The publishing of his ground-breaking geological work did not result in great praise and financial rewards.  In fact, he was soon bankrupt and was forced to leave London.  He was forced to sell his extensive fossil collection to the British Museum for a pittance.  All that he owned was confiscated. and he later ended up in debtor's prison.  Smith, like many great scientists, is often portrayed as a lone hero against a great tide of religious opposition.  In England, most men and women of the day were highly religious.  They tended to believe in human origins as they were described in the Bible.  In it, earth began exactly 4004 years before the birth of Christ as described in the book of Genesis.  People were not immediately receptive to Smith's findings.  However, was it solely because Smith was promoting that the age of the Earth was many orders of magnitude greater than the 6000 years outlined by the Bible?  Or, was it just a lack of interest in this field of study by those not involved in the canal and coal excavation projects of the day?

In Smith's time, there were many advanced and increasingly accurate maps of the world which were used for navigation.  However, many theological maps of the world still depicted concepts of the Bible such as the Garden of Eden, fierce creatures and antipodes (see our eBook: "The Flat Earth").  Though it may be true that some people still believed that mountains grew organically like trees, and also viewed these religious maps as being based in fact; these times were not nearly as "dark" as they are often portrayed.

It is said by some that many people believed that the remains of animals found in ancient stone were the mysterious works of God (e.g. unknown forces exerted on them by the stars) [1].  This is a simplistic view and one not held by most historians.  It is a view which was confronted with questions such as "Why are these fossil objects not found everywhere?"  The force of the stars should obviously be exerted everywhere on Earth.  Why were some fossils in mud and peat preserved beautifully and easily retrieved while others were poorly preserved and nearly impossible to extract from the surrounding rock?  Why were shells found high in the mountains?  While its true that the theistic explanation may have been that Noah's great flood swept them up there, this view was rapidly dispelled.

It's also said that Smith sometimes feared that to deny his beliefs and proceed with his studies would result in him being branded a heretic.  However, it's clear that any such concerns didn't adversely sway his work.  He began to understand the processes of great pressure, heat and age in the role of fossilization.  He grew to understand that some fossils were relics of extinct species.  His work as a surveyor and involvement in canal projects and coal mining furthered his field of study.  There was a great need to know what might be encountered as the excavation projects proceeded.  The study of geology was on.

It is an exaggeration to view Smith as a scientist in a valiant fight against religious opposition.  While he was a known agnostic, it is said that he too believed in the Great Flood.  "Specifically, he believed that the English strata had been laid down in a series of deluges that swept England from southeast to northwest (Gillispie 1951; Laudan 1987)..." [3]

Smith contributed greatly to the field of geology.  His work in predicting underlying strata in excavation projects was very valuable, as were his publications and maps.  However, he was not the first geologist nor the first to discover and understand fossils.  He even states in his famous publication, Strata Identified by Organized Fossils [6], "Fossil shells had long been known amongst the curious, collected with care, and preserved in their cabinets..."  It was his use of fossils and knowledge of strata that was of great value.

Heated debate rages on regarding the state of religion in European society during these centuries.  In the case of William Smith, we think the claimed forces of religious opposition are overblown.  He should be viewed, as should other geologists of his time, as a heroes for their ground-breaking work in the field of geology... not as a lone scientists fighting against the forces of religious dogma.  In fact, he probably faced more opposition by competing geologists, and in disbelief of his theories by canal engineers of the day, than from the Church.

Click HERE, or on above map, for larger view.