126 Analysis of Scientific Books. 



utterly by the deluge. He shews by a learned argument, that 

 the description of the rivers in the garden of Eden, (Gen. ii. 

 11 — 14,) is a marginal gloss in a transcript of the original 

 history, which in time became incorporated with the text ; and, 

 consequently, that no inference, as to the identity of the for- 

 mer and the present habitable earth, can be drawn from that 

 description. He then concludes, from the general result of the 

 preceding inquiry, that the numerous revolutions assumed by the 

 mineral geology " are the offspring of defective investigation 

 and unregulated fancy," and are all reducible to those two 

 only which are recorded in the Mosaical history ; and that in 

 the second question, " relative to the changes which this globe 

 has undergone since its first formation, and to the mode by 

 which those changes were effected, the Mosaical geology has 

 maintained the superiority over the mineral, which it established 

 in the first question relative to the mode by which that first 

 formation was produced." A code of general principles, 

 " which may at all times guide our view in contemplating the 

 phenomena apparent in the globe, and secure us against the 

 fascination of unsubstantial theories," followed by some valu- 

 able general reflections, closes the work. 



We have thus given a pretty circumstantial account of this 

 very interesting volume. The length of our review may per- 

 haps seem to bear a somewhat too large proportion to the size 

 of the book ; but its value is not to be estimated by the number 

 of its pages, and we could not, in justice to our author, con- 

 dense his matter into a smaller compass. Indeed, so pregnant 

 is it in argument, that nothing but a careful perusal of the work 

 itself can give a perfect idea of its merit. The subject is inves- 

 tigated with logical precision, from the commencement to the 

 conclusion. Nothing important is omitted or slurred over, that 

 can fairly be adduced on either side of the question — all is can- 

 didly discussed, and the merit of every statement critically 

 examined. If there be any thing in the work that we think 

 might be improved, it is, that sometimes, though rarely, there 

 is a little unnecessary amplification and repetition ; and in one 

 instance we do not very clearly understand the author's mean- 

 ing. We allude to the part (not noticed in the body of our 

 review) relating to the hebdomadal computation of time. We 

 do not see what exact portions of time he would comprehend 

 in his month and year, nor how those portions are to be de- 

 fined. We wish he had been rather more explicit on this head, 

 and that he had given us the result of Frank's attempt to con- 

 struct a true fundamental chronology, founded on the golden 

 period of the jubilee, which he alludes to. 



The principal features of the work appear to us to be, the 

 inference the author deduces from the sacred record, of two 



