246 



DESIGN IN NATURE 



§ 49. Effect of Cosmic Changes on Plants and Animals. 



Considering the intimate relation which obtains between the organic and inorganic kingdoms — between plants 

 and animals on the one hand, and the elements composing them, and circulating within them, on the other — it 

 follows that plants and animals are more or less influenced by their surroundings and by cosmic changes, such as 

 Ught and darkness ; day and night ; the seasons ; heat and cold ; moisture and dryness ; absence or presence 

 of electricity in the atmosphere, &c. 



Plants, on the whole, are more susceptible to cosmic changes than animals, from the fact that their affinities 

 with the inorganic kingdom are closer, and more pronounced. This follows, because they are, with few exceptions, 

 fixed to the earth and dependent, in a great measure, for their food on their immediate surroundings. 



The extent to which the cosmic changes referred to influence plants and animals is, in every instance, limited. 



The changes in question affect plants and animals most in a state of domestication. Wild plants and animals 

 are comparatively httle influenced by them. 



That cosmic changes and environment do not essentially alter the forms and functions of plants and animals 

 is proved in two ways : — 



(a.) Plants and animals, varieties of which have been obtained by man's selection and fostering care, revert 

 to their originals if left to themselves. Thus the several cultivated grains and vegetables, if allowed to run wild, 

 degenerate and breed back. The same may be said of animals : the endless varieties of pigeons, if uncared for, 

 all revert to the blue rock pigeon. 



(b.) Animals have not perceptibly changed during the historical period. Thus man has had the same external 

 configuration and traits of character for at least five or six thousand years. Egyptian tombs some five thousand 

 years old display drawings of the five leading races of man as recognised at the present day. They also give repre- 

 sentations of a large number of domestic and other animals, which are the same now as they were in the days of the 

 Pharaohs, and in the remote past.^ 



If we go back to geological records, we find foraminifera in all respects similar to those existing at present, 

 which hved at an inconceivably earher period, and long before the appearance on the earth of fishes, reptiles, birds, 

 and animals. 



Sir J. William Dawson, when speaking of the origin of specific types and varieties and the external conditions 

 favourable to their production, and when discussing the question as to " whether the conditions favourable to the 

 appearance of new varieties were also those favourable to the creation of new types or the reverse," says : " In the 

 present state of our knowledge we have no good ground either to limit the number of specific types beyond what 

 a fair study of our material may warrant, or to infer that such primitive types must necessarily have been of low 

 grade, or that progress in varietal forms has always been upward. The occurrence of such an advanced and 

 specialised type as that of Dadoxylon in the Middle Devonian should guard us against these errors. The creative 

 process may have been applicable to the highest as well as to the lowest forms, and subsequent deviations must have 

 included degradation as well as elevation. I can conceive nothing more unreasonable than the statement some- 

 times made that it is illogical or even absurd to suppose that highly organised beings could have been produced except 

 by derivation from previously existing organisms. This is begging the whole question at issue. . . . 



" There is no reason to believe that any specific cJuinge has occurred in any plant within the Pleistocene or modern 

 period." '^ 



In an address delivered to the biological section of the British Association, Mr. Carruthers has discussed this 



reveaiea eaiaor sn'aia exmniia praciicajiy coiunmous series 01 ornamental utensils and suulptnrert nioiinnieiits connecting the A'eolithic a; 

 Pliaraoiiic times. He observes that the Hints of Egyiit were of exceptionally fine workmanshiij, that art is of immemorial antiquity 1 

 ancient laud, and that the earliest liiids were linked by continuity of style with the latest. The objects of which M. Capart's work tre 

 ascribed to dates lying between 7000 ii.c. and .'fOOO B.C.. and the first dynasty is supposed to have been found in Petrie's excavations of thi 



' As archaiological research is prosecuted, and our knowledge advances, it becomes more and more evident that civilisation and art in Egypt 

 are considerably older than was suspected even a few years ago. It is now believed that man was in a forward state of civilisation as far back as 

 9000 years arjn. To Professor Flinders Petrie the discoveries establishing this fact are mainly due. Many other distinguished investigators have 

 contributed their quota, among whom may be mentioned 11. Capart, who has written an interesting work 011 " Primitive Art in Egypt." 



M. Capart in his volume shows that Egyptian art is indigenous, and was not greatly affected by outside influences. He says that recently- 

 revealed eailier sti-ata exhiliita practically continuous series of ornamental utensils and sculptured nionunients connecting the Neolithic age with 



in that 

 reats are 



- ., „ ., 1. the small 



town of Abydos. 



The following abstract has reference to a work, "The Egyjitians in Egypt," by Professor Flindei-s Petrie : " Far back in pre-historic times the 

 savage who wandered over the wild desert mountains of Sinai picked up little scraps of sky-blue stone which pleased liis fancy. These were 

 doubtless preserved 1)y being stuck into holes in his weajions and objects of wood, as the Bedawin do now ; and these decorated things were 

 traded over into Egyi)t. The pre-historic man of Egypt demanded more, and a trade in turquoise sprang up, and provided the turquoise beads 

 which were treasured for necklaces in the Nile Valley abotU elglit tlumsand years ago. The primitive workers doubtless extracted the stones from 

 the sandstone rock by means of the flint-scrapers, such as arc found by hundreds in the old mine-heaps. When Egypt passed into the settled form 

 of unifled govenmient, under the dynasties, the early kings would not leave this supply of jewels unclaimed. So in Sinai, as far back as about 

 JfSOO n.c. there are figures of the Egyptian king smiting the natives, and of the general who headed the expedition. These are the oldest 

 sculptures known. Several such scenes of triumph were carved by later kings, especially those of the pyramid period, as Seneferu, about AOOO B.C." 



^ •• The Geological History of Plants." Science Series, Loiid(m, 1888. 



