See Prestwich's Geotoqy (1888), U. 534 ; In his ContTinerted Qiustimu of lieolngy (1895), p. 46, he gives similar but some- what higher figures. It was in 1869 that ' the barriers which restricted the age of man to a limited traditional chronologj* were overthromi by the discoveries in the Galley of the Somme and Brixham Cave' (*. p. 19). ' Palasolithic ' implements are those found in association with extinct mammalia ; ' neolithic' Implements, whicli show a higher type of workmanship, are those found with existing species. In the pakpulilhic period, the • river-drift man ' hunted the elephant and the lion, the hippopotamus and the rhinoceros, in the valley of the Lower Thames. — See further on this subject Evans, The Ancient Stone Implements, It'capon*, and Ornaments of Great Britain^, 1S97 <on their antiquity, pp. 70:i-9) ; Boyd Dawkins, Earhi Man in Britain, If-SO (where, at the end of the several chapters, the characteristics of the civilization of the Bucce.'^sive ages— the river-drift hunter, the cave man, the neolithic farmer and herdsman [contemporar>' with the beginnings of organized empires in the East), the bronze age, and the iron a^e— are well indicated) ; Lyell, A ntirndty of Man *. 1S73 ; Lord Avebury (Sir J. Lubbock), Prehistoric Tim'rsO (1900), esp. ch. 11 ; G. K. Wright, Man arid the Glacial Age (in the Intern. Scifnt. Series), 1892, p. 242ff. ; Morris, Man and hisAncestor(a small popularly written work), 19O0, p. 219.; Tylor, Anthropolo'jij, p. 2SfT. That man was coeval in Western Europe with the glacial period is accepted by Sayce, Races o/ tite OT, p. 2;j.
The general conclusion, resulting from all that has been said, may be summed up in Dr. Tylor's words : ' Man's first appearance on earth goes'back to an age compared with which the ancients, as we call I hem, are but moderns. The four thousand
years of recorded history only take us back to ■ prehistoric period of untold length, during which took place the primary distribution of mankind over the earth and the development of the great races, the formation of speech and the settlement of the great families of language, and the giowth of culture up to the levels of the old-world nations of the East, the forerunners and founders of modem civilized life' (Anthropology, p. 24).
5. It is thus ajiparent that there are two great facts, the antiquity of man, and the ivide distril/u- tion of mnn over the surface of the earth, of which the biblical narrative, whether in 11'"' or else- where, takes no account. It is true, of course, that 11*-' accounts ostensibly for the distribution of man ' over the face of the whole earth ' ; but it has been sliown above why it does not do so really : the dispersion is placed too late to account for the known facts respecting both the distribution of man and the diversity of races : how, for example, can the ' river-drift man ' of the glacial, or even of the post-glacial, period he brought within the scope of the biblical narrative ? To say that the biblical writers spoke only of the nations of whom they knew is perfectly true ; but the admission deprives their statements of all historical or scien- tific value: ' pala?olithic ' and 'neolithic' man, and the black and j'ellow historic races, all existed ; and any explanation, purporting to account for the populations of the earth, and the diversity of Iangua;_'es spoken by them, must take cognizance of them : an explanation which does not take cognizance of them can be no historically true account either of the diffusion of mankind, or of the diversity of speech. The first 11 chapters of Genesis, it may be safely assumed, report faithfully what was currently believed among the Hebrews respecting the early history of mankind : they contain no account of the real beginnings of man, or of human civilization, upon the earth.
6. The true explanation of the story in Gn IP'*, it cannot be doubted, is that which is given by Prof, (now Bishop) Eyle in his Early Narratives of Genc-i-is, p. 127 ft'. As in 2"'-4 the origin of various existing customs and institutions is ex- plained in accordance with the beliefs of Hebrew antiquity, so in 11'"* the explanation is given of the diversity of languages spoken by different peoples inhabiting difl'erent parts of the earth. As soon as men began to reflect, they must have wondered wliat was the cause of differences of language, which not only impressed the Hebrews (Is o3''', Dt 2S*', Jer 5'^, Ps 114'), but also were an impediment to free intercourse, and accentuated national interests and antagonisms. ' The story of tlie Tower of Babel supplied to such primitive questionings an answer suited to the comprehension of a primitive time. Just as Greek fable told of the giants who strove to scale Olympus, so Semitic legend told of the impious act by which the sons of men sought to raise themselves to the dwelling-place of God, and erect an enduring symbol of human unity to be seen from every side'; and how Jehovah inter- posed to frustrate their purposes, and brought upon them the very dispersal wliicli they had sought to avoid. The narrative thus contains sim])ly the answer which Hebrew folk-lore gave to the question which dilierences of language and nation- ality directly suggested. At the same time, it is so worded as to convey (like the other early narra- tives of Genesis) spiritual lessons. Though the conception of Deity is naive, and even, it may be (v.'), imperfectly disengaged from polytheism, the narrative nevertheless emphasizes Jehovah's supre- macy over the world ; it teaches how the self exaltation of man is checked by God ; and it shows how the distribution of mankijid into