286 Von Hoff on tJie Origin of Meteoric Stones. 



that they are of cosmical origin ; and hence that they are either 

 the fragments of shattered planets ; or themselves small plane- 

 tary bodies, which, floating and revolving in space, descend to 

 the earth's surface when they come within the reach of the at- 

 traction of our globe ; or, finally, that they are accumulations of 

 loose matter (the original material from which the planets were 

 formed). 



The second : that they are masses ejected from the moon, was 

 advanced by Baron Von Ende, after the possibility of such an 

 origin had been mathematically demonstrated by Laplace and 

 Olbers ; and has been recently defended by Benzenberg and 

 Berzelius. 



The third : that they are of atmospheric origin, that is, that 

 they have been formed in the earth's atmosphere from gaseous 

 substances belonging to itself, has been adopted by several au- 

 thors, and recently by Egen and Butler. 



Some other more or less paradoxical opinions, such as, that 

 meteoric stones are terrestrial stony masses altered by lightning, 

 or masses ejected by the volcanps of the earth, or even portions 

 of the poles, have all been proved to have so little foundation, 

 that they are unworthy of farther consideration. 



Butler's essay induced me to publish formerly some observa- 

 tions on the origin of meteoric stones,* but at that time the in- 

 vestigations of Berzelius had not been made known. That 

 great chemist has declared himself an advocate for the lunar 

 origin of meteoric stones, on grounds which he finds in the 

 chemical constitution and oryctognostical characters of these 

 bodies; thus affording new support to Ende, Benzenberg, and 

 the other partisans of an hypothesis which had been partly 

 raised on a mathematical basis. 



The views of Berzelius had great attractions for me, but 

 some doubts which I entertained on the subject, have induced me 

 to place in as clear a light as possible all the circumstances con- 

 nected with the remarkable phenomenon of the fall of meteoric 

 stones. I now venture to offer my observations on the ques- 

 tion, and I do so the more willingly, because it may possibly 

 have been imagined (though incorrectly), from the tenor of my 

 former remarks on Butler's hypothesis, that I assumed to my- 



* PoggendorfPs Annalen, vol. xxxiv. p. 351. 



