Three Physico-Theological Discourses, Explanation of illustrations – Description of illustration 3
Place this Half-sheet next after p. 132 before the 3 Plates.
REflecting upon the length of this Discourse concerning the Original of these Bodies, I am suspicious that the vulgar and inconsiderate Reader will be ready to demand, What needs all this ado? To what purpose so many words about so trivial a Subject? What reference hath the consideration of Shells and Bones of Fishes petrified to Divinity? Wherefore I shall in a few words shew the great importance of this Disquisition concerning formed Stones, and the Determination of their Original.
For, 1st, If we adhere to their Opinions who hold them to have been original Productions of Nature, in imitation only of the Shells and Bones of Fishes: We put a Weapon into the Atheists hands, affording him a strong Argument to prove that even Animals themselves are casual Productions, and not the effects of Counsel or Design. For to what end are these Bodies curiously figured and adorned? if for no other but to exhibit such a Form, for the Ornament of the Vniverse, or to gratifie the Curiosity of Man; these are but general ends, whereas the parts of every Species of Body are formed and fitted to the particular Vses and Conveniences of that Body. And if Nature would delineate or imprint Figures upon Bodies, only to be Spectacles to Man, one would think it should not have made choice of those of the Shells and Bones of Fishes, but rather of such as were absolutely new and different from any frequently seen or belonging to Animals; which serve rather to amuse than delight him. But 2ly, we find in the Earth not only Stones formed in imitation of Shells; but real Shells, Teeth and Bones of Fishes, or Bodies so like them, that they are not to be distinguished by Figure, Texture, Colour, Weight, or any other Accident. Now what greater Argument can the Atheist desire to prove, that the Shells of Fishes were never designed by any provident Efficient for their Defence, or their Bones for the sustaining of their Bodies, but that the Fish and Shell containing it, and the Bones sustaining it, did casually concur▪ than that there should be real Shells produced without any Fish in them, and that in dry places where no Fish ever did or could breed, or indeed live, and real Fish-bones, where there never was nor could be any Fish.
Doth it not than concern a Divine to be acquainted with this Objection against the Bodies of Animals being the effects of Counsel and Design, and provided with an answer to it. For my part I must needs confess that this Argument weighs so with me, whether from that innate Prolepsis my self, and I think most other Men have of the Prudence of Nature in all its Operations, or from mine own observing that in all other things, it acts for ends, that it is alone sufficient to preponderate all the Arguments against the contrary Opinions, though I acknowledge them to be of great force and hard to be answered, and to incline or rather constrain me to allow that these Bodies were either real Bones and Shells of Fishes, or owe their Figure to them. I cannot (to use the Words of F. Columna) prevail with my self to believe, that Nature ever made Teeth without a Iaw, or Shells without an Animal Inhabitant, or single Bones, no not in their own proper Element, much less in a strange one, Who even of the Vulgar beholding any considerable part of an Animal which he sees not the use of, is not apt presently to ask what it serves for, as by that innate Prolepsis I mentioned before, presuming it was …ot made in vain, but for some end and use. Suppose any of us should find in the Earth the compleat Skeleton of a Man, he must be as credulous as the Atheist, if he could believe that it grew there of it self, and never had relation to any Man's Body. Why then should we tbink that the entire Skeletons of Fishes found sometimes in the Earth, had no other Original? nor ever were any part of living Fishes.
2ly, If we chuse and embrace the contrary Opinion, viz. That these Bodies were the real Shells and Bones of Fishes, or owe their Figures to them, we shall find that this also is urged with many and almost unsuperable Difficulties, the principal of which I have already produced, and shall here omit, repeating only two that refer to Divinity.
1. These Bodies being found dispersed all over the Earth, they of the contrary Opinion demand how they come there? If it be answered, That they were brought in by the general Deluge; in contradiction thereto, they argue thus. If these Stones were found scattered singly and indifferently all the Earth over, there might be indeed some reason to imagine that they were brought in by the Floud; but being found in some particular places only, either lying thick in great Beds of Sand and Gravel, or amassed together in huge Lumps, by a stony Cement▪ such Beds must in all likelihood have been the effect of those Animals breeding there for a considerable time, whereas the Floud continued upon the Earth but ten Months, during half which time it's not likely that the Mountains were covered; and yet there are found of these Bodies upon very high Mountains, not excepting the Appenine and Alps themselves. Whence they conclude, that they were neither brought in by the Floud, nor bred during the Floud, b…t some other way produced. For if they were the Shells of Fishes, or their Bones, the Water must needs have covered the whole Earth, even the Mountains themselves for a …uch longer time than is consistent with the Scripture-History of the Floud, and therefore we must seek some other original of these Bodies.
If we stick to the Letter of the Scripture-History of the Creation, that the Creation of Fishes succeeded the Separation of Land and Sea, and that the six days wherein the World was created, were six natural Days and no more, it is very difficult to return a satisfactory Answer to this Objection: I shall therefore only add a conjecture of my own, and that is, That possibly at the first Creation, the whole Earth was not all at once uncovered, but only those parts whereabout Adam and the other Animals were created, and the rest gradually afterwards, perchance not in many Years; during which time these Shell-fish might breed abundantly all the Sea over, the bottom whereof being elevated and made dry Land, the Beds of Shell-fish, must necessarily be raised together with it.
2. It will hence follow that many Species of Animals have been lost out of the World, which Philosophers and Divines are unwilling to admit, esteeming the Destruction of any one Species a dismembring of the Vniverse, and rendring the World imperfect. Whereas they think the Divine Providence is especially concerned and solicitous to secure and preserve the Works of the Creation. And truly so it is, as appears, in that it was so careful to lodge all Land-Animals in the Ark at the time of the general Deluge, and in that of all Animals recorded in Natural Histories, we cannot say that there hath been any one Species lost, no not of the most infirm and most exposed to injury and ravine. Moreover it is likely, that as there neither is nor can be any new Species of Animal produced, all proceeding from Seeds at first created; so Providence without which one individual Sparrow falls not to the Ground, doth in that manner watch over all that are created, that an entire Species shall not be lost or destroyed by any Accident. Now I say, if these Bodies were sometimes the Shells and Bones of Fish, it will thence follow, that many Species have been lost out of the World, as for example, those Ophiomorphous ones, whose Shells are now called Cornua Ammonis, of which there are many Species, none whereof at this day, appear in our or other Seas, so far as I have hitherto seen, heard or read. To which I have nothing to reply, but that there may be some of them remaining some where or other in the Seas, though as yet they have not come to my Knowledge. For though they may have perished or by some Accident been destroyed out of our Seas, yet the Race of them may be preserved and continued still in others. So though Wolves and Bevers, which we are well assured were sometimes native of England, have been here utterly destroyed and extirpated out of this Island, yet there remain plenty of them still in other Countrys.
By what hath been said concerning the nature and original of Stones, I hope it may appear, that this is no idle and unnecessary Discourse, but very momentous and important; and this Subject, as mean as it seems, worthy the most serious consideration of Christian Philosophers and Divines; concerning which, though I have spent many thoughts, yet can I not fully satisfie my self, much less then am I likely to satisfie others.
But I promise my self and them more full satisfaction shortly from the Labours of those who are more conversant and better acquainted with these Bodies than I, who have been more industrious in searching them out, and happy in discovering them, who have been more curious and diligent in considering and comparing them, more critical and exact in observing and noting their nature, texture, figure, parts, places, differences, and other accidents, than my self, and particularly that learned and ingenious Person before remembred.
The following Tables, containing some Species of the most different Genera of these Bodies, viz. Shark's Teeth, Wolf-fish's Teeth, Cockles or Concha, Periwinkles or Turbens, Cornua Ammonis or Serpent stones▪ Sea-urchins and their Prickles, Vertebres and other Bones of Fishes, entire Fishes Petrifi'd, and of those some singly, some represented as they lye in Beds and Quarries under Ground, for the information of those who are less acquainted with such Bodie, were thought fit to be added to this Edition.
TAB. II. Pag. 162.
FIG. 1, 2. Several Fragments and Lumps of petrify'd Shells, as they lie in Quarries and Beds under ground; on many of these Petrifactions there still remain some Laminae, or Plates of the Original Shells, which prove them not to be Stones primarily so figur'd.
Fig 3. The Cornu Ammonis lying in Rocks with other petrify'd Bodies.
TAB. III. Pag. 162.
FIG. 1, 2. Two petrify'd Fishes lying in Stone, with their Seales and Bones.
Fig. 3. A Sea-Urchin petrify'd with its prickles broken off, which are a sort of Lapis Iudaicus, or Iew-Stones; their Insertions on the Studs or Protuberances of the Shell are here shewn. See their History and Manner of Lying in Stone and Beds, in Agostino Scilla. 4. Napoli.
TAB. IV. Pag. 162.
FIG. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. Several petrify'd Teeth of Dog-Fishes, Sharks, and other Fishes.
Fig. 15, 16. The same lying in a Tophaceous Bed, and also in a Jaw-Bone.
Fig. 17. The petrify'd Teeth of a Wolf-Fish, in a piece of the Jaw; the Round Ones, or Grinders, are sold in Maltha for petrify'd Eyes of Serpents; and by our Jewellers and Goldsmiths for Toad-stones, commonly put in Rings.
Fig. 18, 19, 20. Other petrify'd Bones of Fishes, especially Joynts, or Vertebra's of Back-bones, one with two stony Spines, issuing out, f. 20. See them more at large in the Draughts of that curious Sicilian Painter, Agostino Scilla.
Place this before Tab. II. p. 162.