SIR ISAAC NEWTON UPON BURNET’S THEORY OF THE EARTH.
In 1668, Dr. Thomas Burnet printed his Theoria Telluris Sacra, “an eloquent physico-theological romance,” says Sir David Brewster, “which was to a certain extent adopted even by Newton, Burnet’s friend. Abandoning, as some of the fathers had done, the hexaëmeron, or six days of Moses, as a physical reality, and having no knowledge of geological phenomena, he gives loose reins to his imagination, combining passages of Scripture with those of ancient authors, and presumptuously describing the future catastrophes to which the earth is to be exposed.” Previous to its publication, Burnet presented a copy of his book to Newton, and requested his opinion of the theory which it propounded. Newton took “exceptions to particular passages,” and a correspondence ensued. In one of Newton’s letters he treats of the formation of the earth, and the other planets, out of a general chaos of the figure assumed by the earth,—of the length of the primitive days,—of the formation of hills and seas, and of the creation of the two ruling lights as the result of the clearing up of the atmosphere. He considers the account of the creation in Genesis as adapted to the judgment of the vulgar. “Had Moses,” he says, “described the processes of creation as distinctly as they were in themselves, he would have made the narrative tedious and confused amongst the vulgar, and become a philosopher more than a prophet.” After referring to several “causes of meteors, such as the breaking out of vapours from below, before the earth was well hardened, the settling and shrinking of the whole globe after the upper regions or surface began to be hard,” Newton closes his letter with an apology for being tedious, which, he says, “he has the more reason to do, as he has not set down any thing he has well considered, or will undertake to defend.”—See the Letter in the Appendix to Sir D. Brewster’s Life of Newton, vol. ii.
The primitive condition of the earth, and its preparation for man, was a subject of general speculation at the close of the seventeenth century. Leibnitz, like his great rival (Newton), attempted to explain the formation of the earth, and of the different substances which composed it; and he had the advantage of possessing some knowledge of geological phenomena: the earth he regarded as having been originally a burning mass, whose temperature gradually diminished till the vapours were condensed into a universal ocean, which covered the highest mountains, and gradually flowed into vacuities and subterranean cavities produced by the consolidation of the earth’s crust. He regarded fossils as the real remains of plants and animals which had been buried in the strata; and, in speculating on the formation of mineral substances, he speaks of crystals as the geometry of inanimate nature.—Brewster’s Life of Newton, vol. ii. p. 100, note. (See also “The Age of the Globe,” in Things not generally Known, p. 13.)