MODERN BIOLOGY 339 



fossils cannot be the same as those living now; the fossil remains of lions, 

 bears, elephants, belong to species other than those at present existing; 

 fossilized human remains do not exist, the human bones that have been 

 declared to be such have become mixed up with fossil finds by accident. 

 In this connexion he maintains, in opposition to Lamarck, that the pe- 

 riods of geological development have not by any means been going on for 

 an indefinite time, but, on the contrary, during a fairly limited space of 

 time, and that therefore the assumption that species change through hab- 

 its and environment is unwarranted. If change of species were conceivable, 

 it would be possible, he thinks, to come across transitions between extinct 

 and now existing animal forms, but there are none. The immutability of 

 species is to Cuvier's mind an absolute fact; he has not a trace of Linnasus's 

 hesitation, which he expressed in his old age, in face of the difficulty of 

 drawing a line of demarcation between the species; according to Cuvier's 

 definition, species consist of "those individuals that originate from one an- 

 other or from common parents and those which resemble them as much as 

 one another." In this definition no mention is made of the creation of the 

 species, which, it will be remembered, Linnasus took as his starting-point, 

 but which, on the whole, Cuvier does not discuss at all. The assertion that 

 so often occurs in literature that, in his view, life has been created anew 

 after each catastrophe is utterly incorrect; on the contrary, he points out 

 that isolated parts of the earth may have been spared on each occasion when 

 it was laid waste, and that living creatures have propagated their species 

 anew from these oases, which indeed he expressly applies to the human race. 

 But as a rule Cuvier is not particularly interested in what might conceivably 

 have happened; he adheres to what he considers to be definitely proved, 

 leaving hypotheses to the "metaphysician." Nor is it true, as has also been 

 stated of him, that he allowed religious beliefs to invade the realm of sci- 

 ence; he certainly embraced with conviction the tenets of the Protestant 

 Church, whose guardian he eventually became, but in his scientific argu- 

 ments these doctrines play no part whatever; as a matter of fact Lamarck 

 refers to the Creator far more often than Cuvier. It is true that the latter 

 cites the First Book of Moses in support of his flood theory, but Chaldean 

 and Egyptian documents are quoted at the same time and with exactly the 

 same authority; and to ascribe historical authenticity to popular legends 

 was an illusion shared at that time by most professional historians. 



His Regne animal 

 In his work Le Regne animal, distribue apres son organisation, which was pub- 

 lished in 1817, Cuvier develops his ideas further. In the foreword he enters 

 a strong protest against those who would arrange all living creatures in one 

 series and declares that such a method is unforgivable. He emphatically de- 

 nies that mammals, which come last in the system, are the lowest, or that 



