PRINCIPLES OF GEOLOGY. 3 



served as the basis of many later hypotheses which contain no more 

 information. The Pythagorean doctrine of the intermutations of sub- 

 stance, and repeated revolutions in the nature of all created things, of 

 which this is urged as an example, has not a little resemblance to some 

 of Dr. Hutton's speculations on cosmogony, whilst in Ovid's description 

 of chaos, we really seem to behold the germ of a Wernerian theory. 



We may pass the centuries of darkness which succeeded the splendid 

 sera of Rome, and fix our attention on times more approaching our own. 

 The discoveries of Newton, in celestial mechanics, introduced a new 

 order of inquirers concerning the history of the earth ; but, unhappily, 

 few of them followed the steps of their illustrious leader. The " theories," 

 as they were arrogantly termed, of Burnet, Whiston, Woodward, and 

 Buffon, are now remembered only as the splendid errors of illustrious 

 men, and the systematic hypothesis of Whitehurst, though far better 

 supported by the practical knowledge of its author, has shared the same 

 unregretted fate. To rank with these neglected dreams, the respected 

 opinions of Hutton and Werner, would be unjust: the former, a man 

 of capacious intellect and original genius, has combined in his system 

 much that is excellent and much that is extravagant ; but its errors have 

 been corrected by the progress of inquiry, and its truths illustrated even 

 by his opponents. Werner's fame rests secure on accurate observation 

 and sagacious generalization of facts. From an examination of a srnall 

 tract of country, he deduced principles which are found to be univer- 

 sally applicable. He first taught that the earth is constructed after a 

 regular plan, and composed, near the surface, of rocks laid on one another, 

 in a constant order of succession. His theoretical views, though zealous- 

 ly embraced by his numerous disciples, were of little value, and rather 

 obscured the real utility of his practical system. 



Geologists have commonly placed Mr. Smith in comparison with 

 Werner; and have agreed that in England one was accomplishing what 

 occupied the attention of the other in Germany, and that both were 

 unconsciously acting on the same plan, and producing the same results. 

 This is strictly true as far as relates to their practical opinions ; but 



B 2 



