82

INTERIOR OF THE EARTH.

Therefore whatever may be asserted, concerning the immense antiquity of this globe, must be considered, if not false, to be at least conjectural. When they speak indefinitely of myriads of ages, which costs nothing, as Cuvier remarks, but a dash of the pen, or with greater absurdity, pretend to assign definite epochas', we cannot but admire the fancy from which such reveries proceed, and smile at the credulity which believes them."

In another place, the same author observes as follows::

"And after all, are we much more enlightened respecting the recesses of the earth itself? what proportion does the degree to which we can penetrate bear to the diameter of the globe'? who can tell whether the impassable granite constitutes a solid nucleus of this planet, or reposes itself on other strata, concealing marvels as great, as those with which we are already acquainted, but unlike them, destined peradventure to remain for ever impenetrable to human investigation. Again, how small a part of the crust of the earth has been examined, and what proportion does that bear to its entire superficies? and, lastly, have geologists been invariably successful in disentangling the confusion of strata, in numbers of localities, and in accounting for the causes of such confusion 3 ?"

3

1 I know not whether this can be held to allude to such epochs as the following, of which Mr. Mantell writes, the "Iguanodon Epoch," the "Cretacious Epoch," the " Wealden Epoch," the " Elephantine Epoch," the "Modern Epoch," the "Human Epoch," &c.

2 It is calculated that, after making the greatest allowances even for the depths of our seas, there would remain 7990 miles of its diameter, which must for ever remain concealed from our view.-Fairholme.

3 Griffith's Fossil Remains, 1830.

NUCLEUS OF THE GLOBE.

83

As to the remarks of the writer just cited, concerning the nucleus of the globe, and all that may be below the impassable granite, if I may make the observation without appearing impertinently ludicrous, I should say, that our geologists may (fully to satisfy their curiosity, and the curiosity of the public) have perhaps a journey to take, they little think of, and yet not beyond their powers; the "spirit of a geologist," as has been hinted, being free to carry him " per omnes terrasque tractusque maris, cœlumque profundum,"-Lyell. For if our earth be not as Leibnitz supposed, an extinguished sun, it is, according to Buffon, as all theorists must know, part and portion of the very body of the sun itself, and consequently composed of the same materials, granite of course included'. Or if they should not like to go quite so far as the sun, they may stop at Venus or Mercury', and

1 Lehman, director of the Prussian mines, in an "Essai d'une Histoire Naturelle de Conches de la Terre," conceived all our primitive rocks to be parts of the original nucleus of the globe. Buffon himself considered granite to be the true solar matter, unchanged but by its congelation. One writer, Mr. Marshall, judged the earth to be formed from meteoric stones, which arriving from other spheres, brought with them the organic bodies of other worlds, whence the lost species of our own must ever be sought in vain, without at least, the powers of Micromegas. "It is not surprising," says Dr. Maculloch upon this, "that geology has been a subject of ridicule."

2 As useful itineraries for such a journey, I would recommend Macrobius in Somnium Scipionis, lib. i. c. 12, and Baron Swedenborg, on "the Earths in our Solar System;" but above all the Itinerarium Exstaticum of Athanasius Kircher, from which I could make many extracts exceedingly applicable to the subject in hand, very particularly as to the theory of De Luc, in representing light to be the very principle wanting to give scope for all those processes, by which the surface of the earth became what it is. Had the theorist seen occasion to express his ideas in Latin, I could have pointed out several passages in Kircher,

84

PLANETARY BODIES.

inquire if any of their inhabitants have found out what granite is; whether of aqueous or igneous origin? and whether any thing lies below it? for, if the earth be part of the sun, all the other planets are so also, and there is no knowing at this distance, what proficiency their physiologists may have made in the study of their respective habitations. Perhaps in their travels, they may learn something about that unfortunate planet, which seems to have received damage in its original projection from the sun, or afterwards, by collision with a comet; I mean the planet, supposed, not without reason', to have become divided into four parts, forming our newly discovered asteroids, or telescopic planets, as they are called, Ceres, Pallas, Juno and Vesta.. Is this mere banter? far from it. "If man," says Mr. Lyell, "could witness the birth of other worlds he might reason by induction upon the origin of his No person living can entertain more exalted ideas than myself of the immensity of the universe, and, as a consequence of it, of the plurality of worlds; and, though I look upon Buffon's system, to be in many respects but an amusing work of fancy, I am much disposed to think there is a great affinity in the circumstances of all the planets of our system. This

own."

scarcely requiring the alteration of a word. He even calls light, in reference to a chaos, the entelechia, or principle of motion, tending to order and perfection. It may be said perhaps, that Kircher was a visionary, and no better a philosopher than Moses or De Luc; but he was very learned and very entertaining: and if we are to give up history, and struggle only for a preference of guesses and conjectures, I must say I like some of Kircher's guesses as well as any.

1 See Turner's Sacred History of the World, Letter ii. p. 55, 56, and the Annuaire for 1832. See also Sir John Herschel's Discourse on Natural Philosophy, 308.

PLURALITY OF WORLDS.

85

is no new opinion; very long ago I printed and published a treatise expressly on the Plurality of Worlds, designed to show, that as a philosophical opinion, it was not inconsistent with the language of the Holy Scriptures; that many of the expressions in the latter, in their original tongues, admitted of such an extension, as to include other worlds besides our own; and, that in reality the great scheme of redemption, might pervade all the systems of God's creation, as well as this; so that universally there should be found, where wanted, as well one MEDIATOR, as one GODΕΙΣ ΘΕΟΣ ΕΙΣ ΜΕΣΙΤΗΣ (1 Tim. ii. 5), which was the title of my book. The book itself was quickly out of print, and being soon occupied with other things, I never applied my mind to the publication of a second edition; but on looking back to it, I find many things in it, applicable to the subject of which I am now treating, and a variety of authors referred to, in proof of the planets being all of one creation, as dependent on the same sun for light. Among these references, I find two treatises by Dr. Samuel Pye cited, published in 1765 and 1766, one entitled "Moses and Bolingbroke," the other, "The Mosaic Theory of the Solar and Planetary System;" he is at the pains to show that the first and second chapters of Genesis would, with very trifling allowances, as well apply to Jupiter or Saturn, and their inhabitants, as to the earth, &c. answer to Lord Bolingbroke, who had objected to man's being made by Moses the final cause or object, if not of the whole creation, yet at least of our system. The application of the two chapters is very ingenious, and I think just.

This was meant as an

86

OBJECT OF MODERN GEOLOGISTS.

believe, to ascertain where our planet came from, or what other bodies are made just like it, or as mere theorists, to tell us how they themselves could, if they chose it, put such a globe as this earth together; but, seeing that it has been put together somehow or other, their object is to take it all to pieces, or as much of it at least as they can get at, in order to decide not only what may have happened to it, in time past, but what is likely to become of it, if it continue to proceed exactly as it does now, for ages to come, if not for ever; of which some appear to have very little doubt.

:

Geology is of late become so fashionable, that I ought not, perhaps, to suppose any of my readers to be so ignorant, as to need to be supplied with the outlines of Dr. Hutton's "Theory of the Earth." I shall however copy what Mr. Lyell says of it: "The ruins of an older world," said Hutton, "are visible in the present structure of our planet; and the strata which now compose our continents have been once beneath the sea, and were formed out of the waste of pre-existent continents. The same forces are still destroying, by chemical decomposition, or mechanical violence, even the hardest rocks, and transporting the materials to the sea, where they are spread out, and form strata analogous to those of more ancient date. Although loosely deposited along the bottom of the ocean, they become afterwards altered and consolidated by volcanic heat, and then heaved up, fractured, and contorted." “He imagined, in short, that the continents were first gradually destroyed, and when their ruins had furnished materials for new continents, they were upheaved by violent and paroxysmal convulsions. He, therefore, required