The Ancient Life History of the Earth. Henry Alleyne Nicholson

great cause why we can never obtain a perfect series of all the animals and plants that have lived upon the globe. Wherever one of these great physical gaps occurs, we find, as we might expect, a corresponding break in the series of life-forms. In other words, whenever we find two formations to be unconformable, we shall always find at the same time that there is a great difference in their fossils, and that many of the fossils of the older formation do not survive into the newer, whilst many of those in the newer are not known to occur in the older. The cause of this is, obviously, that the lapse of time, indicated by the unconformability, has been sufficiently great to allow of the dying out or modification of many of the older forms of life, and the introduction of new ones by immigration.

      Apart, however, altogether, from these great physical breaks and their corresponding breaks in life, there are other reasons why we can never become more than partially acquainted with the former denizens of the globe. Foremost amongst these is the fact that an enormous number of animals possess no hard parts of the nature of a skeleton, and are therefore incapable, under any ordinary circumstances, of leaving behind them any traces of their existence. It is true that there are cases in which animals in themselves completely soft-bodied are nevertheless able to leave marks by which their former presence can be detected: Thus every geologist is familiar with the winding and twisting "trails" formed on the surface of the strata by sea-worms; and the impressions left by the stranded carcases of Jelly-fishes on the fine-grained lithographic slates of Solenhofen supply us with an example of how a creature which is little more than "organised sea-water" may still make an abiding mark upon the sands of time. As a general rule, however, animals which have no skeletons are incapable of being preserved as fossils, and hence there must always have been a vast number of different kinds of marine animals of which we have absolutely no record whatever. Again, almost all the fossiliferous rocks have been laid down in water; and it is a necessary result of this that the great majority of fossils are the remains of aquatic animals. The remains of air-breathing animals, whether of the inhabitants of the land or of the air itself, are comparatively rare as fossils, and the record of the past existence of these is much more imperfect than is the case with animals living in water. Moreover, the fossiliferous deposits are not only almost exclusively aqueous formations, but the great majority are marine, and only a comparatively small number have been formed by lakes and rivers. It follows from the foregoing that the palæontological record is fullest and most complete so far as sea-animals are concerned, though even here we find enormous gaps, owing to the absence of hard structures in many great groups; of animals inhabiting fresh waters our knowledge is rendered still further incomplete by the small proportion that fluviatile and lacustrine deposits bear to marine; whilst we have only a fragmentary acquaintance with the air-breathing animals which inhabited the earth during past ages.

      Lastly, the imperfection of the palæontological record, due to the causes above enumerated, is greatly aggravated, especially as regards the earlier portion of the earth's history, by the fact that many rocks which contained fossils when deposited have since been rendered barren of organic remains. The principal cause of this common phenomenon is what is known as "metamorphism"—that is, the subjection of the rock to a sufficient amount of heat to cause a rearrangement of its particles. When at all of a pronounced character, the result of metamorphic action is invariably the obliteration of any fossils which might have been originally present in the rock. Metamorphism may affect rocks of any age, though naturally more prevalent in the older rocks, and to this cause must be set down an irreparable loss of much fossil evidence. The most striking example which is to be found of this is the great Laurentian series, which comprises some 30,000 feet of highly-metamorphosed sediments, but which, with one not wholly undisputed exception, has as yet yielded no remains of living beings, though there is strong evidence of the former existence in it of fossils.

      Upon the whole, then, we cannot doubt that the earth's crust, so far as yet deciphered by us, presents us with but a very imperfect record of the past. Whether the known and admitted imperfections of the geological and palæontological records are sufficiently serious to account satisfactorily for the deficiency of direct evidence recognisable in some modern hypotheses, may be a matter of individual opinion. There can, however, be little doubt that they are sufficiently extensive to throw the balance of evidence decisively in favour of some theory of continuity, as opposed to any theory of intermittent and occasional action. The apparent breaks which divide the great series of the stratified rocks into a number of isolated formations, are not marks of mighty and general convulsions of nature, but are simply indications of the imperfection of our knowledge. Never, in all probability, shall we be able to point to a complete series of deposits, or a complete succession of life linking one great geological period to another. Nevertheless, we may well feel sure that such deposits and such an unbroken succession must have existed at one time. We are compelled to believe that nowhere in the long series of the fossiliferous rocks has there been a total break, but that there must have been a complete continuity of life, and a more or less complete continuity of sedimentation, from the Laurentian period to the present day. One generation hands on the lamp of life to the next, and each system of rocks is the direct offspring of those which preceded it in time. Though there has not been continuity in any given area, still the geological chain could never have been snapped at one point, and taken up again at a totally different one. Thus we arrive at the conviction that continuity is the fundamental law of geology, as it is of the other sciences, and that the lines of demarcation between the great formations are but gaps in our own knowledge.

CHAPTER V.

       Table of Contents

      CONCLUSIONS TO BE DRAWN FROM FOSSILS.

      We have already seen that geologists have been led by the study of fossils to the all-important generalisation that the vast series of the Fossiliferous or Sedimentary Rocks may be divided into a number of definite groups or "formations," each of which is characterised by its organic remains. It may simply be repeated here that these formations are not properly and strictly characterised by the occurrence in them of any one particular fossil. It may be that a formation contains some particular fossil or fossils not occurring out of that formation, and that in this way an observer may identify a given group with tolerable certainty. It very often happens, indeed, that some particular stratum, or sub-group of a series, contains peculiar fossils, by which its existence may be determined in various localities. As before remarked, however, the great formations are characterised properly by the association of certain fossils, by the predominance of certain families or orders, or by an assemblage of fossil remains representing the "life" of the period in which the formation was deposited.

      Fossils, then, enable us to determine the age of the deposits in which they occur. Fossils further enable us to come to very important conclusions as to the mode in which the fossiliferous bed was deposited, and thus as to the condition of the particular district or region occupied by the fossiliferous bed at the time of the formation of the latter. If, in the first place, the bed contain the remains of animals such as now inhabit rivers, we know that it is "fluviatile" in its origin, and that it must at one time have either formed an actual riverbed, or been deposited by the overflowing of an ancient stream. Secondly, if the bed contain the remains of shellfish, minute crustaceans, or fish, such as now inhabit lakes, we know that it is "lacustrine," and was deposited beneath the waters of a former lake. Thirdly, if the bed contain the remains of animals such as now people the ocean, we know that it is "marine" in its origin, and that it is a fragment of an old sea-bottom.

      We can, however, often determine the conditions under which a bed was deposited with greater accuracy than this. If, for example, the fossils are of kinds resembling the marine animals now inhabiting shallow waters, if they are accompanied by the detached relics of terrestrial organisms, or if they are partially rolled and broken, we may conclude that the fossiliferous deposit was laid down in a shallow sea, in the immediate vicinity of a coast-line, or as an actual shore-deposit. If, again, the remains are those of animals such as now live in the deeper parts of the ocean, and there is a very sparing intermixture of extraneous fossils (such as the bones of birds or quadrupeds, or the remains of plants), we may presume that the deposit is one of deep water. In other cases, we may find, scattered through the rock, and still in their