of Italy, was one of the first who applied sound reasoning to these
subjects. The mud of rivers, he said, had covered and penetrated into
the interior of fossil shells at a time when these were still at the
bottom of the sea near the coast. "They tell us that these shells were
formed in the hills by the influence of the stars; but I ask where in
the hills are the stars now forming shells of distinct ages and species?
and how can the stars explain the origin of gravel, occurring at
different heights and composed of pebbles rounded as if by the motion of
running water; or in what manner can such a cause account for the
petrifaction in the same places of various leaves, sea-weeds, and
marine-crabs?"[40]

The excavations made in 1517, for repairing the city of Verona, brought
to light a multitude of curious petrifactions, and furnished matter for
speculation to different authors, and among the rest to Fracastoro,[41]
who declared his opinion, that fossil shells had all belonged to living
animals, which had formerly lived and multiplied where there exuviae are
now found. He exposed the absurdity of having recourse to a certain
"plastic force," which it was said had power to fashion stones into
organic forms; and with no less cogent arguments, demonstrated the
futility of attributing the situation of the shells in question to the
Mosaic deluge, a theory obstinately defended by some. That inundation,
he observed, was too transient; it consisted principally of fluviatile
waters; and if it had transported shells to great distances, must have
strewed them over the surface, not buried them at vast depths in the
interior of mountains. His clear exposition of the evidence would have
terminated the discussion forever, if the passions of mankind had not
been enlisted in the dispute; and even though doubts should for a time
have remained in some minds, they would speedily have been removed by
the fresh information obtained almost immediately afterwards, respecting
the structure of fossil remains, and of their living analogues.

But the clear and philosophical views of Fracastoro were disregarded,
and the talent and argumentative powers of the learned were doomed for
three centuries to be wasted in the discussion of these two simple and
preliminary questions: first, whether fossil remains had ever belonged
to living creatures; and, secondly, whether, if this be admitted, all
the phenomena could not be explained by the deluge of Noah. I