An abstract of this paper was presented on 8 April 1976 at a meeting of the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies, at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.

¹ Report by Cuvier, et al. , 1806Google Scholar, in André, N., Théorie de la surface actuelle de la terre, Paris, 1806, pp. 320–1, 326Google Scholar. See also, Cuvier, , ‘Discours préliminaire’, Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles des quadrupèdes, 4 vols., Paris, 1812, i, 26–35Google Scholar, and Coleman, William, Georges Cuvier, zoologist, Cambridge, Mass., 1964, p. 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

² Lyell, Charles, Principles of geology, 3 vols., London, 1830–1833, i, 29–30Google Scholar. Rudwick, M. J. S., ‘The strategy of Lyell's Principles of geology’, Isis, 1970, 61, especially 8–11.Google Scholar

³ Eyles, V. A., ‘Hutton’. in Dictionary of scientific biography, New York, 1972, vi, 580Google Scholar. The same view is to be found in many discussions of Hutton and Lyell, primarily to explain the resistance encountered by their theories. For a recent sample of revisionist literature on Lyell, see the ‘Lyell Centenary issue’, The British journal for the history of science, 1976, 9Google Scholar, especially the articles by Porter, and Ospovat, , pp. 91–103, 190–8.Google Scholar

⁴ Haber, Francis C., The age of the world, Baltimore, 1959, pp. 112–13.Google Scholar

⁵ Allen, Don Cameron, The legend of Noah, Urbana, Ill., 1963, especially pp. 68, 84–5, 181.Google Scholar

⁶ Calmet, , Commentaire littéral sur tous les livres de l'Ancien et du Nouveau Testament, 23 vols., Paris, 1707–1716, i, 176–9, 186Google Scholar. Also, Dinago, F. (éd.), Publication des oeuvres inédites de Dom A. Calmet, 2 vols., St-Dié, 1877–1878, ii. 39–67.Google Scholar

⁷ Simon, Richard, Histoire critique du Vieux Testament, nouv. éd., Rotterdam, 1685, especially p. 33Google Scholar for the flood. Discussion with long quotations can be found in Gray, Edward M., Old Testament criticism, London and New York, 1923Google Scholar. chapter IX. Also Margival, H., Essai sur Richard Simon, Paris, 1900Google Scholar, chapter V, and Steinmann, J., Richard Simon et les origines de l'exégèse biblique, Paris, 1960, pp. 100–16, 124–30.Google Scholar

⁸ [Astruc, Jean], Conjectures sur les memoires originaux dont il paroit que Moyse s'est servi pour composer le Livre de la Genese, Brussels, 1753, pp. 3–18Google Scholar. Also, Gray, , op. cit. (7)Google Scholar, chapter XII. Reviewers are cited at length in Lods, A., Jean Astruc et la critique biblique au XVIII^e siècle, Strasbourg, 1924, pp. 62–71.Google Scholar

⁹ For changes in the Sorbonne, see Palmer, R. R., Catholics and unbelievers in eighteenth-century France, Princeton, 1939, pp. 40–1, 51, 123, 129Google Scholar. Palmer considers the Sorbonne to have become more rigid and vigilant after the Prades affair (1751–3), but his book shows a continuing variety of thought in orthodox circles. An example of the Sorbonne's naive literalism is in its response to Buffon's two great works, in 1751 and after 1778, respectively; see Piveteau, J. (ed.), Oeuvres philosophiques de Buffon, Paris, 1954, pp. 106–9Google Scholar, and Flourens, P., Des manuscrits de Buffon, Paris, 1860, pp. 254–80.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Pluche, Noël-Antoine, Le spectacle de la nature, Paris, (1756), iii. especially 515–36Google Scholar. For the popularity of Pluche, see Mornet, D., Les sciences de la nature en France, au XVIII^e siècle, Paris, 1911, pp. 248–9Google Scholar. Also, Mallet, abbé, ‘Arche de Noé’, in Diderot, and d'Alembert, , Encyclopédie, Paris, 1751, i. 606–9.Google Scholar

¹¹ [LeMascrier, J.-B.], ‘Essai sur la chronologie’, in Mirabaud, J.-B.], Le monde, son origine, et son antiquité, 2nd edn., London, 1778, ii. 163–5Google Scholar, and the same writer in de Maillet, Benoît, Telliamed (ed. and tr. by Carozzi, A. V.), Urbana, Ill., 1968, p. 381Google Scholar, nn. 52, 54. Carozzi insists that LeMascrier held to the Orthodox' view of 6,000 years as the age of the earth; pp. 30 and 380, n. 50. LeMascrier was less flexible about the flood, in fact, than about the age of the earth; see below, note 24.

¹² Journal de littérature, des sciences et des arts, 1779, 3, 412–15.Google Scholar

¹³ Palmer, , op. cit. (9), p. 221Google Scholar. The whole of Palmer's book shows a range of belief on such vital matters as sin, grace, and the nature of man.

¹⁴ Rousseau, , ‘Discourse on the origin and foundations of inequality among men’, 1755Google Scholar, in Masters, Roger D. (ed.), The first and second discourses, New York, 1964, p. 103.Google Scholar

¹⁵ For Boulanger, see Manuel, Frank, The eighteenth century confronts the gods, New York, 1967, pp. 214–19Google Scholar. Manuel's book is rich in examples of nonbiblical searches for origins, but see especially pp. 132–4. Theological conflict about the state of nature is treated by Palmer, , op. cit. (9), chapter II.Google Scholar

¹⁶ The harshness of censorship is emphasized by Gay, Peter, The Enlightenment, an interpretation, 2 vols., New York, 1967–9, ii. 70–9Google Scholar; less extreme views are to be found in Palmer, , op. cit. (9), pp. 16–17Google Scholar, and in Roger, Jacques, ‘Introduction’, in Buffon, Les époques de la nature (ed. by Roger, J.), Mémoires du Muséum national d'histoire naturelle, Série C, Tome X, Paris, 1962, p. cxiiGoogle Scholar. The only searching discussion of the failure of the Sorbonne to condemn Buffon after 1778 is in Roger, , pp. cxxxii–viGoogle Scholar; his conclusions are tentative because he has had to rely on Paris gossip in the absence of ‘harder’ information.

¹⁷ One of the many useful treatments of liberal Anglicanism is Stromberg, Roland N., Religious liberalism in eighteenth-century England, London, 1954Google Scholar, especially chapter IV. See also Gillett, Charles R., Burned books: neglected chapters in British history and literature, 2 vols., New York, 1932, iiGoogle Scholar. chapters XXVII–VIII. Gillett has discovered virtually no ‘heterodox’ books condemned after 1720; ‘virtual’ is necessary because of unsubstantiated reports that there may have been two.

¹⁸ The quotation is from Gay, , op. cit. (16), p. 71Google Scholar. The Berlin Academy was under far greater royal control than its Paris counterpart, but it awarded its prize in 1772 to Herder's non-biblical account of the origin of language, and it boasted Maupertuis as its President for a time. Maupertuis published several heterodox works during this period; see Glass, Bentley, ‘Maupertuis’, in Dictionary of scientific biography, New York, 1974, ix. 186–9.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Clayton's arguments are summarized by one of his critics, Catcott, Alexander, A treatise on the Deluge, and edn., London, 1768, pp. 11–12Google Scholar. Also, Collier, K. B., Cosmogonies of our fathers, New York, 1934, pp. 229, 234Google Scholar. At the time of his death, Clayton was in imminent danger of being charged with heresy for his Arian views; but this was so unusual that I suspect the problem stemmed from his being a bishop rather than a lesser cleric or a layman. See Winnett, A. R., in Baker, Derek (ed.), Schism, heresy and religious protest, Cambridge, 1972, pp. 311–21.Google Scholar

²⁰ Mirabaud, , op. eit. (11), i. 95–6Google Scholar. See Telliamed, op. cit. (11), pp. 298–9Google Scholar, and its editor's comments, p. 300, n. c.

²¹ Voltaire, , Philosophical dictionary (tr. by Gay, Peter), New York, 1962, pp. 284–97, 327–8, 394Google Scholar: articles Genèse, Inondation, Miracles. For Buffon's objections to miracles, see Roger, , op. cit. (16), pp. lxxxv, xlviii.Google Scholar

²² Boulanger, , ‘Déluge’, in Encyclopédie, op. cit. (10), 1754, iv. 795–803.Google Scholar

²³ D'Holbach's transparent compromises with Genesis can be found in his translations of Henckel, J. F., Pyritologie, 2 vols., Paris, 1760, i. 122n, 123n, 131nGoogle Scholar; and Lehmann, J. G., Traités de physique, d'histoire naturelle, de mineralogie et de métallurgie, 3 vols., Paris, 1759, iii. pp. v–x, 83n, 192nGoogle Scholar. See also his article, ‘Terre, couches de la’, in Encyclopédie, op. cit. (10), 1765, xvi. 170Google Scholar; Collier, , op. cit. (19), p. 283Google Scholar; and Manuel, , op. cit. (15), pp. 234, 238.Google Scholar

²⁴ Buffon, , Epoques, op. cit. (16), pp. 182–4Google Scholar. Telliamed, op. cit. (11)Google Scholar, compare pp. 213–15 with pp. 297–300. Lamétherie, , Théorie de la terre, 3 vols., Paris 1795, iii. 189–224, 258–84Google Scholar, and Leçons de géologie, 3 vols., Paris, 1816, especially ii. 325–34Google Scholar; also, Taylor, K. L., ‘Lamétherie’, in Dictionary of scientific biography, New York, 1973, vii. 602–4Google Scholar. Blumenbach, J. F., Beyträge zur Naturgeschichte, 2nd edn., 1806, iGoogle Scholar. in The anthropological treatises of J. F. Blumenbach (tr. by Bendyshe, T.), London, 1865, pp. 285–6 and 286Google Scholar, n. 2. Sulzer, J. G., ‘Conjecture physique sur quelques changemens arrivés dans la surface du globe terrestre’, Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences et belles-lettres, Berlin, 1762 (1769), pp. 90–8Google Scholar. Sulzer developed a theory of local eruptions of lakes, which, he believed, could have given rise to flood legends; this theory apparently attracted little attention in the eighteenth century.

²⁵ Jahn, Melvin E., in Schneer, C. J. (ed.), Toward a history of geology, Cambridge, Mass., 1969, pp. 198, 200Google Scholar. Also, Henckel, , op. cit. (23), i. 110–11, 123, 131Google Scholar and Bourguet, Louis, Traité des pétrifications, 2 vols., Paris, 1742, i. 53–94Google Scholar. Henckel's work first appeared in 1725.

²⁶ [d'Argenville, Dezallier], L'histoire naturelle éclaircie dans deux de ses parties principales, la lithologie et la conchyliologie, Paris, 1742, pp. 156–60Google Scholar; and additional remarks on the deluge in the 1757 edition of this work, pp. xix, 58, 66–71. Early critiques of Woodward are mentioned by Rudwick, , The meaning of fossils, London & New York, 1971, pp. 82–3, 93Google Scholar; others were produced before 1750 by such writers as Vallisneri, Moro, and Buffon. Later naturalists who gave the flood a sedimentary role were Lehmann and Wallerius, discussed below; see notes 42, 45.

²⁷ Walker, John, Lectures on geology (ed. by Scott, Harold W.), Chicago & London, 1966, p. 181Google Scholar. The lectures seem to date from about 1780.

²⁸ Réaumur, , in Mémoires de l'Académie royale des sciences, 1720 (1722), pp. 400–16Google Scholar. References to Réaumur and the Touraine are frequent throughout the century.

²⁹ Nathorst, A. G., ‘Carl von Linné as a geologist’. Annual report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, 1908, pp. 713, 721Google Scholar; Haber, , op. cit. (4), p. 160Google Scholar; and Desmarest, , ‘Linné’, Encyclopédie méthodique: géographie physique, Paris, 1795, i. 304Google Scholar. For Bergman, see Hedberg, Hollis, in Schneer, , op. cit. (25), p. 189Google Scholar. Whitehurst, John, An inquiry into the original state and formation of the earth, 2nd edn., London, 1786, pp. 58–9, 118–22.Google Scholar

³⁰ In addition to works cited in the preceding note, see Linnaeus, , ‘On the increase of the habitable earth’, in Select dissertations from the Amoenitates Academicae, tr. Brand, F. J., 2 vols., London, 1781, i. 71–127Google Scholar. The allusion is to Descartes' Le monde, available in many editions and translations, and to several features of Buftbn's cosmogony, e.g. his experiments to measure the rate of cooling of an incandescent globe.

³¹ See notes 29, 30, 34. The phrase by Linnaeus is quoted in Haber, F. C., ‘Fossils and the idea of a process of time in natural history’, in Glass, B., Temkin, O., and Straus, W. L. (eds.), Forerunners of Darwin: 1745–1853, Baltimore, 1968, p. 242.Google Scholar

³² Whitehurst, , op. cit. (29), especially p. 131.Google Scholar

³³ Valmont de Bomare, J.-C., Dictionnaire raisonné universel d'histoire naturelle, nouv. éd., 6 vols., Paris, 1767–1768, ii. 708Google Scholar, article ‘Fossiles’. The articles ‘Déluge’ in the 1764 and 1767 editions recount the views of those who think marine fossils relics of the flood; discussion of evidence is reserved for articles ‘Falun’, ‘Fossiles’, and ‘Terre’, which deal with the universal ocean and the concept of successive revolutions.

³⁴ Details of this research and the different interpretations of results are in Desmarest, , ‘Ferner’, Encyclopédie méthodique, op. cit. (29), i. 133–50Google Scholar. Cf. Wegmann, , in Schneer, , op. cit. (25), pp. 386–94Google Scholar, who believes that these issues had little impact outside Scandinavia during the eighteenth century.

³⁵ Boyle's little tract, De fundo maris (Relations about the bottom of the sea), was first published in English and Latin in 1670. Allusions to this work are numerous, some perhaps based on the summary in the better known study by Marsigli, L. F., Histoire physique de la mer, Amsterdam, 1725, pp. I, 48Google Scholar. Marsigli could reach no conclusion about bottom currents, later discussed in Telliamed, op. cit. (11), especially pp. 60–9Google Scholar.

³⁶ Moro, A. L., De'crostocei e degli altri marini: corpi che si truovano su' monti, Venice, 1740, pp. 15–23, 142–55Google Scholar. Also, Wallerius, J. G., Mineralogie (tr. by d'Holbach, ), 2 vols., Paris, 1753, i. 139.Google Scholar

³⁷ Bertrand, Elie, Memoires sur la structure interieure de la terre, Zurich, 1752, pp. 23–31, 50–1, 56–7, 64–6.Google Scholar

³⁸ For an early use of ‘revolutions’ in this non-astronomical sense, see Fontenelle, , in Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences, 1718 (1719), p. 5Google Scholar. Also, Roger, , op. cit. (16), p. 270Google Scholar, n. 10, and ‘Révolutions de la terre’, Encyclopédie, op. cit. (10), 1765, xiv. 237–8Google Scholar. I am indebted to Professor Henry Guerlac for calling the last to my attention. ‘Revolution’ was used primarily in English and French; the corresponding terms then common in other languages have no violent connotations: Veränderung, mutatio, mutazione.

³⁹ Vallisneri, De' corpi marini, che su' monti si trovano, 2nd edn., Venice, 1728, pp. 34, 35, 41, 47, 73.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Hooykaas, R., Natural law and divine miracle: the principle of uniformity in geology, biology and theolog), Leiden, 1963, pp. 4–17Google Scholar. See also Desmarest, , in Encyclopédie méthodique, op. cit. (29), i. 417Google Scholar, and iii. 197, where he distinguishes between disorderly bouleversements and orderly révolutions produced by known causes.

⁴¹ Werner, A. G., Short classification and description of the various rocks (tr. with introduction and notes by Ospovat, A.), New York, 1971, pp. 17–24.Google Scholar

⁴² Lehmann, , op. cit. (23), especially iii. 192–8Google Scholar, and Greene, John C., The death of Adam, New York, 1961, pp. 67–72Google Scholar. Wallerius, , op. cit. (36), ii. 123.Google Scholar

⁴³ The quotation is from Pallas, P. S., Observations sur la formation des montagnes et les changernens arrivés au globe, St Petersburg, 1777, pp. 35–6Google Scholar See Greene, , op. cit. (42), pp. 80–1Google Scholar. Arduino, G., ‘Saggio fisico-mineralogico di lythogonia, e orognosia’, Atti dell' Accademia delle scienze di Siena, 1774, 5, 254Google Scholar. Reprinted in Arduino, , Raccolta di memorie, Venice, 1775Google Scholar, which was translated into German in 1778.

⁴⁴ Vallisneri, , op. cit. (39), pp. 49, 76, 83–4Google Scholar; Moro, , op. cit. (36), pp. 426–32Google Scholar; and Desmarest, , in Encyclopédie méthodique, op. cit. (29), iii. 197–8, 606–15, 618–32.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Lehmann, , op. cit. (23), iii. 284–92, 297ff, 314–15Google Scholar. Wallerius, , De l'origine du monde et de la terre en particulier, Warsaw, 1780, pp. 354–7.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Cf. Cuvier, 's early statement in ‘Notice sur le squelette d'une très-grande espèce de quadrupède inconnue jusqu'à présent, trouvé au Paraguay’, Magasin encylopédique, 1796, I, 310Google Scholar; and Rudwick, , op. cit. (26)Google Scholar, chapter III. The case for marine invertebrates was complicated by problems of identification and classification, but it was also argued that apparently extinct forms might still be alive in unexplored ocean depths. One of the rare efforts to gather together evidence on this subject is Burtin, F. X., ‘Reponse a la question physique, proposée par la Société de Teyler, sur les revolutions generales, qu'a subies la surface de la terre, et sur l'ancienneté de notre globe’, Verhandelingen, uitgegeeven door Teyler's tweede genootschap, Haarlem, 1790, viiiGoogle Scholar. He concludes that the great number of extinct invertebrates demonstrates that at least one catastrophe did occur. See also Blumenbach, , op. cit. (24), pp. 283–6Google Scholar, his Manuel d'histoire naturelle, tr. Artaud, Soulange, 2 vols., Metz, 1803, ii. 148–9Google Scholar, and the synopsis of one of his works by de Villefosse, Héron, in Journal da mines, 1804, 16, 5–36.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Esper, J. F., Description des zoolithes nouvellement decouvertes d'animaux quadrupedes inconnus et des cavernes qui les renferment, tr. Isenflamm, J. G., Nuremberg, 1774, especially p. 81Google Scholar. For Pallas, see above, note 43. An excellent discussion of the problem of extinction, with emphasis on the great quadrupeds, is in Greene, , op. cit. (42)Google Scholar, chapter IV. Further examples of scientists who questioned whether the recent catastrophe should be identified with the flood are given by Page, Leroy, in Schneer, , op. cit. (25), p. 267Google Scholar and passim.

⁴⁸ Galileo, , ‘Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina’, in Discoveries and opinions of Galileo (tr. with introduction and notes by Drake, Stillman), New York, 1957, pp. 175–216.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Kirwan, , Geological essays, London, 1799, p. 5Google Scholar; also, pp. 5–6, 54–86.

⁵⁰ See articles by Pouilly, and Fréret, , in Memoires de litterature tirez des registres de l'Academie royale des inscriptions et belles lettres, Paris, 1729, 6, especially 153, 156, 71–114Google Scholar. Also, Manuel, , op. cit. (15)Google Scholar, passim; Gossman, Lionel, Medievalism and the ideologies of the Enlightenment: the world and work of La Curne de Sainte-Palaye, Baltimore, 1968, pp. 153–7Google Scholar; and Simon, Rénee, ‘Nicolas Fréret, académicien’, Studies on Voltaire and the eighteenth century, 1961, 17, 120–30.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Fontenelle, , in Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences, 1722 (1724), p. 4Google Scholar. On the question of ‘monuments’, see the crucial article by Momigliano, Arnaldo, ‘Ancient history and the antiquarian’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 1950, 13, 285–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar; reprinted in two collections of Momigliano's articles: Studies in historiography, New York, 1966, pp. 1–39Google Scholar, and Contributo alla storia degli studi classici, Rome, 1955, pp. 67–106.Google Scholar

⁵² Esper, , op. cit. (47), p. 81Google Scholar. Lehmann, , op. cit. (23), iii. 192Google Scholar. Desmarest, , in Encyclopédie méthodique, op. cit. (29), iii. 606.Google Scholar