This great question of how plants came on the earth, and particularly
how from these apparently simplest organisms our whole wonderful
vegetation has arisen, has always been one of the most interesting
things in the history of the world. There are many different ways of
studying this, and in the very earliest stages of plant development we
are forced to reason, not so much by actual records or buried skeletons
of the plants that probably existed then, for only a very few have ever
been found, but by our knowledge of the physical and chemical
requirements of unicellular plants, and those slightly more developed,
and of their individual life histories. It is, for instance, certain
that the first plants must have been aquatic, as no real land plants are
known for hundreds of thousands of years after the earth was quite
capable of maintaining plant life. The absolute necessity of water to
complete fertilization in nearly all cryptogams also makes it fairly
certain that water plants, and these of the simplest nonflowering type,
were the first living things to be found on the earth. And it is more
than a fair inference that these were inhabitants of warm or hot water.
Subsequently, as the water cooled, they may well have been not unlike
the green scum found on ponds to-day.
Of course, the actual origin of life itself is still as much of a riddle
as it was when the ancient philosophers began to speculate about it
years before the Christian era. Protoplasm, the unit or basis of all
life, while its composition and growth requirements are fairly well
known, has never been made in any laboratory. Nor have scientists ever
been able to decide what the combination of physical and chemical forces
must have been to originate it. But that from a perfectly sterile,
probably steaming hot globe, there did finally develop some form of
life, and that this must have been aquatic plant rather than animal
life, seems not only certain, but the only hypothesis upon which all
subsequent development of life must have been based. It is not necessary
to ascribe the origin of life to providential inspiration nor to the
meddling of strange and outlandish deities, as all savage tribes did and
some more civilized peoples still do. There can, however, be no escaping
the fact that life is more than the combination of physical and chemical
conditions which sustain it, and that its origin has never, and may
never be “explained” by merely describing the conditions which
unquestionably favored its appearance. In other words, the origin of
plant life throws us back upon things believed but incapable of proof,
and is none the less wonderful because we cannot yet understand the
probable progression of forces and materials to which it owes its
origin.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account