A short review of what hath been already treated of, and in what manner. The several faces and Schemes under which the Earth would appear to a Stranger, that should view it first at a distance, and then more closely, and the Application of them to our subject. All methods, whether Philosophical or Theological, that have been offer’d by others for the Explication of the Form of the Earth, are examin’d and refuted. A conjecture concerning the other Planets, their Natural Form and State compared with ours.
WE have finisht the Three Sections of this Book, and in this last Chapter we will make a short review and reflection upon what hath been hitherto treated of, and add some further confirmations of it. The Explication of the
[paragraph continues] Universal Deluge was the first proposal and design of this Discourse, to make that a thing credible and intelligible to the mind of Man: And the full Explication of this drew in the whole Theory of the Earth: Whose original we have deduc’d from its first Source, and shew’d both what was its Primæval Form, and how it came into its present Form. The summ of our Hypothesis concerning the Universal Deluge was this; That it came not to pass, as was vulgarly believ’d, by any excess of Rains, or any Inundation of the Sea, nor could ever be effected by a meer abundance of Waters; unless we suppose some dissolution of the Earth at the same time, namely when the Great Abyss was broken open. And accordingly we shewed that without such a dissolution, or if the Earth had been always in the same form it is now, no mass of water, any where to be found in the World, could have equal’d the height of the Mountains, or made such an universal Deluge. Secondly, we shewed that the form of the Earth at first, and till the Deluge, was such as made it capable and subject to a Dissolution: And thirdly, that such a dissolution being suppos’d, the Doctrine of the universal Deluge is very reasonable and intelligible; And not only the doctrine of the Deluge, but the same supposition is a Key to all Nature besides, shewing us how our Globe became Terraqueous, what was the original of Mountains, of the Sea-chanel, of Islands, of subterraneous Cavities; Things, which without this supposition, are as unintelligible as the universal Flood it self. And these things reciprocally confirming one another, our Hypothesis of the Deluge is arm’d both breast and back, by the causes and by the effects.
It remains now, that, as to confirm our Explication of the Deluge, we shew’d all other accounts that had been given of it to be ineffectual or impossible, so to confirm our doctrine concerning the dissolution of the Earth, and concerning the original of Mountains, Seas, and all inequalities upon it, or within it, we must examine what causes have been assign’d by others, or what accounts given of these things: That seeing their defectiveness, we may have the more assurance and satisfaction in our own method.
And in order to this, let us observe first the general forms under which the Earth may be consider’d, or under which it doth appear accordingly as we view it more nearly or remotely; And the first of these and the most general is that of a Terraqueous Globe. If a Philosopher should come out of another World out of curiosity to see our Earth, the first discovery or observation he would make would be this, that it was a Terraqueous Globe; Thus much he might observe at a great distance when he came but near the borders of our World. This we discern in the Moon and most of the Planets, that they are divided into Sea and Land, and how this division came, would be his first remark and inquiry concerning our Earth; and how also those subdivisions of Islands, or little Earths which lie in the Water, how these were form’d, and that great Chanel that contains them both.
The second form that the Earth appears under, is that of an uneven and Mountainous Globe. When our Traveller had got below the Circle of the Moon, he would discern the bald tops of our Mountains, and the long ranges of them upon our Continents. We cannot from the Earth discern Mountains and Valleys
in the Moon, directly, but from the motion of the light and shadows which we see there, we easily collect that there are such inequalities: And accordingly we suppose that our Mountains would appear at a great distance, and the shady Valleys lying under them; and that this curious person that came to view our Earth, would make that his second Enquiry, how those Mountains were form’d? and how our Globe came to be so rude and irregular? for we may justly demand how any irregularity came into Nature, seeing all her first motions and her first forms are regular, and whatsoever is not so is but secondary, and the consequence of some degeneracy, or of some decay.
The third visible form of our Earth is that of a broken Globe; not broken throughout, but in the outward parts and Regions of it. This, it may be, you will say, is not a visible form; it doth not appear to the eye, without reasoning, that the surface of the Earth is so broken. Suppose our new Visitant had now pass’d the middle Region of the Air, and was alighted upon the top of Pick Teneriffe for his first resting place, and that sitting there he took a view of the great Rocks, the wide Sea, and of the shores of Africk and Europe; for we'll suppose his piercing Eye to reach so far; I will not say that at first sight he would pronounce that the surface of this Globe was broken, unless he knew it to be so by comparison with some other Planet like to it; but the broken form and figure of many parts of the Rocks, and the posture in which they lay, or great portions of them, some inclin’d, some prostrate, some erected, would naturally lead him to that thought, that they were a ruine; He would see also the Islands tore from the Continents, and both the shores of the Continents and their in-land parts in the same disorder and irregular situation. Besides, he had this great advantage in viewing the Earth at a distance, that he could see a whole Hemisphere together, which, as he made his approaches through the Air, would have much what the same aspect and countenance as ’tis represented with in the great Scheme;Pag. {prr. 118} And if any man should accidentally hit upon that Scheme, not knowing or thinking that it was the Earth, I believe his first thought of it would be, that it was some great broken body, or ruin’d frame of matter; and the original, I am sure, is more manifestly so. But we'll leave our Strange-Philosopher to his own observations, and with him good Guides and Interpreters in his Survey of the Earth, and that he would make a favourable report at his return home, of our little dirty Planet.
In the mean time, let us pursue, in our own way, this Third Idea of the Earth a little further, as it is a broken Globe. Nature I know hath dissembled and cover’d this form as much as may be, and time hath helpt to repair some of the old breaches, or fill them up; besides, the changes that have been made by Art and Humane industry, by Agriculture, Planting, and Building Towns, hath made the face of the Earth quite another thing from what it was in its naked rudeness. As mankind is much alter’d from its Pristine state, from what it was four thousand years ago, or towards the first Ages after the Flood, when the Nations liv’d in simplicity or barbarousness; So is the Earth too, and both so disguis’d and transform’d, that if one of those Primitive Fathers should rise from the dead, he would scarce know this to be the same World which he liv’d in before. But to discern
the true form of the Earth, whether intire or broken, regular or disorder’d, we must in the first place take away all those ornaments or additions made by Art or Nature, and view the bare carcass of the Earth, as it hath nothing on it but Rocks and Mountains, Desarts and Fields, and hollow Valleys, and a wide Sea. Then secondly, we must in our imagination empty this Chanel of the Sea, take out all the Waters that hinder the sight of it, and look upon the dry Ditch, measure the depth and breadth of it in our mind, and observe the manner of its construction, and in what a wild posture all the parts of it lie; according as it hath been formerly represented. Chap. 10And lastly, we must take off the cover of all Subterraneous places and deep Caverns, to see the inside of the Earth; and lay bare the roots of Mountains, to look into those holes and Vaults that are under them, fill’d sometimes with Fire, sometimes with Water, and sometimes with thick Air and Vapours. The object being thus prepar’d, we are then to look fix’dly upon it, and to pronounce what we think of this disfigur’d mass, whether this Exteriour frame doth not seem to be shatter’d; and whether it doth more aptly resemble a new-made World, or the ruines of one broken. I confess when this Idea of the Earth is present to my thoughts, I can no more believe that this was the form wherein it was first produc’d, than if I had seen the Temple of Jerusalem in its ruines, when defac’d and sack’d by the Babylonians, I could have perswaded my self that it had never been in any other posture, and that Solomon had given orders for building it so.
So much for the form of the Earth: It remains now that we examine what causes have been assign’d by others of these irregularities in the form of the Earth, which we explain by the dissolution of it; what accounts any of the Ancients have given or attempted to give, how the Earth swell’d into Mountains in certain places, and in others was deprest into low Valleys, how the body of it was so broken, and how the Chanel of the Sea was made. The Elements naturally lie in regular forms one above another, and now we find them mixt, confounded and transpos’d, how comes this disturbance and disordination in Nature? The Explications of these things that have been given by others, may be reduc’d to two general sorts, Philosophical or Theological, and we will try them both for our satisfaction.
Of Philosophers none was more concern’d to give an account of such things than Epicurus, both because he acknowledg’d the Origin of the Earth to have been from a Chaos, and also admitted no causes to act in Nature but Matter and Motion: Yet all the account we have from the Epicureans of the form of the Earth, and the great inequalities that are in it, is so slight and trivial, that me-thinks it doth not deserve the name of a Philosophical Explication. They say that the Earth and Water were mix’d at first, or rather the Earth was above the Water, and as the Earth was condens’d by the heat of the Sun, and the Winds, the Water was squeez’d out in certain places, which either it found hollow or made so; and so was the Chanel of the Sea made. Then as for Mountains, while some parts of the Earth shrunk and sunk in this manner, others would not sink, and these standing still while the others fell lower, made the Mountains. How the subterraneous Cavities were made according to them, I do not find.
This is all the Account that Monsieur Gassendi (who seems to have made it his business, as well as his pleasure, to embellish that Philosophy) can help us to out of the Epicurean Authors, how the Earth came into this form; And he that can content himself with this, is, in my mind, of an humour very easie to be pleas’d. Do the Sun and the Wind use to squeaze pools of Water out of the Earth, and that in such a quantity as to make an Ocean? They dry the Earth, and the Waters too, and rarifie them into vapours, but I never knew them to be the causes of pressing Water out of the Earth by condensation. Could they compress the Earth any otherwise, than by drying it and making it hard? and in proportion, as it was more dry, would it not the more imbibe and suck up the Water? and how were the great Mountains of the Earth made, in the North and in the South, where the influence of the Sun is not great? what sunk the Earth there, and made the flesh start from the bones? But ’tis no wonder that Epicurus should give such a mean account of the Origin of the Earth, and the form of its parts, who did not so much as understand the general Figure of the Body of it, that it was Spherical, or that the Heavens encompast it round. One must have a blind love for that Philosophy, and for the conclusions it drives at, not to see its lameness and defects in those first and fundamental parts.
Aristotle, though he was not concern’d to give an account how the Earth came into this present form, as he suppos’d it, Eternal; yet upon another consideration he seems oblig’d to give some reason how the Elements came into this disorder; seeing he supposeth, that, according to the order of Nature, the Water should lie above the Earth in a Sphere, as the Air doth above the Water, and his Fire above the Air. This he toucheth upon in his Meteors, but so gently and fearfully, as if he was handling hot coals. He saith the Sea is to be consider’d as the Element, or body of Waters that belongs to this Earth, and that these Waters change places, and the Sea is some Ages in one part of the Globe, and some Ages in another; but that this is at such great distances of time that there can be no memory or record of it. And he seems willing to suppose that the Water was once all over the Earth, but that it dri’d up in certain places, and continuing in others, it there made the Sea.
What a miserable account is this? As to his change or removal of the Sea-chanel in several Ages, as it is without all proof or probability, if he mean it of the Chanel of the great Ocean, so ’tis nothing to the purpose here; for the question is not why the Chanel of the Sea is in such a part of the Earth, rather than in another, but why there is any such prodigious Cavity in or upon the Earth any where. And if we take his supposition, that the Element of Water was once higher than the Earth, and lay in a Sphere about it, then let him tell us in plain terms how the Earth got above, or how the Cavity of the Ocean was made, and how the Mountains rise; for this Elementary Earth which lay under the Water, was, I suppose, equal and smooth when it lay there; and what reason was there, that the Waters should be dri’d in one part of it, more than another, if they were every where of an equal depth, and the ground equal under them? It was not the Climates made any distinction, for there is Sea towards the Poles, as well as under the Æquator; but suppose they were dri’d up in certain places, that would
make no Mountains, no more than there are Mountains in our dri’d Marches: And the places where they were not dri’d, would not therefore become as deep and hollow as the Sea-chanel, and tear the Earth and Rocks in pieces. If you should say that this very Elementary Earth, as it lay under the Waters, was unequal, and was so originally, form’d into Mountains and Valleys, and great Cavities; besides that the supposition is altogether irrational in it self, you must suppose a prodigious mass of Water to cover such an Earth; as much as we found requisite for the vulgar Deluge, namely, eight Oceans; and what then is become of the other seven? Upon the whole I do not see that either in Epicurus's way, who seems to suppose that the Waters were at first within the Earth; nor in Aristotle's way, who seems to suppose them upon the Earth, any rational or tolerable account can be given of the present form of the Earth.
Wherefore some modern Authors, dissatisfied, as very well they might be, with these Explications given us by the Ancients concerning the form of the Earth, have pitch’d upon other causes, more true indeed in their kind, and in their degree, but that fall as much short of those effects to which they would apply them. They say that all the irregularities of the body of the Earth have risen from Earthquakes in particular places, and from Torrents and Inundations, and from eruptions of Fire, or such like causes, whereof we see some instances more or less every Age; And these have made that havock upon the face of the Earth, and turn’d things up-side down, raising the Earth in some places, and making great Cavities or Chasms in others, so as to have brought it at length into that torn, broken, and disorderly form in which we now see it.
These Authors do so far agree with us, as to acknowledge that the present irregular form of the Earth must have proceeded from ruines and dissolutions of one sort or other, but these ruines they make to have been partial only, in this or in that Country, by piece-meal, and in several Ages, and from no other causes but such as still continue to act in Nature, namely, accidental Earthquakes and eruptions of Fires and Waters. These causes we acknowledge as readily as they do, but not as capable to produce so great effects as they would ascribe to them: The surface of the Earth may be a little changed by such accidents as these, but for the most part they rather sink the Mountains than raise new ones: As when Houses are blown up by Mines of powder, they are not set higher, but generally fall lower and flatter: Or suppose they do sometimes raise an Hill, or a little Mount, what's that to the great Mountains of our World, to those long and vast piles of Rocks and Stones, which the Earth can scarce bear? What's that to strong-backt Taurus or Atlas, to the American Andes, or to a Mountain that reacheth from the Pyreneans to the Euxine Sea? There's as much difference between these and those factitious Mountains they speak of, as betwixt them and Mole-hills.
And to answer more distinctly to this opinion, as before in speaking of Islands we distinguish’d betwixt Factitious and Original Islands, so if you please we may distinguish here betwixt Factitious and Original Mountains; and allowing some few, and those of the fifth or sixth magnitude, to have risen from such accidental causes, we enquire concerning the rest and the greatest, what was their Original?
[paragraph continues] If we should suppose that the seven Hills upon which Rome stands, came from ruines or eruptions, or any such causes, it doth not follow that the Alps were made so too. And as for Mountains, so for the Cavities of the Earth, I suppose there may be disruptions sometimes made by Earthquakes, and holes worn by subterraneous Fires and Waters; but what's that to the Chanel of the Atlantick Ocean, or of the Pacifick Ocean, which is extended an hundred and fifty degrees under the Æquator, and towards the Poles still further. He that should derive such mighty things from no greater causes, I should think him a very credulous Philosopher. And we are too subject indeed to that fault of credulity in matter of Philosophizing; Many when they have found out causes that are proper for certain effects within such a compass, they cannot keep them there, but they will make them do every thing for them; and extend them often to other effects of a superiour nature or degree, which their activity can by no means reach to. Ætna hath been a burning Mountain ever since and above the memory of Man, yet it hath not destroy’d that Island, nor made any new Chanel to the Sea, though it stands so near it. Neither is Vesuvius above two or three miles distant from the Sea-side, to the best of my remembrance, and yet in so many Ages it hath made no passage to it, neither open nor subterraneous. ’Tis true some Isthmus's have been thrown down by Earthquakes, and some Lakes have been made in that manner, but what's this to a Ditch nine thousand miles broad? such an one we have upon the Earth, and of a depth that is not measurable; what proportion have these causes to such an instance? and how many thousand Ages must be allow’d to them to do their work, more than the Chronology of our Earth will bear?
Besides, when were these great Earthquakes and disruptions, that did such great execution upon the body of the Earth? was this before the Flood or since? If before, then the old difficulty returns, how could there be a Flood, if the Earth was in this Mountainous form before that time? This, I think, is demonstrated impossible in the Second and Third Chapters. If since the Flood, where were the Waters of the Earth before these Earthquakes made a Chanel for them? Besides, where is the History or Tradition that speaks of these strange things, and of this great change of the Earth? hath any writ of the Origins of the Alps? In what year of Rome, or what Olympiad they were born? or how they grew from little ones? how the Earth groan’d when it brought them forth, when its bowels were torn by the ragged Rocks? Do the Chronicles of the Nations mention these things, or ancient fame, or ancient Fables? were they made all at once, or in successive Ages? These causes continue still in Nature, we have still Earthquakes and subterraneous Fires and Waters, why should they not still operate and have the same effects? We often hear of Cities thrown down by Earthquakes, or Countries swallow’d up, but whoever heard of a new chain of Mountains made upon the Earth, or a new Chanel made for the Ocean? We do not read that there hath been so much as a new Sinus of the Sea ever since the memory of man: Which is far more feasible than what they pretend. And things of this nature being both strange and sensible, excite admiration and great attention when they come to pass, and would certainly have been remembred or propagated
in some way or other, if they had ever happen’d since the Deluge. They have recorded the foundation of Cities and Monarchies, the appearance of blazing-Stars, the eruptions of fiery Mountains, the most remarkable Earthquakes and Inundations, the great Eclipses or obscurations of the Sun, and any thing that look’d strange or prodigy-like, whether in the Heavens or on Earth, and these which would have been the greatest prodigies and greatest changes that ever happen’d in nature, would these have escap’d all observation and memory of men? that's as incredible as the things themselves are.
Lastly, to comprehend all these opinions together, both of the Ancient and Modern Authors, they seem all to agree with us in this, That the Earth was once under another form; otherwise why do they go about to shew the causes how it came into this form. I desire then to know what form they suppose the Earth to have been under before the Mountains were made, the Chanel of the Sea, or subterraneous Cavities. Either they must take that form which we have assign’d it before the Deluge, or else they must suppose it cover’d with Water, till the Sea-chanels were made, and the Mountains brought forth; As in that Fig. pag. 55Fig. 2. p. 56.. And no doubt it was once in this form, both reason and the authority of Moses assures us of it; and this is the Test which every opinion must be brought to, how the Earth emerg’d out of that watery form? and in particular, as to that opinion which we are now examining, the question is, how by Earthquakes, and fiery eruptions, subterraneous Waters, and such like causes, the body of the Earth could be wrought from that form to this present form? And the thing is impossible at first sight; for such causes as these could not take place in such an Earth. As for subterraneous Waters, there could be none at that time, for they were all above ground; and as for subterraneous Exhalations, whether Fiery or Aery, there was no place for them neither, for the Earth when it lay under the Water was a solid uniform mass, compact and close united in its parts, as we have shewn before upon several occasions; no Mines or hollow Vaults for the Vapours to be lodg’d in, no Store-houses of Fire, nothing that could make Earthquakes, nor any sort of ruines or eruptions: These are Engines that cannot play but in an Earth already broken, hollow, and cavernous. Therefore the Authors of this opinion do in effect beg the question; they assign such causes of the present form of the Earth, as could not take place, nor have any activity until the Earth was in this form: These causes may contribute something to increase the rudeness and inequalities of the Earth in certain places, but they could not be the original causes of it: And that not only because of their disproportion to such effects, but also because of their incapacity, or non-existence at that time when these effects were to be wrought.
Thus much concerning the Philosophical opinions, or the natural Causes that have been assign’d for the irregular form of this present Earth. Let us now consider the Theological opinions, how Mountains were made at first, and the wonderful Chanel of the Sea: And these Authors say, God Almighty made them immediately when he made the World; and so dispatch the business in a few words. This is a short account indeed, but we must take heed that we do not derogate from the perfection of God, by ascribing all things promiscuously to his
immediate action. I have often suggested that the first order of things is regular and simple, according as the Divine Nature is; and continues so till there is some degeneracy in the moral World; I have also noted upon several occasions, especially in the Lat. Treat. Chap. II the deformity and incommodiousness of the present Earth; and from these two considerations we may reasonably infer, that the present state of the Earth was not Original, but is a state of subjection to Vanity, wherein it must continue till the redemption and restitution of all things.
But besides this general consideration, there are many others, both Natural and Theological against this opinion, which the Authors of it, I believe, will find unanswerable. 2 Ep. Chap. 3. 5, 6.As first, St. Peter's distinction betwixt the present Earth and the Ante-diluvian; and that in opposition to certain profane persons, who seem to have been of the same opinion with these Authors, namely, that the Heavens and the Earth were the same now that they had been from the beginning, and that there had been no change in Nature, either of late, or in former Ages; These St. Peter confutes and upbraids them with ignorance or forgetfulness of the change that was brought upon Nature at the Deluge, or that the Ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth were of a different form and constitution from the present, whereby that World was obnoxious to a Deluge of Water, as the present is to a Deluge of Fire. Let these Authors put themselves in the place of those Objectors, and see what answer they can make to the Apostle, whom I leave to dispute the case with them. I hope they will not treat this Epistle of St. Peter's so rudely as Didymus Alexandrinus did, an ancient Christian, and one of St. Jerom's Masters, he was of the same opinion with these Theological Authors, and so fierce in it, that seeing St. Peter's doctrine here to be contrary, he said this Epistle of St. Peter's was corrupted, and was not to be receiv’d into the Canon. And all this because it taught that the Heavens and the Earth had chang’d their form, and would do so again at the Conflagration; so as the same World would be Triform in success of time. We acknowledge his Exposition of St. Peter's words to be very true, but what he makes an argument of the corruption of this Epistle, is rather, in my mind, a peculiar argument of its Divine Inspiration. In the second place, these writers dash upon the old rock, the impossibility of explaining the Deluge; if there were Mountains from the beginning, and the Earth then in the same form as it is now. Thirdly, they make the state of Paradise as unintelligible as that of the Deluge; For those properties that are assign’d to Paradise by the Ancients, are inconsistent with the present form of the Earth: As will appear in the Second Book. Lastly, they must answer, and give an account of all those marks which we have observ’d in Nature (both in this Chapter, and the Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh), of fractions, ruines, and dissolutions that have been on the Earth, and which we have shewn to be inexplicable, unless we admit that the Earth was once in another form.
These arguments being premis’d, let us now bring their opinion close to the Test, and see in what manner these Mountains must have been made according to them, and how the Chanel of the Sea, and all other Cavities of the Earth. Fig. 2. {pr. 56.}Let us to this purpose consider the Earth again in that transient incompleat form which it had when the Abysse encompast the whole body of it; we both agree
that the Earth was once in this state, and they say that it came immediately out of this state into its present form, there being made by a supernatural Power a great Chanel or Ditch in one part of it, which drew off the Waters from the rest, and the Earth which was squeez’d and forc’d out of this Ditch made the Mountains. So there is the Chanel of the Sea made, and the Mountains of the Earth; how the subterraneous Cavities were made according to these Authors, I do not well know. This I confess seems to me a very gross thought, and a way of working very un-God-like; but however let's have patience to examine it.
And in the first place, if the Mountains were taken out of the Chanel of the Sea, then they are equal to it, and would fill it up if they were thrown in again. But these proportions upon examination will not agree; for though the Mountains of the Earth be very great, yet they do not equal by much the great Ocean. The Ocean extends to half the surface of the Earth; and if you suppose the greatest depth of the Ocean to answer the height of the greatest Mountains, and the middle depth to the middle sort of Mountains, the Mountains ought to cover all the dry Land to make them answer to all the capacity of the Ocean; whereas we suppos’d them upon a reasonable computation to cover but the tenth part of the dry Land; and consequently, neither they, nor the Sea-chanel, could have been produc’d in this manner, because of their great disproportion to one another. And the same thing appears, if we compare the Mountains with the Abyss, which cover’d the Earth before this Chanel was made; for this Chanel being made great enough to contain all the Abyss, the Mountains taken out of it must also be equal to all the Abyss, but the aggregate of the Mountains will not answer this by many degrees; for suppose the Abyss was but half as deep as the deep Ocean, to make this Calculus answer, all the dry Land ought to be cover’d with Mountains, and with Mountains as high as the Ocean is deep, or doubly high to the depth of the Abyss, because they are but upon one half of the Globe. And this is the first argument against the reciprocal production of Mountains and the Sea, their incongruency or disproportion.
Secondly, we are to consider that a great many Mountains of the Earth are far distant from any Seas, as the great in-land Mountains of Asia and of Africk, and the Sarmatick Mountains, and others in Europe, how were these great bodies flung thorough the Air from their respective Seas, whence they were taken, to those places where they stand? What appearance is there in common reason, or credibility, that these huge masses of Earth and Stone that stand in the middle of Continents, were dug out of any Seas? We think it strange, and very deservedly, that a little Chapel should be transported from Palestine to Italy over Land and Sea, much more the transportation of Mount Atlas or Taurus thorough the Air, or of a range of Mountains two or three thousand miles long, would surely upon all accounts appear incongruous and incredible: Besides, neither the hollow form of Mountains, nor the stony matter whereof they commonly consist, agrees with that supposition, that they were prest or taken out of the Chanel of the Sea.
Lastly, We are to consider that the Mountains are not barely laid upon the Earth, as a Tomb-stone upon a Grave, nor stand as Statues do upon a Pedestal, as this opinion seems to suppose; but they are one continu’d substance with the
body of the Earth, and their roots reach into the Abyss; As the Rocks by the Sea-side go as deep as the bottom of the Sea in one continu’d mass: And ’tis a ridiculous thing to imagine the Earth first a plain surface, then all the Mountains set upon it, as Hay-cocks in a Field, standing upon their fiat bottoms. There is no such common surface in Nature, nor consequently any such super-additions, ’tis all one frame or mass, only broken and disjoynted in the parts of it. To conclude, ’tis not only the Mountains that make the inequalities of the Earth, or the irregularity of its surface, every Country, every Province, every Field hath an unequal and different situation, higher or lower, inclin’d more or less, and sometimes one way, sometimes another, you can scarce take a miles compass in any place where the surface of the ground continues uniform; and can you imagine that there were Moulds or Stones brought from the Sea-chanel to make all those inequalities? Or that Earthquakes have been in every Country, and in every Field? The inner Veins and Lares of the Earth are also broken as well as the surface. These must proceed from universal causes, and all those that have been alledg’d, whether from Philosophy or Theology, are but particular or Topical. I am fully satisfied, in contemplation of these things, and so I think every unprejudic’d person may be, that to such an irregular variety of situation and construction, as we see every where in the parts of the Earth, nothing could answer but some universal concussion or dislocation, in the nature of a general ruine.
We have now finisht this first part of our Theory, and all that concerns the Deluge or dissolution of the Earth; and we have not only establisht our own Hypothesis by positive arguments, but also produc’d and examin’d all suppositions that have been offer’d by others, whether Philosophical or Theological, for the Explication of the same things; so as nothing seems now to remain further upon this subject. For a conclusion of all, we will consider, if you please, the rest of the Earths, or of the Planets within our Heavens, that appertain to the same common Sun; to see, so far as we can go by rational conjectures, if they be not of the same Fabrick, and have undergone the like fate and forms with our Earth. It is now acknowledg’d by the generality of Learned Men, that the Planets are Opake bodies, and particularly our next neighbour, the Moon, is known to be a Terraqueous Globe, consisting of Mountains and Valleys, as our Earth does; and we have no reason to believe but that she came into that form by a dissolution, or from like causes as our Earth did. Mercury is so near the Sun, that we cannot well discern his face, whether spotted or no, nor make a judgment of it. But as for Venus and Mars, if the spots that be observed in them be their Waters or their Sea, as they are in the Moon, ’tis likely They are also Terraqueous Globes, and in much what a like form with the Moon and the Earth, and, for ought we know, from like causes. Particularly as to Venus, ’tis a remarkable passage that St. Austin De civ. Dei lib. 21. c. 8.hath preserv’d out of Varro, he saith, That about the time of the great Deluge there was a wonderful alteration or Catastrophe happen’d to the Planet Venus, and that she chang’d her colour, form, figure, and magnitude. This is a great presumption that she suffer’d her dissolution about the same time that our Earth did. I do not know that any such thing is recorded concerning any of the other Planets, but the body of Mars looks very rugged, broken, and much disorder’d.
Saturn and Jupiter deserve a distinct consideration, as having something particular and different from the rest of the Planets. Saturn is remarkable for his Hoop or Ring, which seems to stand off from his body, and would strongly induce one to believe, that the exteriour Earth of that Planet, at its dissolution, did not all fall in, but the Polar parts sinking into the Abyss, the middle or Æquinoctial parts still subsisted, and bore themselves up in the nature of an Arch about the Planet, or of a Bridge, as it were, built over the Sea of Saturn. Jupiter of all the Planets I take to be most intire, and in an Ante-diluvian state; His Fasciæ or Belts, as they call them, I should guess to be Waters, or the two frigid Zones, where his Waters fall and make two Canals in those parts; such as we shall show to have been in our Earth before it was broke. 2 Book. c. 9. Fig. 3This Planet without all doubt is turn’d about its Axis, otherwise how should its Four Moons be carri’d about it? And this is also collected from the motion of that (permanent) spot that is upon its body; which spot I take to be either a Lake, or a Chasm and Hiatus into the Abysse of the Planet; that is part of the Abysse open or uncover’d, like the Aperture we made in the Seventh Figure. Chap. 6. pag. 67.And this might either have been left so, by Providence, at first, for some reasons fitting that Earth, or it may have fain in afterwards, as Plato's Atlantis, or as Sodom and Gomorrha, as some judgment upon part of that World. However that be, as to the Belts of Jupiter, which are the most remarkable Phænomenon of that Planet, I take them to be his Zones, and to lie parallel with one another, and I believe also with his Æquator: But we must first know how his Poles lie, and in what situation with the Ecliptick, and in what Aspect to us, before such things can be certainly determin’d. In the mean time, if we have guest aright, that Jupiter is in an Ante-diluvian state, I should rather expect to find the Figure of his Body, than of any other of the Planets, to be Oval or Oblong, such as our Earth was before its Deluge. To conclude, seeing all the Planets that are plac’d in this Heaven, and are the foster-children of this Sun, seem to have some affinity one with another, and have much-what the same countenance, and the same general Phænomena; It seems probable that they rise much-what the same way, and after the like manner as our Earth, each one from its respective Chaos; And that they had the same Elementary Regions at first, and an exteriour Orb form’d over their Abyss: And lastly, that every one of them hath suffer’d, or is to suffer its Deluge, as our Earth hath done. These, I say, are probable conjectures according to the Analogy of Reason and Nature, so far as we can judge concerning things very remote and inaccessible.
And these things being thus, and our Theory of the Deluge, and the Dissolution which brought it, having such a general agreement both with our Heavens and our Earth, I think there is nothing but the uncouthness of the thing to some mens understandings, the custom of thinking otherwise, and the uneasiness of entring into a new sett of thoughts, that can be a bar or hindrance to its reception.