The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Rise and Progress of Palaeontology
    
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The Rise and Progress of Palaeontology

Author: Thomas Henry Huxley

Release date: May 1, 2001 [eBook #2628]
                Most recently updated: December 3, 2008

Language: English

Credits: Produced by D. R. Thompson, and David Widger


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE RISE AND PROGRESS OF PALAEONTOLOGY ***




Produced by D. R. Thompson





THE RISE AND PROGRESS OF PALAEONTOLOGY

THIS IS ESSAY #2 FROM "SCIENCE AND HEBREW TRADITION"

By Thomas Henry Huxley



That application of the sciences of biology and geology, which is
commonly known as palaeontology, took its origin in the mind of the
first person who, finding something like a shell, or a bone, naturally
imbedded in gravel or rock, indulged in speculations upon the nature
of this thing which he had dug out--this "fossil"--and upon the causes
which had brought it into such a position. In this rudimentary form, a
high antiquity may safely be ascribed to palaeontology, inasmuch as we
know that, 500 years before the Christian era, the philosophic doctrines
of Xenophanes were influenced by his observations upon the fossil
remains exposed in the quarries of Syracuse. From this time forth not
only the philosophers, but the poets, the historians, the geographers
of antiquity occasionally refer to fossils; and, after the revival of
learning, lively controversies arose respecting their real nature.
But hardly more than two centuries have elapsed since this fundamental
problem was first exhaustively treated; it was only in the last century
that the archaeological value of fossils--their importance, I mean, as
records of the history of the earth--was fully recognised; the first
adequate investigation of the fossil remains of any large group of
vertebrated animals is to be found in Cuvier's "Recherches sur les
Ossemens Fossiles," completed in 1822; and, so modern is stratigraphical
palaeontology, that its founder, William Smith, lived to receive the
just recognition of his services by the award of the first Wollaston
Medal in 1831.

But, although palaeontology is a comparatively youthful scientific
speciality, the mass of materials with which it has to deal is already
prodigious. In the last fifty years the number of known fossil remains
of invertebrated animals has been trebled or quadrupled. The work of
interpretation of vertebrate fossils, the foundations of which were
so solidly laid by Cuvier, was carried on, with wonderful vigour and
success, by Agassiz in Switzerland, by Von Meyer in Germany, and
last, but not least, by Owen in this country, while, in later years, a
multitude of workers have laboured in the same field. In many groups of
the animal kingdom the number of fossil forms already known is as great
as that of the existing species. In some cases it is much greater; and
there are entire orders of animals of the existence of which we should
know nothing except for the evidence afforded by fossil remains. With
all this it may be safely assumed that, at the present moment, we are
not acquainted with a tittle of the fossils which will sooner or later
be discovered. If we may judge by the profusion yielded within the last
few years by the Tertiary formations of North America, there seems to be
no limit to the multitude of mammalian remains to be expected from that
continent; and analogy leads us to expect similar riches in Eastern
Asia, whenever the Tertiary formations of that region are as carefully
explored. Again, we have, as yet, almost everything to learn respecting
the terrestrial population of the Mesozoic epoch; and it seems as if
the Western territories of the United States were about to prove as
instructive in regard to this point as they have in respect of tertiary
life. My friend Professor Marsh informs me that, within two years,
remains of more than 160 distinct individuals of mammals, belonging to
twenty species and nine genera, have been found in a space not larger
than the floor of a good-sized room; while beds of the same age have
yielded 300 reptiles, varying in size from a length of 60 feet or 80
feet to the dimensions of a rabbit.

The task which I have set myself to-night is to endeavour to lay before
you, as briefly as possible, a sketch of the successive steps by
which our present knowledge of the facts of palaeontology and of those
conclusions from them which are indisputable, has been attained; and I
beg leave to remind you, at the outset, that in attempting to sketch
the progress of a branch of knowledge to which innumerable labours
have contributed, my business is rather with generalisations than with
details. It is my object to mark the epochs of palaeontology, not to
recount all the events of its history.

That which I just now called the fundamental problem of palaeontology,
the question which has to be settled before any other can be profitably
discussed, is this, What is the nature of fossils? Are they, as the
healthy common sense of the ancient Greeks appears to have led them to
assume without hesitation, the remains of animals and plants? Or are
they, as was so generally maintained in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and
seventeenth centuries, mere figured stones, portions of mineral matter
which have assumed the forms of leaves and shells and bones, just as
those portions of mineral matter which we call crystals take on the form
of regular geometrical solids? Or, again, are they, as others thought,
the products of the germs of animals and of the seeds of plants which
have lost their way, as it were, in the bowels of the earth, and have
achieved only an imperfect and abortive development? It is easy to sneer
at our ancestors for being disposed to reject the first in favour of one
or other of the last two hypotheses; but it is much more profitable to
try to discover why they, who were really not one whit less sensible
persons than our excellent selves, should have been led to entertain
views which strike us as absurd, The belief in what is erroneously
called spontaneous generation, that is to say, in the development
of living matter out of mineral matter, apart from the agency of
pre-existing living matter, as an ordinary occurrence at the present
day--which is still held by some of us, was universally accepted as an
obvious truth by them. They could point to the arborescent forms
assumed by hoar-frost and by sundry metallic minerals as evidence of the
existence in nature of a "plastic force" competent to enable inorganic
matter to assume the form of organised bodies. Then, as every one who is
familiar with fossils knows, they present innumerable gradations, from
shells and bones which exactly resemble the recent objects, to masses of
mere stone which, however accurately they repeat the outward form of the
organic body, have nothing else in common with it; and, thence, to mere
traces and faint impressions in the continuous substance of the rock.
What we now know to be the results of the chemical changes which take
place in the course of fossilisation, by which mineral is substituted
for organic substance, might, in the absence of such knowledge, be
fairly interpreted as the expression of a process of development in the
opposite direction--from the mineral to the organic. Moreover, in an age
when it would have seemed the most absurd of paradoxes to suggest that
the general level of the sea is constant, while that of the solid land
fluctuates up and down through thousands of feet in a secular ground
swell, it may well have appeared far less hazardous to conceive that
fossils are sports of nature than to accept the necessary alternative,
that all the inland regions and highlands, in the rocks of which marine
shells had been found, had once been covered by the ocean. It is not so
surprising, therefore, as it may at first seem, that although such men
as Leonardo da Vinci and Bernard Palissy took just views of the nature
of fossils, the opinion of the majority of their contemporaries set
strongly the other way; nor even that error maintained itself long after
the scientific grounds of the true interpretation of fossils had been
stated, in a manner that left nothing to be desired, in the latter half
of the seventeenth century. The person who rendered this good service
to palaeontology was Nicolas Steno, professor of anatomy in Florence,
though a Dane by birth. Collectors of fossils at that day were familiar
with certain bodies termed "glossopetrae," and speculation was rife as
to their nature. In the first half of the seventeenth century, Fabio
Colonna had tried to convince his colleagues of the famous Accademia dei
Lincei that the glossopetrae were merely fossil sharks' teeth, but his
arguments made no impression. Fifty years later, Steno re-opened the
question, and, by dissecting the head of a shark and pointing out the
very exact correspondence of its teeth with the glossopetrae, left no
rational doubt as to the origin of the latter. Thus far, the work of
Steno went little further than that of Colonna, but it fortunately
occurred to him to think out the whole subject of the interpretation of
fossils, and the result of his meditations was the publication, in 1669,
of a little treatise with the very quaint title of "De Solido intra
Solidum naturaliter contento." The general course of Steno's argument
may be stated in a few words. Fossils are solid bodies which, by some
natural process, have come to be contained within other solid bodies,
namely, the rocks in which they are embedded; and the fundamental
problem of palaeontology, stated generally, is this: "Given a body
endowed with a certain shape and produced in accordance with natural
laws, to find in that body itself the evidence of the place and manner
of its production." [1] The only way of solving this problem is by the
application of the axiom that "like effects imply like causes," or as
Steno puts it, in reference to this particular case, that "bodies which
are altogether similar have been produced in the same way." [2] Hence,
since the glossopetrae are altogether similar to sharks' teeth, they
must have been produced by sharklike fishes; and since many fossil
shells correspond, down to the minutest details of structure, with the
shells of existing marine or freshwater animals, they must have been
produced by similar animals; and the like reasoning is applied by
Steno to the fossil bones of vertebrated animals, whether aquatic
or terrestrial. To the obvious objection that many fossils are not
altogether similar to their living analogues, differing in substance
while agreeing in form, or being mere hollows or impressions, the
surfaces of which are figured in the same way as those of animal or
vegetable organisms, Steno replies by pointing out the changes which
take place in organic remains embedded in the earth, and how their solid
substance may be dissolved away entirely, or replaced by mineral matter,
until nothing is left of the original but a cast, an impression, or
a mere trace of its contours. The principles of investigation thus
excellently stated and illustrated by Steno in 1669, are those
which have, consciously or unconsciously, guided the researches of
palaeontologists ever since. Even that feat of palaeontology which has
so powerfully impressed the popular imagination, the reconstruction of
an extinct animal from a tooth or a bone, is based upon the simplest
imaginable application of the logic of Steno. A moment's consideration
will show, in fact, that Steno's conclusion that the glossopetrae are
sharks' teeth implies the reconstruction of an animal from its tooth. It
is equivalent to the assertion that the animal of which the glossopetrae
are relics had the form and organisation of a shark; that it had
a skull, a vertebral column, and limbs similar to those which are
characteristic of this group of fishes; that its heart, gills, and
intestines presented the peculiarities which those of all sharks
exhibit; nay, even that any hard parts which its integument contained
were of a totally different character from the scales of ordinary
fishes. These conclusions are as certain as any based upon probable
reasonings can be. And they are so, simply because a very large
experience justifies us in believing that teeth of this particular form
and structure are invariably associated with the peculiar organisation
of sharks, and are never found in connection with other organisms. Why
this should be we are not at present in a position even to imagine; we
must take the fact as an empirical law of animal morphology, the reason
of which may possibly be one day found in the history of the evolution
of the shark tribe, but for which it is hopeless to seek for an
explanation in ordinary physiological reasonings. Every one practically
acquainted with palaeontology is aware that it is not every tooth, nor
every bone, which enables us to form a judgment of the character of the
animal to which it belonged; and that it is possible to possess many
teeth, and even a large portion of the skeleton of an extinct animal,
and yet be unable to reconstruct its skull or its limbs. It is only
when the tooth or bone presents peculiarities, which we know by previous
experience to be characteristic of a certain group, that we can safely
predict that the fossil belonged to an animal of the same group. Any one
who finds a cow's grinder may be perfectly sure that it belonged to an
animal which had two complete toes on each foot and ruminated; any one
who finds a horse's grinder may be as sure that it had one complete
toe on each foot and did not ruminate; but if ruminants and horses
were extinct animals of which nothing but the grinders had ever been
discovered, no amount of physiological reasoning could have enabled
us to reconstruct either animal, still less to have divined the
wide differences between the two. Cuvier, in the "Discours sur les
Revolutions de la Surface du Globe," strangely credits himself, and has
ever since been credited by others, with the invention of a new method
of palaeontological research. But if you will turn to the "Recherches
sur les Ossemens Fossiles" and watch Cuvier, not speculating, but
working, you will find that his method is neither more nor less than
that of Steno. If he was able to make his famous prophecy from the jaw
which lay upon the surface of a block of stone to the pelvis of the same
animal which lay hidden in it, it was not because either he, or any
one else, knew, or knows, why a certain form of jaw is, as a rule,
constantly accompanied by the presence of marsupial bones, but simply
because experience has shown that these two structures are co-ordinated.


The settlement of the nature of fossils led at once to the next advance
of palaeontology, viz. its application to the deciphering of the history
of the earth. When it was admitted that fossils are remains of animals
and plants, it followed that, in so far as they resemble terrestrial, or
freshwater, animals and plants, they are evidences of the existence of
land, or fresh water; and, in so far as they resemble marine organisms,
they are evidences of the existence of the sea at the time at which
they were parts of actually living animals and plants. Moreover, in
the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be admitted that the
terrestrial or the marine organisms implied the existence of land or
sea at the place in which they were found while they were yet living.
In fact, such conclusions were immediately drawn by everybody, from
the time of Xenophanes downwards, who believed that fossils were really
organic remains. Steno discusses their value as evidence of repeated
alteration of marine and terrestrial conditions upon the soil of Tuscany
in a manner worthy of a modern geologist. The speculations of De Maillet
in the beginning of the eighteenth century turn upon fossils; and Buffon
follows him very closely in those two remarkable works, the "Theorie
de la Terre" and the "Epoques de la Nature" with which he commenced and
ended his career as a naturalist.

The opening sentences of the "Epoques de la Nature" show us how
fully Buffon recognised the analogy of geological with archaeological
inquiries. "As in civil history we consult deeds, seek for coins, or
decipher antique inscriptions in order to determine the epochs of human
revolutions and fix the date of moral events; so, in natural history,
we must search the archives of the world, recover old monuments from the
bowels of the earth, collect their fragmentary remains, and gather into
one body of evidence all the signs of physical change which may enable
us to look back upon the different ages of nature. It is our only
means of fixing some points in the immensity of space, and of setting a
certain number of waymarks along the eternal path of time."

Buffon enumerates five classes of these monuments of the past history of
the earth, and they are all facts of palaeontology. In the first place,
he says, shells and other marine productions are found all over the
surface and in the interior of the dry land; and all calcareous rocks
are made up of their remains. Secondly, a great many of these shells
which are found in Europe are not now to be met with in the adjacent
seas; and, in the slates and other deep-seated deposits, there are
remains of fishes and of plants of which no species now exist in our
latitudes, and which are either extinct, or exist only in more northern
climates. Thirdly, in Siberia and in other northern regions of
Europe and of Asia, bones and teeth of elephants, rhinoceroses, and
hippopotamuses occur in such numbers that these animals must once have
lived and multiplied in those regions, although at the present day they
are confined to southern climates. The deposits in which these remains
are found are superficial, while those which contain shells and other
marine remains lie much deeper. Fourthly, tusks and bones of elephants
and hippopotamuses are found not only in the northern regions of the old
world, but also in those of the new world, although, at present, neither
elephants nor hippopotamuses occur in America. Fifthly, in the middle of
the continents, in regions most remote from the sea, we find an infinite
number of shells, of which the most part belong to animals of those
kinds which still exist in southern seas, but of which many others have
no living analogues; so that these species appear to be lost, destroyed
by some unknown cause. It is needless to inquire how far these
statements are strictly accurate; they are sufficiently so to justify
Buffon's conclusions that the dry land was once beneath the sea; that
the formation of the fossiliferous rocks must have occupied a vastly
greater lapse of time than that traditionally ascribed to the age of
the earth; that fossil remains indicate different climatal conditions
to have obtained in former times, and especially that the polar regions
were once warmer; that many species of animals and plants have become
extinct; and that geological change has had something to do with
geographical distribution.

But these propositions almost constitute the frame-work of
palaeontology. In order to complete it but one addition was needed, and
that was made, in the last years of the eighteenth century, by William
Smith, whose work comes so near our own times that many living men may
have been personally acquainted with him. This modest land-surveyor,
whose business took him into many parts of England, profited by the
peculiarly favourable conditions offered by the arrangement of our
secondary strata to make a careful examination and comparison of their
fossil contents at different points of the large area over which they
extend. The result of his accurate and widely-extended observations
was to establish the important truth that each stratum contains certain
fossils which are peculiar to it; and that the order in which the
strata, characterised by these fossils, are super-imposed one upon the
other is always the same. This most important generalisation was
rapidly verified and extended to all parts of the world accessible to
geologists; and now it rests upon such an immense mass of observations
as to be one of the best established truths of natural science. To the
geologist the discovery was of infinite importance as it enabled him to
identify rocks of the same relative age, however their continuity might
be interrupted or their composition altered. But to the biologist it
had a still deeper meaning, for it demonstrated that, throughout the
prodigious duration of time registered by the fossiliferous rocks, the
living population of the earth had undergone continual changes, not
merely by the extinction of a certain number of the species which had at
first existed, but by the continual generation of new species, and the
no less constant extinction of old ones.

Thus the broad outlines of palaeontology, in so far as it is the common
property of both the geologist and the biologist, were marked out at
the close of the last century. In tracing its subsequent progress I must
confine myself to the province of biology, and, indeed, to the
influence of palaeontology upon zoological morphology. And I accept
this limitation the more willingly as the no less important topic of
the bearing of geology and of palaeontology upon distribution has been
luminously treated in the address of the President of the Geographical
Section. [3]

The succession of the species of animals and plants in time being
established, the first question which the zoologist or the botanist had
to ask himself was, What is the relation of these successive species
one to another? And it is a curious circumstance that the most important
event in the history of palaeontology which immediately succeeded
William Smith's generalisation was a discovery which, could it have been
rightly appreciated at the time, would have gone far towards suggesting
the answer, which was in fact delayed for more than half a century. I
refer to Cuvier's investigation of the mammalian fossils yielded by
the quarries in the older tertiary rocks of Montmartre, among the chief
results of which was the bringing to light of two genera of extinct
hoofed quadrupeds, the _Anoplotherium_ and the _Palaeotherium._ The rich
materials at Cuvier's disposition enabled him to obtain a full
knowledge of the osteology and of the dentition of these two forms, and
consequently to compare their structure critically with that of existing
hoofed animals. The effect of this comparison was to prove that the
_Anoplotherium,_ though it presented many points of resemblance with the
pigs on the one hand and with the ruminants on the other, differed from
both to such an extent that it could find a place in neither group. In
fact, it held, in some respects, an intermediate position, tending to
bridge over the interval between these two groups, which in the existing
fauna are so distinct. In the same way, the _Palaeotherium_ tended to
connect forms so different as the tapir, the rhinoceros, and the horse.
Subsequent investigations have brought to light a variety of facts of
the same order, the most curious and striking of which are those
which prove the existence, in the mesozoic epoch, of a series of forms
intermediate between birds and reptiles--two classes of vertebrate
animals which at present appear to be more widely separated than any
others. Yet the interval between them is completely filled, in the
mesozoic fauna, by birds which have reptilian characters, on the one
side, and reptiles which have ornithic characters, on the other. So
again, while the group of fishes, termed ganoids, is, at the present
time, so distinct from that of the dipnoi, or mudfishes, that they have
been reckoned as distinct orders, the Devonian strata present us with
forms of which it is impossible to say with certainty whether they are
dipnoi or whether they are ganoids.

Agassiz's long and elaborate researches upon fossil fishes, published
between 1833 and 1842, led him to suggest the existence of another kind
of relation between ancient and modern forms of life. He observed that
the oldest fishes present many characters which recall the embryonic
conditions of existing fishes; and that, not only among fishes, but in
several groups of the invertebrata which have a long palaeontological
history, the latest forms are more modified, more specialised, than the
earlier. The fact that the dentition of the older tertiary ungulate
and carnivorous mammals is always complete, noticed by Professor Owen,
illustrated the same generalisation.

Another no less suggestive observation was made by Mr. Darwin, whose
personal investigations during the voyage of the _Beagle_ led him
to remark upon the singular fact, that the fauna, which immediately
precedes that at present existing in any geographical province of
distribution, presents the same peculiarities as its successor. Thus, in
South America and in Australia, the later tertiary or quaternary fossils
show that the fauna which immediately preceded that of the present day
was, in the one case, as much characterised by edentates and, in the
other, by marsupials as it is now, although the species of the older are
largely different from those of the newer fauna.

However clearly these indications might point in one direction, the
question of the exact relation of the successive forms of animal and
vegetable life could be satisfactorily settled only in one way; namely,
by comparing, stage by stage, the series of forms presented by one and
the same type throughout a long space of time. Within the last few years
this has been done fully in the case of the horse, less completely
in the case of the other principal types of the ungulata and of the
carnivora; and all these investigations tend to one general result,
namely, that, in any given series, the successive members of that series
present a gradually increasing specialisation of structure. That is to
say, if any such mammal at present existing has specially modified and
reduced limbs or dentition and complicated brain, its predecessors in
time show less and less modification and reduction in limbs and teeth
and a less highly developed brain. The labours of Gaudry, Marsh, and
Cope furnish abundant illustrations of this law from the marvellous
fossil wealth of Pikermi and the vast uninterrupted series of tertiary
rocks in the territories of North America.

I will now sum up the results of this sketch of the rise and progress
of palaeontology. The whole fabric of palaeontology is based upon two
propositions: the first is, that fossils are the remains of animals and
plants; and the second is, that the stratified rocks in which they
are found are sedimentary deposits; and each of these propositions is
founded upon the same axiom, that like effects imply like causes. If
there is any cause competent to produce a fossil stem, or shell, or
bone, except a living being, then palaeontology has no foundation; if
the stratification of the rocks is not the effect of such causes as
at present produce stratification, we have no means of judging of the
duration of past time, or of the order in which the forms of life have
succeeded one another. But if these two propositions are granted,
there is no escape, as it appears to me, from three very important
conclusions. The first is that living matter has existed upon the earth
for a vast length of time, certainly for millions of years. The second
is that, during this lapse of time, the forms of living matter have
undergone repeated changes, the effect of which has been that the animal
and vegetable population, at any period of the earth's history, contains
certain species which did not exist at some antecedent period, and
others which ceased to exist at some subsequent period. The third is
that, in the case of many groups of mammals and some of reptiles,
in which one type can be followed through a considerable extent of
geological time, the series of different forms by which the type is
represented, at successive intervals of this time, is exactly such as it
would be, if they had been produced by the gradual modification of the
earliest forms of the series. These are facts of the history of the
earth guaranteed by as good evidence as any facts in civil history.

Hitherto I have kept carefully clear of all the hypotheses to which men
have at various times endeavoured to fit the facts of palaeontology, or
by which they have endeavoured to connect as many of these facts as they
happened to be acquainted with. I do not think it would be a profitable
employment of our time to discuss conceptions which doubtless have had
their justification and even their use, but which are now obviously
incompatible with the well-ascertained truths of palaeontology. At
present these truths leave room for only two hypotheses. The first is
that, in the course of the history of the earth, innumerable species
of animals and plants have come into existence, independently of
one another, innumerable times. This, of course, implies either that
spontaneous generation on the most astounding scale, and of animals
such as horses and elephants, has been going on, as a natural process,
through all the time recorded by the fossiliferous rocks; or it
necessitates the belief in innumerable acts of creation repeated
innumerable times. The other hypothesis is, that the successive species
of animals and plants have arisen, the later by the gradual modification
of the earlier. This is the hypothesis of evolution; and the
palaeontological discoveries of the last decade are so completely in
accordance with the requirements of this hypothesis that, if it had not
existed, the palaeontologist would have had to invent it.

I have always had a certain horror of presuming to set a limit upon the
possibilities of things. Therefore I will not venture to say that it is
impossible that the multitudinous species of animals and plants may have
been produced, one separately from the other, by spontaneous generation;
nor that it is impossible that they should have been independently
originated by an endless succession of miraculous creative acts. But
I must confess that both these hypotheses strike me as so astoundingly
improbable, so devoid of a shred of either scientific or traditional
support, that even if there were no other evidence than that of
palaeontology in its favour, I should feel compelled to adopt the
hypothesis of evolution. Happily, the future of palaeontology is
independent of all hypothetical considerations. Fifty years hence,
whoever undertakes to record the progress of palaeontology will note the
present time as the epoch in which the law of succession of the forms of
the higher animals was determined by the observation of palaeontological
facts. He will point out that, just as Steno and as Cuvier were enabled
from their knowledge of the empirical laws of co-existence of the parts
of animals to conclude from a part to the whole, so the knowledge of the
law of succession of forms empowered their successors to conclude, from
one or two terms of such a succession, to the whole series; and thus
to divine the existence of forms of life, of which, perhaps, no trace
remains, at epochs of inconceivable remoteness in the past.




FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: _De Solidoiintra Solidum,_ p.5--"Dato corpore certa figura
praedito et juxta leges naturae producto, in ipso corpore argumenta
invenire locum et modum productionis detegentia."]

[Footnote 2: "Corpora sibi invicem omnino similia simili etiam modo
producta sunt."]

[Footnote 3: Sir J. D. Hooker.]







*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE RISE AND PROGRESS OF PALAEONTOLOGY ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
    at www.gutenberg.org. If you
    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.