155 
we have in our Journal already on this subject ; but what was omitted 
meets so exactly the point now adduced by Mr. Row, that, not to give him 
the trouble of going on with an argument which is totally untenable, I will 
now read the passage. In the sixth number of our Journal of Transactions 
(vol. ii. page 166) will be found a note on the extinct volcanoes of Auvergne, 
where we have the following, alluding to an article in the Quarterly Review 
of 1844 : — 
44 Referring to the probability that the fires of Vesuvius might have been 
4 quenched before the soil of Italy had. been trod by the sons of Japhet,’ up 
to the time when they again burst forth in the days of Pliny, and referring 
to the remarkable omission of all allusion by that precise writer to the 
destruction of Herculaneum and Pompeii, the reviewer goes on : — 4 Concern- 
ing the destruction of Herculaneum and Pompeii Pliny says nothing, ’ ” 
This is the matter which, according to Mr. Row, ought to have made so 
prodigious a sensation in the history of the time ! 
44 4 — an omission so singular that, as Mr. Lyell truly says, it baffles all 
explanation. Nor is the void of Pliny’s information otherwise than most 
scantily supplied by the sources which might have been expected to afford us 
aid. Amongst the whole body of Greek and Roman writers, three only notice the 
entombment of these polluted communities. Our knowledge of a visitation 
such as no human being had beheld since the destruction of the cities of the 
plain, is derived merely from the casual allusion of the epigrammatist, the 
confused hint of Tacitus, 44 Haustse aut obrutae urbes fecundissima Campaniae 
ora,” and the tradition reported by Dion Cassius. Had Herculaneum and 
Pompeii never been discovered, the accounts transmitted to us of their 
tragical end would therefore have been discredited by the majority of critical 
inquirers, so vague and general are the narratives, or so long subsequent to 
the event.’ ” 
You see, therefore, that what Mr. Row has just been arguing has been fully 
considered and disposed of already. I may observe that it is Sir Charles 
Lyell who is here called 44 Mr. Lyell ” in 1844. 
44 Mr. Lyell thereupon wisely observes : 4 This case may often serve as a 
caution to the geologist, who has frequent occasion to weigh in like manner 
negative evidence derived from the silence of eminent writers, against the 
obscure but positive testimony of popular tradition.’ Perhaps even more 
remarkable than the record of the first outbreak, within the historical period, 
of volcanic activity in the Italian peninsula are the circumstances attending 
the memorials of the last known occurrence of such phenomena in Central 
France. During three years (458 — 460) Auvergne and Dauphine were 
convulsed by violent and continued volcanic eruptions ; streams of lava, 
bursting forth from the summits of the mountains, broke down the cones, 
which ejected continuous ignited showers, attended by earthquakes, shaking, 
as it were, the foundations of the earth. Thunders rolled through the sub- 
terranean caverns ; so awful were the concussions, the sounds, the fires, that 
the beasts of the forest, driven from their haunts, sought refuge in the abodes 
of mankind. Strange as it may seem, these phenomena are commemorated 
by the usages of the Church, and inscribed in the pages of our Liturgy.” 
The argument Mr. Row was proceeding to urge from the supposed silence of 
contemporaneous writers with regard to the eruptions of the mountains of 
Auvergne, is therefore already disposed of. He is simply wrong. The article 
M 2 
