History presents some almost incredible examples of the stupidity and obstinacy of mankind in the explanation of natural phenomena. It seems quite impossible that when the German philosopher Chladni, less than a century ago, asserted that meteorites were extra-terranean bodies, the Academies of Europe laughed at him in scorn. Several meteoric showers falling in Europe shortly after did not convince the bigoted philosophers. And when Pictet in 1802 read a paper before the French Institute in favor of the theory, he was insulted by his learned audience. It was not until a year afterwards, when the great meteoric shower occurred in Normandy, that Biot, deputized by the French Government, succeeded in convincing the most sceptical. Yet only a few years previous De Luc, the first meteorologist of Europe, the founder of geology, declared that he would not believe it even if a stone should fall at his feet from the skies. In 1751, Peysonnel presented to the Academy of Sciences at Naples an elaborate memoir in which he very plainly proved that the coral belonged to the animal and not the vegetable kingdom. But his admirable paper was hooted at by the European naturalists; and even the distinguished philosopher Reaumur declared that the idea which was advanced was really too absurd to be discussed.
When we come to review the hypotheses of science during the last century, we shall feel more inclined to be generous and flexible in our views of natural phenomena.
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
The nodular or globular forms of the gem present no serious objection to the idea of vegetable or animal origin; and we may refer for argument to the calcareous nodules of the old red sandstone. These concretionary and radiated masses are merely sarcophagi of animal remains; and their arrangement plainly shows the chemical influences of decaying animal matter and also the multiple and varied effect of crystalline attraction and electric force. Can we say that the crystallized diamonds occurring in well-defined placers are any more remarkable than the little globular petrifactions found in the cretaceous formation and known as the Coscinopora globularis, and which nature provided with a perforation so that ancient man adopted them as ornaments in place of beads?
We are often reminded by the antiquary of the remarkable foresight or acuteness of the ancient poet Lucretius in his explanation of certain natural phenomena which have since been verified by modern science. But of all the heaven-inspired dreamers none have come nearer the truth in terrestrial matters than the Arabian poet Fizee, who wrote:—
“The sun from whom the seven seas obtain pearls,
The black stone from his rays obtains the jewel,
The mine from the correcting influence of his beams obtains gold.”
Plato believed that the gems were produced by a sort of vivifying spirit descending from the stars. It is undoubtedly from the influence of the solar forces and the magnetic and electric currents which are constantly playing through the crust of the earth that the gems derive their origin.
These phenomena of the earth’s vitality are manifested in their greatest force along certain elliptics, which may be traced over the true gem districts of Asia, Africa, and Brazil, and in marked contrast to adjacent territories. The miners in South Africa, disturbed by the severe whirlwinds and frequent thunder-storms, soon began to imagine that the excessive electric action had something to do with the creation of the gems they sought. Mr. Voysey, Geologist to the India Survey, also observed the very marked telluric action in the diamond formations of India, and moreover that the process of crystallization took place there with wonderful rapidity. So convinced was this keen observer of the present reproduction of gems in the alluvial soil or conglomerate that he commenced to collect the proofs of recrystallization. Unfortunately for science, Mr. Voysey died shortly after he adopted these views. Dr. Buchanan, another traveller who visited many of the mines of India, was impressed with this idea; and he was assured by the miners all over India that the regeneration of diamonds is always going on in the peculiar gravel. In proof of their statements, many men were then engaged in working over the débris that had been examined many years before. An interval of fifteen years was sufficient in their estimation to reproduce new gems, at least to a certain extent. This reproduction, or rather, we will say, assertion of a reproduction, reminds one of the mysterious action of the nitre beds, which yield rich returns after a rest of a few years, and especially those which occur among rocks which are destitute of potash.
It is to the learned Abbé Haüy we owe the theory that crystals are made up of an assemblage of minute parts or molecules, each having the same definite form. To the diamond especially this hypothesis may be applied, since it is composed of thin laminæ covering or concealing its primary form. With the aid of the skill of the artisan we can remove these coverings one after the other, until the definite and elementary form of the crystal be revealed. In the time of Louis XIV. it was thought that the size of diamonds might be increased by placing them in certain solutions, as crystals of salt are enlarged by immersing them in solutions of the same substance. But the difficulty then was to find the required liquid; and even at the present day we have not yet succeeded in discovering the composition of the water of crystallization of crystals of quartz or topaz, although Nature has shown the fluid to us in the cavities of certain crystals.
These curious speculations which were discussed in the days of the “Grand Monarque” are again revived by the theory that gold nuggets are not only deposited from aqueous solutions, but are actually increasing in size under certain influences and conditions.