wide mouths of those
  rivers as along the coasts, and around the original islands of
  _geest_; especially that of Heiligeland, the most distant from the
  coast, and opposite the mouth of the Eyder. Of this island, which
  is steep towards the south, the original mass consists of strata
  of _sandstone_; and at that time its _marsch_ extended almost to
  Eyderstede: there were _marsches_ likewise around all the other
  original islands; besides very large islands of pure _marsch_ in
  the intervals of the former.

  All these lands were desert at the arrival of the Frisians; and
  the parts on which they established their first habitations, to
  take care of their breeds of horses and cattle feeding on the
  _marsches_, were the original eminences of the islands; on that of
  Heiligeland they built a temple to their great goddess Phoseta, or
  Fosta. When they became too numerous to confine themselves to the
  heights, their herds being also greatly multiplied, they ventured
  to begin inhabiting the _marsches_; but afterwards, some great
  inundations having shewn them the dangers of that situation, they
  adopted the practice followed by those who had settled on the
  _marsches_ of the province of Groningen, and still continued on the
  Halligs; that of raising artificial mounts called _werfs_, on which
  they built their houses, and whither they could, upon occasion,
  withdraw their herds; and it likewise appears, that, in the
  winter, they assembled in greater numbers on the spots originally
  the highest, in the islands, as well as on some parts of the coasts.

  Things continued in this state for several centuries; during which
  period, it is probable that the inhabitants of these lands were
  often, by various catastrophes, disturbed in the enjoyment of them,
  though not discouraged. But in 516, by which time these people were
  become very numerous, more than 600 of them perished by one of the
  concurrences of fatal circumstances already defined. It was then
  that they undertook the astonishing enterprise of enclosing these
  lands. They dug ditches around all the _marsches_, heaping up on
  their exterior edge the earth which was taken out; and thus they
  opposed to the sea, dikes of eight feet in height. After this,
  comprehending that nothing could contribute more to the safety of
  their dwellings, than to remove the sea to a greater distance,
  they undertook, with that view, to exclude it from the intervals
  between the islands, by uniting, as far as should be possible,
  those islands with each other. I will describe the process by which
  they effected this, after I shall have recalled to attention some
  circumstances leading to it.

  From all that I have already said of the _fore-lands_, and of the
  manner in which they are increased, it may be understood, that
  the common effects of the _waves_ and of the _tides_ is to bring
  materials from the bottom of the sea towards the coasts; and
  that the process continues in every state of the sea. The land
  winds produce no _waves_ on the coasts, which can carry back to
  the bottom of the sea what has been brought thence by the winds
  blowing against the shore; and as for the _tides_, it may have
  been already comprehended (and shall soon be proved), that the
  _ebb_ carries back but very little of what has been brought by the
  _flood_. So that, but for some extraordinary circumstances, the
  materials continually impelled towards the shore, which first form
  islands, would at last unite against the coast in a continuous
  soil. The rare events, productive of great catastrophes, do not
  carry back these materials towards the bottom of the sea; they
  only, as it has been said before, ravage the surface, diminishing
  the heights, and destroying the effect of vegetation. These, then,
  were the effects against which it was necessary to guard.

  I now come to the plan of uniting the _islands_, formed by these
  early inhabitants. They availed themselves for that purpose of
  all such parts of the sand-banks as lay in the intervals between
  the large islands, and were beginning to produce grass. These,
  when surrounded with dikes, are what are called _Hoogs_; and
  their effects are to break the waves, thus diminishing their
  action against the dikes of the large islands, and, at the same
  time, to determine the accumulation of the mud in the intervals
  between those islands. In this manner a large _marsch_ island,
  named Everschop, was already, in 987, united to Eyderstede by the
  point on which Poppenbull is situated; and in 995, the union of
  the same _marsches_ was effected by another point, namely, that
  of Tetenbull. Lastly, in the year 1000, Eyderstede received a
  new increase by the course of the Hever, prolonged between the
  sand banks, being fixed by a dike; but the whole still remained
  an _island_. This is an example of the manner in which the
  _marsch_ islands were united by the _hoogs_; and the chronicle of
  the country says, that, by these labours, the islands were so
  considerably enlarged in size, and the intervals between them so
  much raised, that, at low water, it was possible to pass on foot
  from one to the other. The extent of these _marsches_ was so great
  on the coast of Sleswigh alone, that they were divided into three
  provinces, two of which comprehended the islands, and the third
  comprised the _marsches_ contiguous to the coast; and the same
  works were carried on upon the _marsches_ of the coast of Holstein.

  But the grounds thus gained from the sand-banks were very
  insecure; these people, though they had inhabited them more than
  ten centuries, had not yet understood the possibility of that
  combination of fatal circumstances above described, against which
  their dikes formed but a very feeble rampart; the North Sea, by the
  extraordinary elevations of its level, being much more formidable
  in this respect than the ocean, where the changes of absolute level
  are much less considerable. I shall give an abridged account of the
  particulars extracted by M. Hartz from the chronicle of Dankwerth,
  relative to the great catastrophes which these _marsches_
  successively underwent, previously to the time when experience led
  to the means necessary for their security.

  In 1075, the island of Nord Strand, then contiguous to the coast,
  particularly experienced the effect of that unusual combination
  of destructive causes; the sea passing over its dike, and forming
  within it large excavations like lakes. In 1114 and 1158,
  considerable parts of Eyderstede were carried away; and in 1204,
  the part called Sudhever in the _marsch_ of Uthholm was destroyed.
  All these catastrophes were fatal to many of the _marsch_ settlers;
  but in 1216, the sea having risen so high that its waves passed
  over Nord Strand, Eyderstede, and Ditmarsch, near 10,000 of their
  inhabitants perished. Again, in 1300, seven parishes in Nord Strand
  and Pellworm were destroyed; and in 1338, Ditmarsch experienced a
  new catastrophe, which swept away a great part of it on the side
  next Eyderstede: the dike of the course of the Eyder between the
  sand-banks was demolished, and the tides have ever since preserved
  their course throughout that wide space. Lastly, in the year 1362,
  the isles of Fora and Sylt, then forming but one, were divided, and
  Nord Strand, then a _marsch_ united to the coast, was separated
  from it.

  During a long time, the inhabitants who survived these
  catastrophes, and their successors, were so much discouraged,
  that they attempted nothing more than to surround with _dikes_
  like the former such spaces of their meadow-land as appeared the
  least exposed to these ravages, leaving the rest to its fate. But
  the common course of causes continually tending to extend and to
  raise the grassy parts of the sand-banks, and no extraordinary
  combination of circumstances having interrupted these natural
  operations, later generations, farther advanced in the arts,
  undertook to secure to themselves the possession of those new
  grounds. In 1525, they turned their attention to the indentations
  made, during the preceding catastrophes, in the borders of the
  _marsches_; the waves, confined in these narrow spaces, sometimes
  threatening to cut their way into the interior part. In the front
  of all the creeks of this kind they planted stakes, which they
  interlaced with osiers, leaving a certain space between the lines.
  The waves, thus broken, could no longer do injury to the _marsch_;
  and their sediments being deposited on both sides of this open
  fence, very solid _fore-lands_ were there formed. In 1550, they
  raised the _dikes_ considerably higher, employing wheelbarrows, the
  use of which was only then introduced. For this purpose, they much
  enlarged and deepened the interior canals, in order to obtain more
  earth, not merely to add to the height of the dikes, but to extend
  their base on the outer side. At last they began to cover these
  dikes with straw-ropes; but this great preservative of dikes was at
  first ill managed; and the use of it was so slowly spread, that it
  was not adopted in North Strand and in Eyderstede, till about the
  years 1610 and 1612.

  Before that time, however, the safety of the extensive soil of
  the latter _marsch_ had been provided for in a different manner.
  I have said above, that, when the isles of Everschop and Utholm
  had been united to it, the whole together still formed but one
  large _island_; now, in this state, it was in as great danger
  on the side towards the continent, as on that open to the sea;
  because two small rivers, the Trene and the Nord Eyder, discharging
  themselves into the interval between it and the land, and by
  preserving their course to the sea, this interval was thus kept
  open to tempest, sometimes from the side of the Hever, sometimes
  from that of the Eyder; and the waves, beating against the _geest_,
  were thence repelled upon the _marsch_. The inhabitants, seeing
  that the expence of remedying these evils would be greater than
  they could afford, while at the same time it was indispensable to
  their safety, addressed themselves to their bishop and to their
  prefect, of whom they requested pecuniary assistance; and having
  obtained it they first undertook the great enterprise of carrying
  the Trene and the Nord Eyder higher up into the Eyder; keeping
  their waters, however, still separate for a certain space, by a
  _dam_ with a _sluice_, in order to form there a reservoir of fresh
  water; the tides ascending up the Eyder above Frederickstadt.
  They were thus enabled to carry on the extremities of the _dike_
  on both sides to join the _geest_; and the interval between the
  latter and the _marsch_ was then soon filled up, there being only
  left at their junction the canal above described which receives
  the water of the _geest_, and, at low water, discharges them from
  both its extremities by sluices. At the same time, the islands of
  Pellworm and Nord Strand were united with each other by means of
  eight _hoogs_; and the _sandy marsches_ of which I have spoken,
  contiguous to the _geest_, on the north of that of Husum, were
  inclosed with dikes.

  After the dikes had been thus elevated, and their surface
  rendered firm by the straw ropes, though the latter were not yet
  properly fixed, the inhabitants of the _marsches_ for some time
  enjoyed repose; but on the 11th October 1634, the sea, rising
  to an excessive height, carried away, during a great tempest,
  the _hoogs_ which had produced the junction between Pellworm and
  Nord Strand, these having ever since continued distinct islands;
  it also violently attacked Ditmarsch; and its ravages extended
  over the whole coast, as far as the very extensive new lands of
  Jutland. Princes then came forward zealously to the relief of
  their subjects. In particular, Frederick III., Duke of Sleswigh,
  seeing that the inhabitants of Nord Strand were deficient both
  in the talents and in the means necessary for the reparation and
  future security of that large island, and knowing that the art
  of dikes had made greater progress in Holland, because of the
  opulence of the country, addressed himself to the States-General,
  requesting them to send him an engineer of dikes, with workmen
  accustomed to repair them; and this was granted. The dikes of Nord
  Strand were then repaired in the most solid manner; and the Dutch
  engineer, seeing the fertility of its soil, advised his sons upon
  his death-bed, to purchase lands and settle there, if the Duke
  would grant them the free exercise of their religion; they being
  Jansenist catholics, and the inhabitants of the island Lutherans.
  The Duke agreed to this, on condition that they and their posterity
  should continue to superintend the works carried on upon the
  dikes; to which they engaged themselves. From that time the art of
  dikes, and particularly that part of it which consists in covering
  them solidly with straw, has become common to all the _marsches_;
  and the Dutch families, which have contributed to this fortunate
  change, continue to inhabit the same island, and to enjoy the free
  exercise of their religion.”


NOTE G, p. 28.

ON THE SAND-FLOOD.

In different parts of Scotland, as in Aberdeenshire, Hebrides, and
Shetland Islands, there are examples of the natural chronometer
mentioned in the text. In Morayshire there is a striking example of
the sand-flood, concerning which the following details have been
furnished by my young friend the Rev. Mr Ritchie.


_Sand-Flood in Morayshire._

  “Westward from the mouth of the river Findhorn in Morayshire, a
  district, consisting of upwards of ten square miles of land, which,
  owing to its extreme fertility, was once termed the Granary of
  Moray, has been depopulated and rendered utterly unproductive by
  the sand-flood. This barren waste may be characterised as hilly;
  the accumulations of sand composing these hills frequently varying
  in their height, and changing their situation.

  There is historical evidence, that, in the year 1097, the Moray
  Firth overflowed the low country on its southern shore, and threw
  out sand. But the destruction of the barony of Coubine (which
  includes the greater part of the desert mentioned above) was long
  subsequent to this, as might be proved from the inscription on a
  tombstone in the church yard of Dyke. From historical notices,
  also, in regard to the Kinnairds of Coubine, preparing for
  publication, it appears that the eruption of sand commenced about
  the year 1677; that its progress was gradual; that, in 1697, not a
  vestige was to be seen of the manor-place, orchards, and offices
  of Coubine; that two-thirds of the barony were already ruined, and
  that the sand was daily gaining ground.

  This sand, which overwhelmed Coubine, came from Mavieston,
  situated on the shore, about seven miles west from the mouth of
  the Findhorn, where, from time immemorial, there have been large
  accumulations of sand. The sands at Mavieston had formerly been
  covered with vegetation. In an act of the Scottish Parliament,
  dated 16th July 1695, for the preservation of lands adjacent to
  sand-hills, it is stated, that the destruction of Coubine “was
  occasioned by the bad practice of pulling bent and juniper.” Having
  been thus set at liberty, the sand moved towards the north-east, as
  appears from the desolation which marks its progress. The moving
  cause is the wind. I have had opportunities of witnessing the
  effect of the wind on the loose sand. When the breeze is moderate
  it carries along with it successive waves of sand, each wave (if I
  may be allowed the expression) being of a small size, and moving
  with greater or less velocity, in proportion to the strength of the
  breeze, and presenting a very beautiful appearance. When the wind
  is high the heavier particles are drifted forwards, the more minute
  are raised to a considerable height in the atmosphere, occasioning
  no small inconvenience to the spectator, who finds his ears and
  nostrils filled with sand. The movements of the sand are still
  towards the north-east. In the winter of 1816 a large portion of
  Binsness, the only remaining farm on the west side of the Findhorn,
  situated in the line of the sand’s progress, was overwhelmed.
  Since that period large accumulations of sand have disappeared
  altogether, and rich soil, marked with the plough, has been left
  bare, after having been buried for upwards of a century.

  The very minute particles, which, as has been stated, the wind
  raises to a considerable height, are occasionally carried across
  the Bay of Findhorn. In the statistical account of Dyke, the parish
  in which Coubine is situated, it is said, “that, at the town of
  Findern, in a blowing day, one may feel the sand sharply striking
  on his face, from the west side.” This sand, of extreme fineness,
  is to be seen in and around the town of Findhorn, and along the
  coast much rich land is said to have been covered by sand brought
  from the west.

  The greater quantity of the sand is drifted into the river, and its
  effects have been very remarkable. Many years ago the mouth of the
  river having become blocked up with sand, it cut out for itself
  its present channel, which conducts it, by a more direct course,
  to the sea. In consequence of this, the old town of Findhorn had
  changed its situation, from the east to the west side of the
  river, and its site has since been covered by the sea. Previous
  to this, however, the inhabitants, carrying with them the stones
  of their former houses, had removed across the river, and erected
  the present village. On the retiring of the tide from the bay,
  the river almost disappears, being swallowed up by the sand, and
  quick-sands are formed. The effect resulting from the same cause,
  the drifting in of the sand is very different at high water. In
  consequence of the channel of the river having been filled up, the
  bay has increased in breadth. The sand constantly carried down by
  the river has formed a bar, which prevents the entrance of large
  vessels; and the river, probably owing to its increased breadth,
  and this bar depriving it of the impetus acquired in the course
  of its descent, is, at spring-tides, unable to force its way into
  the sea, when it is made to flow back, and inundate a considerable
  extent of carse-land situated at the head of the bay. It was at one
  time proposed to render the river navigable by dredging. And it is
  proposed to endeavour to save the adjoining carse-land, which is of
  the richest quality, from the monthly inundation to which it is at
  present subject, by building a wall along the river side.

  I venture to suggest, that the plan Nature employs for fettering
  down sand should first be imitated, and that seeds of the Arundo
  arenaria, Elymus arenarius, and other plants, which grow readily
  in sand, should be, from time to time, strewed over the Mavieston
  Hills. The seeds of the Arundo arenaria are not always to be had;
  but plants might easily be procured in abundance, and be dibbled
  into the sand-hills. The circumstance of great accumulations of
  sand having of late disappeared from Coubine, has given rise
  to the expectation, that the barony is at no distant period to
  become again serviceable to man. By cutting off fresh supplies
  from Mavieston, this period would be accelerated, and the proposed
  improvements rendered comparatively easy.

  There is at present little bent on Coubine. It is chiefly confined
  to a range of knolls, which forms the southern boundary of the
  sand, and protects the adjoining cultivated fields from its
  encroachments; and yet, notwithstanding the terrible calamity
  the inhabitants of Moray brought upon themselves, by the pulling
  of bent, this “bad practice” still prevails; this plant being in
  no other district of country which I have visited so generally
  employed for thatching cottars’ houses, and other economical
  purposes.”

       *       *       *       *       *

In the Outer Hebrides the effects of the sand-flood are also
considerable, as shewn in the following notice communicated by my
intelligent assistant Mr Macgillivray.


_Sand-Flood in the Hebrides, and other parts of Scotland._

  “The bottom of the sea, along the whole west coast of the Outer
  Hebrides, from Barray Head to the Butt of the Lewis, appears to
  consist of sand. Along the shores of these islands this sand
  appears here and there, in patches of several miles, separated
  by intervals of rock, of equal or greater extent. In some places
  the sandy shores are flat, or very gently sloping, forming what
  are here called Fords; in others, behind the beach, there is an
  accumulation of sand to the height of from twenty to sixty feet,
  formed into hillocks. This sand is constantly drifting; and in
  several places islands have been formed by the removal of isthmi.
  The parts immediately behind the beach are also liable to be
  inundated by the sand; and in this manner most of the islands have
  suffered very considerable damage. Those of Pabbay and Berneray in
  Harris may be particularised; in the former of which, a tract of
  about a mile and a-half long, by half a mile in breadth, has been
  converted into a desert of drifting sand; and in the latter a large
  plain, that was formerly noted for its fertility, has been entirely
  swept away. The sand consists almost entirely of comminuted shells,
  apparently of the species which are found in the neighbouring seas.
  It is rather coarse in the grain; but, during high winds, by the
  rubbing of its particles upon each other, a sort of dust is formed,
  which, at a distance, resembles smoke, and which, in the Island
  of Berneray, I have seen driven into the sea, to the distance of
  upwards of two miles, appearing like a thin white fog. The cure of
  sand drift has been attempted in these islands in two different
  ways. Mr Alexander Macleod, surgeon of North Uist, is the inventor
  of the most efficacious method, which is that of cutting thin
  square turfs from the neighbouring pasture grounds, and laying them
  down at intervals of some inches. In the course of a very few years
  the turfs coalesce, and the stript ground is little the worse; for
  the roots remaining in it, a new vegetation rapidly springs up. The
  other method was introduced by Mr Macleod of Harris, and tried
  extensively upon his estate. It consists of planting small bundles
  of Arundo arenaria, at distances of about a foot and a-half. These
  take root, and prevent the drifting to a certain degree. But often
  vegetation is tardy in establishing itself, and if the turf plan
  be not considerably more expensive, it seems preferable, because
  it very effectually prevents the drift, and moreover, produces
  excellent pasture ground; the former of which indications, the
  planting system, does not completely effect, and the latter in a
  very imperfect degree.”

We may add, as this subject is a very interesting one, that further
details, in regard to the moving sands of Scotland, will be found,
on consulting the Statistical Account of Scotland, vol. xx. p. 220.
In the Appendix to the Account of the parish of Dyke, vol. xx. p.
228. _et seq._ there is an account of the Sand-Hills of Mavieston,
which overwhelmed the barony of Coubine, as mentioned in Mr Ritchie’s
communication. In vol. xix. p. 622. is a notice of the shifting of
two hills of the Mavieston Range 500 yards in twenty years. In vol.
xxi. p. 207. is a notice of some hundred acres in Duffus’ parish
covered three feet deep by drift sand; fourteen inches accumulating
in one night. In Neill’s Tour in Orkney and Shetland 1804, it is
observed, that, in the neighbourhood of the Castle of Noltland,
in Westra, much havoc has been done by the blowing of the sand.
No measures are there employed for putting a stop to this kind of
devastation. In the 6th volume of the Highland Society’s Transactions
will be found a report of the operations carried on in Harris, and
alluded to in Mr Macgillivray’s communication. And in Dr Walker’s
Account of the Hebrides, and Mr Macdonald’s Work on the Hebrides,
farther details may be seen. In Jameson’s Account of the Shetland
Islands, and in Shirreff and Fleming’s Reports on these islands,
are also facts connected with this devastating agent. We may add,
that Dr Oudney, Major Denham, and Captain Clapperton, have added
to our knowledge of the blowing sands of the African deserts. The
coloured engraving of the sand-hills of the African Desert in Denham,
Oudney and Clapperton’s Narrative, is a striking and interesting
representation of the form of the moving sand-hills of Africa.


_The moving Sands of Africa and their effects are thus described in
the_ Mercure de France _for September 1809, by De Luc_.

The sands of the Lybian desert, he says, driven by the west winds,
have left no lands capable of tillage on any parts of the western
banks of the Nile not sheltered by mountains. The encroachment of
these sands on soils which were formerly inhabited and cultivated is
evidently seen. M. Denon informs us, in the account of his _Travels
in Lower and Upper Egypt_, that summits of the ruins of ancient
cities buried under these sands still appear externally; and that,
but for a ridge of mountains called the _Lybian chain_, which borders
the left bank of the Nile, and forms, in the parts where it rises, a
barrier against the invasion of these sands, the shores of the river,
on that side, would long since have ceased to be habitable. Nothing
can be more melancholy, says this traveller, than to walk over
villages swallowed up by the sand of the desert, to trample under
foot their roofs, to strike against the summits of their minarets,
to reflect that yonder were cultivated fields, that there grew trees,
that here were even the dwellings of men, and that all has vanished.

If, then, our continents were as ancient as has been pretended, no
traces of the habitation of men would appear on any part of the
western bank of the Nile, which is exposed to this scourge of the
sands of the desert. The existence, therefore, of such monuments
attests the successive progress of the encroachments of the sand;
and those parts of the bank, formerly inhabited, will for ever
remain arid and waste. Thus the great population of Egypt, announced
by the vast and numerous ruins of its cities, was in great part
due to a cause of fertility which no longer exists, and to which
sufficient attention has not been given. The sands of the desert
were formerly remote from Egypt; the _Oases_, or habitable spots,
still appearing in the midst of the sands, being the remains of the
soils formerly extending the whole way to the Nile; but these sands,
transported hither by the western winds, have overwhelmed and buried
this extensive tract, and doomed to sterility a land which was once
remarkable for its fruitfulness.

It is therefore not solely to her revolutions and changes of
sovereigns that Egypt owes the loss of her ancient splendour; it is
also to her having been thus irrecoverably deprived of a tract of
land, by which, before the sands of the desert had covered it, and
caused it to disappear, her wants had been abundantly supplied. Now,
if we fix our attention on this fact, and reflect on the consequences
which would have attended it if thousands, or only some hundreds, of
centuries had elapsed since our continents first existed above the
level of the sea, does it not evidently appear that all the country
on the west of the Nile would have been buried under this sand before
the erection of the cities of ancient Egypt, how remote soever that
period may be supposed; and that in a country so long afflicted with
sterility, no idea would even have been formed of constructing such
vast and numerous edifices? When these cities indeed were built,
another cause concurred in favouring their prosperity. The navigation
of the Red Sea was not then attended with any danger on the coasts;
all its ports, now nearly blocked up with _reefs of coral_, had
a safe and easy access; the vessels laden with merchandize and
provisions could enter them and depart without risk of being wrecked
on these shoals, which have risen since that time, and are still
increasing in extent.

The defects of the present government of Egypt, and the discovery of
the passage from Europe to India round the Cape of Good Hope, are
therefore not the only causes of the present state of decline of this
country. If the sands of the desert had not invaded the bordering
lands on the west, if the work of the sea polypi in the Red Sea had
not rendered dangerous the access to its coasts and to its ports, and
even filled up some of the latter, the population of Egypt and the
adjacent countries, together with their product, would alone have
sufficed to maintain them in a state of prosperity and abundance.
But now, though the passage to India by the Cape of Good Hope
should cease to exist, though the political advantages which Egypt
enjoyed during the brilliant period of Thebes and Memphis should
be re-established, she could never again attain the same degree of
splendour.

Thus the reefs of coral which had been raised in the Red Sea on the
east of Egypt, and the sands of the desert which invade it on the
west, concur in attesting this truth: That our continents are not of
a more remote antiquity than has been assigned to them by the sacred
historian in the book of Genesis, from the great era of the deluge.


NOTE H, p. 30.

_Action of the Sea upon Coasts._

The ocean, in its action upon the cliffs and banks situated on the
coast, breaks them down to a greater or less extent, and either
accumulates the debris at their basis in the form of sea beaches
of greater or less magnitude, or by currents carries it away to be
deposited upon other shores, or to give rise to sand-banks near the
coast, which, in the course of time, become united to the land, and
thus secure it from the further action of the sea. These _destroying_
and _forming_ effects of the waters of the ocean are to be observed
all around the coasts of this island; and beautiful examples of such
actions are to be seen on the coasts of Ireland, and in many of the
islands that lie to the west and north of Great Britain. In a paper
read before the Wernerian Natural History Society, Mr Stevenson,
engineer, mentions many facts illustrative of the destroying effects
of the ocean on our coasts.--Thus he informs us that the waters
of the sea are wearing away the land upon both sides of the Frith
of Forth, not only in exposed, but also in sheltered situations,
and the solid strata, as well as the looser alluvial formations,
which owe their origin to the destroying agency of the ocean at a
former period, are again yielding to its action. At Saint Andrew’s,
the famous castle of Cardinal Beaton, which is said originally to
have been some distance from the sea, now almost overhangs it:
From St Andrew’s northward to Eden water and the River Tay, the
coast presents a sandy beach, and is so liable to shift, that it is
difficult to trace the change it may have undergone. It is certain,
however, that, within this last century, the sea has made such an
impression upon the sands of Barray, on the northern side of the
Tay, that the light-houses at the entrance of the river, which were
formerly erected at the southern extremity of Button-ness, have
been from time to time removed about a mile and a quarter further
northward, on account of the wasting and shifting of these sandy
shores, and that the spot on which the outer light-house stood in
the 17th century, is now two or three fathoms under water, and is at
least three quarters of a mile within flood-mark.


NOTE, p. 32.

_On the growth of Coral Islands._

Of all the genera of lithophytes, the madrepore is the most abundant.
It occurs most frequently in tropical countries, and decreases
in number and variety as we approach the poles. It encircles in
prodigious rocks and vast reefs many of the basaltic and other
rocky islands in the South Sea and Indian Ocean, and, by its daily
growth, adds to their magnitude. The coasts of the islands in
the West Indies, also those of the islands on the east coast of
Africa, and the shores and shoals of the Red Sea, are encircled
and incrusted with rocks of coral. Several different tribes of
madrepore contribute to form these coral reefs; but by far the most
abundant are those of the genera carophylla, astrea and meandrina.
These lithophytic animals not only add to the magnitude of land
already existing, but, according to some naturalists, they form whole
islands. Dr Forster, in his Observations made during a Voyage round
the World, gives an account of the formation of these coral islands
in the South Sea.

All the low isles, he says, seem to me to be a production of the
sea, or rather its inhabitants, the polype-like animals forming the
lithophytes. These animalcules raise their habitation gradually
from a small base, always spreading more and more, in proportion as
the structure grows higher. The materials are a kind of lime mixed
with some animal substances. I have seen these large structures in
all stages, and of various extent. Near Turtle Island, we found, at
a few miles distance, and to leeward of it, a considerable large
circular reef, over which the sea broke every where, and no part of
it was above water; it included a large deep lagoon. To the east
and north-east of the Society Isles, are a great many isles, which
in some parts are above water; in others, the elevated parts are
connected by reefs, some of which are dry at low water, and others
are constantly under water. The elevated parts consist of a soil
formed by a sand of shells and coral rocks, mixed with a light black
mould, produced from putrified vegetables, and the dung of sea-fowls;
and are commonly covered by cocoa-nut trees and other shrubs, and
a few antiscorbutic plants. The lower parts have only a few shrubs
and the above plants; others still lower, are washed by the sea at
high-water. All these isles are connected, and include a lagoon in
the middle, which is full of the finest fish; and sometimes there is
an opening, admitting a boat or canoe, in the reef, but I never saw
or heard of an opening that would admit a ship.

The reef, or the first origin of these isles, is formed by the
animalcules inhabiting the lithophytes. They raise their habitation
within a little of the surface of the sea, which gradually throws
shells, weeds, sand, small bits of corals, and other things, on the
tops of these coral rocks, and at last fairly raises them above
water; where the above things continue to be accumulated by the sea,
till by a bird, or by the sea, a few seeds of plants that commonly
grow on the sea-shore, are thrown up, and begin to vegetate; and
by their annual decay and reproduction from seeds, create a little
mould, yearly accumulated by the mixture with sand, increasing the
dry spot on every side; till another sea happens to carry a cocoa-nut
hither, which preserves its vegetative power a long time in the sea,
and therefore will soon begin to grow on this soil; especially as
it thrives equally in all kinds of soil; and thus may all these low
isles have become covered with the finest cocoa-nut trees.

The animalcules forming these reefs want to shelter their habitation
from the impetuosity of the winds, and the power and rage of the
ocean; but as, within the tropics, the winds blow commonly from one
quarter, they, by instinct, endeavour to stretch only a ledge, within
which is a lagoon, which is certainly entirely screened against the
power of both. This, therefore, might account for the method employed
by the animalcules in building only narrow ledges of coral rocks, to
secure in their middle a calm and sheltered place; and this seems to
me to be the most probable cause of the origin of all the Tropical
Low Isles, over the whole South Sea.

That excellent navigator, the late Captain Flinders, gives the
following interesting account of the formation of Coral Islands,
particularly of Half-way Island on the north coast of Terra
Australis[381].

  “This little island, or rather the surrounding reef, which is three
  or four miles long, affords shelter from the south-east winds;
  and being at a moderate day’s run from Murray’s Isles, it forms
  a convenient anchorage for the night to a ship passing through
  Torres’ Strait: I named it _Half-way Island_. It is scarcely more
  than a mile in circumference, but appears to be increasing both in
  elevation and extent. At no very distant period of time, it was one
  of those banks produced by the washing up of sand and broken coral,
  of which most reefs afford instances, and those of Torres’ Strait a
  great many. These banks are in different stages of progress: some,
  like this, are become islands, but not yet habitable; some are
  above high-water mark, but destitute of vegetation; whilst others
  are overflowed with every returning tide.

  “It seems to me, that, when the animalcules which form the corals
  at the bottom of the ocean cease to live, their structures adhere
  to each other, by virtue either of the glutinous remains within, or
  of some property in salt water; and the interstices being gradually
  filled up with sand and broken pieces of coral washed by the sea,
  which also adhere, a mass of rock is at length formed. Future races
  of these animalcules erect their habitations upon the rising bank,
  and die in their turn, to increase, but principally to elevate,
  this monument of their wonderful labours. The care taken to work
  perpendicularly in the early stages, would mark a surprising
  instinct in these diminutive creatures. Their wall of coral,
  for the most part, in situations where the winds are constant,
  being arrived at the surface, affords a shelter, to leeward of
  which their infant colonies may be safely sent forth; and to
  this, their instinctive foresight, it seems to be owing, that the
  windward side of a reef exposed to the open sea, is generally,
  if not always, the highest part, and rises almost perpendicular,
  sometimes from the depth of 200, and perhaps many more fathoms. To
  be constantly covered with water, seems necessary to the existence
  of the animalcules, for they do not work, except in holes upon the
  reef, beyond low-water mark; but the coral, sand, and other broken
  remnants thrown up by the sea, adhere to the rock, and form a solid
  mass with it, as high as the common tides reach. That elevation
  surpassed, the future remnants, being rarely covered, lose their
  adhesive property; and remaining in a loose state, form what is
  usually called a _key_, upon the top of the reef. The new bank is
  not long in being visited by sea-birds: salt plants take root upon
  it, and a soil begins to be formed; a cocoa-nut, or the drupe of
  a pandanus, is thrown on shore; land birds visit it, and deposit
  the seeds of shrubs and trees; every high tide, and still more
  every gale, adds something to the bank; the form of an island is
  gradually assumed; and last of all comes man to take possession.

  “Half-way Island is well advanced in the above progressive state;
  having been many years, probably some ages, above the reach of
  the highest spring tides, or the wash of the surf in the heaviest
  gales. I distinguished, however, in the rock which forms its basis,
  the sand, coral, and shells, formerly thrown up, in a more or less
  perfect state of cohesion. Small pieces of wood, pumice stone, and
  other extraneous bodies which chance had mixed with the calcareous
  substances when the cohesion began, were inclosed in the rock; and
  in some cases were still separable from it without much force. The
  upper part of the island is a mixture of the same substances in
  a loose state, with a little vegetable soil; and is covered with
  the _casuarina_ and a variety of other trees and shrubs, which
  give food to parroquets, pigeons, and some other birds; to whose
  ancestors, it is probable, the island was originally indebted for
  this vegetation.”

Mr Chamisso, who accompanied Kotzebue in his voyage, has published
interesting observations on this subject. He informs us that the
low islands of the South Sea and Indian Ocean owe their origin
principally to the operations of several species of coral. Their
situation with respect to each other, as they often form rows, their
union in several places in large groups, and their total absence in
other parts of the same seas, induce us to conclude, that the corals
have founded their building on shoals of the sea; or, to speak more
correctly, on the tops of mountains lying under water. On the one
side, as they increase, they continue to approach the surface of
the sea, on the other side they enlarge the extent of their earth.
The larger species of corals, which form blocks, measuring several
fathoms in thickness, seem to prefer the more violent surf on the
external edge of the reef; this, and the obstacles opposed to the
continuation of their life, in the middle of a broad reef, by the
amassing of the shells abandoned by the animals, and fragments of
corals, are probably the reason that the outer edge of the reef first
approaches the surface. As soon as it has reached such a height, that
it remains almost dry at low water, the corals leave off building
higher; sea-shells, fragments of coral, shells of echini, and their
broken-off prickles, are united by the burning sun, through the
medium of the cementing calcareous sand, which has arisen from
the pulverization of the above mentioned shells into one whole or
solid stone, which, strengthened by the continual throwing up of new
materials, gradually increases in thickness till it at last becomes
so high, that it is covered only during some seasons of the year by
the high tides. The heat of the sun so penetrates the mass of stone
when it is dry, that it splits in many places, and breaks off in
flakes. These flakes, so separated, are raised one upon another by
the waves at the time of high water. The always active surf throws
blocks of coral, (frequently of a fathom in length, and three or
four feet thick,) and shells of marine animals, between and upon the
foundation stones; after this the calcareous sand lies undisturbed,
and offers to the seeds of trees and plants, cast upon it by the
waves, a soil upon which they rapidly grow, to overshadow its
dazzling white surface. Entire trunks of trees, which are carried by
the rivers from other countries and islands, find here, at length, a
resting place after their long wanderings; with them come some small
animals, such as lizards and insects, as the first inhabitants. Even
before the trees form a wood, the real sea-birds nestle here; strayed
land-birds take refuge in the bushes; and at a much later period,
when the work has been long since completed, man also appears, builds
his hut on the fruitful soil formed by the corruption of the leaves
of the trees, and calls himself lord and proprietor of this new
creation.

In the preceding account, we have seen how the exterior edge of a
submarine coral edifice first approaches the surface of the water,
and how this reef gradually assumes the properties of land; the
island, therefore, necessarily has a circular form, and in the
middle of it an inclosed lake. This lake, however, is not entirely
inclosed; (and it could not be, for without supply from the sea it
would soon be dried up by the rays of the sun,) but the exterior
wall consists of a great number of smaller islands, which are
separated from each other by sometimes larger, sometimes smaller
spaces. The number of these islets amounts, in the larger coral
islands, to sixty; and between them it is not so deep but that it
becomes dry at the time of ebb. The interior sea has in the middle
generally a depth of from thirty to five-and-thirty fathoms; but on
all sides towards the land the depth gradually increases. In those
seas where the constant monsoons prevail, where, consequently, the
waves beat only on one side of the reef or island, it is natural
that this side of the reef, exposed to the unremitting fury of the
ocean, should be formed chiefly by broken-off blocks of coral, and
fragments of shells, and first rise above the elements that created
it. It is only these islands respecting the formation and nature
of which we hitherto know any thing with certainty; we are almost
entirely without any observations on those in the Indian and Chinese
Sea, which lie in the regions of the six months’ monsoons. From the
charts given of them, it is to be inferred that every side is equally
advanced in formation. The lee side of such a coral reef in the
Pacific Ocean, which is governed by the constant monsoons, frequently
does not shew itself above the water, when the opposite side, from
time immemorial, has attained perfection in the atmospheric region;
the former reef is even interrupted in many places by intervals
tolerably broad, and of the same depth as the inner sea, which have
been left by nature, like open gates, for the exploring mariner
to enter the internal calm and secure harbour. In their external
form the coral islands do not resemble each other; but this, and
the extent of each, probably depends on the size of the submarine
mountain tops, on which their basis is founded. Those islands which
have more length than breadth, and are opposed in their greatest
extent to the winds and waves, are richer in fruitful islets than
those whose situation is not so adapted to a quick formation.
In the large island-chains, there are always some single islets
which have the appearance of high land; these lie upon an angle
projecting into the sea, are exposed to the surf upon two sides,
consist therefore almost entirely of large blocks of coral, and are
destitute of smaller fragments of shells and coral sand to fill up
the intervals. They are, therefore, not adapted to support plants
requiring a depth of soil, and only afford a basis to high trees,
provided with fibrous roots, (as the Pisonia, Cordia Sebastiana, L.;
Morinda citrifolia, L.; and Pandanus odoratissimus, L.), which, at
a distance, give to these, always very small islands, the form of a
hill. The inner shores of the island, exposed to the surf, consist
of fine sand, which is washed up by the tide. Between the small
islands under their protection, and even in the middle of the inner
sea, are found smaller pieces of coral, which seek a quiet abode,
form in time, though very slowly, banks, till they at last reach the
surface of the water; gradually increase in extent; unite with the
islands that surround them; and at length fill up the minor seas,
so that what was at first a ring of islands, becomes one connected
land. The islands which are so far formed, retain in the middle a
flat plain, which is always lower than the wall that surrounds them
on the banks; for which reason pools of water are formed in them,
after a continued rain,--the only springs and wells they possess. One
of the peculiarities of these islands is, that no dew falls in the
evening, that they cause no tempests, and do not check the course of
the wind. The very low situation of the country sometimes exposes the
inhabitants to great danger, and threatens their lives when the waves
roll over their islands, if it happens that the equinox and full
moon fall on the same day (consequently when the water has reached
its greatest height), and a storm agitates the sea at the same time.
These islands are said to be also shaken by earthquakes.

MM. Quoy and Gaimard, in a lately published memoir, propose, _1st_,
To examine how corals raise their habitations upon rocks, and what
circumstances are favourable or unfavourable to their growth. _2d_,
To shew that there are no islands of any extent, constantly inhabited
by man, which are entirely formed of corals; and that far from
raising from the depths of the ocean perpendicular walls, as has been
alleged, these animals form only layers or crusts of a few fathoms
thickness.

The following, according to the French naturalists, is the manner in
which this addition or superposition of madrepores is effected. In
the places where the heat is constantly intense, where the land is
indented by bays containing shallow and quiet water, which is not
liable to be agitated by great surges, or by the regular breezes
of the tropics, there also the saxigenous polypi multiply. They
construct their habitations on the submarine rocks, envelope these
rocks in whole or in part, but do not form them properly speaking.
Thus, all those reefs, those girdles of madrepore, which are so
frequently met with in the South Sea, to the leeward of islands,
are shoals depending upon the conformation of the original ground,
which will be perceived to belong to it when the direction of the
mountains and hills has been attentively observed. It is always where
the slopes are gentle, and the sea shallowest, that the greatest
masses of madrepores are found. They sprout up if it is calm; in the
contrary case, they form only scattered tufts, belonging to species
which seem to be least affected by the agitation of the waters.

It has been said, and it is even a matter of general belief among
mariners, say MM. Quoy and Gaimard, that there occur in the
equatorial seas shoals composed of _corals_, which rise from the
greatest depths, like walls at the bottom of which the sounding
line finds no ground. The fact certainly does exist in so far as
regards the depth spoken of; and it is this very circumstance which
is productive of so much danger to vessels, which, when taken in a
calm and carried away by currents, cannot cast anchor in such places.
But it is not correct to say that these reefs are entirety formed of
madrepores. First, because the species which always form the most
considerable banks, such as some meandrinæ, certain caryophylleæ, but
especially the astreæ, adorned with the most beautiful and velvety
colours, require the influence of light to perfect them; because
they are not seen to grow beyond a few yards of depth; and because
they cannot consequently be developed at a depth of ten or twelve
hundred feet, as they would necessarily be, did they raise the cliffs
in question. Besides, these different species of animals would then
almost exclusively enjoy the privilege of living at all depths,
under all degrees of pressure, and, so to speak, in all temperatures.

Another circumstance to which navigators have not adverted, which
corroborates the opinion here stated, is, that, in depths so great
as those to which we allude, the sea, always agitated at the
surface, breaks with force upon these reefs, without requiring for
that purpose any additional impulse from the winds. And by merely
attending to the necessary consequences of the observations of these
same navigators, who say (what is very true) that, wherever the waves
are agitated, the lithophytes are unable to go on with their work,
because they destroy their frail edifices, we shall acquire the moral
certainty that these submarine steeps are not produced by these
animalcules. But, in these same places, let there occur a hollow, a
sheltered spot of some kind, and then they will immediately raise
their habitations, and will contribute to diminish the little depth
that already exists there. And this is what may be seen in almost all
the places where an elevated temperature permits these animals to
grow in abundance.

In the localities where the tides are sensible, their currents alone
may sometimes form irregular canals between the madrepores, without
their ever being encumbered with their species, from the twofold
cause united, of the motion and the coldness of the water; while, on
the other hand, the flexible alcyonia are seen to multiply there.

When these geological dispositions are carefully observed, we see
that the zoophytes rise to the surface of the waves, never beyond
it; after which the generation which has attained thus far appears
to die. It is destroyed much sooner, if, from the effect of the
tides, these frail animalcules are exposed naked to the action of a
burning sun. When there occur small hollows in these heaps of inert
spoils, deprived of their inhabitants, which are always covered by
the water, several tufts of those lithophytes are still remarked,
which, having escaped from the almost general destruction, glow with
the most lively colours. Then, the families which are developed anew,
not being able to build on the outside of those reefs on which the
sea is constantly breaking, draw nearer and nearer the shore, where
the waves now deadened have scarcely any more action upon them, as in
the Isle of France, at Timor, the Papua, the Marian, and the Sandwich
Islands; provided always the waters had not a great depth, as is
the case at Turtle Island, of which Cook speaks, where no bottom is
found between the madrepore reefs and the island, notwithstanding the
shortness of the space which exists between these two points.

If we examine these animals in the places best adapted to their
growth, we shall see their different species, the forms of which, as
varied as they are elegant, become rounded into balls, spread out
into fans, or ramify into trees, mingling together, blending with
each other, and reflecting the varied hues of red, yellow, blue and
violet.

It is well known that all these alleged walls, exclusively formed of
corals, are intersected with openings through which the sea enters
and retires with violence; and every body knows the danger which
Captain Cook ran on one occasion, on the coast of New Holland, when
he had no other resource, in order to save himself from destruction,
than to take the sudden resolution of attempting one of these narrow
passes, where one is always sure of finding plenty of water. And this
circumstance also comes in support of what we have advanced; for, if
these perpendicular walls were entirely composed of madrepores, they
would present no deep openings in their continuity, because it is the
property of zoophytes to build in masses that have no interruption;
and because, again, could they raise themselves from very great
depths, they would end with encumbering and shutting up these
passages; a circumstance which does not take place, and probably
never will, from the causes which we have related.

If these facts prove, that madrepores cannot exist at very great
depths, the submarine rocks, which they only increase in height, are
not, therefore, exclusively formed by them.

We now come to the second part of the argument; and we assert, that
there are no islands of any magnitude and constantly inhabited by
man, that are formed by corals; and that the layers which they
construct under the water, are not more than a few fathoms in
thickness.

We shall commence with the second part of this question. The
impossibility of penetrating to the bottom of the sea to examine
at what precise depth the solid zoophytes establish themselves,
constrains us to confine ourselves to what has taken place in former
times; and the monuments which the ancient revolutions of the globe
have disclosed to our view, will serve to prove what is going on in
our own days. We shall mention what has been seen in several places,
and we shall first speak of the island which Peron took for the
theatre of the great works of these polypi, namely the island of
Timor.

The banks of coral which the sea has left exposed in the land,
as it retired, are remarkable for their uncommon magnitude. The
whole shores of Coupang are formed of them, and the low hills in
its vicinity are enveloped in them; but a few hundred yards from
the town, they disappear, when distinct strata of slate make their
appearance. The corals form a bed over the subjacent rocks from 25 to
80 feet thick.

Every thing announces that, in the Island of Timor, there exist
no mountains exclusively formed of corals. As in all extensive
countries, they are composed of various substances. Quoy and Gaimard
having coasted it for about fifty leagues, sufficiently near to
enable them to form an idea of its geography, were able to see that
it exhibited volcanic appearances in several parts. Besides it
abounds in mines of gold and copper, which, in conjunction with what
we have already mentioned, shews in a general way the nature of the
rocks of which it is composed.

Perhaps, remarks Quoy and Gaimard, the Bald-Head, a mountain of
King George’s harbour in New Holland, which Vancouver has described
in passing, and on the summit of which he saw perfectly preserved
branches of coral, might be adduced as a fact in opposition to the
opinion here advanced. Yet the phenomenon exhibited there, is still
precisely the same as at Timor, and in a thousand other places[382].
The zoophytes have built upon a basis previously existing, and
they occupy only the surface of it. For why should this Bald-Head
differ from Mount Gardner, which, although close by it, is formed of
primitive rocks? Besides, Peron says, that it has the same geological
constitution. (T. ii. p. 133.)

At Rota, one of the Marian Isles, M. Gaudichaud, detached from the
limestone rock, at about a hundred toises above the level of the
sea, branches of true madrepores, in perfect preservation. Here are,
then, three localities in which they are found at great heights. We
have observed them, say the French naturalists, at infinitely lower
elevations in several other places, as at the Isle of France, where
they form a bed more than six feet thick, between two streams of
lava; at Wahou, one of the Sandwich Islands, where they have not
a greater elevation, but extend for several hundred toises over
the surface of the island. In all these cases, it is necessary to
distinguish between the lithophytes, which have, by their living
powers, formed continuous masses, from those which, after having been
rolled about, broken down by the water, and mixed with sea shells,
contribute to form those deposits known by the name of _madrepore
limestone_. The latter sort is nothing but the debris of the former.
Deposits of this description occur in the Marian Isles, and in those
of the Papous; they occur also on the coasts of France, and in
several other places.

It would appear from observations made in Timor and other places,
that the species of the genus Astræa which are the only ones capable
of covering immense extents of surface, do not commence their
operations at a greater depth than twenty-five or thirty feet, in
order to raise their habitations to near the surface of the sea.
Fragments of these species are never obtained, either with the
sounding line, or upon the anchors; nor do we ever see them, unless
in places where the water is shallow; while the branched madrepores,
which do not form thick and continuous beds, either on the elevated
places which the ocean has left, or on the shores where they still
exist, live at considerable depths.

It is evident, then, that these corals have erected their fabrics
on the summits of submarine hills and mountains; and that all those
reefs of Taiti, the Dangerous Archipelago, Navigators’ Islands, the
Friendly Islands, &c. are composed of madrepores only at the surface.

We thus consider it demonstrated, that the rocks of the solid
zoophytes or coral, are not capable of forming the immense bases on
which the greater number of the islands that occur in the Pacific
Ocean rest.

There now remains for us to state how these animals, by their
union, are capable of raising small islets. Forster, as already
stated, has given a very good description of the manner in which
this is effected. In fact, when these animalcules have raised their
habitations to the surface of the water, under the shelter of the
land, and they remain uncovered during the reflux of the tide, the
hurricanes which sometimes supervene, by the agitation which they
produce in those shallow waters, throw up from the bottom sand and
mud. These substances are detained in the sinuosities and cavities
formed between the corals, and thus serve to fix them together, and
connect them into masses. Whenever the summit of this new island
can remain constantly uncovered by the sea, and the waves can no
longer destroy what they themselves have contributed to form, then
its extent is enlarged, and its edges are gradually raised by the
successive addition of sand. According to the direction of the
winds and currents they may long remain sterile; but if the seeds
of vegetables be transported to them from the neighbouring shores,
by the action of these two causes, then, in latitudes favourable to
their development, we presently see these islands becoming covered
with verdure, the successively accumulated remains of which form
layers of soil, which contribute to the elevation of the surface.

But, in order that this phenomenon of growth be accomplished,
the distance from land must not be too great, because then the
vegetables cannot get so easily to the islets in question, which
then remain almost always bare and sterile. And for this reason what
navigators report of those madrepore Islands of the Great Ocean,
which are covered with verdure, and are yet at a great distance
from any known land, has always appeared to us extraordinary; and
that so much the more, that, in those vast spaces, the violence
of the waves, which nothing can break there, must disturb the
operations of the zoophytes. We do not, however, deny the existence
of these islands, which it would be interesting carefully to examine
anew; for, whenever navigators meet with low islands between the
Tropics, they do not hesitate, in compliance with the generally
received opinion, to say that they consist of madrepores. Yet how
many islands, which scarcely rise above the surface of the water,
recognise no such origin? We may mention, as an example, the Island
of Boni, situated under the equator, the beautiful vegetation of
which rises upon limestone. Cocoa Island, near Guam, is in the same
condition, being also composed of limestone. In general, if they are
inhabited, consequently they have springs or lakes of fresh water,
we may almost be certain that they are not composed of lithophytes,
or are only so in part, because springs could not be formed in their
porous substances. Some of the Caroline Isles are excessively low; we
supposed them encrusted with madrepores; and as they have inhabitants
there must be somewhere in them a soil favourable to the accumulation
of fresh water[383].

In restraining the power of these animalcules, concludes Quoy and
Gaimard, and in pointing out the limits which nature has prescribed
them, we have no other object than to furnish more correct data to
the naturalists who aspire to great hypothetical considerations,
regarding the conformation of the globe. On reconsidering these
zoophytes with greater attention, they will no longer be seen
filling up the basins of the seas, raising islands, increasing
the size of the continents, threatening future generations with a
solid equatorial circle formed of their spoils. Their influence,
with regard to the road-steads or harbours, in which they multiply,
is already great enough, without adding more to it. But, compared
with the masses on which they rest, what are their layers, often
interrupted, and which must be searched for with care, before they
can be recognised, to the enormous volcanic peaks of the Sandwich
Islands, the Island of Bourbon, the Moluccas, the Marian Islands, the
mountains of Timor, New Guinea, &c. &c.? Nothing, certainly; and the
solid zoophytes are in no degree capable of being compared with the
testaceous mollusca, with reference to the materials which they have
furnished, and still continue to furnish to the crust of the Globe.


NOTE I, p. 33.

ON THE LEVEL OF THE BALTIC.

About the middle of the last century, a controversy took place
among the natural philosophers of the north of Europe, regarding
the alleged gradual lowering of the level of the sea in general,
and of the Baltic Sea in particular. Celsius was the first who
introduced this idea to notice. He generalised it by applying it
to all the planets, and was supported by the authority of the
celebrated Linnæus. He soon perceived, however, that the point could
never be settled by mere discussion, and that facts alone could
lead to any certain result. Observation was therefore had recourse
to; and thus the dispute in question had at least one good effect,
that of directing to the subject the attention of men of science,
whose situation might enable them to mark the variations of level
that take place along the coasts of the North Sea. The results of
investigations undertaken for this purpose, are now beginning to be
collected.

In the course of 1820 and 1821, Mr Bruncrona, assisted by the
officers of the Pilotage Establishment, and other qualified persons,
undertook the examination of all the authentic measures that had been
established upon the west coast of the Baltic, during the last half
century. The results of this examination are given in a short memoir,
inserted in the Swedish Transactions for 1823. The following table
indicates the degree to which the level of the sea has fallen during
the last forty years, on the coast of Sweden, at various latitudes.
It is proper to remark, that, in some of the places observed, the
measures were much older, and in some others much more recent,
than the period of forty years. In both these cases, the change of
level that must have been effected during this period, has been
estimated, by calculating the mean annual depression furnished by the
observations.

  +-----------+----------+-----------+----------+-----------+----------+
  |           | Fall of  |           | Fall of  |           | Fall of  |
  |           | surface  |           | surface  |           | surface  |
  | Latitude. | in forty | Latitude. | in forty | Latitude. | in forty |
  |           |  years.  |           |  years.  |           |  years.  |
  +-----------+----------+-----------+----------+-----------+----------+
  |East Coast.|   Feet.  |East Coast.|   Feet.  |East Coast.|   Feet.  |
  |  63° 59′  |   1.50   |  59° 17′  |   2.17   |  56° 10′  |   0.00   |
  |  ... ...  |   2.50   |  58  44   |   1.00   |  56  11   |   0.00   |
  |  ... ...  |   0.50   |  58  42   |   1.08   |  55  53   |   0.00   |
  |  61  43   |   2.50   |  58  45   |   1.17   |                      |
  |  61  37   |   2.83   |  58  35   |   2.00   |   South-West Coast.  |
  |  61  32   |   2.50   |  58  28   |   0.07   |  55  23   |   0.00   |
  |  61  45   |   2.50   |  58  11   |   0.83   |  55  22   |   0.00   |
  |  60  11   |   2.33   |  58   8   |   1.00   |  57  21   |   0.00   |
  |  59  46   |   0.17   |  57  50   |   1.00   |  57  53   |   1.00   |
  |  59  46   |   2.00   |  56  41   |   0.41   |                      |
  +-----------+----------+-----------+----------+-----------+----------+

Of the facts collected in the course of this investigation, the
following may be mentioned as tending to support the opinion of a
fall of level.

_1st_, It is generally believed among the pilots of the Baltic,
that the sea has become shallower along the course which vessels
ordinarily follow; but, it is added, that this alteration is more
sensible in the places where the tide collects sand, detached
pebbles, and sea-weeds, or in those where the bottom is composed
of rocks. The same observation has been made in the neighbourhood
of some large towns and fisheries; for example, a hydrographic
chart made in 1771, gives six fathoms for the mean depth of the sea
opposite the harbour of Landskrona, whereas, in 1817, the sounding
line scarcely gave five fathoms at the same point.

_2d_, According to the oldest and most experienced pilots, the
straits which separate the numerous islets scattered along the coast
of Sweden, from Haarparanda to the frontiers of Norway, received
vessels that drew ten feet of water; now they are not practicable for
boats that draw more than two or three feet.

_3d_, The pilots further affirm, that, along the whole coast of
Bahusia, the bottom undergoes a diminution, which becomes sensible
every ten years in certain places, where it is composed of rocks.
Several other parts of the Baltic may be cited, in which a similar
change has been remarked.

M. C. P. Hallstrom, in an Appendix to Mr Bruncrona’s Memoir, gives
the following table of the diminution observed in the depth of the
waters of the Gulf of Bothnia.

  +------------------------+------+------+------+----+------------------+
  |                        | Mean marked in                             |
  |                        |      | Height of the water reobserved in   |
  |                        |      |      | Fall beneath the original    |
  |       PLACES.          |      |      | mark in feet.                |
  |                        |      |      |      | Number of years.      |
  |                        |      |      |      |    | Fall of the water|
  |                        |      |      |      |    | in 100 years,    |
  |                        |      |      |      |    | in feet.         |
  +------------------------+------+------+------+----+------------------+
  |Raholem, parish of      | 1700 | 1750 | 2.05 | 50 | 4.10             |
  |  Lower Kalix,          |      | 1775 | 2.49 | 75 | 4.32             |
  |Stor Rebben, parish     | 1751 | 1785 | 1.70 | 34 | 5.00             |
  |  of Pitea,             |      | 1796 | 1.90 | 45 | 4.22             |
  |Ratan, parish           | 1749 | 1785 | 2.70 | 36 | 4.72             |
  |  of Bygdea,            |      | 1795 | 2.50 | 46 | 5.43             |
  |                        |      | 1819 | 2.60 | 70 | 3.47             |
  |                        | 1774 | 1785 | 0.55 | 11 | 5.00             |
  |                        |      | 1795 | 1.16 | 21 | 5.52             |
  |                        |      | 1819 | 1.60 | 45 | 3.57             |
  |                        | 1795 | 1819 | 0.65 | 24 | 2.71             |
  |Rönnskat, on the        | 1755 | 1797 | 1.70 | 42 | 4.05             |
  |  coast of Wasa,        |      | 1821 | 2.87 | 65 | 4.35             |
  |Wargön, on the          | 1755 | 1785 | 1.45 | 30 | 4.83             |
  |  coast of Wasa,        |      | 1797 | 1.69 | 42 | 4.02             |
  |                        |      | 1821 | 2.87 | 65 | 4.35             |
  |Lögfrundet, near Sefle, | 1731 | 1785 | 2.90 | 54 | 5.37             |
  |                        |      | 1796 | 2.17 | 65 | 3.34             |
  |Ulfon, in Angermanland, | 1795 | 1822 | 1.58 | 27 | 5.85             |
  +------------------------+------+------+------+----+------------------+

It is not demonstrated that the numbers of the last column represent
exactly the lowering of the water in a century; for it has not
yet been sufficiently determined if this lowering be uniform,
or if it vary at different periods, and if it depend upon some
local circumstance,--upon the climate,--or upon the state of the
atmosphere. Nor is it properly established, that this lowering, which
becomes less perceptible from the north of the Baltic, until it
disappears entirely at the southern extremity, follows precisely the
same law of diminution as the latitude. It appears to be uniform in
the whole extent of the Gulf of Bothnia, and it rises about four feet
and a quarter in that region; at Calmar (lat. 57° 50′) it is only
two feet; but it is not yet known whether it decreases in a regular
manner between these two places.

Some authors consider the facts related by MM. Bruncrona and
Halstrom, as deciding the question in favour of those who believe in
a lowering of the level of the Baltic. The editor of the _Annalen der
Physik_[384] goes farther, and seems to consider it as confirming the
opinion of a general lowering of the level of the sea. In support
of this opinion, he adduces the traditions and observations of the
natives of Otaheite and of the Moluccas and Sunda Islands, regarding
the retreat of the sea in several parts of their coast. We are
disposed to stand neutral in this matter. The geographers who have
collected the greatest number of facts relating to the level of the
inland seas, and of the ocean in its various regions, find nearly as
many in favour of a rise as in favour of a fall of level. The very
distribution of contrary indications, leads them to believe in a
partial displacement of the mass of waters from one region towards
another, and even from the one side of an inland sea towards the
opposite side; a displacement which might be owing to fugitive or
more or less durable causes, such as a variation of temperature in
the polar regions, the action of winds and of currents, modified by
the greater or less quantity of water in the rivers that feed the
different basins, upon the sides opposed to their direction.

Are the facts contained in the memoir in question of a nature to
overthrow this opinion? They do not appear so to us. The two series
of observations which are adduced, only shew a fall upon the coasts
of Sweden, properly so called, that is to say, upon the west coast
of the Baltic, and the east coast of the Cattegat. Two observations
only have been made upon the coasts of Finland, toward the extremity
of the Gulf of Bothnia. These facts would perfectly accord with the
opinion of those who think that the currents determined from the
north to the south of the Baltic by the numerous streams which rush
into it, push the waters toward the south shore, that of Pomerania,
Mecklenbourg, and Holstein; and that the waters consequently gain
upon the land on this coast, as numerous historical facts attest,
while they retire along the northern shores, those of the Gulf of
Bothnia. Be this as it may, the question as to the constancy of the
level of the sea cannot be considered as decided, until a long series
of observations shall have been made upon authentic and perfectly
fixed measures erected upon all the shores of the different seas,
and of the different regions of the ocean. Those which have been
published in the Swedish Transactions furnish important documents for
this purpose; and similar ones should be begun to be collected in
other countries.

The phenomena exhibited by the waters of the Baltic engaged the
attention of two rival speculators, Playfair and Deluc; and their
views are often alluded to by geologists. We shall here state them in
their own words. Professor Playfair, in his well known and elegant
work on the Huttonian Theory of the Earth, has the following remarks:

  “If we proceed further to the north, to the shores of the _Baltic_
  for instance, we have undoubted evidence of a _change of level_ in
  the same direction as on our own shores. The level of the sea has
  been represented as lowering at so great a rate as _forty inches
  in a century_. Celsius observed, that several rocks which are now
  above the water, were not long ago sunken rocks, and dangerous
  to navigators; and he took particular notice of one which, in
  the year 1680, was on the surface of the water, and, in the
  year 1731, was 20½ Swedish inches above it. From an inscription
  near _Aspo_, in the lake _Melar_, which communicates with the
  _Baltic_, engraved, as is supposed, about five centuries ago, the
  level of the sea appears to have sunk in that time no less than
  thirteen Swedish feet. All these facts, with many more which it is
  unnecessary to enumerate, make the _gradual depression_, not only
  of the _Baltic_, but of the whole _Northern Ocean_, a matter of
  certainty.”--_Playfair’s Illustrations_, p. 445.

That indefatigable and accurate observer De Luc, has the following
commentary on the preceding passage.

  “It would be unnecessary to mention even the two inconsiderable
  facts above, if the _depression_ of the _level_ of the seas were
  indeed a matter of certainty; for the best authenticated and the
  least equivocal monuments of their change would then abound along
  all their coasts. But proofs are every where found that such a
  change is chimerical: they may be seen in all the vales coming
  down to these seas, in which there is no perceptible impression of
  the action of any waters but those of the land, and no vestige,
  through their whole extent, of any permanent abode of those of the
  sea; and proofs to the same effect are equally visible, along the
  coasts of both these seas, in all the new lands which have been
  formed on them, and which, being perfectly horizontal from the
  point where their formation commenced, evidently show that the
  water displaced by them has been constantly at the same level.
  Hence appears the necessity of multiplying, as I have done, and
  shall continue to do, for the subversion of a prejudice of such
  ancient date, the examples of these peremptory proofs of its total
  want of foundation. The rock mentioned by Celsius had probably been
  observed by him at times when the level of the sea was different;
  its known differences much exceeding the quantity here specified.
  As for the inscription near Aspo, in a country abounding with lakes
  as much as that which I have above described, if we are acquainted
  with its terms, we should probably find it to be, like many which
  I have seen in various places along the course of the Oder and the
  Elbe, the monument of some extraordinary inundation of the land,
  from the sudden melting of the snows in the mountains, at a time
  when the water had been prevented from running off by an equally
  extraordinary rise of the level of the sea; of which the effects on
  low coasts may extend very far inland.

  “By this conclusion, however, from these few facts, contrary to
  every thing observed on the coasts of this sea, Mr Playfair thinks
  himself authorised to maintain, that the gradual depression, not
  only of the Baltic, but of the whole northern ocean, is a matter
  of certainty; afterwards he examines merely which of these two
  causes, the subsidence of the sea itself, or the elevation of the
  land around it, agrees the best with the phenomena; and he decides
  in favour of the latter, pointing out its accordance with the
  Huttonian Theory.”


NOTE L, p. 119.

FOSSIL REMAINS OF THE HUMAN SPECIES.

From the observations of Werner and others, it appears, that the most
simple animals are those first met with in a mineralized state; that
these are succeeded by others more perfect, and which are contained
in newer formations; and that the most perfect, as quadrupeds, occur
only in the newest formation. But we naturally inquire, have no
remains of the human species been hitherto discovered in any of the
formations? Judging from the arrangement already mentioned, we would
naturally expect to meet with remains of man in the newest of the
formations. In the writings of ancient authors there are descriptions
of anthropolithi. In the year 1577, Fel. Plater, Professor of
Anatomy at Basle, described several fossil bones of the elephant
found at Lucerne, as those of a giant at least nineteen feet high.
The Lucernese were so perfectly satisfied with this discovery, that
they caused a painting to be made of the giant, as he must have
appeared when alive, assumed two such giants as the supporters of
the city arms, and had the painting hung in their public hall. The
Landvoigt Engel, not satisfied with this account of these remains,
maintained that our planet, before the creation of the present race
of men, was inhabited by fallen angels, and that these bones were
part of the skeletons of some of those miserable beings. Scheuchzer
published an engraving and description of a fossil human skeleton,
which proved to be a gigantic species of salamander or proteus.
Spallanzani describes a hill of fossil human bones in the island
of Cerigo; but this also is an error, as has been satisfactorily
shewn by Blumenbach. Lately, however, a fossil human skeleton has
been imported into this country from Guadaloupe, by Sir Alexander
Cochrane. It is imbedded in a block of calcareous stone, composed of
particles of limestone and coral, and which, like the aggregations
of shells found on the limestone coasts in some parts of this
country, has acquired a great degree of hardness. It is therefore an
instance of a fossil human petrifaction in an alluvial formation. The
engraving here given is copied from the Philosophical Transactions
of the Royal Society of London; and the following description of the
fossil remains it exhibits is that of Mr Konig, which has been drawn
up with great care.

  “The situation of the skeleton in the block was so superficial,
  that its presence in the rock on the coast had probably been
  indicated by the projection of some of the more elevated parts of
  the left fore-arm.

  “The operation of laying the bones open to view, and of reducing
  the superfluous length of the block at its extremities, being
  performed with all the care which its excessive hardness, and the
  relative softness of the bones, required, the skeleton exhibited
  itself in the manner represented in the annexed drawing (Pl. I.)
  with which my friend Mr Alexander has been so good as to illustrate
  this description.

  “The skull is wanting; a circumstance which is the more to be
  regretted, as this characteristic part might possibly have thrown
  some light on the subject under consideration, or would, at least,
  have settled the question, whether the skeleton is that of a
  Carib, who used to give the frontal bone of the head a particular
  shape by compression, which had the effect of depressing the upper
  and protruding the lower edge of the orbits, so as to make the
  direction of their opening nearly upwards, or horizontal, instead
  of vertical[385].

  “The vertebræ of the neck were lost with the head. The bones of
  the thorax bear all the marks of considerable concussion, and are
  completely dislocated. The seven true ribs of the left side, though
  their heads are not in connexion with the vertebræ, are complete;
  but only three of the false ribs are observable. On the right side
  only fragments of these bones are seen; but the upper part of the
  seven true ribs of this side are found on the left, and might at
  first sight be taken for the termination of the left ribs; as may
  be seen in the drawing. The right ribs must therefore have been
  violently broken and carried over to the left side, where, if this
  mode of viewing the subject be correct, the sternum must likewise
  lie concealed below the termination of the ribs. The small bone
  dependent above the upper ribs of the left side, appears to be the
  right clavicle. The right os humeri is lost; of the left nothing
  remains except the condyles in connexion with the fore-arm, which
  is in the state of pronation; the radius of this side exists nearly
  in its full length, while of the ulna the lower part only remains,
  which is considerably pushed upwards. Of the two bones of the right
  fore-arm, the inferior terminations are seen. Both the rows of the
  bones of the wrists are lost, but the whole metacarpus of the left
  hand is displayed, together with part of the bones of the fingers:
  the first joint of the fore-finger rests on the upper ridge of the
  os pubis; the two others, detached from their metacarpal bones, are
  propelled downwards, and situated at the inner side of the femur,
  and below the foramen magnum ischii of this side. Vestiges of three
  of the fingers of the right hand are likewise visible, considerably
  below the lower portion of the fore-arm, and close to the upper
  extremity of the femur. The vertebræ may be traced along the whole
  length of the column, but are in no part of it well defined. Of the
  os sacrum, the superior portion only is distinct: it is disunited
  from the last vertebra and the ilium, and driven upwards. The
  left os ilium is nearly complete, but shattered, and one of the
  fragments depressed below the level of the rest; the ossa pubis,
  though well defined, are gradually lost in the mass of the stone.
  On the right side, the os innominatum is completely shattered, and
  the fragments are sunk: but towards the acetabulum, part of its
  internal cellular structure is discernible.

  “The thigh-bones, and the bones of the leg of the right side, are
  in good preservation, but being considerably turned outwards, the
  fibula lies buried in the stone, and is not seen. The lower part
  of the femur of this side is indicated only by a bony outline,
  and appears to have been distended by the compact limestone that
  fills the cavities both of the bones of the leg and thigh, and to
  the expansion of which, these bones probably owe their present
  shattered condition. The lower end of the left thigh-bone appears
  to have been broken and lost in the operation of detaching the
  block; the two bones of the leg, however, on this side, are nearly
  complete; the tibia was split almost the whole of its length a
  little below the external edge, and the fissure being filled up
  with limestone, now presents itself as a dark-coloured straight
  line. The portion of the stone which contained part of the bones
  of the tarsus and metatarsus, was unfortunately broken; but the
  separate fragments are preserved.

  “The whole of the bones, when first laid bare, had a mouldering
  appearance, and the hard surrounding stone could not be detached
  without frequently injuring their surface; but after an exposure
  for some days to the air, they acquired a considerable degree of
  hardness. Sir H. Davy, who subjected a small portion of them to
  chemical analysis, found that they contained part of their animal
  matter, and all their phosphate of lime.”


NOTE M, p. 128.

_Account of the Displacement of that part of the Coast of the
Adriatic which is occupied by the Mouths of the Po._

That portion of the shore of the Adriatic which lies between the
lake, or rather _lagune_, of Commachio, and the _lagunes_ of Venice,
has undergone considerable alterations since ancient times, as is
attested by authors worthy of entire credit, and as is still evinced
by the actual state of the soil in the districts near the coast;
but it is impossible now to give any exact detail of the successive
progress of these changes, and more especially of their precise
measures during the ages which preceded the twelfth century of our
era.

We are, however, certain, that the city of _Hatria_, now called
_Adria_, was formerly situated on the edge of the coast; and by this
we attain a known fixed point upon the primitive shore, whence the
nearest part of the present coast, at the mouth of the Adige, is at
the distance of 25,000 _metres_[386]; and it will be seen in the
sequel, that the extreme point of the alluvial promontory formed by
the Po, is farther advanced into the sea than the mouth of the Adige
by nearly 10,000 metres[387].

The inhabitants of Adria have formed exaggerated pretensions, in
many respects, as to the high antiquity of their city, though it
is undeniably one of the most ancient in Italy, as it gave name to
the sea which once washed its walls. By some researches made in
its interior and its environs, a stratum of earth has been found
mixed with fragments of Etruscan pottery, and with nothing whatever
of Roman manufacture. Etruscan and Roman pottery are found mixed
together in a superior bed, on the top of which the vestiges of
a theatre have been discovered. Both of these beds are far below
the level of the present soil. I have seen at Adria very curious
collections, in which these remains of antiquity are separately
classed; and having, some years ago, observed to the viceroy, that
it would be of great importance, both to history and geology, to
make a thorough search into these buried remains at Adria, carefully
noticing the levels in comparison with the sea, both of the primitive
soil, and of the successive alluvial beds, his Highness entered
warmly into my ideas; but I know not whether these propositions have
been since carried into effect.

Following the coast, after leaving Hatria, which was situated at
the bottom of a small bay or gulf, we find to the south a branch of
the _Athesis_ or Adige, and of the _Fossa Philistina_, of which the
remaining trace corresponds to what might have been the Mincio and
Tartaro united, if the Po had still run to the south of Ferrara. We
next find the _Delta Venetum_, which seems to have occupied the place
where the lake or lagune of Commachio is now situated. This delta
was traversed by seven branches of the _Eridanus_ or Po, formerly
called also the _Vadis Padus_ or _Podincus_; which river, at the
diramification of these seven branches, and upon its left or northern
bank, had a city named _Trigoboli_, whose site could not be far from
where Ferrara now stands. Seven lakes, inclosed within this delta,
were called _Septem Maria_, and Hatria was sometimes denominated
_Urbs Septem Marium_, or the city of the seven seas or lakes.

Following the coast from Hatria to the northwards, we come to the
principal mouth of the _Athesis_ or Adige, formerly named _Fossa
Philistina_, and afterwards _Estuarium Altini_, an interior sea,
separated by a range of small islands from the Adriatic Gulf, in the
middle of which was a cluster of other small isles, called _Rialtum_,
and upon this archipelago the city of Venice is now seated. The
_Estuarium Altini_ is what is now called the Lagune of Venice, and no
longer communicates with the sea, except by five passages, the small
islands of the Archipelago having been united into a continuous dike.

To the east of the lagunes, and north from the city of Este, we find
the _Euganian_ mountains, or hills, forming, in the midst of a vast
alluvial plain, a remarkable isolated group of rounded hills, near
which spot the fable of the ancients supposes the fall of Phæton to
have taken place. Some writers have supposed that this fable may have
originated from the fall of some vast masses of inflamed matters near
the mouths of the Eridanus, that had been thrown up by a volcanic
explosion; and it is certain that abundance of volcanic products are
found in the neighbourhood of Padua and Verona.

The most ancient notices that I have been able to procure respecting
the situation of the shores of the Adriatic at the mouths of the Po,
only begin to be precise in the twelfth century. At that epoch the
whole waters of this river flowed to the south of Ferrara, in the _Po
de Volano_ and the _Po di Primaro_, branches which inclosed the space
occupied by the _lagune_ of Commachio. The two branches which were
next formed by an irruption of the waters of the Po to the north of
Ferraro, were named the river of _Corbola_, _Longola_, or _Mazzorno_,
and the river _Toi_. The former, and more northern of these, received
the _Tartaro_, or _canal bianco_, near the sea, and the latter was
joined at Ariano by another branch derived from the Po, called the
_Goro river_. The sea-coast was evidently directed from south to
north, at the distance of ten or eleven thousand _metres_[388] from
the meridian of Adria; and _Loreo_, to the north of _Mesola_, was
only about 2000 _metres_[389] from the coast.

Towards the middle of the twelfth century, the flood-waters of the
Po were retained on their left or northern side by dikes near the
small city of _Ficarolo_, which is about 19,000 _metres_[390] to
the north-west of Ferrara, spreading themselves southwards over
the northern part of the territory of Ferrara and the _Polesine_
of Rovigo, and flowed through the two formerly mentioned canals of
_Mazzorno_ and _Toi_. It seems perfectly ascertained, that this
change in the direction of the waters of the Po had been produced by
the effects of human labours; and the historians who have recorded
this remarkable fact only differ from each other in some of the
more minute details. The tendency of the river to flow in the new
channels, which had been opened for the more ready discharge of its
waters when in flood, continually increased; owing to which the
two ancient chief branches, the _Volano_ and _Primaro_, rapidly
decreased, and were reduced in less than a century to their present
comparatively insignificant size; while the main direction of the
river was established between the mouth of the Adige to the north,
and what is now called _Porto di Goro_, on the south. The two
before-mentioned canals of _Mazzorno_ and _Toi_ becoming insufficient
for the discharge, others were dug; and the principal mouth, called
_Bocco Tramontana_, or the northern mouth, having approached the
mouth of the Adige, the Venetians became alarmed in 1604; when they
excavated a new canal of discharge, named _Taglio de Porto Viro_, or
_Po delle Fornaci_, by which means the _Bocco Maestra_, was diverted
from the Adige towards the south.

During four centuries, from the end of the twelfth to that of the
sixteenth, the alluvial formations of the Po gained considerably upon
the sea. The northern mouth, which had usurped the situation of the
_Mazzorno_ canal, becoming the _Rama di Trimontana_, had advanced
in 1600 to the distance of 20,000 _metres_[391] from the meridian
of Adria; and the southern mouth, which had taken possession of
the canal of _Toi_, was then 17,000 _metres_[392] advanced beyond
the same point. Thus the shore had become extended nine or ten
thousand _metres_[393] to the north, and six or seven thousand to
the south[394]. Between these two mouths there was formerly a bay,
or a part of the coast less advanced than the rest, called _Sacca
di Goro_. During the same period of four hundred years previous to
the commencement of the seventeenth century, the great and extensive
embankments of the Po were constructed; and also, during the same
period, the southern slopes of the Alps began to be cleared and
cultivated.

The great canal, denominated _Taglio di Porto Viro_, or _Po delle
Fornaci_, ascertains the advance of the alluvial depositions in the
vast promontory now formed by the mouths or delta of the Po. In
proportion as their entrances into the sea extend from the original
land, the yearly quantity of alluvial depositions increases in an
alarming degree, owing to the diminished slope of the streams, which
was a necessary consequence, of the prolongation of their bed, to the
confinement of the waters between dikes, and to the facility with
which the increased cultivation of the ground enabled the mountain
torrents which flowed into them to carry away the soil. Owing to
these causes, the bay called _Sacra di Goro_ was very soon filled
up, and the two promontories which had been formed by the two former
principal mouths of _Mazzorno_ and _Toi_, were united into one vast
projecting cape, the most advanced point of which is now 32,000 or
33,000 _metres_[395] beyond the meridian of Adria: so that in the
course of two hundred years, the mouths or delta of the Po have
gained about 14,000 _metres_[396] upon the sea.

From all these facts, of which I have given a brief enumeration, the
following results are clearly established.

_First_, That, at some ancient period, the precise date of which
cannot be now ascertained, the waves of the Adriatic washed the walls
of Adria.

_Secondly_, That, in the twelfth century, before a passage had been
opened for the waters of the Po at _Ficarrolo_; on its left or
northern bank, the shore had been already removed to the distance of
nine or ten thousand _metres_[397] from Adria.

_Thirdly_, That the extremities of the promontories formed by the
two principal branches of the Po, before the excavation of the
_Taglio di Porto Viro_, had extended, by the year 1600, or in four
hundred years, to a medium distance of 18,500 _metres_[398] beyond
Adria; giving, from the year 1200, an average yearly increase of the
alluvial land of 25 _metres_[399].

_Fourthly_, That the extreme point of the present single promontory,
formed by the alluvions of the existing branches, is advanced
to between thirty-two and thirty-three thousand _metres_[400]
beyond Adria; whence the average yearly progress is about seventy
_metres_[401] during the last two hundred years, being a greatly more
rapid proportion than in former times.

  PRONY.


NOTE, p. 244.

_On the Universal Deluge._

Mr Cuvier in the present work, and more recently in a note to Mr
Lemaire’s edition of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, enumerates the Mosaic,
Grecian, Assyrian, Persian, Indian, and Chinese traditions,
concerning a universal deluge; and concludes from them, that the
surface of the globe, five or six thousand years ago, underwent a
general and sudden revolution, by which the lands inhabited by the
human beings who lived at that time, and by the various species of
animals known at the present day, were overflowed by the ocean; out
of which emerged the present habitable portions of the globe. This
celebrated naturalist maintains, that these regions of the earth
were peopled by the few individuals who were preserved, and that the
tradition of the catastrophe has been preserved among these new races
of people, variously modified by the difference of their situation
and their social disposition. According to Mr Cuvier, similar
revolutions of nature had taken place, at periods long antecedent
to that of the Mosaic deluge. The dry land was inhabited, if not by
human beings, at least by land animals at an earlier period; and must
have been changed from the dry land to the bed of the ocean; and it
might even be concluded from the various species of animals contained
in it, that this change, as well as its opposite, had occurred more
than once.

This opinion being brought forward in a geognostic work, especially
in a work abounding in such valuable matters of fact, and stated
as the result of geognostic investigation, we may be permitted, in
this point of view, to examine it; and to ask, whether, from the
phenomena exhibited by the present condition of the earth’s surface,
we are entitled to conclude that it owes its conformation to such a
universal deluge.

We know, from arguments suggested by chemistry and the higher
mechanics, that the globe was once in a state of fluidity; hence it
might be maintained with some appearance of probability, that the
condition of the earth, previous to the existence of organic matter,
depended upon fusion; and that the primitive rocks are of igneous
origin. Since, however, granite has been found above rocks of various
kinds which contain the remains of organic bodies, we are under no
necessity of ascribing to primitive rocks an origin different from
that of subsequent formations; and, without having recourse to other
arguments, the fact, that aquatic animals are the most abundant of
fossil organic remains from the earliest of the transition to the
latest of the secondary and tertiary formations, affords evidence
that they are precipitates from water.

Notwithstanding the great and daily advancement of science, our
knowledge of chemistry is still too imperfect for us to arrive at
an adequate knowledge of the state of this water, or rather sea,
as, from its universal expansion, it must be denominated. Did it
contain dissolved in it at the same time all the materials from
which the various beds of rock were formed; what were the solvents
of those materials which we find, either insoluble in water, or
at least not easily soluble; by what means were the precipitates
produced; and whence came this prodigious mass of waters? Upon these
unanswered questions depend others no less important. The aquatic
animals of a former world undoubtedly lived in this sea; otherwise,
we must admit of another sea free from heterogeneous materials. But
did these animals continue to live in it during the whole process
of precipitation; and did this process proceed so slowly and
imperceptibly, that animal life was not interrupted by it, and that
only remains of dead animals, such as the skeletons of fishes, and
the covering of shell-fishes, were enveloped in the precipitates?
Or, did animal life continue only during the state of solution; and
were the myriads of aquatic animals found in beds of rocks buried in
them alive? Many naturalists appear to entertain the latter opinion,
from observing the agonies of death depicted in the distorted
position of fishes in copper-slate, or from deriving the bituminous
properties of stink-stone, as well as of marl, from the decomposition
of animal bodies, of which such numerous vestiges are extant in these
beds? In this way a plausible explanation is given of the phenomena
of a former world that has perished. How, then, do they explain the
constant appearance of so many species, which have continued without
interruption for such an infinite length of time? Have these species
been propagated by individuals who accidentally escaped destruction:
or, Does a new race continually spring up again? But laying aside
the difficulty of this explanation, the violent destruction of so
many races of animals, is scarcely consistent with the general
order of the universe, according to which, we behold every animal
occupying its proper element, and fulfilling its particular destiny.
We, therefore, involuntarily revert to the opinion, that those
creatures, whose remains are preserved in beds of rocks, have lived
continually in the sea, out of which the rocks were precipitated, in
the same manner as the analogous species now living in the sea become
enveloped in deposits still taking place, although on a comparatively
small scale.

What has just been said does not entitle us to admit that the various
parts of the earth have been, from time to time, overflowed with
water. Yet are there other appearances which completely indicate
such a change, namely, beds of coal, and the fossil remains of land
animals. The carbonisation of roots of trees in clefts of rocks,
and of marsh plants in peat-bogs, which takes place, as it were,
under our own immediate observation; the transitions of bituminous
wood into pitch-coal, the frequent presence of vegetables partly
converted into coal, in the neighbourhood of beds of coal, and which
are more abundant the nearer they are to these beds; and, finally,
the chemical nature of coal, which is similar to that of vegetables,
go to prove the vegetable origin of the older and independent coal
formation.

Though some fossil vegetables might derive their origin, by being
floated to quarters more or less remote from their native soil, as we
find to be the case in many islands of the South Sea, and on other
shores; on the other hand, neither the breadth and extent of beds of
coal, nor the erect position in which fossil trees and reed plants
are not unfrequently found in their neighbourhood, coincide with such
an explanation. The plants, from which these beds were formed, once
stood and grew in the place where they were buried; and, from these
remains, we infer that they were entirely land plants, tree-ferns,
_Lycopodia_, and other cryptogamia. It also appears undeniable, that
the land, being once dry, was, during a longer or shorter time,
covered with luxuriant vegetation; that it was afterwards overflowed
with water, and then became dry land again. But, was this overflow of
water produced by a sudden, violent, and universal catastrophe, such
as we consider the deluge? Many circumstances leave room for opposite
conjecture. If it is probable that the older or black coal is of
vegetable origin, the plants from which it has originated, must have
suffered an incomparably greater change than those of more recent
coal formations. Their composition and their texture, afford evidence
of a long operation of the fluid in which the changes were produced;
and their situation, proves that the substance of the plants, though
not entirely dissolved, was yet much comminuted, and was kept
floating and swimming, and then precipitated. How can we, in any
other way, account for the layers of sandstone and slate-clay, with
which coal regularly alternates, so that from one to sixty alternate
beds have been enumerated? How can we explain the combination of
mineral coal with slate-clay, or account for the appearance of
bituminous shale, flinty slate, of iron-pyrites and iron-ore, in the
midst of mineral coal itself? We do not, however, admit of a repeated
uncovering and covering of the land with water, and of a renewal of
vegetation for every particular bed of coal; far from it, for violent
inundations exhibit very different phenomena. These formations, like
pure mineral formations, bear the evident impress of a lengthened
operation, and of gentle precipitations; and whoever still entertains
doubts regarding this, may have them completely removed by the
condition in which vegetable remains are frequently found in the
coal formations, by the perfect preservation of the most delicately
shaped fern leaves, by the upright position of stems, and by other
appearances of a similar character. It is also an important objection
against the universality of the cover of water, notwithstanding the
wide extent of beds of coal, that they are sometimes accompanied with
fossil remains of fresh-water shells, from which we are entitled to
draw the conclusion, that they must have been deposited in inclosed
basins of inland waters.

From the beds of coal found in various situations among _Alpine_
limestone, as well as in other secondary formations, under similar
circumstances, we are at liberty to maintain that they are not
indebted for their origin to any universal and sudden revolution.

When we proceed to the second division of coal formations, to
brown coal, or to _lignite_, the principal difference we discover
is, that the change which the vegetables have undergone, having
taken place at a time when the chemical power had lost much of its
energy, was incomplete; and besides, we observe in the different
brown coal formations the same repetition of single beds alternating
with other beds of rocks, the mixture of different minerals, and
not unfrequently of upright stems. Some appear to be derived from
sea plants, and others from fresh-water plants; but the greater
proportion from land plants. They, equally with the beds of black
coal, give evidence of a new overflow of water, and the water plants
themselves, which never thrive at a great depth, and which frequently
appear under prodigious beds of rocks, must have experienced such a
change. But that change was scarcely of the kind which we understand
by a deluge, and the frequent repetition of deluges indicated,
according to some, by the repeated beds of coal from the transition
to the newest tertiary periods, is hardly credible. It may be
maintained, with more certainty, of _brown coal_ than of _black
coal_, that they have been formed in land water, and hence in
limited and isolated basins of water, since fresh-water animals are
their constant attendants.

Although the beds of coal of our secondary formations appear to
have originated in a similar way with other mineral formations, and
not by violent catastrophes, it is otherwise with a part of those
vegetable remains which are met with in alluvial land. Subterranean
forests, whose circumference, in some instances, extends about 70
square leagues, partly in a state of good preservation, and partly
more or less decomposed, afford satisfactory proof of deluges, and
have undoubtedly been covered up with earth by a violent eruption of
standing or running water. But these are local effects, similar to
what take place in our own day, but on a larger scale.

There are abundant fossil remains of land animals, resembling those
of water animals, found in such a state of preservation, that we
cannot suppose them to have been brought hither from distant places,
and by means of currents. Their appearing in beds of rocks, or
generally in aqueous precipitates, proves that the soil they first
inhabited, must have been dry land, afterwards overflowed with water.

The appearance of what are called fresh water shells, in alternate
beds with marine animals, being sometimes observed in newer flœtz
rocks in great abundance, seems to indicate a reiterated retreat
and return of the sea. But however meritorious the labours of
naturalists, through whom attention has been directed to the
subject, may be in other respects, we are nevertheless disposed
to entertain doubts concerning their conclusions. In our own seas
and ponds upon the coasts, we observe the same testaceous animals
growing equally well in salt water, and in water nearly fresh; and,
again, fresh water animals living in salt water[402]. By artificial
means the inhabitants of the sea may be changed into inhabitants of
fresh water; as fresh-water animals are, in their turn, converted
into marine animals, so that, to decide concerning the proper
element of each individual species is often matter of difficulty.
Therefore, other circumstances besides that of containing salt
must be taken into account. The occasional plenty, scarcity, or
absolute want of food; the soil being sometimes sandy, slimy, or
rocky; the depth, extent, agitation or tranquillity of the water;
and, finally, the quality of the air contained in it, may be as
instrumental in determining the habitation of these animals, as the
materials which the water holds in solution. An excellent observer
has indeed very lately shewn in a treatise, which supports the idea
of fresh-water formations, that we possess no unerring character
for distinguishing sea shell-fish from those of fresh water; but
admitted, notwithstanding the transition above stated, we can draw
a line of distinction between them, we must not forget that this
investigation is neither regarding sea shell-fish now existing,
nor of our present waters. We indeed draw our conclusion, and
not without reason, from similar conformation, similar modes of
existence. But one of two things must be; either that the shell-fish,
whose remains are found in beds of rocks, lived in the water out
of which these beds were precipitated, or the water in which they
lived, was dislodged by other water containing the materials of the
precipitations. In the first and more generally admitted case, the
water was so different from the present water, whether salt or fresh,
that we cannot infer from the inhabitants of the latter any thing
concerning the inhabitants of the former; but we can confidently
maintain, that a greater resemblance prevails between our sea and
land water, than between either the one or the other, and that fluid
which was inhabited by the shell-fish. In other respects, there
remains no other difference between fresh and salt water formations,
but that the bottom upon which the former is placed once contained
land water; a fact worthy of observation: but the notion of enclosed
basins, and of isolated formations originating in them, the way
in which fresh water formations are supposed to have taken place,
remained a long time unsatisfactory. Finally, we may be permitted to
ask, upon what grounds they considered themselves entitled to ascribe
to the former sea the continual possession of a portion of salt,
while the salt precipitates appear only at particular intervals, and
after long interruptions? If the sea occasionally contained a great,
and sometimes a very small, quantity of salt, it might equally be at
times altogether without it. And yet it deserves to be remembered,
that the beds of rock, to which the salt formations are most nearly
related, contain no petrifactions; that, therefore, the so-called
marine animals are wanting in those periods during which we have any
direct evidence of the presence of salt water.

There is, however, a geognostic fact, which, in preference to all
others, has been cited in evidence of violent revolutions and
deluges, that is, the appearance of conglomerates or of reproduced
kinds of stone. Indeed, there might still be a wide field for
investigation here, and more than one formation, which now passes
for sandstone, might be acknowledged as an original and chemical
production; without having occasion to go so far as Mr Gerhard does
with greywacke,--that is, to consider them as immediate precipitates
from the atmosphere. But still conglomerates sufficiently genuine,
will remain from the transition period through all the subsequent
formations, to serve as acknowledged monuments of destruction, as
well as of the renovation of what was destroyed. These are the
Codices rescripti, in the archives of the Earth, out of which, the
antiquarian will one day decipher the almost obliterated traces of
her former condition, as well as the history of her changes. Though
these conglomerates deviate so much in their nature, and in the
character of their origin, from chemical productions, they have yet
among themselves this remarkable and common characteristic, that,
with few exceptions, the older are much less varied in character,
and more extensive in distribution, than the newer, and that, at
length, the newest conglomerates become mere local appearances.
But, in reference to the main question which engages our attention,
we may conjecture that the beds of rocks from which the sea had
never retreated, might be assailed by its floods and currents,
and shattered to pieces, as happens even in our own time, and the
fragments be again reunited into solid rocks, by means of the still
remaining dissolved matter in the water. But of many conglomerates it
is evident that they have been deposited on the dry land, in the same
way as our gravels. Jupiter, who took counsel with himself, whether
he would destroy the sinful world with fire or water, and at length
decided for water[403], may not be so justly considered the author of
these appearances, as Saturn, who devoured his children. Or, to be
less metaphorical in our language, it may perhaps have been with the
origin of conglomerates, as it is in our own day with the origin of
fragments of rock and boulders, in which the rock being fractured in
various places by the alternations of heat and cold, by the influence
of air and atmospheric water, falls into pieces of greater or smaller
magnitude, which are carried forward by the water, and gradually
rounded in their progress, so that they assume a more perfectly
globular shape the farther they are removed from their original
situation. Therefore, as regards the foregoing enquiry, it is not an
unimportant circumstance, that the long but continual rolling of the
boulders during their rounding, appears to be much more efficacious
than a rapid and violent impetus, and that, in this case, as in
many other geognostic appearances, time rather than force is to be
taken into account. Another circumstance, perhaps, corresponds with
this, that the change produced by the weather, not only by the first
disunion, but also by the progressive disintegration of the rocks,
by the blunting of the edges and corners, by the diminution of the
fragments, and generally in the origin of the boulders and fragments
of rocks of every description, has just as much influence as the
mechanical operation of the water; and that a great part of the land
called Alluvial, generally owes its existence to this cause[404]. But
if, upon farther consideration, the conglomerates appear to derive
their origin in a similar way with rolled masses of gravel, they
afford evidence, nevertheless, of the elevated station of the water
in the neighbourhood, from which they had been before removed; for
their conglomeration could take place only under water; and, with few
exceptions, they occupy an incomparably greater elevation than any of
the coal formations, or any of the beds of rocks which enclose the
remains of land animals.

Geognosy certainly contains many facts, which cannot be explained,
but by a change from dry land to the bottom of the sea, although our
knowledge of them is still so imperfect, that we cannot hazard a
probable conjecture respecting the numbers of these changes, whether
they commence at the same or at different periods in the various
quarters of the world, and whether they are local or universal.
These changes appear neither sudden nor violent, such as we consider
revolutions of the earth, but at all times proceed with silent and
regular steps, and depend upon similar causes, concealed it is true
from us, such as the universal retreat of the waters from their
original height to the present bed of the ocean. We do not belong to
those geologists who divert the world from its axis for the purpose
of explaining the inequalities of its surface, at whose command the
Earth sometimes opens her bosom to engulf the sea, and at other times
the floodgates of Heaven are lifted up to pour down another ocean.
He who reflects on the devastation caused by earthquakes, inundations
and the fall of mountains, even though they are merely local
appearances confined to particular quarters, cannot help putting
the question to himself, how the order, regularity and connection
exhibited by strata of rocks, could in any measure exist, if the same
or similar accidents had happened throughout the whole world, and
if mechanical power had operated with such energy, and to such an
extent? All our knowledge of the structure of the earth, and of the
existence of its inhabitants, declares rather a quiet uninterrupted
and continually progressive advancement in its formation and
development.

In the lapse of geological epochs, we observe a gradation of rock
formations following one another, in which the latter, however
remotely connected, still appear sufficiently similar to the earlier
to indicate a common origin, till they at length terminate in simple
formations, resembling those which are presently taking place. When
the precipitates were exhausted, and the structure was completed,
nay, even earlier, its destruction commenced; not that violent
destruction by which lofty mountains are torn asunder and levelled,
no uproar of nature, no gigantic struggle of the elements, such as
we commonly conceive, but a decomposition of the strata of rocks
to a greater or less depth, caused partly by chemical, partly by
mechanical, but slow operating powers, what they wanted in intensity
being compensated by the endurance of their operation. According
to the common law of nature, deficiency of power is supplied by
duration of time; for, of all the oracles which have been consulted
concerning the formation of the earth, there is no one which can
make such important revelations to us as the oracle of the age of
mountains. These operations at the earth’s surface generally appear
to have produced its present figure, and to have designed it for the
habitation of numerous organic beings. This appears as early as a
suitable element occurred; first, in water, then in land animals;
and, like the formation of rocks, we observe a regular succession of
organic formations, the later always descending from the earlier,
down to the present inhabitants of the earth, and to the last created
being who was to exercise dominion over them. But here occurs this
important distinction: the organic world with youthful vigour renews
itself daily, and decomposes its materials only to reunite them by
fresh combinations in uninterrupted succession; while the powers of
the inorganic world appear almost extinguished. Though this course of
nature is manifest to our own observation, her resources and progress
are, on the contrary, more concealed; and we can hardly lift the veil
which conceals her, unless we follow Bacon’s advice, Turn back from
rash theories, and follow observation and experience.

We have hitherto endeavoured to shew that incontrovertible geognostic
facts indicate an alternate rising and falling of the water which
covered the earth’s surface, but that they were not of a kind to
justify the notion of violent revolutions, or of sudden and universal
eruptions of the sea; and that, therefore, such deluges as the Mosaic
deluge, recorded in the traditions of nations, were not revolutions
of this description. If, according to the supposition of Cuvier, the
earth’s surface inhabited at the commencement of the latter deluge
has become the present bed of the sea, and the former bed of the
sea has become the present dry land, then, according to the present
state of geography, _though only conjectural_, we should be able
to point out such portions of the earth as were overwhelmed by the
catastrophe; and yet we have never heard that any one has hazarded
such an experiment. In the constitution of the present habitable
globe, we find no proofs remaining of such a revolution.

Among these revolutions of nature, we never reckon common
inundations, such as take place at present from water overflowing its
boundaries, though these also may produce devastation whose effects
remain visible for an hundred years. But, in mountainous districts,
another kind of aqueous eruption makes its appearance, and may be
classed along with the traditions of a deluge. We very frequently,
for instance, observe the valleys of high mountains forming a range
of basins separated from one another by shorter or longer defiles,
and opening through the last defile into a wider valley, or a marsh.
The shape of these basins, or cauldrons, commonly lying above one
another like so many stories, and the level surface of their water,
leave no doubt of their being once enclosed lakes which were formerly
blocked up by the barriers of the defiles, and which flowed towards
the level country, as soon as the defiles were broken down by the
waters. If no kind of historical monuments in the west of Europe
bears evidence of those events, which, at least on a small scale,
occur in our own times, this intimates that it was inhabited, not by
an original population, but by a foreign or modern race of people;
whereas those revolutions extended to remote antiquity. The numerous
masses of rock found on both sides of the Alps to the height of
4000 feet, as well as in the plains of the north of Europe, at a
great distance from their original position, and concerning whose
coming hither so much light has lately been thrown by Messrs Buch
and Escher, are a very probable proof of these debacles; while every
circumstance renders it evident that these blocks were swept along
by the currents thus created, to the place where they are now found.
The Greek writers have also preserved accounts of such revolutions,
which, although not unquestionably authenticated, are yet stamped
with the impress of historical testimony. Herodotus has the following
passages directly relative to the country where the Greeks place
their second or Deucalionic deluge. “Thessaly must formerly have
been an inland sea, surrounded by high mountains. On the east it was
bounded by Pelios and Ossa, whose bases were united; on the north by
Olympus; on the west by Pindus; and on the south by Othrys. Thessaly
lay in the midst of these mountains in the form of a basin, into
which, in conjunction with other copious streams, the five well-known
rivers, the Peneus, the Apidanus, the Orochomenus, the Enipeus, and
the Pamisos, emptied themselves. These rivers, which are collected in
their basin from the mountains which encompass Thessaly, after their
junction under the name of Peneus, in which they lose their former
appellation, open towards the sea through a narrow valley. According
to tradition, this valley and opening did not formerly exist; so
that the rivers and the Lake Brebeis, which did not formerly bear
these names, having their confluence in this place, rendered the
whole of Thessaly an inland sea. The Thessalians affirm that Neptune
opened the valley for the passage of the river Peneus, and they may
perhaps be right. If we consider Neptune the author of earthquakes,
and consider the violent concussion of the mountains caused by them
as the work of this deity, we must, upon surveying these regions,
confess that they owe their present shape to him; for the separation
of every mountain appears to me to have been produced by some violent
commotion of the earth.” Strabo makes mention of this tradition,
which he thought worthy of belief, and accounts for the origin of the
Vale of Tempe, which is the bed of the river Peneus, and likewise for
the separation of Ossa from Olympus, by means of an earthquake[405].
In making this remark, we perceive that our theories which allow
that earthquakes are to operate in forming the surface of the earth,
have not even the merit of novelty. According to the last writer,
similar eruptions of water must have originated in the lake Copais in
Bœotia[406], in the lakes Bistonis and Aphnetis, in Thrace, and have
been accompanied with huge devastation[407]. Diodorus Siculus[408]
remembered a Samothracian tradition, according to which the Euxine
Sea was once shut up on all sides. It afterwards burst through its
mighty mound of _kyanischen_ rocks to the Hellespont, and inundated
a great part of the coast of Asia, as well as Samothracia itself. An
objection started to the possibility of such an event is, that, from
the observations of Olivier and General Andreossy, the shores of the
Black Sea are, in most places, lower than those of the Bosphorus; and
that its waters, therefore, even if they were considerably higher
than they are at present, would more readily overflow the former than
the latter. But since every rock exposed for such a length of time
is daily crumbling down, it is a question, whether the shore of the
Black Sea has undergone any alteration since that period; and we know
that the eruptions took their direction, not so much from the low
situation of the barrier, as from the nature of the rock of which it
was constructed, being influenced by the weather, and from the rock
itself being rent asunder. Be that as it may, the words with which
Diodorus commences his narrative are remarkable, when he says, the
Samothracian deluge happened earlier than those of other nations.
It at least so far preceded others, that, in the estimation of the
Greek historian, independent of the deluges of Ogyges and Deucalion,
similar natural occurrences more or less authenticated were received
as historical facts.

Finally, the effects produced by the bursting of lakes or debacles
do not appear to be out of proportion to the devastation mentioned
by the traditions of nations. To abide by our former example,
floods which could carry along with them masses of rock of 50,000
cubic feet, were in a situation to bury a whole people; and the few
individuals who might be preserved would undoubtedly have handed
down the memory of such an event to remote posterity. Other deluges
may have arisen from other causes, at a time when, as is shewn by
numerous vestiges, lakes and rivers had a much greater elevation
than at present; and, therefore, every overflowing of them must have
produced greater and more extensive ravages.

From these last local eruptions of water, that is, from single
limited districts, arose the mechanical precipitates known under the
denomination of Alluvial Soil. Their situation, as the uppermost
covering of the earth, as well as their origin, which takes place
beneath our own observation, furnishes evidence of their being the
most recent mineral formations; and it follows from their nature and
connection that they were not produced by chemical means, but removed
by the mechanical force of water. Since they, among other things,
contain prostrate forests, and abundant remains of land animals, we
conclude that they did not originate in the bed of the sea, but were
floated and deposited upon the dry land by an overflow of land water.
How is it conceivable that these precipitates have been covered by
the ocean, since their deposition, and have, by means of an opposite
change, become the dry land they are at present; and yet it must have
been so, if they are to be considered as intimations of the Mosaic
deluge.

The view now given, which is that of Henger in his Beiträge, is also
advocated by other naturalists, and has lately been brought forward
in an interesting manner in the Edinburgh Philosophical Journal[409].
We have been frequently requested to give the two views, in regard
to the universal deluge, namely, that which maintains that it is
proved by an appeal to the phenomena of the mineral kingdom; the
other, which affirms that that great event has left no traces of its
existence on the surface or in the interior of the earth. M. Cuvier’s
Essay, and Professor Buckland’s Reliquiæ, are the best authorities
for the first opinion; while numerous writers have advocated the
second.


NOTE, p. 244.

ON THE ACTION OF RUNNING WATERS.

A very great degree of power has been attributed to the waters
which move at the surface of the earth, or in its interior. Many
geologists have advanced the opinion, that they have scooped out the
channels and even the valleys in which they flow, and formed the
cliffs whose feet they wash; and many philosophers, naturalists and
even geologists, still support this opinion, not only in some of its
applications, but even in its whole extent.

In order to appreciate it, it is sufficient to observe with care the
different modes of action of water set in motion by different causes,
and the changes which it has operated upon the rocks and deposits
upon which it has acted, from the most remote times to which history
may reach.

We must, in the first place, successively examine the different sorts
of action of the principal masses of water which are in motion at
the surface of the earth, that is to say, the action of torrents, of
rivers, of currents of the sea, or of great lakes, and that of waves.

We shall afterwards see what consequences are to be deduced from
these observations.


1. _Action of Torrents._

_Torrents_ have a true degrading and _scooping_ action upon the
earth’s surface, but, by the necessary consequence of the sense
which we attach to the word, this action cannot be exercised upon
spaces of great extent, for a torrent is a water-course which has a
great declivity. Now, on account of the little height which the most
elevated summits of the globe have in comparison with the extent
of its surface, this action cannot be very extensive; it can only,
therefore, produce short and narrow ravines. This action, as all who
have visited high mountain chains may have seen, is only often local
and instantaneous; it presents no remarkable effect but upon the
heaps of debris which cover the declivities of the mountains, and on
broken rocks, partially disintegrated by other causes, and lastly on
moveable deposits. The results of this action contribute to confine
it within narrower limits still, by heaping up at the mouths of
torrents in the valleys or plains, the debris carried down by these
torrents. The elevation of the soil, which necessarily follows from
the accumulation of these debris, diminishes with the declivity, the
rapidity, and consequently the power of these water-courses.

Great masses of water moving rapidly, have a marked transporting
power. Striking examples of this power have but too often been
seen in Holland, by the breaking down of the dikes, and in Alpine
mountains, in consequence of extraordinary rains during tempests,
or from the rupture of some of the natural barriers of lakes. In
these latter times (in 1818), the Vallée de Bagne experienced the
terrible effects of this devastating power. Masses of ice having
fallen towards the upper part of this valley, and accumulated
there, raised a dike sufficiently compact and strong to block up
the course of the Dranse. The waters of this river, rapid and pent
up in certain parts of its course, as are all those of the high
Alps, accumulated above this barrier of ice, and formed a lake which
attained, at its maximum, 130 metres of mean breadth, from 3000 to
4000 metres of length, and 36 of mean depth, and consequently a
volume of water estimated at about 29,000,000 cubic metres. Although,
by means of operations conducted with equal skill and courage,
about the third part of this volume was let off without danger, the
remaining part having suddenly broken through the barrier of ice,
was precipitated with an almost unexampled impetuosity of 11 metres
in the second, into the Vallée de Bagne. In the first part of its
course, and in the space of half an hour which the mass of water took
in traversing a league, it carried away trees, dwellings, enormous
masses of debris, and rocks _already separated from their mass_, as
M. Escher, expressly says; it covered all the broad parts of the
valley with rubbish, pebbles and sand, and carried the remainder of
the substances which it had swept away, as well to the extremity
of the valley, towards Martigny, as into the bed of the Rhone. The
mass of water took an hour and a half in rushing from the glacier to
Martigny. The same event took place from the same cause, and with
nearly similar results, in 1595.

Torrents may therefore scoop out ravines in certain formations, and
produce effects which appear considerable, because we judge of them
by comparison with our own feeble means. But how diminutive and
circumscribed are these changes produced in the configuration of
the globe, compared with the long and broad valleys which furrow in
vast numbers the immense surface of the earth, and to the formation
of which neither the torrents nor great rivers which exist at the
present day have in any way contributed, as we shall presently
demonstrate.


2. _Action of Rivers._

The action of _rivers_ must be examined under two very different
circumstances, or at two different parts of their course.

_First_, When they are compressed between mountains, whether at no
great distance from their source, or even at the middle of their
course.

_Secondly_, When they have reached broad valleys, whose declivity is
slight, or plains which commonly surround their mouth.

In the first case, these rivers partake of the impetuosity and power
of torrents. They often run with rapidity, and in great quantity, at
the bottom of narrow and deep valleys: they are as it were inclosed
in channels, whose vertical walls appear as if cut by art. The first
idea which presents itself to all who have seen these appearances
for the first time, and who are satisfied with first impressions,
is, that these streams, which are pretty powerful and always very
impetuous, have dug these deep grooves; and if sometimes the hardness
of the rocks and the height of the precipices which form their
sides, appear too great for those small streams that meander at
their feet, what cannot be attributed to their immediate power is
attributed to the continued action of time.

Without examining how long a series of ages it would be necessary
to admit, before the rivers which we have mentioned above, and the
water-courses encased in the deep valleys of the Alps, Pyrenees,
Jura, Grampians, &c. could have scooped their valleys, on which their
present action is so slow that no one has yet been able to estimate
it; without examining if this long series of ages agrees with the
phenomena, which preclude our attributing so remote an antiquity
to the actual state of the earth’s surface, a question of too much
importance to be treated indirectly; it will be sufficient to mention
here four sorts of observations, in order to be persuaded, or at
least to suspect, that the present rivers, even supposing them ten
times the size that they are, could not have scooped out the deep
channels at the bottom of which they run.

1. We must recur to the period when the ranges of hills which border
the present valleys were not as yet scooped out, but were united in
such a manner as not to leave any hollow between them, or merely a
slight original depression.

This shallowness of the valley would be accompanied with an
inconsiderable slope of its bottom. If, then, we suppose the same
mass of water, it must run with less quickness, and consequently
with much less power; and yet a very great force must be attributed
to it, before it could have had the power of removing a portion of
rock nearly represented by a recumbent triangular prism, having often
500 metres of breadth by a sometimes equal and often much greater
vertical thickness. If, in order to get rid of this difficulty, we
admit a volume of water incomparably larger than the present volume
of the rivers to which so great effects are attributed, we must admit
much more elevated and more extended mountains, to give rise to so
great a volume of water.

Were we only detained by this hypothesis, and did not direct
observation oppose itself to the admission of this disaggregating
power and its effect, we might pass it over; but two other
observations render the hypothesis inadmissible.

2. Historical records equally concur to prove that the rivers
possessed of the greatest power which can be attributed to them, have
no appreciable corroding action upon the rocks on which they move.

No one has maintained that the greater number of the cascades,
cataracts, or rapids, long known and mentioned on account of their
celebrity, have disappeared or have even sensibly diminished, nor
consequently that the natural dike which the water had encountered
in its course, has been worn or even completely disrupted. We do
not find that cascades have changed into cataracts, and these again
into rapids. The cataracts of the Nile have been spoken of from time
immemorial, as always opposing an obstacle to the navigation of that
river; the same is the case with those of the Danube, of the fall of
the Rhine at Schaffhausen, &c. The famous cascades of the Alps and
Pyrenees have been cited ever since writing was in use; and among all
these examples we can scarcely find two or three cascades that have
been lowered, or cataracts reduced in their level.

The only cascade which we can point out as having really diminished
in height, is that of Tungasca in Siberia. We do not, however, assert
but that there may be others. So many causes different from those
of erosion may concur to lower a cascade, or even make it disappear
almost entirely, that we are rather astonished at the small number
of examples mentioned, than embarrassed by the objections which
these examples might present to the opinion which we are defending:
for the fall of a part of the rock which forms the cliff from which
the cascade is precipitated; an abundant accumulation of debris at
the foot of the cliff; a real destruction of the softer deposits,
forming part of the strata of the mountain from which they fall, are
sufficient causes for changing the height of waterfalls. These causes
must present themselves pretty frequently; but how different is their
action from that of erosion? This, if it existed, would extend from
the source of the river to its mouth, and would have a considerable
influence upon the configuration of the earth’s surface. Those which
we have mentioned have, on the contrary, an action so limited and so
local, as to be scarcely appreciable.

3. Allowing, for the moment, that a river, possessed of a vast
erosive or disaggregating power, may have scooped out the valley in
the bottom of which it at present flows, in a state of feebleness
very different from its original state, we must account for the
disposal of a vast mass of earth and rock, which filled up the valley
before the river had removed it. It is not possible to suppose that
it has been transported into the sea, which is often more than a
hundred leagues from the valley; for we know that when rivers, on
reaching the plains, lose their rapidity, they allow the matters to
be precipitated which they held in suspension. Besides, we have
shown that many rivers, on leaving the mountains, traverse lakes, in
which they deposit all the earthy matters suspended in their waters.
This deposition is particularly striking in all the considerable
rivers, which descend from the ridge of the Alps toward the
north-west and south-east of that chain of mountains. These rivers
meet, at the opening of the valleys they flow through, lakes, which
they traverse, and which seem intended for their purification. Thus,
on the northern side, we see the Rhone traversing the lake of Geneva;
the Aar, the Lakes of Brientz and Thun; the Reuss, the Lake of the
Four Cantons; the Linth, the Lake of Zurich; the Rhine, the Lake of
Constance. On the south side, the Lac Majeur is traversed by the
Tessin, the Lake of Como by the Adda, the Lake Disco by the Oglio;
the Lake of Guarda by the Mincio, &c. Now, these lakes, which are
only themselves deeper parts of the valley, would have been filled up
by the debris conveyed to the valley, if this valley had the origin
attributed to it. Proceeding from one hypothesis to another, it might
perhaps be supposed that these lakes may have been sufficiently deep
to swallow up all the debris of the valley, without being chocked up.
But, rather than admit such suppositions, why not grant that the same
unknown cause which has scooped out the lake, has also scooped out
the valley which is only a continuation of it?

4. But if facts had proved that the waters degrade the rocks, scoop
them out, and perpetually remove their debris, we might perhaps be
induced to admit that unknown causes, of which we are absolutely
ignorant, and of which we can form no idea, have given to the
original rivers the means of surmounting all these obstacles. Now,
observation would seem absolutely to prove the contrary.

We have remarked, that rapid rivers which, in the bottom of valleys,
fall in cascades, from rock to rock, which beat with violence against
the walls which contain them, do not in any degree alter these
rocks, and that, far from corroding their surface, they allow it to
be covered with a rich coating of mosses, confervæ, &c. which could
neither maintain itself, nor be formed at all, were the least portion
of the surface of these rocks continually or even only frequently
removed.

A much more striking fact is that which some of the great rivers
present, such as the Nile, the Orinoco, &c. which flow in the
equatorial regions.

These powerful rivers, when they have arrived at places where they
are contracted, and, as it were, jammed in between two rocky walls,
form impetuous cataracts. Their waters, endowed by the celerity of
this fall with the greatest erosive power that can be attributed to
this fluid, must necessarily have corroded, or at least worn, the
rocks which they have thus beat against since the creation of our
present Continent. Now, so far from removing the surface, they cover
it with a brownish varnish of a peculiar nature.

It appears, therefore, well established, that water _alone_ does not
scoop those rocks, whose aggregation is complete, or which are solid;
and that it does not wear them in any way, whatever be its quantity
of motion.

We say _water alone_; and we must insist on this distinction, in
order to make the preceding facts agree with other facts, which might
seem contradictory.

We often see furrows scooped out on the walls that bound the narrows
of rivers; we also see rocks rounded, and entirely destitute of moss.
But let the facts be examined with attention, and we shall find that
this erosion always takes place in the parts of their course, where,
on account of the nature of the neighbouring soil, the torrents carry
with them, in their risings (or floods), debris and detached stones
from their banks; and it is by means of these stones that they wear
the rocks which are in their bed.

It is very easy to appreciate these circumstances. It is remarked,
that this erosion has never taken place at the sources of powerful
springs. All the pebbles which had to be carried off have been so
long ago, and the mosses which grow abundantly on the rocks at the
level of the water, and in the bed of these torrents, have nothing
more to fear from the destructive action of these solid bodies. The
case is the same with the parts which immediately succeed a lake, or
a great excavation, capable of arresting all the hard bodies carried
off by the river. There the mosses appear in abundance; because they
are not subjected to the action of any other substance than of the
water alone.

The present rivers do not therefore appear to have any erosive power
upon the rocks which are completely aggregated, when they act by
themselves, and when no other cause, such as frost, decomposition,
&c. has disintegrated the rock. The absence of these foreign
circumstances is proved by the vegetation or the enamel which then
cover the rocks exposed to the action of the water.

These rivers, in proportion as they remove from the rocks in the
neighbourhood of the lofty mountains in which they took their rise,
often gain in volume what they have lost in velocity; but the power
dependent upon size rarely compensates that which they owed to
rapidity; and although these large rivers still retain a transporting
power, sufficient to carry along with them the obstacles which oppose
themselves to their progress, they are far from presenting results
of action so striking as those of torrents. They stir up, when
flooded, or when they change place, the earth and mobile sand which
cover their bottom, especially towards their edges, and transport
them to some distance; but they scarcely move pebbles larger than an
egg, which occur in their bed, and which have been brought there in
other times, and under other circumstances. On thus transporting the
comminuted and mobile mineral matters, they deposite them again in
places where their current is relaxed by some cause, and thus raise
the bottom of their bed in these places; they seek a new passage in
the midst of the barriers which they have themselves constructed.
The principal current is then borne, sometimes against one bank, and
sometimes against the other; and when it comes to beat upon the foot
of a steep part, composed of moveable soil, as the banks commonly
are, in such cases, they really erode it, and make it fall into
the river; and transport to another part of its course, the earth
resulting from the destruction of the bank, and give rise to new
obstacles. Hence the new deposites, which border rivers in all points
where their current is slackened, and principally toward their mouth.
It is sufficient for our present purpose to have referred to facts
remarkable for their number, for the importance which they have had
in regard to the modern changes of the configuration of the globe;
and, lastly, in regard to agriculture and civilisation;--facts of
easy observation, and which tend to prove, that the action of rivers,
whose fall is not sufficiently rapid to entitle them to be considered
as torrents, is not to scoop out their bed, either in the valleys or
in the plains through which they flow, but rather to raise them, and
to tend, consequently, rather to level and flatten the earth than to
furrow it, more than it has been since the Continents have assumed
the configuration which they now possess.

But if we have not been able to recognise a real corroding power in
the great rivers falling in the form of cascades or cataracts, let
us inquire elsewhere, in circumstances where the water seems endowed
with a still superior power, what are the effects of this agent?


3. _Action of Waves._

It is in the sea, an enormous mass, sometimes acquiring, from the
action of the winds, an incalculable power, that we must find the
maximum of force of the water of the _present_ times. In fact, in
this case, the power of transportation is so prodigious, that the
strongest barriers, both natural and artificial, are overturned, and
the largest stones, together with enormous fragments of rocks torn
from their place, transported, and even projected to a distance.
But it is to these effects that this immeasurable power is limited.
The water, which displaces and transports to a distance these heavy
masses, does not abrade the surface when it acts by itself. We see
this surface, on rocks and the sides of piers and dikes, perpetually
beaten by the waves, covered with fuci, confervæ, byssi, and other
delicate vegetables, _without roots_, which the waves have not
prevented from contracting a first and feeble adherence, and which
they do not hinder from growing. But, if the waves carry with them
pebbles, or even sand, it is those hard bodies which act; the surface
of the rocks is abraded, and all vegetation ceases.

The same effect takes place, and is even augmented by the real
degradation of the coasts, if the sea acts upon friable rocks,
capable of mixing with water, such as argillaceous or calcareous
marl, or chalk, or upon rocks which are hard, but naturally fissured,
or partly disaggregated, such as certain granites; it then easily
removes the crumbled or previously detached parts, scoops out the
foot of the rock or steep coast, and causes the upper part, which is
deprived of support, to fall. But, in consequence of this fall, it
forms a slope, which, by its inclination, deadens the violence of the
shock, and even protects the foot of the cliff, for some time only,
if it be friable, or capable of disintegration; and for ever, if,
being compact, it does not carry in it the causes of destruction. The
action of the waves ceasing, the slope is covered with vegetation;
and if the coast continues, nevertheless, to be worn, the changes are
then owing to causes unconnected with the action of water.

Such is, in few words, the ordinary action of the water of the sea
upon steep coasts, and even that of great masses of water in a
state of agitation. M. De Luc, in his various works, has estimated
this action with a correctness of observation and of reasoning,
which is remarkable only, because it has not been adopted by all
naturalists; and few have bestowed the unremitting attention upon
the subject which this respectable geologist has done. He has shewn,
that the destructive action of the waters upon steep shores, and
other coasts or abrupt cliffs, was considerably restrained by the
very consequences of this action; that the debris which accumulated
protected the lower parts of these coasts from the action of the
water, or gradually reduced an abrupt coast to a very inclined and
permanent slope.

Next, to _torrents_, to rapid and large _rivers_, and to _waves_,
it is to _currents_ that a great influence on the earth’s surface
has been attributed,--an influence which a highly gifted naturalist,
Buffon, has employed to explain all the inequalities of the earth’s
surface.

Our knowledge of the action of currents is less precise than that
which we possess of rivers. But if we cannot so visibly demonstrate
that, in no circumstance similar to those which we have specified,
do they scoop out the bottom of the sea into valleys, nor form any
mountains, we can, at least, conjecture with much probability, and
maintain, that we have no direct and constant proof of that action.


4. _Action of Currents._

No one doubts that currents, near coasts, heap up upon the beach,
at the mouth of rivers and harbours, pebbles, sand, gravel, mud, or
other transportable matters, whether these currents constantly exist,
or simply result from the momentary action of a predominating wind;
but this action, although already limited to the mobile matters which
form the bottom of the sea only in some parts, whether this action,
I say, extends to a great depth, that is to several hundred yards,
is a question not yet resolved. In the first place, the observation
made by mariners, that, in the most violent tempests, the sea is only
agitated towards the coasts, or on shallows, and that bodies, sunk
to a great depth, (and still what is this depth in comparison with
that of the sea,) do not feel the motions of its surface, nor that of
currents; and, secondly, reasoning, and even calculation, according
to Messieurs La Place and Poisson, concur to shew, that the violent
motions of the waters of the sea are not propagated to a great depth.
It is therefore probable, that all the transportable matters, which
are at this depth, must remain nearly in the position in which they
are, since our Continents have assumed their present configuration,
unless phenomena and motions of the sea take place at the bottom, of
which we are ignorant, and which are foreign to the subject which at
present occupies our attention.

But if we have no perfectly certain ideas regarding the propagation
of the motions of the sea in depth, we can assert, that, whatever
that extent and that power may be, the submarine currents no more
abrade the rocks than rivers do the surface of the land. This
proof is always derived from the same kind of fact, namely, from
the vegetable and animal bodies which constantly cover the rocks,
and which are found, at all times, by means of various sorts of
dredge-fishing. In fact, no one has remarked, that the places in
which oysters, mussels, corals and sponges are fished, are more
sheltered from currents than others; nor that these places, after
violent tempests, have been deprived, and consequently, as it were,
despoiled of those productions, which, by covering the rocks,
demonstrate that they preserve the integrity of their surface. Many
of these bodies, however, as sponges, fuci and confervæ, contract but
a feeble adherence to the bodies upon which they are placed.

       *       *       *       *       *

It therefore appears, if not completely proved, at least extremely
probable, from the facts and reasonings which we have related,

1. That the _presently existing_ waters, that is to say, in the state
of purity in which we are acquainted with them, have no erosive
action upon rocks, whatever be the nature of these rocks, when, 1st,
The rocks are completely solid, and when they are neither friable
nor disintegrated; 2d, When these waters act by themselves, that is
to say, when their action is not complicated with the really erosive
action of solid bodies, such as pebbles, sand, and perhaps even
pieces of ice.

2. That water, sometimes acquiring, on account of its quality and
velocity, a great transporting power, may remove masses, already
detached, and of great size, according to its degree of velocity, and
the bulk of its mass, and so far as it preserves this same power.

3. That the presently existing waters may have attacked, undermined,
and caused to fall down, portions of solid and steep rocks, by mixing
with beds of clay, marl, and sand, interposed between their solid
strata; that they may also, in their rapid falls, have scooped pretty
deep ravines in very inclined deposites, consisting of disintegrated
rocks; but that these waters could not have scooped out, either
by a violent action, or by a slow one, however long continued, any
of those long and broad longitudinal depressions, which are named
valleys, or of those narrow openings, with almost vertical walls,
which are named _gorges_ or ravines.

4. That, even when the deposites, which border these valleys or
these ravines, are composed of transportable matter, the waters
which at present flow in them could not have scooped them out, even
supposing them to have been much larger in some than they now are;
the declivity of the present deposite not being sufficiently great to
give to these masses of water the rapidity necessary for producing
this effect, and a power sufficient for carrying off the moveable
matters which filled the valley or gorge.

5. Lastly, that the present running waters, so far from having
contributed to form the numerous valleys, glens, gorges and ravines,
continually tend to fill them up, and rather to level the surface of
the globe than to furrow it, more deeply than it is.

  _Vid._ Brongniart _sur l’Eau_.


NOTE

_On the Connection of Geology with Agriculture and Planting[410]._

That all sorts of soils are not equally adapted to all productions,
is a remark of Virgil’s, the truth of which becomes obvious, when
we consider many facts ascertained in Agriculture and Forestry. If,
therefore, as the poet advises, our object be to determine what each
particular region can produce, and what it cannot, our attention
ought in the first place to be directed to the physical circumstances
which exert their influence over vegetation.

All plants that are the subject of cultivation are fixed in the
ground. By one of their parts, through which they derive their
principal nourishment, they penetrate into the soil, which serves
them as a basis, and affords them the means of procuring subsistence;
by the other part they raise themselves into the atmosphere, which
is not only necessary in itself for their existence, but is also the
medium through which they derive the warming and vivifying influence
of the solar rays. Hence we can understand how much the existence of
plants must be influenced by differences in the condition of the soil
and air.

The superficial crust of the globe is formed of soil capable
of producing vegetables. This productive soil, however, is not
everywhere continuous, being interrupted on the one hand by the
watery covering of the earth, and on the other by perennial snow and
bare rock. Where soil does occur, it separates the solid mass of the
earth from the atmosphere, and is the porous medium through which the
gaseous and watery parts of the latter may act in a greater or less
degree upon the former. It is very seldom that strata of vegetable
soil lie beneath strata of other matters; and where they occur in
this position, the overlying strata are either of volcanic or of
alluvial origin. Of the former case, a very remarkable example occurs
in the Isle of Bourbon, in which large tracts covered with vegetables
and even trees, have been laid waste and overwhelmed by streams of
lava; and large rivers in their overflowings occasionally leave
deposits of various characters, over the productive soil containing
remains of formerly existing plants.

Productive soil, as well in regard to its _situation_ as to its
_constitution_, depends upon the nature and condition of the rocks
which form the solid mass of the earth. It is always of secondary
formation, compared with the rock on which it rests, its principal
parts usually originating from the decomposition of this rock. While
the forms of the surface of the solid mass of the earth, have much
influence upon the action of the atmosphere, they also in some degree
modify that of climate. From these circumstances it would appear that
the solid substrata of productive soil exert an influence in various
ways upon vegetables; whence it follows that, in order to obtain a
more intimate knowledge of the conditions which operate upon their
existence, it is necessary to call in geology to our assistance.

Although the scientific study of agriculture has made great progress
in our times, the relations which exist between the constitution
of the solid crust of the earth, and the formation and nature of
vegetable soil, present a wide field for investigation. Geologists
have hitherto too much neglected the examination of the productive
covering of the earth, and those who have treated scientifically
of agriculture and forestry have usually looked upon the vegetable
soil in its own simple capacity, without regard to its foundation
and origin. To point out the way by which we are to proceed in our
investigation of the relations which exist between the solid crust of
the earth and the productive soil which covers it, is the principal
object of the following observations.

Bare rocks cannot be made subservient to the purposes of agriculture.
Lichens indeed, cover the surface of rocks, deriving their chief
nutriment from the atmosphere; mosses draw the water necessary for
their subsistence from the fissures of stones; the roots of grasses
seek in the chinks of rocks for particles of earth sufficient for
their sustenance; various shrubs and trees penetrate here and there
into rocky masses by their roots (having the powerful and continued
action of living wedges), where the cohesion of the parts is
smallest, in order to prepare a fixed seat for themselves, and be
secure from the pernicious effects of the atmosphere. The surface of
the earth is always sterile, however, when it shows a continuity of
naked rock, uncovered by vegetable mould. The cultivation of fields
and woods, and even the rearing of cattle, cannot therefore find
scope in regions which are entirely rocky. Abrupt and precipitous
mountains being generally in this condition are usually barren; but
in plains and on declivities, a bare rocky surface is much less
frequently the cause of sterility than an unfavourable proportion
of mould. Some rocky and moderately elevated regions also occur,
more or less destitute of vegetable mould, whose sterility depends
upon volcanic causes. Iceland, for example, affords cases of this
description. In many parts of Sweden, as in Westrogothia, in
Scotland, &c., there occur many elevated regions, in which gneiss
and granite predominating, exclude to a great extent all kinds of
vegetation excepting lichens. In the same districts we sometimes meet
with pastures and corn-fields interrupted here and there by bare
rocks rising but little above the surface, by which the value of
the ground is much diminished, and great impediments opposed to its
cultivation.

As bare rocks are incapable of all cultivation, their distance
from the under surface of vegetable mould must also be of great
importance. In the plains of the north of Germany, for example, this
distance is often so great that a rocky surface is never found,
while, on the contrary, in other countries, especially such as are
mountainous, the roots of plants not unfrequently touch the subjacent
rock; the variation between these extremes being of all degrees. The
effect of the distance of the surface of the solid rock from the
under surface of productive soil may be both _direct_ and _indirect_,
and may vary much, not only with reference to the species of rock,
but also to the vegetables.

The surface of the solid strata of the earth has a _direct_ influence
upon the cultivation of plants, because it terminates the extension
of their roots, and limits the volume of the soil necessary for their
sustenance. As the length and direction of the roots vary exceedingly
in different species, the difference of effect with regard to their
growth, and the approximation of the rock to the under surface of the
soil, must in general be so much the less prejudicial in proportion
as the roots decline from the perpendicular; whence it follows, that
certain grasses, and some small pasture plants, may grow in very
thin layers of soil, where the larger grasses and pasture plants
with longer roots, could not find subsistence; and that shrubs and
trees, with long perpendicular roots, cannot survive in many places,
where others with more horizontal roots may thrive. These inferences
are proved to be correct by observations in agriculture and forestry
generally known.

Mountainous regions, which are not so elevated but that corn might
grow sufficiently well in them, in so far as depends upon the
conditions of the air or climate, are yet frequently not adapted for
its cultivation, on account of the too near approach of the rock to
the surface, or shallowness of the soil, and produce nothing but
grasses, and some other pasture plants, among which, however, there
is the greatest difference in this respect. _Trifolium montanum_, for
example, can support itself on rocky mountains, where _T. pratense_
could not grow. _Hedysarum onobrychis_ grows luxuriantly on the sunny
declivities of calcareous mountains, where _Medicago sativa_ (Lucern)
does not find a suitable station. The cultivation of this excellent
pasture plant in some mountainous regions, especially where the rocks
are calcareous, has not proved so advantageous as might have been
expected, because the plants have died out in the course of a few
years; whereas, in proper places, where its very long roots find a
sufficient depth of soil, they usually last for a great length of
time.

The vicinity of the rock to the under surface of the vegetable mould,
or the shallowness of the soil, seems to be the principal cause
why the _Beech_ grows better on many calcareous mountains than the
_Oak_, which, on the other hand, finds a fitter station on mountains
in which sandstone predominates, where the soil is usually deeper.
It would seem to be for a similar reason that the _Beech_ grows in
many rocky districts, for example, on the Hartz Mountains, at pretty
considerable heights, especially on the sides of valleys which run to
the south, while these places do not admit the _Oak_, which is found
in the middle provinces of Sweden and Norway; while the Beech, on the
other hand, grows only in the southern parts. From the deficiency of
soil, the Upper Hartz can produce neither the _Pinus pinea_, nor _P.
sylvestris_; the horizontal roots, however, of the _Abies_, or Norway
Spruce, are content with the small portion of earth which covers the
greywacke and slate, although they cannot find sufficient hold to
protect its lofty trunks from being thrown down by the tempest. In
some parts of the Forest of Thuringia, where the covering of loose
earth is deeper than in the Hartz, the _Pinus picea_, or pitch pine,
grows luxuriantly. The common fir, _Pinus sylvestris_, which attains
a great height in proper soil, on the contrary, is stunted and
distorted on rocky mountains, where the roots soon come in contact
with the rock. It there loses the character of a tree, and assumes
that of a shrub, as in place of a single upright stem, several
branches shoot out, and these, not unfrequently, are creeping or bent.

The different conditions of rocks, especially their structure
and their state of cohesion, are of some importance in producing
these effects; for the surface of rocks must be detrimental or
impervious to the roots of plants, in proportion to the compactness
of their structure, and the cohesion of their parts. Schistose
rocks, for example, afford a more easy passage to roots, than
granular crystalline ones; pure quartz resists the roots of plants
in the highest degree; sandstone much less; and pure limestone, on
account of its comparatively small number of fissures, is much less
favourable to vegetation than marl, chalk, or slightly cohering
calcareous rocks, the masses of which are usually split in all
directions.

The direction and inclination of the strata have also some influence
in this matter; for, in proportion as the principal fissures of
the strata are, from their direction or inclination, more readily
presented to the roots of vegetables, the less prejudicial will
their surface be to vegetation. Horizontal strata, therefore, are
the least favourable to vegetation, perpendicular ones the most. In
the inclination of strata intermediate in some degree between these
positions, the roots of vegetables will find a greater obstacle on
the side of a hill in which the surface of a stratum is opposed to
them, than on the other, in which the principal fissures of the
strata are open. The effects of this circumstance may frequently be
observed in mountainous tracts having two principal inclinations, the
state of vegetation, and especially the growth of wood, being more
prosperous on the one of these declivities than on the other.

The surface of the solid strata of the earth may also have an
_indirect influence_ upon the cultivation of vegetables. The various
_inclinations of this surface_ deserve first to be considered, being
of the greatest effect with regard to fixing the fertile soil. The
horizontal position of a rocky surface is in the highest degree
favourable to the stability of vegetable earth; and the greater its
angle of inclination, the greater is the danger of its losing the
soil upon it. In a highly inclined plane, the imperfect support
of the centre of gravity is the sole cause of the loss of earth;
in a less inclined plane the diminution of soil is usually caused
by water, which produces this effect in a greater or less degree,
according to the difference of inclination. In both these modes, by
which a removal of soil is produced, the effect may be modified by
a difference in the condition of the loose earth, as not only its
stability as to situation, but also its resistance to the power of
water, vary according to the size, figure, and cohesion of the parts,
as well as their adhesion to the surface of the rock. Sandy loose
soils, for example, are more liable to transposition than marly or
loamy ones; and these, again, are more easily moved than such as are
clayey and adhesive.

Whatever be the nature of the soil, a small degree of inclination
in the solid rock is sufficient to favour its denudation by the
removal of the former; and the inclinations of the surfaces of rocks
having a covering of earth and vegetation, are in reality much less
considerable than we usually suppose them to be, judging merely by
the eye. The celebrated Humboldt has published observations on this
subject. According to his measurements, a slope of even fifteen
degrees appears steep, and a declivity of thirty-seven degrees is so
abrupt, that if it be covered with a dense sward, it can scarcely be
climbed. The inclination of the pastures of the Alps seldom exceeds
an angle of ten or fifteen degrees, and a slope of twenty degrees
is pretty steep. At an inclination of forty degrees, the surface
of the rock is sometimes covered with earth bearing a sward, but
at a greater inclination the rocks are usually destitute of soil
and vegetation. In the Upper Hartz, the most common inclination of
the declivities of the mountains is twenty-five degrees; nor does
it usually exceed thirty-three, at which inclination the _beech_
and _spruce_ grow. The greatest declivities at which ground can be
advantageously cultivated have an inclination of thirty degrees.

The roots of vegetables, especially of grasses, shrubs, and trees,
are of much importance in supporting the earth upon the declivities
of rocks. Care must therefore be taken that the declivities of
mountains which are covered with turf or wood, be not altogether
deprived of these coverings, as sometimes happens in consequence of
loosening the turf for agricultural purposes, or of incautiously
extirpating the wood. In Norway, near Roraas, there occur mountains,
destitute of all vegetation, that had formerly been covered with
woods, but where now, from the deficiency of soil, no seeds could
take root. The same is the case in many parts of the Alps, where,
from the irregular long-continued removal of the timber, the sides
of mountains which were formerly covered with thick woods, now show
nothing but naked rocks. For this reason, in mountainous countries
with very steep declivities, the breeding of cattle and planting of
woods are often more advantageous than agriculture. In France the
greatest inclination of the public roads is limited by law to an
angle of four degrees and forty-six minutes: a similar restriction
with regard to agriculture might not be without benefit in certain
mountainous countries.

The inclinations of the surface of the solid crust of the earth vary
much, according to the different qualities of the rocks; some having
a tendency to form abrupt precipices, others, again, to produce
gentle declivities. For this reason, mountains consisting of quartz
or porphyry, for example, very frequently present surfaces destitute
of vegetation; while, on the other hand, those of granite, slate or
sandstone, are more frequently adapted for agriculture and planting.
In the northern parts of Scotland, quartz rocks, destitute of all
vegetation, rise in the midst of mountains covered with gramineous
plants, and sometimes wood. In the most fertile part of the south of
Norway porphyritic mountains rise from a calcareous and schistose
base, with lofty, rugged, and bare cliffs. In the southern parts of
the Tyrol the rocky sterility of the abrupt and lofty porphyritic
mountains presents a striking contrast to the fertility of the
neighbouring limestone mountains, which are covered with vines,
walnuts and chesnuts.

The _surface_ of the solid strata of the earth has also an indirect
influence upon the cultivation of plants, in so far as the water
which the vegetable mould acquires from the atmosphere, is retained
in the soil, or is drawn off by the subjacent rock. Different rocks
produce very different effects in this respect, depending as well
upon their constitution as their structure. The component parts of
rocks imbibe water in different modes and degrees; and different
sorts of rocks not only attract water with different celerity, but
also imbibe different quantities of it. The latter difference depends
chiefly upon the various substances of which rocks are composed,
partly, also, upon their porosity. Siliceous rocks attract water in
the lowest degree, argillaceous ones in the highest, and calcareous
rocks appear to have an intermediate action in this respect.
Compact and granular crystalline rocks attract water in a smaller
degree, and more slowly; friable or crumbled rocks imbibe it in
greater quantity, and with more celerity than those which are not
disintegrated. The condition of rocks with regard to the attraction
of water, affects, in a different manner, the humidity of soil;
for, by this attraction, moisture may as well be abstracted from,
as imparted to, the loose earth or soil by which rocks are covered.
Part of the moisture which vegetable earth or soil derives from the
atmosphere passes into the subjacent mass of rock, but this may again
be compensated by evaporation; on which account the soil of such
rocks as have but a small attraction for water usually dries up more
readily than soils whose solid substratum attracts and retains the
moisture in a greater degree.

It is probable that the structure of rocks has also a greater, and
not less, diversified influence upon the humidity of productive
soil. Solid rocks, which are not traversed by numerous perpendicular
fissures penetrating to a considerable depth, allow the water
to remain in the soil; but columnar and schistose rocks, with
perpendicular fissures, and strata declined from the horizontal
position, draw off the water from the soil covering their surface,
into lower places, where it often re-appears under the form of
springs. In these circumstances, we find a partial explanation of the
great difference between the humidity of soil covering a surface of
solid granite, and that lying upon limestone, which is intersected
by numerous fissures. Granitic mountains are often furnished with
marshes, whereas, on the other hand, the dryness of the soil upon
calcareous mountains is generally excessive[411], the cause of
which phenomenon is, in a great measure, to be attributed to the
circumstances above mentioned. Columella observes, that silex having
a moderate covering of earth, preserves to the latter its humidity;
and Palladius repeats the remark. In districts which consist of
quartzose rocks, not less than of granitic ones, the surface is often
covered with marshes. Porphyritic rocks, on the contrary, which have
a remarkable segregation of parts, as well as columnar basalt, let
off the water to lower places. Springs are very frequently found
at the bottom of basaltic mountains; for the atmospheric waters
penetrate by the perpendicular fissures to the strata on which the
basalt rests, and appear at the place where the two rocks meet.

The effect of different rocks upon the preservation and diminution
of the moisture of fertile soil, influences vegetation in various
degrees. The retentive power of the surface of rocks is of the
greatest importance, where the soil consists chiefly of sand, through
which the water percolates, and passes off entirely, unless it meets
with a stratum of such a nature, as to obstruct its passage, or comes
upon a surface of solid rock. The cause of the sterility of sandy
plains is not merely their sandy nature, but also the great depth
of the mass or rock capable of retaining the water. The same sand,
when covering mountains consisting of sandstone, has a much less
degree of sterility than in those plains, because the surface of the
subjacent rock impedes the progress of the water, and consequently
retains it in the soil[412]. It has been sufficiently proved by
experiments, that plants can grow in pure sand, when furnished
with the necessary quantity of water. A subjacent rocky surface
has an entirely different effect upon soil which is very retentive
of moisture, upon a clay soil for example, as, in that case, the
humidity is increased to a prejudicial degree. In land of this
nature, a substratum of rock having the property of drawing off the
water would be useful.

The different conditions of rocks with regard to caloric, may have
some indirect influence upon the vigour of plants. Heat, whether
imparted to the vegetable soil by the sun’s rays, or generated by
various chemical processes in the earth itself, penetrates to the
surface of the subjacent rocks, and is more or less drawn from it in
a longer or shorter time. Columella observes, that rocks in the upper
part of the soil are prejudicial to vines and trees, but in the lower
part cool them. The heat of soil will be more or less drawn from it,
according to the greater or less conducting power of the subjacent
rock. Compact crystalline rocks are probably better conductors of
caloric than those which are of looser texture; siliceous rocks than
argillaceous and calcareous ones. The influence of the subjacent rock
must be greater in this respect, in proportion to the thinness of the
superincumbent soil. The effect of the abduction of caloric is more
particularly sensible, where the roots of cultivated plants touch
the rock, a circumstance which we often see in vineyards. The vine
frequently thrives remarkably on the declivities of mountains, in
which it sends its roots among fragments of stones. Experience shows,
that the quality of wine is influenced by the different conditions
of the stones, among which vines are planted. Albertus Magnus has
observed, that the vine thrives well in earth which is mixed with
fragments of black roofing slate; and Humboldt remarks, that the
vines which grow upon the mountains of the valley of the Rhine,
consisting of black clay-slate, afford an excellent wine. At the Cape
of Good Hope, also, the vine thrives well in a soil produced by the
decomposition of clay-slate, and mixed with fragments of it[413].
It is probable, that the adaptation of this sort of soil to the
cultivation of the vine, depends upon its slow conducting power, and
upon its rapidly imbibing the rays of the sun, on account of its dark
colour, and thus increasing the heat of the ground.

Hitherto we have only spoken of the _proximate_ influence of rocks
upon plants; but it cannot be denied, that the _remote_ effects which
they produce, (inasmuch as vegetable soil is derived from them, and,
therefore, the qualities of this soil depend in a great measure upon
their nature,) are of greater importance.

It is from the rocks which constitute the crust of the earth, that
the principal portion of productive soil is derived. Although other
substances belonging to the animal and vegetable kingdoms, are
necessary for the nourishment of plants, a soil consisting chiefly
of inorganic particles is still more necessary, both for sustaining
their roots, and for receiving, retaining, and partly also preparing
nutrition for them; for, according to accurate observations, some
inorganic substances exert an influence upon the decomposition of
animal and vegetable remains. These effects vary much according to
differences in the aggregation and chemical nature of the inorganic
parts; of which circumstances, however, the different qualities of
rocks are the ultimate cause.

Two kinds of productive soil may be distinguished with regard to
their origin. The soil has either originated in the place in which
it now is from the subjacent rock, or it has been transported to the
places in which it is now found by some power, especially by that
of water. The first kind may be named _untransported_, the second
_transported soil_. To the first kind of soil is to be referred a
great part of the soil which covers the summits and declivities of
mountains, and to the other, the soil which fills the bottoms of
valleys, as well as a great part of the loose soil of extensive
strata in hilly countries and plains. Untransported soil is generally
thinner than the transported; and of the two the latter is that which
most frequently occurs in low land. The first kind of soil, the
untransported, is found to be more or less similar, in its principal
constituent parts, to the rocks from which it has originated; in the
other kind, the transported soil, on the contrary, the parts which
were originally in connection, have been variously separated and
mixed, by the agency of the powers by which its transportation was
effected.

The quantity and quality of the soil derived from the disintegration
of rocks, must depend upon the nature of these rocks; its quality
being determined by the constituent parts of the rock from which it
originated, and its quantity being proportioned to the greater or
less degree in which the rock may resist decomposition.

The disintegration of rocks, and their conversion into loose earth,
are partly _mechanical_, and partly _chemical_. The principal
mechanical powers, by which disintegration is effected, are, _1st_,
The weight of the loosened parts; _2d_, Water, not merely in its
liquid and mobile state, but also, and that chiefly, in the state
of ice; _3d_, The roots of vegetables in general, and especially of
trees. These powers usually act more or less in conjunction, and the
effects produced by this union are in many cases almost incredible.

The disintegration of rocks commences in those parts where the
power of cohesion is least energetic. Rents take place owing to the
unequal attraction of parts, and also in the direction of planes,
in which heterogeneous parts are in contact; and in this manner
the original structure of rocks determines the first steps of
their disintegration. Water, which enters into the minute fissures
of rocks, by the power of capillary attraction, is expanded by
congelation, and thus overcomes the cohesion of parts, and produces
rents. The roots of trees acting as wedges, produce the same
effect in a wonderful degree, a phenomenon which has been so well
illustrated by Annæus Seneca, in his Natural Questions. “Let us
consider,” says he, “how great a power is exerted by the most minute
seeds, which, although at first small as they are, can scarcely
find a place in the crevices of rocks, yet at length grow to such
a size as to rend asunder vast rocks, overturning crags and cliffs,
by the power of their very minute and delicate roots.” The parts
of rocks loosened by these powers, are entirely separated, and are
carried to a great or less distance, by streams of water, and in
the higher regions, by the power of winds. In cliffs and precipices
which have been formed by the splitting of masses of rock, effected
in the manner above described, the loosened parts often lose their
stability; and, following the direction of gravity, fall to the
ground, an effect which has also been described by Seneca in another
place. “Nor is it alone probable,” says he, “that rocks are split
asunder by their mere weight, but also when streams of water are
carried over them, the continual moisture works into the joinings of
the rock, and daily takes away a portion of the connecting matter,
and, if I may so speak, abrades the skin by which it is contained.
At length, in the course of ages, this gradual detrition so much
diminishes the supporting parts, that they can no longer sustain the
weight. Then masses of vast size fall down, and the rock tumbling
from its ancient seat, overwhelms whatever lies below.” The cohesion
of some rocks, especially argillaceous ones, is so slight, and their
porosity so great, that their smallest parts imbibe water, and are
sensibly softened by it, an effect which is much assisted by the
freezing of the water. This mechanical change is experienced by the
different varieties of common clay, slate-clay, and some other rocks.

_Chemical_ powers often act in conjunction with mechanical ones, in
breaking down rocks, the former, the chemical, frequently finishing
what had been begun by the latter. Mechanical powers only changing
the _aggregation_ of rocks, may break down their parts to a certain
size, according to their different nature; chemical powers, again,
which change the _nature_ of substances, destroy the connection of
the minute parts of rocks. When chemical is preceded by mechanical
action, it is much assisted by it. The latter has a much more general
effect, as all rocks are subjected to its influence; chemical
decomposition, on the other hand, acts only upon some rocks, and in
these only upon certain parts. The chemical decomposition of rocks is
chiefly effected by the oxygen of atmospheric air and of water; but
we are also persuaded, that certain cryptogamic plants, intimately
attached to the surface of stones, Lichens namely, assist in their
destruction.

The oxygen of air and water can only affect the constituent parts
of rocks, which have a great affinity to it, such as the iron and
sulphur forming pyrites, oxydulous iron, oxydulous manganese, or
the same substances mixed with earth or carbonic acid, charcoal and
bitumen. Very solid and compact masses of rock, such as greenstone,
which are not easily affected by other means, are sometimes corroded
by the chemical change of the pyrites contained in them, by which
it is converted into a hydrate of iron[414]. In certain other
rocks, which are also readily broken down by mechanical agents,
clay-slate for instance, the disintegration is much accelerated by
the decomposition of the pyrites. The oxydulous iron of felspar is
commonly converted by decomposition into a hydrate or ochre. The
carbonate of iron, as well as of manganese, which sometimes occur
in rocks, in limestone rock for example, are deprived of carbonic
acid by the oxidation of their bases. Charcoal and bitumen, which
are sometimes contained in rocks, limestone and argillaceous ones
for example, are dissipated by the contact of air, so that rocks
which were originally of a dark colour, lose it, and become whitish.
Water, as a chemical agent, contributes so much to the decomposition
of certain rocks, that, either in a pure state, or in combination
with carbonic acid, it dissolves their parts, of which gypsum and
limestone afford examples. In certain other minerals, in felspar
for instance, a separation of the constituent parts, produced by
the contact of air and water, is observed, the proximate cause of
which has not hitherto been discovered. The mass is decomposed, its
lamellar structure is converted into an earthy nature, the alkali
contained in the felspar is extracted by the water, a mineral is
produced, to which the Chinese have given the name of _Kaolin_, and
which is adapted for the manufacture of porcelain. Granite and gneiss
occur in some districts, the felspar of which is decomposed in this
manner through the whole mass,--a circumstance which must be of great
importance in regard to the formation of productive soil.

Cryptogamic plants covering the surface of rocks, and thriving well
in this situation, where more perfect vegetables could not grow,
seem also destined to promote the chemical decomposition of rocks,
an effect which they produce both directly and indirectly. As they
imbibe the water of the atmosphere, and retain it like a sponge,
they keep up a constant application of this substance to the rock,
and in this manner contribute indirectly to its decomposition. There
are some cryptogamic plants also, which consume certain portions of
the rocks with which they are in contact, corrode their surface, and
destroy the cohesion of its parts, effects which may chiefly be seen
in certain cryptogamic plants attached to calcareous rocks. In this
manner one sort of vegetation prepares a place for another, and the
most imperfect vegetables are subservient to the growth of the more
perfect.

After premising thus much, we shall now proceed to the examination
of the principal rocks, in so far as regards their connection with
the formation of productive soil, beginning with those which resist
decomposition in the highest degree, and ending with those which are
the most conducive to the formation of loose earth and soil.

In the first class, we place those rocks which experience no
chemical decomposition, in so far as regards their principal mass,
and whose cohesion of parts is so great that mechanical powers can
only open their natural fissures to a greater extent, and thus break
them down into fragments. Of this kind are _vitreous lava_, _pure
quartz_, _compact quartz_, _flinty slate_, and _porphyry with a
siliceous basis_. On mountains consisting of these rocks, scarcely
any productive soil is found, and frequently none at all. They are
usually characterized by sterile rocks and cliffs, the bases of which
are covered with innumerable rough fragments of stones, retaining
their sharp edges for a great length of time, the heaps of which
seldom produce any thing else than mosses, which frequently cover the
interstices of fragments, occasionally a few grasses, and sometimes
a solitary shrub or tree. Examples, Bennevis, Paps of Jura, and
Morven Hills. Of all rocks, vitreous volcanic productions are the
least capable of contributing to the formation of productive soil.
Their dark coloured tracts descend from volcanic mountains to the
valleys in frightful sterility, the chinks of their rugged masses
scarcely affording sufficient water for the roots of mosses[415].
To the second class we refer _compact limestone_, a rock which
contributes extensively to the formation of the solid crust of
the globe. In so far as regards its principal constituent parts,
it is not affected by atmospheric water or air; but, as its parts
have but comparatively little cohesion, and are usually separated
in a considerable degree by minute fissures, they are more liable
to be broken down and crumbled by mechanical powers, than those
of the rocks belonging to the first class. In districts where the
fundamental rock is limestone, the layers of loose original soil
or subsoil are thin, and filled with numerous fragments. As the
soil arising from the disintegration of limestone contains a great
proportion of calcareous matter, it is neither favourable to the
growth of plants in general, nor to that of the greater number of
vegetables which are the object of cultivation. Soil of this kind
is too hot, dry and stony; hence the reason why districts, in which
pure limestone rocks predominate, are often sterile. The case is
different, however, where a portion of clay enters as an ingredient
into the composition of calcareous rocks, for here the soil is
usually very productive; or, where rocks of a different nature
alternate with masses of pure limestone, having a greater capability
than it of contributing to the formation of productive soil. When
water, containing carbonic acid, passes through limestone rocks, it
dissolves portions of it, and deposits them in other places, by which
the decomposition of the limestone and the formation of loose earth
may be in some measure accelerated.

To the third class belong _chalk_ and _gypsum_; which, in so far
as regards their decomposition by chemical means, are of a similar
nature with compact limestone; but possessing a much slighter
cohesion of parts, are more liable to be broken down by mechanical
means. Water also dissolves gypsum, and thus assists in its
disintegration. The soil arising from these rocks resembles that
produced by compact limestone, which explains the want of fertility,
observable in certain gypseous tracts of the North of Germany, and in
the chalk districts of France. The fertility which we see in certain
places where chalk is the fundamental rock, as in the Isle of Wight,
Island of Rugen, &c. is to be attributed as well to argillaceous and
marly strata alternating with the chalk, as to the greater humidity
of the atmosphere, by which the dryness and heat of the soil are
diminished.

In the fourth class we place certain rocks, composed of different
minerals, but compact in appearance, which, although they resist
mechanical disintegration, are yet subject to chemical action, and
are, by means of it, converted into a loose, compound productive
soil. Of this kind are _basalt_, and some other rocks very nearly
allied to it.

To the fifth class we refer those rocks which have a crystalline,
granular, or slaty texture. The mutual adhesion of the heterogeneous
parts, of which they consist, being, in general, inconsiderable,
they are easily broken down by mechanical means, and thus contribute
in a high degree to the formation of productive soil. The felspar
contained in these rocks, on account of the chemical decomposition
which it readily undergoes, has a great effect not only upon the
quantity, but also the fertility of the soil produced. The quartz,
on the contrary, as well as the mica and hornblende, long resist
chemical decomposition; they are, however, useful in this respect,
that the argillaceous soil arising from the felspar, has its
tenacity diminished; and is consequently rendered better adapted for
vegetation, by being intermixed with them. _Granite_ and _gneiss_,
of all truly granular crystalline rocks, afford the deepest and
most fertile soil, aptly compounded of different substances,
sufficiently loose in its aggregation, and capable of retaining the
necessary moisture. Soil arising from the disintegration of granite
is unfavourable to vegetation only, where the rock abounds much in
quartz, and where the superfluous water cannot run off, and so gives
rise to marshes, which produce only vegetables of inferior quality;
of which we have examples in the granite districts of Aberdeen. In
such places as these, peat is easily generated, which, although of
great use, is yet much less advantageous than wood. _Syenite_, which
abounds much in hornblende, is inferior to granite, with respect to
the production of fertile soil; and primitive _greenstone_, which
resists disintegration and decomposition in the highest degree,
occupies the last place in this class. In the series of slaty
crystalline rocks, _mica-slate_ is next to gneiss: but on account of
the small proportion of felspar which enters into its composition,
it does not afford so productive a soil.

In the sixth class may be placed the slaty rocks, whether simple,
or intimately compounded, which do not readily undergo chemical
decomposition, but which easily separate at their natural fissures,
and are mechanically resolved into an earthy mass, forming a paste
with water, circumstances which are observed chiefly in _clay-slate_,
a rock of much importance in the formation of productive soil,
usually passing into a clayey sort of earth.

To the seventh class belong the conglomerated rocks, whose parts
indeed undergo very little, if any, chemical change, but are easily
separated by mechanical means, and are thus converted into a
gravelly, sandy, or earthy mass. Of this kind are _greywacke_, _old
red sandstone_, and sandstones of various kinds. Much diversity is
exhibited by these rocks, with regard to the facility with which they
undergo disintegration, as well as the nature of the soil arising
from them; circumstances which chiefly depend upon the nature of the
cement, and its relation to the parts cemented. The disintegration of
these rocks is the more easily effected that the cement is abundant,
and less intimately connected with the other parts, that is, the more
they depart from a crystalline nature; on which account greywacke
is less easily converted into soil, than the common varieties of
sandstone. By the decomposition of greywacke, a loose and fertile
soil is formed, containing particles of quartz and clay in due
proportion; on the other hand, by the decomposition of red sandstone,
a soil is frequently produced, abounding in argillaceous particles
impregnated with iron, and therefore stiff and cold. The _variegated
sandstone_, with a marly cement, not unfrequently affords a pretty
fertile soil; the _quadersandstein_, on the contrary, commonly
presents a sandy and arid soil.

Lastly, in the eighth class we shall place those rocks, whether
simple or intimately compounded, whose nature is so loose, or whose
parts are so separated, that they fall with great facility into an
earthy mass, and are also in part mechanically reduced by water. To
this class belong the different varieties of _marl_, _slate-clay_,
_basaltic_ and _volcanic tuffa_. These rocks, many of which are
extensively diffused, are of much importance in the formation of
productive soil, although the quality of the earth produced by them
varies much, according to their different natures. Slate-clay affords
an argillaceous soil; in earth produced by the decomposition of marl,
the clay is diminished in proportion to the greater abundance of the
calcareous or sandy parts; while a mixed and very fertile soil is
usually generated from basaltic and volcanic tufas.

The various relations which exist in the stratification and position
of rocks, have much influence in producing a diversity in the
soil formed immediately from their decomposition. This diversity
cannot be so great when different rocks of various ages occur in a
determinate order in horizontal strata; in which case, the uppermost
bed may exhibit a great extent of surface of the same nature. When,
on the other hand, strata of rocks of different natures, forms,
and dimensions, placed at different angles of inclination, and
in different directions, appear at the surface, it will easily
be understood how it may happen that the soil produced by their
decomposition may occur of very different qualities, in places
not very distant from each other. The manner in which the soil is
influenced by a difference in the arrangement and position of the
strata, will become evident, on comparing districts in which one
particular sort of rock lies beneath the surface in horizontal
strata, with others in which the solid substratum is composed of
various rocks differing in their inclination towards the horizon.
In districts of the former kind, the qualities of the soil vary
in general but little; in such as are of the latter kind, on the
contrary, they are often found extremely different. The great
diversity of soil seen in England, as well as in Germany, may,
in fact, be partly explained by the circumstance, that, in those
countries, the nature and position of the strata vary every where.
On the other hand, the great similarity which pervades the soil of
Southern Russia, is without doubt produced by a uniformity in the
position and inclination of the limestone which lies immediately
under the soil.

The nature of the principal mass of the strata usually exerts a
great degree of influence over the qualities of the soil. When the
solid substratum is sandstone, its effect upon the soil is, in
general, as evidently seen, though not perhaps in an equal degree,
as when it is marl. Exceptions, however, to this rule sometimes
occur; as, for instance, when the principal mass of a rock which
resists disintegration in a high degree contains beds that are
easily reduced to earth. This is the case with the shell-limestone
(muschelkalkstein) of Germany, the mountains of which are not
unfrequently covered with a clayey soil, which has not been produced
by the decomposition of the principal strata themselves, but by that
of the slate-clay and argillaceous marl alternating with them.

Hitherto we have considered untransported soil, or that produced
from the disintegration or decomposition of the subjacent rocks in
the places where it occurs; we have now to examine the relations
which exist between the subjacent rock, and the _transported soil_
lying upon it. The nature of the rock does not indeed influence,
excepting in a more remote degree, the transported soil, which has
been carried to a greater or less distance from the places of its
production, by the agency of moving powers, and again deposited of
various forms and compositions. However, it may often be plainly
seen, that the materials of this soil have been derived from
particular rocks, and that these rocks have exerted some degree of
influence over the formation and distribution of the transported
soil. The examination of these relations is of great importance,
because it is with secondary or transported soil that agriculture
is principally concerned. The varieties of transported soil depend
chiefly upon three circumstances: _1st_, The nature of the rocks from
which they are derived; _2dly_, The quality and effect of the moving
powers; _3dly_, The changes which they may have undergone after their
formation.

The origin of the materials which enter into the composition of
transported soil, has been already considered. From their difference
may be easily explained why soil generated from the debris of
primitive crystalline rocks has different qualities from soil which
has been derived from strata of sandstone or marl.

The principal powers which contribute to the transportation of soil,
are, The weight of loose masses, ice, and water. The weight of loose
masses is a cause of transportation which we frequently see in
operation. By it the huge cones of debris at the base and upon the
declivities of precipices and mountains, are gradually carried off
toward the bottom of the valleys; a phenomenon which can scarcely any
where be better seen than in the valleys of the Alps, where mountains
sometimes occur evidently consisting of debris, and clothed with
trees and shrubs, or covered with pastures, the masses of which are
gradually moved, as upon inclined planes, by the action of the water
which percolates through them.

Ice effects the transportation of rocks and debris, with a power
which nothing can resist. This is no where more conspicuous than
among the glaciers of the Alps, by the falling of which great heaps
of stones and rubbish are produced. The transportation of large
stones by means of ice may also be seen in our mountain torrents in
winter. Huge masses of stone, scattered over the plains of the north
of Germany and the islands of Denmark, and often very prejudicial to
agriculture, whose northern origin appears to be established, may
have been carried by the same powerful agent from Finland, Sweden and
Norway, into those countries, at a time when the plains of northern
Germany, with the other flat districts along the shores of the
Baltic, were still covered by the waves of the ocean.

In the formation of transported soil, water usually exerts a great
degree of power. By means of it, not only are vast masses transported
to the greatest distances, but their parts are at the same time
crumbled down and mingled together. To these operations are to be
attributed the various terminations of different soils at horizontal
distances, as well as the different alternations of their strata at
vertical ones. The power of water in the formation of transported
soil varies, not only according to the different inclinations of its
channel, but also in regard to the form, size, and weight of the
parts carried off by it; for which reason, in the formation of such
soils, the same phenomena take place on a large scale, that we see
on a smaller, in performing the operations of breaking and washing
the ores of metals. For the same reason that, in these processes,
the larger particles subside, while the smaller are propelled, from
which again the heavier particles of ore are sooner deposited than
the lighter; in plains in the vicinity of a mountain, covered with
transported soil, stones and debris are usually seen first, then
earth, clay, and sand mixed together, and farther on, finer sand,
with strata of clay.

Transported or secondary soil, produced by water, according to the
mode of its formation, is divided into four classes, viz.--1. Soil of
Valleys; 2. River Soil; 3. Lake Soil; 4. Marine Soil.

1. _Soil of Valleys._--It is washed down by rain and snow water,
and partly also produced by rivulets, which carry off the loose
parts from the declivities of mountains to the plains. The nature of
this soil in general clearly shews the nearness of its origin. Its
depth is always greatest in the bottom of the valley, and gradually
diminishes toward the declivities of the mountains. The curvature
of the different strata is usually accommodated to the irregularity
of its external form, so that when a section is made of them, they
exhibit a series of parallel curved lines.

2. _River Soil_, or the soil found in the beds and banks of rivers,
and which is produced by the continual propelling power of large
rivers. To this class belong two different kinds; _1st_, Soil
containing pebbles of various sizes, produced by the power of
torrents in the vicinity of mountains; and, _2d_, Earth or mud,
deposited in the beds of rivers, in places at a distance from
mountains. A peculiarity of river soil in general is, that it is much
extended in length, while its breadth is comparatively but small.
The different layers have neither so much irregularity as in the
preceding kind, nor are they so precise in arrangement as in the
following.

3. _Lake Soil_, deposited at the bottom of still water. To this class
is to be referred the soil in the bottoms of valleys, which had
formerly been lakes, either separate or connected with rivers. The
horizontal dimensions of this kind of soil are often more or less
equal. Sometimes, indeed, the length is greater than the breadth;
not, however, in the same degree as in soil deposited in the bed
of rivers. The surface is usually plane, and the different strata
alternate in a parallel manner.

4. _Marine Soil_, that is to say, the mud of the ancient ocean.
It is the greatest of all in its extent, both in a horizontal and
a vertical direction. Its surface is more or less undulated, very
seldom even. Its masses are both very thick and very uniform in
composition. Different and alternating strata, however, do occur,
whose forms and dimensions are usually more or less regular, and
which are not unfrequently undulated.

Soil, after being formed, is acted upon by natural powers in various
ways. The atmosphere is perpetually modifying it; rivers, waves, and
winds, act here and there upon its surface, and alter its external
form; water introduces into it the substances which it holds in
solution. The different constituent parts of soil act upon each
other chemically, and in this manner new decompositions and mixtures
are produced; and this chemical change is increased by the action
of vegetables, as well as of bodies deriving their origin from both
organic kingdoms.

From what has been said of the relations existing between the
masses of which the solid crust of the globe is composed, and the
loose earth or soil by which it is covered, it appears evident
enough (Hausmann concludes) that they have great influence over its
formation and nature, and therefore upon the more perfect vegetables,
and especially those which are the objects of cultivation; and
that although the fertility of the soil is much increased by these
vegetables themselves, yet the first foundation of their vigour is
derived from the disintegration and decomposition of rocks. If this
be correct, the constitution of the solid crust of the earth has a
much more extended influence. For, by preparing a habitation for the
greater and most important parts of plants, it also exerts a high
degree of influence upon the animals which derive their sustenance
from them, and, at the same time, affords the means of subsistence to
man[416].


NOTE.

ACCOUNT OF THE IRISH ELK, FOSSIL ELEPHANT OR MAMMOTH, AND THE
MASTODON.

As the Irish Elk, the Fossil Elephant or Mammoth, and the Mastodon,
are among the most remarkable of the fossil and extinct species of
quadrupeds mentioned in the preceding pages of this work, we, with
the view of farther gratifying the curiosity of our readers, now lay
before them the following additional details from the writings of
Cuvier, Goldfuss, and others.


1. _Fossil Elk of Ireland_, Cervus megaceros[417].

(_Noticed at_ p. 286.)

One of the most magnificent of the bisulcated animals met with in
a fossil state in the British Islands is the Elk of Ireland, the
_Cervus megaceros_. Bones and horns of vast size of this species are
almost daily dug out of the bogs and marl pits of Ireland. Similar
remains have been met with in alluvial strata in Britain, and also in
the Isle of Man.

“So frequently do these remains,” Mr Hart remarks, “occur in most
parts of Ireland, that there are very few of the peasantry who are
not, either from personal observation or report, acquainted with
them by the familiar name of the horns of the ‘old deer.’ Indeed in
some parts of the country they have been found so often, that far
from being regarded as objects of any extraordinary interest, they
have been either thrown aside as lumber, or applied to the commonest
economical uses[418].

“I have made diligent but fruitless search for an account of the
particular time when any of these remains were first discovered. As
they generally occur in marl, it is most likely that they did not
begin to attract attention until the advanced state of agriculture
had created an increased demand for that mineral as a manure. We can
very easily imagine the astonishment which the appearance of horns so
large, and of such strange form, must have excited in the minds of
those who discovered them for the first time, and how readily they
obtained a place in the hall of some adjoining mansion, where they
were deposited as an ornament of great curiosity, from the contrast
which they formed with the horns of the species of deer known at
present. In this way we may account for the preservation of so many
specimens as are found in the possession of the gentry in different
parts of this country.

“Very lately an entire skeleton of the Irish Elk was dug up in that
country. The following statement of the circumstances under which
the bones were found, with their geological position, was laid before
the Dublin Society, in a letter from Archdean Maunsell to the Right
Hon. George Knox.

  “_Middleton Lodge, March 8. 1825._

  “MY DEAR SIR,

  “I deferred replying to your letter of the 1st, as it was my
  intention to proceed to Limerick in a few days, and I was anxious
  to look over some notes I had taken, and which I left there, of
  the circumstances connected with the discovery of the fossil
  remains which the Royal Dublin Society have received. As I have,
  however, been obliged to postpone my departure for several days,
  I can no longer defer offering my best thanks for the kind manner
  in which you have received the conjectures which I formed upon a
  subject to which my attention was directed, by having fortunately
  been present before the bones were disturbed from the situation in
  which they had lain during a period which I apprehend it would not
  be easy to define. I am sensible that any consideration which may
  have been attached to my observations should be attributed to the
  interest which the subject itself is calculated to excite, rather
  than to any ability of mine to do it justice. The opinion which
  I took the liberty of communicating to you was formed after some
  consideration, and although I had not the most remote idea of its
  being worthy of any attention, I can have no objection to your
  making any use of it which you may conceive expedient. There is, I
  conceive, much interesting material for speculation, resulting from
  the discovery of these fossil remains, and the first that naturally
  occurs is the manner in which the animals were destroyed, and
  the bones so singularly preserved. I stated, in the hasty sketch
  which I gave you of my theory upon this point, that I apprehended
  they must have been destroyed by some overwhelming deluge, that
  they were probably drowned upon the hills where they had taken
  refuge, as the waters rose, and that, as they subsided, they were
  drawn from thence into the valley in which they were found; that
  the agitation of the waters had occasioned such a dispersion of
  the bones, when the ligaments dissolved, as would account for
  their having been scattered in the way in which they were found,
  and that the deposite of shell marl, with which I supposed the
  water to have been turbid, had so completely protected them from
  atmospheric influence as to prevent their subsequent decomposition.
  To enable you to form some estimate of the reasonableness of this
  supposition, it is necessary that I should endeavour to explain the
  situation, &c. of the valley and the adjoining hills. The valley
  in which the remains were found contains about twenty plantation
  acres, and the soil consists of a stratum of peat about a foot
  thick, immediately under this a stratum of shell-marl, varying
  from 1½ to 2½ feet in thickness; in this many of the shells retain
  their original colour and figure, and are not marine; under the
  marl there is a bed of light blue clay; through this one of my
  workmen drove an iron rod, in several places, twelve feet deep,
  without meeting opposition. Most of the bones and heads, eight in
  number, were found in the marl; many of them, however, appeared to
  rest on the clay, and to be merely covered by the marl. The remains
  were disposed in such a manner as to prevent the possibility of
  ascertaining the exact component parts of each skeleton; in some
  places portions were found removed many yards from others, and in
  no instance were two bones found lying close to each other. Their
  position also was singular; in one place two heads were found, with
  the antlers entwined in each other, and immediately under them a
  large blade-bone; in another, a very large head was discovered, and
  although a most diligent search was made, no part of the skeleton
  found; within some hundred yards, in another, the jaw-bones were
  found, and not the head. The conclusion which, I conceive, may
  fairly be deduced from such a position of the various parts of
  the animals is, that there must have been some powerful agent
  employed in dispersing them after their death; and as I consider
  it impossible that their own gravity could have been sufficient to
  sink them through the various strata, I conceive these must have
  originated subsequently to the dispersion of the bones. I also
  think, that, if they had been exposed for any time to atmospheric
  influence, they never could have been preserved in their present
  extraordinary perfection.

  “The hills immediately adjoining this valley are composed of
  limestone, with a covering of rich mould of various degrees of
  thickness. One of them, whose base is about thirty acres, rises
  directly from the edge of the valley, with sides very precipitous,
  and in one place perfectly perpendicular, of naked limestone. In
  every part of this hill the superficies comprises as much stone as
  mould; on the side nearly opposite, the hill is equally high, but
  the sides not so steep, and the covering of mould thicker; on the
  other sides the ground only rises in some degree (twenty or thirty
  feet perhaps), and consists of a thin mould, and immediately under
  a _very hard_ limestone gravel. Indeed, except where limestone
  forms the substratum, this is the character of all the soil in the
  vicinity except the Corkasses, which are evidently alluvial. I am
  fully aware, that, assuming the destruction of the animals to have
  been occasioned by a flood, they would naturally have retreated
  from the water to the hills, and that, as they probably met their
  fate there, their remains should have been discovered on the summit
  of the hills, and not in the valley, particularly as one of them
  is perfectly flat on the top, which contains six or seven acres. I
  apprehend that the remains of many of them were deposited on the
  tops of the hills; but as they have _now_ only a slight covering
  of mould, not sufficient to cover a small dog, they were formerly
  perfectly bare; and as they were thus devoid of the means of
  protecting the remains from the atmosphere, whatever was left there
  soon became decomposed, and resolved into portions of the mould,
  which is now to be found on the hills. This remark I conceive also
  to be applicable to the soil with the substratum of limestone
  gravel, which affords quite as little material for preserving the
  bones as the hills do.

  “It is material that I should observe, that of eight heads which
  we found, none were without antlers; the variety in character also
  was such as to induce me to imagine, that possibly the females were
  not devoid of these appendages. Unfortunately, however, from the
  difficulty of raising them, being saturated with water, and as soft
  as wet brown paper, only three were at all perfect.

  “Having now disposed of these antediluvians, a question naturally
  arises, how it happens that the fossil remains of no other animals
  were found, when the same fate probably overwhelmed every existing
  creature? Could deer have been the only living beings at that
  period? Was Ireland part of a great continent when this catastrophe
  occurred, and were these unfortunates the first emigrants to our
  Isle from that great centre from whence the globe was supplied with
  occupants, and did they perish before other animals less influenced
  by enterprise, and less endowed with physical strength, could have
  followed their example? These problems I confess myself unable to
  solve, and shall not presume to obtrude my many reveries upon this
  and other points, which have originated in the discovery of a few
  bones, upon those who I know are so much better competent to form a
  sound opinion. I shall, I hope, be able to send the antlers, which
  are very fine, on the 15th of this month.

  “If you have a desire to make any use of this letter, I can only
  say I have no objection. I remain, dear Sir, with feelings of great
  respect,

      “Yours most truly,

      “WILLIAM W. MAUNSELL.”

Of this skeleton, the most perfect hitherto found, the following
interesting description is given by Mr Hart, in his memoir.

  “This magnificent skeleton is perfect in every single bone of the
  framework which contributes to form a part of its general outline:
  the spine, the chest, the pelvis, and the extremities, are all
  complete in this respect; and, when surmounted by the head, and
  beautifully expanded antlers, which extend out to a distance of
  nearly six feet on either side, forms a splendid display of the
  reliques of the former grandeur of the animal kingdom, and carries
  back the imagination to a period when whole herds of this noble
  animal wandered at large over the face of the country.

  To proceed with a description of the several parts of this specimen
  in detail, I shall commence with the horns, which give the animal
  its chief characteristic feature.

  _The horns._--That the description of these may be the more
  intelligible, I will first explain the terms which I mean to apply
  to their several parts. Each horn consists of the socket or root,
  the burr or coronary circle, the beam or shaft, the palm and the
  antlers.

  The socket or root is the part of the horn which grows out of
  the frontal bone, and which is never shed; it is smooth, of a
  brown colour, an inch and half in length, and eleven inches three
  quarters in circumference; in the animal’s lifetime it was covered
  by the skin. The coronary or bead-like circle, or burr, is a ring
  of small, hard, whitish prominences, resembling a string of pearls,
  which encircles the junction of the socket with the part of the
  horn which falls annually from the heads of all deer.

  The beam or shaft extends outwards, with a curvature whose
  concavity looks downwards, and backwards. This part is nearly
  cylindrical at its root, and its length equals about one-fourth of
  that of the whole horn; its outer end is spread out and flattened
  on its upper surface, and is continuous with the palm, which
  expands outwards in a fan-like form, the outer extremity of which
  measures two feet ten inches across, being its broadest part.
  Where the beam joins the palm the horn undergoes a kind of twist,
  the effect of which on the palm is, to place its edges above and
  below, and its surfaces anterior and posterior; the anterior
  surface is convex, and looks outwards; the posterior is concave,
  and its surface looks towards that of the opposite palm. Such is
  the position of the horns, when the head is so placed that the
  zygomatic arch is parallel to the horizon, as it would be during
  progression, or whilst the animal stands in an easy posture.

  The antlers are the long pointed processes which project from
  the horns, two of which grow from the beam anteriorly; the first
  comes off immediately from the root, and is directed downwards,
  overhanging the orbit; this is called the brow antler, which, in
  this specimen, is divided into two points at its extremity[419].

  The other antler, which comes off from the beam, we may call the
  sur-antler: in this specimen it consists of a broad plate or palm,
  concave on its upper surface, horizontal in its direction, and
  forked into two points anteriorly,--an appearance which I have not
  observed in any other specimen of upwards of forty which I have
  seen, nor do I find it marked in any of the plates of those bones
  extant.

  There is one antler given off posteriorly from the junction of the
  beam with the palm: it runs directly backwards parallel to the
  corresponding one of the opposite horn. The inferior edge of the
  palm beyond this runs outwards and backwards: it is obtuse and
  thick, and its length is two feet six inches. From the anterior
  and external borders of each palm there come off six long pointed
  antlers. None of these are designated by any particular name. The
  number of the antlers of both sides taken together is twenty-two.

  The surface of the horns is of a lightish colour, resembling that
  of the marl in which they were found; they are rough, and marked
  with several arborescent grooves, where the ramifications of the
  arteries by which they had been nourished during their growing
  state were lodged. The horns, with the head attached, weighed
  eighty-seven pounds avoirdupois. The distance between their extreme
  tips in a right line is nine feet two inches.

  _Head._--The forehead is marked by a raised ridge extended between
  the roots of the horns; anterior to this, between the orbits and
  the root of the nose, the skull is flat; there is a depression on
  each side in front of the root of the horn and over the orbit,
  capable of lodging the last joint of the thumb, at the bottom of
  which is the superciliary hole, large enough to give passage to
  an artery proportioned to the size of the horns. Inferior to the
  orbit we have the lachrymatory fossa, and the opening left by the
  deficiency of bone common to all deer, and remarkable for being
  smaller in this than in any other species.

  Below the orbits the skull grows suddenly narrower, and the upper
  parts of the nasal bones become contracted by a depression on
  either side, at the lower part of which is the infra-orbitar hole.
  The opening of the nares is oval, being five inches long by three
  broad, the greatest breadth being in the centre. From the roots of
  the horns to the occipital spine measures three inches and an half;
  the occiput descends at a right angle with this, being three inches
  deep to the foramen magnum: the greatest breadth of the occiput is
  eight inches. The temporal fossæ approach to within two inches of
  each other behind the horns.

  _Teeth._--They do not differ from those of animals of the
  ruminating class. The incisors were not found, having dropped out;
  there is no mark of canine teeth; the molares are not much worn
  down, and are twenty-four in number.

  The skeleton measures, from the end of the nose to the tip of
  the tail, ten feet ten inches. The spine consists of twenty-six
  vertebræ, viz. seven cervical, thirteen dorsal, and six lumbar. The
  size of the cervical vertebræ greatly exceeds that of the other
  classes, and the spines of the dorsal rise to a foot in height. The
  necessity of these bones being so marked is obvious, considering
  the strong cervical ligament, and powerful muscles, required for
  supporting and moving a head which, at a moderate calculation, must
  have sustained a weight of three quarters of a hundred of solid
  bony matter.

  The extremities are in proportion to the different parts of the
  trunk, and present a conformation favourable to a combination of
  great strength with fleetness.

  It is not the least remarkable circumstance connected with these
  bones, that they are in such a high state of preservation as to
  present all the lines and impressions of the parts which had been
  attached to them in the recent state. Indeed, if we examine them
  as compared with the bones of an animal from which all the softer
  parts have been separated by maceration, the only perceptible
  differences in their physical properties are, that they are a
  little heavier, a degree harder, that their surface is brown, and
  that they all, with the exception of the horns, present a polished
  appearance, which is owing to the periosteum having been preserved,
  and still remaining to cover them, as was discovered when they were
  chemically examined.

  The existence of fat or adipocire in the shaft of one of the
  bones mentioned by Archdeacon Maunsell, and which I saw in his
  possession, is a thing for which it is extremely difficult to
  account, as it occurred but in one solitary instance, and it did
  not appear that this bone was at all differently circumstanced from
  the rest. Those which I had an opportunity of examining, by boring
  holes in them, were hollow, and contained, for the most part, only
  a small quantity of black animal earth.

  Mr Stokes found, in a rib of this animal,


  Animal matter,                  42.87
  Phosphates with some Fluates,   43.45
  Carb., Lime                      9.14
  Oxides,                          1.02
  Silica,                          1.14
  Water and loss,                  2.38
                                 ------
                                 100.00

  Dr Apjohn of Dublin made the following observations with regard to
  the animal matter in the bones:

  ‘The bone was subjected for two days to the action of dilute
  muriatic acid. When examined at the end of this period, it had
  become as flexible as a recent bone submitted to the action of
  the same solvent. The periosteum was in some parts puffed out by
  carbonic acid gas, disengaged from the bone, and appeared to be in
  a state of perfect soundness.

  ‘To a portion of the solution of the bone in the muriatic acid some
  infusion of galls was added, which caused a copious precipitate of
  a dun colour. This proved to be tannate of gelatine, mixed with a
  small portion of the tannate and gallate of iron.

  ‘The cartilage and gelatine, therefore, so far from being
  destroyed, had not been perceptibly altered by time.’”

Until Baron Cuvier published his account of these remains[420], they
were generally believed to have belonged to the same species as the
moose deer or elk of North America, an opinion which appears to have
been first advanced by Dr Thomas Molyneux in 1697[421], and which
depends principally on the exaggerated description of that animal
given by Josselyn in his account of two voyages to New England,
published in 1674, in which he states that it is sometimes twelve
feet high, with horns of two fathoms wide! This was the more readily
believed by the learned Doctor, as it tended to confirm him in a
favourite theory which he seems to have entertained, that Ireland had
once been joined to the New Continent.

But the assertions of Josselyn regarding the size of the American
moose have not been confirmed by the testimony of later travellers,
from whose observations it is now clearly ascertained that the only
large species of deer inhabiting the northern parts of America are
the wapiti or Canadian stag (_Cervus canadensis_), the rein-deer (_C.
Tarandus_), and the moose or elk (_C. Alces_).

The peculiar branching of the brow antlers of the rein-deer, and
the rounded horns of the wapiti[422], are characters sufficient
to prevent us confounding either of these animals with the fossil
species.

The palmate form of the horns of the elk gave greater probability to
the opinion of its specific identity with the fossil animal.

A little attention, however, to a few circumstances, will shew a most
marked difference between them.

First, as to size, the difference is very remarkable, it not being
uncommon to find the fossil horns ten feet between the extreme
tips[423], while the largest elk’s horns never measure four feet.
This measurement in a pair in the Museum of the Royal Dublin Society,
is three feet seven inches: the largest pair seen by Pennant in the
house of the Hudson’s Bay Company, measured thirty-four inches[424].

The horn of the elk has two palms, a lesser one which grows forward
from the front of the beam, where the principal palm begins to
expand. This is called brow antler by Cuvier, but it corresponds in
situation rather to the sur-antler, there being, properly speaking,
no brow antler attached to the root of the beam. The elk has no
posterior antler similar to that of the fossil animal, nor does its
beam take a similar arched direction, but runs more directly outwards.

Cuvier remarks, that the palm of the fossil horn increases in breadth
as it extends outwardly, while that of the elk is broadest next the
beam.

The palm of the elk’s horn is directed more backwards, while the
fossil one extends more in the lateral direction. The antlers of the
elk are shorter and more numerous than those of the fossil animals.

As the horns of the fossil animal exceed in size those of the elk,
so, on the contrary, does the skull of the latter exceed in size
that of the former; the largest heads of the fossil species not
exceeding one foot nine inches in length, while the head of the elk
is frequently two feet. The fossil head is broader in proportion;
its length being to its breadth as two to one; in the elk they are
as three to one, according to Parkinson.[425] The breadth of the
skull between the roots of the horns is but four inches in the fossil
skulls; in that of the elk in the Society’s Museum it is 6½ inches.

Cuvier thinks it probable that the females of the fossil species had
horns[426], an opinion to which I am very much disposed to subscribe,
from having observed that these parts present differences in size and
strength, which appear not to be dependent on differences of age.
For instance, the teeth of the specimen in Trinity College are much
more worn down, and the sutures of the skull are more effaced than
in the specimen described in this paper; yet the horns of the latter
are much more concave, and more expanded, than those of the former;
and on comparing a single horn of each of these specimens together,
that belonging to the Society exceeds the other by nearly a sixth
in the length, and little less than a third in the breadth; it is
not, therefore, unlikely that the animal whose horns were larger and
more curved was a male. Something similar to this is observed in the
rein-deer, both sexes of which have horns, but with this difference,
that they are smaller and less branched in the female. Hence we find
that this animal possessed characters of its own sufficient to prove
it of a species as distinct from the moose or elk as this latter
species is from the rein-deer or any other. Therefore, it is improper
to retain the name of elk or moose deer any longer: perhaps it might
be better called the _Cervus megaceros_, a name merely expressive of
the great size of its horns.

That this animal shed its head furniture periodically, is proved
by the occasional occurrence of detached horns having the smooth
convex surface below the burr, similar to what is observed on the
cast horns of all deer. Specimens of this are to be seen in the
Museum of Trinity College, and I possess one myself, of which I have
had a drawing made. As every other species of deer shed their horns
annually, there is no reason for supposing that that process occurred
at longer intervals in this.

It is a popular opinion with the Indians that the elk is subject to
epilepsy, with which he is frequently seized when pursued, and thus
rendered an easy prey to the hunters. Many naturalists affect to
disbelieve this account, without, however, assigning any sufficient
reason. But if it be considered, that, during the growth of the
horns, there must be a great increased determination of blood to
those parts, which are supplied by the frontal artery, a branch from
the internal carotid, it is quite conformable to well established
pathological principles, to suppose, that, after the horns are
perfected, and have ceased to receive any more blood, that fluid may
be determined to those internal branches of the carotid which supply
the brain, and establish a predisposition to such derangements of
its circulation as would produce epilepsy, or even apoplexy: if such
an effect were produced in consequence of the size of the horns in
the elk, it is reasonable to suppose that it prevailed in a greater
degree in the fossil animal whose horns were so much larger.

What could have been the use of these immense horns? It is quite
evident that they would prevent the animal making any progress
through a thickly wooded country, and that the long, tapering,
pointed antlers were totally unfit for lopping off the branches of
trees, a use to which the elk sometimes applies his horns[427], and
for which they seem well calculated, by having their antlers short
and strong, and set along the edge of the palm, somewhat resembling
the teeth of a saw in their arrangement. It would rather appear,
then, that they were given the animal as weapons for its protection,
a purpose for which they seem to have been admirably designed; for
their lateral expansion is such, that should occasion require the
animal to use them in his defence, their extreme tips would easily
reach beyond the remotest parts of his body; and if we consider the
powerful muscles for moving the head, whose attachments occupied
the extensive surfaces of the cervical vertebræ, with the length of
the lever afforded by the horns themselves, we can easily conceive
how he could wield them with a force and velocity which would deal
destruction to any enemy having the hardihood to venture within their
range.

From the formidable appearance of these horns, then, we must suppose
that their possessor was obnoxious to the aggressions of some
carnivorous animals of ferocious habits; and such we know to have
abounded in Ireland, as the wolf, and the celebrated Irish wolf dog.
Nor would it be surprising if limestone caves should be discovered
in this country, containing the remains of beasts of prey and their
victims, similar to the hyænas’ dens of Kirkdale, and other places,
respecting which such interesting researches have been lately laid
before the public by the geologists of this country and the Continent.

The absence of all record, or even tradition, respecting this
animal[428], naturally leads one to inquire whether man inhabited
this country during its existence? I think there is presumptive
evidence in the affirmative of this question, afforded by the
following circumstances. A head of this animal described by Professor
Goldfuss of Bonn, was discovered in Germany in the same drain with
several urns and stone hatchets; and in the 7th volume of the
Archæologia Britannica, is a letter of the Countess of Moira, giving
an account of a human body found in gravel, under eleven feet of peat
soaked in the bog water: it was in good preservation, and completely
clothed in antique garments of hair, which her ladyship thinks might
have been that of our fossil animal. But more conclusive evidence
on this question is derived from the appearance exhibited by a rib,
presented by Archdeacon Maunsell to the Royal Dublin Society, in
which I discovered an oval opening near its lower edge, the long
diameter of which is parallel to the length of the rib, its margin
is depressed on the outer, and raised on the inner surface, round
which there is an irregular effusion of callus. This opening had
been evidently produced by a sharp pointed instrument, which did not
penetrate so deep as to cause the animal’s death, but which remained
fixed in the opening for some length of time afterward; in fact it
was such an effect as would be produced by the head of an arrow
remaining in a wound after the shaft was broken off[429].

It is not improbable, therefore, that the chace of this gigantic
animal once supplied the inhabitants of this country with food and
clothing.

As to the causes which led to the extinction of this animal, whether
it was suddenly destroyed by the deluge, or by some other great
catastrophe of nature, or whether it was ultimately exterminated
by the continued and successful persecution of its pursuers, as
has nearly been the case with the red deer within the recollection
of many of the present generation, I profess myself unable to form
any decided opinion, owing to the limited number of facts as yet
collected on the subject. On some future occasion I may, perhaps,
be induced to revert to so interesting a topic, should I have
opportunities of discovering any thing worthy of communication.


The following Table exhibits a comparative view of the measurements
of different parts of the skeletons of the Cervus Megaceros in
the Museum of the Royal Dublin Society, and in the Royal Museum
of the University of Edinburgh, with some parts of the Moose. The
measurements of the Edinburgh specimen are taken from Professor
Jameson’s memoir on _organic remains_, in the Supplement to the
Encyclopedia Britannica.

                                 |R. D. Soc. |U. of Edin.| Moose
  HEAD.                          | Ft. In.   | Ft. In.   | Ft. In.
                                 |           |           |
  Length of the head,            |  1   8½   |  1   8¼   |
  Breadth of the skull between   |           |           |
    the orbits.                  |  0  10½   |  0   9    |
  Do. of skull at the occiput,   |  0   8    |           |
  Diameter of the orbit,         |  0   2⅜   |  0   2½   |
  Distance between infra orbitar |           |           |
    holes across the skull,      |  0   7    |           |
  Length of alveolar processes   |           |           |
    of the upper jaw,            |  0   6    |  0   6    |
  Length of lower jaw,           |  1   5½   |  0   3½   |
  Diam. of foramen magnum,       |  0   2    |           |
                                 |           |           |
  HORNS.                         |           |           |
                                 |           |           |
  Distance between the extreme   |           |           |
    tips, measured by the skull, | 11  10    |           |
  Ditto, in a straight line      |           |           |
    across,                      |  9   2    |  6   8    |  3   7
  Length of each horn,           |  5   9    |  5   1    |
  Greatest breadth of the palm,  |  2  10    |           |
  Length of the beam,            |  1   9    |           |  0   6½
  Ditto of brow antler,          |  0   8¾   |           |
  Ditto of sur-antler,           |  1   4    |           |
  Circumference of the beam      |           |           |
    at root of brow antler,      |  1   0¾   |           |  0   7½
                                 |           |           |
  BODY.                          |           |           |
                                 |           |           |
  Length of spine,               | 10  10    |  9   8    |
  Ditto of sternum,              |  2   4    |           |
  Height to the upper extremity  |           |           |
    of the dorsal spines,        |  6   6    |           |
  Ditto to the highest point     |           |           |
    of the tip of the horn,      | 10   4    |           |
                                 |           |           |
  EXTREMITIES.                   |           |           |
                                 |           |           |
  Greatest length of the scapula,|  1   6½   |           |
  Ditto breadth at the base,     |  0  10¾   |           |
  Ditto depth of its spine,      |  0   2¾   |           |
  Length of the humerus,         |  1   4    |  1   3½   |
  Ditto of ulna and radius,      |  1   8    |  1   6    |
  Ditto of carpus,               |  0   2¾   |  0   2    |
  Circumference of do.,          |  0   9½   |           |
  Length of metacarpus,          |  1   0½   |  1   0½   |
  Length of phalanges,           |  0   7    |  0   6½   |
  From anterior superior spine   |           |           |
    of one ileum to that of      |           |           |
    the other,                   |  1   4½   |  1   6½   |
  From anterior superior spine   |           |           |
    to the tuber ischii,         |  1   8    |  1   9½   |
  Greatest diameter of           |           |           |
    foramen ovale,               |  0   4    |  0   3    |
  Least do. of do.,              |  0   2¾   |  0   2¼   |
  Length of the femur,           |  1   6½   |  1   5½   |
  Ditto of tibia,                |  1   6    |  1   6    |
  Length of the tarsus,          |           |           |
    including the os calcis,     |  0   8    |           |
  Ditto of the metatarsus,       |  1   1¾   |  1   1¾   |


2. _Account of the Two Living Species of Elephant, and of the Extinct
Species of Elephant, or Mammoth._

1. ELEPHAS AFRICANUS.--_The Elephant with rounded skull, large ears,
grinders, having rhomboidal-shaped marks on their crown, which we
call the African Elephant_ (_Elephas Africanus_), is a quadruped
which has hitherto been found only inhabiting Africa. There can
be no doubt that it is this species which lives at the Cape, at
Senegal, and in Guinea; there is reason to believe that it also
occurs at Mosambique; but it is not certain that individuals of the
following species do not occur in this part of Africa. A sufficient
number of individuals have not been figured or compared, to know if
this species presents remarkable varieties. It is it that produces
the largest tusks. Both sexes are equally furnished with tusks, at
least at Senegal. _The natural number of the hoofs is four before,
and three behind._ The ear is very large, and covers the shoulder.
The skin is of a deep and uniform brown. This species has not been
domesticated in modern times. It appears, however, to have been tamed
by the ancients, who attributed to it less power and courage in
that state than to the following species; but their observations do
not appear to have been confirmed, at least in so far as refers to
magnitude. Its natural manners are not perfectly known; yet judging
of them by the notices of travellers, they appear to resemble in
every thing essential those of the following species.

2. ELEPHAS INDICUS.--_The Elephant with elongated skull, concave
forehead, small ears, grinders marked with undulating bands_, which
we call the _Indian Elephant_ (_Elephas Indicus_), is a quadruped
which has only been observed with certainty beyond the Indus. It
extends from both sides of the Ganges to the Eastern Sea and the
south of China. They are also found in the Islands of the Indian Sea,
in Ceylon, Java, Borneo, Sumatra, &c. There is still no authentic
proof that it exists in any part of Africa, although neither is the
contrary absolutely proved. The inhabitants of India having from
time immemorial been in the habit of taking this species and taming
it, it has been much better observed than the other. Varieties have
been remarked as to size, lightness of form, the length and direction
of the tusks, and the colours of the skin. The females and some of
the males have tusks which are always small and straight. The tusks
of the other males never attain so great a length as in the African
species[430]. _The natural number of the hoofs is five before and
four behind._ The ear is small, frequently angular. The skin is
commonly grey, spotted with brown. There are individuals entirely
white. The height varies from fifteen to sixteen feet. Its manners,
the mode of taking it, and of treating it, have been carefully
described by many travellers and naturalists, from Aristotle down to
Mr Corse Scott.

3. ELEPHAS PRIMIGENIUS, Blum, or MAMMOTH.--_The Elephant with
elongated skull, concave forehead, very long alveolæ for the tusks,
the lower jaw obtuse, the grinders broader, parallel, marked with
closer bands_, which we name the _Fossil Elephant_ (_Elephas
primigenius_, Blum.), is the _Mammoth_ of the Russians. Its bones
are only found in the fossil state. No person has seen in a fresh
state bones resembling those by which this species is peculiarly
distinguished, nor have the bones of the two preceding species been
seen in the fossil state.[431] Its bones are found in great number
in many countries, but in better preservation in the north than
elsewhere. It resembles the Indian more than the African species. It
differs, however, from the former in the grinders, in the form of
the lower jaw, and many other bones, but especially in the length
of the alveolæ and tusks. This last character must have singularly
modified the figure and organisation of its proboscis, and given it a
physiognomy much more different from that of the Indian species, than
might have been expected from the similarity of the rest of their
bones. It appears that its tusks were generally large, frequently
more or less spirally arcuate, and directed outwards. There is no
proof that they differ much according to differences of sex or
race. The size was not much greater than that to which the Indian
species may attain; it appears to have been still clumsier in its
proportions. It is already manifest from its osseous remains, that
it was a species differing more from the Indian, than the ass from
the horse, and the jackal and isatis from the wolf and fox. It is not
known what had been the size of its ears, or the colour of its skin;
but it is certain that, at least, some individuals bore two sorts
of hair, namely, a red, coarse, tufted wool, and stiff black hairs,
which, upon the neck and along the dorsal spine, became long enough
to form a sort of mane. Thus, not only is there nothing impossible
in its having been able to support a climate which would destroy the
Indian species, but it is even probable that it was so constituted
as to prefer cold climates. Its bones are generally found in the
alluvial and superficial strata of the earth, and most commonly in
the deposits which fill up the bottom of valleys, or which border
the beds of rivers. They scarcely ever occur by themselves, but are
confusedly mingled with bones of other quadrupeds of known genera,
such as rhinoceroses, oxen, antelopes, horses, and frequently with
remains of marine animals, particularly conchiferous species, some of
which have even been found adhering to them. The positive testimony
of Pallas, Fortis, and many others, does not allow us to doubt that
this latter circumstance has frequently taken place, although it is
not always observed. We ourselves have at this moment under our eyes
a portion of a jaw covered with millepores and small oysters.

The strata which cover the bones of elephants are not of very great
thickness, and they are scarcely ever of a rocky nature. They are
seldom petrified, and there are only one or two cases recorded in
which they were found imbedded in a shelly or other rock. Frequently
they are simply accompanied with our common fresh water shells. The
resemblance, in this latter respect, as well as with regard to the
nature of the soil, between the three places, of which we have the
most detailed accounts, viz. _Tonna_, _Cantstadt_, and the _Forest
of Bondi_, is very remarkable. Every thing, therefore, seems to
announce that the cause which has buried them, is one of the most
recent of those that have contributed to change the surface of the
globe. It is nevertheless a physical and general cause; the bones of
_fossil elephants_ are so numerous, and have been found in places so
desert and even uninhabitable, that we cannot suppose that they had
been conducted there by man. The strata which contain them and those
which are above them, shew, that this cause was aqueous, or that it
was water that covered them; and in many places these waters were
nearly the same as those of our present sea, since they supported
animals nearly the same. But, it was not by these waters that they
were transported to the places where they now are. Bones of this
description have been found in almost every country that has been
examined by naturalists. An irruption of the sea that might have
brought them from places which the _Indian elephant_ now inhabits,
could not have scattered them so far, nor dispersed them so equably.
Besides, the inundation which buried them has not risen above the
great chains of mountains, since the strata which it has deposited,
and which cover the bones, are only found in plains of little
elevation. It is not, therefore, seen how the carcases of elephants
could have been transported into the north, across the mountains of
_Thibet_, and the _Altaic_ and _Uralian_ chains.

Further, these bones are not rolled; they retain their ridges and
apophyses; they have not been worn by friction. Very frequently the
epiphyses of those which had not yet attained their full growth, are
still attached to them, although the slightest effort would suffice
to detach them. The only alterations that are remarked, arise from
the decomposition which they have undergone during their abode in
the earth. Nor can it with more reason be represented that the
entire carcases had been violently transported. In this case, the
bones would indeed have remained entire; but they would also have
remained together, and would not have been scattered. The shells,
millepores, and other marine productions which are attached to some
of these bones, prove besides that they had remained at least some
time stripped and separated at the bottom of the fluid which covered
them. The elephants’ bones had therefore already been in the places
in which they are found, when the fluid covered them. They were
scattered about in the same manner as in our own country the bones
of horses and other animals that inhabit it may be, and as the dead
bodies are spread in the fields.

Every circumstance, therefore, renders it extremely probable, that
the elephants which have furnished the fossil bones, dwelt and
lived in the countries where their bones are at present found. They
could only, therefore, have disappeared by a revolution, which had
destroyed all the individuals then living, or by a change of climate,
which prevented them from propagating. But whatever this cause may
have been, it must have been sudden. The bones and ivory which are
found in so perfect a state of preservation in the plains of Siberia,
are only so preserved by the cold which congeals them there, or
which, in general, arrests the action of the elements upon them. If
this cold had come on by degrees and slowly, these bones, and still
more the soft parts with which they are still sometimes invested,
would have had time to decompose, like those which occur in warm and
temperate countries. It would especially have been impossible that an
entire carcase, like that discovered by Mr Adams, could have retained
its flesh and skin without corruption, if it had not been immediately
enveloped by the ice which preserved it. Thus, all the hypotheses of
a gradual cooling of the earth, or of a slow variation, whether in
the inclination or in the position of the axis of the globe, fall to
be rejected.

If the present _elephants_ of _India_ were the descendants of these
ancient elephants, which have been preserved in that climate to
the present day, from their being there placed beyond the reach
of the catastrophe which destroyed them in the others, it would
be impossible to explain why their species has been destroyed in
America, where remains are still found, which prove that they had
formerly existed there. The vast empire of Mexico presented to them
heights enough to escape from an inundation so little elevated as
that which we must suppose to have taken place, and the climate there
is warmer than is requisite for their temperament.

The various _mastodons_, the _hippopotamus_ and the _fossil
rhinoceros_ lived in the same countries, and in the same districts,
as the _elephants_, since their bones are found in the same strata
and in the same state. Yet these animals very assuredly no longer
exist. Every thing therefore, Cuvier maintains, concurs to induce a
belief that the _fossil elephant_ is, like them, an extinct species,
although it resembles more than they one of the species at present
existing, and that its extinction has been produced by a sudden
cause, by the same great catastrophe which destroyed the species of
the same epoch.


3. _On the Great Mastodon, or Animal of the Ohio._

It appears that the _Great Mastodon_ or _Animal of the Ohio_,
was very like the elephant in its tusks and whole skeleton, the
grinders excepted; that it very probably had a proboscis; that
its height did not exceed that of the elephant, but that it was a
little more elongated, and had limbs somewhat thicker, with a more
slender belly. Notwithstanding all these points of resemblance, the
peculiar structure of its grinders is sufficient to constitute it
of a different genus from the elephant. It further appears, that it
fed much in the same manner as the hippopotamus and boar, choosing
by preference the roots and other fleshy parts of vegetables; that
this sort of food must have drawn it towards the soft and marshy
places; that, nevertheless, it was not formed for swimming, and
living often in the water like the hippopotamus, but that it was a
true land animal. Its bones are much more common in North America
than any where else. They are even perhaps exclusively confined to
that country. They are better preserved, and fresher, than any other
fossil bones known; and, nevertheless, there is not the slightest
proof, the smallest authentic testimony, calculated to impress a
belief that either in America, or any where else, there is still any
living individual, for the various accounts which we have from time
to time read in the journals respecting living mastodons, which had
been observed in the forests or plains of that vast continent, have
never been confirmed, and can only pass for fables.


NOTE

ON THE CAVES IN WHICH BONES OF CARNIVOROUS ANIMALS OCCUR IN GREAT
QUANTITIES.

The extraordinary accumulations of fossil bones in caves and caverns
in different districts, especially in those composed of limestone,
have for many years engaged the attention of inquirers; and, of
late, have afforded many interesting facts to the geologist and
zoologist. In England, as will appear from the following details,
many different fossil animals have been discovered in limestone
caves; but hitherto the caves in Scotland, which will probably be
found to contain interesting documents of an ancient population, have
not been examined. As the subject is a curious and interesting one,
we shall, in the following pages, principally from Cuvier’s great
work, lay before our readers a pretty full account of the different
caves, especially those that afford bones of carnivorous animals.

       *       *       *       *       *

Numerous caves, brilliantly decorated with stalactites of every form,
succeeding each other to a great depth in the interior of mountains,
communicating together by openings so narrow as scarcely to allow a
man to enter them crawling, and which are yet found strewed with an
enormous quantity of bones of large and small animals, are without
dispute among the most remarkable phenomena which the history of
fossil remains could present to the contemplation of the geologist,
especially when we reflect that this phenomenon recurs in a great
number of places, and over a very extended space of country. These
caves have been the object of research of several naturalists,
some of whom have well described and figured the bones which they
contain; and even before they were explored by the naturalist, they
were celebrated among the common people, who, according to their
custom, added many imaginary prodigies to the natural wonders which
are really observed in them. The bones which they contain were long,
under the name of _fossil unicorn_, an important article of commerce
and materia medica, on account of the powerful virtues which were
attributed to them; and it is probable that the desire of finding
these bones contributed much to the more accurate knowledge of these
caves, and even to the discovery of several of them.

The most anciently celebrated is the cave of _Bauman_, situated in
the country of _Blankenburg_, which belongs to the Duke of Brunswick,
to the south of the city of that name, to the east of _Elbingerode_,
and to the north of the village of _Rubeland_, the nearest inhabited
place, in a hill which forms one of the last declivities of the
_Hartz_ toward the east. It has been described by many authors, among
whom we shall particularly mention the great _Leibnitz_, in his
_Protogæa_, pl. i. p. 97, where he gives a map of it, borrowed from
the _Acta Eruditorum_ 1702, p. 305.

Its general direction is east and west, but the entrance faces the
north. It is very narrow, although it is under a pretty large natural
vault. The first cave is the largest. From this to the second, one
must descend by another narrow passage, at first by creeping, and
afterwards by a ladder. The difference of level is 30 feet. The
second cave is the richest in stalactite of all forms. The passage
to the third cave is at first the most difficult of all, and we have
to climb with hands and feet; but it afterwards enlarges, and the
stalactites of its walls are those in which the imagination of the
curious has pretended to see the best characterized figures. It has
two lateral dilatations, of which the map of the _Acta Eruditorum_
makes the third and fourth caves. At its extremity, we have still to
ascend, in order to arrive at the real third cave, which forms a sort
of portal. _Behrens_ says, in his _Hercynia curiosa_, that it cannot
be reached, because it would be necessary to descend more than 60
feet; but the above mentioned map, and the description of _Von der
Hardt_, which accompanies it, describe this third cave under the name
of the Fifth, and place beyond it a narrow passage, terminated by two
small grottoes. Lastly, _Silberschlag_, in his _Geogony_, adds, that
one of these grottoes leads to a narrow passage, which, descending
much, leads under the other caves, and terminates in a place filled
with water. There are still many bones in these remote and little
frequented parts. Most of those bones which are in collections from
this cave, or which have been described, are of the bear genus.

A second cave, nearly as celebrated as the former, and very near,
is that which is named, after the _unicorn, Enihornshæle_, at the
foot of the chateau of _Scharzfels_, in a part of the Electorate
of Hanover which is named the Dutchy of _Grubenhagen_, and nearly
upon the last southern declivity of the _Hartz_. It has also been
described by _Leibnitz_, as well as by _M. Deluc_, in his Letters
to the Queen of England. The entrance is 10 feet high, and 7 broad.
We descend vertically 15 feet into a sort of vestibule, the roof of
which lowers to such a degree, that, at the end of 60 feet, we are
obliged to creep. After a long passage, we come to two other caves,
according to Leibnitz; but Behrens adds three or four, and says,
that, according to the country people, we might penetrate nearly two
leagues.

_Bruckmann_, who gives a map of this cavern (_Epistol. Itin._ p.
34.), represents only five caves, arranged nearly in a straight line,
and connected by extremely narrow passages. The second is the richest
in bones; the third, which is the most irregular, has two small
lateral caves; the fifth is the smallest, and contains a fountain. Of
the bones which have been taken from it, some are in the possession
of M. Blumenbach and other naturalists; and others have been figured
by _Leibnitz_ and _Mylius_. They belong to the bear, hyena, and tiger
or lion genera.

The chain of the Hartz also presents some other caves of less
celebrity, although of the same nature mentioned by Behrens in his
Hercynia curiosa, namely,

The cave of _Hartzburg_, under the castle of the same name, above
_Goslar_ to the south. We do not know why Büsching disputes its
existence. It is true that Behrens cites J. D. Horstius erroneously,
for having seen bones of various animals taken from it; for Horstius
speaks only (_Obs. Anat. dec._ p. 10.) of the cave of _Scharzfels_.

The cave of _Ufftrungen_, in the county of _Stollberg_, to the south
of the castle of that name. It is named in the country _Heim-knohle_,
or _Hiding-hole_. Behrens thinks that fossil bones might be found in
it.

Another cave of the same neighbourhood, is named _Diebsloch, Thieves’
Hole_. Skulls have been found in it, which were supposed to be human.

We shall not speak here of those caves of the Hartz in which bones
have not been discovered. And even those in which they have been
found, are, at the present day, almost exhausted, it being only by
breaking the stalactite that any can be obtained, so much of them had
been taken away for selling as medicines.

The caves of _Hungary_ come after those of the Hartz, with reference
to the remoteness of the time at which they have been known. The
first notice of them is due to _Paterson Hayn_, (Ephem. Nat.
Cur. 1672, Obs. cxxxix. and cxciv.) _Bruckmann_, a physician of
_Wolfenbüttel_, afterwards described them at length. (_Epistola
Itineraria_, 77, and _Breslauer Sammlung_, 1725, First Trim. p.
628.) They are situated in the county of _Liptow_, on the southern
declivities of the _Carpathian mountains_. They are known in the
country by the name of _Dragons’ Caves_, because the people of the
neighbourhood attribute to those animals the bones which occur in
them, and with which they have been acquainted from time immemorial;
but all those which have been figured by authors belong to the Bear
family, and to the species which is named the _Great Cave Bear_
(_Grand Ours des cavernes_).

The caves of Germany the richest in bones are those of _Franconia_,
of which _J. F. Esper_, a clergyman of the country of _Bayreuth_,
has given a very detailed description in a work, printed in French
and German, entitled, _Description des Zoolithes nouvellement
decouvertes_, &c. _Nuremberg Knorr._ 1774, folio, with 14 coloured
plates, and in a memoir inserted among those of the _Berlin Society
of Naturalists_, vol. ix. 1784, p. 56. Another description was
afterwards given, under the title of _Objets dignes de remarque des
environs de Muggendorf_, by J. C. Rosenmüller, folio, with coloured
views, Berlin, 1804. And more lately, M. Goldfuss, at present
Professor of Natural History at Bonn, and Secretary of the _Academia
Naturæ Curiosorum_, has made them the subject of a particular
work printed in 1810 in German, under the title of _Environs of
Muggendorf_, in which he describes them with the greatest care, as
well as the surrounding country, of which he gives a very correct
topographical chart. A great part of these caves is situated in a
small bailiwick, named _Streitberg_, which was formerly a dependence
upon the country of _Bayreuth_, but was inclosed in that of
_Bamberg_, and now forms part of the kingdom of Bavaria. The greatest
number occur in a small peninsula, formed by the river of _Wiesent_,
which falls into the Pegnetz, and belongs to the basin of the _Main_.

However, the chief of all these astonishing caves, those of
_Gaylenreuth_, are beyond the limits of this peninsula, being on the
left bank of the Wiesent, to the north-west of the village from which
it derives its name. The entrance is perforated in a vertical rock;
it is 7½ feet high, and faces the east. The first cave turns to the
right, and is upwards of 80 feet long. The unequal heights of the
vault divide it into four parts; the first three are from 15 to 20
feet high, the fourth is only 4 or 5. At the bottom of this latter,
on the level of the floor, there is a hole 2 feet high, which affords
a passage to the second cave: it has first a direction to the south,
over a length of 60 feet by 40 in breadth, and 18 in height; it
then turns to the west for 70 feet, becoming lower and lower until
at length the height is only 5 feet. The passage which leads to the
third cave is very inconvenient, and one has to turn through various
corridors: it is 30 feet across, and from 5 to 6 in height. The
ground in it is kneaded with teeth and jaws. Near the entrance is a
pit of from 15 to 20 feet, to which one descends by a ladder. After
having descended, we come to a vault of 15 feet diameter by 30 in
height; and towards the side at which the descent is made there is a
cave strewed with bones. On still descending a little, a new arcade
is met with, which leads to a cave 40 feet long, and a new pit of
from 18 to 20 feet deep. After descending this, we reach a cavern
about 40 feet high, all strewed with bones. A passage, of 5 feet by
7, leads to a grotto of 25 feet in length by 12 in breadth. Canals,
20 feet in length, conduct to another grotto of 20 feet in height.
Lastly, there is another cave, 83 feet broad and 24 high, in which
more bones are found than in any of the others.

The sixth cave, which is the last, has a northerly direction, so that
the whole series of caves and passages nearly describes a semicircle.

A fissure in the third cave led to the discovery, in 1784, of a new
cave, 15 feet long and 4 broad, in which the greatest quantities of
hyena and lions’ bones were found. The aperture was much too small
for these animals to have passed through it. A particular canal which
ended in this small cave has afforded an incredible number of bones
and large skulls entire.

In the Philosophical Transactions of 1822, pl. xxvi. there may be
seen a profile of this cave, taken on the spot in 1816, by Professor
Buckland, in which is to be especially remarked an enormous mass,
entirely composed of bones enveloped in the stalactite, and thus
forming an osseous breccia, but of quite a different nature from
those which occur at Gibraltar and other places[432].

The cave of _Gaylenreuth_ is one of those the bones of which are most
completely known, by the researches which have been made or caused to
be made in it for a long time back by distinguished naturalists, such
as MM. Esper, de Humboldt, Ebel of Bremen, Rosenmüller, Sœmmering,
Goldfuss, &c., and by the numerous and rich collections which these
researches have produced. According to the examination which Cuvier
has made of the principal of these collections, three-fourths of
the bones found there belong to the Bear genus, and to two or three
species of that genus. The others belong to the hyena, tiger, wolf,
fox, glutton, and polecat, or some nearly allied species. There are
also found, although in much smaller number, bones of herbivorous
quadrupeds, and, in particular, deer, of which fragments are in the
possession of M. Ebel. It would even appear from a passage of M.
Sœmmering’s, that a parcel of bones had been got in it belonging to
an elephant’s skull[433]. According to Rosenmüller, there were found
in it bones of men, horses, oxen, sheep, deer, roes, mules, badgers,
dogs, and foxes, but which from the researches made by him in the
cave itself, and from their state of preservation, must have been
deposited at periods much later than those of the bear, tigers and
hyenas[434].

The small peninsula situate nearly opposite to this cave, presents
several other caves, as the _Schœnstein_, or _Beautiful Rock_, which
contains seven contiguous caverns. The _Brunnenstein_, or _Fountain
Rock_, in which, according to Esper, there are only found bones of
known species, such as badgers, dogs, foxes, hogs, and deer; but
Esper had too little anatomical knowledge for his testimony to be
entirely relied on with respect to this. These bones are sometimes
encrusted with stalactite. It contains also the _Holeberg_, or
_Hollow Mountain_, in which eight or ten caves form a series of 200
feet in length, with two entrances. Bones of the same bears as at
_Gaylenreuth_, are found here in various lateral depressions; and
there are also deer and hogs.--The _Wizerloch_, so named from an
ancient Sclavonic deity formerly worshipped there, the most dismal
cavern of the whole country, situate in its most elevated part, and
in which some vertebræ have been found. It is more than 200 feet
long. The _Wunderhœhle_, which takes its name from its discoverer,
has been known since 1773: its extent is 160 feet.--Lastly, the
Cave of _Klaustein_, consisting of four grottoes, and upwards of
200 feet deep. Bones have been found in the third grotto, and most
abundantly towards its extremity. It might be supposed that the name
_Klaustein_ signified _Claw-rock_, and it would thus accord very well
with a place where, without doubt, as at Gaylenreuth, a multitude of
ungual phalanges of bears and animals of the tiger kind have been
found. But M. Goldfuss asserts, that it was called _Klaustein_, or
_St Nicholas’s Rock_, after a chapel of this name, which formerly
stood upon it.--There are still the _Geiss-knok_, or _Goat Cave_, and
a cave discovered in 1793. M. Rosenmüller found in them two human
skeletons already covered with stalactite.

The country which surrounds this small peninsula has itself several
caves, independently of that of _Gaylenreuth_, as those of _Mockas_,
_Rabenstein_, and _Kirch-ahorn_, three villages, situate, the first
to the south, and the other two to the north-east of Gaylenreuth.
Bones were formerly found in the first. The last bears in the
country the expressive name of _Zahn-loch_, or _Tooth Cave_; it also
bears the name of _Hohen-mirschfeld_, a village on whose ground it
is situate; and the country people have long been in the habit of
seeking in it those bones, which they imagined to be medicinal. MM.
Rosenmüller and Goldfuss have in fact found bear and tiger bones.
There are two others in the territory of the same village, of which
the one named _Schneider-loch_ (_Tailor’s Hole_), is said to have
furnished the vertebræ of an elephant. That of _Zewig_, close upon
_Waschenfeld_, at the very edge of the _Wiesent_, is nearly 80 feet
deep; and it is said that skeletons of men and wolves were found in
it.

All these hills, containing caves in their interior, and situate so
near each other, seem to form a small chain, interrupted only by
brooks, and which joins the more elevated chain of the _Fichtelberg_,
in which are the highest mountains of Franconia, and from which flow
the _Main_, the _Saale_, the _Eger_, the _Naab_, and many small
rivers. M. Rosenmüller, and after him, others assert, that those
which are in the hills to the north of the _Wiesent_, contain not
a single fragment of bone, while those to the south are filled with
them.

In 1799, a cave, remarkable for its situation, was discovered,
which connects in some measure those of the _Hartz_ with those of
_Franconia_. It is the Cave of _Glücksbrun_, in the bailiwick of
_Altenstein_, in the territory of _Meinungen_, on the south-western
declivity of the chain of the _Thuringerwald_ (Blumenb. _Archæol.
Telluris_, p. 15. _Zach. Monate. Corresp. 1800, January_, p. 30.)
It is the same which M. Rosenmüller names _Libenstein_, on account
of its being on the road from _Altenstein_ to this latter, which is
a bathing place. There is a description of it by M. Kocher, in the
_Magazin für Mineralogie_, by M. C. E. A. De Hof, 1st band. heft. iv.
p. 427. The limestone in which it is situate rests upon bituminous
schist, and, rising much upwards, comes to rest upon primitive rocks.
The limestone varies in hardness and in the nature of its fracture,
and contains marine petrifactions, such as pectinites, echinites, &c.

In making a road, there was discovered an opening, from which a very
cold air issued, which determined the Duke of Saxe-Meinungen to have
it farther examined. A narrow passage, of twenty feet in length, was
found, which led to a cave of thirty-five feet, having a breadth of
from three to twelve, and a height of from six to twelve, according
to the places, and terminated by a large piece of rock, which was
removed. The labour of two years discovered and cleared a series
of caves connected together, and of which the bottom rose and fell
alternately. They terminate in a place where water flows; but various
lateral fissures make it probable that there are still several caves
which have not been opened, and that they perhaps form a sort of
labyrinth.

The bottom and walls of this cave are furnished with the same mud as
the others, but blacker. The bones were pretty numerous, and tinged
with the same colour, but only two tolerably entire skulls were
obtained. That of which M. Kocher gives a figure, is the species
of bear named _Ursus spelæus_. There are also caves of this kind
in Westphalia. J. Es Silberschlag, in the _Mem. des Naturalistes_
of Berlin (_Schriften_, vol. vi. p. 132), describes the one called
_Kluter-hœhle_, near the village of _Oldenforde_, in the county of
_Mark_, on the edge of the _Milspe_ and _Ennepe_, two streams which
fall into the Ruhr, and with it into the Rhine. Its entrance is
about half-way up a hill called _Kluterberg_, is only three feet
three inches high, and faces the south. The cave itself forms a true
labyrinth in the interior of the mountain.

Not far from this, in the same county, at Sundwich, two leagues from
_Iserlohn_, is another cave, which, for about twenty-five years back,
has furnished a very large quantity of bones, part of which has been
carried to Berlin, and the rest has remained in the country in the
hands of various individuals[435].

If we cast a glance upon a general map, it is not difficult to
perceive a certain continuity in the mountains in which these
singular caves occur. The Carpathians join with the mountains of
Moravia and those of Bohemia called _Bœhmerwald_, to separate the
basin of the Danube, from those of the Vistula, Oder and Elbe. The
Fichtelgebirge separates the basin of the Elbe from that of the
Rhine. The Thuringerwald and the Hartz continue to limit the basin of
the Elbe, by separating it from that of the Weser.

These different chains have but slight intervals between them. The
caves of Westphalia alone are not connected in so evident a manner
with the others.

Very lately, bones have been discovered in a cavern, which extends
more towards the south, and is even situate on the other or Italian
side of the Alps. It is that of _Adelsberg_ in _Carniola_, a place
situate on the great road from _Laybach_ to _Trieste_, and about half
way between these two cities. The whole of this country is full of
caverns and grottoes, which have given rise to numerous sinkings of
the surface, thus giving a very singular appearance to the country.
Several of these caverns have long been celebrated among naturalists.
That of _Adelsberg_ is generally visited by travellers, on account of
its being near the highway, and because a river called the _Piuka_
or _Poike_ is lost there, forming a subterranean lake, and emerging
again on the north side, under the name of _Unz_. A hole which the
Chevalier de _Lowengreif_ discovered in 1816, in one of its walls, at
the height of 14 fathoms, conducted him to a series of new caves of
vast extent, and of incomparable beauty, from the lustre and variety
of their stalactites.

A part of these caves was, however, known, and must be, or have
been accessible, by some other place, for inscriptions were found
in them with dates, from 1393 to 1676, together with human bones,
and entire carcases, that had been buried there. A German pamphlet
was published at Trieste, in which are described all the windings
of these subterranean passages, their different halls, their
domes, their columns, and all the other appearances produced by
their stalactites. We shall not follow the author (M. de _Volpi_,
Director of the School of Commerce and Navigation at Trieste) through
this immense labyrinth. Let it suffice to say, that this zealous
naturalist asserts his having proceeded more than three leagues,
almost in a straight line, and that he was only stopped by a lake
which rendered it impossible to go on. It was about two leagues from
the entrance that he discovered bones of animals, of which he gives
figures, and which he describes under the name of Palæotheria. He had
the politeness to communicate to me, says Cuvier, his drawings the
year before, but it appears my reply did not reach him, for he makes
no mention of it in his book.

Be this as it may, his figures clearly shewed that the bones in
question belonged to the great cave-bear. In fact, several of these
bones having been presented to the Congress of Laybach, _Prince
Metternich_, whose enlightened taste for the advancement of knowledge
has already been of so much service, had the goodness to address them
to Cuvier, who disposed them in the Royal Cabinet, where any one may
satisfy himself as to their species.

There are, without doubt, caves in many other chains, and several
are known in France. Caves occur in Suabia, but no bones have been
found in them; and, in general, it appears, that, before the last
discoveries, and especially that which has been made in Yorkshire,
none were known but those of Germany and Hungary that were rich in
bones of carnivora. In truth, the rock of _Fouvent_, and which
contains in one of its cavities bones of hyenas, and at the same time
those of elephants, rhinoceroses and horses, might be considered as
belonging to this order of phenomena; but as it was not explored to
any depth, it cannot be certain that it is so.

The case is different with the _Kirkdale_ Cavern. It having been
visited immediately after its discovery by several well informed
persons, and especially by Mr Buckland, every thing has been made
known with respect to it. It is situated in the East Riding of the
county of York, twenty-five miles NNE. of the city of _York_, and
at about the same distance to the west from the sea and the town of
Scarborough. The small river of _Hodgebeck_ is lost under ground
in the neighbourhood, much in the same way as the _Piuka_, near
_Adelsberg_. It is placed in one of the limestone hills which form
the northern boundary of the vale of _Pickering_, the waters of which
fall into the Derwent. Mr Buckland compares the stone to that of the
last strata of the Alpine limestone, such as are seen near Aigle and
Meillene.

It was in the course of the year 1821, that some labourers working
at a quarry, discovered by chance the opening, which was closed by
rubbish, covered over with earth and turf. It is about 100 feet above
the neighbouring brook. It can be entered to the distance of 150 or
200 feet, but we can only walk erect in some places, on account of
the stalactites. On its sides there are seen spines of sea-urchins
and other marine remains, incrusted in the mass of the rock; but it
is on the bottom, and there only, that there is found the stratum of
mud, of about a foot thick, stuck full of bones, as at Gaylenreuth.
This mud, and the bones which it contains, are, in various places,
covered or penetrated with stalactite, especially near places where
the rock has lateral fissures.

The discovery having acquired much celebrity, a great number of
people procured bones from it, and placed them in various public
depots. Specimens have been deposited in the York Institution, that
of Whitby and Bristol, the British Museum, the Museum of Oxford
and Cambridge, and by Mr Young of Whitby, in the College Museum of
Edinburgh; but the finest collection of the bones of Kirkdale was
presented to Cuvier, and by him deposited in the Royal Cabinet in
Paris. The greatest number of these bones without comparison, belong
to hyenas of the same species as those of the caverns of Germany;
but there are also many of other large and small animals, which Mr
Buckland supposes to form twenty-one species. From the pieces which
I have under my eye, says Cuvier, there indisputably occur bones of
the _elephant_, _hippopotamus_, _horse_, an _ox_ of the size of the
common _deer_, _rabbits_, _field-rats_; also bones of some other
carnivora, namely, of the _tiger_, _wolf_, _fox_, and _weasel_.
All these bones and teeth are accumulated on the ground, broken
and gnawed, and there are even seen marks of the teeth which have
fractured them. There are even intermixed with them excrements which
have been recognized as perfectly similar to those of the hyena[436].

The hills in which these caverns occur resemble each other in their
composition: they are all of limestone, and all produce abundance of
stalactites. These stalactites line the walls, narrow the passages,
and assume a thousand various forms. The bones are nearly in the
same state in all these caverns: detached, scattered, partly broken,
but never rolled, and consequently not brought from a distance by
water; a little lighter and less solid than recent bones, but still
in their true animal nature, very little decomposed, containing much
gelatine, and not at all petrified. A hardened, but still easily
frangible or pulverisable earth, also containing animal parts, and
sometimes blackish, forms their natural envelope. It is often
impregnated and covered with a crust of stalactite. A covering of
the same nature invests the bones in various places, penetrates
their natural cavities, and sometimes attaches them to the walls of
the cavern. This stalactite is often coloured reddish by the animal
earth which is mixed with it. At other times its surface is stained
black; but it is easy to see that these appearances are caused by
modern occurrences, and have no immediate connection with the cause
which brought the bones into these cavities. We even daily see the
stalactite increasing and enveloping here and there groups of bones
which it had formerly respected.

This mass of earth, penetrated by animal matter, indiscriminately
envelopes the bones of all the species; and, if we except some found
at the surface of the ground, and which had been transported there
at much later periods, which may also be distinguished by their
being much less decomposed, they must all have been interred in the
same manner, and by the same causes. In this mass of earth there are
found, confusedly mingled with the bones (at least in the cave of
Gaylenreuth), pieces of a bluish marble, of which all the corners
are rounded and blunted, and which appear to have been rolled. They
singularly resemble those which form part of the osseous brecciæ of
_Gibraltar_ and _Dalmatia_.

Lastly, what further conspires to render this phenomenon very
striking, is, that the most remarkable of these bones are the same
in these caverns, over an extent of more than two hundred leagues.
Three-fourths and upwards belong to species of _bears_, which are
now extinct. A half, or two-thirds of the remaining fourth, belong
to a species of _hyena_, which is equally unknown at the present
day. A smaller number belong to a species of the _tiger_ or _lion_
kind, and to another of the _wolf_ or _dog_ genus; lastly, the most
diminutive have belonged to various small carnivora, as the _fox_,
the _polecat_, or at least species very nearly allied to them, &c.

The Kirkdale Cavern, however, forms a notable exception, inasmuch as
none, or very few, bones of bears are found in it, and in its being
the hyena that appears to predominate among the carnivora.

The species so common in the alluvial formations, the _elephants_,
_rhinoceroses_, _horses_, _oxen_ or _aurochs_, and _tapirs_, are
of very rare occurrence in the caves of Germany. There are even
some in which no one is said to have found them, and the only
bones of herbivora mentioned are remains of deer. In this point
also, however, the Kirkdale cave differs much from the others,
inasmuch as it abounds almost as much in bones of large and small
herbivora, as in bones of carnivora. All the great pachydermata of
the alluvial formations are seen in it: the elephants, rhinoceroses
and hippopotami. There are also seen in it bones of oxen, deer, and
even small bones of mice and birds. But there are no bones of marine
animals of any species, either at Kirkdale or in Germany. Those who
have pretended that they saw bones of _seals_, _morses_, or other
similar species, have been led into error by the hypothesis which
they had previously adopted.

These bones of carnivora, so numerous in the caves, are rare in the
great alluvial strata; the hyena alone has been seen in any quantity
at Canstadt, near Aichstedt, and in some other places. There have
also been found some traces of bears in Tuscany and Austria, but
their relative proportion is always infinitely less than in the
caves; and it is always sufficiently proved by these circumstances,
that these various animals have lived together in the same countries,
and have belonged to the same epoch.

Cuvier concludes, there can only be imagined three general causes
which might have placed these bones in such quantity in these vast
subterranean cavities. Either they are the remains of animals
which inhabited these abodes, and which died peaceably there; or
inundations and other violent causes have carried them into these
cavities; or, lastly, they had been enveloped in rocky strata, the
dissolution of which produced these caverns, and they have not been
dissolved by the agent which carried off the matter of the strata.

This last cause is refuted by the fact, that the strata in which the
caves occur contain no bones; and the second by the entireness of
the smallest prominences of the bones, which does not permit us to
think that they had been rolled; for if some bones are worn, as Mr
Buckland has remarked, they are only so on one side, which would only
prove that some current has passed over them, and in the deposit in
which they are. We are, therefore, obliged to have recourse to the
first supposition, whatever difficulties it presents on its part, and
to say that these caves served as a retreat to carnivorous animals,
and that these carried there, for the purpose of devouring them, the
animals which formed their prey, or the parts of these animals.

Mr Buckland has observed, that the hyena bones are not less broken
and splintered than those of the herbivorous animals; from which he
concludes, that the hyenas had devoured the dead bodies of their own
species, as those of the present day still do.

These animals attack each other during their life; for the fossil
head of a hyena is preserved, which had evidently been wounded and
afterwards healed[437].

This supposition is moreover confirmed by the animal nature of the
earth in which these bones are found[438].

This much is certain, that the establishment of these animals in the
caves has taken place at a much later epoch than that at which the
great rocky strata have been formed, not only those which compose
the mountains in which the caves are situated, but the strata of
much newer origin. No permanent inundation has penetrated into the
subterranean dens, and formed a regular rocky deposit. The mud
arising from the proper decomposition of these animals, and the
stalactites that have been filtered through the wall of the caves,
are the only matters which cover these remains, and these stalactites
increase so rapidly, that M. Goldfuss already found a layer of them
covering the names of MM. Esper and Rosenmüller, whose visits did
not date thirty years before his own. The rolled stones that are met
with, and the marks of detrition observed on some bones, announce, at
the very utmost, but passing currents.

But how have so many ferocious animals which peopled our forests
been extirpated? All the reply we can make is, that they must have
been destroyed at the same time, and by the same cause, as the large
herbivora, which, like them, also peopled these forests, and of which
no traces remain at the present day any more than of them.


ACCOUNT OF THE CAVE CONTAINING BONES AT ADELSBERG IN CARNIOLA.

The following interesting account of the cave, slightly noticed at
pages 524 and 525, is extracted from a memoir by M. Bertrand Geslin,
Member of the Natural History Society of Paris, published in the
number of the _Annales des Sciences Naturelles_ for April 1826.

  M. Cuvier, says Gesler, speaking of the Adelsberg Cave, from the
  account published by M. Volpi of Trieste, says, that it was nearly
  two leagues from the entrance where he discovered bones of animals.

  Having visited this cave myself, I am obliged to say that M.
  Volpi’s assertion as to this matter is not very correct. On my way
  to Trieste, in July 1823, before going to Adelsberg, I had the
  advantage of seeing M. Volpi. In shewing me the bones collected
  by him at Adelsberg, he also assured me that they were found two
  leagues from the entrance of the cave, and only in a very compact
  block of several cubic feet, from which it was not possible to
  procure more, as he had taken all that he could easily remove.

  Notwithstanding this discouraging account, I betook myself to
  Adelsberg, in order to see a sample of those immense caverns of
  secondary limestone. The entrance of the cave is situated in a
  white compact secondary limestone, lying in great beds inclined
  to the south-west, at an angle of from 30 to 35 degrees. At fifty
  paces from the entrance, we find ourselves as in a large apartment,
  which crosses the torrent of the Pinka. After passing to the left
  bank of this torrent, we enter a rather low and not long passage,
  which leads to a second apartment of an elongated form. It is here
  that the line of chambers truly commences. They are of large but
  variable dimensions, and are situated nearly upon a horizontal
  plane.

  On entering this second chamber, I saw that the ground was formed
  of a yellow and reddish clayey mud, from one to two feet thick,
  and more or less impregnated and covered with crusts of yellow
  stalagmites. In the places where it offered little resistance, I
  dug it up with the point of my hammer, and was fortunate enough to
  disunite some fragments of bone, although, from what had been said
  to me, I ought not to have expected to find them. From this I was
  convinced, that if M. Volpi had only found bones at a distance of
  two leagues from the entrance, it was because he had not been at
  the trouble to search for them nearer. I fell to work with more
  ardour, and succeeded in digging up some in good preservation,
  such as radii, cubiti, femora, humeri, fragments of jaws, calcarea,
  toes, vertebræ, &c., belonging to bears of different sizes, of the
  species termed _Ursus spelæus_. It would appear that the hyena
  tribe is rather rare here, for I only procured a single bone
  belonging to it. It was particularly in two small lateral chambers,
  near the narrow passage, that I obtained a great quantity of these
  bones, the clay there having been dug up by the guides, in order to
  make the floor of the great apartment even with it.

  I continued to dig as I advanced, and everywhere found bones more
  or less broken and enveloped in the clayey mud. After proceeding
  for half an hour, I fell in with a mass, in an apartment of
  considerable dimensions, which was of a conical form, and composed
  of blocks of compact white limestone, of all sizes, mixed with
  yellowish clayey mud. These blocks had their edges as sharp as if
  they had only been lately broken. The mass, which reached to the
  right wall of the cave, might be fifteen feet in height, and twenty
  in diameter at its base: it was covered with stalactite in several
  places. It was in this mass, at about ten feet above the floor of
  the cave, in the clayey mud that filled up the interstices between
  the blocks, that I found the entire skeleton of a young bear, in a
  space of two square feet at most. The bones which I dug out were
  the frontal part of the head, the lower jaw of the left side,
  the seventh cervical and eighth dorsal vertebræ; the eighth and
  fourteenth ribs of the right side; two tibia, femora, and cubiti,
  and two large canine teeth of another bear. If I could have raised
  up the limestone blocks, between which these bones lay, I might
  without doubt have procured a great part of this skeleton. There
  are still found here and there in the cave some small heaps of
  clayey mud, with fragments of white secondary limestone, as well
  as large isolated limestone blocks, which the guides are daily
  destroying, to make the floor even for the convenience of visitors.

  I had only advanced an hour and a quarter’s progress into the cave,
  always finding bones, when the oil of my lamps beginning to fail, I
  was obliged to return without reaching the block in which M. Volpi
  had found the first bones. This block is without doubt owing to the
  same causes as the heap of which I have spoken above.

  The manner in which these heaps exist, being composed of blocks of
  compact white secondary limestone, similar to that which forms the
  walls of the cave, with sharp edges, and piled upon each other,
  made me imagine that they might have fallen from the roof. As I
  returned, I examined the ceiling of the vaults with attention. As
  it was all covered over with stalactites, I could not discover any
  fissure.

  From this short excursion in the Adelsberg cave, I am induced
  to believe, that the bones exist along the whole extent of the
  cave, and that they occur in two different ways; _1st_, scattered
  in the clayey mud which forms the floor of the chambers; and,
  _2dly_, buried in heaps formed of blocks of white secondary compact
  limestone, and yellow clayey mud.

  The hypothesis which M. Cuvier admits as the most probable for
  explaining the presence of these bones in the caves, is that which
  would make these caves to have served as a retreat to carnivorous
  animals.

  The presence of bones in the clayey mud of the floor of the
  Adelsberg cave accords well with this hypothesis; but the case
  is different with those which I found in the heaps of limestone
  blocks and clayey mud. The bones are not at the surface of the
  heap, but rather towards its middle part, buried among the blocks,
  and crushed by them. From this position, and the height at which
  the skeleton mentioned above occurs from the floor of the cave,
  it cannot be supposed that it formed part of the bones with which
  the bottom of the cave is strewed, nor that the blocks had fallen
  upon it. The bones contained in the heap in question must have been
  brought into their present position at the same time, and by the
  same cause as the limestone blocks. They could not, therefore, have
  belonged to animals which inhabited these caves, and died there
  peaceably.

  If it be remarked, that these blocks, which are sometimes very
  large, heaped up above one another, and mixed with clayey mud, have
  their angles perfectly fresh, and are of the same nature as the
  limestone of the walls of the cave, it cannot be admitted that they
  have been brought from a distance. This mode of arrangement could
  only have been produced by their falling from the roof of the cave.

  The following facts also give support to this opinion. In the cave
  of Gaylenreuth, a fissure of the third grotto, was the means, in
  1784, of disclosing a new one, fifteen feet long and four broad,
  where the greatest quantity of hyena or lion bones were found.
  _The aperture was much too small for these animals to have passed
  through it._

  In a cave discovered in 1824, in the district of Lanark in Upper
  Canada, Mr Bigsby observed, that the floor was covered with debris
  of brown granular limestone, similar to that of the walls, and
  that the bones especially formed a heap there. He thinks that the
  animal, whose bones have been found in this cave, was much too
  large to have got into it alive or entire.--_Silliman’s Journal,
  June 1825_, p. 354.

  It must therefore be also admitted here, either that the bones
  could only have got into the cave in the same manner as the heaps
  of blocks found in the Adelsberg cave; that is to say, by falling
  from the roof, or that the apertures have been closed since the
  period at which the animals were buried.

  If it be now considered, _1st_, That the surface of the secondary
  limestone mountains of Carniola is covered with a layer of reddish
  clay; and, _2dly_, That the clayey mud of the heap in the Adelsberg
  cave is mineralogically the same as that which forms the floor
  of the cave; may it not be supposed, that the same catastrophe
  which produced the heaps in the cave may have, at the same time,
  introduced into it the reddish clayey mud of the surface, which, by
  extending itself over the floor of the cave, would have contributed
  to cover the bones that were lying there?

  Moreover, may it not have been the case, that, after the caves
  had been inhabited by the carnivorous animals, the substances
  falling from above, and coming from the surface of the soil, may
  have carried along with the clayey mud and the bones of bears, the
  spoils of large herbivorous animals, which they may have met with,
  and which cannot be supposed to have sought refuge in these caves
  during life.

  There will, no doubt, be objected to me, that opinion which
  maintains, that the bones of herbivora have been dragged into the
  caves by the carnivorous animals. This might certainly have been
  the case with regard to small species, but it is not probable that
  the bones of large species could have been introduced in the same
  manner.

  Admitting as certain, at least with regard to the Adelsberg cave,
  that the limestone blocks and the bear bones which accompany them,
  have fallen from the ceiling, the phenomenon of caves containing
  bones would connect itself pretty well with that of osseous brecciæ
  in a geological point of view. As M. Cuvier observes, “The nature
  of the rocks which contains the one and the other is not very
  different; and, besides, the fissures of caves being generally
  pretty wide, the bones would not have stuck, but would have fallen
  to the bottom, while those of the osseous brecciæ being much
  narrower, and not so deep, would have retained the bones at no
  great distance from the surface of the soil.”

  Thus, from the facts observed in the caves of Germany and England,
  and from that of the Adelsberg cave, which I have described above,
  we may conclude, _1st_, That the presence of bones in caves has
  been produced at two different periods, which, without doubt, have
  not been very distant from each other; the first, that when the
  animals inhabited these caves; the other, that when they had been
  transported there by a somewhat general catastrophe; _2dly_, That
  the second epoch was contemporaneous with the osseous brecciæ, and
  was produced, like them, by a phenomenon or process of filling up.




TABULAR VIEW

OF

The GENERA of FOSSIL MAMMIFERA, CETACEA, AVES, REPTILIA, and INSECTA,
exhibiting their Geognostical Number and Distribution.


  +----------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
  |                |          Genera which are found          |  Number of  |
  |                |                                          |  Species.   |
  |                +------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  |NAMES OF GENERA.|Living|Living,|Fossil|In the|In the|In the|In the|In the|
  |                |only. |and in |only. |Strata|Strata|Strata|Living|Fossil|
  |                |      | the   |      |ante- |of the|post- |State.|State.|
  |                |      |Fossil |      |rior  |Chalk.|erior |      |      |
  |                |      |State. |      |to the|      |to the|      |      |
  |                |      |       |      |Chalk.|      |Chalk.|      |      |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  |   MAMMIFERA.   |      |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |Ursus,          |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  4   |
  |Mustela,        |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Canis,          |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  4   |
  |Hyæna,          |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Felis,          |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Phoca,          |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Didelphis,      |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Castor,         |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Arvicola,       |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Lagomys,        |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Lepus,          |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Megalonyx,      |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Megatherium,    |      |   *   |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Elephas,        |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Mastodon,       |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  6   |
  |Hippopotamus,   |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  4   |
  |Sus,            |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Anoplotherium,  |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Xiphodon,       |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Dichobunus,     |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  3   |
  |Anthracotherium,|      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |Adapis,         |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Chæropotamus,   |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Rhinoceros,     |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  4   |
  |Palæotherium,   |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  8   |
  |Lophiodon,      |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  5   |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+

  +----------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
  |                |          Genera which are found          |  Number of  |
  |                |                                          |  Species.   |
  |                +------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  |NAMES OF GENERA.|Living|Living,|Fossil|In the|In the|In the|In the|In the|
  |                |only. |and in |only. |Strata|Strata|Strata|Living|Fossil|
  |                |      | the   |      |ante- |of the|post- |State.|State.|
  |                |      |Fossil |      |rior  |Chalk.|erior |      |      |
  |                |      |State. |      |to the|      |to the|      |      |
  |                |      |       |      |Chalk.|      |Chalk.|      |      |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  |  MAMMIFERA.(cont.)    |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |Tapirus,        |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Elasmotherium,  |      |       |  *   |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Equus,          |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Mus,            |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Cervus,         |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  5   |
  |Bos,            |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  4   |
  |Myoxus,         |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  2   |
  |                |      |   *   |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |    CETACEA.    |      |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |             |
  |Manatus,        |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Delphinus,      |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  4   |
  |Balæna,         |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  3   |
  |                |      |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |    AVES.(a)    |      |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |Sturnus,        |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Pelecanus,      |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Charadrius,     |      |       |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |                |      |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |    REPTILIA.   |      |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |Testudo,        |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  6   |
  |Crocodilus,     |      |   *   |      |      |  *   |      |      |  6   |
  |Plesiosaurus,   |      |       |  *   |      |      |      |      |  1   |
  |Ichthyosaurus,  |      |       |  *   |   *  |      |      |      |  4   |
  |Pterodactylus,  |      |       |  *   |   *  |      |  *   |      |  3   |
  |Rana,           |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  |Mosasaurus,     |      |       |  *   |      |  *   |      |      |  1   |
  |Salamandra,     |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |  1   |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+

  +----------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
  |                |          Genera which are found          |  Number of  |
  |                |                                          |  Species.   |
  |                +------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  |NAMES OF GENERA.|Living|Living,|Fossil|In the|In the|In the|In the|In the|
  |                |only. |and in |only. |Strata|Strata|Strata|Living|Fossil|
  |                |      | the   |      |ante- |of the|post- |State.|State.|
  |                |      |Fossil |      |rior  |Chalk.|erior |      |      |
  |                |      |State. |      |to the|      |to the|      |      |
  |                |      |       |      |Chalk.|      |Chalk.|      |      |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+
  |    INSECTA.    |      |       |      |      |      |      |      |      |
  |Silpha,(b)      |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Curculio,(c)    |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Scorpio,(c)     |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Musca,(c)       |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Blatta,(c)      |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Tipula,(c)      |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Aranea,(c)      |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Ichneumon,(c)   |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Libellula,(d)   |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Scarabæus,(d)   |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Scolopendra,(d) |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Papilio,(d)     |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Hemerobia,(d)   |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  |Carabus,(d)     |      |   *   |      |      |      |  *   |      |      |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+------+------+------+------+------+

  (a) It is extremely difficult to make out the genera of the Birds,
  whose remains occur in a fossil state, and there are more of them
  than those mentioned.

  (b) In the lignite; the number of species cannot be given in the
  insects.

  (c) In amber.

  (d) In the fossil rocks, according to the old authors.




TABULAR VIEW

OF

The CLASSES, ORDERS, or FAMILIES, of ANIMALS, occurring in a Living
and Fossil State, with their Geognostical Distribution.

        (PART 1 of 2)
  +----------------+-----------------------------------------------+-------+
  |                |       Number of Genera which are found        |       |
  |                |                                               |       |
  |    NAMES OF    +------+-------+------+--------+------+---------+ Total |
  |CLASSES, ORDERS,|In the|Living |In the| In the |In the| In the  |number |
  |  OR FAMILIES.  |living|  and  |Fossil| Strata |Strata| Strata  |  of   |
  |                |state |Fossil.|state |anterior|of the|posterior|Genera.|
  |                |only. |       |only. | to the |Chalk.| to the  |       |
  |                |      |       |      | Chalk. |      | Chalk.  |       |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+--------+------+---------+-------+
  |Polyparia,      |  23  |  30   |  52  |   47   |  19  |   36    |  105  |
  |Stellaridæ,     |      |   4   |      |        |   2  |    4    |    4  |
  |Echinidæ,       |   2  |   6   |   3  |    7   |   8  |    5    |   11  |
  |Annulosa,       |      |   2   |   1  |    1   |   1  |    2    |    3  |
  |Serpulacea,     |   2  |   3   |   1  |    3   |   3  |    3    |    6  |
  |Cirripeda,      |   8  |   2   |      |    1   |      |    2    |   10  |
  |Tubicolæ,       |   1  |   3   |   2  |        |      |    5    |    6  |
  |Pholadaria,     |      |   2   |      |        |      |    2    |    2  |
  |Bivalve shells, |  18  |  61   |  24  |   44   |  25  |   51    |  103  |
  |Univalve shells,|  33  |  87   |  28  |   27   |  16  |   93    |  148  |
  |Genera little   |      |       |   4  |    3   |   1  |         |    4  |
  |  known,        |      |       |      |        |      |         |       |
  |Crustacea,      |      |  21   |   5  |    5   |   2  |    9    |   28  |
  |Pisces,         |      |  54   |   6  |   11   |   2  |   55    |   60  |
  |Mammifera &     |      |  24   |  12  |        |      |   36    |   36  |
  |  Cetacea,      |      |       |      |        |      |         |       |
  |Aves,(a)        |      |   3   |      |        |      |    3    |    3  |
  |Reptilia,       |      |   4   |   4  |    3   |   2  |    4    |    8  |
  |Insecta,        |      |  14   |      |        |      |   14    |   14  |
  |Vegetabilia,    |      |  14   |  10  |   12   |   1  |   15    |   24  |
  +----------------+------+-------+------+--------+------+---------+-------+

        (PART 2 of 2)
  +----------------+-------------+
  |                |  Number of  |
  |                |   Species   |
  |    NAMES OF    +------+------+
  |CLASSES, ORDERS,|In the|In the|
  |  OR FAMILIES.  |living|fossil|
  |                |state.|state.|
  |                |      |      |
  |                |      |      |
  +----------------+------+------+
  |Polyparia,      |  527 |  414 |
  |Stellaridæ,     |   76 |    4 |
  |Echinidæ,       |   95 |  112 |
  |Annulosa,       |   17 |   29 |
  |Serpulacea,     |   36 |   69 |
  |Cirripeda,      |   50 |   17 |
  |Tubicolæ,       |   11 |   16 |
  |Pholadaria,     |   12 |    4 |
  |Bivalve shells, | 1009 | 1104 |
  |Univalve shells,| 1945 | 1544 |
  |Genera little   |      |    5 |
  |  known,        |      |      |
  |Crustacea,      |      |   54 |
  |Pisces,         |      |  183 |
  |Mammifera &     |      |   89 |
  |  Cetacea,      |      |      |
  |Aves,           |      |    3 |
  |Reptilia,       |      |   23 |
  |Insecta,        |      |      |
  |Vegetabilia,    |      |      |
  +----------------+------+------+

  (a) The fossil remains of birds being very difficult to be
  recognized, the number of genera in that state is undoubtably much
  more considerable.


THE END.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] See Note A, at the end of this Essay.

[2] See Note B.

[3] The opinion maintained by some geologists, that certain strata
have been formed in the inclined position in which they are now
found, admitting it true with regard to some particular strata
which might have been crystallized, as Mr Greenough supposes, like
the deposit which encrusts the inside of vessels, in which water
containing gypsum has been boiled, cannot at least apply to those
which contain shells or rolled stones, which could not have waited,
so suspended, the formation of the cement by which they were to be
agglutinated.

[4] See Note C.

[5] The conjecture of the Marquis de la Place, that the materials of
which the globe is composed, have perhaps existed at first in the
elastic form, and have successively assumed a liquid consistence on
cooling, and have at length been solidified, is well supported by the
recent experiments of M. Mitscherlich, who has composed, of all sorts
of substances, and crystallized by the heat of intense furnaces,
several of the mineral species which enter into the composition of
primitive mountains.--Note D.

[6] The Travels of Saussure and Deluc present a multitude of facts
of this description. These geologists imagined, that they could
only have been produced by enormous eruptions. De Buch and Escher
have recently employed themselves upon this subject. The memoir of
the latter, inserted in the Nouvelle Alpina of Steinmüller, vol. i.
presents the general results in a remarkable manner. The following is
a comprehensive view of them: Such of these blocks as are scattered
over the low parts of Switzerland and Lombardy, come from the Alps,
and have descended along their valleys. They occur every where, and
of all sizes, up to 50,000 cubic feet, over the great extent of
country which separates the Alps from the Jura mountains; and they
rise upon the sides of the latter facing the Alps, to a height of
4000 feet above the level of the sea. They are found at the surface,
or in the superficial layers of debris, but not in the strata of
sandstone, molasse, or conglomerate, which fill up almost every where
the interval in question. They are sometimes isolated, sometimes in
heaps. The height of their situation is not connected with their
magnitude; the smaller ones alone appear sometimes a little worn, but
the large ones are not so at all. Those which belong to the basin of
each river are found, upon examination, to be of the same nature as
the mountains of the tops or sides of the high valleys in which the
tributary streams of this river take their rise. They are already
seen in these upper valleys, and are particularly accumulated at the
places which are situated above some of the contractions of these
valleys. They have passed over the lower hills, when their height
has not been more than 4000 feet; and then they are seen upon the
other side of the ridges, in the cantons between the Alps and Jura,
and even upon the latter itself. It is opposite the mouths of the
valleys of the Alps that they are seen in the greatest quantity, and
at the greatest heights; those of the intervening spaces have not
been carried so high. Among the chains of the Jura mountains, which
are more remote from the Alps, they are only found in places which
are opposite the openings of the nearer chains.

From these facts, the author draws the conclusion, that the
transportation of these blocks has taken place at a period subsequent
to the deposition of the sandstones and conglomerates, and has
perhaps been occasioned by the last of the revolutions which the
globe has experienced. He compares the transportation in question to
that which still takes place from the agency of torrents; but the
objections presented by the consideration of the great size of the
blocks, and the deep valleys over which they must have passed, appear
to us to militate greatly against this part of his hypothesis.--Note
E.

[7] Regarding the changes of the surface of the earth, known from
history or tradition, and consequently dependent on causes still in
operation, see the German work of M. de Hof, entitled “Geschichte der
Natürlichen Veränderungen der Erdoberfläche,” 2 vols. 8vo. Goth. 1822
and 1824. The facts contained in it are collected with equal care and
erudition.

[8] Note F.

[9] Note G.

[10] Voyage aux Terres Australes, t. i. p. 161.

[11] Note H.

[12] It is a common opinion in Sweden, that the level of the sea is
becoming lower, and that many places may even be forded or passed
dry-shod, which were formerly impracticable. Eminent philosophers
have adopted this popular opinion; and M. von Buch goes so far as
to suppose that the whole of Sweden is gradually rising. But it is
singular, that no one has made, or at least published, a series of
accurate observations, calculated to confirm a fact that had been
announced so long ago, and which would leave no doubt upon the mind,
if, as Linnæus asserts, this difference of level were so much as four
or five feet yearly. Note I.

[13] Mr Stevenson, in his observations upon the bed of the German
Ocean and British Channel, maintains that the level of the sea is
continually rising, and has been very sensibly elevated within the
last three centuries. Fortis asserts the same of some parts of
the Adriatic sea. But the example of the Temple of Serapis, near
Pouzzola, proves that the margins of that sea are, in many places,
of such a nature as to be subject to local risings and fallings. On
the other hand, there are thousands of quays, roads, and other works,
made along the sea-side by the Romans, from Alexandria to Belgium,
the relative level of which has never varied. Note K.

[14] When I formerly mentioned this circumstance of the science of
geology having become ridiculous, I only expressed a fact, to the
truth of which every day bears witness; but in this I did not profess
to give my own opinion, as some respectable geologists seem to have
believed. If their mistake has arisen from any thing equivocal in my
expressions, I here apologize to them.

[15] Burnet, Telluris Theoria Sacra. Lond. 1681.

[16] Woodward, Essay towards the Natural History of the Earth. Lond.
1702.

[17] Scheuchzer, Mém. de l’Acad. 1708.

[18] Whiston, New Theory of the Earth. Lond. 1708.

[19] Leibnitz, Protogæa. Act. Lips. 1683; Gott. 1749.

[20] Telliamed. Amsterd. 1748.

[21] Theorie de la Terre, 1749; and Epoques de la Nature, 1775.

[22] See La Physique de Rodig. p. 106, Leipsic, 1801; and Telliamed,
vol. ii. p. 169, as well as a multitude of new German works. M. de
Lamarck has of late years developed this system to a great extent, in
France, and supported it with much ingenuity, in his Hydrogeologie
and Philosophie Zoologique.

[23] M. Patrin has shewn much ingenuity in supporting these
fantastical ideas, in several articles of the Nouveau Dictionnaire
d’Histoire Naturelle.

[24] This application of pantheism to geology may be best seen in the
works of Oken and Steffens.

[25] Delamétherie, in his “Géologie,” admits crystallization as the
principal agent.

[26] Hutton and Playfair.--Illustrations of the Huttonian Theory of
the Earth. Edin. 1802.

[27] Lamanon,--in various parts of the Journal de Physique,--after
Michaelis, and several others.

[28] Dolomieu, in the Journal de Physique.

[29] MM. de Marschall, in their Researches respecting the Origin and
Development of the present order of the World. Giessen, 1802.

[30] Bertrand,--Periodical Renewal of the Terrestrial Continents.
Hamburgh, 1799.

[31] My work has, in fact, proved how far this inquiry was yet new
when I commenced it, notwithstanding the excellent labours of Camper,
Pallas, Blumenbach, Merk, Sömmering, Rosenmüller, Fischer, Faujas,
Home, and other learned men, whose works I have most scrupulously
cited in such of my chapters as their researches are connected with.

[32] This is more particularly noticed in the Chapter on Elephants in
the first volume of Professor Cuvier’s _Recherches_.

[33] See the history of the Rhinoceros in the first part of the
second volume of Professor Cuvier’s _Recherches_.

[34] See the chapter on the Hippopotamus, in the first volume of
_Recherches_.

[35] Hist. Anim. Lib. ii. cap. 1.

[36] Jul. Capitol., Gord. iii. cap. 23.

[37] Antilope Gnu, Gmel.

[38] Pliny, Lib. viii. cap. 32.; and Ælian, Lib. vii. cap. 5.

[39] Ælian, Anim. v. 27.

[40] Pliny, lib. viii. cap. 15.; and lib. xi. cap. 37.

[41] Ælian, Anim. xiv. 14.

[42] Opp. Cyneg., ii. v. 445. et seq.

[43] Pliny, lib. viii. cap. 21.

[44] See the great Work upon Egypt, Antiq. iv. pl. 49.; and pl. 66.

[45] Ælian, Anim. xv. 14.

[46] Idem, Anim. iii. 34.

[47] Arist. Hist. Anim. lib. ii. cap. 5.

[48] Ælian, ii. 53.

[49] Idem, ii. 20.

[50] Idem, xv. 24.

[51] Idem, xv. 24.

[52] Idem, Anim. iii. 3.

[53] Idem, iv. 32.

[54] This is more particularly explained in the chapters upon Deer
and Oxen, in the fourth volume of Professor Cuvier’s _Recherches_.

[55] Aurochs is Bos Urus, Lin., not the Urus of the ancients, which
latter appears now to be extinct.

[56] Buffon having read in Du Fouilloux a mutilated passage of
Gaston-Phébus, Count de Foix, in which that prince describes the
chase of the rein-deer, imagined that, in the time of Gaston, this
animal lived in the Pyrenees; and the printed editions of Gaston
were so faulty, that it was difficult to make out, with certainty,
what the author had intended to say; but having had recourse to his
original manuscript, which is preserved in the Royal Library, I have
ascertained that it was in _Xueden_ and _Nourvègue_, (Sweden and
Norway), that he relates having seen and hunted the rein-deer.

[57] Athenæis, lib. v.

[58] The only error committed, is that of giving it a claw too much
to the hind foot. Augustus exhibited thirty-six of them; Dion, lib.
lv.

[59] Caracalla killed one of them in the Circus; Dion, lib. lxxvii.
Consult also Gisb. Cuperi de Eleph. in nummis obviis, ex. ii. cap.
vii.

[60] See Lichtenstein, Comment. de Simiarum quotquot veteribus
innotuerunt formis. Hamburgh, 1791.

[61] The Jerboa is impressed upon the medals of Cyrene, and indicated
by Aristotle under the name of _Two-legged Rat_.

[62] Plin. viii. 31. Arist. lib. ii. cap. 40. Phot. Bibl., Art. 72;
Ctes. Indic. Ælian, Anim., iv. 21.

[63] Ælian, Anim. iv. 27.

[64] Ælian, xvi. 20. Photius, Bibl., art. 72. Ctes. Indic.

[65] See Corneille Lebrun, Voyage en Muscovie, en Perse et aux Indes,
tom. ii. See also the German work by M. Heeren, on the Commerce of
the Ancients.

[66] Photius, Bibl., art. 250. Agatharchid., Excerpt. hist., cap.
xxxix. Ælian, Anim. xvii. 45. Plin. viii. 21.

[67] I have even seen, in the collection of the late Mr Addrien
Camper, a skeleton of a hyena, in which several of the vertebræ of
the neck were anchylosed. It was probably from seeing some similar
individual that the character in question was attributed to all
hyenas. This animal ought to be more subject than any other to such
an accident, on account of the prodigious power of the muscles of its
neck, and the frequent use which it makes of them. When the hyena has
laid hold of any thing, it is easier to drag it along by it than to
wrest it from its jaws; and it is this circumstance which has caused
the Arabs to consider it as the emblem of invincible obstinacy.

[68] It does not in reality change its sex, but it has an orifice in
the perineum, which might make it be supposed to be hermaphrodite.

[69] Arist. Anim. ii. 1. iii. 1. Plin. xl. 46.

[70] Herod. iv. 192.

[71] Oppian, Cyneg. ii. vers. 551.

[72] Plin. viii. 53.

[73] Philostorg. iii. 11.

[74] Plin. viii. 21.

[75] Onesicrit, ap. Strab. lib. xv. Ælian, xiii. 42.

[76] Plin. viii. 31.

[77] Barrow’s Voyage to the Cape, Fr. transl. ii. 178.

[78] Oppian, Cyneg, lib. II. v. 468. and 471.

[79] De Anim. lib. xv. cap. 14.

[80] Ælian, Anim. iv. 52; Photius, Bibl. p. 154.

[81] I do not intend by this remark, as I have already observed on
a former occasion, to detract from the merit of the observations of
Camper, Pallas, Blumenbach, Sœmmering, Merk, Faugas, Rosenmüller,
Home, &c.; but their excellent works, which have been very useful
to me, and which I quote throughout, are incomplete; and several of
these works have only been published since the first editions of this
Essay.

[82] See M. Frederick Cuvier’s memoir upon the varieties of dogs, in
the Annales du Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, which he drew up at the
request of Professor Cuvier, from a series of skeletons of all the
varieties of the dog prepared in the Professor’s collection.

[83] The first figure made of it from nature is in the Description
de la Menagerie, a work composed by M. Cuvier. It is seen perfectly
represented in the great work on Egypt.--Antiq. t. iv. pl. xlix.

[84] See the Journal de Marseille et des Bouches-du-Rhône, of the
27th Sept. 25th Oct. and 1st Nov. 1820.

[85] I am confirmed in this opinion by the sketches transmitted to me
by M. Cottard, one of the Professors of the College of Marseilles.

[86] These skeletons, more or less mutilated, are found near Port
de Moule, on the north-west coast of the mainland of Guadaloupe, in
a kind of slope resting against the steep edges of the island. This
slope is, in a great measure, covered by the sea at high-water, and
is nothing else than a tufa, formed, and daily augmented, by the very
small debris of shells and corals, which the waves detach from the
rocks, and the accumulated mass of which assumes a great degree of
cohesion in the places that are most frequently left dry. We find, on
examining them with a lens, that several of these fragments have the
same red tint as a part of the corals contained in the reefs of the
island. Formations of this kind are common in the whole archipelago
of the Antilles, where they are known to the Negroes under the name
of _Maçonne-bon-dieu_. Their augmentation is proportioned to the
violence of the surge. They have extended the plain of the Cayes
to St Domingo, the situation of which has some resemblance to the
Plage du Moule, and there are sometimes found in it fragments of
earthen vessels, and of other articles of human fabrication, at a
depth of twenty feet. A thousand conjectures have been made, and
even events imagined, to account for these skeletons of Guadaloupe.
But, from all the circumstances of the case, M. Moreau de Jonnès,
correspondent of the Academy of Sciences, who has been upon the spot,
and to whom I am indebted for the above details, thinks that they are
merely bodies of persons that have perished by shipwreck. They were
discovered in 1805 by M. Manuel Cortès y Campomanès, at that time a
general officer in the service of the colony. General Ernouf, the
governor, caused one to be extracted with much labour, of which the
head, and almost the whole superior extremities, were wanting. This
had been deposited at Guadaloupe, in the expectation that another
and more complete specimen would be procured, in order to send them
together to Paris, when the island was taken by the English. Admiral
Cochrane having found this skeleton at the headquarters, sent it to
the English Admiralty, who presented it to the British Museum. It is
still in that collection, and M. Kœnig, Keeper of the Mineralogical
Department, has described it in the Phil. Trans. of 1814, and there
I saw it in 1818. M. Kœnig observes, that the stone in which it is
imbedded, has not been cut to its present shape, but that it seems to
have been simply inserted, in the form of a distinct nodule, into the
surrounding mass. The skeleton is so superficial, that its presence
must have been perceived by the projection of some of its bones.
They still contain some of their animal matter, and the whole of
their phosphate of lime. The rock being entirely formed of pieces of
corals, and of compact limestone, readily dissolves in nitric acid.
M. Kœnig has detected fragments of _Millepora miniacea_, of several
madrepores, and of shells, which he compares to _Helix acuta_ and
_Turbo pica_. This fossil skeleton is represented in Plate I. More
recently, General Donzelot has caused another of these skeletons
to be extracted, which is now in the Royal Cabinet, and of which a
figure is given in Plate II. It is a body which has the knees bent.
A small portion of the upper jaw, the left half of the lower, nearly
the whole of one side of the trunk and pelvis, and a large portion of
the left upper and lower extremities, are what remain of it. The rock
which contains it, is evidently a travertin, in which are imbedded
shells of the neighbouring sea, and land-shells, which are still
found alive in the island, namely, the _Bulimus guadalupensis_ of
Ferussac.

[87] See M. de Schlotheim’s Treatise on Petrifactions, Gotha, 1820,
p. 57; and his Letter in the Isis of 1820, 8th Number, No. 6. of
Supplement.

[88] It is perhaps proper that I take notice of those fragments of
sandstone, regarding which some noise was attempted to be made last
year (1824), and in which a man and a horse were alleged to have
been found petrified. The mere circumstance of its being a man and
a horse, with their flesh and skin, that these fragments must have
represented, might have enabled every one to perceive that the whole
was a mere _lusus naturæ_, and not a true petrifaction.--Note L.

[89] Fourcroy has given an analysis of them in the Annales du Museum,
vol. x. p. 1.

[90] Journal de Physique, t. xlii, p. 40. _et seq._

[91] Herod. Euterpe, v. and xxv.

[92] Arist. Meteor. lib. i. cap. 14.

[93] Demaillet, Description of Egypt, p. 102-3.

[94] Herod. Euterpe, xiii.

[95] See M. Girard’s Observations on the valley of Egypt; and on the
secular increase of the soil which covers it, in the great work upon
Egypt, and Mod. Mem. t. ii. p. 343. On this subject we may further
observe that Dolomieu, Shaw, and other respectable authors, have
estimated these secular elevations much higher than M. Girard. It is
to be lamented, that nowhere has it been tried to examine the depth
of these deposits over the original soil, or the natural rock.

[96] See M. Forfait’s Memoir on the lagunes of Venice, inserted in
the Mém. de la Classe Phys. de l’Institut, t. v. p. 213.

[97] Note M.

[98] In various parts of the two last volumes of his Letters to the
Queen of England.

[99] Melpom. lxxxvi.

[100] Ibid. lvi.

[101] This supposed diminution of the Black Sea and Sea of Asoph, has
also been attributed to the rupture of the Bosphorus, which had taken
place at the pretended period of the deluge of Deucalion; and yet,
in order to establish the fact itself, recourse is had to successive
diminutions of the extent attributed to these seas by Herodotus,
Strabo, and others. But it is very obvious, that, if this diminution
had arisen from the rupture of the Bosphorus, it would necessarily
have been completed long before the time of Herodotus, and even at
the period at which Deucalion is supposed to have lived.

[102] See the Geography of Herodotus by M. Rennel, p. 56. _et seq._;
and the Physical Geography of the Black Sea, &c. by M. Dureau de
Lamalle. There is only at present the small river of Kamennoipost,
that could represent the Gerrhus and Hypacyris, such as they are
described by Herodotus.

M. Dureau, p. 170, supposes Herodotus to have made the Borysthenes
and Hypanis discharge themselves into the Palus Mæotis; but Herodotus
(in Melpom. liii.) only says that these two rivers fall together
into the same lake, that is, into the Liman, as at the present day.
Herodotus does not carry the Gerrhus and Hypacyris any farther.

[103] For example, M. Dureau de Lamalle, in his Physical Geography
of the Black Sea, quotes Aristotle (Meteor. lib. i. cap. 13.) as
“apprising us, that, in his time, there still existed several ancient
periods and peripli, attesting that there had been a canal leading
from the Caspian Sea into the Palus Mæotis.” Now, Aristotle’s words
at the place mentioned (Duval’s edition, i. 545. B.) are merely
these: “From the Paropamisus, descend, among other rivers, the
Bactrus, the Choaspes, and the Araxis, from which the Tanais, which
is a branch of it, takes its origin, into the Palus Mæotis.” Who does
not see that this nonsense, which is neither founded upon peripli
nor periods, is nothing else than the strange idea of Alexander’s
soldiers, who took the Jaxartes or Tanais of the Transoxian for the
Don or Tanais of Scythia? Arrian and Pliny distinguish these two
rivers from each other, but the distinction does not appear to have
been made in the time of Aristotle. How, then, could such geographers
as these furnish us with geological documents?

[104] See the Report upon the Downs of the Gulf of Gascony (or Bay of
Biscay) by M. Tassin.--Mont. de-Marsan, an x.

[105] Memoir on the means of fixing Downs, by M. Bremontier.

[106] Report of M. Tassin, loc. cit.

[107] See M. Bremontier’s Memoir.

[108] Denon, Voyage en Egypte.

[109] We might cite in confirmation all the travellers who have
visited the western border of Egypt.

[110] These phenomena are very well treated of in M. Deluc’s
Letters to the Queen of England, in the parts where he describes
the peat-mosses of Westphalia; and in his Letters to Lametherie,
inserted in the Journal de Physique for 1791, &c. as well as in those
which he has addressed to Blumenbach. We may refer also to the very
interesting details which are given in note F, respecting the islands
of the west coast of the Duchy of Sleswick, and the manner in which
they have been joined, whether to one another, or to the continent,
by alluvial depositions and peat-mosses, as well as respecting the
irruptions of the sea which from time to time have destroyed or
separated some of their parts.

[111] The period of Cyrus, about 650 years before the Christian era.

[112] The period of Ninus, about 2348 years before Christ, according
to Ctesias, and those who have followed him; but only 1250, according
to Volney, after Herodotus.

[113] Herodotus lived 440 years before Christ.

[114] Cadmus, Pherecydes, Aristæus of Proconnesus, Acusilaus,
Hecatæus of Miletum, Charon of Lampsacus, &c. See Vossius, Histor.
Græc. lib. i., and especially his fourth book.

[115] Note N.

[116] The Septuagint, 5345 years; the Samaritan text, 4869; the
Hebrew text, 4174.

[117] There is a difference of several years among chronologists
with respect to each of these events; but these migrations form,
notwithstanding, the peculiar and very remarkable feature of the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries before the christian era. Thus,
according to the calculations of Usserius, Cecrops came from Egypt to
Athens about 1556 years before Christ; Deucalion settled on Parnassus
about 1548; Cadmus arrived from Phenicia at Thebes about 1493; Danaus
came to Argos about 1485; and Dardanus established himself on the
Hellespont about 1449. All these founders of nations must therefore
have been nearly contemporary with Moses, whose migration took place
in 1491. Consult further, regarding the synchronism of Moses, Danaus
and Cadmus, _Diodorus_, lib. xi; in Photius, p. 1152.

[118] The genealogies of Apollodorus are generally known, and that
portion of them upon which Clavier endeavoured to establish a sort of
primitive history of Greece; but, when we become acquainted with the
genealogies of the Arabs, those of the Tartars, and all those which
our old chronicling monks invented for the different sovereigns of
Europe, and even for individuals, we readily comprehend that Greek
writers must have done for the early periods of their nation what has
been done for all the other nations, at periods when criticism had
not been used to throw light upon history.

[119] 1856 or 1823 years before Christ, or other dates still, but
always about 350 years before the principal Phœnician or Egyptian
colonies.

[120] The common date of Ogyges, according to Acusilaus, followed by
Eusebius, is 1796 years before Christ, consequently several years
after Inachus.

[121] Varro places the deluge of Ogyges, which he calls the _first
deluge_, 400 years before Inachus, and consequently 1600 years
before the first Olympiad. This would refer it to a period of 2376
years before Christ; and the deluge of Noah, according to the
Hebrew text, is 2349, there being only 27 years of difference. This
testimony of Varro is mentioned by Censorinus, _De Die Natali_,
cap. xxi. In reality, Censorinus wrote only 238 years after Christ;
and, it appears, from Julius Africanus, _ap. Euseb._ Præp. cv. that
Acusilaus, the first author who placed a deluge in the reign of
Ogyges, made this prince cotemporary with Phoronæus, which would have
brought him very near the first Olympiad. Julius Africanus makes only
an interval of 1020 years between the two epochs; and there is even
a passage in Censorinus conformable to this opinion. Some also read
_erogitium_ in place of _ogygium_, in the passage of Varro, which
we have quoted above from Censorinus. But what would this be but an
Erogitian Cataclysm, of which nobody has ever heard?

[122] Neither Homer nor Hesiod knew any thing of the deluge of
Deucalion, any more than that of Ogyges. The first author, whose
works are extant, by whom mention is made of the former, is Pindar
(Od. Olymp. ix.) He speaks of Deucalion as landing upon Parnassus,
establishing himself in the city of Protogene (first growth or
birth), and re-creating his people from stones; in a word, he
relates, but confining it to a single nation only, the fable
afterwards generalized by Ovid, and applied to the whole human race.
The first historians who wrote after Pindar, namely, Herodotus,
Thucydides, and Xenophon, make no mention of any deluge, whether of
the time of Ogyges, or that of Deucalion, although they speak of the
latter as one of the first kings of the Hellenes.

Plato, in his Timæus, says only a few words of the deluge, as well
as of Deucalion and Pyrrha, in order to commence the recital of the
great catastrophe, which, according to the priests of Sais, destroyed
the Atlantis; but, in these few words, he speaks of the deluge in the
singular number, as if it had been the only one. He even expressly
mentions farther on, that the Greeks knew only one. He places the
name of Deucalion immediately after that of Phoroneus, the first of
the human race, without making mention of Ogyges. Thus, with him, it
is still a general event, a true universal deluge, and the only one
which had happened. He regards it, therefore, as identical with that
of Ogyges.

Aristotle (Meteor. i. 14.) seems to be the first who considered this
deluge only as a local inundation, which he places near Dodona and
the river Achelous, but near the Achelous and Dodona of Thessaly.
Apollodorus (Bibl. i. § 7.) restores to the deluge of Deucalion all
its grandeur and mythological character. According to him, it took
place at the period when the age of brass was passing into the age
of iron. Deucalion is the son of Titan Prometheus, the fabricator
of man; he forms anew the human race of stones; and yet Atlas, his
uncle, Phoroneus, who lived before him, and several other personages
anterior to him, preserve a lengthened posterity.

In proportion as we advance toward authors who approach nearer our
own times, we find circumstances of detail added, which more resemble
those related by Moses. Thus Apollodorus gives Deucalion a great
chest as a means of safety; Plutarch speaks of the pigeons by which
he sought to find out whether the waters had retired; and Lucian, of
the animals of every kind which he had taken with him, &c.

With regard to the blending of traditions and hypotheses, by which
it has recently been tried to infer the conclusion, that the rupture
of the Thracian Bosphorus was the cause of Deucalion’s deluge,
and even of the opening of the pillars of Hercules, by making the
waters of the Euxine Sea discharge themselves into the Archipelago,
supposing them to have been much higher and more extended than they
have been since that event, it is not necessary for us to treat of
it in detail, since it has been determined by the observations of M.
Olivier, that if the Black Sea had been as high as it is imagined
to have been, it would have found several passages for its waters,
by hills and plains less elevated than the present banks of the
Bosphorus; and by those of the Count Andreossy, that had it one day
fallen suddenly in the manner of a cascade by this new passage,
the small quantity of water that could have flowed at once through
so narrow an aperture, would not only be diffused over the immense
extent of the Mediterranean, without occasioning a tide of a few
fathoms, but that the mere natural inclination necessary for the
flowing of the waters, would have reduced to nothing their excess of
height above the shores of Attica.

See further on this subject the note that I have published at the
head of the third volume of Ovid, of M. Lemaire’s collection.

[123] Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Antiq. Rom. lib. i. cap. lxi.

[124] Diodorus Siculus, lib. v. cap. xlvii.

[125] Stephen of Byzantium, under the word Iconium;--Zenodotus, Prov.
cent. vi. No. 10.;--and Suidas, _voce_ Nannacus.

[126] Lucian, De Deâ Syrâ.

[127] Arnobius, Contra Gênt. lib. v. p. m. 158, even speaks of a rock
in Phrygia, from which it was pretended that Deucalion and Pyrrha had
taken their stones.

[128] This mutual resemblance in their institutions is carried to
such an extent as to make it very natural to suppose that these
nations had a common origin. It should not be forgotten, that many
ancient authors thought that the Egyptian institutions came from
Ethiopia; and that Syncellus, p. 151. says positively that the
Ethiopians came from the banks of the Indus in the time of King
Amenophtis.

[129] See Polier. Mythology of the Hindoos, vol. i. p. 89, 91.

[130] See the elaborate Memoir of Mr Wilfort, on the chronology of
the kings of Magadha, and the Indian emperors, and on the epochs
of Vicramaditya or Bikermadjit, and Salivahanna, in the Calcutta
Memoirs, vol. ix. p. 82. 8vo. edit.

[131] See Sir William Jones on the chronology of the Hindoos,
Calcutta Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 111. See also Wilfort on the same
subject, Ibid. vol. v. p. 241. and the lists which he gives in his
essay cited above, vol. ix. p. 116.

[132] Wilfort, Calcutta Mem. 8vo. vol. ix. p. 133.

[133] In the Ayeen-Acbery, vol. ii. p. 138, of the English transl.
See also Heeren, Commerce of the Ancients, vol. i. part ii. p. 329.

[134] See Bentley, on the Astronomical Systems of the Hindoos, and
their Connection with History; Calcutta Memoirs, vol. viii. p. 243.
of the 8vo edition.

[135] See Mr Colebrooke’s Memoir on the Vedas, Calcutta Memoirs, vol.
viii. p. 493. 8vo edition.

[136] Megasthenes apud Strabonem, lib. xv. p. 709. Almel.

[137] The epoch which gave birth to the present age, _Caliyug_ (the
earthen age,) 4927 years before the present day, or 3200 years before
Christ. See Legentil, Voyage aux Indes, t. i. p. 253.;--Bentley,
Calcutta Memoirs, vol. viii. of the 8vo edition, p. 212. This period
is only fifty-nine years farther back than the deluge of Noah,
according to the Samaritan text.

[138] The person named Satyavrata plays the same part as Noah, by
saving himself with fourteen saints. See Sir W. Jones, Calcutta
Memoirs, vol. i. p. 230. 8vo edition;--also in the Bagvadam, or
Bagavata, translated by Fouché d’Obsonville, p. 212.

[139] Cala-Javana, or, in common language, Cal-Yun, to whom his
partisans might have given the epithet, _deva_, _deo_, (dieu, god),
having attacked Chrishna (the Indian Apollo), at the head of the
northern nations (the Scythians, of whom was Deucalion, according
to Lucian), was repulsed by fire and water. His father Garga had
for one of his surnames _Pramathesa_ (Prometheus); and, according
to another legend, he was devoured by the eagle Garuda. These
particulars have been extracted by Mr Wilfort (in his Memoir upon
Mount Caucasus, Calcutta Memoirs, vol. vi. p. 507, 8vo edition),
from the Sanscrit drama, entitled Hari-Vansa. Mr Charles Ritter, in
his Vestibule of the History of Europe before Herodotus, concludes
that the whole fable of Deucalion was of foreign origin, and had
been brought into Greece along with the other legends of that part
of the Grecian worship which had come from the north, and which had
preceded the Egyptian and Phenician colonies. But if it be true that
the constellations of the Indian sphere have also names of persons
celebrated in Greece, that Andromeda and Cepheus are represented
under the names of _Antarmadia_ and _Capiia_, &c. we should perhaps
be induced to draw, with Mr Wilfort, a conclusion quite the reverse.
Unfortunately the authenticity of the documents referred to by this
writer has been doubted among the learned.

[140] About 4000 years before the present time. See Bentley, Calcutta
Memoirs, vol. viii. p. 226. of the 8vo edition, Note.

[141] See Plato’s Timæus and Critias.

[142] Euterpe, chap. xcix. et seq.

[143] Herodotus thought he had discovered relations of figure and
colour between the Colchians and Egyptians; but it is infinitely more
probable that those dark-coloured Colchians of which he speaks, were
an Indian colony, attracted by the commerce anciently established
between India and Europe, by the Oxus, the Caspian Sea, and the
Phasis. See Ritter, Vestibule of Ancient History before Herodotus,
chap. i.

[144] Euterpe, chap. cxliii.

[145] Ibid. cxliv.

[146] Euterpe; cxli.

[147] Ibid. clix., and in the fourth Book of the Kings, chap. 19, or
in the second of the Paral. chap. 32.

[148] Syncell. p. 40.

[149] Syncell. p. 51.

[150] Ibid. p. 91. _et seq._

[151] Diod. Sic. lib. i. sect. 2.

[152] Tacit. Annal. lib. ii. cap. 60.

N. B.--According to the interpretation given by Ammianus, lib. xvii.
cap. 4., of the hieroglyphics on the obelisk of Thebes, which is at
present in Rome in the place of St John of Latran, it appears that a
Rhamestes was styled, after the eastern manner, lord of the habitable
earth; and that the history told to Germanicus was only a commentary
on this inscription.

[153] Pliny, lib. xxxvi. cap. 8, 9, 10, 11.

[154] That of Ramestes in Ammian. loc. cit.

[155] Stromat. lib. vi. p. 633.

[156] See the “Precis du Systeme Hieroglyphique des Anciens
Egyptiens,” by M. Champollion the younger, p. 245; and his Letter to
the Duke de Blacas, p. 15 et seq.

[157] This important bas-relief is engraved in the second volume of
M. Caillaud’s Voyage à Meroë, Plate xxxii.

[158] Syncell, p. 59.

[159] Canon, p. 355.

[160] The whole ancient mythology of the Brahmins has relation to the
plains or the course of the Ganges, where their first establishments
were evidently formed.

[161] The descriptions of the ancient Chaldean monuments have a
strong resemblance to what we see of those of the Indians and
Egyptians; but these monuments are not equally well preserved,
because they were only built of bricks dried in the sun.

[162] Clio, cap. xcv.

[163] Clio, cap. vii.

[164] Stephen of Byzantium, at the word _Chaldæi_.

[165] Josephus, (Contra App.) lib. i. cap. xix.

[166] Diod. Sic. lib. ii.

[167] Josephus (contra App.) lib. i. cap. 6; and Strabo, lib. xv. p.
687.

[168] See in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres, vol. v.
the memoir of Freret on the History of the Assyrians.

[169] Strabo, lib. xi. p. 507.

[170] Syncellus, p. 38 and 39.

[171] N. B.--It is very remarkable that Herodotus does not mention
having seen monuments of Sesostris, except in Palestine, and does not
speak of those of Ionia, but upon the authority of others, adding, at
the same time, that Sesostris is not named in the inscriptions, and
that those who had seen these monuments attributed them to Memnon.
See Euterpe, chap. cvi.

[172] Justin, lib. i. cap. i. Vetleius Paterculus, lib. i. cap. 7.

[173] See Moses of Chorene, Histor. Armeniac. lib. l. cap. i.

[174] See the Preface of the Brothers Whiston, regarding Moses of
Chorene, p. 4.

[175] Zendavesta of Anquetil, vol. ii. p. 354.

[176] Mazoudi, ap. Sacy, MS. of the Royal Library, vol. viii. p. 161.

[177] See the preface to the edition of Chou-king, by M. de Guignes.

[178] Chou-king, French translation, p. 9.

[179] See the Yu-kong, or first chapter of the second part of the
Chou-king, pp. 43-60.

[180] See the excellent and magnificent work of M. de Humboldt upon
the Mexican monuments.

[181] Geminus, who was cotemporary with Cicero, explains their
motives at length. See M. Halma’s edition at the end of the Ptolomée,
p. 43.

[182] The whole of this system is developed by Censorinus, De Die
Natali, cap. xviii. and xxi.

[183] Ideler. Historical Researches regarding the Astronomical
Observations of the Ancients. M. Halma’s translation, at the end of
his Canon de Ptolomée, p. 32. _et seq._

[184] Bainbridge, Canicul.

[185] Petau, Var. Dios. lib. v. cap. vi. p. 108.--Also, La Nanze,
Acad. de Bell. Lett. t. xiv. p. 346.

[186] Petau. loc. cit. M. Ideler asserts that this concurrence of
the heliacal rising of Sirius also took place in 2782 before Christ.
(Historical Researches in M. Halma’s Ptolomée, vol. iv. p. 37.) But
with regard to the Julian year 1598 after Christ, which is also the
last of a great year, Petau and Ideler differ much from each other.
The latter refers the heliacal rising of Sirius to the 22d July; the
former to the 19th or 20th of August.

[187] See, in the great work on Egypt, Antiq. Memoirs, vol. 1. p.
803. the ingenious Memoir of M. Fourier, entitled Recherches sur les
Sciences et le Gouvernement de l’Egypte.

[188] These are the words of the late M. Nouet, Astronomer to the
Expedition to Egypt. See Volney, New Inquiries regarding Ancient
History, vol. iii.

[189] Delambre, Abregé d’Astronomie, p. 217; and in his note upon the
Parantaellons, in his History of the Astronomy of the Middle Age, p.
lij.

[190] Delambre, Report upon M. de Paravey’s Memoir regarding the
Sphere, in the 8th vol. of the Nouvelles Annales des Voyages.

[191] Ideler, loc. cit. p. 38.

[192] See Laplace, Systeme du Monde, 3d edition, p. 17; and the
Annuaire of 1818.

[193] See on the Inaccuracy of the Determinations of the Sphere of
Eudoxus, M. Delambre, in the first volume of his History of the
Astronomy of the Ancients, p. 120. et seq.

[194] See the Preliminary Discourse of the History of the Astronomy
of the Middle Age, by M. Delambre, p. viii. et seq.

[195] Euterpe, chap. iv.

[196] Diog. Laert. lib. i. in Thalet.

[197] Saturnal. lib. i. cap. xv.

[198] Bibl. lib. i. p. 46.

[199] Geogr. p. 182.

[200] See regarding the probable newness of this period the excellent
dissertation of M. Biot, in his Researches respecting several points
of the Egyptian Astronomy, p. 148 _et seq._

[201] See M. Delambre, Hist. de l’Astronomie, vol. i. p. 212. See
also his analysis of Geminus, _ibid._ p. 211. Compare this with M.
Ideler’s Memoirs on the Astronomy of the Chaldeans, in the fourth
volume of M. Halma’s Ptolemy, p. 166.

[202] See Bailly, History of Ancient Astronomy; and M. Delambre, in
his work on the same subject, vol. i. p. 3.

[203] See Laplace, Exposé du Systeme du Monde, p. 330; and the
Memoir of Mr Davis, on the Astronomical Calculations of the
Indians.--Calcutta Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 225, 8vo. edition.

[204] See Mr Bentley’s Memoirs on the Antiquity of the
Surya-Siddhanta, Calcutta Memoirs, vol. vi. p. 540; and on the
Astronomical Systems of the Indians, ibid., vol. viii. p. 195. of the
8vo edition.

[205] Manuscript Memoirs of M. de Paravey, on the sphere of Upper
Asia.

[206] See the profound essay on the Astronomy of the Indians in M.
Delambre’s Histoire de l’Astronomie ancienne, vol. i. p. 400-556.

[207] See the Memoir of Sir William Jones, on the Antiquity of the
Indian Zodiac, Calcutta Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 289 of the 8vo edition.

[208] The following are Mr Wilfort’s own words, in his memoir on the
Testimonies of Ancient Hindoo Books, respecting Egypt and the Nile,
Calcutta Memoirs, vol. iii. p. 433 of the 8vo edition:

--“Having desired my pundit, who is a learned astronomer, to point
out in the heavens the constellation of Antarmada, he directed me
immediately to Andromeda, which I had taken care not to shew him as a
constellation that I knew. He afterwards brought me a very rare and
curious book, in Sanscrit, in which there was a particular chapter
on the Upanacshatras, or extra-zodiacal constellations, with figures
of Capeya, of Casyape, seated, and holding a lotus-flower in her
hand; of Antarmada, chained, with the fish near her; and of Parasica,
holding the head of a monster, which he had killed, dropping blood,
and having snakes for hair.”

Who does not recognise in this, Perseus, Cepheus, and Cassiope? But
we must not forget that this pundit of Mr Wilfort’s has become much
suspected.

[209] Chou-king, p. 6 and 7.

[210] Idem, p. 66. _et seq._

[211] See, in the Connaissance des Temps of 1809, p. 382, and in M.
Delambre’s Histoire de l’Astronomie ancienne, vol. i. p. 391, the
extract of a memoir by P. Gaubil, on the Observations of the Chinese.

[212] Thus at Dendera, the ancient Tentyris, a city below Thebes,
in the portico of the great temple, the entrance of which faces the
north, there are seen on the ceiling the signs of the zodiac marching
in two bands, one of which extends along the eastern side, and the
other along the opposite one. Each of the bands is embraced by the
figure of a woman of the same length, the feet of which are toward
the entrance, the head and arms toward the bottom of the portico;
the feet are consequently to the north, and the heads to the south.
(Great Work on Egypt, Antiq. vol. ix. pl. 20.)

The Lion is at the head of the band which is on the western side;
his direction is toward the north, or toward the feet of the figure
of the woman, and his feet are toward the eastern wall. The Virgin,
the Balance, the Scorpion, the Saggittary and the Capricorn, follow
marching in the same line. The latter is placed toward the bottom of
the portico, and near the hands and head of the large figure of the
woman. The signs of the eastern band commence at the extremity where
those of the other band terminate, and are consequently directed
toward the bottom of the portico, or toward the arms of the large
figure. They have the feet toward the lateral wall of their own side,
and the heads in the contrary direction to those of the opposite
band. The Aquarius marches first, and is followed by the Fishes,
the Ram, the Bull, and the Twins. The last of the series, which is
the Crab, or rather the Scarabæus, (for this insect is substituted
for the crab in the zodiacs of Egypt), is thrown to a side upon the
legs of the large figure. In the place which it should have occupied
is a globe resting upon the summit of a pyramid, composed of small
triangles, which represent a sort of rays, and before the base of
which is a large head of a woman with two small horns. A second
scarabæus is placed awry and cross-wise upon the first band, in the
angle which the feet of the large figure form with the body, and
before the space in which the Lion marches, which is a little behind.
At the other end of this same band, the Capricorn is very near the
bottom, or at the arms of the large figure; and, upon the left band,
the Aquarius is separated to some distance from it. The Capricorn,
however, is not repeated like the Crab. The division of this zodiac,
from the entrance, is therefore made between the Lion and the Cancer;
or if it be thought that the repetition of the Scarabæus marks a
division of the sign, it takes place in the Crab itself; but that of
the lower end is made between the Capricorn and Aquarius.

In one of the inner halls of the same temple, there was a circular
planisphere inscribed in a square, the same that has been brought to
Paris by M. Lelorrain, and which is to be seen at the Royal Library.
In it, also, the signs of the zodiac are observed among many other
figures which appear to represent constellations. (Great Work on
Egypt, Antiq. vol. iv. pl. 21.) The Lion corresponds to one of the
diagonals of the square; the Virgin, which follows, corresponds to
a perpendicular line which is directed toward the east; the other
signs march in the usual order, till we come to the Crab, which, in
place of completing the chain, by corresponding to the level of the
Lion, is placed above it, nearer the centre of the circle, in such a
manner that the signs are upon a somewhat spiral line. This Crab, or
rather Scarabæus, marches in a contrary direction to the other signs.
The Twins correspond to the north, the Sagittary to the south, and
the Fishes to the east, but not very exactly. At the eastern side of
this planisphere is a large figure of a woman, with the head directed
toward the south, and the feet toward the north, like that of the
portico. Some doubt might therefore also be raised regarding the
point at which the series of the signs ought to commence. According
as one of the perpendiculars or one of the diagonals is taken, or the
place where one part of the series passes over the other part, the
division will be judged to be at the Lion, or between the Lion and
the Crab; or lastly at the Twins.

At Esne, the ancient Latopolis, a city placed above Thebes, there
are zodiacs on the ceilings of two different temples. That of the
great temple, the entrance of which faces the east, is upon two
bands, which are contiguous and parallel to one another, along the
south side of the ceiling. The female figures which embrace them are
not placed in the direction of their length, but in that of their
breadth, so that one lies across near the entrance, or to the east,
the head and arms toward the north, and the feet toward the lateral
wall, or toward the south, and the other is in the bottom of the
portico, equally across, and looking toward the first. The band
nearest the axis of the portico, or the north, presents first, on
the side of the entrance, or east, and toward the head of the female
figure, the Lion, placed a little behind, and marching toward the
bottom, the feet directed toward the lateral wall. Behind the Lion,
at the commencement of the band, are two smaller Lions. Before it is
the Scarabæus, and then the Twins marching in the same direction;
then the Bull and the Ram, and the Fishes close to each other,
placed across upon the middle of the band, the Bull having its head
toward the lateral wall, the ram toward the axis. The Aquarius is
more distant, and resumes the same direction toward the bottom as
the first signs. On the band nearest the lateral wall and the north,
we see first, but at a considerable distance from the wall of the
bottom, or the west, the Capricorn, which marches in a contrary
direction to the Aquarius, and is directed toward the east, or the
entrance of the portico, having the feet turned toward the lateral
wall. Close upon it is the Sagittarius, which thus corresponds with
the Fishes and Ram. It also marches toward the entrance; but its feet
are turned toward the axis, and in a contrary direction to those of
the Capricorn. At a certain distance before, and placed near one
another, are the Scorpion and a woman holding the Balance. Lastly, a
little before, but still at a considerable distance from the anterior
or eastern extremity, is the Virgin which is preceded by a sphinx.
The Virgin and the woman holding the Balance, have also their feet
toward the wall, so that the Sagittary is the only one which is
placed with its head contrary to the other signs.

To the north of Esne is a small isolated temple, equally facing the
east, and having a zodiac also in its portico (Great Work on Egypt,
Antiquities, vol. i. Plate 87.) This zodiac is upon two lateral and
separated bands. That which extends along the south side commences
with the Lion, which marches toward the bottom, or toward the west,
the feet turned toward the wall, or the south. It is preceded by
the Scarabæus, and the latter by the Gemini, marching in the same
direction. The Bull, on the contrary, faces them, having a direction
toward the east. But the Ram and the Fishes resume the direction
toward the bottom, or toward the west. On the band of the north
side, the Aquarius is near the bottom, or the west, marching towards
the entrance or east, the feet turned toward the wall, preceded by
the Capricorn and Sagittary, both marching in the same direction.
The other signs are lost; but it is clear that the Virgin must have
marched at the head of this band, on the side next the entrance.
Among the accessory figures of this small zodiac, must be remarked
two winged Rams placed across, the one between the Bull and the
Twins, the other between the Scorpion and Sagittary, and each nearly
in the middle of its band; the second, however, a little more
advanced toward the entrance.

It was at first thought, that, in the great zodiac of Esne, the
division of the entrance took place between the Virgin and the Lion,
and that of the bottom between the Fishes and the Aquarius. But Mr
Hamilton, and MM. de Jollois and Villiers, have supposed, that, in
the Sphinx, which precedes the Virgin, they found a repetition of the
Lion, analogous to that of the Cancer in the great zodiac of Dendera;
so that, according to them, the division would be at the Lion. In
fact, without this explanation, there would only be five signs on one
side, while there would be seven on the other.

With regard to the small zodiac of the north of Esne, it is not known
whether some emblem analogous to this Sphinx may have occurred in it,
because this part is destroyed.--See British Review, February 1817,
p. 136; and Critical Letter on Zodiacomania, p. 33.

[213] Description of the Pyramids of Ghiza, by M. Grobert, p. 117.

[214] Connaissance des Temps for the year xiv.

[215] Observations upon the zodiac of Dendera, in the Revue
Philosophique et Litteraire, 1806, p. 257, _et seq._

[216] Ægyptiaca, p. 212.

[217] See in the British Review of February 1817, p. 13. _et seq._
the article No. vi. upon the origin and antiquity of the zodiac.
It is translated at the end of Swartz’s Critical Letter upon the
Zodiacomania.

[218] See M. Nouet’s Memoir in Volney’s New Inquiries regarding
Ancient History, vol. iii. p. 328-336.

[219] Eratosthenes has made but one constellation of the Scorpion
and Talons. He indicates the commencement of the latter without its
termination; and as he gives 1823 years to Scorpio, properly so
called, there remain 1089 for the other, on the supposition that
there is not an empty space between these two constellations.

[220] See the great work on Egypt. Antiq. Mem. vol. i. p. 486.

[221] Rhode. Essay upon the Age of the Zodiac, and the Origin of the
Constellations, in German. Breslau, 1809, p. 78.

[222] According to the tables of M. Delambre’s note above, the
solstice has remained 3474, or at least 3307 years, in the
constellation of virgo, the one which occupies the greatest space in
the zodiac, and 2617 in that of the Lion.

[223] Translation of Herodotus by Larcher, vol. ii. p. 570.

[224] See the Dissertation of the Abbé Dominique Testa, Sopra due
Zodiaci novellamente scoperte nell’ Egitto, Rome, 1802, p. 34.

[225] Delambre. Note at the end of the Report on the Memoir of M. de
Paravey. This report is printed in the Nouvelles Annales des Voyages,
vol. viii.

[226] See the work of M. Biot, entitled, Recherches sur plusieurs
points de l’Astronomie Egyptienne, appliquées aux monumens
astronomiques trouvés en Egypte; Paris, 1823, 8vo.

[227] Letronne. Researches into the history of Egypt during the
domination of the Greeks and Romans, p. 180.

[228] Id. ibid. p. xxxviij.

[229] Letronne. Ibid. p. 456, and 457.

[230] Letronne. Critical and Archæological Observations upon the
object of the zodiacal representations which remain to us of
antiquity, occasioned by an Egyptian zodiac painted in a mummy case,
which bears a Greek inscription of the time of Trajan; Paris, 1824,
8vo, p. 30.

[231] Idem, p. 48, and 49.

[232] Varro, de Ling. Lat. lib. vi. Signa, quod aliquid significent,
ut libra æquinoctium; Macrob. Sat. lib. i. cap. xxi. Capricornus ab
infernis partibus ad superas solem reducens Capræ naturam videtur
imitari.

[233] See the Memoir on the Origin of the Constellations, in Dupuis’s
Origine des Cultes, vol. iii. p. 324. _et seq._

[234] Id. ibid. p. 267.

[235] Dupuis himself suggests this second hypothesis. Ibid. p. 340.

[236] Ægyptiaca, p. 215.

[237] See in the Great Work on Egypt, Antiq. Mem. vol. i., the memoir
of M. Remi Raige upon the nominal and original zodiac of the ancient
Egyptians. See also the table of the Greek, Roman, and Alexandrian
months, in M. Halma’s Ptolemy, vol. iii.

[238] See the Historical Researches regarding the Astronomical
Observations of the ancients, by M. Ideler, a translation of which
has been inserted by M. Halma in the third volume of his Ptolemy: and
especially M. Freret’s memoir on the opinion of Lanauze, relative
to the establishment of the Alexandrian year, in the memoirs of the
Academy of Belles Lettres, vol. xvi. p. 308.

[239] See the Memoir of Sir William Jones on the Antiquity of the
Indian Zodiac. Calcutta Memoirs, vol. ii.

[240] See the Zodiac explained, or Researches regarding the Origin
and Signification of the Constellations of the Greek Sphere,
translated from the Swedish of M. Swartz; Paris, 1809.

[241] Saturnalia, lib. i. cap. xxi. sub. fin. _Nec solus Leo, sed
signa quoque universa zodiaci ad naturam solis jure referuntur, &c._
It is only in the explanation of the Lion and Capricorn, that he
has recourse to some phenomenon relative to the seasons; the Cancer
itself is explained in a general point of view, and with reference to
the obliquity of the sun’s march.

[242] See the Memoir of M. Guignes on the Zodiacs of the Eastern
Nations, in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres, vol. xlvii.

[243] See M. de Fortia d’Urban’s History of China before the Deluge
of Ogyges, p. 33.

[244] Copies have been printed separately, under the title of
_Description Geologique des Environs de Paris_, par MM. G. Cuvier et
Al. Brongniart. Second edition. Paris, 1822, 4to.

[245] See Professor Buckland’s work, entitled _Reliquiæ Diluvianæ_.
Lond. 1823, 4to, p. 185 et seq.; and the article _Eau_, by M.
Brongniart, in the 14th volume of the _Dictionnaire des Sciences
Naturelles_.

[246] A full view of the arrangement of rocks is given in note O.

[247] See my “Recherches sur les Ossemens Fossiles,” t. v. part ii.
p. 300.

[248] Id. vol. v. part ii. p. 355 and 525.

[249] See my “Recherches,” vol. v. part ii. p. 447.

[250] Researches, &c. vol. v. part ii. p. 475, _et seq._

[251] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 485 and 486.

[252] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 143.

[253] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 127.

[254] We expect a fuller knowledge of it from M. Conybeare’s
researches.

[255] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 343.

[256] Ibid. p. 120.

[257] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 358. _et seq._

[258] Ibid. p. 376.

[259] Ibid. p. 380.

[260] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 225.

[261] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 161, 232, and 350.

[262] Researches, vol. v. part iv. p. 310, _et seq._

[263] Ibid. p. 163.

[264] Ibid. p. 316.

[265] P. 317.

[266] Researches, vol. v. part ii. p. 266.

[267] Id. vol. v. part i. p. 234; and part ii. p. 521.

[268] See my Researches, in the whole of vol. iii., and especially p.
250; and vol. v. part ii. p. 505.

[269] Ibid. vol. v. part ii. p. 505.

[270] Researches, vol. iii. p. 254; and vol. iv. p. 498. and 499.

[271] Ibid. vol. iii. p. 258.

[272] Ibid. vol. v. part ii. p. 505.

[273] See my Researches, vol. ii. part i. p. 177 and 218; vol. iii.
p. 394; and vol. iv. p. 498.

[274] Regarding the Anaplotheria, see the whole of the 3d volume of
my “Researches,” and particularly p. 250 and 396.

[275] “Researches,” vol. iii. p. 398 and 404; vol. iv. p. 501; vol.
v. part ii. p. 506.

[276] “Researches,” vol. iii. p. 260.

[277] Id. vol. iii. p. 265.

[278] “Researches,” vol. iv. p. 103.

[279] I am indebted for the knowledge of this animal to the Count
de Bournon; and as I have not described it in my great work, I have
given a figure of it here. See Plate II. figs. 1 and 2.

[280] “Researches,” vol. iii. p. 267.

[281] Id. vol. iii. p. 269.

[282] Id. vol. iii. p. 272.

[283] Id. vol. iii. p. 284.

[284] Id. vol. iii. p. 297 and 300.

[285] Id. vol. v. part ii. p. 506.

[286] “Researches,” vol. iii. p. 304 _et seq._

[287] Id. vol. v. part ii. p. 166.

[288] Id. vol. iii. p. 335; vol. v. part ii. p. 166.

[289] Id. vol. iii. p. 233.

[290] Id. vol. v. p. 232.

[291] Id. vol. iii. p. 329; vol. v. part ii. p. 222.

[292] “Researches,” vol. v. part ii. p. 223 and 227.

[293] Id. vol. iii. p. 338.

[294] See my “Researches,” vol. iii. p. 351. _et seq._

[295] Id. vol. v. part i. p. 309.

[296] Id. p. 390.

[297] “Researches,” vol. v. part i. p. 393.

[298] Id. vol. v. part i. p. 352. and 357.

[299] “Researches,” vol. i. p. 75, 195 and 335; vol. iii. p. 371 and
405; vol. iv. p. 491.

[300] “Researches,” vol. i. p. 250, 265 and 335; vol. iv. p. 493.

[301] Id. vol. i. p. 206, 249; vol. iii. p. 376.

[302] “Researches,” vol, i. p. 304, 322; vol, iii. p. 380; vol. iv.
p. 493.

[303] Id. vol. ii. part i. p. 64; and vol. iv. p. 496.

[304] “Researches,” vol. ii. part i. p. 89. vol. iii.; p. 390; and
vol. v. part ii. p. 50.

[305] Id. vol. iii. p. 385.

[306] Id. vol. ii. part i. p. 71.

[307] Id. vol. ii. part i. p. 89.

[308] See my “Researches,” vol. part i. p. 89.

[309] Id. p. 95.

[310] Id. p. 109.

[311] See my “Researches,” vol. iv. p. 70.

[312] “Researches,” vol. iv. p. 168-225.

[313] Id. p. 89.

[314] See my “Researches,” vol. iv. p. 94.

[315] Id. vol. iv. p. 98.

[316] Id. vol. iv. p. 148; and vol. v. part ii. p. 509.

[317] Id. vol. iv. p. 150; vol. v. part ii. p. 510.

[318] Id. vol. iv. p. 153.

[319] Id. vol. iv. p. 199-204.

[320] Id. vol. iv. p. 174, 177, 196; vol. v. part i. p. 55.

[321] See my “Researches,” vol. iv. p. 178, 202, and 206; vol. v.
part i. p. 54.

[322] Id. vol. v. part i. p. 55.

[323] Id. vol. iv. p. 206.

[324] Id. vol. v. part ii. 517.

[325] Id. part i. p. 59.

[326] Id. p. 174; and part ii. p. 519.

[327] See my “Researches,” vol. v. part i. p. 160.

[328] Id. vol. v. p. 193.

[329] Id. vol. iv. p. 193.

[330] See my “Researches,” vol. iv. p. 351.

[331] Id. vol. iv. p. 356 and 357.

[332] Id. vol. iv. p. 392, and 507.

[333] Id. vol. iv. p. 452.

[334] Id. vol. iv. p. 458.

[335] Id. vol. iv. p. 461.

[336] Id. vol. iv. p. 475.

[337] Id. vol. iv. p. 467.

[338] See my “Researches,” vol. iv. p. 378 and 507; and vol. v. part
ii. p. 516.

[339] See Mr Buckland’s excellent work, entitled _Reliquiæ Diluvianæ_.

[340] See in the _Reliquiæ Diluvianæ_ of Mr Buckland the account of
the skeleton of a woman found in the cave of Pavyland; and in my
Researches, vol. iv. p. 193, that of a fragment of a jaw, found in
the osseous brecciæ of Nice.

M. de Schlotheim collected human bones in fissures at Kœstritz, where
there are also bones of rhinoceroses; but he himself expresses his
doubts regarding the epoch at which they were deposited.

[341] Herodotus, i. 2.

[342] Ælian, lib. ii. cap. 35 and 38.

[343] Id. lib. i. cap. 38.

[344] Bruce, French translation, 8vo. vol. viii, p. 264; and Atlas,
pl. xxxv., under the name of Abouhannès.

[345] Description d’un Ibis blanc et de deux cicognes, Academie des
Sciences de Paris, t. iii, pl. iii. p. 61. of the 4to edition of
1734, pl. xiii. fig. 1. The beak is represented as truncated at the
end, but this is a fault of the engraver.

[346] Numenius sordide albo-rufescens, capite anteriore nudo rubro,
lateribus rubro purpureo et carneo colore maculatis, remigibus
majoribus nigris, rectricibus sordide albo rufescentibus, rostro in
exortu dilute luteo, in extremitate aurantio, pedibus griseis. Ibis
candida, Brisson, Ornithologia, t. v. p. 349.

[347] Planches Enluminées, No. 389; Histoire des Oiseaux, t. viii.
4to. p. 14. pl. 1. This last figure is a copy of that of Perault,
with the same fault.

[348] Handbuch der Naturgeschichte, p. 203. of the edition of 1799;
but in the edition of 1807 he has restored the name of Ibis to the
bird to which it belongs.

[349] Philosophical Transactions for 1794.

[350] Folio edition, Oxford 1746, pl. v. and pages 64-66.

[351] Hasselquist, Iter Palestinum, p. 249. _Magnitudo gallinæ, seu
cornicis_; and, p. 250. _vasa quæ in sepulchris inveniuntur, cum
avibus conditis, hujus sunt magnitudinis_.

[352] We have definitively established this genus in our “Regne
Animal,” t. i. p. 483, and it appears to have been adopted by
naturalists.

[353] Bruce, _loc. cit._; and Savigny, “Mem. sur l’Ibis,” p. 12.

[354] Ælian, lib. ii. cap. 38.

[355] Ψιλὴ τὴν κεφαλὴν, καὶ τὴν δειρὴν πᾶσαν, λευκὴ πτεροῖσι πλην
κεφαλῆς, καὶ αὐχένος καὶ ἀκρέων τῶν πτερύγων καὶ τοῦ πυγαίου ἄκρου.
Larcher, in his French translation of Herodotus, has properly
understood the difference of the words αὐχήν, the nape, and δειρή or
δέρη the throat.

[356] Ælian, lib. v. cap. 29.

[357] Ælian, lib. ii. cap. xxxv;--Plut. De Solert. An.; Cic. de Nat.
Deor. lib. ii.;--Phil. de Anim. prop. 16. &c.

[358] De Med. Ægypt. lib. i. fol. i. vers. Paris Edition, 1646.

[359] Rer. Ægypt. lib. iv. cap. i. t. i. p. 199 of the Leyden Edition.

[360] See the French Translation, vol. ii. p. 167.

[361] Description de l’Egypte, part ii. p. 23.

[362] Antiq. Monum. Pl. x. p. 129.

[363] Hist. Anim. lib. ix. cap. xxvii. and lib. x. cap. xxx.

[364] Buffon, Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux, 4to, vol. viii. p. 17.

[365] Belon, Nature des Oiseaux, p. 159 and 200; and Portraits
d’Oiseaux, folio 44, vers.

[366] Observations de plusieurs singularités, &c.

[367] Savigny, Mémoire sur l’Ibis, p. 37.

[368] Idem, ibid.

[369] See the Great Work on Egypt, Natural History of Birds, pl. vii.
fig. 2.

[370] Euterpe, cap. lxxv. Herodotus says a place in Arabia, but it
is not seen how a place in Arabia could have been _near the city of
Buto_, which was in the western part of the Delta.

[371] Avis excelsa, cruribus rigidis, corneo proceroque rostro. Cic.
de Nat. Deor. lib. i.

[372] Strabo, lib. xvii.

[373] Ælian, Anim. lib. x. cap. xxix.

[374] Leopold de Buch, Voyage en Norwege, t. i. p. 30. of the German
edition.

[375] The _Sierra Parima_.

[376] T. ii. p. 233, 236, 252, 273, 288, 382, 597, 627, and 633.

[377] Are there any blocks in North America to the north of the Great
Lakes?

[378] In Silliman’s American Journal there are many interesting
details in regard to the distribution of boulders in the northern
parts of North America.

[379] By _geest_ is understood the alluvial matter which is spread
over the surface both of the hilly and low country, and appears,
according to De Luc, to have been formed the last time the waters of
the ocean stood over the surface of the earth.--J.

[380] By _marsch_, according to De Luc, is understood the new land
added to the coasts since the last retiring of the water of the globe
from the surface of the earth, and is formed by the sediments of
rivers, mixed more or less with sand from the bottom of the sea.--J.

[381] Vol. II. p. 114, 115, 116.

[382] A remarkable fact of this kind is related by Salt, in his
second journey to Abyssinia. The Bay of Amphila, in the Red Sea,
is formed, he says, of twelve islands, eleven of which are in part
composed of alluvial matters, consisting of corallines, madrepores,
echinites, and a great variety of shells common in that sea. The
height of these islands is sometimes thirty feet above high water.
The small island, which differs from the eleven others, is composed
of a solid limestone rock, in which veins of calcedony are observed.
Does not this small island, we may ask, indicate that some cause has
prevented the madrepores from covering it, while they constructed
their habitations in the neighbourhood, on bases which probably must
be of the same nature as those of the small island?

[383] On glancing over the charts of Kotzebue’s voyage, we are
struck at seeing several of these islands grouped in a circular
form, connected with one another by reefs which appear to consist of
madrepores, and to present, by this arrangement, a small internal
sea of great depth, to which an entrance is afforded by one or more
openings. May not this arrangement be owing to submarine craters, on
the edge of which the lithophytes have erected their habitations?

[384] 1824, St. 12. p. 443.

Malté Brun. Precis de la Geogr. Univers. T. ii. p. 459.; Catteau
Calleville, Tabl. de la Mer Balt. T. i. p. 158, 188.

[385] See the excellent figures in Blumenbach’s Decades.

[386] Equal to 27,340 yards and 10 inches English measure, or 15½
miles and 60 yards.

In these reductions of the revolutionary French _metres_ to English
measure, the _metre_ is assumed as 39.37 English inches.--_Transl._

[387] Or 10,936 yards and 4 inches, equal to 6 miles and nearly a
quarter, English measure.

Hence the entire advance of the alluvial promontory of the Po appears
to have extended to 21 miles 5 furlongs and 216 yards.--_Transl._

[388] Equal to 10,936 or 12,030 yards English measure.--_Transl._

[389] Or 2,186 yards 2 feet English.--_Transl._

[390] Or 20,778 yards 1 foot 10 inches.--_Transl._

[391] Or 21,872 yards.--_Transl._

[392] Or 18,591 yards.--_Transl._

[393] Equal to 9,842 or 10,936 yards.--_Transl._

[394] Equal to 6,564 or 7,655 yards.--_Transl._

[395] From 19 miles 7 furlongs and 15 yards, to 20 miles 4 furlongs
and 9 yards, English measure.--_Transl._

[396] Or 15,366 yards.--_Transl._

[397] Equal to 9,842 or 10,936 yards.--_Transl._

[398] 20,231 yards.--_Transl._

[399] Exactly 27 yards 1 foot and ¼ of an inch English.--_Transl._

[400] Already stated at from 19¾ to 20½ miles; or more precisely,
from 34,995 yards 1 foot 8 inches, to 36,089 yards 10 inches English
measure.--_Transl._

[401] Equal to 76 yards 1 foot 7 inches and 9/10ths.--_Transl._

[402] In the salt lakes of Westphalia, we find Lymnæa and fresh water
plants in abundance.

[403]
      “Jamque erat in totas sparsurus fulmina terras,
      Tela reponuntur, manibus fabricata Cyclopum:
      Pœna placet diversa; genus mortale sub undis
      Perdere, et ex omni nimbos dimittere cœlo.”
                        OVID. _Met._ lib. i. v. 255.

[404] Vide note on the Non-mechanical Action of pure Water.

[405] T. ix. c. 6. Claudian describes this occurrence in the
following words:

      “Cum Thessaliam scopulis inclusa teneret
      Peneo stagnante palus, et mersa negarent
      Arva coli, trifida Neptunus euspide montes
      Impulit adversos: tum forti saucius ictu
      Dissiluit gelido vertex Ossæus Olympo.”
                        _De raptu Proserp._ I. ii. v. 179.

[406] L. i c. 3.

[407] According to Wheeler, who was on the spot, it appears to have
broken through the Mount Ptous.

[408] Bibliothec. Historic. l. v. c. 47.

[409] Vol. xiv. p. 205.

[410] The remarks on the connection of geology with agriculture and
planting, are inserted here as an illustration of some of the details
in the body of the work. They will, we think, be useful to students
of agriculture and geology, and interesting to the general reader.

[411] The dryness depends chiefly, if not entirely, on the fissures
or divisions in the rocky base of the soil; for, in some parts of
Sologne in France, as stated by Mr Arthur Young, and in sundry
districts of England, chalk and limestone bottoms are occasionally
observed to be retentive and wet. Undergrounds, formed of chalk or
limestone, have frequently a thin covering of vegetable mould, from
their being, in some cases, over close and wet, and in others over
open and dry; the former condition being unfriendly to vegetation and
the formation of mould, and the latter too readily permitting its
departure when formed, or otherwise favouring the decomposition and
waste of that material.

[412] The reason here assigned is confirmed by some observations
delivered by one of the latest and most intelligent of the English
writers on agriculture. “If,” says Mr Marshall, “the several strata”
(viz. the subsoil and base) “are of so loose a texture, as to permit
the waters of rains to pass quickly downward, without being in
any sufficient degree arrested by the soil, the land may be said
to be worthless to agriculture.” He adds, “Before we suggest any
improvement of lands of the latter description, it will be proper
to premise, that many of the light sandy soils of Norfolk, which
would otherwise be uniformly absorbed to a great depth, have a thin
earthy substance, or ‘Pan,’ which intervenes between the soil and the
subsoil, and which is of such a texture, as to check the descent of
rain waters, and thereby retain them the longer in the soil, as well
as to prevent the manure it contains from being carried away by their
rapid descent; yet sufficiently pervious to prevent a surcharge of
moisture from injuring the produce. To this fortunate circumstance
is principally owing the fertility of the lands of East Norfolk:
for wherever this filter happens to be broken by the plough, or
otherwise, the soil becomes unfertile, and continues to be so for a
length of years.”--(_See Norfolk_, vol. i. page 11.) “This fact aptly
suggests the expedient of improving, or fresh forming, a filter of
this kind; seeing how capable it is of producing so many valuable
advantages; the more especially, as it is probably the Norfolk pan
owes its origin to fortuitous art, rather than to nature.”--(_See
Norfolk_, vol. i. page 12.) “A millstone, or other heavy wheel-shaped
stone, made to run upon its edge, in the bottom of the plough-furrow
(the thickness of its edge being equal to the width of the furrow),
by the help of an axle and wheels, would greatly compress a light,
porous subsoil. The idea of forming a pan artificially, struck me
first in Norfolk; and time and experience have strengthened it. If
the experiment be made on a compressible subsoil, as sandy loam, or
the soft rubble which sometimes intervenes between an absorbent soil
and an open rock, there can be little doubt of its success. But on
loose open gravel, which is not sufficiently mixed with tenacious
mould to sheath it, and lying on an open base, less utility may be
expected from it.”

[413] _Vide_ Dr Adam of Calcutta’s Remarks on the Rocks and Soil
of Constantia at the Cape of Good Hope, in an early number of the
Edinburgh Philosophical Journal.

[414] The ochre yellow colour of the decayed greenstone around
Edinburgh, and in general in many trap districts in this country, is
caused by the decomposition of the imbedded iron pyrites.

[415] The Streams of Obsidian in Iceland, Lipari, Peak of Teneriffe,
Ascension, and Mexico, afford striking examples of the fact stated
above.

[416] Those who feel disposed to examine the connection of Geology
and Agriculture, will find many additional details and views given in
Hausmann’s work, of which the above may be considered in some degree
as a condensed view.

[417] John Hart, Esq. Member of the Royal College of Surgeons in
Ireland, some time ago sent to me a copy of a very interesting
tract entitled “A Description of the Skeleton of the Fossil Deer
of Ireland, _Cervus megaceros_; drawn up at the instance of the
Committee of Natural Philosophy of the Royal Dublin Society.”
The details in the text are extracted from Mr Hart’s memoir, and
the engraving of the Elk is copied from Mr Hart’s lithographic
delineation.

[418] In a Report which Mr Hart made to the Committee of Natural
Philosophy of the Royal Dublin Society, and which was printed in
their Proceedings of July 8. 1824, he alluded to an instance of a
pair of these horns having been used as a field gate near Tipperary.
Since that he has learned that a pair had been in use for a similar
purpose near Newcastle, county of Wicklow, until they were decomposed
by the action of the weather. There is also a specimen in Charlemont
House, the town residence of the Earl of Charlemont, which is said to
have been used for some time as a temporary bridge across a rivulet
in the county of Tyrone.

[419] I have seen this antler divided into three points in two
specimens, one at the Earl of Besborough’s, county Kilkenny (which
measured eight feet four inches between the tips), the other in the
hall of the Museum of Trinity College: it is single in the greater
number of specimens, as in those which Cuvier describes.

[420] Vide Annales du Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, tome xii. et
Ossemens Fossiles, tome iv.

[421] Philosophical Transactions, vol. xix.

[422] A fine pair of this species, male and female, were exhibited
by Mr Bullock in this city a few summers ago. They did not answer to
any description of Pennant or of Dr Shaw, but had the characters of
C. canadensis as given by Cuvier.

[423] Dr Percy, Bishop of Dromore, describes a pair which measured
fourteen feet by the skull. Archæologia Brit. v. vii.

[424] Pennant’s Zoology, vol. i.

[425] Organic Remains, vol. iii.

[426] Ossemens Fossiles, tom. iv.

[427] The elk, when pursued in the forests of North America, breaks
off branches of trees as thick as a man’s thigh.

[428] It is evidently not the animal mentioned by Julius Cæsar, under
the name of Alces; vide Comment. de Bello Gallico, vi. cap. x.; nor
is it the Alces of Pliny.

[429] I am well aware of the occasional existence of holes in the
ribs, a few instances of which I have seen in the human subject: but
they differ essentially in character from the opening here described,
as they occupy the centre of the rib, mostly in its sternal
extremity, and have their margin depressed on both sides.

[430] In A. W. Schlegel’s Contributions to the History of the
Elephant, in the Indische Bibliothek, i. 2, are enumerated many facts
not generally known regarding the African and Asiatic Elephants, and
the details are accompanied with interesting inferences.

[431] According to Schleiermacher, Goldfuss and Von Bachr, fossil
tusks, resembling those of the African Elephant, have been found in
some districts. Cuvier, however, questions their being in a true
fossil state.

[432] This plate forms the frontispiece to the present work.

[433] Sœmmering über die fossilien Knocken, welche in der _Protogæa_
Von Leibnitz abgebildet sind: eine Abhandlung in der Magazin für die
Naturgeschichte des Menschen von C. Grosse, iii. 1790, s. 73.

[434] Rosenmüller, Beschreib. des Höhlenbären, s. 2.

[435] Further information in regard to these caves will be found
in Leonhard Taschenb. der Min. vii. 2. S. 439; and in Nöggerath’s
Gebirge in Rheinland-Westphalen, ii. S. 27. and iii. 1. 13.

[436] In England and Wales the following caves have been found to
contain fossil bones:

1. Cave in _Duncombe Park_, not far from that of Kirkdale. It
contains only recent bones.

2. Cave of _Hutton_, a village in Somersetshire, at the foot of
the Mendip Hills. Bones of elephants, horses, hogs, of two species
of deer, of oxen, the nearly entire skeleton of a fox, and the
metacarpal bone of a large bear, have been found in it.

3. Cave of _Derdham Down_, near to _Clifton_, to the westward of
Bristol. Bones of horses were found in it.

4. Cave of _Balleye_, near to _Warksworth_, in Derbyshire. In 1663,
teeth of elephants, some of which are still preserved, were found in
it.

5. Cave of _Dream_, at the village of _Callow_, near to _Warksworth_.
It was discovered in the year 1822, by some miners in search of
lead-ore. Nearly all the bones of a rhinoceros, in a good state of
preservation, were found enclosed in a bed of mud in this cave.

6. Fissures and caves at _Oreston_. These are in transition
limestone. Bones of the rhinoceros, hyæna, tiger, wolf, deer, ox, and
horse, have been found in them.

7. Cave of _Nicholaston_, near the coast of _Glamorgan_, in the Bay
of _Oxwich_. In the year 1792, bones of the elephant, rhinoceros, ox,
deer, and hyæna, were found in it.

8. Caves of _Paveland_, in the county of _Glamorgan_, between the Bay
of Oxwich and Cape Worms, at the entrance of the English Channel.
There are two openings in a cliff thirty or forty feet above the
level of the sea, which we cannot reach but at low water. The
clergyman and the surgeon of the neighbouring village of Portinan
found in them a tusk and grinder of an elephant; afterwards other
bones of the elephant, rhinoceros, horse, bear, hyæna, fox, wolf,
ox, deer, rat, of birds, the _skeleton of a woman_, and splinters
of bones, were also found. But many of these bones are modern; and
the diggings made at remote and unknown periods have displaced the
ancient bones, and mixed them with the modern, and also with shells
of the present sea.

Professor Goldfuss, in the 11th volume of the _Nova Acta
Physico-medica Academiæ Cæsareæ Leopoldino-Carolinæ Naturæ
Curiosorum_, published in 1823, gives an account of the fossil bones
he met with in the caves of Westphalia and Franconia. Speaking of the
Cave of Gaylenreuth, he says, that Esper has the following remarks on
the quantity of bones taken from these caves:

On first examination, there were collected, in a very short time,
in the dust of the floors of these caves, upwards of 200 different
teeth; and we may assume that, by the end of the year 1774, some
thousands were collected. It is difficult to form a conception of
the number of these zoolithes, and of the earth in which they are
contained; and I do not hesitate in believing, that, at the lowest
estimate, several hundred waggons load would not remove the whole.
The animal earth, with intermingled bones, was, in many places, eight
or ten feet deep. Esper calculated that, in his time, 180 skulls had
been taken out of the loose animal earth, the conglomerate not having
been broken up for this purpose. Of late years, the conglomerate
afforded, in the space of three years, 150 skulls; and we may
estimate that twice as many more were destroyed in breaking them
out of the hard stalactitic matter. If we add to this the pieces of
skulls which occur in this repository, more frequently than perfect
skulls, we may estimate that more than a thousand individuals lie
buried here.

These bones occur now, as formerly, irregularly dispersed; that is,
teeth, cylindrical bones, cranial bones, and vertebræ of different
species, and of different individuals of different ages, and of
various sizes, occur conglutinated together. We never find the under
jaw of the same skull near to it, and rarely the two separated
portions of the same lower jaw together; the skulls occurring all
in the deeper places: and Esper found the teeth forming a bed by
themselves. The bones still possess their sharper edges, and are
neither rubbed nor gnawed.

If we assume a thousand buried individuals, the proportion of the
different species will be, according to Dr Goldfuss, as follows:

  1. Hyæna spelæa,        25
  2. Canis spelæus,       50
  3. Felis spelæa,        25
  4. Gulo spelæus,        30
  5. Ursus priscus,       10
  6. Ursus arctoideus,    60
  7. Ursus spelæus,      800

The bones of small animals, mentioned by Esper, are now no longer met
with; and, in the collections of Esper and Frischmann, Dr Goldfuss
saw only a few dozen of the glutton (Gulo.) The contents of a
peculiar conglomerate described by Esper, cannot now be determined.
It consisted of a confused assemblage of very small bones, the
fracture surfaces of which were fibrous, and contained also the
thigh-bone and rib of a bird, which were conjectured to equal in size
those of the eagle; hence Esper inferred that the mass was made up of
the remains of reptile and fish bones.

No remains have hitherto been found in these caves; but in former
times we are told that teeth of the elephant were found in the
Zahnloch, and a vertebra, supposed, of a rhinoceros, in the
Schneiderloch. The bones of domestic animals, such as deer, roes,
foxes, and badgers, frequently found in the caves, shew, at a glance,
that they have come into their present situation accidentally, at a
modern period.

The cave at _Mockas_ formerly contained in its deepest fissures,
teeth and fragments of bones of bears, associated with rolled stones,
and enveloped in earthy marl. The entrance to this cave is situated
on the acclivity of a hill. Goldfuss ascended to the entrance of
it by means of a rope, and found in its interior many narrow, wide
extended hollows, which are generally so confined that we can only
visit them by creeping. Here and there there are small widenings, and
frequently narrow outlets occur in the roof.

The _Zahnloch_ and the _Schneiderloch_, which also contain single
bones of bears, are small vaults, with wide openings, into which we
can penetrate without difficulty.

[437] The fact mentioned in the text brings to our recollection an
interesting Memoir of Professor Walther, entitled, “On the Antiquity
of diseases in Bones,” printed in Grasse and Walther’s Journal der
Chirurgie und Augenheil Kunde, viii. From eleven specimens of bones
of cave-bears found in the Caves of Sundwich, described by Walther,
a proof is obtained, that the common forms of osseous diseases occur
in them, just as they are observed at present in the human species,
viz. necrosis, anchylosis, caries, exostosis, formation of new bony
matter, thickening, thinning, and arthritic properties of diseased
bones. Most of those diseases are such as would result from violent
injuries, and the consequent very tedious organo-vital reaction. Such
mechanical injuries would give rise to necrosis, caries, exostosis,
&c. We can easily conceive, says Walther, how that the rapacious
animals of a former world may have been exposed to violent mechanical
injuries of their bodies, and of single parts of them. It is worthy
of remark, that most of the diseased bones are of the lower jaw, the
alveolar processes of it and the walls of single alveolæ. During the
combats of the cave bears for their prey amongst themselves, or with
other gigantic animals, the jaws and teeth must have experienced the
greatest mechanical injuries. The necroses of the humeral bones are
such as might result from a bruising of the bones, and the caries of
the upper surface of the bodies of the lumbar vertebræ, may have been
occasioned by external violence. Walther is also of opinion, that
the cave-bears suffered from diseases of the bones not referrible
to mechanical injuries. He remarks of a radius and a vertebra,
whose arthritic condition he carefully describes, “These bones have
experienced pathological changes, which could only arise from a long
continued diseased condition of the nutritive process. They are very
light, have an extremely thin crust, the greater part of their mass
is of a spongy, very porous substance, and are uncommonly fragile.
Such a change could not be produced by any external mechanical
injury, nor by any slight action of the weather; but must proceed
from a tedious constitutional disease, connected with a total
change of the organo-forming plastic activity, and proceeding from
a peculiar dyscrasia.” Hence it is probable, these cave-bears even
suffered from gout, scrophula, and other similar diseases.

[438] According to Laugier, in 100 parts of the earth in which
the bones in the caves of Gaylenreuth are imbedded, he found the
following proportional quantity of constituent parts:

  1. Lime, with a little magnesia, in the state of carbonate,     32.0
  2. Carbonic acid and moisture,                                  24.0
  3. Phosphate of lime,                                           21.5
  4. Animal matter and water,                                     10.0
  5. Alumina slightly coloured with manganese,                     4.0
  6. Silica coloured with iron,                                    4.0
  7. Oxide of iron, probably combined with phosphoric acid,        3.5
  8. Loss,                                                         1.0
                                                                 -----
                                                                 100.0





       *       *       *       *       *

       *       *       *       *       *

BOOKS

PRINTED FOR WILLIAM BLACKWOOD, EDINBURGH;

AND T. CADELL, STRAND, LONDON.

  Elegantly Printed, in 3 vols. royal octavo,
  EXOTIC FLORA;

  Containing
  FIGURES AND DESCRIPTIONS

  OF
  NEW, RARE, OR OTHERWISE INTERESTING EXOTIC PLANTS,

  _Especially of such as are deserving of being Cultivated
  in our Gardens_;

  TOGETHER WITH
  REMARKS UPON THEIR GENERIC AND SPECIFIC CHARACTERS,
  NATURAL ORDERS, HISTORY, CULTURE, TIME OF FLOWERING, &c.

  BY WILLIAM JACKSON HOOKER, LL.D. &c.

  Member of the Imperial Academy Naturæ Curiosorum; of the Wernerian
  Natural History Society of Edinburgh; of the Royal Botanic Society
  of Ratisbon; of the Helvetic Society of Natural History, &c. &c. and
  _Regius Professor of Botany in the University of Glasgow_.

  The Work includes, under the title of EXOTIC FLORA, Figures and
  Descriptions of such Plants, not natives of Great Britain, as are
  Cultivated in our Gardens, or, in defect of them, of such as can
  be faithfully represented from well-preserved specimens in our
  Herbaria. In the selection of Species, preference is, of course,
  given to such as recommend themselves by their beauty, their
  history, novelty, or some remarkable or little-known characters in
  their flowers and fruit.

       *       *       *       *       *


  In one large volume 8vo, with Eight Plates, price 15s.

  ELEMENTS OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF PLANTS;

  Containing the Principles of Scientific Botany, Nomenclature,
  Theory of Classification, Phytography, Anatomy, Chemistry,
  Physiology, Geography, and Diseases of Plants; with a History of
  the Science, and Practical Illustrations.

  By A. P. DECANDOLLE, and K. SPRENGELL.

  Translated from the German.

       *       *       *       *       *


  In octavo, price 15s.

  FLORA EDINENSIS;

  OR

  A DESCRIPTION OF PLANTS GROWING NEAR EDINBURGH,

  Arranged according to the Linnean System; with a Concise Introduction
  to the Natural Orders of the Class Cryptogamia, and Illustrative
  Plates.

  By ROBERT KAYE GREVILLE, F.R.S. & F.A.S.E.

  Member of the Wernerian Natural History Society of Edinburgh,
  &c. &c. &c.

       *       *       *       *       *


  A New Edition, entirely re-composed, in 4 large vols. 8vo. L. 3,

  A SYSTEM OF CHEMISTRY.

  BY THOMAS THOMSON, M.D. F.R.S. &c. &c.

       *       *       *       *       *


  In one vol. 8vo. with Four Maps of the Constellations, and a Plate
  of the figures illustrative of the Work. The Second Edition,
  corrected and improved. Price 9s.

  AN ELEMENTARY TREATISE ON ASTRONOMY;

  Or, an Easy Introduction to a Knowledge of the Heavens,

  Intended for the Use of those who are not much conversant in
  Mathematical Studies.

  By the REV. A. MYLNE, D. D.

  Minister of Dollar, Honorary Member of the Royal Physical Society,
  and Fellow of the Society of Scottish Antiquaries.

       *       *       *       *       *


  Handsomely Printed in 8vo. the Second Edition, Price 14s.

  WERNER’S NOMENCLATURE OF COLOURS,

  With Additions, so as to render it highly useful to the Arts and
  Sciences, particularly Zoology, Botany, Chemistry, Mineralogy,
  and Morbid Anatomy. Annexed to which are examples selected from
  well-known objects in the Animal, Vegetable, and Mineral Kingdoms.

  By PATRICK SYME,

  Flower-Painter, Edinburgh; Painter to the Wernerian and Caledonian
  Horticultural Societies.

  “Having the good fortune to possess a colour-suite of minerals,
  made, under the eye of Werner, by my late friend H. Meuder of
  Freyberg, and being desirous of making this collection as generally
  useful as possible, I mentioned my wish to Mr Syme, who readily
  undertook to make a delineation of all the varieties in this
  collection. This he executed with his usual skill and accuracy;
  adding, at the same time, to the series several other colours,
  which he has distinguished by appropriate names, and arranged along
  with those in the Wernerian system. The whole has been published in
  a series of Tables, in a Treatise which ought to be in the hands of
  every Mineralogist, and indeed in the possession of Naturalists of
  every description.”--Professor JAMESON’S _Characters of Minerals_.

       *       *       *       *       *


  In One Volume large 8vo. Price 14s.

  HISTORICAL SKETCH

  OF

  THE PROGRESS OF DISCOVERY, NAVIGATION,
  AND COMMERCE,

  From the earliest Records to the beginning of the Nineteenth Century.

  BY WILLIAM STEVENSON, ESQ.

  ⁂ This HISTORICAL SKETCH has been drawn up with reference to, and
  in order to form the 18th and concluding Volume of KERR’S VOYAGES
  and TRAVELS. But though drawn up with this object, it is strictly
  and entirely an independent and separate Work. At the conclusion
  of the Volume is given a Select Catalogue of Voyages and Travels,
  which, it is hoped, will be found generally useful, not only in
  directing reading and inquiry, but also in the formation of a
  Library.




  TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

  Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been
  corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within
  the text and consultation of external sources.

  There are several references to both ‘De Luc’ and ‘Deluc’; these
  refer to the same person, and have not been changed.

  Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text,
  and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained.

  Pg vi: ‘gradual developement’ replaced by ‘gradual development’.
  Pg xxi: ‘Zodaical’ replaced by ‘Zodiacal’.
  Pg xxii: ‘Horse,   288’ replaced by ‘Horse,   285’.
  Pg 3: ‘of the Peleponnesus’ replaced by ‘of the Peloponnesus’.
  Pg 21: ‘formations, aud’ replaced by ‘formations, and’.
  Pg 58: ‘lama, the vicuna’ replaced by ‘llama, the vicuna’.
  Pg 68: ‘large qradupeds’ replaced by ‘large quadrupeds’.
  Pg 74: ‘Three several’ replaced by ‘Three separate’.
  Pg 78: was incorrectly labelled as ‘87’ in the original book.
  Pg 80: ‘lama, the vicunna’ replaced by ‘llama, the vicuna’.
  Pg 84: ‘corrrespond, and’ replaced by ‘correspond, and’.
  Pg 112: ‘that the fosil’ replaced by ‘that the fossil’.
  Pg 138: ‘by the Phenicians’ replaced by ‘by the Phœnicians’.
  Pg 149: ‘a very reremote’ replaced by ‘a very remote’.
  Pg 155: ‘the Bramins, and’ replaced by ‘the Brahmins, and’.
  Pg 172: was incorrectly labelled as ‘146’ in the original book.
  Pg 211: ‘even admiting’ replaced by ‘even admitting’.
  Pg 212: ‘Zodaical’ replaced by ‘Zodiacal’.
  Pg 212: ‘1_{s}’ (subscript s) replaced by ‘1^s’ (superscript s).
  Pg 222: ‘double suppositon’ replaced by ‘double supposition’.
  Pg 225: ‘found bebetween’ replaced by ‘found between’.
  Pg 227: missing anchor for Footnote [226] inserted after
          ‘at that period’.
  Pg 249 Table: the duplicate headings ‘Transition Formations’ and
          ‘Primitive Formations’ have been removed from the last two
          blocks of the table.
  Pg 263: ‘named it _Iquanodon_’ replaced by ‘named it _Iguanodon_‘.
  Pg 263: missing anchor for Footnote [261] inserted after
          ‘_Iguanodon_‘.
  Pg 279: ‘whereever our ancient’ replaced by ‘wherever our ancient’.
  Pg 280: ‘or anaplothæria,’ replaced by ‘or anaplotheria,’.
  Pg 302: ‘of Bufffon’ replaced by ‘of Buffon’.
  Pg 360: ‘is very obsure’ replaced by ‘is very obscure’.
  Pg 361: ‘Letters sur l’Histoire’ replaced by ‘Lettres sur l’Histoire’.
  Pg 367: ‘islands of Pelworm’ replaced by ‘islands of Pellworm’.
  Pg 374: ‘of Maviston’ replaced by ‘of Mavieston’.
  Pg 378: ‘Great Britian’ replaced by ‘Great Britain’.
  Pg 379: ‘sands of Barrey’ replaced by ‘sands of Barray’.
  Pg 385: ‘breaks of in’ replaced by ‘breaks off in’.
  Pg 401: ‘1770’ replaced by ‘1700’.
  Pg 461: ‘a slop of even’ replaced by ‘a slope of even’.
  Pg 475: ‘sol d crust’ replaced by ‘solid crust’.
  Pg 476: ‘it of contributiug’ replaced by ‘it of contributing’.
  Pg 493: ‘with the\nPalm,’ replaced by ‘with the Palm’.
  Pg 506 Table: the heading ‘HEAD.’ has been inserted at the top of
          column 1.
  Pg 522: ‘various corridores’ replaced by ‘various corridors’.
  Pg 541: ‘crosses the torent’ replaced by ‘crosses the torrent’.
  Pg 547 Table: this multipage Table has been split into three parts.
         The right-hand column ‘OBSERVATIONS’ with four entries has
         been replaced by four Notes (a) to (d) below the Table.
  Pg 549: Note (d); ‘the fissil rocks’ replaced by ‘the fossil rocks’.
  Pg 550 Table: this wide Table has been split into two parts.
         The right-hand column ‘OBSERVATIONS’ with a single entry has
         been replaced by a Note (a) below the Table.

  Pg 24 Footnote [7]: ‘Geschechte der Natürliche’ replaced by
        ‘Geschichte der Natürlichen’.
  Pg 62 Footnote [34]: ‘on the Hippopatamus’ replaced by
        ‘on the Hippopotamus’.
  Pg 65 Footnote [56]: ‘describes the chace’ replaced by
        ‘describes the chase’.
  Pg 136 Footnote [110]: ‘the peat-moses of’ replaced by
        ‘the peat-mosses of’.
  Pg 144 Footnote [119]: ‘principal Phenician’ replaced by
        ‘principal Phœnician’.
  Pg 291 Footnote [334]: ‘458’ replaced by ‘p. 458’.
  Pg 351 Footnote [355]: Some adjustments have been made to the
         Greek quotation, after checking with external sources.
  Pg 510 Footnote [431]: ‘been found  some’ replaced by
         ‘been found in some’.

  There is a reference to ‘Note K’ and ‘Note N’ and ‘Note O’, but they
  do not exist. ‘Note J’ does not exist and has no reference to it.







End of Project Gutenberg's Essay on the Theory of the Earth, by Georges Cuvier