FLOOD
600
FLOOD
2. The truth of the Mosaic historj'- of the deluge is confirmed by the tradition of it which universally ob- tained. A tradition of tlie deluye, in many respects accurately coinciding with the Mosaic account, has been preserved almost universally among the ancient nations. It is a verj* remarkable fact concerning the deluge that the memory of almost all nations begins v.'.'th the history of it, even of those nations which were imknown until they were discovered by enterprising voyagers and travellers ; and that traditions of the deluge were kept up in all the rites and ceremonies of the Gentile world ; and it is observable that, the farther we go back, the more vivid the traces appear, especially in those countries which were nearest to the scene of action. Such narratives have formed part of the rude belief of the Eg)'ptians, Chaldaeans, Greeks, Scythians, and Celtic tribes. They have also been discovered among the Peruvians and Mexicans, the aborigines of Cuba, North America, and the South-Sea Islands. See Ararat.
3. The account furnished by the sacred historian is circumstantially distinct, and the whole is expresslj^ ascribed to divine agency: but in several of the lesser particulars secondary causes, as rain, "the opening of the windows of heaven" (vii, 11), and the "breaking up of the fountains of the great deep," are mentioned, and again tlie effect of wind in drying up the waters (viii, 1). It is chiefl}' to be remarked that the whole event is represented as both commencing and termina- ting in the most gradual and quiet manner, without anything at all resembling the catastrophes and con- vulsions often pictured in vulgar imagination as ac- companying it. When the waters subsided, so little w^is the surface of tlie earth changed that the vegeta- tion continued uninjured; the olive-trees remained from which the dove brought its token. We allude partic- ularly to these circumstances in the narrative as being those which bear most upon the probable nature and extent of the event, which it is our main object in the present article to examine, according to the tenor of what little evidence can be collected on the subject, whether from the terms of the narrative, or from other sources of information which may be opened to us by the researches of science. See Cockburn, Inquiry into the Truth and Certainty of the Mosaic Deluge (London, 1750).
The evidence which geology may disclose, and which can in any degree bear on our present subject, must, from the nature of the case, be confined to indications of superficial action attributable to the agency of wa- ter, subsequent to the latest period of the regular geo- logical formations, and corresponding in character to a temporary inundation of a quiet and tranquil nature, of a depth sufficient to cover the highest mountains, and, lastly (as indeed this condition implies), extend- ing over tlie whole globe ; or, if these conditions should not l>e fullillod, tlien indications of at least something approaching to this, or with which the terms of tlie description may be fairly understood and interpreted to correspond. (See Prof. Hitchcock, on " The His- torical and Geological Deluges compared," in the Bih. Repos. January, 1837; April, 1837; April, 1838; also Brown's translation of "twelve dissertations" [on the Flood] out of Lo Clerc [Commentary, i, G6-70, 1710] on (icnesis, London, 1090.) Of those geological facts which seem to lioar at all upon such an inquirj', the first, psrhaps, which strikes us is the occurrence of what was formerly all included under the common name of diluvium, liut which more modern research has separated into many distinct classes. The general term may, liowever, not inaptly describe superficial ac- cumulations, whether of soil, sand, gravel, or loose ag- gregations of larger blocks, which are found to prevail over large tracts of the earth's surface, and are mani- festly superinduced over the deposits of different ages, witli which they have no connection. An examina- tion of the contents of this accumulated detritus soon
showed the diversified nature of the fragments of which it is composed in different localities. The general re- sult, as bearing on our present sulijcct, is obviously tliis: tlie traces of currents, and the like, which the surface of the earth does exhibit, and which might be ascribed to diluvial action of some kind, are certainly not the results of one universal simultaneous submerg- ence, but of many distinct, local, aqueous forces, for the most part continued in action for long periods, and of a kind prcciselj' analogous to such agency as is now at work. Wliile, further, many parts of the existing surface show no traces of such operations ; and the phenomena of the volcanic districts prove distinctly that during the enormous periods which have elapsed since the craters wore active, no deluge could possibly have passed over tliem without removing all those ligliter portions of their exuvia; which have evidently remained wholly untouched since they were ejected. Upon the whole, it is thus apparent that we have no evidence whatever of any great aqueous revolution at any comparatively recent period having affected the earth's surface over any considerable tract: changes, doubtless, may have been produced on a small scale in isolated districts. The phenomena presented by caves containing bones, as at Kirkdale and other localities, are not of a kind forming any breach in the continuity of the analogies l)y which all the changes in the sur- face are more and more seen to have been carried on. But a recent simultaneous influx of water covering the globe, and ascending above the level of the mountains, must have left indisputable traces of its influence, which not only is not the case, but against wliich we have seen posiiice facts standing out. Such traces must especiallj' be expected to be found in the masses of human remains which such a deluge must have im- bedded in the strata of soil and detritus, if these were formed by that event. Now it is quite notorious that no bed indisputabl}^ attributable to diluvial action has ever been found containing a single bone or tooth of the human species. We must therefore contend that no evidence h'ls yet been adduced of any deposit which can be identified with the Noachian deluge. See Ge- ology.