Instead, for example, of the rule which we find in the application of heat for the fusion and evaporation of mineral substances upon the surface of this earth, we may find it necessary to consider the effect which changed circ.u.mstances produce in the mineral regions, and occasion a change of that rule of action which we have learned from experience, when melting and evaporating those substances in the atmosphere or on the surface of the earth.

It is in this manner that a theory, which was formed by the generalization of particular facts, comes to be a source of information, by explaining to us certain appearances which otherwise we could not understand. Thus, it was not the appearance of the tides that taught the theory of gravitation; it was the theory of gravitation that made us understand the appearance of the tides. In like manner, the law of gravitation, which was demonstrated from the motion of the moon in her orbit round this earth, when applied to the paths of comets, explained that appearance. Our theory, of a central fire, has been formed upon the consolidation of the strata of this earth; but this theory is to be applied for the explanation of various different appearances. In this manner, two different purposes will be served; the trying of the theory by its application to phenomena; and the explanation of phenomena by the principles laid open in the theory.

I may repeat it; a theory of the earth must ultimately depend upon matter of fact or particular observation; but those observations must be distinct, and those distinguished things must be generalised. We have just now given for an example, a distinction among stones, in knowing them by their sensible qualities. But, besides distinguishing those objects, we are also to inquire into the origin and cause of those things which are distinguished. Here, again, we take into our aid the chemical as well as the mechanical properties of these several things; and hence learn to know on what their natural form and const.i.tution may depend. Having thus attained the natural philosophy of stones, we next inquire into the place and application of those things in nature; and in this manner we acquire some knowledge with regard to the natural const.i.tution of this earth. We find this earth composed of known things; it is therefore the operations, required in these compositions, which form the natural philosophy of this earth, considered as a body of solid land. But, the solid land is only one part of the globe; therefore, the philosophy of the globe proceeds still farther by knowing the const.i.tution of this planetary body, as consisting of different parts united for a purpose, which is that of a world.

The general theory of this earth as a world, will thus appear to be a complex thing, which however founded upon simple principles, contains many subjects of discussion, and requires attention to a variety of particulars. For, not only the great features of this earth are to be explained by the theory, but also the most minute appearance, such as are to be found, even with microscopic observation, in every particular part.

Thus the nature, const.i.tution, and cause of every particular appearance in the construction of this earth, are to be investigated in a geological theory, as well as that general const.i.tution of the world in which all the particular parts are to be employed for a purpose.

If the subject here examined shall be found properly explained, there will remain little doubt with regard to the justness of the theory, which will then be applicable to other appearances that may occur; although every appearance is not to be explained, in a manner equally satisfactory, by any theory which is not perfect.

The first subject to be examined is the modern theory of primitive mountains. I have written several chapters upon that subject, having successively acquired more light in this interesting part of the theory, by observations of my own in several places of this country, as well as from the natural history of other countries. I shall give these nearly in the order in which they occurred, or had been written.

CHAP. IV.

The Supposition of Primitive Mountains refuted.

In the theory now given, the earth has been represented as a composition of different materials, which had existed in another form, and as the effect of natural operations; therefore, however various may be found the structure of our earth, and however dissimilar some parts of its composition may be in comparison with others, no part should be considered as original, in relation to the globe, or as primitive, in relation to second causes, _i.e._ physical operations by which those parts should have been formed. But it is pretended by naturalists, that there are certain primitive mountains in the earth, bodies which have had another origin than that of the general strata of the globe and subsequent ma.s.ses; an origin, therefore, which cannot be considered as having been produced from natural operations, or as effected in the course of known causes. Now, if it can be made to appear, that there is no solid ground for this distinction; and if it can be shown, that there is truly no mineral body in this earth which may not have been produced by operations natural to the globe, we should thus procure a certain confirmation of the doctrine. This also will be the more interesting, in being deduced from a part of natural appearances, which seemed to be inconsistent with the theory.

Certain ma.s.ses or mountains of granite, are the only bodies of this earth which have apparently a certain pretension to this species of originality. These, therefore, must be now the subject of our examination.

Granite, considered by itself, does not appear to have any claim to originality in its nature. It is composed of bodies which are capable of being a.n.a.lyzed; and these are then found to be compositions of different substances, which are also sometimes variously proportioned. The feldspar and the mica, for example, as well as the schorl, are found variously coloured in different granites, and coloured in various proportions. Besides the variety in the composition, or chemical mixture of the different bodies which compose granite, this rock admits of a great diversity, from the variety of its mechanical mixture, or from the different species of bodies which are its const.i.tuent parts. M. de Saussure, who has examined this subject perhaps more than any other person, and who has had the very best opportunities for this purpose, says, that this composition may be found in all the different combinations which may be produced by every possible composition of 7 or 8 different kinds of stone, (page 108, Voyage dans les Alpes, etc.).

Neither does this fill up the measure of its variety; for, another source of change is found in the grain of this rock stone; I have a specimen of this variety from the size almost of sand to that of some inches.

Were granite, therefore, to be supposed as in the original state of its creation, nature would be considered as having operated in an indefinite diversity of ways, without that order and wisdom which we find in all her works; for here would be change without a principle, and variety without a purpose. There is no reason, however, to suppose granite original, more than any other composite rock, although we may be ignorant of the particular process in which it is formed, and although, comparatively in relation to certain other rocks, granite, or certain ma.s.ses of this composition, may be found of a more ancient date.

If granite be truly stratified, and those strata connected with the other strata of the earth, it can have no claim to originality; and the idea of primitive mountains, of late so much employed by natural philosophers, must vanish, in a more extensive view of the operations of the globe; but it is certain that granite, or a species of the same kind of stone, is thus found stratified. It is the _granit feuilletee_ of M. de Saussure, and, if I mistake not, what is called _gneis_ by the Germans. We have it also in our north alpine country of Scotland; of this I have specimens, but have not seen it in its place.

Granite being thus found stratified, the ma.s.ses of this stone cannot be allowed to have any right of priority over the schistus, its companion in the alpine countries, although M. de Saussure, whose authority I would revere, has given it for the following reason; that it is found the most centrical in the chains of high mountains, or in alpine countries. Now, supposing this fact to be general, as he has found it in the Alps, no argument for the priority of those ma.s.ses can be founded either upon the height or the situation of those granite mountains; for the height of the mountain depends upon the solidity and strength of the stone. Now though it is not to be here maintained that granite is the most durable of those alpine rocks, yet as a mountain, either granite in general, or in particular, certain species of it, may be esteemed such, consequently, this ma.s.sy stone, remaining highest in the mountainous region, will naturally be considered as the centre, and according to this rule, as having the pre-eminence in point of seniority.

The rock which stands in compet.i.tion with granite for the t.i.tle of primitive in the order of mountains, is that micaceous stratified stone which is formed chiefly of quartz, but which admits of great variety like the granite. The difference between those two bodies does not consist in the materials of which they are composed, for, in their varieties, they may be in this respect the same, but in a certain regularity of composition, in this alpine stone, which evidently arises from stratification or subsidence in water.

If we shall thus consider all the varieties of this alpine stone as being of one kind, and call it granite, then we shall distinguish in this body two different species, from whence perhaps some interesting conclusion may be formed with regard to the operations of the globe.

These two species are, _first_, granite regular in its composition, or stratified in its construction; and, _secondly_, granite in ma.s.s, or irregular in its construction. Let us now endeavour to make use of these generalizations and distinctions.

In examining the great diversity of our whinstone, trap, or basaltes, it is found at last to granulate into granite; at the same time those two different species of rock-stone may be distinguished. A perfect granite has not in its composition necessarily any argillaceous earth, farther than may be in the natural const.i.tution of its distinct parts; whereas, a perfect basalt may have abundance of this substance, without any quartz or any siliceous body. A perfect granite, is, therefore, an extremely hard stone, having quartz and feldspar for its basis; but a perfect whin or basaltes may be extremely soft, so as to cut easily with a knife. In like manner granite is a composition which graduates into porphyry; but porphyry is only whinstone of a harder species. Therefore, though perfectly distinct, those three things graduate into each other, and may be considered as the same.

Granite and whinstone, or basaltes, though distinct compositions, thus graduating into each other; and whinstone, as well as porphyry, being without doubt a species of lava, we may consider the granite which is found in ma.s.s without stratification, in like manner as we do the ma.s.ses of whinstone, basaltes, or Swedish trap, as having flowed in the bowels of the earth, and thus been produced by the chance of place, without any proper form of its own, or in an irregular shape and construction. In this manner would be explained the irregular shape or structure of those granite ma.s.ses; and thus great light would be thrown upon the waved structure of the stratified alpine stone, which, though it has not been made to flow, has been brought to a great degree of softness, so as to have the original straight lines of its stratification changed to those undulated or waving lines which are in some cases extremely much incurvated.

It remains only to confirm this reasoning, upon our principles, by bringing actual observation to its support; and this we shall do from two of the best authorities. The Chevalier de Dolomieu, in describing the volcanic productions of Etna, mentions a lava which had flowed from that mountain, and which may be considered as a granite. But M. de Saussure has put this matter out of doubt by describing most accurately what he had seen both in the Alps and at the city of Lyons. These are veins of granite which have flowed from the contiguous ma.s.s into the stratified stone, and leave no doubt with regard to this proposition, that the granite had flowed in form of subterranean lava, although M. de Saussure has drawn a very different conclusion from this appearance. I have also a specimen from this country of a vein of granite in a granite stone, the vein being of a smaller grain than that of the rock which it traverses.[20]

[Note 20: This is what I had wrote upon, the subject of granite, before I had acquired such ample testimony from my own observations upon that species of rock. I have given some notice, in the 3d vol. of the Transactions of the Edinburgh R.S. concerning the general result of those observations, which will be given particularly in the course of this work.]

It will thus appear, that the doctrine which of late has prevailed, of primitive mountains, or something which should be considered as original in the construction of this earth, must be given up as a false view of nature, which has formed the granite upon the same principle with that of any other consolidated stratum; so far as the collection of different materials, and the subsequent fusion of the compound ma.s.s, are necessary operations in the preparation of all the solid ma.s.ses of the earth.

Whatever operations of the globe, therefore, may be concluded from the composition of granite ma.s.ses, as well as of the alpine strata, these must be considered as giving us information with regard to the natural history of this earth; and they will be considered as important, in proportion as they disclose to us truths, which from other strata might not be so evident, or at all made known.

Let us now examine the arguments, which, may be employed in favour of that supposition of primitive mountains.

The observations, on which naturalists have founded that opinion of originality in some of the component parts of our earth, are these; _first_, They observe certain great ma.s.ses of granite in which stratification is not to be perceived; this then they say is an original ma.s.s, and it is not to be derived from any natural operation of the globe; _secondly_, They observe considerable tracts of the earth composed of matter in the order of stratification as to its general composition, but not as to its particular position, the vertical position here prevailing, instead of the horizontal which is proper to strata formed in water; this, therefore, they also term primitive, and suppose it to be from another origin than that of the subsidence of materials moved in the waters of the globe; _lastly_, They observe both strata and ma.s.ses of calcareous matter in which they cannot distinguish any marine body as is usual in other strata of the same substance; and these calcareous ma.s.ses being generally connected with their primitive mountains, they have also included these collections of calcareous matter, in which marine bodies are not observed, among the primitive parts which they suppose to be the original construction of this globe.

It may be proper to see the description of a calcareous alpine mountain.

M. de Saussure gives us the following observations concerning a mountain of this kind in the middle of the Alps, where the water divides in running different ways towards the sea. It is in describing the pa.s.sage of the Bon-Homme, (Tom. 2. V. dans les Alpes).

"-- 759. Sur la droite ou au couchant de ces rochers, on voit une montagne calcaire etonnante dans ce genre par la hardiesse avec laquelle elle eleve contre le ciel ses cimes aigues et tranchantes, taillees a angles vifs dans le costume des hautes cimes de granit. Elle est pourtant bien surement calcaire, je l'ai observee de pres, et on rencontre sur cette route les blocs qui s'en detachent.

"Cette pierre porte les caracteres des calcaires les plus anciennes; sa couleur est grise, son grain a.s.sez fin, on n'y appercoit aucun vestige de corps organises; ses couches sont peu epaisses, ondees et coupees frequemment par des fentes paralleles entr'elles et perpendiculaires a leurs plans. On trouve aussi parmi ces fragmens des breches calcaires grises."

Here is a mountain which will rank with the most primitive of the earth; But why? only because it is extremely consolidated without any mark of organised body. Had there been in this mountain but one single sh.e.l.l, we should not then have scrupled to conclude that the origin of this lofty mountain had been the same with every marble or limestone in the earth.

But though, from the structure of this stone, there is no mark of its having been formed immediately of the calcareous parts of animals, there is every mark of those calcareous strata having been formed like other marbles by deposit in the waters of the globe.

These two things are also h.o.m.ologated by the equal or perfect consolidation of their substance; for, as it is to be proved that all stratified marbles have been consolidated by the fusion of their substance, we must attribute the same consolidating cause to those alpine ma.s.ses; the frequent veins that divide those calcareous strata which M. de Saussure has here described, also prove the nature of the consolidating cause, (see Chap. 1. page 111.).

This mountain, considered by itself, may perhaps afford no data by which a naturalist might read the circ.u.mstances of its origin. But, Is a theory of the earth to be formed upon such a negative observation? and, Is there any particular in this mountain, that may not be shown in others of which the origin is not in any degree doubtful?

It is not to be disputed, that there are parts of the solid body of our earth which may be considered as primary or prior, compared with others that are posterior, in relation to the time of their formation, and much less changed with regard to the state in which they had been originally formed:--But it is here denied, that there are any parts of the earth which do not appear to have had the same origin with all the rest, so far as this consists in the collection of materials deposited at the bottom of the waters[21]; for there is no solid ma.s.s of land that may not be traced to this origin, either from its composition, or from its local connection with other ma.s.ses, the nature of which in this respect are known. We have already given examples of this from sufficient authority. The evidence, therefore, of those primary ma.s.ses being original in relation to the natural operations of the globe, is reduced to this a.s.sertion, that there are no vestiges of organised bodies to be found in those primary ma.s.ses. Let us now examine how far this testimony for the originality of those ma.s.ses is to be admitted in fact and sound reasoning.

[Note 21: There are no collection of those alpine ma.s.ses in which may not be found in some of them sand, mica, and gravel; but these materials prove the existence of an earth, on which those fragments of greater ma.s.ses had been formed, and more or less worn by attrition.]

The matter in question at present is this, that there are certain tracts of countries in which no vestige of organised bodies are found; now, let us suppose the fact to be true or well grounded, Can we conclude from this that there had been originally no organised bodies in the composition of those ma.s.ses?--Such a conclusion could only be formed in making a supposition, that every organised body deposited in a ma.s.s of matter, whether h.o.m.ogeneous or heterogeneous, should be preserved without change, while the collected ma.s.s, in which it had been deposited, changes as much as possible by the operation both of fire and water. But this supposition is erroneous, and cannot be admitted; and the study of marbles will demonstrate this truth, that the calcareous relics of organised bodies are changed, in the consolidating operations of the globe, in every degree, from the smallest alteration to the greatest, when they become indistinguishable any farther to our sight.

Therefore, from the supposition of no appearance of marine bodies in the pretended primitive ma.s.ses, there is no sufficient evidence or reason to conclude, that those ma.s.ses have not had a marine origin; because, the traces of organised bodies may be obliterated by the many subsequent operations of the mineral region; and which operations, the present state of those ma.s.ses certify beyond dispute.

We are now to examine the fact, how far the ground on which that false reasoning had been founded is strictly true.

In the first place, then, it must be considered, that the alledged fact is nothing but a negative a.s.sertion, importing that no mark of organised bodies had been observed, in certain stones and strata which some naturalists have examined with that view. But, though many naturalists have looked for them without success, it does not follow that such marks may not be found; it indeed proves that such a task is difficult, and the success of it, to a particular, most precarious; accident, however, may bring about what the greatest industry has not been able to attain.

Secondly, there is good reason to believe that this a.s.serted negation is not absolutely true; for I have in my possession what I consider as proof of the contrary; I found it in Wales, and I think it is in what may be considered as primitive mountains;--it is the mark of sh.e.l.ls in a stone of that kind.

Thus, I had formed my opinion with regard to this alleged fact, long before I had seen any description either of the Alps or Pyrennean mountains; and now I have no reason to change that opinion. It may indeed be alleged, that the strata of marble or limestone, containing marine bodies found in those mountains, are secondary strata, and not the primitive. To this I can give no reply, as the descriptions given of those strata do not enable me to decide this point.

At the village of Mat, under the Mont Blatten for example, there is a quarry of schistus or black slate, in which are often found the print and the bones of fishes. (Discours sur l'Histoire Naturelle de la Suisse, page 225.). If this may be considered as an alpine or primitive schistus, it would be decisive of the question: But it would require to have it well ascertained that this schistus is truly one of those which are esteemed primitive, or that it is properly connected with them.

But though I cannot find in those interesting descriptions which we now have got, any one which is demonstrative of this truth, that calcareous marine objects are found in the primitive strata, this is not the case with regard to another object equally important in deciding this question, Whether the primitive strata are found containing the marks of organised bodies?

M. de Dellancourt, in his _Observations Mineralogiques_, Journal de Physique Juillet 1786, in describing the mountains of Dauphine, gives us the following fact with regard to those alpine vertical strata.

"La pierre const.i.tuante de la montagne d'Oris est en general le _Kneifs_ ou la roche feuilletee mica et quartz a couches plus ou moins ferrees quelquefois le schorl en roche penetre de steat.i.te. Les couches varient infiniment quant a leur direction et a leur inclinaisons. Cette montagne est cultivee et riche dans certain cantons, surtout autour du village d'Oris, mais elle est tres-escarpee dans beaucoup d'autres. Entre le village d'Oris et celui du Tresnay est une espece de combe a.s.sez creuse formee par la chute des eaux des cimes superieures des rochers. Cette combe offre beaucoup de schiste dont les couches font ou tres-inclinees ou perpendiculaires. Entre ces couches il s'en est trouve de plus noires que les autres et capable de bruler, mais difficilement. Les habitans ont extrait beaucoup de cette matiere terreuse, et lui ont donne le nom de charbon de terre. Ils viennent meme a bout de la faire bruler, et de s'en servir l'hiver en la melant avec du bois. Ce schiste noir particulier m'a paru exister princ.i.p.alement dans les endroits ou les eaux se sont infiltrees entre les couches perpendiculaires, et y ont entraine diverse matieres, et sur-tout des debris de vegetaux que j'ai encore retrouves a demi-noirs, pulverulens et comme dans un etat charbonneux."

This formation of coal, by the infiltration of water and carrying in of vegetable bodies, certainly cannot be admitted of; consequently, from this description, there would seem to be strata of coal alternated with the alpine schisti. But the formation of mineral coal requires vegetable matter to have been deposited along with those earthy substances, at the bottom of the sea. The production of vegetable bodies, again, requires the const.i.tution of sea and land, and the system of a living world, sustaining plants at least, if not animals.

In this natural history of the alpine schisti, therefore, we have a most interesting fact, an example which is extremely rare. Seldom are calcareous organised bodies found among those alpine strata, but still more rarely, I believe, are the marks of vegetable bodies having contributed in the formation of those ma.s.ses. But however rare this example, it is equally decisive of the question, Whether the alpine schisti have had a similar origin as the other strata of the globe, in which are found abundance of animal and vegetable bodies, or their relics? and we are authorised to say, that since those perfect alpine strata of Dauphine have had that origin, all the alpine schisti of the globe have been originally formed in a similar manner. But to put this matter out of doubt:

In this summer 1788, coming from the Isle of Man, Mr Clerk and I traveled through the alpine schistus country of c.u.mberland and Westmoreland. We found a limestone quarry upon the banks of Windermere, near the Low-wood Inn. I examined this limestone closely, but despaired of finding any vestige of organised body. The strata of limestone seem to graduate into the slate or schistus strata, between which the calcareous are placed. Fortunately, however, I at last found a fragment in which I thought to perceive the works of organised bodies in a sparry state; I told Mr Clerk so, and our landlord Mr Wright, who had accompanied us. I have brought home this specimen, which I have now ground and polished; and now it is most evidently full of fragments of entrochi. Mr Wright then told me he had seen evident impressions of marine objects, as I understood from the description, in the slate of those mountains; and he was to send me specimens so soon as he could procure them.

Here is one specimen which at once overturns all the speculations formed upon that negative proposition. The schistus mountains of c.u.mberland were, in this respect, as perfect primitive mountains as any upon the earth, before this observation; now they have no claim upon that score, no more than any limestone formed of sh.e.l.ls.

When I first announced my belief that such objects in natural history might be found, I little thought to have seen it realised, to such a degree as has now happened in the little circle of my knowledge. In the summer 1791,