An Expository Outline of the Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation
i >> ith a Notice of the Author\'s Explanations: A Sequel to the Vestiges >> An Expository Outline of the Vestiges of the Natural History of CreationAN EXPOSITORY OUTLINE
OF THE
"VESTIGES OF THE NATURAL HISTORY OF CREATION;"
WITH A COMPREHENSIVE AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ARGUMENTS BY WHICH THE
EXTRAORDINARY HYPOTHESES OF THE AUTHOR ARE SUPPORTED AND HAVE BEEN
IMPUGNED, WITH THEIR BEARING UPON THE RELIGIOUS AND MORAL INTERESTS OF
THE COMMUNITY.
WITH A NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR'S
"EXPLANATIONS:"
A SEQUEL TO THE VESTIGES.
* * * * *
_Originally printed in a Supplement of_ THE ATLAS _Newspaper of August
30 and December 20, 1845._
* * * * *
LONDON: EFFINGHAM WILSON, ROYAL EXCHANGE. J. VINCENT, OXFORD; G.
ANDREWS, DURHAM; J. TEPPELL, NORWICH; BRODIE AND CO., SALISBURY. A. AND
C. BLACK, EDINBURGH; D. ROBERTSON, GLASGOW; A. BROWN AND CO., ABERDEEN.
W. CURRY, JUN., AND CO., DUBLIN.
1846.
ADVERTISEMENT.
* * * * *
The following tractate first appeared in the form of a literary review
in a supplement of the ATLAS; but two impressions of that journal having
been long since exhausted, and inquiries still continuing numerous and
urgent, the proprietor has granted permission for the article to be
reprinted in a separate, more convenient, and perhaps enduring vehicle
than that of a newspaper.
Few works of a scientific import have been published that so promptly
and deeply fixed public attention as the _Vestiges of Creation_, or
elicited more numerous replies and sharper critical analysis and
disquisition. Upon so vast a question as the evolution of universal
creation differences of opinion were natural and unavoidable. Many have
disputed the accuracy of some of the author's facts, and the sequence
and validity of his inductive inferences; but few can withhold from him
the praise of a patient and intrepid spirit of inquiry, much occasional
eloquence, and very considerable powers of analysis, systematic
induction, arrangement and combination.
In what follows the leading objects kept in view have been--first, an
expository outline of the author's facts and argument; next, of the
chief reasons by which they have been impugned by Professor SEDGWICK,
Professor WHEWELL, Mr. BOSANQUET, and others who have entered the lists
of controversy. These arrayed, the concluding purpose fitly followed of
a brief exhibition of the relative strength of the main points in issue,
with their bearing on the moral and religious interests of the
community.
It is the fourth and latest edition that has been submitted to
investigation. In this impression the author has introduced several
corrections and alterations, without, however, any infringement or
mitigation of its original scope and character. More recently appeared
his "Explanations," a Sequel to the "Vestiges of the Natural History of
Creation;" in which the author endeavours to elucidate and strengthen
his former position. This had become necessary in consequence of the
number of his opponents, and the inquiry and discussion to which the
original publication had given rise. Of this, also, a lengthened review
was given in the ATLAS, which has been included; so that the reader will
now have before him a succinct outline of a novel and interesting topic
of philosophical investigation.
In the present reprint a few corrections have been made, and the
illustrative table at page 34, and some other additions, introduced.
_London, January_ 1, 1846.
AN EXPOSITORY OUTLINE
OF THE
"VESTIGES OF THE NATURAL HISTORY OF CREATION."
It rarely happens that speculative inquiries in England command much
attention, and the _Vestiges of Creation_ would have probably formed no
exception, had it not been from the unusual ability with which the work
has been executed. The subject investigated is one of vast, almost
universal, interest; for everyone--the low, in common with the high in
intellect--find enigmas in creation that they would gladly have
unriddled, and promptly gather round the oracle who has boldly stepped
forth to cut the knot of their perplexities. The first impression made,
too, is favourable. No very striking originality, eloquence, or genius,
is displayed; yet there is ingenuity; and though the author betrays the
zeal of an advocate, desirous of leading to a determinate and _material_
conclusion, his address, like that of the apostle of temperance, is
mostly mild and equable, with occasionally a little gentlemanly fervour
to give animation to his discourse. His style is mostly felicitous,
sometimes beautiful, lucid, precise, and elevated. In tone and manner of
execution, in quiet steadiness of purpose, in the firm, intrepid spirit
with which truth, or that which is conceived to be true, is followed,
regardless of startling presentments, the _Vestiges_ call to mind the
_Mecanique Celeste_, or _Systeme du Monde_. In caution, as in science,
the author is immeasurably inferior to LAPLACE; but in magnitude and
boldness of design he transcends the illustrious Frenchman. LAPLACE
sought no more than to subject the celestial movements to the formulas
of analysis, and reconcile to common observation terrestrial
appearances; but our author is far more ambitious--more venturesome in
aim--which is nothing less than to lift the veil of ISIS, and solve the
phenomena of universal nature. With what success remains to be
considered. That great skill and cleverness, that a very superior
mastery is evinced, we have conceded, and, we will also add, great show
of fairness in treatment and conclusion.
No partial opening is made; the great design, in all its extent, is
manfully grappled with. The universe is first surveyed, next the mystery
of its origin. After ranging through sidereal space, examining the
bodies found there, their arrangement, formation, and evolution, the
author selects our own planet for especial interrogation. He disembowels
it, scrutinizing the internal evidences of its structure and history,
and thence infers the causes of past vicissitudes, existing relations,
and appearances. These disposed of, the surface is explored, the
phenomena of animal and vegetable existence contemplated, and the
sources of vital action, sexual differences, and diversities of species
assigned. Man, as the supreme head and last work of progressive
creation, challenges a distinct consideration; his history and mental
constitution are investigated, and the relation in which a sublime
reason stands to the instinct of brutes discriminated. The end and
purpose of all appropriately form the concluding theme, which finished,
the curtain drops, and the last sounds heard are that the name of the
Great Unknown will probably never be revealed; that "praise will elicit
no response," nor any "word of censure" be parried or deprecated.
"Give me," exclaimed ARCHIMEDES, "a fulcrum, and I will raise the
earth." "Give me," says the author of the _Vestiges_, "gravitation and
development, and I will create a universe." ALEXANDER'S ambition was to
conquer a world, our author's is to create one. But he is wrong in
saying that his is the "first attempt to connect the natural sciences
into a history of creation, and thence to eliminate a view of nature as
one grand system of causation." The attempt has been often made, but
utterly failed; its results have been found valueless, hurtful--to have
occupied without enlarging the intellect, and the very effort has long
been discountenanced. Great advances, however, have been made in science
since system-making began to be discredited; nature has been
perseveringly ransacked in all her domains, and many extraordinary
secrets drawn from her laboratory. Astronomy and geology, chemistry and
electricity, have greatly extended the bounds of knowledge; still, we
apprehend, we are not yet sufficiently armed with facts to resolve into
one consistent whole her infinite variety.
Efforts at generalization, however, and the systematic arrangement of
natural phenomena, are seldom wholly fruitless. If false, they tend to
provoke discussion--to lead to active thought and useful research. A
solitary truth, though new and useful, rarely obtains higher distinction
than to be quietly placed on the rolls of science, while a bold
speculation, traversing the whole field of creation, and smoothing all
its difficulties, satisfies for the moment, and fixes general attention.
Of this the _Vestiges of Creation_ are an example. Without adding to our
positive knowledge by a single new discovery, demonstration, or
experiment, they have excited more interest than the _Principia_ of
NEWTON. From this popular success, if good do not accrue, no great evil
need be anticipated. Hypotheses are most hurtful when accredited by an
irreversible authority--when erected into a tribunal without appeal,
they become the arbitrary dictator in lieu of the handmaid of science.
Discussion and invention, in place of being stimulated, are then
fettered by them; the human mind is enslaved, as Europe was for
centuries by the _Physics_ of ARISTOTLE, and still continues to be in
some of the ancient retreats and conservatories of exploded errors. But
these form the exceptions, not the rule of the age, which is free and
equal inquiry. Errors have ceased to have prescriptive immunities; and
mere conjectures, however sanctioned or plausible, if inconsistent with
science--with the ascertained facts of experiment and observation, are
speedily passed into the region of dreams and chimeras.
Whether this will be the fate of our author remains to be proved. The
moment selected for his appearance has at least been well chosen. The
_Vestiges_ have the air of novelty, a long time having elapsed since any
one had the hardihood to propound a new system of Nature. In common with
most manifestations of our time, his effort exhibits a marked
improvement on the crudities of his predecessors in the same line of
architectural ambition. Science has been called to his aid, and the
patient ingenuity with which he has sought to make the latest
discoveries subservient to his purpose challenges admiration, if not
acquiescence. Some of our contemporaries have been warmed into almost
theological aversion by the boldness of his conclusions, but we see
little cause for fear, and none for bitterness or apprehension. More
closely Nature is investigated and deeper the impression will become of
her majesty and might. Unlike earthly greatnesses, she loses no
power--no grandeur--no fascination--no prestige, by familiarity. The
greatest philosophers will always rank among her greatest admirers and
most devout and fervent worshippers.
Had our author proved all he has assumed our faith would not be
lessened, nor our wonder diminished. Whether matter or spirit has been
the world's architect, the astounding miracle of its creation is not the
less. What does it import whether it resulted direct from the fiat of
Omnipotence, or intermediately from the properties He impressed, or the
law of development He prescribed? He who gave the law, who infused the
energies by which Chaos was transmuted into an organized universe,
remains great and inscrutable as ever.
It is time, however, that we entered upon a more detailed and closer
investigation of the _Vestiges of Creation_. Our purpose is not hastily,
and without examination, to deprecate, deny, or controvert; but
patiently, and without prejudice, to inquire, to submit faithfully and
intelligibly the outlines of a remarkable treatise; describe briefly its
scope and bearing, the arguments by which they are supported, and the
counter reasons by which they appear to be wholly or partially impugned.
Our readers will thus be enabled to appreciate the merits of a
controversy, the most comprehensive and interesting that for a
lengthened period has occupied the attention of the scientific and
intellectual world.
For greater clearness of exposition we shall endeavour to follow the
order observed by the author in the division and treatment of his
subjects, commencing first with the
BODIES OF SPACE.
The author opens his subject with a brief but luminous outline of the
arrangement and formation of the astral and planetary systems of the
heavens. He first describes the solar system, of which our earth is a
member, consisting of the sun, planets, and satellites with the less
intelligible orbs termed comets, and taking as the uttermost bounds of
this system the orbit of Uranus, it occupies a portion of space not less
than three thousand six hundred millions of miles in diameter. The mind
cannot form an exact notion of so vast an expanse, but an idea of it may
be obtained from the fact, that, if the swiftest racehorse ever known
had began to traverse it at full speed at the time of the birth of
MOSES, he would only yet have accomplished half his journey. Vast as is
the solar system, it is only one of an infinity of others which may be
still more extensive. Our sun is supposed to be a star belonging to a
constellation of stars, each of which has its accompaniment of revolving
planets; and the constellation itself with similar constellations to
form revolving clusters round some mightier centre of attraction; and so
on, each astral combination increasing in number, magnitude, and
complexity, till the mind is utterly lost in the vain effort to grasp
the limitless arrangement.
Of the stars astronomers can hardly be said to know anything with
certainty. Sirius, which is the most lustrous, was long supposed to be
the nearest and most within the reach of observation, but all attempts
to calculate the distance of that luminary have proved futile. Of its
inconceivable remoteness some notion may be formed by the fact, that the
diameter of the earth's annual orbit, if viewed from it, would dwindle
into an invisible point. This is what is meant by the stars not having,
like the planets, a _parallax_; that is, the earths' orbit, as seen from
them, does not subtend a measurable angle. With two other stars,
however, astronomers have unexpectedly and recently been more fortunate
than with Sirius, and have been able to calculate their distances from
the earth. The celebrated BESSEL, and soon afterwards, the late Mr.
HENDERSON, astronomer royal for Scotland, were the first to surmount the
difficulty that had baffled the telescopic resources of the HERSCHELS.
BESSEL detected a parallax of one-third of a second in the star 61
Cygni, and in the constellation of the Centaur HENDERSON found another
star whose parallax amounted to one second. Of the million of fixed
glittering points that adorn the sky, these are the only two whose
distances have been calculated, and to express them, miles, leagues, or
orbits seems inadequate. Light, whose speed is known to be 192,000 miles
per second, would be three years in reaching our earth from the star of
HENDERSON; and starting from BESSEL'S star and moving at the same rate
it could only reach us in ten years. These are the nearest stars, but
there are others whose distances are immeasurably greater, and whose
light, though starting from them at the beginning of creation, may not
have reached our globe!
The stars visible to the eye are about 3,000, but the number increases
with every increase of telescopic power, and may be said to be
innumerable. They are not of uniform lustre or form, but vary in figure
and brightness. Some of them have a _nebulous_ or cloudy appearance; and
there are entire clusters with this dusky aspect, mostly pervaded,
however, with luminous points of more brilliant hue. In the outer fields
of astral space Sir WILLIAM HERSCHEL observed a multitude of nebulae, one
or two of which may be seen by the naked eye. All of them, when seen by
instruments of low power, look like masses of luminous vapour; but some
of them had brighter spots, suggesting to Sir WILLIAM the idea of a
condensation of the nebulous matter round one or more centres. But when
these luminous masses are examined by more powerful instruments many of
them lose their cloudy form, and are resolved into shining points, "like
spangles of diamond dust." It is in this way several nebulae have yielded
to the gigantic reflector of Lord ROSSE, and others with still greater
optical resources may follow. This brings us to the first questionable
and controversial portion of the _Vestiges_; namely,--the
NEBULAR HYPOTHESIS.
It is among the gaseous bodies just described, in the outer boundary of
Nature, which neither telescope nor geometry can well reach, that
speculation has laid its _venue_, and commenced its aerial castles.
LAPLACE was the first to suggest the nebular hypothesis, which he did
with great diffidence, not as a theory proved, or hardly likely, but as
a mathematical possibility or illustration. His range of creation,
moreover, was not so vast as that of our author, which assumes to
compass the entire universe, but was limited to the evolution of the
solar system. The mode in which this might be evolved, LAPLACE thus
explains:--
He conjectures that in the original condition of the solar system the
sun revolved upon his axis, surrounded by an atmosphere which, in virtue
of an excessive heat, extended far beyond the orbits of all the planets,
the planets as yet having no existence. The heat gradually diminished,
and as the solar atmosphere contracted by cooling, the rapidity of its
rotation increased by the laws of rotatory motion, and an exterior zone
of vapour was detached from the rest, the central attraction being no
longer able to overcome the increased centrifugal force. The zone of
vapour might in some cases retain its form, as we still see in Saturn's
ring; but more usually the ring of vapour would break into several
masses, and these would generally coalesce into one mass, which would
revolve about the sun. Such portions of the solar atmosphere abandoned
successively at different distances, would form planets in the state of
vapour. These masses of vapour, it appears from mechanical laws, would
have each its rotatory motion, and as the cooling of the vapour still
went on, would each produce a planet that might have satellites and
rings formed from the planet, in the same manner as the planets were
formed from the atmosphere of the sun.
All the known motions of the solar system are consistent and
reconcileable with this theory of LAPLACE, and upon it the author of the
_Vestiges_ has enlarged and founded his wider scheme of physical
creation. He supposes the void of nature to have been originally filled
with a universal FIRE MIST (p. 30), out of which all the celestial orbs
were made and put in motion. How this mist was put in activity, and
resolved into the luminous and revolving bodies that we now see, and one
of which we inhabit is the first urgent perplexity to surmount in the
conjecture. It is manifest that if a mist filled the entire region of
space, a mist it must for ever remain, unless acted upon by some cause
adequate to give it new action and arrangement. No sun, no stars or
planets could spontaneously emanate from an inert vapour any more than
from nothing. To meet this, his first difficulty, the author supposes
that there were certain _nuclei_, or centres of greater condensation,
analogous to those still remarked in the nebulae of the heavens, and that
these nuclei, by their superior attractive force, consolidated into
spheres the gaseous matter around them:--
"Of nebulous matter," says he, "in its original state we know too
little to enable us to suggest _how nuclei should be established in
it_. But supposing that from a _peculiarity_ in the constitution
nuclei are formed, we know very well how, by the power of
gravitation, the process of an aggregation of the neighbouring
matter to these nuclei should proceed until masses more or less
solid should be detached from the rest. It is a _well-known law in
physics, that when fluid matter collects towards, or meets in a
centre, it establishes a rotatory motion_. See minor results of
this law in the whirlpool and the whirlwind--nay, on so humble a
scale as the water sinking through the aperture of a funnel. It
thus becomes certain, that when we arrive at the stage of a
nebulous star we have a rotation on its axis commenced."
Up to this, however, the author has proved nothing. The existence of the
fire-mist and nuclei are assumptions only, and the way by which he tries
to account for rotatory motion is clearly erroneous. The aggregation of
matter round the nuclei by gravitation would have no such tendency; no
more than a perfect balance would of itself have a tendency to move
about its fulcrum, or a falling stone to deviate from its vertical
course. Gravitation would indeed compress the particles of matter, but
its tendency and entire action is towards the nucleus; it compresses
them no more on one side of the line of their direction to the centre of
force than on any other side; and hence no _lateral_ or _rotatory
motion_ would ensue. Rotation, therefore, is yet unaccounted for; though
the author says _it is a well-known law in physics_ that when fluid
matter collects towards, or meets in a centre, it establishes a rotatory
motion; and then for illustration refers to a whirlwind or whirlpool. No
such effect would follow the conditions stated, and an entire ignorance
is betrayed of the laws of mechanical philosophy. In the whirlpool and
the whirlwind the gyration is caused by the fluid passing, not _to_ the
centre, but _through_ it and away from it; in the whirlpool downwards
through the place of exit, in the whirlwind upwards to where the vacuum
has caused the rapid aggregation.
LAPLACE was too able a mathematician to commit these elementary
blunders; he did not assume to account for rotation by inapplicable
laws, but took for granted that the sun revolved upon its axis, and
thence communicated a corresponding motion to the bodies thrown from its
surface. But our author has sought to advance beyond his teacher, and in
this way has shown his ignorance of physics by an egregious mistake. At
this point we might stop, without following the ulterior steps by which
the solar system is made to evolve out of heated vapour. Having got
rotation, though by an impossible process, the author falls into the
illustration already given of the theory of LAPLACE. The rotation of
each nucleus or sun round its axis produces centrifugal force; that
force, by refrigeration, increases beyond the centripetal force of
gravity; in consequence rings are formed and detached from the surface,
whose unequal coherence of parts mostly causes them to break into
separate masses or planets, partaking of the motion of the bodies from
which they have been separated, and these primaries in their turn
becoming centres of gravitation and centrifugal force, throw off their
secondaries, or _moons_.
In this way the solar system and other systems upon a similar plan of
arrangement, it is conjectured, may have been formed. According to the
author the generative process is still in progress, and new worlds are
in course of being thrown off from new suns in the confines of creation.
These nebulous stars on the outer bounds of space, of varying forms and
brightness, are supposed to be the centres of new systems in different
stages of development, like children of various ages and growth in a
numerous family. This is the author's own illustration (p. 20), and
after giving it he proceeds:--
"Precisely thus, seeing in our astral system many thousands of
worlds in all stages of formation, from the most rudimental to that
immediately preceding the present condition of those we deem
perfect, it is unavoidable to conclude that all the perfect have
gone through the various stages which we see in the rudimental.
This leads us at once to the conclusion that the whole of our
firmament was at one time a diffused mass of nebulous matter,
extending through the space which it still occupies. So also, of
_course_, must have been the other astral systems. Indeed, we must
presume the whole to have been originally in one connected mass,
the astral systems being only the first division into parts, and
solar systems the second.
"The first idea which all this impresses upon us is, that the
formation of bodies in space is _still and at present in progress_.
We live at a time when many have been formed, and many are still
forming. Our own solar system is to be regarded as completed,
supposing its perfection to consist in the formation of a series of
planets, for there are mathematical reasons for concluding that
Mercury is the nearest planet to the sun, which can, according to
the laws of the system, exist. But there are other solar systems
within our astral systems, which are as yet in a less advanced
state, and even some quantities of nebulous matter which have
scarcely begun to advance towards the stellar form. On the other
hand, there are vast numbers of stars which have all the appearance
of being fully formed systems, if we are to judge from the complete
and definite appearance which they present to our vision through
the telescope. We have no means of judging of the _seniority of
systems; but it is reasonable to suppose that among the many, some
are older than ours_. There is, indeed, one piece of evidence for
the probability of the comparative youth of our system, altogether
apart from human traditions and the geognostic appearances of the
surface of our planet. This consists in a thin nebulous matter,
which is diffused around the sun to nearly the orbit of Mercury, of
a very oblately spheroidal shape. This matter, which sometimes
appears to our naked eyes, at sunset, in the form of a cone
projecting upwards in the line of the sun's path, and which bears
the name of the Zodiacal Light, has been thought a residuum or last
remnant of the concentrating matter of our system, and thus may be
supposed to indicate the comparative recentness of the principal
events of our cosmogony. _Supposing the surmise and inference_ to
be correct, and they may be held as so far supported by more
familiar evidence, we might with the more confidence speak of our
system as not amongst the elder born of Heaven, but one whose
various phenomena, physical and moral, as yet lay undeveloped,
while myriads of others were fully fashioned, and in complete
arrangement. Thus, in the sublime chronology to which we are
directing our inquiries, we first find ourselves called upon to
consider the globe which we inhabit as a child of the sun, elder
than Venus and her younger brother Mercury, but posterior in date
of birth to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus; next to regard our
whole system as probably of recent formation in comparison with
many of the stars of our firmament. We must, however, be on our
guard against supposing the earth as a recent globe in our ordinary
conceptions of time. From evidence afterwards to be adduced, it
will be seen that it cannot be presumed to be less than many
hundreds of centuries old. How much older Uranus may be, no one can
tell, far less how much more aged may be many of the stars of our
firmament, or the stars of other firmaments, than ours."