CAUSE FOE THE OEIGIN OP THE TKADITION OF THE FLOOD. 291 



Professor T. McK. Hughes, M.A., F.R.S. — I must commence 

 with an expression of regret that we have not got Professor 

 Prestwich with us to-day. 



The points in this paper lead us over a very wide field of 

 inquiry. Sir Henry Howorth has pointed out that we must not 

 always take the simple explanation which presents itself to us 

 from the examination of one section only, but that we must con- 

 sider the whole question from a larger point of view, and we must 

 see how the explanation of given cases fits in with the observa- 

 tions of others, made over a wider extent of country. That is 

 perfectly true ; but on the other hand, if we can prove a particular 

 negative we overthrow the affirmative. The questioii is not 

 whether the waters of the ocean ever rolled continuously round 

 the whole earth — an hypothesis not impossible, as it would take 

 about thirty-six times all the land above sea level to fill the ocean 

 bed, but improbable, because inconsistent with what we know of 

 the persistence of life, and for other reasons. We are considering 

 the suggestion that there was in comparatively recent times a 

 submergence of a transient nature, extending over a limited area, 

 and giving rise to floods of a violent character and great trans- 

 porting power. It has been observed that over the surface, not 

 only of our own country, but in the north of France, and over 

 wide areas in Central Europe and Asia, there is a sujoerficial 

 deposit of loam or gravel or mixed soil. But when in one case 

 we hear of remains of the mammoth being found and in another 

 of nothing but recent animals, we may be sure that the two 

 deposits are not synchronous. There appears to be room to 

 believe that some of the finer deposits are due to dust blown by 

 the wind, as pointed out by Richthoven in China and by Drew 

 in India. We must also bear in mind that there are agents of a 

 very complex kind that move the soil and the rubble at a very 

 low angle over the surface of the ground. It may be observed 

 how changes of temperature and moisture will affect our pave- 

 ments, pushing the kerbstone out, and how the soil travels down 

 a slope and covers ancient foundations. In what does this differ 

 from the material said to have been moved by a wave of trans- 

 lation ? The principal point that is relied upon in proof that it 

 was translated rapidly and is not the result of long continued 

 action, is that both the stones in the rubble and the bones ai'e 

 angular and sharply fractured. But how can the rushing waters 



