Harris, section 12 

Cuvier (1812) in Rudwick (1997)

“The Revolutions of the Globe” is perhaps Cuvier’s most influential geological work. It originally appeared as a preliminary discourse to a collection of Cuvier’s fossil studies, and was presented as a framework that illustrated the significance of these works. The standard English translation prior to Rudwick dated to 1815 and was not reliable. Rudwick provides a new translation and a good introduction that outlines the basic argument of the text. To help you follow the organization of the text, here is an outline that I hope is useful.

First, the explicit argument of the text. Cuvier introduces the idea of revolutions by using an imaginary tour into a mountain range. He then brings in more detailed information to characterize these events. His review of modern processes (sections 8-18) is considerably expanded from summaries he published in 1808, showing the expansion of geological knowledge. His attack on geological systems (sections 19-21) is followed by an important section (sections 22-25) on how to make progress in geology. Please read this carefully – it is the first part of his proposal for an international research agenda. This is followed by a long section on fossils (emphasizing quadrapeds – terrrestrial vertebrates), his past work, the fossil progression (sections 26-33). He then jumps to two important discussions: (1) the argument that the last revolution pre-dated human history – this section clearly shows the desire to figure out the relation between human and natural history (sections 34-39); (2) his proposal for future research that was in many ways a blueprint for work over the next few decades (section 40). 

Another way we can address the text is to consider it in light of the scientific practices discussed by Rudwick. How are the four practices reflected in the language, examples, and arguments in the text? How does this paper incorporate these practices – in particular, the tradition of 18th century “theories of the earth” and the use of analogs to human history? 

Things to do 

1. Make use of Rudwick’s introduction and the outline provided – it will keep you “on track” as you read the text.
2. Take time to critically reflect on the argument of the text.
   • Revolutions and Processes
     • What was the evidence for the “revolutions”? For their suddenness? For their being numerous?
     • What modern processes does he itemize? 
     • Why does he claim that modern processes are inadequate to form the geological features described?
     • How good was his argument that unknown processes were responsible for some natural phenomena? Under what conditions would it be acceptable?
   • Geological Theories (sections 19-20 can be skimmed)
     • What was Cuvier’s opinion of the “systems” of former geologists? Why did he think they were so diverse, contradictory, and (most likely) inadequate?
     • What was the current state of geology and how would Cuvier reform it?
   • Fossils
     • Why are fossils important?
     • Why are vertebrates any better than invertebrates for environmental diagnosis?
     • What is the scientific evidence against species transformations? What does it say about Cuvier’s conception of geological time?
     • What did he know about the distribution of fossils through time (this would be termed the “fossil progression”)?
     • What does his use of human records imply about geological time? (sections 36-38 can be skimmed)
   • What next?
     • What specific problems did Cuvier recommend as part of this research agenda? Why did he stress study of the Tertiary (younger) strata versus the Primary rocks? Numerous geologists (including Lyell) picked up this theme.
3. Ruckwick (1996) Four practices
   • How does Cuvier pull together the four practices described by Rudwick (1996?)
   • In Cuvier’s language, can you find evidence for the transfer of concepts from human history into natural history?

Links to course homepage and course schedule.