{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_67527/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_67527","id":"gutenberg_67527","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/67527","summary":null,"tags":["Asterolepididae","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Category: Science - Biology","Category: Science - Earth/Agricultural/Farming","Creation","Evolution","Fishes, Fossil","Geology -- Scotland","Miller, Hugh, 1802-1856","Paleontology -- Scotland"],"text":"[Illustration: Engraved by J. Sartain.\u2014From a original Talbotype.\n\nGould & Lincoln, Boston]\n\n\n\n\n                                   THE\n                       FOOT-PRINTS OF THE CREATOR:\n                                   OR,\n                      THE ASTEROLEPIS OF STROMNESS.\n\n                                   BY\n                              HUGH MILLER,\n                 AUTHOR OF \u201cTHE OLD RED SANDSTONE,\u201d ETC.\n\n        \u201cWhen I asked him how this earth could have been repeopled if\n        ever it had undergone the same fate it was threatened with by\n        the comet of 1680, he answered,\u2014\u2018that required the power of a\n        Creator.\u2019\u201d\u2014_Conduit\u2019s \u201cConversation with Sir Isaac Newton\u201d._\n\n                     FROM THE THIRD LONDON EDITION.\n\n                       WITH A MEMOIR OF THE AUTHOR\n                            BY LOUIS AGASSIZ.\n\n                                 BOSTON:\n                           GOULD AND LINCOLN.\n                          69 WASHINGTON STREET.\n                     NEW YORK: SHELDON AND COMPANY.\n                     CINCINNATI: GEO. S. BLANCHARD.\n                                  1868.\n\n       Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1850, by\n                       GOULD, KENDALL AND LINCOLN,\n     In the Clerk\u2019s Office of the District Court for the District of\n                             Massachusetts.\n\n\n\n\nTO SIR PHILIP DE MALPAS GREY EGERTON, BART. M.P., F.R.S. & G.S.\n\n\nTo you, Sir, as our highest British authority on fossil fishes, I take\nthe liberty of dedicating this little volume. In tracing the history of\nCreation, as illustrated in that ichthyic division of the vertebrata\nwhich is at once the most ancient and the most extensively preserved, I\nhave introduced a considerable amount of fact and observation, for the\ngeneral integrity of which my appeal must lie, not to the writings of my\nfriends the geologists, but to the strangely significant record inscribed\nin the rocks, which it is their highest merit justly to interpret and\nfaithfully to transcribe. The ingenious and popular author whose views\non Creation I attempt controverting, virtually carries his appeal from\nscience to the want of it. I would fain adopt an opposite course: And\nmy use, on this occasion, of your name, may serve to evince the desire\nwhich I entertain that the collation of my transcripts of hitherto\nuncopied portions of the geologic history with the history itself,\nshould be in the hands of men qualified, by original vigor of faculty\nand the patient research of years, either to detect the erroneous or to\ncertify the true. Further, I feel peculiar pleasure in availing myself\nof the opportunity furnished me, by the publication of this little work,\nof giving expression to my sincere respect for one who, occupying a\nhigh place in society, and deriving his descent from names illustrious\nin history, has wisely taken up the true position of birth and rank in\nan enlightened country and age; and who, in asserting, by his modest,\npersevering labors, his proper standing in the scientific world, has\nrendered himself first among his countrymen in an interesting department\nof Natural Science, to which there is no aristocratic or \u201croyal road.\u201d\n\n    I have the honor to be, Sir,\n\n                      With admiration and respect,\n\n                                  Your obedient humble servant,\n\n                                                             HUGH MILLER.\n\n\n\n\nTO THE READER.\n\n\nThere are chapters in this little volume which will, I am afraid, be\ndeemed too prolix by the general reader, and which yet the geologist\nwould like less were there any portion of them away. They refer chiefly\nto organisms not hitherto figured nor described, and must owe their\nmodicum of value to that very minuteness of detail which, by critics of\nthe merely literary type, unacquainted with fossils, and not greatly\ninterested in them, may be regarded as a formidable defect, suited\nto overlay the general subject of the work. Perhaps the best mode of\ncompromising the matter may be to intimate, as if by beacon, at the\noutset, the more repulsive chapters; somewhat in the way that the\nservants of the Humane Society indicate to the skater who frequents in\nwinter the lakes in the neighborhood of Edinburgh, those parts of the\nice on which he might be in danger of losing himself. I would recommend,\nthen, readers not particularly pal\u00e6ontological, to pass but lightly over\nthe whole of my fourth and fifth chapters, with the latter half of the\nthird, marking, however, as they skim the pages, the conclusions at which\nI arrive regarding the bulk and organization of the extraordinary animal\ndescribed, and the data on which these are founded. My book, like an\nIrish landscape dotted with green bogs, has its portions on which it may\nbe perilous for the unpractised surveyor to make any considerable stand,\nbut across which he may safely take his sights and lay down his angles.\n\nIt will, I trust, be found, that in dealing with errors which, in at\nleast their primary bearing, affect questions of science, I have not\noffended against the courtesies of scientific controversy. True, they\nare errors which also involve moral consequences. There is a species\nof superstition which inclines men to take on trust whatever assumes\nthe name of science; and which seems to be a reaction on the old\nsuperstition, that had faith in witches, but none in Sir Isaac Newton,\nand believed in ghosts, but failed to credit the Gregorian calendar. And,\nowing mainly to the wide diffusion of this credulous spirit of the modern\ntype, as little disposed to examine what it receives as its ancient\nunreasoning predecessor, the development doctrines are doing much harm on\nboth sides of the Atlantic, especially among intelligent mechanics, and\na class of young men engaged in the subordinate departments of trade and\nthe law. And the harm, thus considerable in amount, must be necessarily\nmore than merely considerable in degree. For it invariably happens,\nthat when persons in these walks become materialists, they become also\nturbulent subjects and bad men. That belief in the existence after death,\nwhich forms the distinguishing _instinct_ of humanity, is too essential\na part of man\u2019s moral constitution not to be missed when away; and so,\nwhen once fairly eradicated, the life and conduct rarely fail to betray\nits absence. But I have not, from any consideration of the mischief thus\neffected, written as if arguments, like cannon-balls, could be rendered\nmore formidable than in the cool state by being made red-hot. I have\nnot even felt, in discussing the question, as if I had a man before me\nas an opponent; for though my work contains numerous references to the\nauthor of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d I have invariably thought on these occasions,\nnot of the anonymous writer of the volume, of whom I know nothing, but\nsimply of an ingenious, well-written book, unfortunate in its facts and\nnot always very happy in its reasonings. Further, I do not think that\npal\u00e6ontological fact, in its bearing on the points at issue, is of such\na doubtful complexion as to leave the geologist, however much from moral\nconsiderations in earnest in the matter, any very serious excuse for\nlosing his temper.\n\nIn my reference to the three great divisions of the geologic scale, I\ndesignate as _Pal\u00e6ozoic_ all the fossiliferous rocks, from the first\nappearance of organic existence down to the close of the Permian system;\nall as _Secondary_, from the close of the Permian system down to the\nclose of the Cretaceous deposits; and all as _Tertiary_, from the close\nof the Cretaceous deposits down to the introduction of man. The wood-cuts\nof the volume, of which at least nine tenths of the whole represent\nobjects never figured before, were drawn and cut by Mr. John Adams of\nEdinburgh, (8, Heriot Place,) with a degree of care and skill which has\nleft me no reason to regret my distance from the London artists and\nengravers. So far at least as the objects could be adequately represented\non wood, and in the limited space at Mr. Adams\u2019 command, their truth\nis such that I can safely recommend them to the pal\u00e6ontologist. In\nthe accompanying descriptions, and in my statements of geologic fact\nin general, it will, I hope, be seen that I have not exaggerated the\npeculiar features on which I have founded, nor rendered truth partial in\norder to make it serve a purpose. Where I have reasoned and inferred,\nthe reader will of course be able to judge for himself whether the\nargument be sound or the deduction just; and to weigh, where I have\nmerely speculated, the probability of the speculation; but as, in at\nleast _some_ of my statements of fact, he might lie more at my mercy, I\nhave striven in every instance to make these adequately representative of\nthe actualities to which they refer. And so, if it be ultimately found\nthat on some occasions I have misled others, it will, I hope, be also\nseen to be only in cases in which I have been mistaken myself. The first\nor popular title of my work, \u201cFoot-prints of the Creator,\u201d I owe to Dr.\nHetherington, the well-known historian of the Church of Scotland. My\nother various obligations to my friends, literary and scientific, the\nreader will find acknowledged in the body of the volume, as the occasion\noccurs of availing myself of either the information communicated, or the\norganism, recent or extinct, lent me or given.\n\n\n\n\nHUGH MILLER, AUTHOR OF \u201cOLD RED SANDSTONE\u201d AND \u201cFOOTPRINTS OF THE\nCREATOR.\u201d\n\n\nThe geological works of Hugh Miller have excited the greatest interest,\nnot only among scientific men, but also among general readers. There is\nin them a freshness of conception, a power of argumentation, a depth\nof thought, a purity of feelings, rarely met with in works of that\ncharacter, which are well calculated to call forth sympathy, and to\nincrease the popularity of a science which has already done so much to\nexpand our views of the Plan of Creation. The scientific illustrations\npublished by Mr. Miller are most happily combined with considerations of\na higher order, rendering both equally acceptable to the thinking reader.\nBut what is in a great degree peculiar to our author, is the successful\ncombination of Christian doctrines with pure scientific truths. On that\naccount, his works deserve peculiar attention. His generalizations have\nnothing of the vagueness which too often characterize the writings\nof those authors who have attempted to make the results of science\nsubservient to the cause of religion. Struck with the beauty of Mr.\nMiller\u2019s works, it has for some time past been my wish to see them more\nextensively circulated in this country; and I have obtained leave from\nthe author to publish an American edition of his \u201cFootprints of the\nCreator,\u201d for which he has most liberally furnished the publishers with\nthe admirable wood-cuts of the original.\n\nWhile preparing some additional chapters, and various notes illustrative\nof certain points alluded to incidentally in this work, it was deemed\nadvisable to preface it with a short biographical notice of the author.\nI had already sketched such a paper, when I became acquainted with a full\nmemoir of this remarkable man, containing most interesting details of\nhis earlier life, written by that eminent historian of the \u201cMartyrs of\nScience,\u201d the great natural philosopher of Scotland. It has occurred to\nme that, owing to the frequent references which I could not avoid to my\nown researches, I had better substitute this ample Biography for my short\nsketch, with such alterations and additions as the connection in which\nit is brought here would require. I therefore proceed to introduce our\nauthor with Sir David Brewster\u2019s own words:\u2014\n\nOf all the studies which relate to the material universe, there is none,\nperhaps, which appeals so powerfully to our senses, or which comes\ninto such close and immediate contact with our wants and enjoyments,\nas that of Geology. In our hourly walks, whether on business or for\npleasure, we tread with heedless step upon the apparently uninteresting\nobjects which it embraces: but could we rightly interrogate the rounded\npebble at our feet, it would read us an exciting chapter on the history\nof primeval times, and would tell us of the convulsions by which it\nwas wrenched from its parent rock, and of the floods by which it was\nabraded and transported to its present humble locality. In our visit to\nthe picturesque and the sublime in nature, we are brought into closer\nproximity to the more interesting phenomena of geology. In the precipices\nwhich protect our rock-girt shores, which flank our mountain glens, or\nwhich variegate our lowland valleys, and in the shapeless fragments at\ntheir base, which the lichen colors, and round which the ivy twines, we\nsee the remnants of uplifted and shattered beds, which once reposed in\npeace at the bottom of the ocean. Nor does the rounded boulder, which\nwould have defied the lapidary\u2019s wheel of the Giant Age, give forth a\nless oracular response from its grave of clay, or from its lair of sand.\nFloated by ice from some Alpine summit, or hurried along in torrents of\nmud, and floods of water, it may have traversed a quarter of the globe,\namid the crash of falling forests, and the death shrieks of the noble\nanimals which they sheltered. The mountain range, too, with its catacombs\nbelow, along which the earthquake transmits its terrific sounds, reminds\nus of the mighty power by which it was upheaved;\u2014while the lofty peak,\nwith its cap of ice, or its nostrils of fire, places in our view the\ntremendous agencies which have been at work beneath us.\n\nBut it is not merely amid the powers of external nature that the once\nhidden things of the Earth are presented to our view. Our temples and\nour palaces are formed from the rocks of a primeval age; bearing the\nvery ripple-marks of a Pre-Adamite ocean,\u2014grooved by the passage of the\nonce moving boulder, and embosoming the relics of ancient life, and the\nplants by which it was sustained. Our dwellings, too, are ornamented with\nthe variegated limestones,\u2014the indurated tombs of molluscous life,\u2014and\nour apartments heated with the carbon of primeval forests, and lighted\nwith the gaseous element which it confines. The obelisk of granite,\nand the colossal bronze which transmit to future ages the deeds of the\nhero and the sage, are equally the production of the Earth\u2019s prolific\nwomb; and from the green bed of the ocean has been raised the pure and\nspotless marble, to mould the divine lineaments of beauty, and perpetuate\nthe expressions of intellectual power. From a remoter age, and a still\ngreater depth, the primary and secondary rocks have yielded a rich\ntribute to the chaplet of rank, and to the processes of art.\n\nExhibiting, as it peculiarly does, almost all those objects of interest\nand research, Scotland has been diligently studied both by native\nand foreign observers; and she has sent into the geological field a\ndistinguished group of inquirers, who have performed a noble feat in\nexploring the general structure of the Earth, in decyphering its ancient\nmonuments, and in unlocking those storehouses of mineral wealth, from\nwhich civilized man derives the elements of that gigantic power which his\notherwise feeble arm wields over nature.\n\nThe occurrence of shells on the highest mountains, and the remains of\nplants and animals, which the most superficial observer could not fail\nto notice, in the rocks around him, have for centuries commanded the\nattention and exercised the ingenuity of every student of nature. But\nthough sparks of geological truth were from time to time elicited by\nspeculative minds, it was not till the end of the last century that\nits great lights broke forth, and that it took the form and character\nof one of the noblest of the sciences. Without undervaluing the labors\nof Werner, and other illustrious foreigners, or those of our southern\ncountrymen, Mitchell and Smith, at the close of the last century, we\nmay characterize the commencement of the present as the brightest\nperiod of geological discovery, and place its most active locality in\nthe northern metropolis of our island. It was doubtless from the Royal\nSociety of Edinburgh, as a centre, that a great geological impulse was\npropagated southward, and it was by the collision of the Wernerian and\nHuttonian views, the antagonist theories of water and of fire, that men\nof intellectual power were summoned from other studies; and that grand\ntruths, which fanaticism and intolerance had hitherto abjured, rose\ntriumphant over the ignorance and bigotry of the age. The Geological\nSociety of London, which doubtless sprung from the excitement in the\nScottish metropolis, entered on the new field of research with a\nfaltering step. The prejudices of the English mind had been marshalled\nwith illiberal violence against the Huttonian doctrines. Infidelity and\nAtheism were charged against their supporters; and had there been a\nProtestant Inquisition in England at that period of general political\nexcitement, the geologists of the north would have been immured in its\ndeepest dungeons.\n\nTruth, however, marched apace; and though her simple but majestic\nprocession be often solemn and slow, and her votaries few and dejected,\nyet on this, as on every occasion, she triumphed over the most inveterate\nprepossessions, and finally took up her abode in those very halls and\ninstitutions where she had been persecuted and reviled. When their\nscience had been thus acquitted of the charge of impiety and irreligion,\nthe members of the Geological Society left their humble and timid\nposition of being the collectors only of _the materials of future\ngeneralizations_, and became at once the most successful observers of\ngeological phenomena, and the boldest asserters of geological truth.\n\nIn this field of research, in which the physical, as well as the\nintellectual, frame of the philosopher is made tributary to science, two\nof our countrymen\u2014Sir Roderick Murchison and Sir Charles Lyell\u2014have been\namong our most active laborers. From the study of their native glens,\nthese distinguished travellers, like the Humboldts and the Von Buchs of\nthe continent, have passed into foreign lands, exploring the north and\nthe south of Europe, and extending their labors to the eastern ranges of\nthe Ural and the Timan, and to the Apallachians and the Alleghanies in\nthe far west. But while our two countrymen were interrogating the strata\nof other lands, many able and active laborers had been at work in their\nown.\n\nAmong the eminent students of the structure of the earth, Mr. Hugh\nMiller holds a lofty place, not merely from the discovery of new and\nundescribed organisms in the Old Red Sandstone, but from the accuracy and\nbeauty of his descriptions, the purity and elegance of his composition,\nand the high tone of philosophy and religion which distinguishes all\nhis writings. Mr. Miller is one of the few individuals in the history\nof Scottish science who have raised themselves above the labors of an\nhumble profession, by the force of their genius and the excellence of\ntheir character, to a comparatively high place in the social scale.\nMr. Telford, like Mr. Miller, followed the profession of a stone-mason,\nbefore his industry and self-tuition qualified him for the higher\nfunctions of an architect and an engineer. And Mr. Watt and Mr. Rennie\nrose to wealth and fame without the aid of a university education. But,\ndistinguished as these individuals were, none of them possessed those\nqualities of mind which Mr. Miller has exhibited in his writings; and,\nwith the exception of Burns, the uneducated genius which has done honor\nto Scotland during the last century, has never displayed that mental\nrefinement, and classical taste, and intellectual energy, which mark all\nthe writings of our author. We wish that we could have gratified our\nreaders with an authentic and even detailed narrative of the previous\nhistory of so remarkable a writer, and of the steps by which his\nknowledge was acquired, and the difficulties which he encountered in its\npursuit; but though this is not, to any great extent, in our power, we\nshall at least be able, chiefly from Mr. Miller\u2019s own writings, to follow\nhim throughout his geological career.\n\nMr. Miller was born at Cromarty, of humble but respectable parents, whose\nhistory would have possessed no inconsiderable interest, even if it had\nnot derived one of a higher kind from the genius and fortunes of their\nchild. By the paternal side he was descended from a race of sea-faring\npeople, whose family burying-ground, if we judge from the past, seems to\nbe the sea. Under its green waves his father sleeps: his grandfather, his\ntwo granduncles, one of whom sailed round the world with Anson, lie also\nthere; and the same extensive cemetery contains the relics of several of\nhis more distant relatives. His father was but an infant of scarcely a\nyear old, at the death of our author\u2019s grandfather, and had to commence\nlife as a poor ship-boy; but such was the energy of his mind, that, when\nlittle turned of thirty, he had become the master and owner of a fine\nlarge sloop, and had built himself a good house, which entitled his son\nto the franchise on the passing of the Reform Bill. Having unfortunately\nlost his sloop in a storm, he had to begin the world anew, and he soon\nbecame master and owner of another, and would have thriven, had he lived;\nbut the hereditary fate was too strong for him, and when our author was a\nlittle boy of five summers, his father\u2019s fine new sloop foundered at sea\nin a terrible tempest, and he and his crew were never more heard of. Mr.\nMiller had two sisters younger than himself, both of whom died ere they\nattained to womanhood. His mother experienced the usual difficulties\nwhich a widow has to encounter in the decent education of her family; but\nshe struggled honestly and successfully, and ultimately found her reward\nin the character and fame of her son. It is from this excellent woman\nthat Mr. Miller has inherited those sentiments and feelings which have\ngiven energy to his talents as the defender of revealed truth, and the\nchampion of the Church of his fathers. She was the great granddaughter of\na venerable man, still well known to tradition in the north of Scotland\nas Donald Roy of Nigg,\u2014a sort of northern Peden, who is described in\nthe history of our Church as the single individual who, at the age of\neighty, when the presbytery of the district had assembled in the empty\nchurch for the purpose of inducting an obnoxious presentee, had the\ncourage to protest against the intrusion, and to declare \u201cthat the blood\nof the people of Nigg would be required at their hands, if they settled\na man _to the walls_ of that church.\u201d Tradition has represented him as\na seer of visions, and a prophesier of prophecies; but whatever credit\nmay be given to stories of this kind, which have been told also of Knox,\nWelsh, and Rutherford, this ancient champion of Non-Intrusion was a man\nof genuine piety, and the savor of his ennobling beliefs and his strict\nmorals has survived in his family for generations. If the child of such\nparents did not receive the best education which his native town could\nafford, it was not their fault, nor that of his teacher. The fetters\nof a gymnasium are not easily worn by the adventurous youth who has\nsought and found his pleasures among the hills and on the waters. They\nchafe the young and active limb that has grown vigorous under the blue\nsky, and never known repose but at midnight. The young philosopher of\nCromarty was a member of this restless community; and he had been the\nhero of adventures and accidents among rocks and woods, which are still\nremembered in his native town. The parish school was therefore not the\nscene of his enjoyments; and while he was a truant, and, with reverence\nbe it spoken, a dunce, while under its jurisdiction, he was busy in the\nfields and on the sea-shore in collecting those stores of knowledge\nwhich he was born to dispense among his fellow-men. He escaped, however,\nfrom school, with the knowledge of reading, writing, and a little\narithmetic, and with the credit of uniting a great memory with a little\nscholarship. Unlike his illustrious predecessor, Cuvier, he had studied\nNatural History in the fields and among the mountains ere he had sought\nfor it in books; while the French philosopher had become a learned\nnaturalist before he had even looked upon the world of Nature. This\nsingular contrast is not difficult to explain. With a sickly constitution\nand a delicate frame, the youthful Cuvier wanted that physical activity\nwhich the observation of Nature demands. Our Scottish geologist, on the\ncontrary, in vigorous health, and with an iron frame, rushed to the rocks\nand the sea-shore in search of the instruction which was not provided for\nhim at school, and which he could find no books to supply.\n\nAfter receiving this measure of education, Mr. Miller set out in\nFebruary, 1821, with a heavy heart, as he himself confesses, \u201cto make his\nfirst acquaintance with a life of labor and restraint:\u201d\u2014\n\n    \u201cI was but a slim, loose-jointed boy at the time, fond of the\n    pretty intangibilities of romance, and of dreaming when broad\n    awake; and woful change! I was now going to work at what Burns\n    has instanced in his \u2018Twa Dogs\u2019 as one of the most disagreeable\n    of all employments\u2014to work in a quarry. Bating the passing\n    uneasiness occasioned by a few gloomy anticipations, the\n    portion of my life which had already gone by had been happy\n    beyond the common lot. I had been a wanderer among rocks and\n    woods,\u2014a reader of curious books, when I could get them,\u2014a\n    gleaner of old traditionary stories,\u2014and now I was going to\n    exchange all my day-dreams and all my amusements for the kind\n    of life in which men toil every day that they may be enabled to\n    eat, and eat every day that they may be enabled to toil. The\n    quarry in which I wrought lay on the southern shore of a noble\n    inland bay, or frith, rather, (the Bay of Cromarty,) with a\n    little, clear stream on the one side, and a thick fir wood on\n    the other. It had been opened in the Old Red Sandstone of the\n    district, and was overtopped by a huge bank of diluvial clay,\n    and which rose over it in some places to the height of nearly\n    thirty feet.\u201d\u2014_Old Red Sandstone_, p. 4.\n\nAfter removing the loose fragments below, picks and wedges and levers\nwere applied in vain by our author and his brother workmen to tear up and\nremove the huge strata beneath. Blasting by gunpowder became necessary. A\nmass of the diluvial clay came tumbling down, \u201cbearing with it two dead\nbirds, that in a recent storm had crept into one of the deeper fissures,\nto die in the shelter.\u201d While admiring the pretty cock goldfinch, and the\nlight-blue and grayish-yellow woodpecker, and moralizing on their fate,\nthe workmen were ordered to lay aside their tools, and thus ended the\nfirst day\u2019s labor of our young geologist. The sun was then sinking behind\nthe thick fir wood behind him, and the long dark shadows of the trees\nstretching to the shore. Notwithstanding his blistered hands, and the\nfatigue which blistered them, he found himself next morning as light of\nheart as his fellow-laborers, and able to enjoy the magnificent scenery\naround him, which he thus so beautifully describes:\u2014\n\n    \u201cThere had been a smart frost during the night, and the rime\n    lay white on the grass as we passed onwards through the fields;\n    but the sun rose in a clear atmosphere, and the day mellowed\n    as it advanced into one of those delightful days of early\n    spring which give so pleasing an earnest of whatever is mild\n    and genial in the better half of the year. All the workmen\n    rested at midday, and I went to enjoy my half hour alone on a\n    mossy knoll in the neighboring wood, which commands through the\n    trees a wide prospect of the bay and the opposite shore. There\n    was not a wrinkle on the water, nor a cloud in the sky; and\n    the branches were as moveless in the calm as if they had been\n    traced on canvas. From a wooded promontory that stretched half\n    way across the frith, there ascended a thin column of smoke. It\n    rose straight on the line of a plummet for more than a thousand\n    yards; and then, as reaching a thinner stratum of air, spread\n    out equally on every side, like the foliage of a stately tree.\n    Ben Wevis rose to the west, white with the yet unwasted snows\n    of winter, and as sharply defined in the clear atmosphere as\n    if all its sunny slopes and blue retiring hollows had been\n    chiselled in marble. A line of snow ran along the opposite\n    hills; all above was white, and all below was purple.\u201d\u2014_Old Red\n    Sandstone_, pp. 6, 7.\n\nIn raising from its bed the large mass of strata which the gunpowder had\nloosened, on the surface of the solid stone, our young quarrier descried\nthe ridged and furrowed ripple marks which the tide leaves upon every\nsandy shore, and he wondered what had become of the waves that had thus\nfretted the solid rock, and of what element they had been composed. His\nadmiration was equally excited by a circular depression in the sandstone,\n\u201cbroken and flawed in every direction, as if it had been the bottom of a\npool recently dried up, which had shrunk and split in the hardening.\u201d And\nbefore the day closed, a series of large stones had rolled down from the\nclay, \u201call rounded and water-worn, as if they had been tossed in the sea\nor the bed of a river for hundreds of years.\u201d Was the clay which enclosed\nthem created on the rock upon which it lay? No workman ever manufactures\na half-worn article!\u2014were the ejaculations of the geologist at his\nalphabet.\n\nOur author and his companions were soon removed to an easier wrought\nquarry, and one more pregnant with interest, which had been opened \u201cin\na lofty wall of cliffs that overhangs the northern shore of the Moray\nFrith.\u201d Here the geology of the district exhibited itself in section.\n\n    \u201cWe see in one place the primary rock, with its veins of\n    granite and quartz,\u2014its dizzy precipices of gneiss, and its\n    huge masses of hornblende; we find the secondary rock in\n    another, with its bed of sandstone and shale,\u2014its spars, its\n    clays, and its nodular limestones. We discover the still little\n    known but highly interesting fossils of the Old Red Sandstone\n    in one deposition; we find the beautifully preserved shells and\n    lignites of the lias in another. There are the remains of two\n    several creations at once before us. The shore, too, is heaped\n    with rolled fragments of almost every variety of rock,\u2014basalts,\n    ironstones, hypersthenes, porphyries, bituminous shales, and\n    micaceous schists. In short, the young geologist, had he all\n    Europe before him, could hardly choose for himself a better\n    field. I had, however, no one to tell me so at the time, for\n    geology had not yet travelled so far north; and so, without\n    guide or vocabulary, I had to grope my way as I best might,\n    and find out all its wonders for myself. But so slow was the\n    process, and so much was I a seeker in the dark, that the facts\n    contained in these few sentences were the patient gatherings of\n    years.\u201d\u2014_Old Red Sandstone_, pp. 9, 10.\n\nIn this rich field of inquiry, our author encountered, almost daily, new\nobjects of wonder and instruction. In one nodular mass of limestone he\nfound the beautiful ammonite, like one of the finely sculptured volutes\nof an Ionic capital. Within others, fish-scales and bivalve shells;\nand in the centre of another he detected a piece of decayed wood. Upon\nquitting the quarry for the building upon which the workmen were to be\nemployed, the workmen received half a holiday, and our young philosopher\ndevoted this valuable interval to search for certain curiously shaped\nstones, which one of the quarriers told him resembled the heads of\nboarding-pikes, and which, under the name of _thunder-bolts_, were held\nto be a sovereign remedy for cattle that had been bewitched. On the\nshore two miles off, where he expected these remarkable bodies, he found\ndeposits quite different either from the sandstone cliffs or the primary\nrocks further to the west. They consisted of \u201cthin strata of limestone,\nalternating with thicker beds of a black slaty substance,\u201d which burned\nwith a bright flame and a bituminous odor. Though only the eighth part\nof an inch thick, each layer contained thousands of fossils peculiar to\nthe lias,\u2014scallops and gryphites, ammonites, twigs and leaves of plants,\ncones of pine, pieces of charcoal, and scales of fishes,\u2014the impressions\nbeing of a chalky whiteness, contrasting strikingly with their black\nbituminous lair. Among these fragments of animal and vegetable life, he\nat last detected his _thunder-bolt_ in the form of a Belemnite, the\nremains of a kind of cuttle-fish long since extinct.\n\nIn the exercise of his profession, which \u201cwas a wandering one,\u201d our\nauthor advanced steadily, though slowly and surely, in his geological\nacquirements.\n\n    \u201cI remember,\u201d says he, \u201cpassing direct on one occasion from the\n    wild western coast of Ross-shire, where the Old Red Sandstone\n    leans at a high angle against the prevailing quartz rock of\n    the district, to where, on the southern skirts of Mid-Lothian,\n    the mountain limestone rises amid the coal. I have resided\n    one season on a raised beach on the Moray Frith. I have spent\n    the season immediately following amid the ancient granites\n    and contorted schists of the central Highlands. In the north,\n    I have laid open by thousands the shells and lignites of the\n    Oolite; in the south, I have disinterred from their matrices\n    of stone or of shale the huge reeds and tree ferns of the\n    carboniferous period.... In the north, there occurs a vast gap\n    in the scale. The Lias leans unconformably against the Old Red\n    Sandstone; there is no mountain limestone, no coal measures,\n    none of the New Red Marls or Sandstones. There are at least\n    three entire systems omitted. But the upper portion of the\n    scale is well-nigh complete. In one locality we may pass from\n    the Lower to the Upper Lias, in another from the Inferior to\n    the Great Oolite, and onward to the Oxford Clay and the Coral\n    Rag. We may explore in a third locality beds identical in their\n    organisms with the Wealden of Sussex. In a fourth, we find the\n    flints and fossils of the chalk. The lower part of the scale\n    is also well-nigh complete. The Old Red Sandstone is amply\n    developed in Moray, Caithness, and Ross, and the Grauwacke very\n    extensively in Banffshire. But to acquaint one\u2019s self with\n    the three missing formations,\u2014to complete one\u2019s knowledge of\n    the entire scale, by filling up the hiatus,\u2014it is necessary\n    to remove to the south. The geology of the Lothians is the\n    geology of at least two thirds of the gap, and perhaps a little\n    more;\u2014the geology of Arran wants only a few of the upper\n    beds of the New Red Sandstone to fill it entirely.\u201d\u2014_Old Red\n    Sandstone_, pp. 13-17.\n\nAfter having spent nearly fifteen years in the profession of a\nstone-mason, Mr. Miller was promoted to a position more suited to his\ngenius. When a bank was established in his native town of Cromarty, he\nreceived the appointment of accountant, and he was thus employed, for\nfive years, in keeping ledgers and discounting bills. When the contest in\nthe Church of Scotland had come to a close, by the decision of the House\nof Lords in the Auchterurder Case, Mr. Miller\u2019s celebrated letter to Lord\nBrougham attracted the particular attention of the party which was about\nto leave the Establishment, and he was selected as the most competent\nperson to conduct the _Witness_ newspaper, the principal metropolitan\norgan of the Free Church. The great success which this journal has\nmet with is owing, doubtless, to the fine articles, political,\necclesiastical, and geological, which Mr. Miller has written for it. In\nthe few leisure hours which so engrossing an occupation has allowed him\nto enjoy, he has devoted himself to the ardent prosecution of scientific\ninquiries; and we trust the time is not far distant when the liberality\nof his country, to which he has done so much honor, will allow him to\ngive his whole time to the prosecution of science.\n\nGeologists of high character had believed that the Old Red Sandstone\nwas defective in organic remains; and it was not till after ten years\u2019\nacquaintance with it that Mr. Miller discovered it to be _richly\nfossiliferous_. The labors of other ten years were required to assign to\nits fossils their exact place in the scale.\n\nAmong the fossils discovered by our author, the _Pterichthys_ or winged\nfish is doubtless the most remarkable. He had disinterred it so early as\n1831, but it was only in 1838 that he \u201cintroduced it to the acquaintance\nof geologists.\u201d It was not till 1831 that Mr. Miller began to receive\nassistance in his studies from without. In the appendix to Messrs.\nAnderson of Inverness\u2019s admirable _Guide to the Highlands and Islands of\nScotland_, which \u201che perused with intense interest,\u201d he found the most\nimportant information respecting the geology of the North of Scotland;\nand during a correspondence with the accomplished authors of that work,\nmany of his views were developed, and his difficulties removed. In\n1838, he communicated to Dr. Malcolmson of Madras, then in Paris, a\ndrawing and description of the _Pterichthys_. His letter was submitted\nto Agassiz, and subsequently a restored drawing was communicated to the\nElgin Scientific Society. The great naturalist, as well as the members\nof the provincial society, were surprised at the new form of life\nwhich Mr. Miller had disclosed, and some of them, no doubt, regarded\nit with a sceptical eye. \u201cNot many months after, however, a true _bona\nfide Pterichthys_ was turned up in one of the newly-discovered beds of\nNairnshire.\u201d In his last visit to Scotland, Agassiz found six species of\nthe _Pterichthys_, three of which, and the wings of a fourth, were in Mr.\nMiller\u2019s collection.\n\nThis remarkable animal has less resemblance than any other fossil of\nthe Old Red Sandstone to anything that now exists. When first brought\nto view by the single blow of a hammer, there appeared on a ground of\nlight-colored limestone the effigy of a creature, fashioned apparently\nout of jet, with a body covered with plates, two powerful looking arms\narticulated at the shoulders, a head as entirely lost in the trunk as\nthat of the ray, (or skate,) and a long angular tail, equal in length to\na third of the entire figure. Its general resemblance is to the letter\nT,\u2014the upper part of the vertical line being swelled out, and the lower\npart ending in an angular point, the two horizontal portions being, in\nthe opinion of Agassiz, organs of locomotion. To this remarkable fossil\nM. Agassiz has given the appropriate name of _Pterichthys Milleri_. An\naccount of it, accompanied with two fine specimens, was communicated\nto the Geological Section of the British Association at Glasgow, in\nSeptember, 1840; and the most ample details, with accurate drawings,\nwere afterwards published, in 1841, in Mr. Miller\u2019s first work, _The Old\nRed Sandstone_, which was dedicated to Sir Roderick Murchison, who was\nborn on the Old Red Sandstone of the North, in the same district as Mr.\nMiller, and whose great acquirements and distinguished labors are known\nall over the world among scientific men. This admirable work has already\npassed through three editions. From the originality and accuracy of its\ndescriptions, and the importance of the researches which it contains, it\nhas obtained for its author a high reputation among geologists; while\nfrom the elegance and purity of its style, and the force and liveliness\nof its illustrations, it has received the highest praise from its more\ngeneral readers.[1]\n\nAlthough we have been obliged, from the information which it contains\nof our author\u2019s early studies, to mention the \u201cOld Red Sandstone\u201d as if\nit had been his first work; yet so early as 1830, after he had made his\nfirst fossil discoveries at Cromarty, he composed a paper on the subject,\n(his first published production,) which appeared as one of the chapters\nof a small legendary and descriptive work, entitled _The Traditional\nHistory of Cromarty_, which did not appear till 1835. This chapter,\nentitled \u201cThe Antiquary of the World,\u201d possesses a high degree of\ninterest. After describing the scene around him in its pictorial aspect,\nand under the warm associations, which link it with existing life, he\nsurveys it with the cool eye of an \u201cantiquary of the world,\u201d studying\nits once buried monuments, and decyphering the alphabet of plants and\nanimals, the hieroglyphics which embosom the history of past times and\nof successive creations. The gigantic Ben Wevis, with its attendant\nhills, rose abruptly to the west. The distant peaks of Ben Vaichard\nappeared in the south, and far to the north were descried the lofty\nhills of Sutherland, and even the Ord-hill of Caithness. Descending from\nthe towers of nature\u2019s lofty edifice he surveys its ruins, its broken\nsculptures, and its half-defaced inscriptions, as exhibited in certain\nIchthyic remains of the Lower Old Red Sandstone which had then no name,\nand which were unknown to the most accomplished geologists. Among these\nhe specially notices \u201ca confused bituminous-looking mass that had much\nthe appearance of a toad or frog,\u201d thus shadowing forth in the morning\ntwilight the curious _Pterichthys_, which he was able afterwards, in\nbetter specimens, to exhibit in open day. As we have already referred,\nwith some minuteness, to the fossils which our author had at this time\ndiscovered in the great charnel-house of the old world, we shall indulge\nour readers with a specimen of the noble sentiments which they inspired,\nand of the beautiful language in which these sentiments are clothed.\n\n    \u201cBut let us quit this wonderful city of the dead, with all\n    its reclining obelisks, and all its sculptured tumuli, the\n    memorials of a race that exist only in their tombs. And yet,\n    ere we go, it were well, perhaps, to indulge in some of those\n    serious thoughts which we so naturally associate with the\n    solitary burying-ground and the mutilated remains of the\n    departed. Let us once more look around us, and say, whether,\n    of all men, the Geologist does not stand most in need of\n    the Bible, however much he may contemn it in the pride of\n    speculation. We tread on the remains of organized and sentient\n    creatures, which, though more numerous at one period than the\n    whole family of man, have long since ceased to exist; the\n    individuals perished one after one\u2014their remains served only\n    to elevate the floor on which their descendants pursued the\n    various instincts of their nature, and then sunk, like the\n    others, to form a still higher layer of soil; and now that the\n    whole race has passed from the earth, and we see the animals\n    of a different tribe occupying their places, what survives of\n    them but a mass of inert and senseless matter, never again\n    to be animated by the mysterious spirit of vitality\u2014that\n    spirit which, dissipated in the air, or diffused in the ocean,\n    can, like the sweet sounds and pleasant odors of the past,\n    be neither gathered up nor recalled! And O, how dark the\n    analogy which would lead us to anticipate a similar fate for\n    ourselves! As individuals, we are but as yesterday; to-morrow\n    we shall be laid in our graves, and the tread of the coming\n    generation shall be over our heads. Nay, have we not seen a\n    terrible disease sweep away, in a few years, more than eighty\n    millions of the race to which we belong; and can we think of\n    this and say that a time may not come when, like the fossils\n    of these beds our whole species shall be mingled with the\n    soil, and when, though the sun may look down in his strength\n    on our pleasant dwellings and our green fields, there shall be\n    silence in all our borders, and desolation in all our gates,\n    and we shall have no thought of that past which it is now our\n    delight to recall, and no portion in that future which it is\n    now our very nature to anticipate. Surely it is well to believe\n    that a widely different destiny awaits us\u2014that the _God_ who\n    endowed us with those wonderful powers, which enable us to\n    live in every departed era, every coming period, has given us\n    to possess these powers forever; that not only does he number\n    the hairs of our heads, but that his cares are extended to\n    even our very remains; that our very bones, instead of being\n    left, like the exuvi\u00e6 around us, to form the rocks and clays\n    of a future world, shall, like those in the valley of vision,\n    be again clothed with muscle and sinew, and that our bodies,\n    animated by the warmth and vigor of life, shall again connect\n    our souls to the matter existing around us, and be obedient to\n    every impulse of the will. It is surely no time, when we walk\n    amid the dark cemeteries of a departed world, and see the cold\n    blank shadows of the tombs falling drearily athwart the way\u2014it\n    is surely no time to extinguish the light given us to shine so\n    fully and so cheerfully on our own proper path, merely because\n    its beams do not enlighten the recesses that yawn around us.\n    And O, what more unworthy of reasonable men than to reject\n    so consoling a revelation on no juster quarrel, than when it\n    unveils to us much of what could not otherwise be known, and\n    without the knowledge of which we could not be other than\n    unhappy, it leaves to the invigorating exercises of our own\n    powers whatever, in the wide circle of creation, lies fully\n    within their grasp!\u201d\u2014_The Antiquary of the World_, pp. 56-58.\n\nThe next work published by Mr. Miller was entitled \u201c_First Impressions\nof England and its People_,\u201d[2] a popular and interesting volume, which\nhas already gone through two editions, and which may be read with equal\ninterest by the geologist, the philanthropist, and the general reader. It\nis full of knowledge and of anecdote, and is written in that attractive\nstyle which commands the attention even of the most incurious readers.\n\nThis delightful work, though only in _one_ volume, is equal to _three_ of\nthe ordinary type, and cannot fail to be perused with high gratification\nby all classes of readers. It treats of every subject which is presented\nto the notice of an accomplished traveller while he visits the great\ncities and romantic localities of merry England. We know of no tour\nin England written by a native in which so much pleasant reading and\nsubstantial instruction are combined; and though we are occasionally\nstopped in a very delightful locality by a precipice of the Old Red\nSandstone, or frightened by a disinterred skeleton, or sobered by the\nburial-service over Pal\u00e6ozoic graves, we soon recover our equanimity,\nand again enter upon the sunny path to which our author never fails to\nrestore us.\n\nMr. Miller\u2019s new work, the \u201c_Footprints of the Creator_,\u201d of which\nwe publish now another edition, authorized by the writer, is very\nappropriately dedicated to Sir Philip Grey Egerton, Bart., M. P. for\nCheshire\u2014a gentleman who possesses a magnificent collection of fossils,\nand whose skill and acquirements in this department of geology is\nknown and appreciated both in Europe and America. The work itself is\ndivided into fifteen chapters, in which the author treats of the fossil\ngeology of the Orkneys, as exhibited in the vicinity of Stromness; of\nthe development hypothesis, and its consequences; of the history and\nstructure of that remarkable fish, the Asterolepis; of the fishes of the\nUpper and Lower Silurian rocks; of the progress of degradation, and its\nhistory; of the Lamarckian hypothesis of the origin of plants, and its\nconsequences; of the Marine and Terrestrial floras; and of final causes,\nand their bearing on geological history. In the course of these chapters\nMr. Miller discusses the development hypothesis, or the hypothesis of\nnatural law, as maintained by Lamarck and by the author of the Vestiges\nof Creation, and has subjected it, in its geological aspect, to the most\nrigorous examination. Driven by the discoveries of Lord Rosse from the\ndomains of astronomy, where it once seemed to hold a plausible position,\nit might have lingered with the appearance of life among the ambiguities\nof the Pal\u00e6ozoic formations; but Mr. Miller has, with an ingenuity and\npatience worthy of a better subject, stripped it even of its semblance\nof truth, and restored to the Creator, as Governor of the universe, that\npower and those functions which he was supposed to have resigned at its\nbirth.\n\nHaving imposed upon himself the task of examining in detail the various\nfossiliferous formations of Scotland, our author extended his inquiries\ninto the mainland of Orkney, and resided for some time in the vicinity\nof the busy seaport town of Stromness, as a central point from which the\nstructure of the Orkney group of islands could be most advantageously\nstudied. Like that of Caithness, the geology of these islands owes its\nprincipal interest to the immense development of the Lower Old Red\nSandstone formation, and to the singular abundance of its vertebrate\nfossils. Though the Orkneys contain only the _third_ part of the Old\nRed Sandstone, which, but a few years ago, was supposed to be the least\nproductive in fossils of any of the geological formations, yet it\nfurnishes, according to Mr. Miller, more fossil fish than _every_ other\ngeological system in England, Scotland, and Wales, from the Coal Measures\nto the Chalk, inclusive. It is, in short, \u201c_the land of fish_,\u201d and\n\u201ccould supply with ichthyolites, by the ton and by the ship-load, the\nmuseums of the world.\u201d Its various deposits, with the curious organisms\nwhich they inclose, have been upheaved from their original position\nagainst a granitic axis, about six miles long and one broad, \u201cforming the\ngreat back-bone of the western district of the Island Pomona; and on this\ngranitic axis, fast jambed in between a steep hill and the sea, stands\nthe town of Stromness.\u201d\n\nThe mass or pile of strata thus uplifted is described by Mr. Miller as a\nthree-barred pyramid resting on its granite base, exhibiting three broad\ntiers\u2014red, black, and gray\u2014sculptured with the hieroglyphics in which\nits history is recorded. The great conglomerate base on which it rests,\ncovering from 10,000 to 15,000 square miles, from the depth of from 100\nto 400 feet, consists of rough sand and water-worn pebbles; and above\nthis have been deposited successive strata of mud, equal in height to\nthe highest of our mountains, now containing the remains of millions and\ntens of millions of fish which had perished in some sudden and mysterious\ncatastrophe.\n\nIn the examination of the different beds of the three-barred formation,\nour author discovered a well-marked bone, like a petrified large roofing\nnail, in a grayish-colored layer of hard flag, about 100 yards over the\ngranite, and about 160 feet over the upper stratum of the conglomerate.\nThis singular bone, which Mr. Miller has represented in a figure, was\nprobably the oldest vertebrate organism yet discovered in Orkney. It was\n5\u215e inches long, 2\u00bc inches across the head, and \u00b3\u2044\u2081\u2080ths of an inch thick\nin the stem, and formed a characteristic feature of the Asterolepis, as\nyet the most gigantic of the ganoid fishes, and probably one of the first\nof the Old Red Sandstone. In his former researches, our author had found\nthat all of the many hundred ichthyolites which he had disinterred from\nthe Lower Old Red Sandstone were comparatively of a small size, while\nthose in the Upper Old Red were of great bulk; and hence he had naturally\ninferred, that vertebrate life had increased towards the close of the\nsystem\u2014that, in short, it began with an age of dwarfs, and ended with an\nage of giants; but he had thus greatly erred, like the supporters of the\ndevelopment system, in founding positive conclusions on merely negative\nevidence; for here, at the very base of the system, where no dwarfs were\nto be found, he had discovered one of the most colossal of its giants.\n\nAfter this most important discovery, Mr. Miller extended his inquiries\neasterly for several miles along the bare and unwooded Lake of Stennis,\nabout fourteen miles in circumference, and divided into an upper arm\nlower sheet of water by two long promontories jutting out from each side\nand nearly meeting in the middle. The sea enters this lake through the\nopenings of a long rustic bridge, and hence the lower division of the\nlake \u201cis salt in its nether reaches, and brackish in its upper ones;\nwhile the higher division is merely brackish in its nether reaches, and\nfresh enough in its upper ones to be potable.\u201d The fauna and flora of\nthe lake are therefore of a mixed character, the marine and fresh water\nanimals having each their own reaches, though each kind makes certain\nencroachments on the province of the other.\n\nIn the marine and lacustrine floras of the lake, Mr. Miller observed\nchanges still more palpable. At the entrance of the sea, the _Fucus\nnodosus_ and _Fucus vesiculosus_ flourish in their proper form and\nmagnitude. A little farther on in the lake, the F. nodosus disappears,\nand the F. vesiculosus, though continuing to exist for mile after mile,\ngrows dwarfish and stunted, and finally disappears, giving place to\nrushes and other aquatic grasses, till the lacustrine has entirely\ndisplaced the marine flora. From these two important facts, the existence\nof the fragment of _Asterolepis_ in the lower flagstones of the Orkneys,\nand of the \u201ccuriously mixed semi-marine semi-lacustrine vegetation in the\nLoch of Stennis,\u201d which our author regards as bearing directly on the\ndevelopment hypothesis, he takes occasion to submit that hypothesis to a\nsevere examination, and to point out its consequences\u2014its incompatibility\nwith the great truths of morality and revealed religion. According\nto Professor Oken, one of the ablest supporters of the development\ntheory, \u201cThere are two kinds of generation in the world, the creation\nproper, and the propagation that is sequent thereon, or the _original\nand secondary generation_. Consequently, no organism has been created\nof larger size than an infusorial point. No organism is, or ever has\nbeen created, which is not microscopic. Whatever is large has not been\ncreated, but developed. Man has not been created, but developed.\u201d Hence\nit follows that during the great geological period, when race after race\nwas destroyed, and new forms of life called into being, \u201cnature had been\npregnant with the human race,\u201d and that immortal and intellectual Man is\nbut the development of the Brute\u2014itself the development of some monad or\nmollusc, which has been smitten into life by the action of electricity\nupon a portion of gelatinous matter.\n\nIf the development theory be true, \u201cthe early fossils ought to be very\nsmall in size,\u201d and \u201cvery low in organization.\u201d In the earliest strata we\nought to find only \u201cmere _embryos_ and _f\u0153tuses_; and if we find instead\nthe _full-grown_ and _mature_, then must we hold that the testimony of\ngeology is not only _not in accordance_ with the theory, but in positive\nopposition to it.\u201d Having laid this down as the _principle_ by which\nthe question is to be decided, our author proceeds to consider \u201cwhat\nare the _facts_.\u201d The _Asterolepis_ of Stromness _seems_ to be the\noldest organism yet discovered in the most ancient geological system of\nScotland, in which vertebrate remains occur. It is probably the oldest\nC\u0153lacanth that the world has yet produced, for there is no certain trace\nof this family in the great Silurian system, which lies underneath, and\non which, according to our existing knowledge, organic existence first\nbegan. \u201cHow, then,\u201d asks Mr. Miller, \u201con the two relevant points\u2014bulk and\norganization\u2014does it answer to the demands of the development hypothesis?\nWas it a mere f\u0153tus of the finny tribe, of minute size and imperfect\nembryonic faculty? Or was it of, at least, the ordinary bulk, and, for\nits class, of the average organization?\u201d\n\nIn order to answer these questions, Mr. Miller proceeds in his _third_\nchapter to give the recent history of the Asterolepis; in his _fourth_,\nto ascertain the cerebral development of the earlier vertebrata; and in\nhis _fifth_ chapter to describe the structure, bulk, and aspect of the\nAsterolepis. In the rocks of Russia certain fossil remains had been long\nago discovered, of such a singular nature as to have perplexed Lamarck\nand other naturalists. Their true place among fishes was subsequently\nascertained by M. Eichwald, a living naturalist; and Sir Roderick\nMurchison found that they were Ichthyolites of the Old Red Sandstone.\nAgassiz gave them the name of _Chelonichthys_; but in consequence of very\nfine specimens having been found in the Old Red Sandstone of Russia,\nwhich Professor Asmus of Dorpat sent to the British Museum, and which\nexhibited star-like markings, he abandoned his name of _Chelonichthys_,\nand adopted that of _Asterolepis_, or star-scale, which Eichwald had\nproposed. Many points, however, respecting this curious fossil remained\nto be determined, and it was fortunate for science that Mr. Miller was\nenabled to accomplish this object by means of a variety of excellent\nspecimens which he received from Mr. Robert Dick, \u201can intelligent\ntradesman of Thurso, one of those working men of Scotland, of active\ncuriosity and well developed intellect, that give character and standing\nto the rest.\u201d Agassiz had inferred, from very imperfect fragments, that\nthe _Asterolepis_ was a strongly-helmed fish of the _C\u0153lacanths_, or\nhollow spine family\u2014that it was probably a flat-headed animal, and that\nthe discovery of a head or of a jaw might prove that the genus Dendrodus\ndid not differ from it. All these conjectures were completely confirmed\nby Mr. Miller, after a careful examination of the specimens of Mr. Dick.\n\nBefore proceeding to describe the structure of the gigantic Asterolepis,\nMr. Miller devotes a long and elaborate chapter to the subject of the\ncerebral development of the earlier vertebrata, in order to ascertain\nin what manner their true brains were lodged, and to discover the\nmodification which the cranium, as their protecting box, received in\nsubsequent periods. This inquiry, which he has conducted with great skill\nand ability, is not only highly interesting in itself, but will be found\nto have a direct bearing on the great question which it is his object to\ndiscuss and decide.\n\nThe facts and reasonings contained in this chapter will, we doubt not,\nshake to its very base the bold theory of Professor Oken, which has been\nso generally received abroad, and which is beginning to find supporters\neven among the solid thinkers of our own country. In the _Isis_ of 1818,\nProfessor Lorenz Oken has given the following account of the hypothesis\nto which we allude. \u201cIn August, 1806,\u201d says he, \u201cI made a journey over\nthe Hartz. I slid down through the wood on the south side, and straight\nbefore me, at my very feet, lay a most beautiful blanched skull of\na hind. I picked it up, turned it round, regarded it intensely;\u2014the\nthing was done. \u2018It is a vertebral column,\u2019 struck me like a flood of\nlightning, \u2018to the marrow and bone;\u2019 and since that time the skull has\nbeen regarded as a vertebral column.\u201d\n\nThis remarkable hypothesis was at first received with enthusiasm by the\nnaturalists of Germany, and, among others, by Agassiz, who, from grounds\nnot of a geological kind, has more recently rejected it. It has been\nadopted by our distinguished countryman, Professor Owen, and forms the\ncentral idea in his lately published and ingenious work \u201cOn the Nature\nof Limbs.\u201d The conclusion at which he arrives, that the fore-limbs of\nthe vertebrata are the ribs of the occipital bone or vertebra set free,\nand (in all the vertebrata higher in the scale than the ordinary fishes)\ncarried down along the vertebral column by a sort of natural dislocation,\nis a deduction from the idea that startled Professor Oken in the forest\nof the Hartz. Whatever support this hypothesis might have expected from\nGeology, has been struck from beneath it by this remarkable chapter of\nMr. Miller\u2019s work; and though anatomists may for a while maintain it\nunder the influence of so high an authority as Professor Owen, we are\nmuch mistaken if it ever forms a part of the creed of the geologist.\nMr. Miller indeed has, by a most skilful examination of the heads of\nthe earliest vertebrata known to geologists, proved that the hypothesis\nderives no support from the structure which they exhibit, and Agassiz has\neven upon general principles rejected it as untenable.\n\nMr. Miller\u2019s next chapter on the structure, bulk, and aspect of the\nAsterolepis, is, like that which precedes it, the work of a master,\nevincing the highest powers of observation and analysis. Its size in the\nlarger specimens must have been very great; and from a comparison of the\nproportion of the head in the Ganoids to the length of the body, which\nis sometimes as one to five, or one to six, or one to six and a half,\nor even one to seven, our author concludes that the total length of the\nspecimens in his possession must have been at least eight feet three\ninches, or from nine feet nine to nine feet ten inches. The remains of an\nAsterolepis found by Mr. Dick at Thurso, indicate a length of from twelve\nfeet five to thirteen feet eight inches; and one of the Russian specimens\nof Professor Asmus must have been from _eighteen_ to _twenty-three_ feet\nlong. \u201cHence,\u201d says Mr. Miller, \u201cin the not unimportant circumstance\nof size\u2014the most ancient C\u0153lacanths yet known, instead of taking their\nplaces agreeably to the demands of the development hypothesis among the\nsprats, sticklebacks, and minnows of their class, took their place among\nits huge basking sharks, gigantic sturgeons, and bulky swordfishes.\nThey were giants, not dwarfs.\u201d Again, judging by the analogies which\nits structure exhibits to that of fishes of the existing period, the\nAsterolepis must have been a fish high in the scale of organization.\n\nA specimen of Asterolepis, discovered by Mr. Dick, among the Thurso\nrocks, and sent to Mr. Miller, exhibited the singular phenomenon of a\nquantity of thick tar lying beneath it, which stuck to the fingers when\nlifting the pieces of rock. \u201cWhat had been once the nerves, muscles, and\nblood of this ancient Ganoid, still lay under its bones,\u201d a phenomenon\nwhich our author had previously seen beneath the body of a poor suicide,\nwhose grave in a sandy bank had been laid open by the encroachments of a\nriver, the sand beneath it having been \u201cconsolidated into a dark colored\npitchy mass,\u201d extending a full yard beneath the body. In like manner,\nthe animal juices of the Asterolepis had preserved its remains, by \u201cthe\npervading bitumen, greatly more conservative in its effects than the oil\nand gum of an old Egyptian undertaker.\u201d The bones, though black as pitch\nretained to a considerable degree the peculiar qualities of the original\nsubstance, in the same manner as the adipocire of wet burying-grounds\npreserves fresh and green the bones which it encloses.\n\nIn support of his anti-development views, Mr. Miller devotes his next and\n_sixth_ chapter to the recent history, order, and size of the fishes of\nthe Upper and Lower Silurian rocks. Of these ancient formations, the bone\nbed of the Upper Ludlow rocks is the only one which, besides defensive\nspines of fish, contains teeth, fragments of jaws, and shagreen points,\nwhereas, in the inferior deposits, defensive spates alone are found. The\nspecies discovered by Professor Phillips, in the Wenlock shale, were\nmicroscopic; and the author of the _Vestiges_ took advantage of this\ninsulated fact to support his views, by pronouncing the little creatures\nto which the species belonged as the f\u0153tal embryos of their class. Mr.\nMiller has, however, even on this ground, defeated his opponent. By\ncomparing the defensive spines of the _Onchus Murchisoni_ of the Upper\nLudlow bed with those of a recent _Spinax Acanthias_, or dog-fish, and\nof the _Cestracion Phillippi_, or Port Jackson shark, he arrives at the\nconclusion, that the fishes to which the species belonged must be all of\nconsiderable size; and in the following chapter _on the high standing\nof the Placoids_ he shews that the same early fishes were high in\nintelligence and organization.\n\nIn his _ninth_ chapter on the _History and Progress of Degradation_,\nour author enters upon a new and interesting subject. The object of\nit is to determine the proper ground on which the standing of the\nearlier vertebrata should be decided, namely, the test of what he terms\nhomological symmetry of organization. In nature there are monster\nfamilies, just as there are in families monster individuals\u2014men without\nfeet, hands, or eyes, or with them in a wrong place\u2014sheep with legs\ngrowing from their necks, ducklings with wings on their haunches, and\ndogs and cats with more legs than they require. We have thus, according\nto our author\u20141, _monstrosity through defect of parts_; 2, _monstrosity\nthrough redundancy of parts_; and 3, _monstrosity through displacement of\nparts_. This last species, united in some cases with the other two, our\nauthor finds curiously exemplified in the geological history of the fish,\nwhich he considers better known than that of any other division of the\nvertebrata; and he is convinced that it is from a survey of the progress\nof degradation in the great Ichthyic division that the standing of the\nkingly fishes of the earlier periods is to be determined.\n\nIn the earliest vertebrate period, namely, the Silurian, our author\nshews that the fishes were homologically symmetrical in their\norganization, as exhibited in the Placoids. In the second great Ichthyic\nperiod, that of the Old Red Sandstone, he finds the first example in\nthe class of fishes of _monstrosity, by displacement of parts_. In all\nthe Ganoids of the period, there is the same departure from symmetry\nas would take place in man if his neck was annihilated, and the arms\nstuck to the back of the head. In the _Coccosteus_ and _Pterichthys_\nof the same period, he finds the first example of _degradation through\ndefect_, the former resembling a human monster without hands, and the\nlatter one without feet. After ages and centuries have passed away,\nand then after the termination of the Pal\u00e6ozoic period, a change takes\nplace in the formation of the fish tail. \u201cOther ages and centuries pass\naway, during which the reptile class attains to its fullest development\nin point of size, organization, and number; and then, after the times\nof the cretaceous deposits have begun, we find yet another remarkable\nmonstrosity of displacement introduced among all the fishes of one very\nnumerous order, and among no inconsiderable proportion of the fishes\nof another. In the newly-introduced Ctenoids (_Acanthopterygii_,) and\nin those families of the Cycloids which Cuvier erected into the order\n_Malacopterygii sub-brachiati_, the hinder limbs are brought forward and\nstuck on to the base of the previously misplaced fore limbs. All the\nfour limbs, by a strange monstrosity of displacement, are crowded into\nthe place of the extinguished neck. And such, in the present day, is the\nprevalent type among fishes. Monstrosity through _defect_ is also found\nto increase; so that the snake-like _apoda_, or feet-wanting fishes,\nform a numerous order, some of whose genera are devoid, as in the common\neels and the congers, of only the hinder limbs, while in others, as in\nthe genera _Mur\u00e6na_ and _Synbranchus_, both hinder and fore-limbs are\nwanting.\u201d From these and other facts, our author concludes that as in\nexisting fishes we find many more proofs of the monstrosity, both from\ndisplacement and defect of parts, than in all the other three classes\nof the vertebrata, and as these monstrosities did not appear early, but\nlate, \u201cthe progress of the race as a whole, though it still retains\nnot a few of the higher forms, has been a progress not of development\nfrom the low to the high, but of degradation from the high to the low.\u201d\nAn extreme example of the degradation of distortion, superadded to\nthat of displacement, may be seen in the flounder, plaice, halibut, or\nturbot,\u2014fishes of a family of which there is no trace in the earlier\nperiods. The creature is twisted half round and laid on its side. The\ntail, too, is horizontal. Half the features of its head are twisted to\none side, and the other half to the other, while its wry mouth is in\nkeeping with its squint eyes. One jaw is straight, and the other like\na bow; and while one contains from _four_ to _six_ teeth, the other\ncontains from _thirty_ to _thirty-five_.\n\nAided by facts like these, an ingenious theorist might, as our author\nremarks, \u201cget up as unexceptionable a theory of degradation as of\ndevelopment.\u201d But however this may be, the principle of degradation\nactually exists, and \u201cthe history of its progress in creation bears\ndirectly against the assumption that the earlier vertebrata were of a\nlower type than the vertebrata of the same Ichthyic class which exist\nnow.\u201d\n\nIn his next and _tenth_ chapter, our author controverts with his usual\npower the argument in favor of the development hypothesis, drawn from\nthe predominance of the Brachiopods among the Silurian Molluscs. The\nexistence of the highly organized Cephalopods, in the same formation,\nnot only neutralizes this argument, but authorizes the conclusion that\nan animal of a very high order of organization existed in the earliest\nformation. It is of no consequence whether the Cephalopods, or the\nBrachiopods were most numerous. Had there been only one cuttle fish in\nthe Silurian seas, and a million of Brachiopods, the fact would equally\nhave overturned the development system.\n\nIn the same chapter, Mr. Miller treats of the geological history of\nthe Fossil flora, which has been pressed into the service of the\ndevelopment hypothesis. On the authority of Adolphe Brongniart, it was\nmaintained that, previous to the age of the Lias, \u201cNature had failed to\nachieve a tree\u2014and that the rich vegetation of the Coal Measures had\nbeen exclusively composed of magnificent immaturities of the vegetable\nkingdom, of gigantic ferns and club mosses, that attained to the size\nof forest trees, and of thickets of the swamp-loving horse-tail family\nof plants.\u201d True exogenous trees, however, do exist of vast size, and\nin great numbers, in all the coal-fields of our own country, as has\nbeen proved by Mr. Miller. Nay, he himself discovered in the Old Red\nSandstone, _Lignite_, which is proved to have formed part of a true\ngymnospermous tree, represented by the pines of Europe and America, or\nmore probably, as Mr. Miller believes, by the Araucarians of Chili and\nNew Zealand. This important discovery is pregnant with instruction. The\nancient Conifer must have waved its green foliage over dry land, and it\nis not probable that it was the only tree in the primeval forest. \u201cThe\nship carpenter,\u201d as our author observes, \u201cmight have hopefully taken\naxe in hand to explore the woods for some such stately pine as the one\ndescribed by Milton,\u2014\n\n    \u2018Hewn on Norwegian hills, to be the mast\n    Of some great admiral.\u2019\u201d\n\nViewing this _olive leaf_ of the Old Red Sandstone as not at all devoid\nof poetry, our author invites us to a voyage from the latest formation up\nto the first zone of the Silurian formation,\u2014thus passing from ancient to\nstill more ancient scenes of being, and finding, as at the commencement\nof our voyage, a graceful intermixture of land and water, continent,\nriver, and sea.\n\nBut though the existence of a true Placoid, a real vertebrated fish, in\nthe Cambrian limestone of Bala, and of true wood at the base of the Old\nRed Sandstone, are utterly incompatible with the development hypothesis,\nits supporters, thus driven to the wall, may take shelter under the\nvague and unquestioned truth that the lower plants and animals preceded\nthe higher, and that the order of creation was fish, reptiles, birds,\nmammalia, quadrumana, and man. From this resource, too, our author\nhas cut off his opponents, and proceeds to show that such an order of\ncreation, \u201cat once wonderful and beautiful,\u201d does not afford even the\nslightest presumption in favor of the hypothesis which it is adduced to\nsupport.\n\nThis argument is carried on in a popular and amusing dialogue in the\n_eleventh_ chapter. Mr. Miller shows, in the clearest manner, that\n\u201csuperposition is not parental relation,\u201d or that an organism lying\nabove another gives us no ground for believing that the lower organism\nwas the parent of the higher. The theorist, however, looks only at those\nphases of truth which are in unison with his own views; and, when truth\npresents no such favorable aspect, he finally wraps himself up in the\nfolds of ignorance and ambiguity\u2014the winding-sheet of error refuted\nand exposed. We have not yet penetrated, says he, in feeble accents,\nto the formations which represent the dawn of being, and the simplest\norganism may yet be detected beneath the lowest fossiliferous rocks.\nThis undoubtedly _may be_, and Sir Charles Lyell and Mr. Leonard Horner\nare of opinion that such rocks may yet be discovered; while Sir Roderick\nMurchison and Professor Sedgwick and Mr. Miller are of an opposite\nopinion. But even were such rocks discovered to-morrow, it would not\nfollow that their organisms gave the least support to the development\nhypothesis. In the year 1837, when fishes were not discovered in the\nUpper Silurian rocks, the theorist would have rightly predicted the\nexistence of lower fossiliferous beds; but when they are discovered, and\ntheir fossils examined, they furnish the strongest argument that could\nbe desired against the theory they were expected to sustain. This fact,\nno doubt, is so far in favor of the supposition that there may be still\nlower fossil-bearing strata; but, as Mr. Miller observes, \u201cThe pyramid of\norganized existence, as it ascends into the by-past eternity, inclines\nsensibly towards its apex,\u2014that apex of \u2018_beginning_\u2019 on which, on far\nother than geological grounds, it is our privilege to believe. The broad\nbase of the superstructure planted on the existing scene stretches across\nthe entire scale on life, animal and vegetable; but it contracts as it\nrises into the past;\u2014man,\u2014the quadrumana,\u2014the quadrupedal man,\u2014the bird\nand the reptile are each in succession struck from off its breadth, till\nwe at length see it with the vertebrata, represented by only the fish,\nnarrowing as it were to a point; and though the clouds of the upper\nregion may hide its apex, we infer, from the declination of its sides,\nthat it cannot penetrate much farther into the profound.\u201d\n\nIn our author\u2019s next chapter, the _twelfth_ of the series, he proceeds\nto examine the \u201cLamarckian hypothesis of the origin of plants, and its\nconsequences.\u201d\n\nIn his _thirteenth_ chapter, on \u201cThe two Floras, marine and terrestrial,\u201d\nhe has shown that all our experience is opposed to the opinion, that the\none has been transmuted into the other. If the marine had been converted\ninto terrestrial vegetation, we ought to have, in the Lake of Stennis,\nfor example, plants of an intermediate character between the alg\u00e6 of the\nsea, and the monocotyledons of the lake. But no such transition-plants\nare found. The alg\u00e6, as our author observes, become dwarfish and\nill-developed. They cease to exist as the water becomes fresher, \u201cuntil\nat length we find, instead of the brown, rootless, flowerless fucoids and\nconferv\u00e6 of the ocean, the green, rooted, flowering flags, rushes, and\naquatic grasses of the fresh water. Many thousands of years have failed\nto originate a single intermediate plant.\u201d The same conclusion may be\ndrawn from the character of the vegetation along the extensive shores of\nBritain and Ireland. No botanist has ever found a single plant in the\ntransition state.\n\nThe _fourteenth_ chapter of the \u201cFootprints\u201d will be perused with great\ninterest by the general reader. It is a powerful and argumentative\nexposure of the development hypothesis, and of the manner in which the\nsubject has been treated in the \u201cVestiges.\u201d Whether we consider it in\nits nature, in its history, or in the character of the intellects with\nwhom it originated, or by whom it has been received and supported, Mr.\nMiller has shown that it has nothing to recommend it. It existed as a\nwild dream before Geology had any being as a science. It was broached\nmore than a century ago by De Maillet, who knew nothing of the geology\neven of his day. In a translation of his Telhamed, published in 1750,\nMr. Miller finds very nearly the same account given of the origin of\nplants and animals, as that in the \u201cVestiges,\u201d and in which the sea\nis described as that \u201cgreat and fruitful womb of nature, in which\norganization and life first begin.\u201d Lamarck, though a skilful botanist\nand conchologist, was unacquainted with geology; and as he first\npublished his development hypothesis in 1802, (an hypothesis identical\nwith that of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d) it is probable that he was not then a very\nskilful zoologist. Nor has Professor Oken any higher claims to geological\nacquirements. He confesses that he wrote the first edition of his work\nin _a kind of inspiration!_ and it is not difficult to estimate the\nintelligence of the inspiring idol that announced to the German sage that\nthe globe was a vast crystal, a little flawed in the facets, and that\nquartz, feldspar, and mica, the three constituents of granite, were the\nhail-drops of heavy showers of stone that fell into the original ocean,\nand accumulated into rocks at the bottom!\n\nSuch is the unscientific parentage of the theories promulgated in the\n\u201cVestiges.\u201d But the author of this work appeals in the first instance to\nscience. Astronomy, Geology, Botany, and Zoology are called upon to give\nevidence in his favor; but the astronomer, geologist, botanist, and the\nzoologist, all refuse him their testimony, deny his premises, and reject\nhis results. \u201cIt is not,\u201d as Mr. Miller happily observes, \u201cthe illiberal\nreligionist that casts him off. It is the inductive philosopher.\u201d Science\naddresses him in the language of the possessed: \u201cThe astronomer I know,\nand the geologist I know; but who are ye?\u201d Thus left alone in a cloud\nof star-dust, or in brackish water between the marine and terrestrial\nflora, he \u201cappeals from science to the want of it,\u201d casts a stone at\nour Scientific Institutions, and demands a jury of \u201cordinary readers,\u201d\nas the only \u201ctribunal\u201d by which \u201cthe new philosophy is to be truly and\nrighteously judged.\u201d\n\nThe last and _fifteenth_ chapter of Mr. Miller\u2019s work, \u201cOn the Bearing\nof Final Causes on Geologic History,\u201d if read with care and thought,\nwill prove at once delightful and instructive. The principle of _final\ncauses_, or the conditions of existence, affords a wide scope to our\nreason in Natural History, but especially in Geology. It becomes an\ninteresting inquiry, if any reason can be assigned why at certain periods\nspecies began to exist, and became extinct after the lapse of lengthened\nperiods of time, and why the higher classes of being succeeded the lower\nin the order of creation? The incompleteness of geological science,\nhowever, does not permit us to remove, for the present, the veil which\nhangs over this mysterious chronology; but our author is of opinion that\nin about a quarter of a century, in a favored locality like the British\nIslands, geological history \u201cwill assume a very extraordinary form.\u201d\n\nIt is a singular fact, which will yet lead to singular results, that\nCuvier\u2019s arrangement of the four classes of vertebrate animals should\nexhibit the same order as that in which they are found in the strata of\nthe earth. In the _fish_, the average proportion of the brain to the\nspinal cord is only as 2 to 1. In the _reptile_, the ratio is 2\u00bd to 1.\nIn the _bird_, it is as 3 to 1. In the _mammalia_, it is as 4 to 1; and\nin _man_, it is as 23 to 1. No less remarkable is the f\u0153tal progress of\nthe human brain. It first becomes a brain resembling that of a fish; then\nit grows into the form of that of a reptile; then into that of a bird;\nthen into that of a mammiferous quadruped, and finally it assumes the\nform of a human brain, \u201cthus comprising in its f\u0153tal progress an epitome\nof geological history, as if man were in himself a compendium of all\nanimated nature, and of kin to every creature that lives.\u201d\n\nWith these considerations, Mr. Miller has brought his subject to the\npoint at which Science in its onward progress now stands. It is to\nembryology we are in future to look for further information upon the\nmost intimate relations which exist between all organized beings. We may\nfairly entertain the hope that the time is not far when we shall not\nonly fully understand the Plan of Creation, but even lift some corner\nof the veil which has hitherto prevented us from forming adequate ideas\nof the first introduction of animal and vegetable life upon earth, and\nof the changes which both kingdoms have undergone in the succession of\ngeological ages.\n\n                                                              L. AGASSIZ.\n\nCAMBRIDGE, _September, 1850_.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n                                                                      PAGE\n\n    STROMNESS AND ITS ASTEROLEPIS.\u2014THE LAKE OF STENNIS                  21\n\n    THE DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES                    37\n\n    THE RECENT HISTORY OF THE ASTEROLEPIS.\u2014ITS FAMILY                   48\n\n    CEREBRAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE EARLIER VERTEBRATA.\u2014ITS\n      APPARENT PRINCIPLE                                                62\n\n    THE ASTEROLEPIS.\u2014ITS STRUCTURE, BULK, AND ASPECT                    94\n\n    FISHES OF THE SILURIAN ROCKS, UPPER AND LOWER.\u2014THEIR RECENT\n      HISTORY, ORDER, AND SIZE                                         130\n\n    HIGH STANDING OF THE PLACOIDS.\u2014OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED               147\n\n    THE PLACOID BRAIN.\u2014EMBRYONIC CHARACTERISTICS NOT NECESSARILY\n      OF A LOW ORDER                                                   160\n\n    THE PROGRESS OF DEGRADATION.\u2014ITS HISTORY                           181\n\n    EVIDENCE OF THE SILURIAN MOLLUSCS.\u2014OF THE FOSSIL FLORA.\u2014ANCIENT\n      TREE                                                             205\n\n    SUPERPOSITION NOT PARENTAL RELATION.\u2014THE BEGINNINGS OF LIFE        230\n\n    LAMARCKIAN HYPOTHESIS OF THE ORIGIN OF PLANTS.\u2014ITS CONSEQUENCES    243\n\n    THE TWO FLORAS, MARINE AND TERRESTRIAL.\u2014BEARING OF THE\n      EXPERIENCE ARGUMENT                                              262\n\n    THE DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS IN ITS EMBRYONIC STATE.\u2014OLDER THAN\n      ITS ALLEGED FOUNDATIONS                                          277\n\n    FINAL CAUSES\u2014THEIR BEARING ON GEOLOGIC HISTORY\u2014CONCLUSION          303\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF WOOD-CUTS\n\n\n                                                                      PAGE\n\n     1. Internal ridge of hyoid plate of _Asterolepis_                  31\n\n     2. Shagreen of _Raja clavata_:\u2014of _Sphagodus_                      54\n\n     3. Scales of _Acanthodes sulcatus_:\u2014shagreen of _Scyllium\n          stellare_                                                     55\n\n     4. Scales of _Cheiracanthus microlepidotus_:\u2014shagreen of\n          _Spinax Acanthias_                                            56\n\n     5. Section of shagreen of _Scyllium stellare_:\u2014of scales of\n          _Cheiracanthus microlepidotus_                                56\n\n     6. Scales of _Osteolepis microlepidotus_:\u2014of an undescribed\n          species of _Glyptolepis_                                      57\n\n     7. Osseous points Of Placoid Cranium                               65\n\n     8. Osseous centrum of _Spinax Acanthias_:\u2014of _Raja clavata_        67\n\n     9. Portions of caudal fin of _Cheiracanthus_:\u2014of _Cheirolepis_     69\n\n    10. Upper surface of cranium of Cod                                 72\n\n    11. Cranial buckler of _Coccosteus_                                 74\n\n    12. Cranial buckler of _Osteolepis_                                 75\n\n    13. Upper surface of head of _Osteolepis_                           77\n\n    14. Under surface of head of _Osteolepis_                           79\n\n    15. Head of _Osteolepis_, seen in profile                           80\n\n    16. Cranial buckler of _Diplopterus_                                81\n\n    17. Ditto                                                           82\n\n    18. Palatal dart-head, and group of palatal teeth, of _Dipterus_    83\n\n    19. Cranial buckler of _Dipterus_                                   85\n\n    20. Base of cranium of _Dipterus_                                   86\n\n    21. Under jaw of _Dipterus_                                         87\n\n    22. Longitudinal section of head of _Dipterus_                      88\n\n    23. Section of vertebral centrum of Thornback                       92\n\n    24. Dermal tubercles of _Asterolepis_                               95\n\n    25. Scales of _Asterolepis_                                         96\n\n    26. Portion of carved surface of scale                              96\n\n    27. Cranial buckler of _Asterolepis_                                98\n\n    28. Inner surface of cranial buckler of _Asterolepis_               99\n\n    29. Plates of cranial buckler of _Asterolepis_                     102\n\n    30. Portion of under jaw of _Asterolepis_                          103\n\n    31. Inner side of portion of under jaw of _Asterolepis_            104\n\n    32. Portion of transverse section of reptile tooth of\n          _Asterolepis_                                                105\n\n    33. Section of jaw of _Asterolepis_                                106\n\n    34. Maxillary bone?                                                108\n\n    35. Inner surface of operculum of _Asterolepis_                    109\n\n    36. Hyoid plate                                                    110\n\n    37. Nail-like bone of hyoid plate                                  111\n\n    38. Shoulder plate of _Asterolepis_                                112\n\n    39. Dermal bones of _Asterolepis_                                  113\n\n    40. Internal bones of _Asterolepis_                                114\n\n    41. Ditto                                                          115\n\n    42. Ischium of _Asterolepis_                                       116\n\n    43. Joint of ray of Thornback:\u2014of _Asterolepis_                    117\n\n    44. Coprolites of _Asterolepis_                                    118\n\n    45. Hyoid plate of Thurso _Asterolepis_                            124\n\n    46. Hyoid plate of Russian _Asterolepis_                           127\n\n    47. Spine of _Spinax Acanthias_:\u2014fragment of Onondago spine        143\n\n    48. Tail of _Spinax Acanthius_:\u2014of _Ichthyosaurus tenuirostris_    172\n\n    49. Port Jackson Shark (_Cestracion Phillippi_)                    177\n\n    50. Tail of _Osteolepis_                                           195\n\n    51. Tail of _Lepidosteus osseus_                                   196\n\n    52. Tail of Perch                                                  197\n\n    53. _Altingia excelsa_ (Norfolk-Island Pine)                       212\n\n    54. Fucoids of the Lower Old Red Sandstone                         216\n\n    55. Two species of Old Red Fucoids                                 217\n\n    56. Fern (?) of the Lower Old Red Sandstone                        219\n\n    57. Lignite of the Lower Old Red Sandstone                         221\n\n    58. Internal structure of lignite of Lower Old Red Sandstone       223\n\n\n\n\nSTROMNESS AND ITS ASTEROLEPIS. THE LAKE OF STENNIS.\n\n\nWhen engaged in prosecuting the self-imposed task of examining in detail\nthe various fossiliferous deposits of Scotland, in the hope of ultimately\nacquainting myself with them all, I extended my exploratory ramble, about\ntwo years ago, into the Mainland of Orkney, and resided for some time in\nthe vicinity of Stromness.\n\nThis busy seaport town forms that special centre, in this northern\narchipelago, from which the structure of the entire group can be most\nadvantageously studied. The geology of the Orkneys, like that of\nCaithness, owes its chief interest to the immense development which\nit exhibits of one formation,\u2014the Lower Old Red Sandstone,\u2014and to the\nextraordinary abundance of its vertebrate remains. It is not too much\nto affirm, that in the comparatively small portion which this cluster\nof islands contains of the _third_ part of a system regarded only a\nfew years ago as the least fossiliferous in the geologic scale, there\nare more fossil fish enclosed than in _every_ other geologic system\nin England, Scotland, and Wales, from the Coal Measures to the Chalk\ninclusive. Orkney is emphatically, to the geologist, what a juvenile\nShetland poetess designates her country, in challenging for it a standing\nindependent of the \u201cLand of Cakes,\u201d\u2014a \u201cLand of Fish;\u201d and, were the trade\nonce fairly opened up, could supply with ichthyolites, by the ton and the\nship-load, the museums of the world. Its various deposits, with all their\nstrange organisms, have been uptilted from the bottom against a granitic\naxis, rather more than six miles in length by about a mile in breadth,\nwhich forms the great back-bone of the western district of Pomona; and on\nthis granitic axis\u2014fast jammed in between a steep hill and the sea\u2014stands\nthe town of Stromness. Situated thus _at the bottom_ of the upturned\ndeposits of the island, it occupies exactly such a point of observation\nas that which the curious eastern traveller would select, in front of\nsome huge pyramid or hieroglyphic-covered obelisk, as a proper site for\nhis tent. It presents, besides, not a few facilities for studying with\nthe geological phenomena, various interesting points in physical science\nof a cognate character. Resting on its granitic base, _in front_ of\nthe strangely sculptured pyramid of three broad tiers,\u2014red, black, and\ngray,\u2014which the Old Red Sandstone of these islands may be regarded as\nforming, it is but a short half mile from the Great Conglomerate base\nof the formation, and scarcely a quarter of a mile more from the older\nbeds of its central flagstone deposit; while an hour\u2019s sail on the one\nhand opens to the explorer the overlying arenaceous deposit of Hoy, and\nan hour\u2019s walk on the other introduces him to the Loch of Stennis, with\nits curiously mixed flora and fauna. But of the Loch of Stennis and its\nproductions more anon.\n\nThe day was far spent when I reached Stromness: but as I had a fine\nbright evening still before me, longer by some three or four degrees of\nnorth latitude than the midsummer evenings of the south of Scotland,\nI set out, hammer in hand, to examine the junction of the granite and\nthe Great Conglomerate, where it has been laid bare by the sea along\nthe low promontory which forms the western boundary of the harbor. The\ngranite here is a ternary of the usual components, somewhat intermediate\nin grain and color between the granites of Peterhead and Aberdeen;\nand the conglomerate consists of materials almost exclusively derived\nfrom it,\u2014evidence enough of itself, that when this ancient mechanical\ndeposit was in course of forming, the granite\u2014exactly such a compound\nthen as it is now\u2014was one of the surface rocks of the locality, and\nmuch exposed to disintegrating influences. This conglomerate base of\nthe Lower Old Red Sandstone of Scotland\u2014which presents, over an area\nof many thousand square miles, such an identity of character, that\nspecimens taken from the neighborhood of Lerwick, in Shetland, or of\nGamrie, in Banff, can scarce be distinguished from specimens detached\nfrom the hills which rise over the Great Caledonian Valley, or from the\ncliffs immediately in front of the village of Contin\u2014seems to have been\nformed in a vast oceanic basin of primary rock,\u2014a Pal\u00e6ozoic Hudson\u2019s or\nBaffin\u2019s Bay,\u2014partially surrounded, mayhap, by primary continents, swept\nby numerous streams, rapid and headlong, and charged with the broken\ndebris of the inhospitable regions which they drained. The graptolite\nbearing grauwacke of Banffshire seems to have been the only fossiliferous\nrock that occurred throughout the entire extent of this ancient northern\nbasin; and its few organisms now serve to open the sole vista through\nwhich the geological explorer to the north of the Grampians can catch a\nglimpse of an earlier period of existence than that represented by the\nichthyolites of the Lower Old Red Sandstone.\n\nVery many ages must have passed ere, amid waves and currents, the\nwater-worn debris which now forms the Great Conglomerate could have\naccumulated over tracts of sea-bottom from ten to fifteen thousand\nsquare miles in area, to its present depth of from one to four hundred\nfeet. At length, however, a thorough change took place; but we can only\ndoubtfully speculate regarding its nature or cause. The bottom of the\nPal\u00e6ozoic basin became greatly less exposed. Some protecting circle of\ncoast had been thrown up around it; or, what is perhaps more probable,\nit had sunk to a profounder depth, and the ancient shores and streams\nhad receded, through the depression, to much greater distances. And, in\nconsequence, the deposition of rough sand and rolled pebbles was followed\nby a deposition of mud. Myriads of fish, of forms the most ancient\nand obsolete, congregated on its banks or sheltered in its hollows;\ngeneration succeeded generation, millions and tens of millions perished\nmysteriously by sudden death; shoals after shoals were annihilated; but\nthe productive powers of nature were strong, and the waste was kept\nup. But who among men shall reckon the years or centuries during which\nthese races existed, and this muddy ocean of the remote past spread out\nto unknown and nameless shores around them? As in those great cities of\nthe desert that lie uninhabited and waste, we can but conjecture their\nterm of existence from the vast extent of their cemeteries. We only\nknow that the dark, finely-grained schists in which they so abundantly\noccur must have been of comparatively slow formation, and that yet the\nthickness of the deposit more than equals the height of our loftiest\nScottish mountains. It would seem as if a period equal to that in which\nall human history is comprised might be cut out of a corner of the period\nrepresented by the Lower Old Red Sandstone, and be scarce missed when\naway; for every year during which man has lived upon earth, it is not\nimprobable that the _Pterichthys_ and its contemporaries may have lived a\ncentury. Their last hour, however, at length came. Over the dark-colored\nichthyolitic schists so immensely developed in Caithness and Orkney,\nthere occurs a pale-tinted, unfossiliferous sandstone, which in the\nisland of Hoy rises into hills of from fourteen to sixteen hundred feet\nin height; and among the organisms of those newer formations of the Old\nRed which overlie this deposit, not a species of ichthyolite identical\nwith the species entombed in the lower schists has yet been detected. In\nthe blank interval which the arenaceous deposit represents, tribes and\nfamilies perished and disappeared, leaving none of their race to succeed\nthem, that other tribes and families might be called into being, and fall\ninto their vacant places in the onward march of creation.\n\nSuch, so far as the various hieroglyphics of the pile have yet rendered\ntheir meanings to the geologist, is the strange story recorded on the\nthree-barred _pyramid_ of Stromness. I traced the formation upwards this\nevening along the edges of the upturned strata, from where the Great\nConglomerate leans against the granite, till where it merges into the\nichthyolitic flagstones; and then pursued these from older and lower to\nnewer and higher layers, desirous of ascertaining at what distance over\nthe base of the system its more ancient organisms first appear, and what\ntheir character and kind. And, embedded in a grayish-colored layer of\nhard flag, somewhat less than a hundred yards over the granite, and about\na hundred and sixty feet over the upper stratum of the conglomerate, I\nfound what I sought,\u2014a well-marked bone,\u2014in all probability the oldest\nvertebrate remain yet discovered in Orkney. What, asks the reader, was\nthe character of this ancient organism of the Pal\u00e6ozoic basin?\n\nAs shown by its cancellated texture, palpable to the naked eye, and\nstill more unequivocally by the irregular complexity of fabric which\nit exhibits under the microscope,\u2014by its speck-like life-points or\ncanaliculi, that remind one of air-bubbles in ice,\u2014its branching\nchannels, like minute veins, through which the blood must once have\nflown,\u2014and its general groundwork of irregular lines of corpuscular\nfibre, that wind through the whole like currents in a river studded with\nislands,\u2014it was as truly osseous in its composition as the solid bones of\nany of the reptiles of the Secondary, or the quadrupeds of the Tertiary\nperiods. And in form it closely resembled a large roofing-nail. With this\nbone our more practised pal\u00e6ontologists are but little acquainted, for\nno remains of the animal to which it belonged have yet been discovered\nin Britain to the south of the Grampians,[3] nor, except in the Old Red\nSandstone of Russia, has it been detected any where on the Continent.\nNor am I aware that, save in the accompanying wood-cut, (fig. 1,) it has\never been figured. The amateur geologists of Caithness and Orkney have,\nhowever, learned to recognize it as the \u201cpetrified nail.\u201d The length\nof the entire specimen in this instance was five seven eighth inches,\nthe transverse breadth of the head two inches and a quarter, and the\nthickness of the stem nearly three tenth parts of an inch. This nail-like\nbone formed a characteristic portion of the _Asterolepis_,\u2014so far as\nis yet known, the most gigantic ganoid of the Old Red Sandstone, and,\njudging from the _place_ of this fragment, apparently one of the first.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 1.\n\nINTERNAL RIDGE OF HYOID PLATE OF ASTEROLEPSIS.[4]\n\n(One third the natural size, linear.)]\n\nThere were various considerations which led me to regard the \u201cpetrified\nnail\u201d in this case as one of the most interesting fossils I had ever\nseen; and, before quitting Orkney, to pursue my explorations farther to\nthe south, I brought two intelligent geologists of the district,[5] to\nmark its place and character, that they might be able to point it out to\ngeological visitors in the future, or, if they preferred removing it to\ntheir town museum, to indicate to them the stratum in which it had lain.\nIt showed me, among other things, how unsafe it is for the geologist to\nbase positive conclusions on merely negative data. Founding on the fact\nthat, of many hundred ichthyolites of the Lower Old Red Sandstone which\nI had disinterred and examined, all were of comparatively small size,\nwhile in the Upper Old Red many of the ichthyolites are of great mass and\nbulk, I had inferred that vertebrate life had been restricted to minuter\nforms at the commencement than at the close of the system. It had begun,\nI had ventured to state in the earlier editions of a little work on the\n\u201cOld Red Sandstone,\u201d with an age of dwarfs, and had ended with an age\nof giants. And now, here, at the very base of the system, unaccompanied\nby aught to establish the contemporary existence of its dwarfs,\u2014which\nappear, however, in an overlying bed about a hundred feet higher up,\u2014was\nthere unequivocal proof of the existence of one of the most colossal of\nits giants. But not unfrequently, in the geologic field, has the practice\nof basing positive conclusions on merely negative grounds led to a\nmisreading of the record. From evidence of a kind exactly similar to that\non which I had built, it was inferred, some two or three years ago, that\nthere had lived no reptiles during the period of the Coal Measures, and\nno fish in the times of the Lower Silurian System.\n\nI extended my researches, a few days after, in an easterly direction from\nthe town of Stromness, and walked for several miles along the shores of\nthe Loch of Stennis,\u2014a large lake about fourteen miles in circumference,\nbare and treeless, like all the other lakes and lochs of Orkney, but\npicturesque of outline, and divided into an upper and lower sheet of\nwater by two low, long promontories, that jut out from opposite sides,\nand so nearly meet in the middle as to be connected by a thread-like\nline of road, half mound, half bridge. \u201cThe Loch of Stennis,\u201d says Mr.\nDavid Vedder, the sailor-poet of Orkney, \u201cis a beautiful Mediterranean in\nminiature.\u201d It gives admission to the sea by a narrow strait, crossed,\nlike that which separates the two promontories in the middle, by a\nlong rustic bridge; and, in consequence of this peculiarity, the lower\ndivision of the lake is salt in its nether reaches and brackish in its\nupper ones, while the higher division is merely brackish in its nether\nreaches, and fresh enough in its upper ones to be potable. Viewed from\nthe east, in one of the long, clear, sunshiny evenings of the Orkney\nsummer, it seems not unworthy the eulogium of Vedder. There are moory\nhills and a few rude cottages in front; and in the background, some\neight or ten miles away, the bold, steep mountain masses of Hoy; while\non the promontories of the lake, in the middle distance, conspicuous\nin the landscape, from the relief furnished by the blue ground of the\nsurrounding waters, stand the tall gray obelisks of Stennis\u2014one group on\nthe northern promontory, the other on the south,\u2014\n\n    \u201cOld even beyond tradition\u2019s breath.\u201d\n\nThe shores of both the upper and lower divisions of the lake were\nstrewed, at the time I passed, by a line of _wrack_, consisting, for\nthe first few miles from where the lower loch opens to the sea, of only\nmarine plants, then of marine plants mixed with those of fresh-water\ngrowth, and then, in the upper sheet of water, of lacustrine plants\nexclusively. And the fauna of the loch is, I was informed, of as mixed a\ncharacter as its flora,\u2014the marine and fresh-water animals having each\ntheir own reaches, with certain debatable tracts between, in which each\nkind expatiates with more or less freedom, according to its specific\nnature and constitution,\u2014some of the sea-fish advancing far on the fresh\nwater, and others, among the proper denizens of the lake, encroaching\nfar on the salt. The common fresh-water eel strikes out, I was told,\nfarthest into the sea-water; in which, indeed, reversing the habits\nof the salmon, it is known in various places to deposit its spawn. It\nseeks, too, impatient of a low temperature, to escape from the cold of\nwinter, by taking refuge in water brackish enough, in a climate such\nas ours, to resist the influence of frost. Of the marine fish, on the\nother hand, I found that the flounder got greatly higher than any of\nthe others, inhabiting reaches of the lake almost entirely fresh. I\nhave had an opportunity elsewhere of observing a curious change which\nfresh water induces in this fish. In the brackish water of an estuary,\nthe animal becomes, without diminishing in general size, thicker and\nmore fleshy than when in its legitimate habitat, the sea: but the flesh\nloses in quality what it gains in quantity;\u2014it grows flabby and insipid,\nand the margin-fin lacks always its strip of transparent fat. But the\nchange induced in the two floras of the lake\u2014marine and lacustrine\u2014is\nconsiderably more palpable and obvious than that induced in its two\nfaunas. As I passed along the strait, through which it gives admission\nto the sea, I found the commoner fucoids of our sea-coasts streaming\nin great luxuriance in the tideway, from the stones and rocks of the\nbottom. I marked, among the others, the two species of kelp-weed, so\nwell known to our Scotch kelp-burners,\u2014_Fucus nodosus_ and _Fucus\nvesiculosus_,\u2014flourishing in their uncurtailed proportions; and the\nnot inelegant _Halidrys siliquosa_, or \u201ctree in the sea,\u201d presenting\nits amplest spread of pod and frond. A little farther in, _Halidrys_\nand _Fucus nodosus_ disappear, and _Fucus vesiculosus_ becomes greatly\nstunted, and no longer exhibits its characteristic double rows of\nbladders. But for mile after mile it continues to exist, blent with some\nof the hardier conferv\u00e6, until at length it becomes as dwarfish and\nnearly as slim of frond as the conferv\u00e6 themselves; and it is only by\ntracing it through the intermediate forms that we succeed in convincing\nourselves that, in the brown stunted tufts of from one to three inches\nin length, which continue to fringe the middle reaches of the lake,\nwe have in reality the well-known Fucus before us. Rushes, flags, and\naquatic grasses may now be seen standing in diminutive tufts out of the\nwater; and a terrestrial vegetation at least continues to exist, though\nit can scarce be said to thrive, on banks covered by the tide at full.\nThe lacustrine flora increases, both in extent and luxuriance, as that of\nthe sea diminishes; and in the upper reaches we fail to detect all trace\nof marine plants: the alg\u00e6, so luxuriant of growth along the straits of\nthis \u201cminiature Mediterranean,\u201d altogether cease; and a semi-aquatic\nvegetation attains, in turn, to the state of fullest development any\nwhere permitted by the temperature of this northern locality. A memoir\ndescriptive of the Loch of Stennis, and its productions, animal and\nvegetable, such as old Gilbert White of Selborne could have produced,\nwould be at once a very valuable and curious document, important to the\nnaturalist, and not without its use to the geological student.\n\nI know not how it may be with others; but the special phenomena connected\nwith Orkney that most decidedly bore fruit in my mind, and to which\nmy thoughts have most frequently reverted, were those exhibited in\nthe neighborhood of Stromness. I would more particularly refer to the\ncharacteristic fragment of _Asterolepis_, which I detected in its lower\nflagstones, and to the curiously mixed, semi-marine, semi-lacustrine\nvegetation of the Loch of Stennis. Both seem to bear very directly on\nthat development hypothesis,\u2014fast spreading among an active and ingenious\norder of minds, both in Britain and America, and which has been long\nknown on the Continent,\u2014that would fain transfer the work of creation\nfrom the department of miracle to the province of natural law, and would\nstrike down, in the process of removal, all the old landmarks, ethical\nand religious.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES.\n\n\nEvery individual, whatever its species or order, begins and increases\nuntil it attains to its state of fullest development, under certain\nfixed laws, and _in consequence_ of their operation. The microscopic\nmonad develops into a f\u0153tus, the f\u0153tus into a child, the child into\na man; and, however marvellous the process, in none of its stages is\nthere the slightest mixture of miracle; from beginning to end, all is\nprogressive development, according to a determinate order of things.\nHas _Nature_, during the vast geologic periods, been pregnant, in like\nmanner, with the human race? and is the species, like the individual,\nan effect of progressive development, induced and regulated by law? The\nassertors of the revived hypothesis of Maillet and Lamarck reply in the\naffirmative. Nor, be it remarked, is there positive atheism involved in\nthe belief. God might as certainly have _originated_ the species by a\nlaw of development, as he _maintains_ it by a law of development; the\nexistence of a First Great Cause is as perfectly compatible with the\none scheme as with the other; and it may be necessary thus broadly to\nstate the fact, not only in justice to the Lamarckians, but also fairly\nto warn their non-geological opponents, that in this contest the old\nanti-atheistic arguments, whether founded on the evidence of design, or\non the preliminary doctrine of final causes, cannot be brought to bear.\n\nThere are, however, beliefs, in no degree less important to the moralist\nor the Christian than even that in the being of a God, which seem wholly\nincompatible with the development hypothesis. It, during a period so\nvast as to be scarce expressible by figures, the creatures now human\nhave been rising, by _almost_ infinitesimals, from compound microscopic\ncells,\u2014minute vital globules within globules, begot by electricity on\ndead gelatinous matter,\u2014until they have at length become the men and\nwomen whom we see around us, we must hold either the monstrous belief,\nthat all the vitalities, whether those of monads or of mites, of fishes\nor of reptiles, of birds or of beasts, are individually and inherently\nimmortal and undying, or that human souls are _not_ so. The difference\nbetween the dying and the undying,\u2014between the spirit of the brute that\ngoeth downward, and the spirit of the man that goeth upward,\u2014is not a\ndifference infinitesimally, or even atomically _small_. It possesses\nall the breadth of the eternity to come, and is an _infinitely great_\ndifference. It cannot, if I may so express myself, be shaded off by\ninfinitesimals or atoms; for it is a difference which\u2014as there can be\nno class of beings intermediate in their nature between the dying and\nthe undying\u2014admits not of gradation at all. What mind, regulated by the\nordinary principles of human belief, can possibly hold that every one\nof the thousand vital points which swim in a drop of stagnant water are\ninherently fitted to maintain their individuality throughout eternity? Or\nhow can it be rationally held that a mere progressive step, in itself no\ngreater or more important than that effected by the addition of a single\nbrick to a house in the building state, or of a single atom to a body\nin the growing state, could ever have produced immortality? And yet,\nif the _spirit_ of a monad or of a mollusc be not immortal, then must\nthere either have been a point in the history of the species at which\na dying brute\u2014differing from its offspring merely by an inferiority of\ndevelopment, represented by a few atoms, mayhap by a single atom\u2014produced\nan undying man, or man in his present state must be a mere animal,\npossessed of no immortal soul, and as irresponsible for his actions to\nthe God before whose bar he is, in consequence, never to appear, as his\npresumed relatives and progenitors the beasts that perish. Nor will it\ndo to attempt escaping from the difficulty, by alleging that God at some\ncertain link in the chain _might_ have converted a mortal creature into\nan immortal existence, by breathing into it a \u201cliving soul;\u201d seeing that\na renunciation of any such direct interference on the part of Deity in\nthe work of creation forms the prominent and characteristic feature of\nthe scheme,\u2014nay, that it constitutes the very nucleus round which the\nscheme has originated. And thus, though the development theory be not\natheistic, it is at least practically tantamount to atheism. For, if man\nbe a dying creature, restricted in his existence to the present scene of\nthings, what does it really matter to him, for any one moral purpose,\nwhether there be a God or no? If in reality on the same religious level\nwith the dog, wolf, and fox, that are by nature _atheists_,\u2014a nature most\nproperly coupled with irresponsibility,\u2014to what one practical purpose\nshould he know or believe in a God whom he, as certainly as they, is\nnever to meet as his Judge? or why should he square his conduct by\nthe requirements of the moral code, farther than a low and convenient\nexpediency may chance to demand?[6]\n\nNor does the purely Christian objection to the development hypothesis\nseem less, but even more insuperable than that derived from the\nprovince of natural theology. The belief which is perhaps of all others\nmost fundamentally essential to the revealed scheme of salvation, is\nthe belief that \u201cGod created man upright,\u201d and that man, instead of\nproceeding onward and upward from this high and fair beginning, to a yet\nhigher and fairer standing in the scale of creation, sank and became\nmorally lost and degraded. And hence the necessity for that second\ndispensation of recovery and restoration which forms the entire burden\nof God\u2019s revealed message to man. If, according to the development\ntheory, the progress of the \u201cfirst Adam\u201d was an upward progress, the\nexistence of the \u201csecond Adam\u201d\u2014that \u201chappier man,\u201d according to Milton,\nwhose special work it is to \u201crestore\u201d and \u201cregain the blissful seat\u201d of\nthe lapsed race\u2014is simply a meaningless anomaly. Christianity, if the\ndevelopment theory be true, is exactly what some of the more extreme\nModerate divines of the last age used to make it\u2014an idle and unsightly\nexcrescence on a code of morals that would be perfect were it away.\n\nI may be in error in taking this serious view of the matter; and, if so,\nwould feel grateful to the man who could point out to me that special\nlink in the chain of inference at which, with respect to the bearing of\nthe theory on the two theologies\u2014natural and revealed\u2014the mistake has\ntaken place. But if I be in error at all, it is an error into which I\nfind not a few of the first men of the age,\u2014represented, as a class, by\nour Professor Sedgwicks and Sir David Brewsters,\u2014have also fallen; and\nuntil it be shown to _be_ an error, and that the development theory is in\nno degree incompatible with a belief in the immortality of the soul\u2014in\nthe responsibility of man to God as the final Judge\u2014or in the Christian\nscheme of salvation\u2014it is every honest man\u2019s duty to protest against any\n_ex parte_ statement of the question, that would insidiously represent\nit as ethically an indifferent one, or as unimportant in its theologic\nbearing, save to \u201clittle religious sects and scientific coteries.\u201d In\nan address on the fossil flora, made in September last by a gentleman\nof Edinburgh to the St. Andrew\u2019s Horticultural Society, there occurs\nthe following passage on this subject: \u201cLife is governed by external\nconditions, and new conditions imply new races; but then as to their\ncreation, that is the \u2018_mystery of mysteries_.\u2019 Are they created by an\nimmediate fiat and direct act of the Almighty? or has He originally\nimpressed life with an elasticity and adaptability, so that it shall\ntake upon itself new forms and characters, according to the conditions\nto which it shall be subjected? Each opinion has had, and still has,\nits advocates and opponents; but the truth is, that _science_, so far\nas it knows, or rather so far as it has had the honesty and courage to\navow, has yet been unable to pronounce a satisfactory decision. _Either\nway, it matters little_, _physically or morally_, either mode implies\nthe same omnipotence, and wisdom, and foresight, and protection; and it\nis only your little religious sects and scientific coteries which make\na pother about the matter,\u2014sects and coteries of which it may be justly\nsaid, that they would almost exclude God from the management of his own\nworld, if not managed and directed in the way that they would have it.\u201d\nNow, this is surely a most unfair representation of the consequences,\nethical and religious involved in the development hypothesis. It is not\nits compatibility with belief in the existence of a First Great Cause\nthat has to be established, in order to prove it harmless; but its\ncompatibility with certain other all-important beliefs, without which\nsimple Theism is of no moral value whatever\u2014a belief in the immortality\nand responsibility of man, and in the scheme of salvation by a Mediator\nand Redeemer. Dissociated from these beliefs, a belief in the existence\nof a God is of as little _ethical_ value as a belief in the existence of\nthe great sea-serpent.\n\nLet us see whether we cannot determine what the testimony of Geology,\non this question of creation by development, really is. It is always\nperilous to under-estimate the strength of an enemy; and the danger from\nthe development hypothesis to an ingenious order of minds, smitten with\nthe novel fascinations of physical science, has been under-estimated\nvery considerably indeed. Save by a few studious men, who to the\ncultivation of Geology and the cognate branches add some acquaintance\nwith metaphysical science, the general correspondence of the line of\nassault taken up by this new school of infidelity, with that occupied\nby the old, and the consequent ability of the assailants to bring, not\nonly the recently forged, but also the previously employed artillery into\nfull play along its front, has not only not been marked, but even not\nso much as suspected. And yet, in order to show that there actually is\nsuch a correspondence, it can be but necessary to state, that the great\nantagonist points in the array of the opposite lines, are simply the\n_law_ of development _versus_ the _miracle_ of creation. The evangelistic\nChurches cannot, in consistency with their character, or with a due\nregard to the interests of their people, slight or overlook a form of\nerror at once exceedingly plausible and consummately dangerous, and which\nis telling so widely on society, that one can scarce travel by railway or\nin a steamboat, or encounter a group of intelligent mechanics, without\nfinding decided trace of its ravages.\n\nBut ere the Churches can be prepared competently to deal with it, or with\nthe other objections of a similar class which the infidelity of an age so\nlargely engaged as the present in physical pursuits will be from time to\ntime originating they must greatly extend their educational walks into\nthe field of physical science. The mighty change which has taken place\nduring the present century, in the direction in which the minds of the\nfirst order are operating, though indicated on the face of the country in\ncharacters which cannot be mistaken, seems to have too much escaped the\nnotice of our theologians. Speculative theology and the metaphysics are\ncognate branches of the same science; and when, as in the last and the\npreceding ages, the higher philosophy of the world was metaphysical, the\nChurches took ready cognizance of the fact, and, in due accordance with\nthe requirements of the time, the battle of the Evidences was fought on\nmetaphysical ground. But, judging from the preparations made in their\ncolleges and halls, they do not now seem sufficiently aware\u2014though the\nlow thunder of every railway, and the snort of every steam engine, and\nthe whistle of the wind amid the wires of every electric telegraph,\nserve to publish the fact\u2014that it is in the departments of physics, not\nof metaphysics, that the greater minds of the age are engaged,\u2014that the\nLockes, Humes, Kants, Berkeleys, Dugald Stewarts, and Thomas Browns,\nbelong to the past,\u2014and that the philosophers of the present time, tall\nenough to be seen all the world over, are the Humboldts, the Aragos, the\nAgassizes, the Liebigs, the Owens, the Herschels, the Bucklands, and the\nBrewsters. In that educational course through which, in this country,\ncandidates for the ministry pass, in preparation for their office,\nI find every group of great minds which has in turn influenced and\ndirected the mind of Europe for the last three centuries, represented,\nmore or less adequately, save the last. It is an epitome of all kinds\nof learning, with the exception of the kind most imperatively required,\nbecause most in accordance with the genius of the time. The restorers of\nclassic literature\u2014the Buchanans and Erasmuses\u2014we see represented in our\nUniversities by the Greek and what are termed the Humanity courses; the\nGalileos, Boyles, and Newtons, by the Mathematical and Natural Philosophy\ncourses; and the Lockes, Kants, Humes, and Berkeleys, by the Metaphysical\ncourse. But the Cuviers, the Huttons, the Cavendishes, and the Watts,\nwith their successors, the practical philosophers of the present age,\u2014men\nwhose achievements in physical science we find marked on the surface of\nthe country in characters which might be read from the moon,\u2014are _not_\nadequately represented. It would be perhaps more correct to say, that\nthey are not represented at all;[7] and the clergy, as a class, suffer\nthemselves to linger far in the rear of an intelligent and accomplished\nlaity\u2014a full age behind the requirements of the time. Let them not shut\ntheir eyes to the danger which is obviously coming. The battle of the\nEvidences will have as certainly to be fought on the field of physical\nscience, as it was contested in the last age on that of the metaphysics.\nAnd on this new arena the combatants will have to employ new weapons,\nwhich it will be the privilege of the challenger to choose. The old,\nopposed to these, would prove but of little avail. In an age of muskets\nand artillery, the bows and arrows of an obsolete school of warfare\nwould be found greatly less than sufficient, in the field of battle, for\npurposes either of assault or defence.\n\n\u201cThere are two kinds of generation in the world,\u201d says Professor Lorenz\nOken, in his \u201cElements of Physio-philosophy;\u201d \u201cthe creation proper, and\nthe propagation that is sequent thereupon\u2014or the _generatio originaria_\nand _secundaria_. Consequently, no organism has been created of larger\nsize than an infusorial point. No organism is, nor ever has one been\ncreated, which is not microscopic. Whatever is larger has not been\ncreated, but developed. Man has not been created, but developed.\u201d Such,\nin a few brief dogmatic sentences, is the development theory. What,\nin order to establish its truth, or even to render it in some degree\nprobable, ought to be the geological evidence regarding it? The reply\nseems obvious. In the first place, the earlier fossils ought to be very\n_small_ in size; in the second, very _low_ in organization. In cutting\ninto the stony womb of nature, in order to determine what it contained\nmayhap millions of ages ago, we must expect, if the development theory\nbe true, to look upon mere embryos and f\u0153tuses. And if we find, instead,\nthe full grown and the mature, then must we hold that the testimony of\nGeology is not only _not in accordance_ with the theory, but in positive\nopposition to it. Such, palpably, is the _principle_ on which, in this\nmatter, we ought to decide. What are the _facts_?\n\nThe oldest organism yet discovered in the most ancient geological\nsystem of Scotland in which vertebrate remains occur, _seems_ to be the\n_Asterolepis_ of Stromness. After the explorations of many years over a\nwide area, I have detected none other equally low in the system; nor have\nI ascertained that any brother-explorer in the same field has been more\nfortunate. It is, up to the present time, the most ancient Scotch witness\nof the great class of fishes that can in this case be brought into court;\nnay, it is in all probability the oldest _ganoid_ witness the world has\nyet produced; for there appears no certain trace of this order of fishes\nin the great Silurian system which lies underneath, and in which, so far\nas geologists yet know, organic existence first began. How, then, on the\ntwo relevant points\u2014bulk and organization\u2014does it answer to the demands\nof the development hypothesis? Was it a mere f\u0153tus of the finny tribe,\nof minute size, and imperfect, embryonic faculty? Or was it of at least\nthe ordinary bulk, and, for its class, of the average organization?\nMay I solicit the forbearance of the non-geological reader, should my\nreply to these apparently simple questions seem unnecessarily prolix and\nelaborate? Peculiar opportunities of observation, and the possession of\na set of unique fossils, enable me to submit to our pal\u00e6ontologists a\ncertain amount of information regarding this ancient ganoid, which they\nwill deem at once interesting and new; and the bearing of my statements\non the general argument will, I trust, become apparent as I proceed.\n\n\n\n\nTHE RECENT HISTORY OF THE ASTEROLEPIS. ITS FAMILY.\n\n\nIt had been long known to the continental naturalists, that in certain\nRussian deposits, very extensively developed, there occur in considerable\nabundance certain animal organisms; but for many years neither their\nposition nor character could be satisfactorily determined. By some they\nwere placed too high in the scale of organized being; by others too low.\nKutorga, a writer not very familiarly known in this country, described\nthe remains as those of mammals;\u2014the Russian rocks contained, he said,\nbones of quadrupeds, and, in especial, the teeth of swine: whereas\nLamarck, a better known authority, though not invariably a safe one,\u2014for\nhe had a trick of dreaming when wide awake, and of calling his dreams\nphilosophy,\u2014assigned to them a place among the corals. They belonged,\nhe asserted, as shown by certain star-like markings with which they are\nfretted, to the Polyparia. He even erected for their reception a new\ngenus of Astrea, which he designated, from the little rounded hillock\nwhich rises in the middle of each star, the genus _Monticularia_. It was\nleft to a living naturalist, M. Eichwald, to fix their true position\nzoologically among the class of fishes, and to Sir Roderick Murchison\nto determine their position geologically as ichthyolites of the Old Red\nSandstone.\n\nSir Roderick, on his return from his great Russian campaigns, in which\nhe fared far otherwise than Napoleon, and accomplished more, submitted\nto Agassiz a series of fragments of these gigantic Ganoids; and the\ncelebrated ichthyologist, who had been introduced little more than\na twelvemonth before to the _Pterichthys_ of Cromarty, was at first\ninclined to regard them as the remains of a large cuirassed fish of\nthe Cephalaspian type, but generically new. Under this impression he\nbestowed upon the yet unknown ichthyolite of which they had formed part,\nthe name _Chelonichthys_, from the resemblance borne by the broken\nplates to those of the carapace and plastron of some of the Chelonians.\nAt this stage, however, the Russian Old Red yielded a set of greatly\nfiner remains than it had previously furnished; and of these casts were\ntransmitted by Professor Asmus, of the University of Dorpat, to the\nBritish and London Geological Museums, and to Agassiz. \u201cI knew not at\nfirst what to do,\u201d says the ichthyologist, \u201cwith bones of so singular\na conformation that I could refer them to no known type.\u201d Detecting,\nhowever, on their exterior surfaces the star-like markings which had\nmisled Lamarck, and which he had also detected on the lesser fragments\nsubmitted to him by Sir Roderick, he succeeded in identifying both the\nfragments and bones as remains of the same genus and on ascertaining\nthat M. Eichwald had bestowed upon it, from these characteristic\nsculpturings, the generic name _Asterolepis_, or star-scale, he suffered\nthe name which he himself had originated to drop. Even this second name,\nhowever, which the ichthyolite still continues to bear, is in some degree\nfounded in error. Its true scales, as I shall by and by show, were not\nstelliferous, but fretted by a peculiar style of ornament, consisting\nof waved anastomosing ridges, breaking atop into angular-shaped dots,\nscooped out internally like the letter V; and were evidently intermediate\nin their character between the scales which cover the _Glyptolepis_\nand those of the _Holoptychius_. And the stellate markings which M.\nEichwald graphically describes as minute paps rising out of the middle\nof star-like wreaths of little leaflets, were restricted to the dermal\nplates of the head.\n\nAgassiz ultimately succeeded in classing the bones which had at first so\npuzzled him, into two divisions\u2014interior and dermal; and the latter he\ndivided yet further, though not without first lodging a precautionary\nprotest, founded on the extreme obscurity of the subject, into cranial\nand opercular. Of the interior bones he specified two,\u2014a super-scapular\nbone, (_supra-scapulaire_,)\u2014that bone which in osseous fishes completes\nthe scapular arch or belt, by uniting the scapula to the cranium; and\na maxillary or upper jaw-bone. But his world-wide acquaintance with\nexisting fishes could lend him no assistance in determining the places\nof the dermal bones: they formed the mere fragments of a broken puzzle,\nof which the key was lost. Even in their detached and irreducible state,\nhowever, he succeeded in basing upon them several shrewd deductions. He\ninferred, in the first place, that the _Asterolepis_ was not, as had\nbeen at first supposed, a cuirassed fish, which took its place among\nthe Cephalaspians, but a strongly helmed fish of that C\u0153lacanth family\nto which the _Holoptychius_ and _Glyptolepis_ belong; in the second,\nthat, like several of its bulkier cogeners, it was in all probability\na broad, flat-headed animal; and, in the third, that as its remains\nare found associated in the Russian beds with numerous detached teeth\nof large size,\u2014the boar tusks of Kutorga\u2014which present internally that\npeculiar microscopic character on which Professor Owen has erected his\nDendrodic or tree-toothed family of fishes,\u2014it would in all likelihood\nbe found that both bones and teeth belonged to the same group. \u201cIt\nappears more than probable,\u201d he said, \u201cthat one day, by the discovery of\na head or an entire jaw, it will be shown that the genera _Dendrodus_\nand _Asterolepis_ form but one.\u201d As we proceed, the reader will see how\njustly the ichthyologist assigned to the _Asterolepis_ its place among\nthe C\u0153lacanths, and how entirely his two other conjectures regarding it\nhave been confirmed. \u201cI have had in general,\u201d he concluded, \u201cbut small\nand mutilated fragments of the creature\u2019s bones submitted to me, and\nof these, even the surface ornaments not well preserved; but I hope\nthe immense materials with which the Old Red Sandstone of Russia has\nfurnished the savans of that country will not be lost to science; and\nthat my labors on this interesting genus, incomplete as they are, will\nexcite more and more the attention of geologists, by showing them how\nignorant we are of all the essential facts concerning the history of the\nfirst inhabitants of our globe.\u201d\n\nI know not what the savans of Russia have been doing for the last few\nyears; but mainly through the labors of an intelligent tradesman of\nThurso, Mr. Robert Dick,\u2014one of those working men of Scotland of active\ncuriosity and well-developed intellect, that give character and standing\nto the rest,\u2014I am enabled to justify the classification and confirm the\nconjectures of Agassiz. Mr. Dick, after acquainting himself, in the\nleisure hours of a laborious profession, with the shells, insects, and\nplants of the northern locality in which he resides, had set himself to\nstudy its geology; and with this view he procured a copy of the little\ntreatise on the Old Red Sandstone to which I have already referred, and\nwhich was at that time, as Agassiz\u2019s Monograph of the Old Red fishes had\nnot yet appeared, the only work specially devoted to the pal\u00e6ontology\nof the system, so largely developed in the neighborhood of Thurso. With\nperhaps a single exception,\u2014for the Thurso rocks do not yet seem to have\nyielded a _Pterichthys_,\u2014he succeeded in finding specimens, in a state\nof better or worse keeping, of all the various ichthyolites which I had\ndescribed as peculiar to the Lower Old Red Sandstone. He found, however,\nwhat I had _not_ described,\u2014the remains of apparently a very gigantic\nichthyolite; and, communicating with me through the medium of a common\nfriend, he submitted to me, in the first instance, drawings of his new\nset of fossils; and ultimately, as I could arrive at no satisfactory\nconclusion from the drawings, he with great liberality made over to me\nthe fossils themselves. Agassiz\u2019s Monograph was not yet published; nor\nhad I an opportunity of examining, until about a twelvemonth after,\nthe casts, in the British Museum, of the fossils of Professor Asmus.\nBesides, all the little information, derived from various sources, which\nI had acquired respecting the Russian _Chelonichthys_,\u2014for such was its\nname at the time,\u2014referred it to the cuirassed type, and served but to\nmislead. I was assured, for instance, that Professor Asmus regarded\nhis set of remains as portions of the plates and paddles of a gigantic\n_Pterichthys_, of from twenty to thirty feet in length. And so, as I had\nrecognized in the Thurso fossils the peculiarities of the _Holoptychian_\n(C\u0153lacanth) family, I at first failed to identify them with the remains\nof the great Russian fish. All the larger bones sent me by Mr. Dick were,\nI found, cerebral; and the scales associated with these indicated, not\na cuirass-protected, but a scale-covered body and exhibited, in their\nsculptured and broadly imbricated surfaces, the well-marked C\u0153lacanth\nstyle of disposition and ornament. But though I could _not_ recognize in\neither bones or scales the remains of one ichthyolite more of the Old\nRed Sandstone, \u201cthat could be regarded as manifesting as peculiar a type\namong fishes as do the Ichthyosauri and Plesiosauri among reptiles,\u201d[8]\nI was engaged at the time in a course of inquiry regarding the cerebral\ndevelopment of the earlier vertebrata, that made me deem them scarce less\ninteresting than if I could. Ere, however, I attempt communicating to the\nreader the result of my researches, I must introduce him, in order that\nhe may be able to set out with me to the examination of the _Asterolepis_\nfrom the same starting-point, to the C\u0153lacanth family,\u2014indisputably one\nof the oldest, and not the least interesting, of its order.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 2.\n\na. _Shagreen of the Thornback (Raja clavata.)_\n\nb. _Shagreen of Sphagodus,\u2014a placoid of the Upper Silurian._[9]]\n\nSo far as is yet known, all the fish of the earliest fossiliferous\nsystem belonged to the placoid or \u201c_broad plated_\u201d order,\u2014a great\ndivision of fishes, represented in the existing seas by the Sharks and\nRays,\u2014animals that to an internal skeleton of cartilage unite a dermal\ncovering of points, plates, or spines of enamelled bone, and have their\ngills fixed. The dermal or cuticular bones of this order vary greatly in\nform, according to the species or family: in some cases they even vary,\naccording to their place, on the same individual. Those button-like\ntubercles, for instance, with an enamelled thorn, bent like a hook,\ngrowing out of the centre of each, which run down the back and tail, and\nstud the pectorals of the thorn-back, (_Raja clavata_,) differ very much\nfrom the smaller thorns, with star-formed bases, which roughen the other\nparts of the creature\u2019s body; and the bony points which mottle the back\nand sides of the sharks are, in most of the known species, considerably\nmore elongated and prickly than the points which cover their fins, belly,\nand snout. The extreme forms, however, of the shagreen tubercle or plate\nseem to be those of the upright prickle or spine on the one hand, and of\nthe slant-laid, rhomboidal, scale-shaped plate on the other. The minuter\nthorns of the ray (fig. 2, _a_) exemplify the extreme of the prickly\ntype; the fins, abdomen, and anterior part of the head of the spotted\ndog-fish (_Scyllium stellare_) are covered by lozenge-shaped little\nplates, which glisten with enamel, and are so thickly set that they cover\nthe entire surface of the skin, (fig. 3, _b_,)\u2014and these seem equally\nillustrative of the scale-like form. They are shagreen points passing\ninto osseous scales, without, however, becoming really such; though they\napproach them so nearly in the shape and disposition of their upper\ndisks, that the true scales, also osseous, of the _Acanthodes sulcatus_,\n(fig. 3, _a_,) a Ganoid of the Coal Measures, can scarce be distinguished\nfrom them, even when microscopically examined. It is only when seen in\nsection that the distinctive difference appears. The true scale of the\nAcanthodes, though considerably elevated in the centre, seems to have\nbeen planted on the skin; whereas the scale-like shagreen of the dog-fish\nis elevated over it on an osseous pedicle or footstalk (fig. 5, _a_) as\na mushroom is elevated over the sward on its stem; and the base of the\nstalk is found to resemble in its stellate character that of a shagreen\npoint of the prickly type. The apparent scale is, we find, a bony prickle\nbent at right angles a little over its base, and flattened into a\nrhomboidal disk atop.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 3.\n\na. _Scales of Acanthodes sulcatus._\n\nb. _Shagreen of Scyllium stellare, (Snout.)_\n\n(Mag. eight diameters.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 4.\n\na. _Scales of Cheiracanthus microlepidotus._\n\nb. _Shagreen of Spinax Acanthias. (Snout.)_\n\n(Mag. eight diameters.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 5.\n\na. _Section of shagreen of Scyllium stellare._\n\nb. _Under surface of do._\n\nc. _Section of scales of Cheiracanthus microlepidotus._\n\nd. _Under surface of do._\n\n(Mag. eight diameters.)]\n\nIn small fragments of shagreen, (fig. 2 _b_) which have been detected in\nthe bone-bed of the Upper Ludlow Rocks, (Upper Silurian,) and constitute\nthe most ancient portions of this substance known to the pal\u00e6ontologist,\nthe osseous tubercles are, as in the minuter spikes of the ray, of the\nupright thorn-like type; they merely serve to show that the placoids\nof the first period possessed, like those of the existing seas, an\nability of secreting solid bone on their cuticular surfaces; and that,\nthough at least such of them as have bequeathed to us specimens of\ntheir dermal armature possessed it in the form farthest removed from\nthat of their immediate successors the ganoid fishes, they resembled\nthem not less in the substance of which their dermoskeletal, than in\nthat of which their endoskeletal, parts were composed. For the internal\nskeleton in both orders, during these early ages, seems to have been\nequally cartilaginous, and the cuticular skeleton equally osseous. In\nthe ichthyolitic formation immediately over the Silurians,\u2014that of the\nLower Old Red Sandstone,\u2014the Ganoids first appear; and the members of at\nleast one of the families of the deposit, the Acanths,\u2014a family rich in\ngenera and species,\u2014seem to have formed connecting links between this\nsecond order and their placoid predecessors. They were covered with true\nscales (fig. 4, _a_,) and their free gills were protected by gill-covers;\nand so they must be regarded as real Ganoids but as the shagreen of the\nspotted dog-fish nearly approaches, in form and character, to ganoid\nscales, without being really such, the scales of this family, on the\nother hand, approached equally near, without changing their nature, to\nthe shagreen of the Placoids, especially to that of the spiked dogfish,\n(_Spinax Acanthias_.) (Fig. 4, _b_.) We even find on their under surfaces\nwhat seems to be an approximation to the characteristic footstalk.\nThey so considerably thicken in the middle from their edges inwards,\n(fig. 5, _c_,) as to terminate in their centres in obtuse points.\nWith these shagreen-like scales, the heads, bodies, and fins of all\nthe species of at least two of the Acanth genera,\u2014_Cheiracanthus_ and\n_Diplacanthus_,\u2014were as thickly covered as the heads, bodies, and fins\nof the sharks are with their shagreen; and so slight was the degree of\nimbrication, that the portion of each scale overlaid by the two scales in\nimmediate advance of it did not exceed the one twelfth part of its entire\narea. In the scale of the _Cheiracanthus_ we find the covered portion\nindicated by a smooth, narrow band, that ran along its anterior edges,\nand which the furrows that fretted the exposed surface did not traverse.\nIt may be added, that both genera had the anterior edge of their fins\narmed with strong spines,\u2014a characteristic of several of the Placoid\nfamilies.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 6.\n\na. _Scales of Osteolepis macrolepidotus._\n\nb. _Scales of an undescribed species of Glyptolepis._[10]\n\n(The single scales mag. two diameters;\u2014the others nat. size.)]\n\nIn the Dipterian genera _Osteolepis_ and _Diplopterus_ the scales\nwere more unequivocally such than in the Acanths, and more removed\nfrom shagreen. The under surface of each was traversed longitudinally\nby a raised bar, which attached it to the skin, and which, in the\ntransverse section, serves to remind one of the shagreen footstalk.\nThey are, besides, of a rhomboidal form; and, when seen in the finer\nspecimens, lying in their proper places on what had been once the\ncreature\u2019s body, they seem merely laid down side by side in line, like\nthose rows of glazed tiles that pave a cathedral floor; but on more\ncareful examination, we find that each little tile was deeply grooved\non its higher side and end, (for it lay diagonally in relation to the\nhead,) like the flags of a stone roof, (fig. 6, _a_,)\u2014that its lateral\nand anterior neighbors impinged upon it along these grooves to the\nextent of about one third its area,\u2014and that it impinged, in turn,\nto the same extent on the scales that bordered on it posteriorly and\nlatero-posteriorly. Now, in the C\u0153lacanth family, (and on this special\npoint the foregoing remarks are intended to bear,) the scales, which were\ngenerally of a round or irregularly oval form, (fig. 6, _b_,) overlapped\neach other to as great an extent as in any of the existing fishes of\nthe Cycloid or Ctenoid orders,\u2014to as great an extent, for instance, as\nin the carp, salmon, or herring. In a slated roof there is no part on\nwhich the slates do not lie double, and along the lower edge of each\ntier they lie triple;\u2014there is more of slate covered than of slate seen:\nwhereas in a tile-roof, the covered portion is restricted to a small\nstrip running along the top and one of the edges of each tile, and the\ntiles do not lie double in more than the same degree in which the slates\nlie triple. The scaly cover of the two genera of Dipterians to which\nI have referred was a cover on the _tile_-roof principle; and this is\nan exceedingly common characteristic of the scales of the Ganoids. The\nscaly cover of the C\u0153lacanths, on the other hand, was a cover on the\n_slate_-roof principle;\u2014there was in some of their genera about one third\nmore of each scale covered than exposed; and this is so rare a ganoidal\nmode of arrangement, that, with the exception of the _Dipterus_,\u2014a genus\nwhich, though it gives its name to the Dipterian sept, differed greatly\nfrom every other Dipterian,\u2014I know not, beyond the limits of the ancient\nC\u0153lacanth family, a single Ganoid that possessed it. The bony covering of\nthe C\u0153lacanths was _farthest_ removed in character from shagreen, as that\nof their contemporaries the Acanths approximated to it most nearly; they\nwere, in this respect, the two extremes of their order; and did we find\nthe C\u0153lacanths in but the later geological formations, while the Acanths\nwere restricted to the earlier, it might be argued by assertors of the\ndevelopment hypothesis, that the amply imbricated, slate-like scale of\nthe latter had been developed in the lapse of ages from the shagreen\ntubercle, by passing in its downward course\u2014broadening and expanding\nas it descended\u2014through the minute, scarcely imbricated disks of the\nAcanths, and the more amply imbricated tile-like rhombs of the Dipterians\nand Pal\u00e6onisci, until it had reached its full extent of imbrication in\nthe familiar modern type exemplified in both the C\u0153lacanths and the\nordinary fishes. But such is not the order which nature has observed;\u2014the\ntwo extremes of the ganoid scale appear together in the same early\nformation: both become extinct at a period geologically remote; and the\nganoid scales of the existing state of things which most nearly resemble\nthose of ancient time are scales formed on the intermediate or tile-roof\nprinciple.\n\nThe scales of the C\u0153lacanths were, in almost all the genera which\ncompose the family, of great size; in some species, of the greatest size\nto which this kind of integument ever attained. Of a C\u0153lacanth of the\nCoal Measures, the _Holoptychius Hibberti_, the scales in the larger\nspecimens were occasionally from five to six inches in diameter. Even\nin the _Holoptychius nobilissimus_, in an individual scarcely exceeding\ntwo and a half feet in length, they measured from an inch and a half to\nan inch and three quarters each way. In the splendid specimen of this\nlast species, in the British Museum, there occur but fourteen scales\nbetween the ventrals, though these lie low on the creature\u2019s body, and\nthe head; and in a specimen of a smaller species,\u2014the _Holoptychius\nAndersoni_,\u2014but about seventeen. The exposed portion of the scale was\nin most species of the family curiously fretted by intermingled ridges\nand furrows, pits and tubercles, which were either boldly relieved, as\nin the _Holoptychius_, or existed, as in the _Glyptolepis_, as slim,\ndelicately chiselled threads, lines, and dots. The head was covered by\nstrong plates, which were roughened with tubercles either confluent or\ndetached, or hollowed, as in the _Bothriolepis_, into shallow pits. The\njaws were thickly set with an outer range of true fish teeth, and more\nthinly with an inner range of what seem _reptile_ teeth, that stood up,\ntall and bulky, behind the others, like officers on horseback seen over\nthe heads of their foot-soldiers in front. The _double_ fins,\u2014pectorals\nand ventrals,\u2014were characterized each by a thick, angular, scale-covered\ncentre, fringed by the rays; and they must have borne externally\nsomewhat the form of the sweeping paddles of the Ichthyosaurian genus,\u2014a\npeculiarity shared also by the double fins of the _Dipterus_. The\n_single_ fins, in all the members of the family of which specimens\nhave been found sufficiently entire to indicate the fact, were four in\nnumber,\u2014an anal, a caudal, and two dorsal fins; and, with the exception\nof the anterior dorsal, which was comparatively small, and bent downwards\nalong the back, as if its rays had been distorted when young,[11] they\nwere all of large size. They crowded thickly on the posterior portion of\nthe body,\u2014the anterior dorsal opposite the ventrals, and the posterior\ndorsal opposite the anal fin. The fin-rays of the various members of the\nfamily, and such of their spinous processes as have been detected, were\nhollow tubular bones; or rather, like the larger pieces in the framework\nof the Placoids, they were cartilaginous within, and covered externally\nby a thin osseous crust or shell, which alone survives; and to this\npeculiarity they owe their family name, C\u0153lacanth, or \u201chollow-spine.\u201d\nThe internal hollow, _i. e._ cartilaginous centre, was, however,\nequally a characteristic of the spinous processes of the _Coccosteus_.\nIn their general proportions, the C\u0153lacanths, if we perhaps except one\nspecies,\u2014the _Glyptolepis microlepidotus_,\u2014were all squat, robust,\nstrongly-built fishes, of the Dirk Hatterick or Balfour-of-Burley type;\nand not only in the larger specimens gigantic in their proportions, but\nremarkable for the strength and weight of their armor, even when of but\nmoderate stature. The specimen of _Holoptychius nobilissimus_ in the\nBritish Museum could have measured little more than three feet from snout\nto tail when most entire; but it must have been nearly a foot in breadth,\nand a bullet would have rebounded flattened from its scales. And such\nwas that ancient C\u0153lacanth family, of which the oldest of our Scotch\nGanoids,\u2014the _Asterolepis_ of Stromness,\u2014formed one of the members, and\nwhich for untold ages has had no living representative.\n\nLet us now enter on our proposed inquiry regarding the cerebral\ndevelopment of the earlier vertebrata, and see whether we cannot\nascertain after what manner the first true brains were lodged, and\nwhat those modifications were which their protecting box, the cranium,\nreceived in the subsequent periods. Independently of its own special\ninterest, the inquiry will be found to have a direct bearing on our\ngeneral subject.\n\n\n\n\nCEREBRAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE EARLIER VERTEBRATA. ITS APPARENT PRINCIPLE.\n\n\nIt is held by a class of naturalists, some of them of the highest\nstanding, that the skulls of the vertebrata consist, like the columns\nto which they are attached, of vertebral joints, composed each, in the\nmore typical forms of head, as they are in the trunk, of five parts or\nelements,\u2014the centrum or body, the two spinous processes which enclose\nthe spinal cord, and the two ribs. These cranial vertebr\u00e6, four in\nnumber, correspond, it is said, to the four senses that have their seat\nin the head: there is the nasal vertebra, the centrum of which is the\nvomer, its spinal processes the nasal and ethmoid bones, and its ribs the\n_upper_ jaws; there is the ocular vertebra, the centrum of which is the\nanterior portion of the sphenoid bone, its spinal processes the frontals,\nand its ribs the _under_ jaws; there is the lingual vertebra, the centrum\nof which is the posterior sphenoid bone, its spinal processes the\nparietals, and its ribs the hyoid and branchial bones,\u2014portions of the\nskeleton largely developed in fishes; and, lastly, there is the auditory\nvertebra, the centrum of which is the base of the occipital bone, and its\nspinal processes the occipital crest, and which in the osseous fishes\nbears attached to it, as its ribs, the bones of the scapular ring. And\nthe cerebral segments thus constructed we find represented in typical\ndiagrams of the skull, as real vertebr\u00e6. Professor Owen, in his lately\npublished treatise on \u201cThe Nature of Limbs,\u201d\u2014work charged with valuable\nfact, and instinct with philosophy,\u2014figures in his draught of the\narchetypal skeleton of the vertebrata, the four vertebr\u00e6 of the head, in\na form as unequivocally such as any of the vertebr\u00e6 of the neck or body.\n\nNow, for certain purposes of generalization, I doubt not that the\nconception may have its value. There are in all nature and in all\nphilosophy certain central ideas of general bearing, round which, at\ndistances less or more remote, the subordinate and particular ideas\narrange themselves,\n\n    \u201cCycle and epicycle, orb in orb.\u201d\n\nIn the classifications of the naturalist, for instance, all _species_\nrange round some central _generic_ idea; all genera round some central\nidea, to which we give the name of _order_; all orders round some central\nidea of _class_; all classes round some central idea of _division_;\nand all divisions round the interior central idea which constitutes\na _kingdom_. Sir Joshua Reynolds forms his theory of beauty on this\nprinciple of central ideas. \u201cEvery species of the animal, as well as\nof the vegetable creation,\u201d he remarks, \u201cmay be said to have a fixed\nor determinate form, towards which nature is continually inclining,\nlike various lines terminating in a centre; or it may be compared to\npendulums vibrating in different directions over one central point,\nwhich they all cross, though only one of their number passes through\nany other point.\u201d He instances, in illustrating his theory, the Grecian\n_beau ideal_ of the human nose, as seen in the statues of the Greek\ndeities. It formed a straight line; whereas all deformity of nose is of\na convex or concave character, and occasioned by either a rising above\nor a sinking below this medial line of beauty. And it may be of use, as\nit is unquestionably of interest, to conceive, after this manner, of a\ncertain type of skeleton, embodying, as it were, the central or primary\ntype of all vertebral skeletons, and consisting of a double range of\nrings, united by the bodies of the vertebr\u00e6, as the two rings of a\nfigure 8 are united at their point of junction; the upper ring forming\nthe enclosure of the brain,\u2014spinal, and cephalic; the lower that of\nthe viscera,\u2014respiratory, circulatory, and digestive. Such is the idea\nembodied in Professor Owen\u2019s archetypal skeleton. It is a series of\nvertebr\u00e6 composing double rings,\u2014their _brain_-rings comparatively small\nin the vertebr\u00e6 of the trunk, but of much greater size in the vertebr\u00e6\nof the head. But it must not be forgotten, that central ideas, however\nnecessary to the classification of the naturalist, are not historic\nfacts. We may safely hold, with the philosophic painter, that the outline\nof the typical human nose is a straight line; but it would be very\nunsafe to hold, as a consequence, that the first men had all straight\nnoses. And when we find it urged by at least one eminent assertor of the\ndevelopment hypothesis,\u2014Professor Oken,\u2014that light was the main agent in\ndeveloping the substance of nerve,\u2014that the nerves, ranged in pairs, in\nturn developed the vertebr\u00e6, each vertebra being but \u201cthe periphery or\nenvelope of a pair of nerves,\u201d\u2014and that the nerves of those four senses\nof smell, sight, taste, and hearing, which, according to the Professor,\n\u201cmake up the head,\u201d originated the four cranial vertebr\u00e6 which constitute\nthe skull,\u2014it becomes us to test the central idea, thus converted into a\nsort of historic myth, by the realities of actual history. What, then,\nlet us inquire, is the real history of the cerebral development of the\nvertebrata, as recorded in the rocks of the earlier geologic periods?\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 7.\n\n_Osseous points of placoid cranium._[12]\n\n(Mag. twelve diameters)]\n\nThough the vertebrata existed in the ichthyic form throughout the vastly\nextended Silurian period, we find in that system no remains of the\ncranium: the Silurian fishes _seem_, as has been already said, (page\n53,) to have been exclusively Placoid, and the purely cartilaginous box\nformed by nature for the protection of the brain in this order has in\nno case been preserved. Teeth, and, in at least one or two instances,\nthe minute jaws over which they were planted have been found, but no\nportion of the skull. We know, however, that in the fishes of the same\norder which now exist, the cranium consists of one undivided piece of a\ncartilaginous substance, set thickly over its outer surface with minute\npolygonal points of bone, (fig. 7,) composed internally of star-like\nrays, that radiate from the centre of ossification, and that present, in\nconsequence, seen through a microscope, the appearance of the polygonal\ncells of a coral of the genus Astrea. The pattern induced is that of\nstars set within polygons. Along the sides or top of this unbroken\ncranial box, that exhibits no mark of suture, we find the perforations\nthrough which the nerves of smell, sight, taste, and hearing passed from\nthe brain outwards, and see that they have failed to originate distinct\nvertebral envelopes for themselves;\u2014they all lodge in one undivided\nmansion-house, and have merely separate doors. We find, further, that\nthe homotypal _ribs_ of the entire cranium consist, not of four, but\nsimply of a single pair, attached to the occiput, and which serves both\nto suspend the jaws, upper and nether, in their place under the middle of\nthe head, and to lend support to the hyoid and branchial framework; while\nthe scapular ring we find existing, as in the higher vertebrata, not as\na cerebral, but as a cervical or dorsal appendage. In the wide range\nof the animal kingdom there are scarce any two pieces of organization\nthat less resemble one another in form than the vertebr\u00e6 of the placoids\nresemble their skulls; and the difference is not merely external, but\nextends to even their internal construction. In both skull and vertebr\u00e6\nwe detect an union of bone and cartilage; but the bone of each vertebra\nforms an internal continuous nucleus, round which the cartilage is\narranged, whereas in the skulls it is the cartilage that is internal, and\nthe bone is spread in granular points over it. If we dip the body of one\nof the dorsal vertebr\u00e6 of a herring into melted wax, and then withdraw\nit, we will find it to represent in its crusted state the vertebral\ncentrum of a Placoid,\u2014soft without, and osseous within; but in order\nto represent the placoid skull, we would have first to mould it out of\none unbroken piece of wax, and then to cover it over with a priming of\nbone-dust. And such is the effect of this arrangement, that, while the\nskull of a Placoid, exposed to a red heat, falls into dust, from the\ncircumstance that the supporting framework on which the granular bone\nwas arranged perishes in the fire, the vertebral centrum, whose internal\nframework is itself bone, and so _not_ perishable, comes out in a state\nof beautiful entireness,\u2014resembling in the thornback a squat sand-glass,\nelegantly fenced round by the lateral pillars, (fig. 8, _b_;) and in\nthe dog-fish (_a_) a more elongated sand-glass, in which the lateral\npillars are wanting. Such are the heads and vertebral joints of the\nexisting Placoids; and such, reasoning from analogy, seem to have been\nthe character and construction of the heads and vertebral joints of the\nPlacoids of the Silurian period,\u2014earliest-born of the Vertebrata.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 8.\n\na. _Osseous centrum of Spinax Acanthias._\n\nb. _Osseous centrum of Raja clavata._\n\n(Nat. size.)]\n\nThe most ancient brain-bearing craniums that have come down to us\nin the fossil state, are those of the Ganoids of the Lower Old Red\nSandstone; and in these fishes the true skull appears to have been\nas entirely a simple cartilaginous box, as that of the Placoids of\neither the Silurian period or of the present time, or of those existing\nGanoids, the sturgeons. In the Lower Old Red genera _Cheiracanthus_ and\n_Diplacanthus_, though the heads are frequently preserved as amorphous\nmasses of colored matter, we detect no trace of internal bone, save\nperhaps in the gill-covers of the first-named genus, which were fringed\nby from eighteen to twenty minute osseous rays. The cranium seems to have\nbeen covered, as in the shark family, by skin, and the skin by minute\nshagreen-like scales; and all of the interior cerebral framework which\nappears underneath exists simply as faint impressions of an undivided\nbody, covered by what seem to be osseous points,\u2014the bony molecules,\nit is probable, which encrusted the cartilage. The jaws, in the better\nspecimens, are also preserved in the same doubtful style, and this state\nof keeping is the common one in deposits in which every true bone,\nhowever delicate, presents an outline as sharp as when it occupied its\nplace in the living animal. The dermal or skin-skeleton of both genera,\nwhich consisted, as has been shown (pages 55, 56) of shagreen-like\nosseous scales and slender spines, both brilliantly enamelled, is\npreserved entire; where as the interior framework of the head exists as\nmere point speckled impressions; and the inference appears unavoidable\nthat parts which so invariably differ in their state of keeping now, must\nhave essentially differed in their substance originally.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 9.\n\na. _Portion of caudal fin of Cheiracanthus._[13]\n\nb. _Portion of caudal fin of Cheirolepis Cummingi\u00e6._\n\n(Mag. three diameters.)]\n\nNow, in the _Cheiracanthus_ we detect the first faint indications of\na peculiar arrangement of the dermal skeleton, in relation to certain\nparts of the skeleton within, which\u2014greatly more developed in some of its\ncontemporaries\u2014led to important results in the general structure of these\nGanoids, and furnishes the true key to the character of the early ganoid\nhead. In such of the existing Placoids as I have had an opportunity of\nexamining, the only portions of the dermal skeleton of bone which conform\nin their arrangement to portions of the interior skeleton of cartilage,\nare the teeth, which are always laid on a base of skin right over the\njaws: there is also an approximation to arrangement of a corresponding\nkind, though a distant one, in those hook-armed tubercles of certain\nspecies of rays which run along the vertebral column; but in the shagreen\nby which the creatures are covered I have been able to detect no such\narrangement. Whether it occurs on the fins, the body, or the head, or in\nthe scale form, or in that of the prickle, it manifests the same careless\nirregularity. And on the head and body of the _Cheiracanthus_, and on\nall its fins save one, the shagreen-like scales, though laid down more\nsymmetrically in lines than true shagreen, manifested an equal absence\nof arrangement in relation to the framework within. On that one fin,\nhowever;\u2014the caudal,\u2014the scales, passing from their ordinary rhomboidal\nto a more rectangular form, ranged themselves in right lines over the\ninternal rays, (fig. 9, _a_,) and imparted to these such strength as a\nsplint of wood or whalebone fastened over a fractured toe or finger\nimparts to the injured digit,\u2014a provision which was probably rendered\nnecessary in the case of this important organ of motion, from the\ncircumstance that it was the only fin which the creature possessed that\nwas not strengthened and protected anteriorly by a strong spine. In the\n_Cheirolepis_,\u2014a contemporary fish, characterized, like its cogeners the\n_Cheiracanthus_ and _Diplacanthus_, by shagreen-like scales, but in which\nthe spines were wanting,\u2014we find a farther development of the provision.\nIn all the fins the richly-enamelled dermal-covering was arranged in\nlines over the rays, (fig. 9, _b_;) and the scale, which assumes in the\nfins, like the scales on the tail of the _Cheiracanthus_, though somewhat\nmore irregularly, a rectangular shape, is so considerably elongated,\nthat it assumes for its normal character as a scale, that of the joint\nof an external ray. A similar arrangement of external protection takes\nplace in this genus over the bones of the head; the cartilaginous jaws\nreceive their osseous dermal covering, and, with these, the hyoid bones,\nthe opercules, and the cranium. And it is in these dermal plates,\nwhich covered an interior skull, of which, save in one genus,\u2014the\n_Dipterus_,\u2014not a vestige remains in any of the Old Red fishes thus\nprotected, that we first trace what seem to be the homologues of the\ncranial bones of the osseous fishes,\u2014at least their homologues so far as\nthe _cuticular_ can represent the _internal_. They appear for the first\ntime, not as modified spinous processes, broadened, as in the carapace\nof the Chelonians, into _osseous_ plates, but like those _corneous_\nexternal plates of this order of reptiles, (known in one species as the\ntortoise-shell of commerce,) the origin of which is purely cuticular,\nand which evince so little correspondence in their divisions with the\nsutures of the bones on which they rest, that they have been instanced,\nin their relation to the joinings beneath, as admirable illustrations of\nthe _cross-banding_ of the mechanician.\n\nIn the heads of the osseous fishes, the cranium proper, though\nconsisting, like the skulls of birds, reptiles, and mammals, of several\nbones, exists from snout to nape, and from mastoid to mastoid, as\none unbroken box; whereas all the other bones of the head, such as\nthe maxillaries and intermaxillaries, the lower jaws, the opercular\nappendages, the branchial arches, and the branchiostegous rays,\nare connected but by muscle and ligament, and fall apart under the\nputrefactive influences, or in the process of boiling. This unbroken box,\nwhich consists, in the cod, of twenty-five bones, is the _homologue_ of\nthat cranial box of the Placoids which consists of one entire piece, and\nthe _homotype_, according to Oken, of the bodies and spinal processes of\nfour vertebr\u00e6; while the looser bones which drop away represent their\n_ribs_. The upper surface of the box,\u2014that extending from the nasal\nbone to the nape,\u2014is the only part over which a dermal buckler could\nbe laid, as it is the only part with which the external skin comes in\ncontact; and so it is between this upper surface and the cranial bucklers\nof the earlier Ganoids that we have to institute comparisons. For it\nis a curious fact, that, with the exception of the Old Red genera\n_Acanthodus_, _Cheiracanthus_, and _Diplacanthus_,[14] all the Ganoids of\nthe period in which Ganoids first appear _have_ dermal bucklers placed\nright over their true skulls, and that these, though as united in their\nparts as the bones proper to the cranium in quadrupeds and fishes, are\ncomposed of several pieces, furnished each with its independent centre\nof ossification. The Dipterians, the C\u0153lacanths, the Cephalaspians, and\nat least one genus placed rather doubtfully among the Acanths,\u2014the genus\n_Cheirolepis_,\u2014all possessed cranial bucklers extending from the nape to\nthe snout, in which the plates, various, in the several genera, in form\nand position, were fast _soldered_ together, though in every instance the\nlines of suture were distinctly marked.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 10.\n\nUPPER SURFACE OF CRANIUM OF COD.[15]\n\nA, _Occipital bone_. B, B, _Parietals_. C, C, C, _Superior frontal_. D,\nD, _Anterior frontal_. I, _Nasal bone_. F, F, _Posterior frontals_. E, E,\n_Mastoid bones_. 2, 2, _Eye orbits_. a, a, _Par-occipital bones_.]\n\nOn each side of this external cranium the various cerebral plates, like\nthe corresponding cerebral _ribs_ in the osseous fishes, were free, at\nleast not anchylosed together; and some of their number unequivocally\nperformed, in part at least, the functions of two of these cerebral\nribs, viz. the upper and under jaws, with the functions of the opercular\nappendages attached to the latter. In the cod, as in most other osseous\nfishes, the upper portion of the cranium consists of thirteen bones,\nwhich represent, however, only seven bones in the human skull,\u2014the nasal,\nthe frontal, the two parietal, the occipital, and one-half the two\ntemporal bones. And whereas in man, and in most of the mammals, there are\nfour of these placed in the medial line,\u2014the four which, according to the\nassertors of the vertebral theory, form the spinal crests of the four\ncerebral vertebr\u00e6,\u2014in the cod there are but three. The super-occipital\nbone, A, (fig. 10,) pieces on to the superior frontal, C, C, C; and the\nparietals, B, B, which in the human subject from the upper and middle\nportions of the cranial vault, are thrust out laterally and posteriorly,\nand take their places, in a subordinate capacity, on each side of the\nsuper-occipital. This is not an invariable arrangement among fishes;\u2014in\nthe carp genus, for instance, the parietals assume their proper medial\nplace between the occipital and frontal bones; but so very general is\nthe displacement, that Professor Owen regards it as characteristic of\nthe great ichthyic class, and as the first example in the vertebrata,\nreckoning from the lower forms upwards, of a sort of natural dislocation\namong the bones,\u2014\u201ca modification,\u201d he remarks, \u201cwhich, sometimes\naccompanied by great change of place, has tended most to obscure the\nessential nature of parts, and their true relations to the archetype.\u201d\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 11.\n\nCRANIAL BUCKLER OF COCCOSTEUS DECIPIENS.\n\na, a, _Points of attachment to the cuirass which covered the upper part\nof the creature\u2019s body_.]\n\nOf all the cerebral bucklers of the first ganoid period, that which\nbest bears comparison with the cranial front of the cod is the buckler\nof the _Coccosteus_, (fig. 11.) The general proportions of this portion\nof the ancient Cephalaspian head differ very considerably from those of\nthe corresponding part in the modern cycloid one; but in their larger\ndivisions, the modern and the ancient answer bone to bone. Three osseous\nplates in the _Coccosteus_, A, C, I, the homologues, apparently, of the\noccipital, frontal, and nasal bones, range along the medial line. The\napparent homologues of the parietals, B, B, occupy the same position\nof lateral displacement as the parietals of the cod and of so many\nother fishes. The posterior frontals, F, and the anterior frontals,\nD, also occupy places relatively the same, though the latter, which\nare of greater proportional size, encroach much further, laterally and\nposteriorly, on the superior frontal C, C, C, and sweep entirely round\nthe upper half of the eye orbits, 2, 2. The apparent homologue of the\nmastoid bone, E, which also occupies its proper place, joins posteriorly\nto a little plate, a, imperfectly separated in most specimens from the\nparietal, but which seems to represent the par-occipital bone; and it is\na curious circumstance, that as, in many of the osseous fishes, it is to\nthese bones that the forks of the scapular arch are attached, they unite\nin the _Coccosteus_ in furnishing, in like manner, a point of attachment\nto the cuirass which covered the upper part of the creature\u2019s body. Of\nthe true internal skull of the _Coccosteus_ there remains not a vestige\nLike that of the sturgeon, it must have been a perishable cartilaginous\nbox.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 12.\n\nCRANIAL BUCKLER OF OSTEOLEPIS.]\n\nIn the _Osteolepis_,\u2014an animal the whole of whose external head I have,\nat an expense of some labor, and from the examination of many specimens,\nbeen enabled to restore,\u2014the cranial buckler (fig. 12) was divided in a\nmore arbitrary style; and we find that an element of uncertainty mingles\nwith our inferences regarding it, from the circumstance that some of its\nlines of division, especially in the frontal half, were not real sutures,\nbut formed merely a kind of surface-tatooing, resorted to as if for\npurposes of ornament. The cranial buckler of the _Asterolepis_ exhibited,\nas I shall afterwards have occasion to show, a similar peculiarity;\u2014both\nhad their pseudo-sutures, resembling those false joints introduced by the\narchitect into his rusticated basements, in order to impart the necessary\naspect of regularity to what is technically termed the coursing and\nbanding of the fabric. We can however, determine, notwithstanding the\ninduced obscurity that the buckler of the _Osteolepis_ was divided\ntransversely in the middle into two main parts or segments,\u2014an occipital\npart, C, and a frontal part, A; and that the occipital segment _seems_\nto include also the parietal and mastoid plates, and the frontal segment\nto comprise, with its own proper plates, not only the nasal plate, but\nalso the representative of the anterior part of the vomer. All, however,\nis obscure. But in our uncertainty regarding the homologies of the\ndivisions of this dermal buckler, let us not forget the homology of the\nbuckler itself, as a whole, with the upper surface of the true cranium\nin the osseous fishes. Though frequently crushed and broken, it exists\nin all the finer specimens of my collection as a symmetrically arranged\ncollocation of enamelled plates, as firmly united into one piece,\nthough they all indicate their distinct centres of ossification, as the\ncorresponding surface of the cranium in the carp or cod. The lateral\ncurves in the frontal part immediately opposite the lozenge-shaped plate\nin the centre, show the position of the eyes, which were placed in this\ngenus, as in some of the carnivorous turtles, immediately over the\nmouth,\u2014an arrangement common to almost all the Ganoids of the Lower Old\nRed Sandstone. The nearly semicircular termination of the buckler formed\nthe creature\u2019s snout; and in the _Osteolepis_, as in the _Glyptolepis_\nand the _Diplopterus_, it was armed on the under side, like the vomer of\nso many of the osseous fishes, with sharp teeth. Some of my specimens\nindicate the nasal openings a little in advance of the eyes. The nape of\nthe creature was covered by three detached plates, (9, 9, 9, fig. 13,)\nwhich rested upon anterior dorsal scales, and whose homologies, in the\nosseous fishes, may possibly be found in those bones which, uniting\nthe shoulder-bones to the head, complete the scapular belt or ring. The\noperculum we find represented by a single plate (8) which had attached to\nit, as its sub-operculum, a plate (13) of nearly equal size, (see figs.\n14 and 15.) Four small plates (2, 4, 5) formed the under curve of the\neyes, described in many of the osseous fishes by a chain of small bones\nor ossicles; a considerably larger plate (6) occupied the place of the\npreopercular bone; while the intermaxillaries had their representatives\nin well-marked plates, (3, 3,) which, in the genera _Osteolepis_,\n_Diplopterus_, and _Glyptolepis_, we find bristling so thickly with\nteeth along their lower edges, as to remind us of the miniature saws\nemployed by the joiner in cutting out circular holes. These external\nintermaxillaries did not, as in the perch or cod, meet in front of the\nnasal bone and vomer, but joined on at the side, a little in advance of\nthe eyes, leaving the rounded termination of the cranial buckler, which,\nlike the intermaxillaries, was thickly fringed with teeth, to form, as\nhas been already said, the creature\u2019s snout.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 13.\n\nUPPER PART OF HEAD OF OSTEOLEPIS.]\n\nThe under jaws (10)\u2014strongly-marked bones in at least all the Dipterian\nand C\u0153lacanth genera\u2014we find represented externally by massy plates,\nbearing, like those of the upper jaw, their range of teeth. As shown\nin a well-preserved specimen of the lower jaw of _Holoptychius_, in\nmy possession, they were boxes of bone enclosing a bulky nucleus of\ncartilage, which, in approaching towards the condyloid process, where\ngreat strength was necessary, was thickly traversed by osseous cancelli,\nand passed at the joint into true bone. It is in the under jaws of the\nearlier Ganoids that we first detect a true union of the external with\nthe internal skeleton,\u2014of the bony plates and teeth, which were _mere\nplates and teeth of the skin_, with the osseous, granular walls which\nenclosed at least all the larger pieces of the cartilaginous framework\nof the interior. The jaws of the Rays and Sharks, formed of cartilage,\nand fenced round on their sides and edges by their thin coverings of\npolygonal, bony points, are wholly internal and skin-covered; whereas\nthe teeth, which rest on the soft cuticular integument right over them,\nare as purely dermal as the surrounding shagreen. Teeth and shagreen\nmay, we find, be alike stripped off with the skin. Now, in the earlier\nganoidal jaw, two sides of the osseous box which it composed,\u2014its outer\nand under sides,\u2014were mere dermal plates, representative of the skin\nof the placoids, or of their shagreen; while the other two,\u2014its upper\nand inner sides,\u2014seem to have been developments of the interior osseous\nwalls which covered the endo-skeletal cartilage. Nor is it unworthy of\nnotice, that the reptile fishes of the period had their _ichthyic_ teeth\nranged along the edge of an exterior _dermal_ plate which covered the\nouter side of the jaw; whereas their _reptile_ teeth were planted on\na plate, apparently of interior development, which covered its upper\nedge. It is further worthy of remark, that while the teeth of the dermal\nplate,\u2014themselves also dermal,\u2014seem as if they had grown out of it, and\nformed part of it,\u2014just as the teeth of the Placoids grew out of the\nskin on which they rest,\u2014the _reptile_ teeth within rested in shallow\npits,\u2014the first faint indications of true sockets.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 14.\n\nUNDER PART OF HEAD OF OSTEOLEPIS.[16]]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 15.\n\nHEAD OF OSTEOLEPIS, SEEN IN PROFILE.]\n\nThat space included within the arch formed by the sweep of the under\njaws, which we find occupied in the osseous fishes by the hyoid bones and\nthe branchiostegous rays, was filled up externally, in the Dipterians\nand C\u0153lacanths, and in at least two genera of Cephalaspians, by dermal\nplates; in some genera, such as the _Diplopterus_, by three plates; in\nothers, such as the _Holoptychius_ and _Glyptolepis_, by two; and in\nthe _Asterolepis_, as we shall afterwards see, by but a single plate.\nIn the _Osteolepis_ these plates were increased to five in number, by\nthe little plates 14, 14, (fig. 14,) which, however, may have been also\npresent in the _Diplopterus_, though my specimens fail to show them. The\ngeneral arrangement was of much elegance,\u2014an elegance, however, which,\nin the accompanying restorations, the dislocation of the free plates,\ndrawn apart to indicate their detached character, somewhat tends to\nobscure. But the position of the eyes must have imparted to the animal\na sinister reptile-like aspect. The profile, (fig. 15,) the result, not\nof a chance-drawn outline, arbitrarily filled up, but produced by the\ncareful arrangement in their proper places of actually existing plates,\nserves to show how perfectly the dermo-skeletal parts of the creature\nwere developed. Some of the animals with which we are best acquainted, if\nrepresented by but their cuticular skeleton, would appear simply as sets\nof hoofs and horns. Even the tortoise or pengolin would present about the\nhead and limbs their gaps and missing portions; but the dermo-skeleton\nof the _Osteolepis_, composed of solid bone, and burnished with enamel,\nexhibited the outline of the fish entire, and, with the exception of\nthe eye, the filling up of all its external parts. Presenting outside,\nin its original state, no fragment of skin or membrane, and with even\nits most flexible organs sheathed in enamelled bone, the _Osteolepis_\nmust have very much resembled a fish carved in ivory; and, though so\neffectually covered, it would have appeared, from the circumstance, that\nit wore almost all its bone outside, as naked as the human teeth.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 16.\n\nCRANIAL BUCKLER OF DIPLOPTERUS.]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 17.\n\nCRANIAL BUCKLER OF DIPLOPTERUS.]\n\nThe cranial buckler of the _Diplopterus_ (fig. 16) somewhat resembled\nthat of its fellow-dipterian the _Osteolepis_, but exhibited greater\nelegance of outline. My first perfect specimen, which I owe to the\nkindness of Mr. John Miller, of Thurso, an intelligent geologist of the\nnorth, reminded me, as it glittered in jet-black enamel on its ground\nof pale gray, of those Roman cuirasses which one sees in old prints,\nimpaled on stakes, as the central objects in warlike trophies formed\nof spoils taken in battle. The rounded snout represented the chest and\nshoulders, the middle portion the waist, and the expansion at the nape\nthe piece of dress attached, which, like the Highland kilt, fell adown\nthe thighs. The addition of a fragment of a sleeve, suspended a little\nover the eye orbits, 2, 2, seemed all that was necessary in order to\nrender the resemblance complete. But as I disinterred the buried edges of\nthe specimen with a graver, the form, though it grew still more elegant,\nbecame less that of the ancient coat of armor; the snout expanded into\na semicircle; the eye orbits gradually deepened; and the entire fossil\nbecame not particularly like any thing but the thing it once was,\u2014the\ncranial buckler of the _Diplopterus_. The print (fig. 17) exhibits its\ntrue form. It consists of two main divisions, occipital (A) and frontal,\n(C, fig. 16;) and in each of these we find a pair of smaller divisions,\nwith what seem to be indications of yet further division, marked, not by\nlines, but by dots; though I have hitherto failed to determine whether\nthe plates which these last indicate possess their independent centres of\nossification. Not unfrequently, however, has the comparative anatomist\nto seek the analogues of two bones in one; nor is it at least _more_\ndifficult to trace in the faint divisions of the cranial buckler of the\n_Diplopterus_, the homologues of the occipital, frontal, parietal,\nmastoid, and nasal bones, than to recognize the representatives of the\ncarpals of the middle and ring finger in man, in the cannon bone of the\nfore leg of the ox. I may mention in passing, that the little central\nplate of the frontal division, (1, fig. 16,) which so nearly corresponds\nwith that of the _Osteolepis_, occurred, though with considerable\nvariations of form and homology, and some slight difference of position,\nin all the Ganoids of the Old Red Sandstone whose craniums were covered\nwith an osseous buckler, and that its place was always either immediately\nbetween the eyes or a very little over them. Its never-failing recurrence\nshows that it must have had _some_ meaning, though it may be difficult\nto say what. In the _Coccosteus_ it takes the form of the male dovetail,\nwhich united the nasal plate or snout to the plate representative\nof the superior frontal. Of the cartilaginous box which formed the\ninterior skull of either _Osteolepis_, or _Diplopterus_, or, with but\none exception, of the interior skulls of any of their contemporaries, no\ntrace, as I have said, has yet been detected. The solitary exception in\nthe case is, however, one of singular interest.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 18.\n\na. _Palatal dart-head._\n\nb. _Group of palatal teeth._]\n\nIn a collection of miscellaneous fragments sent me by Mr. Dick from the\nrocks of Thurso, I detected patches of palatal teeth ranged in nearly the\nquadratures of circles, and which radiated outwards from the rectangular\nangle or centre, (fig. 18, _b_.) And with the patches there occurred\nplates exactly resembling the barbed head of a dart, (_a_,) with which\nI had been previously acquainted, though I had failed to determine their\ncharacter or place. The excellent state of keeping of some of Mr. Dick\u2019s\nspecimens now enabled me to trace the patches with the dart-head, and\nseveral other plates, to a curious piece of palatal mechanism, ranged\nalong the base of a ganoid cranium, covered externally by a brightly\nenamelled buckler, and to ascertain the order in which patches and plates\noccurred. And then, though not without some labor, I succeeded in tracing\nthe buckler with which they were associated to the _Dipterus_,\u2014a fish\nwhich, though it has engaged the attention of both Cuvier and Agassiz,\nhas not yet been adequately restored. It is on an ill-preserved Orkney\nspecimen of the cranial buckler of this Ganoid that the ichthyologist has\nfounded his genus _Polyphractus_; while groupes of its palatal teeth from\nthe Old Red of Russia he refers to a supposed Placoid,\u2014the _Ctenodus_.\nBut in the earlier stages of pal\u00e6ontological research, mistakes of this\ncharacter are wholly unavoidable. The pal\u00e6ontologist who did avoid them\nwould be either very unobservant, or at once very rash and very fortunate\nin his guesses. If, ere an entire skeleton of the _Ichthyosaurus_\nhad turned up, there had been found in different localities, in the\nLiasic formation, a beak like that of a porpoise, teeth like that of\na crocodile, a head and sternum like that of a lizard, paddles like\nthose of a cetacean, and vertebr\u00e6 like those of a fish, it would have\nbeen greatly more judicious, and more in accordance with the existing\nanalogies, to have erected, provisionally at least, places specifically,\nor even generically separated, in which to range the separate pieces,\nthan to hold that they had all united in one anomalous genus; though such\nwas actually the fact. And Agassiz, in erecting three distinct genera\nout of the fragments of a single genus, has in reality acted at once\nmore prudently and more intelligently than if he had avoided the error\nby rashly uniting parts which in their separate state indicate no tie of\nconnection.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 19.\n\nCRANIAL BUCKLER OF DIPTERUS.]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 20.\n\nBASE OF CRANIUM OF DIPTERUS.]\n\nThe cranial buckler of the _Dipterus_ (fig. 19) was, like that of the\n_Diplopterus_, of great beauty. In some of the finer specimens, we find\nthe enamel ornately tatooed, within the more strongly-marked divisions,\nby delicately traced lines, waved and bent, as if upon the principle\nof Hogarth; and though the lateral plates are numerous and small, and\ndefy the homologies, we may trace in those of the central line, from the\nsnout to the nape, what seem to be the representatives of the frontal,\nparietal, and occipital bones,\u2014the parietals ranging, as in the skull\nof the carp and in that of most of the mammals, in their proper place\nin the medial line. But the under surface of the cranium, armed, as on\nthe upper surface, with plates of bone, exhibited an arrangement still\nmore peculiar, (fig. 20.) Its rectangular patches of palatal teeth, its\ncurious dart-like bone, placed immediately behind these, and attached,\nas the dart-head is attached to the handle, to a broad lozenge-shaped\nplate, with two strong osseous processes projecting on either side, forms\nsuch a _tout ensemble_ as is unique among fishes. Even here, however,\nthere may be traced at least a shade of homological resemblance to the\nbones which form the base of the osseous skull. The single lozenge-shaped\nplate, (A,) with its dart-head, occupies the place of the basi-occipital\nbone; the posterior portion of the vomer seems represented by a strong\nbony ridge, extending towards the snout; two separate bones, each bearing\none of the angular patches of teeth, corresponds to the sphenoid bone\nand its al\u00e6; and attached laterally to each of these there is the strong\nprojecting bone, on which the lower jaw appears to have hinged, and\nwhich apparently represents the lower part of the temporal bone. Not less\nsingular was the form of the creature\u2019s under jaw, (fig. 21.) I know no\nother fish-jaw, whether of the recent or the extinct races, that might\nbe so readily mistaken for that of a quadruped. It exhibits not only the\ncondyloid, but also the coronoid processes; and, save that it broadens\non its upper edges, where in mammals the grinders are placed, so as to\nfurnish field enough for angular patches of teeth, which correspond with\nthe angular patches in the palate, it might be regarded, found detached,\nas at least a reptilian, if not mammalian, bone. The disposition of\nthe palatal teeth of the _Dipterus_ will scarce fail to remind the\nmechanist of the style of grooving resorted to in the formation of\nmill-stones for the grinding of flour; nor is it wholly improbable that,\nin correspondence with the rotatory motion of the stones to which the\ngrooving is specially adapted, jaws so hinged may have possessed some\nsuch power of lateral motion as that exemplified by the human subject in\nthe use of the molar teeth.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 21.\n\nUNDER JAW OF DIPTERUS.]\n\nThe protection afforded by the osseous covering of both the upper and\nunder surface of the cranium of this ichthyolite has resulted, in\nseveral instances, in the preservation, though always in a greatly\ncompressed state, of the cranium itself, and the consequent exhibition\nof two very important cranial cavities, the brain-pan proper, and the\npassage through which the spinal cord passed into the brain. In the\nsturgeon the brain occupies nearly the middle of the head; and there\nis a considerable part of the occipital region traversed by the spine\nin a curved channel, which, seen in profile, appears wide at the nape,\nbut considerably narrower where it enters the brain-pan, and altogether\nvery much resembling the interior of a miniature hunting-horn. And such\nexactly was the arrangement of the greater cavities in the head of the\n_Dipterus_. The portion of the cranium which was overlaid by what may be\nregarded as the occipital plate was traversed by a cavity shaped like a\nLilliputian bugle-horn; while the hollow in which the brain was lodged\nlay under the two parietal plates, and the little elliptical plate in\nthe centre. The accompanying print, (fig. 22,) though of but slight\nshow, may be regarded by the reader with some little interest, as a not\ninadequate representation of the most ancient brain-pan on which human\neye has yet looked,\u2014as, in short, the type of cell in which, myriads of\nages ago, in at least one genus, that mysterious substance was lodged, on\nwhose place and development so very much in the scheme of creation was\ndestined to depend. The specimen from which the figure is taken was laid\nopen laterally by chance exposure to the waves on the shores of Thurso,\nanother specimen, cut longitudinally by the saw of the lapidary, yields a\nsimilar section, but greatly more compressed in the cavities; on which,\nof course, as unsupported hollows, the compression to which the entire\ncranium had been exposed chiefly acted. When the top and bottom of a\nbox are violently forced together, it is the empty space which the box\nencloses that is annihilated in consequence of the violence.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 22.\n\nLONGITUDINAL SECTION OF HEAD OF DIPTERUS]\n\nIt is deserving of notice, that the analogies of the cranial cavities\nin this ancient Ganoid should point so directly on the cranial cavities\nof that special Ganoid of the present time which unites a true skull of\ncartilage to a dermal skull of osseous plates,\u2014a circumstance strongly\ncorroborative of the general evidence, negative and positive, on which\nI have concluded that the true skulls of the first Ganoids were also\ncartilaginous. It is further worthy of observation, that in all the\nsections of the cranium of _Dipterus_ which I have yet examined, the\ninternal line is continuous, as in the Placoids, from nape to snout,\nand that the true skull presents no trace of those cerebral vertebr\u00e6 of\nwhich skulls are regarded by Oken and his disciples as developments.\nHistorically at least, the progress of the ichthyic head seems to have\nbeen a progress from simple cartilaginous boxes to cartilaginous boxes\ncovered with osseous plates, that performed the functions whether active\nor passive, of internal bones; and then from external plates to the\ninterior bones which the plates had previously represented, and whose\nproper work they had done.\n\nThe principle which rendered it necessary that the divisions which exist\nin the dermal skulls of the first Ganoids should so closely correspond\nwith the divisions which exist in the internal skulls of the osseous\nfishes of a greatly later period, does not seem to lie far from the\nsurface. Of the solid parts of the ichthyic head, a certain set of\npieces afford protection to the brain and cerebral nerves, and to some\nof the organs of the senses, such as those of seeing and hearing; while\nanother certain set of pieces constitute the framework through which an\nimportant class of functions, manducatory and respiratory, are performed.\nThe protective bones of merely passive function are fixed, whereas the\nbones of active function, such as the jaws, the osseous framework of the\nopercules, and the hyoid bones, are to the necessary extent free, _i.\ne._ capable of independent motion. Of course, the detached character\nnecessary to the free cerebral bones would be equally necessary in\ncerebral plates united dermally to the pieces of the cartilaginous\nframework, which performed in the ancient fish the functions of these\nfree bones. And hence jaw plates, opercular plates, and hyoid plates,\nwhose homological relation with recent jaws and opercular and hyoid\nbones cannot be mistaken. They were operative in performing identical\nmechanical functions, and had to exist, in consequence, in identical\nmechanical conditions. And an equally simple, though somewhat different\nprinciple, seems to have regulated the divisions of the fixed cranial\nbucklers of the Old Red Ganoids, and to have determined their homologies\nwith the fixed cerebral bones of the osseous fishes.\n\nThese cranial bucklers, extending from nape to snout, protected the\nexposed upper surface of the cartilaginous skull, and conformed to it in\nshape, as a helmet conforms to the shape of the head, or a breast-plate\nto the shape of the chest. And as the cartilaginous heads resembled in\ngeneral outline the osseous ones, the buckler which covered their upper\nsurface resembled in general outline the upper surface of the osseous\nskull. It was in no case entirely a flat plate; but in every species\nrounded over the snout and in most species at the sides; and so, in\norder that its characteristic proportions might be preserved throughout\nthe various stages of growth in the head which it covered, it had to be\nformed from several distinct centres of ossification, and to extend in\narea around the edges of the plates originated from these. The workman\nfinds no difficulty in adding to the size of a piece of straight wall,\nwhether by heightening or lengthening it; but he cannot add to the size\nof a dome or arch, without first taking it down, and then erecting it\nanew on a larger scale. In the domes and arches of the animal kingdom,\nthe problem is solved by building them up of distinct pieces, few or\nmany, according to the demands of the figure which they compose, and\nrendering these pieces capable of increase along their edges. It is on\nthis principle that the Cystidea, the Echinid\u00e6, the Chelonian carapace\nand plastron, and the skulls of the osseous Vertebrata, are constructed.\nIt is also the principle on which the cranial bucklers of the ancient\nGanoids were formed.[17] And from the general resemblance in figure of\nthese bucklers to the upper surface of the osseous skull, the separate\nparts necessary for the building up of the one were anticipated, by many\nages, in the building up of the other; just as we find external arches\nof stone which were erected two thousand years ago, constructed on the\nsame principle, and relatively of the same parts, as internal arches of\nbrick built in the present age. Doubtless, however, with this mechanical\nnecessity for correspondence of parts in the formation of corresponding\nerections, there may have mingled that regard for typical resemblance\nwhich seems so marked a characteristic of the _style_, if I may so\nexpress myself, in which the Divine Architect gives expression to his\nideas. The external osseous buckler He divided after the general pattern\nwhich was to be exemplified, in latter times, in the divisions of the\ninternal osseous skull; as if in illustration of that \u201cideal exemplar\u201d\nwhich dwelt in his mind from eternity, and on the palpable existence\nof which sober science has based deductions identical in their scope\nand bearing with some of the sublimest doctrines of the theologian.\n\u201cThe recognition,\u201d says Professor Owen, \u201cof an ideal exemplar for the\nvertebrated animals, proves that the knowledge of such a being as man\nexisted before man appeared; for the Divine mind which planned the\narchetype also foreknew all its modifications. The archetypal idea was\nmanifested in the flesh, under divers such modifications, upon this\nplanet, long prior to the existence of those animal species that actually\nexemplify it.\u201d\n\nBut while we find place in that geological history in which every\ncharacter is an organism, for the \u201cideal exemplar\u201d of Professor Owen,\nwe find _no_ place in it for the vertebr\u00e6-developed skull of Professor\nOken. The true genealogy of the head runs in an entirely different line.\nThe nerves of the cerebral senses did not, we find, originate cerebral\nvertebr\u00e6, seeing that the heads of the first and second geologic periods\nhad their cerebral nerves, but _not_ their cerebral vertebr\u00e6; and that\nwhat are regarded as cerebral-vertebr\u00e6 appear for the first time, not in\nthe early fishes, but in the reptiles of the Coal formation. The line of\nsuccession through the fish, indicated by the Continental assertor of\nthe development hypothesis, is a line cut off. All the existing evidence\nconspires to show that the placoid heads of the Silurian system were,\nlike the placoid heads of the recent period, mere cartilaginous boxes;\nand that in the succeeding system there existed ganoidal heads, that\nto the internal cartilaginous box added external plates of bone, the\nhomologues, apparently,\u2014so far at least as the merely cuticular could\nbe representative of the endo-skeletal,\u2014of the opercular, maxillary,\nfrontal, and occipital bones in the osseous fishes of a long posterior\nperiod,\u2014fishes that were not ushered upon the scene until after the\nappearance of the reptile in its highest forms and of even the marsupial\nquadruped.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ASTEROLEPIS, ITS STRUCTURE, BULK, AND ASPECT.\n\n\nWith the reader, if he has accompanied me thus far, I shall now pass\non to the consideration of the remains of the _Asterolepis_. Our\npreliminary acquaintance with the cerebral peculiarities of a few of\nits less gigantic contemporaries will be found of use in enabling us to\ndetermine regarding a class of somewhat resembling peculiarities which\ncharacterized this hugest Ganoid of the Old Red Sandstone.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 24.\n\n_Dermal tubercles of Asterolepis_\n\n(Mag. two diameters.)]\n\nThe head of the _Asterolepis_, like the heads of all the other\nC\u0153lacanths, and of all the Dipterians, was covered with osseous\nplates,\u2014its body with osseous scales; and, as I have already had occasion\nto mention, it is from the star-like tubercles by which the cerebral\nplates were fretted that M. Eichwald bestowed on the creature its\ngeneric name. Agassiz has even erected species on certain varieties in\nthe pattern of the stars, as exhibited on detached fragments; but I am\nfar from being satisfied that we are to seek in their peculiarities of\nstyle the characters by which the several species were distinguished.\nThe stellar form of the tubercle seems to have been its normal or most\nperfect form as it was also, with certain modifications, that of the\ntubercle of the _Coccosteus_ and _Pterichthys_; but its development as\na complete star was comparatively rare: in most cases the tubercles\nexisted without the rays,\u2014frequently in the insulated pap-like shape,\nbut not rarely confluent, or of an elongated or bent form; and when to\nthese the characteristic rays were added, the stars produced were of a\nrather eccentric order,\u2014stars somewhat resembling the shadows of stars\nseen in water. Individual specimens have already been found, on which, if\nwe recognize the form of the tubercle as a specific character, several\nspecies might be erected. The accompanying wood-cut (fig. 24) represents,\nfrom a Thurso specimen, what seems to be the true normal pattern of\nthese cerebral carvings. Seen in profile (_b_) the tubercles resemble\nlittle hillocks, perforated at their base by single lines of thickly-set\ncaves; while seen from above, (_a_,) the narrow piers of bone by which\nthe caves are divided take the form of rays. The reader will scarce fail\nto recognise in this print the coral _Monticularia_ of Lamarck, or to\ndetect, in at least the profile, the peculiarity which suggested the name.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 25.\n\nSCALES OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(Nat. size.)\n\na. _Inner surface of scale._\n\nb. _Exterior surface._]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 26.\n\nPORTION OF CARVED SURFACE OF SCALE.\n\n(Mag. four diameters.)]\n\nThe scales which covered the creature\u2019s body (fig. 25) were, in\nproportion to its size, considerably smaller and thinner than those\nof the _Holoptychius_, which, however, they greatly resemble in their\ngeneral style of sculpture. Each, on the lower part of its exposed\nfield, was, we see, fretted by longitudinal anastomosing ridges, which,\nin the upper part, break into detached angular tubercles, placed with\nthe apex downwards, and hollowed, leaf-like, in the centre; while that\ncovered portion which was overlaid by the scales immediately above we\nfind thickly pitted by microscopic hollows, that give to this part of the\nfield, viewed under a tolerably high magnifying power, a honeycombed\nappearance. The central and lower parts of the interior surface of the\nscale (_a_) are in most of the specimens irregularly roughened; while a\nbroad, smooth band, which runs along the top and sides, and seems to have\nfurnished the line of attachment to the creature\u2019s body, is comparatively\nsmooth. The exterior carvings, though they demand the assistance of\nthe lens to see them aright, are of singular elegance and beauty; as\nperhaps the accompanying wood-cut, (fig. 26,) which gives a magnified\nview of a portion of the scale immediately above (_b_) from the middle\nof the honeycombed field on the right side, to where the anastomosing\nridges bend gracefully in their descent, may in some degree serve to\nshow. I have seen a richly inlaid coat of mail, which was once worn by\nthe puissant Charles the Fifth; but its elaborate carvings, though they\nbelonged to the age of Benvenuto Cellini, were rude and unfinished,\ncompared with those which fretted the armor of the _Asterolepis_.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 27.\n\nCRANIAL BUCKLER OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One fifth nat. size, linear.)]\n\nThe creature\u2019s cranial buckler, which was of great size and strength,\nmight well be mistaken for the carapace of some Chelonian fish of no\ninconsiderable bulk. The cranial bucklers of the larger Dipterians\nwere ample enough to have covered the corresponding part in the skulls\nof our middle-sized market-fish, such as the haddock and whiting; the\nbuckler of a _Coccosteus_ of the extreme size would have covered, if\na little altered in shape, the upper surface of the skull of a cod,\nbut the cranial buckler of _Asterolepis_, from which the accompanying\nwood-cut was taken, (fig. 27,) would have considerably more than covered\nthe corresponding part in the skull of a large horse; and I have at\nleast one specimen in my collection which would have fully covered\nthe front skull of an elephant. In the smaller specimens, the buckler\nsomewhat resembles a laborer\u2019s shovel divested of its handle, and sorely\nrust-eaten along its lower or cutting edge. It consisted of plates,\nconnected at the edges by flat squamous sutures, or, as a joiner might\nperhaps say, _glued_ together in _bevelled_ joints. And in consequence\nof this arrangement, the same plates which seem broad on the exterior\nsurface appear comparatively narrow on the interior one, and _vice\nversa_; the occipital plate, (_a_,) which, running from the nape along\nthe centre of the buckler, occupies so considerable a space on its outer\nsurface, exhibits inside a superficies reduced at least one half. Like\nnine tenths of its contemporaries, the _Asterolepis_ exhibits the little\ncentral plate between the eyes; but the eye orbits, unlike those of the\n_Coccosteus_, and of all the Dipterian genera, which were half-scooped\nout of the cranial buckler, half-encircled by detached plates, were\nplaced completely within the field of the buckler,\u2014a circumstance in\nwhich they resemble the eye orbits of the _Pterichthys_, and, among\nexisting fish, those of the sea-wolf. The characteristic is also a\ndistinctive one in Cuvier\u2019s second family of the Acanthopterygii,\u2014the\n\u201cfishes with hard cheeks.\u201d A deep line immediately over the eyes, which,\nhowever, indicated no suture, but seems to have been merely ornamental,\nforms a sort of rudely tatooed eyebrow; the marginal lines parallel to\nthe lateral edges of the buckler were also mere tatooings; but all the\nothers indicated joints which, though more or less anchylosed, had a\nreal existence. So flat was the surface, that the edge of a ruler rests\nupon it, in my several specimens, both lengthwise and across; but it was\ntraversed by two flat ridges, which, stretching from the corners of the\nlatero-posterior, _i. e._ parietal, plates, (_b_, _b_,) converged at the\nlittle plate between the eyes, while along the centre of the depressed\nangle which they formed, a third ridge, equally flat with the others, ran\ntowards the same point of convergence from the nape. The three ridges,\nwhen strongly relieved by a slant light, resemble not inadequately an\nimpression, on a large scale, of the Queen\u2019s broad arrow.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 28.\n\nINNER SURFACE OF CRANIAL BUCKLER OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One fifth nat. size, linear.)]\n\nThe inner surface of the cranial buckler of _Asterolepis_, (fig.\n28,)\u2014that which rested on the cartilaginous box which formed the\ncreature\u2019s interior skull,\u2014stands out in bolder relief from the stone\nthan its outer surface, and forms a more picturesque object. Like the\ninner surfaces of the bucklers of _Coccosteus_ and _Pterichthys_, but\nmuch more thickly than these, it was traversed by minute channelled\nmarkings, somewhat resembling those stri\u00e6 which may be detected in the\nflatter bones of the ordinary fishes, and which seem in these to be\nmere interstices between the osseous fibres. And in the plates, as in\nthe bones, they radiate from the centres of ossification, which are\ncomparatively dense and massy, towards the thinner overlapping edges.\nThese radiating lines are equally well marked in the cerebral bones of\nthe human f\u0153tus. The three converging ridges on the outer surface we\nfind on the inner surface also,\u2014the lateral ones a little bent in the\nmiddle, but so directly opposite those outside, that the thickening of\nthe buckler which takes place along their line is at least as much a\nconsequence of their inner as of their outer elevation over the general\nplatform. A fourth bar ran transversely along the nape, and formed the\ncross beam on which the others rested; for the three longitudinal ridges\nmay be properly regarded as three strong beams, which, extending from\nthe transverse beam at the nape to the front, where they converged like\nthe spokes of a wheel at the nave, gave to the cranial roof a degree of\nsupport of which, from its great flatness, it may have stood in need. In\ncranial bucklers in which the average thickness of the plates does not\nexceed three _eighth_ parts of an inch, their thickness in the centre of\nthe ridges exceeds three _quarters_. The head of the largest crocodile\nof the existing period is defended by an armature greatly less strong\nthan that worn by the _Asterolepis_ of the Lower Old Red Sandstone. Why\nthis ancient Ganoid should have been so ponderously helmed we can but\ndoubtfully guess; we only know, that when nature arms her soldiery, there\nare assailants to be resisted and a state of war to be maintained. The\nposterior central plate, the homologue apparently of the occipital bone,\nwas curiously carved into an ornate massive leaf, like one of the larger\nleaves of a Corinthian capital, and terminated beneath, where the stem\nshould have been, in a strong osseous knob, fashioned like a pike head.\nTwo plates immediately over it, the homologues of the superior frontal\nbone, with the little nasal plate which, perched atop in the middle,\nlay between the creature\u2019s eyes, resembled the head and breast in the\nfemale figure, at least not less closely than those of the \u201clady in the\nlobster;\u201d the posterior frontal plates in which the outer and nether\nhalf of the eye orbits were hollowed formed a pair of sweeping wings,\nand thus in the centre of the buckler we are presented with the figure\nof an angel, robed and winged, and of which the large sculptured leaf\nforms the body, traced in a style in no degree more rude than we might\nexpect to see exemplified on the lichen-encrusted shield of some ancient\ntombstone of that House of Avenel which bore as its arms the effigies\nof the Spectre Lady. Children have a peculiar knack in detecting such\nresemblances; and the discovery of the angel in the cranium of the\n_Asterolepis_ I owe to one of mine.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 29.\n\nPLATE OF CRANIAL BUCKLER OF ASTEROLEPIS.]\n\nIt is on this inner side of the cranial buckler, where there are no such\npseudo-joinings indicated as on the external surface, that the homologies\nof the plates of which it is composed can be best traced. It might be\nwell, however, ere setting one\u2019s self to the work of comparison, to\nexamine the skulls of a few of the osseous fishes of our coast, and to\nmark how very considerably they differ from one another in their lines of\nsuture and their general form. The cerebral divisions of the conger-eel,\nfor instance, are very unlike those of the haddock or whiting; and the\nsutures in the head of the gurnard are dissimilarly arranged from those\nin the head of the perch. And after tracing the general type in the\nmore anomalous forms, and finding, with Cuvier, that in even these the\n\u201cskull consists of the same bones, though much subdivided, as the skulls\nof the other vertebrata,\u201d we will be the better qualified for grappling\nwith the not greater anomalies which occur in the cranial buckler of the\n_Asterolepis_. The occipital plate, _A_, _a_, _a_, (fig. 29,) occupies\nits ordinary place opposite the centre of the nape; the two parietals, B,\nB, rest beside it in their usual ichthyic position of displacement; the\nsuperior frontal we find existing, as in the young of many animals, in\ntwo pieces, C, C; the nasal plate I, placed immediately in advance of it,\nis flanked, as in the cod, by the anterior frontals, D, D; the posterior\nfrontals, F, F, which, when viewed as in the print, from beneath, seem of\nconsiderable size, and describe laterally and posteriorly about one half\nthe eye orbits, have their area on the exterior surface greatly reduced\nby the overriding squamose sutures of the plates to which they join; and\nlastly, two of these overlying plates, E, E,\u2014which, occurring in the\nline of the lateral bar or beam, are of great strength and thickness,\nand lie for two thirds of their length along the parietals, and for the\nremaining third along the superior frontals,\u2014represent the mastoid bones.\nSuch, so far as I have been yet able to read the cranial buckler of the\n_Asterolepis_, seem to be the homologies of its component plates.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 30.\n\nPORTION OF UNDER JAW OF ASTEROLEPIS, (OUTER SIDE.)\n\n(One half nat. size.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 31.\n\nPORTION OF UNDER JAW OF ASTEROLEPIS, (INNER SIDE.)\n\n(One half nat. size.)]\n\nThere were no parts of the animal more remarkable than its jaws. The\nunder jaws,\u2014for the nether maxillary consisted, in this fish, as in\nthe placoid fishes, and in the quadrupeds generally, of two pieces\njoined in the middle,\u2014were, like those of the _Holoptychius_, boxes\nof bone, which enclosed central masses of cartilage. The outer and\nunder sides were thickly covered with the characteristic star-like\ntubercles; and along the upper margin or lip there ran a thickly-set row\nof small broadly-based teeth, planted as directly on the edge of the\nexterior plate as iron spikes on the upper edge of a gate (fig. 30.)\nMr. Parkinson expresses some wonder, in his work on fossils, that, in\na fine ichthyolite in the British Museum, not only the _teeth_ should\nhave been preserved, but also the _lips_; but we now know enough of\nthe construction of the ancient Ganoids to cease wondering. The _lips_\nwere formed of as solid bone as the teeth themselves, and had as fair a\nchance of being preserved entire; just as the metallic rim of a _cogged_\nwheel has as fair a chance of being preserved as the metallic cogs that\nproject from it. Immediately behind the front row,\u2014in which the teeth\npresent the ordinary ichthyic appearance,\u2014there ran a thinly-set row of\nhuge _reptile_ teeth, based on an interior platform of bone, which formed\nthe top of the cartilage-enclosing box composing the jaw. These were at\nonce bent outwards and twisted laterally, somewhat like nails that have\nbeen drawn out of wood by the claw of a carpenter\u2019s hammer, and bent\nawry with the wrench, (fig. 31.) They were furrowed longitudinally from\npoint to base by minute thickly-set stri\u00e6 and were furnished laterally,\nin most of the specimens though not in all, with two sharp cutting\nedges. The reptile had as yet no existence in creation; but we see its\nfuture coming symbolized in the dentition of this ancient Ganoid: it,\nas it were, shows us the _crocodile_ lying entrenched behind the fish.\nThe interior structure of these reptile teeth is very remarkable. In the\nlongitudinal section we find numerous cancelli, ranged lengthwise along\nthe outer edges, but much crossed, net-like, within,\u2014greatly more open\ntowards the base than at the point,\u2014and giving place in the centre to a\nhollow space, occasionally traversed by a few slim osseous partitions.\nIn the transverse section these cancelli are found to radiate from\nthe open centre towards the circumference, like the spokes of a wheel\nfrom the nave; and each spoke seems as if, like Aaron\u2019s rod, it had\nbecome instinct with vegetative life, and had sprouted into branch and\nblossom. Seen in a microscope of limited field, that takes in, as in\nthe accompanying print, (fig. 32,) not more than a fourth part of the\nsection, the appearance presented is that of a well-trained wall tree.\nAnd hence the generic name _Dendrodus_, given by Professor Owen to teeth\nfound detached in the deposits of Moray, when the creatures to which they\nhad belonged were still unknown,\u2014a name, however, which will, I suspect,\nbe found synonymous rather with that of a family than of a genus; for\nso far as I have yet examined, I find that the dendrodic or tree-like\ntooth, was in at least the Old Red Sandstone, a characteristic of all\nthe C\u0153lacanth family. I may mention, however, as a curious subject of\ninquiry, that the C\u0153lacanths of the Coal Measures seem to have had their\nreptile teeth formed of pure ivory,\u2014a substance, which I have not yet\ndetected among the reptile-fish of the Old Red. Towards the base of the\nreptile teeth of _Asterolepis_, the interstices between the branches\ngreatly widen, as in the branches of a tree in winter divested of its\nfoliage, (fig. 33, _c_;) the texture also opens towards the base in the\n_fish_-teeth, outside, in which, however, the pattern in the transverse\nsection is greatly less complex and ornate than that which the reptile\nteeth exhibits. When cut across near the point, they appear each as a\nthick ring, (_b_,) traversed by lines that radiate towards the centre;\nwhen cut across about half way down, they somewhat resemble, seen under\na high magnifying power those cast-iron wheels on which the engineer\nmounts his railway carriages, (_a_.) In the longitudinal section their\nline of junction with the jaw is marked by numerous openings, but by no\nline of division, and they appear as thickly dotted by what were once\ncanaliculi, or life points, as any portion of the dermal bone on which\nthey rest.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 32.\n\nPORTION OF TRANSVERSE SECTION OF REPTILE TOOTH OF ASTEROLEPIS\n\na. _Nat. size._\n\nb. _Mag. twelve diameters._]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 33.\n\nA. _Section of Jaw of Asterolepis._\n\nc. _Reptile tooth as shown in section._\n\na, b, & c. _Row of ichthyic teeth in dermal plate of jaw._\n\nB. _Magnified representatives of ichthyic teeth, a and b, in_ A.]\n\nIt seems truly wonderful, when one considers it, to what minute and\nobscure ramifications that variety of pattern which nature so loves to\nmaintain is found to descend. It descends in the fishes, both recent\nand extinct, to even the microscopic structure of their teeth; and\nwe find, in consequence, not less variety of figure in the sliced\nfragments of the teeth of the ichthyolites of a single formation, than\nin the carved blocks of an extensive calico print-yard. Each _species_\nhas its own distinct pattern, as if, in all the individuals of which\nit consisted, the same block had been employed to stamp it; and each\n_genus_ its own general _type_ of pattern, as if the same radical idea,\nvariously altered and modified, had been wrought upon in all. In the\n_Dendrodic_ (C\u0153lacanth?) family, for instance, it is the radical type,\nthat from a central nave there should radiate, spoke-like, a number\nof arborescent branches; but in the several genera and species of the\nfamily, the branches belong, if I may so express myself, to different\nshrubs, and present dissimilar outlines. It has appeared to me, that\nat least a _presumption_ against the transmutation of species might be\nbased on those inherent peculiarities of structure which are thus found\nto pervade the entire texture of the framework of animals. If we find\nerections differing from one another merely in external form, we have\nno difficulty in conceiving how, by additions and alterations, they\nmight be brought to exhibit a perfect uniformity of plan and aspect:\n_transmutation_,\u2014_development_,\u2014_progression_,\u2014(if one may use such\nterms,)\u2014seem possible in such circumstances. But if the buildings differ\nfrom each other, not only in external form, but also in every brick and\nbeam, bolt and nail, no mere scheme of external alteration could ever\ninduce a real resemblance. Every brick would have to be taken down, and\nevery beam and bolt removed. The problem could not be wrought by the\nremodelling of an old house: the only mode of solving it would be by the\nerection of a new one.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 34.\n\nMAXILLARY BONE?\n\n(One fourth nat. size, linear.)]\n\nOf the upper maxillary bones of the _Asterolepis_, I only know that\na considerable fragment of one of the pieces, recognized as such by\nAgassiz, has been found in the neighborhood of Thurso by Mr. Dick,\nunaccompanied, however, by any evidence respecting its place or function.\nIt exhibits none of the characteristic tubercles of the dermal bones,\nand no appearance of teeth; but is simply a long bent bone, resembling\nsomewhat less than the half of an ancient bow of steel or horn,\u2014such\na bow as that which Ulysses bended in the presence of the suitors.\nBy some of the Russian geologists this bone was at first regarded as\na portion of the arm or wing of some gigantic _Pterichthys_. In the\naccompanying print (fig. 34) I have borrowed the general outline from\nthat of a specimen of Professor Asmus, of which a cast may be seen in\nthe British Museum; while the shaded portion represents the fragment\nfound by Mr. Dick. The intermaxillary bones, like the dermal plates of\nthe lower jaw, were studded by star-like tubercles, and bristled thickly\nalong their lower edges with the ichthyic teeth, flanked by teeth of\nthe reptilian character. The opercules of the animal consisted, as in\nthe sturgeon, of single plates (fig. 35) of great massiveness and size,\nthickly tubercled outside, without trace of joint or suture, and marked\non their under surface by channelled lines, that radiate, as in the other\nplates, from the centre of ossification. That space along the nape which\nintervened between the opercules, was occupied, as in the _Dipterus_ and\n_Diplopterus_, by three plates, which covered rather the anterior portion\nof the body than the posterior portion of the head, and which, in the\nrestoration of _Osteolepis_, (fig. 13,) appear as the plates, 9, 9, 9. I\ncan say scarce any thing regarding the lateral plates which lay between\nthe intermaxillaries and the cranial buckler, and which exist in the\n_Osteolepis_, fig. 13, as the plates 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7; nor do I know how\nthe snout terminated, save that in a very imperfect specimen it exhibits,\nas in the _Diplopterus_ and _Osteolepis_, a rounded outline, and was set\nwith teeth.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 35.\n\nINNER SURFACE OF OPERCULUM OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One fifth nat. size, linear.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 36.\n\nHYOID PLATE.\n\n(One ninth nat. size, linear.)]\n\nThat space comprised within the arch of the lower jaws, in which the\nhyoid bone and branchiostegous rays of the osseous fishes occur, was\nfilled by a single plate of great size and strength, and of singular\nform, (fig. 36;) and to this plate, existing as a steep ridge running\nalong the centre of the interior surface, and thickening into a massy\nknob at the anterior termination, that nail-shaped organism, which I have\ndescribed as one of the most characteristic bones of the _Asterolepis_,\nbelonged. In the _Osteolepis_, the space corresponding to that occupied\nby this hyoid plate was filled, as shown in fig. 14, by five plates of\nnot inelegant form; and the divisions of the arch resembled those of\na small Gothic window, in which the single central mullion parts into\ntwo branches atop. In the _Holoptychius_ and _Glyptolepis_ there were\nbut two plates; for the central mullion, _i. e._ line of division,\ndid not branch atop; and in the _Asterolepis_, where there was no\nline of division, the strong nail-like bone occupied the place of the\ncentral mullion. The hyoidal armature of the latter fish was strongest\nin the line in which the others were weakest. Each of the five hyoid\nplates of the _Osteolepis_, or of the two plates of the _Glyptolepis_\nor _Holoptychius_, had its own centre of ossification; and in the\nsingle plate of _Asterolepis_, the centre of ossification, as shown by\nthe radiations of the fibre, was the nail-head. This head, placed in\nimmediate contact with the strong boxes of bone which composed the under\njaw, just where their central joining occurred, seems to have lent them\na considerable degree of support, which at such a juncture may have been\nnot unnecessary. In some of the nail-heads, belonging, it is probable, to\na different species of _Asterolepis_ from that in which the nail figured\nin page 7, and the plate in the opposite page, occurred,\u2014for its general\nform is different, (fig. 37,)\u2014there appear well-marked ligamentary\nimpressions closely resembling that little spongy pit in the head of the\nhuman thigh-bone to which what is termed the round ligament is attached.\nThe entire hyoid-plate, viewed on its outer side, resembles in form the\nhyoid-bone,\u2014or cartilage rather,\u2014of the spotted dog-fish, (_Scyllium\nstellare_;) but its area was at least a hundred times more extensive\nthan in the largest _Scyllium_, and, like all the dermal plates of the\n_Asterolepis_, it was thickly fretted by the characteristic tubercles.\nIn the Ray, as in the Sharks, the piece of thin cartilage of which this\nplate seems the homologue, is a flat, semi-transparent disk; and there\nis no part of the animal in which the progress of those bony molecules\nwhich encrust the internal framework may be more distinctly traced, as if\nin the act of creeping over what they cover, in slim threads or shooting\npoints,\u2014and much resembling new ice creeping in a frosty evening over the\nsurface of a pool.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 37.\n\nNAIL-LIKE BONE OF HYOID PLATE.\n\n(One half nat. size.)]\n\nThat suite of shoulder-bones that in the osseous fishes forms the belt\nor frame on which the opercules rest, and furnishes the base of the\npectorals, was represented in the _Asterolepis_, as in the sturgeon, by a\nring of strong osseous plates, which, in one of the two species of which\ntrace is to be found among the rocks of Thurso, were curiously fretted\non their external surfaces, and in the other species comparatively\nsmooth. The largest, or coracoidian plate of the ring, as it occurs in\nthe more ornate species, (fig. 38,) might be readily enough mistaken,\nwhen seen with only its surface exposed for the ichthyodorulite of\nsome large fish, allied, mayhap, to the _Gyracanthus formosus_ of the\nCoal Measures; but when detached from the stone, the hollow form and\npeculiar stri\u00e6 of the inferior surface serve to establish its true\ncharacter as a dermal plate. The diagonal furrowings which traversed\nit, as the twisted flutings traverse a Gothic column moulded after the\ntype of the Apprentice Pillar in Roslin chapel, seem to have underlaid\nthe edge of the opercule; at least I find a similar arrangement in the\nshoulder-plates of a large species of _Diplopterus_, which are deeply\ngrooved and furrowed where the opercule rested, as if with the design of\nkeeping up a communication between the branchi\u00e6 and the external element,\neven when the gill-cover was pressed closely down upon them. And,\u2014as in\nthese shoulder-plates of the _Diplopterus_ the furrows yield their place\nbeyond the edge of the opercule to the punctulated enamel common to the\nouter surface of all the creature\u2019s external plates and scales,\u2014we find\nthem yielding their place, in the shoulder-plates of the _Asterolepis_,\nto the starred tubercles.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 38.\n\nSHOULDER (_i. e._ CORACOID?) PLATE OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One third nat. size, linear.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 39.\n\nDERMAL BONES OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One third nat. size, linear.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 40.\n\nINTERNAL BONES OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One half nat. size, linear.)]\n\nA few detached bones, that bear on their outer surfaces the dermal\nmarkings, must have belonged to that angular-shaped portion of the head\nwhich intervened between the cranial buckler and the intermaxillary bone;\nbut the key for assigning to them their proper place is still to find;\nand I suspect that no amount of skill on the part of the comparative\nanatomist will ever qualify him to complete the work of restoration\nwithout it. I have submitted to the reader the cranial bucklers of\n_five_ several genera of the ganoids of the Old Red Sandstone; but no\namount of study bestowed on these would enable even the most skilful\nichthyologist to restore a _sixth_; nor is the lateral area of the head,\nwhich was, I find, variously occupied in each genus, less difficult to\nrestore than the buckler which surmounted it. Two of the more entire of\nthese dermal bones I have figured (fig. 39, _a_ and _b_) in the hope\nof assisting future inquirers, who, were they to pick up all the other\nplates, might yet be unable, lacking the figured ones, to complete the\nwhole. The curiously-shaped plate _a_, represented in its various sides\nby the figures 1, 2, 3, is of an acutely angular form in the transverse\nsection, (the external surface, 1, forming an angle which varies from\nthirty to forty-five degrees with the base, 3;) and as it lay, it is\nprobable when in its original place, immediately under the edge of the\ncranial buckler, it may have served to commence the line of deflection\nfrom the flat top of the head to the steep descent of the sides, just\nas what are technically termed the _spur_-stones in a gable-head serve\nto commence the line of deflection from the vertical outline of the\nwall to the inclined line of the roof, or as the spring-stones of an\narch serve to commence the curve. A few internal bones in my possession\nare curious, but exceedingly puzzling. The bone _a_, fig. 40, which\nresembles a rib, or branchiostegous ray, of one of the ordinary fishes,\nformed apparently part of that osseous _style_ which in fishes such as\nthe haddock and cod we find attached to the suite of shoulder-bones, and\nwhich, according to Cuvier, is the analogue of the coracoidian bone,\nand, according to Professor Owen, the analogue of the clavicle. Fig.\n_b_ is a mere fragment, broken at both ends, but exhibiting, in a state\nof good keeping, lateral expansions, like those of an ancient halbert.\nFig. _c_, 41, which is also a fragment, though a more considerable\none, bears in its thicker and straighter edge a groove like that of an\nichthyodorulite, which, however, the bone itself in no degree resembles.\nFig. _d_ is a flat bone, of a type common in the skeleton of fishes, but\nwhich, in mammals, we find exemplified in but the scapulars. It seems,\nlike these, to have furnished the base to which some suite of movable\nbones was articulated,\u2014in all likelihood that proportion of the carnal\nbonelets of the pectoral fins which are attached in the osseous fishes\nto its apparent homologue, the radius. Fig. _e_, a slim light bone,\nwhich narrows and thickens in the centre, and flattens and broadens at\neach end, was probably a scapula or shoulder-blade,\u2014a bone which in\nmost fishes _splices_ on, as a sailor would say, by squamose jointings,\nto the coracoidian bone at the one end, and the super-scapular bone at\nthe other. As indicated by its size, it must have belonged to a small\nindividual: it is, however, twice as long, and about six times as bulky,\nas the scapula of a large cod.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 41.\n\nINTERNAL BONES OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One third nat. size, linear.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 42.\n\nISCHIUM OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One half nat. size, linear.)]\n\nOf the bone represented in fig. 42, I have determined, from a Cromarty\nspecimen, the place and use: it formed the interior base to which\none of the ventral fins was attached. In all fishes the bones of the\nhinder extremities are inadequately represented: in none do we find the\npelvic arch complete; and to that nether portion of it which we do find\nrepresented, and which Professor Owen regards as the homologue of the\n_os ischium_ or hip-bone, the homologues of the metatarsal and toe-bones\nare attached, to the exclusion of the bones of the thigh and leg. In the\nAbdominales,\u2014fishes such as the salmon and carp,\u2014that have the ventrals\nplaced behind the abdomen, in the position analogous to that in which\nthe hinder legs of the reptiles and mammals occur, the ischiatic bones\ngenerally exist as flat triangular plates, with their heads either\nturned _inwards_ and downwards, as in the herring, or _outwards_ and\ndownwards, as in the pike; whereas in some of the cartilaginous fishes,\nsuch as the Rays and Sharks, they exist as an undivided cartilaginous\nband, stretched transversely from ventral to ventral. And such, with\nbut an upward direction, appears to have been their position in the\n_Asterolepis_. They seem to have united at the narrow neck A, over the\nmiddle of the lower portion of the abdomen; and to the notches of the\nflat expansion B,\u2014notches which exactly resemble those of the immensely\ndeveloped carpal bones of the Ray,\u2014five metatarsal bones were attached,\nfrom which the fin expanded. It is interesting to find the number in this\nancient representative of the vertebrata restricted to five,\u2014a number\ngreatly exceeded in most of the existing fishes, but which is the true\nnormal number of the vertebrate sub-kingdom as shown in all the higher\nexamples such as man, the _quadrumana_, and in most of the _carnaria_.\nThe form of this bone somewhat resembles that of the analogous bone in\nthose fishes, such as the perch and gurnard, cod and haddock, which have\ntheir ventrals suspended to the scapular belt; but its position in the\nCromarty specimen, and that of the ventrals in the various specimens of\nthe C\u0153lacanth family in which their place is still shown, forbids the\nsupposition that _it_ was so suspended,\u2014a circumstance in keeping with\nall the existing geological evidence on the subject, which agrees in\nindicating, that of the low type of fishes that have, monster-like, their\n_feet_ attached to their necks, the Old Red Sandstone does not afford a\ntrace. This inferior type, now by far the most prevalent in the ichthyic\ndivision of the animal kingdom, does not seem to have been introduced\nuntil near the close of the Secondary period, long after the fish had\nbeen degraded from its primal place in the fore front of creation. In\none of my specimens a few fragments of the rays are preserved, (fig. 43,\n_b_.) They are about the eighth part of an inch in diameter: depressed\nin some cases in the center, as if, over the internal hollow formed by\nthe decay of the cartilaginous centre, the bony crust of which they are\ncomposed had given way; and, like the rays of the thornback, they are\nthickened at the joints, and at the processes by which they were attached\nto the ischiatic base. It may be proper, I should here state, that of\nsome of the internal bones figured above I have no better evidence that\nthey belonged to the _Asterolepis_, than that they occur in the same\nbeds with the dermal plates which bear the characteristic star-like\nmarkings,\u2014that they are of very considerable size,\u2014and that they formed\nno part of the known fishes of the formation.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 43.\n\na. _Single joint of ray of Thornback._\n\nb. _Single joint of ray of Asterolepis._]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 44.\n\nCOPROLITES OF ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(Nat. Size.[18])]\n\nOn exactly the same grounds I infer that certain large coprolites of\ncommon occurrence in the Thurso flagstones, which contain the broken\nscales of Dipterians, and exhibit a curiously twisted form, (fig. 44,)\nalso belonged to the _Asterolepis_; and from these, that the creature\nwas carnivorous in its habits,\u2014an inference which the character of\nits teeth fully corroborates; and farther, that, like the sharks and\nrays, and some of the extinct Enaliosaurs, it possessed the spiral\ndisposition of intestine. Paley, in his chapter on the compensatory\ncontrivances palpable in the structure of various animals, refers to a\npeculiar substitutory provision which occurs in a certain amphibious\nanimal described in the Memoirs of the French Academy. \u201cThe reader\nwill remember,\u201d he says, \u201cwhat we have already observed concerning the\n_intestinal_ canal,\u2014that its length, so many times exceeding that of the\nbody, promotes the extraction of the chyle from the aliment, by giving\nroom for the lacteal vessels to act upon it through a greater space.\nThis long intestine, whenever it occurs, is in other animals disposed in\nthe abdomen from side to side, in returning folds. But in the animal now\nunder our notice, the matter is managed otherwise. The same intention is\nmechanically effectuated, but by a mechanism of a different kind. The\nanimal of which I speak is an amphibious quadruped, which our authors\ncall the Alopecias or sea-fox. The intestine is straight from one end to\nthe other but in this straight, and consequently short intestine, is a\nwinding, cork-screw, spiral passage, through which the food, not without\nseveral circumvolutions, and, in fact, by a long route, is conducted to\nits exit. Here the shortness of the gut is _compensated_ by the obliquity\nof the perforation.\u201d This structure of intestine, which all the true\nPlacoids possess, and at least the Sturiones among existing Ganoids,\nseems to have been an exceedingly common one during both the Pal\u00e6ozoic\nand Secondary periods. It has left its impress on all the better\npreserved coprolites of the Coal Measures, so abundant in the shales of\nNewhaven and Burdie House, and on those of the Lias and Chalk. It seems\nto be equally a characteristic of well nigh all the bulkier coprolites\nof the Lower Old Red Sandstone.[19] In these, however, it manifests\na peculiar trait, which I have failed to detect in any of the recent\nfishes; nor have I yet seen it indicated, in at least the same degree, by\nthe Carboniferous or Secondary coprolitic remains. In the bowels which\nmoulded the coprolites of Lyme-Regis, of the Chalk, and of the Newhaven\nand Granton beds, a single screw must have winded within the cylindrical\ntube, as a turnpike stair winds within its hollow shaft; and such also is\nthe arrangement in the existing Sharks and Rays; whereas the bowels which\nmoulded the coprolites of the Lower Old Red Sandstone must have been\ntraversed by triple or quadruple screws laid closely together, as we find\nthe stalk of an old-fashioned wine-glass traversed by its thickly-set\nspiral lines of thread-like china. And so, while on the surface of both\nthe Secondary and Carboniferous coprolites there is space between the\nscrew-like lines for numerous cross markings that correspond to the\nthickly set veiny branches which traverse the sides of the recent placoid\nbowel, the entire surface of the Lower Old Red coprolites is traversed\nby the spiral markings. Is there nothing strange in the fact, that after\nthe lapse of mayhap millions of years,\u2014nay, it is possible, millions\nof ages,\u2014we should be thus able to detect at once general resemblance\nand special dissimilarity in even the most perishable parts of the most\nancient of the Ganoids?\n\nI must advert, in passing, to a peculiarity exemplified in the state of\nkeeping of the bones of this ancient Ganoid, in at least the deposits\nof Orkney and Caithness. The original animal matter has been converted\ninto a dark-colored bitumen, which in some places, where the remains\nlie thick, pervades the crevices of the rocks, and has not unfrequently\nbeen mistaken for coal. In its more solid state it can hardly be\ndistinguished, when used in sealing a letter,\u2014a purpose which it serves\nindifferently well,\u2014from black wax of the ordinary quality; when more\nfluid, it adheres scarce less strongly to the hands than the coal-tar of\nour gas-works and dock-yards. Underneath a specimen of _Asterolepis_,\nfirst pointed out to me in its bed among the Thurso rocks by Mr. Dick,\nand which, at my request, he afterwards raised and sent me to Edinburgh,\npacked up in a box, there lay a quantity of thick tar, which stuck as\nfast to my fingers, on lifting out the pieces of rock, as if I had laid\nhold of the planking of a newly tarred yawl. What had been once the\nnerves, muscles, and blood of this ancient Ganoid still lay under its\nbones, and reminded me of the appearance presented by the remains of a\npoor suicide, whose solitary grave, dug in a sandy bank in the north\nof Scotland, had been laid open by the encroachments of a river. The\nskeleton, with pieces of the dress still wrapped round it, lay at length\nalong the section; and, for a full yard beneath, the white dry sand was\nconsolidated into a dark-colored pitchy mass, by the altered animal\nmatter which had escaped from it, percolating downwards, in the process\nof decay.\n\nIn consequence of the curious chemical change which has thus taken place\nin the animal juices of the _Asterolepis_, its remains often occur in\na state of beautiful preservation: the pervading bitumen, greatly more\nconservative in its effects than the oils and gums of an old Egyptian\nundertaker, has maintained, in their original integrity, every scale,\nplate, and bone. They may have been much broken ere they were first\ncommitted to the keeping of the rock, or in disentangling them from\nits rigid embrace; but they have, we find, caught no harm when under\nits care. Ere the skeleton of the Bruce, disinterred after the lapse of\nfive centuries, was recommitted to the tomb, such measures were taken\nto secure its preservation, that, were it to be again disinterred, even\nafter as many more centuries had passed, it might be found retaining\nunbroken its gigantic proportions. There was molten pitch poured over\nthe bones, in a state of sufficient fluidity to permeate all the pores,\nand fill up the central hollows, and which, soon hardening around\nthem, formed a bituminous matrix, in which they may lie unchanged for\na thousand years. Now, exactly such was the process to which nature\nresorted with these gigantic skeletons of the Old Red Sandstone. Like the\nbones of the Bruce, they are bones steeped in pitch; and so thoroughly\nis every pore and hollow still occupied, that, when cast into the fire,\nthey flame like torches. Though black as jet, they still retain, too,\nin a considerable degree, the peculiar _qualities_ of the original\nsubstance. The late Mr. George Sanderson of Edinburgh, one of the most\ningenious lapidaries in the kingdom, and a thoroughly intelligent man,\nmade several preparations for me, for microscopic examination, from\nthe teeth and bones; and though they were by far the oldest vertebrate\nremains he had ever seen, they exhibited, he informed me, in the\nworking, more of the characteristics of recent teeth and bone than any\nother fossils he had ever operated upon. Recent bone when in the course\nof being reduced on the wheel to the degree of thinness necessary to\nsecure transparency, is apt, under the heat induced by the friction, to\nacquire a springy elasticity, and to start up from the glass slip to\nwhich it has been cemented; whereas bone in the fossil state usually\nlies as passive, in such circumstances, as the stone which envelopes\nit. Mr. Sanderson was, however, surprised to find that the bone of the\n_Asterolepis_ still retained its elasticity, and was scarce less liable,\nwhen heated, to start from the glass,\u2014a peculiarity through which he at\nfirst lost several preparations. I have seen a human bone that had for\nages been partially embedded in a mass of adipocere, partially enveloped\nin the common mould of a churchyard, exhibit two very different styles\nof keeping. In the adipocere it was as fresh and green as if it had\nbeen divested of the integuments only a few weeks previous; whereas the\nportion which projected into the mould had become brittle and porous, and\npresented the ordinary appearance of an old churchyard bone. And what the\nadipocere had done for the human bone in this case, seems to have been\ndone for the bones of the _Asterolepis_ by the animal bitumen.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 45.\n\nHYOID PLATE OF THURSO ASTEROLEPIS.[20]\n\n(One fifth the nat. size, linear.)]\n\nThe size of the _Asterolepis_ must, in the larger specimens, have been\nvery great. In all those ganoidal fishes of the Old Red Sandstone that\nhad the head covered with osseous plates, we find that the cranial\nbuckler bore a certain definite proportion,\u2014various in the several genera\nand species,\u2014to the length of the body. The drawing-master still teaches\nhis pupils to regulate the proportions of the human figure by the seven\nhead-lengths which it contains; and perhaps shows them how an otherwise\nmeritorious draftsman,[21] much employed half an age ago in drawing for\nthe wood-engraver, used to render his figures squat and ungraceful by\nmaking them a head too short. Now, those ancient Ganoids which possessed\na cranial buckler may, we find, be also measured by head-lengths. Thus,\nin the _Coccosteus decipiens_, the length of the cranial buckler from\nnape to snout equalled one fifth the entire length of the creature\nfrom snout to tail. The entire length of the _Glyptolepis_ was equal to\nabout five one half times that of its cranial buckler. The _Pterichthys_\nwas formed in nearly the same proportions. The _Diplopterus_ was fully\nseven times the length of its buckler: and the _Osteolepis_ from six and\na half to seven. In all the cranial bucklers of the _Asterolepis_ yet\nfound, the snout is wanting. The very fine specimen figured in page 99\n(fig. 28) terminates abruptly at the little plate between the eyes, the\nspecimen figured in page 98 (fig. 27) terminates at the upper line of\nthe eye. The terminal portion which formed the snout is wanting in both,\nand we thus lack the measure, or _module_, as the architect might say,\nby which the proportions of the rest of the creature were regulated.\nWe can, however, very nearly approximate to it. A hyoid plate in my\ncollection (fig. 45) is, I find, so exactly proportioned in size to the\ncranial buckler, (fig. 28,) that it might have belonged to the same\nindividual; and by fitting it in its proper place, and then making the\nnecessary allowance for the breadth of the nether jaw, which swept two\nthirds around it, and was surmounted by the snout, we ascertain that\nthe buckler, when entire, must have been, as nearly as may be, a foot\nin length. If the _Asterolepis_ was formed in the proportions of the\n_Coccosteus_, the buckler (fig. 28) must have belonged to an individual\nfive feet in length; if in the proportions of the _Pterichthys_ or\n_Glyptolepis_, to an individual five and a half feet in length; and\nif in those of the _Diplopterus_ or _Osteolepis_, to an individual of\nfrom six and a half to seven feet in length. Now I find that the hyoid\nplate can be inscribed\u2014such is its form\u2014in a semicircle, of which the\nnail-shaped ridge in the middle (if we strike off a minute portion of the\nsharp point, usually wanting in detached specimens) forms very nearly\nthe radius, and of which the diameter equals the breadth of the cranial\nbuckler, along a line drawn across at a distance from the nape, equal\nto two thirds of the distance between the nape and the eyes. Thus, the\nlargest diameter of a hyoid plate which belonged to a cranial buckler a\nfoot in length is, I find, equal to seven one quarter inches, while the\nlength of its nape somewhat exceeds three five eighth inches. The nail of\nthe Stromness specimen measures five and a half inches. It must have run\nalong a hyoid plate eleven inches in transverse breadth, and have been\nassociated with a cranial buckler eighteen one eighth inches in length;\nand the _Asterolepis_ to which it belonged must have measured from snout\nto tail, if formed, as it probably was, in the proportions of its brother\nC\u0153lacanth the _Glyptolepis_, eight feet three inches; and if in those\nof the _Diplopterus_, from nine feet nine to ten feet six inches. This\noldest of Scottish fish\u2014this earliest-born of the Ganoids yet known\u2014was\nat least as bulky as a large porpoise.\n\nIt was small, however, compared with specimens of the _Asterolepis_\nfound elsewhere. The hyoid plate figured in page 110, (fig. 36,)\u2014a\nThurso specimen which I owe to the kindness of Mr. Dick,\u2014measures\nnearly fourteen inches, and the cranial buckler of the same individual,\nfifteen one fourth inches, in breadth. The latter, when entire, must\nhave measured twenty-three one half inches in length; and the fish to\nwhich it belonged, if formed in the proportions of the _Glyptolepis_,\nten feet six inches; and if in those of the _Diplopterus_, from twelve\nfeet five to thirteen feet eight inches in length. Did the shield still\nexist in its original state as a buckler of tough, enamel-crusted bone,\nit might be converted into a Highland target, nearly broad enough to\ncover the ample chest of a Rob Roy or Allan M\u2019Aulay, and strong enough to\ndash aside the keenest broadsword. Another hyoid plate found by Mr. Dick\nmeasures sixteen one half inches in breadth; and a cast in the British\nMuseum, from one of the Russian specimens of Professor Asmus, (fig. 46,)\ntwenty-four inches. The individual to which this last plate belonged\nmust, if built in the shorter proportions, have measured eighteen, and if\nin the longer, twenty-three feet in length. The two hyoid plates of the\nspecimen of _Holoptychius_ in the British Museum measure but four and a\nhalf inches along that transverse line in which the Russian _Asterolepis_\nmeasures two feet, and the largest Thurso specimen sixteen inches and a\nhalf. The maxillary bone of a cod-fish two and a half feet from snout to\ntail measures three inches in length. One of the Russian maxillary bones\nin the possession of Professor Asmus measures in length twenty-eight\ninches. And that space circumscribed by the sweep of the lower jaw\nwhich it took, in the Russian specimen, a hyoid plate twenty-four\ninches in breadth to fill, could be filled in the two-and-a-half-feet\ncod by a plate whose breadth equalled but an inch and a half. Thus, in\nthe not unimportant circumstance of size, the most ancient Ganoids yet\nknown, instead of taking their places, agreeably to the demands of the\ndevelopment hypothesis, among the sprats, sticklebacks, and minnows of\ntheir class, took their place among its huge basking sharks, gigantic\nsturgeons, and bulky sword-fishes. They were giants, not dwarfs.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 46.\n\nHYOID PLATE OF RUSSIAN ASTEROLEPIS.\n\n(One twelfth the natural size, linear.)]\n\nBut what of their organization? Were they fishes low or high in the\nscale? On this head we can, of course, determine merely by the analogies\nwhich their structure exhibits to that of fishes of the existing\nperiod; and these point in three several directions;\u2014in two of the\nnumber, directly on genera of the high Ganoid order; and in the third,\non the still higher Placoids and Enaliosaurs. No trace of vertebr\u00e6\nhas yet been found; and so we infer\u2014lodging, however, a precautionary\nprotest, as the evidence is purely negative, and therefore it some\ndegree inconclusive\u2014that the vertebral column of the _Asterolepis_\nwas, like that of the sturgeon, cartilaginous. Respecting its external\ncovering, we positively know, as has been already shown, that, like\nthe _Lepidosteus_ of America and the _Polypterus_ of the Nile, it was\ncomposed of strong plates and scales of solid bone; and, regarding its\ndentition, that, as in these last genera, and even more decidedly than\nin these, it was of the mixed ichthyic-reptilian character,\u2014an outer row\nof thickly-set fish-teeth being backed by an inner row of thinly-set\nreptile-teeth. And its form of coprolite indicates the spiral disposition\nof intestine common to the Rays and Sharks of the existing period, and\nof the Ichthyosauri of the Secondary ages. Instead of being, as the\ndevelopment hypothesis would require, a fish low in its organization,\nit seems to have ranged on the level of the highest ichthyic-reptilian\nfamilies ever called into existence. Had an intelligent being, ignorant\nof what was going on upon earth during the week of creation, visited\nEden on the morning of the sixth day, he would have found in it many\nof the inferior animals, but no trace of man. Had he returned again in\nthe evening, he would have seen, installed in the office of keepers of\nthe garden, and ruling with no tyrant sway as the humble monarchs of\nits brute inhabitants, two mature human creatures, perfect in their\norganization, and arrived at the full stature of their race. The entire\nevidence regarding them, in the absence of all such information as that\nimparted to Adam by Milton\u2019s angel, would amount simply to this, that\nin the morning man _was not_, and that in the evening he _was_. There,\nof course, could not exist, in the circumstances, a single appearance\nto sanction the belief that the two human creatures whom he saw walking\ntogether among the trees at sunset had been \u201cdeveloped from infusorial\npoints,\u201d not created mature. The evidence would, on the contrary,\nlie all the other way. And in no degree does the geologic testimony\nrespecting the earliest Ganoids differ from what, in the supposed case,\nwould be the testimony of Eden regarding the earliest men. Up to a\ncertain point in the geologic scale we find that the Ganoids _are not_;\nand when they at length make their appearance upon the stage, they enter\nlarge in their stature and high in their organization.\n\n\n\n\nFISHES OF THE SILURIAN ROCKS\u2014UPPER AND LOWER. THEIR RECENT HISTORY,\nORDER, AND SIZE.\n\n\nBut the system of the Old Red Sandstone represents the _second_, not\nthe _first_, great period of the world\u2019s history. There was a preceding\nperiod at least equally extended, perhaps greatly more so, represented\nby the Upper and Lower Silurian formations. And what is the testimony\nof this morning period of organic existence, in which, so far as can\nyet be shown, vitality, in the planet which man inhabits, and of whose\nhistory or productions he knows anything, was first associated with\nmatter? May not the development hypothesis find a standing in the system\nrepresentative of this earliest age of creation, which it fails to find\nin the system of the Old Red Sandstone?\n\nIt has been confidently asserted, not merely that it _may_, but that it\n_does_. Ever since the publication, in 1839, of Sir Roderick Murchison\u2019s\ngreat work on the Silurian System, it had been known that the remains\nof fishes occur in a bed of the \u201cLudlow Rock,\u201d\u2014one of the most modern\ndeposits of the _Upper_ Silurian division; and subsequent discoveries\nboth in England and America, had shown that even the _base_ of this\ndivision has its ichthyic organisms. But for year after year, the\nlower half of the system,\u2014a division more than three thousand feet in\nthickness,\u2014had failed, though there were hands and eyes busy among its\ndeposits, to yield any vertebrate remains. During the earlier half of\nthe first great period of organic existence, though the polyparia,\nradiata, articulata, and mollusca, existed, as their remains testified,\nby myriads, fish had, it was held, not yet entered upon the scene; and\nthe assertors of the development theory founded largely on the presumed\nfact of their absence. \u201cIt is still customary,\u201d says the author of the\n\u201cVestiges of Creation,\u201d in his volume of \u201cExplanations,\u201d \u201cto speak of\nthe earliest fauna as one of an elevated kind. When rigidly examined, it\nis not found to be so. IN THE FIRST PLACE, IT CONTAINS NO FISH. There\nwere seas supporting crustacean and molluscan life, but _utterly devoid\nof a class of tenants who seem able to live in every example of that\nelement which supports meaner creatures_. This single fact, that only\ninvertebrated animals now lived, is surely in itself a strong proof that,\nin the course of nature, _time_ was necessary for the creation of the\nsuperior creatures. And if so, it undoubtedly is a powerful evidence of\nsuch a theory of development as that which I have presented. If not, let\nme hear an equally plausible reason for the great and amazing fact, that\nseas were for numberless ages destitute of fish. I fix my opponents down\nto the consideration of this fact, so that no diversion respecting high\nmolluscs shall avail them.\u201d And how is this bold challenge to be met?\n\nMost directly, and after a fashion that at once discomfits the challenger.\n\nIt might be rationally enough argued in the case, that the author of\nthe \u201cVestiges\u201d was building greatly more on a piece of purely negative\nevidence,\u2014the presumed absence of fish from the Lower Silurian\nformations,\u2014than purely negative evidence is, from its nature as such,\nsuited to bear; that only a very few years had passed since it was known\nthat vertebrate remains occurred in the _Upper_ Silurian, and only a\nfew more since they had been detected in the Old Red Sandstone; nay,\nthat within the present century their frequent occurrence in even the\nCoal Measures was scarce suspected; and that, as his argument, had it\nbeen founded twelve years ago on the supposed absence of fishes from\nthe Upper Silurian, or twenty years ago on the supposed absence of\nfishes from the Old Red Sandstone, would have been quite as plausible\nin reference to its negative data then as in reference to its negative\ndata now, so it might now be quite as erroneous as it assuredly would\nhave been then. Or it might be urged, that the fact of the absence of\nfish from the Lower Silurians, even were it really a fact, would be in\nno degree less reconcilable with the theory of creation by direct act,\nthan with the hypothesis of gradual development. The fact that Adam\ndid not exist during the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth days\nof the introductory week of Scripture narrative, furnishes no argument\nwhatever against the fact of his creation on the sixth day. And the\nremark would of course equally apply to the non-existence of fishes\nduring the Lower Silurian period, had they been really non-existent\nat the time, and to their sudden appearance in that of the Upper. But\nthe objection admits of a greatly more conclusive answer. \u201cI fix my\nopponents down,\u201d says the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d \u201cto the consideration\nof this fact,\u201d _i. e._ that of the absence of fishes from the earliest\nfossiliferous formations. And I, in turn, fix you down, I reply, to the\nconsideration of the antagonist fact, not negative, but positive, and\nnow, in the course of geological discovery, fully established, that\nfishes were _not_ absent from the earliest fossiliferous formations.\nFrom none of the great geological formations were fishes absent,\u2014not\neven from the formations of the Cambrian division. \u201cThe Lower Silurian,\u201d\nsays Sir Roderick Murchison, in a communication with which, in 1847, he\nhonored the writer of these chapters, \u201cis no longer to be viewed as an\ninvertebrate period; for the _Onchus_ (species not yet decided) has been\nfound in the Llandeilo Flags and in the Lower Silurian rocks of Bala.\nIn one respect I am gratified by the discovery; for the form is so very\nlike that of the _Onchus Murchisoni_ of the Upper Ludlow rock, that it\nis clear the Silurian system is one great natural-history series, as is\nproved, indeed, by all its other organic remains.\u201d It may be mentioned\nfurther, in addition to this interesting statement, that the Bala spine\nwas detected in its calcareous matrix by the geologists of the Government\nSurvey, and described to Sir Roderick as that of an _Onchus_, by a very\ncompetent authority in such matters,\u2014Professor Edward Forbes, and that\nthe annunciation of the existence of spines of fishes in the Llandeilo\nFlags we owe to one of the most cautious and practised geologists of the\npresent age,\u2014Professor Sedgwick of Cambridge.\n\nSo much for the _fact_ of the existence of vertebrata in the Lower\nSilurian formations, and the _argument_ founded on their presumed\nabsence. Let me now refer\u2014their presence being determined\u2014to the tests\nof size and organization. Were these Silurian fishes of a bulk so\ninconsiderable as in any degree to sanction the belief that they had\nbeen developed shortly before from microscopic points? Or were they of a\nstructure so low as to render it probable that their development was at\nthe time incomplete? Were they, in other words, the embryos and f\u0153tuses\nof their class? or did they, on the contrary, rank with the higher and\nlarger fishes of the present time?\n\nIt is of importance that not only the direct _bearing_, but also the\nactual _amount_, of the evidence in this case, should be fairly stated.\nSo far as it extends, the testimony is clear; but it does not extend\nfar. All the vertebrate remains yet detected in the Silurian System,\nif we except the debris of the Upper Ludlow bone-bed, might be sent\nthrough the Post-Office in a box scarcely twice the size of a copy of\nthe \u201cVestiges.\u201d The naturalist of an exploring party, who, in crossing\nsome unknown lake, had looked down over the side of his canoe, and seen\na few fish gliding through the obscure depths of the water, would be but\nindifferently qualified, from what he had witnessed, to write a history\nof _all_ its fish. Nor, were the some six or eight individuals of which\nhe had caught a glimpse to be of small size, would it be legitimate for\nhim to infer that only small-sized fish lived in the lake; though, were\nthere to be some two or three large ones among them, he might safely\naffirm the contrary. Now, the evidence regarding the fishes of the\nSilurian formation very much resembles what that of the naturalist would\nbe, in the supposed case, regarding the fishes of the unexplored lake;\nwith, however, this difference, that as the deposits of the ancient\nsystem in which they occur have been examined for years in various parts\nof the world, and all its characteristic organisms, save the ichthyic\nones, found in great abundance and fine keeping, we may conclude that\nthe fish of the period were comparatively few. The pal\u00e6ontologist, so\nfar as the question of number is involved, is in the circumstances, not\nof the naturalist who has only once crossed the unknown lake, but of the\nangler who, day after day, casts his line into some inland sea abounding\nin shell-fish and crustacea, and, after the lapse of months, can scarce\ndetect a nibble, and, after the lapse of years, can reckon up all the\nfish which he has caught as considerably under a score. The existence\nof this great division of the animal kingdom, like that of the earlier\nreptiles during the Carboniferous period, did not form a prominent\ncharacteristic of those ages of the earth\u2019s history in which they began\nto be.\n\nThe earliest discovered vertebral remains of the system\u2014those of the\nUpper Ludlow rock\u2014were found in digging the foundations of a house at\nLudford, on the confines of Shropshire, and submitted, in 1838, by\nSir Roderick Murchison to Agassiz, through the late Dr. Malcolmson of\nMadras. I used at the time to correspond on geological subjects with Dr.\nMalcolmson,\u2014an accomplished geologist and a good man, too early lost to\nscience and his friends,\u2014and still remember the interest which attached\non this occasion to his communication bearing the Paris post-mark,\nfrom which I learned for the first time that there existed ichthyic\nfragments greatly older than even the ichthyolites of the Lower Old Red\nSandstone, and which made me acquainted with Agassiz\u2019s earliest formed\ndecision regarding them. Though existing in an exceedingly fragmentary\ncondition,\u2014for the materials of the thin dark-colored layer in which\nthey had lain seemed as if they had been triturated in a mortar,\u2014the\nichthyologist succeeded in erecting them into six genera; though it may\nbe very possible,\u2014as some of these were formed for the reception of\ndetached spines, and others for the reception of detached teeth,\u2014that,\nas in the case of _Dipterus_ and _Asterolepis_, the fragments of but\na single genus may have been multiplied into two genera or more. And\nminute scale-like markings, which mingled with the general mass, and\nwere at first regarded as the impressions of real scales, have been\nsince recognized as of the same character with the scale-like markings\nof the _Seraphim_ of Forfarshire, a huge crustacean. Even admitting,\nhowever, that a set of teeth and spines, with perhaps the shagreen points\nrepresented in page 54, fig. 2, _b_, in addition, may have all belonged\nto but a single species of fish, there seem to be materials enough,\namong the remains found, for the erection of two species more. And we\nhave evidence that at least two of the three kinds were fishes of the\nPlacoid order, (_Onchus Murchisoni_ and _Onchus tenuistriatus_,) and\u2014as\nthe supposed scales must be given up\u2014no good evidence that the other kind\nwas not. The ichthyic remains of the Silurian System next discovered\nwere first introduced to the notice of geologists by Professor Phillips,\nat the meeting of the British Association in 1842.[22] They occurred,\nhe stated, in a quarry near Hales End, at the base of the Upper Ludlow\nrock, immediately over the Aymestry Limestone, and were so exceedingly\ndiminutive, that they appeared to the naked eye as mere discolored spots;\nbut resolved under the microscope into scattered groupes of minute\nspines, like those of the _Cheiracanthus_, with what seemed to be still\nmore minute _scales_, or, perhaps,\u2014what in such circumstances could\nscarce be distinguished from scales,\u2014shagreen points of the scale-like\ntype. The next ichthyic organism detected in the Silurian rocks occurred\nin the Wenlock Limestone, a considerably lower and older deposit, and was\nfirst described in the \u201cEdinburgh Review\u201d for 1845 by a vigorous writer\nand masterly geologist, (generally understood to be Professor Sedgwick of\nCambridge,) as \u201ca characteristic portion of a fish undoubtedly belonging\nto the Cestraciont family of the Placoid order.\u201d In the \u201cAmerican\nJournal of Science\u201d for 1846, Professor Silliman figured, from a work\nof the States\u2019 Surveyors, the defensive spine of a Placoid found in the\nOnondago Limestone of New York,\u2014a rock which occurs near the base of the\nUpper Silurian System, as developed in the western world;[23] and in\nthe same passage he made reference to a mutilated spine detected in a\nstill lower American deposit,\u2014the Oriskany Sandstone. In the Geological\nJournal for 1847, it was announced by Professor Sedgwick, that he had\nfound \u201c_defences of fishes_\u201d in the Upper Llandeilo Flags, and by Sir\nRoderick Murchison, that the \u201cdefence of an _Onchus_\u201d had been detected\nby the geologists of the Government survey, in the Limestone near Bala.\nSir Roderick referred in the same number to the remains of a fish found\nby Professor Phillips in the Wenlock Shale. And such, up to the present\ntime, is the actual _amount_ of the evidence with which we have to deal,\nand the dates of its piecemeal production. Let us next consider the\n_order of its occurrence in the geologic scale_.\n\n                          {             +-----+\n                          { Upper       |     |   Fish, 1838,\n                          { Ludlow.     |  1  |   (Murchison.)\n                          {             |     |   Fish, 1842,\n                          {             +-----+   (Phillips.)\n                          { Aymestry    |     |\n                          { Limestone.  |  2  |\n                          {             +-----+\n    UPPER SILURIAN ROCKS. { Lower       |     |\n                          { Ludlow.     |  3  |\n                          {             +-----+\n                          { Wenlock     |     |   Fish, 1845,\n                          { Limestone.  |  4  |   (Sedgwick.)\n                          {             |     |   Fish, 1846,\n                          {             +-----+   (Silliman.)\n                          { Wenlock     |  5  |   Fish, 1847.\n                          { Shale.      |     |   (Phillips.)\n                                        +-----+\n                                         -----\n                          {             +-----+\n                          { Caradoc     |     |\n                          { Sandstone,  |  6  |\n                          { &c.         |     |\n    LOWER SILURIAN ROCKS. {             +-----+\n                          { Llandeilo   |     |   Fish, 1847,\n                          { Flags, &c.  |  7  |   (Sedgwick.)\n                          {             +-----+\n                                         -----\n                          {             +-----+\n                          { Plynlimmon  |     |\n                          { Group.      | _a_ |\n                          {             +-----+\n                          { Bala        |     |   Fish, 1847,\n    CAMBRIAN ROCKS.       { Limestone.  | _b_ |   (Geologists of\n                          {             |     |   Government\n                          {             +-----+   Survey.)\n                          { Snowdon     |     |\n                          { Group.      | _c_ |   Fucoids.\n                          {             |     |\n                          {             +-----+\n\nThe better marked sub-divisions of the Silurian System, as described\nin the great work specially devoted to it, may be regarded as seven\nin number. An eight has since been added, by the transference of the\nTilestones from the lower part of the Old Red Sandstone group, to the\nupper part of the Silurian group underneath; but in order the better to\nshow how ichthyic discovery has in its slow course penetrated into the\ndepths, I shall retain the divisions recognized as those of the system\nwhen that course began. The highest or most modern Silurian deposit,\nthen, (No. 1 of the accompanying diagram,) is the _Upper_ Ludlow Rock;\nand it is in the superior strata of this division that the bone-bed\ndiscovered in 1838 occurs; while the exceedingly minute vertebrate\nremains described by Professor Phillips in 1842 occur in its base. The\ndivision next in the descending order is the Aymestry Limestone, (No. 2;)\nthe next (No. 3.) the _Lower_ Ludlow rock; then (No. 4.) the Wenlock or\nDudley Limestone occurs; and then, last and oldest deposit of the _Upper_\nSilurian formation, the Wenlock shale, (No. 5.) It is in the fourth, or\nWenlock Limestone division, that the defensive spine described in the\n\u201cEdinburgh Review\u201d for 1845 as the oldest vertebrate organism known at\nthe time, was found;[24] while the vertebrate organism found by Professor\nPhillips belongs to the fifth, or base deposit of the Upper Silurian.\nFurther, the American spines of Onondago and Oriskany, described in 1846,\noccurred in rocks deemed contemporary with those of the Wenlock division.\nWe next cross the line which separates the base of the Upper from the top\nof the Lower Silurian deposits, and find a great arenaceous formation,\n(No. 6,) known as the Caradoc Sandstones; while the Llandeilo Flags, (No.\n7,) the formation upon which the sandstones rest, compose, according to\nthe sections of Sir Roderick, published in 1839, the lowest deposit of\nthe Lower Silurian rocks. And it is in the upper part of this lowest\nmember of the system that the ichthyic defences, announced in 1847 by\nProfessor Sedgwick, occur. Vertebrate remains have now been detected in\nthe same relative position in the _seventh_ and _most ancient_ member\nof the system, that they were found to occupy in its _first_ and _most\nmodern_ member ten years ago. But this is not all. Beneath the Lower\nSilurian division there occur vast fossiliferous deposits, to which the\nname \u201cCambrian System\u201d was given, merely provisionally, by Sir Roderick,\nbut which Professor Sedgwick still retains as representative of a\ndistinct geologic period; and it is in these, greatly below the Lower\nSilurian base line, as drawn in 1839, that the Bala Limestones occur.\nThe Plynlimmon rocks (_a_)\u2014a series of conglomerate, grauwacke, and\nslate beds, several thousand yards in thickness\u2014intervene between the\nLlandeilo Flags and the Limestones of Bala, (_b_.) And, of consequence,\nthe defensive spine of the _Onchus_, announced in 1847 as detected in\nthese limestones by the geologists of the Government Survey, must have\nformed part of a fish that perished many ages ere the oldest of the Lower\nSilurian formations _began_ to be deposited.\n\nLet us now, after this survey of both the amount of our materials, and\nthe order and time of their occurrence, pass on to the question of size,\nas already stated. Did the ichthyic remains of the Silurian System,\nhitherto examined and described, belong to large or to small fishes? The\nquestion cannot be altogether so conclusively answered as in the case\nof those Ganoids of the Lower Old Red Sandstone whose dermal skeletons\nindicate their original dimensions and form. In fishes of the Placoid\norder, such as the Sharks and Rays, the dermal skeleton is greatly less\ncontinuous and persistent than in such Ganoids as the Dipterians and\nC\u0153lacanths; and when their remains occur in the fossil state, we can\nreason, in most instances, regarding the bulk of the individuals of which\nthey formed part, merely from that of detached teeth or spines, whose\nproportion to the entire size of the animals that bore them cannot be\nstrictly determined. We can, indeed, do little more than infer, that\nthough a large Placoid may have been armed with but small spines or\nteeth, a small Placoid could not have borne very large ones. And to this\nPlacoid order all the Silurian fish, from the Aymestry Limestone to the\nCambrian deposits of Bala inclusive, unequivocally belong. Nor, as has\nbeen already said, is there sufficient evidence to show that any of the\nichthyic remains of the Upper Ludlow rocks do _not_ belong to it. It is\npeculiarly the order of the system. The Ludlow bone-bed contains not\nonly defensive spines, but also teeth, fragments of jaws, and shagreen\npoints; whereas, in all the inferior deposits which yield any trace of\nthe vertebrata, the remains are those of defensive spines exclusively.\nLet us, then, take the defensive spine as the part on which to found our\ncomparison.\n\nOne of the best marked Placoids of the Upper Ludlow bone-bed is that\n_Onchus Murchisoni_ to which the distinguished geologist whose name it\nbears refers, in his communication, as so nearly resembling the oldest\nPlacoid yet known,\u2014that of the Bala Limestone. And the living fishes\nwith which the _Onchus Murchisoni_ must be compared, says Agassiz,\nthough \u201cthe affinity,\u201d he adds, \u201cmay be rather distant,\u201d are those of\nthe genera \u201c_Cestracion_, _Centrina_, and _Spinax_.\u201d I have placed\nbefore me a specimen of recent _Spinax_, of a species well known to\nall my readers on the sea-coast, the _Spinax Acanthias_, or common\ndog-fish, so little a favorite with our fishermen. It measures exactly\ntwo feet three inches in length; and of the defensive spines of its two\ndorsals,\u2014these spear-like thorns on the creature\u2019s back immediately in\nadvance of the fins, which so frequently wound the fisher\u2019s hand,\u2014the\nanterior and smaller measures, from base to point, an inch and a half,\nand the posterior and larger, two inches. I have also placed before me\na specimen of _Cestracion Phillippi_, (the Port Jackson Shark,) a fish\nnow recognized as the truest existing analogue of the Silurian Placoids.\nIt measures twenty-two three fourth inches in length, and is furnished,\nlike _Spinax_, with two dorsal spines, of which the anterior and larger\nmeasures from base to point one one half inch, and the posterior and\nsmaller, one one fifth inch. But the defensive spine of the _Onchus\nMurchisoni_, as exhibited in one of the Ludlow specimens, measures,\nthough mutilated at both ends, three inches and five eighth parts in\nlength. Even though existing but as a fragment, it is as such nearly\ntwice the length of the largest spine of the dog-fish, unmutilated and\nentire, and considerably _more_ than twice the length of the largest\nspine of the Port Jackson Shark. The spines detected by Professor\nPhillips, in an inferior stratum of the same upper deposit, were, as\nhas been shown, of microscopic minuteness; and when they seemed to\nrest on the extreme horizon of ichthyic existence as the most ancient\nremains of their kind, the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d availed himself of\nthe fact. He regarded the little creatures to which they had belonged\nis the f\u0153tal embryos of their class, or\u2014to employ the language of the\nEdinburgh Reviewer\u2014as \u201cthe tokens of Nature\u2019s first and half-abortive\nefforts to make fish out of the lower animals.\u201d From the latter editions\nof his work, the paragraph to which the Reviewer refers has, I find,\nbeen expunged; for the horizon has greatly extended, and what seemed\nto be its line of extreme distance has travelled into the middle of\nthe prospect. But that the passage should have at all existed is a not\nuninstructive circumstance, and shows how unsafe it is, in more than\nexternal nature, to regard the line at which, for the time, the landscape\ncloses, and heaven and earth seem to meet, as in reality the world\u2019s end.\nThe Wenlock spine, though certainly not microscopic, is, I am informed\nby Sir Philip Egerton, of but small size; whereas the contemporary spine\nof the Onondago Limestone, though comparatively more a fragment than the\nspine of the Upper Ludlow _Onchus_,\u2014for it measures only three inches in\nlength,\u2014is at least five times as bulky as the largest spine of _Spinax\nAcanthias_. Representing one of the massier fishes disporting amid the\nsome four or five small ones, of which in my illustration, the naturalist\ncatches a glimpse in fording the unknown lake, it at least serves to\nshow that all the Silurian ichthyolites must not be described as small,\nseeing that not only might many of its undetected fish have been large,\nbut that some of those which _have_ been detected were actually so.\nAnother American spine, of nearly the same formation,\u2014for it occurs in\na limestone, varying from twenty to seventy feet in thickness, which\nimmediately overlies that of the Onondago deposit, though still more\nfragmentary than the first, for its length is only two three eighth\ninches,\u2014maintains throughout a nearly equal thickness,\u2014a circumstance\nin itself indicative of considerable size; and in positive bulk it\nalmost rivals the Onondago one. Of the Lower Silurian and Bala fishes no\ndescriptions or figures have yet appeared. And such, up to the present\ntime, is the testimony derived from this department of Geology, so far\nas I have been able to determine it, regarding the size of the ancient\nSilurian vertebrata. \u201cNo organism,\u201d says Professor Oken, \u201cis, nor ever\nhas one been, created, which is not microscopic.\u201d The Professor\u2019s pupils\nand abettors, the assertors of the development hypothesis, appeal to\nthe geological evidence as altogether on _their_ side in the case; and\nstraightway a few witnesses enter court. But, lo! among the expected\ndwarfs, there appear individuals of more than the average bulk and\nstature.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 47.\n\na. _Posterior Spine of Spinax Acanthias._\n\nb. _Fragment of Onondago Spine._\n\n(Natural Size.)]\n\nStill, however, the question of organization remains. Did these ancient\nPlacoid fishes stand high or low in the scale? According to the poet,\n\u201cWhat can we reason but from what we know?\u201d We are acquainted with the\nPlacoid fishes of the present time; and from these only, taking analogy\nas our guide, can we form any judgment regarding the rank and standing\nof their predecessors, the Placoids of the geologic periods. But the\nconsideration of this question, as it is specially one on which the\nlater assertors of the development hypothesis concentrate themselves, I\nmust, to secure the space necessary for its discussion, defer till my\nnext chapter. Meanwhile, I am conscious I owe an apology to the reader\nfor what he must deem tedious minuteness of description, and a too\nprolix amplitude of statement. It is only by representing things as they\nactually are, and in the true order of their occurrence, that the effect\nof the partially selected facts and exaggerated descriptions of the\nLamarckian can be adequately met. True, the disadvantages of the more\nsober mode are unavoidably great. He who feels himself at liberty to\narrange his collected shells, corals, and fish-bones, into artistically\ndesigned figures, and to select only the pretty ones, will be of course\nable to make of them a much finer show than he who is necessitated to\nrepresent them in the order and numerical proportions in which they occur\non some pebbly beach washed by the sea. And such is the advantage, in a\nliterary point of view, of the ingenious theorist, who, in making figures\nof his geological facts, takes no more of them than suits his purpose,\nover the man who has to communicate the facts as he finds them. But the\nhomelier mode is the true one. \u201cCould we obtain,\u201d says a distinguished\nmetaphysician, \u201ca distinct and full history of all that has passed in\nthe mind of a child, from the beginning of life and sensation till it\ngrows up to the use of reason,\u2014how its infant faculties began to work,\nand how they brought forth and ripened all the various notions, opinions,\nand sentiments which we find in ourselves when we come to be capable\nof reflection,\u2014this would be a treasure of natural history which would\nprobably give more light into the human faculties than all the systems\nof philosophers about them since the beginning of the world. But it is\nin vain,\u201d he adds, \u201cto wish for what nature has not put within the reach\nof our power.\u201d In like manner, could we obtain, it may be remarked, a\nfull and distinct account of a single class of the animal kingdom, from\nits first appearance till the present time, \u201cthis would be a treasure\nof natural history which would cast more light\u201d on the origin of living\nexistences, and the true economy of creation, than all the theories of\nall the philosophers \u201csince the beginning of the world.\u201d And in order to\napproximate to such a history as nearly as possible,\u2014and it does seem\npossible to approximate near enough to substantiate the true readings of\nthe volume, and to correct the false ones,\u2014it is necessary that the real\nvestiges of creation should be carefully investigated, and their order of\nsuccession ascertained.\n\n\n\n\nHIGH STANDING OF THE PLACOIDS.\u2014OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED.\n\n\nWe have seen that some of the Silurian Placoids were large of size: the\nquestion still remains, Were they high in intelligence and organization?\n\nThe Edinburgh Reviewer, in contending with the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d\nreplies in the affirmative, by claiming for them the first place among\nfishes. \u201cTaking into account,\u201d he says, \u201cthe brain and the whole nervous,\ncirculating, and generative systems, they stand at the highest point of\na natural ascending scale.\u201d They are fishes, he again remarks, that rank\namong \u201cthe very highest types of their class.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe fishes of this early age, and of all other ages previous to\nthe Chalk,\u201d says his antagonist, in reply, \u201care, for the most part,\ncartilaginous. The cartilaginous fishes\u2014_Chondropterygii_ of Cuvier\u2014are\nplaced by that naturalist as a second series in his descending scale;\nbeing, however, he says, \u2018in some measure _parallel to the first_.\u2019\nHow far this is different from their being the highest types of the\nfish class, need not be largely insisted upon. Linn\u00e6us, again, was so\nimpressed by the low characters of many of this order, that he actually\nranked them with worms. Some of the cartilaginous fishes, nevertheless,\nhave certain peculiar features of organization, chiefly connected with\nreproduction, in which they excel other fish; but such features are\npartly partaken of by families in inferior sub-kingdoms, showing that\nthey cannot truly be regarded as marks of grade in their own class. When\nwe look to the great fundamental characters particularly to the framework\nfor the attachment of the muscles, what do we find?\u2014why, that of these\nPlacoids,\u2014\u2018the highest types of their class,\u2019\u2014it is barely possible to\nestablish their being vertebrata at all, the back-bone having generally\nbeen too slight for preservation, although the vertebral columns of later\nfossil fishes are as entire as those of any other animals. In many of\nthem traces can be observed of the muscles having been attached to the\nexternal plates, strikingly indicating their low grade as vertebrate\nanimals. The Edinburgh Reviewer \u2018highest types of their class\u2019 are in\nreality a separate series of that class, generally inferior, taking the\nleading features of organization of structure as a criterion, but when\ndetails of organization are regarded, stretching farther, both downward\nand upward, than the other series; so that, looking at one extremity, we\nare as much entitled to call them the lowest, as the Reviewer, looking at\nanother extremity, is to call them the \u2018highest of their class.\u2019 Of the\ngeneral inferiority there can be no room for doubt. Their cartilaginous\nstructure is, in the first place, analogous to the embryonic state of\nvertebrated animals in general. The maxillary and intermaxillary bones\nare in them rudimental. Their tails are finned on the under side only,\u2014an\nadmitted feature of the salmon in an embryonic stage; and the mouth is\nplaced on the under side of the head,\u2014also a mean and embryonic feature\nof structure. These characters are essential and important, whatever\nthe Edinburgh Reviewer may say to the contrary; they are the characters\nwhich, above all, I am chiefly concerned in looking to, for they are\nfeatures of embryonic progress, and embryonic progress is the grand key\nto the theory of development.\u201d\n\nSuch is the ingenious piece of special pleading which this most popular\nof the Lamarckians directs against the standing and organization of the\nearlier fishes. Let us examine it somewhat in detail, and see whether\nthe slight admixture of truth which it contains serves to do aught more\nthan to render current, like the gilding of a counterfeit guinea spread\nover the base metal, the amount of error which lies beneath. I know\nnot a better example than that which it furnishes, of the entanglement\nand perplexity which the meshes of an artificial classification, when\nconverted, in argumentative processes, into symbols and abstractions, are\nsure to involve subjects simple enough in themselves.\n\nFishes, according to the classification of a preponderating majority\nof the ichthyologists that have flourished from the earliest times\ndown to those of Agassiz, have been divided into two great series, the\n_Ordinary_ or osseous, and the _Chondropterygii_ or cartilaginous. And\nthese two divisions of the class, instead of being ranged consecutively\nin a continuous line, the one in advance of the other, have been\nranged in two parallel lines, the one directly abreast of the other.\nThere is this further peculiarity in the arrangement, that the line\nof the cartilaginous series, from the circumstance that some of its\nfamilies rise higher and some sink lower in the scale than any of the\nordinary fishes, outflanks the array of the osseous series at both\nends. The front which it presents contains fewer genera and species\nthan that of the osseous division; but, like the front of an army drawn\nout in single file, it extends along a greater length of ground. And\nto this long-fronted series of the cartilaginous, or, according to\nCuvier, _chondropterygian_ fishes, the Placoid families of Agassiz\nbelong,\u2014among the rest, the Placoids of the Silurian formations, Upper\nand Lower. But though all the Placoids of this latter naturalist be\ncartilaginous fishes, all cartilaginous fishes are not Placoids. The\n_Sturionid\u00e6_ are cartilaginous, and are, as such, ranked by Cuvier\namong the _Chondropterygii_, whereas Agassiz places them in his Ganoid\norder. Many of the extinct fishes, too, such as the _Acanthodei_,\n_Dipterid\u00e6_, _Cephalaspid\u00e6_, were, as we have seen, cartilaginous in\ntheir internal framework, and yet true Ganoids notwithstanding. The\nprinciple of Agassiz\u2019s classification wholly differs from that of Cuvier\nand the older ichthyologists; for it is a classification founded, not\non the character of the internal but on that of the cuticular or dermal\nskeleton. And while to the geologist it possesses great and obvious\nadvantages over every other,\u2014for of the earlier fishes very little more\nthan the cuticular skeleton survives,\u2014it has this further recommendation\nto the naturalist, that, (in so far at least as its author has been true\nto his own principles,) instead of anomalously uniting the highest and\nlowest specimens of their class,\u2014the fishes that most nearly approximate\nto the reptiles on the one hand, and the fishes that sink furthest\ntowards the worms on the other,\u2014it gathers into one consistent order all\nthe individuals of the higher type, distinguished above their fellows\nby their development of brain, the extensive range of their instincts,\nand the perfection of their generative systems. Further, the history of\nanimal existences, as recorded in the sedimentary rocks of our planet,\nreads a recommendation of this scheme of classification which it extends\nto no other. We find that in the progress of creation the fishes _began\nto be_ by groupes and septs, arranged according to the principle on which\nit erects its orders. The Placoids came first, the Ganoids succeeded\nthem, and the Ctenoids and Cycloids brought up the rear. The march has\nbeen marshalled according to an appointed programme, the order of which\nit is peculiarly the merit of Agassiz to have ascertained.\n\nNow, may I request the reader to mark, in the first place that what we\nhave specially to deal with at the present stage of the argument are the\nPlacoid fishes of the Silurian formations, Upper and Lower. May I ask him\nto take note, in the second, that the long-fronted _chondropterygian_\nseries of Cuvier, though it includes, as has already been said, the\nPlacoid order of Agassiz,\u2014just as the red-blooded division of animals\nincludes the bimana and quadrumana,\u2014is no more to be regarded as\n_identical_ with the Placoids, than the red-blooded animals are to be\nregarded as identical with the apes or with the human family. It simply\nincludes them in the character of _one_ of the three great divisions into\nwhich it has been separated,\u2014the division ranged, if I may so express\nmyself, on the extreme right of the line; its middle portion, or main\nbody, being composed of the _Sturiones_, a family on the general level of\nthe osseous fishes; while, ranged on the extreme left, we find the low\ndivision of the _Suctorii_, _i. e._ Cyclostomi, or Lampreys. But with\nthe middle and lower divisions we have at present nothing to do; for of\nneither of them, whether _Sturiones_ or _Suctorii_, does the Silurian\nSystem exhibit a trace. Further be it remarked, that the scheme of\nclassification which gives an abstract standing to the _Chondropterygii_,\nis in itself merely a certain perception of resemblance which existed\nin certain minds, having _cartilage_ for its general idea; just as\nanother certain perception of resemblance in one other certain mind\nhad _cuticular skeleton_ for its general idea, and as yet another\nperception of resemblance in yet other certain minds had _red blood_\nfor its general idea. As shown by the disparities which obtain among\nthe section which the scheme serves to separate from the others, it no\nmore determines rank or standing than that greatly more ancient scheme\nof classification into \u201cring-streaked and spotted,\u201d which served to\ndistinguish the flocks of the patriarch Jacob from those of Laban his\nfather-in-law, but which did not distinguish goats from sheep, nor sheep\nfrom cattle.\n\nThe effect of introducing, after this manner, generalizations made\naltogether irrespective of _rank_, and avowedly without reference to it,\ninto what are inherently and specifically _questions of rank_, admits of\na simple illustration.\n\nLet us suppose that it was not with the standing of the Silurian Placoids\nthat we had to deal, but with that of the _mammals_ of the recent\nperiod, including the _quadrumana_, and even the _bimana_, and that we\nhad ventured to describe them, in the words of the Edinburgh Reviewer,\nas \u201cthe very highest types of their class.\u201d What would be thought of\nthe reasoner who, in challenging the justice of the estimate, would\nargue that these creatures, men as well as monkeys, belonged simply to\nthat division of red-blooded animals which includes, with the bimana\nand quadrumana, the frog, the gudgeon, and the _earthworm_?\u2014a division,\nhe might add, \u201cwhich, when details of organization are regarded,\nstretches farther, both downward and upward,\u201d than that division of the\nwhite-blooded animals to which the crab, the spider, the cuttle-fish,\nand the dragon fly belong; \u201cso that, looking at one extremity, any one\nis as much entitled to call the red-blooded animals the lowest division,\nas any other, looking at another extremity, is to call them the highest\ndivision, of animals.\u201d What, it might well be asked in reply, has the\nearthworm, with its red-blood to do in a question respecting the place\nand standing of the bimana? Or what, in the parallel case, have the\n_Suctorii_\u2014the worms of Linn\u00e6us\u2014to do in a question respecting the\nplace and standing of the real Placoids? True it is that, according to\none principle of classification, now grown somewhat obsolete, men and\nearthworms are equally red-blooded animals; true it is that, according\nto another principle of classification, the Placoids of Agassiz and the\ncartilaginous worms of Linn\u00e6us are equally _Chondropterygii_. The bimana\nand the earthworm have their red blood in common; the glutinous hag and\nthe true Placoids have as certainly their internal cartilage in common;\nand if the fact of the red blood of the worm lowers in no degree the rank\nof the bimana, then, on the same principle, the fact of the internal\ncartilage of the glutinous hag cannot possibly detract from the standing\nof the true Placoid. In both cases they are creatures that entirely\ndiffer,\u2014the earthworms from the bimana, and the cartilaginous _worms_\nfrom the Placoids; and the classification which tags them together,\nwhether it be that of Aristotle or that of Cuvier, cannot be converted\ninto a sort of minus quantity, of force enough to detract from the value\nand standing of the bimana in the one case, or of the true Placoids\nin the other. It is in no degree derogatory to the human family that\nearthworms possess red blood; it is in no degree derogatory to the true\nPlacoids that the _Suctorii_ possess cartilaginous skeletons.\n\nLet the reader now mark the use which has been made, by the author of\nthe \u201cVestiges,\u201d of the name and authority of Linn\u00e6us. \u201cLinn\u00e6us,\u201d he\nstates, \u201cwas so impressed by the low character of many of this order,\n(the _Chondropterygii_,) that he actually ranked them with worms.\u201d Now,\nwhat is the fact here? Simply that Linn\u00e6us had no such general order as\nthe _Chondropterygii_ in his eye at all. Though chiefly remarkable as a\nnaturalist for the artificialness of his classifications, his estimate\nof the cartilaginous fishes was remarkable\u2014though carried too far in its\nextremes, and in some degree founded in error\u2014for an opposite quality.\nIt was an estimate formed, in the main, on a natural basis. Instead of\ntaking their cartilaginous skeleton into account, he looked chiefly at\ntheir standing as animals; and, struck with that extent of front which\nthey present, and with both their superiority on the extreme right, and\ntheir inferiority on the extreme left, to the ordinary fishes, he erected\nthem into two separate orders, the one lower and the other higher than\nthe members of the osseous line. And so far was he from regarding the\ntrue Placoids\u2014those _Chondropterygii_ which to an internal skeleton of\ncartilage add external plates, points, or spines of bone\u2014as low in the\nscale, that he actually raised them above fishes altogether, by erecting\nthem into an order of reptiles,\u2014the older _Amphibia Nantes_. Surely, if\nthe name of Linn\u00e6us was to be introduced into this controversy at all, it\nought to have been in connection with _this_ special fact; seeing that\nthe point to be determined in the question under discussion is simply\nthe place and standing of that very order which the naturalist rated so\nhigh,\u2014not the place and standing of the order which he degraded. It so\nhappens that there is one of the _Chondropterygii_ which, so far from\nbeing a true Placoid, does not possess a single osseous plate, point, or\nspine: it is a worm like creature, without eyes, without movable jaws,\nwithout vertebral joints, without scales, always enveloped in slime, and\ngreatly abhorred by our Scotch boatmen of the Moray Frith, who hold that\nit burrows, like the grave-worm, in the decaying bodies of the dead.\nAnd this creature, \u201cthe glutinous hag,\u201d or, according to north-country\nfishermen, the \u201cramper-eel,\u201d or \u201cpoison-ramper,\u201d was regarded by Linn\u00e6us\nas belonging, not to the class of fishes, but to the Vermes. Now, _this_\nis the special fact with which, in the development controversy, the\nauthor of the \u201cVestiges\u201d connects the name of the Swedish naturalist!\nAll the fish of the Silurian System belonged to that true Placoid order\nwhich Linn\u00e6us, impressed by its high standing, erected into an order,\nnot of worms, but of reptiles. He elevated A, the true Placoid, while he\ndegraded B, the glutinous hag. But it was necessary to the argument of\nthe author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d that the earliest existing fish should be\nrepresented as fish low in the scale; and so he has cited the name and\nauthority of Linn\u00e6us in its bearing against the glutinous hag B, as if\nit had borne against the standing of the true Placoid A. The Patagonians\nare the tallest and bulkiest men in the world, whereas their neighbors,\nthe Fuegians are a slim and diminutive race. And if, in some controversy\nraised regarding the real size of the more gigantic tribe, they were to\nbe described as the \u201cvery _tallest_ types of their class,\u201d any statement\nin reply, to the effect that some trustworthy voyager had examined\ncertain races of the extreme south of America, and had found that they\nwere both short and thin, would be neither relevant in its facts nor\nlegitimate in its bearing. But if the controversialist who thus strove\nto strengthen his case by the voyager\u2019s authority, was at the same time\nfully aware that the voyager had seen not only the diminutive Fuegians,\nbut also the gigantic Patagonians, and that he had described these last\nas very gigantic indeed, the introduction of the statement regarding the\nsmaller race, when he wholly sank the statement regarding the larger,\nwould be not merely very irrelevant in the circumstances, but also very\nunfair. Such, however, is the style of statement to which the author of\nthe \u201cVestiges\u201d has (I trust inadvertently) resorted in this controversy.\n\nIt is not uninstructive to mark how slowly and gradually the naturalists\nhave been groping their way to a right classification in the ichthyic\ndepartment of their science, and how it has been that identical\nperception of resemblance, having _cartilage_ for its general idea,\nto which the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d attaches so much importance,\nthat has served mainly to retard their progress. Not a few of the more\ndistinguished among their number deemed it too important a distinction\nto be regarded as merely secondary; and so long as it was retained as\na primary characteristic, the fishes failed to range themselves in the\nnatural order;\u2014dissimilar tribes were brought into close neighborhood,\nwhile tribes nearly allied were widely separated. It failed, as has\nbeen shown, to influence Linn\u00e6us; and though he no doubt pressed his\npeculiar views too far when he degraded the glutinous hag into a worm,\nand elevated the Sharks and Rays into reptiles, it is certainly worthy\nof remark, that, in the scheme of classification which is now regarded\nas the _most natural_,\u2014that of Professor Muller, modified by Professor\nOwen,\u2014the ichthyic worms of the Swede are placed in the first and\nlowest order of fishes,\u2014the _Dermopteri_,\u2014and the greater part of his\nichthyic reptiles, in the eleventh and highest,\u2014the _Plagiostomi_. Cuvier\nyielded, as has been shown, to the idea of resemblance founded on the\n_material_ of the ichthyic framework, and so ranged his fishes into two\nparallel lines. Professor Oken, after first enunciating as law that \u201cthe\ncharacteristic _organ_ of fishes is the osseous system,\u201d confessed the\n\u201cgreat difficulty\u201d which attaches to the question of skeletal \u201ctexture\nor substance,\u201d and finally gave up the distinction founded on it as\nobstinately irreducible to the purposes of a natural classification.\n\u201cThe cartilaginous fishes,\u201d he says, \u201cappear to belong to each other,\nand are also usually arranged together; yet amongst them we find those\nspecies, such as the Lampreys, which obviously occupy the lowest grade\nof all fishes, while the Sharks and Rays remind us of the Reptilia.\u201d\nAnd so, sinking the consideration of texture altogether, he placed the\nfamily of the Lamprey, including the glutinous hag, at the bottom of the\nscale, and the Sharks and Rays at the top. Agassiz\u2019s system, peculiarly\nhis own, has had the rare merit, as I have shown, of furnishing a key\nto the history of the fish in its several dynasties, which we may in\nvain seek in any other. His divisions,\u2014if, retaining his strongly-marked\nPlacoids and Ganoids, as orders stamped in the mint of nature, we throw\nhis perhaps less obviously divisible Ctenoids and Cycloids into one\norder,\u2014the corneous or horn-covered,\u2014are scarcely less representative\nof periods than those great classes of the vertebrata, mammals, birds,\nreptiles, and fishes, which we find not less regularly ranged in their\norder of succession in the geologic record than in the \u201cAnimal Kingdom\u201d\nof Cuvier,\u2014a shrewd corroboration, in both cases, I am disposed to\nthink, of the rectitude of the arrangement. What seems to be the special\ndefect of his system is, that having erected his four orders, and then\nfinding a certain number of residuary families that, on his principle\nof cuticular character, stubbornly refused to fall into any determinate\nplace, he distributed them among the others, with reference chiefly to\nthe totally distinct principle of Cuvier. Thus the _Suctorii_, soft,\nsmooth, slimy-skinned fishes, that do not possess a single placoid\ncharacter, and are not true Placoids, he has yet placed in his Placoid\norder, influenced, apparently, by the \u201cperception of resemblance that\nhas _cartilage_ for its central idea;\u201d and the effect has been a massing\ninto one anomalous and entangled group the fishes of the first period\nof geologic history, with fishes of which we do not find a trace save\nin the existing scene of things, and of the highest families of their\nclass with families that occupy the lowest place. But we live in an age\nin which even the benefactors of the world of mind cannot make false\nsteps with impunity; and so, while Agassiz\u2019s _three_ ichthyic orders will\ncontinue to be recognized by the pal\u00e6ontologist as the orders of three\ngreat geologic periods, the _Suctorii_ have already been struck from off\nhis higher fishes by the classification of Muller and Owen, and carried\nto that lowest point in the scale (indicated by Linn\u00e6us and Oken) which\ntheir inferior standing renders so obviously the natural one. Some of\nmy readers may perhaps remember how finely Bacon, in his \u201cWisdom of the\nAncients,\u201d interprets the old mythologic story of Prometheus. Prometheus,\nsays the philosopher, had conferred inestimable favors on men, by\nmoulding their forms into shape, and bringing them fire from heaven; and\nyet they complained of him and his teachings to Jupiter. And the god,\ninstead of censuring their ingratitude, was pleased with the complaint,\nand rewarded them with gifts. In putting nature to the question, it is\neminently wholesome to be doubting, cross-examining, complaining; ever\ndemanding of our masters and benefactors the philosophers, that they\nshould reign over us, not arbitrarily and despotically,\n\n    \u201cLike the old kings, with high exacting looks,\n    Sceptred and globed,\u201d\n\nbut like our modern constitutional monarchs, who govern by law; and,\nfurther, that an appeal from their decisions on all subjects within the\njurisdiction of Nature should for ever be open to Nature herself. The\nseeming ingratitude of such a course, if the \u201ccomplaints\u201d be made in a\nright spirit and on proper grounds, Jupiter always rewards with gifts.\n\nLet us now see for ourselves, in this spirit, whether there may not be\nsomething absolutely derogatory, in the existence of a cartilaginous\nskeleton, to the creatures possessing it; or whether a deficit of\ninternal bone may not be greatly more than neutralized, as it assuredly\nmust have been in the view of Linn\u00e6us, Muller, and Owen, by a larger than\nordinary share of a vastly more important substance.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PLACOID BRAIN. EMBRYONIC CHARACTERISTICS NOT NECESSARILY OF A LOW\nORDER.\n\n\nThat special substance, according to whose mass and degree of development\nall the creatures of this world take rank in the scale of creation,\nis not _bone_, but _brain_. Were animals to be ranged according to\nthe solidity of their bones, the class of birds would be assigned the\nfirst place; the family of the _Felid\u00e6_, including the tiger and lion,\nthe second; and the other terrestrial carnivora the third. Man and the\nherbivorous animals, though tolerably low in the scale, would be in\nadvance of at least the reptiles. Most of these, however, would take\nprecedence of the sagacious _Delphinid\u00e6_; the osseous fishes would\ncome next in order; the true Placoids would follow, succeeded by the\n_Sturiones_; and the _Suctorii_, _i. e._ Cyclostomi or Lampreys, would\nbring up the rear. There would be evidently no order here: the utter\nconfusion of such an arrangement, like that of the bits of a dissected\nmap flung carelessly out of its box by a child, would of itself\ndemonstrate the inadequacy and erroneousness of the regulating principle.\nBut how very different the appearance presented, when for _solidity of\nbone_ we substitute _development of brain_! Man takes his proper place\nat the head of creation; the lower mammalia follow,\u2014each species in\ndue order, according to its modicum of intelligence; the birds succeed\nthe mammalia; the reptiles succeed the birds; the fishes succeed the\nreptiles; next in the long procession come the invertebrate animals; and\nthese, too, take rank, if not according to their development of brain\nproper, at least according to their development of the _substance_ of\nbrain. The occipital nervous ganglion of the scorpion greatly exceeds\nin size that of the earthworm; and the occipital nervous ring of the\nlobster, that of the intestinal Ascaris. At length, when we reach the\nlowest or _acrite_ division of the animal kingdom, the substance of\nbrain altogether disappears. It has been calculated by naturalists, that\nin the vertebrata, the brain in the class of fishes bears an average\nproportion to the spinal cord of about two to one; in the class of\nreptiles, of about two and a half to one; in the class of birds, of about\nthree to one; in the class of mammals, of about four to one; and in the\nhigh-placed, sceptre-bearing human family, a proportion of not less than\n_twenty-three_ to one. It is palpably according to development of brain,\nnot development of bone, that we are to determine points of precedence\namong the animals,\u2014a fact of which no one can be more thoroughly aware\nthan the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d himself. Of this let me adduce a\nstriking instance, of which I shall make further use anon.\n\n\u201cAll life,\u201d says Oken, \u201cis from the sea; none from the continent.\nMan also is a child of the warm and shallow parts of the sea in the\nneighborhood of the land.\u201d Such also was the hypothesis of Lamarck and\nMaillet. In following up the view of his masters, the author of the\n\u201cVestiges\u201d fixes on the _Delphinid\u00e6_ as the sea-inhabiting progenitors\nof the simial family, and, through the simial family, of man For that\nhighest order of the mammalia to which the _Simiad\u00e6_ (monkeys) belong,\n\u201cthere remains,\u201d he says, \u201ca basis in the _Delphinid\u00e6_, the last and\nsmallest of the cetacean tribes. This affiliation has a special support\nin the brain of the dolphin family, which is distinctly allowed to be,\nin proportion to general bulk, the greatest among mammalia next to the\norang-outang and man. We learn from Tiedemann, that each of the cerebral\nhemispheres is composed, as in man and the monkey tribe, of three\nlobes,\u2014an anterior, a middle, and a posterior; and these hemispheres\npresent much more numerous circumvolutions and grooves than those of any\nother animal. Here it might be rash to found any thing upon the ancient\naccounts of the dolphin,\u2014its familiarity with man, and its helping him\nin shipwreck and various marine disasters; although it is difficult to\nbelieve these stories to be altogether without some basis in fact. There\nis no doubt, however, that the dolphin evinces a predilection for human\nsociety, and charms the mariner by the gambols which it performs beside\nhis vessel.\u201d\n\nHere, then, the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d palpably founds on a large\ndevelopment of brain in the dolphin, and on the manifestation of a\ncorrespondingly high order of instincts,\u2014and this altogether irrespective\nof the structure or composition of the creature\u2019s internal skeleton. The\nsubstance to which he looks as all-important in the case is _brain_, not\n_bone_. For were he to estimate the standing of the dolphin, not by its\nbrain, but by its skeleton, he would have to assign to it a place, not\nonly _not_ in advance of its brethren the _mammalia_ of the sea, but\neven in the rear of the _reptiles_ of the sea, the marine tortoises, or\nturtles,\u2014and scarce more than abreast of the osseous fishes. \u201cFishes,\u201d\nsays Professor Owen, in his \u201cLectures on the Vertebrate Animals,\u201d\n\u201chave the least proportion of earthy matter in their bones; birds the\nlargest. The mammalia, especially the active, predatory species, have\nmore earth, or harder bones, than reptiles. In each class, however, there\nare differences in the density of bone among its several members. For\nexample, in the fresh-water fishes, the bones are lighter, and retain\nmore animal matter, than in those which swim in the denser sea. And in\nthe _dolphin_, a warm-blooded marine animal, they differ little in this\nrespect from those of the sea-fish.\u201d Such being the fact, it is surely\nbut fair to inquire of the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d why he should\ndetermine the rank and standing of the _Delphinid\u00e6_ according to one set\nof principles, and the rank and standing of the Placoids according to\nanother and entirely different set? If the _Delphinid\u00e6_ are to be placed\nhigh in the scale, notwithstanding the softness of their skeletons,\nsimply because their brains are large, why are the Placoids to be\nplaced low in the scale, notwithstanding the largeness of their brains,\nsimply because their skeletons are soft? It is not too much to demand,\nthat on the principle which he himself recognizes as just, he should\neither degrade the dolphin or elevate the Placoid. For it is altogether\ninadmissible that he should reason on one set of laws when the exigencies\nof his hypothesis require that creatures with soft skeletons should be\nraised in the scale, and on another and entirely different set when its\nnecessities demand that they should be depressed.\n\nBut do the Placoids possess in reality a large development of brain? I\nhave examined the brains of almost all the common fish of our coast, both\nosseous and cartilaginous, not, I fear, with the skill of a Tiedemann,\nbut all the more intelligently in consequence of what Tiedemann had\npreviously done and written: and so I can speak with some little\nconfidence on the subject, so far at least as my modicum of experience,\nthus acquired, extends. Of all the common fish of the Scottish seas,\nthe spotted or lesser dog-fish bears, in proportion to its size, the\nlargest brain; the gray or picked dog-fish ranks next in its degree\nof development; the Rays, in their various species, follow after; and\nthe osseous fishes compose at least the great body of the rear; while\nstill further behind, there lags a hapless class\u2014the _Suctorii_, one of\nwhich, the glutinous hag, has scarce any brain, and one, the _Amphioxus_\nor lancelet, wants brain altogether. I have compared the brain of the\nspotted dog-fish with that of a young alligator, and have found that in\nscarce any perceptible degree was it inferior, in point of bulk, and very\nslightly indeed in point of organization, to the brain of the reptile.\nAnd the instincts of this Placoid family,\u2014one of the truest existing\nrepresentatives of the Placoids of the Silurian System[25] to which we\ncan appeal,\u2014correspond, we invariably find, with their superior cerebral\ndevelopment. I have seen the common dog-fish, _Spinax Acanthias_,\nhovering in packs in the Moray Frith, some one or two fathoms away from\nthe side of the herring boat from which, when the fishermen were engaged\nin hauling their nets, I have watched them, and have admired the caution\nwhich, with all their ferocity of disposition, they rarely failed to\nmanifest;\u2014how they kept aloof from the net, even more warily than the\ncetacea themselves,\u2014though both dog-fish and cetacea are occasionally\nentangled;\u2014and how, when a few herrings were shaken loose from the\nmeshes they at once darted upon them, exhibiting for a moment, through\nthe green depths, the pale gleam of their abdomens, as they turned upon\ntheir sides to seize the desired morsels,\u2014a motion rendered necessary\nby the position of the mouth in this family; and how next, their object\naccomplished, they fell back into their old position, and waited on as\nbefore. And I have been assured by intelligent fishermen, that at the\ndeep-sea white-fishing, in which baited hooks, not nets, are employed,\nthe degree of shrewd caution exercised by these creatures seems more\nextraordinary still. The hatred which the fisher bears to them arises not\nmore from the actual amount of mischief which they do him, than from the\ncircumstance that in most cases they persist in doing it with complete\nimpunity to themselves. I have seen, said an observant Cromarty fisherman\nto the writer of these chapters, a pack of dog-fish watching beside\nour boat, as we were hauling our lines, and severing the hooked fish,\nas they passed them, at a bite, just a little above the vent, so that\nthey themselves escaped the swallowed hook; and I have frequently lost,\nin this way, no inconsiderable portion of a fishing. I have observed,\nhowever, he continued, that when a fresh pack of hungry dog-fish came\nup, and joined the pack that had been robbing us so coolly, and at their\nleisure, a sudden rashness would seize the whole,\u2014the united packs would\nbecome a mere heedless mob, and, rushing forward, they would swallow\nour fish entire, and be caught themselves by the score and the hundred.\nWe may see something very similar to this taking place among even the\nshrewder mammalia. When pig refuses to take his food, his mistress\nstraightway calls upon the cat, and, quickened by the dread of the coming\nrival, he gobbles up his rations at once. With the comparatively large\ndevelopment of brain, and the corresponding manifestations of instinct,\nwhich the true Placoids exhibit, we find other unequivocal marks of a\ngeneral superiority to their class. In their reproductive organs they\nrank not with the common fishes, nor even with the lower reptiles,\nbut with the Chelonians and the Sauria. Among the Rays, as among the\nhigher animals, there are individual attachments formed between male and\nfemale: their eggs unlike the mere spawn of the osseous fishes, or of\neven the Batrachians, are, like those of the tortoise and the crocodile,\ncomparatively few in number, and of considerable size: their young,\ntoo, like the young of birds and of the higher reptiles, pass through\nno such metamorphosis as those of the toad and frog, or of the amphibia\ngenerally. And some of their number\u2014the common dog-fish for instance\u2014are\novoviviparous, bringing forth their young, like the common viper and the\nviviparous lizard, alive and fully formed.\n\n\u201cBut such features,\u201d says the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d referring\nchiefly to certain provisions connected with the reproductory system\nin the Placoids, \u201care partly partaken of by families in inferior\nsub-kingdoms, showing that they cannot truly be regarded as marks of\ngrade in their own class.\u201d Nay, single features do here and there occur\nin the inferior sub-kingdoms, which very nearly resemble single features\nin the placoid character and organization, which even very nearly\nresemble single features in the _human_ character and organization; but\nis there any of the inferior sub-kingdoms in which there occurs such\na _collocation_ of features? or does such a collocation occur in any\nclass of animals\u2014setting the Placoids wholly out of view\u2014which is not\na high class? Nay, further, does there occur in any of the inferior\nsub-kingdoms\u2014existing even as a single feature\u2014that most prominent,\nleading characteristic of this series of fishes,\u2014a large brain?\n\nBut is not the \u201ccartilaginous structure\u201d of the Placoids analogous to\nthe embryonic state of vertebrated animals in general? Do not the other\nplacoid peculiarities to which the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d refers,\u2014such\nas the heterocercal or one-sided tail, the position of the mouth on the\nunder side of the head, and the rudimental state of the maxillaries\nand intermaxillaries,\u2014bear further analogies with the embryonic state\nof the higher animals? And is not \u201cembryonic progress the grand key to\nthe theory of development?\u201d Let us examine this matter. \u201cThese are the\ncharacters,\u201d says this ingenious writer, \u201cwhich, above all, I am chiefly\nconcerned in looking to; for they are features of embryonic progress, and\nembryonic progress is the grand key to the theory of development.\u201d Bold\nassertion, certainly; but, then, assertion is not argument! The statement\nis not a reason for the faith that is in the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d\nbut simply an avowal of it; it is simply a confession, not a defence,\nof the Lamarckian creed; and, instead of being admitted as embodying a\nfirst principle, it must be put stringently to the question, in order to\ndetermine whether it contain a principle at all.\n\nIn the first place, let us remark, that the cartilaginous structure\nof the Placoids bears no very striking analogy to the cartilaginous\nstructure of the higher vertebrata in the embryonic state. In the case\nof the _Delphinid\u00e6_, with their soft skeletons, the analogy is greatly\nmore close. Bone consists of animal matter, chiefly gelatinous, hardened\nby a diffusion of inorganic earth. In the bones of young and f\u0153tal\nmammalia, inhabitants of the land, the gelatinous prevails; in the old\nand middle-aged there is a preponderance of the earth. Now, in the bones\nof the dolphin there is comparatively little earth. The analogies of\nits internal skeleton bear, not on the skeletons of its brethren the\nmature full-grown mammals of the land, but on the skeletons of their\nimmature or f\u0153tal offspring. But in the case of the true Placoids that\nanalogy is faint indeed. Their skeletons contain true bone;\u2014the vertebral\njoints of the Sharks and Rays possess each, as has been shown, an osseous\nnucleus, which retains, when subjected to the heat of a common fire,\nthe complete form of the joint; and their cranial framework has its\nsurface always covered over with hard osseous points. But though their\nskeletons possess thus their modicum of bone, unlike those of embryonic\nbirds or mammals, they contain, in what is properly their cartilage, no\ngelatine. The analogy signally fails in the very point in which it has\nbeen deemed specially to exist. The cartilage of the _Chondropterygii_\nis a substance so essentially different from that of young or embryonic\nbirds and mammals, and so unique in the animal kingdom, that the heated\nwater in which the one readily dissolves has no effect whatever upon the\nother. It is, however, a curious circumstance, exemplified in some of the\nShark family,[26] though it merely serves, in its exceptive character,\nto establish the general fact, that while the rays of the double fins,\nwhich answer to the phalanges, are all formed of this _indissoluble_\ncartilage, those rays which constitute their outer framework, with the\nrays which constitute the framework of all the single fins, are composed\nof a _mucoidal_ cartilage, which boils into glue. At certain definite\nlines a change occurs in the texture of the skeleton; and it is certainly\nsuggestive of thought, that the difference of substance which the change\ninvolves distinguishes that part of the skeleton which is homologically\nrepresentative of the skeletons of the higher vertebrata, from that part\nof it which is peculiar to the creature as a fish, viz. the dorsal and\ncaudal rays, and the extremities of the double fins. These emphatically\nichthyic portions of the animal may be dissipated by boiling, whereas\nwhat Linn\u00e6us would perhaps term its _reptilian_ portion abides the heat\nwithout reduction.\n\nBut is not the one-sided tail, so characteristic of the sharks, and of\nalmost all the ancient Ganoids, also a characteristic of the young salmon\njust burst from the egg? Yes, assuredly; and, so far as research on the\nsubject has yet extended, of not only the salmon, but of _all_ the other\nosseous fishes in their f\u0153tal state. The salmon, on its escape from the\negg, is a little monster of about three quarters of an inch in length,\nwith a huge heart-shaped bag, as bulky as all the rest of its body,\ndepending from its abdomen. In this bag provident nature has packed up\nfor it, in lieu of a nurse, food for five weeks; and, moving about every\nwhere in its shallow pool, with its provision knapsack slung fast to it,\nit reminds one disposed to be fanciful, save that its burden is on the\nwrong side, of Scottish soldiers of the olden time summoned to attend\ntheir king in war,\u2014\n\n    \u201cEach on his _back_, a slender store,\n    His forty days\u2019 provision bore,\n      As ancient statutes tell.\u201d\n\nAround that terminal part of the creature\u2019s body traversed by the\ncaudal portion of the vertebral column, which commences in the salmon\nimmediately behind the ventrals, there runs at this period, and for the\nensuing five weeks in which it does not feed, a membranous fringe or fin,\nwhich exactly resembles that of the tadpole, and which, existing simply\nas an expansion of the skin, exhibits no mark or rays. In the place of\nthe true caudal fin, however, we may detect with the assistance of a\nlens, an internal framework with two well-marked lobes, and ascertain,\nfurther, that this tail is set on awry,\u2014the effect of a slight upward\nbend in the creature\u2019s body. And when viewed in a strong light as a\ntransparency, we perceive that the spinal cord takes the same upward\nbend, and, as in the sturgeon, passes in an exceedingly attenuated\nform into the upper lobe. What may be regarded as the _design_ of the\narrangement is probably to be found in the peculiar form given to the\nlittle creature by the protuberan bag in front. A wise instinct teaches\nit, from the moment of its exclusion from the egg, to avoid its enemies.\nIn the instant the human shadow falls upon its pool, we see it darting\ninto some recess at the side or bottom, with singular alacrity; and in\norder to enable it to do so, and to steer itself aright,\u2014as, like an\nill-trimmed vessel, deep in the water ahead, the balance of its body\nis imperfect,\u2014there is, if I may so express myself, a heterocercal\npeculiarity of helm required. It has got an irregularly-developed tail to\nbalance an irregularly-developed body, as skiffs _lean_ on the one beam\nand _full_ on the other require, in rowing, a cast of the rudder to keep\nthem straight in their course.\n\nSinking altogether, however, the final cause of the peculiarity, and\nregarding it simply as a _f\u0153tal_ one, that indicates a certain stage\nof imperfection in the creature in which it occurs, on what principle,\nI ask, are we to infer that what is a sign of immaturity in the young\nof one set of animals, is a mark of inferior organization in the adult\nforms of another set? The want of eyes in any of the animal families, or\nthe want of organs of progression, or a fixed and sedentary condition,\nlike that of the oyster, are all marks of great inferiority. And yet,\nif we admit the principle, that what are evidences of immaturity in\nthe young members of one family are signs of inferior organization in\nthe fully-grown members of another, it could easily be shown that eyes\nand legs are defects, and that the unmoving oyster stands higher in the\nscale than the ever-restless fish or bird. The immature _Tubularia_\npossess locomotive powers, whereas in their fully developed state they\nremain fixed to one spot in their convoluted tubes. The immature _Lepas_\nis furnished with members well adapted for swimming, and with which it\nswims freely; as it rises towards maturity, these become blighted and\nweak; and, when fully grown,\u2014fixed by its fleshy pedicle to the rock or\nfloating log to which it attached itself in its transition state,\u2014it is\nno longer able to swim. The immature _Balanus_ is furnished with two\neyes: in its state of maturity these are extinguished, and it passes its\nperiod of full development in darkness. Further, it is not generally held\nthat in the human family a white skin is a decided mark of degradation,\nbut rather the reverse; and yet nothing can be more certain than that\nthe Negro f\u0153tus has a white skin. Since eyes, and organs of progression,\nand a power of moving freely, and a white skin, are mere embryonic\npeculiarities in the _Balanus_, the _Lepas_, the _Tubularia_, and the\nNegro, and yet are in themselves, when found in the mature animal,\nevidences of a high, not of a low standing, on what principle, I ask are\nwe to infer that the peculiarity of a heterocercal tail, embryonic in the\nsalmon, is, when found in the mature Placoid, an evidence, not of a high\nstanding, but of a low? Every true analogy in the case favors an exactly\nopposite view. In the heterocercal or one-sided tail, the vertebral\njoints gradually diminish, as in the tails of the _Sauria_ and _Ophidia_,\ntill they terminate in a point; whereas the homocercal tail common to the\nosseous fishes exhibits no true analogy with the tails of the higher\norders. Its abruptly terminating vertebral column, immensely developed\nposterior processes, and broadly expanded osseous rays, seem to be simply\na few of the many marks of decline and degradation which fishes, the\noldest of the vertebrata, exhibit in this late age of the world, and\nwhich, in at least the earlier geologic periods, when they were greatly\nyounger as a class, they did not betray.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 48.\n\na. _Tail of Spinax Acanthias._\n\nb. _Tail of Ichthyosaurus Tenuirostris_, (Buckland.)]\n\nIn illustration of this view, I would fain recommend to the reader a\nsimple experiment. Let him procure the tail of a common dog-fish, (fig.\n48, _a_,) and cutting it across about half an inch above where the\ncaudal fin begins, let him boil it smartly for about half an hour. He\nwill first see it swell and then burst, all around those thinner parts\nof the fin that are traversed by the caudal rays,\u2014wholly mucoidal, as\nshown by this test, in their texture, and which yield to the boiling\nwater, as if formed of isinglass. They finally dissolve, and drop away,\nwith the surrounding cuticular integument; and then there only remains,\nas the insoluble framework of the whole, the bodies of the vertebr\u00e6,\nwith their neural and h\u0153mal processes. The tail has now lost much of its\nichthyic character, and has acquired, instead, a considerable degree of\nresemblance to the reptilian tail, as exemplified in the saurians. I\nhave introduced into the wood-cut, for the purpose of comparison, the\ntail of the ichthyosaurus, (_b_.) It consists, like the other, of a\nseries of gradually diminishing vertebr\u00e6, and must have also supported,\nsays Professor Owen, a propelling fin, placed vertically, as in the\nshark, which, however, from its perishable nature, has in every instance\ndisappeared in the earth, as that of the dog-fish disappears in the\nboiling water. It will be seen that its processes are comparatively\nsmaller than those of the fish, and that the bodies of its vertebr\u00e6 are\nshorter and bulkier; but there is at least a general correspondence of\nthe parts; and were the tail of the crocodile, of which the vertebral\nbodies are slender and the processes large, to be substituted for that of\nthe enaliosaur here, the correspondence would be more marked still. After\nthus _developing_ the tail of the reptile out of that of the fish,\u2014as the\ncauldron-bearing Irish magician of the tale developed young ladies out\nof old women,\u2014simply by _boiling_, let the reader proceed to a second\nstage of the experiment, and see whether he may not be able still further\nto develope the reptilian tail so obtained, into that of the mammal, by\n_burning_. Let him spread it out on a piece of iron hoop, and thrust it\ninto the fire; and then, after exposure for some time to a red heat has\nconsumed and dissipated its merely cartilaginous portions, such as the\nneural and h\u0153mal processes, with the little pieces which form the sides\nof the neural arch, and left only the whitened bodies of the vertebr\u00e6,\nlet him say whether the bony portion which remains does not present a\nmore exact resemblance to the mammiferous tail\u2014that of the dog, for\nexample\u2014than any thing else he ever saw. The Lamarckians may well deem it\nan unlucky circumstance, that one special portion of their theory should\ndemand the depreciation of the heterocercal tail, seeing that it might be\nrepresented with excellent effect in another, as not merely a connecting\nlink in the upward march of progression between the tail of the true fish\nand that of the true reptile, but as actually containing in itself\u2014as\nthe caterpillar contains the future pupa and butterfly\u2014the elements of\nthe reptilian and mammiferous tail. If there be any virtue in analogy,\nthe heterocercal tail is, I repeat, of a decidedly higher type than the\nhomocercal one. It furnishes the first example in the vertebrata of the\ncoccygeal vertebr\u00e6 diminishing to a point, which characterizes not only\nall the higher reptiles, but also all the higher mammals, and which we\nfind represented by the _Os coccygis_ in man himself. But to this special\npoint I shall again refer.\n\nWith regard to that rudimentary state of the _occipital_ framework of\nthe Placoids to which the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d refers, it may be but\nnecessary to say that, notwithstanding the simplicity of their box-like\nskulls, they bear in their character, as cases for the protection of\nthe brain, at least as close an analogy to the skulls of the higher\nanimals, as those of the osseous fishes, which consist usually of the\nextraordinary number of from sixty to eighty bones,\u2014a mark\u2014the author of\nthe \u201cVestiges\u201d himself being judge in the case\u2014rather of inferiority than\nthe reverse. \u201cElevation is marked in the scale,\u201d we find him saying,\n\u201cby an animal exchanging a multiplicity of parts serving one end, for\na smaller number.\u201d The skull of a cod consists of about thrice as many\nseparate bones as that of a man. But I do not well see that in this case\nthe fact either of _simplicity_ in excess or of _multiplicity_ in excess\ncan be insisted upon in either direction, as a proper basis for argument.\nNearly the same remark applies to the maxillaries as to the skull. The\nunder jaw in man consists of a single bone; that of the thornback\u2014if we\ndo not include the two suspending _ribs_, which belong equally to the\nupper jaw\u2014of two bones, (the number in all the mammiferous quadrupeds:)\nthat of the cod of four bones, and, if we include the suspending\n_ribs_, of twelve. On what principle are we to hold, with _one_ as the\nrepresentative number of the highest type of jaw, that _two_ indicates\na lower standing than _four_, or _four_ than _twelve_? In reference to\nthe further statement, that in many of the ancient fishes \u201ctraces can\nbe observed of the muscles having been attached to the external plates,\nstrikingly indicating their low grade as vertebrate animals,\u201d it may\nbe answer enough to state, that the peculiarity in question was not a\ncharacteristic of the _most_ ancient fishes,\u2014the Placoids of the Silurian\nsystem,\u2014but of some Ganoids of the succeeding systems. The reader may\nremember, as a case in point, the example furnished by the nail-like bone\nof _Asterolepis_, figured in page 111, in which there exists depressions\nresembling that of the round ligament in the head of the quadrupedal\nthigh-bone. And as for the remark that the opening of the mouth of\nthe Placoid, \u201con the under side of the head,\u201d is indicative of a low\nembryonic condition, it might be almost sufficient to remark, in turn,\nthat the lowest family of fishes\u2014that to which the supposed worms of\nLinn\u00e6us belong\u2014have the mouth not under, but at the anterior termination\nof the head,\u2014in itself an evidence that the position of the mouth at the\nextremity of the muzzle, common to the greater number of the osseous\nfishes, can be no very high character, seeing that the humblest of the\n_Suctorii_ possess it; and that many osseous fishes, whose mouths open,\nnot on the under, but the upper side of the snout, as in the distorted\nand asymmetrical genus _Platessa_, are not only in no degree superior to\ntheir bony neighbors, and far inferior to the placoid ones, but bear,\nin direct consequence of the arrangement, an expression of unmistakable\nstupidity. The objection, however, admits of a greatly more conclusive\nreply.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 49.\n\nPORT JACKSON SHARK, (_Cestracion Phillippi_.)]\n\n\u201cThis fish, to speak in the technical language of Agassiz,\u201d says the\nEdinburgh Reviewer, in reference to the ancient ichthyolite of the\nWenlock Shale, \u201cundoubtedly belongs to the Cestraciont family of the\nPlacoid order,\u2014proving to demonstration that the oldest known fossil fish\n[1845] belongs to the highest type of that division of the vertebrata.\u201d\nI may add, that the character and family of this ancient specimen was\ndetermined by our highest British authority in fossil ichthyology,\nSir Philip Egerton. And it is in depreciation of Professor Sedgwick\u2019s\nstatement regarding its high standing that the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d\nrefers to the supposed inferiority indicated by a mouth opening, not at\nthe extremity of the muzzle, but under the head. Let us, then, fully\ngrant, for the argument\u2019s sake, that the occurrence of the mouth in the\nmuzzle _is_ a sign of superiority, and its occurrence under the head a\nmark of great inferiority, and then ascertain how the fact stands with\nregard to the _Cestracion_. \u201cThe Cestracion sub-genus,\u201d says Mr. James\nWilson, in his admirable treatise on fishes, which forms the article\nICHTHYOLOGY in the \u201cEncyclop\u00e6dia Britannica,\u201d \u201chas the temporal aperture,\nthe anal fin, and rounded teeth, of _Squalus Mustelus_; _but the mouth is\nTERMINAL, or AT THE EXTREMITY OF THE POINTED MUZZLE_.\u201d The accompanying\nfigure, (fig. 49,) taken from a specimen of _Cestracion_ in the\ncollection of Professor John Fleming, may be recorded as of some little\ninterest, both from its direct bearing on the point in question, and from\nthe circumstance that it represents, not inadequately for its size, the\nsole surviving species (_Cestracion Phillippi_) of the oldest vertebrate\nfamily of creation. With this family, so far as is yet known, ichthyic\nexistence first began. It does not appear that on the globe which we\ninhabit there was ever an ocean tenanted by living creatures at all that\nhad not its _Cestracion_,\u2014a statement which could not be made regarding\nany other vertebrate family. In Agassiz\u2019s \u201cTabular View of the Genealogy\nof Fishes,\u201d the Cestracionts, and they only, sweep across the entire\ngeologic scale. And, as shown in the figure, the mouth in this ancient\nfamily, instead of opening, as in the ordinary sharks, under the middle\nof the head, to expose them to the suspicion of being creatures of low\nand embryonic character, opened in a broad, honest-looking muzzle, very\nmuch resembling that of the hog. The mouths of the most ancient Placoids\nof which we know any thing, _did not_, I reiterate, _open under their\nheads_.\n\nBut why introduce the element of embryonic progress into this question\nat all? It is not a question of embryonic progress. The very legerdemain\nof the sophist\u2014the juggling by which he substitutes his white balls\nfor black, or converts his pigeons into crows\u2014consists in the art of\nattaching the conclusions founded on the facts or conditions of one\nsubject, to some other subject essentially distinct in its nature.\nGestation is not creation. The history of the young of animals in their\nembryonic state is simply the history of the f\u0153tal young; just as the\nhistory of insect transformation, in which it has been held by good men,\nbut weak reasoners, that there exists direct evidence of the doctrine\nof the resurrection, is the history of insect transformation, and of\nnothing else. True, the human mind is so constituted that it converts\nall nature into a storehouse of comparisons and analogies; and this fact\nof the metamorphosis of the creeping caterpillar, after first passing\nthrough an intermediate period of apparent death as an inert aurelia,\ninto a winged image, seemed to have seized on the human fancy at a very\nearly age, as wonderfully illustrative of life, death, and the future\nstate. The Egyptians wrapped up the bodies of their dead in the chrysalis\nform, so that a mummy, in their apprehension, was simply a human pupa,\nwaiting the period of its enlargement; and the Greeks had but one word\nin their language for butterfly and the soul. But not the less true is\nit, notwithstanding, that the facts of insect transformation furnish no\nlegitimate key to the totally distinct facts of a resurrection of the\nbody, and of a life after death. And on what principle, then, are we to\ntrace the origin of past dynasties in the changes of the f\u0153tus if not\nthe rise of the future dynasty in the transformations of the caterpillar?\n\u201cThese [embryonic] characters [that of the heterocercal tail, and of the\nmouth of the ordinary shark type] are essential and important,\u201d remarks\nthe author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d \u201cwhatever the Edinburgh Reviewer may say\nto the contrary;\u2014they are the characters which, above all, I am chiefly\nconcerned in looking to, for they are the features of embryonic progress,\nand embryonic progress is the grand key to the theory of development.\u201d\nYes; the grand key to the theory of _f\u0153tal_ development; for embryonic\nprogress _is_ f\u0153tal development. But on what is the assertion based\nthat they form a key to the history of creation? Aurelia are not human\nbodies laid out for the sepulchre, nor are butterflies human souls;\nas certainly gestation is not creation, nor a life of months in the\nuterus a succession of races for millions of ages outside of it. On\nwhat grounds, then, is the assertion made? Does it embody the result\nof a discovery or announce the message of a revelation? Did the author\nof the \u201cVestiges\u201d find it out for himself, or did an angel from heaven\ntell it him? If it be a discovery, show us, we ask, the steps through\nwhich you have been conducted to it; if a revolution produce, for our\nsatisfaction, the evidence on which it rests. For we are not to accept\nas data, in a question of science, idle comparisons or vague analogies,\nwhether produced through the intentional juggling of the sophist, or\ninvoluntarily conjured up in the dreamy delirium of an excited fancy.\n\nIt is one of the difficulties incident to the task of replying to any\ndogmatic statement of error, that every mere annunciation of a false\nfact or false principle must be met by elaborate counter-statement or\ncarefully constructed argument and that prolixity is thus unavoidably\nentailed on the controversialist who labors to set right what his\nantagonist has set wrong. The promulgator of error may be lively and\nentertaining, whereas his pains-taking confutator runs no small risk of\nbeing tedious and dull. May I, however, solicit the forbearance of the\nreader, if, after already spending much time in skirmishing on ground\ntaken up by the enemy,\u2014one of the disadvantages incident to the mere\ndefendant in a controversy of this nature,\u2014I spend a little more in\nindicating what I deem the proper ground on which the standing of the\nearlier vertebrata should be decided. To the test of _brain_ I have\nalready referred, as all-important in the question: I would now refer to\nthe test of what may be termed _homological symmetry of organization_.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PROGRESS OF DEGRADATION. ITS HISTORY.\n\n\nThough all animals be fitted by nature for the life which their instincts\nteach them to pursue, naturalists have learned to recognize among them\ncertain aberrant and mutilated forms, in which the type of the special\nclass to which they belong seems distorted and degraded. They exist\nas the monster _families_ of creation, just as among families there\nappear from time to time monster _individuals_,\u2014men, for instance,\nwithout feet, or hands, or eyes, or with their feet, hands, or eyes\ngrievously misplaced,\u2014sheep with their fore legs growing out of their\nnecks, or ducklings with their wings attached to their haunches. Among\nthese degraded races, that of the footless serpent, which \u201cgoeth upon\nits belly,\u201d has been long noted by the theologian as a race typical, in\nits condition and nature, of an order of hopelessly degraded beings,\nborne down to the dust by a clinging curse; and, curiously enough, when\nthe first comparative anatomists in the world give _their_ readiest\nand most prominent instance of degradation among the denizens of the\nnatural world, it is this very order of footless reptiles that they\nselect. So far as the geologist yet knows, the Ophidians did not appear\nduring the Secondary ages, when the monarchs of creation belonged to\nthe reptilian division, but were ushered upon the scene in the times of\nthe Tertiary deposits, when the mammalian dynasty had supplanted that\nof the Iguanodon and Megalosaurus. Their ill omened birth took place\nwhen the influence of their house was on the wane, as if to set such a\nstamp of utter hopelessness on its fallen condition, as that set by the\nbirth of a worthless or idiot heir on the fortunes of a sinking family.\nThe degradation of the Ophidians consists in the absence of limbs,\u2014an\nabsence total in by much the greater number of their families, and\nrepresented in others, as in the boas and pythons, by mere abortive\nhinder limbs concealed in the skin; but they are thus not only _monsters\nthrough defect of parts_, if I may so express myself, but also _monsters\nthrough redundancy_, as a vegetative repetition of vertebra and ribs, to\nthe number of three or four hundred, forms the special contrivance by\nwhich the want of these is compensated. I am also disposed to regard the\npoison-bag of the venomous snakes as a mark of degradation;\u2014it seems,\njudging from analogy, to be a protective provision of a low character,\nexemplified chiefly in the invertebrate families,\u2014ants, centipedes,\nand mosquitos,\u2014spiders, wasps, and scorpions. The higher carnivora\nare, we find, furnished with unpoisoned weapons, which, like those of\ncivilized man, are sufficiently effective, simply from the excellence\nof their construction, and the power with which they are wielded, for\nevery purpose of assault or defence. It is only the squalid savages and\ndegraded boschmen of creation that have their feeble teeth and tiny\nstings steeped in venom, and so made formidable. _Monstrosity through\ndisplacement of parts_ constitutes yet another form of degradation; and\nthis form, united, in some instances, to the other two, we find curiously\nexemplified in the geological history of the fish,\u2014a history which, with\nall its blanks and missing portions, is yet better known than that of\nany other division of the vertebrata. And it is, I am convinced, from a\nsurvey of the progress of degradation in the great ichthyic division,\u2014a\nprogress recorded as \u201cwith a pen of iron in the rock for ever,\u201d\u2014and not\nfrom superficial views founded on the cartilaginous or non-cartilaginous\ntexture of the ichthyic skeleton, that the standing of the kingly fishes\nof the earlier periods is to be adequately determined. Any other mode\nof survey, save the parallel mode which takes development of brain into\naccount, evolves, we find, nothing like principle, and lands the inquirer\nin inextricable difficulties and inconsistencies.\n\nIn all the higher non-degraded vertebrata we find a certain uniform\ntype of skeleton, consisting of the head, the vertebral column, and\nfour limbs; and these last, in the various symmetrical forms, whether\nexemplified in the higher fish, the higher reptiles, the higher birds,\nthe higher mammals, or in man himself, occur always in a certain\ndeterminate order. In all the mammals, the scapular bases of the fore\nlimbs begin opposite the eighth vertebra from the skull backwards, the\nseven which go before being cervical or neck vertebr\u00e6; in the birds,\u2014a\ndivision of the vertebrata that, from their peculiar organization,\nrequire longer and more flexible necks than the mammals,\u2014the scapulars\nbegin at distances from the occiput, varying, according to the species,\nfrom opposite the thirteenth to opposite the twenty-fourth vertebra;\nand in the reptiles\u2014a division which, according to Cuvier, \u201cpresents\na greater diversity of forms, characters, and modes of gait, than any\nof the other two,\u201d\u2014they occur at almost all points, from opposite\nthe second vertebra, as in the frog, to opposite the thirty-third or\nthirty-fourth vertebra, as in some species of plesiosaurus. But in\nall,\u2014whether mammals, birds, or undegraded reptiles,\u2014they are so placed,\nthat the creatures possess _necks_, of greater or less length, as an\nessential portion of their general type. The hinder limbs have also in\nall these three divisions of the animal kingdom their typical place.\nThey occur opposite, or very nearly opposite, the posterior termination\nof the abdominal cavity, and mark the line of separation between the\nvertebr\u00e6 of the trunk (dorsal, lumbar, and sacral) and the third and\nlast, or _caudal_ division of the column,\u2014a division represented in\nman by but four vertebr\u00e6, and in the crocodile by about thirty-five,\nbut which is found to exist, as I have already said, in all the more\nperfect forms. The limbs, then, in all the symmetrical animals of the\nfirst three classes of the vertebrata, mark the three great divisions of\nthe vertebral column,\u2014the division of the _neck_, the division of the\n_trunk_, and the division of the _tail_. Let us now inquire how the case\nstands with the fourth and lowest class,\u2014that of the fishes.\n\nIn those existing Placoids that represent the fishes of the earliest\nvertebrate period, the places of the double fins,\u2014pectorals and\nventrals,\u2014which form in the ichthyic class the true homologues of the\nlimbs, correspond to the places which these occupy in the symmetrical\nmammals, birds, and reptiles. The scapular bases of the fore or pectoral\nfins ordinarily begin opposite the twelfth or fourteenth vertebra;[27]\nbut they range, as in man and the mammals, in a forward direction, so\nthat the fins themselves are opposite the eighth or tenth. The pelvic\nbases of the ventral fins are placed nearly opposite the base of the\nabdomen, so that, as in all the symmetrical animals, the vent opens\nbetween, or nearly between, those hinder limbs which the bases support.\nIn the Rays, which, so far as is yet known, did not appear in creation\nuntil the Secondary ages had begun, the bases of the fore limbs, _i.\ne._ pectoral fins, are attached to the lower part of a huge cervical\nvertebra, nearly equal in length to _all_ the trunk vertebr\u00e6 united; and\nin the Chimerid\u00e6, which also first appear in the Secondary division,\nthey are attached, as in the osseous fishes, to the hinder part of the\nhead. But in the representatives of all those Silurian Placoids yet\nknown, of which the family can be determined, or any thing with safety\npredicated, the cervical division is found to occur as a series of\nvertebr\u00e6: they present in this, as in the hinder portion of their bodies,\nthe homological symmetry of organization typical of that vertebral\nsub-kingdom to which they belong.\n\nIn the second great period of ichthyic existence,\u2014that of the Old\nRed Sandstone,\u2014we find the first example, in the class of fishes, of\n\u201cmonstrosity through _displacement_ of parts,\u201d and apparently also\u2014in\nat least two genera, though the evidence on this head be not yet quite\ncomplete\u2014of \u201cmonstrosity through _defect_ of parts.\u201d In all the Ganoids\nof the period, with (so far as we can determine the point) only two\nexceptions, the scapular bases of the fore limbs are brought forward\nfrom their typical place opposite the base of the cervical vertebr\u00e6, and\nstuck on to the occipital plate. There occurs, in consequence, in one\ngreat order of the ichthyic class, such a departure from the symmetrical\ntype as would take place in a monster example of the human family in\nwhom the neck had been annihilated, and the arms stuck on to the back of\nthe head. And in the genera _Coccosteus_ and _Pterichthys_ we find the\nfirst example of degradation through _defect_. In the _Pterichthys_ the\n_hinder_ limbs seem wanting, and in the _Coccosteus_ we find no trace\nof the _fore_ limbs. The one resembles a monster of the human family\nborn without hands, and the other a monster born without feet. Ages\nand centuries pass, and long unreckoned periods come to a close; and\nthen, after the termination of the Pal\u00e6ozoic period, we see that change\ntaking place in the form of the ichthyic tail, to which I have already\nreferred, (and to which I must refer at least once more,) as singularly\nillustrative of the progress of degradation. Yet other ages and centuries\npass away, during which the reptile class attains to its fullest\ndevelopment, in point of size, organization, and number; and then, after\nthe times of the Cretaceous deposits have begun, we find yet another\nremarkable monstrosity of displacement introduced among all the fishes of\none very numerous order, and among no inconsiderable proportion of the\nfishes of another. In the newly-introduced Ctenoids, (_Acanthopterygii_,)\nand in those families of the Cycloids which Cuvier erected into the order\n_Malacopterygii sub-brachiati_, the hinder limbs are brought forward,\nand stuck on to the base of the previously misplaced fore limbs. All the\nfour limbs, by a strange monstrosity of displacement, are crowded into\nthe place of the extinguished neck. And such, at the present day, is the\nprevalent type among fishes. Monstrosity through _defect_ is also found\nto increase; so that the snake-like _apoda_, or feet-wanting fishes, form\na numerous order, some of whose genera are devoid, as in the common eels\nand the congers, of only the hinder limbs, while in others, as in the\ngenera Mur\u00e6na and Synbranchus, both hinder and fore limbs are wanting.\nIn the class of fishes, as fishes now exist, we find many more evidences\nof the monstrosity which results from both the misplacement and defect\nof parts, than in the other three classes of the vertebrata united, and\nknowing their geological history better than that of any of the others,\nwe know, in consequence, that the monstrosities did not appear _early_,\nbut _late_, and that the progress of the race as a whole, though it\nstill retains not a few of the higher forms, has been a progress, not of\ndevelopment from the low to the high, but of degradation from the high to\nthe low.\n\nThe reader may mark for himself, in the flounder, plaice, halibut, or\nturbot,\u2014fishes of a family of which there appears no trace in the earlier\nperiods,\u2014an extreme example of the degradation of distortion superadded\nto that of displacement. At a first glance the _limbs_ seem but to\nexhibit merely the amount of natural misarrangement and misorder common\nto the _Acanthopterygii_ and _Sub-brachiati_;\u2014the base of the pectorals\nare stuck on to the head, and the base of the ventrals attached to that\nof the pectorals. From the circumstance, however, that the creature is\ntwisted half round and laid on its side, we find that at least one of the\npairs of double fins\u2014the pectorals\u2014perform the part of single fins,\u2014one\nprojecting from the animal\u2019s superior, the other from its inferior side,\nin the way the anal and dorsal fins project from the upper and under\nsurfaces of other fishes; while its real dorsal and anal fins, both\ndeveloped very largely, and\u2014in order to preserve its balance\u2014in about an\nequal degree, and wonderfully correspondent in form, perform, from their\nlateral position, the functions of single fins. Indeed, at a first glance\nthey seem the analogues of the largely-developed pectorals of a very\ndifferent family of flat fishes,\u2014the Rays. It would appear as if single\nand double fins, by some such mutual agreement as that which, according\nto the old ballad, took place between the churl of Auchtermuchty and his\nwife, had agreed to exchange callings, and perform each the work of the\nother. The tail, too, possesses, in consequence of the twist, not the\nvertical position of other fish-tails, but is spread out horizontally,\nlike the tails of the cetacea. It is however, in the head of the flounder\nand its cogeners that we find the more extraordinary distortions\nexemplified. In order to accommodate it to the general twist, which\nrendered lateral what in other fishes is dorsal and abdominal, and dorsal\nand abdominal what in other fishes is lateral, one half its features had\nto be twisted to the one side, and the other half to the other. The face\nand cranium have undergone such a change as that which the human face and\ncranium would undergo, were the eyes to be drawn towards the left ear,\nand the mouth towards the right. The skull, in consequence, exhibits, in\nits fixed bones, a strange Cyclopean character, unique among the families\nof creation: it has its one well-marked eye orbit opening, like that of\nPolyphemus, direct in the middle of the fore part of its head; while\nthe other, external to the cranium altogether, we find placed among the\nfree bones, directly over the maxillaries. And the wry mouth\u2014twisted in\nthe opposite direction, as if to keep up such a balance of deformity as\nthat which the breast-hump of a hunchback forms to the hump behind\u2014is in\nkeeping with the squint eyes. The jaws are strangely asymmetrical. In\nsymmetrical fishes the two bones that compose the anterior half of the\nlower jaw are as perfectly correspondent in form and size as the left\nhand or left foot is correspondent, in the human subject, to the _right_\nhand or _right_ foot; but not such their character in the flounder.\nThe one is a broad, short, nearly straight bone; the other is larger,\nnarrower, and bent like a bow; and while the one contains only from four\nto six teeth, the other contains from thirty to thirty-five. Scarcely in\nthe entire ichthyic kingdom are there any two jaws that less resemble\none another than the two halves of the jaw of the flounder, turbot,\nhalibut, or plaice. The intermaxillary bones are equally ill matched:\nthe one is fully twice the size of the other, and contains about thrice\nas many teeth. That bilateral symmetry of the skeleton which is so\n_invariable_ a characteristic of the vertebrata, that ordinary observers,\nwho have eyes for only the rare and the uncommon, fail to remark it,\nbut which a Newton could regard as so wonderful, and so thoroughly in\nharmony with the uniformity of the planetary system, has scarce any\nplace in the asymmetrical head of the flounder. There exists in some of\nour north country fishing villages an ancient apologue, which, though\nnot remarkable for point or meaning, at least serves to show that this\npeculiar example of distortion the rude fishermen of a former age were\nobservant enough to detect. Once on a time the fishes met, it is said, to\nelect a king; and their choice fell on the herring. \u201cThe herring king!\u201d\ncontemptuously exclaimed the flounder, a fish of consummate vanity, and\ngreatly piqued on this occasion that its own presumed claims should have\nbeen overlooked; \u201cwhere, then, am I?\u201d And straightway, in punishment of\nits conceit and rebellion, \u201cits eyes turned to the back of its head.\u201d\nHere is there a story palpably founded on the degradation of misplacement\nand distortion, which originated ages ere the naturalist had recognized\neither the term or the principle.\n\nIt would be an easy matter for an ingenious theorist, not much disposed\nto distinguish between the minor and the master laws of organized\nbeing, to get up quite as unexceptionable a theory of degradation as\nof development. The one-eyed, one-legged Chelsea pensioner, who had a\nchild, unborn at the time, laid to his charge, agreed to recognize his\nrelationship to the little creature, if, on its coming into the world,\nit was found to have a green patch over its eye, and a wooden leg.\nAnd, in order to construct a hypothesis of progressive degradation,\nthe theorist has but to take for granted the transmission to other\ngenerations of defects and compensating redundancies at once as extreme\nand accidental as the loss of eyes or limbs, and the acquisition of\ntimber legs or green patches. The snake, for instance, he might regard as\na saurian, that, having accidentally lost its limbs, exerted itself to\nsuch account throughout a series of generations, in making up for their\nabsence, as to spin out for itself, by dint of writhing and wriggling,\nrather more than a hundred additional vertebr\u00e6, and to alter, for\npurposes of greater flexibility, the structure of all the rest. And as\nfishes, when nearly stunned by a blow, swim for a few seconds on their\nside, he might regard the flounders as a race of half-stunned fishes,\npreviously degraded by the misplacement of their limbs, that, instead of\nrecovering themselves from the blow given to some remote parent of the\nfamily, had expended all their energies in twisting their mouths round\nto what chanced to be the under side on which they were laid, and their\neyes to what chanced to be the upper, and that made their pectorals\nserve for anal and dorsal fins, and their anal and dorsal fins serve\nfor pectorals. But while we must recognize in nature certain laws of\ndisturbance, if I may so speak, through which, within certain limits,\ntraits which are the result of habit or circumstance in the parents are\ncommunicated to their offspring, we would err as egregiously, did we\ntake only these into account, without noting that infinitely stronger\nantagonist law of reproduction and restoration which, by ever gravitating\ntowards the original type, preserves the integrity of races, as the\nastronomer would, who, in constructing his orrery, recognized only that\nlaw of propulsion through which the planets speed through the heavens,\nwithout taking into account that antagonist law of gravitation which,\nby maintaining them in their orbits, insures the regularity of their\nmovements. The law of restoration would recover and right the stunned\nfish laid on its side; the law of reproduction would give limbs to the\noffspring of the mutilated saurian. We have evidence, in the extremeness\nof the degradation in these cases, that it cannot be a degradation\nhereditarily derived from accident. Nature is, we find, active, not in\nperpetuating the accidental wooden legs and green patches of ancestors\nin their descendants, but in restoring to the offspring the true limbs\nand eyes which the parents have lost. It is, however, not with a theory\nof hereditary degradation, but a hypothesis of gradual development, that\nI have at present to deal; and what I have to establish as proper to\nthe present stage of my argument is, that this principle of degradation\nreally exists, and that the history of its progress in creation bears\ndirectly against the assumption that the earlier vertebrata were of a\nlower type than the vertebrata of the same ichthyic class which exist\nnow.[28]\n\nThe progress of the ichthyic tail, as recorded in geologic history,\ncorresponds with that of the ichthyic limbs. And as in the existing\nstate of things we find fishes that _nearly_ represent, in this respect,\nall the great geologic periods,\u2014I say _nearly_, not _fully_, for I\nam acquainted with no fish adequately representative of the period\nof the Old Red Sandstone,\u2014it may be well to cast a glance over the\n_contemporary_ series, as illustrative of the _consecutive_ one. In those\nPlacoids of the shark family that to a large brain unite homological\nsymmetry of organization, and represent the fishes of the first period,\nwe find, as I have already shown, that the vertebr\u00e6 gradually diminish\nin the caudal division of the column, until they terminate in a point,\u2014a\ncircumstance in which they resemble not merely the betailed reptiles,\nbut also all the higher mammiferous quadrupeds, and even man himself.\nAnd it is this peculiarity, stamped upon the less destructible portions\nof the framework of the tail,\u2014vertebr\u00e6 and processes,\u2014rather than the\none-sided or heterocercal form of the surrounding fin, composed of but\na mucoidal substance, that constitutes its grand characteristic; seeing\nthat in some Placoid genera, such as _Scyllium Stellare_, the terminal\nportion of the fin is scarce less largely developed above than below,\nand that in others, as in most of the Ray family, the under lobe of the\nfin is wholly wanting. In the sturgeon,\u2014one of the few Ganoids of the\npresent time,\u2014we become sensible of a peculiar modification in this\nheterocercal type of tail: the lower lobe is, we find, composed, as in\n_Spinax_ and _Scyllium_, of rays exclusively; while through the centre\nof the upper lobe there runs an acutely angular patch of lozenge-shaped\nplates, like that which runs through the centre of the double fins of\n_Dipterus_ and the C\u0153lacanths. But while in the sharks the gradually\ndiminishing vertebr\u00e6 stand out in bold relief, and form the thickest\nportion of the tail, that which represents them in the sturgeon (the\nangular patch) is slim and thin,\u2014slimmer in the middle than even at the\nsides;\u2014in part a consequence, no doubt, of the want, in this fish, of\nsolid vertebr\u00e6, but a consequence also of the extreme attenuation of the\nnervous cord, in its prolongation into the lobe of the fin. Further,\nthe rays of the tail\u2014its peculiarly ichthyic portion, which are purely\nmucoidal in _Spinax_, _Scyllium_, and _Cestracion_\u2014have become osseous in\nthe sturgeon. The _fish_ has _set_ and become _fixed_, as cement sets in\na building, or colors are fixed by a mordant. And it is worthy of special\nremark that, correspondent with the peculiarly _ichthyic_ development\nof tail in this fish, we find the prevailing ichthyic displacement of\nthe fore limbs. Again, in the _Lepidosteus_, another of the true Ganoids\nwhich still exist, the internal angle of the upper lobe of the tail\nwholly disappears, and with the internal angle the prolongation of the\nnervous cord. Still, however, it is what the tail of the sturgeon would\nbecome were the angular patch to be obliterated, and rays substituted\ninstead,\u2014it is a tail set on awry. And in this fish also we find the\nichthyic displacement of fore limb. One step more, and we arrive at\nthe homocercal or equal-lobed tail, which seems to attain to its most\nextreme type in those fishes in which, as in the perch and flounder, the\nlast vertebral joint, either very little or very abruptly diminished\nin size, expands into broad processes without homologue in the higher\nanimals, on which the caudal rays rest as their bases. And in by much the\nlarger proportion of these fishes all the four limbs are slung round the\nneck;\u2014they at once exhibit the homocercal tail in its broadest type, and\ndisplacement of limb in its most extreme form.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 50.\n\nTAIL OF OSTEOLEPIS.]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 51.\n\nTAIL OF LEPIDOSTEUS OSSEUS.]\n\nNow, in tracing the geologic history of the ichthyic tail, we find these\nseveral steps or gradations from the heterocercal to the homocercal,\nrepresented by periods and formations. The Siluran periods may be\nregarded as representative of that true heterocercal tail of the\nPlacoids, exemplified in _Spinax_, (page 172, fig. 48,) and _Cestracion_,\n(page 177, fig. 49.) The whole caudal portion of this latter animal,\ncommencing immediately behind the ventrals, is, as becomes a true\ntail, slim, when compared with its trunk; the vertebr\u00e6 are of very\nconsiderable solidity; the rays mucoidal; and where the spinal column\nruns into the terminal fin, it takes such an upward turn as that which\nthe horse-jockey imparts, by the process of _nicking_, to the tails of\nthe hunter and the racehorse. And with the heterocercal tail, so true in\nits homologies to the tails of the higher vertebrata, we find associated,\nas has been shown, the true homological position of the fore limbs.\nWith the commencement of the Old Red Sandstone the ganoidal tail first\npresents itself; and we become sensible of a change in the structure\nof the attached fin, similar to that exemplified in the caudal rays of\nthe sturgeon. As shown by the irregularly-angular patch of scales which\nin all the true C\u0153lacanths, and almost all the Dipterians,[29] runs\nthrough the _upper_ lobe of the fin, and terminates in a point, (see\nfig. 50,) it must have possessed the gradually diminishing vertebr\u00e6, or\na diminishing spinal cord, their analogue; but the rays, fairly _set_,\nas their state of keeping in the rocks certify, exist as narrow oblong\nplates of solid bone; and their anterior edges are strengthened by a line\nof osseous defences, that pass from scales into rays. And in harmonious\naccompaniment with this fairly _stereotyped_ edition of the ichthyic\ntail, we find, in the fishes in which it appears, the first instance of\ndisplacement of _limb_,\u2014the bases of the pectorals being removed from\ntheir original position, and stuck on to the nape of the neck. It may\nbe remarked, in passing, that in the tails of two ganoidal genera of\nthis period,\u2014the _Coccosteus_ and _Pterichthys_,\u2014the analogies traceable\nlie rather in the direction of the tails of the Rays than in those of\nthe Sharks; and that one of these, the _Coccosteus_, seems, as has been\nalready intimated, to have had no pectorals, while it is doubtful whether\nin the _Pterichthys_ the pectorals were not attached to the shoulder,\ninstead on the head. In the Carboniferous and Permian systems there\noccur, especially among the numerous species of the genus _Pal\u00e6oniscus_,\ntails of the type exemplified by the internal angle of the tail of\nthe sturgeon: the lozenge-shaped scales run in acutely angular patches\nthrough their upper lobes; but such is their extreme flatness, as shown\nby the disposition of the enamelled covering, that it appears exceedingly\ndoubtful whether any vertebral column ran beneath;\u2014they seem but to have\ncovered greatly diminished prolongations of the spinal cord. In the\nbase of the Secondary division,\u2014another long stage towards the existing\nstate of things,\u2014we find, with the homocercal tail, which now appears\nfor the first time, numerous tails like that of the _Lepidosteus_, (fig.\n51,) of an intermediate type;\u2014they are rather tails set on awry than\ntruly heterocercal. The diminished cord has disappeared from among the\nfin rays. In the numerous Lepidoid genus, and the genera _Semionotus_\nand _Tetra gonolepis_,\u2014all ganoidal fishes of the Secondary period\u2014this\nintermediate style is very marked; while in their contemporaries of the\ngenera _Ur\u00e6us_, _Microdon_, and _Pycnodus_, we find the earliest examples\nof true homocercal tails. And in the Ctenoids and Cycloids of the Chalk\nthe homocercal tail receives its fullest development. It finds bases for\nits rays in broad non-homological processes, that spread out behind\nabruptly-terminating vertebr\u00e6, (fig. 52,) in the same period in which,\nby a strange process of degradation, the four ichthyic limbs are first\ngathered into a cluster, and hung about the neck.[30]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 52.\n\nTAIL OF PERCH.]\n\nI am aware that by some very distinguished comparative anatomists, among\nthe rest Professor Owen, the attachment, so common among fishes, of the\nscapular arch and the fore limbs to the occipital bone, is regarded,\nnot as a displacement, but as a normal and primary condition of the\nparts. Recognizing in the scapular bones the _ribs_ of the occipital\n_centrum_, the anatomists of this school of course consider them, when\nfound articulated to the occiput, as in their proper and original place,\nand as in a state of natural dislocation when removed, as in all the\nreptiles, birds, and mammals, farther down. We find Professor Oken\nborrowing support to his hypothesis from this view. The limbs, he tells\nus, are simply ribs, that in the course of ages have been set free, and\nhave become by development what they now are. And it is unquestionably\na curious and interesting fact, that there are certain animals, such\nas the crocodile, in which every centrum of the vertebral column, and\nof every _vertebra_ of the head, has its ribs or rib-like appendages,\nwith the exception of the occipital _centrum_. And it is another equally\ncurious fact, that there is another certain class of animals, such as\nthe osseous horn-covered fishes, with the Sturionid\u00e6, Salamandroidei,\nand at least one genus among the Placoids, (the Chim\u00e6roidei,) in which\nthis occipital centrum bears as its _ribs_ the scapular bones, with\ntheir appendages the fore limbs. It is the _centrum_ without _ribs_\nthat is selected in these animals as the centrum to which the scapular\n_ribs_ should be attached. Be it remembered, however, that while it\nis unquestionably the part of the comparative anatomist to determine\nthe relations and homologies of those parts of which all animals are\ncomposed, and to interpret the significancy in the scale of being of the\nvarious modes and forms in which they exist, it is as unquestionably the\npart of the geologist to declare their history, and the order of their\nsuccession _in time_. The questions which fall to be determined by the\ngeologist and anatomist are entirely different. It is the function of the\nanatomist to decide regarding the high and the low, the typical and the\naberrant; and so, beginning at what is lowest or highest in the scale,\nor least or most symmetrical in type, he passes through the intermediate\nforms to the opposite extreme: and such is the order natural and proper\nto his science. It is the vocation of the geologist, on the other hand,\nto decide regarding the early and the late. It is with _time_, not with\n_rank_, that he has to deal. Nor is it in the least surprising that he\nshould seem at issue with the comparative anatomist, when, in classifying\nhis groupes of organized being according to the periods of their\nappearance, there is an order of arrangement forced upon him, different\nfrom that which, on an entirely different principle, the anatomist\npursues. Nor can there be a better illustration of a collision of this\nkind, than the one furnished by the case in point. That peculiarity of\nstructure which, as the lowest in the vertebral skeleton, is to the\ncomparative anatomist the primary and original one, and which, as such,\nfurnishes him with his starting point, is to the geologist not primary,\nbut secondary, simply because it was not primary, but secondary, in the\norder of its occurrence. It belongs, so far as we yet know, not to the\n_first_ period of vertebrate existence, but to the _second_; and appears\nin geologic history as does that savage state which certain philosophers\nhave deemed the original condition of the human species, in the history\nof civilization, when read by the light of the Revealed Record, under the\nshadow of those gigantic ruins of the East that date only a few centuries\nafter the Flood. It is found to be a _degradation_ first introduced\nduring the lapse of an intermediate age,\u2014not the normal condition which\nobtained during the long cycles of the primal one. It indicates, not the\nstarting point from which the race of creation began, but the stage of\nretrogradation beyond it at which the pilgrims who set out in a direction\nopposite to that of the goal first arrived.[31]\n\nThis fact of degradation, strangely indicated in geologic history, with\nreference to all the greater divisions of the animal kingdom, has often\nappeared to me a surpassingly wonderful one. We can see but imperfectly,\nin those twilight depths to which all such subjects necessarily belong;\nand yet at times enough does appear to show us what a very superficial\nthing infidelity may be. The general advance in creation has been\nincalculably great. The lower divisions of the vertebrata preceded\nthe higher;\u2014the fish preceded the reptile, the reptile preceded the\nbird, the bird preceded the mammiferous quadruped, and the mammiferous\nquadruped preceded man. And yet, is there one of these great divisions\nin which, in at least some prominent feature, the present, through this\nmysterious element of degradation, is not inferior to the past? There\nwas a time in which the ichthyic form constituted the highest example\nof life; but the seas during that period did not swarm with fish of the\ndegraded type. There was, in like manner, a time when all the carnivora\nand all the herbivorous quadrupeds were represented by reptiles; but\nthere are no such magnificent reptiles on the earth now as reigned over\nit then. There was an after time, when birds seem to have been the sole\nrepresentatives of the warm-blooded animals; but we find, from the prints\nof their feet left in sandstone, that the tallest men might have\n\n    \u201cWalked under their huge legs, and peeped about.\u201d\n\nFurther, there was an age when the quadrupedal mammals were the magnates\nof creation; but it was an age in which the sagacious elephant, now\nextinct, save in the comparatively small Asiatic and African circles, and\nrestricted to two species, was the inhabitant of every country of the Old\nWorld, from its southern extremity to the frozen shores of the northern\nocean; and when vast herds of a closely allied and equally colossal genus\noccupied its place in the New. And now, in the times of the high-placed\nhuman dynasty,\u2014of those formally delegated monarchs of creation, whose\nnature it is to look behind them upon the past, and before them, with\nmingled fear and hope, upon the future,\u2014do we not as certainly see the\nelements of a state of ever-sinking degradation, which is to exist for\never, as of a state of ever-increasing perfectibility, to which there is\nto be no end? Nay, of a higher race, of which we know but little, this\nmuch we at least know, that they long since separated into two great\nclasses,\u2014that of the \u201celect angels,\u201d and of \u201cangels, that kept not their\nfirst estate.\u201d\n\n\n\n\nEVIDENCE OF THE SILURIAN MOLLUSCS\u2014OF THE FOSSIL FLORA. ANCIENT TREE.\n\n\nAfter dwelling at such length on the earlier fishes, it may seem scarce\nnecessary to advert to their lower contemporaries the mollusca,\u2014that\ngreat division of the animal kingdom which Cuvier places second in the\ndescending order, in his survey of the entire series, and first among the\ninvertebrates; and which Oken regards as the division out of which the\nimmediately preceding class of the vertebral animals have been developed.\n\u201cThe fish,\u201d he says, \u201cis to be viewed as a mussel, from between whose\nshells a monstrous abdomen has grown out.\u201d There is, however, a\npeculiarity in the molluscan group of the Silurian system, to which I\nmust be permitted briefly to refer, as, to employ the figure of Sterne,\nit presents \u201ctwo handles\u201d of an essentially different kind, and as in all\nsuch two-handled cases, the mere special pleader is sure to avail himself\nof only the handle which best suits his purpose for the time.\n\nCuvier\u2019s first and highest class of the molluscs is formed of what are\ntermed the Cephalopods,\u2014a class of creatures possessed of great freedom\nof motion: they can walk, swim, and seize their prey; they have what even\nthe lowest fishes such as the lancelet, want,\u2014a brain enclosed in a\ncartilaginous cavity in the head, and perfectly formed organs of sight;\nthey possess, too, what is found in no other mollusc,\u2014organs of hearing;\nand in sagacity and activity they prove more than matches for the smaller\nfishes, many of which they overmaster and devour. With this highest\nclass there contrasts an exceedingly low molluscous class at the bottom\nof the scale, or, at least, at what is now the bottom of the scale; for\nthey constitute Cuvier\u2019s _fifth_ class; while his _sixth_ and last, the\nCirrhopodes, has been since withdrawn from the molluscs altogether,\nand placed in a different division of the animal kingdom. And this low\nclass, the Brachiopods, are creatures that, living in bivalve shells,\nunfurnished with spring hinges to throw them open, and always fast\nanchored to the same spot, can but thrust forth, through the interstitial\nchinks of their prison-houses, spiral arms, covered with cilia, and\nwinnow the water for a living. Now, it so happens that the molluscan\ngroup of the Silurian system is composed chiefly of these two extreme\nclasses. It contains some of the other forms; but they are few in number,\nand give no character to the rocks in which they occur. There was nothing\nby which I was more impressed, in a visit to a Silurian region, than that\nin its ancient graveyards, as in those of the present day, though in a\ndifferent sense, the high and the low should so invariably meet together.\nIt is, however, not impossible that, in even the present state of things,\na similar union of the extreme forms of the marine mollusca may be taking\nplace in deep-sea deposits. Most of the intermediate forms provided\nwith shells capable of preservation, such as the shelled Gasteropoda\nand the Conchifers, are either littoral, or restricted to comparatively\nsmall depths; whereas the Brachiopoda are deep-sea shells; and the\nCephalopoda may be found voyaging far from land, in the upper strata\nof the sea above them. Even in the seas that surround our own island,\nthe Brachiopodous molluscs\u2014terebratula and crania\u2014have been found, ever\nsince deep-sea dredging became common, to be not very rare shells; and in\nthe Mediterranean, where they are less rare still, fleets of Argonauts,\nthe representatives of a highly organized family of the Cephalopods, to\nwhich it is now believed the Bellerophon of the Pal\u00e6ozoic rocks belonged,\nmay be seen skimming along the surface, with sail and oar, high over the\nprofound depths in which they lie. And, of course, when death comes, that\ncomes to high and low, the remains of both Argonauts and Brachiopods\nmust lie together at the bottom, in beds almost totally devoid of the\nintermediate forms.\n\nNow, the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d in maintaining his hypothesis,\nsuspends it on the handle furnished him by the immense abundance of the\nSilurian Brachiopods. The Silurian period, he says, exhibits \u201ca scanty\nand most defective development of life; so much so, that Mr. Lyell calls\nit, _par excellence_, the age of Brachiopods, with reference to the by\nno means exalted bivalve shell-fish which forms its predominant class.\nSuch being the actual state of the case, I must persist in describing\neven the fauna of this age, which we now know was not the first, as,\ngenerally speaking, such a humble exhibition of the animal kingdom as\nwe might expect, upon the development theory, to find at an early stage\nof the history of organization.\u201d The reader will at once discern the\nfallacy here. The Silurian period was peculiarly an age of Brachiopods,\nfor in no other period were Brachiopods so numerous, specifically or\nindividually, or of such size or importance; whereas it was not _so\npeculiarly_ an age of Cephalopods, for these we find introduced in still\ngreater numbers during the Liasic and Oolitic periods. In 1848, when\nProfessor Edward Forbes edited the Pal\u00e6ontological map of Britain and\nIreland, which forms one of the very admirable series of \u201cJohnstone\u2019s\nPhysical Atlas,\u201d the Cephalopods of the Silurian rocks of England and\nWales were estimated at forty-eight species, and the Brachiopods at\none hundred and fifty; whereas at the same date there were two hundred\nand five Cephalopods of the Oolitic formations enumerated, and but\nfifty-four Brachiopods. It is the molluscs of the inferior, not those\nof the superior class, that constitute (with their contemporaries the\nTrilobites) the characteristic fossils of the Silurian rocks; and hence\nthe propriety of the distinctive name suggested by Sir Charles Lyell.\nBut in the development question, what we have specially to consider is,\nnot the _numbers_ of the low, but the _standing_ of the high. A country\nmay be distinctively a country of flocks and herds, or a country of\nthe carnivorous mammalia, or, like New South Wales or the Galapagos, a\ncountry of marsupial animals or of reptiles. Its human inhabitants may\nbe merely a few hunters or shepherds, too inconsiderable in numbers, and\ntoo much like their brethren elsewhere, to give it any peculiar standing\nas a home of men. But in estimating the highest point in the scale to\nwhich the animal kingdom has attained within its limits, it is of its few\nmen, not of its many beasts, that we must take note. And the point to be\nspecially decided regarding the organisms of the Silurian system, in this\nquestion, is, not the proportion in _number_ which the lower forms bore\nto the higher, but the exact _rank_ which the higher bore in the scale\nof existence. Did the system furnish but a single Cephalopod or a single\nfish, we would yet have as certainly to determine that the chain of being\nreached as high as the Cephalopod or the fish, as if the remains of these\ncreatures constituted its most abundant fossils. The chain of animal\nlife reached quite as high on the evening of the sixth day of creation,\nwhen the human family was restricted to a single pair, as it does now,\nwhen our statists reckon up by millions the inhabitants of the greater\ncapitals of the world; and the special pleader who, in asserting the\ncontrary, would insist on determining the point, not by the _rank_ of the\nmen of Eden, but by the _number_ of minnows or sticklebacks that swarmed\nin its rivers, might be perhaps deemed ingenious in his expedients, but\ncertainly not very judicious in the use of them. It is worthy of remark,\nhowever, that the Brachiopods of those Pal\u00e6ozoic periods in which the\ngroup occupied such large space in creation, consisted of greatly larger\nand more important animals than any which it contains in the present day.\nIt has yielded to what geological history shows to be the common fate,\nand sunk into a state of degradation and decline.\n\nThe geological history of the vegetable, like that of the animal kingdom,\nhas been pressed into the service of the development hypothesis; and\ncertainly their respective courses, both in actual arrangement and in\ntheir relation to human knowledge, seem wonderfully alike. It is not\nmuch more than twenty years since it was held that no exogenous plant\nexisted during the Carboniferous period. The frequent occurrence of\nConifer\u00e6 in the Secondary deposits had been conclusively determined\nfrom numerous specimens; but, founding on what seemed a large amount of\nnegative evidence, it was concluded that, previous to the Liasic age,\nnature had failed to achieve a tree, and that the rich vegetation of the\nCoal Measures had been exclusively composed of magnificent immaturities\nof the vegetable kingdom,\u2014of gigantic ferns and club-mosses, that\nattained to the size of forest trees, and of thickets of the swamp-loving\nhorsetail family of plants, that well nigh rivalled in height those\nforests of masts which darken the rivers of our great commercial cities.\nSuch was the view promulgated by M. Adolphe Brongniart; and it may be\nwell to remark that, so far as the evidence on which it was based was\npositive, the view was sound. It _is_ a fact, that inferior orders of\nplants were developed in those ages in a style which, in their present\nstate of degradation, they never exemplify: they took their place, not,\nas now, among the pigmies and abortions of creation, but among its\ntallest and goodliest productions. It is, however, _not_ a fact that they\nwere the highest vegetable forms of their time. True exogenous trees\nalso existed in great numbers and of vast size. In various localities\nin the coal fields of both England and Scotland,\u2014such as Lennel Braes\nand Allan Bank in Berwickshire, High-Heworth, Fellon, Gateshead, and\nWideopen near Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and in quarries to the west of the\ncity of Durham,\u2014the most abundant fossils of the system are its true\nwoods. In the quarry of Craigleith, near Edinburgh, three huge trunks\nhave been laid open during the last twenty years, within the space of\nabout a hundred and fifty yards, and two equally massy trunks, within\nhalf that space, in the neighboring quarry of Granton, all low in the\nCoal Measures. They lie diagonally athwart the strata,\u2014at an angle of\nabout thirty,\u2014with the nether and weightier portion of their boles\nbelow, like snags in the Mississippi; and we infer, from their general\ndirection, that the stream to which they reclined must have flowed from\nnearly north-east to south-west. The current was probably that of a\nnoble river, which reflected on its broad bosom the shadow of many a\nstately tree. With the exception of one of the Granton specimens, which\nstill retains its strong-kneed roots, they are all mere portions of\ntrees, rounded at both ends as if by attrition or decay; and yet one\nof these portions measures about six feet in diameter by sixty-one feet\nin length; another four feet in diameter by seventy feet in length; and\nthe others, of various thickness, but all bulky enough to equal the\nmasts of large vessels, range in length from thirty-six to forty-seven\nfeet. It seems strange to one who derives his supply of domestic fuel\nfrom the Dalkeith and Falkirk coal-fields, that the Carboniferous\nflora could ever have been described as devoid of trees. I can scarce\ntake up a piece of coal from beside my study fire, without detecting\nin it fragments of carbonized wood, which almost always exhibit the\ncharacteristic longitudinal fibres, and not unfrequently the medullary\nrays. Even the trap-rocks of the district enclose, in some instances,\ntheir masses of lignite, which present in their transverse sections,\nwhen cut by the lapidary, the net-like reticulations of the conifer\u00e6.\nThe fossil botanist, who devoted himself chiefly to the study of\nmicroscopic structure, would have to decide, from the facts of the case,\nnot that trees were absent during the Carboniferous period, but that,\nin consequence of their having been present in amazing numbers, their\nremains had entered more palpably and extensively into the composition\nof coal than those of any other vegetable.[32] So far as is yet known,\nthey all belonged to the two great divisions of the coniferous family,\naraucarians and pines. The huge trees of Craigleith and Granton were of\nthe former tribe, and approximate more nearly to _Altingia excelsa_, the\nNorfolk-Island pine,\u2014a noble araucarian, that rears its proud head from a\nhundred and sixty to two hundred feet over the soil, and exhibits a green\nand luxuriant breadth of foliage rare among the Conifer\u00e6,\u2014than any other\nliving tree.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 53.\n\nALTINGIA EXCELSA, (NORFOLK-ISLAND PINE.)\n\n_From a young specimen in the Botanic Garden, Edinburgh._]\n\nBeyond the Coal Measures terrestrial plants become extremely rare. The\nfossil botanist, on taking leave of the lower Carboniferous beds, quits\nthe land, and sets out to sea; and it seems in no way surprising, that\nthe specimens which he there adds to his herbarium should consist mainly\nof _Fucace\u00e6_ and _Conferve\u00e6_. The development hypothesis can borrow no\nsupport from the simple fact, that while a high terrestrial vegetation\ngrows upon dry land, only alg\u00e6 grow in the sea; and even did the Old Red\nSandstone and Silurian systems furnish, as their vegetable organisms,\nfucoids exclusively, the evidence would amount to no more than simply\nthis, that the land of the Pal\u00e6ozoic periods produced plants of the land,\nand the sea of the Pal\u00e6ozoic periods produced plants of the sea.\n\nIn the Upper Old Red Sandstone,\u2014the formation of the _Holoptychius_\nand the _Stagonolepis_,\u2014the only vegetable remains which I have yet\nseen are of a character so exceedingly obscure and doubtful, that all\nI could venture to premise regarding them is, that they _seem_ to be\nthe fragments of sorely comminuted fucoids. In the formation of the\nMiddle Old Red,\u2014that of the Cephalaspis and the gigantic lobster of\nCarmylie,\u2014the vegetable remains are at once more numerous and better\ndefined. I have detected among the gray micaceous sandstones of\nForfarshire a fucoid furnished with a thick, squat stem, that branches\ninto numerous divergent leaflets or fronds, of a slim parallelogrammical,\ngrass-like form, and which, as a whole, somewhat resembles the scourge\nof cords attached to a handle with which a boy whips his top. And\nProfessor Fleming describes a still more remarkable vegetable organism\nof the same formation, \u201cwhich, occurring in the form of circular, flat\npatches, composed each of numerous smaller contiguous circular pieces, is\naltogether not unlike what might be expected to result from a compressed\nberry, such as the bramble or rasp.\u201d In the Lower Old Red,\u2014the formation\nof the _Coccosteus_ and _Cheiracanthus_,\u2014the remains of fucoids are more\nnumerous still. There are gray slaty beds among the rocks of Navity, that\nowe their fissile character mainly to their layers of carbonized weed;\nand \u201camong the rocks of Sandy-Bay, near Thurso,\u201d says Mr. Dick, \u201cthe\ndark impressions of large fucoids are so numerous, that they remind one\nof the interlaced boughs and less bulky pine-trunks that lie deep in our\nmosses.\u201d A portion of a stem from the last locality, which I owe to Mr.\nDick, measures three inches in diameter; but the ill-compacted cellular\ntissue of the alg\u00e6 is but indifferently suited for preservation; and so\nit exists as a mere coaly film, scarcely half a line in thickness.\n\nThe most considerable collection of the Lower Old Red fucoids which\nI have yet seen is that of the Rev. Charles Clouston of Sandwick, in\nOrkney,\u2014a skilful cultivator of geological science, who has specially\ndirected his pal\u00e6ontological inquiries on the vegetable remains of the\nflagstones of his district, as the department in which most remained\nto be done; but his numerous specimens only serve to show what a\npoverty-stricken flora that of the ocean of the Lower Old Red Sandstone\nmust have been. I could detect among them but two species of plants;\u2014the\none an imperfectly preserved vegetable, more nearly resembling a\nclub-moss than aught else which I have seen, but which bore on its\nsurface, instead of the well-marked scales of the _Lycopodiace\u00e6_,\nirregular rows of tubercles, that, when elongated in the profile, as\nsometimes happens, might be mistaken for minute, ill-defined leaves;\nthe other, a smooth-stemmed fucoid, existing on the stone in most cases\nas a mere film, in which, however, thickly-set longitudinal fibres are\noccasionally traceable, and which may be always distinguished from the\nother by its sharp-edged outline, and from the circumstance that its\nstems continue to retain the same diameter for considerable distances,\nafter throwing off at acute angles numerous branches nearly as bulky\nas themselves. In a Thurso specimen, about two feet in length, which I\nowe to the kindness of Mr. Dick, there are stems continuous throughout,\nthat, though they ramify in that space into from six to eight branches,\nare nearly as thick atop as at bottom. They are the remains, in all\nprobability, of a long, flexible weed, that may have somewhat resembled\nthose fucoids of the intertropical seas, which, streaming slantwise\nin the tide, rise not unfrequently to the surface in from fifteen to\ntwenty fathoms of water; and as, notwithstanding their obscurity,\nthey are among the most perfect specimens of their class yet found,\nand contrast with the stately araucarians of the Coal Measures, in a\nstyle which cannot fail to delight the heart of every assertor of the\ndevelopment hypothesis, I present them to the reader from Mr. Dick\u2019s\nspecimen, in a figure (fig. 54) which, however slight its interest, has\nat least the merit of being true. The stone exhibits specimens of the two\nspecies of Mr. Clouston\u2019s collection,\u2014the sharp-edged, finely-striated\nweed, _a_, and that roughened by tubercles, _b_; which, besides the\ndistinctive character manifested on its surface, differs from the other\nin rapidly losing breath with every branch which it throws off, and,\nin consequence, runs soon to a point. The cut on the opposite page\n(fig. 55) represents not inadequately the cortical peculiarities of\nthe two species when best preserved. The surface of the tubercled one\nwill perhaps remind the Algologist of the knobbed surface of the thong\nor receptacle of _Himanthalia lorea_, a recent fucoid, common on the\nwestern coast of Scotland, but rare on the east. An Orkney specimen\nlately sent me by Mr. William Watt, from a quarry at Skaill, has much\nthe appearance of one of the smaller ferns, such as the moor-worts, sea\nspleen-worts, or maiden-hairs. It exists as an impression in diluted\nblack, on a ground of dark gray, and has so little sharpness of outline,\nthat, like minute figures in oil-paintings, it seems more distinct when\nviewed at arm\u2019s length than when microscopically examined; but enough\nremains to show that it must have been a terrestrial, not a marine\nplant. The accompanying print (fig. 56) may be regarded as no unfaithful\nrepresentation of this unique fossil its state of imperfect keeping.\nThe vegetation of the Silurian system, from its upper beds down till\nwhere we reach the zero of life, is, like that of the Old Red Sandstone,\nalmost exclusively fucoidal. In the older fossiliferous deposits of the\nsystem in Sweden, Russia, the Lake Districts of England, Canada, and\nthe United States, fucoids occur, to the exclusion, so far as is yet\nknown, of every other vegetable form; and such is their abundance in some\nlocalities, that they render the argillaceous rocks in which they lie\ndiffused, capable of being fired as an alum slate, and exist in others\nas seams of a compact anthracite, occasionally used as fuel. They also\noccur in those districts of Wales in which the place and sequence of the\nvarious Silurian formations were first determined, though apparently\nin a state of keeping from which little can be premised regarding\ntheir original forms. Sir Roderick Murchison sums up his notice of the\nvegetable remains of the system in the province whence it derives its\nname, by stating that he had submitted his specimens to \u201cMr. Robert Brown\nand Dr. Greville, and that neither of these eminent botanists were able\nto say much more regarding them than that they were fucoid-like bodies.\u201d\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 54.\n\nFUCOIDS OF THE LOWER OLD RED SANDSTONE.\n\na. _Smooth-stemmed species._\n\nb. _Tubercled species._\n\n(One sixth nat. size, linear.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 55.\n\na. _Smooth-stemmed species._\n\nb. _Tubercled species._\n\n(Natural size.)]\n\nSuch are the vegetable organisms of the Old Red Sandstone and Silurian\nsystems: they are the remains of the ancient marine plants of ancient\nmarine deposits and, as such, lend quite as little support to the\ndevelopment hypothesis as the recent alg\u00e6 of our existing seas. The\ncase, stated in its most favorable form, amounts simply to this,\u2014that\nat certain early periods,\u2014represented by the Upper and Lower Silurian\nand the Old Red deposits,\u2014the seas produced sea-plants; and that, at\na certain later period,\u2014that of the Carboniferous system,\u2014the land\nproduced land-plants. But even this, did it stand alone, would be a _too_\nfavorable statement. I have seen, on one occasion, the fisherman bring\nup with his nets, far in the open sea, a wild rose-bush, that, though\nit still bore its characteristic thorns, was encrusted with serpula,\nand laden with pendulous lobularia. It had been swept from its original\nhabitat by some river in flood, that had undermined and torn down the\nbank on which it grew; and after floating about, mayhap for months, had\nbecome so saturated with water, that it could float no longer. And in\nthat single rose-bush, dragged up to the light and air from its place\namong Sertularia, Flustra, Serpula, and the deep-sea fucoids, I had as\ncertain an evidence of the existence of the dicotyledonous plant, as if\nI had all the families of the Rosaec\u00e6 before me. Now, we are furnished\nby the more ancient formations with evidence regarding the existence\nof a terrestrial vegetation, such as that which the rose-bush in this\ncase supplied. We cannot expect that the proofs should be numerous. In\nthe chart of the Pacific attached to the better editions of \u201cCook\u2019s\nVoyages,\u201d there are several notes along the tract of the great navigator,\nthat indicate where, in mid ocean, trees or fragments of trees had been\npicked up. These entries, however, are but few, though they belong to all\nthe three voyages together: if I remember aright, there are only five\nentries in all,\u2014two in the Northern, and three in the Southern Pacific.\nThe floating shrub or tree, at a great distance from land, is of rare\noccurrence in even the present scene of things, though the breadth of\nland be great, and trees numerous; and in the times of the Silurian and\nOld Red Sandstone systems, when the breadth of land was apparently _not_\ngreat, and trees and shrubs, in consequence, _not_ numerous, it must\nhave been of rarer occurrence still. We learn, however, from Sir Charles\nLyell, that in the \u201cHamilton group of the United States,\u2014a series of\nbeds that corresponds in many of its fossils with the Ludlow rocks of\nEngland,\u2014plants allied to the _Lepidodendra_ of the Carboniferous type\nare abundant; and that in the lower Devonian strata of New York the same\nplants occur associated with ferns.\u201d And I am able to demonstrate, from\nan interesting fossil at present before me, that there existed in the\nperiod of the Lower Old Red Sandstone vegetable forms of a class greatly\nhigher than either _Lepidodendra_ or ferns.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 56.\n\nFERN? OF THE LOWER OLD RED SANDSTONE.\n\n(Natural size.)]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 57.\n\nLIGNITE OF THE LOWER OLD RED SANDSTONE.\n\n(One third nat. size, linear.)]\n\nIn my little work on the Old Red Sandstone, I have referred to an\napparent lignite of the Lower Old Red of Cromarty, which presented, when\nviewed by the microscope, marks of the internal fibre. The surface,\nwhen under the glass, resembled, I said, a bundle of horse-hairs lying\nstretched in parallel lines: and in this specimen alone, it was added,\nhad I found aught in the Lower Old Red Sandstone approaching to proof of\nthe existence of dry land. About four years ago I had this lignite put\nstringently to the question by Mr. Sanderson, and deeply interesting was\nthe result. I must first mention, however, that there cannot rest the\nshadow of a doubt regarding the place of the organism in the geologic\nscale. It is unequivocally a fossil of the Lower Old Red Sandstone. I\nfound it partially embedded, with many other nodules half-disinterred\nby the sea, in an ichthyolitic deposit, a few hundred yards to the\neast of the town of Cromarty, which occurs more than four hundred\nfeet over the Great Conglomerate base of the system. A nodule that\nlay immediately beside it contained a well-preserved specimen of the\n_Coccosteus Decipiens_; and in the nodule in which the lignite itself\nis contained, (fig. 57,) the practised eye may detect a scattered group\nof scales of _Diplacanthus_, a scarce less characteristic organism of\nthe lower formation. And what, asks the reader, is the character of this\nvery ancient vegetable,\u2014the most ancient, by three whole formations,\nthat has presented its internal structure to the microscope? Is it as\nlow in the scale of development as in the geological scale? Does this\nvenerable Adam of the forest appear, like the Adam of the infidel, as a\nsqualid, ill-formed savage, with a rugged shaggy nature, which it would\nrequire the suggestive necessities of many ages painfully to lick into\ncivilization? Or does it appear rather like the Adam of the poet and the\ntheologian, independent, in its instantaneously-derived perfection, of\nall after development?\n\n    \u201cAdam, the goodliest man of men since born\n    His sons.\u201d\n\nIs its tissue vascular or cellular, or, like that of some of the\ncryptogamia, intermediate? Or what, in fine, is the nature and bearing\nof its mute but emphatic testimony, on that doctrine of progressive\ndevelopment of late so strangely resuscitated?\n\nIn the first place, then, this ancient fossil is a true wood,\u2014a\nDicotyledonous or Polycotyledonous _Gymnosperm_, that, like the pines\nand larches of our existing forests, bore naked seeds, which, in their\nstate of germination, developed either double lobes to shelter the embryo\nwithin, or shot out a fringe of verticillate spikes, which performed\nthe same protective functions, and that, as it increased in bulk year\nafter year, received its accessions of growth in outside layers. In\nthe transverse section the cells bear the reticulated appearance which\ndistinguish the conifer\u00e6, (fig. 58, _a_;) the lignite had been exposed\nin its bed to a considerable degree of pressure; and so the openings\nsomewhat resemble the meshes of a net that has been drawn a little awry;\nbut no general obliteration of their original character has taken place,\nsave in minute patches, where they have been injured by compression or\nthe bituminizing process. All the tubes indicated by the openings are, as\nin recent conifer\u00e6, of nearly the same size; and though, as in many of\nthe more ancient lignites, there are no indications of annual rings, the\ndirection of the medullary rays is distinctly traceable. The longitudinal\nsections are rather less distinct than the transverse one; in the section\nparallel to the radius of the stem or bole the circular disks of the\nconifer\u00e6 were at first not at all detected; and, as since shown by a\nvery fine microscope, they appear simply as double and triple lines of\nundefined dots, (_b_,) that somewhat resemble the stippled markings\nof the miniature painter; nor are the openings of the medullary rays\nfrequent in the tangental section (_i. e._ that parallel to the bark,)\n(_c_;) but nothing can be better defined than the peculiar arrangement\nof the woody fibre, and the longitudinal form of the cells. Such is the\ncharacter of this, the most ancient of lignites yet found, that yields\nto the microscope the peculiarities of its original structure. We find\nin it an unfallen _Adam_,\u2014not a half-developed savage.[33]\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 58.\n\nINTERNAL STRUCTURE OF LIGNITE OF LOWER OLD RED SANDSTONE.\n\na. _Transverse section._\n\nb. _Longitudinal section, (parallel to radius, or medullary rays.)_\n\nc. _Longitudinal section, (tangental, or parallel to the bark.)_\n\n(Mag. forty diameters.)]\n\nThe olive leaf which the dove brought to Noah established at least three\nimportant facts, and indicated a few more. It showed most conclusively\nthat there was dry land, that there were olive trees, and that the\nclimate of the surrounding region, whatever change it might have\nundergone, was still favorable to the development of vegetable life.\nAnd, further, it might be very safely inferred from it, that if olive\ntrees had survived, other trees and plants must have survived also; and\nthat the dark muddy prominences round which the ebbing currents were fast\nsweeping to lower levels, would soon present, as in antediluvian times,\ntheir coverings of cheerful green. The olive leaf spoke not of merely\na partial, but of a general vegetation. Now, the coniferous lignite of\nthe Lower Old Red Sandstone we find charged, like the olive leaf, with\na various and singularly interesting evidence. It is something to know,\nthat in the times of the _Coccosteus_ and _Asterolepis_ there existed dry\nland, and that that land wore, as at after periods, its soft, gay mantle\nof green. It is something also to know, that the verdant tint was not\nowing to a profuse development of the mere immaturities of the vegetable\nkingdom,\u2014crisp, slow-growing lichens, or watery spore-propagated fungi\nthat shoot up to their full size in a night,\u2014nor even to an abundance\nof the more highly organized families of the liverworts and the mosses.\nThese may have abounded then, as now; though we have not a shadow of\nevidence that they did. But while we have no proof whatever of _their_\nexistence, we have conclusive proof that there existed orders and\nfamilies of a rank far above them. On the dry land of the Lower Old\nRed Sandstone, on which, according to the theory of Adolphe Brogniart,\nnothing higher than a lichen or a moss could have been expected, the\nship-carpenter might have hopefully taken axe in hand, to explore the\nwoods for some such stately pine as the one described by Milton,\u2014\n\n    \u201cHewn on Norwegian hills, to be the mast\n    Of some great admiral.\u201d\n\nViewed simply in its picturesque aspect, this _olive leaf_ of the Old\nRed seems not at all devoid of poetry. We sail upwards into the high\ngeologic zones, passing from ancient to still more ancient scenes of\nbeing; and, as we voyage along, find ever in the surrounding prospect,\nas in the existing scene from which we set out, a graceful intermixture\nof land and water, continent, river, and sea. We first coast along the\nland of the Tertiary, inhabited by the strange quadrupeds of Cuvier,\nand waving with the reeds and palms of the Paris Basin; the land of the\nWealden, with its gigantic iguanodon rustling amid its tree ferns and\nits cycade\u00e6, comes next; then comes the green land of the Oolite, with\nits little pouched insectivorous quadruped, its flying reptiles, its\nvast jungles of the Brora equisetum, and its forests of the Helmsdale\npine; and then, dimly as through a haze, we mark, as we speed on, the\nthinly scattered islands of the New Red Sandstone, and pick up in our\ncourse a large floating leaf, veined like that of a cabbage, which not a\nlittle puzzles the botanists of the expedition. And now we near the vast\nCarboniferous continent, and see along the undulating outline, between us\nand the sky, the strange forms of a vegetation, compared with which that\nof every previously seen land seems stunted and poor. We speed day after\nday along endless forests, in which gigantic club-mosses wave in air a\nhundred feet over head, and skirt interminable marshes, in which thickets\nof reeds overtop the mast-head. And, where mighty rivers come rolling to\nthe sea, we mark, through the long-retiring vistas which they open into\nthe interior, the higher grounds of the country covered with coniferous\ntrees, and see doddered trunks of vast size, like those of Granton\nand Craigleith, reclining under the banks in deep muddy reaches, with\ntheir decaying tops turned adown the current. At length the furthermost\npromontory of this long range of coast comes full in view: we near it,\u2014we\nhave come up abreast of it: we see the shells of the Mountain Limestone\nglittering white along its further shore, and the green depths under our\nkeel lightened by the flush of innumerable corals; and then, bidding\nfarewell to the land forever,\u2014for so the geologists of but five years\nago would have advised,\u2014we launch into the unmeasured ocean of the Old\nRed, with its three consecutive zones of animal life. Not a single patch\nof land more do those geologic charts exhibit which we still regard as\nnew. The zones of the Silurian and Cambrian succeed the zones of the Old\nRed; and, darkly fringed by an obscure bank of cloud ranged along the\nlast zone in the series, a night that never dissipates settles down upon\nthe deep. Our voyage, like that of the old fabulous navigators of five\ncenturies ago, terminates on the sea in a thick darkness, beyond which\nthere lies no shore and there dawns no light. And it is in the middle of\nthis vast ocean, just where the last zone of the Old Red leans against\nthe first zone of the Silurian, that we have succeeded in discovering\na solitary island unseen before,\u2014a shrub-bearing land, much enveloped\nin fog, but with hills that at least look green in the distance. There\nare patches of floating sea-weed much comminuted by the surf all around\nit; and on one projecting headland we see clear through our glasses a\ncone-bearing tree.\n\nThis certainly is not the sort of arrangement demanded by the exigencies\nof the development hypothesis. A true wood at the base of the Old Red\nSandstone, or a true Placoid in the Limestones of Bala, very considerably\nbeneath the base of the Lower Silurian system, are untoward misplacements\nfor the purposes of the Lamarckian; and who that has watched the progress\nof discovery for the last twenty years, and seen the place of the\nearliest ichthyolite transferred from the Carboniferous to the Cambrian\nsystem, and that of the earliest exogenous lignite from the Lias to the\nLower Devonian, will now venture to say that fossil wood may not yet\nbe detected as low in the scale as any vegetable organism whatever, or\nfossil fish as low as the remains of any animal? But though the response\nof the earlier geologic systems be thus unfavorable to the development\nhypothesis, may not men such as the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d urge, that\nthe geologic evidence, taken as a whole, and in its bearing on groupes\nand periods, establishes the general fact that the lower plants and\nanimals preceded the higher,\u2014that the conifera, for instance, preceded\nour true forest trees, such as the oak and elm,\u2014that, in like manner, the\nfish preceded the reptile, that the reptile preceded the bird, that the\nbird preceded the mammiferous quadruped and the quadrumana, and that the\nmammiferous quadruped and the quadrumana preceded man? Assuredly yes!\nThey may and do urge that Geology furnishes evidence of such a succession\nof existences; and the arrangement seems at once a very wonderful and\nvery beautiful one. Of that great and imposing procession of being of\nwhich this world has been the scene, the programme has been admirably\nmarshalled. But the order of the arrangement in no degree justifies the\ninference based upon it by the Lamarckian. The fact that fishes and\nreptiles were created on an earlier day than the beasts of the field\nand the human family, gives no ground whatever for the belief that \u201cthe\npeopling of the earth was one of a natural kind, requiring time,\u201d or that\nthe reptiles and fishes have been not only the predecessors, but also the\nprogenitors of the beasts and of man. The geological phenomena, even had\nthe author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d been consulted in their arrangement, and\npermitted to determine their sequence, would yet have failed to furnish,\nnot merely an adequate foundation for the development hypothesis,\nbut even the slightest presumption in its favor. In making good the\nassertion, may I ask the reader to follow me through the details of a\nsimple though somewhat lengthened illustration?\n\n\n\n\nSUPERPOSITION NOT PARENTAL RELATION. THE BEGINNINGS OF LIFE.\n\n\nSeveral thousand years ago, ere the upheaval of the last of our raised\nbeaches, there existed somewhere on the British coast a submarine bed,\nrich in sea-weed and the less destructible zoophytes, and inhabited by\nthe commoner crustace\u00e6 and molluscs. Shoals of herrings frequented it\nevery autumn, haunted by their usual enemies the dog-fish, the cod, and\nthe porpoise; and, during the other seasons of the year, it was swum\nover by the ling, the hake, and the turbot. A considerable stream, that\ntraversed a wide extent of marshy country, waving with flags and reeds,\nand in which the frog and the newt bred by millions, entered the sea\na few hundred yards away, and bore down, when in flood, its modicum\nof reptilian remains, some of which, sinking over the submarine bed,\nfound a lodgment at the bottom. Portions of reeds and flags were also\noccasionally entombed, with now and then boughs of the pine and juniper,\nswept from the higher grounds. Through frequent depositions of earthy\nmatter brought down by the streamlet, and of sand thrown up by the sea,\na gradual elevation of the bottom went on, till at length the deep-sea\nbed came to exist as a shallow bank, over which birds of the wader family\nstalked mid-leg deep when plying for food; and on one occasion a small\nporpoise, losing his way, and getting entangled amid its shoals, perished\non it, and left his carcass to be covered up by its mud and silt. That\nelevation of the land, or recession of the sea, to which the country owes\nits last acquired marginal strip of soil, took place, and the shallow\nbank became a flat meadow, raised some six or eight feet above the\nsea-level. Herbs, shrubs, and trees, in course of time covered it over;\nand then, as century succeeded century, it gathered atop a thick stratum\nof peaty mould, embedding portions of birch and hazel bushes, and a few\ndoddered oaks. When in this state, at a comparatively recent period,\nan Italian boy, accompanied by his monkey, was passing over it, when\nthe poor monkey, hard-wrought and ill-fed, and withal but indifferently\nsuited originally for braving the rigors of a keen northern climate,\nlay down and died, and his sorrowing master covered up the remains. Not\nmany years after, the mutilated corpse of a poor shipwrecked sailor was\nthrown up, during a night-storm, on the neighboring beach: it was a mere\nfragment of the human frame,\u2014a mouldering unsightly mass, decomposing\nin the sun; and a humane herd-boy, scooping out a shallow grave for it,\nimmediately over that of the monkey, buried it up. Last of all, a farmer,\nbent on agricultural improvement, furrowed the flat meadow to the depth\nof some six or eight feet, by a broad ditch, that laid open its organic\ncontents from top to bottom. And then a philosopher of the school of\nMaillet and Lamarck, chancing to come that way, stepped aside to examine\nthe phenomena, and square them with his theory.\n\nFirst, along the bottom of the deep ditch he detects marine organisms of\na low order, and generally of a small size There are dark indistinct\nmarkings traversing the gray silt which he correctly enough regards\nas the remains of fucoids and blent with these, he finds the stony\ncells of flustra, the calcareous spindles of the sea-pen, the spines\nof echinus, and the thin granular plates of the crustacea. Layers of\nmussel and pecten shells come next, mixed up with the shells of buccinum,\nnatica, and trochus. Over the shells there occur defensive spines of\nthe dog-fish, blent with the button-like, thornset boucles of the ray.\nAnd the minute skeletons of herrings, with the vertebral and cerebral\nbones of cod, rest over these in turn. He finds, also, well-preserved\nbits of reed, and a fragment of pine. Higher up, the well-marked bones\nof the frog occur, and the minute skeleton of a newt; higher still, the\nbones of birds of the diver family; higher still, the skeleton of a\nporpoise; and still higher, he discovers that of a monkey, resting amid\nthe decayed boles and branches of dicotyledonous plants and trees. He\npursues his search, vastly delighted to find his doctrine of progressive\ndevelopment so beautifully illustrated; and last of all he detects, only\na few inches from the surface, the broken remains of the poor sailor. And\nhaving thus collected his facts, he sets himself to collate them with\nhis hypothesis. To hold that the zoophytes had been created zoophytes,\nthe molluscs molluscs, the fishes fishes, the reptiles reptiles, or the\nman a man, would be, according to our philosopher, alike derogatory to\nthe Divine wisdom and to the acumen and vigor of the human intellect: it\nwould be \u201c_distressing to him to be compelled to picture the power of\nGod, as put forth in any other manner than in those slow, mysterious,\nuniversal laws, which have so plainly an eternity to work in_;\u201d nor,\nwith so large an amount of evidence before him as that which the ditch\nfurnishes,\u2014evidence conclusive to the effect that creation is but\ndevelopment,\u2014does he find it necessary either to cramp his faculties or\noutrage his taste, by a weak yielding to the requirements of any such\nbelief.\n\nMeanwhile the farmer,\u2014a plain, observant, elderly man, comes up, and\nhe and the philosopher enter into conversation. \u201cI have been reading\nthe history of creation in the side of your deep ditch,\u201d says the\nphilosopher, \u201cand find the record really very complete. Look there,\u201d he\nadds, pointing to the unfossiliferous strip that runs along the bottom\nof the bank; \u201cthere, life, both vegetable and animal, first began. It\nbegan, struck by electricity out of albumen, as a congeries of minute\nglobe-shaped atoms,\u2014each a hollow sphere within a sphere, as in the\nwell-known Chinese puzzle; and from these living atoms were all the\nhigher forms progressively developed. The ditch, of course, exhibits\nnone of the atoms with which being first commenced; for the atoms don\u2019t\nkeep;\u2014we merely see their place indicated by that unfossiliferous band\nat the bottom; but we may detect immediately over it almost the first\norganisms into which\u2014parting thus early into the two great branches of\norganic being\u2014they were developed. _There_ are the fucoids, first-born\namong vegetables,\u2014and _there_ the zoophytes, well nigh the lowest of the\nanimal forms. The fucoids are marine plants; for, according to Oken,\n\u2018all life is from the sea,\u2014none from the continent;\u2019 but _there_, a few\nfeet higher, we may see the remains of reeds and flags,\u2014semi-aqueous,\nsemi-aerial plants of the comparatively low monocotyledonous order into\nwhich the fucoids were developed; higher still we detect fragments\nof pines, and, I think, juniper,\u2014trees and shrubs of the land of an\nintermediate order, into which the reeds and flags were developed\nin turn; and in that peaty layer immediately beneath the vegetable\nmould, there occur boughs and trunks of blackened oak,\u2014a noble tree\nof the dicotyledonous division,\u2014the highest to which vegetation in its\nupward course has yet attained. Nor is the progress of the other great\nbranch of organized being\u2014that of the animal kingdom\u2014less distinctly\ntraceable. The zoophytes became crustacea and molluscs,\u2014the crustacea\nand molluscs, dog-fishes and herrings,\u2014the dog-fish, a low placoid,\nshot up chiefly into turbot, cod, and ling; but the smaller osseous\nfish was gradually converted into a batrachian reptile; in short,\nthe herring became a frog,\u2014an animal that still testifies to its\nichthyological origin, by commencing life as a fish. Gradually, in\nthe course of years, the reptile, expanding in size and improving in\nfaculty, passed into a warm-blooded porpoise; the porpoise at length,\ntiring of the water as he began to know better, quitted it altogether,\nand became a monkey, and the monkey by slow degrees improved into\nman,\u2014yes, into man, my friend, who has still a tendency, especially\nwhen just shooting up to his full stature, and studying the \u2018Vestiges,\u2019\nto resume the monkey. Such, Sir, is the true history of creation, as\nclearly recorded in the section of earth, moss, and silt, which you have\nso opportunely laid bare. Where that ditch now opens, the generations\nof the man atop lived, died, and were developed. _There_ flourished\nand decayed his great-great-great-great-grandfather the sea-pen,\u2014his\ngreat-great-great-grandfather the mussel,\u2014his great-great-grandfather\nthe herring,\u2014his great-grandfather the frog,\u2014his grandfather the\nporpoise,\u2014and his father the monkey. And _there_ also lived, died, and\nwere developed, the generations of the oak, from the kelp-weed and tangle\nto the reed and the flag, and from the reed and the flag, to the pine,\nthe juniper, the hazel, and the birch.\u201d\n\n\u201cMaster,\u201d replies the farmer, \u201cI see you are a scholar and, I suspect,\na wag. It would take a great deal of believing to believe all that.\nIn the days of my poor old neighbor the infidel weaver, who died of\n_delirium tremens_ thirty years ago, I used to read Tom Paine; and, as I\nwas a little wild at the time, I was, I am afraid, a bit of a sceptic.\nIt wasn\u2019t easy work always to be as unbelieving as Tom, especially when\nthe conscience within got queasy; but it would be a vast deal easier,\nMaster, to _doubt_ with Tom than to _believe_ with you. I am a plain\nman, but not quite a fool; and as I have now been looking about me in\nthis neighborhood for the last forty years, I have come to know that it\ngives no assurance that any one thing grew out of any other thing because\nit chances to be found atop of it, Master. See, yonder is Dobbin lying\nlazily atop of his bundle of hay; and yonder little Jack, with bridle in\nhand, and he in a few minutes will be atop of Dobbin. And all I see in\nthat ditch, Master, from top to bottom, is neither more nor less than a\ncertain top-upon-bottom order of things. I see sets of bones and dead\nplants lying on the top of other sets of bones and dead plants,\u2014things\nlying atop of things, as I say, like Dobbin on the hay and Jack upon\nDobbin. I doubt not the sea was once here, Master, just as it was once\nwhere you see the low-lying field yonder, which I won from it ten years\nago. I have carted tangle and kelp-weed where I now cut clover and\nrye-grass, and have gathered periwinkles where I now see snails. But it\nis _clean against experience_, as my poor old neighbor the weaver used\nto say,\u2014against _my_ experience, Master,\u2014that it was the kelp-weed that\nbecame the rye-grass, or that the periwinkles freshened into snails.\nThe kelp-weed and periwinkles belong to those plants and animals of the\nsea that we find growing in _only_ the sea; the rye-grass and snails,\nto those plants and animals of the land that we find growing on _only_\nthe land. It is contrary to all experience, and all testimony too, that\nthe one passed into the other, and so I cannot believe it; but I do\nand must believe, instead,\u2014for it is not contrary to experience, and\nmuch according to testimony,\u2014that the Author of all created both land\nproductions and sea productions at the \u2018times before appointed,\u2019 and\n\u2018determined the bounds of their habitation.\u2019 \u2018By faith we understand\nthat the worlds were framed by the word of God;\u2019 and I find I can be\na believer on God\u2019s terms at a much less expense of credulity than an\ninfidel on yours.\u201d\n\nBut in this form at least it can be scarce necessary that the argument\nshould be prolonged.\n\nThe geological phenomena, I repeat, even had the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d\nbeen consulted in their arrangement, and permitted to determine their\nsequence, would fail to furnish a single presumption in favor of the\ndevelopment hypothesis. Does the ditch-side of my illustration furnish it\nwith a single favoring presumption? The arrangement and sequence of the\nvarious organisms are complete in both the zoological and phytological\nbranch. The flag and reed succeed the fucoid; the fir and juniper succeed\nthe flag and reed; and the hazel, birch, and oak succeed the fir and\njuniper. In like manner, and with equal regularity, zoophytes, the\nradiata, the articulata, mollusca, fishes, reptiles, birds, and mammals,\nare ranged, the superior in succession over the inferior classes, in\nthe true ascending order; and yet we at once see that the evidence of\nthe ditch-side, amounting in the aggregate to no more than this, that\nthe remains of the higher lie over those of the lower organisms, gives\nnot a shadow of support to the hypothesis that the lower produced the\nhigher. For, according to the honest farmer, the fact that any one thing\nis found lying on the top of any other thing, furnishes no presumption\nwhatever that the thing below stands in the relation of parent to\nthe thing above. And the evidence which the well-ranged organisms of\nthe ditch-side do not furnish, the organisms of the entire geologic\nscale, even were they equally well ranged, would fail to supply. The\nfossiliferous portion of the ditch-side of my illustration may be, let us\nsuppose, some five or six _feet_ in thickness; the fossiliferous portion\nof the earth\u2019s crust must be some five or six _miles_ in thickness.\nBut the mere circumstance of space introduces no new element into\nthe question. Equally in both cases the fact of superposition is not\n_identical_ with the fact of parental relation, nor even in any degree an\n_analogous_ fact.\n\nAs, however, the succession of remains in the fossiliferous series of\nrocks is infinitely less favorable to the development hypothesis than\nthat of the organisms of the ditch-side, it is not very surprising\nthat the disciples of the development school should be now evincing a\ndisposition to escape from the ascertained facts of Geology, and the\nlegitimate conclusions based upon these, unto unknown and unexplored\nprovinces of the science; or that they should be found virtually urging,\nthat though some of the ascertained facts may seem to bear against them,\nthe facts not yet ascertained may be found telling in their favor.\nSuch, in effect, is the course taken by the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d\nin his \u201cExplanations,\u201d when, availing himself of a difference of\nopinion which exists among some of our most accomplished geologists\nregarding the first epochs of organized existence, he takes part with\nthe section who hold that we have not yet penetrated to the deposits\nrepresentative of the dawn of being, and that fossil-charged formations\nmay yet be detected beneath the oldest rocks of what is now regarded\nas the lowest fossiliferous system. Sir Charles Lyell and Mr. Leonard\nHornet represent the abler and better-known assertors of this last view;\nwhile Sir Roderick Murchison and Professor Sedgwick rank among the more\ndistinguished assertors of the antagonist one. It would be of course\nutterly presumptuous in the writer of these pages to attempt deciding\na question regarding which such men differ; but in forming a judgment\nfor myself, various considerations incline me to hold, that the point\nis now very nearly determined at which, to employ the language of Sir\nRoderick, \u201clife was first breathed into the waters.\u201d The pyramid of\norganized existence, as it ascends in the by-past eternity, inclines\nsensibly towards its apex,\u2014that apex of \u201c_beginning_\u201d in which, on\nfar other than geological grounds, it is our privilege to believe.\nThe broad base of the superstructure, planted on the existing _now_,\nstretches across the entire scale of life, animal and vegetable; but it\ncontracts as it rises into the past;\u2014man\u2014the quadrumana\u2014the quadrupedal\nmammal\u2014the bird\u2014and the reptile\u2014are each in succession struck from off\nits breadth, till we at length see it with the vertebrata, represented\nby only the fish, narrowing, as it were, to a point; and though the\nclouds of the upper region may hide its extreme apex, we infer from the\ndeclination of its sides, that it cannot penetrate much farther into the\nprofound. When Steele and Addison were engaged in breaking up, piecemeal,\ntheir Spectator Club,\u2014killing off good Sir Roger de Coverly with a\ndefluction, marrying Will Honeycomb to his tenant\u2019s daughter, and sending\naway Captain Sentry and Sir Andrew Freeport to their estates to the\ncountry,\u2014it was shrewdly inferred that the \u201cSpectator\u201d himself was very\nsoon to quit the field; and the sudden discontinuance of his lucubrations\njustified the inference. And a corresponding style of reasoning, based\non the corresponding fact of the breaking up and piecemeal disappearance\nof the group of organized being, seems equally admissible. It is\nsomewhat difficult to conceive how at least _many_ more volumes of the\ngeologic record than the known ones could be got up without the _club_.\nFurther,\u2014so far as yet appears, the fish must have lived in advance of\nthe reptile during the three protracted periods of the Old Red Sandstone,\nthe two still more protracted periods of the Upper and Lower Silurians,\nand the perhaps more protracted period still of the Cambrian deposits;\u2014in\nall, apparently, a greatly more extended space than that in which the\nreptile lived in advance of the quadrupedal mammal, or the quadrupedal\nmammal lived in advance of man. On principles somewhat similar to those\non which, with reference to the average term of life, the genealogist\nfixes the probable period of some birth in his chain of succession of\nwhich he cannot determine the exact date, it seems natural to infer that\nthe _birth_ of the fish should have taken place at least not earlier than\nthe times of the Cambrian system.\n\nThere is another consideration, of at least equal, if not greater\nweight. A general correspondence is found to obtain in widely-separated\nlocalities, in the organic contents of that lowest band of the Lower\nSilurian or Cambrian system in which fossils have been detected. In\nRussia, in Sweden, in Norway, in the Lake district of England, and in\nthe United States, there are certain rocks which occupy relatively\nthe same place, and enclose what may be described generally as the\nsame remains. They occur in Scandinavia as that \u201cfucoidal band\u201d of Sir\nRoderick Murchison which forms the base of the vast Pal\u00e6ozoic basin of\nthe Baltic; they exist in Cumberland and Westmoreland as the Skiddaw\nslates of Professor Sedgwick, and bear also their fucoidal impressions,\nblent with graptolites; they are present in North America as those\nPotsdam sandstones of the States\u2019 geologists in which fucoids so abound,\nmixed with a minute lingula, that they impart to some portions of the\nstrata a carboniferous character. But with these deep-lying beds in\nall the several localities, thousands of miles apart, in which their\npassage into the inferior deposits has been traced, fossils cease. And\nwhy cease with them? In one locality the ancient ocean may have been of\nsuch a depth in the period immediately _previous_, and represented, in\nconsequence, by the strata immediately _beneath_, that no animal could\nhave _lived_ at its bottom,\u2014though I do not well see why the remains\nof those animals who, like the shark and pilot-fish, are frequently\nseen swimming over the profoundest depths, might not, did such exist\nat the time, be notwithstanding _found_ at its bottom; or in another\nlocality every trace of organization in the nether rocks may have been\nobliterated, at some posterior period, by fire. But it is difficult to\nimagine that that uniform cessation of organized life at one point, which\nseems to have conducted Sir Roderick Murchison and Professor Sedgwick\nto their conclusion, should have been thus a mere effect of accident.\nAccident has its laws, but uniformity is not one of them; and should the\nexperience be invariable, as it already seems extensive, that immediately\nbeneath the fucoidal beds organic remains cease, I do not see how the\nconclusion is to be avoided, that they represent the period in which at\nleast _existences capable of preservation_ were first introduced. Every\ncase of coincident cessation which has occurred since the determination\nof the second case, must be reckoned, not simply as an additional\nunit in evidence, but, on the principles which determine mathematical\nprobability, as a unit multiplied first by the chances against its\noccurrence, regarded as a mere contingency in that exact formation, and\nsecond, by the sum of all the previous occurrences at the same point.\n\nIn this curious question, however, which it must be the part of future\nexplorers in the geological field definitely to settle, the Lamarckian\ncan have no legitimate stake. It is but natural that, in his anxiety to\nsecure an ultimate retreat for his hypothesis, he should desire to see\nthat darkness in which ghosts love to walk settling down on the extreme\nverge of the geological horizon, and enveloping in its folds the first\nbeginnings of life. But even did the cloud exist, it is, if I may so\nexpress myself, on its nearer side, where there is light,\u2014not within nor\nbeyond it, where there is none,\u2014that the battle must be fought. It is to\nGeology _as it is known to be_, that the Lamarckian has appealed,\u2014not\nto Geology as it is _not_ known to be. He has summoned into court\n_existing_ witnesses; and, finding their testimony unfavorable, he seeks\nto neutralize their evidence by calling from the \u201cvasty deep,\u201d of the\nunexamined and the obscure, witnesses that \u201cwon\u2019t come,\u201d\u2014that by the\nlegitimate authorities are not known even to exist,\u2014and with which he\nhimself is, on his own confession, wholly unacquainted, save in the old\nscholastic character of mere possibilities. The _possible_ fossil can\nhave no more standing in this controversy than the \u201c_possible angel_.\u201d\nHe tells us that we have not yet got down to that base-line of all the\nfossiliferous systems at which life first began; and very possibly we\nhave not. But what of that? He has carried his appeal to Geology _as it\nis_;\u2014he has referred his case to the testimony of the _known_ witnesses,\nfor in no case can the _unknown_ ones be summoned or produced. It is on\nthe evidence of the known, and the known only, that the exact value of\nhis claims must be determined; and his appeal to the unknown serves but\nto show how thoroughly he himself feels that the actually ascertained\nevidence bears against him. The severe censure of Johnson on reasoners of\nthis class is in no degree over-severe. \u201cHe who will determine,\u201d said the\nmoralist, \u201cagainst that which he knows, because there may be something\nwhich he knows not,\u2014he that can set hypothetical possibility against\nacknowledged certainty,\u2014is not to be admitted among reasonable beings.\u201d\n\nBut the honest farmer\u2019s reminiscences of his deceased neighbor the\nweaver, and his use at second-hand of Hume\u2019s experience-argument,\nnaturally lead me to another branch of the subject.\n\n\n\n\nLAMARCKIAN HYPOTHESIS OF THE ORIGIN OF PLANTS. ITS CONSEQUENCES.\n\n\nI have said that the curiously-mixed, semi-marine, semi-lacustrine flora\nof the Lake of Stennis became associated in my mind, like the ancient\n_Asterolepis_ of Stromness, with the development hypothesis. The fossil,\nas has been shown, represents not inadequately the geologic evidence in\nthe question,\u2014the mixed vegetation of the lake may be regarded as forming\na portion of the phytological evidence.\n\n\u201cAll life,\u201d says Oken, \u201cis from the sea. Where the sea organism, by\nself-elevation, succeeds in attaining into form, there issues forth\nfrom it a higher organism. Love arose out of the sea-foam. The primary\nmucus (that in which electricity originates life) was, and is still,\ngenerated in those very parts of the sea where the water is in contact\nwith earth and air, and thus upon the shores. The first creation of the\norganic took place where the first mountain summits projected out of the\nwater,\u2014indeed, without doubt, in India, if the Himalaya be the highest\nmountain. _The first organic forms, whether plants or animals, emerged\nfrom the shallow parts of the sea._\u201d Maillet wrote to exactly the same\neffect a full century ago. \u201cIn a word,\u201d we find him saying, in his\n\u201cTelliamed,\u201d \u201cdo not herbs, plants, roots, grains, and all of this kind\nthat the earth produces and nourishes, come from the sea? Is it not at\nleast natural to think so, since we are certain that all our habitable\nlands came originally from the sea? Besides, in small islands far from\nthe continent, which have appeared but a few ages ago at most, and where\nit is manifest that never any man had been, we find shrubs, herbs, roots,\nand sometimes animals. Now, you must be forced to own either that these\nproductions owed their origin to the sea, or to a new creation, which is\nabsurd.\u201d\n\nIt is a curious fact, to which, in the passing, I must be permitted to\ncall the attention of the reader, that all the leading assertors of the\ndevelopment hypothesis have been bad geologists. Maillet had for his\nerrors and deficiencies the excellent apology that he wrote more than\na hundred years ago, when the theory of a universal ocean, promulgated\nby Leibnitz nearly a century earlier, was quite as good as any of the\nother theories of the time, and when Geology, as a science, had no\nexistence. And so we do not wonder at an ignorance which was simply that\nof his age, when we find him telling his readers that plants _must_\nhave originated in the sea, seeing that \u201call our habitable lands came\noriginally from the sea;\u201d meaning, of course, by the statement, not at\nall what the modern geologist would mean were he to employ even the same\nwords, but simply that there was a time when the universal ocean covered\nthe whole globe, and that, as the waters gradually diminished, the\nloftier mountain summits and higher table-lands, in appearing in their\nnew character as islands and continents, derived their flora from what,\nin a universal ocean could be the only possible existing flora,\u2014that\nof the sea. But what shall we say of the equally profound ignorance\nmanifested by Professor Oken, a living authority, whom we find prefacing\nfor the Ray Society, in 1847, the English translation of his \u201cElements\nof Physio-philosophy?\u201d \u201cThe first creation of the organic took place,\u201d\nwe find him saying, \u201cwhere the first mountain summits projected out\nof the sea,\u2014_indeed, without doubt, in India, if the Himalaya be the\nhighest mountain_.\u201d Here, evidently, in this late age of the world, in\nwhich Geology _does_ exist as a science, do we find the ghost of the\nuniversal ocean of Leibnitz walking once more, as if it had never been\nlaid. Is there now in all Britain even a tyro geologist so unacquainted\nwith geological fact as not to know that the richest flora which the\nglobe ever saw had existed for myriads of ages, and then, becoming\nextinct, had slept in the fossil state for myriads of ages more, ere\nthe highest summits of the Himalayan range rose over the surface of the\ndeep? The Himalayas disturbed, and bore up along with them in their\nupheaval, vast beds of the Oolitic system. Belemnites and ammonites have\nbeen dug out of their sides along the line of perpetual snow, seventeen\nthousand feet over the level of the sea. What in the recent period form\nthe loftiest mountains of the globe, existed as portions of a deep-sea\nbottom, swum over by the fishes and reptiles of the great Secondary\nperiod, when what is now Scotland had its dark forests of stately\npine,\u2014represented in the present age of the world by the lignites of\nHelmsdale, Eathie, and Eigg,\u2014and when the plants of a former creation\nlay dead and buried deep beneath, in shales and fire-clay,\u2014existing as\nvast beds of coal, or entombed in solid rock, as the brown massy trunks\nof Granton and Craigleith. And even ere these last existed as living\ntrees, the coniferous lignite of the Lower Old Red Sandstone found at\nCromarty had passed into the fossil state, and lay as a semi-calcareous,\nsemi-bituminous mass, amid perished _Dipterians_ and extinct _Coccostei_.\nSo much for the Geology of the German Professor. And be it remarked,\nthat the _actualities_ in this question can be determined by only the\ngeologist. The mere naturalist may indicate from the analogies of his\nscience, what possibly _might_ have taken place, but what really _did_\ntake place, and the true order in which the events occurred, it is the\npart of the geologist to determine. It cannot be out of place to remark,\nfurther, that geological discovery is in no degree responsible for the\ninfidelity of the development hypothesis; seeing that, in the first\nplace, the hypothesis _is greatly more ancient than the discoveries_,\nand, in the second, that its more prominent assertors are _exactly the\nmen who know least of geological fact_. But to this special point I shall\nagain refer.\n\nThe author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d is at one, regarding the supposed marine\norigin of terrestrial plants, with Maillet and Oken; and he regards the\ntheory, we find him stating in his \u201cExplanations,\u201d as the true key to\nthe well-established fact, that the vegetation of groupes of islands\ngenerally corresponds with that of the larger masses of land in their\nneighborhood. Marine plants of the same kinds crept out of the sea, it\nwould seem, upon the islands on the one hand, and upon the larger masses\nof land on the other, and thus produced the same flora in each; just as\ntadpoles, after passing their transition state, creep out of their canal\nor river on the opposite banks, and thus give to the fields or meadows on\nthe right-hand side a supply of frogs, of the same appearance and size\nas those poured out upon the fields and meadows of the left. \u201cThus, for\nexample,\u201d we find him saying, \u201cthe Galapagos exhibit general characters\nin common with South America; and the Cape de Verd islands, with Africa.\nThey are, in Mr. Darwin\u2019s happy phrase, satellites to those continents,\nin respect of natural history. Again,\u201d he continues, \u201cwhen masses of\nland are only divided from each other by narrow seas, there is usually a\ncommunity of forms. The European and African shores of the Mediterranean\npresent an example. Our own islands afford another of far higher value.\nIt appears that the flora of Ireland and Great Britain is various, or\nrather that we have five floras or distinct sets of plants, and that\neach of these is partaken of by a portion of the opposite continent.\nThere are, first, a flora confined to the west of Ireland, and imparted\nlikewise to the north-west of Spain; second, a flora in the south-west\npromontory of England and of Ireland, extending across the Channel to\nthe north-west coast of France; third, one common to the south-east\nof England and north of France; fourth, an Alpine flora developed in\nthe Scottish and Welsh Highlands, and intimately related to that of\nthe Norwegian Alps; fifth, a flora which prevails over a large part of\nEngland and Ireland, \u2018mingled with other floras, and diminishing slightly\nas we proceed westward:\u2019 this bears intimate relation with the flora\nof Germany. Facts so remarkable would force the meanest fact-collector\nor species-demonstrator into generalization. The really ingenious man\nwho lately brought them under notice (Professor Edward Forbes) could\nonly surmise, as their explanation, that the spaces now occupied by the\nintermediate seas must have been dry land at the time when these floras\nwere created. In that case, either the original arrangement of the\nfloras, or the selection of land for submergence, must have been apposite\nto the case in a degree far from usual. The necessity for a simpler cause\nis obvious, and it is found in the hypothesis of a _spread of terrestrial\nvegetation from the sea into the lands adjacent_. The community of forms\nin the various regions opposed to each other merely indicates a distinct\nmarine creation in each of the oceanic areas respectively interposed, and\nwhich would naturally advance into the lands nearest to it, as far as\ncircumstances of soil and climate were found agreeable.\u201d\n\nSuch, regarding the origin of terrestrial vegetation, are the views\nof Maillet, Oken, and the author of the \u201cVestiges.\u201d They all agree in\nholding that the plants of the land existed in their first condition as\nweeds of the sea.\n\nLet me request the reader at this stage, ere we pass on to the\nconsideration of the experience-argument, to remark a few incidental,\nbut by no means unimportant, consequences of the belief. And, first, let\nhim weigh for a moment the comparative demands on his credulity of the\ntheory by which Professor Forbes accounts for the various floras of the\nBritish Islands, and that hypothesis of transmutation which the author of\nthe \u201cVestiges\u201d would so fain put in its place, as greatly more simple,\nand, of course, more in accordance with the principles of human belief.\nIn order to the reception of the Professor\u2019s theory, it is necessary to\nhold, in the first place, that the creation of each species of plant\ntook place, not by repetition of production in various widely-separated\ncentres, but in some single centre, from which the species propagated\nitself by seed, bud, or scion, across the special area which it is now\nfound to occupy. And this, in the first instance, is of course as much an\nassumption as any of those assumed numbers or assumed lines with which,\nin algebra and the mathematics, it is necessary in so many calculations\nto set out, in quest of some required number or line, which, without the\nassistance of the assumed ones, we might despair of ever finding. But\nthe assumption is in itself neither unnatural nor violent; there are\nvarious very remarkable analogies which lend it support; the facts which\nseem least to harmonize with it are not wholly irreconcilable, and are,\nbesides, of a merely exceptional character; and, further, it has been\nadopted by botanists of the highest standing.[34] It is necessary to\nhold, in the second place, in order to the reception of the theory, that\nthe area of the earth\u2019s surface occupied by the British Islands and the\nneighboring coasts of the Continent once stood fifty fathoms higher, in\nrelation to the existing sea-level, than it does now,\u2014a belief which,\nwhatever its specific grounds or standing in this particular case, is\nat least in strict accordance with the general geological phenomena of\nsubsidence and elevation, and which, so far from outraging any experience\nfounded on observation or testimony, runs in the same track with what\nis known of wide areas now in the course of sinking, like that on the\nItalian coast, in which the Bay of Bai\u00e6 and the ruins of the temple of\nSerapis occur, or that in Asia, which includes the Run of Cutch; or of\nwhat is known of areas in the course of rising, like part of the coast\nof Sweden, or part of the coast of South America, or in Asia along the\nwestern shores of Aracan. Whereas, in order to close with the _simpler_\nantagonistic belief of the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d it is necessary\nto hold, _contrary_ to all experience, that _dulce_ and _henware_[35]\nbecame, through a very wonderful metamorphosis, cabbage and spinnage;\nthat kelp-weed and tangle bourgeoned into oaks and willows; and that\n_slack_, _rope-weed_, and _green-raw_,[36] shot up into mangel-wurzel,\nrye-grass, and clover. _Simple_, certainly! An infidel on terms such\nas these could with no propriety be regarded as an _unbeliever_. It is\nwell that the New Testament makes no such extraordinary demands on human\ncredulity.\n\nLet us remark further, at this stage, that, judging from the generally\nreceived geological evidence in the case, very little time seems to be\nallowed by the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d for that miraculous process of\ntransmutation through which the low alg\u00e6 of our sea-shores are held to\nhave passed into high orders of plants which constitute the prevailing\nBritish flora. The boulder clay, which rises so high along our hills,\nand which, as shown by its inferior position on the lower grounds, is\ndecidedly the most ancient of the country\u2019s superficial deposits, is yet\nso modern, geologically, that it contains only recent shells. It belongs\nto that cold, glacial, post-Tertiary period, in which what is now Britain\nexisted as a few groupes of insulated hill-tops, bearing the semi-arctic\nvegetation of our fourth flora,\u2014that true _Celtic_ flora of the country\nwhich we now find, like the country\u2019s Celtic races of our own species,\ncooped up among the mountains. The fifth or Germanic flora must have\nbeen introduced, it is held, at a later period, when the climate had\ngreatly meliorated. And if we are to hold that the plants of this last\nflora were _developed_ from sea-weed, not propagated across a continuity\nof land from the original centre in Germany, or borne by currents from\nthe mouths of the Germanic rivers,\u2014the theory of Mon. C. Martins,\u2014then\nmust we also hold that that development took place since the times of\nthe boulder clay, and that fucoids and conferv\u00e6 became dicotyledonous\nand monocotyledonous plants during a brief period, in which the _Purpura\nlapillus_ and _Turritella terebra_ did not alter a single whorl, and\nthe _Cyprina islandica_ and _Astarte borealis_ retained unchanged each\nminute projection of their hinges, and each nicer peculiarity of their\nmuscular impressions. _Creation_ would be greatly less wonderful than a\nsudden transmutative process such as this, restricted in its operation\nto groupes of English, Irish, and Manx plants, identical with groupes\nin Germany, when all the various organisms around them, such as our\nsea-shells, continued to be exactly what they had been for ages before.\nA process of development from the lowest to the highest forms, rigidly\nrestricted to the flora of a country, would be simply the miracle of\nJonah\u2019s gourd several thousand times repeated.\n\nI must here indulge in a few remarks more, which, though they may seem of\nan incidental character, have a direct bearing on the general subject.\nThe geologist infers, in all his reasonings founded on fossils, that a\nrace or species has existed from some one certain point in the scale\nto some other certain point, if he find it occurring at both points\ntogether. He infers on this principle, for instance, that the boulder\nclay, which contains only _recent_ shells, belongs to the _recent_ or\npost-Tertiary period; and that the Oolite and Lias, which contain _no_\nrecent shells, represent a period whose existences have all become\nextinct. And all experience serves to show that his principle is a sound\none. In creation there are many species linked together, from their\ndegree of similarity, by the _generic_ tie; but no perfect verisimilitude\nobtains among them, unless hereditarily derived from the one, two, or\nmore individuals, of contemporary origin, with which the race began.\nTrue, there are some races that have spread over very wide circles,\u2014the\ncircle of the human family has become identical with that of the globe;\nand there are certain plants and animals that, from peculiar powers of\nadaptation to the varieties of soil and climate,\u2014mayhap also from the\ntenacious vitality of their seeds, and their facilities of transport by\nnatural means,\u2014are likewise diffused very widely. There are plants,\ntoo, such as the common nettle and some of the ordinary grasses, which\naccompany civilized man all over the globe, he scarce knows how, and\nspring up unbidden where-ever he fixes his habitation. He, besides,\ncarries with him the common agricultural weeds: there are localities\nin the United States, says Sir Charles Lyell, where these _exotics_\noutnumber the native plants; but these are exceptions to the prevailing\neconomy of distribution; and the circles of species generally are\ncomparatively limited and well defined. The mountains of the southern\nhemisphere have, like those of Switzerland and the Scotch Highlands,\ntheir forests of coniferous trees; but they furnish no Swiss pines or\nScotch firs; nor do the coasts of New Zealand or Van Dieman\u2019s Land\nsupply the European shells or fish. True, there may be much to puzzle\nin the identity of what may be termed the exceptional plants, equally\nindigenous, apparently, in circles widely separated by space. It has\nbeen estimated that there exist about a hundred thousand vegetable\nspecies, and of these, thirty Antarctic forms have been recognized by\nDr. Hooker as identical with European ones. Had Robinson Crusoe failed\nto remember that he had shaken the old corn-bag where he found the wheat\nand barley ears springing up on his island, he might have held that he\nhad discovered a new centre of the European cerealia. And the process\nanalogous to the shaking of the bag is frequently a process _not_ to be\nremembered. There are several minute lochans in the Hebrides and the west\nof Ireland in which there occurs a small plant of the cord-rush family,\n(_Eriocaulon septangulare_,) which, though common in America, is nowhere\nto be found on the European Continent. It is the only British plant\nwhich belongs to no other part of Europe. How was it transported across\nthe Atlantic? Entangled, mayhap, in the form of a single seed,\u2014for its\nseeds are exceedingly light and small,\u2014in the plumage of some water-fowl,\nfree of both sea and lake, it had been carried in the germ from the\nweed-skirted edge of some American swamp or mere, to some mossy lochan of\nConnaught or of Skye; and one such seed transported by one such accident,\nunique in its occurrence in thousands of years, would be quite sufficient\nto puzzle all the botanists forever after. I have seen the seed of one\nof our Scotch grasses, that had been originally caught in the matted\nfleece of a sheep reared among the hills of Sutherland, and then wrought\ninto a coarse, ill-dressed woollen cloth, carried about for months in a\npiece of underclothing. It might have gone over half the globe in that\ntime, and, when cast away with the worn vestment, might have originated\na new circle for its species in South America or New Holland. There are\nseeds specially contrived by the Great Designer to be carried far from\ntheir original habitats in the coats of animals,\u2014a mode which admits\nof transport to much greater distances than the mode, also extensively\noperative, of consigning them for conveyance to their stomachs; and when\nwe see the work in its effects, we are puzzled by the want of a record\nof an emigratory process, of which, in the circumstances, no record\ncould possibly exist. Unable to make out a case for the \u201cshaking of the\nbag,\u201d we bethink us, in the emergency, of repetition of creation. But\nin circles separated by _time_, not space,\u2014by _time_, across whose dim\ngulfs no voyager sails, and no bird flies, and over which there are\nno means of transport from the point where a race once fails, to any\nother point in the future,\u2014we find no repetition of species. If the\nproduction of perfect duplicates or triplicates in independent centres\nwere a law of nature, our works of physical science could scarce fail\nto tell us of identical species found occurring in widely-separated\nsystems,\u2014Scotch firs and larches, for instance, among the lignites of\nthe Lias, or _Cyprina islandica_ and _Ostrea edulis_ among the shells\nof the Mountain Limestone. But never yet has the geologist found in his\nsystems or formations any such evidence as facts such as these might be\nlegitimately held to furnish, of the independent _de novo_ production of\nindividual members of any single species. On the contrary, the evidence\nlies so entirely the other way, that he reasons on the existence of a\nfamily relation obtaining between all the members of each species, as\none of his best established principles. If members of the same species\nmay exist through _de novo_ production, without hereditary relationship,\nso thoroughly, in consequence, does the fabric of geological reasoning\nfall to the ground, that we find ourselves incapacitated from regarding\neven the bed of common cockle or mussel shells, which we find lying a few\nfeet from the surface on our raised beaches, as of the existing creation\nat all. Nay, even the human remains of our moors may have belonged, if\nour principle of relationship in each species be not a true one, to\nsome former creation, cut off from that to which we ourselves belong,\nby a wide period of death. All pal\u00e6ontological reasoning is at an end\nforever, if identical species can originate in independent centres,\nwidely separated from each other by periods of time; and if they fail to\noriginate in periods separated by time, how or why in centres separated\nby space?\n\nLet the reader remark further, the bearing of those facts from which this\nprinciple of geological reasoning has been derived, on the development\nhypothesis. We find species restricted to circles and periods; and though\nstragglers are occasionally found outside the circle in the existing\nstate of things, never are they found beyond their period among the\nremains of the past. It was profoundly argued by Cuvier, that _life_\ncould not possibly have had a chemical origin. \u201cIn fact,\u201d we find him\nremarking, \u201clife exercising upon the elements which at every instant\nform part of the living body, and upon those which it attracts to it, an\naction contrary to that which would be produced without it by the usual\nchemical affinities, it is inconsistent to suppose that it can itself\nbe produced by these affinities.\u201d And the phenomena of restriction to\ncircle and period testify to the same effect. Nothing, on the one hand,\ncan be more various in character and aspect than the organized existences\nof the various circles and periods; nothing more invariable, on the\nother, than the results of chemical or electrical experiment. And yet,\nto use almost the words of Cuvier, \u201cwe know of no other power in nature\ncapable of reuniting previously separated molecules,\u201d than the electric\nand the chemical. To these agents, accordingly, all the assertors of the\ndevelopment hypothesis have had recourse for at least the _origination_\nof life. Air, water, earth existing as a saline mucus, and an active\npersistent electricity, are the creative ingredients of Oken. The\nauthor of the \u201cVestiges\u201d is rather less explicit on the subject: he\nsimply refers to the fact, that the \u201cbasis of all vegetable and animal\nsubstances consists of nucleated cells,\u2014that is, of cells having granules\nwithin them;\u201d and states that globules of a resembling character \u201ccan\nbe produced in albumen by electricity;\u201d and that though albumen itself\nhas not yet been produced by artificial means,\u2014the only step in the\nprocess of creation which is wanting,\u2014it is yet known to be a chemical\ncomposition, the mode of whose production may \u201cbe any day discovered in\nthe laboratory.\u201d Further, he adopts, as part of the foundation of his\nhypothesis, the pseudo-experiment of Mr. Weekes, who holds that out of\ncertain saline preparations, acted upon by electricity, he can produce\ncertain living animalcula of the mite family;\u2014the vital and the organized\nout of the inorganic and the dead. In all such cases, electricity, or\nrather, according to Oken, galvanism, is regarded as the vitalizing\nprinciple. \u201c_Organism_,\u201d says the German, \u201cis _galvanism_ residing in\na thoroughly homogeneous mass.... A galvanic pile pounded into atoms\nmust become alive. In this manner nature brings forth organic bodies.\u201d\nI have even heard it seriously asked whether electricity be not God!\nAlas! could such a god, limited in its capacity of action, like those\n\u201cgods of the plains\u201d in which the old Syrian trusted, have wrought, in\nthe character of Creator, with a variety of result so endless, that in\nno geologic period has repetition taken place? In all that purports to\nbe experiment on the development side of the question, we see nothing\nelse save repetition. The _Acarus Crossi_ of Mr. Weekes is not a new\nspecies, but the _repetition_ of an old one, which has been long known\nas the _Acarus horridus_, a little bristle-covered creature of the mite\nfamily, that harbors in damp corners among the debris of outhouses, and\nthe dust and dirt of neglected workshops and laboratories. Nay, even a\nchange in the chemical portion of the experiment by which he believed the\ncreature to be produced, failed to secure variety. A powerful electric\ncurrent had been sent, in the first instance, through a solution of\nsilicate of potash, and, after a time, the _Acarus horridus_ crawled out\nof the fluid. The current was then sent through a solution of nitrate of\ncopper, and after a due space, the _Acarus horridus_ again creeped out.\nA solution of ferro-cyanate of potash was next subjected to the current,\nand yet again, and in greater numbers than on the two former occasions,\nthere appeared, as in virtue, it would seem, of its extraordinary\nappetency, _to be_ the same ever-recurring _Acarus horridus_. How, or\nin what form, the little creature should have been introduced into the\nseveral experiments, it is not the part of those who question their\nlegitimacy to explain; it is enough for us to know, that individuals of\nthe family to which the _Acarus_ belongs are so remarkable for their\npowers of life, even in their fully developed state, as to resist, for\na time, the application of boiling water, and to live long in alcohol.\nWe know, further, that the _germs_ of the lower animals are greatly\nmore tenacious of vitality than the animals themselves; and that they\nmay exist in their state of embryonism in the most unthought of and\nelusive forms; nay,\u2014as the recent discoveries regarding alterations of\ngeneration have conclusively shown,\u2014that the germ which produced the\nparent may be wholly unlike the germ that produces its offspring, and\nyet identical with that which produced the parent\u2019s parent. Save on\nthe theory of a quiescent vitality, maintained by seeds for centuries\nwithin a few inches of the earth\u2019s surface, we know not how a layer of\nshell, sand, or marl, spread over the bleak moors of Harris, should\nproduce crops of white clover, where only heath had grown before; nor\nhow brakes of doddered furze burnt down on the slopes of the Cromarty\nSutors should be so frequently succeeded by thickets of raspberry. We\nare not, however to give up the _unknown_,\u2014that illimitable province in\nwhich science discovers,\u2014to be a wild region of dream, in which fantasy\nmay invent. There are many dark places in the field of human knowledge\nwhich even the researches of ages may fail wholly to enlighten; but no\none derives a right from that circumstance to people them with chimeras\nand phantoms. They belong to the philosophers of the future,\u2014not to the\nvisionaries of the present. But while it is not our part to explain\n_how_, in the experiments of Mr. Weekes, the chain of life from life has\nbeen maintained unbroken, we can most conclusively show, that that world\nof organized existence of which we ourselves form part, is, and ever has\nbeen, a world, not of tame repetition, but of endless variety. It is\npalpably not a world of _Acarid\u00e6_ of one species, nor yet of creatures\ndeveloped from these, under those electric or chemical laws of which\nthe grand characteristic is invariability of result. The vast variety\nof its existences speak not of the operation of _unvarying laws_, that\nrepresent, in their uniformity of result, the unchangeableness of the\nDivinity, but of _creative acts_, that exemplify the infinity of His\nresources.\n\nLet the reader yet further remark, if he has followed me through these\npreliminary observations, what is really involved in the hypothesis of\nthe author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d regarding the various floras common to\nthe British islands and the Continent. If it was upon his scheme that\nEngland, Ireland, and the mainland of Europe came to possess an identical\nflora, production _de novo_ and by repetition of the same species must\nhave taken place in thousands of instances along the shores of each\nisland and of the mainland. His hypothesis demands that the sea-weed on\nthe coast of Ireland should have been developed, first through lower, and\nthen higher forms, into thousands of terrestrial plants,\u2014that exactly\nthe same process of development from sea-weed into terrestrial plants of\nthe same species should have taken place on the coast of England, and\nagain on the coasts of the Continent generally,\u2014and that identically\nthe same vegetation should have been originated in this way in at least\nthree great centres. And if plants of the same species could have had\nthree distinct centres of organization and development, why not three\nhundred, or three thousand, or three hundred thousand? Nor will it do\nto attempt escaping from the difficulty, by alleging that there is the\ngroundwork in the case of at least a common marine vegetation to start\nfrom; and that thus, if we have not properly the existence of the direct\nhereditary tie among the various individuals of each species, we may yet\nrecognize at least a sort of collateral relationship among them, derived\nfrom the relationship of their marine ancestry. For relationship, in even\nthe primary stage, the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d virtually repudiates, by\nadopting, as one of the foundations of his hypothesis, with, of course,\nall the legitimate consequences, the experiments of Mr. Weekes. The\nanimalcul\u00e6-making process is instanced as representative of the first\nstage of being,\u2014that in which dead inorganic matter assumes vitality;\nand it corresponds, in the zoological branch, to the production of a\nlow marine vegetation in the phytological one. A certain semi-chemical,\nsemi-electrical process, originates, time after time, certain numerous\nlow forms of life, identical in species, but connected by no tie of\nrelationship: such is the presumed result of the Weekes experiment.\nA certain further process of development matures low forms of life,\nthus originated, into higher species, also identical, and also wholly\nunconnected by the family tie: such are the consequences legitimately\ninvolved in that island-vegetation theory promulgated by the author of\nthe \u201cVestiges.\u201d And be it remembered that Mr. Weekes\u2019 process, so far as\nit is simply electrical and chemical, is a process which is as capable\nof having been gone through in all times and all places, as that other\nprocess of strewing marl upon a moor, through which certain rustic\nexperimenters have held that they produced white clover. It could have\nbeen gone through during the Carboniferous or the Silurian period; for\nall truly chemical and electrical experiments would have resulted in\nmanifestations of the same phenomena then as now:\u2014an acid would have\neffervesced as freely with an alkali; and each fibre of an electrified\nfeather\u2014had feathers then existed\u2014would have stood out as decidedly apart\nfrom all its neighbors. We must therefore hold, if we believe with the\nauthor of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d first, from the Weekes experiment, that in all\ntimes, and in all places, every centre of a certain chemical and electric\naction would have become a new centre of creation to certain _recent_\nspecies of low, but not _very_ low, organization; and, second, from his\ndoctrine regarding the identity of the British and Continental floras,\nthat in the course of subsequent development from these low forms, the\nprocess in each of many widely-separated centres,\u2014widely separated both\nby space and time,\u2014would be so nicely correspondent with the process in\nall the others, that the same higher _recent_ forms would be matured in\nall. And to doctrines such as these, the experience of all Geologists,\nall Phytologists, all Zoologists, is diametrically opposed. If these\ndoctrines be true, _their_ sciences are false in their facts, and idle\nand unfounded in their principles.\n\n\n\n\nTHE TWO FLORAS, MARINE AND TERRESTRIAL. BEARING OF THE EXPERIENCE\nARGUMENT.\n\n\nIs the reader acquainted with the graphic verse, and scarce less\ngraphic prose, in which Crabbe describes the appearances presented by\na terrestrial vegetation affected by the waters of the sea? In both\npassages, as in all his purely descriptive writings, there is a solidity\nof truthful observation exhibited, which triumphs over their general\nhomeliness of vein.\n\n                      \u201cOn either side\n    Is level fen, a prospect wild and wide,\n    With dykes on either hand, by ocean self-supplied.\n    Far on the right the distant sea is seen,\n    And salt the springs that feed the marsh between;\n    Beneath an ancient bridge the straitened flood\n    Rolls through its sloping banks of slimy mud;\n    Near it a sunken boat resists the tide,\n    That frets and hurries to the opposing side;\n    The rushes sharp, that on the borders grow,\n    Bend their brown florets to the stream below,\n    Impure in all its course, in all its progress slow.\n    Here a grave Flora scarcely deigns to bloom,\n    Nor wears a rosy blush, nor sheds perfume.\n    The few dull flowers that o\u2019er the place are spread,\n    Partake the nature of their fenny bed;\n    Here on its wiry stem, in rigid bloom,\n    Grows the salt lavender, that lacks perfume;\n    Here the dwarf sallows creep, the septfoil harsh,\n    And the soft slimy mallow of the marsh.\n    Low on the ear the distant billows sound,\n    And just in view appears their stony bound.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe ditches of a fen so near the ocean,\u201d says the poet, in the note\nwhich accompanies this passage, \u201care lined with irregular patches of a\ncoarse-stained laver; a muddy sediment rests on the horse-tail and other\nperennial herbs which in part conceal the shallowness of the stream; a\nfat-leaved, pale-flowering scurvy-grass appears early in the year, and\nthe razor-edged bullrush in the summer and autumn. The fen itself has a\ndark and saline herbage: there are rushes and _arrow-head_; and in a few\npatches the flakes of the cotton-grass are seen, but more commonly the\n_sea-aster_, the dullest of that numerous and hardy genus; a _thrift_,\nblue in flower, but withering, and remaining withered till the winter\nscatters it; the _salt-wort_, both simple and shrubby; a few kinds of\ngrass changed by the soil and atmosphere; and low plants of two or three\ndenominations, undistinguished in the general view of scenery;\u2014such is\nthe vegetation of the fen where it is at a small distance from the ocean.\u201d\n\nAnd such are the descriptions of Crabbe, at once a poet and a botanist.\nIn referring to the blue tint exhibited in salt-fens by the pink-colored\nflower of the _thrift_, (_Statice Armeria_,) he might have added, that\nthe general green of the terrestrial vegetation likewise assumes, when\nsubjected to those modified marine influences under which plants of\nthe land can continue to live, a decided tinge of blue. It is further\nnoticeable, that the general brown of at least the larger alg\u00e6 presents,\nas they creep upwards upon the beach to meet with these, a marked tinge\nof yellow. The prevailing brown of the one flora approximates towards\nyellow,\u2014the prevailing green of the other towards blue; and thus,\ninstead of mutually merging into some neutral tint, they assume at their\nline of meeting directly antagonistic hues.\n\nBut what does experience say regarding the transmutative conversion of\na marine into a terrestrial vegetation,\u2014that experience on which the\nsceptic founds so much? As I walked along the green edge of the Lake\nof Stennis, selvaged by the line of detached weeds with which a recent\ngale had strewed its shores, and marked that for the first few miles the\naccumulation consisted of marine alg\u00e6, here and there mixed with tufts\nof stunted reeds or rushes, and that as I receded from the sea it was\nthe alg\u00e6 that became stunted and dwarfish, and that the reeds, aquatic\ngrasses, and rushes, grown greatly more bulky in the mass, were also\nmore fully developed individually, till at length the marine vegetation\naltogether disappeared, and the vegetable debris of the shore became\npurely lacustrine,\u2014I asked myself whether here, if anywhere, a transition\nflora between lake and sea ought not to be found? For many thousand years\nere the tall gray obelisks of Stennis, whose forms I saw this morning\nreflected in the water, had been torn from the quarry, or laid down in\nmystic circle on their flat promontories, had this lake admitted the\nwaters of the sea, and been salt in its lower reaches and fresh in its\nhigher. And during this protracted period had its quiet, well-shattered\nbottom been exposed to no disturbing influences through which the\ndelicate process of transmutation could have been marred or arrested.\nHere, then, if in any circumstances, ought we to have had in the broad,\npermanently brackish reaches, at least indications of a vegetation\nintermediate in its nature between the monocotyledons of the lake and the\nalg\u00e6 of the sea; and yet not a vestige of such an intermediate vegetation\ncould I find among the up-piled debris of the mixed floras, marine\nand lacustrine. The lake possesses no such intermediate vegetation. As\nthe water freshens in its middle reaches, the alg\u00e6 become dwarfish and\nill-developed; one species after another ceases to appear, as the habitat\nbecomes wholly unfavorable to it, until at length we find, instead of\nthe brown, rootless, flowerless fucoids and conferv\u00e6 of the ocean, the\ngreen, rooted, flower-bearing flags, rushes, and aquatic grasses of\nthe fresh water. Many thousands of years have failed to originate a\nsingle intermediate plant. And such, tested by a singularly extensive\nexperience, is the general evidence.\n\nThere is scarce a chain-length of the shores of Britain and Ireland that\nhas not been a hundred and a hundred times explored by the botanist,\u2014keen\nto collect and prompt to register every rarity of the vegetable kingdom;\nbut has he ever yet succeeded in transferring to his herbarium a single\nplant caught in the transition state? Nay, are there any of the laws\nunder which the vegetable kingdom exists better known than those laws\nwhich fix certain species of the alg\u00e6 to certain zones of coast, in which\neach, according to the overlying depth of water and the nature of the\nbottom, finds the only habitat in which it can exist? The rough-stemmed\ntangle (_Laminaria digitata_) can exist no higher on the shore than\nthe low line of ebb during stream-tides; the smooth-stemmed tangle\n(_Laminaria saccharina_) flourishes along an inner belt, partially\nuncovered during the ebbs of the larger neaps; the forked and cracker\nkelp-weeds (_Fucus serratus_ and _Fucus nodosus_) thrive in a zone still\nless deeply covered by water, and which even the lower neaps expose. And\nat least one other species of kelp-weed, the _Fucus vesiculosus_, occurs\nin a zone higher still, though, as it creeps upwards on the rocky beach,\nit loses its characteristic bladders, and becomes short and narrow of\nfrond. The thick brown tufts of _Fucus canaliculatus_, which in the lower\nand middle reaches of the Lake of Stennis I found heaped up in great\nabundance along the shores, also rises high on rocky beaches,\u2014so high in\nsome instances, that during neap-tides it remains uncovered by the water\nfor days together. If, as is not uncommon, there be an escape of land\nsprings along the beach, there may be found, where the fresh water oozes\nout through the sand and gravel, an upper terminal zone of the conferv\u00e6,\nchiefly of a green color, mixed with the ribbon-like green layer, (_Ulva\nlatissima_,) the purplish-brown layer, (_Porphyra laciniata_,) and still\nmore largely with the green silky Enteromorpha, (_E. compressa_.)[37]\nAnd then, decidedly within the line of the storm-beaches of winter,\u2014not\nunfrequently in low sheltered bays, such as the Bay of Udale or of\nNigg, where the ripple of every higher flood washes,\u2014we may find the\nvegetation of the land\u2014represented by the sentinels and picquets of\nits outposts\u2014coming down, as if to meet with the higher-growing plants\nof the sea. In salt marshes the two vegetations may be seen, if I may\nso express myself, _dovetailed_ together at their edges,\u2014at least one\nspecies of club-rush (_Scirpus maritimus_) and the common saltwort and\nglasswort (_Salsola kali_ and _Salicornia procumbens_) encroaching so far\nupon the sea as to mingle with a thinly-scattered and sorely-diminished\nfucus,\u2014that bladderless variety of the _Fucus vesiculosus_ to which I\nhave already referred, and which may be detected in such localities,\nshooting forth its minute brown fronds from the pebbles. On rocky\ncoasts, where springs of fresh water come trickling down along the\nfissures of the precipices, the observer may see a variety of _Rhodomenia\npalmata_\u2014the fresh-water dulse of the Moray Frith\u2014creeping upwards from\nthe lower limits of production, till just where the common gray balanus\nceases to grow. And there, short and thick, and of a bleached yellow\nhue, _it_ ceases also; but one of the commoner marine conferv\u00e6,\u2014the\n_Conferva arcta_, blent with a dwarfed _Enteromorpha_,\u2014commencing a\nvery little below where the dulse ends, and taking its place, clothes\nover the runnels with its covering of green for several feet higher:\nin some cases, where it is frequently washed by the upward dash of the\nwaves, it rises above even the flood-line; and in some crevice of the\nrock beside it, often as low as its upper edge, we may detect stunted\ntufts of the sea-pink or of the scurvy-grass. But while there is thus\na vegetation intermediate _in place_ between the land and the sea, we\nfind, as if it had been selected purposely to confound the transmutation\ntheory, that it is in no degree intermediate in character. For, while\nit is chiefly marine weeds of the lower division of the conferv\u00e6 that\ncreep upwards from the sea to meet the vegetation of the land, it is\nchiefly terrestrial plants of the higher division of the dicotyledons\nthat creep downwards from the land to meet the vegetation of the sea.\nThe salt-worts, the glass-worts, the arenaria, the thrift, and the\nscurvy-grass, are all dicotyledonous plants. Nature draws a deeply-marked\nline of division where the requirements of the transmutative hypothesis\nwould demand the nicely graduated softness of a shaded one; and,\naddressing the strongly marked floras on either hand, even more sternly\nthan the waves themselves, demands that to a certain definite bourne\nshould they come, and no farther.\n\nBut in what form, it may be asked, or with what limitations, ought the\nChristian controversialist to avail himself, in this question, of the\nexperience argument? Much ought to depend, I reply, on the position\ntaken up by the opposite side. We find no direct reference made by the\nauthor of the \u201cVestiges\u201d to the anti-miracle argument, first broached\nby Hume, in a purely metaphysical shape, in his well-known \u201cInquiry,\u201d\nand afterwards thrown into the algebraic form by La Place, in his\n_Essai philosophique sur les Probabilit\u00e9s_. But we do not detect its\ninfluences operative throughout the entire work. It is because of\nsome felt impracticability on the part of its author, of attaining\nto the prevailing belief in the _miracle_ of creation, that he has\nrecourse, instead, to the so-called _law_ of development. The _law_ and\nthe _miracle_ are the alternatives placed before him; and, rejecting\nthe _miracle_, he closes with the _law_. Now, in such circumstances,\nhe can have no more cause of complaint, if, presenting him with the\nexperience argument of Hume and La Place, we demand that he square\nthe evidence regarding the existence of his _law_ strictly according\nto its requirements, than the soldier of an army that charged its\nfield-pieces with rusty nails would have cause of complaint if he found\nhimself wounded by a missile of a similar kind, sent against him by\nthe artillery of the enemy. You cannot, it might be fairly said, in\naddressing him, acquiesce in the miracle here, because, as a violation of\nthe laws of nature, there are certain objections, founded on invariable\nexperience, which bear direct against your belief in it. Well, here\nare the objections, in the strongest form in which they have yet been\nstated; and here is your hypothesis respecting the development of marine\nalg\u00e6 into terrestrial plants. We hold that against that hypothesis\nthe objections bear at least as directly as against any miracle\nwhatever,\u2014nay, that not only is it contrary to an invariable experience,\nbut opposed also to all testimony. We regard it as a mere idle dream.\nMaillet dreamed it,\u2014and Lamarck dreamed it,\u2014and Oken dreamed it; but none\nof them did more than merely dream it: its existence rests on exactly the\nsame basis of evidence as that of Whang the miller\u2019s \u201cmonstrous pot of\ngold and diamonds,\u201d of which he dreamed three nights in succession, but\nwhich he never succeeded in finding. If we are in error in our estimate,\nhere is the argument, and here the hypothesis; give us, in support of the\nhypothesis, the amount of evidence, founded on a solid experience, which\nthe argument demands.\n\nBut to leave the experience argument in exactly the state in which it\nwas left by Hume and La Place, would be doing no real justice to our\nsubject. It is in that state quite sufficient to establish the fact,\nthat there can be no real escape from belief in _acts of creation_ never\nwitnessed by man, to _processes of development_ never witnessed by man;\nseeing that a presumed _law_ beyond the cognizance of experience must be\nas certainly rejected, on the principle of the argument, as a presumed\n_miracle_ beyond that cognizance. It places the presumed _law_ and the\npresumed _miracle_ on exactly the same level. But there is a palpable\nflaw in the anti-miracle argument. It does not prove that miracles _may\nnot have taken place_, but that miracles, whether they have taken place\nor no, are _not to be credited_, and this simply because they _are_\nmiracles, _i. e._ violations of the established laws of nature. And if it\nbe possible for events to take place which man, on certain principles,\nis imperatively required not to credit, these principles must of course\nserve merely to establish a discrepancy between the actual _state_ of\nthings, and what is to be _believed_ regarding it. And thus, instead of\nserving purposes of truth, they are made to subserve purposes of error;\nfor the existence of truth in the mind is neither more nor less than the\nexistence of certain conceptions and beliefs, adequately representative\nof what actually _is_, or what really _has taken place_.\n\nI cannot better illustrate this direct tendency of the anti-miracle\nargument to destroy truth in the mind, by bringing the mental beliefs\ninto a state of nonconformity with the possible and actual, than by a\nquotation from La Place himself: \u201cWe would not,\u201d he says, \u201cgive credit\nto a man who would affirm that he saw a hundred dice thrown into the\nair, and that they all fell on the same faces. If we had ourselves been\nspectators of such an event, we would not believe our own eyes till we\nhad scrupulously examined all the circumstances, and assured ourselves\nthat there was no trick or deception. After such an examination, we would\nnot hesitate to admit it, notwithstanding its great improbability; and no\none would have recourse to an inversion of the laws of vision in order to\naccount for it.\u201d Now, here is the principle broadly laid down, that it\nis impossible to communicate by the evidence of testimony, belief in an\nevent which _might_ happen, and which, if it happened, _ought_ on certain\nconditions to be credited. No one knew better than La Place himself, that\nthe _possibility_ of the event which he instanced could be represented\nwith the utmost exactitude by figures. The probability, in throwing a\nsingle die, that the ace will be presented on its upper face, is as one\nin six,\u2014six being the entire number of sides which the cube can possibly\npresent, and the side with the ace being one of these;\u2014the probability\nthat in throwing a _pair_ of dice the aces of both will be at once\npresented on their upper faces, is as one in thirty-six, as against the\none sixth chance of the ace being presented by the one, there are also\nsix chances that the ace of the other should not concur with it;\u2014and in\nthrowing _three_ dice, the probability that their three aces should be at\nonce presented is, of course, on the same principle, as one in six times\nthirty-six, or, in other words, as one in two hundred and sixteen. And\nthus, in ascertaining the exact degree of probability of the hundred aces\nat once turning up, we have to go on multiplying by six, for each die we\nadd to the number, the product of the immediately previous calculation.\nUnquestionably, the number of chances _against_, thus balanced with\nthe single chance _for_, would be very great; but its existence as a\ndefinite number would establish, with all the force of arithmetical\ndemonstration, the _possibility_ of the event; and if an eternity were\nto be devoted to the throwing into the air of the hundred dice, it would\noccur an _infinite number of times_. And yet the principle of Hume and La\nPlace forms, when adopted, an impassable gulf between this possibility\nand human belief. The possibility might be embodied, as we see, in an\nactual occurrence,\u2014an occurrence witnessed by hundreds; and yet the\nanti-miracle argument, as illustrated by La Place, would cut off all\ncommunication regarding it between these hundreds of witnesses, however\nunexceptionable their character as such, and the rest of mankind. The\nprinciple, instead of giving us a right rule through which the beliefs\nin the mind are to be rendered correspondent with the reality of things,\ngoes merely to establish a certain imperfection of transmission from one\nmind to another, in consequence of which, realities in fact, if very\nextraordinary ones, could not possibly be received as objects of belief,\nnor the mental appreciation of things be rendered adequately concurrent\nwith the state in which the things really existed.\n\nNor is the case different when, for a _possibility_ which the\narithmetician can represent by figures, we substitute the _miracle_\nproper. Neither Hume nor La Place ever attempted to show that miracles\ncould not take place; they merely directed their argument against a\nbelief in them. The wildest sceptic must admit, if in any degree a\nreasonable man, that there _may_ exist a God, and that that God _may_\nhave given laws to nature. No _demonstration_ of the non-existence of a\nGreat First Cause has been ever yet attempted, nor, until the knowledge\nof some sceptic extends over all space, ever _can_ be rationally\nattempted. Merely to _doubt_ the fact of God\u2019s existence, and to give\nreasons for the doubt, must till then form the highest achievements of\nscepticism. And the God who _may_ thus exist, and who _may_ have given\nlaws to nature, _may_ also have revealed himself to man, and, in order to\nsecure man\u2019s reasonable belief in the reality of the revelation, _may_\nhave temporarily suspended in its operation some great natural law,\nand have thus shown himself to be its Author and Master. Such seems to\nbe the philosophy of miracles; which are thus evidently not only _not_\nimpossibilities, but even not _improbabilities_. Even were we to permit\nthe sceptic himself to fix the numbers representative of those several\n_mays_ in the case, which I have just repeated, the chances against\nthem, so to speak, would be less by many thousand times than the chances\nagainst the hundred dice of La Place\u2019s illustration all turning up\naces. The existence of a Great First Cause is at least as probable\u2014the\nsceptic himself being judge in the matter\u2014as the _non_-existence of a\nGreat First Cause; and so the probability in this first stage of the\nargument, instead of being, as in the case of the single die, only one\nto six, is as one to one. Again,\u2014in accordance with an expectation so\ngeneral among the human family as to form one of the great instincts of\nour nature,\u2014an instinct to which every form of religion, true or false,\nbears evidence,\u2014it is in no degree less probable that this God should\nhave revealed himself to man, than that he should _not_ have revealed\nhimself to man; and here the chances are again as one to one,\u2014not, as in\nthe second stage of the calculation on the dice, as one to thirty-six.\nNor, in the third and last stage, is it less probable that God, in\nrevealing himself to man should have given miraculous evidence of the\ntruth of the revelation, so that man \u201cmight believe in Him for His work\u2019s\nsake,\u201d than that He should _not_ have done so; and here yet again the\nchances are as one to one,\u2014not as one to two hundred and sixteen. No\nrational sceptic could fix the chances lower; nay, no rational sceptic,\nso far as the _existence_ of a Great First Cause is concerned, would be\ninclined to fix them so low: and yet it is in order to annihilate all\nbelief in a possibility against which the chances are so few as to be\nrepresented\u2014scepticism itself being the actuary in the case\u2014by three\nunits, that Hume and La Place have framed their argument. Miracles _may_\nhave taken place,\u2014the probabilities against them, stated in their most\nextreme and exaggerated form, are by no means many or strong; but we are\nnevertheless not to believe that they _did_ take place, simply because\nmiracles they were. Now, the effect of the establishment of a principle\nsuch as this would be simply, I repeat, the destruction of the ability\nof transmitting certain beliefs, however well founded originally, from\none set or generation of men to another. These beliefs the first set\nor generation might, on La Place\u2019s own principles, be compelled to\nentertain. The evidence of the senses, however wonderful the event\nwhich they certified, is not, he himself tells us, to be resisted. But\nthe conviction which, on one set of principles, these men were on no\naccount to resist, the men that came immediately after them were, on\nquite another set of principles, on no account to entertain. And thus\nthe anti-miracle argument, instead of leading, as all true philosophy\nought, to an exact correspondence between the realities of things and\nthe convictions received by the mind regarding them, palpably forms a\nbar to the reception of beliefs, adequate to the possibilities of actual\noccurrence or event, and so constitutes an imperfection or flaw in the\nmental economy, instead of working an improvement. And, in accordance\nwith this view, we find that in the economy of minds of the very highest\norder this imperfection or flaw has had no place. Locke studied and wrote\nupon the subject of miracles proper, and exhibited in his \u201cDiscourse\u201d\nall the profundity of his extraordinary mind; and yet Locke was a\nbeliever. Newton studied and wrote on the subject of miracles of another\nkind,\u2014those of prophecy; and he also, as shown by his \u201cObservations on\nthe Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse,\u201d was a believer. Butler\nstudied and wrote on the subject of miracles, chiefly in connection with\n\u201cMiraculous Revelation;\u201d and he also was a believer. Chalmers studied\nand wrote on the subject of miracles in his \u201cEvidences,\u201d after Hume, La\nPlace, and Playfair had all promulgated their peculiar views regarding\nit; and he also was a believer. And in none of the truly distinguished\nmen of the present day, though all intimately acquainted with the\nanti-miracle argument, is this flaw or imperfection found to exist: on\nthe contrary, they all hold, as becomes the philosophic intellect and\ncharacter, that whatever is possible may occur, and that whatever occurs\nought, on the proper evidence, to be believed.\n\nBut though the experience argument is of no real force, and, as shown by\nthe beliefs of the higher order of minds, of no real effect, when brought\nto bear against miracles supported by the proper testimony, _it is_ of\ngreat force and effect when brought to bear, not against _miracles_,\nbut against some presumed _law_. It is experience, and experience only,\nthat determines what is or is not law, and it is law, and law only,\nthat constitutes the subject-matter of ordinary experience. Experience,\nin determining what is really miracle, does so simply through its\npositive knowledge of law: by knowing law, it knows also what would be a\nviolation of it. And so miracle cannot possibly form the subject-matter\nof experience in the sense of Hume. For did miracle constitute the\nsubject-matter of experience, the law of which the miracle was a\nviolation _could not_: most emphatically, in this case, were there \u201cno\nlaw\u201d there could be \u201cno transgression;\u201d and so experience would be unable\nto recognize, not only the existence of the law transgressed, but also\nof the miracle, in its character as such, which was a transgression of\nthe law. We determine from experience that there exists a certain fixed\nlaw, known among men as the law of gravitation; and that, in consequence\nof this law, if a human creature attempt standing upon the sea, he will\nsink into it; or if he attempt rising from the earth into the heavens,\nhe will remain fixed to the spot on which the attempt is made. Such, in\nthese cases, would be the direct effects of this gravitation _law_; and\nany presumed law antagonistic in its character could not be other than a\nlaw contrary to that invariable experience by which the existence of the\nreal law in the case is determined. But certain it is\u2014for the evidence\nregarding the facts cannot be resisted, and by the greatest minds has\nnot been resisted\u2014that a man _did_ once walk upon the sea without\nsinking into it, and _did_ once ascend from the earth into the sky; and\nthese _miracles_ ought not to be tested\u2014and by earnest inquirers after\ntruth really never have been tested\u2014by any experience of the uniformity\nof the law of which they were professed transgressions, seeing it was\nessentially and obviously necessary that, in order to serve the great\nmoral purpose which God intended by them, the law which they violated\nshould have been a uniform law, and that they should have been palpable\nviolations of it. But while the experience argument is thus of no\nvalue when directed against well-attested _miracle_, it is, as I have\nsaid, all-potent when directed against presumed _law_. Of law we know\nnothing, I repeat, except what experience tells us. A miracle contrary\nto experience in the sense of Hume is simply a miracle; a presumed law\ncontrary to experience is no law at all. For it is from experience, and\nexperience only, that we know any thing of natural law. The argument\nof Hume and La Place is perfect, as such, when directed against the\ndevelopment visions of the Lamarckian.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS IN ITS EMBRYONIC STATE. OLDER THAN ITS ALLEGED\nFOUNDATIONS.\n\n\nWhen Maillet first promulgated his hypothesis, many of the departments\nof natural history existed as mere regions of fable and romance; and,\nin addressing himself to the _Muscadins_ of Paris, in a popular work as\nwild and amusing as a fairy tale, he could safely take the liberty, and\nhe did take it very freely, of exaggerating the marvellous, and adding\nfresh fictions to the untrue. And in preparing them for his theory of\nthe metamorphoses of a marine into a terrestrial vegetation, he set\nhimself, in accordance with his general character, to show that really\nthe transmutation did not amount to much. \u201cI know you have resided a\nlong time,\u201d his Indian Philosopher is made to say, \u201cat Marseilles. Now,\nyou can bear me witness, that the fishermen there daily find in their\nnets, and among their fish, plants of a hundred kinds, with their fruits\nstill upon them; and though these fruits are not so large and so well\nnourished as those of our earth, yet the species of these plants is in\nno other respect dubious. They there find clusters of white and black\ngrapes, peach-trees, pear-trees, prune-trees, apple-trees, and all sorts\nof flowers. When in that city, I saw, in the cabinet of a curious\ngentleman, a prodigious number of those sea-productions of different\nqualities, especially of rose-trees, which had their roses very red when\nthey came out of the sea. I was there presented with a cluster of black\nsea-grapes. It was at the time of the vintage, and there were two grapes\nperfectly ripe.\u201d\n\nNow, all this, and much more of the same nature, addressed to the\nParisians of the reign of Louis the Fifteenth, passed, I doubt not,\nwonderfully well; but it will not do now, when almost every young girl,\nwhether in town or country, is a botanist, and works on the alg\u00e6 have\nbecome popular. Since Maillet wrote, Hume promulgated his argument on\nMiracles, and La Place his doctrine of Probabilities. There can be no\ndoubt that these have exerted a wholesome influence on the laws of\nevidence; and by these laws, as restricted and amended,\u2014laws to which,\nboth in science and religion, we ourselves conform,\u2014we insist on trying\nthe Lamarckian hypothesis, and in condemning it,\u2014should it be found to\nhave neither standing in experience nor support from testimony,\u2014as a\nmere feverish dream, incoherent in its parts and baseless in its fabric.\nGive, we ask, but one well-attested instance of transmutation from the\nalg\u00e6 to even the lower forms of terrestrial vegetation common on our\nsea-coasts, and we will keep the question open, in expectation of more.\nIt will not do to tell us\u2014as Cuvier was told, when he appealed to the\nfact, determined by the mummy birds and reptiles of Egypt, of the fixity\nof species in all, even the slightest particulars, for at least three\nthousand years\u2014that immensely extended periods of time are necessary to\neffect specific changes, and that human observation has not been spread\nover a period sufficiently ample to furnish the required data regarding\nthem. The apology is simply a confession that, in these ages of the\nsevere inductive philosophy, you have been dreaming your dream, cut off,\nas if by the state of sleep, from all the tangibilities of the real\nwaking-day world, and that you have not a vestige of testimony with which\nto support your ingenious vagaries.\n\nBut on another account do we refuse to sustain the excuse. It is\n_not true_ that human observation has not been spread over a period\nsufficiently extended to furnish the necessary data for testing the\ndevelopment hypothesis. In one special walk,\u2014that which bears on the\nsupposed transmutation of alg\u00e6 into terrestrial plants,\u2014human observation\n_has_ been spread over what is strictly analogous to _millions_ of years.\nFor extent of space in this matter is exactly correspondent with duration\nof time. No man, in this late period of the world\u2019s history, attains to\nthe age of five hundred years; and as some of our larger English oaks\nhave been known to increase in bulk of trunk and extent of bough for five\ncenturies together, no man can possibly have seen the same huge oak pass,\naccording to Cowper, through its various stages of \u201ctreeship,\u201d\u2014\n\n    \u201cFirst a seedling hid in grass;\n    Then twig; then sapling; and, as century rolls\n    Slow after century, a giant bulk,\n    Of girth enormous, with moss-cushioned root\n    Upheaved above the soil, and sides embossed\n    With prominent wens globose.\u201d\n\nBut though no man lives throughout five hundred years of time, he can\ntrace, by passing in some of the English forests through five hundred\nyards of space, the history of the oak in all its stages of growth, as\ncorrectly as if he _did_ live throughout the five hundred years. Oaks, in\nthe space of a few hundred yards, may be seen in every stage of growth,\nfrom the newly burst acorn, that presents to the light its two fleshy\nlobes, with the first tender rudiments of a leaflet between, up to the\ngiant of the forest, in the hollow of whose trunk the red deer may\nshelter, and find ample room for the broad spread of his antlers. The\nfact of the development of the oak, from the minute two-lobed seedling of\na week\u2019s growth up to the gigantic tree of five centuries, is as capable\nof being demonstrated by observation spread over five hundred yards of\nspace, as by observation spread over five hundred years of time. And\nbe it remembered, that the sea-coasts of the world are several hundred\nthousand miles in extent. Europe is by far the smallest of the earth\u2019s\nfour large divisions, and it is bounded, in proportion to its size, by a\ngreater extent of land than any of the others. And yet the sea-coasts of\nEurope alone, including those of its islands, exceed twenty-five thousand\nmiles. We have results before us, in this extent of space, identical\nwith those of many hundred thousand years of time; and if terrestrial\nplants were as certainly developments of the low plants of the sea as\nthe huge oak is a development of the immature seedling, just sprung from\nthe acorn, so vast a stretch of sea-coast could not fail to present us\nwith the intermediate vegetation in all its stages. But the sea-coasts\nfail to exhibit even a vestige of the intermediate vegetation. Experience\nspread over an extent of space analogous to millions of years of time,\ndoes not furnish, in this department, a single fact corroborative of the\ndevelopment theory, but, on the contrary, many hundreds of facts that\nbear directly against it.\n\nThe author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d is evidently a practised and tasteful\nwriter, and his work abounds in ingenious combinations of thought; but\nthose powers of abstract reflection on whose vigorous exercise the\norigination of argument depends, nature seems to have denied him. There\nare two things in especial which his work wants,\u2014_original observation_\nand _abstract thought_,\u2014the power of _seeing_ for himself and of\n_reasoning_ for himself; and what we find instead is simply a vivid\nappreciation of the _images_ of things, as these images exist in other\nminds, and a vigorous perception of the various shades of resemblance\nwhich obtain among them. There is a large amount of analogical power\nexhibited; but that basis of truth which correct observation can alone\nfurnish, and that ability of nicely distinguishing differences by\nwhich the faculty of discerning similarity must be forever regulated\nand governed, are wanting, in what, in a mind of fine general texture\nand quality, must be regarded as an extraordinary degree. And hence an\ningenious but very unsolid work,\u2014full of images transferred, not from the\nscientific field, but from the field of _scientific mind_, and charged\nwith glittering but vague resemblances, stamped in the mint of fancy;\nwhich, were they to be used as mere counters in some light literary game\nof story-telling or character-sketching, would be in no respect out of\nplace, but which, when passed current as the proper coin of philosophic\nargument, are really frauds on the popular understanding. There are,\nhowever, not a few instances in the \u201cVestiges\u201d and its \u201cSequel,\u201d in which\nthat defect of reflective power to which I refer rather enhances than\ndiminishes the difficulty of reply, by presenting to the controversialist\nmere intangible clouds with which to grapple; that yet, through the\nexistence of a certain superstition in the popular mind, as predisposed\nto accept as true whatever takes the form of science, as its predecessor\nthe old superstition was inclined a century ago to reject science itself,\nare at least suited to blind and bewilder. Of this kind of difficulty,\nthe following passage, in which the author of the work cashiers the\nCreator as such, and substitutes, instead, a mere animal-manufacturing\npiece of clock-work, which bears the name of natural law,[38] furnishes\nus with a remarkable instance.\n\n\u201cAdmitting,\u201d he remarks, \u201cthat we see not now any such fact as the\nproduction of new species, we at least know, that while such facts were\noccurring upon earth, there were associated phenomena in progress of\na character perfectly ordinary. For example, when the earth received\nits first fishes, sandstone and limestone were forming in the manner\nexemplified a few years ago in the ingenious experiments of Sir James\nHall; basaltic columns rose for the future wonder of man, according to\nthe principle which Dr. Gregory Watt showed in operation before the\neyes of our fathers; and hollows in the igneous rocks were filled with\ncrystals, precisely as they could now be by virtue of electric action,\nas shown within the last few years by Crosse and Becquerel. The seas\nobeyed the impulse of gentle breezes, and rippled their sandy bottoms,\nas seas of the present day are doing; the trees grew as now, by favor\nof sun and wind, thriving in good seasons and pining in bad: this\nwhile the animals above fishes were yet to be created. The movements\nof the sea, the meteorological agencies, the disposition which we see\nin the generality of plants to thrive when heat and moisture were most\nabundant, were kept up in silent serenity, as matters of simply natural\norder, throughout the whole of the ages which saw reptiles enter in\ntheir various forms upon the sea and land. It was about the time of the\nfirst mammals that the forest of the Dirt-Bed was sinking in natural\nruin amidst the sea sludge, as forests of the Plantagenets have been\ndoing for several centuries upon the coast of England. In short _all the\ncommon operations of the physical world were going on in their usual\nsimplicity, obeying that order which we still see governing them_; while\nthe supposed extraordinary causes were in requisition for the development\nof the animal and vegetable kingdoms. There surely hence arises a strong\npresumption against any such causes. It becomes much more likely that\nthe latter phenomena were evolved in the manner of law also, and that we\nonly dream of extraordinary causes here, as men once dreamt of a special\naction of Deity in every change of wind and the results of each season,\nmerely because they did not know the laws by which the events in question\nwere evolved.\u201d\n\nHow, let us suppose, would David Hume\u2014the greatest thinker of which\ninfidelity can boast\u2014have greeted the auxiliary who could have brought\nhim such an _argument_ as a contribution to the cause? \u201cYour objection,\nso far as you have stated it,\u201d the philosopher might have said, \u201camounts\nsimply to this:\u2014Creation by direct act is a miracle; whereas all that\nexists is _propagated_ and _maintained_ by natural law. Natural laws\u2014to\nvary the illustration\u2014were in full operation at the period when the\nAuthor of the Christian religion was, it is said, engaged in working\nhis miracles. When, according to our opponents, he walked upon the\nsurface of the sea, Peter, through the operation of the natural law of\ngravitation, was sinking into it; when he withered, by a word, the barren\nfig-tree, there were other trees on the Mount thriving in conformity\nwith the vegetative laws, under the influence of sun and shower; when\nhe raised the dead Lazarus, there were corpses in the neighboring tombs\npassing, through the natural putrefactive fermentation, into a state\nof utter decomposition. In fine, at the time when he was engaged, as\nReid and Campbell believe, in working miracles in violation of law, the\nlaws of which these were a violation actually existed, and were every\nwhere actively operative; or, to employ your own words, when the New\nTestament miracles were, it is alleged, in the act of being wrought,\n\u2018all the common operations of the physical world were going on in their\nusual simplicity, obeying that order which we still see governing them.\u2019\nSuch is the portion of your statement already made; what next?\u201d \u201cIt is\nsurely very unlikely,\u201d replies the auxiliary, \u201cthat in such a complex\nmass of phenomena there should have been two totally distinct modes\nof the exercise of the Divine power,\u2014the mode by miracle and the mode\nby law.\u201d \u201cUnlikely!\u201d rejoins the philosopher; \u201con what grounds?\u201d \u201cO,\njust _unlikely_,\u201d says the auxiliary;\u2014\u201cunlikely that God should be at\nonce operating on matter through the agency of natural laws, of which\n_man knows much_, and through the agency of miraculous acts, of the\nnature of which _man knows nothing_. But I have not thought out the\nsubject any further: you have, in the statement already made, my entire\n_argument_.\u201d \u201cAy, I see,\u201d the author of the \u201cEssay on Miracles\u201d would\nprobably have remarked; \u201cyou deem it unlikely that Deity should not only\nwork in part, as he has always done, by means of which _men_,\u2014clever\nfellows like you and me\u2014think they know a great deal but that he should\nalso work in part, _as he has always done_, by means of which they know\nnothing at all. Admirably reasoned out! You are, I make no doubt, a\nsound, zealous unbeliever in your private capacity, and your argument\nmay have great weight with your own mind, and be, in consequence, worthy\nof encouragement in a small way; but allow me to suggest that, for\nthe sake of the general cause, it should be kept out of reach of the\nenemy. There are in the Churches Militant on both sides of the Tweed\nshrewd combatants, who have nearly as much wit as ourselves.\u201d I think I\nunderstand the reference of the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d to the _dream_\n\u201cof a special action of Deity in every change of wind and the results of\neach season.\u201d Taken with what immediately goes before, it means something\nconsiderably different from those fancies of the \u201cuntutored Indian,\u201d who,\naccording to the poet,\n\n    \u201cSees God in clouds, or hears him in the wind.\u201d\n\nThere is a school of infidelity, tolerably well known in the capital\nof Scotland as by far the most superficial which our country has yet\nseen, that measures mind with a tape-line and the callipers, and, albeit\nnot Christian, laudably exemplifies, in a loudly expressed regard for\nscience, the Christian grace of loving its enemy. And the belief in a\nspecial Providence, who watches over and orders all things, and without\nwhose permission there falleth not even a \u201csparrow to the ground,\u201d the\napostles of this school set wholly aside, substituting, instead, a belief\nin the indiscriminating operation of natural laws; as if, with the broad\nfact before them that even man can work out his will merely by knowing\nand directing these laws, the God by whom they were instituted should\nlack either the power or the wisdom to make them the pliant ministers\nof _his_. It is, I fear, to the distinctive tenet in the creed of this\nhapless school that the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d refers. Nor is it in the\nleast surprising, that a writer who labors through two carefully written\nvolumes,[39] to destroy the existing belief in \u201cGod\u2019s works of Creation,\u201d\nshould affect to hold that the belief in his \u201cworks of Providence\u201d had\nbeen destroyed already. But faith in a special superintendence of Deity\nis not yet dead: nay, more, He who created the human mind took especial\ncare, in its construction, that, save in a few defective specimens of the\nrace, the belief should never die.\n\nThe author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d complains of the illiberality with which\nhe has been treated. \u201cIt has appeared to various critics,\u201d we find\nhim saying, \u201cthat very sacred principles are threatened by a doctrine\nof universal law. A natural origin of life, and a natural basis in\norganization for the operations of the human mind, speak to them of\nfatalism and materialism. And, strange to say, those who every day give\nviews of _physical cosmogony_ altogether discrepant in appearance with\nthat of Moses, apply hard names to my book for suggesting an _organic\ncosmogony_ in the same way, liable to inconsiderate odium. I must firmly\nprotest against this mode of meeting speculations regarding nature.\nThe object of my book, whatever may be said of the manner in which\nit is treated, is purely scientific. The views which I give of the\nhistory of organization stand exactly on the same ground upon which the\ngeological doctrines stood fifty years ago. I am merely endeavoring to\nread aright another chapter of the mystic book which God has placed\nunder the attention of his creatures.... The absence of all liberality\nin my reviewers is striking, and especially so in those whose geological\ndoctrines have exposed them to similar misconstruction. If the men newly\nemerged from the odium which was thrown upon Newton\u2019s theory of the\nplanetary motions had rushed forward to turn that odium upon the patrons\nof the dawning science of Geology, they would have been prefiguring the\nconduct of several of my critics, themselves hardly escaped from the\nrude hands of the narrow-minded, yet eager to join that rabble against\na new and equally unfriended stranger, as if such were the best means\nof purchasing impunity for themselves. _I trust that a little time will\nenable the public to penetrate this policy._\u201d\n\nNow, there is one very important point to which the author of this\ncomplaint does not seem to have adverted. The astronomer founded his\nbelief in the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun, not on\na mere dream-like hypothesis, founded on nothing, but on a wide and solid\nbase of pure induction. Galileo was no mere dreamer;\u2014he was a discoverer\nof great truths, and a profound reasoner regarding them: and on his\ndiscoveries and his reasonings, compelled by the inexorable laws of his\nmental constitution, did he build up certain deductive beliefs, which had\nno previous existence in his mind. His convictions were consequents, not\nantecedents. Such, also, is the character of geological discovery and\ninference, and of the existing belief,\u2014their joint production,\u2014regarding\nthe great antiquity of the globe. No geologist worthy of the name _began_\nwith the belief, and then set himself to square geological phenomena\nwith its requirements. It is a deduction,\u2014a result;\u2014not the starting\nassumption, or given sum, in a process of calculation, but its ultimate\nfinding or answer. Clergymen of the orthodox Churches, such as the\nSumners, Sedgwicks, Bucklands, Conybeares, and Pye Smiths of England,\nor the Chalmerses, Duncans, and Flemings of our own country, must have\ncome to the study of this question of the world\u2019s age with at least no\nbias in favor of the geological estimate. The old, and, as it has proven,\nerroneous reading of the Mosaic account, was by much too general a one\nearly in the present century, not to have exerted upon them, in their\ncharacter as ministers of religion, a sensible influence of a directly\nopposite nature. And the fact of the complete reversal of their original\nbias, and of the broad unhesitating finding on the subject which they\nultimately substituted instead, serves to intimate to the uninitiated the\nstrength of the evidence to which they submitted. There can be nothing\nmore certain than that it is minds of the same calibre and class, engaged\nin the same inductive track, that yielded in the first instance to the\nastronomical evidence regarding the earth\u2019s motion, and, in the second,\nto the geological evidence regarding the earth\u2019s age.[40]\n\nBut how very different the nature and history of the development\nhypothesis, and the character of the intellects with whom it originated,\nor by whom it has been since adopted! In the first place, it existed\nas a wild dream ere Geology had any being as a science. It was an\nantecedent, not a consequent,\u2014a starting assumption, not a result. No\none will contend that Maillet was a geologist. Geology has no place among\nthe sciences in the age in which he lived and even no name. And yet\nthere is a translation of his _Telliamed_ now lying before me, bearing\ndate 1750, in which I find very nearly the same account given of the\norigin of animals and plants as that in the \u201cVestiges,\u201d and in which\nthe sea is described as that great and fruitful womb of nature in which\norganization and life first began. Lamarck, at the time when Maillet\nwrote, was a boy in his sixth year. He became, comparatively early in\nlife, a skilful botanist and conchologist; but not until turned of fifty\ndid he set himself to study general zoology; and his greater work on\nthe invertebrate animals, on which his fame as a naturalist chiefly\nrests, did not _begin_ to appear\u2014for it was published serially\u2014until\nthe year 1815. But his development hypothesis, identical with that\nof the \u201cVestiges,\u201d was given to the world long before,\u2014in 1802; at\na time when it had not been ascertained that there existed placoids\nduring the Silurian period, or ganoids during the Old Red Sandstone\nperiod, or enaliosaurs during the Oolitic period; and when, though\nSmith had constructed his \u201cTabular View of the British Strata,\u201d his map\nhad not yet appeared, and there was little more known regarding the\nlaws of superposition among the stratified rocks than was to be found\nin the writings of Werner. And if the presumption be strong, in the\ncircumstances, that Lamarck originated his development hypothesis ere\nhe became in any very great degree skilful as a zoologist, it is no\nmere presumption, but a demonstrable truth, that he originated it ere\nhe became a geologist; for a geologist he never became. In common with\nMaillet and Buffon, he held by Leibnitz\u2019s theory of a universal ocean;\nand such, as we have already seen, was his ignorance of fossils, that\nhe erected dermal fragments of the Russian _Asterolepis_ into a new\ngenus of Polyparia,\u2014an error into which the merest tyro in pal\u00e6ontology\ncould not now fall. Such, in relation to these sciences, was the man\nwho perfected the dream of development. Nor has the most distinguished\nof its continental assertors now living,\u2014Professor Oken,\u2014any higher\nclaim to be regarded as a disciple of the inductive school of Geology\nthan Lamarck. In the preface to the recently published translation of\nhis \u201cPhysio-Philosophy,\u201d we find the following curious confession:\u2014\u201cI\nwrote the first edition of 1810 _in a kind of inspiration_, and on that\naccount it was not so well arranged as a systematic work ought to be.\nNow, though this may appear to have been amended in the second and third\nedition, yet still it was not possible for me to completely attain the\nobject held in view. The book has therefore remained essentially the\nsame as regards its fundamental principles. It is only the empirical\narrangement into series of plants and animals that has been modified\nfrom time to time, _in accordance with the scientific elevation of their\nseveral departments, or just as discoveries and anatomical investigations\nhave increased, and rendered some other position of the objects a matter\nof necessity_.\u201d An interesting piece of evidence this; but certainly\nrather simple as a confession. It will be found that while whatever gives\nvalue to the \u201cPhysio-Philosophy\u201d of the German Professor (a work which,\nif divested of all the inspired bits, would be really a good one) was\nacquired either before or since its first appearance in the ordinary way,\nits development hypothesis came direct from the god. Further, as I have\nalready had occasion to state, Oken holds, like Lamarck and Maillet, by\nthe universal ocean of Leibnitz; he holds, also, that the globe is a vast\ncrystal, just a little flawed in the facets: and that the three granitic\ncomponents\u2014quartz, feldspar, and mica\u2014are simply the hail-drops of heavy\nstone showers that shot athwart the original ocean, and accumulated into\nrock at the bottom, as snow or hail shoots athwart the upper atmosphere,\nand accumulates, in the form of ice, on the summits of high hills, or\nin the arctic or antarctic regions. Such, in the present day, are the\ngeological notions of Oken! They were doubtless all promulgated in what\nis modestly enough termed \u201ca _kind_ of inspiration;\u201d and there are few\nnow so ignorant of Geology as not to know that the _possessing_ agent in\nthe case\u2014for _inspiration_ is not quite the proper word\u2014must have been\nat least of kin to that ingenious personage who volunteered of old to\nbe a lying spirit in the mouths of the four hundred prophets. And the\nwell-known fact, that the most popular contemporary expounder of Oken\u2019s\nhypothesis\u2014the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d\u2014has in every edition of his work\nbeen correcting, modifying, or altogether withdrawing his statements\nregarding both geological and zoological phenomena, and that his gradual\ndevelopment as a geologist and zoologist, from the sufficiently low type\nof acquirement to which his first edition bore witness, may be traced, in\nconsequence, with a distinctness and certainty which we in vain seek in\nthe cases of presumed development which he would so fain establish,\u2014has\nin its bearing exactly the same effect. His development hypothesis was\ncomplete at a time when his geology and zoology were rudimental and\nimperfect. Give me your facts, said the Frenchman, that I may accommodate\nthem to my theory. And no one can look at the progress of the Lamarckian\nhypothesis, with reference to the dates when, and the men by whom, it was\npromulgated, without recognizing in it one of perhaps the most striking\nembodiments of the Frenchman\u2019s principle which the world ever saw. It is\nnot the illiberal religionist that rejects and casts it off,\u2014it is the\ninductive philosopher. Science addresses its assertors in the language of\nthe possessed to the sons of Sceva the Jew;\u2014\u201cThe astronomer I know, and\nthe geologist I know; but who are ye?\u201d\n\nOne of the strangest passages in the \u201cSequel to the Vestiges,\u201d is that\nin which its author carries his appeal from the tribunal of science to\n\u201canother tribunal,\u201d indicated but not named, before which \u201cthis new\nphilosophy\u201d [remarkable chiefly for being neither philosophy nor new] \u201cis\nto be truly and righteously judged.\u201d The principle is obvious, on which,\nwere his opponents mere theologians, wholly unable, though they saw\nthe mischievous character and tendency of his conclusions, to disprove\nthem scientifically, he might appeal from theology to science: \u201cit is\nwith scientific truth,\u201d he might urge, \u201cnot with moral consequences,\nthat I have aught to do.\u201d But on what allowable principle, professing,\nas he does, to found his theory on scientific fact, can he appeal from\nscience to the want of it? \u201cAfter discussing,\u201d he says, \u201cthe whole\narguments on both sides in so ample a manner, it may be hardly necessary\nto advert to the objection arising from the mere fact, that nearly all\nthe scientific men are opposed to the theory of the \u2018Vestiges.\u2019 As this\nobjection, however, is likely to be of some avail with many minds, it\nought not to be entirely passed over. If I did not think there were\nreasons, independent of judgment, for the scientific class coming so\ngenerally to this conclusion, I might feel the more embarrassed in\npresenting myself in direct opposition to so many men possessing talents\nand information. As the case really stands, the ability of this class to\ngive at the present a true response upon such a subject appears extremely\nchallengeable. It is no discredit to them that they are, almost without\nexception, engaged each in his own little department of science, and\nable to give little or no attention to other parts of that vast field.\nFrom year to year, and from age to age, we see them at work, adding, no\ndoubt, much to the known, and advancing many important interests, but\nat the same time doing little for the establishment of comprehensive\nviews of nature Experiments in however narrow a walk, facts of whatever\nminuteness, make reputations in scientific societies; all beyond\nis regarded with suspicion and distrust. The consequence is, that\nphilosophy, as it exists amongst us, does nothing to raise its votaries\nabove the common ideas of their time. There can therefore be nothing\nmore conclusive against our hypothesis in the disfavor of the scientific\nclass, than in that of any other section of educated men.\u201d\n\nThis is surely a very strange statement. Waiving altogether the _general_\nfact, that great original discoverers in any department of knowledge are\nnever men of one science or one faculty, but possess, on the contrary,\nbreadth of mind and multiplicity of acquirement;\u2014waiving, too, the\n_particular_ fact, that the more distinguished original discoverers of\nthe present day rank among at once its most philosophic, most elegant,\nand most extensively informed writers;\u2014granting, for the argument\u2019s sake,\nthat our scientific men _are_ men of narrow acquirement, and \u201cexclusively\nengaged, each in his own little department of science;\u201d\u2014it is surely\nrational to hold, notwithstanding, that in at least these little\ndepartments they have a better right to be heard than any other class of\npersons whatever. We must surely not refuse to the man of science what we\nat once grant to the common mechanic. A cotton-weaver or calico-printer\nmay be a very narrow man, \u201cexclusively engaged in his own little\ndepartment;\u201d and yet certain it is that, in a question of cotton-weaving\nor calico-printing, his evidence is justly deemed more conclusive in\ncourts of law than that of any other man, however much his superior in\ngeneral breadth and intelligence. And had the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d\nfounded his hypothesis on certain facts pertaining to the arts of\ncotton-weaving and calico-printing, the cotton-weaver and calico-printer\nwould have an indisputable right to be heard on the question of their\ngeneral correctness. Are we to regard the case as different because\nit is on facts pertaining to science, not to cotton-weaving or\ncalico-printing, that he professes to found? His hypothesis, unless\nsupported by scientific evidence, is a mere dream,\u2014a fiction as baseless\nand wild as any in the \u201cFairy Tales\u201d or the \u201cArabian Nights.\u201d And, fully\nsensible of the fact, he calls in as witnesses the physical sciences, and\nprofesses to take down their evidence. He calls into court Astronomy,\nGeology, Phytology, and Zoology. \u201cHold!\u201d exclaims the astronomer, as the\nexamination goes on; \u201cyou are taking the evidence of my special science\nmost unfairly; I challenge a right of cross-examining the witness.\u201d\n\u201cHold!\u201d cries the geologist; \u201cyou are putting my science to the question,\nand extorting from it, in its agony, a whole series of fictions: I\nclaim the right of examining it fairly and softly, and getting from\nit just the sober truth, and nothing more.\u201d And the phytologist and\nzoologist urge exactly similar claims. \u201cNo, gentlemen,\u201d replies the\nauthor of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d \u201cyou are narrow men, confined each of you to\nhis own little department, and so I will not permit you to cross-examine\nthe witnesses.\u201d \u201cWhat!\u201d rejoin the men of science, \u201cnot permit us to\nexamine our own witnesses!\u2014refuse to us what you would at once concede\nto the cotton-weaver or the calico-printer, were the question one of\ncotton-weaving or of calico-printing! We are surely not much narrower\nmen than the man of cotton or the man of calico. It is but in our own\nlittle departments that we ask to be heard.\u201d \u201cBut you shall not be heard,\ngentlemen,\u201d says the author of the \u201cVestiges;\u201d \u201cat all events, I shall\nnot care one farthing for anything you say. For observe, gentlemen, my\nhypothesis is nothing without the evidence of your sciences; and you all\nunite, I see, in taking that evidence from me; and so I confidently raise\nmy appeal in this matter to people who know nothing about either you or\nyour sciences. It must be before another tribunal that the new philosophy\nis to be truly and righteously judged.\u201d Alas! what can this mean? or\nwhere are we to seek for that tribunal of last resort to which this\ningenious man refers with such confidence the consideration of his case?\nCan it mean, that he appeals from the only class of persons qualified to\njudge of his facts, to a class ignorant of these, but disposed by habits\nof previous scepticism to acquiesce in his conclusions, and take his\npremises for granted;\u2014that he appeals from astronomers and geologists to\nlow-minded materialists and shallow phrenologers,\u2014from phytologists and\nzoologists to mesmerists and phreno-mesmerists?\n\nI remember being much struck, several years ago, by a remark dropped in\nconversation by the late Rev. Mr. Stewart of Cromarty, one of the most\noriginal-minded men I ever knew. \u201cIn reading in my Greek New Testament\nthis morning,\u201d he said, \u201cI was curiously impressed by a thought which,\nsimple as it may seem, never occurred to me before. The portion which\nI perused was in the First Epistle of Peter; and as I passed from the\nthinking of the passage to the language in which it is expressed,\u2014\u2018This\nGreek of the untaught Galilean fisherman,\u2019\u2014I said, \u2018so admired by\nscholars and critics for its unaffected dignity and force, was not\nacquired, as that of Paul may have been, in the ordinary way, but formed\na portion of the Pentecostal gift! Here, then, immediately under my eye,\non these pages, are there embodied, not, as in many other parts of the\nScriptures, the mere _details_ of a miracle, but the direct _results_ of\na miracle. How strange! Had the old tables of stone been placed before\nme, with what an awe-struck feeling would I have looked on the characters\ntraced upon them by God\u2019s own finger! How is it that I have failed to\nremember that, in the language of these Epistles, miraculously impressed\nby the Divine power upon the mind, I possessed as significant and\nsuggestive a relic as that which the inscription miraculously impressed\nby the Divine power upon the stone could possibly have furnished?\u201d It\nwas a striking thought; and in the course of our walk, which led us over\nrichly fossiliferous beds of the Old Red Sandstone, to a deposit of the\nEathie Lias, largely charged with the characteristic remains of that\nformation, I ventured to connect it with another. \u201cIn either case,\u201d I\nremarked, as we seated ourselves beside a sea-cliff, sculptured over with\nthe impressions of extinct plants and shells, \u201cyour relics, whether of\nthe Pentecostal Greek or of the characters inscribed on the old tables of\nstone, could address themselves to but previously existing belief. The\nsceptic would see in the Sinaitic characters, were they placed before\nhim, merely the work of an ordinary tool; and in the Greek of Peter and\nJohn, a well-known language, acquired, he would hold, in the common way.\nBut what say you to the relics that stand out in such bold relief from\nthe rocks beside us, in _their_ character as the results of miracle? The\nperished tribes and races which they represent all _began_ to exist.\nThere is no truth which science can more conclusively demonstrate than\nthat they had all a beginning. The infidel who, in this late age of\nthe world, would attempt falling back on the fiction of an \u2018infinite\nseries,\u2019 would be laughed to scorn. They all began to be. But how? No\ntrue geologist holds by the development hypothesis;\u2014it has been resigned\nto sciolists and smatterers;\u2014and there is but one other alternative.\nThey began to be, _through the miracle of creation_. From the evidence\nfurnished by these rocks we are shut down either to the belief in\n_miracle_, or to the belief in something else infinitely harder of\nreception, and as thoroughly unsupported by testimony as it is contrary\nto experience. Hume is at length answered by the severe truths of the\nstony science. He was not, according to Job, \u2018in league with the stones\nof the field,\u2019 and they have risen in irresistible warfare against him in\nthe Creator\u2019s behalf.\u201d\n\n\n\n\nFINAL CAUSES.\u2014THEIR BEARING ON GEOLOGIC HISTORY. CONCLUSION.\n\n\n\u201cNatural History has a principle on which to reason,\u201d says Cuvier, \u201cwhich\nis peculiar to it, and which it employs advantageously on many occasions:\nit is that of the _conditions of existence_, commonly termed _final\ncauses_.\u201d\n\nIn Geology, which is Natural History extended over all ages,\nthis principle has a still wider scope,\u2014embracing not merely the\ncharacteristics and conditions of the beings which now exist, but of\nall, so far as we can learn regarding them, which have ever existed,\nand involving the consideration of not merely their peculiarities as\nraces placed before us without relation to time, but also of the history\nof their rise, increase, decline, and extinction. In studying the\n_biography_, if I may so express myself, of an individual animal, we\nhave to acquaint ourselves with the circumstances in which nature has\nplaced it,\u2014its adaptation to these, both in structure and instinct,\u2014the\npoints of resemblance which it presents to the individuals of other races\nand families, and the laws which determine its terms of development,\nvigorous existence, and decay. And all Natural History, when restricted\nto the passing _now_ of the world\u2019s annals, is simply a congeries of\nbiographies. It is when we extend our view into the geological field that\nit passes from _biography_ into _history proper_, and that we have to\nrise from the consideration of the birth and death of individuals, which,\nin all mere biographies, form the great terminal events that constitute\nbeginning and end, to a survey of the birth and death of races, and the\nelevation or degradation of dynasties and sub-kingdoms.\n\nWe learn from human history that nations are as certainly mortal as men.\nThey enjoy a greatly longer term of existence, but they die at last:\nRollin\u2019s History of Ancient Nations is a history of the dead. And we\nare taught by geological history, in like manner, that _species_ are as\nmortal as individuals and nations, and that even genera and families\nbecome extinct. There is no _man_ upon earth at the present moment whose\nage greatly exceeds an hundred years;\u2014there is no _nation_ now upon\nearth (if we perhaps except the long-lived Chinese) that also flourished\nthree thousand years ago;\u2014there is no _species_ now living upon earth\nthat dates beyond the times of the Tertiary deposits. All bear the stamp\nof death,\u2014individuals,\u2014nations,\u2014species; and we may scarce less safely\npredicate, looking upon the past, that it is appointed for nations and\nspecies to die, than that it \u201cis appointed for _man_ once to die.\u201d Even\nour own species, _as now constituted_,\u2014with instincts that conform to the\noriginal injunction, \u201cincrease and multiply,\u201d and that, in consequence,\n\u201cmarry and are given in marriage,\u201d\u2014shall one day cease to exist: a fact\nnot less in accordance with beliefs inseparable from the faith of the\nChristian, than with the widely-founded experience of the geologist. Now,\nit is scarce possible for the human mind to become acquainted with the\nfact, that at certain periods species began to exist and then, after the\nlapse of untold ages, ceased to be, without inquiring whether, from the\n\u201cconditions of existence, commonly termed final causes,\u201d we cannot deduce\na reason for their rise or decline, or why their term of being should\nhave been included rather in one certain period of time than another.\nThe same faculty which finds employment in tracing to their causes the\nrise and fall of nations, and which it is the merit of the philosophic\nhistorian judiciously to exercise, will to a certainty seek employment\nin this department of history also; and that there will be an appetency\nfor such speculations in the public mind, we may infer from the success,\nas a literary undertaking, of the \u201cVestiges of Creation,\u201d\u2014a work that\nbears the same sort of relation, in this special field to sober inquiry,\nfounded on the true conditions of things, that the legends of the old\nchroniclers bore to authentic history. The progressive state of geologic\nscience has hitherto militated against the formation of theory of the\nsoberer character. Its facts\u2014still merely in the forming\u2014are necessarily\nimperfect in their classification, and limited in their amount; and\nthus the essential data continues incomplete. Besides, the men best\nacquainted with the basis of fact which already exists, have quite enough\nto engage them in adding to it. But there are limits to the field of\npal\u00e6ontological discovery, in its relation to what may be termed the\nchronology of organized existence, which, judging from the progress of\nthe science in the past, may be well nigh reached in favored localities,\nsuch as the British islands, in about a quarter of a century from the\npresent time; and then, I doubt not, geological history, in legitimate\nconformity with the laws of mind, and from the existence of the pregnant\nprinciple peculiar, according to Cuvier, to that science of which Geology\nis simply an extension, will assume a very extraordinary form. We cannot\nyet aspire \u201cto the height of this great argument:\u201d our foundations are\nin parts still unconsolidated and incomplete, and unfitted to sustain the\nperfect superstructure which shall one day assuredly rise upon them; but\nfrom the little which we can now see, \u201cas if in a glass darkly,\u201d enough\nappears from which to\n\n            \u201cAssert eternal Providence,\n    And justify the ways of God to men.\u201d\n\nThe history of the four great monarchies of the world was typified, in\nthe prophetic dream of the ancient Babylonish king, by a colossal image,\n\u201cterrible in its form and brightness,\u201d of which the \u201chead was pure gold,\u201d\nthe \u201cbreast and arms of silver,\u201d the \u201cbelly and thighs of brass,\u201d and the\nlegs and feet \u201cof iron, and of iron mingled with clay.\u201d The vision in\nwhich it formed the central object was appropriately that of a puissant\nmonarch; and the image itself typified the merely human monarchies of the\nearth. It would require a widely different figure to symbolize the great\nmonarchies of creation. And yet Revelation does furnish such a figure.\nIt is that which was witnessed by the captive prophet beside \u201cthe river\nChebar,\u201d when \u201cthe heavens were opened, and he saw visions of God.\u201d In\nthat chariot of Deity, glowing in fire and amber, with its complex wheels\n\u201cso high that they were dreadful,\u201d set round about with eyes, there were\nliving creatures, of whose four faces three were brute and one human; and\nhigh over all sat the Son of Man. It would almost seem as if, in this\nsublime vision,\u2014in which, with features distinct enough to impress the\nimagination, there mingle the elements of an awful incomprehensibility,\nand which even the genius of Raffaelle has failed adequately to\nportray,\u2014the history of all the past and of all the future had been\nsymbolized. In the order of Providence intimated in the geologic record,\nthe brute faces, as in the vision, outnumber the human;\u2014the human\ndynasty is one, and the dynasties of the inferior animals are three; and\nyet who can doubt that they all equally compose parts of a well-ordered\nand perfect whole, as the four faces formed but one cherubim; that\nthey have been moving onward to a definite goal, in the unity of one\ngrand harmonious design,\u2014now \u201clifted up high\u201d over the comprehension of\nearth,\u2014now let down to its humble level; and that the Creator of all has\nbeen ever seated over them on the throne of his providence,\u2014a \u201clikeness\nin the appearance of a man,\u201d\u2014embodying the perfection of his nature in\nhis workings, and determining the end from the beginning?\n\nThere is geologic evidence, as has been shown, that in the course of\ncreation the higher orders succeeded the lower. We have no good reason to\nbelieve that the mollusc and crustacean preceded the fish, seeing that\ndiscovery, in its slow course, has already traced the vertebrata in the\nichthyic form, down to deposits which only a few years ago were regarded\nas representatives of the first beginnings of organized existence on our\nplanet, and that it has at the same time failed to add a lower system\nto that in which their remains occur. But the fish seems most certainly\nto have preceded the reptile and the bird; the reptile and the bird to\nhave preceded the mammiferous quadruped; and the mammiferous quadruped\nto have preceded man,\u2014rational, accountable man, whom God created in\nhis own image,\u2014the much-loved Benjamin of the family,\u2014last-born of all\ncreatures. It is of itself an extraordinary fact, without reference to\nother considerations, that the order adopted by Cuvier, in his animal\nkingdom, as that in which the four great classes of vertebrate animals,\nwhen marshalled according to their rank and standing, naturally range\nshould be also that in which they occur in order of time. The brain\nwhich bears an average proportion to the spinal cord of not more than\ntwo to one, came first,\u2014it is the brain of the fish; that which bears to\nthe spinal cord an average proportion of two and a half to one succeeded\nit,\u2014it is the brain of the reptile; then came the brain averaging as\nthree to one,\u2014it is that of the bird; next in succession came the brain\nthat averages as four to one,\u2014it is that of the mammal; and last of all\nthere appeared a brain that averages as _twenty-three_ to one,\u2014reasoning,\ncalculating man had come upon the scene. All the facts of geological\nscience are hostile to the Lamarckian conclusion, that the lower brains\nwere developed into the higher. As if with the express intention of\npreventing so gross a mis-reading of the record, we find, in at least two\nclasses of animals,\u2014fishes and reptiles,\u2014the higher races placed at the\nbeginning: the slope of the inclined plane is laid, if one may so speak,\nin the reverse way, and, instead of rising towards the level of the\nsucceeding class, inclines downwards, with at least the effect, if not\nthe design, of making the break where they meet exceedingly well marked\nand conspicuous. And yet the record does seem to speak of _development\nand progression_;\u2014not, however, in the province of organized existence,\nbut in that of insensate matter, subject to the purely chemical laws.\nIt is in the style and character of _the dwelling-place_ that gradual\nimprovement seems to have taken place;\u2014not in the functions or the rank\nof any class of its inhabitants; and it is with special reference to this\ngradual improvement in our common mansion-house the earth, in its bearing\non the \u201cconditions of existence,\u201d that not a few of our reasonings\nregarding the introduction and extinction of species and genera must\nproceed.\n\nThat definite period at which man was introduced upon the scene seems\nto have been specially determined by the conditions of correspondence\nwhich the phenomena of his habitation had at length come to assume with\nthe predestined constitution of his mind. The large reasoning brain would\nhave been wholly out of place in the earlier ages. It is indubitably the\nnature of man to base the conclusions which regulate all his actions\non fixed phenomena,\u2014he reasons from cause to effect, or from effect to\ncause; and when placed in circumstances in which, from some lack of the\nnecessary basis, he cannot so reason, he becomes a wretched, timid,\nsuperstitious creature, greatly more helpless and abject than even the\ninferior animals. This unhappy state is strikingly exemplified by that\ndeep and peculiar impression made on the mind by a severe earthquake,\nwhich Humboldt, from his own experience, so powerfully describes.\n\u201cThis impression,\u201d he says, \u201cis not, in my opinion, the result of a\nrecollection of those fearful pictures of devastation presented to our\nimagination by the historical narratives of the past, but is rather due\nto the sudden revelation of the delusive nature of the inherent faith\nby which we had clung to a belief in the immobility of the solid parts\nof the earth. We are accustomed from early childhood to draw a contrast\nbetween the mobility of water and the immobility of the soil on which we\ntread; and this feeling is confirmed by the evidence of our senses. When,\ntherefore, we suddenly feel the ground move beneath us, a mysterious\nforce, with which we were previously unacquainted, is revealed to us as\nan active disturber of stability. A moment destroys the illusion of a\nwhole life; our deceptive faith in the repose of nature vanishes; and\nwe feel transported into a realm of unknown destructive forces. Every\nsound\u2014the faintest motion of the air\u2014arrests our attention, and we no\nlonger trust the ground on which we stand. There is an idea conveyed\nto the mind, of some universal and unlimited danger. We may flee from\nthe crater of a volcano in active eruption, or from the dwelling whose\ndestruction is threatened by the approach of the lava stream; but in an\nearthquake, direct our flight whithersoever we will, we still feel as\nif we trod upon the very focus of destruction.\u201d Not less striking is\nthe testimony of Dr. Tschudi, in his \u201cTravels in Peru,\u201d regarding this\nsingular effect of earthquakes on the human mind. \u201cNo familiarity with\nthe phenomenon can,\u201d he remarks, \u201cblunt the feeling. The inhabitant of\nLima, who from childhood has frequently witnessed these convulsions\nof nature, is roused from his sleep by the shock, and rushes from his\napartment with the cry of \u2018_Misericordia_!\u2019 The foreigner from the\nnorth of Europe, who knows nothing of earthquakes but by description,\nwaits with impatience to feel the movements of the earth, and longs to\nhear with his own ear the subterranean sounds, which he has hitherto\nconsidered fabulous. With levity he treats the apprehension of a coming\nconvulsion, and laughs at the fears of the natives; but as soon as his\nwish is gratified, he is terror-stricken, and is involuntarily prompted\nto seek safety in flight.\u201d\n\nNow, a partially consolidated planet, tempested by frequent earthquakes\nof such terrible potency, that those of the historic ages would be but\nmere ripples of the earth\u2019s surface in comparison, could be no proper\nhome for a creature so constituted. The fish or reptile,\u2014animals of a\nlimited range of instinct, exceedingly tenacious of life in most of their\nvarieties, oviparous, prolific, and whose young immediately on their\nescape from the egg can provide for themselves, might enjoy existence in\nsuch circumstances, to the full extent of their narrow capacities; and\nwhen sudden death fell upon them,\u2014though their remains, scattered over\nwide areas, continue to exhibit that distortion of posture incident to\nviolent dissolution, which seems to speak of terror and suffering,\u2014we may\nsafely conclude there was but little real suffering on the case: they\nwere happy up to a certain point, and unconscious forever after. Fishes\nand reptiles were the proper inhabitants of our planet during the ages of\nthe earth-tempests; and when, under the operation of the chemical laws,\nthese had become less frequent and terrible, the higher mammals were\nintroduced. That prolonged ages of these tempests did exist, and that\nthey gradually settled down, until the state of things became at length\ncomparatively fixed and stable, few geologists will be disposed to deny.\nThe evidence which supports _this_ special theory of the development\nof our planet in its capabilities as a scene of organized and sentient\nbeing, seems palpable at every step. Look first at these Grauwacke rocks;\nand, after marking how in one place the strata have been upturned on\ntheir edges for miles together, and how in another the Plutonic rock has\nrisen molten from below, pass on to the Old Red Sandstone, and examine\nits significant platforms of violent death,\u2014its faults, displacements,\nand dislocations; see, next, in the Coal Measures, those evidences of\nsinking and ever-sinking strata, for thousands of feet together; mark in\nthe Oolite those vast overlying masses of trap, stretching athwart the\nlandscape, far as the eye can reach; observe carefully how the signs of\nconvulsion and catastrophe gradually lessen as we descend to the times of\nthe Tertiary, though even in these ages of the mammiferous quadruped the\nearth must have had its oft-recurring ague fits of frightful intensity;\nand then, on closing the survey, consider how exceedingly partial and\nunfrequent these earth-tempests have become in the recent periods. Yes;\nwe find every where marks of at once progression and identity,\u2014of\nprogress made, and yet identity maintained; but it is in the habitation\nthat we find them,\u2014not in the inhabitants. There is a tract of country in\nHindustan that contains nearly as many square miles as all Great Britain,\ncovered to the depth of hundreds of feet by one vast overflow of trap;\na track similarly overflown, which exceeds in area all England, occurs\nin Southern Africa. The earth\u2019s surface is roughened with such,\u2014mottled\nas thickly by the Plutonic masses as the skin of the leopard by its\nspots. The trap district which surrounds our Scottish metropolis, and\nimparts so imposing a character to its scenery, is too inconsiderable to\nbe marked on geological maps of the world, that we yet see streaked and\nspeckled with similar memorials, though on an immensely vaster scale,\nof the eruption and overflow which took place in the earthquake ages.\nWhat could man have done on the globe at a time when such outbursts\nwere comparatively common occurrences? What could he have done where\nEdinburgh now stands during that overflow of trap porphyry of which the\nPentland range forms but a fragment, or that outburst of greenstone of\nwhich but a portion remains in the dark ponderous coping of Salisbury\nCraigs, or when the thick floor of rock on which the city stands was\nbroken up, like the ice of an arctic sea during a tempest in spring, and\nlaid on edge from where it leans against the Castle Hill to beyond the\nquarries at Joppa? The reasoning brain would have been wholly at fault\nin a scene of things in which it could neither foresee the exterminating\ncalamity while yet distant, nor control it when it had come; and so the\nreasoning brain was not produced until the scene had undergone a slow\nbut thorough process of change, during which, at each progressive stage,\nit had furnished a platform for higher and still higher life. When the\nconifer\u00e6 could flourish on the land, and fishes subsist in the seas,\nfishes and cone-bearing plants were created; when the earth became a\nfit habitat for reptiles and birds, reptiles and birds were produced;\nwith the dawn of a more stable and mature state of things the sagacious\nquadruped was ushered in; and, last of all, when man\u2019s house was fully\nprepared for him,\u2014when the data on which it is his nature to reason\nand calculate had become fixed and certain,\u2014the reasoning, calculating\nbrain was moulded by the creative finger, and man became a living soul.\nSuch seems to be the true reading of the wondrous inscription chiselled\ndeep in the rocks. It furnishes us with no clue by which to unravel the\nunapproachable mysteries of creation;\u2014these mysteries belong to the\nwondrous Creator, and to Him only. We attempt to theorize upon them,\nand to reduce them to law, and all nature rises up against us in our\npresumptuous rebellion. A stray splinter of cone-bearing wood,\u2014a fish\u2019s\nskull or tooth,\u2014the vertebra of a reptile,\u2014the humerus of a bird,\u2014the jaw\nof a quadruped,\u2014all, any of these things, weak and insignificant as they\nmay seem, become in such a quarrel too strong for us and our theory: the\npuny fragment, in the grasp of truth, forms as irresistible a weapon as\nthe dry bone did in that of Samson of old; and our slaughtered sophisms\nlie piled up, \u201cheaps upon heaps,\u201d before it.\n\nThere is no geological fact nor revealed doctrine with which this special\nscheme of development does not agree. To every truth, too, really such,\nfrom which the antagonist scheme derives its shadowy analogies, it leaves\nits full value. It has no quarrel with the facts of even the \u201cVestiges,\u201d\nin their character as realities. There is certainly something very\nextraordinary in that f\u0153tal progress of the human brain on which the\nassertors of the development hypothesis have founded so much. Nature, in\nconstructing this curious organ, first lays down a grooved cord, as the\ncarpenter lays down the keel of his vessel; and on this narrow base the\nperfect brain, as month after month passes by, is gradually built up,\nlike the vessel from the keel. First it grows up into a brain closely\nresembling that of a fish; a few additions more convert it into a brain\nundistinguishable from that of a reptile; a few additions more impart\nto it the perfect appearance of the brain of a bird; it then developes\ninto a brain exceedingly like that of a mammiferous quadruped; and,\nfinally, expanding atop, and spreading out its deeply corrugated lobes,\ntill they project widely over the base, it assumes its unique character\nas a human brain. Radically such from the first, it passes towards its\nfull development, through all the inferior forms, from that of the fish\nupwards,\u2014thus comprising, during its f\u0153tal progress, an epitome of\ngeologic history, as if each man were in himself, not the _microcosm_ of\nthe old fanciful philosopher, but something greatly more wonderful,\u2014a\ncompendium of all animated nature, and of kin to every creature that\nlives. Hence the remark, that man is the sum total of all animals,\u2014\u201cthe\nanimal equivalent,\u201d says Oken, \u201cto the whole animal kingdom.\u201d We are\nperhaps too much in the habit of setting aside real facts, when they\nhave been first seized upon by the infidel, and appropriated to the\npurposes of unbelief, as if they had suffered contamination in his\nhands. We forget, like the brother \u201cweak in the faith,\u201d instanced by\nthe Apostle, that they are in themselves \u201ccreatures of God;\u201d and too\nreadily reject the lesson which they teach, simply because they have been\noffered in sacrifice to an idol. And this strange fact of the progress\nof the human brain is assuredly a fact none the less worth looking at\nfrom the circumstance that infidelity has looked at it first. On no\nprinciple recognizable in right reason can it be urged in support of the\ndevelopment hypothesis;\u2014it is a fact of _f\u0153tal_ development, and of that\nonly. But it would be well should it lead our metaphysicians to inquire\nwhether they have not been rendering their science too insulated and\nexclusive; and whether the mind that works by a brain thus \u201cfearfully and\nwonderfully made,\u201d ought not to be viewed rather in connection with all\nanimated nature, especially as we find nature exemplified in the various\nvertebral forms, than as a thing fundamentally abstract and distinct.\nThe brain built up of all the types of _brain_, may be the organ of a\nmind compounded, if I may so express myself, of all the varieties of\n_mind_. It would be perhaps over fanciful to urge that it is the creature\nwho has made himself free of all the elements, whose brain has been\nthus in succession that of all their proper denizens; and that there\nis no animal instinct, the function of which cannot be illustrated by\nsome art mastered by man: but there can be nothing over fanciful in the\nsuggestion, founded on this fact of f\u0153tal development, that possibly some\nof the more obscure signs impressed upon the human character may be best\nread through the spectacles of physical science. The successive phases of\nthe f\u0153tal brain give at least fair warning that, in tracing to its first\nprinciples the moral and intellectual nature of man, what is properly\nhis \u201cnatural history\u201d should not be overlooked. Oken, after describing\nthe human creature in one passage as \u201cequivalent to the whole animal\nkingdom,\u201d designates him in another as \u201cGod wholly manifested,\u201d and as\n\u201cGod become man;\u201d\u2014a style of expression at which the English reader\nmay start, as that of the \u201cbig mouth speaking blasphemy,\u201d but which\nhas become exceedingly common among the nationalists of the Continent.\nThe irreverent naturalist ought surely to have remembered, that the\nsum total of all the animals cannot be different in its nature from the\nvarious sums of which it is an aggregate,\u2014seeing that _no_ summation ever\ndiffers in _quality_ from the items summed up, which compose it,\u2014and\nthat, though it may amount in this case to man _the animal_,\u2014to man,\nas he may be weighed, and measured, and subjected to the dissecting\nknife,\u2014it cannot possibly amount to God. Is God merely a sum total of\nbirds and beasts, reptiles and fishes;\u2014a mere Egyptian deity, composed\nof fantastic hieroglyphics derived from the forms of the brute creation?\nThe impieties of the transcendentalist may, however, serve to illustrate\nthat mode of seizing on terms which, as the most sacred in the message\nof revelation, have been long coupled in the popular mind with saving\ntruths, and forcibly compelling them to bear some visionary and illusive\nmeaning, wholly foreign to that with which they were originally invested,\nwhich has become so remarkable a part of the policy of modern infidelity.\nRationalism has learned to sacrifice to Deity with a certain measure of\nconformity to the required pattern; but it is a conformity in appearance\nonly, not in reality: the sacrifice always resembles that of Prometheus\nof old, who presented to Jupiter what, though it seemed to be an ox\nwithout blemish, was merely an ox-skin stuffed full of bones and garbage.\n\nThere is another very remarkable class of facts in geological history,\nwhich appear to fall as legitimately within the scope of argument founded\non final causes, as those which bear on the appearance of man at his\nproper era. The period of the mammiferous quadrupeds seems, like the\nsucceeding human period, to have been determined, as I have said, by the\nearth\u2019s fitness at the time as a place of habitation for creatures so\nformed. And the bulk to which, in the more extreme cases, they attained,\nappears to have been regulated, as in the higher mammals now, with\nreference to the force of gravity at the earth\u2019s surface. The Megatherium\nand the Mastodon, the Dinotherium and the extinct elephant, increased\nin bulk, in obedience to the laws of the specific constitution imparted\nto them at their creation; and these laws bore reference, in turn, to\nanother law,\u2014that law of gravity which determines that no creature which\nmoves in air and treads the surface of the earth should exceed a certain\nweight or size. To very near the limits assigned by this law some of the\nancient quadrupeds arose. It is even doubtful whether the Dinotherium,\nthe most gigantic of mammals, may not have been, like the existing\nsea-lions and morses, mainly an aquatic quadruped;\u2014an inference grounded\non the circumstance that, in at least portions of its framework, it seems\nto have risen beyond these limits. Now, it does not seem wonderful that,\nwith apparent reference to the point at which the gravity of bodies\nat the earth\u2019s surface _bisects_ the conditions of texture and matter\nnecessary to existence among the sub-aerial vertebrata, the _reptiles_\nof the Secondary periods should have grown up in some of their species\nand genera to the extreme size. A world of frogs, newts, and lizards\nwould have borne stamped upon it the impress of a tame and miserable\nmediocrity, that would have harmonized ill with the extent of the\nearth\u2019s capabilities for supporting life on a large scale. There would\nbe no principle of adaptation or rule of proportion maintained between\nan animal kingdom composed of so contemptible a group of beings, and\neither the dynamic laws under which matter exists on our planet, or the\nluxuriant vegetation which it bore during the Secondary ages. And such\nwas not the character of the group which composed the reptile dynasty.\nThe Iguanodon must have been quite as tall as the elephant,\u2014greatly\nlonger, and, it would seem, at least as bulky. The Megalosaurus must have\nat least equalled the rhinoceros; the Hyl\u00e6osaurus would have outweighed\nthe hippopotamus. And when reptiles that rivalled in size our hugest\nmammals inhabited the land, other reptiles,\u2014Ichthyosaurs, Plesiosaurs,\nand Cetiosaurs,\u2014scarce less bulky than the cetacea themselves, possessed\nthe sea. Not only was the platform of being occupied in all its\n_breadth_, but also in all its _height_; and it is according to our\nsimpler and more obvious ideas of adaptation\u2014simple and obvious because\ngleaned from the very surface of the universe of life\u2014that such should\nhave been the case. But it does appear strange, because under the\nregulation, it would seem, of a principle of adaptation more occult,\nand, if I may so speak, more _Providential_, that no sooner are the huge\nmammals introduced _as a group_, than, with but a few exceptions, the\nreptiles appear in greatly diminished proportions. They no longer occupy\nthe platform to its full extent of _height_. Even in tropical countries,\nin which certain families of mammals still attain to the maximum size,\nthe reptiles, if we except the crocodilean family, a few harmless\nturtles, and the degraded boas and pythons, are a small and comparatively\nunimportant race. Nay, the existing giants of the class\u2014the crocodiles\nand boas\u2014hardly equal in bulk the third-rate reptiles of the ages of\nthe Oolite and the Wealden. So far as can be seen, there is no reason\ndeduceable from the nature of things, why the country that sustains a\nmammal bulky as the elephant, should not also support a reptile huge\nas the Iguanodon; or why the Megalosaurus, Hyl\u00e6osaurus, and Dicynodon,\nmight not have been contemporary with the lion, tiger, and rhinoceros.\nThe change which took place in the reptile group immediately on their\ndethronement at the close of the Secondary period, seems scarce less\nstrange than that sung by Milton:\u2014\n\n    \u201cBehold a wonder! They but now who seemed\n    In bigness to surpass earth\u2019s giant sons,\n    Now less than smallest dwarfs, in narrow room\n    Thronged numberless; like that pygmean race\n    Beyond the Indian mount; or fairy elves,\n    Whose midnight revels, by a forest side\n    Or fountain, some belated peasant sees,\n    Or dreams he sees, while, overhead, the moon\n    Sits arbitress, and nearer to the earth\n    Wheels her pale course.\u201d\n\nBut though we cannot assign a _cause_ for this general reduction of the\nreptile class, save simply the will of the all-wise Creator, the _reason_\nwhy it should have taken place seems easily assignable. It was a bold\nsaying of the old philosophic heathen, that \u201cGod is the soul of brutes;\u201d\nbut writers on instinct in even our own times have said less warrantable\nthings. God _does_ seem to do for many of the inferior animals of the\nlower divisions, which, though devoid of brain and vertebral column, are\nyet skilful chemists and accomplished architects and mathematicians,\nwhat he enables man, through the exercise of the reasoning faculty,\nto do for himself; and the ancient philosopher meant no more. And in\nclearing away the giants of the reptile dynasty, when their kingdom had\npassed away, and then re-introducing the class as much shrunken in their\nproportions as restricted in their domains, the Creator seems to have\nbeen doing for the mammals what man, in the character of a \u201cmighty hunter\nbefore the Lord,\u201d does for himself. There is in nature very little of\nwhat can be called war. The cities of this country cannot be said to be\nin a state of war, though their cattle-markets are thronged every week\nwith animals for slaughter and the butcher and fishmonger find their\nplaces of business thronged with customers. And such, in the main, is the\ncondition of the animal world;\u2014it consists of its two classes,\u2014animals\nof prey, and the animals upon which they prey: its wars are simply those\nof the butcher and fisher, lightened by a dash of the enjoyments of the\nsportsman.\n\n    \u201cThe creatures see of flood and field,\n      And those that travel on the wind,\n    With them no strife can last; they live\n      In peace and peace of mind.\u201d\n\nGenerally speaking, the carnivorous mammalia respect one another: lion\ndoes not war with tiger, nor the leopard contend with the hyena. But\nthe carnivorous reptiles manifest no such respect for the carnivorous\nmammals. There are fierce contests in their native jungles, on the banks\nof the Ganges, between the gavial and the tiger; and in the steaming\nforests of South America, the boa-constrictor casts his terrible coil\nscarce less readily round the puma than the antelope. A world which,\nafter it had become a home of the higher herbivorous and more powerful\ncarnivorous mammals, continued to retain the gigantic reptiles of\nits earlier ages, would be a world of horrid, exterminating war, and\naltogether rather a place of torment than a scene of intermediate\ncharacter, in which, though it sometimes re\u00ebchoes the groans of\nsuffering nature, life is, in the main, enjoyment. And so,\u2014save in a few\nexceptional cases, that, while they establish the rule as a fact, serve\nalso as a key to unlock that principle of the Divine government on which\nit appears to rest,\u2014no sooner was the reptile removed from his place in\nthe fore-front of creation, and creatures of a higher order introduced\ninto it the consolidating and fast-ripening planet of which he had been\nso long the monarch, than his bulk shrank and his strength lessened,\nand he assumed a humility of form and aspect at once in keeping with\nhis reduced circumstances, and compatible with the general welfare. But\nthough the _reason_ of the reduction appears obvious, I know not that it\ncan be referred to any other _cause_ than simply the will of the All-Wise\nCreator.\n\nThere hangs a mystery greatly more profound over the fact of the\n_degradation_ than over that of the _reduction_ and _diminution_ of\nclasses. We can assign what at least _seems_ to be a sufficient _reason_\nwhy, when reptiles formed as a class the highest representatives of the\nvertebrata, they should be of imposing bulk and strength, and altogether\nworthy of that post of precedence which they then occupied among the\nanimals. We can also assign a _reason_ for the strange reduction which\ntook place among them in strength and bulk immediately on their removal\nfrom the first to the second place. But why not only _reduction_,\nbut also _degradation_? Why, as division started up in advance of\ndivision,\u2014first the reptiles in front of the fishes, then the quadrupedal\nmammals in front of the reptiles, and, last of all, man in front of\nthe quadrupedal mammals,\u2014should the supplanted classes,\u2014two of them at\nleast,\u2014fishes and reptiles,\u2014for there seem to have been no additions\nmade to the mammals since man entered upon the scene,\u2014why should they\nhave become the receptacles of orders and families of a degraded\ncharacter, which had no place among them in their monarchical state? The\nfishes removed beyond all analogy with the higher vertebrata, by their\nhomocercal tails,\u2014the fishes (_Acanthopterygii_ and _Sub-brachiati_) with\ntheir four limbs slung in a belt round their necks,\u2014the flat fishes,\n(_Pleuronectid\u00e6_,) that, in addition to this deformity, are so twisted\nto a side, that while the one eye occupies a single orbit in the\nmiddle of the skull, the other is thrust out to its edge,\u2014the irregular\nfishes generally (sun-fishes, frog-fishes, hippocampi, &c.) were not\nintroduced into the ichthyic division until after the full development\nof the reptile dynasty; nor did the hand that makes no slips in its\nworking \u201cform the crooked serpent,\u201d footless, grovelling, venom-bearing,\nthe authorized type of a fallen and degraded creature, until after the\nintroduction of the mammals. What can this fact of degradation mean?\nSpecies and genera seem to be greatly more numerous in the present age\nof the world than in any of the geologic ages. Is it not possible that\nthe extension of the chain of being which has thus taken place\u2014not only,\nas we find, through the addition of the higher divisions of animals to\nits upper end, but also through the interpolations of _lower links_\ninto the previously existing divisions\u2014may have borne reference to some\npredetermined scheme of well-proportioned gradation, or, according to the\npoet,\n\n    \u201cOf general ORDER since the whole began?\u201d\n\nMay not, in short, what we term degradation be merely one of the modes\nresorted to for filling up the voids in creation, and thereby perfecting\na scale which must have been originally not merely a scale of narrow\ncompass, but also of innumerable breaks and blanks, hiatuses and chasms?\nSuch, certainly, would be the reading of the enigma which a Soame Jenyns\nor a Bolingbroke would suggest; but the geologist has learned from his\nscience, that the completion of a chain of at least contemporary being,\nperfect in its gradations, cannot possibly have formed the design of\nProvidence. Almost ever since God united vitality to matter, the links in\nthis chain of animated nature, as if composed of a material too brittle\nto bear their own weight when stretched across the geologic ages, have\nbeen dropping one after out, from his hand, and sinking, fractured and\nbroken, into the rocks below. It is urged by Pope, that were \u201cwe to press\non superior powers,\u201d and rise from our own assigned place to the place\nimmediately above all, we would, in consequence of the transposition,\n\n            \u201cIn the full creation leave a void,\n    Where, one step broken, the great scale\u2019s destroyed.\n    From nature\u2019s chain whatever link we strike,\n    Tenth or ten thousandth, breaks the chain alike.\u201d\n\nThe poet could scarce have anticipated that there was a science then\nsleeping in its cradle, and dreaming the dreams of Whiston, Leibnitz, and\nBurnet, which was one day to rise and demonstrate that both the tenth and\nthe ten thousandth link in the chain had been already broken and laid\nby, with all the thousands of links between; and that man might laudably\n\u201cpress on superior powers,\u201d and attain to a \u201cnew nature,\u201d without in the\nleast affecting the symmetry of creation by the void which his elevation\nwould necessarily create; that, in fine, voids and blanks in the scale\nare exceedingly common things; and that, if men could, by rising into\nangels, make one blank more, they might do so with perfect impunity.\nFurther, even were the graduated chain of Bolingbroke a reality, and not\nwhat Johnson well designates it, an \u201cabsurd hypothesis,\u201d and were what I\nhave termed the interpolation of links necessary to its completion, the\nmere filling up of the original blanks and chasms would not necessarily\ninvolve the fact of degradation, seeing that each blank could be\nfilled up, if I may go express myself, from its lower end. Each could\nbe as certainly occupied to the full by an elevation of lower forms,\nas by a humiliation of the higher. We might receive the hypothesis of\nBolingbroke, and yet find the mysterious fact of degradation remain an\nunsolved riddle in our hands.\n\nBut though I can assign neither _reason_ nor _cause_ for the fact, I\ncannot avoid the conclusion, that it is associated with certain other\ngreat facts in the moral government of the universe, by those threads of\nanalogical connection which run through the entire tissue of Creation and\nProvidence, and impart to it that character of unity which speaks of the\nsingle producing Mind. The first idea of every religion on earth which\nhas arisen out of what may be termed the spiritual instincts of man\u2019s\nnature, is that of a Future State; the second idea is, that in this state\nmen shall exist in two separate classes,\u2014the one in advance of their\npresent condition, the other far in the rear of it. It is on these two\ngreat beliefs that conscience every where finds the fulcrum from which\nit acts upon the conduct; and it is, we find, wholly inoperative as a\nforce without them. And in that one religion among men that, instead\nof retiring, like the pale ghosts of the others, before the light of\ncivilization, brightens and expands in its beams, and in favor of whose\nclaim as a revelation from God the highest philosophy has declared,\nwe find these two master ideas occupying a still more prominent place\nthan in any of those merely indigenous religions that spring up in the\nhuman mind of themselves. The special lesson which the Adorable Saviour,\nduring his ministry on earth, oftenest enforced, and to which all the\nothers bore reference, was the lesson of a final separation of mankind\ninto two great divisions,\u2014a division of God-like men, of whose high\nStanding and full-orbed happiness man, in the present scene of things,\ncan form no adequate conception; and a division of men finally lost, and\ndoomed to unutterable misery and hopeless degradation. There is not in\nall Revelation a single doctrine which we find oftener or more clearly\nenforced than that there shall continue to exist, throughout the endless\ncycles of the future, a race of degraded men and of degraded angels.\n\nNow, it is truly wonderful how thoroughly, in its general scope, the\nrevealed pieces on to the geologic record. We know, as geologists, that\nthe dynasty of the fish was succeeded by that of the reptile,\u2014that\nthe dynasty of the reptile was succeeded by that of the mammiferous\nquadruped,\u2014and that the dynasty of the mammiferous quadruped was\nsucceeded by that of man as man now exists,\u2014a creature of mixed\ncharacter, and subject, in all conditions, to wide alternations of\nenjoyment and suffering. We know, further\u2014so far at least as we have\nyet succeeded in deciphering the record,\u2014that the several dynasties\nwere introduced, not in their lower, but in their higher forms;\u2014that,\nin short, in the imposing programme of creation it was arranged, as a\ngeneral rule, that in each of the great divisions of the procession\nthe magnates should walk first. We recognize yet further the fact of\ndegradation specially exemplified in the fish and the reptile. And then,\npassing on to the revealed record, we learn that the dynasty of man in\nthe mixed state and character is not the final one, but that there is\nto be yet another creation, or, more properly, _re_-creation, known\ntheologically as the Resurrection, which shall be connected in its\nphysical components, by bonds of mysterious paternity, with the dynasty\nwhich now reigns, and be bound to it mentally by the chain of identity,\nconscious and actual; but which, in all that constitutes superiority,\nshall be as vastly its superior as the dynasty of responsible man is\nsuperior to even the lowest of the preliminary dynasties. We are further\ntaught, that at the commencement of this last of the dynasties, there\nwill be a re-creation of not only elevated, but also of degraded\nbeings,\u2014a re-creation of the _lost_. We are taught yet further, that\nthough the present dynasty be that of a lapsed race, which at their\nfirst introduction were placed on higher ground than that on which they\nnow stand, and sank by their own act, it was yet part of the original\ndesign, from the beginning of all things, that they should occupy\nthe existing platform; and that Redemption is thus no after-thought,\nrendered necessary by the fall, but, on the contrary, part of a general\nscheme, for which provision had been made from the beginning; so that\nthe Divine Man, through whom the work of restoration has been effected,\nwas in reality, in reference to the purposes of the Eternal, what he is\ndesignated in the remarkable text, \u201c_the Lamb slain from the foundations\nof the world_.\u201d Slain from the foundations of the world! Could the\nassertors of the stony science ask for language more express? By piecing\nthe two records together,\u2014that revealed in Scripture and that revealed\nin the rocks,\u2014records which, however widely geologists may mistake the\none, or commentators misunderstand the other, have emanated from the\nsame great Author\u2014we learn that in slow and solemn majesty has period\nsucceeded period, each in succession ushering in a higher end yet higher\nscene of existence,\u2014that fish, reptiles, mammiferous quadrupeds, have\nreigned in turn,\u2014that responsible man, \u201cmade in the image of God,\u201d\nand with dominion over all creatures, ultimately entered into a world\nripened for his reception; but, further, that this passing scene, in\nwhich he forms the prominent figure, is not the final one in the long\nseries, but merely the last of the _preliminary_ scenes; and that that\nperiod to which the bygone ages, incalculable in amount, with all their\nwell-proportioned gradations of being, form the imposing vestibule, shall\nhave perfection for its occupant, and eternity for its duration. I know\nnot how it may appear to others; but for my own part, I cannot avoid\nthinking that there would be a lack of proportion in the series of being,\nwere the period of perfect and glorified humanity abruptly connected,\nwithout the introduction of an intermediate creation of _responsible_\nimperfection, with that of the dying irresponsible brute. That scene of\nthings in which God became Man, and suffered, _seems_, as it no doubt\n_is_, a necessary link in the chain.\n\nI am aware that I stand on the confines of a mystery which man, since the\nfirst introduction of sin into the world till now, has \u201cvainly aspired to\ncomprehend.\u201d But I have no new reading of the enigma to offer. I know not\nwhy it is that moral evil exists in the universe of the All-Wise and the\nAll-Powerful; nor through what occult law of Deity it is that \u201cperfection\nshould come through suffering.\u201d The question, like that satellite, ever\nattendant upon our planet, which presents both its sides to the sun, but\ninvariably the same side to the earth, hides one of its faces from man,\nand turns it to but the Eye from which all light emanates. And it is in\nthat God-ward phase of the question that the mystery dwells. We can map\nand measure every protuberance and hollow which roughens the nether disk\nof the moon, as, during the shades of night, it looks down upon our path\nto cheer and enlighten; but what can we know of the other? It would,\nhowever, seem, that even in this field of mystery the extent of the\ninexplicable and the unknown is capable of reduction, and that the human\nunderstanding is vested in an ability of progressing towards the central\npoint of that dark field throughout all time, mayhap all eternity, as\nthe asymptote progresses upon its curve. Even though the essence of the\nquestion should forever remain a mystery, it may yet in its reduced and\ndefined state, serve as a key for the laying of other mysteries open.\nThe philosophers are still as ignorant as ever respecting the intrinsic\nnature of gravitation; but regarded simply as a force, how many enigmas\nhas it not served to unlock! And that moral gravitation towards evil,\nmanifested by the only two classes of responsible beings of which there\nis aught known to man, and of which a degradation linked by mysterious\nanalogy with a class of facts singularly prominent in geologic history is\nthe result, occupies apparently a similar place, as a force, in the moral\ndynamics of the universe, and seems suited to perform a similar part.\nInexplicable itself, it is yet a key to the solution of all the minor\ninexplicabilities in the scheme of Providence.\n\nIn a matter of such extreme niceness and difficulty, shall I dare venture\non an illustrative example?\n\nSo far as both the geologic and the Scriptural evidence extends, no\nspecies or family of existences seems to have been introduced by creation\ninto the present scene of being since the appearance of man. In Scripture\nthe formation of the human race is described as the terminal act of a\nseries, \u201cgood\u201d in all its previous stages, but which became \u201cvery good\u201d\nthen; and geologists, judging from the modicum of evidence which they\nhave hitherto succeeded in collecting on the subject,\u2014evidence still\nmeagre, but, so far as it goes, independent and distinct,\u2014pronounce\n\u201cpost-Adamic creations\u201d at least \u201cimprobable.\u201d The naturalist finds\ncertain animal and vegetable species restricted to certain circles,\nand that in certain foci in these circles they attain to their fullest\ndevelopment and their maximum number. And these foci he regards as the\noriginal centres of creation, whence, in each instance in the process\nof increase and multiplication, the plant or creature propagated itself\noutwards in circular wavelets of life, that sank at each stage as they\nwidened till at length, at the circumference of the area, they wholly\nceased. Now we find it argued by Professor Edward Forbes that \u201csince\nman\u2019s appearance, certain geological areas, both of land and water,\nhave been formed, presenting such physical conditions as to entitle us\nto expect within their bounds one, or in some instances more than one,\ncentre of creation, or _point of maximum of a zoological or botanical\nprovince_. But a critical examination renders evident,\u201d the Professor\nadds, \u201cthat instead of showing distinct foci of creation, they have\nbeen in all instances peopled by colonization, _i. e._ by migration of\nspecies from pre-existing, and in every case pre-Adamic, provinces. Among\nthe terrestrial areas the British isles may serve as an example; among\nmarine, the Baltic, Mediterranean, and Black Seas. The British islands\nhave been colonized from various centres of creation in (now) continental\nEurope; the Baltic Sea from the Celtic region, although it runs itself\ninto the conditions of the Boreal one; and the Mediterranean, as it\nnow appears, from the fauna and flora of the more ancient Lusitanian\nprovince.\u201d Professor Forbes, it is stated further, in the report of his\npaper to which I owe these details,\u2014a paper read at the Royal Institution\nin March last,\u2014\u201cexhibited, in support of the same view, a map, showing\nthe relation which the centres of creation of the air-breathing molluscs\nin Europe bear to the geological history of the respective areas, and\nproving that the whole snail population of its northern and central\nextent (the portion of the Continent of newest and probably post-Adamic\norigin) had been derived from foci of creation seated in pre-Adamic\nlands. And these remarkable facts have induced the Professor,\u201d it was\nadded, \u201cto maintain the improbability of post-Adamic creations.\u201d\n\nWith the introduction of man into the scene of existence, creation,\nI repeat, seems to have ceased. What is it that now takes its place,\nand performs its work? During the previous dynasties, all elevation\nin the scale was an effect simply of creation. Nature lay dead in a\nwaste theatre of rock, vapor, and sea, in which the insensate laws,\nchemical; mechanical, and electric, carried on their blind, unintelligent\nprocesses: the _creative fiat_ went forth; and, amid waters that\nstraightway teemed with life in its lower forms, vegetable and animal,\nthe dynasty of the fish was introduced. Many ages passed, during which\nthere took place no further elevation: on the contrary, in not a few of\nthe newly introduced species of the reigning class there occurred for\nthe first time examples of an asymmetrical misplacement of parts, and,\nin at least one family of fishes, instances of defect of parts: there\nwas the manifestation of a downward tendency towards the degradation of\nmonstrosity, when the elevatory fiat again went forth, and, _through\nan act of creation_, the dynasty of the reptile began. Again many ages\npassed by, marked, apparently, by the introduction of a warm-blooded\noviparous animal, the bird, and of a few marsupial quadrupeds, but in\nwhich the prevailing class reigned undeposed, though at least unelevated.\nYet again, however, the elevatory fiat went forth, and _through an act\nof creation_ the dynasty of the mammiferous quadruped began. And after\nthe further lapse of ages, the elevatory fiat went forth yet once more\n_in an act of creation_; and with the human, heaven-aspiring dynasty,\nthe moral government of God, in its connection with at least the world\nwhich we inhabit, \u201ctook beginning.\u201d And then creation ceased. Why?\nSimply because God\u2019s moral government _had_ begun,\u2014because in necessary\nconformity with the institution of that government, there was to be a\nthorough identity maintained between the glorified and immortal beings\nof the terminal dynasty, and the dying magnates of the dynasty which now\nis; and because, in consequence of the maintenance of this identity as\nan essential condition of this moral government, mere _acts of creation_\ncould no longer carry on the elevatory process. The work analogous in its\nend and object to those _acts of creation_ which gave to our planet its\nsuccessive dynasties of higher and yet higher existences, is the work of\nREDEMPTION. It is the elevatory process of the present time,\u2014the only\npossible provision for that final act of _re_-creation \u201cto everlasting\nlife,\u201d which shall usher in the terminal dynasty.\n\nI cannot avoid thinking that many of our theologians attach a too narrow\nmeaning to the remarkable reason \u201cannexed to the Fourth Commandment\u201d by\nthe Divine Lawgiver. \u201cGod rested on the seventh day,\u201d says the text,\n\u201cfrom all his work which He had created and made; and God blessed the\nseventh day, and sanctified it.\u201d And such is the reason given in the\nDecalogue why man should also rest on the seventh day. God rested on the\nSabbath, and sanctified it; and therefore man ought also to rest on the\nSabbath, and keep it holy. But I know not where we shall find grounds\nfor the belief that that Sabbath-day during which God rested was merely\ncommensurate in its duration with one of the Sabbaths of short-lived\nman,\u2014a brief period, measured by a single revolution of the earth on\nits axis. We have not, as has been shown, a shadow of evidence that\nHe resumed his work of creation on the morrow: the geologist finds no\ntrace of post-Adamic creation,\u2014the theologian can tell us of none. God\u2019s\nSabbath of rest may still exist;\u2014_the work of REDEMPTION may be the work\nof his Sabbath day_. That elevatory process through successive acts of\ncreation which engaged Him during myriads of ages, was of an ordinary\nweek-day character; but in when the term of his moral government began,\nthe elevatory process proper to it assumed the Divine character of the\nSabbath. This special view appears to lend peculiar emphasis to the\nreason embodied in the commandment. The collation of the passage with\nthe geologic record seems, as if by a species of re-translation, to make\nit enunciate as its injunction, \u201cKeep this day, not merely as a day of\nmemorial related to a past fact, but also as a day of co\u00f6peration with\nGod in the work of elevation in relation both to a present fact and\na future purpose. God keeps his Sabbath,\u201d it says, \u201cin order that He\nmay save; keep yours also, in order that ye may be saved.\u201d It serves,\nbesides, to throw light on the prominence of the Sabbatical command,\nin a digest of law of which no part or tittle can pass away until the\nfulfilment of all things. During the present dynasty of probation and\ntrial, that special work of both God and man on which the character of\nthe future dynasty depends, is the Sabbath-day work of saving and being\nsaved.[41]\n\nIt is in this dynasty of the future that man\u2019s moral and intellectual\nfaculties will receive their full development The expectation of any\nvery great advance in the present scene of things\u2014great, at least, when\nmeasured by man\u2019s large capacity of conceiving of the good and fair\u2014seems\nto be, like all human hope when restricted to time, an expectation\ndoomed to disappointment. There are certain limits within which the race\nimproves;\u2014civilization is better than the want of it, and the taught\nsuperior to the untaught man. There is a change, too, effected in the\nmoral nature, through that Spirit which, by working belief in the heart,\nbrings its aspirations into harmony with the realities of the unseen\nworld, that, in at least its relation to the future state, cannot be\nestimated too highly. But conception can travel very far beyond even its\nbest effects in their merely secular bearing; nay, it is peculiarly its\nnature to show the men most truly the subjects of it, how miserably they\nfall short of the high standard of conduct and feeling which it erects,\nand to teach them, more emphatically than by words, that their degree\nof happiness must of necessity be as low as their moral attainments are\nhumble. Further,\u2014man, though he has been increasing in knowledge ever\nsince his appearance on earth, has not been improving in faculty;\u2014a\nshrewd fact, which they who expect most from the future of this world\nwould do well to consider. The ancient masters of mind were in no respect\ninferior in calibre to their predecessors. We have not yet shot ahead\nof the old Greeks in either the perception of the beautiful, or in the\nability of producing it; there has been no improvement in the inventive\nfaculty since the Iliad was written, some three thousand years ago; nor\nhas taste become more exquisite, or the perception of the harmony of\nnumbers more nice, since the age of the \u00c6neid. Science is cumulative in\nits character; and so its votaries in modern times stand on a higher\npedestal than their predecessors. But though nature produced a Newton\nsome two centuries ago, as she produced a Goliath of Gath at an earlier\nperiod, the modern philosophers, as a class, do not exceed in actual\nstature the worse informed ancients,\u2014the Euclids, Archimedeses, and\nAristotles. We would be without excuse if, with the Bacon, Milton, and\nShakspeare of these latter ages of the world full before us, we recurred\nto the obsolete belief that the human race is deteriorating; but then, on\nthe other hand, we have certain evidence, that since genius first began\nunconsciously to register in its works its own bulk and proportions,\nthere has been no increase in the mass or improvement in the quality of\nindividual mind. As for the dream that there is to be some extraordinary\nelevation of the general platform of the race achieved by means of\neducation, it is simply the hallucination of the age,\u2014the world\u2019s present\nalchemical expedient for converting farthings into guineas, sheerly by\ndint of scouring. Not but that education is good; it exercises, and,\nin the ordinary mind, developes, faculty. But it will not anticipate\nthe terminal dynasty. Yet further,\u2014 man\u2019s average capacity of happiness\nseems to be as limited and as incapable of increase as his average reach\nof intellect: it is a mediocre capacity at best; nor is it greater\nby a shade now, in these days of power-looms and portable manures,\nthan in the times of the old patriarchs. So long, too, as the law of\nincrease continues, man must be subject to the law of death, with its\nstern attendants, suffering and sorrow; for the two laws go necessarily\ntogether; and so long as death reigns, human creatures, in even the best\nof times, will continue to quit this scene of being without professing\nmuch satisfaction at what they have found either in it or themselves. It\nwill no doubt be a less miserable world than it is now, when the good\ncome, as there is reason to hope they one day shall, to be a majority;\nbut it will be felt to be an inferior sort of world even then, and be\neven fuller than now of wishes and longings for a better. Let it improve\nas it may, it will be a scene of probation and trial till the end. And\nso Faith, undeceived by the mirage of the midway desert, whatever form\nor name, political or religious, the phantasmagoria may bear, must\ncontinue to look beyond its unsolid and tremulous glitter,\u2014its bare rocks\nexaggerated by the vapor into air-drawn castles, and its stunted bushes\nmagnified into goodly trees,\u2014and, fixing her gaze upon the re-creation\nyet future,\u2014the terminal dynasty yet unbegun,\u2014she must be content to\nenter upon her final rest\u2014for she will not enter upon it earlier\u2014\u201cat\nreturn\u201d\n\n                      \u201cOf Him, the Woman\u2019s Seed,\n    Last in the clouds, from heaven to be revealed\n    In glory of the Father, to dissolve\n    Satan with his perverted world, then raise\n    From the conflagrant mass, purged and refined,\n    New heavens, new earth, ages of endless date,\n    Founded in righteousness, and peace, and love,\n    To bring forth fruits,\u2014joy and eternal bliss.\u201d\n\nBut it may be judged that I am trespassing on a field into which I have\nno right to enter. Save, however, for its close proximity with that in\nwhich the geologist expatiates as properly his own, this little volume\nwould never have been written. It is the fact that man must believingly\nco\u00f6perate with God in the work of preparation for the final dynasty,\nor exist throughout its never-ending cycles as a lost and degraded\ncreature, that alone renders the development hypothesis formidable.\nBut inculcating that the elevatory process is one of the natural law,\nnot of moral endeavor,\u2014by teaching, inferentially at least, that in the\nbetter state of things which is coming there is to be an identity of\nrace with that of the existing dynasty, but no identity of individual\nconsciousness,\u2014that, on the contrary, the life after death which we\nare to inherit is to be merely a horrid life of wriggling impurities,\noriginated in the putrefactive mucus,\u2014and that thus the men who now\nlive possess no real stake in the kingdom of the future,\u2014it is its\ndirect tendency, so far as its influence extends, to render the required\nco\u00f6peration with God an impossibility. For that co\u00f6peration cannot exist\nwithout belief as its basis. The hypothesis involves a misreading of the\ngeologic record, which not merely affects its meaning in relation to the\nmind, and thus, in a question of science, substitutes error for truth,\nbut which also threatens to affect the record itself, in relation to the\ndestiny of every individual perverted and led astray. It threatens to\nwrite down among the degraded and the lost, men who, under the influence\nof an unshaken faith, might have risen at the dawn of the terminal\nperiod, to enjoy the fulness of eternity among the glorified and the\ngood.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n\n[1] Mr. Miller is the author also of _Scenes and Legends of the North of\nScotland_, one vol. 8vo.; _A Letter from one of the Scotch people to the\nRight Honorable Lord Brougham and Vaux, on the opinions expressed by his\nLordship in the Auchterarder Case_; and _The Whiggism of the Old School,\nas exemplified in the Past History and Present Position of the Church\nof Scotland_. The second of these works is well characterized by Mr.\nGladstone as \u201can able, elegant, and masculine production.\u201d\n\n[2] London, 1847, pp. 409\n\n[3] Since the above sentence was written and set in type, I have learned\nthat my ingenious friend, Mr. Charles Peach of the Customs, Fowey,\nso well known for his pal\u00e6ontological discoveries, has just found in\nthe Devonian system of Cornwall, fragments of what seem to be dermal\nplates of _Asterolepis_. It is a somewhat curious circumstance, that\nthe two farthest removed extremities of Great Britain\u2014Cornwall and\nCaithness\u2014should be tipped by fossiliferous deposits of the same ancient\nsystem, and that organisms which, when they lived, were contemporary,\nshould be found embedded in the rocks which rise over the British Channel\non the one extremity, and overhang the Pentland Frith on the other.\n\n[4] Figured from a Thurso specimen, slightly different in its proportions\nfrom the Stromness specimen described.\n\n[5] Dr. George Garson, Stromness, and Mr. William Watt, jun. Skaill.\n\n[6] The Continental assertors of the development hypothesis are greatly\nmore frank than those of our own country regarding the \u201clife after\ndeath,\u201d and what man has to expect from it. The individual, they tell\nus, perishes forever; but, then, out of his remains there spring up\nother vitalities. The immortality of the soul is, it would seem, an idle\nfigment, for there really exists no such things as souls; but is there no\ncomfort in being taught, instead, that we are to resolve into monads and\nmaggots? Job solaced himself with the assurance that, even after worms\nhad destroyed his body, he was in the flesh to see God. Had Professor\nOken been one of his comforters, he would have sought to restrict his\nhopes to the prospect of living in the worms. \u201cIf the organic fundamental\nsubstance _consist_ of infusoria,\u201d says the Professor, \u201cso must the\nwhole organic world _originate_ from infusoria. Plants and animals can\nonly be metamorphoses of infusoria. This being granted, so also must all\norganizations _consist_ of infusoria, and, during their destruction,\ndissolve into the same. Every plant, every animal, is converted by\nmaceration into a mucous mass; this putrefies, and the moisture is\nstocked with infusoria. Putrefaction is nothing else than a division\nof organisms into infusoria,\u2014a reduction of the higher to the primary\nlife.... Death is no annihilation, but only a change. One individual\nemerges out of another. Death is only a transition to another life,\u2014not\ninto death. This transition from one life to another takes place through\nthe primary condition of the organic, or the mucus.\u201d\u2014_Physio-Philosophy_,\npp. 187-189.\n\n[7] I trust that at least by and by there may be an exception claimed,\nfrom the general, but, I am sure, well-meant, censure of this passage,\nin favor of the Free Church of Scotland. It has got as its Professor of\nPhysical Science\u2014thanks to the sagacity of Chalmers\u2014Dr. John Fleming,\na man of European reputation, and all that seems further necessary, in\norder to secure the benefits contemplated in the appointment, is, that\nattendance on his course should be rendered imperative on _all_ Free\nChurch candidates for the ministry.\n\n[8] Agassiz\u2019s description of the _Pterichthys_, as quoted by Humboldt, in\nhis _Cosmos_.\n\n[9] From Murchison\u2019s Silurian System.\n\n[10] These scales, which occur in a detached state, in a stratified clay\nof the Old Red Sandstone, near Cromarty, present for their size a larger\nextent of _cover_ than the scales of any other Ganoid.\n\n[11] A peculiarity which also occurs in the anterior dorsal of the\n_Dipterus_.\n\n[12] From the head of _Raja clavata_.\n\n[13] The darker, upper patch in this figure indicates a portion in which\nthe scales of the fins in the fossil still retain their enamel;\u2014the\nlighter, a portion from which the enamel has disappeared.\n\n[14] The Acanths of the Coal Measures possess the cranial buckler.\n\n[15] Professor Owen, in fixing the homologies of the ichthyic head,\ndiffers considerably from Cuvier; but his view seems to be demonstrably\nthe correct one. It will, however, be seen, that in my attempted\ncomparison of the divisions of the ancient ganoid cranium with those of\nthe craniums of existing fishes, the points at issue between the two\ngreat naturalists are not involved, otherwise than as mere questions of\nwords. The matter to be determined, for instance, is not whether plate A\nin the skulls of the cod and _Coccosteus_ be the homologue of a part of\nthe occipital or that of a part of the parietal bones, but whether plate\nA in the _Coccosteus_ be the homologue of plate A in the cod. The letters\nemployed I have borrowed from Agassiz\u2019s restoration of the _Coccosteus_;\nwhereas the figures intimate divisions which the imperfect keeping of the\nspecimens on which the ichthyologist founded did not enable him to detect.\n\n[16] The jaws (10, 10) which exhibit in the print their greatest breadth,\nwould have presented in the animal, seen from beneath, their narrow\nunder-edges, and have nearly fallen into the line of the sub-opercular\nplates, (13, 13.)\n\n[17] In all probability it is likewise the principle of the placoid\nskull. The numerous osseous points by which the latter is encrusted,\neach capable of increase at the edges, seem the minute bricks of an\nample dome. It is possible, however, that new points may be formed in\nthe interstices between the first formed ones, as what anatomists term\nthe _triquetra_ or _Wormiana_ form between the serrated edges of the\nlambdoidal suture in the human skull; and that the osseous surface of the\ncerebral dome may thus extend, as the dome itself increases in size, not\nthrough the growth of the previously existing pieces,\u2014the minute bricks\nof my illustration,\u2014but through the addition of new ones. Equally, in\neither case, however, that essential difference between the placoid skull\nand the placoid vertebra, to which I have referred, appears to hinge\non the circumstance, that while the osseous nucleus of each vertebral\ncentrum could form, in even its most complicated shape, from a _single_\npoint, the osseous walls of the cranium had to be formed from _hundreds_.\nThe accompanying diagram serves to show after what manner the vertebral\ncentrum in the Ray enlarges with the growth of the animal, by addition of\nbony matter external to the point in the middle, at which ossification\nfirst begins. The horizontal lines indicate the lines of increment in the\ntwo internal cones which each centrum comprises, and the vertical ones\nthe lines of increment in the lateral pillars.\n\n[Illustration: Fig. 23.\n\nSECTION OF VERTEBRAL CENTRUM OF THORNBACK.]\n\n[18] One of the Thurso coprolites in my possession is about one fourth\nlonger than the larger of the two specimens figured here, and nearly\nthrice as broad.\n\n[19] In two of these, in a collection of several score, I have failed to\ndetect the spiral markings, though their state of keeping is decidedly\ngood. There are other appearances which lead me to suspect that the\n_Asterolepis_ was not the only large fish of the Lower Old Red Sandstone;\nbut my facts on the subject are too inconclusive to justify aught more\nthan sedulous inquiry.\n\n[20] The shaded plate, (_a_,) accidentally presented in this specimen,\nbelongs to the upper part of the head. It is the posterior frontal\nplate F, which half-encircled the eye orbit, (see fig. 29;) and I have\nintroduced it into the print here, as in none of the other prints, or of\nany other specimens, is its upper surface shown.\n\n[21] The late Mr. John Thurston.\n\n[22] \u201cMr. Phillips proceeded to describe some remains of a small fish,\nresembling the _Cheiracanthus_ of the Old Red Sandstone, scales and\nspines of which he had found in a quarry at Hales End, on the western\nside of the Malverns. The section presented beds of the Old Red Sandstone\ninclined to the west; beneath these were arenaceous beds of a lighter\ncolor, forming the junction with Silurian shales; these, again, passing\non to calcareous beds in the lower part of the quarry, containing the\ncorals and shells of the Aymestry Limestone, of their agreement with\nwhich stronger evidence might be obtained elsewhere. He had found none\nof these scales in the junction beds or in the Upper Ludlow Shales; but\nabout sixty or one hundred feet lower, just above the Aymestry Limestone,\nhis attention had been attracted to discolored spots on the _surface_ of\nthe beds, which, upon microscopic examination, proved to be the minute\nscales and spines before mentioned. These remains were only apparent\non the surface, whilst the \u2018fish-bed\u2019 of the Upper Ludlow rock, as it\nusually occurred, was an inch thick, consisting of innumerable small\nteeth and spines.\u201d\u2014_Report, in \u201cAthen\u00e6um\u201d for 1842, of the Proceedings of\nthe Twelfth Meeting of British Association, (Manchester.)_\n\n[23] \u201cThis is the lowest position\u201d (that of the Onondago Limestone) \u201cin\nthe State of New York in which any remains have been found higher in\nthe scale of organized beings than _Crustacea_, with the exception of\nan imperfectly preserved fish-bone discovered by Hall in the Oriskany\nSandstone. That specimen, together with the defensive fish-bone found in\nthis part of the New York system, furnishes evidences of the existence of\nanimals belonging to the class _vertebrata_ during the deposition of the\nmiddle part of the protozoic strata.\u201d\u2014_American Journal of Science and\nArts for 1846_, p. 63.\n\n[24] \u201cThe shales _alternating_ with the Wenlock Limestone.\u201d (_Edinburgh\nReview._)\n\n[25] The Silurian Placoids are most adequately represented by the\n_Cestracion_ of the southern hemisphere; but I know not that of the\npeculiar character and instincts of this interesting Placoid,\u2014the last of\nits race,\u2014there is any thing known. For its form and general appearance\nsee fig. 49, page 177.\n\n[26] Such as the dog-fishes, picked and spotted.\n\n[27] The twelfth in _Spinax Acanthius_, and the fourteenth in _Scyllium\nStellare_.\n\n[28] It will scarce be urged against the degradation theory, that those\nraces which, tried by the tests of defect or misplacement of parts, we\ndeem degraded, are not less fitted for carrying on what in their own\nlittle spheres is the proper business of life, than the non-degraded\norders and families. The objection is, however, a possible one, and one\nwhich a single remark may serve to obviate. It is certainly true that the\ndegraded families _are_ thoroughly fitted for the performance of all the\nwork given them to do. They greatly increase when placed in favorable\ncircumstances, and, when vigorous and thriving, enjoy existence. But then\nthe same may be said of all animals, without reference to their place in\nthe scale;\u2014the mollusc is as thoroughly adapted to its circumstances and\nas fitted to accomplish the end proper to its being, as the mammiferous\nquadruped, and the mammiferous quadruped as man himself; but the fact of\nperfect adaptation in no degree invalidates the other not less certain\nfact of difference of rank, nor proves that the mollusc is equal to the\nquadruped, or the quadruped to man. And, of course, the remark equally\nbears on the _reduced_ as on the _unelevated_,\u2014on lowness of place when\na result of degradation in races pertaining to a higher division of\nanimals, as on lowness of place when a result of the humble standing of\nthe division to which the races belong.\n\n[29] The vertebral column in the genus _Diplopterus_ ran, as in the\nplacoid genus _Scyllium_, nearly through the middle of the caudal fin.\n\n[30] In the following diagram a few simple lines serve to exhibit the\nprogress of degradation. Fig. _a_ represents the symmetrical Placoids of\nthe Silurian period, consisting of head, neck, body, tail, fore limbs and\nhinder limbs; fig. _b_ represents those heterocercal Ganoids of the Old\nRed Sandstone, Coal Measures, and Permian System, in which the neck is\nextinguished, and the fore limbs stuck on to the occiput; fig. _c_, those\nhomocercal Ganoids of the Trias Lias, Oolite, and Wealden, whose tails\nspread out into broad terminal processes, without homologue in the higher\nanimals; fig. _d_, those Acanthopterygii of the Chalk that, in addition\nto the non-homological processes, have both fore limbs and hinder\nlimbs stuck round the head; while fig. _e_ represents the asymmetrical\nPlatessa, of the same period, with one of its eyes in the middle of its\nhead, and the other thrust out to the side.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n[31] I would, however, respectfully suggest, that that theory of cerebral\nvertebr\u00e6, on which, in this question, the comparative anatomists proceed\nas their principle, and which finds as little support in the geologic\nrecord from the actual history of the fore limbs as from the actual\nhistory of the bones of the cranium, may be more ingenious than sound. It\nis a shrewd circumstance, that the rocks refuse to testify in its favor.\nAgassiz, I find, decides against it on other than geological grounds;\nand his conclusion is certainly rendered not the less worthy of careful\nconsideration by the fact that, yielding to the force of evidence, his\nviews on the subject underwent a thorough change. He had first held,\nand then rejected it. \u201cI have shared,\u201d he says, \u201cwith a multitude of\nother naturalists, the opinion which regards the cranium as composed of\nvertebr\u00e6; and I am consequently in some degree called upon to point out\nthe motives which have induced me to reject it.\u201d\n\n\u201cM. Oken,\u201d he continues, \u201cwas the first to assign this signification to\nthe bones of the cranium. The new doctrine he expounded was received\nin Germany with great enthusiasm by the school of the philosophers of\nnature. The author conceived the cranium to consist of three vertebr\u00e6,\nand the basal occipital, the sphenoid, and the ethmoid, were regarded\nas the central parts of these cranial vertebr\u00e6. On these alleged bodies\nof vertebr\u00e6, the arches enveloping the central parts of the nervous\nsystem were raised, while on the opposite side were attached the inferior\npieces, which went to form the vegetative arch destined to embrace the\nintestinal canal and the large vessels. It would be too tedious to\nenumerate in this place the changes which each author introduced, in\norder to modify this matter so as to make it suit his own views. Some\nwent the length of affirming that the vertebr\u00e6 of the head were as\ncomplete as those of the trunk; and, by means of various dismemberments,\nseparations, and combinations, all the forms of the cranium were referred\nto the vertebr\u00e6, by admitting that the number of pieces was invariably\nfixed in every head, and that all the vertebrata, whatever might be\ntheir organization in other respects, had in their heads the same number\nof points of ossification. At a later period, what was erroneous in\nthis manner of regarding the subject was detected; but the idea of the\nvertebral composition of the head was still retained. It was admitted as\na general law, that the cranium was composed of three primitive vertebr\u00e6,\nas the embryo is of three blastodermic leaflets; but that these vertebr\u00e6,\nlike the leaflets, existed only ideally, and that their presence,\nalthough easily demonstrated in certain cases, could only be slightly\ntraced, and with the greatest difficulty, in other instances. The notion\nthus laid down of the virtual existence of cranial vertebr\u00e6 did not\nencounter very great opposition; it could not be denied that there was a\ncertain general resemblance between the osseous case of the brain and the\nrachidian canal; the occipital, in particular, had all the characteristic\nfeatures of a vertebra. But whenever an attempt was made to push the\nanalogy further, and to determine rigorously the anterior vertebr\u00e6 of the\ncranium, the observer found himself arrested by insurmountable obstacles,\nand he was obliged always to revert to the virtual existence.\n\n\u201cIn order to explain my idea clearly, let me have recourse to an\nexample. It is certain that organized bodies are sometimes endowed with\nvirtual qualities, which, at a certain period of the being\u2019s life, elude\ndissection, and all our means of investigation. It is thus that at the\nmoment of their origin, the eggs of all animals have such a resemblance\nto each other, that it would be impossible to distinguish, even by the\naid of the most powerful microscope, the ovarial egg of a craw-fish,\nfor example, from that of true fish. And yet who would deny that beings\nin every respect different from each other exist in these eggs? It is\nprecisely because the difference manifests itself at a later period,\nin proportion as the embryo develops itself, that we are authorized\nto conclude, that, even from the earliest period, the eggs were\ndifferent,\u2014that each had virtual qualities proper to itself, although\nthey could not be discovered by our senses. If, on the contrary, any\none should find two eggs perfectly alike, and should observe two beings\nperfectly identical issue from them, he would greatly err if he ascribed\nto these eggs different virtual qualities. It is therefore necessary, in\norder to be in a condition to suppose that virtual properties peculiar\nto it are concealed in an animal, that these properties should manifest\nthemselves once, in some phase or other of its development. Now, applying\nthis principle to the theory of cranial vertebr\u00e6, we should say, that\nif these vertebr\u00e6 virtually exist in the adult, they must needs show\nthemselves in reality, at a certain period of development. If, on the\ncontrary, they are found neither in the embryo nor the adult, I am of\nopinion that we are entitled likewise to dispute their virtual existence.\n\n\u201cHere, however, an objection may be made to me, drawn from the\nphysiological value of the vertebr\u00e6, the function of which, as is\nwell known, is, on the one hand, to furnish a solid support to the\nmuscular contractions which determine the movements of the trunk, and,\non the other, to protect the centres of the nervous system, by forming\na more or less solid case completely around them. The bodies of the\nvertebr\u00e6 are particularly destined to the first of these offices; the\nneurapophyses to the second. What can be more natural than to admit, from\nthe consideration of this, that in the head, the bodies of the vertebr\u00e6\ndiminish in proportion as the moving function becomes lost, while the\nneurapophyses are considerably developed for protecting the brain, the\nvolume of which is very considerable, when compared with that of the\nspinal marrow? Have we not an example of this fact in the vertebr\u00e6 of\nthe tail, where the neurapophyses become completely obliterated, and\na simple cylindrical body alone remains? Now, may it not be the case,\nthat in the head, the bodies of the vertebr\u00e6 have disappeared; and that,\nin consequence, there is a prolongation of the cord only as far as the\nmoving functions of the vertebr\u00e6 extend? There is some truth in this\nargument, and it would be difficult to refute it _a priori_. But it\nloses all its force the moment that we enter upon a detailed examination\nof the bones of the head. Thus, what would we call, according to this\nhypothesis, the principal sphenoid, the great wings of the sphenoid, and\nthe ethmoid, which form the floor of the cerebral cavity? It may be said\nthey are apophyses. But the apophyses protect the nervous centres only\non the side and above. It may be said that they are the bodies of the\nvertebr\u00e6. But they are formed without the concurrence of the dorsal cord;\nthey cannot, therefore, be the bodies of the vertebr\u00e6. It must therefore\nbe allowed, that these bones at least do not enter into the vertebral\ntype; that they are in some measure peculiar. And if this be the case\nwith them, why may not the other protective plates be equally independent\nof the vertebral type; the more so, because the relations of the frontals\nand parietals vary so much, that it would be almost impossible to assign\nto them a constant place?\u201d\n\n[32] It is stated by Mr. Witham, that, \u201cexcept in a few instances, he\nhad ineffectually tried, with the aid of the microscope, to obtain some\ninsight into the structure of coal. Owing,\u201d he adds, \u201cto its great\nopacity, which is probably due to mechanical pressure, the action of\nchemical affinity, and the percolation of acidulous waters, all traces\nof organization appear to have been obliterated.\u201d I have heard the late\nMr. Sanderson, who prepared for Mr. Witham most of the specimens figured\nin his well-known work on the \u201cInternal Structure of Fossil Vegetables,\u201d\nand from whom the materials of his statement on this point seem to have\nbeen derived, make a similar remark. It was rare, he said, to find a\nbit of coal that exhibited the organic structure. The case, however, is\nfar otherwise; and the ingenious mechanic and his employer were misled,\nsimply by the circumstance, that it is rare to find pieces of coal which\nexhibit the ligneous fibre, existing in a state of keeping solid enough\nto stand the grinding of the lapidary\u2019s wheel. The lignite usually\noccurs in thin layers of a substance resembling soft charcoal, at which,\nfrom the loose adhesion of the fibres, the coal splits at a stroke; and\nas it cannot be prepared as a transparency, it is best examined by a\nStanhope lens. It will be found, tried in this manner, that so far is\nvegetable fibre from being of rare occurrence in coal,\u2014our Scotch coal\nat least,\u2014that almost every cubic inch contains its hundreds, nay, its\nthousands, of cells.\n\n[33] On a point of such importance I find it necessary to strengthen my\ntestimony by auxiliary evidence. The following is the judgment, on this\nancient petrifaction, of Mr. Nicol of Edinburgh,\u2014confessedly one of our\nhighest living authorities in that division of fossil botany which takes\ncognizance of the internal structure of lignites, and decides, from their\nanatomy, their race and family:\u2014\n\n                                       \u201cEdinburgh, 19th July, 1845.\n\n    \u201cDEAR SIR,\u2014I have examined the structure of the fossil wood\n    which you found in the Old Red Sandstone at Cromarty, and\n    have no hesitation in stating, that the reticulated texture\n    of the transverse sections, though somewhat compressed,\n    clearly indicates a coniferous origin; but as there is not\n    the slightest trace of a disc to be seen in the longitudinal\n    sections parallel to the medullary rays, it is impossible to\n    say whether it belongs to the Pine or Araucarian division. I\n    am, &c.,\n\n                                                   \u201cWILLIAM NICOL.\u201d\n\nIt will be seen that Mr. Nicol failed to detect what I now deem the discs\nof this conifer,\u2014those stippled markings to which I have referred, and\nwhich the engraver has indicated in no exaggerated style, in one of the\nlongitudinal sections (_b_) of the wood-cut given above. But even were\nthis portion of the evidence wholly wanting, we would be left in doubt,\nin consequence, not whether the Old Red lignite formed part of a true\ngymnospermous tree, but whether that tree is now represented by the pines\nof Europe and America, or by the araucarians of Chili and New Zealand.\nWere I to risk an opinion in a department not particularly my province it\nwould be in favor of an araucarian relationship.\n\n[34] The following digest from Professor Balfour\u2019s very admirable\n\u201cManual of Botany,\u201d of what is held on this curious subject, may be\nnot unacceptable to the reader. \u201cIt is an interesting question to\ndetermine the mode in which the various species and tribes of plants\nwere originally scattered over the globe. Various hypotheses have\nbeen advanced on the subject. Linn\u00e6us entertained the opinion that\nthere was at first only one primitive centre of vegetation, from which\nplants were distributed over the globe. Some, avoiding all discussions\nand difficulties, suppose that plants were produced at first in the\nlocalities where they are now seen vegetating. Others think that each\nspecies of plant originated in, and was diffused from, a single primitive\ncentre; and that there were numerous such centres situated in different\nparts of the world, each centre being the seat of a particular number\nof species. They thus admit great vegetable migrations, similar to\nthose of the human races. Those who adopt the latter view recognize in\nthe distribution of plants some of the last revolutions of our planet,\nand the action of numerous and varied forces, which impede or favor\nthe dissemination of vegetables in the present day. They endeavor to\nascertain the primitive flora of countries, and to trace the vegetable\nmigrations which have taken place. Daubeny says, that analogy favors\nthe supposition that each species of plant was originally formed in\nsome particular locality, whence it spread itself gradually over a\ncertain area, rather than that the earth was at once, by the fiat of the\nAlmighty, covered with vegetation in the manner we at present behold it.\nThe human race rose from a single pair; and the distribution of plants\nand animals over a certain definite area would seem to imply that the\nsame was the general law. Analogy would lead us to believe that the\nextension of species over the earth originally took place on the same\nplan on which it is conducted at present, when a new island starts up in\nthe midst of the ocean, produced either by a coral reef or a volcano.\nIn these cases the whole surface is not at once overspread with plants,\nbut a gradual progress of vegetation is traced from the accidental\nintroduction of a single seed, perhaps, of each species, wafted by winds\nor floated by currents. The remarkable limitation of certain species to\nsingle spots on the globe seems to favor the supposition of specific\ncentres.\u201d\n\n[35] _Rhodomenia palmata_ and _Alaria esculenta_.\n\n[36] _Porphyra laciniata_, _Chorda filum_, and _Enteromorpha compressa_.\n\n[37] \u201cDr. Neill mentions,\u201d says the Rev. Mr. Landsborough, in his\ncomplete and very interesting \u201cHistory of British Sea-Weeds,\u201d \u201cthat on\nour shores alg\u00e6 generally occupy zones in the following order, beginning\nfrom deep water:\u2014_F. Filum_; _F. esculentus_ and _bulbosus_, _F.\ndigitatus_, _saccharinus_, and _loreus_; _F. serratus_ and _crispus_; _F.\nnodosus_ and _vesiculosus_; _F. canaliculatus_; and, last of all, _F.\npygm\u00e6us_; which is satisfied if it be within reach of the spray.\u201d\n\n[38] We are supplied with a curious example of that ever-returning\ncycle of speculation in which the human mind operates, by not only the\nintroduction of the _principle_ of Epicurus into the \u201cVestiges,\u201d but also\nby the unconscious employment of even his very _arguments_, slightly\nmodified by the floating semi-scientific notions of the time. The\nfollowing passages, taken, the one from the modern work, the other from\nF\u00e9n\u00e9lon\u2019s life of the old Greek philosopher, are not unworthy of being\nstudied, as curiously illustrative of the cycle of thought. Epicurus, I\nmust, however, first remind the reader, in the words of his biographer,\n\u201csupposed that men, and all other animals, were originally produced by\nthe ground. According to him, the primitive earth was fat and nitrous;\nand the sun, gradually warming it, soon covered it with herbage and\nshrubs: there also began to arise on the surface of the ground a great\nnumber of small tumors like mushrooms, which having in a certain time\ncome to maturity, the skin burst, and there came forth little animals,\nwhich, gradually retiring from the place where they were produced, began\nto respire.\u201d And there can be little doubt, that had the microscope been\na discovery of early Greece, the passage here would have told us, not of\nmushroom-like tumors, but of monads. Save that the element of microscopic\nfact is awanting in the one and present in the other, the following are\nstrictly parallel lines of argument:\u2014\n\n\u201cTo the natural objection that the earth does not now produce men,\nlions, and dogs, Epicurus replies that the fecundity of the earth is\nnow exhausted. In advanced age a woman ceases to bear children; a piece\nof land never before cultivated produces much more during the few first\nyears than it does afterwards; and when a forest is once cut down, the\nsoil never produces trees equal to those which have been rooted up.\nThose which are afterwards planted become dwarfish, and are perpetually\ndegenerating. We are, however, he argues, by no means certain but there\nmay be at present rabbits, hares, foxes, bears, and other animals,\nproduced by the earth in their perfect state. The reason why we are\nbackward in admitting it is, that it happens in retired places, and\nnever falls under our view; and, never seeing rats but such as have\nbeen produced by other rats, we adopt the opinion that the earth never\nproduced any.\u201d (_F\u00e9n\u00e9lon\u2019s Lives of the Ancient Philosophers._)\n\n\u201cIn the first place, there is no reason to suppose that, though life had\nbeen imparted by natural means, after the first cooling of the surface\nto a suitable temperament, it would continue thereafter to be capable of\nbeing imparted in like manner. The great work of the peopling of this\nglobe with living species is mainly a fact accomplished: the highest\nknown species came as a crowning effort thousands of years ago. The work\nbeing thus to all appearance finished, we are not necessarily to expect\nthat the origination of life and of species should be conspicuously\nexemplified in the present day. We are rather to expect that the vital\nphenomena presented to our eyes should mainly, if not entirely, be\nlimited to a regular and unvarying succession of races by the ordinary\nmeans of generation. This, however, is no more an argument against a\ntime when phenomena of the first kind prevailed, than it would be a\nproof against the fact of a mature man having once been a growing youth,\nthat he is now seen growing no longer..... Secondly, it is far from\nbeing certain that the primitive imparting of life and form to inorganic\nelements is not a fact of our times.\u201d (_Vestiges of Creation._)\n\n[39] \u201c_Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation_,\u201d and \u201c_Explanations,\nbeing a Sequel to the Vestiges_.\u201d\n\n[40] The chapter in which this passage occurs originally appeared,\nwith several of the others, in the _Witness_ newspaper, in a series of\narticles, entitled \u201cRambles of a Geologist,\u201d and drew forth the following\nletter from a correspondent of the _Scottish Press_, the organ of a\npowerful and thoroughly respectable section of the old Dissenters of\nScotland. I present it to the reader merely to show, that if, according\nto the author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d geologists assailed the development\nhypothesis in the fond hope of \u201cpurchasing impunity for themselves,\u201d they\nwould succeed in securing only disappointment for their pains:\u2014\n\n                      \u201cTHE PRE-ADAMITE EARTH.\n\n              \u201c_To the Editor of the Scottish Press._\n\n    \u201cSIR,\u2014I occasionally observe articles in your neighbor and\n    contemporary the _Witness_, characteristically headed \u2018Rambles\n    of a Geologist,\u2019 wherein the writer with great zeal once more\n    \u2018slays the slain\u2019 heresies of the \u2018Vestiges of Creation.\u2019\n    This writer (of the \u2018Rambles,\u2019 I mean) nevertheless, and at\n    the same time, announces his own tenets to be much of the\n    same sort, as applied to mere dead matter, that those of the\n    \u2018Vestiges\u2019 are with regard to living organisms. He maintains\n    that the world, during the last million of years, has been of\n    itself rising or developing, without the interposition of a\n    miracle, from chaos into its present state; and, of course,\n    as it is still, as a world, confessedly far below the acme of\n    physical perfection, that it must be just now on its passage,\n    self-progressing, towards that point, which terminus it may\n    reach in another million of years hence.[!!!] The author of\n    the \u2018Vestiges,\u2019 as quoted by the author of the \u2018Rambles,\u2019 in\n    the last number of the _Witness_, complains that the latter\n    and his allies are not at all so liberal to him as, from their\n    present circumstances and position, he had a right to expect.\n    He (the author of the \u2018Vestiges\u2019) reminds his opponents that\n    they have themselves only lately emerged from the antiquated\n    scriptural notions that our world was the direct and almost\n    immediate construction of its Creator,\u2014as much so, in fact,\n    as any of its organized tenants,\u2014and that it was then created\n    in a state of physical excellence, the highest possible, to\n    render it a suitable habitation for these tenants, and all\n    this only about six or seven thousand years ago,\u2014to the new\n    light of their present _physico-Lamarckian_ views; and he asks,\n    and certainly not without reason, why should _these men_, so\n    circumstanced, be so anxious to stop him in his attempt to move\n    one step further forward in the very direction they themselves\n    have made the last move?\u2014that is, in his endeavor to extend\n    their own principles of self-development from mere matter to\n    living creatures. Now, Sir, I confess myself to be one of those\n    (and possibly you may have more readers similarly constituted)\n    who not only cannot see any great difference between merely\n    _physical_ and _organic_ development,[!!] but who would be\n    inclined to allow the latter, absurd as it is, the advantage in\n    point of likelihood.[!!!] The author of the \u2018Rambles,\u2019 however,\n    in the face of this, assures us that _his_ views of physical\n    self-development and long chronology belong to the inductive\n    sciences. Now, I could at this stage of his rambles have wished\n    very much that, instead of merely _saying_ so, he had given\n    his _demonstration_. He refers, indeed, to several great men,\n    who, he says, are of his opinion. Most that these men have\n    written on the question at issue I have seen, but it appeared\n    far from demonstrative, and some of them, I know, had not fully\n    made up their mind on the point.[!!!] Perhaps the author of\n    the \u2018Rambles\u2019 could favor us with the inductive process that\n    converted himself; and, as the attainment of truth, and not\n    victory, is my object, I promise either to acquiesce in or\n    rationally refute it.[?] Till then I hold by my antiquated\n    tenets, that our world, nay, the whole material universe, was\n    created about six or seven thousand years ago, and that in a\n    state of physical excellence of which we have in our present\n    fallen world only the \u2018vestiges of creation.\u2019 I conclude by\n    mentioning that this view I have held now for nearly thirty\n    years, and, amidst all the vicissitudes of the philosophical\n    world during that period, I have never seen cause to change\n    it. Of course, with this view I was, during the interval\n    referred to, a constant opponent of the once famous, though now\n    exploded, nebular hypothesis of La Place; and I yet expect to\n    see _physical development_ and _long chronology_ wither also on\n    this earth, now that THEIR ROOT (the said hypothesis) has been\n    eradicated from the SKY.[!!!]\u2014I am, Sir, your most obedient\n    servant,\n\n                                                     \u201cPHILALETHES.\u201d\n\nI am afraid there is little hope of converting a man who has held so\nstoutly by his notions \u201cfor nearly thirty years;\u201d especially as, during\nthat period, he has been acquainting himself with what writers such as\nDrs. Chalmers, Buckland, and Pye Smith have written on the other side.\nBut for the _demonstration_ which he asks, as _I_ have conducted it, I\nbeg leave to refer him to the seventeenth chapter of my little work,\n\u201cFirst Impressions of England and its People.\u201d I am, however, inclined\nto suspect that he is one of a class whose objections are destined to be\nremoved rather by the operation of the laws of matter than of those of\nmind. For it is a comfortable consideration, that in this controversy the\ngeologists _have_ the laws of matter on their side;\u2014\u201cthe stars in their\ncourses fight against Sisera.\u201d Their opponents now, like the opponents\nof the astronomer in the ages gone by, are, in most instances, men who\nhave been studying the matter \u201cfor nearly thirty years.\u201d When they study\nit for a few years longer they disappear; and the men of the same cast\nand calibre who succeed them are exactly the men who throw themselves\nmost confidently into the arms of the enemy, and look down upon their\npoor silent predecessors with the loftiest commiseration. It is, however,\nnot uninstructive to remark how thoroughly, in some instances, the\nweaker friends and the wilier enemies of Revelation are at one in their\nconclusions respecting natural phenomena. The correspondent of the\n_Scottish Press_ merely regards the views of the author of the \u201cVestiges\u201d\nas possessing \u201cthe advantage, in point of likelihood,\u201d over those of\nthe geologists his antagonists: his ally the Dean of York goes greatly\nfurther, and stands up as stoutly for the transmutation of species as\nLamarck himself. Descanting, in his _New System of Geology_, on the\nvarious forms of trilobites, ammonites, belemnites, &c. Dean Cockburn\nsays,\u2014\n\n\u201cThese creatures appear to have possessed the power of secreting from\nthe stone beneath them a limy covering for their backs, and perhaps,\nfed partly on the same solid material. Supposing, now that the first\ntrilobites were destroyed by the Llandeilo Slates, some spawn of these\ncreatures would arise above these flags, and, after a time, would be\nwarmed into existence. These _molluscs_,[!!] then, having a better\nmaterial from which to extract their food and covering, would probably\nexpand in a slightly different form, and with a more extensive mantle\nthan what belonged to the parent species. The same would be still more\nthe case with a new generation, fed upon a new deposit from some deeper\nvolcano, such as the Caradoc or Wenlock Limestone, in which lime more\nand more predominates. Now, if any one will examine the various prints\nof trilobites in Sir R. Murchison\u2019s valuable work, he will find but very\ntrifling differences in any of them,[!!] and those differences only\nin the stony covering of their backs. I knew two brothers once much\nalike: the one became a curate with a large family; the other a London\nalderman. If the skins of these two pachydermata had been preserved in a\nfossil state, there would have been less resemblance between them than\nbetween an _Asaphus tyrannus_ and an _Asaphus caudatus_.... A careful\nand laborious investigation has discovered, as in the trilobites, a\ndifference in the ammonites of different strata; but such differences,\nas in the former case, exist only in the form of the external shell,\nand may be explained in the same manner.[!!] ... As to the scaphites,\nbaculites, belemnites, and all the other _ites_ which learned ingenuity\nhas so named, you find them in various strata the same in all important\nparticulars, but also differing slightly in their outward coverings, as\nmight be expected from the different circumstances in which each variety\nwas placed.[!!] The sheep in the warm valleys of Andalusia have a fine\ncovering like to hair; but remove them to a northern climate, and in a\nfew generations the back is covered with shaggy wool. The animal is the\nsame,\u2014the covering only is changed.... The learned have classed those\nshells under the names of terebratula, orthis, atrypa, pecten, &c. They\nare all much alike.[!!!] It requires an experienced eye to distinguish\nthem one from another: what little differences have been pointed out may\nreadily be ascribed, as before, to difference of situation.\u201d[!!!]\n\nThe author of the \u201cVestiges,\u201d with this, the fundamental portion of his\ncase, granted to him by the Dean, will have exceedingly little difficulty\nin making out the rest for himself. The passage is, however, not without\nits value, as illustrative of the darkness, in matters of physical\nscience, \u201ceven darkness which may be felt,\u201d that is suffered to linger,\nin this the most scientific of ages, in the Church of Buckland, Sedgwick,\nand Conybeare.\n\n[41] The common objection to that special view which regards the _days_\nof creation as immensely protracted periods of time, furnishes a\nspecimen, if not of reasoning in a circle, at least of reasoning from a\nmere assumption. It first takes for granted, that the Sabbath day during\nwhich God rested was a day of but twenty-four hours; and then argues,\nfrom the supposition, that in order to _keep up the proportion_ between\nthe six previous working days and the seventh day of rest, which the\nreason annexed to the fourth commandment demands, these previous days\nmust also have been days of twenty-four hours each. It would, I have\nbegun to suspect, square better with the ascertained facts, and be at\nleast equally in accordance with Scripture, to reverse the process,\nand argue that, _because_ God\u2019s working days were immensely protracted\nperiods, _his_ Sabbath must _also_ be an immensely protracted period.\nThe reason attached to the law of the Sabbath seems to be simply _a\nreason of proportion_;\u2014the objection to which I refer is an objection\npalpably founded on _considerations_ of proportion. And certainly, were\nthe reason to be divested of proportion, it would be divested also of its\ndistinctive character as a reason. Were it to run as follows, it could\nnot be at all understood:\u2014\u201cSix days shalt thou labor, &c., but on the\nseventh day shalt thou do no labor, &c.; for in six immensely protracted\nperiods of many thousand years each did the Lord make the heavens and\nearth, &c., and then rested during a brief day of twenty-four hours;\ntherefore the Lord blessed the brief day of twenty-four hours, and\nhallowed it.\u201d This, I repeat, would not be reason. All, however, that\nseems necessary to the integrity of the reason, in its character as such,\nis, that the proportion of six parts to seven should be maintained. God\u2019s\nperiods may be periods expressed algebraically by letters symbolical of\nunknown quantity, and man\u2019s periods by letters symbolical of quantities\nwell known; but if God\u2019s Sabbath be equal to one of his six working days,\nand man\u2019s Sabbath equal to one of _his_ six working days, the integrity\nof proportion is maintained. When I see the palpable absurdity of such\na reading of the reason as the one given above, I can see no absurdity\nwhatever in the reading which I subjoin:\u2014\u201cSix _periods_ (_a=a=a=a=a=a_)\nshalt thou labor, &c., but on the seventh _period_ (_b=a_) shalt thou do\nno labor, &c.; for in six _periods_ (_x=x=x=x=x=x_) the Lord made heaven\nand earth, &c., and rested the seventh _period_, (_y=x_;) therefore the\nLord blessed the seventh _period_, and hallowed it\u201d The reason, in its\ncharacter as a reason of proportion, survives here in all its integrity.\nMan, when in his unfallen estate, bore the image of God, but it must have\nbeen a miniature image at best;\u2014the proportion of man\u2019s week to that of\nhis Maker may, for aught that appears, be mathematically just in its\nproportions, and yet be a miniature image too,\u2014the mere scale of a map,\non which inches represent geographical degrees. All those week days and\nSabbath days of man which have come and gone since man first entered\nupon this scene of being, with all which shall yet come and go, until\nthe resurrection of the dead terminates the work of Redemption, may be\nincluded, and probably _are_ included, in the one Sabbath day of God.\n\n\n\n\nValuable Works\n\n    PUBLISHED BY GOULD AND LINCOLN,\n    _59 Washington Street, Boston._\n\n\n_HAMILTON\u2019S LECTURES_, embracing the METAPHYSICAL and LOGICAL COURSES;\nwith Notes, from Original Materials, and an Appendix, containing the\nAuthor\u2019s Latest Development of his New Logical Theory. Edited by Rev.\nHENRY LONGUEVILLE MANSEL, B. D., Prof. of Moral and Metaphysical\nPhilosophy in Magdalen College, Oxford, and JOHN VEITCH, M. A., of\nEdinburgh. In two royal octavo volumes, viz.,\n\n     I. METAPHYSICAL LECTURES. Royal octavo, cloth, 3.50.\n\n    II. LOGICAL LECTURES. Royal octavo, cloth, 3.50.\n\n    \u261e G. & L., by a special arrangement with the family of the late\n    Sir William Hamilton, are the authorized, and only authorized,\n    American publishers of this distinguished author\u2019s _matchless_\n    LECTURES ON METAPHYSICS AND LOGIC.\n\n    The above have already been introduced into nearly all our\n    leading colleges.\n\n_LOOMIS\u2019 ELEMENTS OF GEOLOGY_; adapted to Schools and Colleges. With\nnumerous Illustrations. By J. R. LOOMIS, President of Lewisburg\nUniversity, Pa. 12mo, cloth, 1.25.\n\n    \u201cIt is surpassed by no work before the American public.\u201d\u2014_M. B.\n    Anderson, LL. D., President Rochester University._\n\n_PEABODY\u2019S CHRISTIANITY THE RELIGION OF NATURE._ Lectures delivered\nbefore the Lowell Institute in 1863, by A. P. PEABODY, D. D., LL. D.,\nPreacher to the University, and Plummer Professor of Christian Morals,\nHarvard College. Royal 12mo, cloth, 1.50.\n\n    A masterly production, distinguished for its acuteness and\n    earnestness, its force of logic and fairness of statement,\n    written in a style of singular accuracy and beauty.\n\n_PALEY\u2019S NATURAL THEOLOGY_: Illustrated by forty Plates, with Selections\nfrom the Notes of Dr. Paxton, and Additional Notes, Original and\nSelected, with a Vocabulary of Scientific Terms. Edited by JOHN WARE, M.\nD. Improved edition, with elegant illustrations. 12mo, cloth, embossed,\n1.75.\n\n_MANSEL\u2019S PROLEGOMENA LOGICA_; the Psychological Character of Logical\nProcesses. By HENRY LONGUEVILLE MANSEL, B. D. 12mo, cloth, 1.25.\n\n_YOUNG LADIES\u2019 CLASS BOOK_: a Selection of Lessons for Reading of Prose\nand Verse. By EBENEZER BAILEY, A. M. Cloth, embossed, 1.25.\n\n_HAVEN\u2019S MENTAL PHILOSOPHY_; Including the Intellect, the Sensibilities,\nand the Will. By JOSEPH HAVEN, Professor of Intellectual and Moral\nPhilosophy, Chicago University. Royal 12mo, cloth, embossed, 2.00.\n\n    It is believed this work will be found pre\u00ebminently\n    distinguished for the COMPLETENESS with which it presents the\n    whole subject.\n\n_HAVEN\u2019S MORAL PHILOSOPHY_; Including Theoretical and Practical Ethics.\nBy JOSEPH HAVEN, D. D., late Professor of Moral and Intellectual\nPhilosophy in Chicago University. Royal 12mo, cloth, embossed, 1.75.\n\n    It is eminently scientific in method, and thorough in\n    discussion, and its views on unsettled questions in morals are\n    discriminating and sound.\n\n_HOPKINS\u2019 LECTURES ON MORAL SCIENCE_, delivered before the Lowell\nInstitute, Boston, by MARK HOPKINS, D. D., President of Williams College.\nRoyal 12mo, cloth, 1.50.\n\n    \u261e An important work from the pen of one of the most profound\n    thinkers of the age.\n\n_WAYLAND\u2019S ELEMENTS OF MORAL SCIENCE._ By FRANCIS WAYLAND, D. D., late\nPresident of Brown University. 12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_WAYLAND\u2019S MORAL SCIENCE ABRIDGED_, and adapted to the use of Schools and\nAcademies, by the Author. Half mor., 70 cts.\n\n    The same, CHEAP SCHOOL EDITION, boards, 45 cts.\n\n_WAYLAND\u2019S ELEMENTS OF POLITICAL ECONOMY._ By FRANCIS WAYLAND, D. D.\n12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_WAYLAND\u2019S POLITICAL ECONOMY ABRIDGED_, and adapted to the use of Schools\nand Academies, by the Author. Half mor., 70 cents.\n\n    All the above works by Dr. Wayland are used as text-books in\n    most of the colleges and higher schools throughout the Union,\n    and are highly approved.\n\n_AGASSIZ AND GOULD\u2019S PRINCIPLES OF ZO\u00d6LOGY_; Touching the Structure,\nDevelopment, Distribution, and Natural Arrangement, of the RACES OF\nANIMALS, living and extinct, with numerous Illustrations. For the use of\nSchools and Colleges. Part I. COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY. By LOUIS AGASSIZ\nand AUGUSTUS A. GOULD. Revised edition. 1.50.\n\n_PART II._ Systematic Zo\u00f6logy. _In preparation._\n\n    \u201cIt is simple and elementary in its style, full in its\n    illustrations, comprehensive in its range, yet well condensed,\n    and brought into the narrow compass requisite for the purpose\n    intended.\u201d\u2014_Silliman\u2019s Journal._\n\n_RITTER\u2019S GEOGRAPHICAL STUDIES._ Translated from the German of Carl\nRitter, by Rev. W. L. GAGE. With a Sketch of the Author\u2019s Life, and a\nPortrait. 12mo, cloth, 1.50.\n\n    This volume contains the grand generalizations of Ritter\u2019s\n    life-work, the Erdk\u00fcnde, in eighteen volumes; his lectures\n    on the Relations of Geography and History, and a number of\n    important papers on Physical Geography.\n\n_PROGRESSIVE PENMANSHIP_, Plain and ornamental, for the use of Schools.\nBy N. D. GOULD, author of \u201cBeauties of Writing,\u201d \u201cWriting Master\u2019s\nAssistant,\u201d etc. In five parts, each, 20 cts.\n\n_ROGET\u2019S THESAURUS OF ENGLISH WORDS AND PHRASES_, so classified and\narranged as to facilitate the expression of ideas, and assist in literary\ncomposition. New and improved edition. By PETER MARK ROGET, late\nSecretary of the Royal Society, London, etc. Revised and edited, with a\nList of Foreign Words defined in English, and other additions, by BARNAS\nSEARS, D. D., President of Brown University. A NEW AMERICAN Edition, with\nADDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS. 12mo, cloth, 2.00.\n\n    The first American edition having been prepared by Prof. Sears\n    for _strictly educational purposes_, those words and phrases\n    properly termed \u201cvulgar,\u201d incorporated in the original work,\n    were omitted. These expurgated portions have, in the present\n    edition, been _restored_, but by such an arrangement of the\n    matter as not to interfere with the educational purposes of the\n    American editor. Besides this it contains important additions\n    not in the English edition, of words and phrases, and also an\n    alphabetical list of \u201cFOREIGN WORDS AND PHRASES\u201d\u2014Latin, French,\n    Italian, Spanish, Greek, etc.\u2014which most frequently occur in\n    works of general literature, defined in English, making it in\n    _all respects more full and perfect than the author\u2019s edition_.\n\n_GUYOT\u2019S EARTH AND MAN_; Lectures on COMPARATIVE PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY,\nin its relation to the History of Mankind. By ARNOLD GUYOT. With\nIllustrations. 12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_GUYOT\u2019S MURAL MAPS._ A series of elegant Colored Maps, projected on a\nlarge scale for the Recitation Room, consisting of a Map of the World,\nNorth and South America, Geographical Elements, &c., exhibiting the\nPhysical Phenomena of the Globe. By Professor ARNOLD GUYOT, viz.,\n\n_GUYOT\u2019S MAP OF THE WORLD_, _mounted_, 12.00.\n\n_GUYOT\u2019S MAP OF NORTH AMERICA_, _mounted_, 11.00.\n\n_GUYOT\u2019S MAP OF SOUTH AMERICA_, _mounted_, 11.00.\n\n_GUYOT\u2019S GEOGRAPHICAL ELEMENTS_, _mounted_, 11.00.\n\n    \u261e These elegant and entirely original Mural Maps are projected\n    on a large scale, so that when suspended in the recitation room\n    they may be seen from any point, and the delineations without\n    difficulty traced distinctly with the eye. They are beautifully\n    printed in colors, and neatly mounted for use.\n\n_BARTON\u2019S EASY LESSONS IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR_, for Young Beginners. By W. S.\nBARTON, A. M. 12mo, half mor., 75 cts.\n\n    Designed as a SEQUEL TO THE AUTHOR\u2019S NEW SYSTEM OF ENGLISH\n    GRAMMAR, which forms a gradual introduction to the first\n    principles of composition.\n\n_BARTON\u2019S NEW INTERMEDIATE SYSTEM OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR._ By W. S. BARTON,\nA. M. 12mo, half mor., 1.00.\n\n_BARTON\u2019S PRACTICAL EXERCISES IN ENGLISH COMPOSITION_; or, THE YOUNG\nCOMPOSER\u2019S GUIDE. By W. S. BARTON, A. M. 12mo, half mor., 1.00.\n\n_BARTON\u2019S HIGH SCHOOL GRAMMAR_; or, an Exposition of Grammatical\nStructure of the English Language. By _W. S. Barton_, A. M. 12mo. half\nmor., 1.50.\n\n    The above works by Prof. Barton, designed as text-books for\n    the use of schools and academies, are the result of long\n    experience, and will be found to possess many and peculiar\n    merits.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S CRUISE OF THE BETSEY_; or, a Summer Ramble among the\nFossiliferous Deposits of the Hebrides. With Rambles of a Geologist; or,\nTen Thousand Miles over the Fossiliferous Deposits of Scotland. 12mo, PP.\n524, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S ESSAYS_, Historical and Biographical, Political and Social,\nLiterary and Scientific. By HUGH MILLER. With Preface by Peter Bayne.\n12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S FOOT-PRINTS OF THE CREATOR_; or, the Asterolepis of Stromness,\nwith numerous Illustrations. With a Memoir of the Author, by LOUIS\nAGASSIZ. 12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S FIRST IMPRESSIONS OF ENGLAND AND ITS PEOPLE._ With a fine\nEngraving of the Author. 12mo, cloth, 1.50.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S HEADSHIP OF CHRIST_, and the Rights of the Christian People, a\nCollection of Personal Portraitures, Historical and Descriptive Sketches\nand Essays, with the Author\u2019s celebrated Letter to Lord Brougham. By HUGH\nMILLER. Edited, with a Preface, by PETER BAYNE, A. M. 12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S OLD RED SANDSTONE_; or, New Walks in an Old Field. Illustrated\nwith Plates and Geological Sections. NEW EDITION, REVISED AND MUCH\nENLARGED, by the addition of new matter and new Illustrations &c. 12mo,\ncloth, 1.75.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S POPULAR GEOLOGY_; With Descriptive Sketches from a Geologist\u2019s\nPortfolio. By HUGH MILLER. With a Resume of the Progress of Geological\nScience during the last two years. By MRS. MILLER. 12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S SCHOOLS AND SCHOOLMASTERS_; or, the Story of my Education. AN\nAUTOBIOGRAPHY. With a full-length Portrait of the Author. 12mo, 1.75.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S TALES AND SKETCHES._ Edited, with a Preface, &c., by MRS.\nMILLER. 12mo, 1.50.\n\n    Among the subjects are: Recollections of Ferguson\u2014Burns\u2014The\n    Salmon Fisher of Udoll\u2014The Widow of Dunskaith\u2014The\n    Lykewake\u2014Bill Whyte\u2014The Young Surgeon\u2014George Ross, the Scotch\n    Agent\u2014M\u2019Culloch, the Mechanician\u2014A True Story of the Life of a\n    Scotch Merchant of the Eighteenth Century.\n\n_MILLER\u2019S TESTIMONY OF THE ROCKS_; or, Geology in its Bearings on the\ntwo Theologies, Natural and Revealed. \u201cThou shalt be in league with the\nstones of the field.\u201d\u2014_Job._ With numerous elegant Illustrations. One\nvolume, royal 12mo, cloth, 1.75.\n\n_HUGH MILLER\u2019S WORKS._ Ten volumes, uniform style, in an elegant box,\nembossed cloth, 17; library sheep, 20; half calf, 34; antique, 34.\n\n_MACAULAY ON SCOTLAND._ A Critique from HUGH MILLER\u2019S \u201cWitness.\u201d 16mo,\nflexible cloth, 37 cts.","title":"The Foot-prints of the Creator : $b or, The Asterolepis of Stromness","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":105967}