No abstract

No abstract

Hunter was an influential figure who built up large natural history collections, amongst which minerals predominated. He was not a mere collector, however, and both his library and collections were sought out by contemporary workers. Analytical mineralogy only emerged from its alchemical background towards the end of Hunter's lifetime, and his library contains most of this early mineralogical literature, to some of which at least he was a subscriber. He also possessed a number of lapidaries, one of them a unique manuscript, and several specimens indicate his interest in medical mineralogy. The contents of Hunter's mineral and rock collections reflect the interests of his day: there is a piece of the Siberian iron mass which was only accepted as a meteorite in 1794, after Hunter's death, and lavas from Vesuvius, together with his subscription copy of Hamilton's classic 1776 study of that volcano. Lavas from Iceland - perhaps from Sir Joseph Banks - reflect the Plutonist - Neptunist debate, and Hunter's museum was also visited by Raspe, the German Neptunist. Hunter (1768) was the first to establish, on comparative morphological grounds, that the American mastodon differed from living elephants, and that it must therefore be extinct - an idea with which Buffon had toyed in 1761. A recently published manuscript of 1770-1773 shows that Hunter realised the Irish ‘elk’ was quite different from the living American moose, contrary to the then current opinion, and that it too must be extinct. It was to be another forty years before Cuvier demonstrated this difference in comparable detail. Hunter thus broke the Great Chain of Being twice, at the high level of quadrupeds, only one down the ladder of life from man and monkey. This was an important contribution to Enlightenment thought, since "one step broken, the great scale's destroyed" (Pope, 1733). Hunter acquired the foremost collection of Recent corals in Europe, on Fothergill's death in 1781. Corals not only linked inert with living parts of the Chain of Being but, with newly discovered coral islands, formed part of Whitehurst's 1778 theory of the Earth for constructing land. Between 1764 and 1778, Hunter commissioned many drawings of bodily concretions, which were primarily of medical concern. Hunter may also have had an interest in them as part of the ‘stoniness’ problem, for the light they might shed on the fossilisation question.

Smith first described himself as 'land surveyor and drainer' in his 1801 Prospectus but then as 'engineer and mineralogist' in his first book of 1806. His several careers are discussed with an attempt to shed new light on his pioneering career as 'mineral surveyor' (a term invented by his pupil, John Farey, in 1808). The trials for coal with which he was involved can be divided into two: those in which he used his new stratigraphic knowledge in positive searches for new coal deposits; and those where his stratigraphic science could often negatively demonstrate that many such searches were doomed to failure. These latter attempts were being made in, and misled by, repetitious clay lithologies, which resembled, but were not, Coal Measures. Smith was the first to show how unfortunate it was for such coal hunters that the British stratigraphic column abounded in repetitious clay lithologies. It was also unfortunate for Smith that many of the founding fathers of the Geological Society were unconvinced of the reality or the utility of Smith's discoveries. Its leaders at first did not believe he had uncovered anything of significance and then simply stole much of it. The development of Smith's stratigraphic science in the world of practical geology remains poorly understood, but the legacy of his method for unravelling relative geological time and space was one of the most significant of the nineteenth century.

This document is a copy of the following article published by the Geological Curators' Group. It is provided for non-commercial research and educational use.Copyright of this article remains with the author(s). Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited unless agreed in advance. This cover page must be included as an integral part of any copies of this document.Geological collections are an irreplaceable part of our scientific and cultural heritage. The Geological Curators' Group is dedicated to their better care, maintenance and use.

Only three of the 13 founding members of the Geological Society of London were Quakers: William Allen and the brothers Richard and William Phillips. As dissenters, they sought to play a significant part in this new scientific development because they were in many ways excluded from English civil society. Such exclusion had encouraged their entry into trade and commerce, and they saw science as a means of improving the world and their place in it. Their great agitation against slavery, at its height just as the Geological Society of London was founded, significantly enhanced their coherence as a group. One of the first fruits of their interest in science was the Askesian Society, founded in 1796 by Allen and William Phillips, among others. With over half of its membership made up of Quakers, the Askesian was amongst the earlier of the London scientific societies. From its membership, in 1799, grew the British Mineralogical Society, which planned, by survey and analysis, to produce a mineral history of Britain. With Allen, and soon both Phillips brothers, involved in manufacture, analysis and lecturing in the field of chemistry, these interests inevitably led them to want to better understand, and use, mineral resources and to contribute to the founding of the Geological Society.

No abstract

Transmission from the Old to the New World, by means other than publication, of the idea that fossils could help in the analysis of stratigraphic problems is discussed, over the period 1800 to 1840. Focus on the single direction of transmission from England to America does not imply that this was either the only or the most important route by which such ideas came to North America. The contribution of William Smith, and his pupil John Farey, is first briefly reviewed in this context. Until their elucidation of an adequate Standard of sequential lithological units in England, no practical transmission of the idea that fossils could help in stratigraphy was possible. Smith's contacts with American visitors are then discussed but the first migrant informed about the ‘new stratigraphy’ was Henry Steinhauer, a Moravian missionary who emigrated to Philadelphia in 1815. He came direct from the Bath circles in which a knowledge of Smith's results was commonplace. As an even more important link in the chain of transmission, Steinhauer took his own large fossil collection with him, arranged in Standard Smithian stratigraphic order. The next such migrant was John Finch, who arrived in America in 1823 to escape his many English creditors! His success in comparing English and Atlantic coast sequences based on fossils is reviewed. Others like Professor William Buckland, who had been brought up as a Smithian stratigrapher, were also then busy in England comparing such sequences, helped, in Buckland's case, by the geologically inclined Martha Hare, aunt of Professor Robert Hare in Pennsylvania. The contribution of two of Smith's own trans-Atlantic pupils, G.W. Featherstonhaugh and R.C. Taylor, is discussed in a final section. Taylor emigrated to North America in 1831, again taking his large fossil collection, arranged in Smithian stratigraphic order, with him. He took it with the specific intention that it be used to advance correlations between America and England. The arrival of such good collections of stratigraphically arranged fossils could have been a most important link in the chain of transmission of ideas in this field. More research is needed at the American end, in particular to discover what survives of the collections of these early scientific migrants.