1894. SOME NEW BOOKS. 379 



reproduce an outline of the history. We have merely tried to give a 

 general idea of the scope of the volume, which will be welcomed by 

 all who have not the time or opportunity to refer to the original works 

 on which it is based. We need only add that those, too, who desire 

 to study the subject more deeply will find the bibliography at the end 

 a useful guide. 



The Great Ice Age. 

 The Great Ice Age, and its Relation to the Antiquity of Man. By James 

 Geikie, LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., etc. Third edition. Largely rewritten. London : 

 Edward Stanford, 1894. Price 25s. 

 This is a book which, in my view, ought not to have been written. 

 When Mr. James Geikie, in 1873, published the first edition of his 

 " Great Ice Age," it was welcomed by every geologist as a laborious, 

 ingenious, and able argument in favour of a position which was 

 widely held. It contained abundant proofs that its conclusions were 

 based on a wide induction, and whether they were right or wrong, 

 whether they were ephemeral or likely to live, it made no difference 

 to sensible men, who know that most theories are tentative and that 

 it is always a supreme advantage to have even an extravagant theory 

 worked out by an able man. 



When, after twenty years, Mr. Geikie brings out a new edition of 

 his work, largely rewritten, we expect from him, not merely in his 

 capacity as an experienced geologist, but as the occupant of an 

 influential chair in the Universit}' of Edinburgh, and responsible for 

 teaching many young men, that he shall have carefully read and 

 discussed the various objections which have been urged against his 

 facts and his conclusions, and that he shall either answer them or 

 frankly say that fresh light has modified old views. Such a work 

 would have been of great advantage to us all and would have 

 enhanced Mr. Geikie's reputation where, I suppose, he chiefly wishes 

 it to be enhanced, namely, among the younger geologists whose day of 

 triumph is not yesterday or to-day, but to-morrow. 



Instead of this, what have we ? In the first place, a parade of 

 authorities which is really most misleading. Names there are in 

 abundance, some with reputations and some without, but they are 

 virtually all on one side. Of the men quoted and the men whose 

 views are alone considered, some were long ago committed to the 

 same views, and others belong to an official school having an official 

 creed to maintain. What use, therefore, is such a book to anybody ? 

 Who is likely to buy it, or read it, or to learn anything from it, except 

 the unwary amateur, who will not realise that almost every position 

 maintained by Mr. Geikie has been controverted, and that a large 

 part of his arguments are nearly as obsolete as the geological science 

 of De Saussure and De Luc ? 



Mr. Geikie declines to traverse the unwelcome literature where 

 the history of the glacial theory is written. The consequence is that 

 very many so-called discoveries chronicled by Mr. Geikie were made 

 by men long ago, whose work ought to have been recognised. 



There is also a great deal of modification of old views, and of 

 climbing down. How much, only those will realise who take the pains 

 to carefully compare the two editions ; but instead of this being 

 frankly and openly confessed, it is disguised under a specious form 

 of rhetoric. 



Thus Mr. Croll, who was the Dens ex niachind of the first two 

 editions, the inspired prophet who had solved everything, and against 

 whom it was almost treason to argue, is treated very differently in 



