54 COSMOS. 



mundus, which, in its primary meaning, indicated nothing 

 more than ornament, and did not even imply order or regu- 

 larity in the disposition of parts. It is probable that the 

 introduction into the language of Latium of this technical 

 term as an equivalent for Cosmos, in its double signification, is 

 due to Ennius,* who was a follower of the Italian school, and 

 the translator of the writings of Epicharmus and some of his 

 pupils, on the Pythagorean philosophy. 



We would first distinguish between the physical history 

 and the physical description of the world. The former, con- 

 ceived in the most general sense of the word, ought, if mate- 

 rials for writing it existed, to trace the variations experienced 

 by the universe in the course of ages, from the new stars 

 which have suddenly appeared and disappeared in the vault 

 of heaven, from nebula dissolving or condensing, to the first 

 stratum of cryptogamic vegetation on the still imperfectly 

 cooled surface of the earth, or on a reef of coral uplifted 

 from the depths of ocean. The physical description of the 

 world presents a picture of all that exists in space of the 

 simultaneous action of natural forces together with the phe- 

 nomena which they produce. 



But if we would correctly comprehend nature, we must 

 not entirely or absolutely separate the consideration of the 

 present state of things from that of the successive phases 

 through which they have passed. We cannot form a just 

 conception of their nature without looking back on the mode 

 of their formation. It is not organic matter alone that is 

 continually undergoing change and being dissolved to form 

 new combinations. The globe itself reveals at eveiy phase 

 of its existence the mystery of its former conditions. 



We cannot survey the crust of our planet without recog- 

 nising the traces of the prior existence and destruction of an 

 organic world. The sedimentary rocks present a succes- 

 sion of organic forms, associated in groups, which have suc- 

 cessively displaced and succeeded each other. The different 



* See, on Ennius, the ingenious researches of Leopold Krahner, in his 

 Grundlinien zur Geschichte des Verfalls der- Romischen Staats -Religion, 

 1837, s. 41 45 (Outlines of the History of the Decay of the Esta- 

 blished Religion amongst the Romans). In all probability Ennius did 

 not quote from writings of Epicharmus himself, but from poems composed 

 in the name of that philosopher, and in accordance with his views. 



