Anyone who earnestly studies plants
and animals as they exist in the world to-day cannot
help wondering how the earth began and where it got
its life. This is the true end and aim of geological
study. The history of man seems to run back into
a far distant and gloomy past. Except for the
poetical account in Genesis and the traditions of
various peoples throughout the world, real history
fades away into an earlier time of which there are
no written records. When the delvers in the Mesopotamian
plain talk to us of kingdoms running back through
seven or eight or nine thousand years, we seem to be
getting back to the beginnings of things. But
seven or eight or nine thousand years are as nothing
in comparison with the age of the earth, which runs
back into a past so limitless that no man can safely
assign any set figure to it. In a recent paper,
Dr. Walcott, of the Smithsonian Institution, says
that the antiquity of the earth must be measured not
in millions, for they are too short, nor hundreds of
millions, for this carries us too far, but must surely
be measured in tens of millions of years.
When we attempt to study the past
we find its various epochs unequally clear to us.
In human history only quite modern times are absolutely
clear. The history of the Middle Ages is distinct
enough for us to build for ourselves a picture of
the time with reasonable hope of gaining a correct
view of the state of affairs. Back of this comes
the long stretch of the Dark Ages, in which here and
there we have bright spots, but it will perhaps long
be impossible to portray clearly the life of the people.
Getting back to the Romans, things once more become
reasonably plain, as is true also in the case of Greek
history. Back of this stretches the Egyptian
with fair precision, and, older than it, the Babylonian
and Chaldean. But these past three have not left
nearly so definite an account for us as did the later
civilizations of Greece and Rome.
When we try to go back of these we
must change our method of study entirely. Writing
is absent, and all we know of earlier men must be
inferred from a few pictures that were daubed on the
rocks or carved in ivory or bone, from tools made
of stone or bone, from a few metal or stone ornaments,
or from the bones of the men themselves. Even
so, the history fades out without telling us its own
beginnings. It is quite as impossible for history
to write its origins as it is for man, from his own
knowledge, to describe his birth.
What is true of the human story is
quite as true of that of the earth. Recent steps
are very plain. We may read them with considerable
confidence. As we go deeper into the rocks and
find older fossils, the evidence becomes less certain.
The animals differed enough from those of to-day for
us to be less sure what they were like. As we
keep on moving backward through time, and downward
through the rocks, we find, after a while, strata
in which there are evidences of life that existed
long ago, but in which these traces are so altered
that it is impossible to tell what sort of living
things existed; we learn only that they were alive.
Going back still further, these fade out. There
is no knowing when the earth began; there is no knowing
when life began upon the earth. It is not meant
that men have not wondered, even reckoned carefully,
as to how long ago each of these events occurred.
Many speculations have proved entirely useless, a few
remain as yet neither confirmed nor disproved, and
of such we shall speak.
For the last hundred years the theory
of the earth’s origin suggested by the Marquis
Pierre Simon De La Place, of France, near the end of
the eighteenth century, has held almost undisputed
sway among men who were willing to consider the question
as open to human solution. This theory is known
as La Place’s Nebular Hypothesis. When men
began to study the heavenly bodies with the newly
invented telescope, new ideas naturally sprang up.
Among the objects which the glass disclosed were the
nebulae, which are great clouds of fire mist, glowing
masses of gas. They are scarcely visible to the
naked eye, but are among the most interesting objects
in the heavens when seen through a telescope.
The other suggestive heavenly body was our sister planet,
Saturn. Besides having a full complement of moons,
Saturn has around it, as distant as we would expect
moons to be, three great rings. These look very
much as if one’s hat, with an enormously wide
brim, should have the connection between the rim and
the hat broken out completely, but the rim should
still float around the hat without touching it and
should steadily revolve as it stood there. The
rings of Saturn are not solid like the suggested hat
rim. They are evidently made up of a great number
of very small particles, each moving around the center
of Saturn. But the great cloud of them is spread
out flat. At the distance which Saturn is from
the earth they look as if they made a solid sheet.
Furthermore, they do not form, as it were, one continuous
hat rim, but it is as if the rim were broken into three
circular sections, each bigger than the one inside
it and separated from the next by an area nearly as
wide as the ring itself.
With such material in the heavens
to guide him, La Place suggested that the sun had
once been an enormous fire mist scattered over an
area billions of miles in diameter. This gaseous
material, by the attraction of its particles for each
other, began to condense and contract. When the
plug is pulled from a washbasin the particles of water,
in moving toward the center, in order to get out of
the basin, invariably set up a rotary motion.
As the particles of this diffused nebula began to
gather together they, too, gave to the mass a rotary
movement. This grew more and more rapid, with
greater contraction, until the particles on the outer
edge of the rotating mass had just so much speed that
the least bit more would make them tend to fly off
as mud would fly from a revolving wheel. When
this point was reached there was a balance of forces
which made the outermost portion remain as a ring
while the rest contracted away from it, leaving it
behind.
It was La Place’s idea that
this process had repeated itself, and ring after ring
had been left behind. Finally the sun condensed
and grew into a ball, occupying the center of the
system. At varying distances from it were to
be found either rings or planets which had been formed
out of such rings. For La Place suggested that
in a ring like this the material could not be quite
evenly distributed. While every particle in the
ring kept revolving around the sun, those in front
of the densest part were slowly held back by the attraction
of the thicker portion, while those behind it in rotation
had their speed hastened until finally all the material
in the ring had collected at one spot and a new planet
was born. La Place believed that these planets
formed their moons in exactly the same way, and that
Saturn was simply a planet not all of whose moons
had yet been formed. He believed that this happy
accident served to tell us how the universe had been
created.
Of course, so detailed a theory concerning
anything of which we know so little has always had
much ridicule thrown upon it, and yet no truly competing
theory has been proposed until very recent times.
Within a few years a Planetesimal
Theory has been announced, and is gaining considerable
prominence, although it is too early yet to say whether
it will supersede La Place’s idea. In this
theory, also, the suggestion comes from the heavenly
bodies. With the increasing study of the nebulae,
many forms of these interesting bodies have been discovered.
A very common type consists of a great coherent central
mass, with two or more arms extending from opposite
sides in the form of a spiral. This is as if
gaseous revolving nebulae had come into comparatively
close proximity to a passing body. The visitor,
by its attraction, drew from the nebula a wisp of
gas. The revolving motion of the nebula gave
to the attracted arm the spiral form.
These twisted arms are not equally
dense throughout, but have thickened knots here and
there in their course. The Planetesimal Theory
suggests that these thickened knots are embryo planets
and the central portion of the nebulae an embryo sun.
After all the material in such a body has condensed
either around the knots or about the central mass
a new solar system will be complete. As before
stated, neither of these theories can be said to be
demonstrated. Each of them has points in its
favor and each has its difficulties. It is pleasant
to know what men have clearly thought concerning such
questions, but for a man not a trained geologist neither
will carry much conviction. He will still rest
with his own early conclusion that whichever shall
prove to be true, for him his old formula is still
valid, “in the beginning God made the heavens
and the earth.” He will no longer think
of God as having shaped the balls with his own hand
and thrown them into space; he will no longer dream
that it all occurred within a week not more than six
thousand years ago; but still to him will come the
reverent conviction that, whatever the plan by which
it was accomplished, it was still God’s plan
and God carried it out.
Now that we have tried to stretch
our imagination back to the origin of our globe, the
question not unnaturally comes to our mind, how long
ago did all this happen? Is there any possible
means of telling when the history of the earth began?
All such attempts lead either to indefinite or to
uncertain conclusions. Each man who essays the
problem approaches it from a different side and ends
with a different result. But no matter what the
method of approach, all are agreed on at least one
point, the enormous length of time, as counted in years,
through which the earth has lasted.
One great mathematician worked on
the basis of the rate of the present cooling of the
earth. Counting backward to the time when the
earth’s surface must have been hotter, according
to La Place’s idea, he decided that our globe
has been cool enough for the existence of life upon
it for a period of somewhere in the neighborhood of
one hundred million years. Those who try to study
the rate at which mud is being deposited in our bays
and at the mouth of our rivers, and who hence try
to deduce how long it has taken to produce the thickness
of all the stratified rock we know, arrive at a figure
larger, rather than smaller, than that mentioned above.
The same is true of those who try to count the age
of the earth by the rate at which the present rivers
are carrying away their river basins, and hence who
calculate how long it has taken the rivers of the
globe to wash away all the rocks which it is quite
clear have been carried out. Still others have
attempted to solve the problem by seeing how much
salt the rivers are carrying into the sea, and consequently
how long it must have taken the sea to become as salt
as it is. A very late attempt has been based on
the alteration in the minerals that show radio-activity.
Conservative estimates, based on all of these, would
give us a figure on which we must not count with any
exactness, but which will serve at least to mark the
present trend of opinion. We may put this figure
at one hundred millions of years.
The following table gives us the names
of the periods into which the geologist has divided
the past history of the earth. The first column
gives a simple name, which, in each case, is a translation
of the technical name the geologist gives to the era.
This technical name is also given in parenthesis.
The second column shows the number of years ago at
which this period may be placed, while the third column
gives a series of names most of which are in use in
geology and which are intended to indicate the stage
of advancement of the higher animals in that particular
period. Some of these names are perhaps giving
way to later terms, but all of them will be understood
by any geologist. Most of them will serve to
keep very clearly before the mind of the ungeological
the period which he is studying. Like all such
tables, this must be read from the bottom up.
This arrangement is used because the oldest rocks
in the series are naturally at the bottom and the
newest rocks are on the top, though occasionally a
region is sufficiently upset partly to reverse the
order.
Having seen what the scientist supposes
to be the method of formation of the earth itself,
it will be interesting next to consider what the biologist
surmises as to the origin of the life upon the earth.
Here again two explanations hold. The one, and
distinctly the older of the two, says that at some
time in the far distant past, under conditions which
are rarely if ever duplicated, out of the lifeless
material of the globe were produced simple and low
forms of life. These could not properly be called
either animal or plant, but partook somewhat of the
nature of both. Of this there is at present no
evidence whatever. The only reason we have for
suggesting it is that, if we understand the past conditions
on the earth, there was a time when life was impossible.
Now we find life. Hence it must have arisen.
This of itself, of course, furnishes no proof, but
leads us to try to imagine how the transition might
have come about. Every scientist who believes
in this form of origin holds that if the exact conditions
are repeated the result will occur once more.
He may believe that no such repetition is possible,
but he is confident that, if it could be, life would
arise again from lifeless matter.
This process of life arising from
matter that is not alive is known as Spontaneous Generation.
Two hundred years ago it was supposed to occur frequently.
It was common belief that the beautiful pickerel weed
which borders our Northern lakes, after freezing, went
into a sort of protoplasmic slime out of which pickerel
were produced. The eelgrass of the river was
supposed to yield eels in a similar fashion. The
dead bodies of animals were supposed to turn into
maggots. Such crude ideas of spontaneous generation
are no longer possible. The whole science of
bacteriology absolutely presupposes the impossibility
of spontaneous generation in the flasks and test tubes
of the laboratory. One or two men of otherwise
good standing in science still maintain that they are
getting new life in their own test tubes, but they
fail utterly to persuade the scientific world.
I think it is a fair statement of the position of
science to-day to say that there is no evidence whatever
of spontaneous generation, excepting the presence of
life upon the globe.
Not all has been said, however, on
this question. The chemist is learning in the
laboratory to produce many substances which, until
very recent times, were produced only in the bodies
of animals or plants. Dye-stuffs were originally
gotten almost entirely from animal or plant material.
At present the great majority of them are made in
the laboratory, and in not a few cases they not only
imitate the color of the older material, but actually
have identically the same composition and constitution.
The laboratory-made material is exactly like that
made by the animals or the plants.
The same is true with regard to a
large number of the fruit flavors. These are
due to the presence of ethereal oils in the plant,
and their exact counterparts can now be produced in
the laboratory, and can serve every purpose of the
fruit flavor itself. Alcohol has been produced
artificially, and alcohols, which nature never dreamed
of making, so far as we can tell, but which are made
on her plan, are manufactured by the chemist.
Last of all, sugar has recently been built up by the
chemist, though the method at present is so expensive
that it cannot possibly compete with the production
of the commodity from the cane and the beet.
As in the case of alcohol, all the sugars that nature
makes can now be made artificially, and others of the
same general plan which she seems not to have as yet
devised can be produced within the laboratory.
Attempts have been made to manufacture
proteids, but these have as yet eluded the efforts
of the chemist. He is beginning, however, to come
nearer understanding their composition, and when he
once clearly comprehends that he may be able to reproduce
them.
One of the German chemists is convinced
that the nuclein in the nucleus of the cell is not
a very complicated compound. Under such conditions
it is not a matter of surprise that the physiological
chemist should be constantly dreaming that he may at
some time produce living matter in the laboratory.
To the ordinary mind it scarcely seems possible.
We are so entirely sure that life is not amenable to
physics or chemistry that we can hardly conceive of
the possibility of its originating out of matter in
the test tube. If it does so come, and when it
does so come, this will not prove that life is a less
noble and less wonderful thing than we thought.
It will only prove that chemistry and physics are
more noble and more wonderful than we dreamed.
There is another way of approaching
this life problem, though it seems to be rather a
begging of the question than a solution of it.
Of recent years it has been discovered that even the
very low temperatures obtained by evaporating liquid
air, say three hundred degrees below zero, Fahrenheit,
do not kill seeds or spores of mold. The space
between the planets is undoubtedly extremely cold.
We have always supposed it to be entirely too cold
for life to exist in it. But we laid little stress
on the fact because we had no thought of any possible
life existing there. But the discovery that seeds
and spores can live uninjured through extreme cold
has led to an interesting suggestion. This is
that when the earth became adapted to the presence
of life it was infected by germs transported on meteors
from some other system. According to this theory,
organic dust through space is ready to infect any
planet which offers the conditions under which life
may arise. Of course this theory does not explain
the origin of life. It pushes back that origin
a little farther or supposes that life is as old as
matter itself. Again we may leave to the scientist
the discussion and the elaboration of this or any other
theory he may promulgate concerning the origin of
life. When he has established clearly the process
and can produce life we will accept his explanation;
meanwhile, we will always be interested in his attempts
to solve the problem, but still our simple formula,
“in the beginning God,” serves our present
needs and will satisfy us better than any as yet unverified
hypothesis.
When we find through scientific investigation
how life arises we will simply know how God created
it in the beginning.
The next step in the understanding
of early life is to study under the microscope the
simplest forms which we can find in existence to-day.
This, while far easier of execution than the problems
which we have thus far considered, is still not without
serious difficulties. But every day brings us
nearer to the understanding of the structure of living
things. Life the scientist cannot see. All
he can study is living matter. Whether life can
exist separate from living things is a problem outside
the range of his, at least present, possibilities.
Therefore, concerning it he has no answer whatever
to give. But when we come to study living things
we find that all life is associated with protoplasm.
This apparently foamy, jellylike, transparent material
is the only living substance in all the world.
Animals and plants are larger or smaller collections
of the little masses of protoplasm which we know as
cells. The lowest animals are each made up of
but a single cell. This consists of a small mass
of protoplasm surrounded almost always by a thicker
skin or covering, known as the cell wall and enclosing
a complicated kernel known as the nucleus. The
protoplasm seems to be the living substance itself.
The cell wall is not a simple dead scum on the outside
of the protoplasm, but is itself able to do certain
things which can only, so far as we know, be done
by living substances. For instance, of two materials
dissolved in the water in which the cell floats, the
wall may permit one to soak into the animal and keep
the other out. The one allowed to enter will
usually be found good to be used for food by the cell.
The nucleus seems to store within itself the record
of its past history and thus enable the cell to do
in the future what its ancestors did in the past.
Such simple cells can exhibit in very
low form all the activities the higher animals show
in much more elaborate development. A one-celled
animal can move about, can recognize the proximity
of food, can engulf its food and digest it, can build
up its own substance out of the digested food, can
absorb oxygen, can use this oxygen in the burning
of its own substance to produce its own activities,
can act in response to sensation gained from outside,
can throw off its waste matter produced by its own
activities, and can grow. When the proper time
comes its nucleus can split in two, the cell itself
enclosing the nucleus can separate into two cells,
each of which can grow to the size of the parent cell
and repeat its life. This is as simple an animal
as we have yet discovered. Every kitchen drain
swarms with such creatures. On a summer day the
stagnant pools are full of them. The simplest
microscope will show them clearly. This is life
in its lowest terms with which we are acquainted.
With such life, it seems to us, the animal and plant
world must have started their existence, when first
the earth began to teem with living matter.
If, then, we may form any judgment
concerning the first living things upon the globe
by considering the simplest creatures that live here
to-day, certain facts seem clear. In the first
place, life began in the water, and for a long time
was only to be found in the water. Single cells
are so small and dry out so easily that it is necessary
to their existence that they should be kept entirely
moist by the presence of water all about them.
It is true many of them will stand drying, but while
they are thus dried they can scarcely be said to be
much more than just alive. They are utterly inactive,
or, as we say, they are dormant. In such conditions
they become covered with a tough skin, almost a shell,
and their protoplasm is itself nearly dry. Under
these circumstances the life processes hardly continue
at all. The protozoa, as these small animals
are called, tolerate drought for a time; but they
only live, in any sense worth calling living, when
water is abundant and is neither very warm nor very
cold. It is safe to say that the early life of
the world formed in the oceans of the time. So
absolutely is the habit fixed upon cells of protoplasm
that even to-day the activities of the cells of higher
animals depend upon the presence of moisture.
The cells of our own bodies are to-day living, as
it were, in an ocean. Everyone can remember far
enough back to recall some time at which a tear slipped
from his own eye onto his own tongue; we know our
tears are salt. The tongue has tasted, undoubtedly,
the perspiration from the lip on more than one summer
day; this perspiration tasted as salt as the tear itself.
The lymph that constitutes the “water”
of a so-called “water blister” is also
salty, and even the little blood one gets into his
mouth in trying nature’s method of stanching
the flow from a cut finger gives the impression that
it contains a little salt. Every fluid of the
body is salty, and every cell of the body is bathed
in salt water. It is too long since the ancestors
of our cells swam in the seas of the Eozoic time for
us to assert with any positiveness that the ancestral
habit is responsible for this trait in the descendants.
Sure it is that to-day our cells, like their ancestors
of old, live in water, and this water is slightly
salty as were probably the Archaean seas.
The geologist tries as best he may
to build up the geography of the earth in the past.
He endeavors to judge from the rocks as he now finds
them, where the seas, the bays, the dry land, and the
mountains of earlier geological times lay. The
present aspect of the earth is very recent, and earlier
ages must have shown an entirely different distribution
of land and water. The North American continent
was certainly very much smaller than it is now.
The first known lands lay close to the Atlantic seaboard
and probably extended out into the water some distance
beyond the present shoreline. The stretch of
continent was narrow, and grew narrower as it went
southward. In what is now the Canadian district,
a considerable expanse probably existed in very early
times. Then a great internal sea, shallower than
the Atlantic, stretched its unbroken sheet over almost
the entire area now occupied by the United States,
while only a comparatively small hump of earth, ending
in a narrower strip, lay where the great Western plateau
now rears its enormous bulk.
A large portion of the history of
the North American continent, with its developing
animals and plants, is tied up with the gradual shrinkage
of this interior sea. Slowly across the Canadian
district, the Eastern and Western lands became connected
with each other, while the waters progressively were
pushed down the continent, which was steadily growing
from the east and from the north, though less slowly
from the west, into this internal sea. To-day
only the Gulf of Mexico remains as evidence of the
broad stretch that once extended through to the Arctic
Ocean and west beyond the present position of the Rocky
Mountains.
How this great Eastern backbone of
the continent was produced, what sort of animals lived
while these rocks were being formed, or whether this
preceded entirely the existence of life upon the earth,
no man to-day may surely say. In the oldest of
the rocks there are beds of graphite, from which lead
pencils are made. This substance is believed
by the geologists to be, like coal, the remains of
vegetable life. But these early rocks have been
so heated and baked, so twisted and bent, that whatever
forms of life they once held are now obliterated, or
so altered as to give us no idea of what may have
been their character.
So far as anyone can now see, this
past history is wiped out forever and it will be impossible
for men ever to demonstrate the character of this
early life. Speculations, more or less certain,
will arise. They may, after a while, seem so
clear as to receive the acceptance of the scientific
mind. Yet the truth remains that the early history
of the earth, so far as animals and plants are concerned,
is probably lost forever.
The most striking feature concerning
the earliest layers of rocks in which good fossils
are found abundantly is the complexity of the life.
With the exception of the backboned animals, every
important branch of the animal kingdom is represented,
and it is just possible that we have even earlier
forms of the vertebrates themselves. This, to
the evolutionist, is very disconcerting. To find
the great groups all well developed at least twenty-five
million years ago and to find only fossils built on
the same lines since almost nonplusses him. When
the geologist tells him what an enormous length of
time preceded the rocks in which he finds these fossils
and how absolutely these earlier strata have been
altered by the later geological activities he easily
understands why it is impossible to find fossils in
them. As a consequence, the evolutionist is forced
to believe that all the earliest animals have left
no clear traces behind them. Life as he first
surely knows it is already extremely varied and quite
well developed in some of its groups. The early
animals were as well adapted to the times in which
they lived as are the great majority of the animals
of to-day. The reader must not infer this to mean
that the animals of those days were like our present
animals. They were not. No one traveling
in a far country could find there animals as strange
to him as would be those of the earlier stratified
rocks. In these there were no fishes as we know
them to-day, not a single member of the frog and salamander
class, not a reptile, not a bird, not a mammal, and
probably no air-living insects. It is highly doubtful
whether there was any animal living upon the land and
breathing the air twenty-five million years ago.
We start our study, then, at the period
known as the Palaeozoic era, the era of the ancient
life of the globe, beginning twenty-five million and
ending ten million years ago. The first of the
three sections into which this period of life is divided
is known as the Silurian age, the age of invertebrates.
The word invertebrate is an unscientific but convenient
term under which we embrace all the animals below
those having backbones. This period is called
the age of invertebrates because, although there is
an enormous wealth of animal and plant life in the
Silurian, there are no backboned animals except the
lowest kinds of fishes. It was supposed for a
long time that even fishes were absent. Now we
know they existed, but they were small and inconspicuous.
In this period corals were wonderfully abundant,
particularly in the great internal sea which spread
over what is now known as the Mississippi Valley.
Everywhere over this region must have grown in the
shallow water great numbers of creatures called crinoids
or stone lilies. They were attached to the bottom
by slender stems, sometimes many feet long. These
stems are jointed, and when they became fossilized
the sections were apt to separate, with the result
that over a wide area in the Mississippi Valley it
is very common to find these little segments which
look not unlike checkers. At the end of the stem
was a rounded head, with a mouth at the top, and around
the mouth were branched, feathery arms. The creatures
must have been exquisitely beautiful, but they have
completely disappeared from the face of the earth,
with the exception of a very few, found in the obscurity
of the almost fathomless depths of the great ocean.
Here they remain as peculiar relics, only preserved
by the unvarying conditions in the deep sea from the
extinction that has met their sisters.
Those who are familiar with our seacoast
will know an interesting creature known as the horseshoe
crab, or king crab, though in reality it is not a
crab at all. It is rather more nearly related
to the spiders than the crabs, though no one but a
technical zooelogist could possibly associate them
together. The ancestors of these king crabs were
the finest and best developed animals in this early
Palaeozoic time. These creatures had bodies jointed
like the tail of a lobster. They were wide and
flat, instead of narrow and rounded like a lobster,
and each joint of the body was highest in the middle
and distinctly lower at the two sides, thus forming
three regions along their backs. This structure
gives to these creatures the name of trilobites.
These animals were the kings of the early ocean.
They had an interesting habit of curling up nose to
tail before they died, and, as a result, a large proportion
of all the trilobite fossils we find are curled in
this peculiar manner.
After these forms the most abundant
fossils we find in Silurian times were creatures that
at first sight looked as if they might be related
to the clams. These are known as lampshells, because
one shell projects beyond the other and curls up at
the tip so as to resemble the clay lamps which are
dug out of old Roman towns. The lampshells also
have nearly disappeared in modern times. Simple
creatures belonging with our present crab and snail
had begun to make their appearance, but they were
not as abundant as we find them later on.
The third group of the mollusks to
which the nautilus and squid of to-day belong is very
abundantly represented in the Silurian by fossils
with coiled-up shells. As for the plant life of
the time, it is exceedingly difficult to say much
about it. There must have been nothing but marine
plants, and these must have been on the general line
of the seaweeds. Little can be definitely said
concerning them.
The next period of the Palaeozoic
is known as the Devonian age, or the age of fishes.
Now the backboned animals first make their clear and
unmistakable appearance. There are remains in
the Silurian which show that there must have been
a few fishes at that time. The Devonian is so
full of them and they are so well developed and so
diversified that this period is definitely known as
the “age of fishes.” They do not
closely resemble the fishes of to-day, but anyone would
recognize most of them for what they are. Their
bodies were covered, not so much with scales as with
heavy plates, often arranged like tiles, those on the
forward half of the animal being often larger than
those surrounding the rest of the body. The creature
was encased, as it were, in armor. These were
the rulers of the Devonian seas. The land, as
yet, was probably nearly without animal life, the
creatures thus far being almost confined to the water.
A few insects make their appearance and a few thousand-leggers
are running around among the lowly plants; a few spider-like
animals have arisen; there are a few snails that have
left the water and taken to the land. Altogether
only the dawn of a land fauna is to be noticed.
In the Devonian the plants are creeping up upon the
ground. Ferns are growing about everywhere, though
they are not exactly our ferns, but are rather a sort
of intermediate form between these and the present
seed plants.
Now comes an entire change in the
history of the world. By some means a rise in
the bottom seems to have cut off a great part of the
internal sea from the outer ocean and to have converted
it into a widespread shallow bay, much like the sounds
which lie back of the islands that line the Atlantic
Coast from New Jersey to Florida. Just as this
coastal region to-day is covered with salt marshes,
so the whole internal sea of the Carboniferous period
was converted into a great swamp. Sometimes an
oscillation of the crust of the earth brought this
marsh above the surface of the sea and a luxuriant
growth of plants spread over it. Then a sinking
of the bottom allowed the mud and sand to wash down
the shores, and spread out over the marsh, and enclose
the muck of the marsh under a layer of sand or clay.
Another lift of the bottom would start the swamp growing
once more, and a series of alternations between marsh
land and sound seems to have followed. The plants
of this period are not the plants of to-day, though
we still have some very degenerate representatives
of them. The common horse-tail, with its angular,
slender, leaflike branches and its club-shaped spore-bearing
body, is a modern degenerate descendant of the treelike
calamités of the Carboniferous forest. A
creeping evergreen, known by the name of clubmoss,
is in like manner the modern degenerate remnant of
the scalestem and sealstem, which were the great trees
of the forests of the coal period.
All over the surface of the marsh,
between these big trees, grew the ferns. While
the coal itself was formed generally from the scalestems
and sealstems, the most common fossils found in the
shales that lie upon the coal beds are the ferns which
covered the surface of the marsh.
It is believed by many geologists
that this great luxuriant forest points to a time
when the climate was far warmer than it is to-day,
when the air was moist and heavily laden with carbon
dioxide, and when a great mass of clouds practically
enveloped the earth. In this way only do most
geologists account for the enormous wealth of vegetation
in the Carboniferous period and for the abundance of
plants up to the Arctic Ocean, of the kinds that now
grow chiefly in the tropics. But of recent years
a few geologists point to the fact that the peat bogs
of to-day, which seem to be the beginnings of future
coal deposits, are found almost entirely in cold countries.
Hence it is a serious matter to attempt to describe
the climate of any part of the Palaeozoic era.
Certainly of the climate earlier than the Carboniferous
it is very risky to say anything definite.
The forests of the coal period seem
actually to have cleared the air; at least now we
begin to find creatures related to our salamanders
and frogs moving about among the stumps of the marshes.
These amphibians are evidently the descendants of
some of the fishes of the Devonian times. Among
these fishes were some which bear a great resemblance
to a few found in South America, in Africa and Australia
to-day, and which we know as lungfish. Anyone
who has cleaned our fresh water fishes in preparation
for the table will remember that inside of them there
is a long slender bladder filled with air. This
bladder assists in making the fish light, hence making
it easier for it to support itself in the water.
In certain swampy regions these lungfish swim freely
in the water of the marshes. When the dry season
comes, however, the water evaporates, draining the
marshes completely. This would prove the death
of most fishes. The lungfish have a curious habit
which keeps them over the dry season. They cover
themselves with a coat of mud, inside of which there
is a lining of slime produced from their bodies.
In such cocoon-like cases they survive the drought.
The means by which they breathe during this dry season
is interesting. The swim-bladder which we have
just described in other fishes is, with this lungfish,
peculiarly spongy in its walls, presenting a large
surface full of blood vessels which absorb the air
on the inside of the bladder. This air the fish
changes with moderate frequency, the result being
that the swim-bladder serves him exactly as the lung
serves a higher animal. To this fact he owes his
name of lungfish.
We sometimes gain much light concerning
the past history of any particular form of animal
by studying the development of that animal in the
egg, or, in the case of the mammals, before birth.
It is an interesting fact that when the lung begins
to form in the embryo it starts as a simple sac which
is an offspring from the gullet, and occupies the
position of the swim-bladder of the fish. This
sac later divides into two, and develops into the
lungs of the animal. This assures the zooelogist
that the origin of the lungs in the higher animals
is found in the swim-bladder of the so-called lungfish.
In this Silurian time certain of these lungfish were
perhaps trapped in the basin in the marsh by the uplifting
of the border. The waters becoming progressively
shallower and more crowded, these fishes took to the
land, their fins developing into awkward limbs which
slowly became more perfect.
To state the fact in this simple fashion
is to make it seem far less probable than is really
the case. The simple forms of the life of lowly
creatures, as well as the simple character of the legs
and feet in the salamander class, make the explanation
not so unlikely as would at first sight appear.
Suffice it to say that the scientist now believes
that out of the lungfish of the Devonian came the amphibians
of the Carboniferous period.
At the end of the coal period came
the greatest change the face of the globe had seen
for many millions of years. Slowly the continent
rose on both sides of the old interior sea. A
great plateau formed in the region of the Alleghenies
and another in the western district, though this latter
uplift was to be completely washed away, and later
to rise again into the Rocky Mountains and the Sierras.
With the uplift at the edges of the continent came
a steady rise of the internal marshes, until what
had previously been swamp land became progressively
first dry land and, in the western part, even desert,
in that respect being somewhat like what it is now.
The amphibians of to-day (animals
like the salamander and frog) all lay their eggs in
the water and their young have a tadpole stage.
This doubtless was true of the amphibians of the coal
period. With the beginning of the Mesozoic, or
“middle life” period, a change and a progression
comes over the animal world. The tadpole life
of the frog is a rather lengthened one, while the
toad has learned to crowd its tadpole life within
a few weeks. It would seem as if, in the earlier
times of the Mesozoic, this same change of habit had
been going on. With the drying up of the swamp,
some of the amphibians crowded their tadpole stage
further and further back, until it was completely
accomplished before their young left the egg.
An examination of the development of the reptile in
the egg will show a stage very similar to the fish
and to the amphibians, but this is all experienced
before the reptile emerges from the egg. The
reptilian egg, unlike that of the frog, is covered
with a shell, packed away under the surface of the
ground, and left to its own fate. If, as most
geologists believe, the climate of the Mesozoic was
distinctly warm, this habit of the parent of forsaking
the egg was not a serious matter. However the
creatures arose, it is certain that in this Mesozoic
age reptiles roamed the forests, swam the seas, and
even flew in the air. Probably at no other time
in the earth’s history has any one class of animals
so completely dominated the situation as did the reptiles
of this age. They were not only abundant; they
were frequently enormously large. Their skeletons
are among the most interesting that we find to-day.
Gigantic lizards, seventy feet long and eighteen feet
high at the shoulders, dragged their heavy bodies
through the marshy edges of the lakes. Out upon
the land others, not quite so heavy nor so large,
roamed about, some of them feeding upon the soft vegetation,
others having teeth fitted to tear down their herbivorous
cousins. In some of them the hind legs and tail
were very heavy and the front legs so light that it
is quite clear they must have hopped around as do the
kangaroos to-day. Others of these reptiles went
back to the sea, lost the leglike development of their
limbs and regained the flipper form, though the bones
of the fingers and toes are singularly distinguishable
in the paddle.
Strangest of all, a considerable group
of these wonderful reptiles lengthened their little
fingers, sometimes to three or four feet in length,
and had a skin stretched from these fingers over to
the body in such a fashion as to give them wings not
unlike those of the bat. In the wing of the bat,
however, four of the fingers of the hand run through
the membrane and support it. In the pterodactyl,
as these flying reptiles are called, the middle finger
supports the web, while the remaining fingers can
still be used to clasp objects or serve the animal
to lift himself, as the bat can do with his thumbs.
Meanwhile an entire change is coming
over the plant world. The last third of this
age of reptiles is known as the Cretaceous or chalk
period. Now, for the first time, the forests begin
to take on more of the character of our forests of
to-day. Plants like our willow and beech, poplar
and sassafras appear in great abundance. Their
broad leaves serve better than those of any earlier
plants to catch the sunlight. But in addition
they offered such effective evaporating surface that
they cast off rapidly the moisture obtained from the
ground by the plant. Accordingly in the winter
season, when the water in the ground is frozen and
not available for plant purposes, they were forced
to throw away their leaves. It is quite possible
that up to and including the time of the Carboniferous,
plants were all evergreen. There had been before
this little variation in climate over the globe.
Life in the Cretaceous begins to take on distinctly
its modern form.
Among the reptiles of the forest there
appear to have been a few small creatures which to
an observer of those times, if there could have been
an observer, would have seemed of the utmost insignificance
compared with their giant cousins.
These little creatures climbed up
into the trees to escape their enemies. There
were some in whom the skin, in front of the elbow and
behind the wrist, was loose, and stretched across the
joint a little like the wing of a bat. This reptile,
climbing into the trees to escape its enemies, found
that this loose flap of skin served it nicely, and
sailed out of the trees in a manner not unlike that
of the flying squirrel of to-day. Among these
experimenters in aviation, certain forms produced
scales which became elongated and finally slit up
along the side. These slit scales slowly developed
into the feathers of the birds of to-day. Whether
the steps by which the change occurred have been correctly
stated or not, the result is sure. In the rocks
of the chalk period we find the remains of an interesting
creature. If nothing but its bones had been found
it would have been called a reptile. It had a
long tail, it had claws on its front limbs; it had
teeth in its mouth; it had a flexible backbone.
All of these are reptilian rather than bird characters.
Yet on the rocks surrounding these bones are the unmistakable
impressions of the feathers of the wings and of the
tail. Nothing in the world to-day has feathers
excepting the birds, and in this “ancient winged
thing,” for this is the significance of its
name archaeopteryx we have perhaps
the most remarkable link in the world between two distinct
sections of the animal kingdom. Here is a creature
half reptile, half bird; perhaps one-third reptile
and two-thirds bird. It was about the size of
the crow. A little later unmistakable bird skeletons
will appear, but still their jaws are provided with
long conical teeth.
Still more interesting from our standpoint
is another set of primitive animals, utterly insignificant
in appearance, but of momentous importance on account
of their later history. Among these reptiles
were a few small creatures perhaps not much bigger
than mice or moles. Their teeth were a little
more complicated and specialized than the teeth of
their reptilian cousins. Between their scales
were small and sparse hairs. Almost nothing but
their jaws remain to-day to tell us anything about
them. But in this humble little creature of the
Mesozoic, utterly insignificant beside the tremendous
reptiles of the time, we discern the ancestor of the
mammals. These were the progenitors of the horses
and cows, of the cats and dogs, of the monkeys and
apes, of the men of to-day.
During this chalk period, which forms
the last portion of the age of reptiles, life for
the first time grew to look much as it does to-day.
Now, apparently, the cold of winter and the heat of
summer followed each other in regular succession.
There have been colder and warmer periods at various
times in the previous history of the earth, but undoubtedly
they were more uniformly cold or uniformly warm than
now. Ages were warm, or ages were cold, but now
the earth clearly shows the annual alternations of
summer and winter, and for the first time clearly
shows the bands of climate on the earth which we know
as zones.
In the chalk period this new factor
of cold works mightily in favor of the mammals.
Their reptilian ancestors were cold blooded. When
the climate was warm they were active; when the climate
was cold they were sluggish. With the continuation
of the annual alternations of cold and warm weather
that had now set in upon the earth, the little birds
and mammals had in their warm blood an advantage which,
in the long run, enables them not simply to compete
with their reptile forefathers, but to outdistance
them absolutely in the race. Here and there, on
earth to-day, exist a few big reptiles like the crocodiles
and the boa constrictors. But they are few and
comparatively insignificant among the multitudinous
population of the globe and are confined to the hotter
portions of the earth. For the most part, the
reptiles now play an insignificant and unobtrusive
part. The little molelike creatures, practically
unnoticed between their feet in the later Mesozoic,
have come to supplant them entirely, and almost to
rival them in size. While the reptiles have grown
steadily smaller, the mammals have steadily become
larger.
While there is no land mammal to-day
as big as the heaviest of the reptiles in the Mesozoic,
the whale, which is one of the mammals that has again
taken to the ocean, surpasses in size even those gigantic
creatures. There never lived in the world before
a creature quite so big as the biggest of our whales.
Size, however, is not the most important point in
any animal. Speed, sagacity, variability, and
power of adaptation, these are the qualities which
the world prizes, and these the new mammals possessed.
The next geological era is the Cenozoic,
or period of modern life. This is divided into
two quite distinct sections, the Tertiary and the
Quaternary. This era began about five million
years ago, roughly speaking, and is still going on.
The greater half of it is known as the Tertiary.
It was during this time that the mammals came to their
own. At first these creatures belonged to what
the scientist knows as generalized types. They
are jacks-of-all-trades. The student of early
animal life finds in the little Phenacodus, which was
scarcely bigger than a good-sized setter dog, the
beginnings from which many forms have subsequently
developed. This creature showed points of structure
which to-day may be seen in such diversified animals
as the dog, the horse, the rabbit, and the monkey.
It is not, of course, suggested that Phenacodus was
the immediate ancestor of any of these. But there
were no animals in those times more like these I have
mentioned than was Phenacodus, and from forms like
it in main features all of these other animals have
since been derived, each species of animal having
become adapted to one particular kind of life.
The development of diversified situations on the earth,
the varieties of climate, the variation between marsh
and upland, between valley and plateau, furnish a
complexity of environment into each niche of which
a new form of animal fitted itself.
With the increased complexity of mammals
comes the submergence of the reptiles and amphibians
to-day. In all sorts of situations we find mammals.
The old-fashioned continent of Australia is separated
from everything about it by deep water, impassable
to any animal which lives upon it. In this secluded
country evolution is very slow and animals are very
antiquated. We still find there mammals with the
ancient habit of laying eggs in a hollow in the ground,
though after these eggs are hatched the young are
nursed on the milk of the mother. But on the
great continental stretches, where competition is keen,
where the animal must battle for his life against a
wide field of other animals, where migration into
new situations is possible, the rapidity of the development
has been very much greater.
It is in such a situation that man
has arisen. In the extreme southeastern portion
of Asia, and on the islands lying close to the coast,
his highest non-human relatives, members of the ape
family, have reached their best development.
These, of course, are not man’s ancestors.
They are the less progressive members who are left
behind entirely in the race. Whether we have
to-day any traces of the steps by which man arose
from the animal beneath him is vigorously disputed.
Eminent scientists will be found on both sides of this
question.
Many scientific writers to-day take
it for granted that one form, discovered in Java,
while it may not be in the absolutely direct line,
must be very close indeed to the line of ascent toward
man out of the apelike forms. A scientist by
the name of DuBois, working in the banks of a stream
in south-central Java, found a thigh bone which seemed
to him exceedingly human in its general character
and yet not absolutely like the human thigh bone.
The oncoming of the rainy season raised the water
in the river so that DuBois could not continue his
search. Returning a year later, and digging back
deeper into this bank, he found a skull cap and two
molar teeth which seemed to him to belong to the thigh
bone, although they lay several yards farther back,
but at the same level in the bank.
When these bones were subsequently
presented to a meeting of European scientists by DuBois,
he claimed to have found the “missing link”
for which there was so eager a demand. Some of
the best anatomists of the meeting, notably Virchow,
laughed at his claim and said that the skull cap was
simply that of a human idiot, and could be duplicated
in any large asylum. A committee of twelve naturalists
was appointed to report upon DuBois’ find.
Of this committee three asserted the bones to be those
of a low-grade man, three insisted that they belonged
to a high ape, of a type somewhat higher than any
we know to-day, but still distinctly an ape.
Six members of the committee of twelve agreed that
the remains were those of a creature higher than an
ape and lower than any normal man, and represented,
in their opinion, a stage distinctly along the line
of development out of the apes and into man.
This so-called “Java find”
is known in science by the name of Pithecanthropus,
which means the ape-man. Whether we look upon
this fossil as a serious find or not, it is very certain
that in the caves of Europe belonging to the Quaternary
period we find abundant evidences of primitive man.
The older these evidences are, the more likely they
are to be distinctly below the grade of man of to-day,
in the size and shape of the brain case and in the
length and massiveness of the jaw.
There are probably more races than
one represented among these skulls. Some of them
are surely well-deserving of the title of low brow.
Their heavy ridges over the eyes, their small foreheads,
their massive, heavy-set jaws show a race of men far
less endowed mentally and much better endowed in the
matter of brute force than the men of to-day.
These skeletons, or parts of skeletons, are turning
up every year, and we are just beginning to know much
about them. Capable men are studying them with
much care. The next fifty years may not improbably
make the history of the ascent of man as clear as is
now that of the horse, to which we shall refer later.
The whole question of the descent
of man from the lower animals, or his ascent from
them, as Drummond aptly termed it, is to most people
so entirely repugnant as to set them at once, and finally,
against all willingness to consider the question of
Evolution. This, however, does not solve the
problem. Even though truth be horribly unpalatable,
it is still to be believed if it is only the truth.
There is practically no doubt left among scientific
men of the origin of man in lower forms. The
evidences grow more and more complete year by year,
and from every line of investigation. Whether
we study his anatomy, his embryology, his history,
his language, or his civilization, all indications
point in the same direction. Constant discoveries
indicate the fact of an enormously long development
from a very humble form. If this proves to be
true and remains unpalatable, the fault lies in the
palate and not in the truth. Gradually we are
coming to understand that there is no reason why this
truth should be unpalatable. We consider a rise
from humble conditions to be the glory of our heroes;
we esteem it an added charm in their strength that
they should have developed from untoward surroundings.
It is not a disgrace to man to have descended from
the apes. It is to the glory of man that he should
have ascended from forms not much more promising-looking
than the apes of to-day. We must repeat, however,
that the apes were the unprogressive members, and
hence we must not judge man’s ancestors too
harshly. It must have been in them to rise.
But the great glory in the thought of the humble ancestry
lies in the possibilities of his future. If out
of a creature not materially unlike the gibbering ape
of to-day there should have come, under the guiding
hand of an Almighty God, creatures with the endowments
and capabilities of man of to-day, then this is only
an earnest and foretaste of that which may be expected
in the future. A time will come when man shall
have risen to heights as far above anything he now
is as to-day he stands above the ape. Even then
there seems no end. With Infinite Power as the
agent, and limitless time in which to work, man would
be limiting God to an extent unwarranted by the history
of the past to imagine that His process had stopped
to-day, and that man, with his many imperfections
of body, of mind, and of morals, should be the best
that is yet to come. There cling to him still
the limitations and dregs of his brute life.
Often the brute in him comes to the surface. Little
by little he is coming to be dominated by the qualities
God has last given him. Slowly the brute shall
sink away, slowly the divine in him shall advance,
until such heights are attained as we to-day can scarcely
imagine. As we can scarcely conceive the beginnings
of this process, so we can with difficulty imagine
its end. This only can be seen by the Eternal
through whom it shall all come to pass, and by whom
all will in time be accomplished.