S. S. Buckman—TJie Term 'Remera.' 555 



consecutive divisions which the sequence of different species enables 



us to separate in the maximum developments of strata The 



term ' hemera ' is intended to mark the acme of development of one 

 or more species. It is designed as a chronological division, and will 

 not therefore replace the term ' zone ' or be a subdivision of it, for 

 that term is strictly a stratigraphical one." ^ " The proposed term 

 'hemera' is used in a chronological sense as a subdivision of an 

 ' age.' " 2 



These statements should be definite enough. They show that 

 while there were the stratigraphical terms 'zone,' 'stage,' and tlie 

 chronological term ' age ' for the time of a ' stage,' there was no 

 chronological term to denote the time of a ' zone.' So ' hemera ' 

 was proposed to supply the deficiency. ' Hemera,' ' age ' are 

 the time terms ; 'zone,' ' stage ' denote the amount of work done in 

 the way of deposition during these times ; they are the stratigraphical 

 terms. As I said, a hemera marks the acme of development of one 

 or more species, as a chronological term. Just as a ' day ' marks 

 the phenomenon, sunrise, high noon, sunset, or, if one likes to put 

 it so, from sunrise to sunrise again, so a ' hemera ' was designed to 

 mark the time from species-rise to species-rise — that is, from the 

 time when one species or set of species becomes dominant to the 

 time when another species or set of species does so. Such time 

 intervals were to be termed 'heraerse.' And so many ' hemerse ' 

 make an ' age,' just as so many ' days ' make a ' week.' However, as 

 ' hemera,' ' age ' must be of universal application and always have 

 existed, ' zone,' stage ' may be absent locally : either there may 

 have been no strata deposited, or the strata may have been destroyed. 

 At one locality may be seen the strata of the zones A, B, C,. 

 representing the work done during the hemeree A, B, C. At another* 

 locality may be observed only the strata of zones A and C. One 

 may rightly say that zone B is absent; but one cannot say that 

 hemera B is absent. Hemera B has been proved as a time-period 

 between hemeree A and C, by the records at one locality of work 

 accomplished. Therefore, absence of records at another locality 

 cannot show non-existence of time. Time is not local. A man 

 cannot say that there was no Monday in the week because the 

 parish clock happened to be out of order. Yet remarks similar to 

 this, made in regard to hemera, are what I have to protest against. 

 "Absence of any hemerse would not indicate a break in the series 

 of strata " is a sample. A Dorset labourer once came to his master 

 and complained, " Sir, your dawg a bin an yet my fittle." He 

 indicated exactly the agent of destruction. He knew that the 

 deposit (of his dinner) in a particular place had been duly made. 

 He was aware, by facts subjecta jidelibus ociilis, what agent had been 

 concerned in its removal. And he said so ; in effect he said, "There' 

 is a break in the series of my dinners due to destruction by a certain 

 agent." But had he employed the language which is used about 

 a hemera he would have said, not " My dinner is gone," but " One 

 o'clock is absent " — " The absence of one o'clock indicates a break in- 

 1 Op. cit., pp. 481, 482. 2 p. 513. 



