VI PKEFACE 



therefore giv. at greater length in the following 

 pages. 



It may be though t by many of my geological 

 friends that the hypothesis put for.vard involves too 

 much catastrophic action. There is however, I 

 consider, sufficient evidence to warrant the in-, 

 ferences I have drawn fro: a the facts described, as 

 well as reason to believe th-.t the Tradition could not 

 have had its origin otherwise than in an event of 

 a very exceptional and extraordinary character 

 far more so than any that could have resulted 

 from ordin< v river floods. It seemed also to me 

 impossible to account for the special geological 

 phenomena on which th hypotl -is is based by any 

 agency of v/hic^ our time has aiTorded us experience, 

 so that we must judge of the cause of their origin 

 by the re Its as tLcy are now to be observed 

 and interpreted, and not by any assumed postu- 

 lates. Many explanations have b n suggested 

 for par Is, but none have embraced the whole of 

 the geological phenomena. Led to suspect the 

 possibility of an unnnial form of water agency, 

 I put the ca;i of a Submergence and subsequent 

 Emergence hypol . Lically, and found that the con- 

 sequences which resulted agreed in a remarkable 

 manner with the observed facts. In an}' hypothesis 

 fra; xl to meet the incidents recorded in the Nar- 

 rative of the Flood, care must be tnken to separate 

 those statements which conform to natural causes 



