The isolated position of distinct tertiary deposits in different parts of Europe has been already alluded to. In addition to the difficulty presented by this want of continuity when we endeavour to settle the chronological relations of these deposits, another arises from the frequent dissimilarity in mineral character of strata of contemporaneous date, such, for example, as those of London and Paris before mentioned. The identity or non-identity of species is also a criterion which often fails us. For this we might have been prepared, for we have already seen, that the Mediterranean and Red Sea, although within 70 miles of each other, on each side of the Isthmus of Suez, have each their peculiar fauna; and a marked difference is found in the four groups of testacea now living in the Baltic, English Channel, Black Sea, and Mediterranean, although all these seas have many species in common. In like manner a considerable diversity in the fossils of different tertiary formations, which have been thrown down in distinct seas, estuaries, bays, and lakes, does not always imply a distinctness in the times when they were produced, but may have arisen from climate and conditions of physical geography wholly independent of time. On the other hand, it is now abundantly clear, as the result of geological investigation, that different sets of tertiary strata, immediately superimposed upon each other, contain distinct imbedded species of fossils, in consequence of fluctuations which have been going on in the animate creation, and by which in the course of ages one state of things in the organic world has been substituted for another wholly dissimilar. It has also been shown that in proportion as the age of a tertiary deposit is more modern, so is its fauna more analogous to that now in being in the neighbouring seas. It is this law of a nearer agreement of the fossil testacea with the species now living, which may often furnish us with a clue for the chronological arrangement of scattered deposits, where we cannot avail ourselves of any one of the three ordinary chronological tests; namely, superposition, mineral character, and the specific identity of the fossils.
Thus, for example, on the African border of the Red Sea, at the height of 40 feet, and sometimes more, above its level, a white calcareous formation has been observed, containing several hundred species of shells differing from those found in the clay and volcanic tuff of the country round Naples, and of the contiguous island of Ischia. Another deposit has been found at Uddevalla, in Sweden, in which the shells do not agree with those found near Naples. But although in these three cases there may be scarcely a single shell common to the three different deposits, we do not hesitate to refer them all to one period (the Post-Pliocene), because of the very close agreement of the fossil species in every instance with those now living in the contiguous seas.
To take another example, where the fossil fauna recedes a few steps farther back from our own times. We may compare, first, the beds of loam and clay bordering the Clyde in Scotland (called glacial by some geologists), secondly, others of fluvio-marine origin near Norwich, and, lastly, a third set often rising to considerable heights in Sicily, and we discover that in every case more than three-fourths of the shells agree with species still living, while the remainder are extinct. Hence we may conclude that all these, greatly diversified as are their organic remains, belong to one and the same era, or to a period immediately antecedent to the Post-Pliocene, because there has been time in each of the areas alluded to for an equal or nearly equal amount of change in the marine testaceous fauna. Contemporaneousness of origin is inferred in these cases, in spite of the most marked differences of mineral character or organic contents, from a similar degree of divergence in the shells from those now living in the adjoining seas. The advantage of such a test consists in supplying us with a common point of departure in all countries, however remote.
But the farther we recede from the present times, and the smaller the relative number of recent as compared with extinct species in the tertiary deposits, the less confidence can we place in the exact value of such a test, especially when comparing the strata of very distant regions; for we cannot presume that the rate of former alterations in the animate world, or the continual going out and coming in of species, has been every where exactly equal in equal quantities of time. The form of the land and sea, and the climate, may have changed more in one region than in another; and consequently there may have been a more rapid destruction and renovation of species in one part of the globe than elsewhere. Considerations of this kind should undoubtedly put us on our guard against relying too implicitly on the accuracy of this test; yet it can never fail to throw great light on the chronological relations of tertiary groups with each other, and with the Post-Pliocene period.
We may derive a conviction of this truth not only from a study of geological monuments of all ages, but also by reflecting on the tendency which prevails in the present state of nature to a uniform rate of simultaneous fluctuation in the flora and fauna of the whole globe. The grounds of such a doctrine cannot be discussed here, and I have explained them at some length in the third Book of the Principles of Geology, where the causes of the successive extinction of species are considered. It will be there seen that each local change in climate and physical geography is attended with the immediate increase of certain species, and the limitation of the range of others. A revolution thus effected is rarely, if ever, confined to a limited space, or to one geographical province of animals or plants, but affects several other surrounding and contiguous provinces. In each of these, moreover, analogous alterations of the stations and habitations of species are simultaneously in progress, reacting in the manner already alluded to on the first province. Hence, long before the geography of any particular district can be essentially altered, the flora and fauna throughout the world will have been materially modified by countless disturbances in the mutual relation of the various members of the organic creation to each other. To assume that in one large area inhabited exclusively by a single assemblage of species any important revolution in physical geography can be brought about, while other areas remain stationary in regard to the position of land and sea, the height of mountains, and so forth, is a most improbable hypothesis, wholly opposed to what we know of the laws now governing the aqueous and igneous causes. On the other hand, even were this conceivable, the communication of heat and cold between different parts of the atmosphere and ocean is so free and rapid, that the temperature of certain zones cannot be materially raised or lowered without others being immediately affected; and the elevation or diminution in height of an important chain of mountains or the submergence of a wide tract of land would modify the climate even of the antipodes.
It will be observed that in the foregoing allusions to organic remains, the testacea or the shell-bearing mollusca are selected as the most useful and convenient class for the purposes of general classification. In the first place, they are more universally distributed through strata of every age than any other organic bodies. Those families of fossils which are of rare and casual occurrence are absolutely of no avail in establishing a chronological arrangement. If we have plants alone in one group of strata and the bones of mammalia in another, we can draw no conclusion respecting the affinity or discordance of the organic beings of the two epochs compared; and the same may be said if we have plants and vertebrated animals in one series and only shells in another. Although corals are more abundant, in a fossil state, than plants, reptiles, or fish, they are still rare when contrasted with shells, especially in the European tertiary formations. The utility of the testacea is, moreover, enhanced by the circumstance that some forms are proper to the sea, others to the land, and others to freshwater. Rivers scarcely ever fail to carry down into their deltas some land shells, together with species which are at once fluviatile and lacustrine. By this means we learn what terrestrial, freshwater, and marine species co-existed at particular eras of the past; and having thus identified strata formed in seas with others which originated contemporaneously in inland lakes, we are then enabled to advance a step farther, and show that certain quadrupeds or aquatic plants, found fossil in lacustrine formations, inhabited the globe at the same period when certain fish, reptiles, and zoophytes lived in the ocean.
Among other characters of the molluscous animals, which render them extremely valuable in settling chronological questions in geology, may be mentioned, first, the wide geographical range of many species; and, secondly, what is probably a consequence of the former, the great duration of species in this class, for they appear to have surpassed in longevity the greater number of the mammalia and fish. Had each species inhabited a very limited space, it could never, when imbedded in strata, have enabled the geologist to identify deposits at distant points; or had they each lasted but for a brief period, they could have thrown no light on the connection of rocks placed far from each other in the chronological, or, as it is often termed, vertical series.
Many authors have divided the European tertiary strata into three groups—lower, middle, and upper; the lower comprising the oldest formations of Paris and London before-mentioned; the middle those of Bordeaux and Touraine; and the upper all those newer than the middle group.
When engaged in 1828 in preparing my work on the Principles of Geology, I conceived the idea of classing the whole series of tertiary strata in four groups, and endeavouring to find characters for each, expressive of their different degrees of affinity to the living fauna. With this view, I obtained information respecting the specific identity of many tertiary and recent shells from several Italian naturalists, and among others from Professors Bonelli, Guidotti, and Costa. Having in 1829 become acquainted with M. Deshayes, of Paris, already well known by his conchological works, I learnt from him that he had arrived, by independent researches, and by the study of a large collection of fossil and recent shells, at very similar views respecting the arrangement of tertiary formations. At my request he drew up, in a tabular form, lists of all the shells known to him to occur both in some tertiary formation and in a living state, for the express purpose of ascertaining the proportional number of fossil species identical with the recent which characterized successive groups; and this table, planned by us in common, was published by me in 1833.[110-A] The number of tertiary fossil shells examined by M. Deshayes was about 3000; and the recent species with which they had been compared about 5000. The result then arrived at was, that in the lower tertiary strata, or those of London and Paris, there were about 31/2 per cent. of species identical with recent; in the middle tertiary of the Loire and Gironde about 17 per cent.; and in the upper tertiary or Subapennine beds, from 35 to 50 per cent. In formations still more modern, some of which I had particularly studied in Sicily, where they attain a vast thickness and elevation above the sea, the number of species identical with those now living was believed to be from 90 to 95 per cent. For the sake of clearness and brevity, I proposed to give short technical names to these four groups, or the periods to which they respectively belonged. I called the first or oldest of them Eocene, the second Miocene, the third Older Pliocene, and the last or fourth Newer Pliocene. The first of the above terms, Eocene, is derived from ηως, eos, dawn, and καινος, cainos, recent, because the fossil shells of this period contain an extremely small proportion of living species, which may be looked upon as indicating the dawn of the existing state of the testaceous fauna, no recent species having been detected in the older or secondary rocks.
The term Miocene (from μειον, meion, less, and καινος, cainos, recent) is intended to express a minor proportion of recent species (of testacea), the term Pliocene (from πλειον, pleion, more, and καινος, cainos, recent) a comparative plurality of the same. It may assist the memory of students to remind them, that the Miocene contain a minor proportion, and Pliocene a comparative plurality of recent species; and that the greater number of recent species always implies the more modern origin of the strata.