fiwa7er) 
CHAPTER III. 
THE HISTORY OF CREATION ACCORDING TO CUVIER 
AND AGASSIZ. 
General Theoretical Meaning of the Idea of Species.—Distinction between 
the Theoretical and Practical Definition of the Idea of Species.—Cuvier’s 
Definition of Species.—Merits of Cuvier as the Founder of Comparative 
Anatomy.— Distinction of the Four Principal Forms (types or branches) 
of the Animal Kingdom, by Cuvier and Biar.—Cuvier’s Services to 
Palzeontology.—His Hypothesis of the Revolutions of our Globe, and the 
Epochs of Creation separated by them.—Unknown Supernatural Causes 
of the Revolutions, and the subsequent New Creations.—Agassiz’s 
Teleological System of Nature.—His Conception of the Plan of Creation, 
and its six Categories (groups in classification) —Agassiz’s Views of the 
Creation of Species.—Rude Conception of the Creator as a man-like 
being in Agassiz’s Hypothesis of Creation.—Its internal Inconsistency 
and Contradictions with the important Palzontological Laws discovered 
by Agassiz. 
THE real matter of dissension in the contest carried on 
by naturalists as to the origin of organisms, their creation 
and development, lies in the conceptions which are enter- 
tained about the natwre of species. Naturalists either 
agree with Linnzeus, and look upon the different species 
as distinct forms of creation, independent of one another, 
or they assume with Darwin their blood-relationship. 
If we share Linnzeus’ view (which was discussed in our 
last chapter), that the different organic species came into 
existence independently—that they have no blood-relation- 
