The origin of the world according to revelation and science

A^-

THE

ORiaiN OF THE WORLD,

ACCORDING TO

REVELATION AND SCIENCE.
/

By J. W. DAWSON, LL.D., F.R.S., F.G.S.,

PRINCIPAL AND VICE-CHANCELLOR OF m'gILL UNIVERSITY, MONTREAL ; AUTHOR OF

"ACADIAN GEOLOGY," " THE STORY OF THE EARTH AND MAN,"

"life's dawn on EARTH," ETC

" Speak to the Earth, and it shall teach thee."

—Job.

NEW YORK:
HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS,

FRANKLIN SQUARE.
1877.

TO HIS EXCELLENCY

THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF DUFFERIN,
K.P., K.C.B., Etc.,

GOVERNOR- GENERAL OF CANADA,

AS A SLIGHT TRIBUTE OF ESTEEM TO ONE WHO GRACES THE
HIGHEST POSITION IN THE DOMINION OF CANADA BY HIS
EMINENT PERSONAL QUALITIES, HIS REPUTATION AS
A STATESMAN AND AN AUTHOR, AND HIS KIND
AND ENLIGHTENED PATRONAGE OF EDU-
CATION, LITERATURE, AND SCIENCE.

PREFACE.

The scope of this work is in the main identical with
that of '* Archaia," published in i860; but in attempt-
ing to prepare a new edition brought up to the present
condition of the subject, it was found that so much re-
quired to be rewritten as to make it essentially a new
book, and it was therefore decided to give it a new
name, more clearly indicating its character and pur-
pose.

The intention of this new publication is to throw as
much light as possible on the present condition of the
much-agitated questions respecting the origin of the
world and its inhabitants. To students of the Bible
it will afford the means of determining the precise
import of the biblical references to creation, and of
their relation to what is known from other sources.
To geologists and biologists it is intended to give
som-e intelligible explanation of the connection of the
doctrines of revealed religion with the results of their
respective sciences.

A still higher end to which the author would gladly
contribute is that of aiding thoughtful men perplexed
with the apparent antagonisms of science and religion,
and of indicating how they may best harmonize our
great and growing knowledge of nature with our old
and cherished beliefs as to the origin and destiny of
man.

In aiming at these results, it has not been thought

ii Preface.

necessary to assume a controversial attitude or to stand
on the defensive, either with regard to rehgion or sci-
ence, but rather to attempt to arrive at broad and
comprehensive views which may exhibit those higher
harmonies of the spiritual and the natural which they
derive from their common Author, and which reach
beyond the petty difficulties arising from narrow or
imperfect views of either or both. Such an aim is too
high to be fully attained, but in so far as it can be
reached we may hope to rescue science from a dry and
barren infidelity, and religion from mere fruitless sen-
timent or enfeebling superstition.

Since the publication of "Archaia," the subject of
which it treats has passed through several phases, but
the author has seen no reason to abandon in the least
degree the principles of interpretation on which he then
insisted, and he takes a hopeful view as to their ultimate
prevalence. It is true that the wide acceptance of hy-
potheses of ''evolution" has led to a more decided
antagonism than heretofore between some of the utter-
ances of scientific men and the religious ideas of man-
kind, and to a contemptuous disregard of revealed re-
ligion in the more shallow literature of the time ; but, on
the other hand, a barrier of scientific fact and induction
has been slowly rising to stem this current of crude and
rash hypothesis. Of this nature are the great discov-
eries as to the physical constitution and probable origin
of the universe, the doctrine of the correlation and
conservation of forces, the new estimates of the age of
the ekrth, the overthrow of the doctrine of spontaneous
generation, the high bodily and mental type of the ear-
liest known men, the light which philology has thrown
on the unity of language, our growing knowledge of

Preface. iii

the uniformity of the constructive and other habits of
primitive men, and of the condition of man in the ear-
lier historic time, the greater completeness of our con-
ceptions as to the phenomena of life and their relation
to organizable matters — all these and many other
aspects of the later progress of science must tend to
bring it back into greater harmony with revealed re-
ligion.

On the other side, there has been a growing dispo-
sition on the part of theologians to inquire as to the
actual views of nature presented in the Bible, and to
separate these from those accretions of obsolete phi-
losophy which have been too often confounded with
them. With respect to the first chapter of Genesis
more especially, there has been a decided growth in
the acceptance of those principles for which I contend-
ed in i860. In illustration of this I may refer to the
fact that in 1862 it was precisely on these principles
that Dr. McCaul conducted his able defence of the Mo-
saic record of creation in the "Aids to Faith," Avhich
may almost be regarded as an authoritative expression
of the views of orthodox Christians in opposition to
those of the once notorious " Essays and Reviews."
Equally significant is the adoption of this method of
interpretation by Dr. Tayler Lewis in his masterly
'' Special Introduction " to the first chapter of Genesis,
in the American edition of Lange's Commentary, ed-
ited by Dr. Philip Schaff ; and the manifest approval
with which the lucid statement of the relations of Geol-
ogy and the Bible by Dr. Arnold Guyot, was received
by the great gathering of divines at the Convention of
the Evangelical Alliance in New York, in 1873, bears
testimony to the same fact. The author has also had

iv Preface,

the honor of being invited to illustrate this mode
of reconciliation to the students of two of the most
important theological colleges in America, in lectures
afterwards published and widely circulated.

The time is perhaps nearer than we anticipate when
Natural Science and Theology will unite in the con-
viction that the first chapter of Genesis '^ stands alone
among the traditions of mankind in the wonderful
simplicity and grandeur of its words," and that '* the
meaning of these words is always a meaning ahead of
science — not because it anticipates the results of sci-
ence, but because it is independent of them, and runs
as it were round the outer margin of all possible dis-
covery.""'^

In the Appendix the reader will find several short
essays on special points collateral to the general sub-
ject, and important in the solution of some of its diffi-
culties, but which could not be conveniently included
in the text. More especially I would refer to the sum-
maries given in the Appendix of the present state of
our knowledge as to the origin of life, of species, and
of man — topics not discussed in much detail in the body
of the work, both because of the wide fields of contro-
versy to which they lead, and because I have treated
of them somewhat fully in a previous work, '' The Story
of the Earth and Man," in which the detailed history
of life as disclosed by science was the main subject in
hand.

J. VV. D.

May, 1877.

* Argyll's " Primeval Man."

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

THE MYSTERY OF ORIGINS AND ITS SOLUTIONS.

Reality of the Unseen.— Personality of God.— Possibility of a Revelation
of Origins.— Turanian, Aryan, and Semitic Solutions of the Mystery.
—The Abrahamic Genesis.— The Mosaic Genesis Page 9

CHAPTER n.

OBJECTS AND NATURE OF A REVELATION OF ORIGINS.

Objects to be Attained by a Revelation of Origins.— Its Method and
Structure.— Vision of Creation.— Translation of the First Chapter of
Genesis ■ 35

CHAPTER in.

OBJECTS AND NATURE OF A REVELATION OF ORIGINS

{continued).

Character of the Revelation and its Views of Nature.— Natural Law. —
Progress and Development. — Purpose and Use. — Type or Pat-
tern 70

CHAPTER IV.

THE BEGINNING.

The Universe not eternal.— Its Creation.— The Heavens.— The Earth.—
The Creator, Elohim. — The Beginning very Remote in Time 87

CHAPTER V.

THE DESOLATE VOID.

Characteristics of Biblical Chaos. — The Primitive Deep.— The Divine
Spirit. — The Breath of God. — Chaos in other Cosmogonies.— Chemi-
cal and Physical Conditions of the Primitive Chaos 100

vi . Contents.

CHAPTER VI.

LIGHT AND CREATIVE DAYS.

What is Implied in Cosmic Light. — Its Gradual Condensation. — Day and
Night. — Days of Creation. — Their Nature and Length. — They are
Olams, ^ons or Time-worlds. — Objections to this View Answered.
— Confirmations from Extraneous Sources 115

CHAPTER VIL

THE ATMOSPHERE.

Its Present Constitution. — Waters Above and Below. — The "Expanse"
of Genesis not a Solid Arch.— Mythology of the Atmosphere-
Superstitions connected with it Opposed by the Bible 157

CHAPTER VIII.

THE DRY LAND AND THE FIRST PLANTS.

The Earth of the Bible is the Dry Land.— Its Elevation and Support
above the Waters. — Structure of the Continents arranged from the
first. — The First Vegetation. — Its Nature. — Introduction of Life. —
Organization and Reproduction. — Objections considered. — Geolog-
ical Indications I74

CHAPTER IX.

LUMINARIES.

How Introduced.— What Implied in this. — Dominion of Existing Causes.
— Astronomy of the Hebrews. — Not Connected with Astrology.. 199

CHAPTER X.

THE LOWER ANIMALS.

The Sheretzim, or Swarmers. — Their Origin from the Waters. — The Great
Reptiles. — Their Creation. — Coincidences with Geology. — Hypotheses
of Evolution 211

CHAPTER XI.

THE HIGHER ANIMALS AND MAN.

The Placental Mammals. — The Principal Groups of these. — Man, how
Introduced. — His Early Condition. — His Relations to Nature. . . 230

Contents. vii

CHAPTER XII.

THE REST OF THE CREATOR.

The Sabbath of Creation.— The Modern Period.— Its Early History.— The
Fall and Antediluvian Man.— Postdiluvian Extension of Men.. .. 249

CHAPTER XIII.

UNITY AND ANTIQUITY OF MAN.

Biblical Account of his Introduction and Early History. — Historical Tes-
timony with respect to his Unity and Antiquity. — Testimony of
Language 263

CHAPTER XIV.

UNITY AND ANTIQUITY OF MAN {conthlUed).

Geological Evidence of Antiquity of Man. — General Conditions of Post-
glacial and Modern Periods. — Remains of Man in Caverns, in
River-gravels, etc. — Palaeocosmic and Neocosmic Men 294

CHAPTER XV.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS.

Geological Chronology.— Table of Succession of Life.— Points of Agree-
ment of the Two Records. — Parallelism of Genesis and Physical Sci-
ence with Reference to the Origin and Early History of the World. —
Conclusion 3^2

APPENDICES.

A. — True and False Evolution 363

B. — Evolution and Creation by Law 373

C— Modes of Creation 377

D.— Theories of Life 383

E. — Recent Facts as to the Antiquity of Man 386

F. — Glacial Periods in Connection with Genesis 395

G.— Chemistry of the Primeval Earth 400

H.— Tannin and Bhemah 405

I. — Ancient Mythologies 40S

K. — Assyrian and Egyptian Texts 412

L. — Species and Varieties in Connection with Evolution and the

Unity of Man 4^4

THE ORIGIN OF THE WORLD.

CHAPTER I.

THE MYSTERY OF ORIGINS AND ITS SOLUTIONS.

" The things that are seen are temporal." — Paul.
Have we or can we have any certain solution of those two
great questions — Whence are all things ? and Whither do all
things tend ? No thinking man is content to live merely in a
transitory present, ever emerging out of darkness and ever
returning thither again, without knowing any thing of the
origin and issue of the world and its inhabitants. Yet it
would seem that to-day men are as much in uncertainty on
these subjects as at any previous time. It even appears as if
all our added knowledge would only, for a time at least, de-
prive us of the solutions to which we trusted, and give no
others in their room. Christians have been accustomed to
rest on the cosmogony and prophecy of the Bible; but we are
now frankly told on all hands that these are valueless, and
that even ministers of religion more or less " sacrifice their
sincerity" in making them the basis of their teachings. On
the other hand, we are informed that nothing can be discern-
ed in the universe beyond matter and force, and that it is by
a purely material and spontaneous evolution that all things

A 2

lO The Origin of the World.

exist. But when we ask as to the origin of matter and force,
and the laws which regulate them — as to the end to which
their movement is tending, as to the manner in which they
have evolved the myriad forms of life and the human intel-
ligence itself — the only answer is that these are " insoluble
mysteries."

Are we, then, to fall back on the real or imagined revela-
tions and traditions of the past, and to endeavor to find in
them some foothold of assurance; or are we to wait till further
progress in science may have cleared up some of the present
mysteries ? Whatever may be said of the former alternative,
all honest students of science will unite with me in the ad-
mission that the latter is hopeless. We need not seek to be-
little the magnificent triumphs of modern science. They have
been real and stupendous. But it is of their very nature to
conduct us to ultimate facts and laws of which science can
give no explanation; and the further we push our inquiries
the more insuperably does the wall of mystery rise before us.
It is true we can furnish the materials for philosophical spec-
ulations which may be built on scientific facts and principles;
but these are in their nature uncertain, and must constantly
change as knowledge advances. They can not solve for us
the great practical problems of our origin and destiny.

In these circumstances no apology is needed for a thorough
and careful inquiry into those foundations of religious belief
which rest on the idea of a revelation of origins and destinies
made to man from without, and on w^iich we may build the
superstructure of a rational religion, giving guidance for the
present and hope for the future. In the following pages I
propose to enter upon so much of this subject as relates to the
origin and earliest history of the world, in so far as these are
treated of in the Bible and in the traditions of the more an-

The Mystery of 0?'igi?ts and its Solutions, 1 1

cient nations ; and this with reference to the present stand-
point of science in relation to these questions.

To discuss such questions at all, certain preliminary ad-
missions are necessary. These are : (i) The reality of an un-
seen universe, spiritual rather than material in its nature.
(2) The existence of a personal God, or of a great Universal
Will. (3) The possibility of communication taking place be-
tween God and man. I do not propose to attempt any proof
of these positions, but it may be well to explain what they
mean.

(i) That the great machine for the dissipation of energy, in
which we exist, and which we call the universe, must have a
correlative and complement in the unseen, is a conclusion
now forced upon physicists by the necessities of the doctrine
of the conservation of force. In short, it seems that, unless
we admit this conclusion, we can not believe in the possible
existence of the material universe itself, and must sink into
absolute nihilism. This doctrine is expressed by the apostle
Paul in the statement, " The things that are seen are tempo-
ral, but the things that are not seen are eternal," and it has
been ably discussed by the authors of the remarkable work,
"The Unseen Universe." That this unseen world is spirit-
ual— that is, not subject to the same material laws with the
visible universe — is also a fair deduction from physical science,
as well as a doctrine of Scripture. I prefer the term spiritual
to supernatural, because the first is the term used in the Bible,
and because the latter has had associated with it ideas of the
miraculous and abnormal, not implied at all in the idea of
the spiritual, which in some important senses may be more
natural than the material.

(2) The idea of a personal God implies not merely the ex-
istence of an unknown absolute power, as Herbert Spencer

12 TJic Origin of the World.

seems to hold, or of " an Eternal, not ourselves, that makes
for righteousness," as Matthew Arnold puts it, but of a Being
of whom we can affirm will, intelligence, feeling, self- con-
sciousness, not certainly precisely as they occur in us, but in
a higher and more perfect form, of which our own conscious-
ness furnishes the type, or " image and shadow," as Moses
long ago phrased it. On the one hand, it is true that we can
not fully comprehend such a personal God, because not lim-
ited by the conditions which limit us. On the other hand, it
is clear that our intellect, as constituted, can furnish us with
no ultimate explanation of the universe except in the action of
such a primary personal will. In the Bible the absolute per-
sonality of God is expressed by the title " I am." His inti-
mate relation to us is indicated by the expression, " In him
we live, and move, and have our being." His all-pervading
essence is stated as "the fullness of him that filleth all in all."
His relative personality is shadowed forth by the attribution
to him of love, anger, and other human feelings and sentiments,
and by presenting him in the endearing relation of the uni-
versal Father.

(3) With reference to the possibility of communication be-
tween God and man, it may truly be said that such communi-
cation is not only possible, but infinitely probable. God is
not only near to us, but we are in him, and, independently of
the testimony of revelation, it has been felt by all classes of
men, from the rudest and most primitive savages up to our
great English philosopher, John Stuart Mill, that if there is a
God, he can not be excluded from communion with his intel-
ligent creatures, either directly or through the medium of
ministering spirits.* Farther, placed as man is in the midst

* Essays on Theism, 1875.

TJie Mystery of Origins and its Sohitions. 1 3

of complex and to him inexplicable phenomena, involved in
a conflict of good and evil, happiness and misery, to which
the wisest and the greatest minds have found no issue, sub-
ject to be degraded by low passions and tempted to great ex-
tremes of evil, and himself weak, impulsive, and vacillating,
there seems the most urgent need for divine communication.
It may be said that these are conflicts and problems which
God has left man to decide and solve for himself by his own
reason. But when we consider how slow this process is, and
how imperfect even now, after the experience of ages, we
seem to need some intervention that shall stimulate the
human mind, and impel it forward with greater rapidity.
Farther, it would appear only right that an intelligent and
accountable being, placed in a world like this, should have
some explanation of his origin and destiny given him at first,
and that, if he should perchance go astray, a helping hand
should be extended to him.

Practically it is an historical fact that all the great im-
pulses given to humanity have been by men claiming divine
guidance or inspiration, and professing to bring light and
truth from the unseen world. It would be too much to say
that all these prophets and reformers have been inspired of
heaven ; but scarcely too much to say that they have either
received a message of God, or have been permitted to trans-
mit to our world messages for weal or woe from powers with-
out in subordination to him. Farther, we shall have reason
in the sequel to see that in far back prehistoric times, there
must have been impulses given to mankind, and revelations
made to them, as potent as those which have acted in later
historic periods. In Holy Scripture the Word of God is rep-
resented as " enlightening every man ;* and with reference to

* John i., 9.

14 The Origiji of the World.

our present subject we are told that " by faith we understand
that the ages of the world were constituted by the Word of
God, so that the visible things were not made of those which
appear."* In other words, that the will of God has been act-
ive and operative as the sole cause throughout all ages of the
world's creation and history, and that the visible universe is
not a mere product of its own phenomena. AVe may call
this faith, if we please, an intuition or instinct, a God-given
gift, or a product of our own thought acting on evidence af-
forded by the outer world ; but in any case it seems to be
the sole possible solution of the m3^stery of origins.

These points being premised, we are in a position to in-
quire as to the teaching of our own Holy Scriptures, and in
this inquiry we can easily take along with them all other rev-
elations, pretended or true, that deal with our subject.

Max Miiller, in his lectures on the Science of Religion, re-
jects the ordinary division into natural and revealed, and
adopts a threefold grouping, corresponding to the great
division of languages into Turanian, Aryan, and Semitic.
With some modification and explanation, this classification
will serve well our present purpose. As to natural and re-
vealed religions, if we regard our own as revealed, we must
admit an element of revelation in all others as well. Ac-
cording to the Hebrew Scriptures revelation began in Eden,
and was continued more or less in all successive ages up to
the apostolic times. Consequently the earlier revelations of
the antediluvian and postdiluvian times must have been the
common property of all races, and must have been associated
with whatever elements of natural religion they had. When,
therefore, we call our religion distinctively a revealed one, we

* Hebrews xi., 3.

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. 1 5

must admit that traces of the same revelation may be found
in all others. On the other hand, when we characterize our
religion as Hebrew or Semitic, we must bear in mind that in
its earlier stages it was not so limited ; but that, if as old as it
professes to be, it must include a substratum common to it
with the old religions of the Turanians and Aryans. Neglect
of these very simple considerations often leads to great con-
fusion in the minds both of Christians and unbelievers, as to
the relation of Christianity to heathenism, and especially to
the older and more primitive forms of heathenism.

The Turanian stock, of which the Mongolian peoples of
Northern Asia may be taken as the type, includes also the
American races, and the oldest historical populations of
Western Asia and of Europe ; and they are the peoples who,
in their physical features and their art tendencies, most near-
ly resemble the prehistoric men of the caves and gravels.
They largely consist of the populations which the Bible af-
filiates with Ham. They are remarkable for their permanent
and stationary forms of civilization or barbarism, and for the
languages least developed in grammatical structure. These
people had and still have traditions of the creation and early
history of man similar to those in the earlier Biblical books ;
but the connection of their religions with that of the Bible
breaks off from the time of Abraham ; and the earlier portions
of revelation which they possessed became disintegrated into
a polytheism which takes very largely the form of animism,
or of attributing some special spiritual indwelling to all nat-
ural objects, and also that of w^orship of ancestors and he-
roes. The portion of primitive theological belief to which
they have clung most persistently is the doctrine of the im-
mortality of the soul, which in all their religious beliefs oc-
cupies a prominent place, and has always been connected

1 6 The Origin of the World,

with special attention to rites of sepulture and monuments to
the dead. Their version of the revelation of creation appears
most distinctly in the sacred book of the Quiches of Central
America, and in the creation myths of the Mexicans, Iroquois,
Algonquins, and other North American tribes ; and it has
been handed down to us through the Semitic Assyrians from
the ancient Chaldaeo-turanian population of the valley of the
Euphrates.

The Aryan races have been remarkable for their change-
able and versatile character. Their religious ideas in the
most primitive times appear to have been not dissimilar from
those of the Turanians ; and the Indians, Persians, Greeks,
Scandinavians, and Celts have all gone some length in de-
veloping and modifying these, apparently by purely human
imaginative and intellectual materials. But all these devel-
opments were defective in a moral point of view, and had
lost the stability and rational basis which proceed from
monotheism. Hence they have given way before other and
higher faiths ; and at this day the more advanced nations of
the Aryan, or in Scriptural language the Japhetic stock, have
adopted the Semitic faith; and, as Noah long ago predicted,
" dwell in the tents of Shem." No indigenous account of the
genesis of things remains among the Aryan races, with the
exception of that in the Avesta, and in some ancient Hin-
doo hymns, and these are merely variations of the Turanian
or Semitic cosmogony. God has given to the Ar}'ans no spe-
cial revelations of his will, and they would have been left to
grope for themselves along the paths of science and philoso-
ph}', but for the advent among them of the prophets of "Je-
hovah the God of Shem."

It is to the Semitic race that God has been most liberal in
his gift of inspiration. Gathering up and treasuring the old

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. ij

common inheritance of religion, and eliminating from it the
accretions of superstition, the children of Abraham at one
time stood alone, or almost alone, as adherents of a belief in
one God the Creator. Their theology was added to from
age to age by a succession of prophets, all working in one line
of development, till it culminated in the appearance of Jesus
Christ, and then proceeded to expand itself over the other
races. Among them it has undergone two remarkable phases
of retrograde development — the one in Mohammedanism,
which carries it back to a resemblance to its own earlier pa-
triarchal stage, the other in Roman and Greek ecclesiasticism,
which have taken it back to the Levitical system, along with a
strong color of paganism. Still its original documents survive,
and retain their hold on large portions of the more enlightened
Aryan nations, while through their means these documents
have entered on a new career of conquest among the Semites
and Turanians. They are, however, it must be admitted,
among the Aryan races of Europe, growing in a somewhat
uncongenial soil ; partly because of the materialistic organi-
zation of these races, and partly because of the abundant re-
mains of heathenism which still linger among them \ and it
is possible that they may not realize their full triumphs over
humanity till the Semitic races return to the position of Abra-
ham, and erect again in the world the standard of monothe-
istic faith, under the auspices of a purified Christianity.

It follows from this hasty survey that it is the Semitic solu-
tion of the question of origins, as contained in the Hebrew
Scriptures, that mainly concerns us ; and in the first place
we must consider the foundation and historical development
of this solution, as many misconceptions prevail on these
points. We may discuss these subjects under the heads of
the Abrahamic Genesis and the Mosaic Genesis, and may in

1 8 The Origin of the World.

a subsequent chapter consider the results of these in the
Genesis of the later Scripture writers.

THE ABRAHAMIC GENESIS.

It has been a favorite theory with some learned men that
the earlier parts of the book of Genesis existed as ancient
documents even in the time of Moses, and were incorporated
by him in his work, and attempts have been made to separate,
on various grounds, the older from the newer portions. Un-
til lately, however, these attempts have been altogether con-
jectural and destitute of any positive basis of archaeological
fact. A new and interesting aspect has been given to them
by the recent readings of the inscriptions on clay tablets
found at Nineveh, and to which especial attention has been
given by the late Mr. G. Smith, of the Archaeological Depart-
ment of the British Museum.

Assurbanipal, king of Assyria, one of the kings known to
the Greeks by the name of Sardanapalus, reigned at Nine-
veh about B.C. 673. He was a grandson of the Biblical
Sennacherib, and son of Esarhaddon, and it seems that he
had inherited from his fathers a library of Chaldean and As-
syrian literature, written not on perishable paper or parch-
ment, but on tablets of clay, and containing much ancient
lore of the nations inhabiting the valleys of the Tigris and
Euphrates. Assurbanipal, living when the Assyrian empire
had attained to the acme of its greatness, had leisure to be-
come a greater patron of learning than any preceding king.
His scribes ransacked the record chambers of the oldest tem-
ples in the world ; and Babel, Erech, Accad, and Ur had to
yield up their treasures of history and theology to diligent
copyists, who transcribed them in beautiful arrow-head char-
acters^ on new clay tablets, and deposited them in the library

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. 19

of the great king. It would appear that, at the same time,
these documents were edited, archaic forms of expression
translated, and lacunae caused by decay or fracture re-
paired. They were also inscribed with legends stating the
sources whence they had been derived.

The empire of Ass3Tia went down in blood, and its palaces
were destroyed with fire, but the imperishable clay tablets
which had formed the treasure of their libraries remained,
more or less broken it is true, among the ruins. Exhumed
by Layard and Smith, they are now among the collections of
the British Museum, and their decipherment is throwing a new
and strange light on the cosmogony and religions of the early
East. Though the date of the writing of these tablets is com-
paratively modern, being about the time of the later kings of
Judah, the original records from which they were transcribed
profess to have been very ancient — some of them about 1600
years before the time of Assurbanipal, so that they go back to
a time anterior to that of the early Hebrew patriarchs. Their
genuineness has been endorsed, in one case, by the discovery
by Mr. Loftus, in the city of Senkereh, of an apparent origi-
nal, bearing date about 1600 years before Christ, and other
inscriptions of equal or greater antiquity have been found in
the ruins of Ur, on the Euphrates. Nor does there seem
any reason to doubt that the scribes of Assurbanipal faith-
fully transcribed the oldest records extant in their time.
Their care and diligence are also shown by the fact that
where different versions of these records existed in different
cities, they have made copies of these variant manuscripts, in-
stead of attempting to reduce them to one text. The sub-
jects treated of in the Nineveh tablets are very various,
but those that concern our present purpose are the docu-
ments relating to the creation, the fall of man, and the

20 TJie Origin of the World.

deluge, of which considerable portions have been recovered,
and have been translated by Mr. Smith.

These documents carry us back to a time when the Tura-
nian religions had not yet been separated from the Semitic.
The early Chaldeans, termed Cushites in the Bible, and who
under Nimrod seem to have established the first empire in
that region, are now known to have been Turanian ; and
among them apparently arose at a very early period a litera-
ture and a mythology. The Chaldeans were politically subju-
gated by the Semitic Assyrians, but they retained their re-
ligious predominance j and until a comparatively late period
existed as a learned and priestly caste. To these primitive
Chasdim were undoubtedly due the creation legends collected
by the scribes of Assurbanipal. They were obtained in the
old Chaldean cities, in the temples under the guardianship of
Chaldean priests ; and their date carries them back to a time
anterior to the Assyrian conquest, and in which Chaldean
kings still reigned. Here, then, we have an important con-
necting link between the cosmogonies of the Turanian and
Semitic races ; and leaving out of sight for the present the
legends of the deluge and other matters allied to it, we may
inquire as to the nature and contents of the Assyrian and
Chaldean record of creation.

The Assyrian Genesis is similar in order and arrangement
to that in our own Bible, and gives the same general order of
the creative work. Its days, however, of creation, as indeed
there is good internal evidence to prove those of Moses also
are, seem to be periods or ages. It treats of the creation of
gods, as well as of the universe, and thus introduces a poly-
theistic system ; and it seems to recognize, like the Avesta, a
primitive principle of evil, presiding over chaos, and subse-
quently introducing evil among men. These points may be

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions, 21

illustrated by an extract from Mr. Smith's translation. It re-
lates to the earlier part of the work :

" When above were not raised the heavens,
And below on the earth a plant had not grown up
The deep also had not broken up its boundaries
Chaos (or water) Tiamat (the sea or abyss) was the producing mother

of them all
These waters at the beginning were ordained
But a tree had not grown a flower had not unfolded
When the gods had not sprung up any one of them
A plant had not grown and order did not exist
Were made also the great gods

The gods Lahma and Lahamu they caused to come * * *
And they grew * * *
The gods Sar and Kisar were made
A course of days and a long time passed
The god Anu * * *
The gods Sar and * * * "

Here the first existences are Chaos (Mummu, or confusion)
and Tiamat, which is the Thalatth of Berosus, representing
the sea or primitive abyss, but also recognized as a female
deity or first mother. Then we have Lahma and Lahamu,
which represent power or motion in nature, and are the equiv-
alents of the Divine Spirit moving on the face of the waters
in our Genesis. Next we have the production of Sar or Hoar
and Kisar, representing the expanse or firmament. Sar is
supposed to be the god Assur of the Assyrians, a great
weather god, and after whom their nation and its founder
were named. The next process is the creation of the heaven
and the earth, represented by Anu and Anatu. Anu was al-
ways one of the greater gods, and was identified with the
higher or starry heavens. In succeeding tablets to this we
find Bel or Belus introduced, as the agent in the creation of

22 Tlie Origin of the World.

animals and of men ; and he is the true Demiurgus or Me-
diator of the Assyrian system. Next we have the introduction
of Hea or Saturn, who is the equivalent of the Biblical Adam,
and of Ishtar, mother of men, who is the Isha or Eve of
Genesis. The rest of this legend evidently relates to dei-
fied men, among whom are Merodach, Nebo, and other he-
roes.

The first remark that we may make on this Assyrian Gene-
sis is that, while it resembles generally the Mosaic account of
creation, it also strongly resembles the old cosmogonies of
the Egyptians and Persians, and those of the widely scattered
Turanians of Northern Asia and of America. As an extreme
illustration of this, and to obviate the necessity of digression
at this point of our inquiry, I introduce here some extracts
from the Popul Vuh, or sacred book of the Quiche Indians
of Central America, an undoubted product of prehistoric re-
ligion in the western continent.*

" And the heaven was formed, and all the signs thereof set in their
angle and alignment, and its boundaries fixed toward the four winds by
the Creator and Former, and Mother and Father of life and existence — he
by whom all move and breathe, the Father and Cherisher of the peace of
nations and of the civilization of his people — he whose wisdom has pro-
jected the excellence of all that is on the earth or in the lakes or in the
sea."

" Behold the first word and the first discourse. There was yet no man
nor any animal, * * * nothing was but the firmament. The face of the earth
had not yet appeared over the peaceful sea, and all the space of heaven
* * * nothing but immobility and silence in the night."

"Alone also the Creator, the Former, the Dominator, the Feathered
Serpent — those that engender, those that give being — they are upon the

* I avail myself of the condensed translation in Bancroft's " Native
Races," vol. iii. The original French translation of Brasseur du Bour-
bouro: is more full.

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. 23

water like a growing light. They are enveloped in green and blue, and
therefore their name is Gucumatz."*

" Lo now how the heavens exist, how exists also the Heart of Heaven ;
such is the name of God. It is thus that he is called. And they spake,
they consulted together and meditated ; they mingled their words and
their opinions."

"And the creation [of the earth] was verily after this wise. Earth,
they said, and on the instant it was formed ; like a cloud or a fog was
its beginning. Then the mountains rose over the water like great fishes ;
in an instant the mountains and the plains were visible, and the cypress
and the pine appeared. Then was the Gucumatz filled with joy, crying
out : Blessed be thy coming, O Heart of Heaven, Hurakan, Thunderbolt.
Our work and our labor has accomplished its end."

This corresponds to the work of the first four creative days;
and next details are given as to the introduction of animals,
with which, however, the Creator is represented as dissatisfied,
because they could not know or invoke the Creator. They
are therefore condemned to be subject to be devoured one of
another. Again there is a council in heaven, and the gods
determine to make man. But he also is imperfect, for he has
speech without intelligence: so he is condemned to be de-
stroyed by water. A new council is held, and a second race
of men produced ; but this fails in the capacity for religious
worship — "they forgot the Heart of Heaven." These were
partly destroyed by fire and partly converted into apes.
Lastly another council is held, and perfect men created.
Then follows a remarkable series of stories relating to the
early history and migrations of men.

It is known that similar creation myths existed among the

* The Feathered Serpent is perhaps the representative of the Dragon
and Serpent in the Semitic version ; but has not the same evil import,
and his color gave sacredness to blue and green stones, as the turquois
and emerald, both in North and South America, and perhaps also in Asia
and Africa.

24 The Origin of the World.

Mexicans and other early civilized nations of America, and
in ruder and more grotesque forms even among the semi-bar-
barous and hunter tribes. Their connection with the ancient
Semitic and Turanian revelations of Asia is unquestionable.

We have thus in the Assyrian Genesis a relic of early relig-
ious belief belonging to a period when such widely separated
stocks as the Assyrian and American were still one : to a
period, therefore, presumably long anterior to that of Moses.
Yet at this very early period the central portions at least of
the Turanian race had already devised some means of record-
ing their traditions in writing — probably the arrow-head writ-
ing, afterwards used by the Assyrians, had already been in-
vented. Again, at this early period a complex polytheism
had already sprung up, and this was connected with cosmo-
logical ideas, inasmuch as the primitive abyss, the firmament,
the starry heavens, the principle of life, were all subordinate
gods; and so were also some of the earliest of the patriarchs
of the human race. It is possible, however, that this was
among the early Chaldeans an exoteric representation for the
vulgar, and that the priestly caste may have understood it in
a monotheistic sense. In any case, the idea of a Supreme
Creator remains behind the whole. Farther, in the early
Chaldean record we have a more detailed and expanded
document than that of the Hebrew Genesis, probably intend-
ed for the popular ear, and to include as much as possible of
the current mythology. As an example, I quote the follow-
ing in relation to the creation of the moon, being apparently
a part of the narrative of that creative period corresponding
with the fourth day of Genesis :

** In its mass [that is, of the lower chaos] he made a boiling,
The God Uru [the moon] he caused to rise out, the night he over-
shadowed.

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. 25

To fix it also for the light of the night until the shining of the day,
That the month might not be broken and in its amount be regular.
At the beginning of the month at-the rising of the night,
His horns are breaking through to shine in the heavens.
On the seventh day to a circle he begins to swell,
And stretches toward the dawn farther."

We now come to the historical connection of all this with
Abraham and with the Hebrew Scriptures. The early life of
the " Father of the Faithful " belongs to the time when Tu-
ranian and Semitic elements were mingled in the Euphratean
valley. Himself of the stock of Shem, he dwelt in Ur of the
Chaldees, a city in whose ruins, now known by the name of
Mugheir, Chaldean inscriptions have been found of a date
anterior to that of the patriarch. In the time of Abraham a
polytheistic religion already existed in Ur, for we are told
that his father " served other gods." Further, the legends of
the creation and the deluge, and the antediluvian age, with
the history of Nimrod and other postdiluvian heroes, existed
in a written form ; and, strange though this may seem, there
can be little doubt that Abraham, before he left Ur of the
Chaldees, had read the same creation legends that have so
recently been translated and published by Mr. Smith. But
Abraham's relation to these was of a peculiar kind. With a
spiritual enlightenment beyond that of his age, he dissented
from the Turanian animism and polytheism, and maintained
that pure and spiritual monotheism which, according to the
Bible, had been the original faith of the sons of Noah. But
he was overborne by the tendencies of his time, and probably
by the royal and priestly influence then dominant in Chaldea,
and he went forth from his native land in search of a country
where he might have freedom to worship God. It is thus
that Abraham appears as the earliest reformer, the first of

B

26 TJie Origin of the World,

those martyrs of conscience who fear not to differ from the
majority, the father and prototype of the faithful of every age,
and the earliest apostle of the monotheistic faith which still
reigns among all the higher races of men.

Did Abraham take with him in his pilgrimage the records
of his people ? It is scarcely possible to doubt that he did,
and this probably in a written form, but purified from the
polytheism and inane imaginations accreted upon them ; or
perhaps he had access to still older and more primitive rec-
ords anterior to the rise of the Turanian superstitions. In
any case we may safely infer that Abraham and his tribe
carried with them the substance of all that part of Genesis
which contains the history of the world up to his time, and
that this would be a precious heir-loom of his family, until it
was edited and incorporated in the Pentateuch by his great
descendant Moses. It seems plain, therefore, that the origi-
nal prophet or seer to whom the narrative of creation was
revealed lived before Abraham, but we need not doubt that
the latter had the benefit of divine guidance in his noble
stand against the idolatry of his age, and in his selection of
the documents on which his own theology was based. These
considerations help us to understand the persistence of He-
brew monotheism in the presence of the idolatries of Canaan
and Egypt, since these were closely allied to the Chaldean
system against which Abraham had protested. They also
explain the recognition by Abraham, as co-religionists, of
such monotheistic personages as Melchisedec, king of Salem.
They further illustrate the nature of the religious basis in his
people's beliefs on which Moses had to work, and on which
he founded his theocratic system.

Before leaving this part of the subject, I would observe that
the view above given, v;hile it explains the agreement be-

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. 27

tween the Hebrew Genesis and other ancient religious be-
liefs, is in strict accordance with the teachings of Genesis it-
self. The history given there implies monotheism and knowl-
edge of God as the Creator and Redeemer, in antediluvian
and early postdiluvian times, a decadence from this into a sys-
tematic polytheism at a very early date, the protest and dis-
sent of Abraham, his call of God to be the upholder of a purer
faith, and the maintenance of that faith by his descendants.
Besides this, any careful reader of Genesis and of the book of
Job, which, whatever its origin, must be more ancient than the
Mosaic law, will readily discover indications that Abraham
and the patriarchs were in the possession of documents and
traditions of the same purport with those in the early chapters
of Genesis, and that these were to them their only sacred lit-
erature. The reader of the Pentateuch must carry this idea
with him, if he would have any clear conception of the unity
and symmetry of these remarkable books.

THE MOSAIC GENESIS.

In the period of 400 years intervening between Abraham's
departure from Ur and the exodus of Israel from Egypt, no
great prophetic mind, like that of the Father of the Faithful,
appeared among the Hebrews. But then arose Moses, the
greatest figure in all antiquity before the advent of Christ,
and who was destined to give permanence and world-wide
prevalence to the faith for which Abraham had sacrificed so
much. Under the leadership of Moses, the Abrahamidse,
now reduced to the condition of a serf population, emanci-
pated themselves from Egyptian bondage, and, after forty
years of wandering desert life, settled themselves permanent-
ly on the hills and in the valleys of Palestine. The voice of
the ruling race, indistinctly conveyed to us from that distant

28 TJie Origin of the World.

antiquity, maintains that the fugitive slaves were an abject and
contemptible herd ; but the leader of the exodus informs us
that, though cruelly trodden down by a haughty despot, they
were of noble parentage, the heirs of high hopes and prom-
ises. Their migration is certainly the most remarkable nation-
al movement in the world's history — remarkable, not merely
in its events and immediate circumstances, but in its remote
political, literary, and moral results. The rulers of Egypt,
polished, enlightened, and practical men, were yet the devo-
tees of a complicated system of hero and animal worshijo, like
that from which Abraham dissented, and derived in great part
from the "animism" which caused some of the oldest nations
of the world to associate a spiritual indwelling with the natu-
ral objects surrounding them ; or, if they had ceased to be-
lieve in this, they had sunk into a materialistic devotion to
the good things of the present world, combined with a super-
stitious belief in the efficacy of priestly absolution.

The slaves, leaving all this behind them, rose in their relig-
ious opinions to the pure and spiritual monotheism of the
great father of their race ; and their leader presented to them
a law unequalled up to our time in its union of justice, patriot-
ism, and benevolence, and established among them, for the
first time in the world's history, a free constitutional republic.
Nor is this all ; unexampled though such results are elsewhere
in the case of serfs suddenly emancipated. The Hebrew law-
giver has interwoven his institutions in a great historical
composition, including the grand and simple cosmogony of
the patriarchs, a detailed account of the affiliation and ethno-
logical relations of the races of men, and a narrative of the
fortunes of his own people ; intimating not only that they
were a favored and chosen race, but that of them was to arise
a great Deliverer, who would bless all nations with pardon

The Mystery of Origins and its Sohitions. 29

and with peace,"* and would solve once for all those great
problems of the relations of man to God and the unseen
world, which in the time of Moses as in our own were the
most momentous of all, and gave to questions of origins all
their practical value.

The lawgiver passed to his rest. His laws and literature,
surviving through many vicissitudes, have produced in each
succeeding age a new harvest of poetry and history, leaven-
ed with their own spirit. In the mean time the learning and
the superstition of Egypt faded from the eyes of men. The
splendid political and military organizations of Assyria,
Babylon, Persia, and Macedon arose and crumbled into
dust. The wonderful literature of Greece blazed forth and
expired. That of Rome, a reflex and copy of the former, had
reached its culminating point; and no prophet had arisen
among any of these Gentile nations to teach them the truth
of God. The world, with all its national liberties crushed
out, its religion and its philosophy corrupted and enfeebled
to the last degree by an endless succession of borrowings
and intermixtures, lay prostrate under the iron heel of Rome.
Then appeared among the now obscure remnant of Israel,
one who announced himself as the Prophet like unto Moses,
promised of old ; but a prophet whose mission it was to re-
deem not Israel only, but the whole world, and to make all
who will believe, children of faithful Abraham. Adopting the
whole of the sacred literature of the Hebrews, and proving
his mission by its words, he sent forth a few plain men to

* I do not think it necessary to attach any value to the doubts of cer-
tain schools of criticism as to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.
Whatever quibbles may be raised on isolated texts, no rational student
can doubt that we have in these books a collection of authentic documents
of the Exodus. They are absolutely inexplicable on any other supposition.

30 The Origin of the World,

write its closing books, and to plant it on the ruins of all the
time-honored beliefs of the nations — beliefs supported by a
splendid and highly organized priestly system and by despot-
ic power, and gilded by all the highest efforts of poetry and
art.

The story is a very familiar one ; but it is marvellous
beyond ail others. Nor is the modern history of the Bible
less wonderful. Exhumed from the rubbish of the Middle
Ages, it has entered on a new career of victory. It has stim-
ulated the mind of modern Europe to all its highest efforts,
and has been the charter of its civil and religious liberties.
Its wondrous revelation of all that man most desires to know,
in the past, in the present, and in his future destinies, has
gone home to the hearts of men in all ranks of society and in
all countries. In many great nations it is the only rule of
religious faith. In every civilized country it is the basis of
all that is most valuable in religion. Where it has been with-
held from the people, civilization in its highest aspects has
languished, and superstition, priestcraft, and tyranny have
held their ground or have perished under the assaults of a
heartless and inhuman infidelit3^ Where it has been a house-
hold book, education has necessarily flourished, liberty has
taken root, and the higher nature of man has been developed to
the full. Driven from many other countries by tyrannical in-
terference with liberty of thought and discussion, or by a short-
sighted ecclesiasticism, it has taken up its special abode with
the greatest commercial nations of our time ; and, scattered
by their agency broadcast over the world, it is read by every
nation under heaven in its own tongue, and is slowly but
surely preparing the way for wider and greater changes than
any that have heretofore resulted from its influence. Ex-
plain it as we may, the Bible is a great literary miracle ; and

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. 31

no amount of inspiration or authority that can be claimed for
it is more strange or incredible than the actual history of the
book. Yet no book has ever thrown itself into so decided
antagonism with all the great forces of evil in the world.
Tyranny hates it, because the Bible so strongly maintains the
individual value and rights of man as man. The spirit of
caste dislikes it for the same reason. Anarchical license, on
the other hand, finds nothing but discouragement in it.
Priestcraft gnashes its teeth at it, as the very embodiment of
private judgment in religion, and because it so scornfully
ignores human authority in matters of conscience, and human
intervention between man and his Maker. Skepticism sneers
at it, because it requires faith and humility, and threatens
ruin to the unbeliever. It launches its thunders against
every form of violence or fraud or allurement that seeks to
profit by wrong or to pander to the vices of mankind ; all
these consequently are its foes. On the other hand, by its
uncompromising stand with reference to certain scientific
and historical facts, it has appeared to oppose the progress
of thought and speculation ; though, as we shall see, it has
been unfairly accused in this last respect.

With its antagonism to the evil that is in the world we
have at present nothing to do, except to caution the student
of this venerable literature against the prejudices which
interested and unscrupulous foes seek to cultivate. Its
doctrine of the origin of man and of the world, and the rela-
tion of this to modern scientific and historical results, is that
which now claims our attention ; and this more especially in
the relation which the Mosaic cosmogony, considered as an
early revelation from God, may be found to bear to the facts
which modern scientific research has elicited from the uni-
verse itself. The aspects in which apparent conflicts present

32 The Origin of the World.

themselves are threefold. At one time it was not unusual to
impugn the historical accuracy of the Pentateuch on the
evidence of the Greek historians ; and on many points
scarcely any corroborative evidence could be cited in favor
of the Hebrew writers. In our own time much of this diffi-
culty has been removed, and an immense amount of learned
research has been reduced to waste paper, by the circum-
stance that the monuments of Egypt and Assyria have risen
up to bear testimony in favor of the Bible ; and scarcely any
sane man now doubts the value of the Hebrew history. The
battle-ground has in consequence been shifted farther back,
to points concerning the affiliation of the races of men, the
absolute antiquity of man's residence on the earth, and the.
condition of prehistoric men ; questions on which we can
scarcely expect to find, at least for a long time, any de-
cisive monumental or scientific evidence. Secondly, the
Bible commits itself to certain cosmological doctrines and
statements respecting the system of nature, and details of
that system, more or less approaching to the domain which
geology occupies in its investigations .of the past history of
the earth ; and at every stage in the progress of modern
science, independently of the mischief done by smatterers and
skeptics, earnest bigotry on the one hand, and earnest scien-
tific enthusiasm on the other, have come into collision. One
stumbling-block after another has, it is true, been removed
by mutual concession and farther enlightenment, and by the
removal of false traditional interpretations of the sacred rec-
ords, as well as by farther discoveries in relation to nature.
But the field of conflict has thereby apparently only changed;
and we still have some Christians in consequence regarding
the revelations of natural science with suspicion, and some
scientific men cherishing a sullen resentment against what

The Mystery of Origins and its Solutions. 33

they regard as an intolerant intermeddling of theology with
the domain of legitimate investigation. Lastly, the great
growth of physical science, and the tendency to take partial
views of the universe as if it were comprehended in mere
matter and force, with similarly partial views of the doctrines
of continuity and the conservation of forces, along with the
growth of a belief in spontaneous evolution as a philosophical
dogma, have placed many scientific minds in a position which
makes them treat the whole question of the origin and des-
tiny of man and of the world with absolute indifference.

There can nevertheless be no question that the whole
subject is at the present moment in a more satisfactory state
than ever previously ; that much has been done for the solu-
tion of difficulties ; that many theologians admit the great
service which in many cases science has rendered to the
interpretation of the Bible, and that most naturalists feel
themselves free from undue trammels. Above all, there is
a very general disposition to admit the distinctness and inde-
pendence of the fields of revelation and natural science, the
possibility of their arriving at some of the same truths, though
in very different ways, and the folly of expecting them fully
and manifestly to agree in the present state of our informa-
tion. The literature of this kind of natural history has also
become very extensive, and there are few persons who do not
at least know that there are methods of reconciling the cos-
mogony of Moses with that obtained from the study of nature.
For this very reason the time is favorable for an unprejudiced
discussion of the questions involved ; and for presenting on
the one hand to naturalists a summary of what the Bible does
actually teach respecting the early history of the earth and
man, and on the other to those whose studies lie in the book
which they regard as the AVord of God, rather than in the

B2

34 The Origin of the World.

material universe which they regard as his work, a view of
the points in which the teaching of the Bible comes into
contact with natural science at its present stage of progress.
These are the ends which I propose to myself in the follow-
ing pages, and which I shall endeavor to pursue in a spirit of
fair and truthful investigation ; having regard on the one
hand to the claims and influence of the venerable Book of
God, and on the other to the rights and legitimate results of
modern scientific inquiry.

The plan which I have proposed to myself in this part of
my subject is to take the statements of Genesis in their order,
and consider what they import, and how they appear to har-
monize with what we know from other sources. This will
occupy some space, but it will save time in dealing with the
remaining parts of the subject. Before entering upon it, I
propose to devote one chapter to the answers to three ques-
tions which concern the whole doctrine of revealed religion,
whether Semitic, Turanian, or Aryan. These are: (i) Why
the origin of things should be revealed; (2) How it could be
revealed; and (3) What would require to be revealed in or-
der to form the basis of a rational theism.

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 35

CHAPTER II.

OBJECTS AND NATURE OF A REVELATION OF ORIGINS.

" There are two books from which I collect my divinity ; besides Ihat
written one of God, another of his servant nature — that universal and pub-
lic manuscript that lies expansed unto the eyes of all." — Sir T. Browne.

There are some questions, simple enough in themselves,
respecting the general character and object of the references
to nature and creation in the Scriptures, which yet are so
variously and vaguely answered that they deserve some con-
sideration before entering on the detailed study of the sub-
ject. These are : (i) The object of the introduction of such
subjects into the Hebrew sacred books — the why of the reve-
lation of origins. (2) The origin, character, and structure of
the narrative of creation and other cosmological statements in
those books — the how of the revelation, (3) The character
of the Biblical cosmogony, and general views of nature to
which it leads — the what of the revelation.

(i) The Object of the Introduction of a Cosmogony in the Bible.
—Man, even in his rudest and most uncivilized state, does not
limit his mental vision to his daily wants. He desires to live
not merely in the present, but in the future also and the past.
This is a psychological peculiarity which, as much as any
other, marks his separation from the lower animals, and which
in his utmost degradation he never wholly loses. Whatever
may be fancied as to imagined prehistoric nations, it is cer-
tain that no people now existing, or historically known to us,

36 TJie Origin of the World,

is so rude as to be destitute of some hopes or fears in refer-
ence to the future, some traditions as to the distant past.
Every religious system that has had any influence over the
human mind has included such ideas. Nor are we to regard
this as an accident. It depends on fixed principles in our
constitution, which crave as their proper aliment such in-
formation ; and if it can not be obtained, the mind, rather
than want it, invents for itself. We might infer from this
very circumstance that a true religion, emanating from the
Creator, would supply this craving; and might content our-
selves with affirming that, on this ground alone, it behooved
revelation to have a cosmogony.

But the religion of the Hebrews especially required to be
explicit as to the origin of the earth and all things therein.
Its peculiar dogma is that of one only God, the Creator, re-
quiring the sole homage of his creatures. The heathen for
the most part acknowledged in some form a supreme god,
but they also gave divine honors to subordinate gods, to de-
ceased ancestors and heroes, and to natural phenomena, in
such a manner as practically to obscure their ideas of the
Creator, or altogether to set aside his worship. The influ-
ence of such idolatry was the chief antagonism which the
Hebrew monotheism had to encounter; and we learn from
the history of the nation how often the worshippers of Jehovah
were led astray by its allurements. To guard against this
danger, it was absolutely necessary that no place should be
left for the introduction of polytheism, by placing the whole
work of creation and providence under the sole jurisdiction
of the One God. Moses consequently takes strong ground
on these points. He first insists on the creation of all things
by the fiat of the Supreme. Next he specifies the elaboration
and arrangement of all the powers of inanimate nature, and

Objects a7id Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 37

the introduction of every form of organic existence, as the
work of the same First Cause. Lastly, he insists on the cre-
ation of a primal human pair, and on the descent from them
of all the branches of the human race, including of course
those ancestors and magnates who up to his time had been
honored with apotheosis; and on the same principle he ex-
plains the golden age of Eden, the fall, the cherubic emblems,
the deluge, and other facts in human history interwoven by
the heathen with their idolatries. He thus grasps the whole
material of ancient idolatry, reduces it within the compass of
monotheism, and shows its relation to the one true primitive
religion, which was that not only of the Hebrews, but of
right that of the whole world, whose prevailing polytheism
consisted in perversions of its truth or unity. For such rea-
sons the early chapters of Genesis are so far from being of
the character of digressions from the scope and intention of
the book, that they form a substratum of doctrine absolutely
essential to the Hebrew faith, and equally so to its develop-
ment in Christianity.

The references to nature in the Bible, however, and
especially in its poetical books, far exceed the absolute re-
quirements of the reasons above stated ; and this leads to
another and very interesting view, namely, the tendency of
monotheism to the development of truthful and exalted ideas
of nature. The Hebrew theology allowed no attempt at visi-
ble representations of the Creator or of his works for purposes
of worship. It thus to a great extent prevented that connec-
tion of imitative art with religion which flourished in heathen
antiquity, and has been introduced into certain forms of
Christianity. But it cultivated the higher arts of poetry and
song, and taught them to draw their inspiration from nature
as the only visible revelation of Deity. Hence the growth

38 The Origin of the World.

of a healthy " physico-theology," excluding all idolatry of
natural phenomena, and all superstitious dread of them as
independent powers, but inviting to their examination as
manifestations of God, and leading to conceptions of the
unity of plan in the cosmos, of which polytheism, even in its
highest literary efforts, was quite incapable. In the same
manner the Bible has always proved itself an active stimulant
of natural science, connecting such studies, as it does, with
our higher religious sentiments ; while polytheism and ma-
terialism have acted as repressive influences, the one because
it obscures the unity of nature, the other because, in robbing
it of its presiding Divinity, it gives a cold and repulsive,
corpse-like aspect, chilling to the imagination, and incapable
of attracting the general mind.

Naturalists should not forget their obligations to the Bible
in this respect, and should on this very ground prefer its
teachings to those of modern pantheism and positivism, and
still more to those of mere priestly authority. Very few
minds are content with simple materialism, and those who
must have a God, if they do not recognize the Jehovah of the
Hebrew Scriptures as the Creator and Supreme Ruler of the
universe, are too likely to seek for him in the dimness of
human authority and tradition, or of pantheistic philosophy ;
both of them more akin to ancient heathenism than to modern
civilization, and in their ultimate tendencies, if not in their
immediate consequences, quite as hostile to progress in sci-
ence as to evangelical Christianity.

Every student of human nature is aware of the influence
in favor of the appreciation of natural beauty and sublimity
which the Bible impresses on those who are deeply imbued
with its teaching ; even where that same teaching has in-
duced what may be regarded as a puritanical dislike of imita-

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 39

tive art, at least in its religious aspects. On the other hand,
naturalists can not refuse to acknowledge the surpassing
majesty of the views of nature presented in the Bible. No
one has expressed this better than Humboldt : " It is charac-
teristic of the poetry of the Hebrews that, as a reflex of mon-
otheism, it always embraces the universe in its unity, com-
prising both terrestrial life and the luminous realms of space ;
it dwells but rarely on the individuality of phenomena, pre-
ferring the contemplation of great masses. The Hebrew
poet does not depict nature as a self-dependent object,
glorious in its individual beauty, but always as in relation or
subjection to a higher spiritual power. Nature is to him a
work of creation and order — the living expression of the
omnipresence of the Divinity in the visible w^orld." In refer-
ence to the 104th Psalm, which may be viewed as a poetical
version of the narrative of creation in Genesis, the same
great writer remarks : " We are astonished to find in a lyr-
ical poem of such a limited compass, the whole universe — the
heavens and the earth — sketched with a few bold touches.
The calm and toilsome life of marv^^rom the rising of the sun
to the setting of the same, when his daily work is done, is here
contrasted with the moving life of the elements of nature.
This contrast and generalization in the conception of the
mutual action of natural phenomena, and the retrospection of
an omnipresent invisible Power, which can renew the earth or
crumble it to dust, constitute a solemn and exalted rather than
a gentle form of poetic creation."*

If we admit the source of inspiration claimed by the He-
brew poets, we shall not be surprised that they should thus
write of nature. We shall only lament that so many pious

* " Cosmos," Otte's translation.

40 TJie Origin of the World.

and learned interpreters of Scripture have been too little ac-
quainted with nature to appreciate the natural history of the
Book of God, or adequately to illustrate it to those who de-
pend on their teaching ; and that so many naturalists have
contented themselves with wondering at the large general
views of the Hebrew poets, without considering that they are
based on a revelation of the nature and order of the creative
work which supplied to the Hebrew mind the place of those
geological wonders which have astonished and enlarged the
minds of modern nations. A modern divine, himself well
read in nature, truly says : " If men of piety were also men
of science, and if men of science were to read the Scriptures,
there would be more faith on the earth and also more phi-
losophy."* In a similar strain the patient botanist of the
marine algae thus pleads for the joint claims of the Bible and
nature : " Unfortunately it happens that in the educational
course prescribed to our divines natural history has no place,
for which reason many are ignorant of the important bearings
which the book of nature has on the book of revelation.
They do not consider, apparently, that both are from God —
both are his faithful witnesses to mankind. And if this be so,
is it reasonable to suppose that either, without the other, can
be fully understood ? It is only necessary to glance at the
absurd commentaries in reference to natural objects which
are to be found in too many annotations of the Holy Scrip-
tures to be convinced of the benefit which the clergy would
themselves derive from a more extended study of the works
of creation. And to missionaries especially, a minute famil-
iarity with natural objects must be a powerful assistance in
awakening the attention of the savage, who, after his manner,

* Hamilton, " Royal Preacher."

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 41

is a close observer, and likely to detect a fallacy in his teach-
er, should the latter attempt a practical illustration of his dis-
course without sufficient knowledge. These are not days in
which persons who ought to be our guides in matters of doc-
trine can afford to be behind the rest of the world in knowl-
edge ; nor can they safely sneer at the knowledge which puff-
eth up, until, like the apostle, they have sounded its depths
and proved its shallowness."* It is truly much to be desired
that divines and commentators, instead of trying to distort
the representations of nature in the Bible into the supposed
requirements of a barbarous age, or of setting aside modern
discoveries as if they could have no connection with Scrip-
ture truth, would study natural objects and laws sufficiently
to bring themselves in this respect to the level of the Hebrew
writers. Such knowledge would be cheaply purchased even
by the sacrifice of a part of their verbal and literary training.
It is well that this point is now attracting the attention of
the Christian world, and it is but just to admit that some of
our more eminent religious writers have produced noble ex-
amples of accurate illustrations of Scripture derived from nat-
ure. In any case, the Bible itself can not be charged with
any neglect of the claims of nature or with any narrow tend-
ency to place material and spiritual things in antagonism to
one another.

Another reason why a revelation from God must deal with
the origins of things, is that such revelation is, like creation,
in its own nature progressive. It is given little by little to
successive generations of men, and must proceed from the
first rudiments of religious truth onward to its higher devel-
opments with the growth of humanity from age to age. Hence

* Harvey, " Nereis Boreali Americana."

42 The Origin of the World.

the teachings in the early chapters of Genesis are of the sim-
plest and most child-like character, and the first of these early-
teachings is necessarily that of God the Creator, just as our
elementary catechisms for children have been wont to begin
with the question, " Who made you ?" In this way man is led
in the most direct and simple way to the feet of the Universal
Father, and a foundation is laid whereon further religious
teaching adapted to the growth of the individual mind and
to the growing complications of human society can be built.
But again, alike in the earliest and simplest as in the more
advanced states of the human mind, if spiritual things are to
be taught, it must be through the medium of material things.
We have no language to express in any direct way spiritual
truths ; they must be given to us in terms of the natural. We
have not yet learned the tongue of the immortals, and proba-
bly can not learn it in this world. The word " spirit " itself,
which we borrow from the Latin, the Greek Fneiima, the He-
brew Riiah, primarily all agree in signifying breath or wind.
We have to speak of our own breath when we mean our
spiritual nature, of God's breath when we mean his spiritual
nature, and so of all other things not obvious to our senses.
There is constant danger in this that the material shall be
taken for the spiritual of which it is the symbol, the figure
for the reality, the creature for the Creator, and this danger is
best counteracted by a decided testimony in relation to the
origin of all material things in the will of the spiritual and
eternal God. Thus the Bible writers are enabled to use a
free and bold manner of speech respecting divine things.
Their expressions at one time appear pantheistic and at an-
other anthropomorphic; they see God in every thing, and use
with the utmost freedom natural emblems to indicate his per-
fections and procedure, and our relations to him. In this way

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 43

there is life and action in their teaching, and it is removed as
far as possible from a dry, abstract theology, while equally re-
mote from any tinge of idolatry or superstition.

It may, however, be objected that by the introduction of a
cosmogony the Bible exposes itself to a conflict with science,
and that thereby injury results both to science and to religion.
This is a grave charge, and one that has evidently had much
weight with many minds, since it has been the subject of en-
tire treatises designed to illustrate the history of the conflict
or to explain its nature. The revelation of God's will to man
for his moral guidance, if necessary at all, was necessary be-
fore the rise of natural science. Men could not do without
the knowledge of the unity of nature and of the unity of God,
until these great truths could be worked out by scientific in-
duction. Perhaps they might never have been so worked
out Therefore a revealed book of origins has a right to
precedence in this matter. Nor need it in any way come
into conflict with the science subsequently to grow up. Sci-
ence does not deal so much with the origin of nature as with
its method and laws, and all that is necessary on the parf of
a revelation, to avoid conflict with it, is to confine itself to
statements of phenomena and to avoid hypotheses. This is
eminently the course of the Bible. In its cosmogony it shuns
all embellishments and details, and contents itself with the
fact of creation and a slight sketch of its order; and in their
subsequent references to nature the sacred writers are strict-
ly phenomenal in their statements, and refer every thing di-
rectly to the will of God, without any theory as to secondary
causes and relations. They are thus decided and positive
on the points with reference to which it behooves revelation
to testify, and absolutely non-committal on the points which
belong to the exclusive domain of science.

44 T^hc Origin of the World.

What, then, are we to say of the imaginary " conflict of sci-
ence with religion," of which so much has been made ? Simply
that it results largely from misapprehension and from misuse
of terms. True religion, which consists in practical love to
God and to our fellow-men, can have no conflict with science.
True science is its fast ally. The Bible, considered as a rev-
elation of spiritual truth to man for his salvation and enlight-
enment, can have no conflict with science. It promotes the
study of nature, rendering it honorable by giving it the dig-
nity of an inquiry into the ways of God, and rendering it safe
by separating it from all ideas of magic and necromancy. It
gives a theological basis to the ideas of the unity of nature
and of natural law. The conflict of science, when historical-
ly analyzed, is found to have been fourfold — with the Church,
with theology, with superstition, and with false or imperfect
science and philosophy. Religious men may have identi-
fied themselves from time to time with these opponents, but
that is all j and much more frequently the opposition has
been by bad men more or less professing religious objects.
Organizations calling themselves " the Church," and whose
warrant from the Bible is often of the slenderest, have de-
nounced and opposed and persecuted new scientific truths ;
but they have just as often denounced the Bible itself, and
religious doctrines founded on it. Theology claims to be it-
self one of the sciences, and as such it is necessarily imper-
fect and progressive, and may at any time be more or less in
conflict with other sciences ; but theology is not religion, and
may often have very little in common either with true religion
or the Bible. When discussions arise between theology and
other sciences, it is only a pity that either side should indulge
in what has been called the odiiwi t/ieologicum, but which is
unfortunately not confined to divines. Superstition, consid-

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 45

ered as the unreasonable fear of natural agencies, is a passive
rather than an active opponent of science. But .evelation,
which affirms unity, law, and a Father's hand in nature, is the
deadly foe of superstition, and no people who have been read-
ers of the Bible and imbued with its spirit have ever been found
ready to molest or persecute science. Work of this sort has
been done only by the ignorant, superstitious, and priest-rid-
den votaries of systems which withhold the Bible from the
people, and detest it as much as they dislike science. Per-
haps the most troublesome opposition to science, or rather to
the progress of science, has sprung from the tenacity with
which men hold to old ideas. These, which may have been
at one time the best science attainable, root themselves in
popular literature, and even in learned bodies and in educa-
tional books and institutions. They become identified with
men's conceptions both of nature and religion, and modify
their interpretations of the Bible itself. It thus becomes a
most difficult matter to wrench them from men's minds, and
their advocates are too apt to invoke in their defense polit-
ical, social, and ecclesiastical powers, and to seek to support
them by the authority of revelation, when this may perhaps
be quite as favorable to the newer views opposed to them.
All these conflicts are, however, necessary incidents in human
progress, which comes only by conflict ; and there is reason
to believe that they would be as severe in the absence of re-
vealed religion as in its presence, were it not that the ab-
sence of revelation seems often to produce a fixity and
stagnation of thought unfavorable to any new views, and con-
sequently to some extent to any intellectual conflict. It has
been, indeed, to the disinterment of the Bible in the Reforma-
tion of the fifteenth century that the world owes, more than to
any other cause, the immense growth of modern science, and

46 The Origin of the World.

the freedom of discussion which now prevails. The Protest-
ant idea of individual judgment in matters of religion is thor-
oughly Biblical, for the Bible everywhere appeals to men in
this way ; and this idea is the strongest guarantee that the
world possesses for intellectual liberty in other matters.

We conclude, therefore, on all these grounds, that it was
necessary that a revelation from God should take strong and
positive ground on the question of the origin of the universe.

(2) The Origin, Method, and Structure of the Scriptural
Cosjnogony. — A respectable ph3^sicist, but somewhat shallow
naturalist and theologian, whose w^orks at one time attracted
much attention, has said of the first chapter of Genesis : " It
can not be history — it may be poetr}^" Its claims to be his-
tory we shall investigate under another head, but it is perti-
nent to our present inquiry to ask whether it can be poetry.
That its substance or matter is poetical no one who has read
it once can believe; but it can not be denied that in its form
it approaches somewhat to that kind of thought-rhythm or
parallelism which gives so peculiar a character to Hebrew
poetry. We learn from many Scripture passages, especially
in the Proverbs, that this poetical parallelism need not neces-
sarily be connected with poetical thought; that in truth it
might be used, as rhyme is sometimes with us, to aid the
memory. The oldest acknowledged verse in Scripture is a
case in point. Lamech, who lived before the flood, appears
to have slain a man in self-defense, or at least in an encounter
in which he himself was wounded ; and he attempts to define
the nature of the crime in the following words :

"Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;
Ye wives of Lamech, hearken to my speech : —
I have slain a man to my womiding,

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 47

And a young man to my hurt ;

If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,

Truly Lamech seventy and seven fold."

All this is prosaic enough in matter, but the form into which
it is thrown gives it a certain dignity, and impresses it on the
memory; which last object was probably what the author of
this sole fragment of antediluvian literature had in view. He
succeeded too — for the sentiment was handed down, probably
orally; and Moses incorporates it in his narration, perhaps
on account of its interest as the first record of the distinc-
tion between willful murder like that of Cain, and justifiable
homicide. It is interesting also to observe the same parallel-
ism of style, no doubt with the same objects, in many old
Egyptian monumental inscriptions, which, however grandilo-
quent, are scarcely poetical.* It also appears in that ancient
record of creation and the deluge recently rescued from the
clay tablets of Nineveh.

Now in the first chapter of Genesis, and the first three
verses of chapter second, being the formal general narrative
of creation, on which, as we shall see, every other statement
on the subject in the Bible is based, we have this peculiar
parallelism of style. If we ask why, the answer must, I
think, be — to give dignity and symmetry to what would other-
wise be a dry abstract, .and still more to aid memory. This
last consideration, perhaps indicating that this chapter, like
the apology of Lamech, had been handed down orally for a
long period, connects itself with the theory of the pre-Abra-
hamic origin of these documents to which reference has al-
ready been made.

The form of the narrative, however, in no way impairs its

* Osburn, " Monumental History of Egypt."

48 TJie Origiii of the World,

iDrecision or accuracy of statement. On this Eichhorn well
says : " There lies at the foundation of the first chapter a
carefully designed plan, all whose parts are carried out with
much art, whereby its appropriate place is assigned to every
idea;" and we may add, whereby every idea is expressed in
the simplest and fewest words, yet with marvellous accuracy,
amounting to an almost scientific precision of diction, for
which both the form into which it is thrown and the homo-
geneous and simple character of the Hebrew language are
very well adapted. Much of this indeed remains in the En-
glish version, though our language is less perfectly suited
than the Hebrew for the concise announcement of general
truths of this description. Our translators have, however,
deviated greatly from the true sense of many important words,
especially where they have taken the Septuagint translation
for their guide, as in the words "firmament," "whales,"
" creeping things," etc. These errors will be noticed in sub-
sequent pages. In the mean time I may merely add that the
labors of the ablest Biblical critics give us every reason to
conclude that the received text of Genesis preserves, almost
without an iota of change, the beautiful simplicity of its first
chapter; and that we now have it in a more perfect state
than that in which it was presented to the translators of most
of the early versions. It must also be admitted that the ob-
ject in view was best served by that direct reference to the
creative fiat, and ignoring of all secondary causes, which are
conspicuous in this narrative. This is indeed the general
tone of the Bible in speaking of natural phenomena; and this
mode of proceeding is in perfect harmony with its claims to
divine authority. Had not this course been chosen, no other
could have been adopted, in strict consistency with truth,
short of a full revelation of the whole system of nature, in the

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 49

details of all its laws and processes. This we now know
would have been impossible, and, if possible, useless or even
mischievous.

Regarded from this point of view — the plenary inspiration
of the book — the Scriptural references to creation profess to
furnish a very general outline, for theological purposes, of the
principal features of a vast region unexplored when they were
written, and into which human research has yet penetrated
along only a few lines. Natural science, in following out
these lines of observation, has reached some of the objects
delineated in the Scriptural sketch ; of others it has obtained
distant glimpses; many are probably unknown, and we can
appreciate the true value and dimensions relatively to the
whole of very few. So vast indeed are the subjects of the
bold sketch of the Hebrew prophet, that natural science can
not pretend as yet so to fill in the outline as quite to measure
the accuracy of its proportions. Yet the lines, though few,
are so boldly drawn, and with so much apparent unity and
symmetry, that we almost involuntarily admit that they are
accurate and complete. This may appear to be underrating
the actual progress of science relatively to this great fore-
shadowing outline ; but I know that those most deeply versed
in the knowledge of nature will be the least disposed to quar-
rel with it, whatever skepticism they may entertain as to the
greater general completeness of the inspired record.

Another point which deserves a passing notice here is the
theory of Dr. Kurtz and others, that the Mosaic narrative
represents a vision of creation, analogous to those prophetic
visions which appear in the later books of Scripture. This
is beyond all question the most simple and probable solution
of the origin of the document, when viewed as inspired, but
we shall have to recur to it on a future page.

C

50 The Origin of the World.

But with respect to the precise origin of this cosmogony,
the question now arises, Is it really in substance a revelation
from God to man ? We must not disguise from ourselves
that this deliberate statement of an order of creation in so
far challenges comparison with the results of science, and
this in a very different way from that which applies to the in-
cidental references to nature in the Bible. Further, inasmuch
as it relates to events which transpired before the creation of
man, it is of the nature of prophecy rather than of history.
It is, in short, either an inspired revelation of the divine pro-
cedure in creation, or it is a product of human imagination
or research, or a deliberate fraud.

To no part of the Bible do these alternatives more strictly
apply than to its first chapter. This "can not be history"
in the strict acceptation of the term. It relates to events
which no human eye witnessed, respecting w^hich no human
testimony could give any information. It represents the cre-
ation of man as the last of a long series of events, of which it
professes to inform us. The knowledge of these events can
not have been a matter of human experience. If at all en-
titled to confidence, the narrative must, therefore, be received
as an inspired document, not handed down by any doubtful
tradition, but existing as originally transfused into human
language from the mind of the Author of nature himself.
This view is in no way affected by the hypothesis, already
mentioned, that the first chapters of Genesis were compiled
by Moses from more ancient documents. This merely throws
back the revelation to a higher antiquity, and requires us to
suppose the agency of two inspired men instead of one.

It would be out of place here to enter into any argument
for the inspiration of Scripture, or to attempt to define the
nature of that inspiration. I merely wish to impress on the

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 5 1

mind of the reader that without the admission of its reality,
or at least its possibility, our present inquiry becomes merely
a matter of curious antiquarian research. We must also on
this ground distinguish between the claims of the Scriptures
and those of tradition or secular history, when they refer to
the same facts. The traditions and cosmogonies of some
ancient nations have many features in common with the Bible
narrative; and, on the supposition that Moses compiled from
older documents, they may be portions of this more ancient
sacred truth, but clothed in the varied garments of the fanci-
ful mythological creeds which have sprung up in later and
more degenerate times. Such fragments may safely be re-
ceived as secondary aids to the understanding of the authen-
tic record, but it would be folly to seek in them for the whole
truth. They are but the scattered masses of ore, by tracing
which we may sometimes open up new and rich portions of
the vein of primitive lore from which they have been derived.
It is, however, quite necessary here formally to inquire if
there are any hypotheses short of that of plenary inspiration
which may allow us to attach any value whatever to this most
ancient document. I know but two views of this kind that
are worthy of any attention.

1. The Mosaic account of creation may be a result of an-
cient scientific inquiries, analogous to those of modern geol-
ogy.

2. It may be an allegorical or poetical mythus, not intend-
ed to be historical, but either devised for some extraneous
purpose, or consisting of the conjectures of some gifted in-
tellect.

These alternatives we may shortly consider, though the
materials for their full discussion can be furnished only by
facts to be subsequently stated. I am not aware that the

52 Tlie Origin of the World.

first of these views has been maintained by any modern
writer. Some eminent scientific men are, however, disposed
to adopt such an explanation of the ancient Hindoo hymns,
as well as of the cosmogony of Pythagoras, which bears evi-
dence of this origin; and it may be an easy step to infer that
the Hebrew cosmogony was derived from some similar source.
Not many years ago such a supposition would have been re-
garded as almost insane. Then the science of antiquity was
only another name for the philosophy of Greece and Rome.
But in recent times we have seen Egypt disclose the ruins of
a mighty civilization, more grand and massive though less
elegant than that of Greece, and which had reached its acme
ere Greece had received its alphabet — a civilization which,
according to the Scripture history, is derived from that of the
primeval Cushite empire, which extended from the plains of
Shinar over all Southeastern Asia, but was crushed at its
centre before the dawn of secular history. We have now
little reason to doubt that Moses, when he studied the learn-
ing of Egypt, held converse with men who saw more clearly
and deeply into nature's mysteries than did Thales or Py-
thagoras, or even Aristotle."^ Still later the remnants of old

* On this subject I may refer naturalists to the intimate acquaintance
with animals and their habits, indicated by the manner of their use as sa-
cred emblems, and as symbols in hieroglyphic writing. Another illustra-
tion is afforded by the Mosaic narrative of the miracles and plagues con-
nected with the exodus. The Egyptian king, on this occasion, consulted
the philosophers and augurs. These learned men evidently regarded the
serpent-rod miracle as but a more skilful form of one of the tricks of ser-
pent-charmers. They showed Pharaoh the possibility of reddening the
Nile water by artificial means, or perhaps by the development of red al-
gae in it. They explained the inroad of frogs on natural principles, prob-
ably referring to the immense abundance ordinarily of the ova and tadpoles
of these creatures compared with that of the adults. But when the dust
of the land became gnats (" lice" in our version), this was a phenomenon
beyond their experience. Either the species was unknown to them, or its

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 53

Nineveh have been exhumed from their long sepulture, and
antiquaries have been astonished by the discovery that knowl-
edge and arts, supposed to belong exclusively to far more re-
cent times, were in the days of the early Hebrew kings, and
probably very long previously, firmly established on the banks
of the Tigris. Such discoveries, when compared with hints
furnished by the Scriptures, tend greatly to exalt our ideas of
the state of civilization at the time when they were written ;
and we shall perceive, in the course of our inquiry, many ad-
ditional reasons for believing that the ancient Israelites were
much farther advanced in natural science than is commonly
supposed.

We have, however, no positive proof of such a theory, and
it is subject to many grave objections. The narrative itself
makes no pretension to a scientific origin, it quotes no au-
thority, and it is connected with no philosophical speculations
or deductions. It bears no internal evidence of having been
the result of inductive inquiry, but appeals at once to faith in
the truth of the great ultimate doctrine of absolute creation,
and then proceeds to detail the steps of the process, in the
manner of history as recorded by a witness, and not in the
manner of science tracing back effects to their causes. Far-
ther, it refers to conditions of our planet respecting which
science has even now attained to no conclusions supported
by evidence, and is not in a position to make dogmatic as-
sertions. The tone of all the ancient cosmogonies has in

production out of the dry ground was an anomaly, or they knew that no
larvae adequate to explain it had previously existed. In the case of this
plague, therefore, comparatively insignificant and easily simulated, they
honestly confessed — "This is the finger of God." No better evidence
could be desired that the savans here opposed to Moses were men of
high character and extensive observation. Many other facts of similar
tendency might be cited both from Moses and the Egyptian monuments.

54 TJie Origin of the World.

these respects a resemblance to that of the Scriptures, and
bears testimony to a general impression pervading the mind
of antiquity that there was a divine and authoritative testi-
mony to the facts of creation, distinct from history, philosoph-
ical speculation, or induction.

One of the boldest and simplest methods of this kind is
that followed by the authors of the " Types of Mankind," in
the attempt to assign a purely human origin to Genesis ist.
These writers admit the greater antiquity of the first chapter,
though assigning the whole of the book to a comparatively
modern date. They say:

"The 'document Jehovah '"^ does not especially concern
our present subject; and it is incomparable with the grander
conception of the more ancient and unknown writer of Gene-
sis I St. With extreme felicity of diction and conciseness of
plan, the latter has defined the most philosophical views of
antiquity upon cos7nogo7iy ; in fact so well that it has required
the palaeontological discoveries of the nineteenth century — at
least 2500 years after his death — to overthrow his septenary
arrangement of ' Creation ;' which, after all, would still be
correct enough in great principles, were it not for one indi-
vidual oversight and one unlucky blunder; not exposed, how-
ever, until long after his era, by post-Copernican astronomy.
The oversight is where he wrote (Gen. i. 6-8), ' Let there be
raquie,' i.e., z. firmament ; which proves that his notions of
*sky' (solid like the concavity of a copper basin, with stars
set as brilliants in the metal) were the same as those of ad-
jacent people of his time — indeed, of all men before the pub-
lication of Newton's 'Principia' and of Laplace's ' Mecanique
Celeste.' The blunder is where he conceives that atir, ' light,'

* That in Genesis, chap. ii.

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 5 5

and ioMj May' (Gen. i. 14-18), could have been physically
possible three whole days before the 'two great luminaries,'
Sun and Moon, were created. These venial errors deducted,
his majestic song beautifully illustrates the simple process of
ratiocination through which — often without the slightest his-
torical proof of intercourse — different ' Tj^pes of Mankind,' at
distinct epochas, and in countries widely apart, had arrived,
naturally, at cosmogonic conclusions similar to the doctrines
of that Hebraical school of which his harmonic and melodi-
ous numbers remain a magnificent memento.

" That process seems to have been the following : The an-
cients knew, as we do, that man is upon the earth ; and they
were persuaded, as we are, that his appearance was preceded
by unfathomable depths of time. Unable (as we are still) to
measure periods antecedent to man by 2ir\y chronological siz-xid-
ard, the ancients rationally reached the tabulation of some
events anterior to man through induction — a method not orig-
inal with Lord Bacon, because known to St. Paul ; * for his
unseen things from the creation of the world, his power and
Godhead, are clearly seen, being understood by the things thai
are made'' (Rom. i., 20). Man, they felt, could not have
lived upon earth without animal food ; ergo, ' cattle ' pre-
ceded him, together with birds, reptiles, fishes, etc. Noth-
ing living, they knew, could have existed without light and
heat ; ergo, the solar system antedated animal life, no less
than the vegetation indispensable for animal support. But
terrestrial plants can not grow without earth; ergo, that dry
land had to be separated from pre-existent 'waters.' Their
geological speculations inclining rather to the Neptimian than
to the Plutonian theory — for Werner ever preceded Hutton —
the ancients found it difficult to 'divide the waters from the
waters ' without interposing a metallic substance that 'divided

56 The Origin of the World.

the waters which were utider the firmament from the waters
that were above the firmament ;' so they inferred, logically,
that 2. fir7na7fie7it must Jiave been actually created for this ob-
ject. \E. g.j ' The windows of the skies ' (Gen. vii., 1 1) ; * the
waters above the skies ' (Psa. cxlviii., 4).] Before the 'waters '
(and here is the peculiar error of the genesiacal bard) some
of the ancients claimed the pre-existence of light (a view
adopted by the writer of Genesis ist) ; while others asserted
that ' chaos ' prevailed. Both schools united, however, in the
conviction that darkness — Erebus — anteceded all other cre-
ated things. What, said these ancients, can have existed be-
fore the * darkness ?' Ejis entium, the Creator, was the
humbled reply. Elohim is the Hebrew vocal expression of
that climax; to define whose attributes, save through the
phenomena of creation, is an attempt we leave to others more
presumptuous than ourselves."

The problem here set to the " unknown " author of Gene-
sis is a hard one — given the one fact that " man is " to find
in detail how the world was formed in a series of preceding
ages of vast duration. Is it possible that such a problem
could have been so worked out as to have endured the test
of three thousand years, and the scrutiny of modern science?
But there is an " oversight " in one detail, and a " blunder "
in another. By reference farther on, the reader will find un-
der the chapters on "Light" and the "Atmosphere" that the
oversight and blunder are those not of the writer of Genesis,
but of the learned American ethnologists in the nineteenth
century ; a circumstance which cuts in two ways in defense
of the ancient author so unhappily unknown to his modern
critics.

The second of the alternatives above referred to, the myth-
ical hypothesis, has been advanced and ably supported, es-

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins, 57

pecially on the continent of Europe, and by such English
writers as are disposed to apply the methods of modern
rationalistic criticism to the Bible. In one of its least ob-
jectionable forms it is thus stated by Professor Powell :

" The narrative, then, of six periods of creation, followed by
a seventh similar period of rest and blessing, was clearly de-
signed by adaptation to their conceptions to enforce upon the
Israelites the institution of the Sabbath; and in whatever way
its details may be interpreted, it can not be regarded as an
///j/mr^/ statement of the primeval institution of a Sabbath;
a supposition which is indeed on other grounds sufficiently
improbable, though often adopted. * * * If^ then, we would
avoid the alternative of being compelled to admit what must
amount to impugning the truth of those portions at least of
the Old Testament, we surely are bound to give fair consider-
ation to the only suggestion which can set us entirely free
from all the difficulties arising from the geological contra-
diction which does and must exist against any conceivable
interpretation which retains the assertion of the historical
character of the details of the narrative, as referring to the
distinct transactions of each of the seven periods. * =* * The
one great fact couched in the general assertion that all things
were created by the sole power of one Supreme Being is the
whole of the representation to which* an historical character
can be assigned. As to the particular form in which the de-
scriptive narrative is conveyed, we merely affirm that it can
not be history — it may be poetry."*

The general ground on which this view is entertained is
the supposed irreconcilable contradiction between the literal
interpretation of the Mosaic record and the facts of geology.

* Kitto's Cyclopaedia, art. " Creation."
C 3

58 TJic Origin of the World.

The real amount of this difficulty we are not, in the present
stage of our inquiry, prepared to estimate. We can, however,
readily understand that the hypothesis depends on the sup-
position that the narrative of creation is posterior in date to
the Mosaic ritual, and that this plain and circumstantial series
of statements is a fable designed to support the Sabbatical
institution, instead of the rite being, as represented in the
Bible itself, a commemoration of the previously recorded fact.
This is, fortunately, a gratuitous assumption, contrary to the
probable date of the documents, as deduced from internal
evidence and from comparison with the Assyrian and other
cosmogonies ; and it also completely ignores the other mani-
fest uses mentioned under our first head. If proved, it would
give to the whole the character of a pious fraud, and would
obviously render any comparison with the geological history
of the earth altogether unnecessary. While, therefore, it
must be freely admitted that the Mosaic narrative can not
be history, in so far at least as history is a product of human
experience, we can not admit that it is a poetical mythus, or,
in other words, that it is destitute of substantial truth, unless
proved by good evidence to be so j and, when this is proved,
we must also admit that it is quite undeserving of the credit
which it claims as a revelation from God.

Since, therefore, the events recorded in the first chapter of
Genesis were not witnessed by man; since there is no reason
to believe that they were discovered by scientific inquiry ;
and since, if true, they can not be a poetical myth, we must,
in the mean time, return to our former supposition that the
Mosaic cosmogony is a direct revelation from the Creator.
In this respect, the position of this part of the earth's Biblical
history resembles that of prophecy. Writers may accurately
relate contemporary events, or those which belong to the hu-

Objects and Nattire of a Revelation of Origins, 59

man period, without inspiration ; but the moment that they
profess accurately to foretell the history of the future, or to
inform us of events which preceded the human period, we
must either believe them to be inspired, or reject them as
impostors or fanatics. Many attempts have been made to
find intermediate standing -ground, but it is so precarious
that the nicest of our modern critical balancers have been
unable to maintain themselves upon it.

Having thus determined that the Mosaic cosmogony, in its
grand general features, must either be inspired or worthless,
we have further to inquire to what extent it is necessary to
suppose that the particular details and mode of expression
of the narrative, and the subsequent allusions to nature in
the Bible, must be regarded as entitled to this position. We
may conceive them to have been left to the discretion of the
writers ; and, in that case, they will merely represent the
knowledge of nature actually existing at the time. On the
other hand, their accuracy may have been secured by the di-
vine afflatus. Few modern writers have been disposed to in-
sist on the latter alternative, and have rather assumed that
these references and details are accommodated to the state
of knowledge at the time. I must observe here, however,
that a careful consideration of the facts gives to a naturalist
a much higher estimate of the real value of the observations
of nature embodied in the Scriptures than that which divines
have ordinarily entertained ; and, consequently, that if we sup-
pose them of human origin, we must be prepared to modify
the views generally entertained of early Oriental simplicity
and ignorance. The truth is, that a large proportion of the
difficulties in Scriptural natural history appear to have arisen
from want of such accommodation to the low state of the
knowledge of nature among translators and expositors; and

6o The Origin of the World.

this is precisely what we should expect in a veritable revela-
tion. Its moral and religious doctrines were slowly devel-
oped, each new light illuminating previous obscurities. Its
human history comes out as evidence of its truth, when com-
pared with monumental inscriptions ; and why should not
the All-wise have constructed as skilfully its teachings re-
specting his own works? There can be no doubt whatever
that the Scripture writers intended to address themselves to
the common mind, which now as then requires simple and
popular teaching, but they were under obligation to give
truthful statements ; and we need not hesitate to say, with
Dr. Chalmers, in reference to a book making such claims as
those of the Bible : " There is no argument, saving that
grounded on the usages of popular language, which would
tempt us to meddle with the literalities of that ancient and,
as appears to us, authoritative document, any farther than
may be required by those conventionalities of speech which
spring from ' optical ' impressions of nature.'"^

Attempt as we may to disguise it, any other view is totally
unworthy of the great Ruler of the universe, especially in a
document characterized as emphatically the truth, and in a

* Much that is very silly has been written as to the extent of the sup-
posed " optical view" taken by the Hebrew writers ; many worthy liter-
ary men appearing to suppose that scientific views of nature must neces-
sarily be different from those which we obtain by the evidence of our
senses. The very contrary is the fact ; and so long as any writers state
correctly what they observe, without insisting on any fanciful hypotheses,
science has no fault to find with them. What science most detests is the
ignorant speculations of those who have not observed at all, or have ob-
served imperfectly. It is a leading excellence of the Hebrew Scriptures
that they state facts without giving any theories to account for them. It is,
on the contrary, the circumstance that unscientific writers will not be con-
tent to be " optical," but must theorize, that spoils much of our modern
literature, especially in its descriptions of nature.

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 6i

moral revelation, in which statements respecting natural
objects need not be inserted, unless they could be rendered
at once truthful and illustrative of the higher objects of the
revelation. The statement often so flippantly made that the
Bible was not intended to teach natural history has no appli-
cation here. Spiritual \x\x\hs are no doubt shadowed forth in
the Bible by material emblems, often but rudely resembling
them, because the nature of human thought and language
render this necessary, not only to the unlearned, but in some
degree to all ; but this principle of adaptation can not be
applied to plain material facts. Yet a confusion of these two
very distinct cases appears to prevail almost unaccountably
in the minds of many expositors. They tell us that the
Scriptures ascribe bodily members to the immaterial God,
and typify his spiritual procedure by outward emblems ; and
this they think analogous to such doctrines as a solid firma-
ment, a plane earth, and others of a like nature, which they
ascribe to the sacred writers. We shall find that the writers
of the Scriptures had themselves much clearer views, and
that, even in poetical language, they take no such liberties
with truth. '

As an illustration of the extent to which this doctrine of
" accommodation " carries us beyond the limits of fair interpre-
tation, I cite the following passage from one of the ablest and
most judicious writers on the subject :* "It was the opinion
of the ancients that the earth, at a certain height, was sur-
rounded by a transparent hollow sphere of solid matter, which
they called the firmament. When rain descended, they sup-
posed that it was through windows or holes made in the
crystalline curtain suspended in mid-heavens. To these

* Prof. Hitchcock.

62 The Origin of the World,

notions the language of the Bible is frequently conformed.
* * * But the most decisive example I have to give on this
subject is derived from astronomy. Until the time of Coper-
nicus no opinion respecting natural phenomena was thought
better established than that the earth is fixed immovably in
the centre of the universe, and that the heavenly bodies move
diurnally round it. To sustain this view the most decisive
language of Scripture might be quoted. God is there said to
have '•established the foimdatiofis of the earth, so that they could
not be removed forever /' and the sacred writers expressly de-
clare that the heavenly bodies arise and set, and nowhere al-
lude to any proper motion of the earth."

Will it be believed that, with the exception of the poetical
expression, " windows of heaven," and the common forms of
speech relating to sunrise and sunset, the above " decisive "
instances of accommodation have no foundation whatever in
the language of Scripture. The doctrine of the rotation of
solid celestial spheres around the earth belongs to a Greek
philosophy which arose after the Hebrew cosmogony was
complete j and though it occurs in the Septuagint and other
ancient versions, it is not based on the Hebrew original. In
truth, we know that those Grecian philosophers — of the Ionic
and Pythagorean schools — who lived nearest the times of the
Hebrew writers, and who derived the elements of their
science from Egypt and Western Asia, taught very different
doctrines. How absurd, then, is it thus to fasten upon the
sacred writers, contrary to their own words, the views of a
school of astronomy which probably arose long after their
time, when we know that more accurate ideas prevailed
nearer their epoch. Secondl}^, though there is some reason
for stating that the "ancients," though certainly not those of
Israel, believed in celestial spheres supporting the heavenly

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 63

bodies, I suspect that the doctrine of a solid vault support-
ing the clouds, except as a mere poetical or mythological fancy,
is a product of the imagination of the theologians and closet
philosophers of a more modern time. The testimony of
men's senses appears to be in favor of the whole universe
revolving around a plane earth, though the oldest astronom-
ical school with which we are acquainted suspected that this
is an illusion ; but the every-day observation of the most un-
lettered man who treads the fields and is wet with the mists
and rains must convince him that there is no sub-nubilar
solid sphere. If, therefore, the Bible had taught such a doc-
trine, it would have shocked the common-sense even of the
plain husbandmen to whom it was addressed, and could have
found no fit audience except among a portion of the literati
of comparatively modern times. Thirdly, with respect to the
foundations of the earth, I may remark that in the tenth verse
of Genesis there occurs a definition as precise as that of any
lexicon — "and God called the dry lafid earth;" consequent-
ly it is but fair to assume that the earth afterwards spoken of
as supported above the waters is the dry land or continental
masses of the earth, and no geologist can object to the state-
ment that the dry land is supported above the waters by
foundations or pillars.

We shall find in our examination of the document itself
that all the instances of such accommodation which have
been cited by writers on this subject are as baseless as those
above referred to. It is much to be regretted that so many
otherwise useful expositors have either wanted that familiarity
with the aspects of external nature by which all the Hebrew
writers are characterized, or have taken too little pains to
ascertain the actual meaning of the references to creation
which they find in the Bible. I may further remark that if

64 The Origin of the World.

such instances of accommodation could be found in the later
poetical books, it would be extremely unfair to apply them as
aids in the interpretation of the plain, precise, and unadorned
statements of the first chapters of Genesis. There is, how-
ever, throughout even the higher poetry of the Bible, a truth-
ful representation and high appreciation of nature for which
we seek in vain in any other poetry, and we may fairly trace
this in part to the influence of the cosmogony which appears
in its first chapter. The Hebrew was thus taught to recog-
nize the unity of nature as the work of an Almighty Intelli-
gence, to regard all its operations as regulated by his un-
changing law or " decree," and to venerate it as a revelation
of his supreme wisdom and goodness. On this account he
was likely to regard careful observation and representation
with as scrupulous attention as the modern naturalist. Nor
must we forget that the Old Testament literature has descend-
ed to us through two dark ages — that of Greek and Roman
polytheism and of Middle Age barbarism — and that we must
not confound its tenets with those of either. The religious
ideas of both these ages were favorable to certain forms of
literature and art, but eminently unfavorable to the success-
ful prosecution of the study of nature. Hence we have a
right to expect in the literature of the golden age of primeval
monotheism more affinity with the ideas of modern science
than in any intermediate time; and the truthful delineation
which the claims of the Bible to inspiration require might
have been, as already hinted, to a certain extent secured
merely by the reflex influence of its earlier statements, with-
out the necessity of our supposing that illustrations of this
kind in the later books came directly from the Spirit of God.
Our discussion of this part of the subject has necessarily
been rather desultory, and the arguments adduced must de-

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 65

pend for their full confirmation on the results of our future
inquiries. The conclusions arrived at may be summed up as
follows : I. That the Mosaic cosmogony must be considered,
like the prophecies of the Bible, to claim the rank of inspired
teaching, and must depend for its authority on the maintenance
of that claim. 2. That the incidental references to nature in
other parts of Scripture indicate, at least, the influence of
these earlier teachings, and of a pure monotheistic faith, in
creating a high and just appreciation of nature among the
Hebrew people.

It is now necessary to inquire in what precise form this re-
markable revelation of the origin of the world has been given.
I have already referred to the hypothesis that it represents a
vision of creation presented to the mind of a seer, as if in a
series of pictures which he represents to us in words. This
is perhaps the most intelligible conception of the manner of
communication of a revelation from God; and inasmuch as it
is that referred to in other parts of the Bible as the mode of
presentation of the future to inspired prophets, there can be
no impropriety in supposing it to have been the means of
communicating the knowledge of the unknown past. We
may imagine the seer — perhaps some aboriginal patriarch,
long before the time of Moses — perhaps the first man himself
— wrapt in ecstatic vision, having his senses closed to all the
impressions of the present time, and looking as at a moving
procession of the events of the earth's past history, presented
to him in a series of apparent days and nights. In the first
chapter of Genesis he rehearses this divine vision to us, not
in poetry, but in a series of regularly arranged parts or
strophes, thrown into a sort of rhythmical order fitted to im-
press them on the memory, and to allow them to be handed
down from mouth to mouth, perhaps through successive gen-

66 The Origin of the World.

erations of men, before they could be fixed in a written form
of words. Though the style can scarcely be called poetical,
since its expressions are obviously literal and unadorned by
figures of speech, the production may not unfairly be called
the Song or Ballad of Creation, and it presents an Archaic
simplicity reminding us of the compositions of the oldest and
rudest times, while it has also an artificial and orderly ar-
rangement, much obscured by its division into verses and chap-
ters in our Bibles. It is undoubtedly also characterized by a
clearness and grandeur of expression very striking and majes-
tic, and which shows that it was written by and intended for
men of no mean and contracted minds, but who could grasp
the great problems of the origin of things, and comprehend
and express thegi in a bold and vigorous manner. It may be
well, before proceeding farther, to present to the reader this
ancient document in a form more literal and intelligible, and
probably nearer to its original dress, than that in which we are
most familiar with it in our English Bibles :

THE ABORIGINAL SONG OF CREATION.
Beginning.

In the Beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth,

And the Earth was formless and empty,

And darkness on the surface of the deep,

And the Breath of God moved on the Surface of the Waters.

Day One.

And God said — "Let Light be,"
And Light was.
And God saw the Light that it was good.
And God called the Light Da}',
And the darkness he called Night.
And Evening was and Morning was — Day one.

Day Second.

And God said— ^^'Ldi there be an Expanse in the midst of the waters,

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 67

And let it divide the waters from the waters."

And God made the Expanse,

And divided the waters below the Expanse from the waters above

the Expanse.
And it was so.

And God called the Expanse Heavens.
And Evening was and Morning was, a Second Day.

Day Third.

And God said — " Let the waters under the Heavens be gathered into

one place.
And let the Dry Land appear."
And it was so,

And God called the Dry Land Earth,
And the gathering of waters called he Seas.
And God saw that it was good.

And God said — " Let the earth shoot forth herbage,

The Herb yielding seed and the fruit-tree yielding fruit containing

seed after its kind, on the earth."
And it was so.

And the earth brought forth herbage,

The Herb yielding seed and the Tree yielding fruit whose seed is in
it after its kind.
And God saw that it was good.
And Evening was and Morning was, a Third Day.

Day Fottrth.

And God said — "Let there be Luminaries in the Expanse of Heaven,

To divide the day from the night.

And let them be for Signs and for Seasons,

And for Days and for Years.

And let them be Luminaries in the Expanse of Heaven

To give light -on the earth."

And it was so.

And God made two great Luminaries,

The greater Luminary to rule the day,

The lesser Luminary to rule the night,

The Stars also.

And God placed them in the Expanse of Heaven

6S The Origin of the World.

To give light upon the earth,

And to rule over the day and over the night,

And to divide the light from the darkness.
And God saw that it was good.
And Evening was and Morning was, a Fourth Day.

Day Fifth.

And God said— '■'' Let the waters swarm with swarmers, having life,

And let winged animals fly over the earth on the surface of the ex-
panse of heaven."

And God created great Reptiles,

And every living thing that moveth.

With which the waters swarmed after their kind,

And every winged bird after its kind.
And God saw that it was good.

And God blessed them, saying —

" Be fruitful and multiply,

And fill the waters of the sea ;

And let birds multiply in the land."
And Evening was and Morning was, a Fifth Day.

Day Sixth.

And God said—'''- Let the Land bring forth living things after their

kind,
Herbivores and smaller mammals and Carnivores after their kind."
And it was so.

And God made all Carnivores after their kind,
And all Herbivores after their kind.
And all minor mammals after their kind.
And God saw that it was good.
And God said — " Let us make man in our image, after our likeness,
And let him have dominion over the fish in the sea
And over the birds of the heavens.
And over the Herbivora,
And over the Earth,

And over all the minor animals that creep upon the earth."
And God created man in his own image,
In the image of God created he him,
Male and female created he them.

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins, 69

And God blessed them.

And God said unto them —

" Be fruitful and multiply,

And replenish the earth and subdue it,

And have dominion over the fishes of the sea

And over the birds of the air,

And over all the animals that move upon the earth."

And God said—'''' Behold, I have given you all herbs yielding seed,

"Which are on the surface of the whole earth.

And every tree with fruit having seed,

They shall be unto you for food.

And to all the animals of the land

And to all the birds of the heavens.

And to all things moving on the land having the breath of life,

I have given every green herb for food."
And it was so.
And God saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was very

good.
And Evening was and Morning was, a Sixth Day.

Day Seventh.

Thus the Heavens and the Earth were finished.

And all the hosts of them.

And on the seventh day God ended the work which he had made,

And he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had

made.
And God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it,
Because that in it he rested from all his work that he had created and

made.

70 The Origin of the World.

CHAPTER III.

OBJECTS AND NATURE OF A REVELATION OF ORIGINS
— Continued.

"What if earth
Be but a shadow of heaven, and things therein
Each to the other hke ; more than on earth is thought."

Milton.

(3) Character of the Biblical Cosmogony^ and general Views
of Nature which it Contains or to which it Leads. — Much of
what appertains to the character of the revelation of origins
has been anticipated under previous heads. We have only
to read the Song of Creation, as given in the last chapter, to
understand its power and influence as a beginning of relig-
ious doctrine. The revelation was written for plain men in
the infancy of the world. Imagine Chaldean or Hebrew
shepherd listening to these majestic lines from the lips of
some ancient patriarch, and receiving them as truly the
words of God. What a grand opening to him of both the
seen and unseen worlds ! Henceforth he has no super-
stitious dread of the stars above, or of the lightning and
thunder, or of the dark woods and flowing waters beneath.
They are all the works of the one Creator, the same Creator
who is his own Maker, in whose image and shadow he is
made. He can look up now to the heavens or around upon
the earth, and see in all the handiwork of God, and can wor-
ship God through all. He can see that the power that cares

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins, yi

for the birds and the flowers of the field cares for him. He
is no longer the slave and sport of unknown and dreadful
powers ; they are God's workmanship and under his control
— nay, God has given him a mission to subdue and rule over
them. So these noble words raise him to a new manhood,
and emancipate him from the torture of endless fears, and
open to him vast new fields of thought and inquiry, which
may enrich him with boundless treasures of new religious
and intellectual wealth. Imagine still farther that he wan-
ders into those great cities which are the seats of the idola-
tries of his time. He enters magnificent temples, sees elab-
orately decorated altars, huge images, gorgeous ceremonials,
priests gay in vestments and imposing in numbers. He is
invited to bow down before the bull Apis, to worship the
statue of Belus or of Ishtar, of Osiris or of Isis. But this is
not in his book of origins. All these things are contrivances
of man, not works of God, and their aim is to invite him to
adore that which is merely his fellow-creature, that which he
has the divine commission to subdue and rule. So our
primitive Puritan turns away. He will rather raise an altar
of rough stones in the desert, and worship the unseen yet
real Creator, the God that has no local habitation in temples
made with hands, yet is everywhere present. Such is the
moral elevation to which this revelation of origins raises hu-
manity ; and when there was added to it the farther history
of primeval innocence, of the fall, and of the promise of a
Redeemer, and of the fate of the godless antediluvians, there
was a whole system of religion, pure and elevating, and plac-
ing the Abrahamidae, who for ages seem alone to have held
to it, on a plane of spiritual vantage immeasurably above that
of other nations. Farther, every succeeding prophet whose
works are included in the sacred canon, following up these

72 The Origin of the World.

doctrines in the same spirit, and added new treasures of di-
vine knowledge from age to age.

But admitting all this, it may be asked. Are these ancient
records of any value to us ? May we not now dispense with
them, and trust to the light of science ? The infinitely varied
and discordant notions of our modern literature on these
great questions of origin, the. incapacity of any philosophical
system to reach the common mind for practical purposes,
and the baseless character of any religious system which
does not build on these great primitive truths, give a suffi-
cient answer. Farther, we may affirm that the greatest and
widest generalizations of our modern science have, in so far
as they are of practical importance, been anticipated in the
revelations of the Bible, and that in the cosmogony of Gene-
sis and its continuation in the other sacred books we have
general views of the universe as broad as those of any phi-
losophies, ancient or modern. This is a hard test for our
revelation, but it can be endured, and we may shortly inquire
what we find in the Bible of such great general truths.

Many may be disposed to admit the accurate delineation
of natural facts open to human observation in the sacred
Scriptures, who may not be prepared to find in these ancient
books any general views akin to those of the ancient philos-
ophers, or to those obtained by inductive processes in mod-
ern times. Yet views of this kind are scattered through the
Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, and are a natural out-
growth and development of the great facts and principles
asserted in the first chapter of Genesis. They resolve
themselves, almost as a matter of course, into the two lead-
ing ideas of order and adaptation. I have already quoted
the eloquent admission by Baron Humboldt of the presence
of these ideas of the cosmos in Psalm civ. They are both

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 73

conspicuous in the narrative of creation, and equally so in a
great number of other passages. " Order is heaven's first
law ; and the second is like unto it — that every thing serves
an end. This is the sum of all science. These are the
two mites, even all that she hath, which she throws into the
treasury of the Lord ; and, as she does so in faith, Eternal
Wisdom looks on and approves the deed."* These two
mites, lawfully acquired by science, by her independent exer-
tions, she may, however, recognize as of the same coinage
with the treasure already laid up in the rich storehouse of
the Hebrew literature; but in a peculiar and complex form,
which may be illustrated under the following general state-
ments :

I. The Scriptures assert invariable natural law, and con-
stantly recurring cycles in nature. Natural law is expressed
as the ordinance or decree of Jehovah. From the oldest of
the Hebrew books I select the following examples : t

" When he made a decree for the rain,
And a way for the thunder-flash."

— Job xxviii., 26.

" Kno^Yest thou the ordinances of the heavens ?
Canst thou establish a dominion even over the earth ?"

—Job xxxviii., 33.

The later books give us such views as the following :

" He hath established them [the heavens] for ever and ever ;
He hath made a decree which shall not pass."

— Psa. cxlviii., 6.

* McCosh, " Typical Forms and Special Ends."

1 1 adopt that view of the date of Job which makes it precede the Exo-
dus, because the religious ideas of the book are patriarchal, and it contains
no allusions to the Hebrew history or institutions. Were I to suggest an
hypothesis as to its origin, it would be that it was written or found by

D

74 The Origin of the World.

" Thou art forever, O Jehovah, thy word is established in the heavens ;

Thou hast established the earth, and it abideth ;

They continue this day according to thine ordinances, for all are thy

servants." ^

— Psa. cxix., 90.

" When he established the clouds above ;

When he strengthened the fountains of the deep ;

When he gave to the sea his decree.

That the waters should not pass his commandment ;

When he appointed the foundations of the earth."

— Prov. viii., 28.

Many similar instances will be found in succeeding pages;
and in the mean time we may turn to the idea of recurring
cycles, which forms the starting-point of the reasonings of
Solomon on the current of human affairs, in the book of
Ecclesiastes : " One generation passeth away, and another
generation cometh ; but the earth abideth for the ages. The
sun ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteneth to its
place whence it arose. The wind goeth toward the south,
and turneth unto the north. It whirleth about continually,
and returneth again according to its circuits. All the rivers
run into the sea, yet the sea doth not overflow ; unto the
place whence the rivers came, thither they return again." I
might fill pages with quotations more or less illustrative of
the statement in proof of which the above texts are cited; but
enough has been given to show that the doctrine of the Bible
is not that of fortuitous occurrence, or of materialism, or of
pantheism, or of arbitrary supernaturalism, but of invariable
natural law representing the decree of a wise and unchanging
Creator. It is a common but groundless and shallow charge
against the Bible that it teaches an " arbitrary supernatural-
Moses when in exile, and published among his countrymen in Egypt, to
revive their monotheistic religion, and cheer them under the apparent de-
sertion of their God and the evils of their bondage.

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 75

ism." What it does teach is that all nature is regulated by
the laws of God, which like himself are unchanging, but which
are so complex in their relations and adjustments that they
allow of infinite variety, and do not exclude even miraculous
intervention, or what appears to our limited intelligence as
such. In opposition to this, it is true, some physicists have
held that natural law is a fatal necessity.* If they mean by
this a merely hypothetical necessity that certain effects must
follow if certain laws act, this is in accordance with the Bib-
lical view, for nothing can resist the will of God. But if they
mean an absolute necessity that these laws can not be sus-
pended or counteracted by higher laws, or by the will of the
Creator, they assert what is not only contrary to Scripture, but
absurd, for " blind metaphysical necessity, which is the same
always and everywhere, could produce no variety of things."!
It could lead merely to a dead and inert equilibrium. On the
hypothesis of mere physical necessity, the universe either never
could have existed, or must have come to an end infinite ages
ago, which is the same thing. Only on the hypothesis of law
proceeding from an intelligent will can we logically account
for nature.

2. The Bible recognizes progress and development in nat-
ure. At the very outset we have this idea embodied in the
gradual elaboration of all things in the six creative periods,
rising from the formless void of the beginning, through suc-
cessive stages of inorganic and organic being, up to Eden
and to man. Beyond this point the work of creation stops ;
but there is to be an occupation and improvement of the
whole earth by man spreading from Eden. This process is
arrested or impeded by sin and the fall. Here commences

* Tyndall seems to hold this. t Newton,

76 TJie Origin of the World.

the special province of the Bible, in explaining the means of
recovery from the fall, and of the establishment of a new
spiritual and moral kingdom, and finally of the restoration of
Eden in a new heaven and earth. All this is moral, and re-
lates to man, in so far as the present state of things is con-
cerned ; but we have the commentary of Jesus : " My Father
worketh hitherto, and I work ;" the remarkable statement of
Paul, that the whole creation is involved in the results of
man's moral fall and restoration, and the equally remarkable
one that the Redeemer is also the maker of the "worlds" or
ages of the earth's physical progress, as well as of the future
"new heaven and new earth." Peter also rebukes indignant-
ly those scoffers who maintained that all things had remained
as they are since the beginning ; and refers to the creation
v/eek and to the deluge as earnests of the great changes yet
in store for the earth.*

It. is indeed curious to observe how in our version of the
Bible this idea of progress in the universe, or of " time-worlds,"
as it has been called, has been variously replaced by the words
" world " and " eternity," owing to the defective ideas preva-
lent at the time when the translation was made. In the He-
brew Scriptures the term Olam, " age," and in the New Testa-
ment the equivalent term Aid?t have been thus treated, and
their real significance much obscured. Thus when it is said,
" by faith we understand that the woj'Ids were framed," or " by
him God made the worlds^''\ or that certain of God's plans
have been hid "from the beginning of the worM"t the refer-
ence is not to worlds in space, but to worlds in time, or ages
of God's working in the universe. So also these ages of God's

* John v., 17 ; Rom. viii., 22 ; Heb. i,, 2 ; 2 Peter iii.
t Heb. i., 2. X Eph. iii., 9.

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins, y/

working are given to us as our only intelligible type of eter-
nity, of which absolutely we can have no conception. Thus
God's " eternal purpose " is his purpose of the ages. So when
he is the " King eternal/"* and in that capacity gives to his
people " life everlasting," he is the King of the ages, and gives
life of the ages. So in the noble hymn attributed to Moses
(Psalm xc), where our version has, "from everlasting to ever-
lasting thou art God," the original is, "from age to age thou
art, O God." It has perhaps been a defect of our modern
science that it has familiarized us merely with the existence
of worlds in space, and not with their existence in time. It
is only in comparatively modern times that the developments
of chronological geology and of physical astronomy have
brought before us, not only the long ages in which the earth
was passing through its formative stages, but also the fact
that still longer aeons are embraced in the history of the other
bodies of our solar system, and of the starry orbs and nebulae.
These grand conceptions were already embodied in the He-
brew revelation, and were used there as the means of giving
some faint approach to a conception of the unlimited exist-
ence of God himself, of the ages in which his creative work
has been going on, and of the future life he has prepared for
his redeemed people.

Such views of development and progress are not unknown
to many ancient cosmogonies and philosophical systems, but
they had no stable foundation in observed fact until the rise
of modern geology and physical astronomy; which enable us
to affirm that, in addition to those changeless physical laws
which cause the bodies of the universe to wheel in unvarying
cycles, and all natural powers to reproduce themselves, and, in

* I Tim. i., 17. t Eph. iv., 11.

78 The Origin of the World.

addition to those organic laws which produce unceasing suc-
cessions of living individuals, there is a higher law of prog-
ress. We can now trace back man, the animals and plants
his contemporaries, and others which preceded them, our con-
tinents and mountain ranges, and the solid rocks of which
they are composed — nay, the very fabric of the solar system
itself — to their several origins at distinct points of time; and
can maintain that since the earth began to wheel around the
sun, no succeeding year has seen it precisely as it was in the
year before. The old Hebrew record affirms, and I presume
scarcely any sane man really doubts, that this law of progress
emanates from the mind and power of one creative Being.
When men see in natural law only recurring cycles, they may
be pardoned for falling even into the absurdity of believing
in eternal succession; but when they see change and prog-
ress, and this in a uniform direction, overmastering recurring
cycles, and introducing new objects and powers not account-
ed for by previous objects or powers, they are brought very
near to the presence of the Spiritual Creator. And hence,
although no science can reach back to the act of creation,
this doctrine is much more strongly held in our day by geol-
ogists than by physicists. It is quite true that the idea of
creative acts has been superseded to a great extent by that
of "creation by law," or by that of "evolution." Still behind
all there lies a primary creative power; and the validity of
these ideas and their bearing on theism and creation we shall
have to discuss in the sequel. In one thing only does the
Bible here part company with natural science. The Bible
goes on into the future, and predicts a final condition of our
planet, of which science can from its investigations learn
nothing.

3. The Bible recognizes purpose, use, and special adapta-

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 79

tion in nature. It is, in short, full of natural theology, akin
in some respects to that which has been so elaborately work-
ed out by so many modern writers. Numerous passages in
support of this will occur to every one who has read the
Scriptures. It is necessary here, however, to direct attention
to a distinction very obvious in Scripture, but not always
attended to by writers on this subject. The Bible maintains
the true "final cause" of all nature to be, not its material
and special adaptations or its value to man, but the pleasure
or satisfaction of the Creator himself. In the earlier periods
of Creation, before man was upon the earth, God contemplates
his work and pronounces it good. The heavenly hosts praise
him, saying, " Thou hast created all things, and for thy pleas-
ure they are and were created." Further, the Bible repre-
sents intelligences higher than man as sharing in the delight
which maybe derived from the contemplation of God's works.
When the earth first rose from the waters to greet the light,
" the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God
shouted for joy." There are many things in nature that
strongly impress the naturalist with this same view, that the
Creator takes pleasure in his works ; and, like human genius
in its highest efforts, rejoices in production, even if no sen-
tient being should be ready to sympathize. The elaborate
structures of fossils, of which we have only fragmentary re-
mains, the profusion of natural objects of surpassing beauty
that grow and perish unseen by us, the delicate microscopic
mechanism of nearly all organic structures, point to other
reasons for beauty and order than those that concern man, or
the mere utilities of human beings j and though there are now
naturalists who deny absolutely that beauty is an object in
nature, and assign even the colors of flowers and insects to
utility alone, and this of a very low order, this doctrine is so

8o TJie Origin of the World.

repulsive to our higher sentiments that there is httle danger
of its general acceptance ; while the slightest consideration
shows that the utilities referred to could have been secured
without any of this consummate beauty associated with them,
and our perception of and delight in which mark in a way
beyond the ability of skepticism to cavil at our own spiritual
kinship with the Author of all this profusion of beauty. Yet
man is represented as the chief created being for whom this
earth has been prepared and designed. He obtains dominion
over it. A chosen spot is prepared for him, in which not only
his wants but his tastes are consulted; and, being made in
the image of his Maker, his aesthetic sentiments correspond
with the beauties of the Maker's work, and he finds there
also food for his reason and imagination. This view of the
subject, as well as others already referred to, is finely repre-
sented in the address of the Almighty to Job.*

The Bible also very often refers to the special adapta-
tions of natural objects and laws to each other, and to the
promotion of the happiness of sentient creatures lower than
man. The 104th Psalm is replete with notices of such
adaptations, and so is the address to Job ; and indeed this
view seems hardly ever absent from the minds of the Hebrew
writers, but has its highest applications in the lilies of the
field, that toil not neither do they spin, and the sparrows that
are sold for a farthing, yet the heavenly Father has clothed
the one with surpassing beauty, and provides food for the
other, nor allows it to fall without his knowledge. I may, by
way of farther illustration, merely name a few of the adapta-
tions referred to in Job xxxviii. and the following chapters.
The winds and the clouds are so arranged as to afford the

* Job xxxviii. and xxxix.

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 8i

required supplies of moisture to the wilderness where no man
is, to "cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth."
For similar objects the tempest is ordered, and the clouds
arranged "by wisdom." The adaptations of the wild ass, the
wild goat, the ostrich, the migratory birds, the horse, the hip-
popotamus, the crocodile, to their several habitats, modes of
life, and uses in nature, are most vividly sketched and applied
as illustrations of the consummate wisdom of the Creator,
which descends to the minutest details of organization and
habit.

It is to be observed here that in holding this doctrine of
use and adaptation in nature, the Bible is only consistent
with its own theory of rational theism. The Monotheist can
not refer nature to a conflict of antagonistic powers and
forces. He must recognize in it a unity of plan ; and even
those things which appear aberrant, irregular, or noxious
must have their place in this plan. Hence in the Bible God
is maker not only of the day but of the night, not only of the
peaceful cattle but of the voracious crocodile, not only of
the sunshine and shower but of the tornado and the earth-
quake. Further, in all these things God is manifested, so
that we may learn "his eternal power and divinity* from the
things which he has made," and in all these also there are
emblems of his relations to us. This argument from design
is in truth the only proof the Bible condescends to urge for
the existence of God ; and it is the only one in which in his
later days our great English philosopher Mill could see any
validity.f

If the reader happens to be familiar with the objections to
the doctrine of final causes, or teleology, in nature, urged in

* Romans i,, 20. f Essays on Theism.

D 2

82 TJie Origin of the World.

our day by Spencer, Haeckel, and others, he will have seen
from the foregoing statements that these objections are in
themselves baseless, or inapplicable to this doctrine as main-
tained in the Bible. There is no consistency in the position
of men who, when they dig a rudely chipped flint out of a bed
of gravel,, immediately infer an intelligent workman, and who
refuse to see any indication of a higher intelligence in the
creation of the workman himself It is a blind philosophy
which professes to see in primal atoms the "promise and
potency of mind," and which fails to perceive that such
potency is more inconceivable than the evidence of primary
and supreme mind. The men who maintain that wings were
not planned for flight, but that flight has produced wings,
and thousands of like propositions, are simply amusing them-
selves with paradoxes to which may very properly be applied
the strange word devised by Haeckel to express his theory of
nature — Dystekology, or purposelessness. It is to be borne
in mind, however, that the teleology of the Bible is not of that
narrow kind which would make man the sole object of nat-
ure, and the supreme judge of its adaptations. Inasmuch as
God's plan goes over all the ages past and future, and relates
to the welfare of all sentient beings known or unknown to us,
and also to his own sovereign pleasure as the supreme object,
we may not be in a position either to understand or profit by
all its parts, and hence may expect to find many mysteries,
and many things that we can not at present reconcile with
God's wisdom and goodness. We know but "parts of his
ways," the "fullness of his power who can understand."
"His judgments are unsearchable," "his ways are past
finding out."
4. The law of type or pattern in nature is distinctly indicat-
ed in the Bible. This is a principle only recently understood

Objects and Nature of a Revclatioii of Origins. 83

by naturalists, but it has more or less dimly dawned on the
minds of many great thinkers in all ages. Nor is this won-
derful, for the idea of type is scarcely ever absent from our
own conceptions of any work that we may undertake. In
any such work we anticipate recurring daily toil, like the re-
turning cycles of nature. We look for progress, like that of
the growth of the universe. We study adaptation both of the
several parts to subordinate uses, and of the whole to some
general design. But we also keep in view some pattern, style,
or order, according to which the whole is arranged, and the
mutual relations of the parts are adjusted. The architect
must adhere to some order of architecture, and to some style
within that order. The potter, the calico-printer, and the
silversmith must equally study uniformity of pattern in their
several manufactures. The Almighty Worker has exhibited
the same idea in his works. In the animal kingdom, for in-
stance, we have four or more leading types of structure.
Taking any one of these — the vertebrate, for example — we
have a uniform general plan, embracing the vertebral column
constructed of the same elements ; the members, whether the
arm of man, the limb of the quadruped, or the wing of the
bat or the bird, or the swimming-paddle of the whale, built of
the same bones. In like manner all the parts of the verte-
bral column itself in the same animal, whether in the skull,
the neck, or the trunk, are composed of the same elementary
structures. These types are farther found to be sketched out
• — first in their more general, and then in their special features
— in proceeding from the lower species of the same type to
the higher, in proceeding from the earlier to the later stages
of embryonic development, and in proceeding from the more
ancient to the more recent creatures that have succeeded
each other in geological time. Man, the highest of the ver-

84 TJie Origin of the World.

tebrates, is thus the archetype, representing and including all
the lower and earlier members of the vertebrate type. The
above are but trite and familiar examples of a doctrine which
may furnish and has furnished the material of volumes.
There can be no question that the Hebrew Bible is the old-
est book in which this principle is stated. In the first chap-
ter of Genesis we have specific type in the creation of plants
and animals after their kinds or species, and in the formation
of man in the image and likeness of the Creator ; and, as we
shall find in the sequel, there are some curious ideas of high-
er and more general types in the grouping of the creatures
referred to. The same idea is indicated in the closing chap-
ters of Job, where the three higher classes of the vertebrates
are represented by a number of examples, and the typical
likeness of one of these — the hippopotamus — to man, seems
to be recognized. Dr. McCosh has quoted, as an illustration
of the doctrine of types, a very remarkable passage from
Psalm cxxxix. :

" I will praise Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
Marvellous are thy w^orks,
And that my soul knoweth right well.
My substance was not hid from Thee,
When I was made in secret,

And curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth :
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being imperfect ;
And in thy book all my members were written,
Which in continuance were fashioned when as yet there was none
of them."

It would too much tax the faith of many to ask them to
believe that the writer of the above passage, or the Spirit that
inspired him, actually meant to teach — what we now know so
well from geology — that the prototypes of all the parts of the

Objects and Nature of a Revelation of Origins. 85

archetypal human structure may be found in those fossil re-
mains of extinct animals which may, in nearly every country,
be dug up from the rocks of the earth. No objection need,
however, be taken to our reading in it the doctrine of embry-
onic development according to a systematic type.

Science, it is true, or rather I should perhaps say philo-
sophical speculation, has sometimes pushed this idea of plan
into that of a spontaneous genetic evolution of things in time,
without any creative superintendence or definite purpose.
This way of viewing the matter is, however, as we shall have
occasion to see, both bald and irrational, and wants the sym-
metry and completeness of that style of thought which grasps
at once progress and plan and adaptation, as emanating from
a Supreme Will. The question of how the plan has been
worked out will come up for detailed consideration farther
on. In the mean time we have before us the fact that the
Bible represents the cosmos as not the product of a blind
conflict of self-existent forces, but as the result of the pro-
duction and guidance of these forces by infinite wisdom.

It is more than curious that this idea of type, so long exist-
ing in an isolated and often, depised form, as a theological
thought in the imagery of Scripture, should now be a lead-
ing idea of natural science ; and that while comparative
anatomy teaches us that the structures of all past and pres-
ent lower animals point to man, who, as Professor Owen ex-
presses it, has had all his parts and organs " sketched out in
anticipation in the inferior animals," the Bible points still
farther forward to an exaltation of the human type itself into
what even the comparative anatomist might perhaps regard
as among the " possible modifications of it beyond those
realized in this little orb of ours," could he but learn its real
nature.

86 The Origin of the World,

Under the foregoing heads, of the object, the structure, the
authority, and the general cosmical views of the Scripture, I
have endeavored to group certain leading thoughts important
as preliminary to the study of the subject; and, in now enter-
ing on the details of the Old Testament cosmogony, I trust
the reader will pardon me for assuming, as a working hypoth-
esis, that we are studying an inspired book, revealing the
origin of nature, and presenting accurate pictures of natural
facts and broad general views of the cosmos, at least until in
the progress of our inquiry we find reason to adopt lower
views ; and that he will, in the mean time, be content to fol-
low me in that careful and systematic analysis which a work
claiming such a character surely demands.

The Beginning^ 87

CHAPTER IV.

THE BEGINNING.

" In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth." — Gene-
sis i., I.

It is a remarkable and instructive fact that the first verse
of the Hebrew sacred writings speaks of the material uni-
verse— speaks of it as a whole, and as originating in a power
outside of itself The universe, then, in the conception of
this ancient writer, is not eternal. It had a beginning, but
that beginning in the indefinite and by us unmeasured past.
It did not originate fortuitously, or by any merely accidental
conflict of self-existent material atoms, but by an act — an act
of will on the part of a Being designated by that name which
among all the Semitic peoples represented the ultimate, eter-
nal, inscrutable source of power and object of awe and ven-
eration. With the simplicity and child-like faith of an archaic
age, the writer makes no attempt to combat any objections or
difficulties with which this great fundamental truth may be as-
sailed. He feels its axiomatic force as the basis of all true
religion and sound philosophy, and the ultimate fact which
must ever bar our further progress in the investigation of the
origin of things — the production from non-existence of the
material universe by the eternal self-existent God.

It did not concern him to know what might be the nature
of that unconditioned self- existence ; for though, like our

88 The Origin of the World.

ideas of space and time, incomprehensible, it must be as-
sumed. It did not concern him to know how matter and
force subsist, or what may be the difference between a ma-
terial universe cognizable by our senses and the absolute
want of all the phenomena of such a universe or of whatever
may be their basis and essence. Such questions can never
be answered, yet the succession of these phenomena must
have had a commencement somewhere in time. How sim-
ple and how grand is his statement ! How plain and yet
how profound its teachings !

It is evident that the writer grasps firmly the essence of
the question as to the beginning of things, and covers the
whole ground which advanced scientific or philosophical
speculation can yet traverse. That the universe must have
had a beginning no one now needs to be told. If any phil-
osophical speculator ever truly held that there has been an
endless succession of phenomena, science has now completely
negatived the idea by showing us the beginning of all things
that we know in the present universe, and by establishing
the strongest probabilities that even its ultimate atoms could
not have been eternal. But the question remains — If there
was a beginning, what existed in that beginning ? To this
question many partial and imperfect answers have been
given, but our ancient record includes them all.

If any one should say, "In the beginning was nothing."
Yes, says Genesis, there was, it is true, nothing of the pres-
ent matter and arrangements of nature. Yet all was pres-
ent potentially in the will of the Creator.

" In the beginning were atoms," says another. Yes, says
Genesis, but they were created ; and so saj^s modern science,
and must say of ultimate particles determined by weight and
measure, and incapable of modification in their essential

The B^inniyig. 89

properties — " They have the properties of a manufactured
article."*

" In the beginning were forces," says yet another. True,
says Genesis; but all forces are one in origin — they represent
merely the fiat of the eternal and self-existent. So says sci-
ence, that force must in the ultimate resort be an " expression

of Will." t

" In the beginning was Elohim," adds our old Semitic au-
thority, and in him are the absolute and eternal thought and
will, the Creator from whom and by whom and in whom are
all things.

Thus the simple familiar words, " In the beginning God
created the heaven and the earth," answer all possible ques-
tions as to the origin of things, and include all under the
conception of theism. Let us now look at these pregnant
words more particularly as to their precise import and sig-
nificance.

The divine personality expressed by the Hebrew Elohim
may be fairly said to include all that can be claimed for the
pantheistic conception of "dynamis," or universal material
power. Lange gives this as included in the term Elohim, in
his discussion of this term in his book on Genesis. It has
been aptly said that if, physically speaking, the fall of a spar-
row produces a gravitative effect that extends throughout the
universe, there can be no reason why it should be unknown
to God. God is thus everywhere, and always. Yet he is
everywhere and always present as a personality knowing
and willing. From his thought and will in the beginning
proceeded the universe. By him it was created.

* Herschel, Dissertation on the Study of Natural Philosophy ; Maxwell,
Lecture before the British Association.
t Carpenter, " Human Ph3^siology."

QO The Origin of the World.

What, then, is creation in the sense of the Hebrew writer.
The act is expressed by the verb bara, a word of compara-
tively rare occurrence in the Scriptures, and employed to de-
note absolute creation, though its primary sense is to cut or
carve, and it is indeed a near relative of our own English
word " pare." If, says Professor Stuart, of Andover, this
word " does not mean to create in the highest sense, then the
Hebrews had no word by which they could designate this
idea." Yet, like our English "create," the word is used in
secondary and figurative senses, which in no degree detract
from its force when strictly and literally used. Since, how-
ever, these secondary senses may often appear to obscure the
primitive meaning, we must examine them in detail.

In the first chapter of Genesis, after the general statement
in verse i, other verbs signifying Xoform or 7nake are used to
denote the elaboration of the separate parts of the universe,
and the word "create" is found in only two places, when it re-
fers to the introduction of " great whales " (reptiles) and of
man. These uses of the w^ord have been cited to disprove
its sense of absolute creation. It must be observed, how-
ever, that in the first of these cases we have the earliest ap-
pearance of animal life, and in the second the introduction
of a rational and spiritual nature. Nothing but pure mate-
rialism can suppose that the elements of vital and spiritual
being were included in the matter of the heavens and the
earth as produced in the beginning ; and as the Scripture
writers were not materialists, we may infer that they recog-
nized, in the introduction of life and reason, acts of absolute
creation, just as in the origin of matter itself. In Genesis ii.
and iii. we have a form of expression which well marks the dis-
tinction between creation and making. God is there said to
have rested from all his works which he " created and made "

The Begmning. 91

— literally, created " for or in reference to making," the word
for making being one of those already referred to.* The
force of this expression consists in its intimating that God
had not only finished the work oi creation, properly so called,
but also the elaboration of the various details of the universe,
as formed or fashioned out of the original materials. Of a
similar character is the expression in Isaiah xlii., 5, " Jeho-
vah, he that created the heavens and spread them out ;" and
that in Psalm cxlviii.,5, " He commanded and they were cre-
ated, he hath also established them for ever and ever."

In as far as I am aware, the word bar-a in all the remaining
instances of its occurrence in the Pentateuch refers to the
creation of man, with the following exceptions : Exodus
xxxiv., 10, " I will do (create) marvels, such as have not
been seen in all the earth ;" Numbers xvi., 30, " If the
Lord make a new thing (create a creation), and the earth
open her mouth and swallow them up." These verses are
types of a class of expressions in which the proper term for
creation is applied to the production of something new,
strange, and marvellous ; for instance, " Create in me a
clean heart, O Lord;" "Behold, I create new heavens and a
new earth." It is, however, evidently an inversion of sound
exposition to say that these secondary or figurative mean-
ings should determine the primary and literal sense in Gen-
esis i. On the contrary, we should rather infer that the
sacred writers in these cases selected the proper word for
creation, to express in the most forcible manner the novel
and thorough character of the changes to which they refer,
and their direct dependence on the Divine will. By such
expressions we are in effect referred back to the original use

* Asah.

92 The Origin of the World.

of the word, as denoting the actual creation of matter by the
command of God, in contradistinction from those arrange-
ments which have been effected by the gradual operation of
secondary agents, or of laws attached to matter at its crea-
tion. It has been farther observed* that in the Hebrew
Scriptures this word bara is applied to God only as an
agent, not to any human artificer ; a fact which is very im-
portant with reference to its true significance. Viewing cre-
ation in this light, we need not perplex ourselves with the
question whether we should consider Genesis i., i, to refer
to the essence of matter as distinguished from its qualities.
We may content ourselves with the explanation given by
Paul in the eleventh of Hebrews : " By faith we are certain
that the worldsf were created by the decree of God, so that
that which is seen was made of that w^hich appears noL" Or,
with reference to the other uses of the word, if the first in-
troduction of animal life was a creation, and if the introduc-
tion of the rational nature of man was a creation, we may
suppose that the original creation was in like manner the in-
troduction or first production of those entities which we call
matter and force, and which to science now are as much ulti-
mate facts as they were to Moses.

The nature of the act of creation being thus settled, its
extent may be ascertained by an examination of the terms
heaven and earth.

The word "heavens" {shamayim) has in Hebrew as in
English a variety of significations. Of material heavens there
are, in the quaint language of Poole, "/;w regiones, nhi aves,
ubi nubes, iibi sidcra;'' or (i) the atmosphere or firmament ;$

* McDonald, "Creation and the Fall."

t Literally, " ages " or "time-worlds," as they have been called,

t Genesis i., 8, 26-28.

The Bczinnincr.

93

(2) the region of clouds in the upper part of the atmosphere f

(3) the depths of space comprehending the starry orbs.f Be-
sides these we have the "heaven of heavens," the abode of God
and spiritual beings. $ The application of the term " heav-
en" to the atmosphere will be considered when we reach the
6th and 7th verses. In the mean time we may accept the
word in this place as including the material heavens in the
widest sense: (i.) Because it is not here, as in verse 8th, re-
stricted to the atmosphere by the terms of the narrative ; this
restriction in verse 8th in fact implying the wider sense of the
word in preceding verses. (2.) Because the atmospheric firma-
ment, elsewhere called heaven, divides the waters above from
those below, whereas it is evident that all these waters, and of
consequence the materials of the atmosphere itself, are includ-
ed in the earth of the following verse. (3.) Because in verse
14th the sidereal heavens are spoken of as arranged from
pre-existing materials, which refers their actual creation back
to this passage.

In the words now under consideration we therefore regard
the heavens as including the whole material universe beyond
the limits of our earth. That this sense of the word is not
unknown to the writers of Scripture, and that they had en-
larged and rational views of the star-spangled abysses of
spac^, will appear from the terms employed by Moses in his
solemn warning against the Sabasan idolatry, in Deuteronomy
iv. : "And lest thou lift up thine eyes to the heavens, and
when thou seest the sun and the moon and the stars, even all
the host of the heavens, shouldest be incited to worship them
and serve them which Jehovah thy God hath appointed to all

* Job xxxviii., 37. f Gen. i., 14 ; Deut. xvii., 3.

X Gen. xxviii., 17 ; Job xv., 15 ; Psa. ii., 4.

94 The Origin of the World.

nations under the whole heavens." To the same effect is the
expression of the awe and wonder of the poet king of Israel
in Psalm viii. :

*' When I consider the heavens, the work of thy fingers,
The moon and the stars which thou hast ordained;
What is man that thou art mindful of him ?"

I may observe, however, that throughout the Scriptures the
word in question is much more frequently applied to the
atmospheric than to the sidereal heavens. The reason of
this appears in the terms of verse 8th.

If we have correctly referred the term "heavens" to the whole
of extramundane space, then the word "earth" must denote our
globe as a distinct world, with all the liquid and aeriform sub-
stances on its surface. The arrangement of the whole uni-
verse under the heads "heaven" and "earth" has been derided
as a division into " infinity and an atom ;" but when we con-
sider the relative importance of the earth to us, and that it
constitutes the principal object of the whole revelation to
which this is introductory, the absurdity disappears, and we
recognize the classification as in the circumstances natural
and rational. The word " earth " {aretz) is, however, generally
used to denote the dry land, or even a region or district of
country. It is indeed expressly restricted to the dry land in
verse loth; but as in the case of the parallel limitation of the
word "heaven," we m.ay consider this as a hint that its previous
meaning is more extended. That it is really so, appears from
the following considerations : (i.) It includes the deep, or the
material from which the sea and atmosphere were afterwards
formed. (2.) The subsequent verses show that at the period
in question no dry land existed. If instances of a similar
meaning from other parts of Scripture are required, I give

The Beginning. 95

the following : Genesis ii., i to 4, " Thus the heavens and the
earth were finished, and all the host of them j" " these are the
generations of the heavens and the earth.' In this general
summary of the creative work, the earth evidently includes the
seas and all that is in them, as well as the dry land j and the
whole expression denotes the universe. The well-known and
striking remark of Job, " Who hangeth the earth upon noth-
ing," is also a case in point, and must refer to the whole
world, since in other parts of the same book the dry land or
continental masses of the earth are said, and with great truth
and propriety, to be supported above the waters on pillars or
foundations. The following passages may also be cited as
instances of the occurrence of the idea of the whole world
expressed by the word "earth:" Exodus x., 29, "And Moses
said unto him. As soon as I am gone out of the city, I will
spread abroad my hands unto the Lord, and the thunder shall
cease, neither shall there be any more hail j that thou mayest
know the earth is the Lord's 3" Deuteronomy x., 14, " Behold,
the heaven and the heaven of heavens is the Lord's, the earth
also, and all that therein is."

The material universe was brought mto existence in the
" beginning " — a term evidently indefinite as far as regards
any known epoch, and implying merely priority to all other
recorded events. It can not be the first day, for there is no
expressed connection, and the work of the first day is distinct
from that of the beginning. It can not be a general term for
the whole six days, since these are separated from it by that
chaotic or formless state to which we are next introduced.
The beginning, therefore, is the threshold of creation — the
line that separates the old tenantless condition of space from
the world-crowded galaxies of the existing universe. The
only other information respecting it that we have in Scrip-

96 The Origin of the World.

ture is in that fine descriptive poem in Proverbs viii., in
wliich the Wisdom of God personified — who may be held to
represent the Ahuighty Word, or Logos, introduced in the
formula "God said," and afterward referred to in Scrip-
ture as the manifested or conditioned Deity, the Mediator
between man and the otherwise inaccessible Divinity, the
agent in the work of creation as well as in that of redemption
— narrates the origin of all created things :

"Jehovah possessed* me, the beghming of his way,
Before his work of old.
I was set up from everlasting,

From the beginning, before the earth was ; ^

When there were no deeps I was brought forth.
When there were no fountains abounding in water."

The beginning here precedes the creation of the earth, as
well as of the deep which encompassed its surface in its
earliest condition. The beginning, in this point of view,
stretches back from the origin of the world into the depths
of eternity. It is to us emphatically the beginning, because
it witnessed the birth of our material system ; but to the
eternal Jehovah it was but the beginning of a great series of
his operations, and we have no information of its absolute
duration. From the time when God began to create the
celestial orbs, until that time when it could be said that he
had created the heavens and the earth, countless ages may
have rolled along, and myriads of worlds may have passed
through various stages of existence, and the creation of our
planetary system may have been one of the last acts of that
long beginning.

The author of creation is Elohim, or God in his general

* Not " created," as some read. The verb is kana^ not bara.

The Beginning. gy

aspect to nature and man, and not in that special aspect in
reference to tlie Hebrew commonwealtli and to tlie work of
redemption indicated by the name Jehovah {laveh). We
need not enter into the doubtful etymology of the word \ but
may content ourselves with that supported by many, perhaps
the majority of authorities, which gives it the meaning of
" Object of dread or adoration," or with that preferred by
Gesenius, which makes it mean the " Strong or mighty one."
Its plural form has also greatly tried the ingenuity of the
commentators. After carefully considering the various hy-
potheses, such as that of the plural of majesty of the Rabbins,
and the primitive polytheism supposed by certain Rational-
ists, I can see no better reason than an attempt to give a
grammatical expression to that plurality in unity indicated
by the appearance of the Spirit or breath of God and his
Word, or manifested will and power, as distinct agents in the
succeeding verses. This was probably always held by the
Hebrews in a general form; and was by our Saviour and his
apostles specialized in that trinitarian doctrine which enables
both John and Paul explicitly to assert the agency of the
second person of the Trinity in the creative work.

This elementary trinitarian idea of the first chapter of
Genesis may be further stated thus : The name Elohim
expresses the absolute unconditioned will and reason — the
Godhead. The manifestation of God in creative power,
and in the framing and ordering of the cosmos, is repre-
sented by the formula " God said " — the equivalent of the
Divine Word. The further manifestation of God in love
of and sympathy with his work is represented by the Breath
of God, and by the expression, "God saw that it was good"
— operations these of the Divine Spirit.

The aboriginal root of the word Elohim probably lies far

E

98 The Origin of the World.

back of the Semitic literature, and comes from the natural
exclamations "al," "lo," "la," which arise from the sponta-
neous action of the human vocal organs in the presence of
any object of awe or wonder. The plural form may in like
manner be simply equivalent to our terms Godhead or Divin-
ity, implying all that is essentially God without specification
or distinction of personalities. As Dr. Tayler Lewis well re-
marks in his " Introduction to Genesis," we should not dis-
miss such plurals as mere usiis loqiiendi. The plural form
of the name of God, of the heavens (literally, the "heights"),
of the olamim^ or time-worlds, of the word for life in Genesis
(lives), indicates an idea of vastness and diversity not meas-
urable by speech, which must have been impressed on the
minds of early men, otherwise these forms would not have
arisen. God, heaven, time, life, were to them existences
stretching outward to infinity, and not to be denoted by the
bare singular form suitable to ordinary objects.

Fairly regarding, then, this ancient form of words, we may
hold it as a clear, concise, and accurate enunciation of an
ultimate doctrine of the origin of things, which with all our
increased knowledge of the history of the earth w^e are not
in a position to replace with any thing better or more prob-
able. On the other hand, this sublime dogma of creation
leaves us perfectly free to interrogate nature for ourselves, as
to all that it can reveal of the duration and progress of the
creative work. But the positive gain which comes from this
ancient formula goes far be3'ond these negative qualities.
If received, this one word of the Old Testament is sufficient to
deliver us forever from the superstitious dread of nature, and
to present it to us as neither self-existent nor omnipotent,
but as the mere handiwork of a spiritual Creator to whom we
are kin ; as not a product of chance or caprice, but as the

The Begin7iing. 99

result of a definite plan of the All-wise; as not a congeries of
unconnected facts and processes, but as a cosmos, a well-
ordered though complex machine, designed by Him who is
the Almighty and the supreme object of reverence. Had
this verse alone constituted the whole Bible, this one utter-
ance would, wherever known and received, have been an
inestimable boon to mankind ; proclaiming deliverance to
the captives of every form of nature-worship and idolatry, and
fixing that idea of unity of plan in the universe which is the
fruitful and stable root of all true progress in science. We
owe profound thanks to the old Hebrew prophet for these
words — words which have broken from the necks of once
superstitious Aryan races chains more galling than those of
Egyptian bondage.

lOO Tlie Origin of the World.

CHAPTER V.

THE DESOLATE VOID.

"And the earth was desolate and empty, and darkness was upon the
surface of the deep ; and the Spirit of God moved on the surface of the
waters." — Genesis i., 2.

We have here a few bold outlines of a dark and mysterious
scene — a condition of the earth of which we have no certain
intimation from any other source, except the speculations
based on modern discoveries in physical science. It was
"unshaped and empty," formless and uninhabited. The
words thus translated are sufficiently plain in their meaning.
The first is used by Isaiah to denote the desolation of a ruin-
ed city, and in Job and the Psalms as characteristic of the
wilderness or desert. Both in connection are employed by
Isaiah to express the destruction of Idumea, and by Jeremiah
in a powerful description of the ruin of nations by God's judg-
ments. When thus united, they form the strongest expression
which the Hebrew could supply for solitary, uninhabited des-
olation, like that of a city reduced to heaps of rubbish, and
to the silence and loneliness of utter decay.

In the present connection these words inform us that the
earth was in a chaotic state, and unfit for the residence of
organized beings. The words themselves suggest the impor-
tant question : Are they intended to represent this as the
original condition of the earth? Was it a scene of desolation
and confusion when it sprang from the hand of its Creator ?

TJie Desolate Void. I or

or was this state of ruin consequent on convulsions which
may have been preceded by a very different condition, not
mentioned by the inspired historian ? That it may have been
so is rendered possible by the circumstance that the words
employed are generally used to denote the ruin of places
formerly inhabited, and by the want of any necessary connec-
tion in time between the first and second verses. It has even
been proposed, though this does violence to the construction,
to read " and the earth became " desolate and empty. Far-
ther, it seems, a priori, improbable that the first act of crea-
tive power should have resulted in the production of a mere
chaos. The crust of the earth also shows, in its alternations
of strata and organic remains, evidence of a great series of
changes extending over vast periods, and which might, in a
revelation mtended for moral purposes, with great propriety
be omitted.

For such reasons some eminent expositors of these words
are disposed to consider the first verse as a title or introduc-
tion, and to refer to this period the whole series of geological
changes ; and this view has formed one of the most popular
solutions of the apparent discrepancies between the geological
and-Scriptural histories of the world. It is evident, however,
that if we continue to view the term "earth" as including the
whole globe, this hypothesis becomes altogether untenable.
The subsequent verses inform us that at the period in question
the earth was covered by a universal ocean, possessed no at-
mosphere and received no light, and had not entered into its
present relations with the other bodies of our system. No
conceivable convulsions could have effected such changes on
an earth previously possessing these arrangements ; and ge-
ology assures us that the existing laws and dispositions in
these respects have prevailed from the earliest periods to

102 The Origin of the World.

which it can lead us back, and that the modern state of
things was not separated from those which preceded it by any-
such general chaos. To avoid this difficulty, which has been
much more strongly felt as these facts have been more and
more clearly developed by modern science, it has been held
that the word earth may denote only a particular region,
temporarily obscured and reduced to ruin, and about to be
fitted up, by the operations of the six days, for the residence
of man ; and that consequently the narrative of the six days
refers not to the original arrangement of the surface, rela-
tions, and inhabitants of our planet, but to the retrieval from
ruin and repeopling of a limited territory, supposed to have
been in Central Asia, and which had been submerged and its
atmosphere obscured by aqueous or volcanic vapors. The
chief support of this view is the fact, previously noticed, that
the word earth is very frequently used in the signification of
region, district, country; to which may be added the supposed
necessity for harmonizing the Scriptures with geological dis-
covery, and at the same time viewing the days of creation as
literal solar days.

Can we, however, after finding that in verse ist the term
earth must mean the whole world, suddenly restrict it in verse
2d to a limited region. Is it possible that the writer who
in verse loth for the first time intimates a limitation of the
meaning of this word, by the solemn announcement, "And
God called the dry land earth," should in a previous place use
it in a much more limited sense without any hint of such re-
striction. The case stands thus: A writer uses the word
earth in the most general sense ; in the next sentence he is
supposed, without any intimation of his intention, to use the
same word to denote a region or country, and by so doing
entirely to change the meaning of his whole discourse from

The Desolate Void. 103

that which would otherwise have attached to it. Yet the
same writer when, a few sentences farther on, it becomes
necessary for him to use the word earth to denote the dry
land as distinguished from the seas, formally and with an as-
sertion of divine authority, intimates the change of meaning.
Is not this supposition contrary not only to sound principles
of interpretation, but also to common - sense j and would it
not tend to render worthless the testimony of a writer to
whose diction such inaccuracy must be ascribed. It is in
truth to me surprising beyond measure that such a view could
ever have obtained currency ; and I fear it is to be attributed
to a determination, at all hazards and with any amount of
violence to the written record, to make geology and religion
coincide. Must we then throw aside this simple and con-
venient method of reconciliation, sanctioned by Chalmers,
Smith, Harris, King, Hitchcock, and many other great or re-
spectable names, and on which so many good men compla-
cently rest. Truth obliges us to do so, and to confess that
both geology and Scripture refuse to be reconciled on this
basis. We may still admit that the lapse of time between
the beginning and the first day may have been great ; but we
must emphatically deny that this interval corresponds with
the time indicated by the series of fossiliferous rocks.

Before leaving this part of the subject, I may remark that
the desolate and empty condition of the earth was not neces-
sarily a chaotic mass of confusion — rudis indigestaque moles ;
but in reality, when physically considered, may have been a
more symmetrical and homogeneous condition than any that
it subsequently assumed. If the earth were first a vast globe
of vapor, then a liquid spheroid, and then acquired a crust
not yet seamed by fissures or broken by corrugations, and
eventually covered with a universal ocean, then in each of

104 ^-^^^ Origin of the World.

these early conditions it would, in regard to its form, be a
more perfect globe than at any succeeding time. That some-
thing of this kind is the intention of our historian is implied
in his subsequent statements as to the absence of land and
the jDrevalence of a universal ocean in the immediately suc-
ceeding period, which imply that the crust had not yet been
ruptured or disturbed, but presented an even and uniform
surface, no part of which could project above the compara-
tively thin fluid envelope.

The second clause introduces a new object — ^^ the deepy
Whatever its precise nature, this is evidently something in-
cluded in the earth of verse ist, and created with it. The
word occurs in other parts of the Hebrew Scriptures in vari-
ous senses. It often denotes the sea, especially when in an
agitated state (Psa. xlii., 8 ; Job xxxviii., lo). In Psalm cxxxv.,
however, it is distinguished from the sea : " Whatsoever the
Lord pleased, that did he in heaven, in the earth, in the
seas, and in all deeps ^ In other cases it has been supposed
to refer to interior recesses of the earth, as when at the del-
uge "the fountains of the great deep" are said to have been
broken up. It is probable, however, that this refers to the
ocean. In some places it would appear to mean the atmos-
phere or its waters; as Prov.viii., 27-29, "When he prepared
the heavens, I was there ; when he described a circle on
the face of the deep, when he established the clouds above,
when he strengthened the fountains of the deep." The Sep-
tuagint in this passage reads "throne on the winds" and
" fountains under the heaven."* Though we can not attach
much value to these readings, there seems little reason to
doubt that the author of this passage understands by the

* The usual Septuagint rendering is Abyssiis.

The Desolate 'Void. 105

deep the atmospheric waters, and not the sea, which he men-
tions separately. The same meaning must be attached to
the word in another passage of the Book of Proverbs :
"The Lord in wisdom hath founded the earth, by under-
standing hath he established the heavens; by his knowl-
edge the depths are broken up, and the clouds drop down
the small rain."

In the passage now under consideration, it would seem
that we have both the deep and the waters mentioned, and
this not in a way which would lead us to infer their identity.
The darkness on the surface of the deep and the Spirit of
God on the face of the waters seem to refer to the condition
of two distinct objects at the same time. Neither can the
word here refer to subterranean cavities, for the ascription of
a surface to these, and the statement that they were enveloped
in darkness, would in this case have neither meaning nor use.
For these reasons I am induced to believe that the locality
of the deep or abyss is to be sought, not in the universal
ocean or the interior of the earth, but in the vaporous or aeri-
form mass mantling the surface of our nascent planet, and
containing the materials out of which the atmosphere was
afterward elaborated. This is a view leading to important
consequences : one of which is that the darkness on the
surface of the deep can not have been, as believed by the
advocates of a local chaos, a mere atmospheric obscura-
tion j since even at the su7'face of what then represented the
atmosphere darkness prevailed. "God covered the earth
with the deep as with a garment, and the waters stood above
the hills," and without this outer garment was the darkness
of space destitute of luminaries, at least of those greater ones
which are of primary importance to us. We learn from the
following verses that there was no layer of clear atmosphere

E 2

io6 The Origin of the World.

in this misty deep, separating the clouds from the ocean
waters.

The last clause of the verse has always been obscure, and
perhaps it is still impossible to form a clear idea of the oper-
ation intended to be described. We are not even certain
whether it is intended to represent any thing within the com-
pass of ordinary natural laws, or to denote a direct interven-
tion of the Creator, miraculous in its nature and confined to
one period. It is possible that the general intention of the
statement may be to the effect that the agency of the divine
power in separating the waters from the incumbent vapors
had already commenced — that the Spirit which would after-
ward evoke so many wonders out of the chaotic mass was
already acting upon it in an unseen and mysterious way, pre-
paring it for its future destiny.

Some commentators, both Jewish and Christian, are, how-
ever, disposed to view the Ruach Elohini^ Spirit, or breath of
God, as meaning a wind of God, or mighty wind, according to
a well-known Hebrew idiom. The word in its primary sense
means wind or breath, and there are undoubted instances of
the expression "wind of God" for a great or strong wind.
For example, Isaiah xl., 7 : " The grass withereth because
the wind of the Lord bloweth upon it;" see also 2 Kings
ii., 16. Such examples, however, are very rare, and by no
means sufficient of themselves to establish this interpretation.
Those who hold this view do so mainly in consideration of
the advantage which it affords in attaching a definite meaning
to the expression. Many of them are not, however, aware of
its precise import in a cosmical point of view. A violent
wind, before the formation of the atmosphere, and the estab-
lishment of the laws which regulate the suspension and mo-
tions of aqueous vapors and clouds, must have been merely

The Desolate Void. 107

an agitation of the confused misty and vaporous mass of the
deep ; since, as Ainswortli — more careful than modern inter-
preters— long ago observed, " winde (which is the moving of
the aier) was not created till the second day, that the firma-
ment was spred, and the aier made." Such an agitation is by
no means improbable. It would be a very likely accompani-
ment of a boiling ocean, resting on a heated surface, and of
excessive condensation of moisture in the upper regions of the
atmosphere; and might act as an influential means of pre-
paring the earth for the operations of the second day. It is
curious also that the Phoenician cosmogony is said to have
contained the idea of a mighty wind in connection with this
part of creation, and the idea of seething or commotion in the
primitive chaos also occurs in the Assyrian tablets of crea-
tion, while the Quiche legend represents Hurakon, the storm-
god, as specially concerned in the creative work.* On the
other hand, the verb used in the text rather expresses hover-
ing or brooding than violent motion, and this better corre-
sponds with the old fable of the mundane ^gg^ which seems
to have been derived from the event recorded in this verse.
The more evangelical view, which supposes the Holy Spirit
to be intended, is also more in accordance with the general
scope of the Scripture teachings on this subject; and the
opposite idea is, as Calvin well says, "too frigid" to meet with
much favor from evangelical theologians.

Chaos, the equivalent of the Hebrew " desolation and
emptiness," figures largely in all ancient cosmogonies. That
of the Egyptians is interesting, not only from its resemblance
to the Hebrew doctrine, but also from its probable connec-

* Smith, "Assyrian Genesis." Brasseur de Bourbourg's translation of
the *' Popol Vuh" of the ancient Central American Indians.

io8 TJie Origin of the World.

tion with the cosmogony of the Greeks. Taking the version
of Diodorus Siculus, which though comparatively modern, yet
corresponds with the hints derived from older sources, we
find the original chaos to have been an intermingled condi-
tion of elements constituting heaven and earth. This is the
Hebrew " deep." The first step of progress is the separation
of these ; the fiery particles ascending above, and not only
producing light, but the revolution of the heavenly bodies — a
curious foreshadowing of the nebular hypothesis of modern
astronomy. After these, in the terms of the lines quoted by
Diodorus from Euripides, plants, birds, mammals, and finally
man are produced, not however by a direct creative fiat, but
by the spontaneous fecundity of the teeming earth. The
Phoenician cosmogony attributed to Sancuniathon has the
void, the deep, and the brooding Spirit; and one of the terms
employed, " baau," is the same with the Hebrew " bohu,"
void, if read without the points. The Babylonians, according
to Berosus, believed in a chaos — which, however, like the lit-
eral-day theory of some moderns, produced many monsters be-
fore Belus intervened to separate heaven and earth. But the
Assyrian legend found in the Nineveh tablets is very precise
in its intimation of the Chaos or Tiamat, the mother of all
things ; and, farther, it recognizes this personified chaos as
the principle of evil, whose " dragon " becomes the tempter
of the progenitors of mankind, exactly like the Biblical ser-
pent. This "dragon of the abyss" is thus identical in name
and function with the evil principle even of the last book of the
New Testament, and we have in this also probably the origin
of the Ahriman of the Avesta. Thus in these Eastern theolo-
gies the primeval chaos becomes the type of evil as opi^osed
to the order, beauty, and goodness of the creation of God — a
very natural association ; but one kept in the background by

ThB Desolate Void. 109

the Hebrew Scriptures, as tending to a dualistic belief sub-
versive of monotheism. The Greek myth of Chaos, and its
children Erebus and Night, who give birth to Aether and
Day, is the same tradition, personified after the fanciful man-
ner of a people who, in the primitive period of their civiliza-
tion, had no profound appreciation of nature, but were full of
human sympathies * Lastly, in a hymn translated by Dr.

* It is impossible to avoid recognizing in the Greek Theogony, as it ap-
pears in Hesiod and the Orphic poems, an inextricable intermingling of a
cosmogony akin to that of Moses with legendary stories of deceased an-
cestors ; and this has, I must confess, always appeared to me to be a more
rational way of accounting for it than its reference to mere nature-myths.
Chaos, or space, for the chaos of Hesiod differs from that of Ovid, came
first, then Gaea, the earth, and Tartarus, or the lower world. Chaos gave
birth to Erebos (identical with the Hebrew Ereb or Erev, evening) and
Nyx, or night. These again give birth to Aether, the equivalent of the
Hebrew expanse or firmament, and to Hemera, the day, and then the
heavenly bodies were perfected. So far the legend is apparently based
on some primitive history of creation, not essentially different from that
of the Bible. But the Greek Theogony here skips suddenly to the hu-
man period ; and under the fables of the marriage of Gaea and Uranos,
and the Titans, appears to present to us the antediluvian world, with its
intermarriages of the sons of God and men, and its Nephelim or Giants,
with their mechanic arts and their crimes. Beyond this, in Kronos and
his three sons, and in the strange history of Zeus, the chief of these, we
have a coarse and fanciful version of the story of the family of Noah, the
insult offered by Ham to his father, and the subsequent quarrels and dis-
persion of mankind. The Zeus of Homer appears to be the elder of the
three, or Japheth, the real father of the Greeks, according to the Bible ; but
in the time of Hesiod Zeus was the youngest, perhaps indicating that the
worship of the Egyptian Zeus, Amnion or Ham, had already supplanted
among the Greeks that of their own ancestor. But it is curious that even
in the Bible, though Japhet is said to be the greater, he is placed last in
the lists. After the introduction of Greek savans and literati to Egypt,
about B.C. 660, they began to regard their own mythology from this point
of view, though obliged to be reserved on the subject. The cosmology of
Thales, the astronomy of Anaxagoras, and the history of Herodotus afford
early evidence of this, and it abounds in later writers. I may refer the
reader to Grote (History of Greece, vol. i.) for an able and agreeable sum-

no ' The Origin of the World,

Max Miiller from the Rig- Veda, a work probably far older
than the Institutes of Menu, we have such utterances as the
following :

" Nor aught nor nought existed : yon bright sky
Was not, nor heaven's broad woof outstretched above.
What covered all ? what sheltered ? what concealed ?
Was it the water's fathomless abyss ? * * *
Darkness there was, and all at first was veiled
In gloom profound — an ocean without light ;
The germ that still lay covered in the husk
Burst forth, one nature, from the fervent heat."

It is evident that the state of our planet which we have just
been considering is one of which we can scarcely 'form any
adequate conception, and science can in no way aid us, ex-
cept by suggesting hypotheses or conjectures. It is remark-
able, however, that nearly all the cosmological theories which
have been devised contain some of the elements of the in-
spired narrative. The words of Moses appear to suggest a
heated and cooling globe, its crust as yet unbroken by inter-
nal forces, covered by a universal ocean, on which rested a
mass of confused vaporous substances ; and it is of such ma-
terials, thus combined by the sacred historian, that cosmolo-
gists have built up their several theories, aqueous or igneous,
of the early state of the earth. Geology, as a science of ob-

mary of this subject ; and may add that even the few coincidences above
pointed out between Greek mythology and the Bible, independently of the
multitudes of more doubtful character to be found in the older writers on
this subject, appear very wonderful, when we consider that among the
Greeks these vestiges of primitive religion, whether brought with them
from the East or received from abroad, must have been handed down for
a long time by oral tradition among the people ; but obscure though they
may be, the circumstance that some old writers have ridden the resem-
blances to death affords no excuse for the prevailing neglect of them
in more modern times.

The Desolate Void. iii

servation and induction, does not carry us back to this period.
It must still and always say, with Hutton,that it can find "no
trace of a beginning, no prospect of an end " — not because
there has been no beginning or will be no end, but because
the facts which it collects extend neither to the one nor the
other. Geology, like every other department of natural his-
tory, can but investigate the facts which are open to observa-
tion, and reason on these in accordance with the known laws
and arrangements of existing nature. It finds these laws to
hold for the oldest period to which the rocky archives of the
earth extend. Respecting the origin of these general laws
and arrangements, or the condition of the earth before they
originated, it knows nothing. In like manner a botanist
may determine the age of a forest by counting the growth
rings of the oldest trees, but he can tell nothing of the forests
that may have preceded it, or of the condition of the surface
before it supported a forest. So the archaeologist may on
Egyptian monuments read the names and history of succes-
sive dynasties of kings, but he can tell nothing of the state
of the country and its native tribes before those dynasties
began or their monuments were built. Yet geology at least
establishes a probability that a time was when organized be-
ings did not exist, and when many of the arrangements of the
surface of our earth had not been perfected ; and the few
facts which have given birth to the theories promulgated on
this subject tend to show that this pre-geological condition
of the earth may have been such as that described in the
w^ords now under consideration. I may remark, in addi-
tion, that if the words of Moses imply the cooling of the
globe from a molten or intensely heated state down to a
temperature at which water could exist on its surface, the
known rate of cooling of bodies of the dimensions and mate-

1 12 TJic Origin of the World.

rials of the earth shows that the time included in these two
verses of Genesis must have been enormous, amounting it
may be to many millions of years.

There are two other sciences besides geology which have
in modern times attempted to joenetrate into the mysteries of
the primitive abyss, at least by hypothetical explanations — as-
tronomy and chemistry. The magnificent nebular hypothesis
of La Place, which explains the formation of the whole solar
system by the condensation of a revolving mass of gaseous
matter, would manifestly bring our earth to the condition of a
fluid body, with or without a solid crust, and surrounded by a
huge atmosphere of its more volatile materials, gradually con-
densing itself around the central nucleus. Chemistry informs
us that this vaporous mass would contain not only the atmos-
pheric air and water, but all the carbon, sulphur, phosphor-
us, chlorine, and other elements, volatile in themselves, or
forming volatile compounds with oxygen or hydrogen, that
are now imprisoned in various states of combination in the
solid crust of the earth. Such an atmosphere — vast, dark,
pestilential, and capable in its condensation of producing the
most intense chemical action — is a necessity of an earth con-
densing from a vaporous and incandescent state. Thus, in
so far as scientific speculation ventures to penetrate into the
genesis of the earth, its conclusions are at one with the Mo-
saic cosmogony and with the traditions of most ancient na-
tions as to the primitive existence of a chaos — formless and
void, in which "nor aught nor nought existed."

Some of the details of the Mosaic vision of the primeval
chaos may be supplied by the probabilities established by
physics and chemistry. Our first idea of the earth would be a
vast vaporous ball, recently spun out from the general mass of
vapors forming the nebula which once represented the solar

The Desolate Void. 113

system. This huge cloud, whirling its annual round about
the still vaporous centre of the system, would consist of all
the materials now constituting the solid rocks as well as those
of the seas and atmosphere, their atoms kept asunder by the
force of heat, preventing not only their mechanical union, but
even their chemical combination. But heat is being radiated
on all sides into space, and the opposing force of gravitation
is little by little gathering the particles toward the centre. At
length a liquid nucleus is formed, while upon this are being
precipitated showers of condensing matter from the still vast
atmosphere to add to its volume. As this process advances,
a new brilliancy is given to the feebly shining vapors by the
incandescence of solid particles in the upper layers of the
atmosphere, and in this stage our earth would be a little sun, a
miniature of that which now forms the centre of our system,
and which still, by virtue of its greater mass, continues in this
state. But at length, by further cooling, this brilliancy is lost,
and the still fluid globe is surrounded by a vast cloudy pall,
in which condensing vapors gather in huge dark masses, and
amid terrible electrical explosions, pour, in constantly increas-
ing, acid, corrosive rains, upon the heated nucleus, combining
with its materials, or again flashing into vapors. Thus dark-
ness dense and gross would settle upon the vaporous deep,
and would continue for long ages, until the atmosphere could
be finally cleared of its superfluous vapors. In the mean
time a crust of slag or cinder has been forming upon the
molten nucleus. Broken again and again by the heaving of
the seething mass, it at length sets permanently, and finally
allows some portion of the liquid rain condensed upon it to
remain as a boiling ocean. Then began the reign of the
waters, under which the first stratified rocks were laid down
by the deposit of earthy and saline matter suspended or dis-

114 TJie Origin of the World.

solved ill the heated sea. Such is the picture which science
presents to us of the genesis of the earth, and so far as we
can judge from his words, such must have been the picture
presented to the mental vision of the ancient seer of crea-
tion ; but he could discern also that mysterious influence, the
"breath of Elohim," which moved on the face of the waters,
and prepared for the evolution of land and of life from their
bosom. He saw —

"An earth — formless and void;
A vaporous abyss — dark at its very surface ;
A universal ocean — the breath of God hovering over it."

How could such a scene be represented in words? since it
presented none of the familiar features of the actual world.
Had he attempted to dilate upon it, he would, in the absence
of the facts furnished by modern science, have been obliged,
like the writers of some of the less simple and primitive cos-
mogonies already quoted,* to adopt the feeble expedient of
enumerating the things not present. He wisely contents
himself with a few well-chosen words, which boldly sketch the
crude materials of a world hopeless and chaotic but for the
animating breath of the Almighty, who has created even that
old chaos out of which is to be worked in the course of the six
creative days all the variety and beauty of a finished world.

In conclusion, the reader will perceive how this reticence
of the author of Genesis strengthens the argument for the
primitive age of the document, and for the vision-theory as to
its origin ; and will also observe that, in the conception of
this ancient writer, the " promise and potency " of order and
life reside not alone in the atoms of a vaporous world, but
also in the will of its Creator.

* Pages 21, 22, and 109, sup-a.

Light and Creative Days, 115

CHAPTER VI.

LIGHT AND CREATIVE DAYS.

" And God said, Let light be, and light was ; and God saw the light that
it was good, and separated the light from the darkness : and God called
the light Day ; and the darkness he called Night. And Evening was and
Morning was — Day one." — Genesis i., 3-5.

Light is the first element of order and perfection intro-
duced upon our planet — the first innovation on the old re-
gime of darkness and desolation. There is a beautiful
propriety in this, for the Hebrew Aiir (light) should be view-
ed as including heat and electricity as well as light ; and
these three forces — if they are really distinct, and not merely
various movements of one and the same ether — are in them-
selves, or the proximate causes of their manifestation, the
prime movers of the machinery of nature, the vivifying forces
without which the primeval desolation would have been
eternal. The statement presented here is, however, a bold
one. Light without luminaries, which were afterward form-
ed— independent light, so to speak, shining all around the
earth — is an idea not likely to have occurred in the days
of Moses to the framer of a fictitious cosmogony, and yet it
corresponds in a remarkable manner with some of the theo-
ries which have grown out of modern induction.

I have said that the Hebrew word translated "light" includes
the vibratory movements which we call heat and electricity
as well. I make this statement, not intending to assert that

Ii6 The Origin of the World.

the Hebrews experimented on these forces in the manner of
modern science, and would therefore be prepared to under-
stand their laws or correlations as fully as we can. I give
the word this general sense simply because throughout the
Bible it is used to denote the solar light and heat, and also
the electric light of the thunder-cloud : " the light of His
cloud," "the bright light which is in the clouds." The ab-
sence of "«//r," therefore, in the primeval earth, is the ab-
sence of solar radiation, of the lightning's flash, and of vol-
canic fires. We shall in the succeeding verses find addi-
tional reasons for excluding all these phenomena from the
darkness of the primeval night.

The light of the first day can not reasonably be supposed
to have been in any other than a visible and active state.
Whether light be, as supposed by the older physicists, lumi-
nous matter radiated with immense velocity, or, as now ap-
pears more probable, merely the undulations of a universally
diffused ether, its motion had already commenced. The idea
of the matter of light as distinct from its power of affecting
the senses does not appear in the Scriptures any farther than
that the Hebrew name is probably radically identical with
the word ether now used to express the undulating medium
by which light is propagated ; and if it did, the general
creation of matter being stated in verse i, and the notice of
the separation of light and darkness being distinctly given in
the present verse, there is no place left for such a view here.
For this reason, that explanation of these words which sup-
poses that on the first day the matter of light, or the ether
whose motions produce light, w^as created, and that on the
fourth day, when luminaries were appointed, it became visible
by beginning to undulate, must be abandoned; and the con-
nection between these two statements must be soudit in

Light and Creative Days. wj

some other group of facts than that connected with the
existence of the matter of light as distinct from its undu-
lations.

What, then, was the nature of the light which on the first
day shone without the presence of any local luminary ? It
must have proceeded from luminous matter diffused through
the whole space of the solar system, or surrounding our globe
as with a mantle. It was "clothed with light as with a
garment,"

" Sphered in a radiant cloud, for yet the sun was not."

We have already rejected the hypothesis that the primeval
night proceeded from a temporary obscuration of the atmos-
phere ; and the expression, " God said, Let light be," affords
an additional reason, since, in accordance with the strict
precision of language which everywhere prevails in this an-
cient document, a mere restoration of light would not be
stated in such terms. If w^e wish to find a natural explana-
tion of the mode of illumination referred to, we must recur to
one or other of the suppositions mentioned above, that the
luminous matter formed a nebulous atmosphere, slowly con-
centrating itself toward the centre of the solar system, or that
it formed a special envelope of our earth, which subsequently
disappeared.

We may suppose this light-giving matter to be the same
with that which now surrounds the sun, and constitutes the
stratum of luminous substance which, by its wondrous and
unceasing power of emitting light, gives him all his glory.
To explain the division of the light from the darkness, we
need only suppose that the luminous matter, in the progress
of its concentration, was at length all gathered within the
earth's orbit, and then, as one hemisphere only would be

Ii8 The Origin of the World,

illuminated at a time, the separation of light from dark-
ness, or of day from night, would be established. This
hypothesis, suggested by the words themselves, affords a
simple and natural explanation of a statement otherwise
obscure.

It is an instructive circumstance that the probabilities
respecting the early state of our planet, thus deduced from
the Scriptural narrative, correspond very closely with the
most ingenious and truly philosophical speculation ever
hazarded respecting the origin of our solar system. I refer
to the cosmical hypothesis of La Place, which was certainly
formed without any reference to the Bible ; and by persons
whose views of the Mosaic narrative are of that shallow
character which is too prevalent, has been suspected as of
infidel tendency. La Place's theory is based on the follow-
ing properties of the solar system, which will be found
referred to in this connection in many popular works on
astronomy : i. The orbits of the planets are nearly circular.

2. They revolve nearly in the plane of the sun's equator.*

3. They all revolve round the sun in one direction, which is
also the direction of the sun's rotation. 4. They rotate on
their axes also, as far as is known, in the same direction.
5. Their satellites, with the exception of those of Uranus and
Neptune, revolve in the same direction. Now all these
coincidences can scarcely have been fortuitous, and yet they
might have been otherwise without affecting the working of
the system ; and, farther, if not fortuitous, they correspond

* The minor planets discovered in more recent times between Mars
and Jupiter form an exception to this ; but they are of little importance,
and exceptional in other respects as well. To give their arrangement
and the motions of the satellites of Uranus, would require the further
assumption of some unknown disturbing cause.

Light and Creative Days. 119

precisely with the results which would flow from the conden-
sation of a revolving mass of nebulous matter. La Place,
therefore, conceived that in the beginning the matter of our
system existed in the condition of a mass of vaporous mate-
rial, having a central nucleus more or less dense, and the
whole rotating in a uniform direction. Such a mass must,
"in condensing by cold, leave in the plane of its equator
zones of vapor composed of substances which required an
intense degree of cold to return to a liquid or solid state.
These zones must have begun by circulating round the sun
in the form of concentric rings, the most volatile molecules
of which must have formed the superior part, and the most
condensed the inferior part. If all the nebulous molecules
of which these rings are composed had continued to cool
without disuniting, they would have ended by forming a
liquid or solid ring. But the regular constitution which all
parts of the ring would require for this, and which they would
have needed to preserve when cooling, would make this phe-
nomenon extremely rare. Accordingly the solar system pre-
sents only one instance of it — that of the rings of Saturn.
Generally the ring must have broken into several parts which
have continued to circulate round the sun, and with almost
equal velocity, while at the same time, in consequence of
their separation, they would acquire a rotatory motion round
their respective centres of gravity ; and as the molecules of
the superior part of the ring — that is to say, those farthest
from the centre of the sun — had necessarily an absolute
velocity greater than the molecules of the inferior part which
is nearest it, the rotatory motion common to all the fragments
must always have been in the same direction with the orbit-
ual motion. However, if after their division one of these
fragments has been sufficiently superior to the others to unite

120 The Origin of the World.

them to it by its attraction, they will have formed only a mass
of vapor, which, by the continual friction of all its parts,
must have assumed the form of a spheroid, flattened at the
poles and expanded in the direction of its equator."-'^ Here,
then, are rings of vapor left by the successive retreats of the
atmosphere of the sun, changed into so many planets in the
condition of vapor, circulating round the central orb, and
possessing a rotatory motion in the direction of their revolu-
tion, while the solar mass was gradually contracting itself
round its centre and assuming its present organized form.
Such is a general view of the hypothesis of La Place, which
may also be followed out into all the known details of the
solar system, and will be found to account for them all.
Into these details, however, we can not now enter. Let us
now compare this ingenious speculation with the Scripture
narrative. In both we have the raw material of the heavens
and the earth created before it assumed its distinct forms.
In both we have that state of the planets characterized as
without form and void, the condensing nebulous mass of
La Place's theory being in perfect correspondence with the
Scriptural "deep." In both it is implied that the permanent
mutual relations of the several bodies of the system must
have been perfected long after their origin. Lastly, suppos-
ing the luminous atmosphere of our sun to have been of such
a character as to concentrate itself wholly around the centre
of the system, and that as it became concentrated it acquired
its intense luminosity, we have in both the production of light
from the same cause ; and in both it would follow that the
concentration of this matter within the orbit of the earth
would effect the separation of day from night, by illuminating

* Nichol's " Planetary System. "

Light and Creative Days. 121

alternately the opposite sides of the earth. It is true that
the theory of La Place does not provide for any such special
condensation of luminous matter, nor for any precise stage of
the process as that in which the arrangements of light and
darkness should be completed j but under his hypothesis it
seems necessary to account in some such way for the sole
luminosity of the sun ; and the point of separation of day
and night must have been a marked epoch in the history of
the process for each planet. The theory of accretion of mat-
ter which has in modern times been associated with that of
La Place would equally well accord with the indications in
our Mosaic record.*

It is further to be observed that so long as the material of
the earth constituted a part of the great vaporous mass, it
would be encompassed with its diffused light, and that after
it had been left outside the contracting solar envelope, it
might still retain some independent luminosity in its atmos-
phere, a trace of which may still exist in the auroral displays
of the upper strata of the air. The earth might thus at first
be in total darkness. It might then be dimly lighted by the
surrounding nebulosity, or by a luminous envelope in its own
atmosphere. Then it might, as before explained, relapse into
the darkness of its misty mantle, and as this cleared away
and the light of the sun increased and became condensed, the
latter would gradually be installed into his office as the sole
orb of day. It is quite evident that we thus have a sufficient
hypothetical explanation of the light of the first of the creative
seons ; and this is all that in the present state of science we
can expect. "Where is the way where light dwelleth ? and as
for darkness, where is the place thereof, that thou shouldest

* Proctor's Lectures, etc.
F

122 The Origin of the World,

take it to the bound thereof, and know the way to the house
thereof?"

For the reasons above given, we must regard the hypothe-
sis of the great French astronomer as a wonderful approxi-
mation to the grand and simple plan of the construction of
our system as revealed in Scripture. Nor must we omit to
notice that the telescope and the spectroscope reveal to us in
the heavens gaseous nebular bodies which may well be new
systems in progress of formation, and in which the Creator is
even now dividing the light from the darkness. Still another
thought in connection with this subject is that the theory of
a condensing system affords a measure of the aggregate time
occupied in the work of creation. Sir William Thomson's
well-known calculations give us one hundred millions of
years as the possible age of the earth as a planetary globe;
but calculations of the sun's heat as produced by gravitation
alone would give a much less time. We have, however, a
right to assume an original heated condition of the vaporous
mass from which the sun was formed. Still the date above
given would seem to be a maximum rather than a minimum
age for the solar system.

"God saw the light that it was good," though it illuminated
but a waste of lifeless waters. It was good because beautiful
in itself, and because God saw it in its relations to long trains
of processes and wonderful organic structures on which it was
to act as a vivifying agency. Throughout the Scriptures light
is not only good, but an emblem of higher good. In Psalm
civ. God is represented as "clothing himself with light as with
a garment ;" and in many other parts of these exquisite lyrics
we have similar figures. " The Lord is my light and salva-
tion j" " Lift up the light of thy countenance upon me ;"
"The entrance of thy law giveth light;" "The path of the

Light and Creative Days. 123

just is as a shining light.'' And the great spiritual Light of
the world, the " only begotten of the Father." the mediator
alike in creation and redemption, is himself the " Sun of
Righteousness." Perhaps the noblest Scripture passage re-
lating to the blessing of light is one in the address of Jeho-
vah to Job, which is unfortunately so imperfectly translated
in the English version as to be almost unintelligible :

" Hast thou in thy lifetime given law to the morning,
Or caused the dawn to know its place,
That it may enclose the horizon in its grasp,
And chase the robbers before it :
It rolls along as the seal over the clay,
Causing all things to stand forth in gorgeous apparel."*

Job xxxviii., 12.

The concluding words, "Day one," bring us to the con-
sideration of one of the most difficult problems in this his-
tory, and one on which its significance in a great measure
depends — the meaning of the word day, and the length of
the days of creation.

In pursuing this investigation, I shall refrain from noticing
in detail the views of the many able modern writers who, from
Cuvier, De Luc, and Jameson, down to Hugh Miller, Donald
McDonald, and Tayler Lewis, have maintained the period
theory, or those equally numerous and able writers who have
supported the opposite view. I acknowledge obligations to
them all, but prefer to direct my attention immediately to the
record itself.

The first important fact that strikes us is one which has

* This translation is as literal as is consistent with the bold abruptness
of the original. The last idea is that of a cylindrical seal rolling over clay,
and leaving behind a beautiful impression where all before was a blank.

124 The Origin of the World.

not received the attention it deserves, viz., that the word
day is evidently used in three senses in the record itself.
We are told (verse 5th) that God called the light, that is, the
diurnal continuance of light, day. We are also informed that
the evening and the morning were the first day. Day, there-
fore, in one of these clauses is the light as separated from the
darkness, which we may call the natural day ; in the other it
is the whole time occupied in the creation of light and its
separation from the darkness, whether that was a civil or as-
tronomical day of twenty-four hours or some longer period.
In other words, the daylight, to which God is represented as
restricting the use of the term day, is only a part of a day of
creation, which included both light and darkness, and which
might be either a civil day or a longer period, but could not
be the natural day intervening between sunrise and sunset,
which is the ordinary day of Scripture phraseology. Again,
in the 4th verse of chapter ii., which begins the second part
of the history, the whole creative week is called one day —
" In the day that Jehovah Elohim made the earth and the
heavens." Such an expression must surely in such a place
imply more than a mere inadvertence on the part of the
writer or writers.

To pave the way for a right understanding of the day of
creation, it may be well to consider, in the first place, the
manner in which the shorter day is introduced. In the ex-
pression, " God called the light day," we find for the first time
the Creator naming his works, and we may infer that some
important purpose was to be served by this. The nature
of this purpose we ascertain by comparison with other in-
stances of the same kind occurring in the chapter. God
called the darkness night, the firmament heaven, the dry land
earth, the gathered waters seas. In all these cases the pur-

Light and Creative Days. 125

pose seems to have been one of verbal definition, perhaps
along with an assertion of sovereignty. It was necessary to
distinguish the diurnal darkness from that unvaried darkness
which had been of old, and to discriminate between the lim-
ited waters of an earth having dry land on its surface and
those of the ancient universal ocean. This is effected by in-
troducing two new terms, night and seas. In like manner it
was necessary to mark the new application of the term earth
to the dry land, and that of heaven to the atmosphere, more
especially as these were the senses in which the words were
to be popularly used. The intention, therefore, in all these
cases was to affix to certain things names different from those
which they had previously borne in the narrative, and to cer-
tain terms new senses differing from those in which they had
been previously used. Applying this explanation here, it re-
sults that the probable reason for calling the light day is to
point out that the word occurs in two senses, and that while
it was to be the popular and proper term for the natural day,
this sense must be distinguished from its other meaning as a
day of creation. In short, we may take this as a plain and
authoritative declaration that the day of creation is not the day
of popular speech. We see in this a striking instance of the
general truth that in the simplicity of the structure of this
record we find not carelessness, but studied and severe pre-
cision, and are warned against the neglect of the smallest
peculiarities in its diction.

What, then, is the day of creation, as distinguished by Moses
himself from the natural day. The general opinion, and that
which at first sight appears most probable, is that it is merely
the ordinary civil day of twenty-four hours. Those who adopt
this view insist on the impropriety of diverting the word from
its usual sense. Unfortunately, however, for this argument,

126 TJie Origin of the World.

the word is not very frequently used in the Scriptures for the
whole twenty-four hours of the earth's revolution. Its ety-
mology gives it the sense of the time of glowing or warmth,
and in accordance with this the divine authority here limits
its meaning to the daylight. Accordingly throughout the He-
brew Scriptures _)w;2 is generally the natural and not the civil
day ; and where the latter is intended, the compound terms
"day and night" and "evening and morning" are frequently
used. Any one who glances over the word "day" in a good
English concordance can satisfy himself of this fact. But
the sense of natural day from sunrise to sunset is expressly
excluded here by the context, as already shown ; and all that
we can say in favor of the interpretation that limits the day
of creation to twenty-four hours, is that next to the use of the
word for the natural day, which is its true popular meaning,
its use for the civil day is perhaps the most frequent. It is
therefore by no means a statement of the whole truth to af-
firm, as many writers have done, that the civil day is t/ie ordi-
nary meaning of the term. At the same time we may admit
that this is ojie of its ordinary meanings, and therefore may
be its meaning here. Another argument frequently urged is
that the day of creation is said to have had an evening and
morning. We shall consider this more fully in the sequel,
and in the mean time may observe that it appears rather
hazardous to attribute an ordinary evening and morning to
a day which, on the face of the record, preceded the forma-
tion and arrangement of the luminaries which are " for days
and for years."*

* Professor Dana thus sums up the various meanings of the word day
in Genesis : " First, in verse 5, the light in general is called day, the dark-
ness night. Second, in the same verse, eve^ti^ig and morning make the first
day, before the sun appears. Third, in verse 14, day stands for i-MeJvc hours.

Light and Creative Days. 127

But it may be affirmed that in the Bible long and unde-
fined periods are indicated by the word "day." In many of
these cases the word is in the plural : as Genesis iv., 3, " And
after days it came to pass," rendered in our version " in proc-
ess of time ;" Genesis xL, 4, " days in ward," rendered " a sea-
son." Such instances as these are not applicable to the pres-
ent question, since the plural may have the sense of indefinite
time, merely by denoting an undetermined number of natural
days. Passages in which the singular occurs in this sense
are those which strictly apply to the case in hand, and such
are by no means rare. A very remarkable example is that
in Genesis ii., 4, already mentioned, where we find, " In the
day when Jehovah Elohim made the earth and the heavens."
This day must either mean the beginning, or must include
the whole six days; most probably the latter, since the word
" made " refers not to the act of creation, properly so called,
but to the elaborating processes of the creative week ; and
occurring as this does immediately after the narrative of cre-
ation, it seems almost like an intentional intimation of the
wide import of the creative days. It has been objected, how-
ever, that the expression " in the day " is properly a com-
pound adverb, having the force of "when" or "at the time."
But the learned and ingenious authors who urge this objec-
tion have omitted to consider the relative probabilities as to

or the period of daylight, as dependent on the sun. Fourth, same verse,
in the phrase "days and seasons," day stands for a period oi ttvejity-four
hours. Fifth y at the close of the account, in verse 4 of the second chapter,
day means the whole period of creatio7i. These uses are the same that we
have in our own language.

Warring, in his book " The Miracle of To-day," has suggested that the
Mosaic days are epochal days, each considered as the close and culmina-
tion of a period. This is an ingenious suggestion, and very well coincides
with the day-period theory as defended in the text.

128 The Origin of the World,

whether the adverbial use had arisen while the word yo7n
meant simply a day, or whether the use of the noun for long
periods was the reason of the introduction of such an adverb-
ial expression. The probabilities are in favor of the latter, for
it is not likely that men would construct an adverb referring
to indefinite time from a word denoting one of the most pre-
cisely limited portions of time, unless that word had also a sec-
ond and more unlimited sense. Admitting, therefore, that the
phrase is an adverb of time, its use so" early as the date of the
composition of Genesis, to denote a period longer than a lit-
eral day, seems to imply that this indefinite use of the word
was of high antiquity, and probably preceded the invention of
any term by which long periods could be denoted.

This use of the word "day" is, however, not limited to cases
of the occurrence of the formula " in the day." The follow-
ing are a few out of many instances that might be quoted:
Job xviii., 20, "They that come after him shall be astonished
at his day;" Job xv., 32, "It shall be accomplished before
his time;'''' Judges xviii., 30, " Until the day of the captivity
of the land;" Deut. i., 39, "And your children which in that
day had no knowledge of good and evil;" Gen. xxxix., 10,
"And it came to pass about that time" (on that day). We
find also abundance of such expressions as "day of calamity,"
" day of distress," " day of wrath," " day of God's power,"
"day of prosperity." In such passages the word is evidently
used in the sense of era or period of time, and this in prose
as well as poetry.

There is a remarkable passage in the Psalms, which con-
veys the idea of a day of God as distinct from human or ter-
restrial days :

"Before the mountains were brought forth,
Or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world,

LigJit arid Creative Days. 129

Even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.

Thou turnest man to destruction,

And sayest, Return, ye children of men ;

For a thousand years are in thy sight as yesterday when it is past,

And as a watch in the night."*

It is a singular coincidence that the authorship of this
Psalm is attributed to Moses, and that its style and language
correspond with the songs credited to him in Deuteronomy.
It is farther to be observed that the reference is to the long
periods employed in creation as contrasted with the limited
space of years allotted to man. Its meaning, too, is some-
what obscured by the inaccurate translation of the third line.
In the original it is, "From olam to ola7n thou art, O El" — that
is, "from age to age." These long ages of creation, consti-
tuting a duration to us relatively eternal, w^ere so protracted
that even a thousand years are but as a watch in the night.
If this Psalm is rightly attributed to the author of the first
chapter of Genesis, it seems absolutely certain that he under-
stood his own creative days as being Olamim or seons. The
same thought occurs in the Second Epistle of Peter : " One
day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand
years as one day."

That the other writers of the Old Testament understood
the creative days in this sense, might be inferred from the en-
tire absence of any reference to the work of creation as short,
since it occupied only six days. Such reference we may find
in modern writers, but never in the Scriptures. On the con-
trary, we receive the impression of the creative work as long
continued. Thus the divine Wisdom says in Prov. viii.. The
Lord possessed me "from the beginning of his way before

* Psalm xc.
F2

130 The Origin of the World.

his works of old, from everlasting, before the antiquities of
the earth." So in Psalm cxlv., God's kingdom relatively to
nature and providence is a kingdom " of all ages." In Psalm
civ., which is a poetical version of the creative work, and the
oldest extant commentary on Genesis i., it is evident that there
was no idea in the mind of the writer of a short time, but
rather of long consecutive processes; and I may remark here
that the course of the narrative itself in Genesis i., implies
time for the replenishing of the earth with various forms of
being in preparation for others, exactly as in Psalm civ.

Perhaps one of the most conclusive arguments in favor
of the length of the creative days is that furnished by the
seventh day and the institution of the Sabbath. In Gen-
esis the seventh day is not said to have had an evening or
morning, nor is God said to have resumed his work on any
eighth day. Consequently the seventh day of creation must
be still current. Now in the fourth commandment the Isra-
elites are enjoined to "remember the Sabbath-day," because
"in six days God created the heavens and the earth." Ob-
serve here that the Sabbath is to be remembered as an insti-
tution already known. Observe farther that the command-
ment is placed in the middle of the Decalogue, a solitary piece
of apparently arbitrary ritual amid the plainest and most
obvious moral duties. Observe also that the reason given —
namely, God's six days' work and seventh day's rest — seems
at first sight both far-fetched and trivial, as an argument for
abstaining from work in a seventh part of our time. How is
all this to be explained ? Simply, I think, on the supposition
that the Lawgiver, and those for whom he legislated, knew be-
forehand the history of creation and the fall, as we have them
recorded in Genesis, and knew that God's days are aeons.
The argument is not, "God worked on six natural days, and

Light and Creative Days. 131

rested on the seventh; do you therefore the same." Such
an argument could have no moral or religious force, more
especially as it could not be affirmed that God habitually
works and rests in this way. The argument reaches far deep-
er and higher. It is this. God created the world in six of
his days, and on the seventh rested, and invited man in Eden
to enter on his rest as a perpetual Sabbath of happiness.
But man fell, and lost God's Sabbath. Therefore a weekly
Sabbath was prescribed to him as a memorial of what he had
lost, and a pledge of what God has promised in the renewal
of life and happiness through our Saviour. Thus the Sabbath
is the central point of the moral law — the Gospel in the Dec-
alogue—the connection between God and man through the
promise of redemption. It is this and this alone that gives it
its true religious significance, but is lost on the natural-day
theory. It would farther seem that this view of the law was
that of our Lord himself, and was known to the Jews of his
time, for, when blamed for healing a man on the Sabbath, he
says, "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work" — an argu-
ment whose force depended on the fact that God continues to
work in his providence throughout his long Sabbath, which
has never been broken except by man. Farther, the writer
of the Epistle to the Hebrews takes this view in arguing as to
the rest or Sabbatism that remains to the people of God. His
argument (chap, iv^, 4) may be stated thus: God finished his
work and entered into his rest. Man, in consequence of the
fall, failed to do so. He has made several attempts since, but
unsuccessfully. Now Christ has finished his work, and has
entered into his Sabbath, and through him we may enter into
that rest of God which otherwise we can not attain to. This
does not, it is true, refer to the keeping of a Sabbath-day ;
but it implies an understanding of the reference to God's

132 TJie Origin of the World.

olamic Sabbath, and also implies that Christ, having entered
into his Sabbatism in heaven, gives us a warrant for the Chris-
tian Sabbath or Lord's day, which has the same relation to
Christ's present Sabbatism in heaven that the old Sabbath
had to God's rest from his work of creation.*

"We may add to these considerations the use of the Greek
term Aim in the New Testament, for what may be called
time -worlds as distinguished from space -worlds. For ex-
ample, take the expression in Heb. i., 2 : " His Son, by whom
he made the worlds," or, literally, "constituted the aeons" —
the long time-worlds of the creation. For God's worlds must
exist in time as well as in space, and both may to our minds
alike appear as infinities. If, then, we find that Moses himself
seems to have understood his creative days as aions, that the
succeeding Old Testament writers favor the same view, that

* It may be desirable to give here, in a slightly paraphrased version,
but strictly in accordance with the views of the best expositors, the es-
sential part of the passage in Hebrews, chap. iv. :

"For God hath spoken in a certain place" (Gen. ii., 2) of the seventh
day in this wise — 'And God did rest on the seventh day from all his
works;' and in this place again — 'They shall not enter into my rest'
(Psa. xcv., 1 1). Seeing, therefore, it still remaineth that some enter therein,
and they to whom it (God's Sabbatism) was first proclaimed entered not in,
because of disobedience (in the fall, and afterward in the sin of the Isra-
elites in the desert), again he fixes a certain day, saying in David's writ-
ings, long after the time of Joshua — 'To-day, if ye hear his voice, hardef
not your hearts.' For if Joshua had given them rest in Canaan, he would
not afterward have spoken of another day. There is therefore yet reserved
a keeping of a Sabbath for the people of God. For he that is entered into
his rest (that is, Jesus Christ, who has finished his work and entered into
his rest in heaven), he himself also rested from his own works, as God did
from his own. Let us therefore earnestly strive to enter into that rest."

It is evident that in this passage God's Sabbatism, the rest intended for
man in Eden and for Israel in Canaan, Christ's rest in heaven after finish-
ing his work, and the final heavenly rest of Christ's people, are all indef-
inite periods mutually related, and can not possibly be natural days.

Light and Creative Days. 133

this view is essential to the true significance of the Sabbath
and the Lord's day, and that it is sustained by Christ and his
apostles, there is surely no need for our clinging to a medi-
aeval notion which has no theological value, and is in opposi-
tion to the facts of nature. On the contrary, should not even
children be taught these grand truths, and led to contemplate
the great work of Him who is from aeon to aeon, and to think
of that Sabbatism which he prepared for us, and which he still
offers to us in the future, in connection with the succession
of worlds in time revealed by geology, and which rivals in
grandeur and perhaps exceeds in interest the extension of
v/orlds in space revealed by astronomy. In truth, we should
bear in mind that the great revelations of astronomy have too
much habituated us to think of space-worlds rather than time-
worlds, while the latter idea was evidently dominant with the
Biblical writers as it is also with modern geologists. Viewed
as sons — divine days, or time-worlds — the days of creation are
thus a reality for all ages ; and connect themselves with the
highest moral teachings of the Bible in relation to the fall of
man and God's plan for his restoration, begun in this seventh
aeon of the world's long history, and to be completed in that
second divine Sabbatism, secured by the work of redemption,
the final "rest" of the "new heavens and new earth," which
remains for the people of God.

But supposing that the inspired writer intended to say that
the world was formed in six long periods of time, could not he
have used some other word than j^;;/ that would have been lia-
ble to fewer doubts. There are words which might have been
used, as, for instance, eth, time, season, or olam, age, ancient
time, eternity. The former, however, has about it a want of
precision as to its beginning and end which unfits it for this
use; the latter we have already seen is used as equivalent to

134 The Origin of the World.

the creative yom. On the whole, I am unable to find any in-
stance which would justify me in affirming that, on the suppo-
sition that Moses intended long periods, he could have better
expressed the idea than by the use of the word yo7n, more es-
pecially if he and those to whom he wrote were familiar with
the thought, preserved to us in the mythology of the Hindoos
and Persians, and probably widely diffused in ancient Asia,
that a working day of the Creator immeasurably transcends
a working day of man.^

Many objections to the view which I have thus endeavored
to support from internal evidence will at once occur to every
intelligent reader familiar with the literature of this subject.
I shall now attempt to give the principal of these objections
a candid consideration.

(i.) It is objected that the time occupied in the work of
creation is given as a reason for the observance of the seventh
day as a Sabbath ; and that this requires us to view the days
of creation as literal days. " For in six days Jehovah made

* For the benefit of those who may value ancient authorities in such
matters, and to show that such views may rationally be entertained inde-
pendently of geology, I quote the following passage from Origen : " Cuinam
quaeso sensum habenti convenienter videbitur dictum, quod dies prima et
secunda et tertia, in quibus et vespera nominatur, et mane, fuerint sine
sole, et sine luna et sine stellis : prima autem dies sine coelo." So St.
Augustine expressly states his belief that the creative days could not be
of the ordinary kind: "Qui dies, cujusmodi sint, aut perdifficile nobis,
aut etiam impossibile est cogitare, quanto magis discere." Bede also re-
marks, "Fortassis hie diei nomen, totius temporis nomen est, et omnia vo-
lumina seculorum hoc vocabulo includit." Many similar opinions of old
commentators might be quoted. It is also not unworthy of note that the
cardinal number is used here, "one day" for first day; and though the
Hebrew grammarians have sought to found on this, and a few similar
passages, a rule that the cardinal may be substituted for the ordinal,
many learned Hebraists insist that this use of the cardinal number im-
plies singularity and peculiarity as well as mere priority.

Light and Creative Days. 135

the heaven and the earth, the sea and all that in them is, and
rested on the seventh day ; therefore Jehovah blessed the
Sabbath-day and sanctified it." The argument used here is,
however, as we have already seen, one of analogy. Because
God rested on his seventh day, he blessed and sanctified it,
and required men in like manner to sanctify their seventh
day.* Now^, if it should appear that the working day of God
is not the same with the working day of man, and that the
Sabbath of God is of proportionate length to his working day,
the analogy is not weakened ; more especially as we find the
same analogy extended to the seventh year. If it should be
said, God worked in the creation of the world in six long ages,
and rested on the seventh, therefore man, in commemoration
of this fact, and of his own loss of an interest in God's rest
by the fall, shall sanctify the seventh of his working days, the
argument is stronger, the example more intelligible, than on
the common supposition. This objection is, in fact, a piece
of pedantic hyperorthodoxy which has too long been handed
about without investigation. I may add to what has been
already said in reference to it, the following vigorous thrust
by Hugh Miller :t

" I can not avoid thinking that many of our theologians at-
tach a too narrow meaning to the remarkable reason attached
to the fourth commandment by the divine Lawgiver. " God
rested on the seventh day," says the text, " from all his work
which he had created and made ; and God blessed the seventh
day and sanctified it." And such is the reason given in the
Decalogue why man should rest on the Sabbath-day. God

* It is to be observed, however, that on the so-called literal day hypoth-
esis the first Sabbath was not man's seventh day, but rather his first, since
he must have been created toward the close of the sixth day.

t " Footprints of the Creator."

136 TJie Origin of the World.

rested on the Sabbath-day and sanctified it j and therefore man
ought also to rest on the Sabbath and keep it holy. But I know
not where we shall find grounds for the belief that the Sab-
bath-day during which God rested was merely commensurate
with one of the Sabbaths of short-lived man — a brief period
measured by a single revolution of the earth on its axis. We
have not, as has been shown, a shadow of evidence that he
resumed his work of creation on the morrow ; the geologist
finds no trace of post-Adamic creation ; the theologian can
tell us of none. God's Sabbath of rest may still exist ; the
work of redemption may be the work of his Sabbath-day.
That elevatory process through successive acts of creation,
which engaged him during myriads of ages, was of an ordi-
nary week-day character; but when the term of his moral gov-
ernment began, the elevatory process peculiar to it assumed
the divine character of the Sabbath. This special view ap-
pears to lend peculiar emphasis to the reason embodied in
the commandment. The collation of the passage with the
geologic record seems, as if by a species of retranslation, to
make it enunciate as its injunction, "Keep this day, not mere-
ly as a day of memorial related to a past fact, but also as a
day of co-operation with God in the work of elevation, in re-
lation both to a present fact and a future purpose." " God
keeps his Sabbath," it says, "in order that he may save;
keep yours also that ye may be saved." It serves besides to
throw light on the prominence of the Sabbatical command,
in a digest of lav/ of which no jot or tittle can pass away un-
til the fulfillment of all things. During the present dynasty
of probation and trial, that special work of both God and man
on which the character of the future dynasty depends is the
Sabbath-day work of saving and being saved.

" The common objection to that special view which regards

Light and Creative Days, 137'

the days of creation as immensely protracted periods of time,
furnishes a specimen, if not of reasoning in a circle, at least
of reasoning from a mere assumption. It first takes for
granted that the Sabbath-day during which God rested was
a day of but twenty-four hours, and then argues from the sup-
position that, in order to keep up the proportion between the
six previous working days and the seventh day of rest, which
the reason annexed to the fourth commandment demands,
these previous days must also have been twenty-four hours
each. It would, I have begun to suspect, square better with
the ascertained facts, and be at least equally in accordance
with Scripture, to reverse the process, and argue that because
God's working days were immensely protracted periods, his
Sabbath also must be an immensely protracted period. The
reason attached to the law of the Sabbath seems to be sim-
ply a reason of proportion : the objection to which I refer is
an objection palpably founded on considerations of propor-
tion, and certainly w^ere the reason to be divested of propor-
tion, it would be divested also of its distinctive character as a
reason. Were it as follows, it could not be at all understood :
" Six days shalt thou labor, etc. ; but on the seventh day
shalt thou do no labor, etc. ; for in six immensely protracted
periods of several thousand years each did the Lord make
the heavens and the earth, etc. ; and then rested during a
brief day of twenty-four hours ; therefore the Lord blessed
the brief day of twenty-four hours and hallowed it." This,
I repeat, would not be reason. All, however, that seems nec-
essary to the integrity of the reason, in its character as such,
is that the proportion of six parts to seven should be main-
tained. God's periods may be periods expressed algebraic-
ally by letters symbolical of unknown quantities, and man's
periods by letters symbolical of quantities well known j but

138 TJie Origin of the World.

if God's Sabbath be equal to one of his six working days,
and man's Sabbath equal to one of his six working days, the
integrity of proportion is maintained."

Not only does this view of the case entirely remove the ob-
jection, but, as we have already seen, it throws a new light
on the nature and reason of the Sabbath. No good reason,
except that of setting an example, can be assigned for God's
resting for a literal day. But if God's Sabbath of rest from
natural creation is still in progress, and if our short Sabbaths
are symbolical of the work of that great Sabbath in its pres-
ent gray morning and in its coming glorious noon, then may
the Christian thank this question, incidentally raised by ge-
ology and its long periods, for a ray of light which shines
along the whole course of Scripture history, from the first
Sabbath up to that final " rest which remaineth for the peo-
ple of God."*

(2.) It is objected that evening and morning are ascribed to
the first day. This has been already noticed ; it may here
be considered more fully. The word evening in the original
is literally the darkening, the sunset, the dusk. Morning is
the ope7iing or hreakitig forth of light — the daybreak. It must
not be denied that the explanation of these terms is attended
with some difficulty, but this is not at all lessened by narrow-
ing the day to twenty-four hours. The first operation of the
first day was the creation of light ; next we have the Creator
contemplating his work and pronouncing it to be good ; then
we have the separation of the light and darkness, previously,
it is to be presumed, intermixed; and all this without the
presence of a sun or other luminary. Which of these opera-

* This idea occurs in Lord Bacon's " Confession of Faith," and De Luc
also maintains that the Creator's Sabbath must have been of long contin-
uance.

Light and Creative Days. 139

tions occupied the evening, and which the morning, if the
day consisted of but twenty-four hours, beginning, according
to Hebrew custom, in the evening? Was the old primeval
darkness the evening or night, and the first breaking forth
of light morning? This is almost the only view compatible
with the Hebrew civil day beginning at evening, but it would
at once lengthen the day beyond twenty-four hours, and con-
tradict the terms of the record. Again, were the separated
light and darkness the morning and evening? If so, why is
the evening mentioned first, contrary to the supposed facts
of the case ? why, indeed, are the evening and morning men-
tioned at all, since on that supposition this is merely a rep-
etition ? Lastly, shall we adopt the ingenious expedient of
dividing the evening and morning between two days, and
maintaining that the evening belongs to the first and the
morning to the second day, which would deprive the first
day of a morning, and render the creative days, whatever
their length, altogether different from Hebrew natural or
civil days? It is unnecessary to pursue such inquiries far-
ther, since it is evident that the terms of the record will not
agree with the supposition of natural evening and morning.
This is of itself a strong presumption against the hypothesis
of civil days, since the writer was under no necessity so to
word these verses that they would not give any rational or
connected sense on the supposition of natural evening and
morning, unless he wished to be otherwise understood.

But what is the meaning of evening and morning, if these
days were long periods? Here fewer difficulties meet us.
First: It is readily conceivable that the beginning and end
of a period named a day should be called evening and morn-
ing. But what made the use of these divisions necessary or
appropriate ? I answer that nature and revelation both give

140 The Origi?i of the World.

grounds at least to suspect that the evening, or earlier part
of each period, was a time of comparative inaction, sometimes
even of retrogression, and that the latter part of each period
was that of its greatest activity and perfection. Thus, on the
views stated in a former chapter, in the first day there was a
time when luminous matter, either gradually concentrating
itself toward the sun, or surrounding the earth itself, shed a
dim but slowly increasing light; then there were day and
night, the light increasing in intensity as, toward the end of
the period, the luminous matter became more and more con-
centrated around the sun. So in our own seventh day, the
earlier part was a time of deplorable retrogression, and
though the Sun of Righteousness has arisen, we have seen
as yet only a dim and cloudy morning. On the theory of
days of vision, as expounded by Hugh Miller, in the "Testi-
mony of the Rocks," in one of his noblest passages, the even-
ing and night fall on each picture presented to the seer like
the curtain of a stage. Secondly : Though the explanation
stated above is the most probable, the hypothesis of long
periods admits of another, namely, that the writer means to
inform us that evening and morning, once established by the
separation of light from darkness, continued without cessa-
tion throughout the remainder of the period — rolling from
this time uninterruptedly around our planet, like the seal cyl-
inder over the clay.* This explanation is, however, less ap-
plicable to the following days than to the first. Nor does
this accord with the curious fact that the seventh day, which,
on the hypothesis of long periods, is still in progress, is not
said to have had an evening or morning.

(3.) It is objected that the first chapter of Genesis " is not a

* See the quotation from Job, supra.

Light and Creative Days. 141

poem nor a piece of oratorical diction," but a simple prosaic
narrative, and consequently that its terms must be taken in a
literal sense. In answer to this, I urge that the most truly
literal sense of the word, namely, the natural day, is excluded
by the terms of the narrative ; and that the word may be
received as a literal day of the Creator, in the sense of one
of his working periods, without involving the use of poetical
diction, and in harmony with the wording of plain prosaic
passages in other parts of the Bible. Exam^Dles of this have
already been given. It is, however, true that, though the first
chapter of Genesis is not strictly poetical, it is thrown into a
metrical form which admits of some approach to a figurative
expression in the case of a term of this kind.

(4.) It has been urged that in cases where day is used to
denote period, as in the expressions " day of calamity," etc.,
the adjuncts plainly show that it can not mean an ordinary
day. In answer to this, I merely refer to the internal evi-
dence already adduced, and to the deliberate character of the
statements, in the manner rather of the description of proc-
esses than of acts. The difficulties attending the explana-
tion of the evening and the morning, and the successive crea-
tion of herbivorous and carnivorous animals, are also strong
indications which should serve here to mark the sense, just
as the context does in the cases above referred to.

(5.) In Professor Hitchcock's valuable and popular "Re-
ligion of Geology," I find some additional objections, which
deserve notice as specimens of the learned trifles which pass
current among writers on this subject, much to the detriment
of sound Scriptural literature. I give them in the words of
the author, i. "From Genesis ii., 5 compared with Genesis
i., II and 12, it seems that it had not rained on the earth till
the third day ; a fact altogether probable if the days were of

142 The Origin of the World.

twenty-four hours, but absurd if they were long periods." It
stril^es us that the absurdity here is all on the side of the
short days. Why should any prominence be given to a fact
so common as the lapse of two ordinary days without rain,
more especially if a region of the earth and not the whole is
referred to, and in a document prepared for a people residing
in climates such as those of Egypt and Palestine. But what
could be more instructive and confirmatory of the truth of the
narrative than the fact that in the two long periods which pre-
ceded the formation and clearing up of the atmosphere or
firmament, on which rain depends, and the elevation of the
dry land, which so greatly modifies its distribution, there had
been no rain such as now occurs. This is a most important
fact, and one of the marked coincidences of the record with
scientific truth. The objection, therefore, merely shows that
the ordinary day hypothesis tends to convert one of the finest
internal harmonies of this wonderful history into an empty
and, in some respects, absurd commonplace. 2. "This hy-
pothesis (that days are long periods) assumes that Moses de-
scribes the creation of all the animals and plants that have
ever liv-ed on our globe. But geology decides that the spe-
cies now living, since they are not found in the rocks any
lower than man is,* could not have been contemporaneous
with those in the rocks, but must have been created when
man was — that is, in the sixth day. Of such a creation no
mention is made in Genesis ; the inference is that Moses does
not describe the creation of the existing races, but only of
those that lived thousands of years earlier, and whose exist-

* This is not strictly correct, as many animals, especially of the lower
tribes, extend back to the early tertiary periods, long before the creation
of man; a fact which of itself is irreconcilable with the Mosaic narrative
on the theory of literal or ordinary days.

Light a7id Creative Days. 143

ence was scarcely suspected till modern times. Who will
admit such an absurdity?" In answer to this objection, I re-
mark that it is based on a false assumption. The hypothesis
of long periods does not require us to assume that Moses no-
tices all the animals and plants that have ever lived, but on
the contrar}' that he informs us only of theyfri-/ appearance of
each great natural type in the animal and vegetable king-
doms j just as he informs us of the first appearance of dry
land on the third day, but says nothing of the changes which
it underwent on subsequent days. Thus plants were created
on the third day, and though they may have been several
times destroyed and renewed as to genera and species, we
infer that they continued to exist in all the succeeding days,
though the inspired historian does not inform us of the fact.
So also many tribes of animals were created in the early part
of the fifth day, and it is quite unnecessary for us to be in-
formed that these tribes continued to exist throusfh the sixth
day. If the days were long periods, the inspired writer could
not have adopted any other course, unless he had been in-
structed to write a treatise on Palaeontology, and to describe
the fauna and flora of each successive period with their char-
acteristic differences. 3. " Though there is a general resem-
blance between the order of creation as described in Genesis
and by geology, yet when we look at the details of the crea-
tion of the organic world, as required by this hypothesis, we
find manifest discrepancy. Thus the Bible represents plants
only to have been created on the third day, and animals not
till the fifth ; and hence at least the lower half of the fossilif-
erous rocks ought to contain nothing but vegetables. Where-
as in fact the lower half of these rocks, all below the carbon-
iferous, although abounding in animals, contain scarcely any
plants, and these in the lowest strata fucoids or sea-weeds.

144 T-^^^^ Origin of the World.

But the Mosaic account evidently describes flowering and
seed-bearing plants, not flowerless and seedless algae. Again,
reptiles are described in Genesis as created on the fifth day;
but reptilia and batrachians existed as early as the time when
the lower carboniferous and even old red sandstone were in
course of deposition, as their tracks on those rocks in Nova
Scotia and Pennsylvania evince.* In short, if we maintain
that Moses describes fossils as well as living species, we find
discrepancy instead of correspondence between his order of
creation and that of geology." In this objection it is assumed
that the geological history of the earth goes back to the third
day of creation, or, in other words, to the dawn of organic life.
None of the greater authorities in geology would, however,
now venture to make such an assertion, and the progress of
geology is rapidly making the contrary more and more prob-
able. The fact is that, on the supposition that the days of
creation are long periods, the whole series of the fossiliferous
rocks belongs to the fifth and sixth days; and that for the
early plant creation of the third day, and the great physical
changes of the fourth, geology has nothing as yet to show^, ex-
cept a mass of metamorphosed eozoic rocks which have hither-
to yielded no fossils except a few Protozoa; but which con-
tain vast quantities of carbon in the form of graphite, which
may be the remains of plants.

I have much pleasure in quoting, as a further answer to
these objections, the following from Professor Dana :t

"Accepting the account in Genesis as true, the seeming

* Since this was written, the bones of many Batrachian reptiles have
been found in the Carboniferous, both in Europe and America. No rep-
tilian remains have yet been found in the Devonian rocks.

^ Biblical Repository, 1856, See also an excellent paper by Prof. C. H.
Hitchcock, Bibliotheca Sacra, 1867.

Light a7id Creative Days. 145

discrepancy between it and geology rests mainly here : Geol-
ogy holds, and has held from the first, that the progress of
creation was mainly through secondary causes; for the ex-
istence of the science presupposes this. Moses, on the con-
trary, was thought to sustain the idea of a simple fiat for each
step. Grant this first point to science, and what farther con-
flict is there? The question of the length of time, it is replied.
But not so j for if we may take the record as allowing more
than six days of twenty-four hours, the Bible then places no
limit to time. The question of the days and periods, it is replied
again. But this is of little moment in comparison with the
first principle granted. Those who admit the length of time
and stand upon days of twenty-four hours have to place ge-
ological time before the six days, and then assume a chaos
and reordering of creation, on the six-day and fiat principle,
after a previous creation that had operated for a long period
through secondary causes. Others take days as periods, and
thus allow the required time, admitting that creation was one
in progress, a grand whole, instead of d^fij-st creation except-
ing man by one method, and a second \^\\\\ man by the other.
This is now the remaining question between the theologians
and geologists ; for all the minor points, as to the exact in-
terpretation of each day, do not affect the general concord-
ance or discordance of the Bible and science.

" On this point geology is now explicit in its decision, and
indeed has long been so. It proves that there was no return
to chaos, no great revolution, that creation was beyond doubt
one in its progress. We know that some geologists have
taken the other view^ But it is only in the capacity of theo-
logians, and not as geologists. The Rev. Dr. Buckland, in
placing the great events of geology between the first and sec-
ond verses of the Mosaic account, did not pretend that there

G

146 The Origin of the World.

was a geological basis for such an hypothesis ; and no writer
since has ever brought forward the first fact in geology to
support the idea of a rearrangement just before man ; not
one solitary fact has ever been appealed to. The conclusion
was on Biblical grounds, and not in any sense on geological.
The best that Buckland could say, when he wrote twenty-five
years since, was that geology did not absolutely disprove
such an hypothesis j and that can not be said now.

" It is often asserted, in order to unsettle confidence in these
particular teachings of geology, that geology is a changing
science. In this connection the remark conveys an errone-
ous impression. Geology is a progressive science; and all
its progress tends to establish more firmly these two prin-
ciples: (i) The slow progress of creation through secondary
causes, as explained; and (2) the progress by periods analo-
gous to the days of Genesis."

I have, I trust, shown that the principal objections to the
lengthening of the Mosaic days into great cosmical periods
are of a character too light and superficial to deserve any re-
gard. I shall now endeavor to add to the internal evidence
previously given some considerations of an external charac-
ter which support this view.

I. The fact that the creation was progressive, that it pro-
ceeded from the formation of the raw material of the universe,
through successive stages, to the perfection of living organ-
isms, if we regard the analogy of God's operations as dis-
closed in the geological history of the earth and in the pres-
ent course of nature, must impress us with a suspicion that
long periods were employed in the work. God might have
prepared the earth for man in an instant. He did not choose
to do so, but on the contrary proceeded step by step; and the
record he has given us does not receive its full significance

Light and Creative Days. i^y

nor attain its full harmony with the course of geological his-
tory, unless we can understand each day of the creative week
as including a long succession of ages.

2. We have, as already explained, reason to believe that
the seventh day at least has been of long duration. At the
close of the sixth, God rested from all his work of material
creation, and we have as yet no evidence that he has re-
sumed it. Neither theologians nor evolutionists will, I pre-
sume, desire to maintain that any strictly creative acts have
occurred in the modern period of geology. We know that
the present day, if it is the seventh, has lasted already for
at least six thousand years, and, if we may judge from the
testimony of prophecy, has yet a long space to run, before
it merges in that " new heaven and new earth " for which
all believers look, and which will constitute the first day of
an endless sabbatism. •

3. The philosophical and religious systems of many ancient
nations afford intimations of the somewhat extensive preva-
lence in ancient times of the notion of long creative periods,
corresponding to the Mosaic days. These notions, in so far
as they are based on truth, are probably derived from the
Mosaic narrative itself, or from the primitive patriarchal doc-
uments which may have formed the basis of that narrative.
They are, no doubt, all more or less garbled versions, and
can not be regarded as of any authorit}^, but they serve to
show what was the interpretation of the document in a very
remote antiquity. I have collected from a variety of sources
the following examples :

The ancient mythology of Persia appears to have had six
creative periods, each apparently of a thousand years, and.
corresponding very nearly with the Mosaic days.* The

* Rhode, quoted by McDonald, "Creation and the Fall," p. 62 ; Euse-
biu5, Chron. Arm.

148 TJie Origin of the World.

Chaldeans had a similar system, to which in a previous
chapter we have already referred. The Etruscans possessed
a history of the creation, somewhat resembling that of the
Bible, and representing the creation as occupying six periods
of a thousand years each.*

The Egyptians believed that the world had been subject
to a series of destructions and renewals, the intervals between
which amounted to 120,000 years, or, according to other au-
thorities, to 300,000 or 360,000 years. This system of de-
struction and renewal the Egyptian priests appear to have
wrought out into considerable detail, but though important
truths may be concealed under their mysterious dogmas, it
will not repay us to dwell on the fragments that remain of
them. There can be no doubt, however, that at least the ba-
sis of the Egyptian cosmogony must have been the common
property of all the Hamite nations, of which Egypt was the
greatest and most permanent ; and therefore in all probabil-
ity derived from the ideas of creation which were current not
long after the Deluge. The Egyptians appear also, as already
stated, to have had a physical cosmogony, beginning with a
chaos in which heaven and earth were mingled, and from
which were evolved fiery matters which ascended into the
heavens, and moist earthy matters which formed the earth
and the sea ; and from these were produced, by the agency
of solar heat, the various animals. The terms of this cosmog-
ony, as it is given by Diodorus Siculus, indicate the belief of
long formative periods.f

The Hindoos have a somewhat extended, though, accord-
ing to the translations, a not very intelligible cosmogony. It

* Suidas, Lexicon — " Tyrrenia."

t Diodorus Siculus, bk. i. Prichard, Egyptian Mythology.

LigJit and Creative Days. 149

plainly, however, asserts long periods of creative work, and is
interesting as an ancient cosmogony preserved entire and
without transmission through secondary channels. The fol-
lowing is a summary, in so far as I have been able to gather
it, from the translation of the Institutes of Menu by Sir W.
Jones.*

The introduction to the Institutes represents Menu as
questioned by the "divine sages" respecting the laws that
should regulate all classes or castes. He proceeds to detail
the course of creation, stating that the " Self-existing Power,t
undiscovered, but making this world discernible, He whom
the mind alone can perceive, whose essence eludes the ex-
ternal senses, who has no visible parts, who exists from eter-
nity, even the soul of all being, whom no being can compre-
hend, shone forth in person."

After giving this exalted view of the Creator, the writer pro-
ceeds to state that the Self-existent created the waters, and
then an ^gg, from which he himself comes forth as Brahma
the forefather of spirits. "The waters are called Nara be-
cause they are the production oi JVara, the spirit of God, and
since they were his first Ayana, or place of motion, he thence
is named Narayana, or moving on the waters. In the &gg
Brahma remained a year, and caused the ^gg to divide, form-
ing the heaven above and the earth beneath, and the subtile
ether, the eight regions, and the receptacle of waters between.
He then drew forth from the supreme soul mind with all its
powers and properties." The rest of the account appears to
be very confused, and I confess to a great extent unintelli-

* "Asiatic Researches."

t This name is exactly identical in meaning with the Hebrew Jehovah
Elohim.

150 The Origin of the World.

gible to me. There follows, however, a continuation of the
narrative, stating that there is a succession of seven Menus,
each of whom produces and supports the earth during his
reign. It is in the account of these successive Menus that
the following statement respecting the days and years of
Brahma occurs :

"A day of the Gods is equal to a year. Four thousand
years of the Gods are called a Critya or Satya age. Four
ages are an age of the Gods. One thousand divine ages {equal
to more than four millions of hiunan years) are a day of Brah-
7na the Creator. Seventy-two divine ages are one manwan-
tara. * * * The aggregate of four ages they call a divine
age, and believe that in every thousand such ages, or in every
day of Brahma, fourteen Menus are successively invested
with the sovereignty of the earth. Each Menu they sup-
pose transmits his authority to his sons and grandsons dur-
ing a period of seventy-two divine ages, and such a period
they call a manwantara. Thirty such days (of the Creator),
or calpas, constitute a month of Brahma; twelve such months
one of his years, and 100 such years his age, of which they
assert that fifty years have elapsed. We are thus, according
to the Hindoos, in the first day or calpa of the fifty-first year
of Brahma's life, and in the twenty-eighth divine age of the
seventh ma7iwantara of that day. In the present day of
Brahma the first Menu was named the Son of the Self-exist-
ent, and by him the institutes of religion and civil duties are
said to have been delivered. In his time occurred a new crea-
tion called the Lotos creation." Of five Menus who succeed-
ed him. Sir William could find little but the names, but the
accounts of the seventh are very full, and it appears that in
his reign the earth was destroyed by a flood. Sir William
suggests that the first Menu may represent the creation, and

LigJit and Creative Days. 151

that the seventh may be Noah. The name Menu or Manu is
equivalent to "man," and signifies "the intelligent."*

In this Hindoo cosmogony we have many points of corre-
spondence with the Scripture narrative : for instance, the
Self-existent Creator ; the agency of the Son of God and
the Holy Spirit ; the absolute creation of matter ; the hov-
ering of the Spirit over the primeval waters ; the sevenfold
division of the creative process ; and the idea of days of
the Creator of immense duration. If we suppose the day
of Brahma in the Hindoo cosmogony to represent the Mo-
saic day, then it amounts to no less than 4,320,000 years ; or
if, with Sir W. Jones, we suppose the manwantara to repre-
sent the Mosaic day, its duration will be 308,571 years; and
the total antiquity of the earth, without counting the unde-
fined "beginning," will be either more than twenty-five or
than two millions of years. It w'ould be folly, however, to
suppose that these Hindoo numbers, which are probably
purely conjectural, or based on astronomical cycles, make
any near approximation to the facts of the case. The Insti-
tutes of Menu are probably in their present form not of great
antiquity, but there are other Hindoo documents of greater
age which maintain similar views, and it is probable that the
account of the creation in the Institutes is at least an imper-
fect version of the original narrative as it existed among
the earliest colonists of India.f It corresponds in many
points vath the oldest notions on these subjects that remain
to us in the wrecks of the mythology of Egypt and other an-

* Miiller, Sanscrit Literature.

t The theology of the Institutes is clearly primitive Semitic in its char-
acter ; and therefore, if the Bible is true, must be older than the Aryan
theogony of the Rig-Veda, as expounded by Miiller, whatever the relative
asfe of the documents.

1 5 2 The Origin of the World.

cient nations, and it aids in proving that the fabulous ages of
gods and demi-gods in the ancient mythologies a?r really pre-
Adamite ; and belong not to human history, but to the work of
creation. It also shows that the idea of long creative periods
as equivalents of the Mosaic days must, in the infancy of the
postdiluvian world, have been very widely diffused. Such
evidence is, no doubt, of small authority in the interpretation
of Scripture ; but it must be admitted that serious considera-
tion is due to a method of interpretation which thus tends to
bring the Mosaic account into harmony with the facts of
modern science, and with the belief of almost universal an-
tiquity, and at the same time gives it its fullest significance
and most perfect internal symmetry of parts. It is also very
interesting to note the wide diffusion among the most ancient
nations of cosmological views identical in their main features
with those of the Bible, proving, almost beyond doubt, that
these views had some common and very ancient source, and
commanded universal belief among the primitive tribes of men.
I have hitherto in this part of the discussion avoided de-
tailed reference to what may be regarded as the "prophetic
day " view of the narrative of creation. This may be shortly
stated as follows : In the prophetical parts of Scripture the
prophet sees in vision, as in a picture or acted scene, the
events that are to come to pass, and in consequence repre-
sents years or longer periods by days of vision. Now the
revelation of the pre-Adamite past is in its nature akin to
that of the unknown future; and Moses may have seen these
wondrous events in vision — in visions of successive days —
under the guise of which he presents geological time. Some
things in the form of the narrative favor this view, and it cer-
tainly affords the most clearly intelligible theory as to the
mode in which such a revelation may have been made to

Light and Creative Days. 153

man. It is advocated by Kurtz, by the author of an excel-
lent little work, the " Harmony of the Mosaic and Geological
Records," by Hugh Miller, and more recently by Tayler
Lewis. To these writers I must refer for its more full il-
lustration, and for the grand pictorial view which it gives of
the vision of the creative week.

In reviewing the somewhat lengthy train of reasoning into
which the term "day" has led us, it appears that from internal
evidence alone it can be rendered probable that the day of
creation is neither the natural nor the civil day. It also ap-
pears that the objections urged against the doctrine of day-
periods are of no weight when properly scrutinized, and that
it harmonizes with the progressive nature of the work, the
evidence of geology, and the cosmological notions of ancient
nations. I do not suppose that this position has been incon-
trovertibly established ; but I believe that every serious dif-
ficulty has been removed from its acceptance ; and with this,
for the present, I remain satisfied. Every step of our subse-
quent progress will afford new criteria of its truth or fallacy.

One further question of some interest is— What, according
to the theory of long creative days and the testimony of ge-
ology, would be the length and precise cosmical nature of
these days ? With regard to the first part of the question,
we do not know the actual value of our geological ages in
time j but it is probable that each great creative aeon may
have extended through millions of years. As to the nature
of the days, this may have been determined by direct voli-
tions of the Creator, or indirectly by some of those great
astronomical cycles which arise from the varying eccentricity
of the earth's orbit, or the diminution of the velocity of its
rotation, or by its gradual cooling.

With reference to these points, science has as yet little in-
G 2

154 The Origin of the World.

formation to give. Sir William Thomson has, indeed, indi-
cated for the time since the earth's crust first began to form
a period of between one and two hundred millions of years;
but Professor Guthrie Tait, on the other hand, argues that
ten or fifteen millions of years are probably sufiicient,^^ and
Lockyer has suggested an hypothesis of successive rekind-
lings of the solar heat which might give a more protracted
time than that of Thomson. Some of the hypotheses of der-
ivation current, but which are based rather on philosophical
speculation than on scientific fact, would also require a
longer time than that allowed by Thomson ; and it is to be
regretted that some geologists, by giving credence to such
hypotheses of derivation, and by loose reasoning on the time
required for the denudation and deposition of rocks, have
been induced to commit themselves to very extravagant esti-
mates as to geological time. On the whole, it is evident that
only the most vague guesses can at present be based on the
facts in our possession, though the whole time required has
unquestionably been very great, the deposition of the series
of stratified rocks probably requiring at least the greater part
of the minimum time allowed by Thomson. f

As to the cosmical nature of the periods, while some geolo-
gists appear to regard the whole of geological time as a con-
tinuous evolution without any breaks, it is evidently more in
accordance with facts to hold that there have been cycles of
repose and activity succeeding each other, and that these
have been of different grades. In the succession of deposits
it is plain that periods of depression and upheaval common
to all the continental masses have succeeded each other at

* " Recent Advances in Physical Science."

t CroU's " Climate and Time " contains some interestinsc facts as to this.

Light and Creative Days. 155

somewhat regular intervals, and that within these periods
there have been alternations of colder and warmer climates.
These, however, are not equal to the creative days of our rec-
ord, for they are greatly more numerous. They are but the
vastly protracted hours of these almost endless days. Beyond
and above these there is another grade of geological period,
marked not by mere gradual elevation and depression of the
continental areas, but by vast crumplings of the earth's crust
and enormous changes of level. Such a great movement un-
questionably closed the Eozoic period of geology. Another
of less magnitude occurred in what is termed the Permian age
at the end of the Palasozoic. A third terminated the Meso-
zoic age, and introduced the Tertiary or Kainozoic. Perhaps
we should reckon the glacial age, though characterized by far
less physical change than the others, as a fourth. The pos-
sible physical causes which have been suggested for such
greater disturbances are the collapses of the crust in equa-
torial regions, which may be supposed to have resulted at
long intervals of time, from the gradual retardation of the
earth's rotation caused by the tides, or the similar collapses
and other changes due to the shrinkages of the earth's inte-
rior caused by its gradual cooling, and to the unequal deposi-
tion of material by water on different parts of its surface.*
The more full discussion of these points belongs, however, to
a future chapter.

These greater movements of the crust, would, as already
stated, coincide to some extent with the later' creative days
in the manner indicated below :

Collapse of crust at close of Eozoic] Close of Fourth ^on, and beginning
Time, ^ of Fifth.

* See the discussion of this in the author's " Story of the Earth," and
in Sir "William Thomson's British Association Address, 1876.

156 The Origin of the World.

Collapse in Permian Period and end ) ^^.^^^^ ^^ ^.^^^^ ^^^^

of Palaeozoic Time, '

Great subsidence and collapse at ) Close of Fifth ^on, and beginning

close of Mesozoic Age, ) of Sixth.

Great subsidence of the Pleistocene ) ^^^^ ^^ ^.^^^ ^^^^_
or Glacial Age, )

The question recurs — Why are God's days so long? He
is not like us, a being of yesterday. He is " from 01am to
01am," and even in human history one day is with him as a
thousand years ; and we who live in these later days of the
world know full well how slow the march of his plan has
been even in human history. We shall know in the endless
ages of a future eternity that even to us these long creative
days may at last become but as watches in the night.

The Atmosphere, 157

CHAPTER VII.

THE ATMOSPHERE.

"And God said, Let there be an expanse between the waters ; and let
it separate the waters from the waters. And God made the expanse, and
separated the waters which are under the expanse from the waters which
are over the expanse : and it was so. And God called the expanse Heaven.
And the evening and the morning were the second day." — Genesis i. 6-8.

At the opening of the period to which we are now intro-
duced the earth was covered by the waters, and these were
in such a condition that there was no distinction between the
seas and the clouds. No atmosphere separated them, or, in
other words, dense fogs and mists everywhere rested on the
surface of the primeval ocean. To understand as far as
possible the precise condition of the earth's surface at this
period, it will be necessary to notice the present constitu-
tion of the atmosphere, especially in its relations to aqueous
vapor.

The regular and constant constituents of the atmosphere
are the elements oxygen and nitrogen, which, at the temper-
ature and pressure existing on the surface of our globe, are
permanently aeriform or gaseous. Beside these gases, the
air always contains a quantity of the vapor of water in a
perfectly aeriform and transparent condition. This vapor is
not, however, permanently gaseous. At all temperatures be-
low 212 degrees it tends to the liquid state ; and its elastic
force, which preserves its particles in the separated state of

158 The Origin of the World,

vapor, increases or diminishes at a more rapid rate than the
increase or diminution of temperature. Hence the quantity ,
of vapor that can be suspended in clear air depends on the
temperature of the air itself. As the temperature of the air
rises, its power of sustaining vapor increases more rapidly
than its temperature ; and as the temperature of the air falls,
the elastic force of its contained vapor diminishes in a great-
er ratio, until it can exist as an invisible vapor no longer, but
becomes condensed into minute bubbles or globules, forming
cloud, mist, or rain. Two other circumstances operate along
with these properties of air and vapor. The heat radiated
from the earth's surface causes the lower strata of air to be,
in ordinary circumstances, warmer than the higher ; and, on
the other hand, warm air, being lighter than that which is
colder, the warm layer of air at the surface continually tends
to rise through and above the colder currents immediately
over it. Let us consider the operation of the causes thus
roughly sketched in a column of calm air. The lower por-
tion becomes warmed, and if in contact with water takes up a
quantity of its vapor proportioned to the temperature, or in
ordinary circumstances somewhat less than this proportion.
It then tends to ascend, and as it rises and becomes mixed
with colder air it gradually loses its power of sustaining
moisture, and at a height proportioned to the diminution of
temperature and the quantity of vapor originally contained in
the air, it begins to part with water, which becomes con-
densed in the form of mist or cloud ; and the surface at
which this precipitation takes place is often still more dis-
tinctly marked when two masses or layers of air at different
temperatures become intermixed ; in which case, on the
principle already stated, the mean temperature produced is
unable to sustain the vapor proper to the two extremes, and

TJie Atmosphere. 159

moisture is precipitated. It thus happens that layers of
cloud accumulate in the atmosphere, while between them
and the surface there is a stratum of clear air. Fogs and
mists are in the present state of nature exceptional appear-
ances, depending generally on local causes, and showing
what the world might be but for that balancing of temper-
ature and the elastic force of vapor which constitutes the
atmospheric firmament.*

The quantity of water thus suspended over the earth is
enormous. "When we see a cloud resolve itself into rain,
and pour out thousands of gallons of water, we can not com-
prehend how it can float in the atmosphere."t The expla-
nation is — I St, the extreme levity of the minute globules,
which causes them to fall very slowly ; 2d, they are support-
ed by currents of air, especially by the ascending currents
developed both in still air and in storms ; sdly, clouds are
often dissolving on one side and forming on another. A
cloud gradually descending may be dissolving away by evap-
oration at the base as fast as new matter is being added
above. On the other hand, an ascending warm current of air
may be constantly depositing moisture at the base of the
cloud, and this may be evaporating under the solar rays
above. In this case a cloud is "merely the visible form of
an aerial space, in which certain processes are at the moment
in equilibrium, and all the particles in a state of upward
movement.''^ But so soon as condensation markedly ex-
ceeds evaporation, rain falls, and the atmosphere discharges
its vast load of water — how vast we may gather from the fact

* Daniell's Meteorological Essays ; Prout's Bridgewater Treatise ; art.
"Meteorology," Encyc. Brit. ; "Maury's Physical Geography of the Sea."
t Kaemtz, "Course of Meteorology."
J Encyc. Brit., art. "Meteorology."

i6o The Origin of the World.

that the waters of all the rivers are but a part of the overflow-
ings of the great atmospheric reservoir. " God binds up the
waters in his thick cloud, and the cloud is not rent under
them." It is thus that the terrestrial waters are divided into
those above and those below that expanse of clear air in
which we live and move, exempt from the dense, dark mists
of the earth's earlier state, yet enjoying the benefits of the
cloudy curtain that veils the burning sun, and of the cloudy
reservoirs that drop down rain to nourish every green thing.

We have no reason to suppose that the laws which regulate
mixtures of gases and vapors did not prevail in the period in
question. It is probable that these laws are as old as the
creation of matter ; but the condition of our earth up to the
second day must have been such as prevented them from
operating as at present. Such a condition might possibly be
the result of an excessive evaporation occasioned by internal
heat. The interior of the earth still remains in a heated
state, and includes large subterranean reservoirs of melted
rock, as is proved by the increase of temperature in deep
mines and borings, and by the widely extended phenomena
of hot springs and volcanic action. At the period in question
the internal temperature of the earth was probably vastly
greater than at present, and perhaps the whole interior of the
globe may have been in a state of igneous fluidity. At the
same time the external solid crust may have been thin, and it
was not fractured and thickened in places by the upheaval of
mountain chains or the deposition of great and unequal sheets
of sediment ; for, as I may again remind the reader, the prim-
itive chaos did not consist of a confused accumulation of
rocky masses, but the earth's crust must then have been more
smooth and unbroken than at any subsequent period. This
being the internal condition of the earth, it is quite conceiva-

The Atmosphere. i6i

ble, without any violation of the existing laws of nature, that
the waters of the ocean, warmed by internal heat, may have
sent up a sufficient quantity of vapor to keep the lower strata
of air in a constant state of saturation, and to occasion an
equally constant precipitation of moisture from the colder
strata above. This would merely be the universal operation
of a cause similar to that which now produces fogs at the
northern limit of the Atlantic Gulf Stream, and in other lo-
calities where currents of warm water flow under or near to
cooler air. Such a state of'things is more conceivable in a
globe covered with water, and consequently destitute of the
dry and powerfully radiating surfaces which land presents,
and receiving from without the rays, not of a solar orb, but of
a comparatively feeble and diffused luminous ether. The
continued action of these causes would gradually cool the
earth's crust and its incumbent waters, until the heat from
without preponderated over that from within, when the result
stated in the text would be effected.

The statements of our primitive authority for this condition
of the earth might also be accounted for on the supposition
that the permanently gaseous part of the atmosphere did not
at the period in question exist in its present state, but that it
was on the second day actually elaborated and caused to take
its place in separating the atmospheric from the oceanic wa-
ters. The first is by far the more probable view; but we
may still apply to such speculations the words of Elihu, the
friend of Job :

" Stand still and consider the wonderful works of God.
Dost thou know when God disposes them,
And the lightning of his cloud shines forth ?
Dost thou know the poising of the dark clouds,
The wonderful works of the Perfect in knowledge ?"

1 62 The Origin of the World.

We may now consider the words in which this great im-
provement in the condition of the earth is recorded. The
Hebrew term for the atmosphere is Rakiah^ hterally, some-
thing expanded or beaten out — an expanse. It is rendered
in our version " firmament," a word conveying the notion of
support and fixity, and in the Septuagint ^^ Stereoma,^^ a word
having a similar meaning. The idea conveyed by the He-
brew word is not, however, that of strength, but of extent; or.
as Milton — the most accurate of expositors of these words —

has it :

" The firmament, expanse of liquid, pure,
Transparent, elemental air, diffused
In circuit to the uttermost convex
Of this great round."

That this was really the way in which this word was under-
stood by the Hebrews appears from several passages of the
Bible. Job says of God, "Who alone spreadeth out the heav-
ens."* David, in the 104th Psalm, which is a poetical par-
aphrase of the history of creation, speaks of the Creator as
'' stretching out the heavens as a curtain." In later writers,
as Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, similar expressions occur. The
notion of a solid or arched firmament was probably altogether
remote from the minds of these writers. Such beliefs may
have prevailed at the time when the Septuagint translation
was made, but I have no hesitation in afiirming that no trace
of them can be found in the Old Testament. In proof of
this, I may refer to some of the passages which have been
cited as affording the strongest instances of this kind of

* It is not meant that the word rakiah occurs in these passages, but to
show how by other words the idea of stretching out or extension rather
than solidity is implied. The verb in the first two passages is nata, to
spread out.

TJie Atmosphere. 163

"accommodation." In Exodus xxiv., 10, we are told, "xA^nd
they saw the God of Israel, and under his feet as it were a
paved work of sapphire, and as it were the heaven itself in its
clearness." This is evidently a comparison of the pavement
seen under the feet of Jehovah to a sapphire in its color, and
to the heavens in its transparency. The intention of the
writer is not to give information respecting the heavens, or to
liken them either to a pavement or a sapphire ; all that we
can infer is that he believed the heavens to be clear or trans-
parent. Job mentions the "pillars of heaven," but the con-
nection shows that this is merely a poetical expression for
lofty mountains. The earthquake causes these pillars of
heaven to "tremble." We are informed in the book of Job
that God "ties up his waters in his thick cloud, and the cloud
is not rent under them." We are also told of the " treasures
of snow and the treasures of hail," and rain is called the
"bottles of heaven," and is said to be poured out of the
"lattices of heaven." I recognize in all these mere poetical
figures, not intended to be literally understood. Some learn-
ed writers wish us to believe that the intention of the Bible in
these places is actually to teach that the clouds are contained
in skin bottles, or something similar, and that they are emp-
tied through hatches in a solid firmament. To found such a
belief, however, on a few figurative statements, seems ridicu-
lous, especially when we consider that the writers of the Scrip-
tures show themselves to be well acquainted with nature, and
would not be likely on any account to deviate so far from the
ordinary testimony of the senses; more especially as by doing
so they would enable every unlettered man who has seen a
cloud gather on a mountain's brow or dissolve away before
increasing heat to oppose the evidence of his senses to their
statements, and perhaps to reject them with scorn as a bare-

164 TJie Origin of the World,

faced imposture. But, lastly, we are triumphantly directed to
the question of Elihu in his address to Job :

" Hast thou with him stretched out the sky,
Which is firm and like a molten mirror ?"

But the word translated sky here is not '''' rakiah^^ or
^^ shamayim,'^ but another signifying the clouds, so that we
should regard Elihu as speaking of the apparent firmness or
stability, and the beautiful reflected tints of the clouds. His
words may be paraphrased thus: "Hast thou aided Him in
spreading out those clouds, which appear so stable and self-
sustaining, and so beautifully reflect the sunlight.'"'* The
above passages form the only authority which I can find in
the Scriptures for the doctrine of a solid firmament, which
may therefore be characterized as a modern figment of men
more learned in books but less acquainted with nature than
the Scripture writers. As a contrast to all such doctrines I
may quote the sublime opening of the poetical account of
creation in Psalm civ., which we may also take here as else-
where as the oldest and most authoritative commentary on
the first chapter of Genesis :

" Bless the Lord, O my soul !
O Lord, my God, thou art very great :
Thou art clothed with honor and majesty,
Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment,
Who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain (of a tent),
W/io layest the beams of thy chambers in the waters^
Who makest the clouds thy chariots.
Who zvalkest Jtpon the wings of the wind.''''

The waters here are those above the firmament, the whole
* See also Humboldt, "Cosmos," vol. ii., pt. i.

The AUno sphere. 165

of this part of the Psalm being occupied with the heavens ;
and there is no place left for the solid firmament, of which
the writer evidently knew nothing. He represents God as
laying his chambers on the waters, instead of on the sup-
posed firmament, and as careering in cloudy chariots on the
wings of the wind, instead of over a solid arch. For all the
above reasons, we conclude that the " expanse " of the verses
under consideration was understood by the writers of the
book of God to be aerial^ not solid ; and the " establishment
of the clouds above," as it is finely called in Proverbs, is
the effect of those meteorological laws to which I have
already referred, and which were now for the first time
brought into operation by the divine Legislator. The He-
brew theology was not of a kind to require such expedi-
ents as that of solid heavenly arches ; it recurred at once
to the will — the decree — of Jehovah ; and was content to
believe that through this efiicient cause the " rivers run
into the sea, yet the sea is not full," for " to the place
whence the rivers came, thither they return again," through
the agency of those floating clouds, " the waters above the
heavens," which " pour down rain according to the vapor
thereof."

God called the expanse " Heaven." In former chapters
we have noticed that heaven in the popular speech of the
Hebrews, as in our own, had different meanings, applying
alike to the cloudy, the astral, and the spiritual heavens.
The Creator here sanctions its application to the aerial ex-
panse ; and accordingly throughout the Scriptures it is used
in this way ; rakiah occurs very rarely, as if it had become
nearly obsolete, or was perhaps regarded as a merely tech-
nical or descriptive term. The divine sanction for the use
of the term heaven for the atmosphere is, as already explain-

1 66 The Origin of the World.

ed, to indicate that this popular use is not to interfere with
its application to the whole universe beyond our earth in
verse ist.

The poetical parts of the Bible, and especially the book
of Job, which is probably the most ancient of the whole,
abound in references to the atmosphere and its phenomena.
I may quote a few of these passages, to enable us to under-
stand the views of these subjects given in the Bible, and the
meaning attached to the creation of the atmosphere, in very
ancient periods. In Job, 38th chapter, we have the following:

" In what way is the lightning distributed,
And how is the east wind spread abroad over the earth ?
Who hath opened a channel for the pouring rain,
Or a way for the thunder-flash ?
To cause it to rain on the land where no man is.
In the desert where no one dwells ;
To saturate the desolate and waste ground.
And to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth."

Here we have the unequal and unforeseen distribution of
thunder-storms, beyond the knowledge and power of man,
but under the absolute control of God, and designed by him
for beneficent purposes. Equally fine are some of the fol-
lowing lines :

" Dost thou lift up thy voice to the clouds,
That abundance of waters may cover thee ?
Dost thou send forth the lightnings, and they go,
And say unto thee, Here are w-e ?
Who can number the clouds by wisdom.
Or cause the bottles of heaven to empty themselves ?
When the dust groweth into mire,
And the clods cleave fast together ?"

In the 36th and 37th chapters of the same book we have
a grand description of atmospheric changes in their relation

The Atmosphere. 167

to man and his works. The speaker is Elihu, who in this an-
cient book most favorably represents the knowledge of nature
that existed at a time probably anterior to the age of Moses
— a knowledge far superior to that which we find in the works
of many modern poets and expositors, and accompanied by
an intense appreciation of the grandeur and beauty of natural
objects :

" For he draweth up the drops of water,
Rain is condensed* from his vapor,
Which the clouds do drop,
And distill upon man abundantly.
Yea, can any understand the distribution of the clouds
Or the thundering of his tabernacle.t
Behold he spreadeth his lightning upon it.
He covereth it as with the depths of the sea.j
By these he executes judgment on the people.
By these also he giveth food in abundance ;
His hands he covers with the lightning.
And commands it (against the enemy) in its striking;
He uttereth to it his decree,§
Concerning the herd as well as proud man.
At this also my heart trembles,
And bounds out of its place ;
Hear attentively the thunder of his voice,
And the loud sound that goes from his mouth.
He directs it under the whole heavens.
And his lightning to the ends of the earth.
After it his voice roareth.

* Heb., " they refine."

t " His pavilion round about him was dark waters and thick clouds of
the skies," Psa. xviii. This expression explains that in the text.

I Or " He darkens the depths of the sea."

§ Translation of these lines much disputed and very difficult. Gesenius
and Conant render it, *' His thunder tells of him ; to the herds even of
him who is on hicrh."

1 68 The Origin of the World.

He thundereth with the voice of his majesty ;

And delays not (the tempest) when his voice is heard.

God thundereth marvellously with his voice,

He doeth wonders which we can not comprehend ;

For he saith to the snow, Be thou on the earth.

Also to the pouring rain, even the great rain of his might.

He sealeth up the hand of every man,

That all men may know his work.

Then the beasts go to their dens.

And remain in their caverns.

Out of the south cometh the whirlwind

And cold out of the north,

By the breath of God the frost is produced

And the breadth of waters becomes bound ;

With moisture he loads the thick cloud,

He spreads the cloud of his lightning,

And it is turned about by his direction.

To execute his pleasure on the face of the world ;

Whether for correction, for his land, or for mercy.

He causeth it to come.

Hearken unto this, O Job,

Stand still and consider the wonderful works of God.

Dost thou know when God disposes these things.

And the lightning of his cloud flashes forth ?

Dost thou know the poising of the clouds,

The wonderful work of the Perfect in knowledge "i

When thy garments become warm

When he quieteth the earth by the south wind ;

Hast thou with him spread out the clouds

Firm and like a molten mirror .?"*

* I take advantage of this long quotation to state that in the case of
this and other passages quoted from the Old Testament I have carefully
consulted the original ; but have availed myself freely of the renderings
of such of the numerous versions and commentaries as I have been able
to obtain, whenever they appeared accurate and expressive, and have not
scrupled occasionally to give a free translation where this seemed neces-
sary to perspicuity. In the book of Job, I have consulted principally the

The Atmosphere. 169

It would not be easy to find, in the poetry of any nation or
time, a description of so many natural phenomena, so fine in
feeling or truthful in delineation. It should go far to dispel
the too prevalent ideas of early Oriental ignorance, and
should lead to a more full appreciation of these noble pictures
of nature, unsurpassed in the literature of any people or time.
I trust that the previous illustrations are sufficient to show,
not only that the stereoina^ or solid firmament of the Septua-
gint, is not to be found in Scripture, but that the positive
doctrine of the Bible on the subject is of a very different
character. For instance, in the above extract from the book
of Job, Elihu speaks of the poising or suspension of the clouds
as inscrutable, and tells us that God draws up water into the
clouds, and pours down rain according to the vapor thereof;
he also speaks of the clouds as being scattered before the
brightness of the sun ; and notices, in truthful as well as ex-
alted language, the nature and succession of the lightning's
flash, the thunder, and the precipitation of rain that follows.
Solomon also informs us that the "establishment of the
clouds above " is due to the law or will of Jehovah. Finally,
in this connection, the divine sanction given to the use of the
term heaven for the atmosphere may in itself be regarded as
an intimation that no definite barrier separates our film of
atmosphere from the boundless abyss of heaven without.

Of this period natural science gives us no intimation. In
the earliest geological epochs organic life, dry land, and an
atmosphere already existed. At the period now under con-
sideration the two former had not been called into existence,
and the latter was in process of elaboration from the materi-

translation appended to Barnes's Commentary, Conant's translation, 1857,
and those of Tayler Lewis and Evans in Schaff's edition of Lange, 1874.

H

170 The Origin of the World.

als of the primeval deep. If the formation of the atmosphere
in its existing conditions was, as already hinted, a result of
the gradual cooling of the earth, then this period must have
been of great length, and the action of the heated waters on
the crust of the globe may have produced thick layers of
detrital matter destined to form the first soils of the succeed-
ing seon. We know nothing, however, of these primitive
strata, and most of them must have been removed by denud-
ing agencies in succeeding periods, or restored by subterra-
nean heat to the crystalline state. The events and results of
this day may be summed up as follows :

"At the commencement of the period the earth was envel-
oped by a misty or vaporous mantle. In its progress those
relations of air and vapor which cause the separation of the
clouds from the earth by a layer of clear air, and the varied
alternations of sunshine and rain, were established. At the
close of the period the newly formed atmosphere covered a
universal ocean ; and there was probably a very regular and
uniform condition of the atmospheric currents, and of the
processes of evaporation and condensation."

But while we must affirm that no idea of a solid atmos-
pheric vault can be detected in the Bible, and while we may
also affirm that such an idea would have been altogether for-
eign to its tone, which invariably refers all things not to sec-
ondary machinery, but to the will and fiat of the Supreme, we
must not forget that a most important moral purpose was to
be served by the assertion of the establishment of the atmos-
pheric expanse. Among all nations the phenomena of the
atmosphere have had important theological and mythological
relations. The ever-changing and apparently capricious as-
pects of the atmosphere and its clouds, the terrible effects of
storms, and the balmy influence of sunshine and calm, deeply

The Atmosphere. 171

impress the minds of simple and superstitious men, and this
all the more that in their daily life and expeditions they are
constantly subjected to the effects of atmospheric vicissitudes.
Hence the greatest gods of all the ancient nations are weath-
er-gods— rulers of the atmospheric heavens — displaying their
anger in the thunder-storm and tornado. It is likely that in
most cases, as in many barbarous tribes of modern times,
these weather-gods were malevolent beings contending against
the genial influences of the heavenly Sun-god ; but in nearly
every case their supposed practical importance has elevated
them, as in the case of the Olympian Zeus, the Scandinavian
Thor, and the American Hurakon, to the place of supreme
divinity. This was one of the superstitions which the He-
brew monotheism had to overcome. Hence the atmosphere
is affirmed to be under Jehovah's law, and all its phenomena
are attributed to his power. The value of this as cutting at
the root of the most widespread superstitions it is easy to
understand, and it has a farther value in teaching that even
the apparently unstable and capricious air is a thing estab-
lished from the first and amenable to the ordinance of God.
How difficult it has been to eradicate superstitious views of
the atmosphere may be learned from the fact that St. Paul, in
writing to the enlightened citizens of Ephesus, could speak
of the power which the heathen worshipped as the " Prince
of the powers of the air," and it is also evidenced by the
abundant notions of this kind which have survived from the
Middle Ages among the more ignorant part of the people
even in lands called Christian.

While, however, the Bible affirms the atmosphere to be sub-
ject to law, it does not carry this into the domain of physical
necessity, and affirm with some modern materialistic philoso-
phers that it is useless to pray for rain. It is God who gives

1/2 TJie Origin of the World.

rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, and what he gives
he can withhold. Perhaps no part of our subject can bet-
ter than this illustrate the rational distinction betw^een a
mere physical fatalism, or a mere superstitious fear of capri-
cious nature, and that belief in a divine Lawgiver which lies
between these extremes. Modern science may smile at the
poor Indian, who in his fear invokes Hurakon or Tlaloc or
the terrible Thunder-bird, and may even despise that nobler
worship of the great Phoenician Sun-god, the source and fount-
ain of all light and life ; against which, though it was the
grandest of all the old idolatries, Elijah waged war to the
death. But may it not equally deride the faith of Elijah
himself, when, after three years of drought, he prayed in the
sight of assembled Israel for rain ? It may do so if physical
law amounts to an invariable necessity, and if there is no
supreme Will behind it. But if natural laws are the expres-
sion of the divine will, if these laws are multiform and com-
plicated in their relations, and regulate vastly varied causes
interacting with each other, and if the action and welfare of
man come within the scope of these laws, then there is noth-
ing irrational in the supposition that God, without any capri-
cious or miraculous intervention, may have so correlated the
myriad adjustments of his creation as that, while it is his usual
rule that rain falls alike on the evil and on the good, he may
make its descent at particular times and places to depend on
the needs and requests of his own children. In truth the
^belief in law is essential to the philosophical conception of
prayer. If the universe were a mere chaos of chances, or
if it were a result of absolute necessity, there would be no
place for intelligent prayer; but if it is under the control of
a Lawgiver, wise and merciful, not a mere manager of mate-
rial machinery, but a true Father of all, then we can go to

The Atmosphere. 173

such a being with our requests, not in the belief that we can
change his great plans, or that any advantage could result
from this if it were possible, but that these plans may be
made in his boundless wisdom and love to meet our necessi-
ties. There is also in the Bible the farther promise that, if
we are truly the children of God, regulating our conduct by
his will and enlightened by his spirit, we shall know how to
pray for what is in accordance with his divine purpose, and
how to receive with gladness whatever he sees fit to give.
While, therefore, the Biblical doctrine as to natural law eman-
cipates us from fears of angry storm-demons, it draws us near
to a heavenly Father, whose power is above all the tempests
of earth, and who, while ruling by law, has regulated all things
in conformity with the higher law of love. When God had
made the atmosphere, he saw that it was good, and the high-
est significance is given to this by the consideration that God
is love. The position of the Bible is thus the true mean be-
tween superstitions at once unhappy and debasing, and a ma-
terialistic infidelity that would reduce the universe to a dead,
remorseless machine, in which we must struggle for a precari-
ous existence till we are crushed between its wheels.

174 The Origin of the World.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE DRY LAND AND THE FIRST PLANTS.

" And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be gathered into one
place, and let the dry land appear : and it was so. And God called the dry
land earth, and the gathering of waters called he seas ; and God saw that
it was good.

"And God said, Let the earth bring forth the springing herb, the herb
bearing seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit, after its kind, whose seed is
in it on the earth : and it was so. And the earth brought forth the tender
herb, the herb yielding seed, and the tree bearing fruit whose seed is in it,
after its kind ; and God saw that it was good." — Genesis i., lo, ii.

These are events sufficiently simple and intelligible in
their general character. Geology shows us that the emer-
gence of the dry land must have resulted from the elevation
of parts of the bed of the ancient universal ocean, and that
the agent employed in such changes is the bending and
crumpling of the outer crust of the earth, caused by lateral
pressure, and operating either in a slow and regular man-
ner or by sudden paroxysms. It farther informs us that the
existing continents consist of stratified or bedded masses,
more or less inclined, fissured and irregularly elevated, and
usually supported by crystalline rocks which have been pro-
duced among them, or forced up beneath or through them by
internal agencies, and which truly constitute the pillars and
foundations of the earth. These elevations, it is true, were
successive, and belong to different periods ; but the appear-
ance of the first dry land is that intended here.

TJic Dry Land and the First Plants. 175

The elevation of the dry land is more frequently referred
to in Scripture than any other cosmological fact ; and while
all have been misapprehended, the statements on this subject
have been even more unjustly dealt with than others. In the
text, the word "earth" {aretz'^) is, by divine sanction, narrowed
in meaning to the dry land ; but while some expositors are
quite willing to restrict it to this, or even a more limited
sense, in the first and second verses of this chapter, almost
the only verses in the Bible where the terms of the narrative
make such a restriction inadmissible, they are equally ready
to understand it as meaning the whole globe in places where
the explanatory clause in the verse now under consideration
teaches us that we should understand the land only, as dis-
tinguished from the sea. I may quote some of these pas-
sages, and note the views they give ; always bearing in mind
that, after the intimation here given, we must understand the
term "earth" as applying only to the continents or dry land^
unless where the context otherwise fixes the meaning. We
may first turn to Psalm civ. :

" Thou laidst the foundations of the earth,
That it should never be removed ;
Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment;
The waters stood above the mountains ;
At thy rebuke they fled ;

At the sound of thy thunder they hasted away ; »

Mountains ascended, valleys descended
To the place thou hast appointed for them :
Thou hast appointed them bounds that they may not pass,
That they return not again to cover the earth."

* The word is one of those that pervade both Semitic and Indo-
European tongues: Sanscrit, a//«;-^; Pehlevi, ar/a; Latin, /tvra; German,
Erde; Gothic, air ^/i a ; Scottish, jj'/r^; English, ear^/i. — Gesenius.

1/6 The Origin of the World,

The position of these verses in this "the hymn of creation"
leaves no doubt that they refer to the events we are now con-
sidering. I have given above the literal reading of the line
that refers to the elevation of mountains and subsidence of
valleys \ admitting, however, that the grammatical construc-
tion gives an air of probability to the rendering in our version,
" they go up by the mountains, they go down by the valleys ;"
which, on the other hand, is rendered very improbable by the
sense. In whichever sense we understand this line, the pict-
ure presented to us by the Psalmist includes the elevation of
the mountains and continents, the subsidence of the waters
into their depressed basins, and the firm establishment of the
dry land on its rocky foundations, the whole accompanied by
a feature not noticed in Genesis — the voice of God's thunder
— or, in other words, electrical and volcanic explosions. The
following quotations refer to the same subject :

"Before the mountains were settled,
Before the hills was I (the Wisdom of God) brought forth;
"While as yet he had not made the earth,
Nor the plains, nor the higher parts of the habitable world.
When he gave the sea his decree
That the waters should not pass his limits.
When he determined the foundations of the earth."

— Proverbs viii., 25.

"Thou hast established the earth, and it endureth,

According to thy decrees they continue this day.

For all are thy servants."

— Psalm cxix., 90.

" Who shaketh the earth out of its place.

And its pillars tremble."

— Job ix., 6.

'■'Where wast thou when I founded the earth?
Declare, if thou hast knowledge.

The Dry Land and the First Plants. 177

Who hath fixed the proportion thereof, if thou knowest?

Who stretched the line upon it?

Upon what are its foundations settled?

Or who laid its corner-stone,

When the morning stars sang together.

And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Who shut up the sea with doors

In its bursting forth as from the womb?

When I made the cloud its garment,

And swathed it in thick darkness,

I measured out for it my limit,

And fixed its bars and doors ;

And said, Thus far shalt thou come, but no farther.

And here shall thy proud waves be stayed."

— Job xxxviii., 4.

In these passages the foundation of the earth at first, as
well as the shaking of its pillars by the earthquake, are con-
nected with what we usually call natural law — the decree of
the Almighty — the unchanging arrangements of an unchange-
able Creator, whose "hands formed the dry land."* This is
the ultimate cause not only of the elevation of the land, but
of all other natural things and processes. The naturalist does
not require to be informed that the details, in so far as they
are referred to in the above passages, are perfectly in accord-
ance with what we know of the nature and support of con-
tinental masses. Geological observation and mathematical
calculation have in our day combined their powers to give
clear views of the manner in which the fractured strata of the
earth are wedged and arched together, and supported by in-
ternal igneous masses upheaved from beneath, and subse-
quently cooled and hardened. A general view of these facts
which we have learned from scientific inquiry, the Hebrews

* Psalm xcv.
H 2

178 The Origin of the World,

gleaned with nearly as much precision from the short account
of the elevation of the land in Genesis, and from the later
comments of their inspired poets. From the same source
our own great poet, Milton, learned these cosmical facts, be-
fore the rise of geology, and expressed them in unexception-
able terms : ^_, . ,

*' The mountains huge appear

Emergent, and their broad bare backs upheave
Into the clouds, their tops ascend the sky.
So high as heaved the tumid hills, so low
Down sunk a hollow bottom, broad and deep,
Capacious bed of waters."

In further illustration of the opinions of the Scripture
writers respecting the nature of the earth, and the disturb-
ances to which it is liable, I quote the following passages.
The first is from the magnificent description of Jehovah
descending to succor his people amid the terrors of the earth-
quake, the volcano, and the thunder-storm, in Psalm xviii. :

*'Then shook and trembled the earth,
The foundations of the hills moved and were shaken,
Because he was angry.
Smoke went up from his nostrils,
Fire from his mouth devoured,
Coals were kindled by it.
Then were seen the channels of the waters.
And the foundations of the world were discovered,
A tthy rebuke — O Jehovah —
At the blast of the breath of thy nostrils."

In another place in the Psalms we find volcanic action
thus tersely sketched :

" He looketh on the earth and it trembleth.
He toucheth the hills and they smoke."

— Psalm civ,, 32.

TJic Dry Land and the First Plants, 179

Perhaps the most remarkable discourse on this subject in
the whole Bible is that in Job xxviii., in which mining opera-
tions are introduced as an illustration of the difficulty of ob-
taining true wisdom. This passage is interesting both from
its extreme antiquit}^, and the advancement in knowledge and
practical skill which it indicates. It presents, however, many
difficulties ; and its details have almost entirely lost their
true significance in our common English version :

" Surely there is a vein for silver,
And a place for the gold which men refine;
Iron is taken from the earth,
And copper is molten from the ore.

To the end of darkness and to all extremes man searcheth,
For the stones of darkness and the shadow of death.
He opens a passage [shaft] from where men dwell,
Unsupported by the foot, they hang down and swing to and fro.*
The earth — out of it cometh bread;
And beneath, it is overturned as by fire.t
Its stones are the place of sapphires.
And it hath lumps J of gold.

The path (thereto) the bird of prey hath not known.
The vulture's eye hath not seen it.§
The wild beasts' whelps have not trodden it,
The lion hath not passed over it.
Man layeth his hand on the hard rock.
He turneth up the mountains from their roots.
He cutteth channels \adits] in the rocks,
His eye seeth every precious thing.

* Gesenius.

t Perhaps "changed," metamorphosed, as by fire. Conant has "de-
stroyed."

I " Dust " in our version, literally lumps or " nuggets."

§ The vulgar and incorrect idea that the vulture " scents the carrion
from afar," so often reproduced by later poets, has no place in the Bible
poetry. It is the bird's keen eye that enables him to find his prey.

i8o The Origin of the World.

He restraineth the streams from trickling,
And bringeth the hidden thing to light.
But where shall wisdom be found,
And where is the place of understanding?"

This passage, incidentally introduced, gives us a glimpse
of the knowledge of the interior of the earth and its products,
as it existed in an age probably anterior to that of Moses.
It brings before us the repositories of the valuable metals
and gems — the mining operations, apparently of some mag-
nitude and difficulty, undertaken in extracting them — and
the wonderful structure of the earth itself, green and product-
ive at the surface, rich in precious metals beneath, and deep-
er still the abode of intense subterranean fires. The only
thing wanting to give completeness to the picture is some
mention of the fossil remains buried in the earth ; and, as
the main thought is the eager and successful search for use-
ful minerals, this can hardly be regarded as a defect. The
application of all this is finer than almost any thing else in
didactic poetry. Man can explore depths of the earth in-
accessible to all other creatures, and extract thence treas-
ures of inestimable value ; yet, after thus exhausting all the
natural riches of the earth, he too often lacks that highest
wisdom which alone can fit him for the true ends of
his spiritual being. How true is all this, even in our own
wonder-working days! A poet of to-day could scarcely
say more of subterranean w^onders, or say it more truth-
fully and beautifully; nor could he arrive at a conclusion
more pregnant with the highest philosophy than the closing
words :

" The fear of the Lord, that is wisdom ;
And to depart from evil is understanding."

TJie Dry Land and the First Plants. i8i

The emergence of the dry land is followed by a repetition
of the approval of the Creator. '* God saw that it was good."
To our view that primeval dry land would scarcely have
seemed good. It was a world of bare, rocky peaks, and
verdureless valleys — here active volcanoes, with their heaps
of scoriae and scarcely cooled lava currents — there vast mud-
flats, recently upheaved from the bottom of the waters — no-
where even a blade of grass or a clinging lichen. Yet it was
good in the view of its Maker, who could see it in relation to
the uses for which he had made it, and as a fit preparatory
step to the new w^onders he was soon to introduce. Then
too, as we are informed in Job xxxviii., " The morning stars
sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy." We
also, when we think of the beautiful variety of the terrestrial
surface, the character and composition of its soils, the variety
of climate and exposure resulting from its degrees of eleva-
tion, the arrangements for the continuance of springs and
streams, and many other beneficial provisions connected with
the merely mechanical arrangements of the dry land, may
well join in the tribute of praise to the All-wise Creator.
There is, however, a farther thought suggested by the approv-
al of the great Artificer. In this wondrous progress of crea-
tion, it seems as if every thing at first was in its best estate.
No succeeding state could parallel the unbroken symmetry
of the earth in the fluid and vaporous condition of the
"deep." Before the elevation of the land, the atmospheric
currents and the deposition of moisture must have been sur-
passingly regular. The first dry land may have presented
crags and peaks and ravines and volcanic cones in a more
marvellous and perfect manner than any succeeding conti-
nents— even as the dry and barren moon now, in this re-
spect, far surpasses the earth. In the progress of organic

1 82 The Origin of the World.

life, geology gives similar indications, in the variety and mag-
nitude of many animal types on their first introduction ; so
that this may very possibly be a law of creation.

During the emergence of the first dry land, large quantities
of detrital matter must have been deposited in the waters,
and in part elevated into land. All of these beds would,
probably, be destitute of organic remains ; but if such beds
were formed and still remain, they are probably unknown to
us, for the oldest formations that we know — those of the Eo-
zoic age — contain traces of such remains. It has, indeed,
been suggested that these most ancient organisms are, as it
were, overlooked in the history of creation, or regarded as
equivalent to those shapeless monsters and animals of the
darkness that are referred to in the older Turanian versions
of this story of creation. I doubt very much, however, if this
is a fair interpretation of our ancient record ; but we shall be
in a better position to discuss it when we come to the actual
introduction of animals.

Modern analogy would induce us to believe that the land
was not elevated suddenly j but either by a series of small
paroxysms, as in the case of Chili, or by a gradual and im-
perceptible movement, as in the case of Sweden — two of the
most remarkable modern instances of elevation of land — ac-
companied, however, in the case of the last by local subsid-
ence.* In either of these ways the seas and rivers would
have time to smooth the more rugged inequalities, to widen
the ravines into valleys, and to spread out sediment in the
lower grounds ; thus fitting the surface for the habitation of
plants and animals. We must not suppose, however, that the
dry land had any close resemblance to that now existing in

* Lyell's " Principles of Geology."

TJie Dry Land and the First Plants. 183

its form or distribution. Geology amply proves that since
the first appearance of dry land, its contour has frequently
been changed, and probably also its position. Hence near-
ly all our present land consists of rocks which have been
formed under the waters, long after the period now under
consideration, and have been subsequently hardened and
elevated ; and since all the existing high mountain ranges
are of a comparatively late age, it is probable that this prime-
val dry land was low, as well as, in the earlier part of the pe-
riod at least, of comparatively small extent. It is, however,
by no means certain that there may not have been a greater
expanse of land toward the close of this period than that
which afterwards existed in those older periods of animal life
to which the earliest fossiliferous rocks of the geologist carry
us back; since, as already hinted, it seems to be a rule in
creation that each new object shall be highly developed of
its kind at its first appearance, and since there have been in
geological time many great subsidences as well as elevations.
Neither must we forget that the oldest land has been sub-
jected throughout geological time to wearing and degrading
agencies, and that from its waste the later formations have
been mainly derived.

It would be wrong, however, to omit to state that, though
we may know at present no remains of the first dry land, we
are not ignorant of its general distribution; for the present
continents show, in the arrangement of their formations and
mountain chains, evidence that they are parts of a plan
sketched out from the beginning. It has often been re-
marked by physical geographers that the great lines of coast
and mountain ranges are generally in directions approaching
to northeast and southwest, or northwest and southeast, and
that where they run in other directions, as in the case of the

1 84 ^/^^ Origin of the World.

south of Europe and Asia, they are much broken by salient
and re-entering angles, formed by lines having these direc-
tions. Professor R. Owen, of Tennessee, and Professor Pierce,
of Harvard College, were, I believe, the first to point out that
these lines are in reality parts of great circles tangent to the
polar circles, and the latter to suggest a theory of their ori-
gin, based on the action of solar heat and the seasons on a
cooling earth. This has been more fully stated by Mr. W.
Lowthian Green in his curious book, " Vestiges of the Molten
Globe."* It would appear that the great circles in question are
in reality at right angles to the line of direction of the attrac-
tion of the sun and moon at the period of either solstice, and
when they happen to be in conjunction or opposition at these
periods; and that such circles would be the lines on which
the thin crust of a cooling globe would be most likely to be
ruptured by its internal tidal-wave. Whatever the cause of
the phenomenon, it is evident that in the formation of its
surface inequalities the earth has cracked — so to speak —
along two series of great circles tangent to the polar circles;
and that these, with certain subordinate lines of fracture run-
ning north and south and east and west, have determined the
forms of the continents from their origin.

M. Elie de Beaumont, and after him most other geologists,
have attributed the elevation of the continents and the up-
heaval and plication of mountain chains to the secular re-
frigeration of the earth, causing its outer shell to become too
capacious for its contracting interior mass, and thus to break
or bend, and to settle toward the centre. This view would
well accord with the terms in which the elevation of the land
is mentioned throughout the Bible, and especially wdth the

* Stanford, London, 1875.

TJie Dry Land and the First Plants. 185

general progress of the work as we have gleaned it from the
Mosaic narrative; since from the period of the desolate void
and aeriform deep to that now before us secular refrigeration
must have been steadily in progress. Let us also observe
here that the earliest fractures of the crust would determine
the first coast lines, and the first slopes along which sedi-
mentary matter would descend from the land and be depos-
ited in the sea. They would also modify the direction of
the ocean currents. Thus the deposition of new formations
would be directed by these old lines, as would also to some
extent the course of all subsequent fractures and plications.
Thus it happens that the lines of outcrop of the oldest rocks
first raised out of the w^aters already marked out the forms
of the continents, and that the later formations appear rather
as fillings-up and extensions of the skeleton established by
the first dry land. Farther, the lines of plication first estab-
lished along the borders of the continents formed resisting
walls along which, in the continued contraction of the earth,
pressure was exerted from the ocean bed, widening and ele-
vating these lines of upheaval, and still farther fixing the
general forms of the continents, and giving variety to their
surfaces. In the progress of geological time there have also
been successive depressions and re-elevations of the conti-
nental plateaus, subjecting them alternately to the wearing
and disintegrating action of the atmosphere and its waters,
and to the influence of waves and ocean currents, and es-
pecially to that of the deep-seated polar currents which have
throughout geological ages been loading the submerged
areas of the earth's surface with the products of the waste
caused by frost and ice in the polar regions. These causes
again have been progressively increasing the oblateness of the
earth's figure, and, along with the slackening of its rotation,

1 86 The Origin of the World.

preparing the way for those periodical collapses in the equa-
torial and temperate regions which form the boundaries of
some of our most important geological periods.* Through-
out all these changes the great general plan of the conti-
nents, first sketched out when the " foundations of the earth "
were laid, before Eozoic time, was being elaborated.

The same creative period that witnessed the first appear-
ance of dry land saw it also clothed with vegetation ; and it
is quite likely that this is intended to teach that no time was
lost in clothing the earth with plants — that the first emerg-
ing portions received their vegetable tenants as they became
fitted for them — and that each additional region, as it rose
above the surface of the waters, in like manner received the
species of plants for which it was adapted. What was the
nature of this earliest vegetation ? The sacred writer speci-
fies three descriptions of plants as included in it; and, by
considering the terms which he uses, some information on
this subject may be gained.

Deshe^ translated " grass " in our version, is derived from a
verb signifying to spring up or bud forth ; the same verb, in-
deed, used in this verse to denote " bringing forth," literally
causing to spring uf>. Its radical meaning is, therefore, vege-
tation in the act of sprouting or springing forth ; or, as con-
nected with this, young and delicate herbage. Thus, in Job
xxxviii., " To satisfy the desolate and waste ground, and to cause
the bud of the yoicng herbage to spring forth." Here the ref-
erence is, no doubt, to the bulbous and tuberous rooted plants
of the desert plains, which, fading away in the summer
drought, burst forth with magical rapidity on the setting-in

* In further explanation of these general geological changes, see " The
Story of the Earth and Man," by the author.

TJie Dry Land and the First Plants. 187

of rain. The following passages are similar : Psalm xxiii.,
"He maketh me to lie down in green pastures" (literally,
young or tender herbage) ; Deuteronomy xxiii., " Small rain
upon the tender herb;'' Isaiah xxxvii., " Grass on the house-
tops." The word is also used for herbage such as can be
eaten by cattle or cut down for fodder, though even in these
cases the idea of young and tender herbage is evidently in-
cluded ; " Fat as a heifer at grass " (Jer. xiv.)— that is, feeding
on young succulent grass, not that which is dry and parched.
" Cut down as the grass, or wither as the green herb," like
the soft, tender grass, soon cut down and quickly withering.
With respect to the use of the word in this place, I may re-
mark : I. It is not here correctly translated by the word "grass ;"
for grass bears seed, and is, consequently, a member of the
second class of plants mentioned. Even if we set aside all
idea of inspiration, it is obviously impossible that any one
living among a pastoral or agricultural people could have
been ignorant of this fact. 2. It can scarcely be a general
term, including all plants when in a young or tender state.
The idea of their springing up is included in the verb, and
this was but a very temporary condition. Besides, this word
does not appear to be employed for the young state of shrubs
or trees. 3. We thus appear to be shut up to the conclusion
that deshe here means those plants, mostly small and her-
baceous, which bear no proper seeds f in other words, the
Cryptogamia — as fungi, mosses, lichens, ferns, etc. The re-
maining words are translated with sufficient accuracy in our
version. They denote seed-bearing or phcenogamous herbs
and trees. The special mention of the fructification of
plants is probably intended not only for distinction, but also

* " Tenera herba, sine semine saltern conspicuo."— Rosenmiiller, " Scho-
lia."

1 88 The Origin of the World.

to indicate the new power of organic reproduction now first
introduced on the surface of our planet, and to mark its dif-
ference from the creative act itself. That this new and won-
drous phenomenon should be so stated is thus in strict sci-
entific propriety, and it is precisely the point that would be
seized by an intelligent spectator of the visions of creation,
who had previously witnessed only the accretion and disin-
tegration of mineral substances, and to whom this marvellous
power of organic reproduction would be in every respect a
new creation.

The arrangement of plants in the three great classes of
cryptogams, seed-bearing herbs, and fruit-bearing trees dif-
fers in one important point— viz., the separation of herbaceous
plants from trees — from modern botanical classification. It
is, however, sufficiently natural for the purposes of a general
description like this, and perhaps gives more precise ideas of
the meaning intended than any other arrangement equally
concise and popular. It is also probable that the object of
the writer was not so much a natural-history classification as
an account of the order of creation, and that he wishes to af-
firm that the introduction of these three classes of plants on
the earth corresponded with the order here stated. This
view renders it unnecessary to vindicate the accuracy of the
arrangement on botanical grounds, since the historical order
was evidently better suited to the purpose in view, and in so
far as the earlier appearance of cryptogamous plants is con-
cerned, it is in strict accordance with geological fact.

A very important truth is contained in the expression
"after its kind" — that is, after its species; for the Hebrew
^^min" used here, has strictly this sense, and, like the Greek
idea and the Latin species, conveys the notion of form as well
as that of kind. It is used to denote species of animals,

The Dry Land and the Fii'st Plants. 189

in Leviticus i., 14, and in Deuteronomy xiv., 15. We are
taught by tliis statement tliat plants were created each kind
by itself, and that creation was not a sort of slump-work to be
perfected by the operation of a law of development, as fancied
by some modern speculators. In this assertion of the distinct-
ness of species, and the production of each as a distinct part
of the creative plan, revelation tallies perfectly with the con-
clusions of natural science, which lead us to believe that
each species, as observed by us, is permanently reproductive,
variable within narrow limits, and incapable of permanent in-
termixture with other species; and though hypotheses of mod-
ification by descent, and of the production of new species by
such modification, may be formed, they are not in accordance
with experience, and are still among the unproved specula-
tions which haunt the outskirts of true science. We shall be
better prepared, however, to weigh the relations of such hy-
potheses to our revelation of origins when we shall have
reached the period of the introduction of animal life.

Some additional facts contained in the recapitulation of
the creative work in Chapter II. may very properly be con-
sidered here, as they seem to refer to the climatal conditions
of the earth during the growth of the most ancient vegetation^
and before the final adjustment of the astronomical relations
of the earth on the fourth day. " And every shrub of the
land before it was on the earth, and every herb of the land
before it sprung up. For the Lord God had not caused it to
rain on the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground ;
but a mist ascended from the earth and watered the whole
surface of the ground." This has been supposed to be a de-
scription of the state of the earth during the whole period an-
terior to the fall of man. There is, however, no Scripture
evidence of this ; and geology informs us that rain fell as at

IQO The Origin of the World.

present far back in the Palaeozoic period, countless ages be-
fore the creation of man or the existing animals. Although,
however, such a condition of the earth as that stated in these
verses has not been known in any geological period, yet it is
not inconceivable, but in reality corresponds with the other
conditions of nature likely to have prevailed on the third day,
as described in Genesis. The land of this period, we may
suppose, was not very extensive nor very elevated. Hence
the temperature would be uniform and the air moist. The
luminous and calorific matter connected with the sun still
occupied a large space, and therefore diffused heat and light
more uniformly than at present. The internal heat of the
earth may still have produced an effect in warming the oce-
anic waters. The combined operation of these causes, of
which we, perhaps, have some traces as late as the Carbon-
iferous period, might well produce a state of things in which
the earth w^as watered, not by showers of rain, but by the
gentle and continued precipitation of finely divided moisture,
in the manner now observed in those climates in which veg-
etation is nourished for a considerable part of the year by
nocturnal mists and copious dews. The atmosphere, in short,
as yet partook in some slight degree of the same moist and
misty character which prevailed before the " establishment of
the clouds above" — the airy firmament of the second day.
The introduction of these explanatory particulars by the sacred
historian furnishes an additional argument for the theory of
long periods. That vegetation should exist for two or three
natural days without rain or the irrigation which is given in
culture, was, as already stated, a circumstance altogether un-
worthy of notice ; but the growth during a long period of a
varied and highly organized flora, without this advantage, and
by the aid of a special natural provision afterward discontin-

The Dry Land and the First Plants. 191

ued, was in all respects so remarkable and so highly illustra-
tive of the expedients of the divine wisdom that it deserved a
prominent place.

It is evident that the words of the inspired writer include
plants belonging to all the great subdivisions of the vegetable
kingdom. This earliest vegetation was not rude or incom-
plete, or restricted to the lower forms of life. It was not
even, like that of the coal jDcriod, solely or mainly cryptoga-
mous or gymnospermous. It included trees bearing fruit, as
well as lichens and mosses, and it received the same stamp of
approbation bestowed on other portions of the work — " it was
good." We have a good right to assume that its excellence
had reference not only to its own period, but to subsequent
conditions of the earth. Vegetation is the great assimilating
power, the converter of inorganic into organic matter suita-
ble for the sustenance of animals. In like manner the lower
tribes of plants prepare the way for the higher. AVe should
therefore have expected a priori that vegetation would have
clothed the earth before the creation of animals, and a suffi-
cient time before it to allow soils to be accumulated, and sur-
plus stores of organic matter to be prepared in advance : this
consideration alone would also induce us to assign a consider-
able duration to the third day. After the elevation of land,
and the draining off from it of the saline matter with which it
would be saturated, a process often very tedious, especially in
low tracts of ground, the soil would still consist only of min-
eral matter, and must have been for a long period occupied
by plants suited to this condition of things, in order that suf-
ficient organic matter might be accumulated for the growth
of a more varied vegetation ; a consideration which perhaps
illustrates the order of the plants in the narrative.

It may be objected to the above views that, however ac-

192 llie Origin of the World.

cordant with chemical and physiological jDrobabilities, they
do not harmonize with the facts of geology ; since the earliest
fossiliferous formations contain almost exclusively the remains
of animals, which must therefore have preceded, or at least
been coeval with, the earliest forms of terrestrial vegetation.
This objection is founded on well-ascertained facts, but facts
which may have no connection with the third day of creation
when regarded as a long period. The oldest geological for-
mations are of marine origin, and contain remains of marine
animals, with those of plants supposed to be allied to the exist-
ing alg^ or sea-weeds. Geology can not, however, assure us
either that no land plants existed contemporaneously with these
earliest animals, or that no land flora preceded them. These
oldest fossiliferous rocks may mark the commencement of
animal life, but they testify nothing as to the existence or
non-existence of a previous period of vegetation alone. Far-
ther, the rocks which contain the oldest remains of life exist
as far as yet known in a condition so highly metamorphic as
almost to preclude the possibility of their containing any
distinguishable vegetable fossils ; yet they contain vast de-
posits of carbon in the form of graphite, and if this, like more
modern coaly matter, was accumulated by vegetable growth,
it must indicate an exuberance of plants in these earliest ge-
ological periods, but of plants as yet altogether unknown to
us. It is possible, therefore, that in these Eozoic rocks we
may have remnants of the formations of the third Mosaic day;
and if we should ever be so fortunate as to find any portion
of them containing vegetable fossils, and these of species
differing from any hitherto known, either in a fossil state or
recent, and rising higher, in elevation and complexity of type,
than the flora of the succeeding Silurian and Carbonifer-
ous eras, we may then suppose that we have penetrated to

The Dry Land and the First Plants. 193

the monuments of this third creative teon. The only other
alternative by which these verses can be reconcikd with ge-
ology is that adopted by the late Hugh Miller, who supposes
that the plants of the third day are those of the Carboniferous
period; but, besides the apparent anachronism involved in
this, we now know that the coal flora consisted mainly of
cryptogams allied to ferns and club-mosses, and of gymno-
sperms allied to the pines and cycads, the higher orders of
plants being almost entirely wanting. For these reasons we
are shut up to the conclusion that this flora of the third
day must have its place before the Palaeozoic period of
geology.

To those who are familiar with the vast lapse of time re-
quired by the geological history of the earth, it may be start-
ling to ascribe the whole of it to three or four of the creative
days. If, however, it be admitted that these days were pe-
riods of unknown duration, no reason remains for limiting
their length any farther than the facts of the case require.
If in the strata of the earth which are accessible to us we can
detect the evidence of its existence for myriads of 3'ears, why
may not its Creator be able to carry our view back for myr-
iads more. It may be humbling to our pride of knowledge,
but it is not on any scientific ground improbable, that the
oldest animal remains known to geology belong to the middle
period of the earth's histor}^, and were preceded by an enor-
mous lapse of ages in which the earth was being prepared for
animal existence, but of which no records remain, except
those contained in the inspired history.

It would be quite unphilosophical for geology to affirm
either that animal life must always have existed, or that its
earliest animals are necessarily the earliest organic beings.
To use, with a slight modification, the words of an able think-

I

194 ^^^^ Origin of the World,

er on these subjects,* " For ages the prejudice prevailed that
the historical period, or that which is coeval with the life of
man, exhausted the whole history of the globe. Geologists
removed that prejudice," but must not substitute "another in
its place, viz., that geological time is coeval with the globe it-
self, or that organic life always existed on its surface."

A second doubt as to the existence of this primitive flora
may be based on the statement that it included the highest
forms of plants. Had it consisted only of low and imperfect
vegetables, there might have been much less difficulty in ad-
mitting its probability. Farther, we find that even in the
Carboniferous period scarcely any plants of the higher orders
flourished, and there was a preponderance of the lower forms
of the vegetable kingdom. We have, however, in geological
chronology, many illustrations of the fact that the progress
of improvement has not been continuous or uninterrupted,
and that the preservation of the flora and fauna of many ge-
ological periods has been very imperfect. Hence the occur-
rence in one particular stratum or group of strata of few or
low representatives of animal and vegetable life affords no
proof that a better state of things may not have existed pre-
viously. We also find, in the case of animals, that each tribe
attained to its highest development at the time when, in the
progress of creation, it occupied the summit of the scale of
life. Analogy would thus lead us to believe that when plants
alone existed, they may have assumed nobler forms than any
now existing, or that tribes now represented by few and hum-
ble species may at that time have been so great in numbers
and development as to fill all the offices of our present com-
plicated flora, as well as, perhaps, some of those now occupied

* Haughton, Address to the Geological Society, Dublin.

The Dry Land and the First Plants. 195

by animals. We have this principle exemplified in the Car-
boniferous flora, by the magnitude of its arborescent club-
mosses, and the vast variety of its gymnosperms. For this
reason we may anticipate that if any remains of this early
plant-creation should be disinterred, they will prove to be
among the most wonderful and interesting geological relics
ever discovered, and will enlarge our views of the compass
and capabilities of the vegetable kingdom, and especially of
its lower forms.

A farther objection is the uselessness of the existence of
plants for a long period, without any animals to subsist on or
enjoy them, and even without forming any accumulation of
fossil fuel or other products useful to man. The only direct
answer to this has already been given. The previous exist-
ence of plants may have been, and probably was, essential to
the comfort and subsistence of the animals afterwards intro-
duced. Independently of this, however, we have an analo-
gous case in the geological history of animals, which prevents
this fact from standing alone. Why was the earth tenanted
so long by the inferior races of animals, and why were so
much skill and contrivance expended on their structures, and
even on their external ornament, when there was no intelligent
mind on earth to appreciate their beauties. Even in the pres-
ent world we may as well ask why the uninhabited islands
of the ocean are found to be replete with luxuriant vegetable
life, why God causes it to rain in the desert where human foot
never treads, or why he clothes with a marvellous exuberance
of beautiful animal and plant forms the depths of the sea. We
can but say that these things seemed and seem good to the
Creator, and may serve uses unknown to us ; and this is pre-
cisely what we must be content to say respecting the plant-
creation of the Eozoic period.

196 The Origin of the World.

Some writers* on this subject have suggested that the cos--
mical use of this plant-creation was the abstraction from the
atmosphere of an excess of carbonic acid unfavorable to the
animal life subsequently to be introduced. This use it may
have served, and when its effects had been gradually lost
through metamorphism and decay, that second great with-
drawal of carbon which took place in the Carboniferous pe-
riod may have been rendered necessary. The reasons afford-
ed by natural history for supposing that plants preceded ani-
mals are thus stated by Professor Dana :

"The proof from science of the existence of plants before
animals is inferential, and still may be deemed satisfactor}^
Distinct fossils have not been found, all that ever existed in
the azoic t rocks having been obliterated. The arguments in
the affirmative are as follows :

" I. The existence of limestone rocks among the other beds,
similar limestones in later ages having been of organic origin ;
also the occurrence of carbon in the shape of graphite, graph-
ite being, in known cases in rocks, a result of the alteration
of the carbon of plants.

"2. The fact that the cooling earth would have been fitted
for vegetable life for a long age before animals could have
existed ; the principle being exemplified everywhere that the
earth was occupied at each period with the highest kinds of
life the conditions allowed.

"3. The fact that vegetation subserved an important pur-

* See McDonald, " Creation and the Fall." Professor Guyot, I believe,
deserves the credit of having first mentioned, on the American side of the
Atlantic, the doctrine respecting the introduction of plants advocated in
this chapter.

t " Eozoic " of this work. Professor Dana in the latest edition of his
Manual uses the name "Archaean."

TJie Dry Land and the First Plants. 197

pose in the coal-period in ridding the atmosphere of carbonic
acid for the subsequent introduction of land animals, suggests
a valid reason for believing that the same great purpose, the
true purpose of vegetation, was effected through the ocean
before the waters were fitted for animal life.

"4. Vegetation being directly or mediately the food of
animals, it must have had a previous existence. The latter
part of the azoic age in geology we therefore regard as the
age when the plant kingdom was instituted, the latter half of
the third day in Genesis. However short or long the epoch,
it was one of the great steps of progress."

In concluding the examination of the work of the third day,
I must again remind the reader that, on the theory of long
creative periods, the words under consideration must refer to
the first introduction of vegetation, in forms that have long
since ceased to exist. Geology informs us that in the period
of which it is cognizant the vegetation of the earth has been
several times renewed, and that no plants of the older and
middle geological periods now exist. We may therefore rest
assured that the vegetable species, and probably also many
of the generic and family forms of the vegetation of the third
day, have long since perished, and been replaced by others
suited to the changed condition of the earth. It is indeed
probable that during the third and fourth days themselves
there might be many removals and renewals of the terrestrial
flora, so that perhaps every species created at the commence-
ment of the introduction of plants may have been extinct be-
fore the close of the period. Nevertheless it was marked by
the introduction of vegetation, which in one or another set of
forms has ever since clothed the earth.

At the commencement of the third day the earth was still
covered by the waters. As time advanced islands and

198 TJie Origin of the World.

mountain-peaks arose from the ocean, vomiting forth the
molten and igneous materials of the interior of the earth's
crust. Plains and valleys were then spread around, rivers
traced out their beds, and the ocean was limited by coasts
and divided by far-stretching continents. At the command
of the Creator plants sprung from the soil — the earliest of
organized structures — at first probably few and small, and
fitted to contend against the disadvantages of soils impreg-
nated with saline particles and destitute of organic matter ;
but as the day advanced increasing in number, magnitude,
and elevation, until at length the earth was clothed with a
luxuriant and varied vegetation, worthy the approval of the
Creator, and the admiring song of the angelic " sons of
God."

Luminaries. 199

CHAPTER IX.

LUMINARIES.

"And God said, Let there be luminaries in the expanse of heaven, to
divide the day from the night ; and let them be for signs and for seasons,
and for days and for years. And let them be for luminaries in the ex-
panse of heaven, to give light on the earth : and it was so.

"And God made two great luminaries, the greater luminary to preside
over the day, the lesser luminary to preside over the night. He made
the stars also. And God placed them in the expanse of heaven to give
light on the earth, and to preside over the day and over the night, and to
separate the light from the darkness : and God saw that it was good. And
the evening and the morning were the fourth day." — Genesis i., 14-19.

After so long a sojourn on the earth, we are in these
verses again carried to the heavens. Every scientific reader
is struck with the position of this remarkable statement, inter-
rupting as it does the progress of the organic creation, and
constituting a break in the midst of the terrestrial history
which is the immediate subject of the narrative; thus, in
effect, as has often been remarked, dividing the creative
week into two portions. Why was the completion of the
heavenly bodies so long delayed ? Why were light and veg-
etation introduced previously ? If we can not fully answer
these questions, we may at least suppose that the position of
these verses is not accidental, though certainly not that which
would have been chosen for its own sake by any fabricator
of systems ancient or modern. Let us inquire, however,
what are the precise terms of the record.

200 TJie Origin of the World.

1. The word here used to denote the objects produced clear-
ly distinguishes them from the product of the first day's cre-
ation. Then God said, " Let light be ;" he now says, " Let lu-
mi?iaries or light-bearers be." We have already seen that the
light of the first day may have emanated from an extended
luminous mass, at first occujDying the whole extent of the
solar system, and more or less attached to the several planetary
bodies, and afterwards concentrated within the earth's orbit.
The verses now under consideration inform us that the proc-
ess of concentration w^as now complete, that our great cen-
tral luminary had attained to its perfect state. This proc-
ess of concentration may have been proceeding during the
whole of the intervening time, or it may have been com-
pleted at once by some more rapid process of the nature of
a direct interposition of creative power.

2. The division of light from darkness is expressed by the
same terms, and is of the same nature with that on the first
day. This separation was now produced in its full extent by
the perfect condensation of the luminiferous matters around
the sun.

3. The heavenly bodies are said to be intended for signs —
that is, for marks or indications — either of the seasons, days,
and years afterwards mentioned, or of the majesty and
power of the true God, as the Creator of objects so grand
and elevated as to become to the ignorant heathen objects
of idolatrous worship ; or perhaps of the earthly events they
are supposed to influence. The arrangements now perfected
for the first time enabled natural days, seasons, and years
to have their limits accurately marked. Previously to this
period there had been no distinctly marked seasons, and
consequently no natural separation of years, nor were the
limits of days at all accurately defined.

Luminaries. 201

4. The terms expanse and heaven^ previously applied to the
atmosphere, are here combined to denote the more distant
starry and planetary heavens. There is no ambiguity in-
volved in this, since the writer must have well known that no
one could so far mistake as to suppose that the heavenly
bodies are placed in that atmospheric expanse which sup-
ports the clouds.

5. The luminaries were made or appointed to their office on
the fourth day. They are not said to have been created, be-
ing included in the creation of the beginning. They were
now completed, and fully fitted for their work. An impor-
tant part of this fitting seems to have been the setting or
placing them in the heavens, conveying to us the impression
that the mutual relations and regular motions of the heaven-
ly bodies were now for the first time perfected.

6. The stars are introduced in a parenthetical manner,
which leaves it doubtful whether we are merely informed
in general terms that they are works of God, as well as those
heavenly bodies which are of more importance to us, or that
they were arranged as heavenly luminaries useful to our
earth on the fourth day. The term includes the fixed stars,
and it is by no means probable that these were in any way
affected by the work referred to the fourth day, any farther
than their appearance from our earth is concerned. This
view is confirmed by the language of the 104th Psalm, which
in this part of the work mentions the sun and moon alone,
without the fixed stars or planets.

It is evident that the changes referred to this period re-
lated to the whole solar system, and resulted in the comple-
tion of that system in the form which it now bears, or at
least in the final adjustment of the motions and relations of
the earth; and we have reason to believe that the condensa-

T 2

202 The Origin of the World.

tion of the luminous envelope around the sun was one of the
most important of these changes. On the hypothesis of La
Place, already referred to as most in accordance with the
earlier stages of the work, there seems to be no especial
reason why the completion of the process of elaboration of
the sun and planets should be accelerated at this particular
stage. We can easily understand, however, that those clos-
ing steps which brought the solar system into a state of per-
manent and final equilibrium would form a marked epoch in
the work ; and we can also understand that now, on the eve
of the introduction of animal life, there is a certain propriety
in the representation of the Creator interfering to close up
the merely inorganic part of his great work, and bring this
department at least to its final perfection. The fourth day,
then, in geological language, marks the complete int7'oductio7i
of " existing causes " in inorganic 7tature, and we henceforth
find no more creative interference, except in the domain of
organization. This accords admirably with the deductions
of modern geology, and especially with that great principle
so well expounded by Sir Charles Lyell, and which forms
the true basis of modern geological reasonings — that we
should seek in existing causes of change for the explanation
of the appearances of the rocks of the earth's crust. Geol-
ogy probably carries us back to the introduction of animal
life ; and shows us that since that time land, sea, and at-
mosphere, summer and winter, day and night — all the great
inorganic conditions affecting animal life — have existed as at
present, and have been subject to modifications the same in
kind with those which they now experience, though perhaps
different in degree. In this ancient record we find in like
manner that the period immediately preceding the creation
of animals witnessed the completion of all the great general

Ltiininaries. 203

arrangements on which these phenomena depend. The Bible,
therefore, and science agree in the truth that existing causes
have been in full force since the creation of animals ; and
that since that period the exercise of creative power has
been limited to the organic world. This has a curious bear-
ing, not often thought of, on modern theories of evolution as
compared with the teaching of the Bible. In one important
sense, absolute creation, in so far as the inorganic universe is
concerned, is in our Mosaic narrative limited to the produc-
tion of matter and force at first. All else is called making,
forming, or appointing. Thus the production of all the ar-
rangements of the waters, the atmosphere, the earth, and the
heavens, in the work of the first four days, and even the in-
troduction of plants, may be correctly termed an evolution
or development from preformed materials, with the single ex-
ception that the reproductive power and specific diversities
of plants are recognized as entirely new facts. Creation is
properly resumed when animal life is introduced. Hence,
in so far as a comparison with the terms of Genesis is con-
cerned, hypotheses as to the evolution of animal life from in-
organic matter are in a different position from hypotheses
as to the previous evolution of the parts of inorganic nature ;
and still more so from statements as to the progress of in-
organic nature subsequent to the introduction of animals ;
since within that period, which really includes the whole of
geological time, absolutely no creation whatever in the do-
main of inanimate nature is affirmed in the Biblical record to
have taken place. On the contrary, all the arrangements of
inorganic nature are represented as finally completed before
the creation of animals.

The obliquity of the earth's axis, which gives us the changes
of the seasons, is apparently included in the arrangements

204 ^/^^ Origin of the World.

of the fourth creative day. The cause of this obhquity, and
the time when it may have attained to its present amount,
have been fertile themes of discussion. It is clear, however,
that if this obliquity was established, as appears to be stated
here, before the introduction of animal life, it can have no
bearing on the changes of climate of which we have evi-
dence in geological time since the dawn of animal life, un-
less, indeed, it is capable of greater variation than astron-
omers admit ; and the same remark applies to supposed
changes in the position of the poles themselves. There is,
however, nothing in this record to oppose the idea of any
secular changes in these arrangements under the laws ap-
pointed in the fourth creative period.

The record relating to the fourth day is silent respecting
the mundane history of the period ; and geology gives no
very certain information concerning it. If, however, we as-
sume that any of the Eozoic or pre-eozoic rocks are deposits
of this or the preceding period, we may infer from the dis-
turbances and alteration which these have suffered, prior to
the deposition of the Cambrian and Silurian, that during or
toward the close of this day the crust of the earth was af-
fected by great movements. There is another consideration
also leading to important conclusions in relation to this pe-
riod. In the earliest fossiliferous rocks there seems to be
good evidence that the dry land contemporary with the seas
in which they were formed was of very small extent. Now,
since on the third day a very plentiful and highly developed
vegetation was produced, we may infer that during that peri-
od the extent of dry land was considerable, and was probably
gradually increasing. If, then, the Cambrian and Silurian
systems, so rich in marine organic remains, belong to the
commencement of the fifth day, we must conclude that dur-

Luminaries. 205

ing the fourth much of the land previously existing had been
again submerged. In other words, during the third day the
extent of terrestrial surface was increasing, on the fourth day
it diminished, and on the fifth it again increased, and proba-
bly has on the whole continued to increase up to the present
time. One most important geological consequence of this is
that the marine animals of the fifth day probably commenced
their existence on sea bottoms which were the old soil sur-
faces of submerged continents previously clothed with vege-
tation, and which consequently contained much organic mat-
ter fitted to form a basis of support for the newly created an-
imals.

I shall close my remarks on the fourth day by a few quo-
tations from those passages of Scripture which refer to the
objects of this day's work, I have already referred to that
beautiful passage in Deuteronomy where the Israelites are
warned against the crime of worshipping those heavenly
bodies which the Lord God hath "divided to every nation
under the whole heaven." In the book of Job also we find
that the heavenly bodies were in his day regarded as signal
manifestations of the power of God, and that several of the
principal constellations had received names :

'' He commandeth the sun, and it shineth not ;
He sealeth up the stars ;*
He alone spreadeth out the heavens,
And walketh on the high waves of the sea ;t

* This may refer to an eclipse, but from the character of the preceding
verses more probably to the obscurity of a tempest. It is remarkable that
eclipses, which so much strike the minds of men and affect them with su-
perstitious awe, are not distinctly mentioned in the Old Testament, though
referred to in the prophetical parts of the New Testament.

t Perhaps rather the high places of the waters, referring to the atmos-
pheric waters.

2o6 The Origin of the World.

He maketh Arcturus, Orion,

The Pleiades, and the hidden chambers of the south ;

Who doeth great things past finding out ;

Yea, marvellous things beyond number."

— Job ix., 9.

"Canst thou tighten the bonds of the Pleiades,*
Or loose the bands of Orion ?

Canst thou bring forth the Mazzaroth in their season,
Or lead forth Arcturus and its sons?
Knowest thou the laws of the heavens.
Or hast thou appointed their dominion over the earth?"

— Job xxxviii., 31.

I may merely remark on these passages that the chambers
of the south are supposed to be those parts of the southern
heavens invisible in the latitude in which Job resided. The
bonds of Pleiades and of Orion probably refer to the appar-
ently close union of the stars of the former group, and the
wide separation of those of the latter ; a difference which, to
the thoughtful observer of the heavens, is more striking than
most instances of that irregular grouping of the stars which
still forms a question in astronomy, from the uncertainty
whether it is real, or only an optical deception arising from
stars at different distances coming nearly into a line with
each other. I have seen in some recent astronomical work
this very instance of the Pleiades and Orion taken as a mark-
ed illustration of this problematical fact in astronomy. Maz-

* The rendering " sweet influences" in our version may be correct, but
the weight of argument appears to favor the view of Gesenius that the
close bond of union between the stars of this group is referred to. I
think it is Herder who well unites both views, the Pleiades being bound
together in a sisterly union, and also ushering in the spring by their ap-
pearance above the horizon. Conant applies the whole to the seasons,
the bands of Orion being in this view those of winter.

Luminaries, 207

zaroth are supposed by modern expositors to be the signs of
the Zodiac.

On the whole, the Hebrew books give us little information
as to the astronomical theories of the time when they were
written. They are entirely non-committal as to the nature of
the connections and revolutions of the heavenly bodies ; and
indeed regard these as matters in their time beyond the grasp
of the human mind, though well known to the Creator and
regulated by his laws. From other sources we have facts
leading to the belief that even in the time of Moses, and
certainly in that of the later Biblical writers, there was not a
little practical astronomy in the East, and some good theory.
The Hindoo astronomy professes to have observations from
3000 B.C., and the arguments of Baily and others, founded
on internal evidence, give some color of truth to the claim.
The Chaldeans at a very early period had ascertained the
principal circles of the sphere, the position of the poles, and
the nature of the apparent motions of the heavens as the re-
sults of revolution on an inclined axis. The Egyptian astron-
omy we know mainly from what the Greeks borrowed from it.
Thales, 640 B.C., taught that the moon is lighted by the sun,
and that the earth is spherical, and the position of its five
zones. Pythagoras, 580 B.C., knew, in addition to the sphe-
ricity of the earth, the obliquity of the ecliptic, the identity of
the evening and morning star, and that the earth revolves
round the sun. This Greek astronomy appears immediately
after the opening of Egypt to the Greeks ; and both these
philosophers studied in that country. Such knowledge, and
more of the same character, may therefore have existed in
Egypt at a much earlier period.

The Psalms abound in beautiful references to the creation
of the fourth day :

2o8 The Origin of the World.

" When I consider the heavens, the work of thy fingers,
The moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained ;
What is man, that thou art mindful of him ?
Or the son of man, that thou visitest him ?"

— Psalm viii.

"Who telleth the number of the stars,
Who calleth them all by their names.
Great is our Lord, and of great praise ;
His understanding is infinite.
The Lord lifteth up the meek;
He casteth the wicked to the ground."

— Psalm cxlvii.

*' The heavens declare the glory of God,
The firmament showeth his handiwork ;
Day unto day uttereth speech.
Night unto night showeth knowledge.
They have no speech nor language,
Their voice is not heard ;
Yet their line is gone out to all the earth,
And their words to the end of the world.
In them hath he set a pavilion for the sun,
Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber,
And rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
Its going forth is from the end of the heavens,
And its circuit unto the end of them.
And there is nothing hid from the heat thereof."

— Psalm xix.

These are excellent illustrations of the truth of the Scrip-
ture mode of treating natural objects, in connection with
their Maker. It is but a barren and fruitless philosophy
which sees the work and not its author — a narrow piety
which loves God but despises his works. The Bible holds
forth the golden mean between these extremes, in a strain of
lofty poetry and acute perception of the great and beautiful,
whether seen in the Creator or reflected from his works.

Liuninaries. 209

The work of this day opens up a wide field for astronom-
ical illustration, more especially in relation to the wisdom
and benevolence of the Creator as displayed in the heavens j
but it would be foreign to our present purpose to enter into
these.

It may be well, however, to think for a moment of the
importance of the facts suggested by the writer of Genesis in
mentioning the use of the heavenly bodies as signs of time.
To what extent civilization or even the continued existence of
man as an intelligent being w^ould have been possible with-
out the marks of subdivision of time given by the great astro-
nomical clock of the universe, it is almost impossible for us
to imagine. Without such marks of time, in any case, the
whole fabric of human culture must have been different from
what it is. Farther, in connection with this, it is a grand
thought of our early revelation that all these heavenly bodies,
however magnificent, and however they might seem to the
heathen to be objects of worship, are but marks on God's
clock, parts of a mere machine which keeps time for us, and
is therefore our servant, as the children of the great Artificer,
and not our ruler. The idea has been termed an astrolog-
ical one ; but astrology as a means of divination has no
place in the record. The heavenly bodies are under the law
of the Creator, and their function relatively to us is to give
light and to give time. Astrological divination is an out-
growth of the Sabaean idolatr}^, and held in abomination
by the monotheistic author of Genesis. His object may be
summed up in the following general statements :

I. The heavenly hosts and their arrangements are the work
of Jehovah, and are regulated wholly by his laws or ordi-
nances ; a striking illustration of the recognition by the He-
brew writer both of creative interference, and that stable.

2IO The Origin of the World.

natural law which too often withdraws the mind of the
philosopher from the ideas of creation and of providence.

2. The heavenly bodies have a relation to the earth — are
parts of the same plan, and, whatever other uses they were
made to serve, were made for the benefit of man.

3. The general physical arrangements of the solar system
were perfected before the introduction of animals on our
planet.

TJie Loiver Animals. 211

CHAPTER X.

THE LOWER ANIMALS.

"And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarming living creatures,
and let birds fly on the surface of the expanse of heaven. And God
created great reptiles, and every living moving thing, which the waters
brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every bird after its kind ;
and God saw that it was good.

" And God blessed them, saying. Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the
waters of the seas, and let the flying creatures multiply in the earth. And
the evening and the morning w^ere the fifth day."— Genesis i., 20-23.

In these words, so full of busy, active, thronging life, we
now enter on that part of the earth's history which has been
most fully elucidated by geology, and we have thus an ad-
ditional reason for carefully weighing the terms of the narra-
tive, which here, as in other places, contain large and impor-
tant truths couched in language of the simplest character.

I. In accordance with the views now entertained by the
best lexicographers, the word translated in our version "creep-
ing things" has been rendered "prolific or swarming creat-
ures." The Hebrew is Sheretz, a noun derived from the verb
used in this verse to denote bringing forth abundantly. It is
loosely translated in the Septuagint Erpeta^ reptiles ; and this
view our English translators appear to have adopted, without,
perhaps, any very clear notions of the creatures intended.
The manner in which it is used in other passages places its
true meaning beyond doubt. I select as illustrations of the

212 The Origin of the World.

most apposite character those verses in Leviticus in which
clean and unclean animals are specified, and in which we
have a right to expect the most precise zoological nomen-
clature that the Hebrew can afford. In Leviticus xi., 20-23,
insects are defined to he Jlyi?tg sheretzim, and in verse 29, etc.,
under the designation ^^ sheretzim of the lafid,' we have ani-
mals named in our version the weasel, mouse, tortoise, ferret,
chameleon, lizard, snail, and mole. The first of these ani-
mals is believed to have been a burrowing creature, perhaps
a mole; the second, from the meaning of its name, "ravager
of fields," is thought to have been a mouse. Some doubt,
however, attends both of these identifications, but it appears
certain that the remaining six species are small reptiles, prin-
cipally lizards. We learn, therefore, that the smaller reptiles,
and perhaps also a few small mammals, are sheretzim. In
verses 41 and 42 we are introduced to other tribes. "And
every sheretz that swarmeth on the earth shall be an abomina-
tion unto you ; it shall not be eaten ; whatsoever goeth upon
the belly (serpents, worms, snails, etc.), and whatsoever hath
more feet (than four) (insects, arachnidans, myriapods). In
verses 9 and 10 of the same chapter we have an enumeration
of the sheretzim of the waters : " Whatsoever hath fins and
scales in the waters, in the seas and in the rivers, them shall
ye eat. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas and
the rivers, of all that swarm in the waters (all the sheretzim
of the waters), they shall be an abomination unto you." Here
the general term sheretz includes all the fishes and the inver-
tebrate animals of the waters. From the whole of the above
passages we learn that this is a general term for all the inver-
tebrate animals and the two lower classes of vertebrates, or,
in other words, for the whole animal kingdom except the
mammalia and birds. To all these creatures the name is

TJie Loiver Animals. 213

particularly appropriate, all of them being oviparous or ovo-
viviparous, and consequently producing great numbers of
young and multiplying very rapidly. The only other creat-
ures which can be included under the term are the two doubt-
ful species of small mammals already mentioned. Nothing
can be more fair and obvious than this explanation of the
term, based both on etymology and on the precise nomen-
clature of the ceremonial law. We conclude, therefore, that
the prolific animals of the fifth day's creation belonged to the
three Cuvierian sub-kingdoms of the Radiata, Articulata, and
Mollusca, and to the classes of Fish and Reptiles among the
vertebrata.

2. One peculiar group oi sheretzim is especially distinguish-
ed by name — the tamiinim, or "great whales" of our ver-
sion. It would be amusing, had we time, to notice the va-
riety of conjectures to which this word has given rise, and
the perplexities of commentators in reference to it. In our
version and the Septuagint it is usually rendered dragon ;
but in this place the seventy have thought proper to put Ketos
(whale), and our translators have followed them. Subsequent
translators and commentators have laid under contribution
all sorts of marine monsters, including the sea-serpent, in
their endeavors to attach a precise meaning to the word ;
w^hile others have been content to admit that it may signify
any kind or all kinds of large aquatic animals. The greater
part of the difficulty appears to have arisen from confounding
two distinct words, taiiiwi and ian^ both names of animals ;
and the confusion has been increased by the circumstance
that in two places the words have been interchanged, proba-
bly by errors of transcribers. Tan occurs in twelve places,
and from these we can gather that it inhabits ruined cities,
deserts, and places to which ostriches resort, that it suckles

214 The Origin of the World.

its young, is of predaceous and shy habits, utters a waiUng
cry, and is not of large size, nor formidable to man. The
most probable conjecture as to the animal intended is that
of Gesenius, who supposes it to be the jackal. The other
word {ta?i?iin), which is that used in the text, is applied as an
emblem of Egypt and its kings, and also of the conquering
kings of Babylon. It is spoken of as furious when enraged,
and formidable to man, and is said to be an inhabitant of
rivers and of the sea, but more especially of the Nile. In
short, it is the crocodile of the Nile. We can easily under-
stand the perplexity of those writers who suppose these two
words to be identical, and endeavor to combine all the char-
acters above mentioned in one animal or tribe of animals.
As a farther illustration of the marked difference in the mean-
ings of the two words, w^e may compare the 34th and 37th
verses of the fifty-first chapter of Jeremiah. In the first of
these verses the King of Babylon is represented as a " dra-
gon" {taiiniii), which had swallowed up Israel. In the second
it is predicted that Babylon itself shall become heaps, a dwell-
ing-place for "dragons" {tanim). There can be no doubt
that the animals intended here are quite different. The de-
vouring tannin is a huge predaceous river reptile, a fit em-
blem of the Babylonian monarch ; the tan is the jackal that
will soon howd in his ruined palaces. It is interesting to know
that philologists trace a connection between tannin and the
Greek teino^ Latin tendo, and similar words, signifying to stretch
or extend, in the Sanscrit, Gothic, and other languages, lead-
ing to the inference that the Hebrew word primarily denotes
a lengthened or extended creature, which corresponds well
with its application to the crocodile. Taking all the above
facts in connection, we are quite safe in concluding that the
creatures referred to by the word under consideration are

The Lower Animals. 215

literally large reptilian animals ; and, from the special men-
tion made of them, we may infer that, in their day, they were
the lords of creation.*

3. In verse 21 the remainder of the j/^^/'^/^:^;;/, besides the
larger reptiles, are included in the general expression, " Living
creature that moveth." The term " living creature " is, liter-
ally, " creature having the breath of life ;" the power of res-
piration being apparently in Hebrew the distinctive character
of the animal. The word moveth {ramash), in its more gen-
eral sense, expresses the power of voluntary motion, as ex-
hibited in animals in general. In a few places, however, it has
a more precise meaning, as in i Kings iv., ^2>i where the ver-
tebrated animals are included in the four classes of "beasts,
fowl, creeping tilings (or reptiles, 7'e?}ies), and fishes." In the
present connection it probably has its most general sense ;
unless, indeed, the apparent repetition in this verse relates to
the amphibious or semi-terrestrial creatures associated with
the great reptiles ; and, in that case, the humbler reptilian
animals alone may be meant.

4. We may again note that the introduction of animal life
is marked by the use of the word " create," for the first time
since the general creation of the heavens and the earth. We
may also note that the animal, as well as the plant, was cre-
ated " after its kind," or " species by species." The animals
are grouped under three great classes— the Remes, the Tan-
ninim, and the Birds ; but, lest any misconception should arise
as to the relations of species to these groups, we are expressly
informed that the species is here the true unit of the creative
work. It is worth while, therefore, to note that this most an-

* It would be unfair to suppress the farther probability that the writer
intends specially to indicate that the sacred crocodile of the Nile was itself
a creature of Jehovah, and among the humbler of those creatures.

2i6 The Origin of the World.

cient authority on this much controverted topic connects spe-
cies on the one hand with the creative fiat, and on the other
with the power of continuous reproduction.

5. In addition to the great mass oi sheretzim^ so accurately
characterized by Milton as

" Reptile with spawn abundant,"

the creation of the fifth day included a higher tribe of ovipa-
rous animals — the birds, the fowl or winged creature of the
text. Birds alone, we think, must be meant here, as we have
already seen that insects are included under the general term
sheretzii7i.

6. It is farther to be observed that the waters give origin to
the first animals — an interesting point when we consider the
contrast here with the creation of plants and of the higher
animals, both of which proceed from the earth.

7. It can not fail to be observed that we have in these
verses two different arrangements of the animals created,
neither corresponding exactly with what modern science
teaches us to regard as the true grouping of the animal king-
dom, according to its affinities. The order in the first enu-
meration should, from the analogy of the chapter, indicate
that of successive creation. The order of the second list
ma}^, perhaps, be that of the relative importance of the ani-
mals, as it appeared to the writer. Or there may have been
a twofold division of the period — the earlier commencing
with the creation of the humbler invertebrates, the later
characterized by the great reptiles — which is the actual state
of the case as disclosed by geology.

8. The Creator recognizes the introduction of sentient ex-
istence and volition by blessing this new work of his hands,
and inviting the swarms of the newly peopled world to enjoy

TJie Loiucr Animals. 217

that happiness for which they were fitted, and to increase and
fill the earth, inaugurating thus a new power destined to still
higher developments.

When we inquire what information geology affords respect-
ing the period under consideration, the answer may be full
and explicit. Geological discovery has carried us back to
an epoch corresponding with the beginning of this day, and
has disclosed a long and varied series of living beings, ex-
tending from this early period up to the introduction of the
higher races of animals. To enter on the geological details of
these changes, and on descriptions of the creatures which suc-
ceeded each other on the earth, would swell this volume into a
treatise on palaeontology, and would be quite unnecessary, as
so many excellent popular works on this subject already exist.
I shall, therefore, confine myself to a few general statements,
and to marking the points in which Scripture and geology
coincide in their respective histories of this long period,
which appears to include the whole of the Palaeozoic and
Mesozoic epochs of geology, with their grand and varied
succession of rock formations and living beings.

In the Primordial or oldest fossiliferous rocks next in suc-
cession to those great Eozoic formations in which protozoa
alone have been discovered, we find the remains of crusta-
ceans, mollusks, and radiates — such as shrimps, shell-fish, and
starfishes — which appear to have inhabited the bottom of a
shallow ocean. Among these were some genera belonging
to the higher forms of invertebrate life, but apparently as yet
no vertebrated animals. Fishes w^ere then introduced, and
have left their remains in the upper Silurian rocks, and very
abundantly in the Devonian and Carboniferous, in the latter
of which also the first reptiles occur, but are principally mem-
bers of that lower group to which the frogs and newts and

K

2i8 The Origin of the World.

their allies belong. The animal kingdom appears to have
reached no higher than the reptiles in the Palaiozoic or
primary period of geology, and its reptiles are comparatively
small and few ; though fishes had attained to a point of per-
fection which they have not since exceeded. There was
also, especially in the Carboniferous age, an abundant and
luxuriant vegetation. The Mesozoic period is, however, em-
phatically the age of reptiles. This class then reached its cli-
max, in the number, perfection, and magnitude of its species,
which filled all those stations in the economy of nature now
assigned to the mammalia. Birds also belong to this era,
though apparently much less numerous and important than at
present. Only a few species of small mammals, of the lowest
or marsupial type, appear as a presage of the mammalian crea-
tion of the succeeding tertiary era. In these two geological pe-
riods, then — the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic — we find, first, the
lower sheretzim represented by the invertebrata and the fishes,
then the great reptiles and the birds ; and it can not be de-
nied that, if we admit that the Mosaic day under consideration
corresponds with these geological periods, it would be impos-
sible better to characterize their creations in so few words
adapted to popular comprehension. I may add that all the
species whose remains are found in the Palaeozoic and Meso-
zoic rocks are extinct, and known to us only as fossils ; and
their connection with the present system of nature consists
only in their forming with it a more perfect series than our
present fauna alone could afford, unless, indeed, we should
find reason to believe that any modern animals are their
modified descendants. They belong to the same system of
types, but are parts of it which have served their purpose and
have been laid aside. The coincidences above noted be-
tween geology and Scripture may be summed up as follows :

The Lower Animals. 219

1. According to both records, the causes which at present
regulate the distribution of light, heat, and moisture, and of
land and water, were, during the whole of this period, much
the same as at present. The eyes of the trilobite of the old
Silurian rocks are fitted for the same conditions with respect
to light with those of existing animals of the same class.
The coniferous trees of the coal measures show annual rings
of growth. Impressions of rain-marks have been found in
the shales of the coal measures and Devonian system. Hills
and valleys, swamps and lagoons, rivers, bays, seas, coral
reefs and shell beds, have all left indubitable evidence of
their existence in the geological record. On the other hand,
the Bible affirms that all the earth's physical features were
perfected on the fourth day, and immediately before the cre-
ation of animals. The land and the water have undergone
during this long lapse of ages many minor changes. Whole
tribes of animals and plants have been swept away and re-
placed by others, but the general aspect of inorganic nature
has remained the same.

2. Both records show the existence of vegetation during
this period; though the geologic record, if taken alone, would,
from its want of information respecting the third day, lead us
to infer that plants are no older than animals, while the Bible
does not speak of the nature of the vegetation that may have
existed on the fifth day.

3. Both records inform us that reptiles and birds were the
higher and leading forms of animals, and that all the lower
forms of animals co-existed with them. In both we have es-
pecial notice of the gigantic Saurian reptiles of the latter
part of the period; and if we have the remains of a few small
species of mammals in the Mesozoic rocks, these, like a few
similar creatures apparently included under the word sheretz

220 The Origin of the World.

in Leviticus, are not sufficiently important to negative the
general fact of the reign of reptiles.*

4. It accords with both records that the work of creation in
this period was gradually progressive. Species after species
was locally introduced, extended itself, and, after having
served its purpose, gradually became extinct. And thus
each successive rock formation presents new groups of spe-
cies, each rising in numbers and perfection above the last,
and marking a gradual assimilation of the general conditions
of our planet to their present state, yet without any convul-
sions or general catastrophes affecting the whole earth at
once.

5. In both records the time between the creation of the
first animals and the introduction of the mammalia as a
dominant class forms a well-marked period. I would not
too positively assert that the close of the fifth day accords
precisely with that of the Mesozoic or secondary period.
The well-marked line of separation, however, in many parts
of the world, between this and the earlier tertiary rocks suc-
ceeding to it, points to this as extremely probable.

It thus appears that Scripture and geology so far concur
respecting the events of this period as to establish, even
without any other evidence, a probability that the fifth day
corresponds with the geological ages with which I have
endeavored to identify it. Geolog}', however, gives us no

* The interesting discovery, by Mr. Beale and others, of several species
of mammalia in the Purbeck, and that of Professor Emmons of a mam-
mal in rocks of similar age in the Southern States of America, do not in-
validate this statement ; for all these, like the j\Iicrolestes of the German
trias and the Ainphitheriiwi of the Stonesfeld slate, are small marsupials
belonging to the least perfect type of mammals. The discovery of so many
species of these humbler creatures, goes far to increase the improbability
of the existeioce of the hicher mammals.

The Lower Animals. 221

means of measuring precisely the length of this day ; but it
gives us the impression that it occupied an enormous length
of time, compared with which the whole human period is
quite insignificant ; and rivalling those mythical " days of
the Creator " which we have noticed as forming a part of the
Hindoo mythology.

Why was the earth thus occupied for countless ages by an
animal population whose highest members were reptiles and
birds ? The fact can not be doubted, since geology and
Scripture, the research of man and the Word of God, concur
in affirming it. We know that the lowest of these creatures
was, in its own place, no less worthy of the Creator than
those which we regard as the highest in the scale of organi-
zation, and that the animals of the ancient, equally with those
of the modern world, abounded in proofs of the wisdom, pow-
er, and goodness of their Maker. Comparative anatomy has
shown that these extinct animals, though often varying much
from their modern representatives, are in no respect rude or
imperfect ; that they have the same appearance of careful
planning and elaborate execution, the same combination of
ornament and utility, the same nice adaptation to the condi-
tions of their existence, which we observe in modern creat-
ures. In addition to this, the many new and wonderful con-
trivances and combinations which they present, and their re-
lations to existing objects, have greatly enlarged our views
of the variety and harmony of the M'hole system of nature.
They are, therefore, in these respects, not without their use
as manifestations of the Creator, in this our later age.

There is another reason, hinted at by Buckland, Miller,
and other writers on this subject, which weighs much with
my mind. All animals and plants are constructed on a few
leading types or patterns, which are again divided into sub-

222 The Origin of the World.

ordinate types, just as in architecture we have certain lead-
ing styles, and these again may admit of several orders, and
these of farther modifications. Types are farther modified to
suit a great variety of minor adaptations. Now we know that
the earth is, at any one time, inadequate to display all the
modifications of all the types. Hence our existing system
of organic nature, though probably more complete than any
that preceded it, is still only fragmentary. It is like what
architecture would be, if all memorials of all buildings more
than a century old were swept away. But, from the begin-
ning to the end of the creative work, there has been, or will
be, room for the whole plan. Hence fossils are little by lit-
tle completing our system of nature j and, if all were known,
would perhaps wholly do so. The great plan must be pro-
gressive, and all its parts must be perishable, except its last
culminating-point and archetype, man. Tennyson expresses
this truth in the following lines :

" The wish that of the living \Yhole

No life may fail beyond the grave;
Derives it not from what we have ,

The likest God within the soul ?

Are God and Nature then at strife,

That Nature lends such evil dreams ?
So careful of the type she seems,

So careless of the single life.

' So careful of the type ?' but no.

From scarped cliff and quarried stone
She cries, ' a thousand types are gone ;

I care for nothing, all shall go.

' Thou makest thine appeal to me :
I bring to life, I bring to death :
The spirit does but mean the breath :

I know no more.' And he, shall he,

TJie Loiver Animals. 223

Man, her last work, who seem'd so fair,
Such splendid purpose in his eyes,
Who roll'd the psalm to wintry skies,

Who built him fanes of fruitless prayer.

Who trusted God was love indeed.
And love Creation's final law —
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw,

With ravine, shriek'd against his creed —

Who loved, who suffer'd countless ills.
Who battled for the True, the Just,
Be blown about the desert dust.

Or seal'd within the iron hills ?

No more ? A monster, then, a dream,
A discord. Dragons of the prime.
That tare each other in their slime.

Were mellow music match'd with him.

O life as futile, then, as frail !

O for thy voice to soothe and bless!

What hope of answer, or redress?
Behind the veil, behind the veil."

The farther explanation given by evolutionists that those
ancient forms of life may be the actual ancestors of the pres-
ent animals, and that through all the ages the Creator was
gradually perfecting his work by a series of descents with
modification, was probably not before the mind of our ancient
Hebrew authority, nor need we attach much value to it till
some proof of the process has been obtained from Nature.
A farther reason, however, which was intelligible to the author
of Genesis, and which is fondly dwelt on in succeeding books
of the Bible, depends on the idea that the Creator himself is
not indifferent to the marvellous structures, instincts, and pow-
ers which he has bestowed upon the lower races of animals.

224 TJie Origin of the World,

Witness the answer of the Almighty to Job, when he spake
out of the Avhirlwind to vindicate his own plans in creation
and providence ; and brought before the patriarch a long train
of animals, explaining and dwelling on the structure and pow-
ers of each, in contrast with the puny efforts and rude artificial
contrivances of man. Witness also the preservation, in the
rocks, of the fossil remains of extinct creatures, as if he who
made them was unwilling that the evidence of their existence
should perish, and purposely treasured them through all the
revolutions of the earth, that through them men might mag-
nify his name. The Psalmist would almost appear to have
had all these thoughts before his mind when he poured out
his wonder in the 104th Psalm :

** O Lord, how manifold are thy works !
In wisdom hast thou made them all.
The earth is full of thy riches ;
So is this wide and great sea,
Wherein are moving things innumerable,
Creatures both small and great.
There go the ships [or " floating animals "] ;
There is leviathan, which thou hast formed to sport therein :
That thou givest them they gather.
Thou openest thy hand, they are filled with good ;
Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled;
Thou takest away their breath, they return to their dust.
Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created,
And thou renewest the face of the earth."

There are, however, good reasons to believe that, in the
plans of divine wisdom, the long periods in which the earth
was occupied by the inferior races were necessary to its sub-
sequent adaptation to the residence of man. In these periods
our present continents gradually grew up in all their variety
and beauty. The materials of old rocks were comminuted and

The Loivcr Animals. 225

mixed to form fertile soils,* and stores of mineral products
were accumulated to enable man to earn his subsistence and
the blessings of civilization by the sweat of his brow. If it
pleased the Almighty during these preparatory stages to re-
plenish the land and sea with living things full of life and
beauty and happiness, who shall venture to criticise his pro-
cedure, or to say to Him, " What doest thou ?"

It Vv'ould be decidedly wrong, in the present state of that
which is popularly called science, to omit to inquire here what
relation to the work of the fifth creative day those theories of
development and evolution which have obtained so great cur-
rency may bear. The long time employed in the introduc-
tion of the lower animals, the use of the terms " make *' and
"form," instead of "create," and the expression "let the wa-
ters bring forth," may well be understood as countenancing
some form of mediate creation, or of " creation by law," or
" theistic evolution," as it has been termed ; but they give
no countenance to the idea either of the spontaneous evolu-
tion of living beings under the influence of merely physical
causes and without creative intervention, or of the transmuta-
tion of one kind of animal into another. Still, with reference
to this last idea, it is plain that revelation gives us no defini-
tion of species as distinguished from varieties or races, so
that there is nothing to prevent the supposition that, within
certain limits indicated by the expression "after its kind,"
animals or plants may have been so constituted as to vary
greatly in the progress of geological time.

If we ask whether any thing is known to science which can

* It is very interesting, in connection with this, to note that nearly all
the earliest and greatest seats of population and civilization have been
placed on the more modern geological deposits, or on those in which stores
of fuel have been accumulated by the growth of extinct plants.

K 2

226 TJie Origin of the World.

give even a decided probability to the notion that living be-
ings are parts of an undirected evolution proceeding under
merely dead insentient forces, and without intention, the an-
swer must be emphatically no.

I have elsewhere fully discussed these questions, and may
here make some general statements as to certain scientific
facts which at present bar the way against the hypothesis of
evolution as applied to life, and especially against that form
of it to which Darwin and his disciples have given so great
prominence.

1. The albuminous or protoplasmic material, which seems
to be necessary to the existence of every living being, is known
to us as a product only of the action of previously living pro-
toplasm. Though it is often stated that the production of
albumen from its elements is a process not differing from the
formation of water or any other inorganic material from its
elements, this statement is false in fact, since, though many
so-called organic substances have been produced by chemical
processes, no particle of either living or non-living organiz-
able matter of the nature of protoplasm has ever been so pro-
duced. The origin, therefore, of this albuminous matter is
as much a mystery to us at present as that of any of the
chemical elements.

2. Though some animals and plants are very simple in
their visible structure, they all present vital properties not to
be found in dead albuminous matter, and no mode is known
whereby the properties of life can be communicated to dead
matter. All the experiments hitherto made, and very emi-
nently those recently performed by Pasteur, Tyndall, and Dal-
linger, lead to the conclusion that even the simplest living
beings can be produced only from germs originating in pre-
viously living organisms of similar structure. The simplest

The Lozver Animals. 227

living organisms are thus to science ultimate facts, for which
it can not account except conjecturally.

3. No case is certainly known in human experience where
any species of animal or plant has been so changed as to as-
sume all the characters of a new species. Species are thus
practically to science unchangeable units, the origin of which
we have as yet no means of tracing.

4. Though the general history of animal life in time bears
a certain resemblance to the development of the individual
animal from the embryo, there is no reason whatever to be-
lieve that this is more than a mere relation of analogy, arising
from the fact that in both cases the law of procedure is to
pass from the simpler forms to the more complex, and from
the more generalized to the more specialized. The external
conditions and details of the two kinds of series are altogether
different, and become more so the more they are investigated.
This shows that the causes can not have been similar.

5. In tracing back animals and groups of animals in geo-
logical time, we find that they always end without any link
of connection with previous beings, and in circumstances which
render any such connections improbable. In the work of our
next creative day, the series of animals preceding the modern
horse has been cited as a good instance of probable evolu-
tion ; but not only are the members of the series so widely
separated in space and time that no connection can be traced,
but the earliest of them, the Orohipptis^ would require, on the
theory, to have been preceded by a previous series extending
so far back that it is impossible, under any supposition of the
imperfection of our present knowledge, to consider such ex-
tension probable. The same difficulty applies to every case
of tracing back any specific form either of animal or plant.
This general result proves, as I have elsewhere attempted to

228 TJie Origin of the World.

show,* that the introduction of the various animal types must
have been abrupt, and under some influence quite different
from that of evolution.

These are what I would term the five fatal objections to
evolution as at present held, as a means of accounting for the
introduction and succession of animals. To what extent they
may be weakened or- strengthened by the future progress of
science it is impossible to say, but so long as they exist it is
mere folly and presumption to afiirm that modern science sup-
ports the doctrine of evolution. There can be no doubt, how-
ever, that the Bible leaves us perfectly free to inquire as to
the plan and method of the Creator, and that, whatever dis-
coveries we may make, we shall find that his plans are order-
ly, methodical, and continuous, and not of the nature of an
arbitrary patchwork.

Though science as yet gives us no certain laws for the in-
troduction of new specific types, it indicates certain possible
modes of the origination of varieties, races, and sub-species
of previously existing types. One of these is that struggle for
existence against adverse external conditions, which, however,
has been harped upon too exclusively by the Darwinian school,
and which will give chiefly depauperated and degraded forms.
Another is that expansion under exceptionally favorable con-
ditions which arises where species are admitted to wider new
areas of geographical range and more abundant and varied
means of sustenance. Land animals and plants must have
experienced this in times of continental elevation ; marine
animals and plants in times of continental depression. An-
other is the tendency to what has been called reproductive
retardation and acceleration which species undergo under

* See Appendix.

TJic Lozvcr Animals. 229

conditions exceptionally unfavorable or favorable, and which
in some modern aquatic animals produces differences so great
that members of the same species have sometimes been placed
in different genera. Lastly, it is conceivable that species may
have been so constructed that after a certain number of gen-
erations they may spontaneously undergo either abrupt or
gradual changes, similar to those which the individual under-
goes at certain stages of growth. This last furnishes the only
true analogy possible between embryology and geological suc-
cession.

While, however, science is silent as to the production of
new specific types, and only gives us indications as to the
origin of varieties and races, it is curious that the Bible sug-
gests three methods in which new organisms may be, and ac-
cording to it have been introduced by the Creator. The first
is that of immediate and direct creation, as when God created
the great Tanninim. The second is that of mediate creation,
through the materials previously existing, as when he said,
"Let the land bring forth plants," or "Let the waters bring
forth animals." The third is that of production from a pre-
vious organism by power other than that of ordinary repro-
duction, as in the origination of Eve from Adam, and the mi-
raculous conception of Jesus. These are the only points in
which its teachings approach the limits of speculations as to
evolution, and they certainly leave scope enough for the le-
gitimate inquiries of science.*

* See Appendix for farther discussion of this subject.

230 The Origin of the World.

CHAPTER XI.

THE HIGHER ANIMALS AND MAN.

" And God said, Let the land bring forth animals after their kinds ; the
herbivora, the reptiles, and the carnivora, after their kinds ; and it was so.
And God made carnivorous mammals after their kinds, and herbivorous
mammals after their kinds, and every reptile of the land after its kind ;
and God saw that it was good.

" And God said. Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness ;
and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, and
over the herbivora and over all the land. So God created man in his
own image, in the image of God created he him ; male and female
created he them. And God blessed them ; and God said. Be fruitful and
multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it ; and have dominion
over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air, and over every
living thing that moveth upon the earth.

" And God said. Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed
which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which is the
fruit of a tree yielding seed ; to you it shall be for food, and to every
beast of the earth and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that
creepeth upon the earth wherein there is life, I have given every green
herb for meat ; and it was so. And God saw every thing that he had made,
and, behold, it was very good. And evening and morning were the sixth
day." — Genesis i., 24-31.

The creation of animals, unlike that of plants, occupies
two days. Here our attention is restricted to the inhabitants
of the iafid, and chiefly to their higher forms. Several new
names are introduced to our notice, which I have endeavored
to translate as literally as possible by introducing zoological
terms where those in common use were deficient.

TJie Higher Animals and Man. 231

1. The first tribe of animals noticed here is named
Bhemah, " cattle " in our version ; and in the Septuagint
"quadrupeds" in one of the verses, and "cattle" in the
other. Both of these senses are of common occurrence in
the Scriptures, cattle or domesticated animals being usually
designated by this word; while in other passages, as in
I Kings iv., 33, where Solomon is said to have written a
treatise on ^^ beasts, fowls, creeping things, and fishes," it
appears to include all the mammalia. Notwithstanding this
wide range of meaning, however, there are passages, and j
these of the greatest authority in reference to our present X
subject, in which it strictly means the herbivorous mammalsf
and which show that when it was necessary to distinguish
these from the predaceous or carnivorous tribes this term
was specially employed. In Leviticus xi., 22-27, we have a
specification of all the Bhemoth that might and might not be
used for food. It includes all the true ruminants, with the
coney, the hare, and the hog, animals of the rodent and pachy-
dermatous orders. The carnivorous quadrupeds are desig-
nated by a different generic term. In this chapter of Leviti-
cus, therefore, which contains the only approach to a system

in natural history to be found in the Bible, hheviah is strictly
a synonym of hei'hivora, including especially ungulates and
rodents. That this is its proper meaning here is confirmed
by the considerations that in this place it can denote but a
part of the land quadrupeds, and that the idea of cattle or
domesticated animals would be an anachronism. At the
same time there need be no objection to the view that the
especial capacity of ruminants and other herbivora for domes-
tication is connected with the use of the word in this place.

2. The word reines, "creeping things " in our version, as we
have already shown, is a very general term, referring to the

i

232 TJie Origin of the World.

power of motion possessed by animals, especially on the sur-
face of the ground. It here in all probability refers to the
additional types of terrestrial reptiles, and other creatures
lower than the mammals, introduced in this period.

3. The compound term {Jiaf th-eretz) which I have vent-
ured to render "carnivora," is literally animal of the land; but
though thus general in its meaning, it is here evidently in-
tended to denote a particular tribe of animals inhabiting the
land, and not included in the scope of the two words already
noticed. In other parts of Scripture this term is used in the
sense of a " wild beast." In a few places, like the other terms
already noticed, it is used of all kinds of animals, but that
above stated is its general meaning, and perfectly accords
with the requirements of the passage.

The creation of the sixth day therefore includes — ist, the
herbivorous mammalia; 2d, a variety of terrestrial reptilia,
and other lower forms not included in the work of the pre-
vious day; 3d, the carnivorous mammalia. It will be ob-
served that the order in the two verses is different. In verse
24th it is herbivora, "creeping things," and carnivora. In
verse 25th it is carnivora, herbivora, and "creeping things."
One of these may, as in the account of the fifth day, indicate
the order oi time in the creation, and the other the order of
ra?ik in the animals made, or there may have been two divis-
ions of the work, in the earlier of which herbivorous animals
took the lead, and in the later those that are carnivorous.
In either case we may infer that the herbivora predominated
in the earlier creations of the period.

It is almost unnecessary to say this period corresponds
with the Tertiary or Cainozoic era of geologists. The coin-
cidences are very marked and striking. As already stated,
though in the later secondary period there were great facili-

TJic Higher A^iiuials and Man. 233

ties for the preservation of mammals in the strata then being
deposited, only a few small species of the humblest order
have been found ; and the occurrence of the higher orders of
this class is to some extent precluded by the fact that the
place in nature now occupied by the mammals was then pro-
vided for by the vast development of the reptile tribes. At
the very beginning of the tertiary period all this was changed ;
most of the gigantic reptiles had disappeared, and terrestrial
mammals of large size and high organization had taken their
place. Perhaps no geological change is more striking and
remarkable than the sudden disappearance of the reptilian
fauna at the close of the mesozoic, and the equally abrupt
appearance of numerous species of large mammals, and this
not in one region only, but over both the great continents,
and not only where a sudden break occurs in the series of
formations, but also where, as in Western America, they pass
gradually into each other. During the whole tertiary period
this predominance of the mammalia continued; and as the
mesozoic was the period of giant reptiles, so the tertiary was
that of great mammals. It is a singular and perhaps not ac-
cidental coincidence that so many of the early tertiary mam-
mals known to us are large herbivora, such as would be in-
cluded in the Hebrew word hhemah; and that in the book of
Job the hippopotamus is called behemoth, the plural form be-
ing apparently used to denote that this animal is the chief of
the creatures known under the general term hhe77iah, while ge-
ology informs us that the prevailing order of mammals in the
older tertiary period was that of the ungulates, and that many
of the extinct creatures of this group are very closely allied
to the hippopotamus. Behemoth thus figures in the book of
Job, not only as at the time a marked illustration of creative
power, but to our farther knowledge also as a singular rem-

234 T^he Origin of the World.

nant of an extinct gigantic race. It is at least curious that
while in the fifth day great reptiles like those of the secondary
rocks form the burden of the work, in the sixth we have a
term which so directly reminds us of those gigantic pachy-
derms which figure so largely in the tertiary period. Large
carnivora also occur in the tertiary formations, and there are
some forms of reptile life, as, for example, the serpents, which
first appear in the tertiary.

I may refer to any popular text-book of geology in evidence
of the exact conformity of this to the progress of mammalian
life, as we now know it in detail from the study of the suc-
cessive tertiary deposits. The following short summary from
Dana, though written several years ago, still expresses the
main features of the case :

" The quadrupeds did not all come forth together. Large
and powerful herbivorous species first take possession of the
earth, with only a few small carnivora. These pass away.
Other herbivora with a larger proportion of carnivora next
appear. These also are exterminated ; and so with others.
Then the carnivora appear in vast numbers and power, and
the herbivora also abound. Moreover these races attain a
magnitude and number far surpassing all that now exist, as
much so indeed, on all the continents. North and South
America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia, as the old mas-
todon, twenty feet long and nine feet high, exceeds the mod-
ern buffalo. Such, according to geolog}^, was the age of
mammals, when the brute species existed in their greatest
magnificence, and brutal ferocity had free play; when the
dens of bears and hyenas, prowling tigers and lions far larger
than any now existing, covered Britain and Europe. Mam-
moths and mastodons wandered over the plains of North
America, huge sloth -like Megatheria passed their sluggish

The Higher Animals and Man. 235

lives on the pampas of South America, and elephantine mar-
supials strolled about Australia.

" As the mammalian age draws to a close, the ancient car-
nivora and herbivora of that era all pass away, excepting, it
is believed, a few that are useful to man. New creations of
smaller size peopled the groves; the vegetation received ac-
cessions to its foliage, fruit-trees and flowers, and the seas
brighter forms of water life. This we know from compari-
sons with the fossils of the preceding mammalian age. There
was at this time no chaotic upturning, but only the opening
of creation to its fullest expansion ; and so in Genesis no
new day is begun, it is still the sixth day.^^

The creation of man is prefaced by expressions implying ^^^
deliberation and care. It is not said, " Let the earth bring
forth" man, but let us form or fashion man. This marks the
relative importance of the human species, and the heavenly
origin of its nobler immaterial part. Man is also said to
have been "created," implying that in his constitution there t^"^^
was something new and not included in previous parts of the
work, even in its material. Man was created, as the Hebrew
literally reads, the shadow and similitude of God — the greatest
of the visible manifestations of Deity in the lower world — the
reflected image of his Maker, and, under the Supreme Law-
giver, the delegated ruler of the earth. Now for the first time
was the earth tenanted by a being capable of comprehending
the purposes and plans of Jehovah, of regarding his works
with intelligent admiration, and of shadowing forth the excel-
lences of his moral nature. For countless ages the earth had
been inhabited by creatures wonderful in their structures and
instincts, and mutely testifying, as their buried remains still
do, to the Creator's glory; but limited within a narrow range
of animal propensities, and having no power of raising a

/

/

236 The Origin of the World.

thought or aspiration toward the Being who made them.
Now, however, man enters on the scene, and the sons of
God, who had shouted for joy when the first land emerged
from the bosom of the deep, saw the wondrous spectacle of a
spiritual nature analogous to their own, united to a corporeal
frame constructed on the same general type with the higher
of- those irrational creatures whose presence on earth they
had so long witnessed.

Man was to rule over the fish of the sea, the birds of the
air, and the hhemah or herbivorous animals. The carnivo-
rous creatures are not mentioned, and possibly were not in-
cluded in man's dominion. We shall find an explanation of
this farther on. The nature of man's dominion we are left
to infer. In his state of innocence it must have been a mild
and gentle sway, interfering in no respect with the free exer-
cise of the powers of enjoyment bestowed on animals by the
Creator, a rule akin to that which a merciful man exercises
over a domesticated animal, and which some animals are
capable of repaying with a warm and devoted affection.
Now, however, man's rule has become a tyranny. " The
whole creation groans " because of it. He desolates the face
of nature wherever he appears, unsettling the nice balance of
natural agencies, and introducing remediless confusion and
suffering among the lower creatures, even when in the might
of his boasted civilization he professes to renovate and im-
prove the face of nature. He retains enough of the image
of his Maker to enable him to a great extent to assert his
dominion, and to aspire after a restoration of his original
paradise, but he has lost so much that the power which he
retains is necessarily abused to selfish ends.

Man, like the other creatures, was destined to be fruitful
and multiply and replenish the earth. We are also informed

TJie Higher Animals and Man. 237

in chapter second that he was placed in a " garden," a chosen
spot in the alluvial plains of Western Asia, belonging to the
later geological formations, and thus prepared by the whole
series of prior geological changes, replenished with all things
useful to him, and containing nothing hurtful, at least in so
far as the animal creation was concerned. These facts,
taken in connection, lead to grave questions. How is the
happy and innocent state of man consistent with the con-
temporaneous existence of carnivorous and predaceous ani-
mals, which, as both Scripture and geology state, were created
in abundance in the sixth day ? How, when confined to a
limited region, could he increase and multiply and replenish
the earth.'' These questions, which have caused no little
perplexity, are easily solved when brought into the light of
our modern knowledge of nature, i. Every large region of
the earth is inhabited by a group of animals differing in the
proportions of identical species, and in the presence of distinct
species, from the groups inhabiting other districts. There is
also sufficient reason to conclude that all animals and plants
have spread from certain local centres of creation, in which
certain groups of species have been produced and allowed
to extend themselves, until they met and became inter-
mingled with species extending from other centres. Now
the district of Asia, in the vicinity of the Euphrates and
Tigris, to which the Scripture assigns the origin of the hu-
man race, is the centre to which we can with the greatest
probability trace several of the species of animals and plants
most useful to man, and it lies near the confines of warmer
and colder regions of distribution in the Old World, and also
near the boundary of the Asiatic and European regions. At
the period under consideration it may have been peopled
with a group of animals specially suited to association with

238 The Origin of the World.

the progenitors of mankind. 2. To remove all zoological
difficulties from the position of primeval man in his state of
innocence, we have but to suppose, in accordance with all
the probabilities of the case, that man was created along with
a group of creatures adapted to contribute to his happiness,
and having no tendency to injure or annoy; and that it is
the formation of these creatures — the group of his own cen-
tre of creation — that is especially noticed in Genesis ii., 19,
et seq.^ where God is represented as forming them out of the
ground and exhibiting them to Adam ; a passage otherwise
superfluous, and indeed tending to confuse the meaning of
the document. 3. The difficulty attending the early exten-
sion of the human race is at once obviated by the geolog-
ical doctrine of the extinction of species. We know that in
past geological periods large and important groups of spe-
cies have become extinct, and have been replaced by new
groups extending from new centres ; and we know that
this process has removed, in early geological periods, many
creatures that would have been highly injurious to human
interests had they remained. Now the group of species
created with man being the latest introduced, we may infer,
on geological grounds, that it would have extended itself
within the spheres of older zoological and botanical districts,
and would have replaced their species, which, in the ordinary
operation of natural laws, may have been verging toward ex-
tinction. Thus not only man, but the Eden in which he
dwelt, with all its animals and plants, would have gradually
encroached on the surrounding wilderness, until man's happy
and peaceful reign had replaced that of the ferocious beasts
that preceded him in dominion, and had extended at least
over all the temperate region of the earth. 4. The cursing of
the ground for man's sake, on his fall from innocence, would

The Higher Animals and Man, 239

thus consist in the permission given to the predaceous an-
imals and the thorns and the briers of other centres of cre-
ation to invade his Eden ; or, in his own expulsion, to con-
tend with the animals and plants which were intended to
have given way and become extinct before him. Thus the
fall of man would produce an arrestment in the progress of
the earth in that last great revolution which would have con-
verted it into an Eden ; and the anomalies of its present
state consist, according to Scripture, in a mixture of the con-
ditions of the tertiary with those of the human period. 5.
Though there is good ground for believing that man was to
have been exempted from the general law of mortality, we
can not infer that any such exemption would have been en-
joyed by his companion animals ; we only know that he
himself would have been free from all annoyance and injury
and decay from external causes. We may also conclude
that, while Eden was sufficient for his habitation, the re-
mainder of the earth would continue, just as in the earlier
tertiary periods, under the dominion of the predaceous mam-
mals, reptiles, and birds. 6. The above views enable us on
the one hand to avoid the difficulties that attend the admis-
sion of predaceous animals into Eden, and on the other the
still more formidable difficulties that attend the attempt
to exclude them altogether from the Adamic world. They
also illustrate the geological fact that many animals, con-
temporaneous with man, extend far back into the Tertiary
period. These are creatures not belonging to the Edenic
centre of creation, but introduced in an earlier part of the
sixth day, and now permitted to exist along with man in his
fallen state. I have stated these supposed conditions of the
Adamic creation briefly, and with as little illustration as pos-
sible, that they may connectedly strike the mind of the reader.

\

240 The Origin of the World.

Each of these statements is in harmony with the Scriptural
narrativ^e on the one hand, and with geology on the other ;
and, taken together, they afford an intelhgible history of
the introduction of man. If a geologist were to state, a pri-
ori, the conditions proper to the creation of any important
species, he could only say — the preparation or selection of
some region of the earth for it, and its production along
with a group of plants and animals suited to it. These are
precisely the conditions implied in the Scriptural account of
the creation of Adam.* The difficulties of the subject have
arisen from supposing, contrary to the narrative itself, that
the conditions necessary for Eden must in the first instance
have extended over the whole earth, and that the creatures
with which man is in his present dispersion brought into
contact must necessarily have been his companions there.
One would think that many persons derive their idea of the
first man in Eden from nursery picture-books ; for the Bible
gives no countenance to the idea that all the animals in the
world were in Eden. On the contrary, it asserts that a selec-
tion was made both in the case of animals and plants, and
that this Edenic assemblage of creatures constituted man's
associates in his state of primeval innocence.

The food of animals is specified at the close of the work
of this day. The grant to man is every herb bearing seed,
and every fruit-tree. That to the lower animals is more ex-
tensive— every green herb. This can not mean that every
animal in the earth was herbivorous. It may refer to the
group of animals associated with man in Eden, and this is
most likely the intention of the writer ; but if it includes the
animals of the whole earth, we may be certain, from the ex-

* See Lyell, Principles of Geology/, "Introduction of Species."

TJie Higher Animals and Man. 241

press mention of carnivorous creatures in the work of the
fifth and sixth days, that it indicates merely the general fact
that the support of the whole animal kingdom is based on
vegetation.

A most important circumstance in connection with the
work of the sixth day is that it witnessed the creation both
of man and the mammalia. A fictitious writer would prob-
ably have exalted man by assigning to him a separate day,
and by placing the whole animal kingdom together in respect
to time. He would be all the more likely to do this, if unac-
quainted, as most ignorant persons as well as literary men
are, with the importance and teeming multitudes of the lower
tribes of animals, and with the typical identity of the human
frame with that of the higher animals. Moses has not done
so, we are at liberty to suppose, because the vision of creation
had it otherwise ; and modern geology has amply vindicated
him in this by its disclosure of the intimate connection
of the human with the tertiary period; and has shown in
this as in other instances that truth and not "accommoda-
tion" was the object of the sacred writer. While, as already
stated, many existing species extend far back into the tertiary
period, showing that the earth has been visited by no univer-
sal catastrophe since the first creation of mammals ; on the
other hand, we can not with certainty trace any existing
species back beyond the commencement of the tertiary era.
Geology and revelation, therefore, coincide in referring the
creation of man to the, close of the period in which mammals
were introduced and became predominant, and in establish-
ing a marked separation between that period and the preced-
ing one in which the lower animals held undisputed sway.
This coincidence, while it strengthens the probability that the
creative days were long periods, opposes an almost insur-

L

\

242 T/ie Origin of the World.

mountable obstacle to every other hypothesis of reconcili-
ation with geological science.

At the close of this clay the Creator again reviews his work,
and pronounces it good. Step by step the world had been
evolved from a primeval chaos, through many successive phys-
ical changes and long series of organized beings. It had now
reached its acme of perfection, and had received its most
illustrious tenant, possessing an organism excelling all others
in majesty and beauty, and an immaterial soul the shadow
of the glorious Creator himself. Well might the angels sing,
when the long-protracted work was thus grandly completed :

•'Thrice happy man,
And sons of men, whom God hath thus advanced,
Created in his image, there to dwell
And worship him, and in reward to rule
Over his works in earth, or sea, or air.
And multiply a race of worshippers
Holy and just ; thrice happy, if they know
Their happiness and persevere upright."

The Hebrew idea of the golden age of Eden is pure and
exalted. It consists in the enjoyment of the favor of God,
and of all that is beautiful and excellent in his works. God
and nature are the whole. Nor is it merely a rude, unintel-
ligent, sensuous enjoyment. Man primeval is not a lazy
savage gathering acorns. He is made in the image of the
Creator; he is to keep and dress his garden, and it is fur-
nished with every plant good for food and pleasant to the
sight. In the midst of our material civilization we need to
disabuse ourselves of some prejudices before we can realize
the fact that man, without the arts of life or any need of them,
is not necessarily a barbarian or a savage. Yet even Adam
must have been an agriculturist with strong and willing

The Higher A^iimals and Man, 243

hands, and must have had some need of agricultural imple-
ments such as those with which the least civilized of his de-
scendants have been wont to till the soil. Still, without art
or with very little of it, he could enjoy all that is beautiful and
grand in nature, and could rise from the observation of nat-
ure to communion with God. We need the more to realize
this, inasmuch as there seems so strong a tendency to con-
found material civilization with higher culture, and to hold
that man primeval must have been low and debased sim-
ply because he may have had no temples and no machinery.
We must remember that he had nature, which is higher than
line art, and that when in harmony with his surroundings he
may have had no need either of exhausting labor or of me-
chanical contrivances. Farther, in the contemplation of nat-
ure and in seeking after God, he had higher teachers than
our boasted civilization can claim.

Alas for fallen man, with his poor civilization gathered
little by little from the dust of earth, and his paltry art that
halts immeasurably behind nature. How little is he able
even to appreciate the high estate of his great ancestor.
The world of fallen men has worshipped art too much, rev-
erenced and studied God and nature too little. The savage
displays the lowest taste when he admires the rude figures
which he paints on his face or his garments more than the
glorious painting that adorns nature ; yet even he acknowl-
edges the pre-eminent excellence of nature by imitating her
forms and colors, and by adapting her painted plumes and
flowers to his own use. There is a wide interval, including
many gradations, between this low position and that of the
cultivated amateur or artist. The art of the latter makes a
nearer approach to the truly beautiful, inasmuch as it more
accurately represents the geometric and organic forms and

244 ^/^^ Origin of the World.

the coloring of nature ; and inasmuch as it devises ideal com-
binations not found in the actual world; which ideal combi-
nations, however, are beautiful or monstrous just as they re-
alize or violate the harmonies of nature. It is only the high-
est culture that brings man back to his primitive refinement.

Art takes her true place when she sits at the feet of nature,
and brings her students to drink in its beauties, that they
may endeavor, however imperfectly, to reproduce them. On
the other hand, the student of nature must not content him-
self with " writing Latin names on white paper," wherewith
to label nature's productions, but must rise to the contempla-
tion of the order and beauty of the Cosmos as a revelation of
Divinity. Both will thus rise to that highest taste which will
enable them to appreciate not only the elegance of individu-
al forms, but their structure, their harmonies, their grouping
and their relations, their special adaptation, and their places
as parts of a great system. Thus art will attain that highest
point in which it displays original genius, without violating
natural truth and unity, and nature will be regarded as the
highest art.

Much is said and done in our time with reference to the
cultivation of popular taste for fine art as a means of civiliza-
tion ; and this, so far as it goes, is well ; but the only sure
path to the highest taste-education is the cultivation of the
study of nature. This is also an easier branch of education,
provided the instructors have sufficient knowledge. Good
works of art are rare and costly ; but good works of nature
are ever3^where around us, waiting to be examined. Such
education, popularly diffused, would react on the efforts of
art. It would enable a widely extended public to appreci-
ate real excellence, and would cause works of art to be
valued just in proportion to the extent to which they realize

TJic Higher Animals and Man, 245

or deviate from natural truth and unity. I do not profess to
speak authoritatively on such subjects, but I confess that the
strong impression on my mind is that neither the revered
antique models, nor the practice and principles of the gener-
ality of modern art reformers, would endure such criticism ;
and that if we could combine popular enthusiasm for art
with scientific appreciation of nature, a new and better art
might arise from the union.

I may appear to dwell too long upon this topic ; but my ex-
cuse must be that it leads to a true estimate both of natural
history and of the sacred Scriptures. The study of nature
guides to those large views of the unity and order of creation
which alone are worthy of a being of the rank of man, and
which lead him to adequate conceptions of the Creator ; but
the truly wise recognize three grades of beauty. First, that
of art, which, in its higher efforts, can raise ordinary minds
far above themselves. Secondly, that of nature, which, in its
most common objects, must transcend the former, since its
artist is that God of whose infinite mind the genius of the
artist is only a faint reflection. Thirdly, that pre-eminent
beauty of moral goodness revealed only in the spiritual nat-
ure of the Supreme. The first is one of the natural resources
of fallen man in his search for happiness. The second was
man's joy in his primeval innocence. The third is the inher-
itance of man redeemed. It is folly to place these on the
same level. It is greater folly to worship either or both of
the first without regard to the last. It is true wisdom to as-
pire to the last, and to regard nature as the handmaid of
piety, art as but the handmaid of nature.

Nature to the unobservant is merely a mass of things
more or less beautiful or interesting, but without any definite
order or significance. An observer soon arrives at the con-

246 The Origin of the World.

elusion that it is a series of circling changes, ever returning
to the same points, ever renewing their courses, under the
action of invariable laws. But if he rests here, he falls infi-
nitely short of the idea of the Cosmos, and stands on the
brink of the profound error of eternal succession. A little
further progress conducts him to the inviting field of special
adaptation and mutual relation of things. He finds that
nothing is without its use ; that every structure is most nice-
ly adjusted to special ends ; that the supposed ceaseless cir-
cling of nature is merely the continuous action of great pow-
ers, by which an infinity of utilities are worked out — the
great fly-wheel which, in its unceasing and at first sight ap-
parently aimless round, is giving motion to thousands of reels
and spindles and shuttles, that are spinning and weaving, in
all its varied patterns, the great web of life.

But the observer, as he looks on this web, is surprised to
find that it has in its whole extent a wondrous pattern. He
rises to the contemplation of type in nature, a great truth to
which science has only lately opened its eyes. He begins
dimly to perceive that the Creator has from the beginning
had a plan before his mind, that this plan embraced various
types or patterns of existence; that on these patterns he has
been working out the whole system of nature, adapting each
to all the variety of uses by an infinity of minor modifications.
That, in short, whether he study the eye of a gnat or the
structure of a mountain chain, he sees not only objects of
beauty and utility, but parts of far-reaching plans of infinite
wisdom, by which all objects, however separated in time or
space, are linked together.

How much of positive pleasure does that man lose who
passes through life absorbed with its wants and its artifici-
alities, and regarding with a " brute, unconscious gaze " the

si

TJie Higher Animals and Man. 247

grand revelation of a higher intelligence in the outer world.
It is only in an approximation through our Divine Redeemer
to the moral likeness of God that we can be truly happy; but
of the subsidiary pleasures which we are here permitted to
enjoy, the contemplation of nature is one of the best and
purest. It was the pleasure, the show, the spectacle prepared
for man in Eden, and how much true philosophy and taste
shine in the simple words that in paradise God planted
trees "pleasant to the sight," as well as "good for food."
Other things being equal, the nearer we can return to this
primitive taste, the greater will be our sensuous enjoyment,
the better the influence of our pleasures on our moral nature,
because they will then depend on the cultivation of tastes at
once natural and harmless, and will not lead us to commun-
ion with and reverence for merely human genius, but will
conduct us into the presence of the infinite perfection of the
Creator.

The Bible knows but one species of man. It is not said
that men were created after their species, as we read of the
groups of animals. Man was made, "male and female;" and
in the fuller details afterwards given in the second chap-
ter— where the writer, having finished his general narrative,
commences his special history of man — but one primitive
pair is introduced to our notice. We scarcely need the de-
tailed tables of affiliation afterward given, or the declaration
of the apostle who preached to the supposed autochthones
of Athens, that " God has made of one blood all nations," to
assure us of the Scriptural unity of man. If, therefore, there
were any good reason to believe that man is not of one but
several origins, we must admit Moses to have been very im-
perfectly informed. Nor, on the other hand, does the Bible
any more than geology allow us to assign a very high antiq-

248 TJie Origin of the World.

uity to the origin of man relatively to that of the earth on which
he dwells. The genealogical tables of the Bible may admit of
some limits of difference of opinion as to the age of the hu-
man world or seon, and also of that of the deluge, from which
man took his second point of departure; but they do not
allow us to put the origin of man farther back than that of
the present or modern condition of our continents and the
present races of animals. They therefore limit us to the
modern or quaternary period of geology. The question of
man's antiquity, so much agitated now, demands, however, a
separate and careful consideration; but we must first devote
a few pages to the simple statements of the Bible respecting
the Sabbath of creation and its relation to human history.

TJie Rest of the Creator, 249

CHAPTER XII.

THE REST OF THE CREATOR.

"And the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made, and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And
God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it God rest-
ed from all his work which he had created to make." — Genesis ii., 1-3.

The end of the sixth day closed the work of creation prop-
erly so called, as well as that of forming and arranging the
things created. The beginning of the seventh introduced a
period which, according to the views already stated, was to
be occupied by the continued increase and diffusion of man
and the creatures under his dominion, and by the gradual
disappearance of tribes of creatures unconnected with his
well-being.

Science in this well accords with Scripture. No proof ex-
ists of the production of a new species since the creation of
man; and all geological and archaeological evidence points
to him and a few of the higher mammals as the newest of
the creatures. There is, on the other hand, good evidence
that several species have become extinct since his creation.
Those who believe in the continuous evolution of animals
and men, it is true, can see no actual termination of the
process with the introduction of man ; but even they see that
the appearance of a rational and moral being at least changes
the nature and order of the development. Nor can they doubt

L 2

250 The Origin of the World,

that man is the hist born of nature, and that the whole ani-
mal creation is crowned by him as its capital or topmost pin-
nacle. The later speculators on this subject have never
reached any truth beyond that long ago stated by the lament-
ed Edward Forbes — a most careful observer and accurate
reasoner on the more recent changes of the earth's surface.
He infers, from the distribution of species from their centres
of creation, that man is the latest product of creative power;
or, in other words, that none of those species or groups of
species which he had been able to trace to their centres, or
the spots at which they probably originated, appear to be of
later or as late origin as man. "This consideration," he says,
"induces me to believe that the last province in time was
completed by the coming of man, and to maintain an hypoth-
esis that man stands unique in space and time, himself equal
to the sum of any pre-existing centre of creation or of all — an
hypothesis consistent with man's moral and social position in
the world."

The seventh day, then, was to have been that in which all
the happiness, beauty, and perfection of the others were to
have been concentrated. But an element of instability was
present in the being who occupied the summit of the animal
scale. Not regulated by blind and unerring instincts, but a
free agent, with a high intellectual and moral nature, and lia-
ble to be acted on by temptation from without; under such
influence he lost his moral balance in stretching out his hand
to grasp the peculiar powers of Deity, and fell beyond the hope
of self-redemption — perpetuating, by one of those laws which
regulate the transmission of mixed corporeal and spiritual
natures, his degradation to every generation of his species.
And so God's great work was marred, and all his plans seem-
ed to be foiled, when they had just reached their completion.

The Rest of the Creator. 251

Thus far science might carry us unaided; for there is not a
true naturalist, however skeptical as to revealed religion, who
does not feel in his inmost heart the disjointed state of the
present relations of man to nature ; the natural wreck that
results from his artificial modes of life, the long trains of vio-
lations of the symmetry of nature that follow in the wake of
his most boasted achievements. But here natural science
stops ; and just as we have found that, in tracing back the
world's history, the Bible carries us much farther than geol-
ogy, so science, having led us to suspect the fallen state of
man, leaves us henceforth to the teaching of revelation. And
how glorious that teaching ! God did not find himself bafiied
— his resources are infinite — he had foreseen and prepared for
all this apparent evil ; and out of the moral wreck he proceeds
to work out the grand process of redemption, which is the es-
pecial object of the seventh day, and which will result in the
production of a new heaven and a new earth wherein dwell-
eth righteousness. In the seventh, as in the former days, the
evening precedes the morning. For four thousand years the
world groped in its darkness — a darkness tenanted by moral
monsters as powerful and destructive as the old pre- Adamite
reptiles. The Sun of Righteousness at length arose, and the
darkness began to pass away; but eighteen centuries have
elapsed, and we still see but the gray dawn of morning, which
we yet firmly believe will brighten into a glorious day that
shall know no succeeding night*

The seventh day is the modern or human era in geology;
and, though it can not yet boast of any physical changes so

* For the exposition of the details of the fall, I beg to refer the reader
to McDonald's " Creation and the Fall," to Kitto's " Antediluvians and
Patriarchs," and to Kurtz's " History of the Old Covenant."

252 The Origin of the World.

great as those of past periods, it is still of much interest, as
affording the facts on which we must depend for explanations
of past changes ; and as immediately connected in time with
those later tertiary periods which afford so many curious
problems to the geological student. The actual connection
of the human wdth preceding periods is still involved in some
obscurity ; and, as we shall see, there has recently been a
strong tendency to throw back the origin of man into pre-
historic ages of enormous length, on grounds which are, how-
ever, much less certain than is commonly imagined. This
question we have to examine ; but before entering upon it
may shortly sketch the actual import of the statements of the
Hebrew Scriptures respecting what may be called the prehis-
toric duration of the human species. This is the more neces-
sary, as the most crude notions seem very widely to prevail
on the subject. I shall, therefore, in this place notice some
general facts deducible from the Bible, and which may be
useful in appreciating the true relation of the human era to
those which preceded it. It will be understood that I shall
endeavor merely to present a picture of what the Bible
actually teaches, and which any one can verify by reading
the book of Genesis.

I. The local centre of creation of the human species, and
probably of a group of creatures coeval with it, was Eden ; a
country of which the Scriptures give a somewhat minute geo-
graphical description. It was evidently a district of Western
Asia ; and, from its possession of several important rivers,
rather a region or large territory than a limited spot, such as
many, who have discussed the question of the site of Eden,
seem to suppose. In this view it is a matter of no moment
to fix its site more nearly than the indication of the Bible that
it included the sources and probably large portions of the val-

The Rest of the C?' eat or, 253

leys of the Tigris, the Euphrates, and perhaps the Oxus and
Jaxartes. Into the minor difficulties respecting the site of
Eden it would be unprofitable to enter, and it will matter little
if we accept that view, which, however, I think less probable,
that it was placed in the lower part of the valley of the Eu-
phrates. I may merely mention one particular of the Biblical
description, because it throws light on the great antiquity of
this geographical delineation, and has been strangely miscon-
ceived by expositors — the relation of those rivers to Cush or
Ethiopia and Havilah, a tribal name derived from that of a
grandson of Cush. On consulting the tenth chapter of Gen-
esis, it will be found that the Cushites under Nimrod, very
soon after the deluge, are stated to have pushed their migra-
tions and conquests along the Tigris to the northward, and
established there the first empire. It is probably this prim-
itive Cushite empire, called Ethiopia in our translation, which
in the epoch of the description of Eden occupied the Euphra-
tean valley, and being bounded on one side by the river call-
ed Gihon, was thus believed to extend over the old site of
Eden. Thus the Cush or Ethiopia of the description has no
direct connection with the African Ethiopia, and speculations
based on such a supposed connection are groundless. On
the other hand this feature furnishes an interesting coinci-
dence with other parts of Genesis, and throws light on many
obscure points in the early history of man ; and since this
Cushite empire had perished even before the time of Moses,
it indicates a still more ancient tradition respecting the pri-
meval abode of our species.

2. Before the deluge this region must have been the seat
of a dense population, which, according to the Biblical ac-
count, must have made considerable advances in the arts,
and at the same time sunk very low in moral debase-

254 The Origin of the World.

ment.* Whether any remains of the central portions of this an-
cient population or its works exist will probably not be deter-
mined with absolute certainty till we have accurate geological
investigations of the whole country in the neighborhood of the
Caspian Sea and along the great rivers of Western Asia, though
there is nothing unreasonable in the belief that some of the
old prehistoric men whose remains are discovered in caves
and river gravels in Europe may belong to the antediluvian
race. Should such remains be found, we might infer, from
the extreme longevity and other characteristics assigned to
the antediluvians, that their skeletons would present peculiar-
ities entitling them to be considered a well-marked variety of
the human species, and this not of a low type of physical
organization. We may also iiafer that the family of man very
early divided into two races — one retaining in greater purity
the moral endowments of the species, the other excelling in
the mechanical and fine arts j and that there were rude and
savage outlying communities of men then as at present. If
the so-called palaeolithic men of Europe are antediluvian, they
were probably of such outlying tribes, and possibly of the
mixed race which sprung up in the later antediluvian age,
and who are described as mighty men physically, and men of
violence. It would be quite natural that this intermixture

* The Bible specifies, perhaps only as the principal of these arts, music
and musical instruments by Jubal, metallurgy by Tubalcain, the domes-
tication of cattle and the nomade life by Jabal. It is highly probable that
these inventors are introduced into the Mosaic record for a theological
reason, to point out the folly of the worship rendered to Phtha, Hephaes-
tos, Vulcan, Horus, Phoebus, and other inventors, either traditionary rep-
resentatives of the family of Lamech, or other heroes wrongly identified
with them. Very possibly their sister Naamah, " the beautiful," is intro-
duced for the same reason, as the true original of some of the female deities
of the heathen.

The Rest of the Create?'. 255

of the Sethite and Cainite races should produce a race excel-
ling both in energy and physical endowments — the "giants"
that were in those days.* If any remains of the two central
nations of the antediluvian period are ever discovered, we
may confidently anticipate that the distinctive characteristics
of these races may be detected in their osseous structures as
well as in their works of art. Farther, it is to be inferred
from notices in the fourth chapter of Genesis, that before the
deluge there was both a nomadic and a settled population,
and that the principal seat of the Cainite, or more debased
yet energetic branch of the human family, was to the eastward
of the site of Eden. No intimations are given by which the
works of art of antediluvian times could be distinguished from
those of later periods ; but that curious summary of the treas-
ures of antediluvian man contained in the notice that the
land of Havilah produced gold and agate and pearl (Gen.
ii., 12) w^ould lead us to believe that the early antediluvian
age was on the whole an age of stone, in which flint for weap-
ons, and gold and shell wampum for ornaments, were the lead-
ing kinds of wealth. On the other hand, the notices of ante-
diluvian metallurgy, and the building and construction of the
ark, would lead us to infer that the later antediluvians had at-
tained to much perfection in some constructive arts — a conclu-
sion which harmonizes with the otherwise inexplicable perfec-
tion of such art soon after the deluge, as evidenced not only
by the story of Babel, but also by the early works of the As-
syrians and Egyptians.

3. "When the antediluvian population had fully proved it-

* I can not for a moment entertain the monstrous supposition of many
expositors that the "sons of God" of these passages are angels, and the
" Nephelim" hybrids between angels and men.

256 The Origin of the World.

self unfit to enter into the divine scheme of moral renova-
tion, it was swept away by a fearful physical catastrophe.
The deluge might, in all its relations, furnish material for an
entire treatise. I may remark here, as its most important
geological peculiarity, that it was evidently a local convulsion.
The object, that of destroying the human race and the an-
imal population of its peculiar centre of creation, the preser-
vation of specimens of these creatures in the ark, and the
physical requirements of the case, necessitate this conclu-
sion, which is now accepted by the best Biblical expositors,"*
and which inflicts no violence on the terms of the record.
Viewed in this light, the phenomena recorded in the Bible,
in connection with geological probabilities, lead us to infer
that the physical agencies evoked by the divine power to
destroy this ungodly race were a subsidence of the region
they inhabited, so as to admit the oceanic waters, and exten-
sive atmospherical disturbances connected with that subsid-
ence, and perhaps with the elevation of neighboring regions.
In this case it is possible that the Caspian Sea, which is now
more than eighty feet below the level of the ocean,t and
which was probably much more extensive then than at pres-
ent, received much of the drainage of the flood, and that the
mud and sand deposits of this sea and the adjoining desert
plains, once manifestly a part of its bottom, conceal any re-
mains that exist of the antediluvian population. In connec-
tion with this, it may be remarked that, in the book of Job,
Eliphaz speaks as if the locality of those wicked nations

* See Lange's " Commentary on Genesis."

t The Russian surveys of 1836 made it one hundred and eight En-
glish feet ; but later authorities reduce it to eighty-three feet six inches
below the Black Sea.

TJie Rest of the Creator. 257

which existed before the deluge was known and accessible
in his time :

" Hast thou marked the ancient way
Which wicked men have trodden,
Who were seized [by the waters] in a moment,
And whose foundations a flood swept away ?"

— Job xxii., 15.

On comparing this statement with the answer of Job in the
26th chapter, verse 5th, it would seem that the ungodly ante-
diluvians were supposed to be still under the waters ; a be-
lief quite intelligible if the Caspian, which, on the latest and
most probable views of the locality of the events of this book,
was not very remote from the residence of Job,* was sup-
posed to mark the position of the pre-Noachic population,
as the Dead Sea afterward did that of the cities of the plain.
Some of the dates assigned to the book of Job would, how-
ever, render it possible that this last catastrophe is that to
which he refers :

"The Rephaim tremble from beneath **

The waters and their inhabitants.
Sheol is naked before him,
And destruction hath no covering."

The word Rephaitn here has been variously rendered
"shades of the dead" and "giants." It is properly the
family or national name of certain tribes of gigantic Ham-
ite men (the Anakim, Emim, etc.) inhabiting Western Asia
at a very remote period; and it must here refer either to
them or to the still earlier antediluvian giants.f

* Kitto's "Bible Illustrations "—Book of Job.

t See article "Rephaim" in Kitto's "Journal of Sacred Literature."
But Gesenius and others regard it, not as an ethnic name, but as a term
for the " shades " or spirits of the dead. See Conant on Job.

258 The Origin of the World,

It is also an important point to be noticed here that the
narrative of the deluge in Genesis is given as the testimony
or record of an eye-witness, and is to be so understood ; and
that the terms of the record imply, not as usually held that
all sorts of animals were taken into Noah's ark, but only a
selection, the character of which is clearly indicated by a
comparison of the five lists of animals given in the narrative.
Bearing this in mind, and noticing that the writer tells of his
own experience as to the rise of the water, the drifting of the
ark, the disappearance of all visible shore, and the sounding
fifteen cubits where a hill had before been, all the difficulties
of the narrative of the deluge will at once disappear. These
difficulties have in fact arisen from regarding the story as the
composition of a historian, not as what it manifestly is, the
log or journal of a contemporary, introduced with probably
little change by the compiler of the book.

After the deluge, we find the human race settled in the
plains of the Euphrates and Tigris, attracted thither by the
fertility of their alluvial soils. There we find them engaging
in a great political scheme, no doubt founded on recollec-
tions of the old antediluvian nationalities, and on a dread
of the evils which able and aspiring men would anticipate
from that wide dispersion of the human race that appears
to have been intended by the Creator in the new circum-
stances of the earth. They commenced accordingly the
erection of a city or tower at Babel, in the plain of Shinar,
to form a common bond of union, a great public work that
should be a rallying-point for the race, and around which its
patriotism might concentrate itself. The attempt was coun-
teracted by an interposition of divine Providence ; and
thenceforth the diffusion of the human race proceeded un-
checked, carrying with it everywhere the memory of the

The Rest of the Creator, 259

celebrated tower, which perpetuated itself not only in the
mounds of Assyria and Babylon and the pyramids of Egypt,
but in the teocallis and temple mounds of the New World.
The Babel enterprise is in fact the first recorded development
of that mound-building instinct which the earlier races every-
where evince, and which has been a distinguishing character-
istic more especially of the Cushite or Turanian race, and has
apparently made them the teachers of constructive arts to all
other peoples. Perhaps a dread of the total decay and loss
of the surviving antediluvian arts in construction and other
matters may have been one impelling motive to the building
of Babel. Perhaps it was connected with the communistic
ideas of the Turanian race, and their conflict with the patri-
archal habits of the Semites. Out of the enterprise at Babel,
however, arose a new type of evil, which, in the forms of mil-
itary despotism, the spirit of conquest, hero-worship, and the
alliance of these influences with literature and the arts, has
been handed down through every succeeding age to our own
time. The name of Nimrod, the son of Cush, has been pre-
served to us in the Bible, and also apparently in the tablets
and inscriptions of Assyria, as the founder of the first des-
potism. This bold and ambitious man, subsequently deified
under different names, established a Hamite or Turanian
empire, which appears to have extended its sway over the
tribes occupying Southwestern Asia and Northeastern Africa,
everywhere supporting its power by force of arms, and intro-
ducing a debasing polytheistic hero-worship, and certain
forms of art probably derived from antediluvian times. The
centre of this Cushite empire, however, gave w^ay to the ris-
ing power of Assyria or the Ashurite branch of the sons of
Shem, at a period antecedent to the dawn of profane history,
except in its mythical form ; and when the light of secular

26o The Origin of the World.

history first breaks upon us, we find Egypt standing forth as
the only stable representative of the arts, the systems, and
the superstitions of the old Cushite empire, of which it had
been the southern branch; while other remnants of the
Hamite races, included in the empire of Nimrod, were scat-
tered over Western Asia, and, migrating into Europe, with or
after the ruder but less demoralized sons of Japheth, carried
with them their characteristic civilization and mythology, to
take root in new forms in Greece and Italy.* Meanwhile
the Assyrian and Persian (Elamite) races were growing in
Middle Asia, and probably driving the more eastern rem-
nants of the Nimrodic empire into India, borrowing at the
same time their superstitions and their claims to universal
dominion. These views, which I believe to correspond with
the few notices in the Bible and in ancient history, and to be
daily receiving new confirmations from the investigations of
the ancient Assyrian monuments, enable us to understand
many mysterious problems in the early history of man.
They give us reason to suspect that the principle of the first
empire was an imitation of the antediluvian world, and that
its arts and customs were mainly derived from that source.
They show how it happens that Egypt, a country so far re-
moved from the starting-point of man after the deluge,
should appear to be the cradle of the arts, and they account
for the Hamite and perhaps antediluvian elements, mixed

* On the Biblical view of this subject, the so-called Aryan mythology,
common to India and Greece, is either a derivative from the Cushite
civilization, or a spontaneous growth of the Japetic stock scattered by the
Cushite empire. The Semitic and Hamitic mythologies are derived from
the primeval cherubic worship of Eden, corrupted and mixed with deifica-
tion of natural objects and stages of the creative work, and with adoration
of deified ancestors and heroes.

TJie Rest of the Creator. 261

with primeval Biblical ideas, as the cherubim, etc., in the old
heathenism of India, Assyria, and Southern Europe, and
which they share with Egypt, having derived them from the
same source. They also show how it is that in the most re-
mote antiquity we find two well -developed and opposite re-
ligious systems ; the pure theism of Noah, and those who re-
tained his faith, and the idolatry of those tribes which re-
garded with adoring veneration the objects and stages of the
creative work, the grander powers and objects of nature, the
mighty Cainites of the world before the flood, and the post-
diluvian leaders who followed them in their violence, their
cultivation of the arts, and their rebellion against God.
These heroes were identified with imaginative conceptions
of the heavenly bodies, animals, and other natural objects,
associated with the fortunes of cities and nations, with par-
ticular territories, and with war and the useful arts, trans-
mitted under different names to one country after another,
and localized in each ; and it is only in comparatively mod-
ern times that we have been able to recognize the full cer-
tainty of the view held long since by many ingenious writers,
that among the greater gods of Egypt and Assyria, and of
consequence among those also of Greece and Rome, were
Nimrod, Ham, Ashur, Noah, Mizraim, and other worthies and
tyrants of the old world; and to suspect that Tubalcain and
Naamah, and other antediluvian names, were similarly hon-
ored, though subsequently overshadowed by more recent di-
vinities. The later Assyrian readings of Rawlinson, Hincks,
and the lamented George Smith, and the more recent works
on Egyptian antiquities, are full of pregnant hints on these
subjects. It would, however, lead us too far from our im-
mediate subject to enter more fully into these questions. I
have referred to them merely to point out connecting-links

262 TJie Origin of the World,

between the secular and sacred history of the earlier part of
the human period, as a useful sequel to our comparison of the
latter with the conclusions of science, and as furnishing hints
which may guide the geologist in connecting the human with
the tertiary period, and in distinguishing between the antedi-
luvian and postdiluvian portions of the former.

It may be said, however, that all this Biblical history, how-
ever it may accord with the little that remains to us of the
written annals of early Oriental nations, is entirely at vari-
ance with those modern archaeological discussions which
point to an immense antiquity of the human race, and to a
primitive barbarism out of which all human culture was little
by little evolved ; and which results of archaeological investi-
gation, wdiile contradictory to the Hebrew Scriptures, are en-
tirely in accord with the evolutionist philosophy. The prom-
inence now given to such views as these renders it necessary
that we should demote a special chapter to their discussion.

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 263

CHAPTER XIII.

UNITY AND ANTIQUITY OF MAN.

" These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in
their nations : and by these were the nations divided in the earth after
the flood." — Genesis x., 32.

The theologians and evangelical Christians of our time,
and with them the credibility of the Holy Scriptures, are sup-
posed by many to have been impaled on a zoological and
archaeological dilemma, in a manner which renders nugatory
all attempts to reconcile the Mosaic cosmogony with science.
The Bible, as we have seen, knows but one Adam, and that
Adam not a myth or an ethnic name, but a veritable man ;
but some naturalists and ethnologists think that they have
found decisive evidence that man is not of one but of several
origins. The religious tendency of this doctrine no Christian
can fail to perceive. In whatever way put, or under whatever
disguise, it renders the Bible history worthless, reduces us to
that isolation of race from race cultivated in ancient times
by the various local idolatries, and destroys the brotherhood
of man and the universality of that Christian atonement which
proclaims that " as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be
made alive."

Fortunately, however, the greater weight of biological and
archaeological evidence is here on the side of the Bible, and
philology comes in with strong corroborative proof But just
as the orthodox theologian is beginning to congratulate him-

264 The Origin of the World.

self on the aid he has thus received, some of his new friends
gravely tell him that, in order to maintain their view, it is
necessary to believe that man has resided on earth for count-
less ages, and that it is quite a mistake to suppose that his
starting-point is so recent as the Mosaic deluge. Nay, some
very rampant theorists of some ethnological schools try to
pierce Moses and his abettors with both horns of the di-
lemma at once, maintaining that men may be of different
species, and yet may have existed for an enormous length
of time as well. The recent prevalence of theories of evolu-
tion has, however, thrown quite into the background the dis-
cussions formerly active respecting the unity of man, but has,
along with geological and archaeological discovery, given in-
creased prominence to those relating to the date of the origin
of our species and the manner of its introduction.

The Bible gives us a definite epoch, that of the deluge,
about 2000 to 3000 B.C., for all existing races of men; but
this, according to it, was only the second starting-point of
humanity, and though no family but that of Noah survived the
terrible catastrophe, it would be a great error to suppose that
nothing antediluvian appears in the subsequent history of
man. Before the deluge there were arts and an old civiliza-
tion, extending over at least two thousand years, and after
the deluge men carried with them these heirlooms of the old
world to commence with them new nations. This has been
tacitly ignored by many of the writers who underrate the value
of the Hebrew history. It may be as well for this reason to
place, in a series of propositions, the principal points in Gen-
esis which relate to the questions now before us.

I. Adam and Isha, the woman, afterward called Eve (Life-
giver), in consequence of the promise of a Redeemer, com-
menced a life of husbandry on their expulsion from Eden,

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 265

which, on the ordinary views of the Bible chronology, may be
supposed to have occurred from 4000 to 5000 years before
the Christian era; and during the lifetime of the primal pair,
the sheep, at least, was domesticated. The Bible, of course,
knows nothing of the imaginary continent of Lemuria, in
which, according to some hypotheses, men are supposed to
have had their birth from apes. A few generations after, in
the time of Lamech, cattle were domesticated ; and the met-
als copper and iron were applied to use— the latter probably
meteoric iron ; and hence, it may be, the Hindoo and Hel-
lenic myths of Twachtrei and Hephasstos in connection with
the thunderbolt. We learn, however, incidentally, as already
mentioned, in the description of Eden in Genesis, chapter
2d, that there was a previous stone age, in which "flint,
pearls or shell beads, and stream-gold" were the chief treas-
ures of man, for this is implied in the "gold, bedolach, and
onyx" of the land of Havilah. It is certain also, from the
discoveries made in Assyria, on the site of Troy, and else-
where, that the use of stone implements continued in Western
Asia long after the deluge. In the time of Noah the distinc-
tion of clean and unclean beasts, and the taking of seven
pairs of certain beasts and birds into the ark, imply that
certain mammals and birds were domesticated.^"

2. Before the flood, as already remarked, there was a divis-
ion of man into two nationalities or races ; and there was a
citizen, an agricultural, a pastoral, and a nomadic population.
Farther, the remarkable progress in the arts implied in the
building of such structures as the Tower of Babel, and other
temple and palace mounds in Assyria, and of the pyramids

* Genesis 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th chapters. See also our previous re-
marks on the deluge.

IM

266 TJie Origin of the World.

of Egypt, within a few generations after the deluge, proves
that a very advanced material civilization and great skill in
constructive arts had been reached in antediluvian times.*

3. After the deluge, the arts of the antediluvians and their
citizen life were almost immediately revived in the plain of
Shinar; but the plans of the Babel leaders, like those of
many others who have attempted to force distinct tribes
into one nationality, failed. The guilt attributed to them
probably relates to the attempt to break up the patriarchal
and tribal organization, which in these early times was the
outward form of true religion, in favor of some sort of national
organization, not compatible with the extension of man im-
mediately over the world, and tending to consolidation into
dense communities. It may be a question here whether the
tribal communism which has prevailed among the American
Indians and other rude races was the primitive form of soci-
ety which the Babel-builders essayed to change, or whether
the Semitic patriarchal system had at first prevailed, and the
Babel difficulties were connected with a conflict between this
and communism or despotism, both new Turanian or Aryan
introductions. In any case. Babel, and Babylon its successor,
remain in the subsequent Biblical literature as types of the
God-defying and antichristian systems that have succeeded
each other from the time of Nimrod to this day.

4. The human race was scattered over the earth in family
groups or tribes, each headed by a leading patriarch, who
gave it its name. First, the three sons of Noah formed three
main stems, and from these diverged several family branches.
The ethnological chart in the loth chapter of Genesis gives
the principal branches under patriarchal and ethnic names ;

* Genesis iv.

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 267

but these, of course, continued to subdivide beyond the space
and time referred to by the sacred writer. It is simply absurd
to object, as some writers have done, to the universahty of
the statements in Genesis, that they do not mention in detail
the whole earth. They refer to a few generations only, and
beyond this restrict themselves to the one branch of the hu-
man family to which the Bible principally relates. We should
be thankful for so much of the leading lines of ethnological
divergence, without complaining that it is not followed out
into its minute ramifications and into all history.

5. The tripartite division in Genesis x. indicates a some-
what strict geographical separation of the three main trunks.
The regions marked out for Japheth include Europe and North-
western Asia. The name Japheth, as well as the statements
in the table, indicate a versatile, nomadic, and colonizing dis-
position as characteristic of these tribes.* The Median popula-
tion, the same with a portion of that now often called Aryan,!
was the only branch remaining near the original seats of the
species, and in a settled condition. The outlying portions
of the posterity of Japheth, on account of their wide dispersion,
must at a very early period have fallen into comparative bar-

* Japheth is "enlargement," his sons are Scythians and inhabitants of
the isles, varying in language and nationality; and Noah predicts, "God
shall enlarge Japheth, he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, Ham shall be
his servant." These are surely characteristic ethnological traits for a pe-
riod so early. On the rationalist view, it may be supposed that this pre-
diction was not written until the characters in question had developed
themselves; but since the greatest enlargement of Japheth has occurred
since the discovery of America, there would be quite as good ground for
maintaining that Noah's prophecy was interpolated after the time of Co-
lumbus.

t The language of this people, the stem of the Indo-European languages,
is, though in a later form, probably that of the Aryan or Persepolitan part
of the trilingual inscriptions at Behistun and elsewhere in Persia.

268 The Origin of the World.

barism, such as we find in historic periods all over Western
and Northern Europe and Northern Asia. Owing to their
habitat, the Japhetites of the Bible include none of the black
races, unless certain Indian and Australian nations are out-
lying portions of this family. The Shemite nations showed
little tendency to migrate, being grouped about the Euphrates
and Tigris valleys and neighboring regions. For this reason,
with the exception of certain Arab tribes, they present no in-
stances of barbarism, and generally retained a high cerebral
organization, and respectable though stationary civilization,
and they possess the oldest alphabet and literature. The
posterity of Ham differs remarkably from the others. It spread
itself over Southern, Central, and Eastern Asia, Southern Eu-
rope, and Northern Africa, and constitutes the stock alike of
the Turanian and African races, as well as probably of the
American tribes. It has all along displayed a great capacity
for certain forms of art and semi-civilization, but has rarely
risen to the level of the Shemite and Japhetite races. It es-
tablished the earliest military and monarchical institutions,
and presents at the dawn of history — in Assyria, in Egypt, and
India — settled and arbitrary forms in politics and religion, of a
character so much resembling that of an old and corrupt civil-
ization that we can scarcely avoid supposing that Ham and his
family had preserved more than any of the other Noachian
races the arts and institutions of the old world before the
flood. It certainly presents itself in early postdiluvian times
as the first representative and teacher of art and material
civilization. The Hamite race is remarkable for the early
development of pantheism and hero-worship, and for the arti-
ficial character of its culture. It presents us with the dark-
est colors, and in the vast solitudes of Africa and Central
Asia its outlying tribes must have fallen into comparative

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 269

barbarism a few centuries after the deluge. It is farther to
be observed that, according to the Bible, the Canaanites and
other Hamite nations spoke languages not essentially differ-
ent from those of the Shemites, while the Japhetite nations
were to them barbarians — " a nation whose tongue thou shalt
not understand."- There was, too, at the date of the disper-
sion of Babel, already a distinction of tongues within each
of the great races of men.

6. All the divisions of the family of Noah had from the first
the domesticated animals and the principal arts of life, and
enjoyed these in a national capacity so soon as sufficiently
numerous. The more scattered tribes, wandering into fresh
regions, and adopting the life of hunters, lost the character-
istics of civilization, and diverged widely from the primitive
languages. We should thus have, according to the Hebrew
ethnology, a central area presenting the principal stems of all
the three races in a permanently civilized state. All around
this area should lie aberrant and often barbarous tribes, dif-
fering most widely from the original type in the more distant
regions, and in those least favorable to human health and
subsistence. In these outlying regions, secondary centres of
civilization might grow up, differing from that of the primitive
centre, except in so far as the common principles of human
nature and intercommunication might prevent this. All these
conclusions, fairly deducible at once from the Mosaic ethnol-
ogy and the theory of dispersion from a centre, are perfectly
in accordance with observed facts, though in absolute contra-
diction to prevalent ethnological conclusions, based on these
facts in connection with theories of development.

A multitude of Bible notices might easily be quoted illus-
trative of these points, and also of the consistency of the Mo-
saic narrative with itself. One of them mav suffice here.

2/0 The Origin of the World.

Abraham, who is said by the Jews to have been contempo-
rary with Shem, as Menes by the Egyptians with Ham, at
least Hved sufficiently near to the time of the rise of the
earliest nations to be taken as an illustration of this primi-
tive condition of society. He was not a patriarch of the first
or second rank, like Ham or Mizraim or Canaan, but a subor-
dinate family leader several removes from the survivors of the
deluge. Yet his tribe increases in comparatively few years
to a considerable number. He is treated as an equal by the
monarchs of Egypt and Philistia. He defeats, with a band
of three or four hundred retainers, a confederacy of four Eu-
phratean kings representing the embryo state of the Persian
and Assyrian empires, and already relatively so strong that
they have overrun much of Western Asia. All this bespeaks
in a most consistent manner the rapid rise of many small
nationalities, scattered over the better parts of wide regions,
and still in a feeble condition, though inheriting from their
ancestors an old civilization, and laying the foundations of
powerful states. If we attach any historical value what-
ever to the narrative, it obviously implies that at a date of
about two thousand years before Christ the regions after-
ward occupied by the oldest historic empires were still thin-
ly peopled, and their dominant races little more than feeble
tribes. This farther corresponds with the authentic history
of all the ancient nations, however these may have been ex-
tended by previous mythical periods. About or shortly be-
fore the time of Abraham, Menes w^as draining for the first
time the swamps of Eg\'pt, Ninus or Nimrod was founding
the Assyrian empire, the Phoenicians were founding Sidon,
agriculture was being introduced into China, the Vedas were
being written in India, the Persian monarchy w^as being
founded ; and, in short, all the historical nations of the East

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 271

were originating, and this apparently by springing into being
witli an already formed civilization.

Such being the Hebrew account of the date and early his-
tory of man, it may be proper here to compare it with such
deductions from archaeological and geological investigation
as may seem to conflict with it, and at the same time to make
some comparisons with the Turanian and Aryan traditions
and speculations as to human origins. The special lines of
investigation important here are : i. Early historical records
other than the Bible; 2. The diversity of human languages;
3. The geological evidence afforded by remains of prehistoric
men found in caverns and other repositories. The last of
these is at present that which has attained the greatest de-
velopment.

I. Early Hiwian History. — Had the human race every-
where preserved historical records, we should have had some
certain evidence as to the places and times of origination of
its tribes and peoples. Unfortunately this has not been the
case. All savage and barbarous races, and many of those
now civilized, have lost all records of their early history.
Most of the so-called ancient nations are comparatively
modern, and their history after a very short course loses it-
self in uncertain tradition and mythical fancies. The only
really ancient nations that have given us in detail their own
v/ritten history are the Hebrews, the Assyrians, the Egyptians,
the Hindoos, and the Chinese. The last people, though pro-
fessedly very ancient, trace their history from a period of
barbarism— a view confirmed by their physical characters
and the nature of their civilization ; and on this account, if
no other, their history can not be considered as of much
archaeological value. According to their own records, their
earliest authentic history goes back to about 2800 B.C., and

2/2 The Origin of the World,

was preceded by a prehistoric period of uncertain duration.
Tlie astronomical deductions of Sclilegel, which would extend
their history to 17,000 years, are evidently altogether unre-
liable."^ The early Hindoo history is palpably fabulous or
distorted, and has been variously modified and changed in
comparatively modern times. There is one great and very
ancient people — the Egyptian — evidently civilized from the
beginning of all history, that have succeeded in transmitting
to us, though only in fragments, their primeval history ; and
of late years constant additions have been made from in-
scribed tablets and monuments to our knowledge of the an-
cient history of the Assyrians and Chaldeans.

The Egyptian history has been gathered first from sketches
by Greek travellers, and from fragments of the chronicles of
Manetho, one of the later Egyptian priests; and, secondly,
from the inscriptions deciphered on Egyptian monuments
and papyri. It is still in a very fragmentary and uncertain
state, but has been used with considerable effect to prove
both the diversity of races of men and the pre-Noachic antiq-
uity of the species. The Egyptian, in features and physical
conformation, tended to the European form, just as the mod-
ern Fellahs and Berbers do ; but he had a dark complexion,
a somewhat elongated head and flattened lips, and certain
negroid peculiarities in his limbs. His language combined
many of the peculiarities of the Semitic, Aryan, and African
tongues, indicating thereby great antiquity or else great inter-
mixture, but not, as some ethnographers demand, both; most
probably the former — the Egyptians being really the oldest
civilized people that we certainly know, and therefore, if lan-
guages have one origin, likely to be near its root-stock.

* Edkins, "China's Place in Philology."

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 273

The actual history of Egypt begins from Menes, the first
human king, a monarch, or rather tribal chief, who took up
his abode in the flats and fens of Lower Egypt, certainly not
very long after the deluge. His name has been translated
" one who walks with Khem," or Ham ; one, therefore, who
was contemporary with this great patriarch and god of the
Egyptians, which will place his time within a few centuries
of the Biblical flood. The date of Menes has been various-
ly placed. In correction of the ordinary Hebrew chronology,
we have the following attempts :

Josephus places his reign 2350 B.C.

Dr. Hales' calculation 2412

Manetho and the Monuments, as corrected by Syn- C ^7^2

cellus and calculated by various archaeologists.. . ) ^'^

' 2782

Herodotus, astronomical reduction by Rennell 2890

Estimate by Gliddon in " Ancient Egypt " 2750

Bunsen, " Egypt's Place," etc 4000

The truth may be somewhere near the mean of the shorter
chronologies given in the list.* That of Bunsen is liable to
very grave objections ; more especially as he adds to it other
views, altogether unsupported by historical evidence, which
would carry back the deluge to 10,000 years B.C. It rests
wholly on the chronology of Manetho, who lived 300 years
B.C. ; and who, even if the Egyptians then possessed authen-
tic documents extending 3700 years before his time, may
have erred in his rendering of them ; and is farther liable to
grave suspicions of having merely grouped the names on the
monuments of his country arbitrarily in Sothic cycles. Far-

* Reginald S. Poole has adduced very ingenious arguments, monumen-
tal, astronomical, and mythological, for the date B.C. 2717.

M 2

2/4 The Origin of the World.

ther, they rest on an interpretation of Manetho, which sup-
poses his early dynasties to have been successive, while good
reasons have been found to prove that many of them consist
of contemporaneous petty sovereigns of parts of Egypt. The
early parts of Manetho's lists are purely mythical, and it is
impossible to fix the point where his authentic history com-
mences. He copied from monuments which have no consec-
utive dates, the precise age of which could only be vaguely
known even in his time, and which are different in their state-
ments in different localities. It is only by making due allow-
ance for these uncertainties that any historical value can be
attached to these earlier dynasties of Manetho. Yet Bunsen
has built on an uncertain interpretation of this writer, as
handed down in a very fragmentary and evidently garbled con-
dition, and on the equally or more uncertain chronology of Era-
tosthenes, a system differing from all previous belief on the sub-
ject, from the Hebrew history, and from all former interpre-
tations of the monuments and Manetho.* Discarding, there-

* It is curious that almost simultaneously with the appearance of Bun-
sen's scheme a similiar view was attempted to be maintained on geolog-
ical grounds. In a series of borings in the delta of the Nile, undertaken
by Mr. Horner, there was found a piece of pottery at a depth which ap-
peared to indicate an antiquity of 13,371 years. But the basis of the cal-
culation is the rate of deposit (3^ inches per century) calculated for the
ground around the statue of Rameses II. at Memphis, dated at 1361 B.C.;
and Mr. Sharpe has objected that no mud could have been deposited around
that statue from its erection until the destruction of Memphis, perhaps 8co
years B.C. Farther, we have to take into account the natural or artificial
changes of the river's bed, which in this very place is said to have been di-
verted from its course by Menes, and which near Cairo is now nearly a mile
from its former site. The liability to error and fraud in boring operations
is also very well known. It has farther been suggested that the deep
cracks which form in the soil of Egypt, and the sinking of wells in ancient
times, are other probable causes of error ; and it is stated that pieces of
burnt brick, which was not in use in Egypt until the Roman times, have

Unity and Antiquity of Man.

^75

fore, in the mean time, this date, and the still older one
claimed by Mariette,* we may roughly estimate the date of
Menes as 2000 to 2500 years B.C.,t and proceed to state
some of the facts developed by Eg3^ptologists.

One of the most striking of these is the proof that Egypt
was a new country in the days of Menes and several genera-
tions of his successors. The monuments of this period show
little of the complicated idolatry, ritual, and caste system
of later times, and are deficient in evidence of the refinement
and variety of art afterward attained. They also show that
these early monarchs were principally engaged in dyking, and
otherwise reclaiming the alluvial flats ; an evidence precisely
of the same character with that which every traveller sees in
the more recently settled districts of Canada, where the forest
is giving way to the exertions of the farmer. Farther, in this
primitive period, known as the "old monarchy," few domestic
animals appear, and experiments seem to have been in prog-
ress to tame others, natives of the country, as the hyena, the
antelope, the stork. Even the dog in the older dynasties is
represented by one or at most two varieties, and the prevalent
one is a wolfish-looking animal akin to the present wild or

been found at even greater depths than the pottery referred to by Mr.
Horner. This discovery, at first sight so startling, and vouched for by a
geologist of unquestioned honor and ability, is thus open to the same
doubts with the Guadaloupe skeletons, the human bones in ossiferous
caverns, and that found in the mud of the Mississippi ; all of which have,
on examination, proved of no value as proofs of the geological antiquity
of man.

* 5004 B.C.

t Perhaps the earliest certain date in Egyptian history is that of Thoth-
mes III. of the eighteenth dynasty, ascertained by Birch on astronomical
evidence as about 1445 B.C. (about 1600, Manetho) ; and it seems nearly
certain that before the eighteenth dynasty, of which this king was the fifth
sovereign, there was no settled general government over all Egypt.

276 The Origin of the World.

half-tamed dogs of the East.* The Egyptians, too, of the ear-
lier dynasties, are more homogeneous in their appearance
than those of the later, after conquest and migration had in-
troduced new races ; and the earliest monumental notice re-
ferring to Negro tribes does not appear until the 12th dynasty,
about half-way between the epoch of Menes and the Christian
era, nor does any representation of the Negro features occur
until, at the earliest, the 17th dynasty. This allows ample
time — one thousand years at the least — for the development,
under abnormal circumstances and isolation, of all the most
strongly marked varieties of man. Still Egypt, even under the
old monarchy, presents evidence of the continuation of ante-
diluvian culture.!

It is obvious, in short, that the whole aspect of early Egyp-
tian history presents to us a people already civilized taking
possession of that country at a period corresponding with that
of the subsidence of the Noachian deluge, and not finding there
any remains of older populations. Nor have any remains of
such populations been found by modern investigation. %

In Assyria the results of the recent discoveries, so well
known through many learned and popular works, strikingly
confirm the Hebrew chronology. They indicate no slow emer-

* The Egyptians seem, like our modern cattle-breeders, to have taken
pride in the initiation and preservation of varieties. Their sacred bull,
Apis, was required to represent one of the varieties of the ox ; and one
can scarcely avoid believing that some of their deified ancestors must
have earned their celebrity as tamers or breeders of animals. At a later
period, the experiments of Jacob with Laban's flock furnish a curious in-
stance of attempts to induce variation.

t See for evidence of these views early notices in Genesis, and Lenor-
mant and Osburne on Egyptian Monuments and History.

X There is no good reason to believe the flint implements mentioned by
DelanoUe and others, as found on the banks of the Nile, to be older than
the historic period.

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 277

gence from barbarism, but show that in Assyria as in Egypt
implements of stone and metal were used together by a primi-
tive people, already far advanced in civilization ; and the oldest
historical names only carry us back to cities and sovereigns
of the Abrahamic age, while the story of the primitive empire
of Nimrod and the traditions of the deluge seem to have sur-
vived in more or less mythical legends. The earliest Assyr-
ian monuments would seem to belong to a Turanian race, of
which comparatively little is known, but which may correspond
with the primitive Cushites of Biblical story. To these, it is
true, Berosus attaches a fabulous antiquity; but this is not
confirmed by the monuments. These, according to the latest
facts disclosed by Smith, Rawlinson, and others, appear to fix
a date of about 1800 B.C. for the foundation of the Assyrian
monarchy proper, and the oldest previous date given by Assur-
bampal, who reigned about B.C. 668 to 626, gives 1635 years
before his time, or say 2280 B.C., as the date of an Elamite
king Kudarnankundi, who seems to be the leader of a prim-
itive tribe, one of the oldest in the region, and who has been
conjectured to have been the Chedorlaomer of Genesis, but
was probably one of his predecessors.

We gather from the Assyrian annals that the early Turanian
kings, while mound-builders like their kindred elsewhere, and
acquainted with metals and with the cuneiform writing, yet
constituted comparatively small nations, and were much oc-
cupied with hunting and other rude sports, and with predatory
expeditions, so as to answer very nearly to the Biblical con-
ception of the early Cushite kingdom of the valley of the
Euphrates, which was probably in the same stage of culture
with the nations that in a later period inhabited the valley
of the Mississippi, and are known as the Alleghans.

In connection with the early history of man, much impor-

278 The Origin of the World.

tance has been attached to the division of the early historic
and prehistoric ages into the periods of Stone, Bronze, and
Iron, and of the former into a PalaeoUthic or ancient stone age,
and a more modern or Neolithic stone age. It is plain, how-
ever, that too great importance has been attached to these
distinctions, and that they express rather differences of cir-
cumstances and of culture than of age, so that they have
really no bearing on the Biblical chronology.

If paleolithic or rudely chipped implements are the oldest
known, as they not improbably were the first tools used by
man, yet their use has extended in the case of rude nations
all the way up to the present time ; and in America and North-
ern Asia we know that their antiquity is but of yesterda}', and
that they were used with highly finished implements of bone,
and of those softer stones that admit of being polished. No
certain line can therefore be drawn even locally between a
Neolithic and a Palaeolithic period, especially since in localities
where flint implements were extensively quarried and made,
as on the banks of riv^ers in Northern France and Southern
England, and in such places as " Grimes' Graves " and Cissbury
in the latter country, where mines were sunk in the chalk for
the extraction of flints, it necessarily happened that vast mul-
titudes of unfinished or spoiled implements and weapons were
left on the ground, while the better -formed specimens were
for the most part taken away. This conclusion is amply sup-
ported by similar localities in America, where people well ac-
quainted with many of the arts of life have left quantities of
strictly palaeolithic material. Wilson, Southall, and other writ-
ers have accumulated so many examples of this that I think
the distinction of Palaeolithic and Neolithic ages must now be
given up by all investigators who possess ordinary judgment.
A remarkable instance is the celebrated "Flint ridge" of

Unity a?td Antiquity of Mail. 279

Ohio, which was a great quarry of flint for implements used
by the ancient mound-builders, a highly civilized race, as well
as by the modern Indians. Here are found countless multi-
tudes of palaeolithic flint implements of all the ordinary types,
but which are merely the unfinished material of workers ca-
pable of producing the most exquisite implements. There can
be scarcely a doubt that the palaeolithic implements of the Eu-
ropean gravels, in so far as they are the workmanship of man,
are in like manner merely the relics of old flint quarries.*

Possibly a more accurate measurement of time for particu-
lar regions of the world might be deduced from the introduc-
tion of bronze and iron. If the former was, as many antiqua-
rians suppose, a local discovery in Europe, and not introduced
from abroad, it can give no measurement of time whatever.
In America, as the facts detailed by Dr. Wilson show, while
a bronze age existed in Peru, it was the copper age in the
Mississippi Valley, and the stone age elsewhere; and these
conditions might have co-existed for any length of time, and
could give no indication of relative dates. On the other hand,
the iron introduced by European commerce spread at once
over the continent, and came into use in the most remote
tribes, and its introduction into America clearly marks an
historical epoch. With regard to bronze in Europe, we must
bear in mind that tin was to be procured only in England and
Spain, and in the latter in very small quantity; the mines of
Saxony do not seem to have been known till the Middle Ages.
We must further consider that tin ore is a substance not me-
tallic in appearance, and little likely to attract the attention
of savages; and that, as we gather from a hint of Pliny, it was
probably first observed, in the West at least, as stream tin, in

* Wilson, " Prehistoric Man," 2d edition, p. 68.

28o The Origin of the World.

the Spanish gold washings. Lastly, when we place in con-
nection with these considerations the fact that in the earliest
times of which we have certain knowledge, the tin trade of
Spain and England was monopolized by the Phoenicians, there
seems to be a strong probability that the extension of the trade
of this nation to the western Mediterranean really inaugurated
the bronze period. The only valid argument against this is the
fact that moulds and other indications of native bronze cast-
ing have been found in Switzerland, Denmark, and elsewhere ;
but these show nothing more than that the natives could re-
cast bronze articles, just as the American Indians can forge
fish-hooks and knives out of nails and iron hoops. Other
considerations might be adduced in proof of this view, but
our limits will not permit us to refer to them. The important
questions still remain : When was this trade commenced, and
how rapidly did it extend itself from the sea-coast across Eu-
rope.'' The British tin trade must have been in existence in
the time of Herodotus, though his notion of the locality was
not more definite than that it was in the extremity of the
earth. The Phoenician settlements in the western Mediter-
ranean must have existed as early as the time of Solomon,
when "ships of Tarshish" was the general designation of sea-
going ships for long voyages. How long previously these col-
onies existed we do not know; but considering the great scar-
city and value of tin in those very ancient times, we may infer
that perhaps only the Spanish, and not the British deposits were
known thus early; or that the Phoenicians had only indirect
access to the latter. Perhaps w^e may fix the time when these
traders were able to supply the nations of Europe with abun-
dance of bronze in exchange for their products, at, say looo to
1 200 B.C., as the earliest probable period; and possibly from
one to two centuries would be a sufficient allowance for the

U^iity and Antiquity of Man. 281

complete penetration of the trade throughout Europe. But
of course wars or migrations might retard or accelerate the
process; and there may have been isolated spots in which a
partial stone period extended up to those comparatively re-
cent times in which first the Greek trade, and afterward the
entire overthrow of the Carthaginian power by the Romans,
terminated forever the age of bronze and substituted the age
of iron. This would leave, according to our ordinary chro-
nologies, at least ten or fifteen centuries for the postdiluvian
stone period in Europe and Western Asia, a time quite suf-
ficient in our view for all that part of it represented by such
monuments as the Danish shell-heaps or the platform habi-
tations of the Swiss lakes; leaving the remains of the prehis-
toric caverns and river gravels for the antediluvian period.
A few facts in illustration of these points, and also of the
Biblical history, may be mentioned here.

We know perfectly that the early Chaldeans of the Euphra-
tean valley were acquainted with the use of metals — bronze
certainly, and at a very early date iron ; yet flint knives and
other implements of stone are found under circumstances
which show that they were used in the palmy days of the
Assyrian empire. The inhabitants of Egypt were acquainted
with bronze and iron long before the date of the Exodus, yet
the Egyptians used stone knives for some purposes up to a
comparatively modern time. Joshua used stone knives for
the purpose of circumcision; and according to Herodotus
there were Ethiopians in the army of Xerxes who used stone-
tipped arrows. If any antiquarian were to stumble on the
"hill of the foreskins " — a mound under which were buried in
all probability the multitudinous flint flakes used in the cir-
cumcision of the thousands of Israel — or the grave in which
some of the Ethiopian auxiliaries of Xerxes were buried with

282 TJie Origin of the Wor/d.

their flint arrow-heads and javelins of antelopes' horn, how
absurd would be the inference that these repositories were
of the palaeolithic age. Nay, so late as 1870 a traveller was
informed that the Bagos, a people of Abyssinia, still made
and used stone hatchets and flint knives *

In Europe we find reason to believe that the Ligurians of
Northwestern Italy were flint-folk of very rude type until they
were conquered by the Gauls about 400 B.C.f Though the
Gauls, Britons, and Germans of the age of Julius Caesar had
iron weapons, yet it is evident that the metal was very scarce,
and that bronze was more common ; and in confirmation of
this it is found that in the trenches before Alize, the Alesia
of Caesar, where the final struggle of the Roman general with
Vercingetorix took place, weapons of stone, bronze, and iron
are intermixed. All over the more northern parts of Europe
there is the best reason to believe that the use of stone and
bronze continued to a much later period, and locally until
long after the Christian era. It is clear that such facts as
these must greatly modify our ideas of the probable age
of the Swiss lake villages, and should induce the greatest
caution in claiming any special antiquity for particular classes
of implements.

One of the most remarkable discoveries of modern times
is that of the site of ancient Troy by Dr. Schliemann, and it
affords clear and decisive evidence as to the historic value
of the ages to which we have referred.

Troy was destroyed by the Greeks perhaps about 1300
B.C., and we know from Homer that this was in what for the

* Southall has accumulated a great number of these facts in his book
on the antiquity of man.

t Professor Issel, quoted in Popular Science Monthly.

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 283

Greeks and Trojans may properly be termed the copper age,
weapons and armor of that metal being in common use, and
also the mode of burial by .cremation. We may well suppose
that at that early date the stone age was still in full force in
Northern Europe and Asia, and in the mountains of Switzer-
land ; and as the tin mines of England had not yet been
reached, bronze was scarce and dear even in Eastern Europe
and Asia. Now Schliemann has disinterred the undoubted
Trojan Ilium on the hill of Hissarlik ; but he finds it to be
only one of several buried cities, and the succession of strata
will be most clearly seen in the section on the following
page, compiled from his clear and circumstantial descrip-
tions. It is needless to say that this presents a succession
of the stone age to one of comparatively high civilization. It
also forms an epitome of that of the whole East, and of primi-
tive man in general, in some very important respects. We
have first, at a date probably coeval with that of the earliest
monarchies of Assyria and Egypt, a primitive people whose
arts and mode of life remind us strongly of the American Tol-
tecans and Peruvians.* Schliemann supposes them to have
been Aryan, but they were more probably of Turanian race.
They must have occupied the site for a very long time.
They were succeeded by a more cultivated people of fine
physical organization, yet possibly still Turanians or primi-
tive Aryans, who by trade or plunder had accumulated large
stores of metallic wealth, and had made advances in the arts
of life placing them on a level with the early Phoenicians and
Egyptians, with whom they probably had intercourse. These

* Wilson has remarked the striking similarity of the pottery of these
people to American fictile wares. This similarity applies also to the early
Cyprian art.

284

The Origin of the World.

Surface.
Fifth stratum to 6^ feet -

The Greek IHum, with buildings and
objects of art characteristic of the
Hellenic civilization of historic pe-
riods.

Fourth stratum to 13 feet -

A second barbarous people, but prob-
ably allied to the first. Very coarse
pottery. Implements and weapons
of copper or bronze — stone knives
and saws.

Third stratum to 23 feet ■

Barbarous people occupying the site
of Troy. Rude stone implements
and rude pottery. Buildings of
small stones and clay. Some ob-
jects of pottery found here would
on American sites be regarded as
probably tobacco-pipes.

Second stratum to 33 feet

Homeric Troy. Implements and
weapons of copper, bronze, and
stone. Pottery, some of it of Pe-
ruvian and ancient Cypriot types.
Fine gold jewelry, and gold and
silver vessels. Armor similar to
that described by Homer. Stone
buildings and walls. This city had
been sacked and burned.

First stratum to 46 or 53 feet . . , ■
Rock.

Primitive or prehistoric Troy. Stone
implements, polished and chipped.
Millstones, copper nails, pottery —
some with patterns curiously resem-
bling those of America — bone im-
plements, terra-cotta disks. Stone
buildings.

were the Trojans of the Homeric poems, and the destruction
of their city was probably in the first instance celebrated in
their own native songs, which Homer at a date but Httle later*
wove into his magnificent poem, and idealized and exaggerated.
The Trojans worshipped an owl-headed goddess — the Athena

* I agree with Gladstone's conclusions as to the date and country of
Homer.

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 285

of the Homeric poems ; and from symbols found are believed
also to have had the worship of a sacred tree, and of fire or
of the Sun. All of these are widespread superstitions over
both the Old and New World. But while Troy flourished
there were barbarous nations not far off still in the stone
age ; and when the city had fallen, these, possibly in succes-
sive hordes, took possession of the fertile plain and used the
old city as their stronghold, perhaps till the foundation of the
Greek city about 650 B.C. I have sketched in some detail
these interesting discoveries, as they so clearly illustrate an
actual succession of ages, and so conclusively show the un-
certainty of the classification into ages of stone and metal,
except when taken in connection with the precise circum-
stances of each locality.

I have referred above only to the question of historic or
postdiluvian man. We have still to consider what remains
exist of antediluvian man. These may be studied in connec-
tion with our third head of geological evidences of man's an-
tiquity; for if the Mosaic narrative be true, the diluvial ca-
tastrophe must have constituted a physical separation be-
tween historic man and prehistoric; since, in so far as ante-
diluvian ages are concerned, all are prehistoric or mythical
everywhere except in the sacred history itself. Antediluvian
men may thus in geology be Pleistocene as distinguished
from modern, or Palaeocosmic as distinguished from Neo-
cosmic*

2. Language in Relation to the Antiquity of Man. — In many
animals the voice has a distinctive character ; but in man it
has an importance altogether peculiar. The gift of speech is

* I suggested these terms in my lectures published under the title
" Nature and the Bible," 1875.

286 The Origin of the World.

one of his sole prerogatives, and identity in its mode of exer-
cise is not only the strongest proof of similarity of psychical
constitution, but more than any other character marks iden-
tity of origin. The tongues of men are many and various \
and at first sight this diversity may, as indeed it often does,
convey the impression of radical diversity of race. But mod-
ern philological investigations have shown many and unex-
pected links of connection in vocabulary or grammatical
structure, or both, between languages apparently the most
dissimilar. I do not here refer to the vague and fanciful
parallels with which our ancestors were often amused, but to
the results of sober and scientific inquiry. " Nothing," says
Professor Max Miiller, " necessitates the admission of differ-
ent independent beginnings for the material elements of the
Turanian, Semitic, and Aryan branches of speech; nay, it is
possible even now to point out radicals which, under various
changes and disguises, have been current in these three
branches ever since their first separation." Of the truth of
this I have convinced myself by some original investigation,
and also of the farther truth that of this radical unity of all hu-
man tongues there is more full evidence than many philologists
are disposed to admit, and that the results of future study
must be to connect more and more with each other the sev-
eral main stems of language. Whether this results merely
from the psychical unity of the human race, or from the his-
torical derivation of languages from one root, is not so mate-
rial as the fact of unity ; but that the latter is implied it
would not be difficult to show.* Let us examine for a little

* Since these words were written I have read the remarkable book
of Edkins on the Chinese language, which supplies much additional in-
formation.

Unity and Atttiqitity of Man. 287

these results as they are presented to us by Latham, Miiller,
Bunsen, and other modern philologists.

A convenient starting-point is afforded by the great group
of languages known as the Indo-European, Japhetic, or Ary-
an. From the Ganges to the west coast of Ireland, through
Indian, Persian, Greek, Italian, German, Celt, runs one great
language — the Sanscrit and the dark Hindoo at one extreme,
the Erse and the xanthous Celt at the other. No one now
doubts the affinity of this great belt of languages. No one
can pretend that any one of these nations learned its lan-
guage from another. They are all decided branches of a
common stock. Lying in and near this area are other na-
tions— as the Arabs, the Syrians, the Jews — speaking lan-
guages differing in words and structure — the Semitic tongues.
Do these mark a different origin ? The philologists answer
in the negative, pointing to the features of resemblance
which still remain, and above all to certain intermediate
tongues of so high antiquity that they are rather to be re-
garded as root-stocks from which other languages diverged
than as mixtures. The principal of these is the ancient
Egyptian, represented by the inscriptions on the monuments
of that wonderful people, and by the more modern Coptic,
which, according to Bunsen and Latham, presents decided
affinities to both the great classes previously mentioned, and
may be regarded as strictly intermediate in its character. It
has accordingly been designated by the term Sub-Semitic*
But it shares this character with all or nearly all the other
African languages, which bear strong marks of affinity to the

* Donaldson has pointed out (British Association Proceedings, 1851)
links of connection between the Slavonian or Sarmatian tongues and the
Semitic languages, which in like manner indicate the primitive union of
the two great branches of languages.

288 The Origin of the World,

Egyptian and Semitic tongues. On this subject Dr. Latham
says, " That the uniformity of languages throughout Africa is
greater than it is either in Asia or in Europe, is a statement
to which I have not the least hesitation in committing my-
self."* To the north the Indo-European area is bounded by
a great group of semi-barbarous populations, mostly with
Mongolian features, and speaking languages which have been
grouped as Turanian. These Turanian languages, on the
one hand, graduate without any break into those of the Es-
quimaux and American Indians; on the other, according to
Miiller and Latham, they are united, though less distinctl}^,
with the Semitic and Japhetic tongues. They not improb-
ably represent in more or less altered forms the most prim-
itive stock of language from which both the Semitic and
Japhetic groups have branched. Another great area on the
coasts and in the islands of the Pacific is overspread by the
Malay, which, through the populations of Transgangetic In-
dia, connects itself with the great Indo-European line. Mr.
Edkins, in his remarkable book on " China's Place in Phi-
lology," has collected a large amount of fact tending to show
tliat the early Chinese in its monosyllabic radicals presents
root-forms traceable into all the stocks of human speech in
the Old World ; and the American languages would have fur-
nished him with similar lines of affinity. If we regard phys-
ical characters, manners, and customs, and mythologies, as
well as mere language, it is much easier thus to link togeth-
er nearly all the populations of the globe. In investigations
of this kind, it is true, the links of connection are often deli-
cate and evanescent; yet they have conveyed to the ablest

* " Man and his Migrations." See also " Descriptive Ethnology,"
where the Semitic affinities are very strongly brought out.

Unity and Antiquity of Man, 289

investigators the strong impression that the phenomena are
rather those of division of a radical language than of union
of several radically distinct.

This impression is farther strengthened when we regard
several results incidental to these researches. Latham has
shown that the languages of men may be regarded as ar-
ranged in lines of divergence, the extreme points of which
are :^uego, Tasmania, Easter Island ; and that from all these
points they converge to a common centre in Western Asia,
where we find a cluster of the most ancient and perfect lan-
guages; and even Haeckel is obliged to adopt in his map of
the affiliation of races of men a similar scheme, though he,
without any good historical or scientific evidence, extends it
back into the imaginary lost continent of Lemuria. Farther,
the languages of the various populations differ in proceeding
from these centres in a manner pointing to degeneracy such
as is likely to occur in small and rude tribes separating from
a parent stock. These fines of radiation follow the most
easy and probable lines of migration of the human race
spreading from one centre. It must also be observed that
in the primary migration of men, there must of necessity
have been at its extreme limits outlying and isolated tribes,
placed in circumstances in which language would very rapid-
ly change ; especially as these tribes, migrating or driven for-
ward, would be continually arriving at new regions present-
ing new circumstances and objects. When at length the ut-
most limit in any direction was reached, the inroads of new
races of population would press into close contact these
various tribes with their different dialects. Where the dis-
tance was greatest before reaching this limit, we might ex-
pect, as in America, to find the greatest mutual variety and
amount of difference from the original stock. After the

N

290 The Origin of the World.

primary migration had terminated, the displacements arising
from secondary migrations and conquests, would necessarily
complicate the matter by breaking up the original gradations
of difference, and thereby rendering lines of migration dif-
ficult to trace.

Taking all these points into the account, along with the
known tendencies of languages in all circumstances to var}^,
it is really wonderful that philology is still able to give so de-
cided indications of unity.

There is, in the usual manner of speaking of these subjects,
a source of misapprehension, which deserves special mention
in this place. The Hebrew Scriptures derive all the nations
of the ancient world from three patriarchs, and the names of
these have often been attached to particular races of men
and their languages ; but it should never be supposed that
these classifications are likely to agree with the Bible affilia-
tion. They may to a certain extent do so, but not necessari-
ly or even probably. In the nature of the case, those por-
tions of these families which remained near the original cen-
tre, and in a civilized state, would retain the original language
and features comparatively unchanged. Those which wan-
dered far, fell into barbarism, or became subjected to extreme
climatic influences, would vary more in all respects. Hence
any general classification, whether on physical or philological
characters, will be likely to unite, as in the Caucasian group
of Cuvier, men of all the three primitive families, while it will
separate the outlying and aberrant portions from their main
stems of affiliation. Want of attention to this point has led to
much misconception ; and perhaps it would be well to aban-
don altogether terms founded on the names of the sons of
Noah, except where historical affiliation is the point in ques-
tion. It would be well if it were understood that when the

Unity and Antiquity of Man, 291

terms Semitic, Japhetic,"*^ and Hametic are used, direct ref-
erence is made to the Hebrew ethnology ; and that, where
other arrangements are adopted, other terms should be used.
It is obviously unfair to apply the terms of Moses in a dif-
ferent way from that in which he uses them. A very prev-
alent error of this kind has been to apply the term Japhetic
to a number of nations not of such origin according to the
Bible ; and another of more modern date is to extend the
term Semitic to all the races descended from Ham, because
of resemblance of language. It should be borne in mind
that, assuming the truth of the Scriptural affiliation, there
should be a " central " group of races and languages where
the whole of the three families meet, and " sporadic "t groups
representing the changes of the outlying and barbarous
tribes.

While, however, all the more eminent philologists adhere
to the original unity of language, they are by no means agreed
as to the antiquity of man ; and some, as for instance Latham
and Dr. Max Midler, are disposed to claim an antiquity for
our species far beyond that usually admitted. In s© far as
this aifects the Bible history, it is important, inasmuch as this
would appear to limit the possible antiquity of all languages
to the time of the deluge. The date of this event has been
variously estimated, on Biblical grounds, at from 1650 B.C.
(Usher) to 3155 B.C. (Josephus and Hales) ; but the longest
of these dates does not appear to satisfy the demands of phi-
lology. The reason of this demand is the supposed length

* I can scarcely except such terms as "Japetic" and "Japetidas," for
lapetus can hardly be any thing else than a traditional name borrowed
from Semitic ethnology, or handed down from the Japhetic progenitors
of the Greeks.

t See art. ♦' Philology," Encyc. Brit.

292 The Origin of the World.

of time required to effect the necessary changes. The subject
is one on which definite data can scarcely be obtained. Lan-
guages change now, even when reduced to a comparatively
stable form by writing. They change more rapidly when
men migrate into new climates, and are placed in contact
with new objects. The English, the Dutch, and the German
were perhaps all at the dawn of the mediaeval era Maeso-
Gothic. At the same rate of change, allowing for greater bar-
barism and greater migrations, they may very well have been
something not far from Egyptian or Sanscrit 2000 years be-
fore Christ. The truth is that present rates of variation afford
no criterion for the changes that must occur in the languages
of small and isolated tribes lapsing into or rising from bar-
barism, possessing few words, and constantly requiring to
name new objects ; and until some ratio shall have been es-
tablished between these conditions and those of modern lan-
guages, fixed by literature and by a comparatively stationary
state of society, it is useless to make any demands for longer
time on this ground.*

Even'in the present day, Moffat informs us that in South
Africa the separation of parts of a tribe, for even a few months,
may produce a notable difference of dialect. If we take
the existing languages of civilized men whose history is known,
we shall find that it is impossible to trace many of them
back as far as the Christian era, and when we have passed
over even half that interval, they become so different as to
be unintelligible to those who now speak them. Where there

* Grammatical structure is no doubt more permanent than vocabulary,
yet we find great changes in the latter, both in tracing cognate languages
from one region to another, and from period to period. The Indo-Ger-
manic languages in Europe furnish enough of familiar instances.

Unity ajid Antiqiiity of Man. 293

are exceptions to this, they arise entirely from the effects
of literature and artificial culture. While, therefore, there is
good ground in philology for the belief in one primitive lan-
guage, there seems no absolute necessity to have recourse
even to the confusion of tongues at Babel to explain the di-
versities of language.* Farther, the Bible carries back the
Semitic group of languages at least to the time of the Deluge,
but it does not seem necessary on the mere ground of ante-
diluvian names, to carry it any farther back, and the Assyrian
inscriptions show the co-existence of Turanian and Semitic
tongues at the dawn of history in the region of the Euphrates
and Tigris. One or other of these — or a monosyllabic lan-
guage underlying it — was probably an antediluvian tongue,
and the other a very early derivative ; and both history and
philology would assign the precedence to the Turanian lan-
guage, which was probably most akin to that which had de-
scended from antediluvian times, and which at that early
period of dispersion indicated in the Bible story of Babel, had
begun to throw off its two great branches of the Aryan and
Semitic languages. These, proceeding in two dissimilar lines
of development, continue to exist to this day along with the
surviving portions of the uncultivated Turanian speech. To
this point, however, we may return under another head.

* It is fair, however, to observe that the Bible refers the first great di-
vergence of language to a divine intervention at the Tower of Babel. The
precise nature of this we do not know ; but it would tend to diminish the
time required.

294 The Origin of the World.

CHAPTER XIV.

UNITY AND ANTIQUITY OF ^K^— {Continued.)

" By the word of God the heavens were from of old, and the earth, form-
ed out of water, and by means of water, by which waters the world that
then was, being overflowed with water, perished." — 2 Peter iii., 5, 6.

3. Geological Evidence as to the Antiquity of Man. — No geo-
logical fact can now be more firmly established than the as-
cending progression of animal life, whereby from the early in-
vertebrates of the Eozoic and Primordial series we pass upward
through the dynasties of fishes and reptiles and brute mam-
mals to the reign of man. In this great series man is ob-
viously the last term ; and when we inquire at what point he
was introduced, the answer must be in the later part of the
great Cainozoic or Tertiary period, which is the latest of the
whole. Not only have we the negative fact of the absence
of his remains from all the earlier Tertiary formations, but
the positive fact that all the mammalia of these earlier ages
are now extinct, and that man could not have survived the
changes of condition which destroyed them and introduced
the species now our contemporaries. This fact is altogether
independent of any question as to the introduction of species
by derivation or by creation. The oldest geological period
in which any animals nearly related in structure to man
occur is that named the Miocene, and no traces of man
have as yet been found in any deposits of this age. All human
remains known belong either to the Pleistocene or Modern.

Uitity and Afttiqiiity of Man. 295

Now the Pleistocene was characterized by one of those pe-
riods of glacial cold which have swept over the earth — by one
of those great winters which have so chilled the continents
that few forms of life could survive them — and man comes in
at the close of this cold period, in what is called the Post-gla-
cial age. Some geologists, it is true, hold to an interglacial
warm period, in which man is supposed to have existed, but
the evidence of this is extremely slender and doubtful, and it
carries back in any case human antiquity but a very little
way. I have, in my " Story of the Earth and Man," shown
reason for the belief, in which I find Professor Hughes, of
Cambridge, coincides with me,* that the interglacial periods
are merely an ingenious expedient to get rid of the difficul-
ties attending the hypothesis of the universal glaciation of
the northern hemisphere.

But, though man is thus geologically modern, it is held
that historically his existence on earth may have been very
ancient, extending perhaps ten or twenty, or even a hundred
times longer than the period of six or seven thousand years
supposed to be proved by sacred history. Let us first, as
plainly and simply as possible, present the facts supposed
thus to extend the antiquity of man, and then inquire as to
their validity and force as arguments in this direction.

The arguments from geology in favor of a great antiquity
for man may be summarized thus: (i) Human remains are
found in caverns under very thick stalagmitic crusts, and in
deposits of earth which must have accumulated before these
stalagmites began to form, and when the caverns were differ-
ently situated with reference to the local drainages. (2) Re-
mains of man are found under peat-bogs which have grown

* Lecture in the Royal Institution, March 24, 1876.

296 The Origin of the World.

so little in modern times that their antiquity on the whole
must be very great. (3) Implements, presumably made by
men, are found in river-gravels so high above existing river-
beds that great physical changes must have occurred since
they were accumulated. (4) One case is on record where a
human bone is believed to have been found under a deposit
of glacial age. (5) Human remains have been found under
circumstances which indicate that very important changes of
level have taken place since their accumulation. (6) Human
remains have been found under circumstances which indicate
great changes of climate as intervening between their date
and that of the modern period. (7) Man is known to have
existed, in Europe at least, at the same time with some quad-
rupeds formerly supposed to have been extinct before his in-
troduction. (8) The implements, weapons, etc., found in the
oldest of these repositories are different from those known to
have been used in historic times.

These several heads include, I think, all the really material
evidence of a geological character. It is evidence of a kind
not easily reducible into definite dates, but there can be no
doubt that its nature, and the rapid accumulation of facts
within a small number of years, have created a deep and
widespread conviction among geologists and archaeologists
that we must relegate the origin of man to a much more re-
mote antiquity than that sanctioned by history or by the Bib-
lical chronology. I shall first review the character of this
evidence, and then state a number of geological facts which
bear in the other direction, and have been somewhat lost
sight of in recent discussions. Of the facts above referred to,
the most important are those which relate to caverns, peat-
bogs, and river-gravels. We may, therefore, first consider the
nature and amount of this evidence.

Unity and Antiquity of Maji. 297

That the reader may more distinctly understand the geo-
logical history of these more recent periods of the earth's
history which are supposed to have witnessed the advent of
man, in Western Europe at least, I quote the following sum-
mary from Sir Charles Lyell of the more modern changes in
that portion of the world. These are :

" First, a continental period, toward the close of which the
forest of Cromer flourished : when the land was at least 500
feet above its present level, perhaps much higher. * * * The
remains oi Hippopotamus major and Rhinoceros etriisais, found
in beds of this period, seem to indicate a climate somewhat
milder than that now prevailing in Great Britain. [This was
a Preglacial era, and may be regarded as belonging to the
close of the Pliocene tertiary.]

" Secondly, a period of submergence, by which the land
north of the Thames and Bristol Channel, and that of Ire-
land, was generally reduced to * * ^ an archipelago. * * *
This was the period of great submergence and of floating
ice, when the Scandinavian flora, which occupied the lower
grounds during the first continental period, may have obtain-
ed exclusive possession of the only lands not covered with
perpetual snow. [This represents the Glacial period; but
according to the more extreme glacialists only a portion of
that period.]

" Thirdly, a second continental period, when the bed of the
glacial sea, with its marine shells and erratic blocks, was laid
dry, and when the quantity of land equalled that of the first
period. * =* * During this period there were glaciers in the
higher mountains of Scotland and Wales, and the Welsh
glaciers * * ^ pushed before them and cleared out the
marine drift with which some valleys had been filled during
the period of submergence. * * * During this last period

N 2

298 The Origin of the World.

the passage of the Germanic flora into the British area took
place, and the Scandinavian plants, together with northern
insects, birds, and quadrupeds, retreated into the higher
grounds. =* * *

" Fourthly, the next and last change comprised the break-
ing up of the land of the British area once more into numer-
ous islands, ending in the present geographical condition of
things. There were probably many oscillations of level dur-
ing this last conversion of continuous land into islands, and
such movements in opposite directions would account for the
occurrence of marine shells at moderate heights above the
level of the sea, notwithstanding a general lowering of the
land. * * * During this period a gradual amelioration of
temperature took place, from the cold of the glacial period
to the climate of historical times." ^

The second continental period above referred to is that
which appears on the best evidence to have been the time of
the introduction of man; but such facts as that of the Settle
Cave, and the implements of the breccia in Kent's Cave, if
rightly interpreted, would make man preglacial or " inter-
glacial."

The deposits found in caverns in France, Switzerland,
Germany, Belgium, and England have afforded a large pro-
portion of the remains from which we derive our notions of
the most ancient prehistoric men of Europe. From the Bel-
gian caves, as explored by M. Dupont, we learn that there
were two successive prehistoric races, both rude or com-
paratively uncivilized. The first were men of Turanian type,
but of great bodily stature and high cerebral organization,
and showing remarkable skill in the manufacture of imple-

* " Antiquity of Man," 4th ed.

Unity and Antiquity of Man, 299

ments and ornaments of bone and ivor}^ These men are be-
lieved to have been contemporary with the earher postglacial
mammals, as the mammoth and hairy rhinoceros, and to
have lived at a time when the European land was more ex-
tensive than at present, stretching far to the west of Ireland,
and connecting Great Britain with the Continent. The skele-
tons found at Cro-Magnon, Mentone, and elsewhere in France
fully confirm the deductions of Dupont as to this earliest race
of Palaeocosmic, Palaeolithic, or antediluvian man. This grand
race seems to have perished or been driven from Europe by
the great depression of the level of the land which inaugu-
rated the modern era, and which was probably accompanied
by many oscillations of level as well as by considerable
changes of climate. They were succeeded by a second
race, equally Turanian in type, but of small stature, and re-
sembling the modern Lapps. These were the "allophylian"
peoples displaced by the historical Celts, and up to their
time the reindeer seems to have existed abundantly in France
and Germany. These two successive prehistoric populations
have been termed respectively men of the "mammoth" age
and men of the " reindeer " age. The Bible record would
lead us to regard the earlier and gigantic men as antediluvian,
and the smaller or Lappish race as postdiluvian. We may
therefore, having already at some length considered the post-
diluvian age, take up the mode of occurrence of the remains
of the earlier of the two races — that of the mammoth age.

The caverns themselves may be divided into those of resi-
dence, of sepulture, and of driftage, though one cavern has
often successively assumed two at least of these characters.
In the caverns of residence large accumulations have been
formed of ashes, charcoal, bones, and other debris of cookery,
among which are found flint and bone implements, the gen-

300 The Origin of the World.

eral character of which, as well as that of the needles, stone
hammers, mortars for paint, and other domestic appliances,
are not more dissimilar from those of the Red Indian and
Esquimau races in North America than these are from one
another, and in many things, as in the bone harpoons, the re-
semblance is very striking indeed. In tendency to imitative
art, and in the skill of their delineations of animals, the pre-
historic men seem to have surpassed all the American races
except the semi-civilized mound-builders and the more cul-
tivated Mexican and Peruvian nations. With regard to the
residence of these men of the mammoth age in caverns, sev-
eral things are indicated by American analogies to which
some attention should be paid.

It is not likely that caverns were the usual places of resi-
dence of the whole population. They may have been winter
houses for small tribes and detached families of fugitives or
outlaws, or they may have been places of resort for hunting
parties at certain seasons of the year. The large quantities
of broken and uncooked bones of particular species, as of the
horse and reindeer, in some of the caverns, would farther in-
dicate a habit of making great battues, like those of the
American hunting tribes, at certain seasons, and of preparing
quantities of pemmican or dried meat preserved with marrow
and fat for future use. The number of bone needles found
in some of the caves would seem to hint that, like the Amer-
icans, they sewed up their pemmican in skin bags. The mul-
titude of flint flakes and of rude stone implements applicable
to breaking bones certainly indicates a wholesale cutting of
flesh and preparation of marrow. In the "Story of the
Earth," I have suggested in connection with this that there
may have been towns or villages of these people unknown
to us, and which would aflbrd higher conceptions of their

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 301

progress in the arts. This anticipation appears recently to
have been realized in the discovery of such a town or forti-
fied village of the mammoth age at Soloutre, in France, and
which seems to afford evidence that these ancient people had
already domesticated the horse, using it as food as well as a
beast of burden, in the manner of the Khirgis and certain other
Tartar tribes of Central Asia.* This, with the undoubtedly
high cerebral organization indicated by the skulls of the mam-
moth age, notably raises our estimate of the position of man
at this early date.

With regard to caves of sepulture, the same remark may be
made as with regard to the caves of residence. They do not
seem to have been the burial-places of large populations, but
only occasional places of interment, few bodies being found
in them, and these often interred in the midst of culinary de-
bris, evidencing previous or contemporary residence. With
regard to the latter, it seems to have been no uncommon prac-
tice with some North American tribes to bury the dead either
in the floors of their huts or in their immediate proximity.
It is probable, however, that the few examples known of caves
of sepulture of this period indicate not tribal or national
places of burial, but occasional and accidental cases, happen-
ing to hunting or war parties, perhaps remote from their or-
dinary places of residence. In so far as method of burial is
concerned, the men of the Palaeocosmic or Mammoth age
seem to have buried the dead extended at full length, and
not in the crouching posture usual with some later races.
Like the Americans, they painted the dead man, and buried
him with his robes and ornaments, and probably with his
weapons, thus intimating their belief in happy hunting-

* Southal], op. cit.

302 The Origin of the World.

grounds beyond the grave.* I may remark here that all the
known interments of the mammoth age indicate a race of
men of great cerebral capacity, with long heads and coarsely
marked features, of large stature and muscular vigor, surpass-
ing indeed much in all these respects the average man of
modern Europe. These characteristics befit men who had
to contend with the mammoth and his contemporaries, and
to subdue the then vast wildernesses of the eastern continent,
and they correspond with the Biblical characteristics of ante-
diluvian man.

Among caves of driftage may be classed some of those
near Liege, in Belgium, and, partially at least, those of Kent's
Hole and Brixham, in England. In these only disarticu-
lated remnants of human skeletons, or more frequently only
flint implements, some of them of doubtful character, have
been found. In my " Story of the Earth," I have taken the
carefully explored Kent's Cavern of Torquay as a typical ex-
ample, and have condensed its phenomena as described by
Mr. Pengelly. I nov/ repeat this description, with some im-
portant emendations suggested by that gentleman in more
recent reports and in private correspondence.

The somewhat extensive and ramifying cavern of Kent's
Hole is an irregular excavation, evidently due partly to fis-
sures or joints in limestone rock, and partly to the erosive
action of water enlarging such fissures into chambers and
galleries. At what time it was originally cut we do not
know, but it must have existed as a cavern at the close of
the Pliocene or beginning of the Post-pliocene period, since
which time it has been receiving a series of deposits which
have quite filled up some of its smaller branches.

* The Mentone skeleton described by Dr. Riviere gives evidence of
these facts.

Unity and Antiqtiity of Man. 303

First and lowest, according to Mr. Pengelly, of the deposits
as yet known, is a " breccia," or mass of broken and rounded
stones, with hardened red clay filling the interstices. Some
of the stones are of the rock which forms the roof and walls
of the cave, but the greater number, especially the rounded
ones, are from more distant parts of the surrounding country.
Many are fragments of grit from the Devonian beds of adja-
cent hills. There are also fragments of stalagmite from an
old crust broken up when the breccia was deposited, and
possibly belonging to Pliocene times. In this mass, the
depth of which is unknown, are numerous bones, nearly all of
one kind of animal, the cave bear or bears, for there may be
more than one species — creatures which seem to have lived in
Western Europe from the close of the Pliocene down to the
modern period. They must have been among the earliest
and most permanent tenants of Kent's Hole at a time when
its lower chambers were still filled with water. Teeth of a
lion and of the common fox also occur in this deposit, but
rarely. Next above the breccia is a floor of " stalagmite," or
stony carbonate of lime, deposited from the drippings of the
roof, and in some places more than twelve feet thick. This
also contains bones of the cave bear, deposited when there
was less access of water to the cavern. Mr. Pengelly infers
the existence of man at this time from the occurrence of
chipped flints supposed to be artificial ; but which, in so far
as I can judge from the specimens described and figured,
must still be regarded as of doubtful origin.

After the old stalagmite floor above mentioned was formed,
the cave again received deposits of muddy water and stones ;
but now a change occurs in the remains embedded. This
stony clay, or " cave earth," has yielded an immense quantity
of teeth and bones, including those of the elephant, rhinoce-

304 The Origin of the World.

ros, horse, hyena, cave bear, reindeer, and Irish elk. With
these were found weapons of chipped flint, and harpoons,
needles, and bodkins of bone, precisely similar to those of
the North American Indians and other rude races. The
"cave earth" is four feet or more in thickness. It is not
stratified, and contains many fallen fragments of rock, round-
ed stones, and broken pieces of stalagmite. It also has
patches of the excrement of hyenas, which the explorers sup-
pose to indicate the temporary residence of these animals;
and besides fragments of charcoal scattered in the mass,
there is in one spot, near the top, a limited layer of burned
wood, with remains which indicate the cooking and eating of
repasts of animal food by man. It is clear that when this
bed was formed the cavern was liable to be inundated with
muddy water, carrying stones and perhaps some of the
bones and implements, and breaking up in places the old
stalagmite floor.* One of the most puzzling features, es-
pecially to those who take an exclusively uniformitarian
view, is that the entrance of water-borne mud and stones
implies a level of the bottom of the water in the neighboring
valleys of nearly one hundred feet above its present height.
The cave earth is covered by a second crust of stalagmite,
less dense and thick than that below, and containing only
a few bones, which are of the same general character with
those beneath, but include a fragment of a human jaw wdth
teeth. Evidently when this stalagmite w^as formed the in-
flux of water-borne materials had ceased, or nearly so ; and
Mr. Pengelly appears to affirm, though without assigning any

* Mr. Pengelly declines to admit this ; but assigns no cause for the
breaking up of portions of the old floor, which he merely refers in general
terms to "natural causes."

Unity arid Antiquity of Man. 305

reason, that none of these bones could, like the masses of
stalagmite, have been lifted from lower beds, or washed into
the cave from without.

The next bed marks a new change. It is a layer of black
mould from three to ten inches thick. Its microscopic
structure does not seem to have been examined ; but it is
probably a forest soil, introduced by growth, by water, by
wind, and by ingress of animals, all of them modern, and
contains works of art from the old British times before the
Roman invasion up to the porter bottles and dropped half-
pence of modern visitors. Lastly, in and upon the black
mould are many fallen blocks from the roof of the cave.

There can be no doubt that this cave and the neighboring
one of Brixham have done very much to impress the minds
of British geologists with ideas of the great antiquity of man ;
and they have, more than any other post-glacial monuments,
shown the existence of some animals now extinct up to the
human age. Of precise data for determining time, they
have, however, given nothing. The only measures which
seem to have been applied, namely, the rate of growth of
stalagmite and the rate of erosion of neighboring valleys,
are, from the very sequence of the deposits, obviously worth-
less j and the only apparently constant measure, namely, the
fall of blocks from the roof, seems not to have been applied,
and Mr. Pengelly declares that it can not be practically
used. We are therefore quite uncertain as to the number of
centuries involved in the filling of this cave, and must re-
main so until some surer system of calculation can be de-
vised. We may, however, attempt to sketch the series of
events which it indicates.

The animals found in Kent's Hole are all "post-glacial,"
some of them of course survivors from "pre-glacial" times,

3o6 The Origin of the World.

and some of them still surviving. They therefore inhabited
the country after it rose from the great glacial submergence.
Perhaps the first colonists of the coast of Devonshire in this
period were the cave bears, migrating on floating ice, and
subsisting like the arctic bear and the black bear of Anti-
costi, on fish, and on the garbage cast up by the sea. They
may have found Kent's Hole a sea-side cavern, with perhaps
some of its galleries still full of water and filling with breccia,
with which the bones of dead bears became mixed. In the
case of such a deposit as this breccia, however, the precise
time when its materials were finally laid down in their pres-
ent form, or the length of time necessary for its accumula-
tion, can not be definitely settled. It may be a result of con-
tinued torrential action or of some sudden cataclysm. As
the land rose, these creatures for the most part betook them-
selves to lower levels, and in process of time the cavern
stood upon a hill -side, perhaps several hundreds of feet
above the sea ; and the mountain streams, their beds not yet
emptied of glacial detritus, washed into it stones and mud,
and probably bones also, while it appears that hyenas occu-
pied the cave at intervals, and dragged in remains of mam-
mals of many species which had now swarmed across the
plains elevated out of the sea, and multiplied in the land.
This was the time of the cave earth ; and before its deposit
was completed, though how long before an unstratified and
therefore probably often-disturbed bed of this kind can not
tell, man himself seems to have been added to the inhabit-
ants of the British land. In pursuit of game he sometimes
ascended the valleys beyond the cavern, or even penetrated
into its outer chambers ; or perhaps there were even in those
days rude and savage hill-menj inhabiting the forests and war-
ring with the more cultivated denizens of plains below, which

Unity and A7itiqiiity of Man. 307

are now deep under the waters. Their weapons, and other im-
plements dropped in the cavern or lost in hunting, or buried
in the flesh of wounded animals which crept to the streams
to assuage their thirst, are those found in the cave earth.
The absence of the human bones may merely show that the
mighty hunters of those days were too hardy, athletic, and
intelligent often to perish from accidental causes, and that
they did not use this cavern for a place of burial. The frag-
ments of charcoal show that they were acquainted with fire,
and possibly that they sometimes took shelter in the cave.
But the land again subsided. The valley of that now name-
less river, of which the Rhine and the Thames may have
alike been tributaries, disappeared under the sea ; and per-
haps some tribe, driven from the lower lands, took up its
abode in this cave, now again near the encroaching waves,
and left there the remains of their last repasts ere they were
driven farther inland or engulfed in the waters. For a time
the cavern may have been wholly submerged, and the char-
coal of the extinguished fires became covered with its thin
coating of clay. But ere long it re-emerged to form part of
an island, long barren and desolate ; and the valleys having
been cut deeper by the receding waters, it no longer received
muddy deposits, and the crust formed by drippings from its
roof contained only bones and pebbles washed by rains and
occasional land floods from its own clay deposits. Finally,
the modern forests overspread the land, and were tenanted
by the modern animals. Man returned to use the cavern
again as a place of refuge or habitation, and to leave there
the relics contained in the black earth. This seems at pres-
ent the only intelligible history of this curious cave and oth-
ers resembling it ; though, when we consider the imperfection
of the results obtained even by a large amount of labor, and

3o8 The Origin of the World.

the difficult and confused character of the deposits in this
and similar caves, too much value should not be attached
to such histories, which may at any time be contradicted or
modified by new facts or different explanations of those al-
ready known. The time involved depends very much on the
answer to the question whether we should regard the post-
glacial subsidence and re-elevation as somewhat sudden, or
as occupying long ages at the slow rate at which some parts
of our continents are now rising or sinking.

Mr. Pengelly thinks it possible, but not proved, that the
lower breccia of Kent's Cavern may be interglacial or pre-
glacial in age. One case only is known where a human
bone has been found in a cavern under deposits supposed
to be of the nature of the glacial drift. It is that of the Vic-
toria Cave, at Settle, in Yorkshire. At this place a human
fibula was found under a layer of boulder clay. But there
are too many chances of this bone having come into this po-
sition by some purely local accident to allow us to attach
much importance to it until future discoveries shall have
supplied other instances of the kind.*

I may close this survey of the cave deposits with a sum-
mary of the results of M. Dupont, as obtained from two of
the caves explored by him, that of Margite and that of Fron-
tal. In the first of these caverns, resting on rolled pebbles
which covered the floor, were four distinct layers of river
mud deposited by inundations, and amounting to two yards
and a half in thickness. In all of these layers were bones.
The lowest contained rude flint implements, and bones of
the mammoth, rhinoceros, bear, horse, chamois, reindeer,

* This whole subject of supposed preglacial or interglacial men is still
in great confusion and uncertainty, and is complicated with questions, still
debated, as to the ages of the supposed glacial and post-glacial deposits.

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 309

stag, and hyena. In the overlying deposits are some flint
implements of more artistic form and a greater prevalence
of the bones of the reindeer. In the second cave, that of
Frontal, over a similar deposit of alluvial mud of the mam-
moth age, was found a sepulchre containing the remains of
sixteen individuals, of the second or diminutive Lappish race
before referred to. The door of the cave had been closed
by %ese people with a slab of stone, and in front was a
hearth for funeral feasts, built on the deposits of the mam-
moth age, and containing bones of animals all recent or now
living in Belgium, and without any traces of the bones of the
extinct quadrupeds. This burial-place belonged to the Neo-
cosmic yet prehistoric race which replaced the Palaeocosmic
men of the mammoth age.

What is the absolute antiquity of the Palaeocosmic age in
Europe? We have no monumental or historical chronology
to answer this question, but only the measures of time fur-
nished by the accumulation of deposits, by the deposition of
stalagmite, by the gradual extinction of animals, and by the
erosion of valleys and other physical changes. These some-
what loose measures have been applied in various ways, but
the tendency of geologists, from the prevalence of uniformi-
tarian views, and the prejudice created by familiarity with
the long times of previous geologic periods, has been to as-
sign to them too great rather than too little value, both as
measures of time and as indicating a remote antiquity.

With reference to the accumulation of deposits, whether
derived from disintegration of the roof and walls of the cave,
introduced by land floods or river inundations or by the
residence of man, their rate is of very diflicult estimation.
Loose stones fallen from the roof, as in the case of Kent's
Cave, would give a fair measure of time if we could be sure

3IO The Origin of the World,

that the climate had continued uniform, and that there had
been no violent earthquakes. Mr. Pengelly has, however,
hopelessly given up this kind of evidence. Where, as in the
case of many of these caves, land floods and river inundations
have entered, these may have been frequent or separated by
long intervals of time, and they may have been of great or
small amount. Where, for instance, as in one of the Belgian
caves, there are six beds of ossiferous mud, but for the fact
that five layers of stalagmite separate them we might not
have known whether they represent six annual inundations,
or floods separated by many centuries from each other.

In the case of the Victoria Cave at Settle, Dawkins, reason-
ing from the accumulation of two feet of detritus over British
remains that may be supposed to be 1200 years old, gives a
basis which would at the same rate of deposit allow about
5000 years for the date of palaeolithic men; but Prestwich
and others, on the basis of stalagmite deposits, claim a vastly
higher antiquity for the men who made the implements found
in Kent's Hole and Brixham.

If we now turn to these stalagmite floors, when we consider
that they have been formed by the slow solution of limestone
by rain-water charged with carbonic acid, and the dropping of
this water on the floor, and when we are told that in Kent's
Cavern a marked date shows that the stalagmite has grown at
the rate of only one twentieth of an inch since 1688, and that
there are two beds of stalagmite, one of which is in some
places twelve feet thick, we are impressed with the conviction
of a vast antiquity. But when we are told by Dawkins that
the rate of deposit in Ingleborough Cave may be estimated
at a quarter of an inch per annum, and when we consider
that the present rate of deposit in Kent's Hole is probably
very different from what it was in the former condition of the

Unity a7id Antiquity of Man. 311

country, stalagmite becomes a very unsafe measure of time.
With respect again to the accumulation of kitchen -midden
stuff in the course of the occupancy of caverns, this proceeds
with great rapidity, when caves are steadily occupied and it
is not the practice to cleanse out the debris of fires, food, and
bedding. Even when the occupation is temporary, a tribe of
savages engaged with the preparation of dried meat and pem-
mican in a very short time produce a considerable heap of
bones and other rejectamenta.

Looking next to the extinction of animals, we find that the
species found in the oldest deposits containing human re-
mains are in part still extant. Others which are locally ex-
tinct we know existed in Europe until historical times, that
is, within the last two thousand years. How long previously
to this the others became extinct we have no certain means
of knowing, though it seems probable that they disappeared
gradually and successively. We have, however, farther to
bear in mind the possibility of cataclysms or climatal changes
which may have proved speedily fatal to many species over
large areas. In any case we have this certain fact that,
though the time elapsed has been sufiicient for the extinction
of many species, it does not seem to have sufficed to effect
any noteworthy change on those that survived. Farther, we
may consider that time is only one factor in this matter, and
not the one which is the efficient cause of change, since we
know no reason why one species of animal should not con-
tinue to be reproduced as long as another, but for the occur-
rence of physical changes of a prejudicial character.

We have still remaining the changes which have taken
place in the erosion of valleys since the caverns were occu-
pied. Dupont informs us that the openings of some of the
caverns once flooded by rivers are now in limestone cliffs two

312 The Origin of the World.

hundred feet above the water, while no appreciable lowering
of the bottoms of the ravines is taking place now. This would
in some contingencies put back the period of filling of the
caves to an indefinite antiquity. But then the questions
occur — Was there once more water in the rivers or more ob-
struction at their outlets, or was the erosive power greater at
one time than now, or were the river valleys excavated in still
more ancient time, and partly filled with mud when the water
entered the caves, and may this mud have been since swept
away ? So, in like manner, the waters flowing in the channels
near Brixham Cave and Kent's Hole were apparently about
seventy feet higher in times of flood than at present, but the
time involved is subject to the same doubts as in the case of
the Belgian caves. Hughes has well remarked that elevations
of the land, by causing rivers to form waterfalls and cascades,
which they cut back, may greatly accelerate the rate of ero-
sion. Farther, there is the best reason to believe that in the
glacial period many old valleys were filled with clay, and that
the modern cutting consisted merely in the removal of this
cla}'. Belt has shown in a recent paper ^ good reason to be-
lieve that this is the case with the Falls of Niagara, and that
the cutting actually effected through rock within the later Ple-
istocene and modern period has been that only of the new
gorge from the whirlpool to Queenstown, the main part of the
ravine being of older date and merely re-excavated. This
would greatly reduce the ordinary estimate of time based on
the cutting of the Niagara gorge.

This leads us next to consider the occurrence of human re-
mains and objects of art in the river-gravels themselves, and
the amount of excavation and deposit involved in the deposi-

* Quarterly Journal of Science, April, 1875.

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 313

tion of these gravels. In the river-gravels of the Somme, and
of many other rivers in France and Southern England, chip-
ped flints and rude flint implements are found in so great
quantity as to imply that the beds and banks of these streams
were resorted to for flint material, and that the unfinished and
rejected implements left in the holes and trenches, or on the
heaps where the work was carried on, were afterward sorted by
running water, perhaps in abnormal floods and debacles, such
as occur in all river valleys occasionally, perhaps in that great
diluvial catastrophe which seems to have terminated the resi-
dence of Palaeocosmic man in Europe. Wilson has well shown
how the heaps left by American tribes in and near their flint
quarries would furnish the material for such accumulations.
The time required for the erosion of the valleys and the de-
posit of the gravels has been very variously estimated. In
the case of the Somme, which river is not appreciably deepen-
ing its bed, if w^e suppose it to have cut its wide valley to the
depth of one hundred and fifty feet out of solid chalk since
the so-called "high level" gravels of France and the South of
England were deposited, the time required shades off into in-
finity. So Evans, in his work on "The Ancient Stone Imple-
ments of Great Britain," looking upon the amount of excava-
tion of wide and deep valleys since the stone implements of
Bournemouth are supposed to have been deposited in gravel,
says, " Who can fully comprehend how immensely remote was
the epoch when that vast bay was high and dry land?" and
he becomes poetical in delineating the view that must have
met the eyes of "palaeolithic" man. And undoubtedly, if
one is to be limited to the precise nature and amount of
causes now at work in the district, the time must not only be
"immensely remote," but illimitably so. The difficulty lies
with the exaggerated uniformitarianism of the supposition that

O

314 The Origin of the World,

such causes could have produced the results. But, for rea-
sons to be immediately stated, the time required is liable to
numerous deductions ; and recently Tylor, Pattison, Collard,
and others have insisted ably on these deductions, as has also
Professor Hughes, of Cambridge. I have myself urged them
strongly in the work already referred to.

In the first place, when we see a deep river valley in which
the present stream is doing an almost infinitesimal amount
of deepening, we are not to infer that this represents all its
work past and present. In times of unusual flood it may do
in one week more than in many previous years. Farther, if
there have been elevations or depressions of the land, when
the land has been raised the cutting power has at once been
enormously increased, and when depressed it has been dimin-
ished, or filling has taken the place of cutting. Again, if the
climate in time past has been more extreme, or the amount
of rainfall greater, the cutting action has then been propor-
tionally rapid. Perhaps no influence is greater in this re-
spect than that which is known to the colonists in Northeast-
ern America as " ice-freshets," when in spring, before the ice
has had time to disappear from the rivers, sudden thaws and
rains produce great floods, which rushing down over the icy
crust, or breaking and hurling its masses before them, work ter-
rible havoc on the banks and alluvial flats, depositing great
beds of gravel, and sweeping away immense masses that had
lain undisturbed for centuries. Now we know that in Europe
the human period was preceded by what has been termed the
glacial age, and as it was passing away there must have been
unexampled floods and ice-freshets, and a temporary " pluvial
period," as it has been called, in which the volume of the
rivers was immensely increased. Farther, it is an established
fact that the period of the appearance of man was a time when

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 315

the continents in the northern hemisphere were more elevated
than at present, and when consequently the cutting action of
rivers was at a maximum. This was again followed by a
period of depression, accompanied probably by many local
cataclysms, if not by a general deluge ; and there are strong
geological reasons to believe that this convulsion was con-
nected with the disappearance from Europe of Palseocosmic
man, and many of the animals his contemporaries. This
view I advocated some time ago in my " Story of the Earth ;"
and more recently Mr. Pattison, in an able paper read be-
fore the Victoria Institute, has developed it in greater detail,
and supported it by a great mass of geological authority.
If the Palsocosmic period was one of continental elevation,
when the greater seats of population were in the valleys of
great rivers now covered by the German Ocean and the En-
glish Channel, and when the valleys of the Thames and the
Somme were those of upland streams frequented by straggling
parties and small tribes, and the seats of extensive flint facto-
ries for the supply of the plains below, and if this state of
things was terminated by a diluvial debacle, we can account
for all the phenomena of the drift implements without any
extravagant estimate of time.

I quote with much pleasure on this subject the following
from the report of a lecture on " Geological Measures of
Time," by Professor Hughes, before the Royal Institution
of London. Hughes was, like myself, a companion of Sir
Charles Lyell in some of his journeys, though belonging to
a younger generation of geologists, and is an accurate ob-
server and reasoner.

" Another method of estimating the lapse of time is found-
ed upon the supposed rate at which rivers scoop out their
channels. Although no very exact estimates have been at-

1 6 TJie Origin of the World,

tempted, still the immense quantity of work that has been
done, as compared with the slow rate at which a river is now
excavating that same part of the valley, is often appealed to
as a proof of a great lapse of time.

" The fact of such an enormous lapse of time is not ques-
tioned, but this part of the evidence is challenged.

" The previous considerations of the rate of accumulation
of silt on the low lands prepares us to inquire whether there
is any waste at all along the alluvial plains. Several examples
were given to show that the lowering of valleys was brought
about by receding rapids and waterfalls ; for instance, follow-
ing up the Rhine, its terraces could often be traced back to
where the waterfall was seen to produce at once almost all
the difference of level between the river reaches above and
below it. At Schaffhausen the river terrace below the hotel
could be traced back and found to be continuous with the
river margin above the fall. The wide plains occurring here
and there, such as the Mayence basin, were due to the river
being arrested by the hard rocks of the gorges below Bingen
so long that it had time to wind from side to side through the
soft rocks above the gorges. When waterfalls cut back to
such basins or to lakes they would recede rapidly, tapping
the waters of the lake, eating back the soft beds of the alluvial
plains, and probably in both cases leaving terraces as evidence,
not of upheavals or of convulsions, but of the arrival of a wa-
terfall which had been gradually travelling up the valley. So
when the Rhone cuts back from the falls at Belgarde we shall
have terraces where now is the shore of Geneva; so also when
the Falls of Schaffhausen, and ages afterward when the Falls
of Laufenburg have tapped the Lake of Constance, there will
be terraces marking its previous levels. And so we may ex-
plain the former greater extent of the Lake of Zurich, which

Uriity and Antiquity of Man, 317

stood higher and spread wider by Utznach and Wetzikon before
it was tapped by the arrival of waterfalls, which cut back into it
and let its waters run off until they fell to their present level.

" A small upheaval near the mouth of a river would have a
similar effect. The Thames below London and the Somme
below St. Acheul can now only just hand on the mud brought
down from higher ground ; but suppose an elevation of a
hundred feet over those parts of England and France (quite
imperceptible if extended over 10,000, 1000, or even 100
years), and the rivers would tumble over soft mud and clay
and chalk, and soon eat their way back from Sheppey to
London, and from St.Valery to Amiens.

" So when we want to estimate the age of the gravels on
the top of the cliff at the Reculvers, or on the edge of the
plateau of St. Acheul, we have to ask, not how long would it
take the rivers to cut down to their present level from the
height of those gravels at the rate at which that part of their
channel is being lowered now, but how long would it take the
Somme or Thames, which once ran at the level of those grav-
els, to cut back from where its mouth or next waterfall was
then to where it runs over rapids now. We ought to know
what movements of upheaval and depression there have been ;
what long alluvial flats or lakes which may have checked
floods, but also arrested the rock-protecting gravel ; how much
the wash of the estuarine waves has helped. In fact, it is
clear that observations made on the action of the rivers at
those points now have nothing to do with the calculation of
the age of the terraces above, and that the circumstances
upon which the rate of recession of the waterfalls and rapids
depends are so numerous and changeable that it is at present
unsafe to attempt any estimate of the time required to pro-
duce the results observed."

3i8 The Origin of the World.

I may close this discussion by quoting from the paper of
my friend Mr. Pattison, already referred to, the following
summing up of his conclusions, in which I fully concur :

"We may assume it as established that there was a time
when England was connected with the Continent, when big
animals roamed in summer up the watercourses and across
the uplands, and man, armed only with rude stones, followed
them into the marshes and woods, hunted them for sustenance,
and consumed them in shelter of caves, then accessible from
the river levels. This state of things was continued until dis-
turbed by oscillations of surface, accompanied by excessive
rainfalls and rushes of water from the water-sheds of the riv-
ers, until the great animals were driven out or destroyed, and
man ceased to visit these parts. The disturbances continued,
the Strait of Dover was formed, the configuration of the soft
parts of the islands and continents was fixed, action subsided,
and the present state of things obtained. Man resumed his
residence, but with loss of the mammoth and its companions.
The reindeer now constituted the type of a state of things
which lasted down to the historic period, without any other
from that time to this. * * *

" Chronologists are agreed that about 2000 years B.C. Abra-
ham migrated from Mesopotamia to Canaan, and that at this
time Egypt at least was old in civilization. Beyond this we
have no positive scale of time in Scripture ; for it is evident,
from the narrative itself, that the latter does not cover the
whole time. * * *

" Ussher estimates from Scripture the creation of man as
about 2000 years before this. During the latter portion of
this time civilization was proceeding under settled govern-
ments in the East, interrupted, says the record and tradition,
by a flood. =^ * =*

Unity and Aritiquity of Man. 319

" So Lucretius :

' Thus, too, the insurgent waters once o'erpowered,
As fables tell, and deluged many a state ;
Till, in its turn, the congregated waves
By cause more potent conquered, heaven restrain'd
Its ceaseless torrents, and the flood decreased.'

Barbarism covered the whole Western world; neither in the
2000 years before Abraham, nor in the 2000 years afterward,
have we any light reflected from these regions to the East.
In this 4000 years, or in the somewhat longer period which
probably will be ultimately settled as warranted by the rec-
ord, we place hypothetically all the phenomena of the later
mammalian age, including the introduction of man as a hunt-,
er, the first occupation of the caves by him also, the diluvial
phenomena of the wide valleys, the oscillations and disturb-
ances of the earth's crust, alterations in the coast-line, and
physical settlement of the country; after this comes the sec-
ond occupation of the caves. In short, if we say that, hypo-
thetically, the whole first known human age occurred within
4000 years of the Christian era, no one can say that it is
geologically impossible. Who can say that 1643 years is in-
sufficient to comprise all the phenomena that occurred dur-
ing a period confessedly characterized by more rapid and ex-
tensive action than at present — a period during which rup-
tures in the earth's crust, oscillations, and permanent uprising
took place, and the intermittent action of violent floods caused
the deposit and disturbance and resettlement of the gravels
and brick-earth ? There is nothing to interfere with the prev-
alent opinion that man was introduced here while the glacial
period was dying out, and while it was still furnishing flood-
waters sufficient to scour and re-sort the gravels of the valleys
down which they flowed. This supposition may be extended
to both the great continents."

320 TJic Origin of the World.

To conclude : Our mode of reconciling the Mosaic history
of antediluvian man with the disclosures of the gravels and
caves would be to identify Palaaocosmic man, or man of the
mammoth age, with antediluvian man; to suppose that the
changes which closed his existence in Europe as well as
Western Asia were those recorded in the Noachian deluge;
and that the second colonization of the diminished and
shrunken Europe of the modern period was effected by the
descendants of Noah. It may be asked — Must we suppose
that the Adam of the Bible was of the type of the coarsely
featured and gigantic men of the European caverns ? I
would answer — Not precisely so; but it is quite possible that
Adam may have been Turanian in feature. We should cer-
tainly suppose him to have been a man well developed in
brain and muscle. Such men as those found in the caves
would rather represent the ruder "Nephelim," the "giants
that were in those days," than Adam in Eden. Farther, the
new colonists of Europe after the deluge would no doubt be
a very rude and somewhat degenerate branch of Noachidae,
probably driven before more powerful tribes in the course of
the dispersion. The higher races of both periods are prob-
ably to be looked for in Western Asia ; but even there we
must expect to find cave men like those whose remains were
found by Tristram in the caves near Tyre, and like the Horim
of Moses ; and we must also expect to find the antediluvian
age in the main an age of stone everywhere, and its arts, ex-
cept in certain great centres of population, perhaps not more
advanced than those of the Polynesians, or those of the agri-
cultural American tribes before the discovery of America by
Columbus.

As a geologist, and as one who has been in the main of
the school of Lyell, and after having observed with much

Unity and Antiquity of Man. 321

care the deposits of the more modern periods on both sides
of the Atlantic, I have from the first dissented from those of
my scientific brethren who have unhesitatingly given their
adhesion to the long periods claimed for human history, and
have maintained that their hasty conclusions on this subject
must bring geological reasoning into disrepute, and react inju-
riously on our noble science. We require to make great
demands on time for the pre-human periods of the earth's
history, but not more than sacred history is willing to allow
for the modern or human age.

O2

322 The Origm of the World,

CHAPTER XV.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS.

** Lo, these are but the outlines of his ways, and how faint the whisper
which we hear of him — the thunder of his power who could understand ?"
— Job xxvi., 14,

In the preceding pages I have, as far as possible, avoided
that mode of treating my subject which was wont to be ex-
pressed as the "reconciliation" of Scripture and Natural Sci-
ence, and have followed the direct guidance of the Mosaic
record, only turning aside where some apt illustration or co-
incidence could be perceived. In the present chapter I pro-
pose to inquire what the science of the earth teaches on these
same subjects, and to point out certain manifest and remark-
able correspondences between these teachings and those of
revelation. Here I know that I enter on dangerous ground,
and that if I have been so fortunate as to carry the intelligent
reader with me thus far, I may chance to lose him now. The
Hebrew Scriptures are common property; no one can fairly
deny me the right to study them, even though I do so in no
clerical or theological capacity ; and even if I should appear
extreme in some of my views, or venture to be almost as enthu-
siastic as the commentators of Homer, Shakespeare, or Dante,
I can not be very severely blamed. But the direct compari-
son of these ancient records with results of modern science
is obnoxious to many minds on different grounds; and all the
more so that so few men are at once students both of nature

Comparisons and Conclusions, 323

and revelation. There are, as yet, but few even of educated
men whose range of study has included any thing that is prac-
tical or useful either in Hebrew literature or geological sci-
ence. That slipshod Christianity which contents itself with
supposing that conclusions which are false in nature may be
true in theology is mere superstition or professional priest-
craft, and has nothing in common with the Bible ; but there
are still multitudes of good men, trained in the verbal and
abstract learning which at one time constituted nearly the
whole of education, who regard geology as a mass of crude
hypotheses destitute of coherence, a perpetual battle-ground
of conflicting opinions, all destined in time to be swept away.
It must be admitted, too, that from the nature of geological
evidence, and from the liability to error in details, the solidity
of its conclusions is not likely soon to be appreciated as fully
as is desirable by the common mind ; while it is unfortunately
true that the outskirts of science are infested with hosts of
half-informed and superficial writers, who state these conclu-
sions incorrectly, or apply them in an unreasonable manner
to matters on which they have no bearing. On the other
hand, the geologist, fully aware of the substantial nature of
the foundations of the science of the earth, regards it as little
less than absurd to find parallels to its principles in an an-
cient theological work. Still there are possible meeting-points
of things so dissimilar as Bible lore and geological exploration.
If man is a being connected on the one hand with material
nature, and on the other with the spiritual essence of the
Creator; if that Creator has given to man powers of exploring
and comprehending his plans in the universe, and at the same
time has condescended to reveal to him directly his will on
certain points, there is nothing unphilosophical or improbable
in the supposition that the same truths may be struck out on

324 The Origin of the World.

the one hand by the action of the human mind on nature, and
on the other by the action of the Divine mind on that of man.
The highest and most nobly constituted minds have ever been
striving to scale heaven above and dive into the earth below,
that they may extort from them the secret of their origin, and,
may find what are the privileges and destinies of man himself.
They have learned much ; and if through other gifted minds,
and through his heaven-descended Word and Spirit, God has
condescended to reveal himself, there must surely be much
in common in that which God's works teach to earnest in-
quirers and that which he directly makes known. But few of
our greatest thinkers, whether on nature or theology, have
reached the firm ground of this higher probability ; or if they
have reached it, have dreaded the scorn of the half-learned
too much to utter their convictions. Still this is a position
which the enlightened Christian and student of nature must
be prepared to occup}^, humbly and with admission of much
ignorance and incapacity, but with bold assertion of the truth
that there are meeting-points of nature and revelation which
afford legitimate subjects of study.

In entering on these subjects, we may receive certain great
truths in reference to the history of the earth as established
by geological evidence. In the present rapidly progressive
state of the science, however, it is by no means easy to sepa-
rate its assured and settled results from those that have been
founded on too hasty generalization, or are yet immature ;
and at the same time to avoid overlooking new and impor-
tant truths, sufficiently established, yet not known in all their
dimensions. In the following summary I shall endeavor to
present to the reader only well -ascertained general truths,
without indulging in those deviations from accuracy for effect
too often met with in popular books. On the other hand, we

Comparisons and Conclusions. 325

have already found that the Scriptures enunciate distinct doc-
trines on many points relating to the earth's early history, to
which it will here be necessary merely to refer in general
terms. Let us in the first place shortly consider the conclu-
sions of geology as to the origin and progress of creation.

I. The widest and most important generalization of mod-
ern geology is that all the materials of the earth's crust, to
the greatest depth that man can reach, either by actual exca-
vation or inference from superficial arrangements, are of such
a nature as to prove that they are not, in their present state,
original portions of the earth's structure ; but that they are
the results of the operation, during long periods, of the causes
of change — whether mechanical, chemical, or vital — now in
operation, on the land, in the seas, and in the interior of the
earth. For example, the most common rocks of our conti-
nents are conglomerates, sandstones, shales, and slates ; all
of which are made up of the debris of older rocks broken
down into gravel, sand, or mud, and then re-cemented. To
these we may add limestones, which have been made up by
the accumulation of corals and shells, or by deposits from
calcareous springs ; coal, composed of vegetable matter ;
and granite, syenite, greenstone, and trap, which are molten
rocks formed in the manner of modern lavas. So general
has been this sorting, altering, and disturbance of the sub-
stance of the earth's crust, that, though we know its structure
over large portions of our continents to the depth of several
miles, the geologist can point to no instance of a truly primi-
tive rock which can be affirmed to have remained unchanged
and in situ since the beginning.

" All are aware that the solid parts of the earth consist of
distinct substances, such as clay, chalk, sand, limestone, coal,
slate, granite, and the like ; but, previously to observation, it

326 The Origin of the World.

is commonly imagined that all had remained from the first in
the state in which we now see them — that they were created
in their present forms and in their present position. The
geologist now comes to a different conclusion ; discovering
proofs that the external parts of the earth were not all pro-
duced in the beginning of things in the state in which we
now behold them, nor in an instant of time. On the contrary,
he can show that they have acquired their actual condition
and configuration gradually and at successive periods, dur-
ing each of which distinct races of living beings have flour-
ished on the land and in the waters ; the remains of these
creatures lying buried in the crust of the earth."*

2. Having ascertained that the rocks of the earth have
thus been produced by secondary causes, we next affirm, on
the evidence of geology, that a distinct order of succession
of these deposits can be ascertained ; and though there are
innumerable local variations in the nature of the rocks form-
ed at the same period, yet there is, on the great scale, a reg-
ular sequence of formations over the whole earth. This suc-
cession is of the greatest importance in the case of aqueous
rocks, or those formed in water ; and it is evident that in the
case of beds of sand, clay, etc., deposited in this way, the up-
per must be the more recent of any two layers. This simple
principle, complicated in various ways by the fractures and
disturbances to which the beds have been subjected, forms
the basis of the succession of " formations " in geology as
deduced from stratigraphical evidence.

3. This regular series of formations would be of little value
as a history of the earth were it not that nearly all the aque-
ous rocks contain remains of the contemporary animals and

* Lyell's " Manual of Elementary Geology."

Comparisons and Conclusions. 327

plants. Ever since the earth began to be tenanted by organ-
ized beings, the various accumulations formed in the bottoms
of seas and at the mouths of rivers have entombed remains
of marine animals, more especially their harder parts, as
shells, corals, and bones, and also fragments or entire speci-
mens of land animals and plants. Hence, in any rock of
aqueous formation, we may find fossil remains of the living
creatures that existed in the waters in which that rock was
accumulated or on the neighboring land. If in the process
of building up the continents, the same locality constituted
in succession a part of the bottom of the ocean, of an inland
sea, of an estuary, and a lake, we should find in the fossil
remains entombed in the deposits of that place evidences of
these various conditions; and thus a somewhat curious history
of local changes might be obtained. Geology affords more
extensive disclosures of this nature. It shows that as we de-
scend into the older formations we gradually lose sight of the
existing animals and plants, and find the remains of others
not now existing ; and these, in turn, themselves disappear,
and were preceded by others ; so that the whole living popu-
lation of the earth appears to have been several tinries re-
newed prior to the beginning of the present order of things.
This seems farther to have occurred in a slow and gradual
manner, not by successive great cataclysms or clearances
of the surface of the earth, followed by wholesale renewal.
This doctrine of geological uniformity is, however, to be un-
derstood as limited by the equally certain fact that there has
been progress and advance, both in the inorganic arrange-
ments of the earth's surface and in its organized inhabitants,
and that there have, in geological as in historical times, been
local cataclysms and convulsions, as those of earthquakes
and volcanoes, often on a very extensive scale. Farther, there

328 The Origin of the World.

are good reasons to believe that there have been alternations
of cold or glacial periods and of warm periods, of periods of
subsidence and re-elevation, and of periods of greater and less
activity of certain of the leading agents of geological change.
But as to the extent of these differences and their bearing on
the geological history, there is still much uncertainty and dif-
ference of opinion.*

In the sediment now accumulating in the bottom of the
waters are being buried remains of the existing animals and
plants. A geological formation is being produced, and it
contains the skeletons and other solid parts of a vast variety
of creatures belonging to all climates, and which have lived
on land as well as in fresh and salt water. Let us now sup-
pose that by a series of changes, sudden or gradual, all the
present organized beings were swept away, and that, when
the earth was renewed by the power of the Creator, a new
race of intelligent beings could explore those parts of the
former sea basins that had been elevated into land. They
would find the remains of multitudes of creatures not exist-
ing in their time ; and by the presence of these they could
distinguish the deposits of the former period from those that
belonged to their own. They could also compare these re-
mains with the corresponding parts of creatures which were
their own contemporaries, and could thus infer the circum-.
stances in which they had lived, the modes of subsistence for
which they had been adapted, and the changes in the distri-
bution of land and water and other physical conditions which
had occurred. This, then, is precisely the place which fossil
organic remains occupy in modern geology, except that our

* For a full discussion of this subject, see the " Story of the Earth
and Man."

Comparisons and Conclusions, 329

present system of nature rests on the ruins, not of one pre-
vious system, but of several.

4. By the aid of the superposition of deposits and their
organic remains, geology can divide the history of the earth
into distinct periods. These periods are not separated by
merely arbitrary boundaries, but to some extent mark impor-
tant eras in the progress of our earth j though they usually
pass into each other at their confines, and the nature of the
evidence prevents us from ascertaining the precise length of
the periods themselves, or the intervals in time which may
separate the several monuments by which they are distin-
guished. The following table will serve to give an idea of
the arrangement at present generally received, with some of
the more important facts in the succession of animal and
vegetable life, as connected with our present subject. It
commences with the oldest periods known to geology, and
gives in the animal and vegetable kingdoms \hQ first appear-
a7ice of each class, with a few notes of the subsequent history
of the principal forms. It must, however, be borne in mind
that farther discoveries may extend some classes farther
back than we at present know them, and that a more de-
tailed table, descending to orders and families, would give a
more precise view of the succession of life. Farther, the sev-
eral geological formations would admit of much subdivision,
and are represented locally by various kinds and different
thicknesses of sediment.*

The oldest fossil remains known are the Protozoa of the
Laurentian rocks. In the succeeding Cambrian or Primor-

* Such a table, with an admirable exposition of the entire succession, as
at present known, is given in the Appendix to Lyell's *' Students' Manual
of Geology."

330

The Origin of the World.

TABULAR VIEW OF THE SUCCESSION OF GEOLOGICAL FORMA-
TIONS AND ORGANIC REMAINS.

PERIODS.

SYSTEMS OF
FORMATIONS.

CLASSES OF ANIMALS.

PLANTS.

I.

Eozoic
Period.

Ancient Metamor-
phic rocks of
Scandinavia
Canada, etc.

Eozoon and probably oth-
er Protozoa.

Graphite and
Iron Ores

representing

Vegetable

Matter.

II.

Primary

or

Paleozoic

Period.

Cambrian -

Lower Silurian. \

Upper Silurian. ■

Erian or Devo-
nian

Radiata — Hydrozoa, Ech-
inodermata (Cystide-
ans).

Mollusca — Brachiopoda,
Lamellibranchiata, Gas-
teropoda, Cephalopoda
(Bivalve and Univalve
Shell-fishes).

Artiadata — A n n e 1 i d a,
Crustacea (Worms and
Soft Shell-fishes of the
lower grades).

Radiata — Anthozoa (coral
animals), Echinoderma-
ta (sea stars, etc.).

Mollusca — Polyzoa, Tuni-
cata.

Other Mollusks and Ar-
ticulates as before.

Radiates, Mollusks, and
Articulates as before.

Vertebrata — First Ganoid
and Placoid Fishes.

Artiadata — Insects and
higher Crustaceans.

Vertebrata — Fishes, Ga-
noid and Placoid.

Algae.

Alg^.

Acrogenous
Land plants.

Acrogens

and Gymno-

sperms.

Comparisons and Conclusions.

331

PERIODS.

SYSTEMS OF
FORMATIONS.

CLASSES OF ANIMALS.

PLANTS.

II.

Primary

OR

Paleozoic

Period

continued.

Carboniferous.. ■
Permian |

Mollusca — Pulmonata
(Land Snails).

Articnlata — Myriapods,
Arachnidans (Gally-
worms, Spiders and
Scorpions).

Vertebrata — Batrachians
or Amphibians preva-
lent.

Vertebrata — Lacertian or
Lizard-like Reptiles.

Acrogens,

Gymno-

sperms, En-

dogens t

III.

Secondary

OR

Mesozoic
Period.

Triassic )

Jurassic ■

Cretaceous <

Vertebrata — Higher Rep-
tiles prevalent ; Marsu-
pial Mammals.

Vertebrata — Great preva-
lence of higher Reptiles ;
Fishes, homocerque ;
Earliest Birds.

Vertebrata — Decadence of
reign of Reptiles ; Or-
dinary Bony fishes.

Endogenous
trees.

Angiosperm-
ous Exogens.

IV.

Tertiary

or

Cainozoic

Period.

Eocene -

Miocene \

Pliocene \

Vertebrata — Mammals
prevalent, especially
Pachyderms ; Cycloid
and Ctenoid Fishes
prevalent.

First //zz/V/o- Invertebrates.

Living Invertebrates more
numerous.

Living Invertebrates still
more numerous.

Exogens
prevalent.

Some Mod-
ern Species
appear.

V.

Post-Terti-
ary OR
Modern
Period.

Post-Pliocene.. 5

Post-Glacial and )
Recent ]

First living Mammals.
Living Invertebrates
prevalent.

Man and living Mammals.

Existing
vegetation.

332 TJie Origin of the World.

dial rocks we find many extinct species of zoophytes, shell-
fish, and crustaceans, and the algae or sea-weeds. In the Pa-
laeozoic period as a whole, though numerous Batrachian or Am-
phibian reptiles existed toward its close, the higher orders of
fishes seem to have been the dominant tribe of animals ; and
vegetation was nearly limited to cryptogams and gymnosperms.
In the Mesozoic period, though small mammalia had been
created, large terrestrial and marine reptiles were the ruling
race, and fishes occupied a subordinate position j while, at
the close, the higher orders of plants took a prominent
place. In the Tertiary and Modern eras, the mammalia,
with man, have assumed the highest or dominant position
in nature.

On this series of groups, and the succession of living beings,
Sir. C. Lyell remarks: "It is not pretended that the principal
sections called Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary are of equiv-
alent importance, or that the subordinate groups comprise
monuments relating to equal portions of time or of the earth's
history. But we can assert that they each relate to succes-
sive periods, during which certain animals and plants, for the
most part peculiar to their respective eras, flourished, and
during which different kinds of sediment were deposited."

We have already, in previous chapters, noticed the parallel-
ism of the succession of life in the earth as revealed in Gen-
esis with that disclosed by geology; but this subject must be
farther referred to in the sequel, and in the mean time the
reader may compare for himself the succession of life in the
table with that in the later creative days.

5. The lapse of time embraced in the geological history of
the earth is enormous. Fully to appreciate this it is neces-
sary to study the science in detail, and to explore its phenom-
ena as disclosed in actual nature. A few facts, however, out

Comparisons and Conclusions. 333

of hundreds which might have been selected, will suffice to
indicate the state of the case. The delta and alluvial plain
of the Mississippi have an area of more than 12,000 square
miles, and must have an average depth of about 800 feet.
At the present rate of conveyance of sediment by the river, it
has been calculated that a period of about 33,000 years is im-
plied in the deposition of this comparatively modern forma-
tion * To be quite safe, let us take 30,000 years, and add
50,000 more for the remainder of the Post-pliocene or Qua-
ternary. We may then safely multiply this number by forty,
for the length of the Tertiary period. We may add three times
as much for the Mesozoic period, and this will be far under
the truth. It will then be quite safe to assume that the Pa-
laeozoic period was three times as long as the Mesozoic and
Tertiary together. This would give altogether, say, 5 1,280,000
years for the whole of geological time from the beginning of
the Palaeozoic, leaving the duration of the Eozoic and previ-
ous periods undetermined, but requiring perhaps nearly as
much time. Great though these demands may seem, they
would be probably far below the rigid requirements of the
case were it not for the probability that the present rate of
transference of material by the great river is less than it was
in Post-pliocene and early modern times. This might en-
able us to reduce our estimate considerably within the scope
of a hundred millions of years.f Take another illustration
from an older formation. An excellent coast section at

* Lyell, basing his calculations on the surveys of Messrs. Humphreys
and Abbott, but others give very different estimates.

t A perfectly parallel example is that of the growth of the peninsula of
Florida in the modern period, by the same processes now adding to its
shores ; and this has afforded to Professor Agassiz a still more extended
measure of the Post-tertiary period.

334 ^/^^ Origin of the World.

the Joggins, in Nova Scotia, exhibits in the coal formation
proper a series of beds with erect trunks and roots of trees
in situ, amounting to nearly loo. About loo forests have
successively grown, partially decayed, and been entombed in
muddy and sandy sediment. In the same section, including
in all about 14,000 feet of beds, there are 76 seams of coal,
each of which can be proved to have taken more time for its
accumulation than that required for the growth of a forest.
Supposing all these separate fossil soils and coals to have
been formed with the greatest possible rapidity, forty thousand
years would be a very moderate calculation for this portion
of the Carboniferous system ; and for aught that we know
thousands of years may be represented by a single fossil soil.
But this is the age of only one member of the Carboniferous
system, itself only a member of the great Palaeozoic group,
and we have made no allowance for the abrasion from pre-
vious rocks and deposition of the immense mass of sandy
and muddy sediment in which the coals and forests are im-
bedded, and which is vastly greater than the deltas of the
largest modern rivers.

Considerations of a physical rather than of a geological nat-
ure also give us long periods for the probable existence of the
earth, though they serve to correct somewhat the extravagant
estimates of some theorists. CroU has based an interesting
calculation on the amount of erosion of the land by rivers.
That of the Mississippi amounts to one foot in 6000 years.
That of the Ganges gives one foot in 2358 years, the average
being, say, one foot in 4179 years. Some smaller rivers give
a much shorter time ; but the average of two great rivers, one
draining a very large area of the western and another of the
eastern hemisphere, and in very different climates and geo-
graphical conditions, will probably be the most reliable datum.

Comparisons and Conclusions, 335

Croll, however, prefers the Mississippi rate.* If we estimate
the proportion of land to water as 576 to 1390, this will give
for the entire area of the ocean a rate of deposition of one
foot in 14,400 years. Now the entire thickness of all the
stratified rocks is estimated at 72,000 feet j and at this rate
the enormous time of 1,036,800,000 years would be necessary.
But we have no right to assume that deposition has been go-
ing on uniformly over the entire sea-bottom. On the contrary,
the greater part of it takes place within a belt of about one
hundred miles from the coasts, and the deposit of calcareous
and other matters over the remainder will scarcely make up
for the portions of this belt on which no deposit is taking
place. This will give an area of deposit of about 11,650,000
square miles, consequently only one twelfth of the above time,
or about 86,400,000 years, would be required. This can be
but a very rough calculation ; but it has the merit of squar-
ing very nearly with the calculations derived from physical
considerations, more especially by Sir William Thomson,
which limit the possible existence of the earth's solid crust
to one hundred millions of years. Similar conclusions have
also been deduced from what is known of the physical con-
stitution of the sun. CroU's own ingenious theory of glacial
periods produced by the varying eccentricity of the earth's
orbit, along with the precession of the equinoxes, would give,
according to him, about 80,000 years ago for the dafe of the
Glacial period, and for the beginning of the Tertiary period
about 3,000,000 years ago.

It would thus appear that physical and geological science

* Reade, of Liverpool, has recently given a much slower rate — one foot
in 13,000 years — as a result of recent English surveys ; but I have not seen
his precise data, and the result certainly differs from those of all other
observations.

33^ TJie Origin of the World.

conspire in assigning a great antiquity to the earth, but not
an unlimited antiquity. They agree in restricting the ages
that have elapsed since the introduction of life within one
hundred millions of years. I confess, however, that a con-
sideration of the fact that all our geological measures of ero-
sion and deposition seem to be based on cases which refer
to what may be termed minimum action leads me to believe
that the actual time will fall very far within this limit. For
example, if we were to suppose an elevation of the land
drained by the Mississippi even to a small amount, its cutting
power would be vastly increased for a long time. The same
effect would result from a subsidence and re-elevation, or
from any cause increasing the amount of rainfall or deposi-
tion of snows in winter. Now we know that such things
have occurred in the. past, while we have no reason to be-
lieve that the amount of action was ever much less than at
present. Similar considerations apply to nearly all our geo-
logical measures of time ; and there has been a tendency
to exaggerate these, as if geologists were entitled to demand
unlimited time, and to stretch the doctrine of uniformity to
the utmost.

6. During the whole time referred to by geology, the great
laws both of inorganic and organic nature have been the same
as at present. The evidence of light and darkness, of sun-
shine and shower, of summer and winter, and of all the known
igneous and aqueous causes of change, extends back almost,
and in some of these cases altogether, to the beginning of the
Palaeozoic period. In like manner the animals and plants
of the oldest rocks are constructed on the same physiological
and anatomical principles with existing tribes, and they can
be arranged in the same genera, orders, or classes, though
specifically distinct. The revolutions of the globe have in-

Coinparisojis and Conclusions . 337

volvecl no change of the general laws of matter ; and though
it is possible that geology has carried us back to the time
when the laws that regulate life began to operate, it does not
show that they were less perfect than now, and it indicates no
trace of the beginning of the inorganic laws. Geological
changes have resulted not from the institution of new laws,
but from new dispositio?is, under existing laws and general
arrangements. There is every reason to believe that in the
inorganic world these dispositions have required no new crea-
tive interpositions during the time to which geology refers,
but merely the continued action of the properties bestowed
on matter when first produced. In the organic world the case
is different.

7. In the succession of animal and vegetable life we find
a constant improvement and advance by the introduction of
new types of being. We have already given a general outline
of this advancement of organized nature. It has consisted
in the introduction, from time to time, of new and more highly
organized beings, so as at once to increase the variety of nat-
ure, and to provide for the elevation of the summit of the
graduated scale of life to higher and higher points. At the
same time, in each successive period, it has been the law of
creation that the forms of life then dominant should attain
their highest development, and should then be succeeded by
more advanced types. For instance, in the earlier Palaeozoic
period we have molluscous animals and fishes, then apparent-
ly the highest forms of life, appearing with a very advanced
organization, not surpassed, if even equalled, in modern times.
In the latter part of the same period, some lower forms of veg-
etable life, now restricted to a comparatively humble place,
were employed to constitute magnificent forests. In the Me-
sozoic period, again, reptiles attained to their highest point

P

338 The Origin of the World,

in organization and variety of form and employment, while
mammalia had as yet scarcely appeared.*

8. If now we ask in what manner the succession of life on
the earth has been produced, two apparently opposite hypoth-
eses rise before us. The one is that of introduction of new
species by creative acts, the other that of development of new
species by changes of those previously existing. In one re-
spect the difference of these views is little more than one of
expression, for the meaning of the statements depends on
what we understand by a species and what by a mere varietal
form, and also on what we understand by creation and what we
mean by development. Twenty years ago nearly all geologists
were believers in creation, though it must be admitted with-
out precisely understanding what they meant by the term.
Now, the great impression produced by Darwin's speculations
and the prevalence of the evolutionist philosophy have pro-
duced a leaning in the other direction. More recently, how-
ever, the absurdities into which the extreme evolutionists find
themselves driven have produced a reaction ; and we hope
that views consistent with revelation, or at least with Theism,
will again be in the ascendant, and that present controversies
will serve to give more precise and definite views than here-
tofore of the relation of nature to God. As illustrations of

* I am quite aware that it may be objected to all this that it is based on
merely negative evidence ; but this is not strictly the case. There are
positive indications of these truths. For example, in the Mesozoic epoch
the lacertian reptiles presented huge elephantine carnivorous and herbiv-
orous species — the Megalosaurus, Iguanodon, etc.; flying species, with hol-
low bones and ample wings — the Pterodactyles ; and aquatic whale-like
species — Pliosaurus, Ichthyosaurus, etc. These creatures actually filled
the offices now occupied by the mammals ; and, though lacertian in their
affinities, they must have had circulatory, respiratory, and nervous sys-
tems far in advance of any modern reptiles even of the order of Loricates.

Comparisons and Conclusions. 339

the opinions prevalent before the rise of the development
theory, I may quote from Pictet and Bronn, two of the most
eminent palaeontologists.

Pictet says, in the introduction to his " Traite de Paleon-
tologie :" " It seems to me impossible that we should admit,
as an explanation of the phenomena of successive faunas, the
passage of species into one another ; the limits of such tran-
sitions of species, even supposing that the lapse of a vast pe-
riod of time may have given them a character of reality much
greater than that which the study of'existing nature leads us
to suppose, are still infinitely within those differences which
distinguish two successive faunas. Lastly, we can least of all
account by this theory for the appearance of new types, to ex-
plain the introduction of which we must necessarily, in the
•present state of science, recur to the idea of distinct creations
posterior to the first."

The following are the general conclusions of Bronn, in his
elaborate and most valuable essay, presented to the French
Academy in 1856, as summarized in a notice of the work in
the Journal of the Geological Society :

" I. The first productions of this power in the oldest Neptu-
nian strata of the earth consisted of Plants, Zoophytes, Mol-
lusks, Crustaceans, and perhaps even Fish ; the simultaneous
appearance of which, therefore, contradicts the assumption
that the more perfect organic forms arose out of the gradual
transformation in time of the more imperfect forms.

" 2. The same power which produced the first organic
forms has continued to operate in intensively as well as ex-
tensively increasing activity during the whole subsequent
geological period, up to the final appearance of man; but
here also can no traces be found of a gradual transformation
of old species and genera into new ; but the new have every-

340 The Origin of the World.

where appeared as new without the co-operation of the for-
mer.

" 3. In the succession of the different forms of plants and
animals, a certain regular course and plan is perceptible,
which is quite independent of chance. While all species
possess only a limited duration, and must sooner or Later dis-
appear, they make way for subsequent new ones, which not
only almost always offer an equivalent, in number, organiza-
tion, and duties to be performed, for those which have disap-
peared, but which are also generally more varied, and there-
fore more perfect, and always maintain an equilibrium with
each other in their stage of organization, their mode of life,
and functions. There always exists, therefore, a certain fixed
relation between the newly arising and the disappearing forms
of organic life.

"4. A similar relation necessarily exists between the new-
ly arising organic forms and the outward conditions of life
which prevailed at their first appearance on the earth's sur-
face, or at the place of their appearance.

"5. A fixed plan appears to be the basis of the whole
series of development of organic forms, in so far as man
makes his first appearance at its close, when he finds every
thing prepared that is necessary to his own existence and to
his progressive development and improvement — which would
not have been possible had he appeared at a former period.

" 6. Such a regular progress in carrying out the same plan
from the beginning to the end of a period of millions of years
can only be accounted for in one of two ways. Either this
course of successive development during millions of years has
been the regular immediate result of the systematic action of
a conscious Creator, who on every occasion settled and car-
ried out not only the order of appearance, formation, organi-

Comparisons and Conclusions. 341

zation, and terrestrial object of each of the countless numbers
of species of plants and animals, but also the number of the
first individuals, the place of their settlement in every in-
stance, although it was in his power to create every thing at
once — or there existed some natural power hitherto entirely
unknown to us, which by means of its own laws formed the
species of plants and animals, and arranged and regulated
all those countless individual conditions ; which power, how-
ever, must in this case have stood in the most immediate con-
nection with, and in perfect subordination to, those powers
which caused the gradually progressing perfection of the
crust of the earth, and the gradual development of the out-
ward conditions of life for the constantly increasing numbers
and higher classes of organic forms in consequence of this
perfection. Only in this way can we explain how the devel-
opment of the organic world could have regularly kept pace
with that of the inorganic. Such a power, although we know
it not, would not only be in perfect accordance with all the
other functions of nature, but the Creator, who regulated the
development of organic nature by means of such a force so
implanted in it, as he guides that of the inorganic world by
the mere co-operation of attraction and affinity, must appear
to us more exalted and imposing than if we assumed that he
must always be giving the same care to the introduction and
change of the vegetable and animal world on the surface of
the earth as a gardener daily bestows on each individual
plant in the arrangement of his garden.

" 7. We therefore believe that all species of plants and ani-
mals were originally produced by some natural power un-
known to us, and not by transformation from a few original
forms, and that that power was in the closest and most nec-
essary connection with those powers and circumstances which
effected the perfection of the earth's surface."

342 The Origin of the World.

Barrande also, probably the greatest living palaeontologist
of Europe, adheres substantially to these views ; as Agassiz
did, and I believe Hall and Dana still do, in America.

I have, for my own part, seen no reason to dissent from
these views, though in the sequel I shall endeavor to present
some considerations which may tend to reconcile with them
some of the hypotheses of a contrary nature now held. It
must be admitted, however, that the majority of geologists
and biologists have abandoned these views of Pictet and
Bronn, and have gone over to the evolutionist philosophy,
with how little reason I have endeavored to show elsewhere,*
and shall farther illustrate in the Appendix. Let it be ob-
served, however, that even evolution does not affect the grand
idea of the unity of nature, or the fact that the plan of the
Creator in the organic world was so vast that it required the
whole duration of our planet, in all its stages of physical ex-
istence, to embrace the whole. There is but one system of
organic nature ; but, to exhibit the whole of it, not only all
the climates and conditions now existing are required, but
those also of all past geological periods. Further, the prog-
ress of nature being mainly in the direction of differentia-
tion of functions once combined, it has a limit backward in
the most general forms and conditions, and forward in the
most specialized. This is the history of the individual and
probably also of the type, of the world itself and of the uni-
verse;'and for this reason material nature necessarily lacks
the eternity of its author.

It appears, from the above facts and reasonings, that geol-
ogy informs us — i. That the materials of our existing conti-
nents are of secondary origin, as distinguished from primitive

* " Story of the Earth" — concluding chapters.

Comparisons and Conclusions. 343

or coeval with the beginning. 2. That a chronological order
of formation of these rocks can be made out. 3. That the
fossil remains contained in the rocks constitute a chronology
of animal and vegetable existence. 4. That the history of
the earth may be divided in this way into distinct periods,
all pre-Adamite. 5. That the pre-Adamite periods were of
enormous duration. 6. That during these periods the exist-
ing general laws of nature were in force, though the disposi-
tions of inorganic nature were different in different periods,
and the animals and plants of successive periods were also
different from each other. 7. The introduction of new species
of animals and of plants, while indicating advance in the per-
fection of nature, does not prove spontaneous development,
but rather a definite plan and law of creation.

The parallelism of these conclusions of careful induct-
ive inquiry into the structure of the earth's crust, with the
results which we have already obtained from revelation, may
be summed up under the following heads :

I. Scripture and Science both testify to the great fact that
there was a beginning — a time when none of all the parts of
the fabric of the universe existed ; when the Self- Existent
was the sole occupant of space. The Scriptures announce
in plain terms this great truth, and thereby rise at once high
above atheism, pantheism, and materialism, and lay a broad
and sure foundation for a pure and spiritual theology. Had
, the pen of inspiration written but the words, " In the begin-
ning God created the heavens and the earth,'* and added no
more, these words alone would have borne the impress of
their heavenly birth, and would, if received in faith, have
done much for the progress of the human mind. These
words contain a negation of hero-worship, star-worship, ani-
mal-worship, and every other form of idolatry. They still

344 ^'^^^ Origin of the World.

more emphatically deny atheism and materialism, and point
upward from nature to its spiritual Creator — the One, the
Triune, the Eternal, the Self-Existent, the All-Pervading, the
Almighty. They call upon us, as with a voice of thunder, to
bow down before that Awful Being of whom it can be said
that he created the heavens and the earth. They thus em-
body the whole essence of natural theology, and most appro-
priately stand at the entrance of Holy Scripture, referring us
to the works which men behold, as the visible manifestation
of the attributes of the Being whose spiritual nature is un-
veiled in revelation. Scripture thus begins with the an-
nouncement of a great ultimate fact, to which science con-
ducts us with but slow and timid steps. Yet science, and
especially geological science, can bear witness to this great
truth. The materialist, reasoning on the fancied stability of
natural things, and their inscription within invariable laws,
concludes that matter must be eternal. No, replies the ge-
ologist, certainly not in its present form. This is but of
recent origin, and was preceded by other arrangements.
Every existing species can be traced back to a time when it
was not ; so can the existing continents, mountains, and seas.
Under our processes of investigation the present melts away
like a dream, and we are landed on the shores of past and
unknown worlds. But I read, says the objector, that you can
see " no evidence of a beginning, no prospect of an end."
It is true, answers geology ; but, in so saying, it is not in-
tended that the present state of things had not an ascer-
tained beginning, but that there has been a greaj; and, so far
as we know, unlimited series of changes carried on under the
guidance of intelligence. These changes we have traced
back very far, without being able to say that we have reached
the first. We can trace back man and his contemporaries to

Comparisons and Conclusions. 345

their origin, and we can reach the points at which still older
dynasties of life began to exist. Knowing, then, that all
these had a beginning, we infer that if others preceded them
they also had a beginning. But, says another objector, is not
the present the child of the past ? Are not all the creatures
that inhabit the earth the lineal descendants of creatures of
past periods, or may not the whole be parts of one continual
succession, under the operation of an eternal law of develop-
ment } No, answers geology, species are immutable, except
within narrow limits, and do not pass into each other, in trac-
ing them toward their origin. On the contrary, they appear
at once in their most perfect state, and continue unchanged
till they are forced off the stage of existence to give place to
other creatures. The origin of species is a mystery, and be-
longs to no natural law that has yet been established. Thus,
then, stands the case at present. Scripture asserts a begin-
ning and a creation. Science admits these, as far as the ob-
jects with which it is conversant extend, and the notions of
eternal succession and spontaneous development, discounte-
nanced both by theology and science, are obliged to take
refuge in those misty regions where modern philosophical
skepticism consorts with the shades of departed heathen-
ism."*

2. Both records exhibit the progressive character of crea-
tion, and in much the same aspect. The Almighty might
have called into existence, by one single momentary act, a
world complete in all its parts. From both Scripture and
geology we know that he has not done so — why we need not

* This was written in i860 for the first edition of" Archaia." I see no
reason to change it now, and its vindication will be found in the Appen-
dix.

P 2

34^ The Origin of the World.

inquire, though we can see that the process employed was
that best adapted to show forth the variety of his resources
and the infinitely varied elements that enter into the perfect
whole.

The Scripture history may be viewed as dividing the prog-
ress of the creation into two great periods, the later of which
only is embraced in the geological record. The first com-
mences with the original chaos, and reaches to the comple-
tion of inorganic nature on the fourth day. Had we any
geological records of the first of these periods, we should
perceive the evidences of slow mutations, tending to the sort-
ing and arrangement of the materials of the earth, and to
produce distinct light and darkness, sea and land, atmos-
phere and cloud, out of what was originally a mixture of the
whole. We should also, according to the Scriptural record,
find this period interlocking with the next, by the interven-
tion of a great vegetable creation, before the final adjustment
of the earth's relations to the other bodies of our system.
The second period is that of the creative development of
animal life. From both records we learn that various ranks
or gradations existed from the first introduction of animals;
but that on the earlier stages only certain of the lower forms
of animals were present ; that these soon attained their
highest point, and then gradually, on each succeeding plat-
form, the variety of nature in its higher — the vertebrate —
form increased, and the upper margin of animal life attained
a more and more elevated point, culminating at length in
man ; while certain of the older forms were dropped, as no
longer required.

In the oldest fossiliferous rocks next to the Eozoic, which
so far have afforded only Protozoa — e. g., the Cambrian and
Lower Silurian — we find the mollusca represented mainly by

Comparisons and Conchisions, 347

their highest and lowest classes, by allies of the cuttle-fish
and nautilus, and by the lowest bivalve shell -fishes. The
Articulata are represented by the highest marine class — the
crustaceans — and by the lowest — the worms, which have left
their marks on some of the lowest fossiliferous beds. The
Radiata, in like manner, are represented by species of their
highest class — the star-fishes, etc. — and by some of their sim-
pler polyp forms. At the very beginning, then, of the fossil-
iferous series, the three lower sub-kingdoms exhibit species
of their most elevated aquatic classes, though not of the very
highest orders in those classes. The vertebrated sub-king-
dom has, as far as yet known, no representative in these low-
est beds. In the Upper Silurian series, however, we find re-
mains of fishes ; and in the succeeding Devonian and car-
boniferous rocks the fishes rise to the highest structures of
their class ; and we find several species of reptiles, repre-
senting the next of the vertebrated classes in ascending or-
der. Here a very remarkable fact meets us. Before the
close of the Palaeozoic period the three lower sub-kingdoms
and the fishes had already attained the highest perfection of
which their types are capable. Multitudes of new species and
genera were added subsequently, but none of them rising high-
er in the scale of organization than those which occur in the
Palaeozoic rocks. Thenceforth the progressive improvement
of the animal kingdom consisted in the addition, first of the
reptile, which attained its highest perfection and importance
in the Mesozoic period, and then of the bird and mammal,
which did not attain their highest forms till the Modern pe-
riod. This geological order of animal life, it is scarcely nec-
essary to add, agrees perfectly with that sketched by Moses,
in which the lower types are completed at once, and the prog-
ress is wholly in the higher.

348 The Origin of the World.

In the inspired narrative we have already noticed some
peculiarities, as, for instance, the early appearance of a highly
developed flora, and the special mention of great reptiles in
the work of the fifth day, which correspond with the signif-
icant fact that high types of structure appeared at the very
introduction of each new group of organized beings — a fact
which, more than any other in geology, shows that, in the or-
ganic department, elevation has always been a ^\x\Q,\\y creative
work, and that there is in the constitution of animal species
no innate tendency to elevation, but that on the contrary we
should rather suspect a tendency to degeneracy and ultimate
disappearance, requiring that the fiat of the Creator should
after a time go out again to " renew the face of the earth."
In the natural as in the moral world, the only law of prog-
ress is the will and the power of God. In one sense, how-
ever, progress in the organic world has been dependent on,
though not caused by, progress in the inorganic. We see in
geology many grounds for believing that each new tribe of
animals or plants was introduced just as the earth became
fitted for it ; and even in the present world we see that re-
gions composed of the more ancient rocks, and not modified
by subsequent disturbances, present few of the means of sup-
port for man and the higher animals ; while those districts in
which various revolutions of the earth have accumulated fer-
tile soils or deposited useful minerals are the chief seats of
civilization and population. In like manner we know that
those regions which the Bible informs us were the cradle of
the human race and the seats of the oldest nations are geo-
logically among the most recent parts of the existing conti-
nents, and were no doubt selected by the Creator partly on
that account for the birthplace of man. We thus find that
the Bible and the geologists are agreed not only as to the

Comparisons and Conclusions. 349

fact and order of progress, but also as to its manner and .
use.

3. Both records agree in affirming that since the beginning
there has been but one great system of nature. We can im-
agine it to have been otherwise. Our existing nature might
have been preceded by a state of things having no connection
with it. The arrangements of the earth's surface might have
been altogether different ; races of creatures might have ex-
isted having no affinity with or resemblance to those of the
present world, and we might have been able to trace no pres-
ent beneficial consequences as flowing from these past states
of our planet. Had geology made such revelations as these,
the consequences in relation to natural theology and the cred-
ibility of Scripture would have been momentous. The Mosaic
narrative could scarcely, in that case, have been interpreted
in such a manner as to accord with geological conclusions.
The questions would have arisen — Are there more creative
Powers than one ? If one, is He an imperfect or capricious
being who changes his plans of operation? The divine au-
thority of the Scriptures, as well as the unity and perfections
of God, might thus have been involved in serious doubts.
Happily for us, there is nothing of this kind in the geological
history of the earth ; as there is manifestly nothing of it in
that which is revealed in Scripture.

In the Scripture narrative each act of creation prepares
for the others, and in its consequences extends to them all.
The inspired writer announces the introduction of each new
part of creation, and then leaves it without any reference to
the various phases which it assumed as the work advanced.
In the grand general view which he takes, the land and seas
first made represent those of all the following periods. So
do the first plants, the first invertebrate animals, the first

350 TJie Origin of the World,

fishes, reptiles, birds, and mammals. He thus assures us that,
however long the periods represented by days of creation,
the system of nature was one from the beginning. In like
manner in the geological record each of the successive con-
ditions of the earth is related to those which precede and
those which follow, as part of a series. So also a uniform
plan of construction pervades organic nature, and uniform
laws the inorganic world in all periods. We can thus include
in one system of natural history all animals and plants, fossil
as well as recent, and can resolve all inorganic changes into
the operation of existing laws. The former of these facts is
in its nature so remarkable as almost to warrant the belief
of special design. Naturalists had arranged the existing
animals and plants, without any reference to fossil species,
in kingdoms, sub - kingdoms, classes, orders, families, and
genera. Geological research has added a vast number of
species not now existing in a living state ; yet all these fos-
sils can be inserted within the limits of recognized groups.
We do not require to add a new kingdom, sub-kingdom, or
class; but, on the contrary, all the fossil genera and species
go into the existing divisions, in such a manner as to fill
them up precisely where they are most deficient, thus oc-
cupying what would otherwise be gaps in the existing sys-
tem of nature. The principal difficulty which they occasion
to the zoologist and botanist is that, by filling the intervals
between genera previously widely separated, they give to the
whole a degree of continuity which renders it more difficult
to decide where the boundaries separating the groups should
be placed.

We also find that the animals and plants of the earlier
periods often combined in one form powers and properties
afterward separated in distinct groups; thus in the earlier

Comparisons and Conclusions. 351

formations the sauroid fishes unite peculiarities afterward di-
vided between the fish and rejDtiles, constituting what Agassiz
has called a synthetic type. Again, the series of creatures in
time accords with the ranks which a study of their types of
structure induces the naturalist to assign them in his system ;
and also within each of the great sub -kingdoms presents
many points of accordance with the progress of the embry-
onic development of the individual animal. Nor is this con-
tradictory to the statement that the earlier representatives of
types are often of high and perfect organization, for the prog-
ress both in geological time and in the life of the individual
is so much one of specialization that an immature animal
often presents points of affinity to higher forms that disappear
in the adult. In connection with this, earlier organic forms
often appear to foreshadow and predict others that are to
succeed them in time, as the winged and marine reptiles of
the Mesozoic foreshadow the birds and cetaceans. Agassiz
has admirably illustrated these links of connection between
the past and the present in the essay on classification pre-
fixed to his " Contributions to the Natural History of Amer-
ica." In reference to "prophetic" types, he says: "They
appear now like a prophecy in those earlier times of an order
of things not possible with the earlier combinations then pre-
vailing in the animal kingdom, but exhibiting in a later pe-
riod in a striking manner the antecedent consideration of
every step in the gradation of animals."

4. The periods into which geology divides the history of
the earth are different from those of Scripture, yet when prop-
erly understood there is a marked correspondence. Geology
refers only to the fifth and sixth days of creation, or, at most,
to these with parts of the fourth and seventh, and it divides
this portion of the work into several eras, founded on alter-

352 The Origin of the World.

nations of rock formations and changes in organic remains.
The nature of geological evidence renders it probable that
many apparently well-marked breaks in the chain may result
merely from deficiency in the preserved remains ; and conse-
quently that what appear to the geologist to be very distinct
periods may in reality run together. The only natural di-
visions that' Scripture teaches us to look for are those be-
tween the fifth and sixth days, and those which within these
days mark the introduction of new animal forms, as, for in-
stance, the great reptiles of the fifth day. We have already
seen that the beginning of the fifth day can be referred almost
with certainty to the Palaeozoic period. The beginning of the
sixth day may with nearly equal certainty be referred to that
of the Tertiary era. The introduction of great reptiles and
birds in the fifth day synchronizes and corresponds with the
beginning of the Mesozoic period ; and that of man at the
close of the sixth day with the commencement of the Modern
era in geology. These four great coincidences are so much
more than we could have expected, in records so very different
in their nature and origin, that we need not pause to search
for others of a more obscure character. It may be well to
introduce here a tabular view of this correspondence between
the geological and Biblical periods, extending it as far as
either record can carry us, and thus giving a complete general
view of the origin and history of the world as deduced from
revelation and science. In comparing this table with that on
page 330, it will be observed that the latter refers to the last
half of the creative week only, the earlier half being occupied
with physical changes which, however probable inferentially,
are not within the scope of geological observation.

5. In both records the ocean gives birth to the first dry
land, and it is the sea that is first inhabited, yet both lead at

Comparisons and Conclusions.

353

PARALLELISM OF THE SCRIPTURAL COSMOGONY WITH THE AS-
TRONOMICAL AND GEOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE EARTH.

BIBLICAL ^ONS.

PERIODS DEDUCED FROM SCIENTIFIC
CONSIDERATIONS.

The Beginning.

First Day. — Earth mantled by the
Vaporous Deep — Production of
Light.

Second Day. — Earth covered by the
Waters — Formation of the At-
mosphere.

Third Day. — Emergence of Dry
Land — Introduction of Vegeta-
tion.

Foicrth Day. — Completion of the
arrangements of the Solar Sys-
tem.

Fifth Day. — Invertebrates and Fish-
es, and afterward great Reptiles
and Birds created.

Sixth Day. — Introduction of Mam-
mals— Creation of Man and Eden-
ic Group of Animals.

Seventh Day. — Cessation of Work
of Creation — Fall and Redemp-
tion of Man.

Fis^hih Day. — New Heavens and
Earth to succeed the Human
Epoch — "The Rest (Sabbath)
that remains to the People of
God."*

Creation of Matter.

Condensation of Planetary Bodies
from a nebulous mass — Hypothe-
sis of original incandescence.

Primitive Universal Ocean, and es-
tablishment of Atmospheric equi-
librium.

Elevation of the land which furnished
the materials of the oldest rocks
— Eozoic Period of Geology }

Metamorphism of Eozoic rocks and
disturbances preceding the Cam-
brian epoch — Present arrange-
ment of Seasons — Dominion of
"Existing Causes" begins.

Palaeozoic Period — Reign of Inver-
tebrates and Fishes.

Mesozoic Period — Reign of Rep-
tiles.

Tertiary Period — Reign of Mam-
mals.

Post - Tertiary — Existing Mammals
and Man.

Period of Human History.

* Heb. iv., 9 ; 2 Peter iii., 13.

Note. — The above table is identical with that published in " Archaia "
in i860, and which the author sees no reason now to change.

354 The Origin of the World.

least* to the suspicion that a state of igneous fluidity preceded
the primitive universal ocean. In Scripture the original
prevalence of the ocean is distinctly stated, and all geologists
are agreed that in the early fossiliferous periods the sea
must have prevailed much more extensively than at present.
Scripture also expressly states that the waters were the birth-
place of the earliest animals, and geology has as yet discov-
ered in the whole Silurian series no terrestrial animal, though
marine creatures are extremely abundant; and though air-
breathing creatures are found in the later Palaeozoic, they are,
with the exception of insects, of that semi-amphibious charac-
ter which is proper to alluvial flats and the deltas of rivers.
It is true that the negative evidence collected by geology
does not render it altogether impossible that terrestrial ani-
mals, even mammals, may have existed in the earliest pe-
riods; yet there are, as already pointed out, some positive
indications opposed to this. The Scripture, however, com-
mits itself to the statement that the higher land animals did
not exist so early, though it must be observed that there is
nothing in the Mosaic narrative adverse to the existence of
birds, insects, and reptiles in the earlier Paleozoic periods.
I have said that the Bible, which informs us of a universal
ocean preceding the existence of land, also gives indications of
a still earlier period of igneous fluidity or gaseous expansion.
Geology also and astronomy have their reasonings and spec-
ulations as to the prevalence of such conditions. Here, how-
ever, both records" become dim and obscure, though it is ev-
ident that both point in the same direction, and combine
those aqueous and igneous origins which in the last century
afforded so fertile ground of one-sided dispute.

6. Both records concur in maintaining what is usually term-
ed the doctrine of existing causes in geology. Scripture and

Comparisons arid Conclusio7ts. 355

geology alike show that since the beginning of the fifth«day,
or Palaeozoic period, the inorganic world has continued un-
der the dominion of the same causes that now regulate its
changes and processes. The sacred narrative gives no hint
of any creative interposition in this department after the
fourth day ; and geology assures us that all the rocks with
which it is acquainted have been produced by the same
causes that are now throwing down detritus in the bottom of
the waters, or bringing up volcanic products from the interior
of the earth. This grand generalization, therefore, first work-
ed out in modern times by Sir Charles Lyell, from a laborious
collection of the changes occurring in the present state of the
world, was, as a doctrine of divine revelation, announced
more than three thousand years ago by the Hebrew law-
giver j not for scientific purposes, but as a part of the theol-
ogy of the Hebrew monotheism.

7. Both records agree in assuring us that death prevailed
in the world ever since animals were introduced. The pun-
ishment threatened to Adam, and considerations connected
with man's state of innocence, have led to the belief that the
Bible teaches that the lower animals, as well as man, were ex-
empt from death before the fall. When, however, we find
the great taftfiiftim, or crocodilian reptiles, created in the fifth
day, and beasts of prey on the sixth, we need entertain no
doubt on the subject, in so far as Scripture is concerned.
The geological record is equally explicit. Carnivorous creat-
ures, with the most formidable powers of destruction, have
left their remains in all parts of the geological series j and
indeed, up to the introduction of man, the carnivorous fishes,
reptiles, and quadrupeds were the lords and tyrants of the
earth. There can be little doubt, however, that the introduc-
tion of man was the beginning of a change in this respect.

356 The Origin of the World.

A creature destitute of offensive weapons, and subsisting on
fruits, was to rule by the power of intellect. As already hint-
ed, it is probable that in Eden he was surrounded by a group
of inoffensive animals, and that those creatures which he had
cause to dread would have disappeared as he extended his
dominion. In this way the law of violent death and destruc-
tion which prevailed under the dynasties of the fish, the rep-
tile, and the carnivorous mammifer would ultimately have been
abrogated ; and under the milder sway of man life and peace
would have reigned in a manner to which our knowledge of
pre-Adamite and present nature may afford no adequate key.
Be this as it may, on the important point of the original prev-
alence of death among the lower animals both records are at
one.

8. In the department of "final causes," as they have been
termed. Scripture and geology unite in affording large and
interesting views. They illustrate the procedure of the All-
wise Creator during a long succession of ages, and thus en-
able us to see the effects of any of his laws, not only at one
time, but in far distant periods. To reject the consideration
of this peculiarity of geological science would be the extrem-
est folly, and would involve at once a misinterpretation of the
geologic record and a denial of the agency of an intelligent
Designer as revealed in Scripture, and indicated by the suc-
cession of beings. Many of the past changes of the earth
acquire their full significance only when taken in connection
with the present wants of the earth's inhabitants ; and along
the whole course of the geological history the creatures that
we meet with are equally rich in the evidences of nice adap-
tation to circumstances and wonderful contrivances for spe-
cial ends, with their modern representatives. As an example
of the former, how wonderful is the connection of the great

Comparisons and Conclusions. 357

vegetable accumulations of the ancient coal swamps, and the
bands and nodules of iron-stone which were separated from
•the ferruginous sands or clays in their vicinity by the action
of this very vegetable matter, with the whole fabric of mod-
ern civilization, and especially with the prosperity of that
race which, in our time, stands in the front of the world's
progress. In a very ancient period, wide swamps and deltas,
teeming with vegetable life, and which, if they now existed,
would be but pestilent breeders of miasmata, spread over
large tracts of the northern hemisphere, on which marine
animals had previously accumulated thick sheets of lime-
stone. Vast beds of vegetable matter were collected by
growth in these swamps, and the waste* particles that passed
off in the form of organic acids were employed in concentrat-
ing the oxide of iron in underlying clays and sands. In the
lapse of ages the whole of these accumulations were buried
deep in the crust of the earth j and long periods succeeded,
when the earth was tenanted by reptilian and other creatures,
unconscious of the treasures beneath them. The modern
period arrived. The equable climate of the coal era had
passed away. Continents were prepared for the residence
of man, and the edges of the old carboniferous beds were
exposed by subterranean movements, and laid bare by de-
nudation. Man was introduced, fell from his state of inno-
cence, and was condemned to earn his subsistence by the
sweat of his brow ; and now for the first time appears the
use of these buried coal swamps. They now afford at once
the materials of improvement in the arts and of comfortable
subsistence in extreme climates, and subjects of surpassing
interest to the naturalist. Similar instances may be gleaned
by the natural theologian from nearly every part of the geo-
logical history.

358 TJie Origin of the World.

Lastly. Both records represent man as the last of God's
works, and the cuhninating-point of the whole creation. We
have already had occasion to refer to this as a result of zool-
ogy, geology, and Scriptural exegesis, and may here confine
ourselves to the moral consequences of this great truth. Man
is the capital of the column ; and, if marred and defaced by
moral evil, the symmetry of the whole is to be restored, not
by rejecting him altogether, like the extinct species of the an-
cient world, and replacing him by another, but by re-casting
him in the image of his Divine Redeemer. Man, though re-
cently introduced, is to exist eternally. He is, in one or an-
other state of being, to be witness of all future changes of the
earth. He has before him the option of being one with his
Maker, and sharing in a future glorious and finally renovated
condition of our planet, or of sinking into endless degradation.
Such is the great spiritual drama of man's fate to be acted
out on the theatre of the world. Every human being must
play his part in it, and the present must decide what that part
shall be. The Bible bases these great foreshadowings of the
future on its own peculiar evidence ; yet I may venture hum-
bly to maintain that its harmony with natural science, as far
as the latter can ascend,. gives to the Word of God a pre-em-
inent claim on the attention of the naturalist. The Bible, un-
like every other system of religious doctrine, fears no investi-
gation or discussion. It courts these. " While science," says
a modern divine,* " is fatal to superstition, it is fortification
to a Scriptural faith. The Bible is the bravest of books.
Coming from God, and conscious of nothing but God's truth,
it awaits the progress of knowledge with calm security. It
watches the antiquary ransacking among classic ruins, and

* Hamilton.

Comparisons and Conclusions, 359

rejoices in every medal he discovers and every inscription he
deciphers ; for from that rusty coin or corroded marble it
expects nothing but confirmations of its own veracity. In
the unlocking of an Egyptian hieroglyphic or the unearthing
of some implement it hails the resurrection of so many wit-
nesses ; and with sparkling elation it follows the botanist as
he scales Mount Lebanon, or the zoologist as he makes ac-
quaintance with the beasts of the Syrian desert j or the trav-
eller as he stumbles on a long-lost Petra or Nineveh or Baby-
lon. And from the march of time it fears no evil, but calmly
abides the fulfilment of those prophecies and the forthcoming
of those events with whose predicted story inspiration has
already inscribed its page. It is not light but darkness which
the Bible deprecates ; and if men of piety were also men of
science, and if men of science were to search the Scriptures,
there would be more faith in the earth, and also more philos-
ophy."

The reader has, I trust, found in the preceding pages suf-
ficient evidence that the Bible has nothing to dread from the
revelations of geology, but much to hope in the way of eluci-
dation of its meaning and confirmation of its truth. If con-
vinced of this, I trust that he will allow me now to ask for
the warnings, promises, and predictions of the Book of God
his entire confidence ; and, in conclusion, to direct his atten-
tion to the glorious prospects which it holds forth to the hu-
man race, and to every individual of it who, in humility and
self-renunciation, casts himself in faith on that Divine Re-
deemer who is at once the creator of the heavens and the
earth, and the brother and the friend of the penitent and the
contrite. That same old book, which carries back our view
to those ancient conditions of our planet which preceded not
only the creation of man, but the earliest periods of which

360 The Origin of the World.

science has cognizance, likewise carries our minds forward
into the farthest depths of futurity, and shows that all present
things must pass away. It reveals to us a new heaven and
a new earth, which are to replace those now existing ; when
the Eternal Son of God, the manifestation of the Father
equally in creation and redemption,, shall come forth con-
quering and to conquer, and shall sweep away into utter ex-
tinction all the blood-stained tyrannies of the present earth,
even as he has swept" away the brute dynasties of the pre-
Adamite world, and shall establish a reign of peace, of love,
and of holiness that shall never pass away : when the purified
sons of Adam, rejoicing in immortal youth and happiness,
shall be able to look back with enlarged understandings and
grateful hearts on the whole history of creation and redemp-
tion, and shall join their angelic brethren in the final and
more ecstatic repetition of that hymn of praise with which
the heavenly hosts greeted the birth of our planet. May God
in his mercy grant that he who writes and they who read
may *' stand in their lot at the end of the days" and enjoy
the full fruition of these glorious prospects.

APPENDIX,

APPENDIX.

A.— TRUE AND FALSE EVOLUTION.

The term " evolution " need not in itself be a bugbear on
theological grounds. The Bible writers would, I presume,
have no objection to it if understood to mean the develop-
ment of the plans of the Creator in nature. That kind of
evolution to which they would object, and to which enlight-
ened reason also objects, is the spontaneous evolution of
nothing into atoms and force, and of these into all the won-
derful and complicated plan of nature, without any guiding
mind. Farther, biological and palceontological science, as
well as the Bible, object to the derivation of living things
from dead matter by merely natural means, because this can
not be proved to be possible, and to the production of the
series of organic forms found as fossils in the rocks of the
earth by the process of struggle for existence and survival of
the fittest, because this does not suffice to account for the
complex phenomena presented by this succession. With ref-
erence to the testimony of palaeontology, I have in other pub-
lications developed this very fully ; and would here merely
quote the summing up of the argument, as given in my Ad-
dress of 1875 before the American Association for the Ad-
vancement of Science :

" I have thus far said nothing of the bearing of the prev-
alent ideas of descent with modification on this wonderful
procession of life. None of these of course can be expected
to take us back to the origin of living beings ; but they also

364 Appendix.

fail to explain why so vast numbers of highly organized spe-
cies struggle into existence simultaneously in one age and
disappear in another; why no continuous chain of succession
in time can be found gradually blending species into each
other; and why in the natural succession of things degrada-
tion under the influence of external conditions and final ex-
tinction seem to be laws of organic existence. It is useless/
here to appeal to the imperfection of the record or to the '
movements or migrations of species. The record is now in
many important parts too complete, and the simultaneousness
of the entrance of the faunas and floras too certainly estab-
lished, and moving species from place to place only evades
the difficulty. The truth is that such hypotheses are at pres- )
ent premature, and that we require to have larger collections/
of facts. Independently of this, however, it appears to me
that from a philosophical point of view it is extremely prob-
able that all theories of evolution as at present applied to
life are fundamentally defective in being too partial in their
character ; and perhaps I can not better group the remainder
of the facts to which I wish to refer than by using them to il-
lustrate this feature of most of the later attempts at general-
ization on this subject.

" First, then, these hypotheses are too partial in their tend-/
ency to refer numerous and complex phenomena to one]
cause, or to a few causes only, when all trustworthy analogy)
would indicate that they must result from many concurrent
forces and determinations of force. We have all no doubt
read those ingenious, not to say amusing, speculations in
which some entomologists and botanists have indulged with
reference to the mutual relations of flowers and haustellate
insects. Geologically the facts oblige us to begin with cryp-
togamous plants and mandibulate insects, and out of the de-
sire of insects for non-existent honc}^, and the adaptations' of
plants to the requirements of non-existent suctorial apparatus,
we have to evolve the marvellous complexity of floral form

True and False Evolution. 365

and coloring, and the exquisitely delicate apparatus of the
mouths of haustellate insects. Now when it is borne in mind
that this theory implies a mental confusion on our part pre-
cisely similar to that which in the department of mechan-
ics actuates the seekers for perpetual motion, that we have
not the smallest tittle of evidence that the changes required
have actually occurred in any one case, and that the thou-
sands of other structures and relations of the plant and the in-
sect have to be worked out by a series of concurrent evolu-
tions so complex and absolutely incalculable in the aggregate
that the cycles and epicycles of the Ptolemaic astronomy were
child's play in comparison, we need not wonder that the com-
mon-sense of mankind revolts against such fancies, and that
we are accused of attempting to construct the universe by
methods that would baffle Omnipotence itself, because they
are simply absurd. In this aspect of them indeed such spec-
ulations are necessarily futile, because no mind can grasp all
the complexities of even any one case, and it is useless to fol-
low out an imaginary line of development which unexplained
facts must contradict at every step. This is also no doubt
the reason why all recent attempts at constructing 'Phylog-
enies ' are so changeable, and why no two experts can agree
about the details of any of them.

^^A second aspect in which such speculatimis are too partial /
is in the unwarranted use which they make of analogy. It is
not unusual to find such analogies as that between the em-
bryonic development of the individual animal and the succes-
sion of animals in geological time placed on a level with that
reasoning from analogy by which geologists apply modern
causes to explain geological formations. No claim could be
more unfounded. When the geologist studies ancient lime-
stones built up of the remains of corals, and then applies the
phenomena of modern coral reefs to explain their origin, he
brings the latter to bear on the former by an analogy which
includes not merely the apparent results, but the causes at

366 Appendix.

work, and the conditions of their action, and it is on this that
the vaHdity of his comparison depends, in so far as it relates
to similarity of mode of formation. But when we compare
the development of an animal from an embryo cell with the
progress of animals in time, though we have a curious anal-
ogy as to the steps of the process, the conditions and causes
at work are known to be altogether dissimilar, and therefore
we have no evidence whatever as to identity of cause, and our
reasoning becomes at once the most transparent of fallacies.
Farther, we have . no right here to overlook the fact that the
conditions of the embryo are determined by those of a previ-
ous adult, and that no sooner does this hereditary potentiality
produce a new adult animal than the terrible external agen-
cies of the physical world, in presence of which all life exists,
begin to tell on the organism, and after a struggle of longer
or shorter duration it succumbs to death, and its substance re-
turns into inorganic nature — a law from which even the longer
life of the species does not seem to exempt it. All this is so
plain and manifest that it is extraordinary that evolutionists
will continue to use such partial and imperfect arguments.
Another example may be taken from that application of the
doctrine of natural selection to explain the introduction of
species in geological time, which is so elaborately discussed
by Sir C. Lyell in the last edition of his ' Principles of Ge-
ology.' The great geologist evidently leans strongly to the
theory, and claims for it the ' highest degree of probability ;'
yet he perceives that there is a serious gap in it, since no
modern fact has ever proved the origin of a new species by
modification. Such a gap, if it existed in those grand analo-
gies by which we explain geological formations through mod-
ern causes, would be admitted to be fatal.

" A third illustration of the partial character of these hypoth-
eses may be taken from the use made of the theory deduced'
from modern physical discoveries, that life must be merely a
product of the continuous operation of physical laws. The

True and False Evolution. . 367

assumption, for it is nothing more, that the phenomena of life
are produced merely by some arrangement of physical forces,
even if it be admitted to be true, gives only a partial explana-
tion of the possible origin of life. It does not account for the
fact that life as a force or combination of forces is set in an-
tagonism to all other forces. It does not account for the
marvellous connection of life with organization. It does not
account for the determination and arrangement of forces im-
plied in life. A very simple illustration may make this plain.
If the problem to be solved were the origin of the mariner's
compass, one might assert that it is wholly a physical arrange-
ment both as to matter and force. Another might assert that
it involves mind and intelligence in addition. In some sense
both would be right. The properties of magnetic force and
of iron or steel are purely physical, and it might even be with-
in the bounds of possibility that somewhere in the universe a
mass of natural loadstone may have been so balanced as to
swing in harmony with the earth's magnetism. Yet we would
surely be regarded as very credulous if we could be induced
to believe that the mariner's compass has originated in that
way. This argument applies with a thousandfold greater
force to the origin of life, which involves even in its simplest
forms so many more adjustments offeree and so much more
complex machinery.

'' Fourthly, these hypotheses are partial, inasmuch as they
fail to account for the vastly varied and correlated interde-
pendencies of natural things and forces, and for the unity of
plan which pervades the whole. These can be explained,
only by taking into the account another element from without.N
Even when it professes to admit the existence of a God, the
evolutionist reasoning of our day contents itself altogether^
with the physical or visible universe, and leaves entirely out
of sight the power of the unseen and spiritual, as if this were'
something with which science has nothing to do, but which
belongs only to imagination or sentiment. So much has this

368 . Appendix.

been the case, that when recently a few physicists and nat-
uralists have turned to this aspect of the case, they have
seemed to be teaching new and startling truths, though only
reviving some of the oldest and most permanent ideas of our
race. From the dawn of human thought it has been the con-
clusion alike of philosophers, theologians, and the common-
sense of mankind that the seen can be explained only by ref-
erence to the unseen, and that any merely physical theory of the
world is necessarily partial. This, too, is the position of our
sacred Scriptures, and is broadly stated in their opening verse;
and indeed it lies alike at the basis of all true religion and all
sound philosophy, for it must necessarily be that ' the things
that are seen are temporal, the things that are unseen eter-
nal.' With reference to the primal aggregation of energy in
the visible universe, with reference to the introduction of life,
with reference to the soul of man, with reference to the heav-
enly gifts of genius and prophecy, with reference to the intro-
duction of the Saviour himself into the world, and with refer-
ence to the spiritual gifts and graces of God's people — all
these spring not from sporadic acts of intervention, but from
the continuous action of God and the unseen world, and this
we must never forget is the true ideal of creation in Scripture
and in sound theology. Only in such exceptional and little in-
fluential philosophies as that of Democritus, and in the specu-
lations of a few men carried off their balance by the brilliant
physical discoveries of our age, has this necessarily partial
and imperfect view been adopted. Never, indeed, was its im-
perfection more clear than in the light of modern science.

" Geology, by tracing back all present things to their origin,
was the first science to establish on a basis of observed facts
the necessity of a beginning and end of the world. But even
physical science now teaches us that the visible world is a
vast machine for the dissipation of energy; that the processes
going on in it must have had a beginning in time, and that all
things tend to a final and helpless equilibrium. This neces-

True and False Evolution, 369

sity implies an unseen power, an invisible universe, in which
the visible universe must have originated, and to which its
energy is ever returning. The hiatus between the seen and
the unseen may be bridged over by the conceptions of atomic
vortices of force, and by the universal and continuous ether;
but whether or not, it has become clear that the conception
of the unseen as existing has become necessary to our belief
in the possible existence of the physical universe itself, even
without taking life into the account.

" It is in the domain of life, however, that this necessity
becomes most apparent ; and it is in the plant that we first
clearly perceive a visible testimony to that unseen which is
the counterpart of the seen. Life in the plant opposes the
outward rush of force in our system, arrests a part of it on its
way, fixes it as potential energy, and thus, forming a mere
eddy, so to speak, in the process of dissipation of energy, it
accumulates that on which animal life and man himself may
subsist, and asserts for a time supremacy over the seen and
temporal on behalf of the unseen and eternal. I say for a
time, because life is, in the visible universe, as at present con-
stituted, but a temporary exception, introduced from that un-
seen world where it is no longer the exception, but the eternal
rule. In a still higher sense, then, than that in which matter
and force testify to a Creator, organization and life, whether
in the plant, the animal, or man, bear the same testimony, and
exist as outposts put forth in the succession of ages from that
higher heaven that surrounds the visible universe. In them,
too. Almighty power is no doubt conditioned or limited by
law, yet they bear more distinctly upon them the impress of
their Maker; and, while all explanations of the physical uni-
verse which refuse to recognize its spiritual and unseen origin
must necessarily be partial and in the end incomprehensible,
this destiny falls more quickly and surely on the attempt to
account for life and its succession on merely materialistic
principles.

Q2

370 Appendix.

"Here again, however, I must remind you that creation, as
maintained against such materiaUstic evolution, whether by
theology, philosophy, or Holy Scripture, is necessarily a con-
tinuous, nay, an eternal influence, not an intervention of dis-
connected acts. It is the true continuity, which includes and
binds together all other continuity.

" It is here that natural science meets with theology, not as
an antagonist, but as a friend and ally in its time of greatest
need ; and I must here record my belief that neither men of
science nor theologians have a right to separate what God in
Holy Scripture has joined together, or to build up a wall be-
tween nature and religion, and write upon it ' no thorough-
fare.' The science that does this must be impotent to ex-
plain nature, and without hold on the higher sentiments of
man. The theology that does this must sink into mere super-
stition.

" In conclusion, can we formulate a few of the general laws,
or perhaps I had better call them general conclusions, re-
specting life, in which all palaeontologists may agree ? Per-
haps it is not possible to do this at present satisfactorily, but
the attempt may do no harm. We may, then, I think, make
the following affirmations :

" I. The existence of life and organization on the earth is
not eternal, nor even coeval with the beginning of the physic-
al universe, but may possibly date from Laurentian or imme-
diately pre-Laurentian times.

"2. The introduction of new species of animals and plants
has been a continuous process, not necessarily in the sense of
derivation of one species from another, but in the higher sense
of the continued operation of the cause or causes which intro-
duced life at first. This, as already stated, I take to be the
true theological or Scriptural as well as scientific idea of what
we ordinarily and somewhat loosely term creation.

" 3. Though thus continuous, the process has not been uni-
form ; but periods of rapid production of species have alter-

True and False Evolution. 371

nated with others in which many disappeared and few were
introduced. This may have been an effect of physical cycles
reacting on the progress of life.

"4. Species, like individuals, have greater energy and vital-
ity in their younger stages, and rapidly assume all their varie-
tal forms, and extend themselves as widely as external circum-
stances will permit. Like individuals also, they have their
periods of old age and decay, though the life of some species
has been of enormous duration in comparison with that of
others ; the difference appearing to be connected with degrees
of adaptation to different conditions of life.

"5. Many allied species, constituting groups of animals and
plants, have made their appearance at once in various parts
of the earth, and these groups have obeyed the same lav/s
with the individual and the species in culminating rapidly,
and then slowly diminishing, though a large group once intro-
duced has rarely disappeared altogether.

" 6. Groups of species, as genera and orders, do not usu-
ally begin with their highest or lowest forms, but with in-
termediate and generalized types, and they show a capacity
for both elevation and degradation in their subsequent his-
tory.

" 7. The history of life presents a progress from the lower
to the higher, and from the simpler to the more complex, and
from the more generalized to the more specialized. In this
progress new types are introduced and take the place of the
older ones, which sink to a relatively subordinate place and
become thus degraded. But the physical and organic changes
have been so correlated and adjusted that life has not only
always maintained its existence, but has been enabled to as-
sume more complex forms, and that older forms have been
made to prepare the way for newer, so that there has been on
the whole a steady elevation culminating in man himself
Elevation and specialization have, however, been secured at
the expense of vital energy and range of adaptation, until the

3/2 Appendix.

new element of a rational and inventive nature was introduced
in the case of man.

" 8. In regard to the larger and more distinct types, we can
not find evidence that they have, in their introduction, been
preceded by similar forms connecting them with previous
groups; but there is reason to believe that many supposed
representative species in successive formations are really only
races or varieties.

"9. In so far as we can trace their history, specific types
are permanent in their characters from their introduction to
their extinction, and their earlier varietal forms are similar to
their later ones.

" 10. Palaeontology furnishes no direct evidence, perhaps
never can furnish any, as to the actual transformation of one
species into another, or as to the actual circumstances of cre-
ation of a species, but the drift of its testimony is to show that
species come i^aper saltum, rather than by any slow and grad-
ual process.

" II. The origin and history of life can not, any more than
the origin and determination of matter and force, be explained
on purely material grounds, but involve the consideration of
power referable to the unseen and spiritual world.

"Different minds may state these principles in different
ways, but I believe that, in so far as palaeontology is concern-
ed, in substance they must hold good, at least as steps to
higher truths."

Evolution and Creation by Law. 373

B.— EVOLUTION AND CREATION BY LAW.

Evolutionist writers have a great horror of what they term
"intervention." But they should be informed that the idea
of a planning Creator does not involve intervention in an ex-
traordinary or miraculous sense, any more than what we call
the ordinary operations of nature. It is a common but child-
ish prejudice that every discovery of a secondary cause di-
minishes so much of what is to be referred to the agency of
God. On the contrary, such discoveries merely aid us in
comprehending the manner of his action. But when evolu-
tionists, in their zeal to get rid of creative intervention, trace
all things to the interaction of insensate causes, they fall into
the absurdity of believing in absolute unmitigated chance as
the cause of perfect order. Evidences of this may be found
by the score in Darwin's works on the origin of species. I
quote, however, from another and usually clear thinker, Wal-
lace, in a review of the Duke of Argyll's "Reign of Law,"
which appeared some years ago, but represents very well this
phase of thought :

" ' It is curious,' says the Duke of Argyll, ' to observe the
language which this most advanced disciple of pure natural-
ism [Mr. Darwin] instinctively uses, when he has to describe
the complicated structure of this curious order of plants [the
Orchids]. Caution in ascribing intentions to nature does
not seem to occur to him as possible. Intention is the one
thing which he does see, and which, when he does not see,
he seeks for diligently until he finds it. He exhausts every
form of words and of illustration by which intention or mental
purpose can be described. ' Contrivance ' — * curious contriv-

374 Appendix.

ance' — 'beautiful contrivance' — these are expressions which
occur over and over again. Here is one sentence describing
the parts of a particular species : ' the labellum is developed
into a long nectary, in order to attract lepidoptera, and we
shall presently give reason for suspecting that the nectar is
purposely so lodged that it can be sucked only slowly, in order
to give time for the curious chemical quality of this viscid
matter setting hard and dry.' " Many other examples of simi-
lar expressions are quoted by the duke, who maintains that
no explanation of these "contrivances" has been or can be
given, except on the supposition of a personal contriver, spe-
cially arranging the details of each case, although causing
them to be produced by the ordinary processes of growth and
reproduction.

" Now there is a difficulty in this view of the origin of the
structure of orchids which the duke does not allude to. The
majority of flowering plants are fertilized, either without the
agency of insects, or, when insects are required, without any
very important modification of the structure of the flower. It
is evident, therefore, that flowers might have been formed
as varied, fantastic, and beautiful as the orchids, and yet have
been fertilized by insects in the same manner as violets
or clover or primroses, or a thousand other flowers. The
strange springs and traps and pitfalls found in the flowers of
orchids can not be necessary /^r se, since exactly the same
end is gained in ten thousand other flowers which do not pos-
sess them. Is it not, then, an extraordinary idea to imagine
the Creator of the universe contriving the various complicated
parts of these flowers as a mechanic might contrive an ingen-
ious toy or a difficult puzzle? Is it not a more worthy con-
ception that they are some of the results of those general laws
which were so co-ordinated at the first introduction of life
upon the earth as to result necessarily in the utmost possible
development of varied forms?"

A moment's thought is sufficient to show that there is no

Evolution and Creation by Law. 375

essential difference between the Creator contriving every detail
of the structure of an orchid and his producing it through
some intermediate cause, or his commanding it into existence
by his almighty word. The same mental process, so to speak,
of the contriver is implied in either case. But there is an
immeasurable difference between any of those ideas and that
of the orchid producing its parts spontaneously under the
operation of insensate physical law, whatever that may be,
alone. Again, in the same review, Wallace writes :

" The uncertainty of opinion among naturalists as to which
are species and which varieties is one of Mr. Darwin's very
strong arguments that these two names can not belong to
things quite distinct in nature and origin. The reviewer says
that this argument is of no weight, because the works of man
present exactly the same phenomena, and he instances patent
inventions, and the excessive difficulty of determining whether
they are new or old. I accept the analogy, and maintain that
it is all in favor of Mr. Darwin's views ; for are not all inven-
tions of the same kind directly affiliated to a common ancestor.
Are not improved steam-engines or clocks the lineal descend-
ants of some existing steam-engine or clock ? Is there ever a
new creation in art or science any more than in nature ? Did
ever patentee absolutely originate any complete and entire in-
vention no portion of which was derived from any thing that
had been made or described before T It is, therefore, clear that
the difficulty of distinguishing the various classes of inventions
which claim to be new is of the same nature as the difficulty
of distinguishing varieties and species, because neither are
absolute new creations, but both are alike descendants of pre-
existing forms, from which and from each other they differ by
varying and often imperceptible degrees. It appears, then,
that however plausible this writer's objections may seem,
whenever he descends from generalities to any specific state-
ment his supposed difficulties turn out to be in reality strong-
ly confirmatory of Mr. Darwin's view."

376 Appendix.

Now that improved steam-engines are lineal descendants
of other steam-engines is absolute nonsense, in any other as-
pect than that the structure of one suggested the structure of
another to a contriving mind. We need not affirm this of God ;
but we may affirm that the plans of the creative mind consti-
tute the true link of connection between the different states
and developments of inorganic and organic objects. This is
the real meaning of creation by law, as distinguished from
mere chance on the one hand, and arbitrary and capricious
intervention on the other. Both of these extremes are equally
illogical ; and it can not be too frequently repeated that di-
vine revelation avoids both by maintaining with equal firm-
ness the agency of the Creator, and that agency not capri-
cious, but according to plan and purpose ; embracing not
merely the action of the divine mind itself, but under it of
all the forces and material things created.

Modes of Creation. 377

C— MODES OF CREATION.

A QUESTION often asked, but not easily answered, with refer-
ence to the creation of animals and plants, is — What was its
precise method, and to what extent is such intervention con-
ceivable. This is, it is true, not a properly scientific question,
since science can not inform us of the act of creation. Nor
is it properly a theological one, since revelation appeals to
our faith in the facts, without giving us much information as
to the mode. It can, therefore, be answered only conjectural-
ly, except in so far as the law or plan of creation can be in-
ferred from what is known, either from science or revelation,
as to the history of life.

We may, in the first place, assume that law or plan must
characterize creation. The Scriptural idea of it is not rec-
oncilable with the supposition of a series of arbitrary acts any
more than the scientific idea. The nature of these laws, as
disclosed by Paleontology, has been already considered in
a preceding part of this Appendix. What we may conject-
ure as to the nature of the creative act itself, from a compari-
son of nature and revelation, may be summed up as follows :

I. If we reduce organized beings to their ultimate organ-
isms^— cells or plastids — and with Spencer and Haeckel sup-
pose these to be farther divisible into still smaller particles
or plastidules, each composed of several complex particles
of albumen or protoplasm, we may suppose the primary act
of creation to consist in the aggregation of molecules of albu-
minous matter into such plastidules bearing the same relations,
as "manufactured articles," to the future cell that inorganic
molecules bear to crystals, and possessing within themselves

378 Appaidix.

the potencies of organic forms. This is the nearest approach
that we can make to the primary creative act, and its scien-
tific basis is merely hypothetical, while revelation gives us no
intimation as to any such constitution of organized matter,

2. The formulae in Genesis, " Let the land produce," and
" Let the waters produce," imply some sort of mediate crea-
tion through the agency of the land and the waters, but of
what sort we have no means of knowing. They include, how-
ever, the idea of the origin of the lower and humbler forms
of life from material pre-existing in inorganic nature, and also
the idea of the previous preparation of the land and the wa-
ters for the sustenance of the creatures produced.

3. The expression in the case of man — "out of the dust" —
would seem to intimate that the human body was constituted
of merely elementary matter, without any previous preparation
in organic forms. It may, however, be intended merely to
inform us that, while the spirit is in the image of God, the
bodily frame is " of the earth earthy," and in no respect dif-
ferent in general nature from that of the inferior animals.

4. The Bible indicates some ways in which creatures may
be modified or changed into new species, or may give rise to
new forms of life. The human body is, we are told, capable
of transformation into a new or spiritual body, different in
many important respects, and the future general prevalence
of this change is an article of religious faith. The Bible rep-
resents the woman as produced from the man by a species
of fission, not known to us as a natural possibility, except in
some of the lower forms of life. The birth of the Saviour is
represented as having been by parthenogenesis, and if it had
pleased God that Jesus was to remain on earth as the pro-
genitor of a new and higher type of man to replace that now
existing, this might be regarded as the introduction of a new
species. To what extent the Creator may have so acted on the
constitution of organized beings as to produce changes of this
kind we have no means of knowing; but if he have done so, we

Modes of Creation, 379

may be sure that it has been in accordance with some definite
plan or law.

5. We have a right to infer from Scripture that there must
be some creative law which provides for the introduction of
species, de 7iovo, from unorganized matter, and which has been
or is called into action by conditions as yet altogether un-
known to us, and as yet inimitable, and therefore in some
sense miraculous. Whether we shall ever by scientific inves-
tigation discover the law of this kind of divine intervention it
is impossible to say. That all the theories of spontaneous L
generation and derivation hitherto promulgated are but wild /
guesses at it is but too evident.

6. Since in inorganic nature we meet with such ultimate
facts as atoms of different kinds and with different properties,
and ether of non-atomic constitution, all of which seem to be
necessary to the existence of the world as it is, we may expect
in like manner to find at the basis of organic structures and
phenomena varied kinds of ultimate organisms and forces,
probably much more complicated than those of inorganic nat-
ure. The broad simplicity of existing theories of derivation
and evolution is thus in itself a presumption against their
truth, except as very partial explanations.

7. We have no right to consider the species " after their
kinds" of revelation as coincident with the species recognized
by science. Many of these may be merely races, the produc-
tion of which in the course of time and in special circumstan-
ces may fall within the powers of created species, and which
may merely be the phases of such species in time and place.
Only the accumulation of vast additional stores of facts can
enable us to have any certain opinion on this point, and till
it is settled the doctrine of derivation must remain purely
hypothetical.

8. The inference of evolutionists that because certain forms
of life succeed each other in geological time, they must have
been derived from each other, has an aspect of truth and sim-

380 Appendix.

plicity ; but the idea of law or plan in creation suggests that
the link of connection may be of a less direct nature than
mere descent with modification. This has been referred to
under a previous head.

9. In the scheme of revelation all the successions and
changes of organized beings, just as much as their introduc-
tion at first, belong to the will and plan of God. Revelation
opposes no obstacle to any scientific investigation of the nat-
ure and method of this plan, nor does it contemplate the
idea that any discoveries of this kind in any way isolate the
Creator from his works. Farther, inasmuch as God is always
present in all his works, one part of his procedure can scarce-
ly be considered an "intervention" any more than another.

10. As an illustration of the hypothetical condition of this
subject, and of the views which may be taken as to its details,
I quote from a memoir of my own certain conclusions with
reference to the origin of the species of land plants which are
found in the older geological formations. The conclusions
stated are at the end of a detailed consideration of these plants
and the circumstances of their occurrence :

"(i.) Some of the forms reckoned as specific in the Devo-
nian and Carboniferous formations may be really derivative
races. There are indications that such races may have orig-
inated in one or more of the following ways : {a) By a nat-
ural tendency in synthetic types to become specialized in the
direction of one or other of their constituent elements. In
this way such plants as Artlwostigma and Psilophyton may
have assumed new varietal forms, {h) By embryonic retar-
dation or acceleration,^ whereby certain species may have
had their maturity advanced or postponed, thus giving them
various grades of perfection in reproduction and complexity
of structure. The fact that so many Erian and Carboniferous
plants seem to be on the confines of the groups of Acrogens

* In the manner ilkistrated by Hyatt and Cope.

Modes of Creation. 381

and Gymnosperms may be supposed favorable to such ex-
changes, {c) The contraction and breaking up of floras which
occurred in the Middle Erian and Lower Carboniferous may
have been eminently favorable to the production of such va-
rietal forms as would result from what has been called the
'struggle for existence.' {d) The elevation of a great ex-
panse of new land at the close of the Middle Erian and the
beginning of the Coal period would, by permitting the exten-
sion of series over wide areas and fertile soils, and by remov-
ing the pressure previously existing, be eminently favorable
to the production of new, and especially of improved, varie-
ties.

"(2.) Whatever importance we may attach to the above
supposed causes of change, we still require to account for the
origin of our specific types. This may forever elude our ob-
servation, but we may at least hope to ascertain the external
conditions favorable to their production. In order to attain
even to this it will be necessary to inquire critically, with ref-
erence to every acknowledged species, what its claims to dis-
tinctness are, so that we may be enabled to distinguish spe-
cific types from mere varieties. Having attained to some
certainty in this, we may be prepared to inquire whether the
conditions favorable to the appearance of new varieties were
also those favorable to the creation of new types, or the re-
verse— whether these conditions were those of compression
or expansion, or to what extent the appearance of new types
may be independent of any external conditions, other than
those absolutely necessary for their existence. I am not with-
out hope that the further study of fossil plants may enable us
thus to approach to a comprehension of the laws of the crea-
tion, as distinguished from those of the continued existence
of species.

" In the present state of our knowledge we have no good
ground either to limit the number of specific types beyond
what a fair study of our material may warrant, or to infer that

382 Appendix,

such primitive types must necessarily have been of low grade,
or that progress in varietal forms has always been upward.
The occurrence of such an advanced and specialized type as
that of Syringoxylon in the Middle Devonian should guard
us against these errors. The creative process may have been
applicable to the highest as well as to the lowest forms, and
subsequent deviations must have included degradation as
well as elevation. I can conceive nothing more unreason-
able than the statement sometimes made that it is illogical or
even absurd to suppose that highly organized beings could
have been produced except by derivation from previously ex-
isting organisms. This is begging the whole question at is-
sue, depriving science of a noble department of inquiry on
which it has as yet barely entered, and anticipating by unwar-
ranted assertions conclusions which may perhaps suddenly
dawn upon us through the inspiration of some great intellect,
or may for generations to come baffle the united exertions of
all the earnest promoters of natural science. Our present at-
titude should not be that of dogmatists, but that of patient
workers content to labor for a harvest of grand generaliza-
tions which may not come till we have passed away, but
which, if we are earnest and true to nature and its Creator,
may reward even some of us."*

* Report on Fossil Plants of the Upper Silurian and Devonian, 1871.

Present Condition of Theories of Life. 383

D.— PRESENT CONDITION OF THEORIES OF LIFE.

One of the most learned and ingenious essays on this sub-
ject recently published* states on its first page that all the
varieties of opinion may be summed up under two heads :

" I. Those which require the addition to ordinary matter of
an immaterial or spiritual essence, substance, or power, gen-
eral or local, whose presence is the efficient cause of life ; and,

" 2. Those which attribute the phenomena of life solely to the
mode of combination of the ordinary material elements of
which the organism is composed, without the addition of any
such immaterial essence, power, or force."

It is quite true that physiologists have up to this time
argued out these two alternatives, and that at present the
second is probably the more prevalent. It is however also
true that neither includes or can possibly include the whole
truth, and that enlightened theism may enable us to hold
both, or all that is true in either. Undoubtedly we must
hold that a higher spiritual power or Creator is necessary to
the existence of life ; but then this is necessary also to the
existence of dead matter and force. So that if physiologists
think proper to trace the whole phenomena of life to materi-
al causes, they do not on that account in any way invalidate
the evidence for a spiritual Creator, nor for a spiritual ele-
ment in the higher nature of man. Yet so inconceivably shal-
low is much of the biological reasoning of the day, that it is
quite common to find physiologists referring all life to spon-
taneous and uncaused material agencies, because they have

* Drysdale's " Protoplasmic Theories of Life."

384 Appendix.

concluded that the arrangements of matter and force are suf-
ficient to explain it ; and, on the other hand, to find theistic
writers accusing physiology of materialism, if it finds the
causes of vital phenomena in material forces, as if God could
be present only in those processes which we can not under-
stand.

AVhat we really know as to the material basis of life may
be summed up in a few words. Chemically, life is based on
compounds of the albuminous group. These are highly com-
plex in a molecular point of view, and seem to be formed in
nature only where certain structures, those of the vegetable
cell, exist under certain conditions. These albuminous sub-
stances do not necessarily possess vital properties. They
may exist in a dead state just as other substances. Under
certain conditions, however, those of forming part of a so-
called living organism, they present phenomena of mechanical
movement and molecular change, and of transformation or
transmission of force, which enable them to transform them-
selves into various kinds of tissues, to nourish these when
formed, and to establish a consensus of action between differ-
ent parts of the organism ; and these properties are vastly
varied in detail according to the kind of organism in which
they take place, and the conditions under which the organism
exists. The actually living matter presents no distinct struct-
ure recognizable by the microscope, and can not be distin-
guished chemically from ordinary albumen or protoplasm;
but when living it must either exist in some peculiar and
complex molecular arrangement unknown as yet to chemistry
and physics, or must be actuated by some force or form of
force called vital, and not as yet isolated or reduced to known
laws or correlation. It does not concern theism or theology
which of these may eventually prove to be the true view, or if
it should be found, which is quite possible, that there is no
real difference between them. In any case it is certain that
in the lower animals, and in the merely physiological proper-

Present Condition of Theories of Life. 385

ties of man himself, living matter may act independently of
any higher spiritual nature in the individual, though of course
not independently of the higher power of God, which gave
matter its properties and sustains them in their action. It is
farther certain that in man the spiritual nature dominates and
controls the vital, except when under abnormal conditions the
latter unduly gains the mastery, and quenches altogether the
spirit. In the language of the Bible, the merely vital en-
dowments of the man belong to the flesh (o-ojo^), and to the
rational mind or soul {-^vxv)- The higher nature which man
derives directly from God is the spirit {Tryevfia). Either of
these parts of the complex humanity is capable of life ((^w>/)
and of immortality. Either of them is capable of being in a
state of death, though the import of this differs in its applica-
tion to each. In Genesis, the body is composed of the ordi-
nary earth-materials — the " dust of the ground." The higher
nature is seen in the "shadow and likeness of God," and in
the inbreathing of the Divine Spirit whereby man became a
" living soul" in a higher sense than that in which the animals
possess the ordinary " breath of life." With these views agree
the later doctrines of the Bible as to the " trichotomy " of
"body, soul, and spirit" in man, and of the added influence
of the Spirit of God as acting on humanity.

R

386 Appendix.

E.— RECENT FACTS AS TO THE ORIGIN AND
ANTIQUITY OF MAN.

Several recent statements as to new facts supposed to prove
a pre-glacial antiquity for our species have been promulgated
in scientific journals; but so great doubt rests upon them that
they do not invalidate the statement that the earliest human
remains belong to the post-glacial age. I may refer to the
following :

A very remarkable discovery was made in 1875 by Professor
Rutimeyer, of Basle. In a brown coal deposit of Tertiary, or
at least of "inter-glacial" age — whatever that may mean in
Switzerland— he found some fragments of wood so interlaced
as to resemble wattle or basket-work. Steenstrup has, how-
ever, reexamined the evidence, and adduces strong reasons
for the conclusion that the alleged human workmanship is
really that of beavers.

The Swedish geologists have shown that there is no prop-
erly Palaeolithic age in Scandinavia, and that even the rein-
deer had probably disappeared from Denmark and Sweden
before their occupation by man. Some facts, however, seem-
ed to indicate a residence of man in Sweden before the great
post-pliocene subsidence. One of the most important of these
is the celebrated hut of Sodertelge, referred to in this connec-
tion by Lyell. Recent observations have, however, shown
that this hut was really covered by a landslip, and that its age
may not be greater than eight centuries. Torel has recently
explained this in the Proceedings of the Archaeological Con-
gress of Stockholm.

The human bone found in the Victoria Cave at Setde, ap-

Recent Facts as to Mans Origin and Antiquity. 387

parently under a patch of boulder-clay, has been regarded as
a good evidence of the pre-glacial origin of man. It has,
however, always appeared to readers of the description as a
very doubtful case; and Professor Hughes, of Cambridge,
has recently expressed the opinion that the drift covering
the bone may be merely a " pocket " of that material dis-
engaged from a cavity in the limestone by the wearing of the
cliff.

The same geologist has also shown reason to believe that
the supposed case of the occurrence of palaeolithic imple-
ments under boulder-clay near Brandon, discovered by Mr.
Skertchley, and paraded by Geikie as a demonstration of the
"inter-glacial" antiquity of man, in accordance with his sys-
tem of successive glacial periods, is really an error, and has
no foundation in the facts of the case.

Mr.Pengelly has endeavored to maintain the value of the
deposit of stalagmite as a means of establishing dates, in his
"Notes of Recent Notices of the Geology of Devonshire," Part
I., 1874; but, I confess, with little success. He urges, in op-
position to the Ingleborough Cave, that at Cheddar, where,
according to him, no appreciable deposit whatever is taking
place on the existing stalagmite. But this, of course, is evi-
dence not applicable to the case in hand, as in the Cheddar
case no stalagmite crust whatever would be produced. There
are, no doubt, crevices and caves in which old stalagmite is
even being removed or diminished in thickness. He farther
asserts that in Kent's Cave teeth of the cave bear and other
extinct animals are found covered by not more than an inch
and a half of stalagmite, and consequently that if this were
deposited at the rate of a quarter of an inch per annum — the
supposed rate on the "Jockey Cap" at Ingleborough — these
animals must have lived in Devonshire only six years ago,
which is, of course, absurd. But he fails to perceive that this
mode of occurrence is quite intelligible on the supposition of
a rapid decrease in the amount of deposition in the later part

388 Appendix.

of the stalagmite period. He farther refers to the fact that
the thicker masses of stalagmite, which correspond to the
places of more active drip of water, are in the same position
in both crusts of stalagmite. This shows that the sources of
water containing bicarbonate of lime have been the same from
the first; but it proves nothing as to the rate of deposit.

Mr. Pengelly's own estimate of the rate of deposit gives,
however, a length of time which is sufficient to show that there
must be error somewhere in his calculations. He states the
aggregate thickness of the two crusts at twelve feet, and then,
assuming a rate of deposit of 0.05 inch in 250 years, or one
inch in 5000 years, he arrives at the conclusion that the whole
deposit required 720,000 years for its formation. He is "will-
ing to suppose" the mechanical deposits to have accumulated
more rapidly ; but allowing one fourth of the time for them,
we have nearly a million of years claimed for the residence
of man in Devonshire, which, independently of other consid-
erations, would push back the Palaeozoic trilobites and corals
of that county into the primitive reign of fire, and which in
point of fact amounts to a rediictio ad absurdum of the whole
argument.

Professor Hughes* refers, as a case of rapid deposition of
matter akin to stalagmite, to the deposit of travertine in the
old Roman aqueduct of the Pont du Gard, near Avignon,
where a thickness of fourteen inches seems to have accumu-
lated in about 800 years. Mr. J. Carey has given in Nature,
December 18, 1873, another instance where a deposit 0.75
inch thick was formed in fifteen years in a lead mine in
Durham. Mr. AV. B. Clarke in the same journal gives a case
where in a cave at Brixton, known as Poole's Hole, a deposit
one eighth of an inch in thickness was formed in six months.
Such examples show how unsafe it is to reason as to the rate
of deposit in by-gone times, and when climatal and local con-

* Lecture before the Royal Institution of London.

Recent Facts as to Mans Origin and Antiquity. 389

ditions may have been very different from those at present
subsisting.

In an able address before the biological section of the Brit-
ish Association in 1876, Wallace adduces the following con-
siderations as bearing on these questions j and these are well
worthy of attention as showing that it is the necessities of
evolution rather than of geological facts that demand the as-
sumption of a great antiquity for man, and induce so many
writers to accept any evidence for this, however doubtful : (i)
The great cerebral development of the so-called Palaeolithic
men, which shows no indications of graduating into inferior
races. (2) The great variety of the implements of these an-
cient men, and the excellence of their carvings on bone and
ivory, point to a similar conclusion. (3) Man is not related
to any existing species of ape, but in various ways to several
different species. (4) There is an accumulation of evidence
to show that the earliest historical races excelled in many
processes in the arts and in many kinds of culture. He in-
stances the wonderful mechanical and engineering skill evi-
denced in the pyramids of Egypt in proof of this. His con-
clusion is either that the origin of man by development from
apes must be pushed much farther back than any geologists
at present hold, and I may add far beyond any probable
date, or that he must have originated by some " distinct and
higher agency" — which last is no doubt the true conclu-
sion.

Haeckel, in his recent work, the "History of Creation,"
sketches the development of man from a monad, in twenty-
two stages ; but he has to admit that stage twenty-first, or
that of the "Ape-like man," nowhere exists, either recent or
fossil. He has to assume that this missing link has perished
in the submergence of an imaginary continent of Lemuria, in
the Indian Ocean ; and it is instructive to observe that, after
deducting this, his affiliation of the races of men, as indicated
in a map of the distribution of the species, is in the main very

390 Appendix.

similar to that with which we are familiar in ordinary collec-
tions of maps illustrative of the Bible.

The Post-glacial, Paloeocosmic, or Palaeolithic men of Eu-
rope are not improbably antediluvian ; and as to their precise
date we know little. As to postdiluvian man, Canon Rawlin-
son has recently pointed out* the remarkable convergence of
all historic dates toward a time between 2000 to 3000 years
B.C., or about the date of the Biblical deluge, which may
reasonably be inferred to have occurred about 3200 B.C.
He gives the following summary of historical origins as as-
certained from the best data, and which accord with the
representation of the Bible that in the time of Abraham the
great monarchies of Egypt and the East were scarcely
more powerful than the nomad tribe led by that patriarch :

Oldest date of Babylon 2300 B.C.

" " Assyria 1500

" *' Iran 1500

" " India 1200

«• ♦' China 1154

" " Phoenicia 1700

" " Troad 2000

" " Egypt 2760

Sept. date of Deluge 3200

He rejects, of course, the fabulous chronologies of Egypt,
China, and India as mythical, or referring to pre-human and
antediluvian periods. It is to be observed that while these
dates place the origins of the oldest civilized nations at pe-
riods considerably subsequent to the deluge, they do not pre-
vent us from supposing that these nations commenced their
existence with an advanced civilization borrowed from ante-
diluvian times, which is indeed a fair conclusion from the
Biblical history, independently of the monumental evidence
referred to by Wallace in a previous paragraph.

* Leisure Hour, 1876.

Recent Facts as to the Antiquity of Man. 391

The Duke of Argyll, iii his excellent little work " Primeval
Man," in which he discusses the arguments in favor of primi-
tive savagery advanced by Sir J. Lubbock in opposition to
the views of Archbishop Whately in his lecture on the " Origin
of Civilization," shows that there is no necessity to suppose
a slow progress of mankind in the arts extending over indef-
inite ages ; and his argument in this respect connects itself
with the facts as to the high cerebral organization of Palaso-
cosmic men referred to above by Wallace. In summing up
one division of his argument, he truly remarks : " If we assume
with the supporters of the savage-theory that man has himself
invented all that he now knows, then the very earliest inven-
tions of our race must have been the most wonderful of all,
and the richest in the fruits they bore. The man who first
discovered the use of fire, and the use of those grasses which
we now know under the name of corn, were discoverers com-
pared with whom, as regards the value of their ideas to the
world, Faraday and Wheatstone are but the inventors of ingen-
ious toys. It may possibly be true, as Whately argues, that
man never could have discovered these things without divine
instruction. If so, it is fatal to the savage theory. But it is
equally fatal to that theory if we assume the opposite position,
and suppose that the noblest discoveries ever made by man
were made by him in primeval times."

I may add that this is true, however far into antiquity we
may stretch back these primeval times.

Professor E. S. Morse, in his address to the American As-
sociation, in 1876, as vice-president, takes as a theme the
contributions of American zoologists to theories of evolution,
and closes with those which refer to what he modestly terms
" man's lowly origin." These contributions he sums up un-
der three heads, as bearing on the following points: "i. That
in his earlier stages he reveals certain persistent characters
of the ape ; 2, That the more ancient men reveal more ape-
like features than the present existing men ; and, 3. That cer-

392 Appendix.

tain characteristics pertaining to early men still persist in the
inferior races of men." Under the first head he gives contri-
butions to the well-known fact that embryonic stages of the
human being, like those of other high types, approximate to
forms permanent in lower types. This is a fact inseparable
from the law of reproduction; and as has been already shown
in the text, absolutely without logical significance as even an
analogical argument in favor of evolution. Under the sec-
ond and third heads, he refers to cases of exceptional skulls
and bones belonging to idiots and degraded races of men, as
showing tendencies to lower forms, which as a matter of
course they do, though with essential differences still mark-
ing them as human ; and he assumes without any proof that
these w^ere relatively more common in primitive times, and
that they are cases of reversion to a previous simian stage,
instead of being results of abnormal conditions in the indi-
vidual or variety. He sums up these arguments in the fol-
lowing paragraph :

" If we take into account the rapidly accumulating data of
European naturalists concerning primitive man, with the mass
of evidence presented in these notes, we find an array of facts
which irresistibly point to a common origin with animals di-
rectly below us, and these evidences are found in the massive
skulls with coarse ridges for muscular attachments, the round-
ing of the base of the nostrils, the early ossification of the
nasal bones, the small cranial capacity in certain forms, the
prominence of the frontal crest, the posterior position of the
foramen magnum, the approximation of the temporal ridges,
the lateral flattening of the tibia, the perforation of the hu-
merus, the tendency of the pelvis to depart from its usual pro-
portions; and, associated with all these, a rudeness of culture
and the evidence of the manifestation of the coarsest instincts.
He must be blind, indeed, who can not recognize the bearing
of such grave and suggestive modifications."

Yet Professor Morse knows that there is no true specific or

Recent Facts as to the Antiquity of Man. 393

even generic kinship between man and any species of ape ;
that the phenomena of idiocy and degeneracy have no real
resemblance to those of distinct specific types ; that the re-
semblances of man to apes, such as they are, point not in a
direct manner to any stock of apes, but in a desultory way
to several ; and consequently that, if derived from any such
animals, it must be from some stock altogether unknown to us
as yet, either among recent or fossil animals. Farther, as
Cope, himself an evolutionist, admits, \vhile we can trace the
skeletons of Eocene mammals through several directions of
specialization in succeeding Tertiary times, man presents the
phenomenon of an unspecialized skeleton which can not fair-
ly be connected with any of these lines. Lastly, his quotation
from Fiske, with reference to the supposed effect of a pro-
tracted infancy to develop the moral characteristics of man,
though accompanied with the usual unfair and unreasonable
sneer (which a naturalist like Morse should have been
ashamed to quote) against men " still capable of believing
that the human race was created by miracle in a single
day," is the feeblest possible attempt to bridge over the gap
between the spiritual nature of man and the merely psychi-
cal nature of brutes.

It is plain that if American naturalists have done nothing
more in favor of the lowly origin of man than that which Pro-
fessor Morse has been able, evidently with much industry and
pains, to gather, we need not for the present abandon our
claims to a higher origin. It is farther significant in con-
nection with this that Professor Huxley, in his lectures in
New York, while resting his case as to the lower animals
mainly on the supposed genealogy of the horse, which has
often been shown to amount to no certain evidence,* avoided
altogether the discussion of the origin of man from apes,
now obviously complicated with so many difficulties that both

* See critique in International Review, Januarj^, 1877.
R2

394 Appendix^

Wallace and Mivart are staggered by them. Professor
Thomas, in his recent lectures * admits that there is no lower
man known than the Australian, and that there is no known
link of connection with the monkeys ; and Haeckel f has to
admit that the penultimate link in his phylogeny, the ape-like
man, is absolutely unknown.

In Chapter XIII. I have not touched on the question of
the absolute origin of language— this not being necessary to
my argument. On this interesting subject, however, we have,
in the naming of the animals by the first man, recorded in the
second chapter of Genesis, not only the primary truth of his
superiority to them, but a farther indication that the roots of
human speech, other than interjectional, lie in onomatopoeia,
and especially in the voices of animals, and that the gift of
speech was not the slow growth of ages, but an endowment of
man from the first, just as much as any of his other powers or
properties. An interesting discussion of this subject will be
found in the concluding chapters of Wilson's " Pre-historic
Man," second edition. Farther, the so-called " tallies " found
with the bones of Palaeocosmic men in European caves, and
illustrated in the admirable work of Christy and Lartet, show
that the rudiments even of writing were already in possession
of the oldest race of men known to archaeology or geology.
(See Wilson, op. cit., vol. ii., p. 54.)

I have not noticed, except incidentally, the alleged discov-
eries of very ancient human remains in America, as they all
appear very problematical. There is, however, some evidence
of the coexistence of man with the mastodon and other post-
glacial animals in Illinois and elsewhere.

* Reported in Nature^ 1876. t " History of Creation."

Glacial Periods and the Interpretation of Genesis. 395

R— BEARING OF GLACIAL PERIODS UPON THE
INTERPRETATION OF GENESIS.

Whatever views may be taken as to that period of cold
which occurs at the close of the Tertiary and beginning of the
Modern period, it can not be held to have constituted any
such break as to be considered, as it was at one time, an
equivalent for the Biblical chaos. This is proved by the sur-
vival through this period of a very large proportion of the an-
imals and plants still existing in the northern hemisphere.
The chronological system of animals and plants has been
continuous, as the Bible represents it, since their first ap-
pearance on earth.

It is further remarkable that while there is geological evi-
dence of climates colder than the present in the temperate re-
gions, there is equally good proof of warmer climates even
within the arctic circle than those of the 'cold temperate re-
gions at present. It is difficult to account for these vicissi-
tudes of climate, and much controversy exists on the subject;
but it seems certain that in the earlier Tertiary and Cretaceous
periods, for example, the supplies of heat and light were so
diffiised over the earth as to permit the growth of a temperate
vegetation in Greenland, and even in Spitzbergen. Geolo-
gists, however unwillingly, have been obliged to admit this as
one of those great possibilities, altogether unexpected before-
hand, which have been developed in the history of our planet.
Various modes of explaining this succession of cold and
warm periods have been adopted, all more or less hypothet-
ical. Lyell has argued that it may be explained by a differ-
ent distribution of land and water and of the ocean currents.

39^ Appendix,

CroU accounts for it by the varying eccentricity of the earth's
orbit, in connection with the precession of the equinoxes.
Evans by a shifting of the axis of rotation of the earth.
Drayson, Bell, Warring, and others, by a change in the inclina-
tion of the earth's axis. Others by the secular diminution of
the internal heat of the earth, and of that of the sun. Others
by the supposed recurrence of periods in which the sun gives
more or less heat, or in which the earth is passing through
colder or warmer regions of space. As the subject is of in-
terest with reference to possible correspondences of these
great summers and winters of the earth with the stages of
the creative work, it may be well to notice shortly the rela-
tive merits of these theories.

(i.) The hypothesis of Croll is one of the most ingenious
and elaborate of the whole; but it has two great defects.
One is that the causes alleged are so uncertain and so com-
plicated that it is difficult to estimate their real value. An-
other is that it proves too much, namely, a regular succes-
sion of cold and warm periods throughout geological time,
of which we have no good evidence, and which is on many
grounds improbable.

(2.) That the earth's axis of rotation has continued un-
changed throughout the whole of the geological ages seems
proved by the fact that the principal lines of crumpling and
upheaval from the Laurentian period downward are arranged
in great circles of the earth tangent to the polar circle; and
that the lines of deposit of sediment in the Palaeozoic age
are coincident with the present direction of the arctic cur-
rents.

(3.) Astronomers consider it improbable that the obliquity
of the ecliptic has materially changed, and serious differences
of opinion exist as to the effects which a greater or less obliq-
uity would produce on climate. It seems certain, however,
that a less obliquity would occasion a more uniform distribu-
tion of heat and light throughout the year ; and this, co-oper-

Glacial Periods and the Interpretation of Genesis. 397

ating with other causes leading to a warm climate, might en-
able a temperate vegetation to approach the pole more close-
ly than at present.

(4.) That the energy of the sun's radiation and the internal
heat of the earth have been slowly decreasing seems certain ;
but it is now generally admitted that these changes are so
gradual that little effect can have been produced by them, ex-
cept in the older geological periods, and that they can have
no connection with the great glacial period of the Post-plio-
cene.

(5.) It is otherwise with the hypothesis that the sun's heat
may, like that of some variable stars, have increased and di-
minished. There is, of course, no direct evidence of this, ex-
cept the small differences observed in C3'cles of eleven and
fifty-five years from the greater or less development of sun-
spots, and the analogy of observed variable stars. Still it is
a possible cause of variations of climate. It might also aid
in accounting for the extraordinary evidences of desert con-
ditions and desiccation presented by the salt deposits of differ-
ent geological periods in temperate latitudes.

(6.) The theory of the passage of the earth through zones
of space of variable temperature is now generally abandoned,
as there seems no reason to believe that such differences
exist.

(7.) The theory of Lyell that changes in the distribution of
land and water may, with the possible co-operation of other
causes, have produced the observed diversities of climate, is
that which seems best to meet the conditions presented. It
is based on the known properties of land and water as to the
absorption, radiation, and convection of heat, and on the re-
markable diversities of climate in similar latitudes arising
from this cause at present. Farther, it accords with the
known fact that very great changes of level have occurred in
connection with the glacial period. This theory undoubtedly
embraces a true cause, admitted by all geologists, and it dis-

398 Appendix.

penses with the necessity of believing in the recurrence of
glacial periods at regular intervals. It farther accords best
with the evidence afforded by fossils, and especially by fossil
plants. It has also the merit of directing due attention to
the diversities of geographical conditions at different periods,
and of dealing with causes of change operating within the
earth itself. The only doubt with respect to it is its suffi-
ciency to explain the changes which have occurred, and the
view entertained of this will depend very much on the inter-
pretation of the facts as to the intensity of the last glacial pe-
riod. If moderate views can be taken of this, and if means
can be found, by a less obliquity of the ecliptic or otherwise,
to furnish a continuous supply of light in the arctic regions,
the difficulties which have been alleged against it would dis-
appear.

(8.) In connection with former periods of cold and warmth,
and with the existence of temperate and tropical vegetation
in polar latitudes, we should not forget that view which takes
into account the probable effects of different conditions of
the atmosphere, and the greater quantity of carbonic acid
present in it, in early geological periods. This would, of
course, best apply to the palaeozoic floras, in so far as our
present knowledge extends ' but there may have been simi-
lar conditions in later periods. Dr. Sterry Hunt thus states
this hypothesis :

" The agency of plants in purifying the primitive atmos-
phere was long since pointed out by Brongniart, and our
great stores of fossil fuel have been derived from the decom-
position, by the ancient vegetation, of the excess of carbonic
acid of the early atmosphere, which through this agency was
exchanged for oxygen gas. In this connection the vegetation
of former periods presents the curious phenomenon of plants
allied to those now growing beneath the tropics flourishing
within the polar circles. Many ingenious hypotheses have
been proposed to account for the warmer climate of earlier

Glacial Periods and the Interpretation of Genesis. 399

times, but are at best unsatisfactory, and it appears to me that
the true solution of the problem may be found in the constitu-
tion of the early atmosphere, when considered in the light of
Dr. Tyndall's beautiful researches on radiant heat. He has
found that the presence of a few hundredths of carbonic-acid
gas in the atmosphere, while offering almost no obstacle to
the passage of the solar rays, would suffice to prevent almost
entirely the loss by radiation of obscure heat, so that the sur-
face of the land beneath such an atmosphere would become
like a vast orchard-house, in which the conditions of climate
necessary to a luxuriant vegetation would be extended even
to the polar regions."

It is obvious that, in the production of complex effects of
this kind, various causes, whether astronomical or connected
with the mutations of the earth's crust, may have co-operated,
and probably in all extreme cases did co-operate.

In any case it is evident that the vicissitudes of climate
and the great pulsations of the crust, which have raised and
depressed portions of the surface and changed the position
of its covering of waters, have been potent agents in the
hands of the Creator in effecting the changes and succession
of living beings, which are thus, as Genesis intimates, children
of the waters and of the land, and of the influences of the
heavens. It is also interesting in this connection to observe
that the occurrence of such periods of general warm climate
as that in the Miocene shows that it would have been possi-
ble for man, under certain conditions, to have extended him-
self far more widely in his Edenic state than we can conceive
of in the present condition of the earth. The modern world
is perhaps even in this way " cursed " for man's sake.

400 Appendix.

G.— Dr. STERRY HUNT ON THE CHEMISTRY OF
THE PRIMEVAL EARTH.

On looking back to the reference to this subject in Chap-
ter v., I think it may be desirable to present to the reader
in some more definite manner the conditions of a forming
world; and I can not do this in any other way so well as
by quoting the words of Dr. Sterry Hunt, as given in the
abstract of his lecture on this subject delivered before the
Royal Institution of London in 1867:

" This hypothesis of the nature of the sun and of the lu-
minous process going on at its surface is the one lately put
forward by Faye, and, although it has met with opposition, ap-
pears to be that which accords best with our present knowl-
edge of the chemical and physical conditions of matter, such
as we must suppose it to exist in the condensing gaseous
mass which, according to the nebular hypothesis, should form
the centre of our solar system. Taking this, as we have al-
ready done, for granted, it matters little whether we imagine
the different planets to have been successively detached as
rings during the rotation of the primal mass, as is generally
conceived, or whether we admit with Chacornac a process of
aggregation or concretion, operating within the primal nebu-
lar mass, resulting in the production of sun and planets. In
either case we come to the conclusion that our earth must at
one time have been in an intensely heated gaseous condition,
such as the sun now presents, self-luminous, and with a proc-
ess of condensation going on at first at the surface only, un-
til by cooling it must have reached the point where the gase-

The Chemistry of the Primeval Earth. 401

ous centre was exchanged for one of combined and liquefied
matter.

" Here commences the chemistry of the earth, to the dis-
cussion of which the foregoing considerations have been only
preliminary. So long as the gaseous condition of the earth
lasted, we may suppose the whole mass to have been homo-
geneous ; but when the temperature became so reduced that
the existence of chemical compounds at the centre became
possible, those which were most stable at the elevated tem-
perature then prevailing would be first formed. Thus, for
example, while compounds of oxygen with mercury or even
with hydrogen could not exist, oxides of silicon, aluminium,
calcium, magnesium, and iron might be formed and condense
in a liquid form at the centre of the globe. By progressive
cooling, still other elements would be removed from the gase-
ous mass, which would form the atmosphere of the non-gase-
ous nucleus. We may suppose an arrangement of the con-
densed matters at the centre according to their respective
specific gravities, and thus the fact that the density of the
earth as a whole is about twice the mean density of the
matters which form its solid surface may be explained. Me-
tallic or metalloidal compounds of elements, grouped differ-
ently from any compounds known to us, and far more dense,
may exist in the centre of the earth.

" The process of combination and cooling having gone on
until those elements which are not volatile in the heat of our
ordinary furnaces were condensed into a liquid form, we may
here inquire what would be the result, upon the mass, of a
further reduction of temperature. It is generally assumed
that in the cooling of a liquid globe of mineral matter, con-
gelation would commence at the surface, as in the case of wa-
ter j but water offers an exception to most other liquids, in-
asmuch as it is denser in the liquid than in the solid form.
Hence ice floats on water, and freezing water becomes cov-
ered with a layer of ice, which protects the liquid below.

402 Appendix,

With most other matters, however, and notably with the vari-
ous mineral and earthy compounds analogous to those which
may be supposed to have formed the fiery-fluid earth, numer-
ous and careful experiments show that the products of solidi-
fication are much denser than the liquid mass ; so that solidi-
fication would have commenced at the centre, whose temper-
ature would thus be the congealing point of these liquid com-
pounds. The important researches of Hopkins and Fairbairn
on the influence of pressure in augmenting the melting-point
of such compounds as contract in solidifying are to be con-
sidered in this connection.

" It is with the superficial portions of the fused mineral
mass of the globe that we have now to do ; since there is no
good reason for supposing that the deeply seated portions
have intervened in any direct manner in the production of
the rocks which form the superficial crust. This, at the time
of its first solidification, presented probably an irregular, di-
versified surface from the result of contraction of the congeal-
ing mass, which at last formed a liquid bath of no great depth
surrounding the solid nucleus. It is to the composition of
this crust that we must direct our attention, since therein
would be found all the elements (with the exception of such
as were still in the gaseous form) now met with in the known
rocks of the earth. This crust is now everywhere buried be-
neath its own ruins, and we can only from chemical consider-
ations attempt to reconstruct it. If we consider the condi-
tions through which it has passed, and the chemical affinities
which must have come into play, we shall see that these are
just what would now result if the solid land, sea, and air were
made to react upon each other under the influence of intense
heat. To tiie chemist it is at once evident that from this
would result the conversion of all carbonates, chlorides, and
sulphates into silicates, and the separation of the carbon,
chlorine, and sulphur in the form of acid gases, which, with
nitrogen, watery vapor, and a probable excess of oxygen, would

The Chemistry of the Primeval Earth. 403

form the dense primeval atmosphere. The resulting fused
mass would contain all the bases as silicates, and must have
much resembled in composition certain furnace-slags or vol-
canic glasses. The atmosphere, charged with acid gases,
which surrounded this primitive rock must have been of im-
mense density. Under the pressure of such a high baromet-
ric column, condensation would take place at a temperature
much above the present boiling-point of water, and the de-
pressed portions of the half cooled crust would be flooded
with a highly heated solution of hydrochloric acid, whose
action in decomposing the silicates is easily intelligible to
the chemist. The formation of chlorides of the various
bases, and the separation of silica, would go on until the af-
finities of the acid were satisfied, and there would be a sepa-
ration of silica, taking the form of quartz, and the production
of a sea-water holding in solution, besides the chlorides of so-
dium, calcium, and magnesium, salts of aluminium and other
metallic bases. The atmosphere, being thus deprived of its
volatile chlorine and sulphur compounds, would approximate
to that of our own time, but differ in its greater amount of
carbonic acid.

" We next enter into the second phase in the action of the
atmosphere upon the earth's crust. This, unlike the first,
which was subaqueous, or operative only on the portion cov-
ered with the precipitated water, is sub-aerial, and consists in
the decomposition of the exposed parts of the primitive crust
under the influence of the carbonic acid and moisture of the
air, which convert the complex silicates of the crust into a
silicate of alumina, or clay, while the separated lime, mag-
nesia, and alkalies, being Converted into carbonates, are car-
ried down into the sea in a state of solution.

" The first effect of these dissolved carbonates would be to
precipitate the dissolved alumina and the heavy metals, after
which would result a decomposition of the chloride of calcium
of the sea-water, resulting in the production of carbonate of

404 Appendix,

lime or limestone, and chloride of sodium or common salt.
This process is one still going on at the earth's surface, slow-
ly breaking down and destroying the hardest rocks, and, aid-
ed by mechanical processes, transforming them into clays j
although the action, from the comparative rarity of carbonic
acid in the atmosphere, is less energetic than in earlier times,
when the abundance of this gas, and a higher temperature, fa-
vored the chemical decomposition of the rocks. But now, as
then, every clod of clay formed from the decay of a crystalline
rock corresponded to an equivalent of carbonic acid abstract-
ed from the atmosphere, and equivalents of carbonate of lime
and common salt formed from the chloride of calcium of the
sea-water."^

* See also Hunt, " Chemical and Geological Essays," p. 35,

Tannin and Bhcmah.

405

H.— TANNIN AND BHEMAH.

The following synopsis of the instances of the occurrence
of the words tannin and tan will serve to show the propriety
of the meaning, "great reptiles," assigned in the text to the
former, as well as to illustrate the utility in such cases of
"comparing Scripture with Scripture:"

T. Tannin.

Exod. vii., 9. — Take thy rod and
cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall
become a serpent.

Deut. xxxii., 33. — Their vine is
the poison oi dragons.

Job vii., 12. — Am I a sea, or a
zuhale, that thou settest a watch
over me.

Psa. Ixxiv., 14. — Thou didst di-
vide the sea by thy strength. Thou
breakest the heads of the dragons
in the waters.

Psa. xci., 13. — The young lion
and the dragon thou shalt tram-
ple under foot.

Psa. cxlviii., 7. — Praise the Lord,
ye dragons and all deeps.

Isa. xxvii., i. — He shall slay the
dragon in the midst of the sea
[river].

Isa. li., 9.— Hath cut Rahab and
wounded the dragon.

Probably a serpent, though per-
haps a crocodile. (Septuagint, " ^pd-

KWV.")

Probably a sj^ecies of serpent.
(Septuagint, " ^pd/cwv.")

Michaelis and others think, prob-
ably correctly, that the Nile and
the crocodile, both objects of vig-
ilance to the Egyptians, are intend-
ed. (Septuagint, "cpoKwr.")

Evidently refers to the destruc-
tion of the Egyptians in the Red
Sea, under emblem of the croco-
dile. (Septuagint, " ^pd/cwj.'.")

The association shows that a pow-
erful carnivorous animal is meant.
(Septuagint, '' ^paKhiv.'')

Evidently an aquatic creature.
(Septuagint, "cVafcwj'.")

A large predaceous aquatic ani-
mal (the crocodile), used here as
an emblem of Egypt. (Septuagint,

'* ^pOKCUV.")

Same as above.

4b6

Appendix.

Jer. li., 34. — [Nebuchadnezzar] A large predaceous animal. (Sep-
hath swallowed me up as a dragon. tuagint, "^pa/cwv.")

Ezek. xxix., 3. — Pharaoh, king of In the Hebrew taniin appears
Egypt, the great dragon that lieth by mistake for tannin. This is
in the rivers. clearly the crocodile of the Nile.

Verses 4 and 5 show that it is a
large aquatic animal with scales.
(Septuagint, **^jod/cwv.")

2. Tan.

Psa. xliv., 19. — Thou hast sore
broken us in the place of dragons.

Isa. xxxiv., 13. — [Bozrah in Idu-
mea] shall be a habitation of drag-
ons and a court of owls [or ostrich-
es].

Isa. xliii., 20. — The wild beasts
shall honor me, the dragons and
the ostriches, because I give water
in the wilderness.

Isa. xiii., 22. — Dragons in their
pleasant palaces.

Isa. XXXV., 7. — And the parched
ground shall become a pool, and
the thirsty land springs of water;
in the habitation of dragons, where
each lay, shall be grass with reeds
and rushes.

Job XXX., 29. — I am a brother of
dragons and a companion of os-
triches.

Jer. ix., II ; x,, 22. — I will make
Jerusalem heaps, a den of dragons.

Some understand this of ship-
wreck ; but, more probably, the
place of dragons is the desert.
(Septuagint, "/cdKwa<e.")

An animal inhabiting ruins, and
associated with the ostrich. (Sep-
tuagint, " <Tf<p)}r.")

Evidently an animal of the dry
deserts. (Septuagint, "trftpj/j/.")

Represented as inhabiting the
ruins of Babylon, and associated
with wild beasts of the desert. (Sep-
tuagint, " fX'^of.")

An animal making its lair or nest
in dry, parched places. (Septua-
gint, "opmc.")

The association indicates an ani-
mal of the desert, and the context
that its cry is mournful. (Septua-
gint, "o•^^pJ^r.")

Same as above. See also Jere-
miah xlix., 33 ; li., 37 ; and Mai.
i., 3, where the word is in the fe-
male form {tanoth). (Septuagint,
'' ^pc'iKcjv" and " crpovOug.''')

Tannin and Bheinah. 407

Lam. iv., 3. — Even the sea-vion- In the Hebrew text the word is

sters draw out the breast, they give taimin, evidently an error for ta-

suck to their young ones. The nhn. The suckling of young, and

daughter of my people is become association of ostriches, agree with

cruel, like the ostriches in the wil- this. (Septuagint, " opd/cwi^.")
derness.

Micah i., 8. — I will make a wail- The wailing cry accords with the

ing like the dragons, and mourning view of Gesenius that the jackal is

like the owls [ostriches]. meant. (Septuagint, " ^pa/cwi/.")

We learn from the above comparative view that the tannin
is an aquatic animal of large size, and predaceous, clothed
with scales, and a fit emblem of the monarchies of Egypt and
Assyria. In two places it is possible that some species of
serpent is denoted by it. We must suppose, therefore, that
in Genesis i. it denotes large crocodilian and perhaps ser-
pentiform reptiles. The tan is evidently a small mammal
of the desert.

I omitted to notice in the text a criticism of my explanation
of the word bheinah in "Archaia," made in Archdeacon Pratt's
"Scripture and Science not at Variance" (edition of 1872).
He opposes to the meaning of " herbivorous animals " which
I have sought to establish, two exceptional passages. In one
of these, Deut. xxviii., 26, the word is used in its most general
sense for all beasts, which the context shows can not be its
meaning in Gen. i. In the other, Prov. xxx., 30, he says it is
applied to the lion. The actual expression used, however,
merely implies that the lion is "mighty among bhemah,'^ the
comparison being probably between the strength of the lion
and that of oxen, antelopes, and other strong and active creat-
ures. It does not affirm that the lion is one of the bhe?nah.
While I have every respect for the erudition of Archdeacon
Pratt, and highly value his book, I must regard this objection
as an example of a style of biblical exposition much to be
deprecated, though too often employed.

4o8 Appendix.

L— ANCIENT MYTHOLOGIES.

The current views respecting the relations of ancient my-
thologies with each other and with the Bible have been con-
tinually shifting and oscillating between extremes. The
latest and at present most popular of these extreme views is
that so well expounded by Dr. Max Miiller in his various es-
says on these subjects, and which traces at least the Indo-Eu-
ropean theogony to a mere personification of natural objects.
The views given in the text are those which to the author ap-
pear alone compatible with the Bible, and with the relations
of Semitic and Aryan theology; but, as the subject is gener-
ally regarded from a quite different point of view, a little fur-
ther explanation may be necessary.

1. According to the Bible, spiritual monotheism is the prim-
itive faith of man, and with this it ranks the doctrine of a ma-
lignant spirit or being opposed to God, and of a primitive
state of perfection and happiness. It is scarcely necessary to
say that these doctrines may be found as sub-strata in all the
ancient theologies.

2. In the Hebrew theology the fall introduces the new doc-
trine of a mediator or deliverer, human and divine, and an ex-
ternal symbolism, that of the cherubic forms, composite figures
made up of parts of the man, the lion, the ox, and the eagle.
These forms are referred back to Eden, where they are mani-
festly the emblems of the perfections of the Deity, lost to man
by the fall, and now opposed to his entrance into Eden and
access to the tree of life, the symbol of his immortal happi-
ness. Subsequently the cherubim are the visible indications
of the presence of God in the tabernacle and temple ; and in

Ancient Mythologies. 409

the Apocalypse they reappear as emblems of the Divine per-
fections, as reflected in the character of man redeemed. The
cherubim, as guardians of the sacred tree, and of sacred
places in general, appear in the worship of the Assyrians and
Egyptians, as the Avinged lions and bulls of the former, and
the sphinx of the latter. They can also be recognized in the
sepulchral monuments of Greek Asia and of Etruria. Far-
ther, it was evidently an easy step to proceed from these
cherubic figures to the adoration of sacred animals. But the
cherubic emblems were connected with the idea of a coming
Redeemer, and this was with equal ease perverted into hero-
worshijD. Every great conqueror, inventor, or reformer was
thus recognized as in some sense the "coming man," just as
Eve supposed she saw him in her first-born. In addition to
this, the sacredness of the first mother as the mother of the
promised seed of the woman, led to the introduction of female
deities.

3. The earliest ecclesiastical system was the patriarchal,
and this also admitted of corruption into idolatry. The great
patriarch, venerable by age and wisdom, when he left this
earth for the spirit world, was supposed there, in the presence
of God, to be the special guardian of his children on earth.
Some of the gods of Eg^^pt and of Greece were obviously of
this character, and in China and Polynesia we see at this day
this kind of idolatry in a condition of active vitality.

4. As stated in the text, the mythology of Egypt and Greece
bears evident marks of having personified certain cosmolog-
ical facts akin to those of the Hebrew narrative of creation.
In this way ancient idolaters disposed of the prehistoric and
pre-Adamite world, changing it into a period of gods and
demigods. This is very apparent in the remarkable Assyrian
Genesis recovered by the late George Smith from the clay
tablets found in the ruined palace of Assurbanipal.

5. In all rude and imaginative nations, which have lost the
distinct idea of the one God, the Creator, nature becomes

410 Appendix.

more or less a source of superstitions. Its grand and more
rare phenomena of volcanoes, earthquakes, thunder-storms,
eclipses, become supernatural portents ; and as the idea of
power associates itself with them, they are personified as
actual agents and become gods. In like manner, the more
constant and useful objects and processes of nature become
personified as beneficent deities. This may be, to a great ex-
tent, the character of the Aryan theology; but, except where all
ideas of primitive religion and traditions of early history have
been lost, it can not be the whole of the religion of any people.
The Bible negatively recognizes this source of idolatry, in so
constantly referring all natural phenomena to the divine de-
cree. In connection with this, it is worthy of remark that rude
man tends to venerate the new animal forms of strange lands.
Something of this kind has probably led some of the Ameri-
can Indians to give a sort of divine honor to the bear. It
was in Egypt that man first became familiar with the strange
and gigantic fauna of Africa, whose effect on his mind in
primitive times we may gather from the book of Job. In
Egypt, consequently, there must have been a strong natural
tendency to the adoration of animals.

The above origins of idolatry and mythology, as stated or
implied in the Bible, of course assume that the Semitic mon-
otheistic religion is the primitive one. The first deviations
from it probably originated in the family of Ham. A city of
the Rephaim ofBashan was in the days of Abraham named
after Ashtoreth Karnaim — the two-horned Astarte, a female
divinity and prototype of Diana, and perhaps an historic per-
sonage, in whom both the moon and the domestic ox were
rendered objects of worship. This is the earliest Bible notice
of idolatry.* In Egypt a mythology of complex diversity ex-
isted at least as far back. AVe must remember, however, that
Egypt is Cush as well as Mizraim, and its idolatry is probably

* Except, perhaps, Job xx.xi., 27,

Ancient Mythologies. 411

to be traced, in the first instance, to the Nimrodic empire,
from which, as from a common centre, certain new and irre-
ligious ideas seem to have been propagated among all the
branches of the human family. It is quite probable that the
correspondences between Egyptian, Greek, and Hindoo myths
go back as far as to the time when the first despotism was
erected on the plain of Shinar, and when able but ungodly
men set themselves to erect new political and social institu-
tions on the ruins of all that their fathers had held sacred.
In addition to this, the mythology and language of the Ary-
ans alike bear the impress of the innovating and restless
spirit of the sons of Japhet.

I have stated the above propositions to show that the Bible
affords a rational and connected theory of the origin of the
false religions of antiquity ; and to suggest as inquiries in re-
lation to every form of mythology — how much of it is primi-
tive monotheism, how much cherub-worship, how much hero-
worship, how much ancestor-worship, how much distorted cos-
mogony, how much pure idealism and superstition, since all
these are usually present. I may be allowed further to re-
mind the reader how much evidence we have, even in modern
times, of the strong tendency of the human mind to fall into
one or another of these forms of idolatry ; and to ask him to
reflect that really the only effectual conservative element is
that of revelation. How strong an argument is this for the
necessity to man of an inspired rule of religious faith.

[The above note was in substance contained in the Ap-
pendix to "Archaia" in i860, and its correctness has, I think,
been confirmed by subsequent discoveries.]

412 Appendix.

K.— ASSYRIAN AND EGYPTIAN TEXTS.

Progress is continually being made in the decipherment
and publication of these, and new facts are coming to light
in consequence as to the religions of the early postdiluvian
period.

According to the late George Smith and to Mr. Sayce, in
their contributions to Bagster's " Records of the Past," the
earliest monumental history of Babylonia reveals two races,
the Akkadian or Urdu, a Turanian race, with an agglutinate
language of the Finnish or Tartar type, and the Sumir or
Keen-gi, believed to be Shemitic. The race of Akkad seems
to have invented the cuneiform writing at a very early period,
and it no doubt represents the primitive Cushites of the Bible,
to whom is attributed the empire of Nimrod, whose first cities
were Babel and Erech and Akkad and Calneh. Very ancient
inscriptions of this early Chaldean or Cushite race exist, prob-
ably earlier than the time of Abraham. That of king Urukh,
who is called "a very ancient king," on an inscription of Na-
bonadius, 555 B.C., represents himself as building temples to
several gods and goddesses, so thai in his time there was al-
ready a developed polytheism, unless, indeed, he was himself
the inventor or introducer of much of it. Yet one can gather
from the probably contemporary Creation and Deluge tablets
translated by Mr. Smith, that a Supreme God was still recog-
nized, and that the subordinate deities, though their worship
\vas probably gaining in importance, were still only local and
created beings. Yet it was undoubtedly from this embryo
idolatry that Abraham dissented, and was thus led to leave
his native land.

Assyrian and Egyptian Texts, 413

In like manner, in the early Egyptian Hymn to Amen Ra,
translated by Mr. Goodwin, though we have the gods men-
tioned, they are inferior beings, and not higher in position than
the angels of the Old Testament, while Ra himself is " Lord
of Eternity, Maker Everlasting," and is praised as

" Chief creator of the whole earth,
Supporter of affairs above every god,
111 whose goodness the gods rejoice."

Thus, although there can be little doubt that Ra was a sun-
god, there can be as little that he is the II or El of the Shem-
itic peoples, and that his worship represents that of the one
God, the Creator. It seems probable also that there was an
esoteric doctrine of this kind among the priests and the edu-
cated, however gross the polytheism of the vulgar. In short,
the state of things in Assyria and Egypt was not dissimilar
from that prevailing at this day in India, where learned men
may fall "back upon the ancient Vedas, and maintain that their
religion is monotheistic, while the common people worship in-
numerable gods. All this points to a primitive monotheism,
just as the peculiar forms of adoration given to saints and
the Virgin Mary in the Greek and Roman churches histori-
cally imply a primitive Christianity on which these newer
beliefs and rites have been engrafted.

414 Appendix.

L. — SPECIES AND VARIETAL FORMS WITH REF-
ERENCE TO THE UNITY OF MAN.

In the concluding chapters of " Archaia " the nature of spe-
cies, as distinguished from varieties, was discussed, and special-
ly applied to the varieties and races of man. This discussion
has been omitted from the text of the present work ; but, in
an abridged form, is introduced here, with especial reference
to those more recent views of this subject now prevalent in
consequence of the growth of the philosophy of evolution ;
but which I feel convinced must, with the progress of science,
return nearer to the opinions held by me in i860, and sum-
marized below.

We can determine species only by the comparison of indi-
viduals. If all these agree in all their characters except those
appertaining to sex, age, and other conditions of the individual
merely, we say that they belong to the same species. If all
species were invariable to this extent, there could be no prac-
tical difficulty, except that of obtaining specimens for compar-
ison. But in the case of very many species there are minor
differences, not sufficient to establish specific diversity, but to
suggest its possibility; and in such cases there is often great
liability to error. In cases of this kind we have principally
two criteria: first, the nature and amount of the differences;
secondly, their shading gradually into each other, or the con-
trary. Under the first of these we inquire — Are they no
greater in amount than those which may be observed in indi-
viduals of the same parentage ? Are they no greater than
those which occur in other species of similar structure or hab-

species and Varietal Forms. 415

its? Do they occur in points known in other species to be
readily variable, or in points that usually remain unchanged?
Are none of them constant in the one supposed species, and
constantly absent in the other ? Under the second we ask —
Are the individuals presenting these differences connected
together by others showing a series of gradations uniting
the extremes by minute degrees of difference ? If we can
answer these questions — or such of them as we have the
means of answering — in the affirmative, we have no hesita-
tion in referring all to the same species. If obliged to answer
all or many in the negative, we must at least hesitate in the
identification ; and if the material is abundant, and the distin-
guishing characters clear and well defined, we conclude that
there is a specific difference.

Species determined in this way must possess certain general
properties in common :

1. Their individuals must fall within a certain rangfe of uni-
form characters, wdder or narrower in the case of different
species.

2. The intervals between species must be distinctly marked,
and not slurred over by intermediate gradations.

3. The specific characters must be invariably transmitted
from generation to generation, so that they remain equally dis-
tinct in their limits if traced backward or forward in time, in
so far as our observation may extend.

4. Within the limits of the species there is more or less li-
ability to variation ; and this, though perhaps developed by
external circumstances, is really inherent in the species, and
must necessarily form a part of its proper description.

5. There is also a physiological distinction between' species,
namely, that the individuals are sterile with one another, where-
as this does not apply to varieties ; and though Darwin has
labored to break down this distinction by insisting on rare ex-
ceptional cases, and suggesting many supposed ways by which
varieties of the same species might possibly attain to this

41 6 Appendix.

kind of distinctness, the difference still remains as a fact in
nature; though one not readily available in practically dis-
tinguishing species.

These general properties of species will, I think, be ad-
mitted by all naturalists as based on nature, and absolutely
necessary to the existence of natural history as a science,
independently of any hypotheses as to the possible changes
of specific forms in the lapse of time. I now proceed to
give a similar summary of the laws of the varieties which
may exist — always, be it observed, within the limits of the
species.

I. The limits of variation are very different in different
species. There are many in which no well-marked variations
have been observed. There are others in which the variations
are so marked that they have been divided, even by skilful nat-
uralists, into distinct species or even genera. I do not here
refer to differences of age and sex. These in many animals
are so great that nothing but actual knowledge of the relation
that subsists would prevent the individuals from being entire-
ly separated from one another. I refer merely to the varie-
ties that exist in adults of the same sex, including, however,
those that depend on arrest of development, and thus make
the adult of one variety resemble in some respects the young
of another; as, for instance, in the hornless oxen, and beard-
less individuals among men. If we inquire as to the causes on
which the greater or less disposition to vary depends, we must,
in the first place, confess our ignorance, by saying that it ap-
pears to be in a great measure constitutional, or dependent
on minute and as yet not distinctly appreciable structural,
physiological, and psychical characters. Darwin states that
Pallas long ago suggested, from the known facts that the
seeds of hybrid plants and grafted trees are very variable, the
theory that mixture of breeds tends to produce variability;
but Darwin does not seem to attach much importance to this,
and admits our inability to explain the origin of these differ-

species and Varietal Forms. 417

ences.* We know, however, certain properties of species that
are always or usually connected with great liability to varia-
tion. The principal of these are the following : i. The Ha-
bility to vary is, in many cases, not merely a specific peculiari-
ty; it is often general in the members of a genus or family.
Thus the cats, as a family, are little prone to vary; the wolves
and foxes very much so. 2. Species that are yery widely dis-
tributed over the earth's surface are usually very variable.
In this case the capacity to vary probably adapts the creature
to a great variety of circumstances, and so enables it to be
widely distributed. It must be observed here that hardiness
and variability of constitution are more important to extensive
distribution than mere locomotive powers, for matters have
evidently been so arranged in nature that, where the habitat is
suitable, colonists will find their way to it, even in the face of
difficulties almost insurmountable. 3. Constitutional liability
to vary is sometimes connected with or dependent on extreme
simplicity of structure, in other cases on a high degree of in-
telligence and consequent adaptation to various modes of sub-
sistence. Those minute, simply organized, and very variable
creatures, the Foraminifera, exemplify the first of these ap-
parent causes; the crafty wolves furnish examples of the
second. 4. Susceptibility to variation is farther modified by
the greater or less adaptability of the digestive and locomo-
tive organs to varied kinds of food and habitat. The monkeys,
intelligent, imitative, and active, are nevertheless very limited
in range and variability, because they can comfortably subsist
only in forests, and in the warmer regions of the earth. The
hog, more sluggish and less intelligent, has an omnivorous ap-
petite, and no very special requirements of habitat, and so can
vary greatly and extend over a large portion of the earth.
Farther, in connection with this subject it may be observed
that the conditions favorable to variation are also in the case

* "Animals and Plants under Domestication," p. 406.
S 3

41 8 Appendix,

of the higher animals favorable to domestication, while it may
also be affirmed that, other things being equal, animals in a
domesticated state are much more liable to vary than those
in a wild state, and this independent of intentional selection.
Darwin admits this, and gives many examples of it.

2. Varieties may originate in two different ways. In the
case of wild animals it is generally supposed that they are
gradually induced by the slow operation of external influences;
but it is certain that in domesticated animals they often ap-
pear suddenly and unexpectedly, and are not on that account
at all less permanent. A large proportion of our breeds of
domestic animals appear to originate in this way. A very re-
markable instance is that of the " Niata " cattle of the Banda
Orientale, described by Darwin in his "Voyage of a Naturalist."
These cattle are believed to have originated about a century
ago among the Indians to the south of the La Plata, and the
breed propagates itself with great constancy. " They appear,"
says Darwin, "externally to hold nearly the same relation to
other cattle which bull-dogs hold to other dogs. Their fore-
head is very short and broad, with the nasal end turr^ed up,
and the upper lip much drawn back; their lower jaws project
outward; when walking they carry their heads low on a short
neck, and their hinder legs are rather longer compared with
the front legs than is usual." It is farther remarkable in re-
spect to this breed that it is, from its conformation of head,
less adapted to the severe droughts of those regions than the
ordinary cattle, and can not, therefore, be regarded as an
adaptation to circumstances. In his later work on animals
under domestication, Darwnn gives many other instances of
the origination of breeds of cattle and other animals in this
abrupt and mysterious manner, and without any selection,
though he strongly leans to the conclusion that slow and
gradual changes are the most frequent causes of variation.
It is to be observed, however, that very slow changes are in
more danger of being accidentally diverted or obliterated by

species and Varietal Forms. 419

crossing, and that the first stages of an incipient change may
be too unimportant to be permanent.

Many writers on the subject of the Unity of Man assume
that any marked variety must require a long time for its pro-
duction. Our experience in the case of the domestic animals
teaches the reverse of this view ; a very important point too
often overlooked.

3. The duration or permanence of varieties is very differ-
ent. Some return at once to the normal type when the
causes of change are removed. Others perpetuate them-
selves nearly as invariably as species, and are named races.
It is these races only that we are likely to mistake for true
species, since here we have that permanent reproduction
which is one of the characteristics of the species. The race,
however, wants the other characteristics of species as above
stated ; and it differs essentially in having branched from a
primitive species, and in not having an independent origin.
It is quite evident that in the absence of historical evidence
we must be very likely to err by supposing races to have
really. originated in distinct "primordial forms." Such error
is especially likely to arise if we overlook the fact of the sud-
den origination of such races, and their great permanency if
kept distinct. There are two facts which deserve especial
notice, as removing some of the difficulty in such cases.
One is that well-marked races usually originate only in do-
mesticated animals, or in wild animals which, owing to ac-
cidental circumstances, are placed in abnormal circum-
stances. Another is, that there always remains a tendency
to return, in favorable circumstances, to the original type.
This tendency to reversion is much underrated by Darwin
and his followers ; yet they constantly recur to it as a means
of proving possible derivation, and their writings abound in
examples of it. Perhaps the most remarkable of these re-
versions are those which occur when varieties destitute of
all the markings of the original stock are crossed and re-

420 Appendix,

produce those markings, which Darwin shows to occur in
pigeons and domestic fowls. The domesticated races usual-
ly require a certain amount of care to preserve them in a
state of purity, both on this account and on account of the
readiness with which they intermix with other varieties of the
same species. Many very interesting facts in illustration of
these points might be adduced. The domesticated hog dif-
fers in many important characters from the wild boar. In
South America and the West Indies it has returned, in three
centuries or less, to its original form.* The horse is probar
bly not known in a state originally wild, but it has run wild in
America and in Siberia. In the prairies of North America,
according to Catlin,t they still show great varieties of color.
The same is the case in Sable Island, off the coast of Nova
Scotia,^: where herds of wild horses have existed since an
early period in the settlement of America. In South Amer-
ica and Siberia they have assumed a uniform chestnut or bay
color. In the plains of Western America they retain the di-
mensions and vigor of the better breeds of domesticated
horses. In Sable Island they have already degenerated to
the level of Highland ponies ; but in all countries where
they have run wild, the elongated and arched head, high
shoulders, straight back, and other structural characters prob-
ably of the original wild horse, have appeared. We also
learn from such instances that, while races among domesti-
cated animals may appear suddenly, they revert to the origi-
nal type, when unmixed, comparatively slowly; and this espe-
cially when the variation is in the nature of degeneracy.

4. Some characters are more subject to variation than oth-
ers. In the higher animals variation takes place very readily

* Prichard. This is admitted by Darwin, who gives other examples,
though he insists much on the climatal variations which still remain in
feral pigs.

t " North American Indians."

X Haliburton's "Nova Scotia;" Gilpin's Lecture on Sable Island.

species and Varietal Forms. 421

in the color and texture of the skin and its appendages.
This, from its direct relation to the external world, and ready
sympathy with the condition of the digestive organs, might be
expected to take the lead. In those domesticated animals
which are little liable to vary in other repects, as the cat and
duck, the color very readily changes. Next may be placed
the stature and external proportions, and the form of such ap-
pendages as the external ear and tail. All these characters
are very variable in domestic animals. Next we may place
the form of the skull, which, though little variable in the wild
state, is nearly always changed by domestication. Psycho-
logical functions, as the so-called instincts of animals, are also
very liable to change, and to have these changes perpetuated
in races. Very remarkable instances of this have been col-
lected by Sir C. Lyell * and Dr. Prichard. Lastly, impor-
tant physiological characters, as the period of gestation, etc.,
and the structure of the internal organs connected with the
functions of nutrition, respiration, etc., are little liable to
change, and remain unaffected by the most extreme varia-
tions in other points; and it is, no doubt, in these more essen-
tial and internal parts that the tendency survives to return
under favorable circumstances to the original type.

5. Varieties or races of the same species are fully repro-
ductive with each other, which is not the case with true spe-
cies. Mutual sterility of varieties of the same species is an
exceptional peculiarity, if it ever truly exist; and, on the
other hand, the cross-fertilization of varieties of the same
species, whether in animals or plants, tends to vigorous life,
and also to return to the primitive or average type. On the
other hand, intermixture of distinct species rarely, if ever, oc-
curs freely in nature. It is generally a result of artificial

**' Principles of Geology;" "Natural History of Man." See also a
very able article on the "Varieties of Man," by Dr. Carpenter, in Todd's
Cyclopaedia.

422 Appendix.

contrivance. Again, hybrids produced from species known
to be distinct are either wholly barren, or barren inter se, re-
producing only with one of the original stocks, and rapidly
returning to it ; or if ever fertile i?iter se, which is somewhat
doubtful, rapidly run out. It has been maintained by Pallas
and others, and Darwin leans to this idea, that there is still
another possibility, namely, that of the perfect and continued
fertility of such mixed races, especially after long domestica-
tion ; but their proofs are derived principally from the in-
termixture of the races of dogs and of poultry, which are
cases actually in dispute at present, as to the original unity
or diversity of the so-called species.

If we apply these considerations to man, our conclusion
must be that, even in his bodily frame, he is not merely spe-
cifically but ordinally distinct from other animals, and that
the differences between races of men are varietal rather than
specific. This view is confirmed by the following facts :

I. The case of man is not that of a wild animal ; and it
presents many points of difference even from the case of the
domesticated lower animals. According to the Bible history,
man was originally fitted to subsist on fruits, to inhabit a tem-
perate climate, and to be exempt from the necessity of de-
stroying or contending with other animals. This view un-
questionably accords very well with his organization. He
still subsists principally on vegetable food, is most numerous
in the warmer regions of the earth ; and, when so subsisting
in these regions, is naturally peaceful and timid. On the
whole, however, his habits of life are artificial — more so than
those of any domesticated animal. He is, therefore, in the
conditions most favorable to variation. Again, man pos-
sesses more than merely animal instincts. His mental
powers permit him to devise means of locomotion, of pro-
tection, of subsistence, far superior to those of any mere ani-
mal ; and his dominant will, insatiable in its desires, bends
the bodily frame to uses and exposes it to external influences

species and Varietal Forms. 423

more various than any inferior animal can dream of. Man is
also more educable and plastic in his constitution than other
animals, owing both to his being less hemmed in by unchang-
ing instincts, and to his physical frame being less restricted
in its adaptations. If a single species, he is also more wide-
ly distributed than any other; and there are even single races
which exceed in their extent of distribution nearly all the in-
ferior animals. Nor is there anything in his structure spe-
cially to limit him to plains, or hills, or forests, or coasts, or
inland regions. All the causes which we can suppose likely
to produce variation thus meet in man, who is himself the
producer of most of the distinct races that we observe in the
lower animals. If, therefore, we condescend to compare man
with these creatures, it must be under protest that what we
learn from them must be understood with reference to his
greater capabilities.

2. The races of men are deficient in some of the essential
characters of species. It is true that they are reproduced
with considerable permanency ; though a great many cases
of spontaneous change, of atavism, or return to the character
of progenitors, and of slow variation under changed condi-
tions, have been recorded. But the most manifest deficiency
in true specific characters is in the invariable shading-ofif of
one race into another, and in the entire failure of those who
maintain the distinction of species in the attempt accurately
to define their number and limits. The characters run into
each other in such a manner that no natural arrangement
based on the whole can apparently be arrived at ; and when
one particular ground is taken, as color, or shape of skull, the
so-called species have still no distinct limits ; and all the ar-
rangements formed differ from each other, and from the de-
ductions of philology and history. Thus, from the division
of Virey into two species, on the entirely arbitrary ground of
facial angle, to that of Bory de St. Vincent into fifteen, we
have a great number and variety of distinctions, all incapable

424 Appendix.

of zoological definition ; or, if capable of definition, eminently-
unnatural. There are, in short, no missing links between the
varieties of men corresponding to that which obtains between
man and lower animals.

3. The races of men differ in those points in which the
higher animals usually vary with the greatest facility. The
physical characters chiefly relied on have been color, charac-
ter of hair, and form of skull, together with diversities in stat-
ure and general proportion. These are precisely the points
in which our domestic races are most prone to vary. The
manner in which these characters differ in the races of men
may be aptly illustrated by a few examples of the arrange-
ments to which they lead.

Dr. Pickering, of the U. S. Exploring Expedition* — who
does not, however, commit himself to any specific distinctions
— has arranged the various races of men on the very simple
and obvious ground of color. He obtains in this way four
races — the White, the Brown, the Blackish-brown, the Black.
The distinction is easy ; but it divides races historically, philo-
logically, and structurally alike ; and unites those which, on
other grounds, would be separated. The white race includes the
Hamite Abyssinian, the Semitic Arabian, the Japhetic Greek.
The Ethiopian or Berber is separated from the cognate Abys-
sinian, and the dark Hindoo from the paler races speaking
like him tongues allied to the Sanscrit. The Papuan, on the
other hand, takes his place with the Hindoo; while the allied
Australian must be content to rank with the Negro; and the
Hottentot is promoted to a place beside the Malay. It is un-
necessary to pursue any farther the arrangement of this pains-
taking and conscientious inquirer. It conclusively demon-
strates that the color of the varieties of the human race must
be arbitrary and accidental, and altogether independent of
unity or diversity of origin.

* "The Races of Men," etc. Boston, 1848.

species and Varietal Forms. 425

Some use has been made, by the advocates of diversity of
species, of the quahty of the hair in the different races. That
of the Negro is said to be flat in its cross section — in this re-
spect approaching to wool; that of the European is oval;
and that of the Mongolian and American round.* The sub-
ject has as yet been very imperfectly investigated; but its in-
dications point to no greater variety than that which occurs
in many domesticated animals — as, for instance, the hog and
sheep. Nay, Dr. Carpenter statesf — and the writer has sat-
isfied himself of the fact by his own observation — that it does
not exceed the differences in the hair from different parts of
the body of the same individual. The human hair, like that
of mammals in general, consists of three tissues : an outer
cortical layer, marked by transverse striae, having in man the
aspect of delicate lines, but in many other animals assuming
the character of distinct joints or prominent serrations; a layer
of elongated, fibrous cells, to which the hair owes most of its
tenacity; and an inner cylinder of rounded cells. In the pro-
portionate development of these several parts, in the quantity
of coloring matter present, and in the transverse section, the
human hair differs very considerably in different parts of the
body. It also differs very markedly in individuals of different
complexions. Similar but not greater differences obtain in
the hair of the scalp in different races; but the flatness of the
Negro's hair connects itself inseparably with the oval of the
hair of the ordinary European, and this with the round ob-
served in some other races. It generally holds that curled
and frizzled hair is flatter than that which is lank and straight;
but this is not constant, for I have found that the waved or
frizzled hair of the New Hebrideans, intermediate apparently
between the Polynesians and Papuans, is nearly circular in
outline, and differs from European hair mainly in the greater

* Browne, of Philadelphia, quoted by Kneeland and others,
t Todd's Cyclopsedia, art. " Varieties of Man."

426 Appendix.

development of the fibrous structure and the intensity of the
color. Large series of comparisons are required ; but those
already made point to variation rather than specific difference.
Some facts also appear to indicate very marked differences as
occurring in the same race from constant exposure or habitual
covering; and also the occasional appearance of the most ab-
normal forms, without apparent cause, in individuals. The
differences depending on greater or less abundance or vigor
of growth of the hair are obviously altogether trivial, when
compared with such examples as the hairless dogs of Chili
and hairless cattle of Brazil, or even with the differences
in this respect observed in individuals of the same race of
men.

Confessedly the most important differences of the races of
men are those of the skeleton, in all parts of which variations
of proportion occur, and are of course more or less commu-
nicated to the muscular investments. Of these, as they exist
in the pelvis, limbs, etc., I need say nothing; for, manifest
though they are, they all fall far within the limits of varia-
tion in familiar domestic animals, and also of hereditary mal-
formation or defect of development occurring in the European
nations, and only requiring isolation for its perpetuation as a
race. The differences in the skull merit more attention, for
it is in this and in its enclosed brain that man most marked-
ly differs from the lower animals, as well as race from race.
It is in the form rather than in the mere dimensions of the
skull that we should look for specific differences; and here,
adopting the vertical method of Blumenbach as the most
characteristic and valuable, we find a greater or less antero-
posterior diameter — a greater or less development of the
jaws and bones of the face. The skull of the normal Euro-
pean, or Caucasian of Cuvier, is round oval; and the jaws
and cheek-bones project little beyond its anterior margin,
when viewed from above. The skull of the Mongolian of
Cuvier is nearly round, and the cheek-bones and jaws pro-

species aiid Varietal Forms, 427

ject much more strongly in front and at the sides. The Negro
skull is lengthened from back to front; the jaws project strong-
ly, or are prognathous; but the cheek-bones are little promi-
nent. For the extremes of these varieties, Retzius proposed
the names of brachy-kephalic or short-headed, and dolicho-
kephalic or long-headed, which have come into general use.
The differences indicated by these terms are of great interest,
as distinctive marks of many of the unmixed races of men ;
but, when pushed to extremes, lead to very incorrect generali-
zations— as Professor D. Wilson has well shown in his paper
on the supposed uniformity of type in the American races —
a doctrine which he fully refutes by showing that within a very
narrow geographical range this primitive and unmixed race
presents very great differences of cranial form."* Exclusive
of idiots, artificially compressed heads, and deformities, the
differences between the brachy-kephalic and dolicho-kephalic
heads range from equality in the parietal and longitudinal
diameter to the proportion of about 14 to 24. As stated by
some ethnologists, these differences appear quite characteris-
tic and distinct; but, so soon as we attempt any minute dis-
crimination, all confidence in them as specific characters dis-
appears. In our ordinary European races similar differences,
and nearly as extensive, occur. The dolicho-kephalic head
is really only an immature form perpetuated; and appears
not only in the Negro, but in the Esquimau, and in certain an-
cient and modern Celtic races. The brachy-kephalic head,
in like manner, is characteristic of certain tribes and portions
of tribes of Americans, but not of all ; of many northern Asi-
atic nations; of certain Celtic and Scandinavian tribes; and
often appears in the modern European races as an occasional
character. Farther, as Retzius has well shown, the long heads
and prominent jaws are not always associated with each other;
and his classification is really the testimony of an able observer

* " Prehistoric Man."

428 Appendix.

against the value of these characters. He shows that the
Celtic and Germanic races (in part) have long heads and
straight jaws; while the Negroes, Australians, Oceanians, Ca-
ribs, Greenlanders, etc., have long heads and prominent jaws.
The Laplanders, Finns, Turks, Sclaves, Persians, etc., have
short heads and straight jaws; while the Tartars, Mongo-
lians, Incas, Malays, Papuans, etc., have short heads and prom-
inent jaws.

Another defect in the argument often based on the diverse
forms of heads is its want of acknowledgment of the ascer-
tained and popularly known fact that these forms in different
tribes or individuals of the same race are markedly influenced
by culture and habits of life. In all races ignorance and de-
basement tend to induce a prognathous form, while culture
tends to the elevation of the nasal bones, to an orthognathous
condition of the jaws, and to an elevation and expansion of
the cranium.*

Again, no adequate allowance has been made in the case
of these forms of skull for the influence of modes of nurture
in infancy. Dr. Morton, observing that the brachy-kephalic
American skull was often unequal sided, and the occiput
much flattened, suggests that this is " an exaggeration of the
natural form produced by the pressure of the cradle-board in
common use among the American natives." Dr. Wilson has
noticed the same unsymmetrical character in brachy-kephalic
skulls in British barrows, and has suspected some artificial
agency in infancy; and says, in reference to the American in-
stances, " I think it extremely probable that further investi-
gation will tend to the conclusion that the vertical or flattened
occiput, instead of being a typical characteristic, pertains en-
tirely to the class of artificial modifications of the natural
cranium familiar to the American ethnologist."

While the points in which the races of men vary are those

* Carpenter in Todd's Cyclopaedia.

species and Varietal Forms. 429

in which lower animals are most liable to undergo change,
the several races display a remarkable constancy in those
which are usually less variable. Prichard and Carpenter
have well shown this in relation to physiological points, as, for
instance, the age of arriving at maturity, the average and ex-
treme duration of life, and the several periods connected with
reproduction. The coincidence in these points alone is by
many eminent physiologists justly regarded as sufficient evi-
dence of the unity of the species.

4. It may also be affirmed, in relation to the varieties of
man, that they do not exceed in amount or extent those ob-
served in the lower animals. If with Frederick Cuvier, Dr.
Carpenter, and many other naturalists, we regard the dog as
a single species, descended in all probability from the wolf,
we can have no hesitation in concluding that this animal far
exceeds man in variability.* But this is denied by many, not
without some show of reason ; and we may, therefore, select
some animal respecting which little doubt can be entertained.
Perhaps the best example is the common hog {Sus scrofa), an
undoubted descendant of the wild boar, and a creature espe-
cially suitable for comparison with man, inasmuch as its pos-
sible range of food is very much the same with his, which is
not the case with any other of our domesticated animals;
and as its headquarters as a species are in the same regions
which have supported the greatest and oldest known com-
munities of men. We may exclude from our comparison the
Chinese hog, by some regarded as a distinct species {Sus In-
dicus), though no wild original is known, and it breeds freely
with the common hog. The color of the domestic hog varies,
like that of man, from white to black ; and in the black hog
the skin as well as the hair partakes of the dark color. The

* For an interesting inquiry into the origin of the dog, see the article in
Todd's Cyclopsedia already referred to ; and the subject is fully discussed
by Dar\Yin, who leans to the theory of the diversity of origin in dogs.

430 Appendix.

abundance and quality of the hair vary extremely ; the stat-
ure and form are equally variable, much more so than in
man. Blumenbach long ago remarked that the difference
between the skull of the ordinary domestic hog and that of
the wild boar is quite equal to that observed between the
Negro and European skulls. Darwin shows that it is much
greater, and illustrates this by an amusing pair of portraits.
The breeds of swine even differ in directions altogether un-
paralleled in man. For instance, both in America and Eu-
rope solid-hoofed swine have originated and become a per-
manent variety ; and there is said to be another variety with
five toes.'^ These are the more remarkable, because, in the
American instances, there can be no doubt that it is the com-
mon hog which has assumed these abnormal forms.

5. All varieties or races of men intermix freely, in a man-
ner which strongly indicates specific unity. AVe hold here, as
already stated, that no good case of a permanent race arising
from intermixture of distinct species of the lower animals has
been adduced ; but there is another fact in relation to this
subject which the advocates of specific diversity would do
well to study. Even in varieties of those domestic animals
which are certainly specifically identical, as the hog, the sheep,
the ox — although crosses between the varieties may easily be
produced — they are not readily maintained, and sometimes
tend to die out. What are called good crosses lead to im-
proved energy, and continual breeding in and in of the same
variety leads to degeneracy and decay; but, on the other
hand, crosses of certain varieties are proved by experience
to be of weakly and unproductive quality ; and every practi-
cal book on cattle contains remarks on the difficulty of keep-
ing up crosses without intermixture with one of the pure
breeds. It would thus appear that very unlike varieties of
the same species display in this respect, in an imperfect man-

* Prichard, Bachman, Cabell.

species and Varietal Forms. 431

ner, the peculiarities of distinct species. It is on this princi-
ple that I would in part account for some of the exceptional
facts which occur in mixed races of men.

What, then, are the facts in the case of man ? In produc-
ing crosses of distinct species, as in the case of the horse and
ass, breeders are obliged to resort to expedients to overcome
the natural repugnance to such intermixture. In the case of
even the most extreme varieties of man, if such repugnance
exists, it is vpluntarily overcome, as the slave population of
America testifies abundantly. By far the greater part of the
intermixtures of races of men tend to increase of vital energy
and vigor, as in the case of judicious crosses of some domes-
tic animals. Where a different result occurs, we usually find
sufficient secondary causes to account for it. I shall refer to
but one such case — that of the half-breed American Indian.
In so far as I have had opportunities of observation or in-
quiry, these people are prolific, much more so than the un-
mixed Indian. They are also energetic, and often highly
intellectual ; but they are of delicate constitution, especially
liable to scrofulous diseases, and therefore not long-lived.
Now this is precisely the result which often occurs in domes-
tic animals, where a highly cultivated race is bred with one
that is of ruder character and training ; and it very probably
results from the circumstance that the progeny may inherit
too much of the delicacy of the one parent to endure the
hardships congenial to the other ; or, on the other hand, too
much of the wild nature of the ruder parent to subsist under
the more delicate nurture of the more cultivated. This diffi-
culty does not apply to the intermixture of the Negro and
the European, though between the pure races this is a cross
too abrupt to be likely to be in the first instance success-
ful.

6. The races of man may have originated in the same man-
ner with the breeds of our domesticated animals. There are
many facts which render it probable that they did originate

432 Appendix,

in this way. Take color, for instance. The fair varieties of
man occur only in the northern temperate zone, and chiefly
in the equable climates of that zone. In extreme climates,
even when .cold, dusky and yellow colors appear. The
black and blackish-brown colors are confined to the inter-
tropical regions, and appear in such portions of all the
great races of mankind as have been long domiciled there.
Diet and degree of exposure have also evidently very much
to do with form, stature, and color. The deer-eating Chippe-
wayan of certain districts of North America is a better devel-
oped man than his compatriots who subsist principally on
rabbits and such meaner fare ; and excess of carbonaceous
food, and deficiency of perspiration or of combustion in the
lungs, appear everywhere to darken the skin.* The Negro
type in its extreme form is peculiar to low and humid river
valleys of tropical Africa. In Australasia similar characters
appear in men of a very different race in similar circum-
stances. The Mongolian type reappears in South Africa.
The Esquimau is like the Fuegian. The American Indian,
both of South and North America, resembles the Mongol ;
but in several of the middle regions of the American con-
tinent men appear who approximate to the Malay. Every-
where and in all races coarse features and deviations from
the oval form of skull are observed in rude populations.
Where men have sunk into a child-like simplicity, the elon-
gated forms prevail. Where they have become carnivorous,
aggressive, and actively barbarous, the brachy-kephalic forms
abound. These and many other considerations tend to the
conclusion that these varieties are inseparably connected with
external conditions. It may still be asked — Were not the
races created as they are, with especial reference to these

* A curious note, by Dr. John Rae, on the change of complexion in the
Sandwich Islanders, consequent on the introduction of clothing, may be
found in the "Montreal Medical Chronicle," 1856, and the "Canadian
Journal " for the same year.

species and Varietal Forms. 433

conditions ? I answer no— because the differences are of a
character in every respect like those that appear in other true
species as the results of influences from without.

Farther, not only have we varieties of man resulting from
the slow operation of climatal and other conditions, but we
have the sudden development of races. One remarkable in-
stance may illustrate my meaning. It is the hairy family of
Siam, described by Mr. Crawford and Mr. Yule.* The pe-
culiarities here consisted of a fine silky coat of hair covering
the face and less thickly the whole body, with at the same
time the entire absence of the canine and molar teeth. The
person in whom these characters originated was sent to Ava
as a curiosity when five years old. He married at twenty-
two, his wife being an ordinary Burmese woman. One of two
children who survived infancy had all the characters of the
father. This was a girl ; and on her marriage the same char-
acters reappeared in one of two boys constituting her family
when seen by Mr. Yule. Here was a variety of a most ex-
treme character, originating without apparent cause, and ca-
pable of propagation for three generations, even when crossed
with the ordinary type. Had it originated in circumstances
favorable to the preservation of its purity, it might have pro-
duced a tribe or nation of hairy men, with no teeth except in-
cisors. Such a tribe would, with some ethnologists, have con-
stituted a new and very distinct species ; and any one who
had suggested the possibility of its having originated within a
few generations as a variety would have been laughed at for
his credulity. It ^ unnecessary to cite any further instances.
I merely wish to insist on the necessity of a rigid compari-
son of the variations which appear in man, either suddenly
or in a slow or secular manner, with the characters of the
so-called races or species.

7. If we turn from the merely physical constitution of man,

* Latham's '* Descriptive Ethnology."
T

434 Appendix.

and inquire as to his psychical and spiritual endowments, it
would be easy to show, as Dr. Carpenter and others have
done, in opposition to Darwin, that on the one hand an im-
passable barrier separates man from the lower animals, and
that on the other there is an essential unity among the races
of men. But this subject I have discussed fully in the con-
cluding chapters of my " Story of the Earth."

If man is thus so very variable, and if many of his leading
varieties have existed for a very long time, does not the fact
that we have but one species afford very strong evidence that
species change only within fixed limits, and do not pass over
into new specific types. Viewed in this way, variability with-
in the specific limits becomes in itself one of the strongest ar-
guments against the doctrine of descent with modification as
a mode of origination of new species.

Let us now add to all this the farther consideration, so well
illustrated in the "Reliquiae Aquitanicas " of Christy and Lar-
tet, that the oldest-known men of the caves and gravels may
be placed in one of the varieties, and this the most widely
distributed, of modern man, and we have a further argument
which tells most strongly against the assumption either of
the extreme antiquity or of the unlimited variability of the
human species.

INDEX.

Abraham, 25, 270.

Abrahamic Genesis, 18.

Abyss, 104,

"Accommodation," theory of, 61.

Adaptation in nature, 78.

^ons of creation, 132.

Agassiz on prophetic types, 350.

on species, 342,

Animals, higher, creation of the, 230.

lower, creation of the, 211.

Antediluvians, 253.

Antiquity of man, 263, 3S6.

of man, geological evidence

of the, 294.
of man, history in relation to

the, 271.
of man, language in relation

to the, 285.

of the earth, 154, 331.

Aretz (earth), 94, 175.

Argyll, Duke of, on creation by law,

373-

Duke of, on the origin of civ-
ilization, 391.

Aryan race, 16, 267.

Assyrian Genesis, 19, 108.

Texts, 412.

Astronomy of the Bible, 207.

Atmosphere, constitution of the, 157.

creation of the, 160.

Augustine on creative days, 134.

^//r (light), 115.

Babel, 258, 266.

Bara (create), 90.

Beaumont, De, on continents, 184.

Bede on creative days, 133.

Beginning, the, Zj, 95.

Behemoth, 233.

Bhemah (herbivores), 231, 406.

Birds, creation of, 216, 219.
Bronn on the origin of species, 339.
Bronze, age of, 279.
Bunsen's chronology, 273.

Cainozoic period, 331.
Carnivora, creation of, 232.
Caverns, human remains in, 298.
Centres of creation, 238.
Chaos, 100, 107.

chemistry of, 112.

Chinese language, 288.
Comparisons and conclusions, 322.
" Conflict of the Bible with science,"

44.
Continents, their origin, 182.
Cosmogony, Assyrian, 108.

Egyptian, 106, 198.

Greek, 109.

Hebrew, its character, 70.

Hebrew, its objects, 35.

Hebrew, its origin, 46.

Indian, 110, 148.

Persian, 147.

Phoenician, 107.

Cranial characters of primitive men,

298.
Creation, 90.

bylaw, 373.

centres of, 238.

days of, 115.

modes of, 375, 377.

of birds, 216, 219.

of carnivora, 232.

of great reptiles, 213.

of herbivora, 231.

of higher animals, 230.

of lower animals, 211.

of man, 235.

of plants, 186.

43^

Index,

Croll, calculations of erosion, 334.

glacial theory of, 396.

Dana on creation of plants, 196.

on creative days, 144.

on tertiary fauna, 234.

Darwin on species, 338.
Day of creation, first, 1 15.

of creation, second, 157.

of creation, third, 174.

of creation, fourth, 199.

of creation, fifth, 211.

of creation, sixth, 230.

of creation, seventh, 249.

Days of creation, 115.
ofcreation compared with ge-
ological periods, 155.

prophetic, 65.

Death before the fall, 355.
"Deep," the, 104.
Deluge, the, 256.
Deshe (herbage), 186.
Design in nature, 78.
Desolate void, 100.
Drysdale on theories of life, 383.
Dupont on Belgian caves, 308.

Earth, the, 94, 102, 175.

its foundations, 177.

Ecclesiastes, chap, i., 74.
Eden, conditions of, 237, 252.

site of, 237-252.

Edkins on the Chinese language,

286, 288.
Egypt, early history of, 272.
Egyptian Cosmogony, J06, 198.

Texts, 412.

Elohhn, 89, 97.

Evans on the erosion of valleys,

313-
Evening of creative days, 13S.
Evolution as applied to aninials, 226,

363-
Excavation of valleys, 315.
Exodus xxiv., 10, 163.

Fall of man, 250.

Final causes, 355.

Firmament, the, 162.

Fluidity, original, of the earth, 1 10,

Forbes on creation of man, 250,

Foundations of the earth, 177.
Frontal, cave of, 308.

Genesis, chap, i,, translated, 66.

chap, i., I, 87.

chap, i., 2, 100.

chap, i., 3 to 5, 115.

chap, i., 6 to 8, 157.

chap, i., ID to II, 174.

chap, i., 14 to 19, 199.

chap, i., 20 to 23, 211.

chap, i., 24 to 31, 230.

chap, ii., I to 3, 299.

chap, iv., 23, 46.

chap. X., 22, 263.

the Abrahamic, 18.

the Assyrian, 20.

the Mosaic, 27.

the Quiche, 22.

Geology, principles of, 325.

Glacial periods, theories of, 395.

God, personality of, ii.

"Grass " in Genesis i., 186.

Greek myths, 109.

Green on the forms of continents, 184.

Haeclcel on the affiliation of races,
289.
on man and apes, 389.

Hamite races, 268.

Harmony of revelation and science,

342.
Havilah, productions of, 255.
Hay'th-eretz (wild beast), 232.
Heavens, the, 92, 165.
Herbivora, creation of, 231.
Hindoos, cosmogony of the, 149.
Hitchcock on creative days, 141.
Horner on the alluvium of the Nile,

274.
Hugl^es on the excavation of valleys,

315.

' on interglacial periods, 295.

r-. — on stalagmite, 388.

on the Victoria Cave, 387.

Humboldt on Hebrew poetry, 39.
Hunt on the chemistry of the prime-
val earth, 400.
Hurakon, 107.
Hut of Sodertelge, 386.

Index,

437

Ice-freshets in America, 314.
Incandescence of the earth, no,

119.
India, cosmogony of, 149.

Japhetic races, 267, 268.
Jehovah, 96.
Jobix., 5, 176.

ix,, 9, 206.

xxii., 15, 257.

xxviii., 179.

xxviii., 26, 'Ji.

xxxvi,, 166.

xxxvii., 14, 161.

xxxviii., 166, 177, 206.

Jones, Sir W., on Indian cosmogo-
ny, 149.

Kent's Cavern, 302.
Kurtz on days of vision, 49.

Lamech, his poem, 46.

Land, its creation, 174.

geological history of, 1S2.

Languages, unity of, 285, 291.

La Place, nebular hypothesis of, 119.

Latham on African languages, 288.

on the radiation of langua-
ges, 289.

Laws of nature, in the Bible, 73.

Lemuria, 289.

Leviticus xi,, 212.

Life, succession of, 331, 337.

theories of, 383.

Light, 115, 121.

Logos, 96.

Luminaries, 199.

Lyell on the cause of the glacial pe-
riod, 397.

on the delta of the Missis-
sippi, 333-

on the pleistocene period,

297.

Mammals, creation of, 231.
Mammoth age, 299.
Man, antiquity of, 386.

creation of, 235.

neocosmic, 285.

palasocosmic, 285, 319.

Man, unity of, 263, 414.

Manetho, chronology of, 273.

Margite, cave of, 30S.

Menes, his epoch, 273.

Mesozoic period, 218, 331.

Miller on creative days, 135.

Mining noticed in the Bible', 179,

Mississippi, delta of the, 333.

Mist watering the ground, 189,

Modern period of geology, 251.

Modes of creation, ^iT].

Moffatt on African languages, 292.

Morse on the evolution of man, 391.

Mosaic Genesis, 27.

Midler's classification of religions,

14.
Mythology, ancient, its origin, 408.

of the atmosphere, 171.

as related to the Bible, 109,

261.

Nature, study of, 244.
Negro races, 276.
Neocosmic man, 285.
" Neolithic " men, 278.
Niagara, excavation of, 312.
Nimrod, 259.
Noah, sons of, 266.

Palaeocosmic men, 285, 319.
" Palaeolithic " men, 278.
Palaeozoic animals, 217.
period, 231,

Parallelism of Scripture and geolo-
gy, 343.
Pattison on the antiquity of man,3i8.
Pengelly on Kent's Cavern, 302.
on stalagmite, 387.

Periods, creative, 126.

geological, 330,

Persians, cosmogony of the, 147.

Philological evidence of the antiqui-
ty of man, 285.

Pictet on the origin of species, 339.

Pierce on the forms of continents,
184.

Pillars of the earth, 177,

Plants, creation of, 186.

Plastids and plastidules, 377.

Pratt, Archdeacon, on b/ietnah, 406.

438

Index.

Prayer and law, 171.
Progress in nature, 75, 337.
Proverbs, viii., 74, 96, 176.
Psalm viiij 208.

viii., I, 94.

xviii., 178.

xix., 208.

xc, 108.

civ., 164, 175, 178, 224.

cxix., 90, 74.

cxix., 20, 176.

cxxxix., 84-

cxlvii., 208.

cxlviii., 6, 73.

Purpose in nature, 78.

Quiche Genesis, 22, 107.

Rakiah (the expanse), 162.
Rawlinson on historical dates, 390.
Reconciliation of the Bible and ge-
ology, 342.
Reindeer age, 299.
Religion, Aryan, 16.

Turanian, 15.

Semitic, 16.

Remes (creeping things), 215.

Rephaim, 257.

Reptiles, 213, 215.

Revelation, idea of, 12.

River valleys, excavation of, 314.

Riiach Elohim, 106.

Rutimeyer on inter-glacial men, 386.

Sabbath, the, as related to ages of
creation, 130.

of the Creator, 249.

Schliemann on Troy, 282.
Shamayim (heavens), 92.
Shemite races, 16.
Sheretz (swarming creature), 211.
Somme, gravels of the, 313.
Song of creation, 66.

Species, Agassiz on, 61.

Bronn on, 339.

distinct from varieties, 414.

in Genesis i., 215.

origin of, 368, 378.

Spirit of God in creation, 106.
Stalagmite, deposition of, 310, 385.
Stereoma, 162.
Stone, ages of, 281.

Table of Biblical periods, 352.

of geological periods, 330.

Tait, Prof., on the age of the earth,

154-

Taiimn (great reptile), 213, 405.
Tennyson on types in nature, 222.
Theories of the origin of genesis, 51.
Thomson, Sir Wm., on the age of

the earth, 154.
Time, geological, 321, 332.
Torel on the Sodertelge hut, 386.
Troy, as described by Schliemann,
. 282.
Type in nature, 82, 222.

Unity of man, 263, 414.

of nature, 36.

Universe, the unseen, ii.

Variation, laws of, 414.
Veda, its cosmogony, no.
Vegetation, its creation, 186.
of Eozoic period, 192.

Victoria Cave, 386.
Vision of creation, 65.
Void, the, 100.

Wallace on evolution, 373.

on primitive man, 389.

Waters above the heavens, 159.
"Whales, great," 213.
Wilson on American skulls, 427.
on ancient pottery, 283.

THE END.

B} PlilNCIFAl DAWSON,

EARTH AND MAN. The Story of the Earth and
Man. By J. W. Dawson, LL.D., F.R.S., F.G.S.,
Principal and Vice-Chancellor of McGill Univer-
sity, Montreal. With Twenty Illustrations. i2mo,
Cloth, $1 50.

An admirable book. It is a clear and interesting resume of the re-
sults of geological investigation, told in simple language, devoid of techni-
calities. The unscientific reader will obtain more knowledge of geology
in one hour's reading of this book than he will in a week's study of more
elaborate and professional books upon the same subject. It is vigorously
written, and with a certain picturesqueness that is exceedingly attractive.
The chapters upon primitive man are peculiarly interesting. — Saturday
Evening Gazette^ Boston.

The pleasantly written volume before us tells the story of the paleon-
tology and physical geography of the earth in prehuman ages, and closes
with a discussion of the theories of the appearance, late in geological
time, of man upon the earth. Dr. Dawson's sketch of paleontology will,
we feel sure, be found interesting by all readers. — Athencmim^ London.

Since Hugh Miller's time no scientific geologist has done more than
Principal Dawson to extend popular interest in this branch of study, to
secure attention to its educational value, or to remove misapprehensions
which exist in some quarters as to the relations of science and Scripture
on geological questions. — Leisure Hour^ London.

We have read his book with profound interest. It is intelligible,
candid, modest. — Boston Transcript.

ORIGIN OF THE WORLD. The Origin of the
World, according to Revelation and Science. By
J. W. Dawson, LL.D., F.R.S., F.G.S., &c. i2mo,
Cloth.

PUBLISHED BY HARPER & BROTHERS, NEW YORK.

Harper & Brothers will send either of the above works by mail,
postage prepaid, to any part of the United States, on receipt of the
price.

By mEXmiPEB illlNCHELl,

SKETCHES OF CREATION : a Popular View of some
of the Grand Conclusions of the Sciences in Reference
to the History of Matter and of Life. Together with a
Statement of the Intimations of Science respecting the
Primordial Condition and the Ultimate Destiny of the
Earth and the Solar System. By Alexander Win-
CHELL, LL.D. With Illustrations. i2mOj Cloth, $2 00.

A GEOLOGICAL CHART : exhibiting the Classification
and Relative Positions of the Rocks, and the Various
Phenomena of Stratigraphical Geology ; together with
an Indication of Geological Equivalents, the most im-
portant American and Foreign Synonyms, the Econom-
ical Products of the Rocks, and numerous Typical Lo-
calities ; with an Actual Section from the Atlantic to
the Rocky Mountains, near the Parallel of Thirty-nine
Degrees. By Alexander Winchell, LL.D. Mounted
on roller, $10 00.

With a Key. 8vo, Paper, 25 cents.

THE DOCTRINE OF EVOLUTION ; its Data, its Prin-
ciples, its Speculations, and its Theistic Bearings. By
Alexander Winchell, LL.D. 12 mo. Cloth, $1 00.

RECONCILIATION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION.

By Alexander Winchell, LL.D. i2mo. Cloth, $2 00.

Published hy HARPER & BROTHERS, New York.

Harper Sc Brothers wi// send any of the above works by mail,
postage prepaid^ to any part of the United States, on receipt of the
price.

DATE DUE

GAYLORD #3523PI Printed in USA