Lyell. 



ON THE GENETIC VIEW OE NATURE. 293 



is established in tlie system cf nature, it is in vain 

 to look for anything higher in the origin of the earth. 

 The result, therefore, of this physical inquiry is, that 

 we find no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an 

 end." The lieginnings of the genetic view of geolog- 

 ica] phenomena, which in Iluttun were still mingled with 

 eatastrophism, were further developed ])y Sir Charles 

 Lyell in his celebrated ' Principles of (xeology.' When u. 

 lie entered upon his geological researches, which were 

 conducted during his very extensive travels all over 

 Europe, a new element had already been introduced 

 into science, of which neither Hutton nor Werner liad 

 been able to a\'ail themselves extensively. This was the 

 identification of geological strata according to the fossil 

 remains which were contained in them, — a realisation 

 of the plan of work already dimly foreshadowed in 

 Leibniz's ' Protogica,' but nevertheless accepted even by 

 Humboldt as only a doubtful indication.^ This valuable 

 brancli of geological science had been started by AA^illiam 

 Smith ill his 'Tabular View of the British Strata' in 

 1790, and further elaborated in his geological map of 

 Kngland (1815), which was the fruit of his own un- 

 aided labours, " for he had explored the whole countrv 



' 'I'lu' Wernerian school ;ire gen- 

 erally accused of having neglected 

 the historical record afforded by 

 fossil remains, and Humboldt, in 

 his ' Essaj- on the Superposition of 

 Rocks in both Hemispheres' (182-3), 

 says (Eng. transl., j). 52): "In 

 the present age naturalists are no 

 longer satisfied with vague and 

 uncertain notions, and they have 

 sagaciously observed that the great- 

 est number of those fossils, buried 

 in different formations, are not 



specifically the same ; that many 

 species wliich they have been enabled 

 to examine with precision vary with 

 the superposed rocks. . . . Ought 

 we to conclude from this assem- 

 blage of facts that all the forma- 

 tions are cliaracteri.sed by particular 

 species ? that the fossil shells nf the 

 chalk, of the muschclkalk, of the 

 Jura limestone, and of the Alpine 

 limestone, all differ from each other ? 

 This would be, in my opinion, to 

 carry the induction much too far." 



