{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_2633/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_2633","id":"gutenberg_2633","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2633","summary":null,"tags":["Bible and science","Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Evolution","Paleontology","Science"],"text":"Produced by D. R. Thompson\n\n\n\n\n\nHASISADRA'S ADVENTURE\n\nESSAY #7 FROM \"SCIENCE AND HEBREW TRADITION\"\n\n\nBy Thomas Henry Huxley\n\n\n\nSome thousands of years ago there was a city in Mesopotamia called\nSurippak. One night a strange dream came to a dweller therein, whose\nname, if rightly reported, was Hasisadra. The dream foretold the speedy\ncoming of a great flood; and it warned Hasisadra to lose no time in\nbuilding a ship, in which, when notice was given, he, his family and\nfriends, with their domestic animals and a collection of wild creatures\nand seed of plants of the land, might take refuge and be rescued from\ndestruction. Hasisadra awoke, and at once acted upon the warning. A\nstrong decked ship was built, and her sides were paid, inside and out,\nwith the mineral pitch, or bitumen, with which the country abounded;\nthe vessel's seaworthiness was tested, the cargo was stowed away, and a\ntrusty pilot or steersman appointed.\n\nThe promised signal arrived. Wife and friends embarked; Hasisadra,\nfollowing, prudently \"shut the door,\" or, as we should say, put on the\nhatches; and Nes-Hea, the pilot, was left alone on deck to do his\nbest for the ship. Thereupon a hurricane began to rage; rain fell in\ntorrents; the subterranean waters burst forth; a deluge swept over\nthe land, and the wind lashed it into waves sky high; heaven and earth\nbecame mingled in chaotic gloom. For six days and seven nights the gale\nraged, but the good ship held out until, on the seventh day, the storm\nlulled. Hasisadra ventured on deck; and, seeing nothing but a waste\nof waters strewed with floating corpses and wreck, wept over the\ndestruction of his land and people. Far away, the mountains of Nizir\nwere visible; the ship was steered for them and ran aground upon the\nhigher land. Yet another seven days passed by. On the seventh, Hasisadra\nsent forth a dove, which found no resting place and returned; then he\nliberated a swallow, which also came back; finally, a raven was let\nloose, and that sagacious bird, when it found that the water had abated,\ncame near the ship, but refused to return to it. Upon this, Hasisadra\nliberated the rest of the wild animals, which immediately dispersed\nin all directions, while he, with his family and friends, ascending a\nmountain hard by, offered sacrifice upon its summit to the gods.\n\nThe story thus given in summary abstract, told in an ancient Semitic\ndialect, is inscribed in cuneiform characters upon a tablet of burnt\nclay. Many thousands of such tablets, collected by Assurbanipal, King\nof Assyria in the middle of the seventh century B.C., were stored in\nthe library of his palace at Nineveh; and, though in a sadly broken\nand mutilated condition, they have yielded a marvellous amount of\ninformation to the patient and sagacious labour which modern scholars\nhave bestowed upon them. Among the multitude of documents of various\nkinds, this narrative of Hasisadra's adventure has been found in a\ntolerably complete state. But Assyriologists agree that it is only a\ncopy of a much more ancient work; and there are weighty reasons\nfor believing that the story of Hasisadra's flood was well known in\nMesopotamia before the year 2000 B.C.\n\nNo doubt, then, we are in presence of a narrative which has all\nthe authority which antiquity can confer; and it is proper to deal\nrespectfully with it, even though it is quite as proper, and indeed\nnecessary, to act no less respectfully towards ourselves; and, before\nprofessing to put implicit faith in it, to inquire what claim it has to\nbe regarded as a serious account of an historical event.\n\nIt is of no use to appeal to contemporary history, although the annals\nof Babylonia, no less than those of Egypt, go much further back than\n2000 B.C. All that can be said is, that the former are hardly consistent\nwith the supposition that any catastrophe, competent to destroy all the\npopulation, has befallen the land since civilisation began, and that\nthe latter are notoriously silent about deluges. In such a case as this,\nhowever, the silence of history does not leave the inquirer wholly at\nfault. Natural science has something to say when the phenomena of nature\nare in question. Natural science may be able to show, from the nature of\nthe country, either that such an event as that described in the story\nis impossible, or at any rate highly improbable; or, on the other hand,\nthat it is consonant with probability. In the former case, the narrative\nmust be suspected or rejected; in the latter, no such summary verdict\ncan be given: on the contrary, it must be admitted that the story may be\ntrue. And then, if certain strangely prevalent canons of criticism are\naccepted, and if the evidence that an event might have happened is to be\naccepted as proof that it did happen, Assyriologists will be at liberty\nto congratulate one another on the \"confirmation by modern science\" of\nthe authority of their ancient books.\n\nIt will be interesting, therefore, to inquire how far the physical\nstructure and the other conditions of the region in which Surippak\nwas situated are compatible with such a flood as is described in the\nAssyrian record.\n\nThe scene of Hasisadra's adventure is laid in the broad valley, six or\nseven hundred miles long, and hardly anywhere less than a hundred\nmiles in width, which is traversed by the lower courses of the rivers\nEuphrates and Tigris, and which is commonly known as the \"Euphrates\nvalley.\" Rising, at the one end, into a hill country, which gradually\npasses into the Alpine heights of Armenia; and, at the other, dipping\nbeneath the shallow waters of the head of the Persian Gulf, which\ncontinues in the same direction, from north-west to south-east, for some\neight hundred miles farther, the floor of the valley presents a gradual\nslope, from eight hundred feet above the sea level to the depths of the\nsouthern end of the Persian Gulf. The boundary between sea and land,\nformed by the extremest mudflats of the delta of the two rivers, is\nbut vaguely defined; and, year by year, it advances seaward. On the\nnorth-eastern side, the western frontier ranges of Persia rise abruptly\nto great heights; on the south-western side, a more gradual ascent leads\nto a table-land of less elevation, which, very broad in the south, where\nit is occupied by the deserts of Arabia and of Southern Syria, narrows,\nnorthwards, into the highlands of Palestine, and is continued by\nthe ranges of the Lebanon, the Antilebanon, and the Taurus, into the\nhighlands of Armenia.\n\nThe wide and gently inclined plain, thus inclosed between the gulf\nand the highlands, on each side and at its upper extremity, is\ndistinguishable into two regions of very different character, one of\nwhich lies north, and the other south of the parallel of Hit, on the\nEuphrates. Except in the immediate vicinity of the river, the northern\ndivision is stony and scantily covered with vegetation, except in\nspring. Over the southern division, on the contrary, spreads a deep\nalluvial soil, in which even a pebble is rare; and which, though, under\nthe existing misrule, mainly a waste of marsh and wilderness, needs\nonly intelligent attention to become, as it was of old, the granary of\nwestern Asia. Except in the extreme south, the rainfall is small and\nthe air dry. The heat in summer is intense, while bitterly cold northern\nblasts sweep the plain in winter. Whirlwinds are not uncommon; and, in\nthe intervals of the periodical inundations, the fine, dry, powdery\nsoil is swept, even by moderate breezes, into stifling clouds, or rather\nfogs, of dust. Low inequalities, elevations here and depressions there,\ndiversify the surface of the alluvial region. The latter are occupied\nby enormous marshes, while the former support the permanent dwellings of\nthe present scanty and miserable population.\n\nIn antiquity, so long as the canalisation of the country was properly\ncarried out, the fertility of the alluvial plain enabled great and\nprosperous nations to have their home in the Euphrates valley. Its\nabundant clay furnished the materials for the masses of sun-dried and\nburnt bricks, the remains of which, in the shape of huge artificial\nmounds, still testify to both the magnitude and the industry of the\npopulation, thousands of years ago. Good cement is plentiful, while\nthe bitumen, which wells from the rocks at Hit and elsewhere, not\nonly answers the same purpose, but is used to this day, as it was in\nHasisadra's time, to pay the inside and the outside of boats.\n\nIn the broad lower course of the Euphrates, the stream rarely acquires\na velocity of more than three miles an hour, while the lower Tigris\nattains double that rate in times of flood. The water of both great\nrivers is mainly derived from the northern and eastern highlands in\nArmenia and in Kurdistan, and stands at its lowest level in early autumn\nand in January. But when the snows accumulated in the upper basins of\nthe great rivers, during the winter, melt under the hot sunshine of\nspring, they rapidly rise, [1] and at length overflow their banks,\ncovering the alluvial plain with a vast inland sea, interrupted only\nby the higher ridges and hummocks which form islands in a seemingly\nboundless expanse of water.\n\nIn the occurrence of these annual inundations lies one of several\nresemblances between the valley of the Euphrates and that of the Nile.\nBut there are important differences. The time of the annual flood is\nreversed, the Nile being highest in autumn and winter, and lowest in\nspring and early summer. The periodical overflows of the Nile, regulated\nby the great lake basins in the south, are usually punctual in arrival,\ngradual in growth, and beneficial in operation. No lakes are interposed\nbetween the mountain torrents of the upper basis of the Tigris and the\nEuphrates and their lower courses. Hence, heavy rain, or an unusually\nrapid thaw in the uplands, gives rise to the sudden irruption of a vast\nvolume of water which not even the rapid Tigris, still less its more\nsluggish companion, can carry off in time to prevent violent and\ndangerous overflows. Without an elaborate system of canalisation,\nproviding an escape for such sudden excesses of the supply of water,\nthe annual floods of the Euphrates, and especially of the Tigris, must\nalways be attended with risk, and often prove harmful.\n\nThere are other peculiarities of the Euphrates valley which may\noccasionally tend to exacerbate the evils attendant on the inundations.\nIt is very subject to seismic disturbances; and the ordinary\nconsequences of a sharp earthquake shock might be seriously complicated\nby its effect on a broad sheet of water. Moreover the Indian Ocean lies\nwithin the region of typhoons; and if, at the height of an inundation,\na hurricane from the south-east swept up the Persian Gulf, driving its\nshallow waters upon the delta and damming back the outflow, perhaps for\nhundreds of miles up-stream, a diluvial catastrophe, fairly up to the\nmark of Hasisadra's, might easily result. [2]\n\nThus there seems to be no valid reason for rejecting Hasisadra's\nstory on physical grounds. I do not gather from the narrative that the\n\"mountains of Nizir\" were supposed to be submerged, but merely that they\ncame into view above the distant horizon of the waters, as the vessel\ndrove in that direction. Certainly the ship is not supposed to ground on\nany of their higher summits, for Hasisadra has to ascend a peak in order\nto offer his sacrifice. The country of Nizir lay on the north-eastern\nside of the Euphrates valley, about the courses of the two rivers Zab,\nwhich enter the Tigris where it traverses the plain of Assyria some\neight or nine hundred feet above the sea; and, so far as I can judge\nfrom maps [3] and other sources of information, it is possible, under\nthe circumstances supposed, that such a ship as Hasisadra's might drive\nbefore a southerly gale, over a continuously flooded country, until it\ngrounded on some of the low hills between which both the lower and the\nupper Zab enter upon the Assyrian plain.\n\nThe tablet which contains the story under consideration is the eleventh\nof a series of twelve. Each of these answers to a month, and to the\ncorresponding sign of the Zodiac. The Assyrian year began with the\nspring equinox; consequently, the eleventh month, called \"the rainy,\"\nanswers to our January-February, and to the sign which corresponds with\nour Aquarius. The aquatic adventure of Hasisadra, therefore, is not\ninappropriately placed. It is curious, however, that the season thus\nindirectly assigned to the flood is not that of the present highest\nlevel of the rivers. It is too late for the winter rise and too early\nfor the spring floods.\n\nI think it must be admitted that, so far, the physical cross-examination\nto which Hasisadra has been subjected does not break down his story. On\nthe contrary, he proves to have kept it in all essential respects [4]\nwithin the bounds of probability or possibility. However, we have not\nyet done with him. For the conditions which obtained in the Euphrates\nvalley, four or five thousand years ago, may have differed to such an\nextent from those which now exist that we should be able to convict him\nof having made up his tale. But here again everything is in favour of\nhis credibility. Indeed, he may claim very powerful support, for it\ndoes not lie in the mouths of those who accept the authority of the\nPentateuch to deny that the Euphrates valley was what it is, even\nsix thousand years back. According to the book of Genesis, Phrat and\nHiddekel--the Euphrates and the Tigris--are coeval with Paradise. An\nedition of the Scriptures, recently published under high authority,\nwith an elaborate apparatus of \"Helps\" for the use of students--and\ntherefore, as I am bound to suppose, purged of all statements that could\nby any possibility mislead the young--assigns the year B.C. 4004 as the\ndate of Adam's too brief residence in that locality.\n\nBut I am far from depending on this authority for the age of the\nMesopotamian plain. On the contrary, I venture to rely, with much more\nconfidence, on another kind of evidence, which tends to show that the\nage of the great rivers must be carried back to a date earlier than\nthat at which our ingenuous youth is instructed that the earth came into\nexistence. For, the alluvial deposit having been brought down by the\nrivers, they must needs be older than the plain it forms, as navvies\nmust needs antecede the embankment painfully built up by the contents of\ntheir wheel-barrows. For thousands of years, heat and cold, rain, snow,\nand frost, the scrubbing of glaciers, and the scouring of torrents laden\nwith sand and gravel, have been wearing down the rocks of the upper\nbasins of the rivers, over an area of many thousand square miles; and\nthese materials, ground to fine powder in the course of their long\njourney, have slowly subsided, as the water which carried them spread\nout and lost its velocity in the sea. It is because this process is\nstill going on that the shore of the delta constantly encroaches on the\nhead of the gulf [5] into which the two rivers are constantly throwing\nthe waste of Armenia and of Kurdistan. Hence, as might be expected,\nfluviatile and marine shells are common in the alluvial deposit; and\nLoftus found strata, containing subfossil marine shells of species now\nliving, in the Persian Gulf, at Warka, two hundred miles in a straight\nline from the shore of the delta. [6] It follows that, if a trustworthy\nestimate of the average rate of growth of the alluvial can be formed,\nthe lowest limit (by no means the highest limit) of age of the rivers\ncan be determined. All such estimates are beset with sources of error\nof very various kinds; and the best of them can only be regarded as\napproximations to the truth. But I think it will be quite safe to assume\na maximum rate of growth of four miles in a century for the lower half\nof the alluvial plain.\n\nNow, the cycle of narratives of which Hasisadra's adventure forms a part\ncontains allusions not only to Surippak, the exact position of which\nis doubtful, but to other cities, such as Erech. The vast ruins at the\npresent village of Warka have been carefully explored and determined to\nbe all that remains of that once great and flourishing city, \"Erech the\nlofty.\" Supposing that the two hundred miles of alluvial country, which\nseparates them from the head of the Persian Gulf at present, have been\ndeposited at the very high rate of four miles in a century, it will\nfollow that 4000 years ago, or about the year 2100 B.C., the city of\nErech still lay forty miles inland. Indeed, the city might have been\nbuilt a thousand years earlier. Moreover, there is plenty of independent\narchaeological and other evidence that in the whole thousand years,\n2000 to 3000 B.C, the alluvial plain was inhabited by a numerous\npeople, among whom industry, art, and literature had attained a\nvery considerable development. And it can be shown that the physical\nconditions and the climate of the Euphrates valley, at that time, must\nhave been extremely similar to what they are now.\n\nThus, once more, we reach the conclusion that, as a question of\nphysical probability, there is no ground for objecting to the reality\nof Hasisadra's adventure. It would be unreasonable to doubt that such a\nflood might have happened, and that such a person might have escaped\nin the way described, any time during the last 5000 years. And if the\npostulate of loose thinkers in search of scientific \"confirmations\"\nof questionable narratives--proof that an event may have happened is\nevidence that it did happen--is to be accepted, surely Hasisadra's story\nis \"confirmed by modern scientific investigation\" beyond all cavil.\nHowever, it may be well to pause before adopting this conclusion,\nbecause the original story, of which I have set forth only the broad\noutlines, contains a great many statements which rest upon just the\nsame foundation as those cited, and yet are hardly likely to meet with\ngeneral acceptance. The account of the circumstances which led up to the\nflood, of those under which Hasisadra's adventure was made known to his\ndescendant, of certain remarkable incidents before and after the flood,\nare inseparably bound up with the details already given. And I am unable\nto discover any justification for arbitrarily picking out some of\nthese and dubbing them historical verities, while rejecting the rest as\nlegendary fictions. They stand or fall together.\n\nBefore proceeding to the consideration of these less satisfactory\ndetails, it is needful to remark that Hasisadra's adventure is a mere\nepisode in a cycle of stories of which a personage, whose name is\nprovisionally read \"Izdubar,\" is the centre. The nature of Izdubar\nhovers vaguely between the heroic and the divine; sometimes he seems a\nmere man, sometimes approaches so closely to the divinities of fire and\nof the sun as to be hardly distinguishable from them. As I have already\nmentioned, the tablet which sets forth Hasisadra's perils is one of\ntwelve; and, since each of these represents a month and bears a story\nappropriate to the corresponding sign of the Zodiac, great weight must\nbe attached to Sir Henry Rawlinson's suggestion that the epos of Izdubar\nis a poetical embodiment of solar mythology.\n\nIn the earlier books of the epos, the hero, not content with rejecting\nthe proffered love of the Chaldaean Aphrodite, Istar, freely expresses\nhis very low estimate of her character; and it is interesting to observe\nthat, even in this early stage of human experience, men had reached\na conception of that law of nature which expresses the inevitable\nconsequences of an imperfect appreciation of feminine charms. The\ninjured goddess makes Izdubar's life a burden to him, until at last,\nsick in body and sorry in mind, he is driven to seek aid and comfort\nfrom his forbears in the world of spirits. So this antitype of Odysseus\njourneys to the shore of the waters of death, and there takes ship\nwith a Chaldaean Charon, who carries him within hail of his ancestor\nHasisadra. That venerable personage not only gives Izdubar instructions\nhow to regain his health, but tells him, somewhat _a propos des bottes_\n(after the manner of venerable personages), the long story of his\nperilous adventure; and how it befell that he, his wife, and his\nsteersman came to dwell among the blessed gods, without passing through\nthe portals of death like ordinary mortals.\n\nAccording to the full story, the sins of mankind had become grievous;\nand, at a council of the gods, it was resolved to extirpate the whole\nrace by a great flood. And, once more, let us note the uniformity of\nhuman experience. It would appear that, four thousand years ago, the\nobligations of confidential intercourse about matters of state were\nsometimes violated--of course from the best of motives. Ea, one of\nthe three chiefs of the Chaldaean Pantheon, the god of justice and of\npractical wisdom, was also the god of the sea; and, yielding to the\ntemptation to do a friend a good turn, irresistible to kindly seafaring\nfolks of all ranks, he warned Hasisadra of what was coming. When Bel\nsubsequently reproached him for this breach of confidence, Ea defended\nhimself by declaring that he did not tell Hasisadra anything; he only\nsent him a dream. This was undoubtedly sailing very near the wind; but\nthe attribution of a little benevolent obliquity of conduct to one of\nthe highest of the gods is a trifle compared with the truly Homeric\nanthropomorphism which characterises other parts of the epos.\n\nThe Chald\u00e6an deities are, in truth, extremely human; and, occasionally,\nthe narrator does not scruple to represent them in a manner which is\nnot only inconsistent with our idea of reverence, but is sometimes\ndistinctly humorous. [7] When the storm is at its height, he exhibits\nthem flying in a state of panic to Anu, the god of heaven, and crouching\nbefore his portal like frightened dogs. As the smoke of Hasisadra's\nsacrifice arises, the gods, attracted by the sweet savour, are compared\nto swarms of flies. I have already remarked that the lady Istar's\nreputation is torn to shreds; while she and Ea scold Bel handsomely for\nhis ferocity and injustice in destroying the innocent along with\nthe guilty. One is reminded of Here hung up with weighted heels; of\nmisleading dreams sent by Zeus; of Ares howling as he flies from the\nTrojan battlefield; and of the very questionable dealings of Aphrodite\nwith Helen and Paris.\n\nBut to return to the story. Bel was, at first, excluded from the\nsacrifice as the author of all the mischief; which really was somewhat\nhard upon him, since the other gods agreed to his proposal. But\neventually a reconciliation takes place; the great bow of Anu is\ndisplayed in the heavens; Bel agrees that he will be satisfied with what\nwar, pestilence, famine, and wild beasts can do in the way of destroying\nmen; and that, henceforward, he will not have recourse to extraordinary\nmeasures. Finally, it is Bel himself who, by way of making amends,\ntransports Hasisadra, his wife, and the faithful Nes-Hea to the abode of\nthe gods.\n\nIt is as indubitable as it is incomprehensible to most of us, that, for\nthousands of years, a great people, quite as intelligent as we are,\nand living in as high a state of civilisation as that which had been\nattained in the greater part of Europe a few centuries ago, entertained\nnot the slightest doubt that Anu, Bel, Ea, Istar, and the rest, were\nreal personages, possessed of boundless powers for good and evil. The\nsincerity of the monarchs whose inscriptions gratefully attribute their\nvictories to Merodach, or to Assur, is as little to be questioned as\nthat of the authors of the hymns and penitential psalms which give full\nexpression to the heights and depths of religious devotion. An \"infidel\"\nbold enough to deny the existence, or to doubt the influence, of these\ndeities probably did not exist in all Mesopotamia; and even constructive\nrebellion against their authority was apt to end in the deprivation, not\nmerely of the good name, but of the skin of the offender. The adherents\nof modern theological systems dismiss these objects of the love and\nfear of a hundred generations of their equals, offhand, as \"gods of the\nheathen,\" mere creations of a wicked and idolatrous imagination; and,\nalong with them, they disown, as senseless, the crude theology, with its\ngross anthropomorphism and its low ethical conception of the divinity,\nwhich satisfied the pious souls of Chaldaea.\n\nI imagine, though I do not presume to be sure, that any endeavour\nto save the intellectual and moral credit of Chaldaean religion,\nby suggesting the application to it of that universal solvent of\nabsurdities, the allegorical method, would be scouted; I will not\neven suggest that any ingenuity can be equal to the discovery of the\nantitypes of the personifications effected by the religious imagination\nof later ages, in the triad Anu, Ea, and Bel, still less in Istar.\nTherefore, unless some plausible reconciliatory scheme should be\npropounded by a Neo-Chaldaean devotee (and, with Neo-Buddhists to\nthe fore, this supposition is not so wild as it looks), I suppose the\nmoderns will continue to smile, in a superior way, at the grievous\nabsurdity of the polytheistic idolatry of these ancient people.\n\nIt is probably a congenital absence of some faculty which I ought to\npossess which withholds me from adopting this summary procedure. But I\nam not ashamed to share David Hume's want of ability to discover\nthat polytheism is, in itself, altogether absurd. If we are bound, or\npermitted, to judge the government of the world by human standards, it\nappears to me that directorates are proved, by familiar experience, to\nconduct the largest and the most complicated concerns quite as well as\nsolitary despots. I have never been able to see why the hypothesis of\na divine syndicate should be found guilty of innate absurdity. Those\nAssyrians, in particular, who held Assur to be the one supreme and\ncreative deity, to whom all the other supernal powers were subordinate,\nmight fairly ask that the essential difference between their system and\nthat which obtains among the great majority of their modern theological\ncritics should be demonstrated. In my apprehension, it is not the\nquantity, but the quality, of the persons, among whom the attributes\nof divinity are distributed, which is the serious matter. If the divine\nmight is associated with no higher ethical attributes than those which\nobtain among ordinary men; if the divine intelligence is supposed to\nbe so imperfect that it cannot foresee the consequences of its own\ncontrivances; if the supernal powers can become furiously angry with the\ncreatures of their omnipotence and, in their senseless wrath, destroy\nthe innocent along with the guilty; or if they can show themselves to\nbe as easily placated by presents and gross flattery as any oriental or\noccidental despot; if, in short, they are only stronger than mortal\nmen and no better, as it must be admitted Hasisadra's deities proved\nthemselves to be--then, surely, it is time for us to look somewhat\nclosely into their credentials, and to accept none but conclusive\nevidence of their existence.\n\nTo the majority of my respected contemporaries this reasoning will\ndoubtless appear feeble, if not worse. However, to my mind, such are\nthe only arguments by which the Chaldaean theology can be satisfactorily\nupset. So far from there being any ground for the belief that Ea,\nAnu, and Bel are, or ever were, real entities, it seems to me quite\ninfinitely more probable that they are products of the religious\nimagination, such as are to be found everywhere and in all ages, so long\nas that imagination riots uncontrolled by scientific criticism.\n\nIt is on these grounds that I venture, at the risk of being called\nan atheist by the ghosts of all the principals of all the colleges of\nBabylonia, or by their living successors among the Neo-Chaldaeans, if\nthat sect should arise, to express my utter disbelief in the gods of\nHasisadra. Hence, it follows, that I find Hasisadra's account of their\nshare in his adventure incredible; and, as the physical details of\nthe flood are inseparable from its theophanic accompaniments, and are\nguaranteed by the same authority, I must let them go with the rest. The\nconsistency of such details with probability counts for nothing. The\ninhabitants of Chaldaea must always have been familiar with inundations;\nprobably no generation failed to witness an inundation which rose\nunusually high, or was rendered serious by coincident atmospheric\nor other disturbances. And the memory of the general features of any\nexceptionally severe and devastating flood, would be preserved by\npopular tradition for long ages. What, then, could be more natural\nthan that a Chaldaean poet should seek for the incidents of a great\ncatastrophe among such phenomena? In what other way than by such an\nappeal to their experience could he so surely awaken in his audience the\ntragic pity and terror? What possible ground is there for insisting that\nhe must have had some individual good in view, and that his history is\nhistorical, in the sense that the account of the effects of a hurricane\nin the Bay of Bengal, in the year 1875, is historical?\n\n\nMore than three centuries after the time of Assurbanipal, Berosus of\nBabylon, born in the reign of Alexander the Great, wrote an account of\nthe history of his country in Greek. The work of Berosus has vanished;\nbut extracts from it--how far faithful is uncertain--have been preserved\nby later writers. Among these occurs the well-known story of the Deluge\nof Xisuthros, which is evidently built upon the same foundation as that\nof Hasisadra. The incidents of the divine warning, the building of the\nship, the sending out of birds, the ascension of the hero, betray their\ncommon origin. But stories, like Madeira, acquire a heightened flavour\nwith time and travel; and the version of Berosus is characterised by\nthose circumstantial improbabilities which habitually gather round the\nlegend of a legend. The later narrator knows the exact day of the month\non which the flood began. The dimensions of the ship are stated with\nMunchausenian precision at five stadia by two--say, half by one-fifth of\nan English mile. The ship runs aground among the \"Gordaean mountains\" to\nthe south of Lake Van, in Armenia, beyond the limits of any imaginable\nreal inundation of the Euphrates valley; and, by way of climax, we have\nthe assertion, worthy of the sailor who said that he had brought up one\nof Pharaoh's chariot wheels on the fluke of his anchor in the Red Sea,\nthat pilgrims visited the locality and made amulets of the bitumen which\nthey scraped off from the still extant remains of the mighty ship of\nXisuthros.\n\nSuppose that some later polyhistor, as devoid of critical faculty as\nmost of his tribe, had found the version of Berosus, as well as another\nmuch nearer the original story; that, having too much respect for his\nauthorities to make up a _tertium quid_ of his own, out of the materials\noffered, he followed a practice, common enough among ancient and,\nparticularly, among Semitic historians, of dividing, both into fragments\nand piecing these together, without troubling himself very much about\nthose resulting repetitions and inconsistencies; the product of such\na primitive editorial operation would be a narrative analogous to that\nwhich treats of the Noachian deluge in the book of Genesis. For the\nPentateuchal story is indubitably a patchwork, composed of fragments\nof at least two, different and partly discrepant, narratives,\nquilted together in such an inartistic fashion that the seams remain\nconspicuous. And, in the matter of circumstantial exaggeration, it in\nsome respects excels even the second-hand legend of Berosus.\n\nThere is a certain practicality about the notion of taking refuge from\nfloods and storms in a ship provided with a steersman; but, surely, no\none who had ever seen more water than he could wade through would dream\nof facing even a moderate breeze, in a huge three-storied coffer, or\nbox, three hundred cubits long, fifty wide and thirty high, left to\ndrift without rudder or pilot. [8] Not content with giving the exact\nyear of Noah's age in which the flood began, the Pentateuchal story adds\nthe month and the day of the month. It is the Deity himself who \"shuts\nin\" Noah. The modest week assigned to the full deluge in Hasisadra's\nstory becomes forty days, in one of the Pentateuchal accounts, and a\nhundred and fifty in the other. The flood, which, in the version of\nBerosus, has grown so high as to cast the ship among the mountains of\nArmenia, is improved upon in the Hebrew account until it covers \"all\nthe high hills that were under the whole heaven\"; and, when it begins\nto subside, the ark is left stranded on the summit of the highest peak,\ncommonly identified with Ararat itself.\n\nWhile the details of Hasisadra's adventure are, at least, compatible\nwith the physical conditions of the Euphrates valley, and, as we have\nseen, involve no catastrophe greater than such as might be brought under\nthose conditions, many of the very precisely stated details of Noah's\nflood contradict some of the best established results of scientific\ninquiry.\n\nIf it is certain that the alluvium of the Mesopotamian plain has been\nbrought down by the Tigris and the Euphrates, then it is no less certain\nthat the physical structure of the whole valley has persisted, without\nmaterial modification, for many thousand years before the date assigned\nto the flood. If the summits, even of the moderately elevated ridges\nwhich immediately bound the valley, still more those of the Kurdish and\nArmenian mountains, were ever covered by water, for even forty days,\nthat water must have extended over the whole earth. If the earth was\nthus covered, anywhere between 4000 and 5000 years ago, or, at any other\ntime, since the higher terrestrial animals came into existence, they\nmust have been destroyed from the whole face of it, as the Pentateuchal\naccount declares they were three several times (Genesis vii. 21, 22,\n23), in language which cannot be made more emphatic, or more solemn,\nthan it is; and the present population must consist of the descendants\nof emigrants from the ark. And, if that is the case, then, as has often\nbeen pointed out, the sloths of the Brazilian forests, the kangaroos\nof Australia, the great tortoises of the Galapagos islands, must have\nrespectively hobbled, hopped, and crawled over many thousand miles\nof land and sea from \"Ararat\" to their present habitations. Thus, the\nunquestionable facts of the geographical distribution of recent land\nanimals, alone, form an insuperable obstacle to the acceptance of the\nassertion that the kinds of animals composing the present terrestrial\nfauna have been, at any time, universally destroyed in the way described\nin the Pentateuch.\n\nIt is upon this and other unimpeachable grounds that, as I ventured\nto say some time ago, persons who are duly conversant with even\nthe elements of natural science decline to take the Noachian deluge\nseriously; and that, as I also pointed out, candid theologians, who,\nwithout special scientific knowledge, have appreciated the weight of\nscientific arguments, have long since given it up. But, as Goethe has\nremarked, there is nothing more terrible than energetic ignorance; [9]\nand there are, even yet, very energetic people, who are neither candid,\nnor clear-headed, nor theologians, still less properly instructed in the\nelements of natural science, who make prodigious efforts to obscure the\neffect of these plain truths, and to conceal their real surrender of\nthe historical character of Noah's deluge under cover of the smoke of a\ngreat discharge of pseudoscientific artillery. They seem to imagine that\nthe proofs which abound in all parts of the world, of large oscillations\nof the relative level of land and sea, combined with the probability\nthat, when the sea-level was rising, sudden incursions of the sea like\nthat which broke in over Holland and formed the Zuyder Zee, may have\noften occurred, can be made to look like evidence that something that,\nby courtesy, might be called a general Deluge has really taken place.\nTheir discursive energy drags misunderstood truth into their service;\nand \"the glacial epoch\" is as sure to crop up among them as King\nCharles's head in a famous memorial--with about as much appropriateness.\nThe old story of the raised beach on Moel Tryfaen is trotted out;\nthough, even if the facts are as yet rightly interpreted, there is not\na shadow of evidence that the change of sea-level in that locality was\nsudden, or that glacial Welshmen would have known it was taking place.\n[10] Surely it is difficult to perceive the relevancy of bringing in\nsomething that happened in the glacial epoch (if it did happen) to\naccount for the tradition of a flood in the Euphrates valley between\n2000 and 3000 B.C. But the date of the Noachian flood is solidly fixed\nby the sole authority for it; no shuffling of the chronological data\nwill carry it so far back as 3000 B.C.; and the Hebrew epos agrees with\nthe Chaldaean in placing it after the development of a somewhat advanced\ncivilisation. The only authority for the Noachian deluge assures us\nthat, before it visited the earth, Cain had built cities; Jubal had\ninvented harps and organs; while mankind had advanced so far beyond the\nneolithic, nay even the bronze, stage that Tubal-cain was a worker in\niron. Therefore, if the Noachian legend is to be taken for the history\nof an event which happened in the glacial epoch, we must revise\nour notions of pleistocene civilisation. On the other hand, if the\nPentateuchal story only means something quite different, that happened\nsomewhere else, thousands of years earlier, dressed up, what becomes of\nits credit as history? I wonder what would be said to a modern historian\nwho asserted that Pekin was burnt down in 1886, and then tried to\njustify the assertion by adducing evidence of the Great Fire of London\nin 1666. Yet the attempt to save the credit of the Noachian story by\nreference to something which is supposed to have happened in the far\nnorth, in the glacial epoch, is far more preposterous.\n\nMoreover, these dust-raising dialecticians ignore some of the most\nimportant and well-known facts which bear upon the question. Anything\nmore than a parochial acquaintance with physical geography and geology\nwould suffice to remind its possessor that the Holy Land itself offers a\nstanding protest against bringing such a deluge as that of Noah anywhere\nnear it, either in historical times or in the course of that pleistocene\nperiod, of which the \"great ice age\" formed a part.\n\nJudaea and Galilee, Moab and Gilead, occupy part of that extensive\ntableland at the summit of the western boundary of the Euphrates valley,\nto which I have already referred. If that valley had ever been filled\nwith water to a height sufficient, not indeed to cover a third of\nArarat, in the north, or half of some of the mountains of the Persian\nfrontier in the east, but to reach even four or five thousand feet, it\nmust have stood over the Palestinian hog's back, and have filled, up to\nthe brim, every depression on its surface. Therefore it could not have\nfailed to fill that remarkable trench in which the Dead Sea, the Jordan,\nand the Sea of Galilee lie, and which is known as the \"Jordan-Arabah\"\nvalley.\n\nThis long and deep hollow extends more than 200 miles, from near the\nsite of ancient Dan in the north, to the water-parting at the head of\nthe Wady Arabah in the south; and its deepest part, at the bottom of the\nbasin of the Dead Sea, lies 2500 feet below the surface of the adjacent\nMediterranean. The lowest portion of the rim of the Jordan-Arabah\nvalley is situated at the village of El Fuleh, 257 feet above the\nMediterranean. Everywhere else the circumjacent heights rise to a very\nmuch greater altitude. Hence, of the water which stood over the Syrian\ntableland, when as much drained off as could run away, enough would\nremain to form a \"Mere\" without an outlet, 2757 feet deep, over the\npresent site of the Dead Sea. From this time forth, the level of\nthe Palestinian mere could be lowered only by evaporation. It is an\nextremely interesting fact, which has happily escaped capture for the\npurposes of the energetic misunderstanding, that the valley, at one\ntime, was filled, certainly within 150 feet of this height--probably\nhigher. And it is almost equally certain, that the time at which this\ngreat Jordan-Arabah mere reached its highest level coincides with the\nglacial epoch. But then the evidence which goes to prove this, also\nleads to the conclusion that this state of things obtained at a period\nconsiderably older than even 4000 B.C., when the world, according to the\n\"Helps\" (or shall we say \"Hindrances\") provided for the simple student\nof the Bible, was created; that it was not brought about by any diluvial\ncatastrophe, but was the result of a change in the relative activities\nof certain natural operations which are quietly going on now; and that,\nsince the level of the mere began to sink, many thousand years ago, no\nserious catastrophe of any description has affected the valley.\n\nThe evidence that the Jordan-Arabah valley really was once filled with\nwater, the surface of which reached within 160 feet of the level of the\npass of Jezrael, and possibly stood higher, is this: Remains of alluvial\nstrata, containing shells of the freshwater mollusks which still inhabit\nthe valley, worn down into terraces by waves which long rippled at the\nsame level, and furrowed by the channels excavated by modern rainfalls,\nhave been found at the former height; and they are repeated, at\nintervals, lower down, until the Ghor, or plain of the Jordan, itself\nan alluvial deposit, is reached. These strata attain a considerable\nthickness; and they indicate that the epoch at which the freshwater mere\nof Palestine reached its highest level is extremely remote; that its\ndiminution has taken place very slowly, and with periods of rest,\nduring which the first formed deposits were cut down into terraces. This\nconclusion is strikingly borne out by other facts. A volcanic region\nstretches from Galilee to Gilead and the Hauran, on each side of the\nnorthern end of the valley. Some of the streams of basaltic lava which\nhave been thrown out from its craters and clefts in times of which\nhistory has no record, have run athwart the course of the Jordan\nitself, or of that of some of its tributary streams. The lava streams,\ntherefore, must be of later date than the depressions they fill. And\nyet, where they have thus temporarily dammed the Jordan and the Jermuk,\nthese streams have had time to cut through the hard basalts and lay bare\nthe beds, over which, before the lava streams invaded them, they flowed.\n\nIn fact, the antiquity of the present Jordan-Arabah valley, as a hollow\nin a tableland, out of reach of the sea, and troubled by no diluvial\nor other disturbances, beyond the volcanic eruptions of Gilead and of\nGalilee, is vast, even as estimated by a geological standard. No marine\ndeposits of later than miocene age occur in or about it; and there is\nevery reason to believe that the Syro-Arabian plateau has been dry land,\nthroughout the pliocene and later epochs, down to the present time.\nRaised beaches, containing recent shells, on the Levantine shores of\nthe Mediterranean and on those of the Red Sea, testify to a geologically\nrecent change of the sea level to the extent of 250 or 300 feet,\nprobably produced by the slow elevation of the land; and, as I have\nalready remarked, the alluvial plain of the Euphrates and Tigris appears\nto have been affected in the same way, though seemingly to a less\nextent. But of violent, or catastrophic, change there is no trace. Even\nthe volcanic outbursts have flowed in even sheets over the old land\nsurface; and the long lines of the horizontal terraces which remain,\ntestify to the geological insignificance of such earthquakes as have\ntaken place. It is, indeed, possible that the original formation of the\nvalley may have been determined by the well-known fault, along which the\nwestern rocks are relatively depressed and the eastern elevated. But,\nwhether that fault was effected slowly or quickly, and whenever it came\ninto existence, the excavation of the valley to its present width, no\nless than the sculpturing of its steep walls and of the innumerable deep\nravines which score them down to the very bottom, are indubitably due\nto the operation of rain and streams, during an enormous length of\ntime, without interruption or disturbance of any magnitude. The alluvial\ndeposits which have been mentioned are continued into the lateral\nravines, and have more or less filled them. But, since the waters have\nbeen lowered, these deposits have been cut down to great depths, and are\nstill being excavated by the present temporary, or permanent, streams.\nHence, it follows, that all these ravines must have existed before\nthe time at which the valley was occupied by the great mere. This fact\nacquires a peculiar importance when we proceed to consider the grounds\nfor the conclusion that the old Palestinian mere attained its highest\nlevel in the cold period of the pleistocene epoch. It is well known\nthat glaciers formerly came low down on the flanks of Lebanon and\nAntilebanon; indeed, the old moraines are the haunts of the few\nsurvivors of the famous cedars. This implies a perennial snowcap of\ngreat extent on Hermon; therefore, a vastly greater supply of water to\nthe sources of the Jordan which rise on its flanks; and, in addition,\nsuch a total change in the general climate, that the innumerable Wadys,\nnow traversed only by occasional storm torrents, must have been occupied\nby perennial streams. All this involves a lower annual temperature and\na moist and rainy atmosphere. If such a change of meteorological\nconditions could be effected now, when the loss by evaporation from the\nsurface of the Dead Sea salt-pan balances all the gain from the Jordan\nand other streams, the scale would be turned in the other direction. The\nwaters of the Dead Sea would become diluted; its level would rise; it\nwould cover, first the plain of the Jordan, then the lake of Galilee,\nthen the middle Jordan between this lake and that of Huleh (the ancient\nMerom); and, finally, it would encroach, northwards, along the course of\nthe upper Jordan, and, southwards, up the Wady Arabah, until it reached\nsome 260 feet above the level of the Mediterranean, when it would\nattain a permanent level, by sending any superfluity through the pass\nof Jezrael to swell the waters of the Kishon, and flow thence into the\nMediterranean.\n\nReverse the process, in consequence of the excess of loss by evaporation\nover gain by inflow, which must have set in as the climate of Syria\nchanged after the end of the pleistocene epoch, and (without taking into\nconsideration any other circumstances) the present state of things must\neventually be reached--a concentrated saline solution in the deepest\npart of the valley--water, rather more charged with saline matter than\nordinary fresh water, in the lower Jordan and the lake of Galilee--fresh\nwaters, still largely derived from the snows of Hermon, in the upper\nJordan and in Lake Huleh. But, if the full state of the Jordan valley\nmarks the glacial epoch, then it follows that the excavation of that\nvalley by atmospheric agencies must have occupied an immense antecedent\ntime--a large part, perhaps the whole, of the pliocene epoch; and we\nare thus forced to the conclusion that, since the miocene epoch, the\nphysical conformation of the Holy Land has been substantially what it is\nnow. It has been more or less rained upon, searched by earthquakes\nhere and there, partially overflowed by lava streams, slowly raised\n(relatively to the sea-level) a few hundred feet. But there is not\na shadow of ground for supposing that, throughout all this time,\nterrestrial animals have ceased to inhabit a large part of its surface;\nor that, in many parts, they have been, in any respect, incommoded by\nthe changes which have taken place.\n\nThe evidence of the general stability of the physical conditions of\nWestern Asia, which is furnished by Palestine and by the Euphrates\nValley, is only fortified if we extend our view northwards to the Black\nSea and the Caspian. The Caspian is a sort of magnified replica of the\nDead Sea. The bottom of the deepest part of this vast inland mere is\nabout 3000 feet below the level of the Mediterranean, while its surface\nis lower by 85 feet. At present, it is separated, on the west, by wide\nspaces of dry land from the Black Sea, which has the same height as\nthe Mediterranean; and, on the east, from the Aral, 138 feet above\nthat level. The waters of the Black Sea, now in communication with the\nMediterranean by the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus, are salt, but become\nbrackish northwards, where the rivers of the steppes pour in a great\nvolume of fresh water. Those of the shallower northern half of the\nCaspian are similarly affected by the Volga and the Ural, while, in the\nshallow bays of the southern division, they become extremely saline in\nconsequence of the intense evaporation. The Aral Sea, though supplied by\nthe Jaxartes and the Oxus, has brackish water. There is evidence that,\nin the pliocene and pleistocene periods, to go no farther back, the\nstrait of the Dardanelles did not exist, and that the vast area,\nfrom the valley of the Danube to that of the Jaxartes, was covered by\nbrackish or, in some parts, fresh water to a height of at least 200\nfeet above the level of the Mediterranean. At the present time, the\nwater-parting which separates the northern part of the basin of the\nCaspian from the vast plains traversed by the Tobol and the Obi, in\ntheir course to the Arctic Ocean, appears to be less than 200 feet above\nthe latter. It would seem, therefore, to be very probable that, under\nthe climatal conditions of part of the pleistocene period, the valley\nof the Obi played the same part in relation to the Ponto-Aralian sea, as\nthat of the Kishon may have done to the great mere of the Jordan valley;\nand that the outflow formed the channel by which the well-known Arctic\nelements of the fauna of the Caspian entered it. For the fossil remains\nimbedded in the strata continuously deposited in the Aralo-Caspian area,\nsince the latter end of the miocene epoch, show no sign that, from\nthat time onward, it has ever been covered by sea water. Therefore, the\nsupposition of a free inflow of the Arctic Ocean, which at one time was\ngenerally received, as well as that of various hypothetical deluges from\nthat quarter, must be seriously questioned.\n\nThe Caspian and the Aral stand in somewhat the same relation to the vast\nbasin of dry land in which they lie, as the Dead Sea and the lake of\nGalilee to the Jordan valley. They are the remains of a vast, mostly\nbrackish, mere, which has dried up in consequence of the excess\nof evaporation over supply, since the cold and damp climate of the\npleistocene epoch gave place to the increasing dryness and great summer\nheats of Central Asia in more modern times. The desiccation of the\nAralo-Caspian basin, which communicated with the Black Sea only by a\ncomparatively narrow and shallow strait along the present valley\nof Manytsch, the bottom of which was less than 100 feet above the\nMediterranean, must have been vastly aided by the erosion of the strait\nof the Dardanelles towards the end of the pleistocene epoch, or perhaps\nlater. For the result of thus opening a passage for the waters of the\nBlack Sea into the Mediterranean must have been the gradual lowering of\nits level to that of the latter sea. When this process had gone so far\nas to bring down the Black Sea water to within less than a hundred feet\nof its present level, the strait of Manytsch ceased to exist; and the\nvast body of fresh water brought down by the Danube, the Dnieper, the\nDon, and other South Russian rivers was cut off from the Caspian,\nand eventually delivered into the Mediterranean. Thus, there is as\nconclusive evidence as one can well hope to obtain in these matters,\nthat, north of the Euphrates valley, the physical geography of an area\nas large as all Central Europe has remained essentially unchanged,\nfrom the miocene period down to our time; just as, to the west of the\nEuphrates valley, Palestine has exhibited a similar persistence of\ngeographical type. To the south, the valley of the Nile tells exactly\nthe same story. The holes bored by miocene mollusks in the cliffs east\nand west of Cairo bear witness that, in the miocene epoch, it contained\nan arm of the sea, the bottom of which has since been gradually filled\nup by the alluvium of the Nile, and elevated to its present position.\nBut the higher parts of the Mokattam and of the desert about Ghizeh,\nhave been dry land from that time to this. Too little is known of the\ngeology of Persia, at present, to allow any positive conclusion to be\nenunciated. But, taking the name to indicate the whole continental\nmass of Iran, between the valleys of the Indus and the Euphrates, the\nsupposition that its physical geography has remained unchanged for\nan immensely long period is hardly rash. The country is, in fact,\nan enormous basin, surrounded on all sides by a mountainous rim, and\nsubdivided within by ridges into plateaus and hollows, the bottom of the\ndeepest of which, in the province of Seistan, probably descends to\nthe level of the Indian Ocean. These depressions are occupied by salt\nmarshes and deserts, in which the waters of the streams which flow\ndown the sides of the basin are now dissipated by evaporation. I am\nacquainted with no evidence that the present Iranian basin was ever\noccupied by the sea; but the accumulations of gravel over a great extent\nof its surface indicate long-continued water action. It is, therefore,\na fair presumption that large lakes have covered much of its present\ndeserts, and that they have dried up by the operation of the same\nchanged climatal conditions as those which have reduced the Caspian and\nthe Dead Sea to their present dimensions. [11]\n\nThus it would seem that the Euphrates valley, the centre of the fabled\nNoachian deluge, is also the centre of a region covering some millions\nof square miles of the present continents of Europe, Asia, and Africa,\nin which all the facts, relevant to the argument, at present known,\nconverge to the conclusion that, since the miocene epoch, the essential\nfeatures of its physical geography have remained unchanged; that it has\nneither been depressed below the sea, nor swept by diluvial waters since\nthat time; and that the Chaldaean version of the legend of a flood in\nthe Euphrates valley is, of all those which are extant, the only one\nwhich is even consistent with probability, since it depicts a local\ninundation, not more severe than one which might be brought about by a\nconcurrence of favourable conditions at the present day; and which might\nprobably have been more easily effected when the Persian Gulf extended\nfarther north. Hence, the recourse to the \"glacial epoch\" for some event\nwhich might colourably represent a flood, distinctly asserted by\nthe only authority for it to have occurred in historical times, is\npeculiarly unfortunate. Even a Welsh antiquary might hesitate over the\nsupposition that a tradition of the fate of Moel Tryfaen, in the glacial\nepoch, had furnished the basis of fact for a legend which arose among\npeople whose own experience abundantly supplied them with the needful\nprecedents. Moreover, if evidence of interchanges of land and sea are\nto be accepted as \"confirmations\" of Noah's deluge, there are plenty of\nsources for the tradition to be had much nearer than Wales.\n\nThe depression now filled by the Red Sea, for example, appears to be,\ngeologically, of very recent origin. The later deposits found on its\nshores, two or three hundred feet above the sea level, contain no\nremains older than those of the present fauna; while, as I have already\nmentioned, the valley of the adjacent delta of the Nile was a gulf of\nthe sea in miocene times. But there is not a particle of evidence that\nthe change of relative level which admitted the waters of the Indian\nOcean between Arabia and Africa, took place any faster than that which\nis now going on in Greenland and Scandinavia, and which has left their\ninhabitants undisturbed. Even more remarkable changes were effected,\ntowards the end of, or since, the glacial epoch, over the region now\noccupied by the Levantine Mediterranean and the AEgean Sea. The eastern\ncoast region of Asia Minor, the western of Greece, and many of the\nintermediate islands, exhibit thick masses of stratified deposits\nof later tertiary age and of purely lacustrine characters; and it is\nremarkable that, on the south side of the island of Crete, such masses\npresent steep cliffs facing the sea, so that the southern boundary of\nthe lake in which they were formed must have been situated where the sea\nnow flows. Indeed, there are valid reasons for the supposition that the\ndry land once extended far to the west of the present Levantine coast,\nand not improbably forced the Nile to seek an outlet to the north-east\nof its present delta--a possibility of no small importance in relation\nto certain puzzling facts in the geographical distribution of animals\nin this region. At any rate, continuous land joined Asia Minor with\nthe Balkan peninsula; and its surface bore deep fresh-water lakes,\napparently disconnected with the Ponto-Aralian sea. This state of things\nlasted long enough to allow of the formation of the thick lacustrine\nstrata to which I have referred. I am not aware that there is the\nsmallest ground for the assumption that the AEgean land was broken up in\nconsequence of any of the \"catastrophes\" which are so commonly invoked.\n[12] For anything that appears to the contrary, the narrow, steep-sided,\nstraits between the islands of the AEgean archipelago may have been\noriginally brought about by ordinary atmospheric and stream action;\nand may then have been filled from the Mediterranean, during a slow\nsubmergence proceeding from the south northwards. The strait of the\nDardanelles is bounded by undisturbed pleistocene strata forty feet\nthick, through which, to all appearance, the present passage has been\nquietly cut.\n\nThat Olympus and Ossa were torn asunder and the waters of the Thessalian\nbasin poured forth, is a very ancient notion, and an often cited\n\"confirmation\" of Deucalion's flood. It has not yet ceased to be in\nvogue, apparently because those who entertain it are not aware that\nmodern geological investigation has conclusively proved that the gorge\nof the Penens is as typical an example of a valley of erosion as any to\nbe seen in Auvergne or in Colorado. [13]\n\nThus, in the immediate vicinity of the vast expanse of country which can\nbe proved to have been untouched by any catastrophe before, during, and\nsince the \"glacial epoch,\" lie the great areas of the AEgean and the\nRed Sea, in which, during or since the glacial epoch, changes of the\nrelative positions of land and sea have taken place, in comparison with\nwhich the submergence of Moel Tryfaen, with all Wales and Scotland to\nboot, does not come to much.\n\nWhat, then, is the relevancy of talk about the \"glacial epoch\" to the\nquestion of the historical veracity of the narrator of the story of the\nNoachian deluge? So far as my knowledge goes, there is not a particle of\nevidence that destructive inundations were more common, over the general\nsurface of the earth, in the glacial epoch than they have been before\nor since. No doubt the fringe of an ice-covered region must be always\nliable to them; but, if we examine the records of such catastrophes in\nhistorical times, those produced in the deltas of great rivers, or in\nlowlands like Holland, by sudden floods, combined with gales of wind or\nwith unusual tides, far excel all others.\n\nWith respect to such inundations as are the consequences of earthquakes,\nand other slight movements of the crust of the earth, I have never heard\nof anything to show that they were more frequent and severer in the\nquaternary or tertiary epochs than they are now. In the discussion\nof these, as of all other geological problems, the appeal to needless\ncatastrophes is born of that impatience of the slow and painful search\nafter sufficient causes, in the ordinary course of nature, which is a\ntemptation to all, though only energetic ignorance nowadays completely\nsuccumbs to it.\n\n\n\n\nPOSTSCRIPT.\n\nMy best thanks are due to Mr. Gladstone for his courteous withdrawal\nof one of the statements to which I have thought it needful to take\nexception. The familiarity with controversy, to which Mr. Gladstone\nalludes, will have accustomed him to the misadventures which arise when,\nas sometimes will happen in the heat of fence, the buttons come off the\nfoils. I trust that any scratch which he may have received will heal as\nquickly as my own flesh wounds have done.\n\n\nA contribution to the last number of this Review (_The Nineteenth\nCentury_) of a different order would be left unnoticed, were it not that\nmy silence would convert me into an accessory to misrepresentations of\na very grave character. However, I shall restrict myself to the barest\npossible statement of facts, leaving my readers to draw their own\nconclusions.\n\nIn an article entitled \"A Great Lesson,\" published in this Review for\nSeptember, 1887:\n\n(1) The Duke of Argyll says the \"overthrow of Darwin's speculations\" (p.\n301) concerning the origin of coral reefs, which he fancied had taken\nplace, had been received by men of science \"with a grudging silence as\nfar as public discussion is concerned\" (p. 301).\n\nThe truth is that, as every one acquainted with the literature of\nthe subject was well aware, the views supposed to have effected this\noverthrow had been fully and publicly discussed by Dana in the United\nStates; by Geikie, Green, and Prestwich in this country; by Lapparent in\nFrance; and by Credner in Germany.\n\n(2) The Duke of Argyll says \"that no serious reply has ever been\nattempted\" (p. 305).\n\nThe truth is that the highest living authority on the subject, Professor\nDana, published a most weighty reply, two years before the Duke of\nArgyll committed himself to this statement.\n\n(3) The Duke of Argyll uses the preceding products of defective\nknowledge, multiplied by excessive imagination, to illustrate the manner\nin which \"certain accepted opinions\" established \"a sort of Reign of\nTerror in their own behalf\" (p. 307).\n\nThe truth is that no plea, except that of total ignorance of the\nliterature of the subject, can excuse the errors cited, and that the\n\"Reign of Terror\" is a purely subjective phenomenon.\n\n(4) The letter in \"Nature\" for the 17th of November, 1887, to which I\nam referred, contains neither substantiation, nor retractation, of\nstatements 1 and 2. Nevertheless, it repeats number 3. The Duke of\nArgyll says of his article that it \"has done what I intended it to\ndo. It has called wide attention to the influence of mere authority\nin establishing erroneous theories and in retarding the progress of\nscientific truth.\"\n\n(5) The Duke of Argyll illustrates the influence of his fictitious\n\"Reign of Terror\" by the statement that Mr. John Murray \"was strongly\nadvised against the publication of his views in derogation of Darwin's\nlong-accepted theory of the coral islands, and was actually induced to\ndelay it for two years\" (p.307). And in \"Nature\" for the 17th November,\n1887, the Duke of Argyll states that he has seen a letter from Sir\nWyville Thomson in which he \"urged and almost insisted that Mr. Murray\nshould withdraw the reading of his papers on the subject from the Royal\nSociety of Edinburgh. This was in February, 1877.\" The next paragraph,\nhowever, contains the confession: \"No special reason was assigned.\" The\nDuke of Argyll proceeds to give a speculative opinion that \"Sir Wyville\ndreaded some injury to the scientific reputation of the body of which he\nwas the chief.\" Truly, a very probable supposition; but as Sir Wyville\nThomson's tendencies were notoriously anti-Darwinian, it does not\nappear to me to lend the slightest justification to the Duke of Argyll's\ninsinuation that the Darwinian \"terror\" influenced him. However, the\nquestion was finally set at rest by a letter which appeared in \"Nature\"\n(29th of December, 1887), in which the writer says that:\n\n\"talking with Sir Wyville about 'Murray's new theory,' I asked what\nobjection he had to its being brought before the public? The answer\nsimply was: he considered that the grounds of the theory had not, as\nyet, been sufficiently investigated or sufficiently corroborated, and\nthat therefore any immature dogmatic publication of it would do less\nthan little service either to science or to the author of the paper.\"\n\nSir Wyville Thomson was an intimate friend of mine, and I am glad to\nhave been afforded one more opportunity of clearing his character from\nthe aspersions which have been so recklessly cast upon his good sense\nand his scientific honour.\n\n(6) As to the \"overthrow\" of Darwin's theory, which, according to the\nDuke of Argyll, was patent to every unprejudiced person four years\nago, I have recently become acquainted with a work, in which a really\ncompetent authority, [14] thoroughly acquainted with all the new lights\nwhich have been thrown upon the subject during the last ten years,\npronounces the judgment; firstly, that some of the facts brought forward\nby Messrs. Murray and Guppy against Darwin's theory are not facts;\nsecondly, that the others are reconcilable with Darwin's theory; and,\nthirdly, that the theories of Messrs. Murray and Guppy \"are contradicted\nby a series of important facts\" (p. 13).\n\nPerhaps I had better draw attention to the circumstance that Dr.\nLangenbeck writes under shelter of the guns of the fortress of\nStrasburg; and may therefore be presumed to be unaffected by those\ndreams of a \"Reign of Terror\" which seem to disturb the peace of some of\nus in these islands (April, 1891).\n\n[See, on the subject of this note, the essay entitled \"An Episcopal\nTrilogy\" in the following volume.]\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n\n[Footnote 1: In May 1849 the Tigris at Bagdad rose 22-1/2 feet--5\nfeet above its usual rise--and nearly swept away the town. In 1831 a\nsimilarly exceptional flood did immense damage, destroying 7000 houses.\nSee Loftus, _Chaldea and Susiana,_ p. 7.]\n\n[Footnote 2: See the instructive chapter on Hasisadra's flood in Suess,\n_Das Antlitz der Erde,_ Abth. I. Only fifteen years ago a cyclone in the\nBay of Bengal gave rise to a flood which covered 3000 square miles of\nthe delta of the Ganges, 3 to 45 feet deep, destroying 100,000 people,\ninnumerable cattle, houses, and trees. It broke inland on the rising\nground of Tipperah, and may have swept a vessel from the sea that far,\nthough I do not know that it did.]\n\n[Footnote 3: See Cernik's maps in _Petermanns Mittheilungen,_\nErganzungashefte 44 and 45, 1875-76.]\n\n[Footnote 4: I have not cited the dimensions given to the ships in most\ntranslations of the story, because there appears to be a doubt about\nthem. Haupt (_Keilinschriftliche Sindfluth-Bericht,_ p. 13: says that\nthe figures are illegible.)]\n\n[Footnote 5: It is probable that a slow movement of elevation of the\nland at one time contributed to the result--perhaps does so still.]\n\n[Footnote 6: At a comparatively recent period, the littoral margin of\nthe Persian Gulf extended certainly 250 miles farther to the northwest\nthan the present embouchure of the Shatt-el Arab. (Loftus, _Quarterly\nJournal of the Geological Society,_ 1853, p. 251.) The actual extent of\nthe marine deposit inland cannot be defined, as it is covered by later\nfluviatile deposits.]\n\n[Footnote 7: Tiele (_Babylonisch-Assyrische Geschicthe,_ pp. 572-3) has\nsome very just remarks on this aspect of the epos.]\n\n[Footnote 8: In the second volume of the _History of the Euphrates,_\np. 637 Col. Chesney gives a very interesting account of the simple and\nrapid manner in which the people about Tekrit and in the marshes of\nLemlum construct large barges, and make them water-tight with bitumen.\nDoubtless the practice is extremely ancient and as Colonel Chesney\nsuggests, may possibly have furnished the conception of Noah's ark. But\nit is one thing to build a barge 44ft. long by 11ft. wide and 4ft.\ndeep in the way described; and another to get a vessel of ten times the\ndimensions, so constructed, to hold together.]\n\n[Footnote 9: \"Es ist nichts schrecklicher als eine thatige\nUnwissenheit,\" _Maximen und Reflexionen,_ iii.]\n\n[Footnote 10: The well-known difficulties connected with this case have\nrecently been carefully discussed by Mr. Bell in the _Transactions_ of\nthe Geological Society of Glasgow.]\n\n[Footnote 11: An instructive parallel is exhibited by the \"Great Basin\"\nof North America. See the remarkable memoir on _Lake Bonneville_ by Mr.\nG. K. Gilbert, of the United States Geological Survey, just published.]\n\n[Footnote 12: It is true that earthquakes are common enough, but they\nare incompetent to produce such changes as those which have taken\nplace.]\n\n[Footnote 13: See Teller, _Geologische Beschreibung des sud-ostlichen\nThessalien;_ Denkschriften d. Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, Bd. xl.\np. 199.]\n\n[Footnote 14: Dr. Langenbeck, _Die Theorien uber die Entstehung der\nKorallen-Inseln und Korallen-Riffe_ (p. 13), 1890.]","title":"Hasisadra's Adventure: Essay #7 from \"Science and Hebrew Tradition\"","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":11775}