Martin Rudwick's
latest work,
Worlds before Adam (hereafter
WBA), is a mighty sequel to his
massive volume Bursting the
Limits of Time (hereafter BLT;
Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 2005; reviewed in RNCSE
2006 Nov/Dec; 26 [6]: 35–6).
Together they constitute a magnum
opus from one of the world's
foremost historians of geology and
paleontology. Like its predecessor
volume, WBA is a weighty book
that details the efforts of 19th-century
geologists to reconstruct an
immensely long and eventful earth history, or "geohistory," as Rudwick
puts it in his title.This book begins
where the previous one leaves off,
in the years following the end of
the Napoleonic era (circa 1817),
when the French comparative
anatomist Georges Cuvier still
wielded considerable influence in
geology, and ends in the early
1840s, when Louis Agassiz's glacial
theory "forced geologists to recognize
the contingent character of
geohistory as a whole" (p 7).
Rudwick divides his book into thirty-six well-written and lavishly illustrated
chapters arranged chronologically
and grouped into four parts.
Part I begins in Paris with Cuvier,
vertebrate paleontology, and earth's
natural "revolutions," then moves to
Great Britain, where important contributions
to stratigraphy and paleontology
were often interpreted in
Biblical terms, and ends with a
lengthy discussion of the debates
about the adequacy of "actual" causes
in explaining geological events of
the distant past.Could small, observable
changes in elevation during
earthquakes, for example, account
for crustal movements on a more
massive, mountainous scale? Part II
deals with the late 1820s and earliest
1830s, when French and English
geologists such as Alexandre
Brongniart, Louis-Constant Prevost,
and William Buckland grappled with
questions of a cooling earth, fossil
faunas, glaciers, extinction and
much more.
Part II ends with Chapter 17,
"The specter of transmutation
(1825–1829)," which deals briefly
(in twelve pages) with the subject
of evolution, which is only "loosely
linked" (p 237) to the central
issues of WBA.As Rudwick argues,
Cuvier had already established the
reality of extinction by the 1820s,
when almost all naturalists agreed
that many of the strange fossil
remains turning up in all quarters
of the globe represented species
long gone.Whether it was brought
about by gradual, local changes of
climate, or through massive catastrophes,
the fact of extinction was
no longer a question. Explanations
for the origins of new species
remained steeped in controversy,
however, especially as evidence
accumulated for the successive
appearance of new organisms in
the fossil record.
Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck had all
but ignored the fossil evidence in
his general theory of transmutation
published in 1809. Fossils were
Cuvier's bailiwick, and he abhorred
transmutation. In 1825, however,
Cuvier's colleague Etienne Geoffroy
Saint-Hillaire published a paper in
which he argued that living gavials
might be the direct descendants of
the fossil crocodiles found in the
Secondary formations of
Normandy, and he tied his argument
explicitly to Lamarckian transmutationism.
Geoffroy used a widely
approved actualistic approach to
make his case, arguing that analogous
"monstrosities," which could
be directly observed in the present
world, represented more significant
morphological variability than that
which was required to explain the
cumulative transformation of vertebrate
animals over the course of
geohistory.But he badly mishandled
the fossil record, suggesting that a
"progressive series" of fossil vertebrates
could be traced from "the
ichthyosaur ... and pterodactyl,
then passed by way of the ...
mosasaur and the Caen crocodile to
the American megatherium ... and
ended with the Parisian
palaeotherium and anoplotherium"
(p 242). Geoffroy's hopelessly confused
series did not win converts.
Moreover, according to Cuvier,
there was as yet a conspicuous
absence of intermediate forms
between fossil and living species.
The important point, though, is
that theories of transmutation were
still kicking around, at least in
France, and they played a role in the
continuing debate over how paleontologists
were to interpret the
history of life. Indeed, Lamarck's
Zoological Philosophy inspired a
book-length repudiation by the
English barrister and geologist
Charles Lyell, who felt compelled to
"defend his own species from the
indignity of being assigned a merely
animal origin" (p 246).
Ultimately, the theoretical background
did not matter. What mattered
most to the practicing geologist
of 1830 was to determine when
species went extinct, when new
ones appeared, and whether they
did so suddenly, gradually, in bunches,
or one at a time. In short, geologists
could reconstruct the history
of life on earth without the necessity
of appealing to any causal explanation.
Debates about the transmutation
of species, Rudwick argues,
developed "in parallel with the
reconstruction of geohistory, with
only a loose linkage between them"
(p 249).This explains the relatively
marginal position that evolution
occupies in his book.
Part III is devoted largely to
Lyell and his contemporaries and
critics, as they debated the merits
of his influential Principles of
Geology and its uniformitarian
approach in the 1830s. Finally, Part
IV takes the story of geologists and
geohistory into the early 1840s, by
which time reconstructing geological
events and deducing their
causal explanations had become
standard practice.
In spite of their intimidating
mass, WBA and BLT together are
not a comprehensive history of
geology, nor are they intended to
be. Whole subfields of geology,
including mineralogy, petrology,
and structural and economic geology,
are largely ignored in favor of
the more obviously historical fields
of stratigraphy and paleontology.
This makes perfect sense in light
of Rudwick's goal of chronicling
the ever-expanding geohistorical
approach of earth scientists in the
early 19th century. Rudwick
claims, with excessive modesty,
that he hopes his work will serve
as a starting point for further
research. But with so grand a
beginning, the prospect of writing
a worthy contribution in history of
geology seems daunting indeed.
WBA is a work of such excellence
as to recommend it to anybody.