and Scotland far more intimate, in earlier than in modern times. There can be little doubt that Henry II. entertained the hopeless and irrational project of incorporating Scotland with France. M. Teulet has given, from a document in the Dupuy Collection, a decision of the Parliament of Paris, by which it was declared that, Mary Stuart having entered her twelfth year, Scotland should henceforth be governed in her name by French delegates, a decision which, as M. Teulet justly remarks, could have been competently arrived at by the Parliament of Scotland alone. Such was probably also the object of the government of Mary of Guise, and of her indiscreet employment of French officials,-a measure which more than anything else tended to alienate the affections of the Scotch. But such was not the object of the Parliament of Scotland in reciprocating the general letters of naturalisation which Henry had issued, nor does there seem any ground for alleging such an intention against the kings of France, either before this period or after-from Louis XII. in 1513 to Louis XIV. in 1646almost all of whom adopted similar measures. In conferring the right of possessing all benefices, dignities, and ecclesiastical offices, lands, and seigneuries, of acquiring and holding heritable and moveable property, of transmitting it, free from the Droit d'Aubaine, and of being treated, favoured, held, deemed, and 'reputed for ever, as true originals of the kingdom,' the object was not incorporate union, but firm and intimate alliance; and we have already seen how well that object was accomplished. One of the most immediate and inevitable results of such relations as these, and one which does not follow at all from the exchange of mercantile commodities, however extensive, is intermarriages. We find, accordingly, that the Scotch who settled in France almost invariably married French wives, leaving behind them a progeny who were bound to both countries by stronger ties than either of their parents. It is thus that elements of national repulsion are overcome, and bonds of national union artificially created. How much more powerful these bonds are than any which arise from common interest, or mere political arrangements, the modern history of Europe most abundantly testifies. ART. IX.-1. The Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man, with Remarks on Theories of the Origin of Species by Variation. By Sir CHARLES LYELL, F.R.S., &c. 8vo. 1863. 2. Antiquités Celtiques et Antediluviennes. Par M. BOUCHER DE PERTHES. 8vo. Paris. Vol. I. 1847. Vol. II. 1857. 3. Machoire humaine découverte à Abbeville dans un terrain non rémanié; Note de M. BOUCHER DE PERTHES, présentée par M. DE QUATREFAGES (Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences). 20 Avril, 1863. 4. Note sur l'authenticité de la découverte d'une machoire humaine et de haches de silex dans le terrain diluvien de Moulin Quignon. Par M. MILNE-EDWARDS (Comptes Rendus, + 18 Mai 1863). 5. On the Occurrence of Flint Implements, associated with the Remains of Animals of Extinct Species, &c. By JOSEPH PRESTWICH, Esq., F.R.S. (Philosophical Transactions, 1860.) 6. Prehistoric Man, Researches into the Origin of Civilization in the Old and New World. By DANIEL WILSON, LL.D. 8vo. 2 vols. 1862. SIR IR CHARLES LYELL has not only been the witness of an amount of progress and change in the science of Geology, formerly unprecedented in the life of one man-we might perhaps also add, unprecedented in the case of any other science-but he has personally contributed in no slight or indirect manner to this progress and to this change. Born shortly before the close of last century, and educated at Oxford, where he was the pupil of Buckland, his after life has been chiefly spent in London, where he has been the interested and indefatigable observer of what was passing in the world of science. The influences of an Oxford education acted upon his acute and highly speculative mind by a kind of antagonism. Mr. Lyell was no granter of propositions. He was soon led to reflect on the precept of Descartes, that a philosopher should once in his life doubt everything he had 'been taught; 条 an amount of philosophical scepticism of which his writings from first to last give ample proof. Passing over some comparatively juvenile papers, his first work- The 'Principles of Geology'-appeared, a volume at a time, com 6 * Preface to vol. iii. of first edition of Principles of Geology.' mencing in 1830. The earliest volume was, however, mainly written in 1828. The vigour of its style, the originality and novelty of its contents, and the importance of the conclusions sought to be deduced from the facts detailed, secured for it at once a measure of popular and scientific attention attained by no geological work-hardly excepting even Cuvier's researches on fossil remains,-perhaps by no other scientific work of the period. What is equally remarkable, the popularity of the Principles of Geology' has continued nearly unabated for thirty years, amidst the incessant and restless progress of the science of which it treats. This arose in part from the fact that Mr. Lyell had the sagacity and good fortune to anticipate the track in which the study of geology was about to be pursued. Unlike his master, Buckland, whose most systematic and original work, the Reliquiæ Diluvianæ,' was the representative of a geological school even then on the wane, Mr. Lyell courageously maintained opinions at the time and for long after to some extent unpopular, not so much in themselves as in the consequences which they were supposed to involve. He had the advantage, however, of seeing adherents year by year resorting to his standard, instead of deserting it; and if he has from time to time frankly abandoned earlier expressed opinions, it has almost always been in the direction of carrying out farther than he had originally felt entitled to do, the consequences of his own early principles of inquiry and argument. But Sir Charles Lyell could not have maintained his very conspicuous place amongst the geologists of Europe, had he not united with his facility and fearlessness in forming conceptions from which many men would have shrunk, an ability and perseverance in maintaining, illustrating, and diffusing them, which have often been wanting in the most eminent thinkers, and in the most diligent cultivators of the physical and natural sciences. Himself one of the earlier members and most zealous promoters of the Geological Society of London, he selected a position considerably different from that of most of his compeers. Instead of writing elaborate monographs on certain formations and on certain features of local geology, he stored up the facts which he accumulated as well by judicious study as by personal intercourse with other geologists, and by his own powers of observation; at one and the same time collecting and classifying; and referring each fact, to which he devoted his special attention, to its place in that system of which he had previously formed a theoretical conception. Living in the midst of the scientific activity of London, his time was yet saved from the distraction and anxiety which the rapid production and publication of detached memoirs are apt to produce; as well as from the attendant controversies, and the other claims on the time of those who are deeply engrossed in the management and support of scientific associations. Sir Charles Lyell could afford to dispense with the flattering popularity and seductive social influence which such surrenders of personal independence and tranquillity are expected to attain. He adopted the dignified position at once of the student and of the methodical teacher, and he has no reason to regret his choice. In this respect he may be fitly compared with another eminent Englishman, not less distinguished in the exact than Sir Charles Lyell is in the natural sciences, whom he also resembles in the lucidity of his style and the admirable method of his systematic writings. The Principles of Geology,' as well as all the subsequent writings of our author, were mainly devoted to the developement of the idea that contemporary changes in the distribution of the materials of the earth's surface are the same in kind, and probably also in degree, as those which obtained in past ages, which, acting through absolutely indefinite periods of time, have brought about those changes of which we trace the undeniable records in the succession and accidents of the strata of the upper portion of our globe. Properly speaking, there was nothing absolutely new in the attempt to collect evidence of the changes going on concurrently with the present order of the world, or to estimate their amount and efficacy. Nor was it any novelty to invoke the aid of vast periods of time in explaining, by the analogy of the Present, a great number, if not all, of the changes manifest in the records of the Past. In the interesting historical chapters of the 'Principles,' Sir C. Lyell enumerated most of his predecessors in this line of thought; scarcely, perhaps, giving due prominence to the industry of Von Hoff* in the collection of the facts of contemporary change, or to the bold speculations and memorable labours of Huttont and Playfairt, in educing a system of dynamical geology, very similar to his own, from the comparatively meagre data which were available at the time they wrote. But after allowing all credit to the geologists of the 18th century, we may fairly admit that the time had arrived when speculation on the principles of the science could be advantageously renewed with the light of fresh researches, Geschichte der Natürlichen Veränderungen der Erdoberfläche. I. Theil. 1822. †Theory of the Earth. 2 vols. 1795. Illustrations of the Huttonian Theory of the Earth. 8vo. 1802. especially that derived from the study of fossil organic remains. The battle of Wernerianism and Huttonianism had been pretty well fought out within the sphere of the original controversybut new data had arisen which tended to give the whole subject a fresh aspect. Nothing contributed more to this result than the opening of the continent to British men of science, and it is plain upon the face of Sir C. Lyell's work that, though not in its origin the result of his journeys to the south of Europe (commencing in 1828), these and his visits to the museums of Paris gave their characteristic impress to every part of the Principles of Geology.' It was a splendid success, and secured for the author permanent fame. Successive editions showed that he had determined to make it the repertory of his most original observations, and the authentic expression of his matured conclusions. As year by year he extended the circuit of his journeys, sedulously observing himself, and treasuring the facts communicated by resident geologists of various countries, it is needless to say that the materials of his work largely increased. Germany and Scandinavia were diligently explored, and twice he crossed the Atlantic with his eye ever fixed on the class of phenomena-those connected with existing physical change-forming the nucleus around which all his geological system was to cohere. The study of volcanoes, which he commenced in Central France, he extended to Spain, Sicily, and the Canaries. Of these various widely-spread investigations he published some of the methodised results apart; as, for example, on the changes of level of the land in Scandinavia, in a paper in the Philosophical Trans'actions,'* on the numerous facts observed in America in two series of published Travels' in that country; and on the formation of volcanic cones, especially of Etna, in the Philo'sophical Transactions' again. But the pith and substance of all that he saw and inferred was compressed into his methodical writings. Each new edition of his great work was in some sense a new book. Notwithstanding all possible curtailments, so much original matter could not be introduced without unduly increasing its bulk; and in a few years, the work was judiciously subdivided into two: one portion retaining the name of 'Principles,' in which the phenomena of geology are considered chiefly with reference to existing causes, or in * Phil. Trans. for 1835. † Published in 1841 and 1845. VOL. CXVIII. NO. CCXLI. S |