Georges Cuvier, Fossil Bones, and Geological Catastrophes: New Translations and Interpretations of the Primary Texts

  • Martin J. S. Rudwick
University of Chicago Press: 1997. Pp.301 $43.95, £27.95
Fossil bones revisited: Cuvier's reconstruction of a “mastodon”, previously known as the “Ohio animal”.

Georges Cuvier (1769-1832) was one of the outstanding figures in science during the first half of the nineteenth century. He managed to deal brilliantly with a threefold career in the areas of science, education and administration. Despite the convulsive movements of French history, he accumulated honours and distinctions, being praised to the skies by some of his fellows and hated by others.

Until recently, researchers and historians spec ializing in the sciences, particularly in France, have focused on two major aspects they considered typical of Cuvier's conservative thoughts, in order to criticize or mock them: his belief in the fixity of biological species and his adherence to the geological theory of catastrophism. Cuvier acted as a brake on the expansion of the transformist ideas developed by Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck, with his religious feelings influencing his interpretation of the history of the Earth.

Thankfully, over the past few years, some historians have offered a less limited view of Cuvier's thoughts. In 1964, William Coleman showed with great expertise, in a masterful book called Georges Cuvier Zoologist, that naturalists owe a tremendous amount to Cuvier for the monumental book he wrote on the comparative anatomy of the animal kingdom. In 1995 Theodore Pietsch, the historian of ichthyology, published the first English translation of Cuvier's introductory text L'Histoire Naturelle des Poissons as part of his Historical Portrait of the Progress of Ichthyology. Pietsch rightly underlined the importance of Cuvier's work both in systematics and in the history of science.

Today, it is Martin J. S. Rudwick's turn to refute the erroneous or vague interpretations made of Cuvier's thoughts and to invite English readers to discover the most accessible of this French naturalist's main geological writings.

The text Rudwick introduces and comments on gives readers an opportunity to follow, step by step, the development of Cuvier's ideas, from his first, youthful writings to the last pieces he produced as a scientist who had become famous throughout Europe.

After providing a brief biography, Rudwick presents two little-known excerpts from letters written by the young Cuvier to his German friend C. H. Pfaff. They concern the geological observations Cuvier had made in Normandy and the reflections that had come to his mind after reading The Theory of the Earth by Jean-Andr& eacute; Deluc. Thes e texts are followed by “Memoir on the species of elephants, both living and fossil” written in 1796; an article on the Megatherium, or “huge beast”, from South America; a leaflet announcing in 1800 Cuvier's programme of research on fossil bones; a general summary and reconstruction of the skeletons of the different species of mammals from the gypsum around Paris; the famous report on the opossum from the gypsum beds in Montmartre; extracts of articles about living and fossil elephants written in 1806; a report on Noël André's Theory of the Present Surface of the Earth; the celebrated Historical Report on the Progress of Geology since 1789, and on its Present State dedicated to the Emperor Napoléon; the first draft (1808) of the Essay on the Mineral Geography of the Environs of Paris; an article on “The fossil bones of ruminants found in superficial deposits”; the preface to the volumes on “Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles”, or “researches on fossil bones”; and the “preliminary discourse” which followed the preface, known as “The revolutions of the globe”.

Finally, Rudwick offers two manuscripts by Cuvier: one from 1798 on “an animal whose bones can be found in the gypsum around Paris” (soon to be known as the Paleotherium), the other presenting Cuvier's notes for his lecture course in geology to the Lycée in 1805. Rudwick has translated and commented on a total of 19 important texts by Cuvier.

This book is very welcome because, since 1813, English-speaking historians have had at their disposal only Robert Jameson's translation of the “preliminary discourse”. This translation is sometimes inaccurate, and, together with Jameson's comments, it has led, as Rudwick explains, “to the widespread belief that Cuvier had constructed his theories in order to support a literalistic interpretation of Genesis or to bo lster the historic ity of the biblical story of the Flood”.

Rudwick's translations correct that gross misconception. But he hasn't just made a simple translation; he has examined each of Cuvier's manuscripts, outlining the corrections and modifications. As a specialist in the history of geology and palaeontology, he has made excellent comments on each of these texts, explaining the ideas and the methods developed by Cuvier, and giving further information about the scientific vocabulary Cuvier used. For instance, the word “analogue” (analogous) which Cuvier used was to be superseded by the word “homologous” introduced later by the British anatomist Richard Owen. The book also includes a bibliography of the sources used by Cuvier.

Rudwick's selection of texts is excellent, many of them, of course, being dedicated to fossil mammals. But I think two absent articles could have also been considered as crucial texts. The first is Cuvier's description of “the great fossil animal found in Maastricht quarries” which proves, for the first time and thanks to a perfect anatomical demonstration, the existence of an extinct species of a marine reptile, closely related to the varanid lizards today known as the Mosasaur. The second text is the one introducing the fossil skeleton of a flying reptile from south Germany, which Cuvier named “Pterodactyle”. This was another decisive and revolutionary discovery, particularly in that it was made from the simple analysis of a plate published in a book, Cuvier himself having never seen the original piece.

The book will also, I hope, encourage everyone who can read French to immerse themselves in the original texts. Quite apart from his scientific skills, Cuvier was also a remarkable writer. Eager to convince, he had an accurate, clear, elegant style and a great sense of drama that allowed him to draw striking and even sometimes dramatic portraits of vanished worlds.

Throughout this book, Rudwick reveals th e interest that can be found in reading the texts written by a man of science whose ideas and concepts deeply influenced nineteenth century society and who helped to raise the international status of anatomy and geology as professions.