/ 
Dr. Baubeny on the Geology of Sicily. 51 
The explanation of these phenomena must be reserved for 
another occasion; at present I have only time to advert to 
the facts themselves. 
The volcanic rocks just considered may, in conformity 
with my friend Professor Buckland’s nomenclature, be term- 
ed Antediluvian,* as they have been all subjected to the ope- 
ration of the same general cause to which the formation of the 
valleys must be referred. 
It is therefore plain, that no craters are to be expected to 
exist in rocks so circumstanced, although it has been errone- 
ously stated that there is one on Monte Vennera, and others 
on some of the contiguous hills. ‘The whole of this class, in 
short, though probably not formed, under the pressure of the 
entire ocean, must have been produced, partially at least, un- 
der water, and that at a period antecedent to the existing 
order of things. 
This, indeed appears to be likewise the case with some of 
the lavas that occur in the neighbourhood of Etna, in the 
greenstone of the Cyclopean Islands, near Catania, which, 
though now severed apart from the mainland, and from each 
other, once constituted a continued stratum, that seems ante- 
cedent to the mountain, at the foot of which it is now placed. 
* In adopting this term, I mean to express no opinion with respect to 
the much agitated question, as to the identity of the particular deluge re- 
corded in the Mosaic History, with the cause to which the excavation 
of the valleys and the formation of beds of gravel are to be referred. 
That no cause, or combination of causes, now in operation, could be 
adequate to produce these effects, and that the best mode of accounting 
for them is to suppose the eruption and subsequent retreat of a vast body 
of water acting simultaneously over the whole surface of the globe, I am 
myself fully of opinion; but that this event was the same with that deluge 
which we see alluded to in Holy Writ, is obviously a distinct question, 
and one which I forbear entering upon, as it belongs rather to the pro- 
vince of Theological than of Scientific discussion. I make these re- 
marks, lest I should be accused of adopting a classification founded on 
hypothetical principles, whereas the expression of antediluvian and post- 
diluvian, here used, is merely meant to imply, that the rocks so named 
were formed before or after the period at which the valleys were exca- 
vated, and may, therefore, be received by every one who agrees with 
Professor Buckland so far as to admit, that the latter effects were 
brought about by the simultaneous operation of one general cause; an€ 
not by a succession of partial ones. 
