recently, was universal among scientific men. Cuvier was so con- vinced on this point that he could hardly be brought to look al what purported to be the fossil remains of man. This conviction on his part, was not a prejudice ; nor was it due to a reverence for the Bible. It was a scientific conviction founded on scientific evidence. The proofs from all sources of the recent origin of man were considered such as to preclude the possibility of his being contemporaneous with any of the extinct races of animals. And even those who were led to admit that point, were in many cases disposed to regard the fact as proving not the antiquity of man, but the existence to a much later period than generally supposed, of animals now extinct. The occurrence of human relics with the bones of extinct animals, " does not seem to me," says Prestwich, " to necessitate the carrying of man back in past time, so much as the bringing forward of the extinct animals toward our own time." ^ Tiie fact that the monuments of human art cannot pre- tend to a higher antiquity than a few thousand years, renders it utterly incredible that man has existed on the earth hundreds of thousands or, as Darwin supposes, millions of years.
Argument from the Races of Men and from Ancient Monuments.
Another argument is founded on the assumption that the differ- ence between the Caucasian, Mongolian, and negro races, which is known to have been as distinctly marked two or three thousand years before Christ as it is now, must have required countless ages to develop and establish. To this it is obvious to answer. First, that difierences equally great have occurred in domestic animals within tlie historic period. Secondly, that marked varieties are not unfrequently produced suddenly, and, so to speak, accidentallv. Thirdly, that these varieties of race are not the effect of the blind operation of physical causes, but bv those causes as intelligently guided by God for the accomplishment of some wise purpose. Animals living in the arctic regions are not only clothed in fur for their protection from the cold, but the color of their clotliing changes with the season. So God fashions the different races of men in their peculiarities to suit them to the regions which they inhabit. Dr. Livingstone, the great African traveller, informs us that the negro type, as it is popularly conceived of, occurs very rarely in Africa, and only in districts where great heat prevails in connection with great moisture. The tribes in the interior of that continent differ greatly, he says, both in hue and contour.
1 Quoted by Professor Dana, Manual of Geology, p. 582.
40 PART n. ch. I. — origin of man.
The idea that it must have taken countless ages for men to rise from the lowest barbarism to the state of civilization indicated by the monuments of Egypt, rests on no better assumption. Tlie earliest state of man instead of being his lowest, was in many respects his highest state. And our own experience as a nation shows that it does not require millenniums for a people to accom- plish greater works than Egypt or India can boast. Two hundred years ago this country was a wilderness from the Atlantic to the Pacific. What is it now ? According to Bunsen it would require a hundred thousand years to erect all these cities, and to build all these railroads and canals.
It is further urged as a proof of the great antiquity of man that the monuments and monumental records of Egypt prove that a nation existed in the highest state of civilization at the time of, or immediately after, the flood. The chronology of the Bible, it is argued, and the chronology of Egypt are thus shown to be irrecon- cilable.
In reference to this difficulty it may be remarked, that the cal- culations of Egyptologists are just as precarious, and in many in- stances iust as extravagant as those of creoloo-ists. This is proved by their discrepancies. It may be said, however, that even the most moderate students of Egyptian antiquities assign a date to the reign of Manes and the building of the pyramids inconsistent with the chronology of the Bible. To this it may be replied that the chronology of the Bible is very uncertain. The data are for the most part facts incidentally stated ; that is, not stated for the purposes of chronology. The views most generally adopted rest mainly on the authority of Archbishop Usher, who adopted the Hebrew text for his guide, and assumed that in the genealogical tables each name marked one generation. A large part, however, of Biblical scholars adopt the Septuagint chronology in preference to the Hebrew ; so that instead of four thousand years from the creation to the birth of Christ, we have nearly six thousand years. Besides it is admitted, that the usual method of calculation founded on the genealogical tables is very uncertain. The design of those tables is not to give the regular succession of births in a given line, but simply to mark the descent. This is just as well done if three, four, or more generations be omitted, as if the whole list were com- plete. That this is the plan on which these genealogical tables are constructed is an admitted fact. "Thus in Genesis xlvi. 18, after recording the sons of Zilpah, her grandsons and her great-grand- sons, the writer adds, ' These are the sons of Zilpah .... and
§3.] ANTIQUITY OF MAN. 4i
these she bare unto Jacob, even sixteen souls.' The same tiling recurs in the case of Bilhah, verse 25, ' she bare these unto Jacob: all the souls were seven.' Compare, verses 15, 22. No one can pretend that the author of this register did not use the term understandlngly of descendants beyond the first generation. In like manner, according to Matthew i. 11, Josias begat his grandson Jechonias, and verse 8, Joram begat his great-great- grandson Ozias. And in Genesis x. 15-18, Canaan, the grand- son of Noah, is said to have begotten several whole nations, the Jebusite, the Amorite, the Girgasite, the Hivite, etc.. etc. Noth- ing can be plainer, therefore, than that in the usage of the Bible, * to bear ' and ' to beget ' are used in a wide sense to indicate descent, without restricting this to the immediate offspring." ^
The extreme uncertainty attending all attempts to determine the chronology of the Bible is sufficiently evinced by the fact that one hundred and eighty different calculations have been made by Jew- ish and Christian authors, of the length of the period between Adam and Christ. The longest of these make it six thousand nine hundred and eighty-four, and the shortest three thousand four hundred and eighty-three years. Under these circumstances it is very clear that the friends of the Bible have no occasion for uneasi- ness. If the facts of science or of history should ultimately make it necessary to admit that eight or ten thousand years have elapsed since the creation of man, there is nothing in the Bible in the way of such concession. The Scriptures do not teach us how long men have existed on the earth. Their tables of genealogy were in- tended to prove that Christ was the son of David and of the Seed of Abraham, and not how many years had elapsed between the creation and the advent.^
1 The Pentateuch Vindicated from the Aspersions of Bishop Colenso, by William Henry Green, Professor in the Theological Seminary, Princeton, N. J. New York, 1863, p. 132.
2 Herzog's Encyklopddie, article " Zeitrechnung," which quotes the Benedictine work L'Art de verifier les Dates. T. i., pp. xxvii.-xxxvi.