the tops of the loftiest mountains in Armenia--a height which
must have been seen to involve the submersion of all the
countries with which the Babylonians were acquainted (p. 66).


I may remark, in passing, that many people think the size of
Noah's ark "monstrous," considering the probable state of the
art of shipbuilding only 1600 years after the origin of man;
while others are so unreasonable as to inquire why the
translation of Enoch is less an "extravagance" than that of
Xisuthros. It is more important, however, to note that the
Universality of the Deluge is recognised, not merely as a part
of the story, but as a necessary consequence of some of its
details. The latest exponent of Anglican orthodoxy, as we have
seen, insists upon the accuracy of the Pentateuchal history of
the Flood in a still more forcible manner. It is cited as one of
those very narratives to which the authority of the Founder of
Christianity is pledged, and upon the accuracy of which "the
trustworthiness of our Lord Jesus Christ" is staked, just as
others have staked it upon the truth of the histories of
demoniac possession in the Gospels.

Now, when those who put their trust in scientific methods of
ascertaining the truth in the province of natural history find
themselves confronted and opposed, on their own ground, by
ecclesiastical pretensions to better knowledge, it is,
undoubtedly, most desirable for them to make sure that their
conclusions, whatever they may be, are well founded. And, if
they put aside the unauthorised interference with their business
and relegate the Pentateuchal history to the region of pure