298 Von Hoff on the Origin of Meteoric Stones. 



stones, are extremely favourable to the thought, that the phe- 

 nomenon is caused by a process which produces solid bodies 

 from the loose matter already mentioned. 



If we adopt this view, we find that it explains many of the 

 phenomena of meteoric stones, much more easily than the other 

 hypothesis ; that the difficulties which are opposed to the adop- 

 tion of the latter do not affect it ; and that it leaves unassailed 

 the results of chemical investigation. 



The s'uddenness of the phenomenon, the momentary explo- 

 sion, the light diffused by the falling body, the circumstance 

 of the stone being cooled on arriving at the earth, its solidity 

 at that moment, its internal crystalline structure, the enormous 

 extent of the fiery mass when at a great height compared with 

 the small volume of its solid product, the fact, that the com- 

 mencement of the phenomena has sometimes presented a small 

 luminous cloud, at other times parallel luminous stripes, which 

 gradually unite to form a fire-ball ; all these appearances are 

 much more easily reconciled to the theory, that, in the fall of a 

 meteoric stone, a new body has been formed, than to the other, 

 that a perfectly formed solid body from another planet, or from 

 some other quarter, has fallen to the earth simply from its spe- 

 cific gravity. I presume it to be well known, that, in great 

 chemical combinations and decompositions, violent and sudden 

 phenomena occur, such as evolutions of heat, light, &c. 



There is another circumstance which seems to favour more 

 the theory of the new formation of a solid mass from original 

 elements, than that of the ejection of a fragment of a larger mass 

 of rock, and this is, the trace of a regular form produced by 

 crystallization of the whole mass which is observable in some 

 meteoric stones.* Although the approximation to a regular 

 form is only a slight one in the cases alluded to, yet it is not to 

 be denied that observations of this kind deserve attention.-)- 



* Chladni's Feuermeteore, p. 49. 



"\ In King's work on Meteoric Stones (1796), afterwards mentioned in the 

 present memoir, we find the following curious passage regarding the form of 

 meteoric stones. He says, " I have received from Sir Charles Blagden a pre- 

 sent of one of the very small stones that are affirmed to have fallen in Tus- 

 cany, and which has very lately been brought carefully from Italy. Its figure 

 plainly indicates, that in the instant of its formation, there was a strong effort 

 towards crystallization. For it is an irregular quadrilateral pyramid, whose 



