<p><SPAN name="link2HCH0010" id="link2HCH0010"></SPAN></p>
<h2> CHAPTER X. ON THE IMPERFECTION OF THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. </h2>
<p>On the absence of intermediate varieties at the present day—On the<br/>
nature of extinct intermediate varieties; on their number—On the lapse<br/>
of time, as inferred from the rate of denudation and of deposition<br/>
number—On the lapse of time as estimated by years—On the poorness of<br/>
our palaeontological collections—On the intermittence of geological<br/>
formations—On the denudation of granitic areas—On the absence of<br/>
intermediate varieties in any one formation—On the sudden appearance<br/>
of groups of species—On their sudden appearance in the lowest known<br/>
fossiliferous strata—Antiquity of the habitable earth.<br/></p>
<p>In the sixth chapter I enumerated the chief objections which might be
justly urged against the views maintained in this volume. Most of them
have now been discussed. One, namely, the distinctness of specific forms
and their not being blended together by innumerable transitional links, is
a very obvious difficulty. I assigned reasons why such links do not
commonly occur at the present day under the circumstances apparently most
favourable for their presence, namely, on an extensive and continuous area
with graduated physical conditions. I endeavoured to show, that the life
of each species depends in a more important manner on the presence of
other already defined organic forms, than on climate, and, therefore, that
the really governing conditions of life do not graduate away quite
insensibly like heat or moisture. I endeavoured, also, to show that
intermediate varieties, from existing in lesser numbers than the forms
which they connect, will generally be beaten out and exterminated during
the course of further modification and improvement. The main cause,
however, of innumerable intermediate links not now occurring everywhere
throughout nature depends, on the very process of natural selection,
through which new varieties continually take the places of and supplant
their parent-forms. But just in proportion as this process of
extermination has acted on an enormous scale, so must the number of
intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, be truly enormous.
Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such
intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely
graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and
serious objection which can be urged against my theory. The explanation
lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record.</p>
<p>In the first place, it should always be borne in mind what sort of
intermediate forms must, on the theory, have formerly existed. I have
found it difficult, when looking at any two species, to avoid picturing to
myself forms DIRECTLY intermediate between them. But this is a wholly
false view; we should always look for forms intermediate between each
species and a common but unknown progenitor; and the progenitor will
generally have differed in some respects from all its modified
descendants. To give a simple illustration: the fantail and pouter pigeons
are both descended from the rock-pigeon; if we possessed all the
intermediate varieties which have ever existed, we should have an
extremely close series between both and the rock-pigeon; but we should
have no varieties directly intermediate between the fantail and pouter;
none, for instance, combining a tail somewhat expanded with a crop
somewhat enlarged, the characteristic features of these two breeds. These
two breeds, moreover, have become so much modified, that, if we had no
historical or indirect evidence regarding their origin, it would not have
been possible to have determined from a mere comparison of their structure
with that of the rock-pigeon, C. livia, whether they had descended from
this species or from some other allied species, such as C. oenas.</p>
<p>So with natural species, if we look to forms very distinct, for instance
to the horse and tapir, we have no reason to suppose that links directly
intermediate between them ever existed, but between each and an unknown
common parent. The common parent will have had in its whole organisation
much general resemblance to the tapir and to the horse; but in some points
of structure may have differed considerably from both, even perhaps more
than they differ from each other. Hence, in all such cases, we should be
unable to recognise the parent-form of any two or more species, even if we
closely compared the structure of the parent with that of its modified
descendants, unless at the same time we had a nearly perfect chain of the
intermediate links.</p>
<p>It is just possible, by the theory, that one of two living forms might
have descended from the other; for instance, a horse from a tapir; and in
this case DIRECT intermediate links will have existed between them. But
such a case would imply that one form had remained for a very long period
unaltered, whilst its descendants had undergone a vast amount of change;
and the principle of competition between organism and organism, between
child and parent, will render this a very rare event; for in all cases the
new and improved forms of life tend to supplant the old and unimproved
forms.</p>
<p>By the theory of natural selection all living species have been connected
with the parent-species of each genus, by differences not greater than we
see between the natural and domestic varieties of the same species at the
present day; and these parent-species, now generally extinct, have in
their turn been similarly connected with more ancient forms; and so on
backwards, always converging to the common ancestor of each great class.
So that the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all
living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But
assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon the earth.</p>
<p>ON THE LAPSE OF TIME, AS INFERRED FROM THE RATE OF DEPOSITION AND EXTENT
OF DENUDATION.</p>
<p>Independently of our not finding fossil remains of such infinitely
numerous connecting links, it may be objected that time cannot have
sufficed for so great an amount of organic change, all changes having been
effected slowly. It is hardly possible for me to recall to the reader who
is not a practical geologist, the facts leading the mind feebly to
comprehend the lapse of time. He who can read Sir Charles Lyell's grand
work on the Principles of Geology, which the future historian will
recognise as having produced a revolution in natural science, and yet does
not admit how vast have been the past periods of time, may at once close
this volume. Not that it suffices to study the Principles of Geology, or
to read special treatises by different observers on separate formations,
and to mark how each author attempts to give an inadequate idea of the
duration of each formation, or even of each stratum. We can best gain some
idea of past time by knowing the agencies at work; and learning how deeply
the surface of the land has been denuded, and how much sediment has been
deposited. As Lyell has well remarked, the extent and thickness of our
sedimentary formations are the result and the measure of the denudation
which the earth's crust has elsewhere undergone. Therefore a man should
examine for himself the great piles of superimposed strata, and watch the
rivulets bringing down mud, and the waves wearing away the sea-cliffs, in
order to comprehend something about the duration of past time, the
monuments of which we see all around us.</p>
<p>It is good to wander along the coast, when formed of moderately hard
rocks, and mark the process of degradation. The tides in most cases reach
the cliffs only for a short time twice a day, and the waves eat into them
only when they are charged with sand or pebbles; for there is good
evidence that pure water effects nothing in wearing away rock. At last the
base of the cliff is undermined, huge fragments fall down, and these
remaining fixed, have to be worn away atom by atom, until after being
reduced in size they can be rolled about by the waves, and then they are
more quickly ground into pebbles, sand, or mud. But how often do we see
along the bases of retreating cliffs rounded boulders, all thickly clothed
by marine productions, showing how little they are abraded and how seldom
they are rolled about! Moreover, if we follow for a few miles any line of
rocky cliff, which is undergoing degradation, we find that it is only here
and there, along a short length or round a promontory, that the cliffs are
at the present time suffering. The appearance of the surface and the
vegetation show that elsewhere years have elapsed since the waters washed
their base.</p>
<p>We have, however, recently learned from the observations of Ramsay, in the
van of many excellent observers—of Jukes, Geikie, Croll and others,
that subaerial degradation is a much more important agency than
coast-action, or the power of the waves. The whole surface of the land is
exposed to the chemical action of the air and of the rainwater, with its
dissolved carbonic acid, and in colder countries to frost; the
disintegrated matter is carried down even gentle slopes during heavy rain,
and to a greater extent than might be supposed, especially in arid
districts, by the wind; it is then transported by the streams and rivers,
which, when rapid deepen their channels, and triturate the fragments. On a
rainy day, even in a gently undulating country, we see the effects of
subaerial degradation in the muddy rills which flow down every slope.
Messrs. Ramsay and Whitaker have shown, and the observation is a most
striking one, that the great lines of escarpment in the Wealden district
and those ranging across England, which formerly were looked at as ancient
sea-coasts, cannot have been thus formed, for each line is composed of one
and the same formation, while our sea-cliffs are everywhere formed by the
intersection of various formations. This being the case, we are compelled
to admit that the escarpments owe their origin in chief part to the rocks
of which they are composed, having resisted subaerial denudation better
than the surrounding surface; this surface consequently has been gradually
lowered, with the lines of harder rock left projecting. Nothing impresses
the mind with the vast duration of time, according to our ideas of time,
more forcibly than the conviction thus gained that subaerial agencies,
which apparently have so little power, and which seem to work so slowly,
have produced great results.</p>
<p>When thus impressed with the slow rate at which the land is worn away
through subaerial and littoral action, it is good, in order to appreciate
the past duration of time, to consider, on the one hand, the masses of
rock which have been removed over many extensive areas, and on the other
hand the thickness of our sedimentary formations. I remember having been
much struck when viewing volcanic islands, which have been worn by the
waves and pared all round into perpendicular cliffs of one or two thousand
feet in height; for the gentle slope of the lava-streams, due to their
formerly liquid state, showed at a glance how far the hard, rocky beds had
once extended into the open ocean. The same story is told still more
plainly by faults—those great cracks along which the strata have
been upheaved on one side, or thrown down on the other, to the height or
depth of thousands of feet; for since the crust cracked, and it makes no
great difference whether the upheaval was sudden, or, as most geologists
now believe, was slow and effected by many starts, the surface of the land
has been so completely planed down that no trace of these vast
dislocations is externally visible. The Craven fault, for instance,
extends for upward of thirty miles, and along this line the vertical
displacement of the strata varies from 600 to 3,000 feet. Professor Ramsay
has published an account of a downthrow in Anglesea of 2,300 feet; and he
informs me that he fully believes that there is one in Merionethshire of
12,000 feet; yet in these cases there is nothing on the surface of the
land to show such prodigious movements; the pile of rocks on either side
of the crack having been smoothly swept away.</p>
<p>On the other hand, in all parts of the world the piles of sedimentary
strata are of wonderful thickness. In the Cordillera, I estimated one mass
of conglomerate at ten thousand feet; and although conglomerates have
probably been accumulated at a quicker rate than finer sediments, yet from
being formed of worn and rounded pebbles, each of which bears the stamp of
time, they are good to show how slowly the mass must have been heaped
together. Professor Ramsay has given me the maximum thickness, from actual
measurement in most cases, of the successive formations in DIFFERENT parts
of Great Britain; and this is the result:—</p>
<p>Feet<br/>
<br/>
Palaeozoic strata (not including igneous beds)..57,154<br/>
Secondary strata................................13,190<br/>
Tertiary strata..................................2,240<br/>
<br/>
—making altogether 72,584 feet;<br/></p>
<p>that is, very nearly thirteen and three-quarters British miles. Some of
these formations, which are represented in England by thin beds, are
thousands of feet in thickness on the Continent. Moreover, between each
successive formation we have, in the opinion of most geologists, blank
periods of enormous length. So that the lofty pile of sedimentary rocks in
Britain gives but an inadequate idea of the time which has elapsed during
their accumulation. The consideration of these various facts impresses the
mind almost in the same manner as does the vain endeavour to grapple with
the idea of eternity.</p>
<p>Nevertheless this impression is partly false. Mr. Croll, in an interesting
paper, remarks that we do not err "in forming too great a conception of
the length of geological periods," but in estimating them by years. When
geologists look at large and complicated phenomena, and then at the
figures representing several million years, the two produce a totally
different effect on the mind, and the figures are at once pronounced too
small. In regard to subaerial denudation, Mr. Croll shows, by calculating
the known amount of sediment annually brought down by certain rivers,
relatively to their areas of drainage, that 1,000 feet of solid rock, as
it became gradually disintegrated, would thus be removed from the mean
level of the whole area in the course of six million years. This seems an
astonishing result, and some considerations lead to the suspicion that it
may be too large, but if halved or quartered it is still very surprising.
Few of us, however, know what a million really means: Mr. Croll gives the
following illustration: Take a narrow strip of paper, eighty-three feet
four inches in length, and stretch it along the wall of a large hall; then
mark off at one end the tenth of an inch. This tenth of an inch will
represent one hundred years, and the entire strip a million years. But let
it be borne in mind, in relation to the subject of this work, what a
hundred years implies, represented as it is by a measure utterly
insignificant in a hall of the above dimensions. Several eminent breeders,
during a single lifetime, have so largely modified some of the higher
animals, which propagate their kind much more slowly than most of the
lower animals, that they have formed what well deserves to be called a new
sub-breed. Few men have attended with due care to any one strain for more
than half a century, so that a hundred years represents the work of two
breeders in succession. It is not to be supposed that species in a state
of nature ever change so quickly as domestic animals under the guidance of
methodical selection. The comparison would be in every way fairer with the
effects which follow from unconscious selection, that is, the preservation
of the most useful or beautiful animals, with no intention of modifying
the breed; but by this process of unconscious selection, various breeds
have been sensibly changed in the course of two or three centuries.</p>
<p>Species, however, probably change much more slowly, and within the same
country only a few change at the same time. This slowness follows from all
the inhabitants of the same country being already so well adapted to each
other, that new places in the polity of nature do not occur until after
long intervals, due to the occurrence of physical changes of some kind, or
through the immigration of new forms. Moreover, variations or individual
differences of the right nature, by which some of the inhabitants might be
better fitted to their new places under the altered circumstance, would
not always occur at once. Unfortunately we have no means of determining,
according to the standard of years, how long a period it takes to modify a
species; but to the subject of time we must return.</p>
<p>ON THE POORNESS OF PALAEONTOLOGICAL COLLECTIONS.</p>
<p>Now let us turn to our richest museums, and what a paltry display we
behold! That our collections are imperfect is admitted by every one. The
remark of that admirable palaeontologist, Edward Forbes, should never be
forgotten, namely, that very many fossil species are known and named from
single and often broken specimens, or from a few specimens collected on
some one spot. Only a small portion of the surface of the earth has been
geologically explored, and no part with sufficient care, as the important
discoveries made every year in Europe prove. No organism wholly soft can
be preserved. Shells and bones decay and disappear when left on the bottom
of the sea, where sediment is not accumulating. We probably take a quite
erroneous view, when we assume that sediment is being deposited over
nearly the whole bed of the sea, at a rate sufficiently quick to embed and
preserve fossil remains. Throughout an enormously large proportion of the
ocean, the bright blue tint of the water bespeaks its purity. The many
cases on record of a formation conformably covered, after an immense
interval of time, by another and later formation, without the underlying
bed having suffered in the interval any wear and tear, seem explicable
only on the view of the bottom of the sea not rarely lying for ages in an
unaltered condition. The remains which do become embedded, if in sand or
gravel, will, when the beds are upraised, generally be dissolved by the
percolation of rain water charged with carbonic acid. Some of the many
kinds of animals which live on the beach between high and low water mark
seem to be rarely preserved. For instance, the several species of the
Chthamalinae (a sub-family of sessile cirripedes) coat the rocks all over
the world in infinite numbers: they are all strictly littoral, with the
exception of a single Mediterranean species, which inhabits deep water and
this has been found fossil in Sicily, whereas not one other species has
hitherto been found in any tertiary formation: yet it is known that the
genus Chthamalus existed during the Chalk period. Lastly, many great
deposits, requiring a vast length of time for their accumulation, are
entirely destitute of organic remains, without our being able to assign
any reason: one of the most striking instances is that of the Flysch
formation, which consists of shale and sandstone, several thousand,
occasionally even six thousand feet in thickness, and extending for at
least 300 miles from Vienna to Switzerland; and although this great mass
has been most carefully searched, no fossils, except a few vegetable
remains, have been found.</p>
<p>With respect to the terrestrial productions which lived during the
Secondary and Palaeozoic periods, it is superfluous to state that our
evidence is fragmentary in an extreme degree. For instance, until recently
not a land-shell was known belonging to either of these vast periods, with
the exception of one species discovered by Sir C. Lyell and Dr. Dawson in
the carboniferous strata of North America; but now land-shells have been
found in the lias. In regard to mammiferous remains, a glance at the
historical table published in Lyell's Manual, will bring home the truth,
how accidental and rare is their preservation, far better than pages of
detail. Nor is their rarity surprising, when we remember how large a
proportion of the bones of tertiary mammals have been discovered either in
caves or in lacustrine deposits; and that not a cave or true lacustrine
bed is known belonging to the age of our secondary or palaeozoic
formations.</p>
<p>But the imperfection in the geological record largely results from another
and more important cause than any of the foregoing; namely, from the
several formations being separated from each other by wide intervals of
time. This doctrine has been emphatically admitted by many geologists and
palaeontologists, who, like E. Forbes, entirely disbelieve in the change
of species. When we see the formations tabulated in written works, or when
we follow them in nature, it is difficult to avoid believing that they are
closely consecutive. But we know, for instance, from Sir R. Murchison's
great work on Russia, what wide gaps there are in that country between the
superimposed formations; so it is in North America, and in many other
parts of the world. The most skilful geologist, if his attention had been
confined exclusively to these large territories, would never have
suspected that during the periods which were blank and barren in his own
country, great piles of sediment, charged with new and peculiar forms of
life, had elsewhere been accumulated. And if, in every separate territory,
hardly any idea can be formed of the length of time which has elapsed
between the consecutive formations, we may infer that this could nowhere
be ascertained. The frequent and great changes in the mineralogical
composition of consecutive formations, generally implying great changes in
the geography of the surrounding lands, whence the sediment was derived,
accord with the belief of vast intervals of time having elapsed between
each formation.</p>
<p>We can, I think, see why the geological formations of each region are
almost invariably intermittent; that is, have not followed each other in
close sequence. Scarcely any fact struck me more when examining many
hundred miles of the South American coasts, which have been upraised
several hundred feet within the recent period, than the absence of any
recent deposits sufficiently extensive to last for even a short geological
period. Along the whole west coast, which is inhabited by a peculiar
marine fauna, tertiary beds are so poorly developed that no record of
several successive and peculiar marine faunas will probably be preserved
to a distant age. A little reflection will explain why, along the rising
coast of the western side of South America, no extensive formations with
recent or tertiary remains can anywhere be found, though the supply of
sediment must for ages have been great, from the enormous degradation of
the coast rocks and from the muddy streams entering the sea. The
explanation, no doubt, is that the littoral and sub-littoral deposits are
continually worn away, as soon as they are brought up by the slow and
gradual rising of the land within the grinding action of the coast-waves.</p>
<p>We may, I think, conclude that sediment must be accumulated in extremely
thick, solid, or extensive masses, in order to withstand the incessant
action of the waves, when first upraised and during subsequent
oscillations of level, as well as the subsequent subaerial degradation.
Such thick and extensive accumulations of sediment may be formed in two
ways; either in profound depths of the sea, in which case the bottom will
not be inhabited by so many and such varied forms of life as the more
shallow seas; and the mass when upraised will give an imperfect record of
the organisms which existed in the neighbourhood during the period of its
accumulation. Or sediment may be deposited to any thickness and extent
over a shallow bottom, if it continue slowly to subside. In this latter
case, as long as the rate of subsidence and supply of sediment nearly
balance each other, the sea will remain shallow and favourable for many
and varied forms, and thus a rich fossiliferous formation, thick enough,
when upraised, to resist a large amount of denudation, may be formed.</p>
<p>I am convinced that nearly all our ancient formations, which are
throughout the greater part of their thickness RICH IN FOSSILS, have thus
been formed during subsidence. Since publishing my views on this subject
in 1845, I have watched the progress of geology, and have been surprised
to note how author after author, in treating of this or that great
formation, has come to the conclusion that it was accumulated during
subsidence. I may add, that the only ancient tertiary formation on the
west coast of South America, which has been bulky enough to resist such
degradation as it has as yet suffered, but which will hardly last to a
distant geological age, was deposited during a downward oscillation of
level, and thus gained considerable thickness.</p>
<p>All geological facts tell us plainly that each area has undergone numerous
slow oscillations of level, and apparently these oscillations have
affected wide spaces. Consequently, formations rich in fossils and
sufficiently thick and extensive to resist subsequent degradation, will
have been formed over wide spaces during periods of subsidence, but only
where the supply of sediment was sufficient to keep the sea shallow and to
embed and preserve the remains before they had time to decay. On the other
hand, as long as the bed of the sea remained stationary, THICK deposits
cannot have been accumulated in the shallow parts, which are the most
favourable to life. Still less can this have happened during the alternate
periods of elevation; or, to speak more accurately, the beds which were
then accumulated will generally have been destroyed by being upraised and
brought within the limits of the coast-action.</p>
<p>These remarks apply chiefly to littoral and sublittoral deposits. In the
case of an extensive and shallow sea, such as that within a large part of
the Malay Archipelago, where the depth varies from thirty or forty to
sixty fathoms, a widely extended formation might be formed during a period
of elevation, and yet not suffer excessively from denudation during its
slow upheaval; but the thickness of the formation could not be great, for
owing to the elevatory movement it would be less than the depth in which
it was formed; nor would the deposit be much consolidated, nor be capped
by overlying formations, so that it would run a good chance of being worn
away by atmospheric degradation and by the action of the sea during
subsequent oscillations of level. It has, however, been suggested by Mr.
Hopkins, that if one part of the area, after rising and before being
denuded, subsided, the deposit formed during the rising movement, though
not thick, might afterwards become protected by fresh accumulations, and
thus be preserved for a long period.</p>
<p>Mr. Hopkins also expresses his belief that sedimentary beds of
considerable horizontal extent have rarely been completely destroyed. But
all geologists, excepting the few who believe that our present metamorphic
schists and plutonic rocks once formed the primordial nucleus of the
globe, will admit that these latter rocks have been stripped of their
covering to an enormous extent. For it is scarcely possible that such
rocks could have been solidified and crystallised while uncovered; but if
the metamorphic action occurred at profound depths of the ocean, the
former protecting mantle of rock may not have been very thick. Admitting
then that gneiss, mica-schist, granite, diorite, etc., were once
necessarily covered up, how can we account for the naked and extensive
areas of such rocks in many parts of the world, except on the belief that
they have subsequently been completely denuded of all overlying strata?
That such extensive areas do exist cannot be doubted: the granitic region
of Parime is described by Humboldt as being at least nineteen times as
large as Switzerland. South of the Amazon, Boue colours an area composed
of rocks of this nature as equal to that of Spain, France, Italy, part of
Germany, and the British Islands, all conjoined. This region has not been
carefully explored, but from the concurrent testimony of travellers, the
granitic area is very large: thus Von Eschwege gives a detailed section of
these rocks, stretching from Rio de Janeiro for 260 geographical miles
inland in a straight line; and I travelled for 150 miles in another
direction, and saw nothing but granitic rocks. Numerous specimens,
collected along the whole coast, from near Rio de Janeiro to the mouth of
the Plata, a distance of 1,100 geographical miles, were examined by me,
and they all belonged to this class. Inland, along the whole northern bank
of the Plata, I saw, besides modern tertiary beds, only one small patch of
slightly metamorphosed rock, which alone could have formed a part of the
original capping of the granitic series. Turning to a well-known region,
namely, to the United States and Canada, as shown in Professor H.D.
Rogers' beautiful map, I have estimated the areas by cutting out and
weighing the paper, and I find that the metamorphic (excluding the
"semi-metamorphic") and granite rocks exceed, in the proportion of 19 to
12.5, the whole of the newer Palaeozoic formations. In many regions the
metamorphic and granite rocks would be found much more widely extended
than they appear to be, if all the sedimentary beds were removed which
rest unconformably on them, and which could not have formed part of the
original mantle under which they were crystallised. Hence, it is probable
that in some parts of the world whole formations have been completely
denuded, with not a wreck left behind.</p>
<p>One remark is here worth a passing notice. During periods of elevation the
area of the land and of the adjoining shoal parts of the sea will be
increased and new stations will often be formed—all circumstances
favourable, as previously explained, for the formation of new varieties
and species; but during such periods there will generally be a blank in
the geological record. On the other hand, during subsidence, the inhabited
area and number of inhabitants will decrease (excepting on the shores of a
continent when first broken up into an archipelago), and consequently
during subsidence, though there will be much extinction, few new varieties
or species will be formed; and it is during these very periods of
subsidence that the deposits which are richest in fossils have been
accumulated.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />