pictet's palaeontology. 57 



" To these questions, however, Palaeontology is able to answer only 

 in a very insufficient manner. The succession of organized beings, 

 the origin of existing species and their geographical distribution, the 

 formation of the different families of mankind, — all these are but 

 clifferent aspects of the same great problem, a solution of which 

 on any one point would necessarily throw great light upon the 

 others. 



" I believe then that the theory of successive creations*, which is 

 the least otjectionable of all, is true in a general sense, but that 

 other causes have perhaps combined with it to determine the actual 

 state of existing creation and of earlier faunas. Possibly those 

 modifications of species, which, as I have already shown, cannot ex- 

 plain the introduction of new types and the appearance of very di- 

 stinct species, have still had some share in producing a number of 

 allied species from a common type ; or in other words, perhaps we 

 must in this, as in other questions, not expect a too exclusive expla- 

 nation, but admit the intervention of various causes. 



" I do not, however, believe that our science is at present in a con- 

 dition to give a satisfactory solution of these difficulties ; and though 

 we may with greater or less distinctness foresee such a solution, it 

 cannot yet be demonstrated. A strict and intelligent study of nature 

 is required, in order to bring together the various materials. We 

 must know better than we do now each one of the successive crea- 

 tions, in order to form a complete idea of their mutual relations, and 

 of their differences from those which have preceded and followed 

 them. This is the most important problem of Palseontology, and its 

 solution is only to be found in the observation of facts, for they 

 alone are permanent, and they perhaps will outlive all the theories 

 discussed at the present day." — Pages 85-94;, 



D. T. A. 



* " I would observe here that this theory is the only one that connects itself 

 logically with our first law, namely that species belonging to different formations 

 are distinct ; for such a law necessarily results if the present theory is admitted, 

 and this in my opinion is a powerful argument in its favour. Still we must not 

 be in too great a hurry to limit future discoveries in Palaeontology by our precon- 

 ceived notions, but rather seek for truth wherever it can be found. Possibly some 

 intermediate theory might also agree with this law." 



