to form a visionary system, than to establish a rational theory; thus it is that the Theory of the Earth has only hitherto been treated in a vague and hypothetical manner; I shall therefore but slightly mention the singular notions of some authors who have written upon the subject.
The first hypothesis I shall allude to, deserves to be mentioned more for its ingenuity than its reasonable solidity; it is that of an English astronomer, (Whiston) versed in the system of Newton, and an enthusiastic admirer of his philosophy; convinced that every event which happens on the terrestrial globe, depends upon the motions of the stars, he endeavours to prove, by the assistance of mathematical calculations, that the tail of a comet has produced every alteration the earth has ever undergone.
The next is the formation of an heterodox theologician, (Burnet) whose brain was so heated with poetical visions, that he imagined he had seen the creation of the universe. After explaining what the earth was in its primary state, when it sprung from nothing; what changes were occasioned by the deluge; what it has been and what it is, he then assumes a
prophetic style, and predicts what will be its state after the destruction of the human race.
The third comes from a writer (Woodward) certainly a better and more extensive observer of nature than the two former, though little less irregular and confused in his ideas; he explains the principal appearances of the globe, by an immense abyss in the bowels of the earth, which in his opinion is nothing more than a thin crust that serves as a covering to the fluid it incloses.
The whole of these hypotheses are raised on unstable foundations; have given no light upon the subject, the ideas being unconnected, the facts confused, and the whole confounded with a mixture of physic and fable; and consequently have been adopted only by those who implicitly believe opinions without investigation, and who, incapable of distinguishing probability, are more impressed with the wonders of the marvellous than the relation of truth.
What we shall say on this subject will doubtless be less extraordinary, and appear unimportant, if put in comparison with the grand systems just mentioned, but it should be remembered that it is an historian's business to describe, not
invent; that no suppositions should be admitted upon subjects that depend upon facts and observation; that his imagination ought only to be exercised for the purpose of combining observations, rendering facts more general, and forming one connected whole, so as to present to the mind a distinct arrangement of clear ideas and probable conjectures; I say probable, because we must not expect to give exact demonstration on this subject, that being confined to mathematical sciences, while our knowledge in physics and natural history depends solely upon experience, and is confined to reasoning upon inductions.
In the history of the Earth, we shall therefore begin with those facts that have been obtained from the experience of time, together with what we have collected by our own observations.
This immense globe exhibits upon its surface heights, depths, plains, seas, lakes, marshes, rivers, caverns, gulphs, and volcanos; and upon the first view of these objects we cannot discover in their dispositions either order or regularity. If we penetrate into its internal part, we shall there find metals, minerals, stones, bitumens, sands, earths, waters, and