18 THE INSULATION OF ST. MICHAEL'S MOUNT. 
case, would in no way affect the conclusion arrived at :—The in- 
sulation was due, not to the mere wasting of the sea-shore, but to 
a general subsidence of the country. 
Should the further question be asked, “‘ What was the date of 
the submergence?” it must be admitted that at present no defi- — 
nite reply can be given. There are several facts, however,—such 
as certain statements and allusions in human history, the deposits 
overlying the forests in some localities, and the amplitude of the 
existing foreshore—which, on being considered, render it impos- 
sible to avoid the conclusion that the date was far removed from 
our own times. 
I. According to Leland the Mount in 1533-40 was in the same 
condition as, and was no larger than, it is at present;* William of © 
Worcester’s estimation, in 1478, of the distance from the main- 
land to the Mount differs little from the distance now ;| Bishop 
Lacy’s encouragement to the faithful in 1425 to complete a cause- 
way between Marazion and the Mount for the protection of life 
and shipping,t denotes that the exposure was as great then as 
it is in our day; and as the Confessor’s charter in 1044 (assuming 
it to be trustworthy) describes the Mount as juata mare—next or 
by the sea—it may be safely concluded that the insulation had 
taken place more than eight centuries ago. 
The earliest known passage, however, supposed to be deserip- 
tive of the Mount, is the famous and oft-quoted one in Diodorus 
Siculus, about 9 B.C.,§ to the effect that the Britons who dwelt 
near the Land’s End, by reason of their intercourse with merchants, 
were more civilized and courteous than the others were; that 
they were the people who dug the tin out of the ground, and cast 
it into square pieces like a die; that they carried it to a British 
island near at hand called Iktis, for at low tide all was dry be- 
tween them and the island, and they conveyed over in carts an 
abundance of tin in the meantime; and that the merchants ex- 
ported it thence to Gaul, through which they carried it on horses’ 
backs to the mouth of the Rhone. 
It is difficult to see how any. one can fail to recognise the 
* Op. cit. Vol. vil., p. 118. 
+ Op. cit. 
+ See Oliver’s Monasticon, p. 28. 
§ Bkev., ch. i. 
