Calymene Blumenbachii, Al. Brong. Europe--U. States.
Macrophthalma, do. Europe--U. States.
Variolaris, do. Europe.
Tristani, do. Europe--U. States.
Bellatula, Dalman. Europe.
Ornata, do. Europe.
Verrucosa, do. Europe.
Calymene Polytoma, Dalman. Europe.
Artinura, do. Europe.
Sclerops, do. Europe.
Schlotheimi, Brown. Europe.
Latiferus, do. Europe.
Asaphus Cornigerus, Al. Brong. Europe.
Caudatus, do. Europe--U. States.
Hausmanni, do. Europe--U. States.
De Buchii, do. Europe.
Brongniartii, Deslongchamps. Europe.
Extenuatus, Wahlenberg. Europe.
Granulatus, do. Europe.
Expansus, do. Europe.
Crassicauda, do. Europe.
Angustifrons, do. Europe.
Heros, Dalman, Europe.
Platynotus, do. Europe.
Frontalis, do. Europe.
Læviceps, do. Europe.
Palpebrosus, do. Europe.
Sluzeri, do. Europe.
Ogygia Guettardii, Al. Brong. Europe.
Desmaresti, do. Europe.
Wahlenbergii, do. Europe.
Sillimani, do. Europe--U. States.
Paradoxides Tessini, do. Europe.
Spinulosus, do. Europe.
Gibbosus, do. Europe.
Scaraboides, do. Europe.
Hoffii, Goldfuss. Europe.
Nileus Armadillo, Dalman. Europe.
Glornerinus, do. Europe.
Illænus Centaurus, Dalman. Europe.
Centrotus, do. Europe.
Laticauda, Wahlenberg. Europe--U. States.
Ampyx Nasutus, Dalman. Europe.
Olenus Bucephalus, Wahlenberg. Europe.
Agnostus Pisciformis, Al. Brong. Europe.
Isotelus Gigas, De Kay. United States.
Planus, do. United States.
Genera and Species not fully determined.
Trilobites Cephaleurya, Rafinesque, United States.
Simla, do. United States.
Granulata, do. United States.
Bilobites Lunulata, do. United States.
Lobata, do. United States.
From the short descriptions given by Professor Rafinesque of the five
last mentioned fossils, I conclude that they belong to the genus
Calymene of Brongniart.
The study of the trilobites naturally leads to the consideration of
those beings which appear to have inhabited our earth previous to the
creation of man. Every one knows that the sceptical naturalist has
drawn from these vestiges of organic life, an argument contradictory
to the Mosaic account of the history of the world, and though every
cavil of the least importance, urged against the truth of the sacred
historian, has been triumphantly confuted, still, the geological
sciolist boldly impugns his veracity, whenever any new facts in his
science can be distorted to his purpose. Such being the case, we
cannot conclude this preface without briefly stating two or three
methods by which any seeming discrepancies may be explained. First,
those who imagine that the six periods of creation, mentioned in the
beginning of the pentateuch, mean literally days of 24 hours each,
believe that, as only a small part of the earth was at first required
for the abode of man and the higher animals, the present continents
might have remained as long beneath the waters, and have undergone
every change necessary to solve this geological puzzle.
Again, others have thought that Moses, after recording, in the first
sentence of Genesis, the great truth that all things were made by the
will of an intelligent Creator--passed silently over some intermediate
state of the earth, which had no direct relation to the history, or to
the duties of man--and proceeded to describe the successive appearance
of the present order of things. On this supposition, the fossil remains
and peculiarities in the structure of the earth may have belonged to
that intermediate state.
A third method of explaining the difficulty, and which we think highly
satisfactory, is, by understanding the days of creation to mean, not
ordinary days, but _periods of time_, in which the recorded events took
place in the order described so briefly by the sacred historian. It is
acknowledged by every one competent to judge, that among the Hebrews,
_days_ and _weeks_ were often used in this manner. The accordance
between the order in which, according to the account of Moses,
the work of creation was accomplished, and the order in which the
fossil remains of plants and animals are deposited in the earth, has
surprised, and has been acknowledged by learned sceptics themselves.[11]
[Footnote 11: The Baron Cuvier, on this subject, remarks, respecting
the Jewish legislator--"His books show us, that he had very perfect
ideas respecting several of the highest questions of natural
philosophy. His cosmogony, especially, considered purely in a
scientific point of view, is extremely remarkable, inasmuch as the
order which it assigns to the different epochs of creation, is
precisely the same as that which has been deduced from geological
considerations."]
It will be useless to push these arguments further. The catastrophes
which have produced the secondary strata, and the diluvian depositions,
could not have been local or partial phenomena; but rather than call
upon a comet, with the abstracted philosopher, to deluge the earth
for every new geological epoch--or to change the axis of motion of
our planet--or to resort to any of his wild, fanciful, and impious
theories, we should, with Sir Humphrey Davy, even prefer the dream that
all the secondary strata were _created_, filled with the remains, as it
were, of animal life, to confound the speculations of our geological
reasoners.