xxxiv Introduction 



bestowed upon them by Ray and other early naturalists. 1 have 

 not in every case endeavoured to correlate these with the accepted 

 modern scientific titles, partly because the identification is often 

 doubtful, but still more because the book must be read in the 

 historic and not in the strictly scientific spirit. You must think 

 yourself back mentally into Whites position. On the other 

 hand, / have desired to prevent the work from giving currency 

 to really false or exploded views, and still more from being a 

 source of erroneous ideas as to fact, by correcting in the footnotes 

 (for the benefit of young or untechnical readers') the most ques- 

 tionable or mistaken statements and conclusions. Wherever 

 modern science has authoritatively settled some point which was 

 a moot one for White, / have given its decision without its 

 reasons. Wherever it has pronounced with a clear voice against 

 his speculations, I have briefly chronicled its new view. Where 

 possible with absolute certainty, I have substituted accepted 

 modern names ; and I have also brought White's crude local 

 geological nomenclature into line with the terms of modern geo- 

 logists. I have corrected and emended the text where it was 

 clearly faulty ; I have given the more recognised modern names 

 of villages and hamlets in square brackets, while preserving in 

 the text White's spelling ; and I have occasionally added the 

 modern form or equivalent of a ivord which White uses in an 

 obsolete shape or a provincial sense. I have thus confined my 

 work in the strictest sense to the task of editing a classic ; I have 

 not attempted the impossible labour of bringing all its statements 

 up to the modern standard of scientific knowledge. And that no 

 doubt may exist as to what part is the author's and what the 

 editor's, I have enclosed all my oivn additions in the text in 

 square brackets. To my own notes I have added the abbreviation 

 ED. Notes without this addition are therefore those of the 

 original writer. 



While saying all this, I would not ivish in any way to detract 

 from the solid and permanent scientific value of White's remark- 



