Natural Catastrophe in Buffon’s Histoire Naturelle
23
by Fontenelle but which he believed to be beyond our understanding.
This is precisely what Buffon does when he sets out to “représenter ce
que l’expérience de tous les temps & ce que nos propres observations
nous apprennent au sujet de la Terre”.
11 To realize this “représentation”, however, Buffon establishes a hierarchy within the observational data at his disposal. All are not equally important, he says, and
without hesitation he distinguishes the facts he deems to be “normaux” from events he considers to be “anormaux”, that is, the “accidents”.
At the end of his inspection of what he calls the “principaux
faits” of Earth history, the savant from Montbard states that all “important” phenomena can be explained exclusively by the action of
regular and continuous causes. What should we make, for example, of
that “espèce d’organisation de la Terre que nous découvrons partout,
[de] cette situation horizontale & parallèle des couches”? Is it not
obvious that it can only come from “une cause constante & et d’un
mouvement réglé & toujours dirigé de la même façon”?
12 The
“arrangement”, as he calls it, must therefore have been produced “par
les eaux ou plûtôt par les sédimens qu’elles ont déposez dans la
succession des temps; toute autre révolution, tout autre mouvement,
toute autre cause auroit produit un arrangement très-différent”.
13 Conversely, he has not encountered a single state of affairs that is the necessary result of catastrophic or discontinuous causes. Hence, he writes,
it is not necessary to explain the “inégalités du globe” in terms of
cataclysms; we might just as well suppose them to be the erosive work
of heavy rains or the movement of the seas, to cite but two alternative
causes.
14 It is only a question of extending sufficiently the duration of
such actions. Why, in effect, should we posit extraordinary causes for
these features, if everyday phenomena suffice to explain them?
This is the reason why Buffon, throughout the Discours that
he devotes to Earth theory and Earth history, refrains from invoking
“ces causes éloignées qu’on prévoit moins qu’on ne les devine”. For
___________________________
11 Buffon, Histoire naturelle, I, p. 68.
12 Buffon, Histoire naturelle, I, p. 81.
13 Buffon, “Preuves de la théorie de la terre, article VIII: Sur les coquilles & les autres
productions de la mer, qu’on trouve dans l’intérieur de la Terre”, Histoire naturelle, I,
p. 304.
14 Buffon, “Conclusion”, Histoire naturelle, I, p. 610.
23
by Fontenelle but which he believed to be beyond our understanding.
This is precisely what Buffon does when he sets out to “représenter ce
que l’expérience de tous les temps & ce que nos propres observations
nous apprennent au sujet de la Terre”.
11 To realize this “représentation”, however, Buffon establishes a hierarchy within the observational data at his disposal. All are not equally important, he says, and
without hesitation he distinguishes the facts he deems to be “normaux” from events he considers to be “anormaux”, that is, the “accidents”.
At the end of his inspection of what he calls the “principaux
faits” of Earth history, the savant from Montbard states that all “important” phenomena can be explained exclusively by the action of
regular and continuous causes. What should we make, for example, of
that “espèce d’organisation de la Terre que nous découvrons partout,
[de] cette situation horizontale & parallèle des couches”? Is it not
obvious that it can only come from “une cause constante & et d’un
mouvement réglé & toujours dirigé de la même façon”?
12 The
“arrangement”, as he calls it, must therefore have been produced “par
les eaux ou plûtôt par les sédimens qu’elles ont déposez dans la
succession des temps; toute autre révolution, tout autre mouvement,
toute autre cause auroit produit un arrangement très-différent”.
13 Conversely, he has not encountered a single state of affairs that is the necessary result of catastrophic or discontinuous causes. Hence, he writes,
it is not necessary to explain the “inégalités du globe” in terms of
cataclysms; we might just as well suppose them to be the erosive work
of heavy rains or the movement of the seas, to cite but two alternative
causes.
14 It is only a question of extending sufficiently the duration of
such actions. Why, in effect, should we posit extraordinary causes for
these features, if everyday phenomena suffice to explain them?
This is the reason why Buffon, throughout the Discours that
he devotes to Earth theory and Earth history, refrains from invoking
“ces causes éloignées qu’on prévoit moins qu’on ne les devine”. For
___________________________
11 Buffon, Histoire naturelle, I, p. 68.
12 Buffon, Histoire naturelle, I, p. 81.
13 Buffon, “Preuves de la théorie de la terre, article VIII: Sur les coquilles & les autres
productions de la mer, qu’on trouve dans l’intérieur de la Terre”, Histoire naturelle, I,
p. 304.
14 Buffon, “Conclusion”, Histoire naturelle, I, p. 610.