140 HISTORY OF GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY, 



In conclusion, Cuvier draws attention to the rudimentary 

 state of scientific knowledge regarding the Secondary rocks and 

 the fossil organisms contained in them. " How glorious it 

 would be if we could arrange the organised products of the 

 universe in their chronological order, as we can already do 

 with the more important mineral substances ! The knowledge 

 of the order of successive forms of life would teach us about 

 the organisation itself. The chronological succession of organ- 

 ised forms, the exact determination of those types which 

 appeared first, the simultaneous origin of certain species and 

 their gradual decay, would perhaps teach us as much about 

 the mysteries of organisation as we can possibly learn through 

 experiments with living organisms.'"' 



When we at the present day pass in retrospect the contents 

 of Cuvier's famous " Discourse," it is easy for us to perceive 

 that the great anatomist was not familiar with the more ad- 

 vanced geological thought of his own time. The works of 

 William Smith "were apparently unknown to him, equally so 

 the researches of Lehmann, Fichtel, and other of the best 

 German stratigraphers. In the structure of mountain-systems, 

 his views differ little from those of Buffon, Pallas, and Saus- 

 vsure. What is new is that Cuvier demands a great number 

 \of catastrophal revolutions, and he assumes that the earlier 

 jpatastrophes were more widespread in their effects than the later. 



In supposing that an invasion of the sea was the immediate 

 cause of the interment of mammalia in the youngest clays and 

 gravels, Cuvier entirely misses the significance of the fact that 

 these are for the most part of fresh-water origin. Again, his 

 calculation of the age of the latest revolution and the appear- 

 ance of man in the northern hemisphere betrays a geological 

 standpoint as narrow as De Luc's or Kirwan's. But what was 

 a far more serious disadvantage to science was that a man of 

 Cuvier's anatomical insight and prescience should deny any 

 genetical connection between the earlier organisms and those 

 now living. Cuvier's erroneous convictions on this point 

 exerted an enormous influence, and it is not too much to say 

 that they retarded the progress of the evolutionary aspect of 

 palaeontology for several decades. 



But Cuvier, by his teaching of the comparative methods, 

 placed all-powerful tools in the hands of scientific men. His 

 greatness rests upon the magnificent work that he accomplished 

 in the domain of the Vertebrates, upon the scientific method 



