498 



NATURE 



{Sept. 1 8, 1879 



lished. Something was I;nown, too, of the geological position, 

 of fopsils. Steno, long before, had obrerved that the lowest 

 rocks were without life. Lehmann had shown that above these 

 primitive roclis, and derived from them, were the secondary 

 strata, full of the records of life, and above these were alluvial 

 derosits, which he referred to local floods and the deluge of 

 Noah. Rouelle, Fuch?el, and Odoardi had shed new light on 

 this subject. Werner had distinguished the transition rocks, 

 containing fossil remains, between the primitive and the secondary, 

 while everything above the chalk he grduped together as " The 

 overflowed land." Werner, as we have seen, had done more 

 than this, if we give him the credit his pupils claim for him. 

 He had found that the formations he examined contained each 

 its own peculiar fossils, and from the older to the newer there 

 was a gradual approach to recent forms. William Smith had 

 worked out the same thing in England, and should equally 

 divide the honour of this important discovery. 



The greatest advance, however, up to this time was that men 

 now preferred to observe rather than to beliive, and facts were 

 held in greater esteem than vague speculations. With this 

 preparation for future progress, the second period in the history 

 of paleontology, as I have divided it, may appropriately be 

 considered at an end. 



Thus far I have said nothing in regard to one branch of my 

 subject, the methods of paljeontological research, for up to this 

 time, of method there was none. We have seen that those of 

 the ancients who noticed marine shells in the solid rock, called 

 them such, and concluded that they had been left there by the 

 sea. The discovery of fossils led directly to theories of how the 

 earth was formed. Here the progress was slow. Subterranean 

 spirits were supposed to guard faithfully the mysteries of the 

 earth, while above the earth. Authority guarded with still greater 

 power the secrets men in advance of their age sought to know. 

 The dominant idea of the first sixteen centuries of the present 

 era was, that the universe was made for Man. This was the 

 great obstacle to the correct determination of the position of the 

 earth in the universe, and later, of the age of the earth. The 

 contest of astronomy against authority was long and severe, but 

 the victory was at last with science. The contest of geology 

 against the same power followed, and continued almost to our 

 day. The result is still the same. In the eaily stages of this 

 contest, there was no strife, for science was benumbed by the 

 embrace of superstition and creed, and little could be done till 

 that was cast off. In a superstitious age, when every natural 

 event is referred to a supernatural cause, science cannot live ; 

 and often as the sacred fire may be kindled by courageous far- 

 seeing souls, will it be quenched by the dense mist of ignorance 

 around it. Scarcely less fatal to the growth of science is the 

 age of Authority, as the past proves too well. With freedom 

 of thought, came definite knowledge, and certain progress ; — 

 but two thousand years was long to wait. 



With the opening of the present century, began a new era 

 in I'alceontology, which we may here distinguish as the third 

 period in its history. This branch of knowledge became now 

 a science. Method replaced disorder, and systematic study 

 superseded casual observation. For the ntxt half ccntui-y the 

 advance was continuous and rapid. One characteristic of this 

 period was, the accurate dttet mination of fossils by comparison 

 with living forms. This will separate it from the two former 

 epochs. Another distinctive feature of this period was the general 

 belief that every species, recent and extinct, vjas a separate 

 creation. 



At the very beginning of the epoch we are now to consider, 

 three names stand out in bold relief : Cuvier, I amarck, and 

 William Smith. To these men the science of jialaeontology 

 owes its origin. Cuvier and Lamarck, in France, had all the 

 power v\ hich great talent, education, and station could give ; 

 William Smith, an English surveyor, was without culture or 

 influence. The last years of the eighteenth century had been 

 spent by each of these men in preparation for his chosen 

 work, and the results ^^■ere now given to the world. Cuvier 

 laid the foundation of the paliEOntology of Vertebrate animals ; 

 Lamarck, of the Invertebrates ; and Smith established the prin- 

 ciples of Stratigraphical Palaeontology. The investigator of 

 fossils to-day seldom needs to consult earlier authors of the 

 science. 



George Cuvier (1769-1832), the most famous naturalist of his 

 time, was led to the study of extinct animals by ascertaining 

 that the remains of fossil elephants he examined were extinct 



species. "This idea," he says later, "which I announced to 

 the Institute in the month of January 1796, opened to me 

 views entirely new respecting the theory of the earth, and 

 determined me to devote myself to the long researches and to 

 the assiduous labours which have now occupied me for twenty- 

 five years."' 



It is interesting to note here that in this first investigation 

 of fossil vertebrates, Cuvier employed the same method that 

 gave him such important results in his later researches. Remains- 

 of elephants had been known to Europe for centuries, and many 

 authors, from Pliny down to the contemporaries of Cuvier, had 

 written about them. Some had regarded the bones as those of 

 human giants, and those who recognised what they were con- 

 sidered them remains of the elephants imported by Hannibal 

 or the Romans. Cuvier, how ever, compared the fossils directly 

 with the bones of existing elephants, and proved them to be 

 distinct. The fact that these remains belonged to extinct 

 species was of great importance. In the case of fossil shells, 

 it was difficult to say that any particular form was not living in 

 a distant ocean ; but the two species of existing elephants, the 

 Indian and the African, were w ell know n, and there w as hardly 

 a possibility that another living one would be found. 



It is important to bear in mind, too, that Cuvier's preparations 

 for the study of the remains of animals was far in advance of 

 any of his predecessors. He had devoted himself for years to 

 careful dissections in the various classes of the animal kingdom, 

 and was really the founder of comparative anatomy, as we now 

 understand it. Cuvier investigated the different groups of the 

 whole kingdom with care, and proposed a new classification 

 founded on the plan of structure, which in its main features ii; 

 the one in use to-day. The first volume of his Comparativ<: 

 Anatomy appeared in 1800, and the work was completed in 

 five volumes in 1805. 



Previous to Cuvier, the only general catalogue of animal:, 

 was contained in Linnaeus' " Systema Natiu-se." In this work, 

 as we have seen, fossil remains were placed with the minerals, 

 not in their appropriate places among the animals and plants. 

 Cuvier enriched the animal kingdom by the introduction 

 of fossil forms among the living, bringing all together into 

 one comprehensive system. His great work, "Le Regne 

 Animal," appeared in four volumes in 1817, and with its two 

 subsequent editions remains the foundation of modern zoology. 

 Cuvier's classic work on vertebrate fossils — "Recherches sur 

 les O; semens Fossiles," in four volumes, appeared in 1812-13. 

 Of this work, it is but just to say that it could only have been 

 written by a man of genius, profound know ledge, the greatest 

 industry, and with the most favourable opportunities. 



The introduction to this work was the famous "Discoursii 

 on the Revolutions of the Surface of the Globe," which hai 

 perhaps been as widely read as any other scientific essay. The 

 discovery of fossil bones in the gypsum quarries of Paris, by 

 the workmen, who considered them human remains ; the care- 

 ful study of these relics by Cuvier, and his restorations frorj 

 them of strange -beasts that had lived long before, is a story 

 with which you are all familiar. Cuvier was the first to prove 

 that the earth had been inhabited by a succession of different 

 series of animals, and he believed that those of each period 

 were peculiar to the age in which they lived. 



In looking over his w ork after a lapse of three-quarters of a' 

 century, we can now see that Cuvier was wrong on some 

 important points, and failed to realise the direction in whicli 

 science was rapidly tending. With all his knowledge of the 

 earth, he could not free himself from tradition, and believed in 

 the universality and power of the Mosaic deluge. Again, he 

 refused to admit the evidence brought forward by his distin- 

 guished colleagues against the permanence ( f species, and used 

 all his great influence to crush out the doctrine of evolution, 

 then first proposed. Cuvier's definition of a species, the domi- 

 nant one for half a century, was as follows: "A specie^ 

 comprehends all the individuals which descend from each 

 other, or from a common parentage, and those which resemble 

 them as much as they do each other." 



The law of "Correlation of Structures," as laid down by 

 Cuvier, has been more widely accepted than almost any thing^ 

 else that bears his name ; and yet, although founded in truth, 

 and useful within certain limits, it would certainly lead to 

 serious error if applied widely in the way he proposed. 



In his discourse, he sums this law as follows : "A claw, a 

 shoulder blade, a condyle, a leg or arm bone, or any other bone 

 " " Ossemens fossiles." Second Edition, vol. i. p. 178. 



