those of the skeleton, in all parts of which variations of proportion
occur, and are of course more or less communicated 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 variation in familiar domestic animals, and also
of hereditary malformation 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 markedly 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 European, 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 project much more strongly in front and at the sides. The
Negro skull is lengthened from back to front; the jaws project
strongly, or are prognathous; but the cheek-bones are little
prominent. 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 generalizations--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.[169] 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 characteristic and distinct; but, so soon as
we attempt any minute discrimination, all confidence in them as
specific characters disappears. 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 ancient 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 Asiatic 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 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, Caribs, Greenlanders, etc.,
have long heads and prominent jaws. The Laplanders, Finns, Turks,
Sclaves, Persians, etc., have short heads and straight jaws; while the
Tartars, Mongolians, Incas, Malays, Papuans, etc., have short heads
and prominent jaws.
Another defect in the argument often based on the diverse forms of
heads is its want of acknowledgment of the ascertained 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 debasement 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.[170]
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 instances, "I think it
extremely probable that further investigation will tend to the
conclusion that the vertical or flattened occiput, instead of being a
typical characteristic, pertains entirely 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 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 extreme 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
evidence 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 observed 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.[171] 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
especially suitable for comparison with man, inasmuch as its possible
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 communities of men. We may exclude from our
comparison the Chinese hog, by some regarded as a distinct species
(_Sus Indicus_), 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 abundance and
quality of the hair vary extremely; the stature 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 unparalleled in man. For instance, both in
America and Europe solid-hoofed swine have originated and become a
permanent variety; and there is said to be another variety with five
toes.[172] These are the more remarkable, because, in the American
instances, there can be no doubt that it is the common hog which has
assumed these abnormal forms.
5. All varieties or races of men intermix freely, in a manner which
strongly indicates specific unity. We 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 improved 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 practical book on cattle contains remarks on the
difficulty of keeping 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 manner, the
peculiarities of distinct species. It is on this principle 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 producing 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 voluntarily 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 domestic
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 inquiry, these people are prolific,
much more so than the unmixed 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
domestic 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
difficulty 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 successful.
6. The races of man may have originated in the same manner with the
breeds of our domesticated animals. There are many facts which render
it probable that they did originate 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 Chippewayan of certain districts of North America is a
better developed 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.[173] 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 circumstances. 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 continent men appear who approximate to
the Malay. Everywhere 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 elongated 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 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 instance may illustrate my
meaning. It is the hairy family of Siam, described by Mr. Crawford and
Mr. Yule.[174] The peculiarities 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 characters reappeared in one of two boys constituting her
family when seen by Mr. Yule. Here was a variety of a most extreme
character, originating without apparent cause, and capable 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 produced a tribe or nation of hairy men,
with no teeth except incisors. Such a tribe would, with some
ethnologists, have constituted 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 is unnecessary to cite any further instances. I
merely wish to insist on the necessity of a rigid comparison 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, 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 impassable 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
concluding 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 within the specific limits becomes in
itself one of the strongest arguments 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 Aquitanicae" of Christy and Lartet, 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.
FOOTNOTES
[Footnote 1: Argyll's "Primeval Man."]
[Footnote 2: Essays on Theism, 1875.]
[Footnote 3: John i., 9.]
[Footnote 4: Hebrews xi., 3.]
[Footnote 5: I avail myself of the condensed translation in Bancroft's
"Native Races," vol. iii. The original French translation of Brasseur du
Bourbourg is more full.]
[Footnote 6: 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.]
[Footnote 7: I do not think it necessary to attach any value to the
doubts of certain 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.]
[Footnote 8: "Cosmos," Otte's translation.]
[Footnote 9: Hamilton, "Royal Preacher."]
[Footnote 10: Harvey, "Nereis Boreali Americana."]
[Footnote 11: Osburn, "Monumental History of Egypt."]
[Footnote 12: On this subject I may refer naturalists to the intimate
acquaintance with animals and their habits, indicated by manner of their
use as sacred emblems, and as symbols in hieroglyphic writing. Another
illustration is afforded by the Mosaic narrative of the miracles and
plagues connected 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 serpent-charmers. They showed Pharaoh the possibility of
reddening the Nile water by artificial means, or perhaps by the
development of red algae in it. They explained the inroad of frogs on
natural principles, probably 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 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.]
[Footnote 13: That in Genesis, chap. ii.]
[Footnote 14: Kitto's Cyclopaedia, art. "Creation."]
[Footnote 15: Much that is very silly has been written as to the extent
of the supposed "optical view" taken by the Hebrew writers; many worthy
literary men appearing to suppose that _scientific_ views of nature must
necessarily 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 observed 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 content to be "optical," but must
theorize, that spoils much of our modern literature, especially in its
descriptions of nature.]
[Footnote 16: Prof. Hitchcock.]
[Footnote 17: McCosh, "Typical Forms and Special Ends."]
[Footnote 18: I adopt that view of the date of Job which makes it
precede the Exodus, 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 Moses when in exile, and published
among his countrymen in Egypt, to revive their monotheistic religion,
and cheer them under the apparent desertion of their God and the evils
of their bondage.]
[Footnote 19: Tyndall seems to hold this.]
[Footnote 20: Newton.]
[Footnote 21: John v., 17; Rom. viii., 22; Heb. i., 2; 2 Peter iii.]
[Footnote 22: Heb. i., 2.]
[Footnote 23: Eph. iii., 9.]
[Footnote 24: 1 Tim. i., 17.]
[Footnote 25: Eph. iv., 11.]
[Footnote 26: Job xxxviii. and xxxix.]
[Footnote 27: Romans i., 20.]
[Footnote 28: Essays on Theism.]
[Footnote 29: Herschel, Dissertation on the Study of Natural Philosophy;
Maxwell, Lecture before the British Association.]
[Footnote 30: Carpenter, "Human Physiology."]
[Footnote 31: Asah.]
[Footnote 32: McDonald, "Creation and the Fall."]
[Footnote 33: Literally, "ages" or "time-worlds," as they have been
called.]
[Footnote 34: Genesis i., 8, 26-28.]
[Footnote 35: Job xxxviii., 37.]
[Footnote 36: Gen. i., 14; Deut. xvii., 3.]
[Footnote 37: Gen. xxviii., 17; Job xv., 15; Psa. ii., 4.]
[Footnote 38: Not "created," as some read. The verb is _kana_, not
_bara_.]
[Footnote 39: The usual Septuagint rendering is _Abyssus_.]
[Footnote 40: Smith, "Assyrian Genesis." Brasseur de Bourbourg's
translation of the "Popol Vuh" of the ancient Central American Indians.]
[Footnote 41: It is impossible to avoid recognizing in the Greek
Theogony, as it appears in Hesiod and the Orphic poems, an inextricable
intermingling of a cosmogony akin to that of Moses with legendary
stories of deceased ancestors; 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 human 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 dispersion 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, Ammon 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
summary 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 resemblances to death affords no excuse for the prevailing neglect
of them in more modern times.]
[Footnote 42: Pages 21, 22, and 109, _supra_.]
[Footnote 43: 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.]
[Footnote 44: Nichol's "Planetary System."]
[Footnote 45: Proctor's Lectures, etc.]
[Footnote 46: 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.]
[Footnote 47: 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 darkness night. _Second_, in the same verse, _evening
and morning_ make the first day, before the sun appears. _Third_, in
verse 14, day stands for _twelve hours_, or the period of daylight, as
dependent on the sun. _Fourth_, same verse, in the phrase "days and
seasons," day stands for a period of _twenty-four hours_. _Fifth_, at
the close of the account, in verse 4 of the second chapter, day means
the _whole period of creation_. 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
culmination of a period. This is an ingenious suggestion, and very well
coincides with the day-period theory as defended in the text.]
[Footnote 48: Psalm xc.]
[Footnote 49: It may be desirable to give here, in a slightly
paraphrased version, but strictly in accordance with the views of the
best expositors, the essential 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., 11). 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 Israelites in the desert), again he fixes a certain day,
saying in David's writings, long after the time of Joshua--'To-day, if
ye hear his voice, harden 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
finishing his work, and the final heavenly rest of Christ's people, are
all indefinite periods mutually related, and can not possibly be natural
days.]
[Footnote 50: For the benefit of those who may value ancient authorities
in such matters, and to show that such views may rationally be
entertained independently 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 autern 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 remarks, "Fortassis hic diei nomen, totius
temporis nomen est, et omnia volumina 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 implies singularity and peculiarity as well as
mere priority.]
[Footnote 51: It is to be observed, however, that on the so-called
literal day hypothesis 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.]
[Footnote 52: "Footprints of the Creator."]
[Footnote 53: 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 continuance.]
[Footnote 54: See the quotation from Job, _supra_.]
[Footnote 55: 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.]
[Footnote 56: Since this was written, the bones of many Batrachian
reptiles have been found in the Carboniferous, both in Europe and
America. No reptilian remains have yet been found in the Devonian
rocks.]
[Footnote 57: _Biblical Repository_, 1856. See also an excellent paper
by Prof. C. H. Hitchcock, _Bibliotheca Sacra_, 1867.]
[Footnote 58: Rhode, quoted by McDonald, "Creation and the Fall," p. 62;
Eusebius, Chron. Arm.]
[Footnote 59: Suidas, Lexicon--"Tyrrenia."]
[Footnote 60: Diodorus Siculus, bk. i. Prichard, Egyptian Mythology.]
[Footnote 61: "Asiatic Researches."]
[Footnote 62: This name is exactly identical in meaning with the Hebrew
Jehovah Elohim.]
[Footnote 63: Mueller, Sanscrit Literature.]
[Footnote 64: The theology of the Institutes is clearly primitive
Semitic in its character; and therefore, if the Bible is true, must be
older than the Aryan theogony of the Rig-Veda, as expounded by Mueller,
whatever the relative age of the documents.]
[Footnote 65: "Recent Advances in Physical Science."]
[Footnote 66: Croll's "Climate and Time" contains some interesting facts
as to this.]
[Footnote 67: See the discussion of this in the author's "Story of the
Earth," and in Sir William Thomson's British Association Address, 1876.]
[Footnote 68: Daniell's Meteorological Essays; Prout's Bridgewater
Treatise; art. "Meteorology," Encyc. Brit.; "Maury's Physical Geography
of the Sea."]
[Footnote 69: Kaemtz, "Course of Meteorology."]
[Footnote 70: Encyc. Brit., art. "Meteorology."]
[Footnote 71: 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.]
[Footnote 72: See also Humboldt, "Cosmos," vol. ii., pt. 1.]
[Footnote 73: Heb., "they refine."]
[Footnote 74: "His pavilion round about him was dark waters and thick
clouds of the skies," Psa. xviii. This expression explains that in the
text.]
[Footnote 75: Or "He darkens the depths of the sea."]
[Footnote 76: 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 high."]
[Footnote 77: 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 necessary to perspicuity. In the book of Job, I have consulted
principally the translation appended to Barnes's Commentary, Conant's
translation, 1857, and those of Tayler Lewis and Evans in Schaff's
edition of Lange, 1874.]
[Footnote 78: The word is one of those that pervade both Semitic and
Indo-European tongues: Sanscrit, _ahara_; Pehlevi, _arta_; Latin,
_terra_; German, _Erde_; Gothic, _airtha_; Scottish, _yird_; English,
_earth_.--Gesenius.]
[Footnote 79: Psalm xcv.]
[Footnote 80: Gesenius.]
[Footnote 81: Perhaps "changed," metamorphosed, as by fire. Conant has
"destroyed."]
[Footnote 82: "Dust" in our version, literally lumps or "nuggets."]
[Footnote 83: 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.]
[Footnote 84: Lyell's "Principles of Geology."]
[Footnote 85: Stanford, London, 1875.]
[Footnote 86: In further explanation of these general geological
changes, see "The Story of the Earth and Man," by the author.]
[Footnote 87: "Tenera herba, sine semine saltem
conspicuo."--Rosenmueller, "Scholia."]
[Footnote 88: Haughton, Address to the Geological Society, Dublin.]
[Footnote 89: 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.]
[Footnote 90: "Eozoic" of this work. Professor Dana in the latest
edition of his Manual uses the name "Archaean."]
[Footnote 91: 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 superstitious awe, are not distinctly mentioned in the
Old Testament, though referred to in the prophetical parts of the New
Testament.]
[Footnote 92: Perhaps rather the high places of the waters, referring to
the atmospheric waters.]
[Footnote 93: 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 appearance above the horizon. Conant applies the
whole to the seasons, the bands of Orion being in this view those of
winter.]
[Footnote 94: 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.]
[Footnote 95: The interesting discovery, by Mr. Beale and others, of
several species of mammalia in the Purbeck, and that of Professor Emmons
of a mammal in rocks of similar age in the Southern States of America,
do not invalidate this statement; for all these, like the _Microlestes_
of the German trias and the _Amphitherium_ 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 existence of the higher mammals.]
[Footnote 96: 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.]
[Footnote 97: See Appendix.]
[Footnote 98: See Appendix for farther discussion of this subject.]
[Footnote 99: See Lyell, Principles of Geology, "Introduction of
Species."]
[Footnote 100: 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."]
[Footnote 101: The Bible specifies, perhaps only as the principal of
these arts, music and musical instruments by Jubal, metallurgy by
Tubalcain, the domestication 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, Hephaestos, Vulcan, Horus, Phoebus, and other
inventors, either traditionary representatives of the family of Lamech,
or other heroes wrongly identified with them. Very possibly their sister
Naamah, "the beautiful," is introduced for the same reason, as the true
original of some of the female deities of the heathen.]
[Footnote 102: 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.]
[Footnote 103: See Lange's "Commentary on Genesis."]
[Footnote 104: The Russian surveys of 1836 made it one hundred and eight
English feet; but later authorities reduce it to eighty-three feet six
inches below the Black Sea.]
[Footnote 105: Kitto's "Bible Illustrations"--Book of Job.]
[Footnote 106: 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.]
[Footnote 107: 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 deification of natural objects and stages of the creative work, and
with adoration of deified ancestors and heroes.]
[Footnote 108: Genesis 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th chapters. See also our
previous remarks on the deluge.]
[Footnote 109: Genesis iv.]
[Footnote 110: 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 period so early. On the rationalist view, it
may be supposed that this prediction 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 Columbus.]
[Footnote 111: 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.]
[Footnote 112: Edkins, "China's Place in Philology."]
[Footnote 113: Reginald S. Poole has adduced very ingenious arguments,
monumental, astronomical, and mythological, for the date B.C. 2717.]
[Footnote 114: It is curious that almost simultaneously with the
appearance of Bunsen's scheme a similiar view was attempted to be
maintained on geological 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 appeared to indicate an antiquity of 13,371 years. But
the basis of the calculation is the rate of deposit (3-1/2 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 800 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 diverted 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 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.]
[Footnote 115: 5004 B.C.]
[Footnote 116: Perhaps the earliest certain date in Egyptian history is
that of Thothmes 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.]
[Footnote 117: 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 instance of attempts to induce variation.]
[Footnote 118: See for evidence of these views early notices in Genesis,
and Lenormant and Osburne on Egyptian Monuments and History.]
[Footnote 119: There is no good reason to believe the flint implements
mentioned by Delanouee and others, as found on the banks of the Nile, to
be older than the historic period.]
[Footnote 120: Wilson, "Prehistoric Man," 2d edition, p. 68.]
[Footnote 121: Southall has accumulated a great number of these facts in
his book on the antiquity of man.]
[Footnote 122: Professor Issel, quoted in _Popular Science Monthly_.]
[Footnote 123: 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.]
[Footnote 124: I agree with Gladstone's conclusions as to the date and
country of Homer.]
[Footnote 125: I suggested these terms in my lectures published under
the title "Nature and the Bible," 1875.]
[Footnote 126: Since these words were written I have read the remarkable
book of Edkins on the Chinese language, which supplies much additional
information.]
[Footnote 127: 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.]
[Footnote 128: "Man and his Migrations." See also "Descriptive
Ethnology," where the Semitic affinities are very strongly brought out.]
[Footnote 129: I can scarcely except such terms as "Japetic" and
"Japetidae," for Iapetus can hardly be any thing else than a traditional
name borrowed from Semitic ethnology, or handed down from the Japhetic
progenitors of the Greeks.]
[Footnote 130: See art. "Philology," Encyc. Brit.]
[Footnote 131: 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-Germanic languages in Europe furnish enough of familiar
instances.]
[Footnote 132: It is fair, however, to observe that the Bible refers the
first great divergence 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.]
[Footnote 133: Lecture in the Royal Institution, March 24, 1876.]
[Footnote 134: "Antiquity of Man," 4th ed.]
[Footnote 135: Southall, _Op. cit._]
[Footnote 136: The Mentone skeleton described by Dr. Riviere gives
evidence of these facts.]
[Footnote 137: 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."]
[Footnote 138: 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
postglacial deposits.]
[Footnote 139: _Quarterly Journal of Science_, April, 1875.]
[Footnote 140: Lyell's "Manual of Elementary Geology."]
[Footnote 141: For a full discussion of this subject, see the "Story of
the Earth and Man."]
[Footnote 142: 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."]
[Footnote 143: Lyell, basing his calculations on the surveys of Messrs.
Humphreys and Abbott, but others give very different estimates.]
[Footnote 144: 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.]
[Footnote 145: 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.]
[Footnote 146: 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 herbivorous species--the Megalosaurus, Iguanodon, etc.;
flying species, with hollow 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 systems far in advance of any modern reptiles
even of the order of Loricates.]
[Footnote 147: "Story of the Earth"--concluding chapters.]
[Footnote 148: This was written in 1860 for the first edition of
"Archaia." I see no reason to change it now, and its vindication will
be, found in the Appendix.]
[Footnote 149: Heb. iv., 9; 2 Peter iii., 13.]
[Footnote 150: Hamilton.]
[Footnote 151: In the manner illustrated by Hyatt and Cope.]
[Footnote 152: Report on Fossil Plants of the Upper Silurian and
Devonian, 1871.]
[Footnote 153: Drysdale's "Protoplasmic Theories of Life."]
[Footnote 154: Lecture before the Royal Institution of London.]
[Footnote 155: _Leisure Hour_, 1876.]
[Footnote 156: See critique in _International Review_, January, 1877.]
[Footnote 157: Reported in _Nature_, 1876.]
[Footnote 158: "History of Creation."]
[Footnote 159: See also Hunt, "Chemical and Geological Essays," p. 35.]
[Footnote 160: Except, perhaps, Job xxxi., 27.]
[Footnote 161: "Animals and Plants under Domestication," p. 406.]
[Footnote 162: Prichard. This is admitted by Darwin, who gives other
examples, though he insists much on the climatal variations which still
remain in feral pigs.]
[Footnote 163: "North American Indians."]
[Footnote 164: Haliburton's "Nova Scotia;" Gilpin's Lecture on Sable
Island.]
[Footnote 165: "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.]
[Footnote 166: "The Races of Men," etc. Boston, 1848.]
[Footnote 167: Browne, of Philadelphia, quoted by Kneeland and others.]
[Footnote 168: Todd's Cyclopaedia, art. "Varieties of Man."]
[Footnote 169: "Prehistoric Man."]
[Footnote 170: Carpenter in Todd's Cyclopaedia.]
[Footnote 171: For an interesting inquiry into the origin of the dog,
see the article in Todd's Cyclopaedia already referred to; and the
subject is fully discussed by Darwin, who leans to the theory of the
diversity of origin in dogs.]
[Footnote 172: Prichard, Bachman, Cabell.]
[Footnote 173: 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.]
[Footnote 174: Latham's "Descriptive Ethnology."]
INDEX.
Abraham, 25, 270.
Abrahamic Genesis, 18.
Abyss, 104.
"Accommodation," theory of, 61.
Adaptation in nature, 78.
AEons 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, 386.
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 civilization, 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.
_Aur_ (light), 115.
Babel, 258, 266.
_Bara_ (create), 90.
Beaumont, De, on continents, 184.
Bede on creative days, 133.
Beginning, the, 87, 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.
by law, 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.
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, 115.
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.
of creation compared with geological 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, 106, 198.
Texts, 412.
_Elohim_, 89, 97.
Evans on the erosion of valleys, 313.
Evening of creative days, 138.
Evolution as applied to animals, 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, 110.
Forbes on creation of man, 250.
Foundations of the earth, 177.
Frontal, cave of, 308.
Genesis, chap. i., translated, 66.
chap. i., 1, 87.
chap. i., 2, 100.
chap. i., 3 to 5, 115.
chap. i., 6 to 8, 157.
chap. i., 10 to 11, 174.
chap. i., 14 to 19, 199.
chap. i., 20 to 23, 211.
chap. i., 24 to 31, 230.
chap. ii., 1 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, 11.
"Grass" in Genesis i., 186.
Greek myths, 109.
Green on the forms of continents, 184.
Haeckel 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.
Hughes on the excavation of valleys, 315.
on interglacial periods, 295.
on stalagmite, 388.
on the Victoria Cave, 387.
Humboldt on Hebrew poetry, 39.
Hunt on the chemistry of the primeval earth, 400.
Hurakon, 107.
Hut of Sodertelge, 386.
Ice-freshets in America, 314
Incandescence of the earth, 110, 119.
India, cosmogony of, 149.
Japhetic races, 267, 268.
Jehovah, 96.
Job ix., 5, 176.
ix., 9, 206.
xxii., 15, 257.
xxviii., 179.
xxviii., 26, 73.
xxxvi., 166.
xxxvii., 14, 161.
xxxviii., 166, 177, 206.
Jones, Sir W., on Indian cosmogony, 149.
Kent's Cavern, 302.
Kurtz on days of vision, 49.
Lamech, his poem, 46.
Land, its creation, 174.
geological history of, 182.
Languages, unity of, 285, 291.
La Place, nebular hypothesis of, 119.
Latham on African languages, 288.
on the radiation of languages, 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 period, 397.
on the delta of the Mississippi, 333.
on the pleistocene period, 297.
Mammals, creation of, 231.
Mammoth age, 299.
Man, antiquity of, 386.
creation of, 235.
neocosmic, 285.
palaeocosmic, 285, 319.
Man, unity of, 263, 414.
Manetho, chronology of, 273.
Margite, cave of, 308.
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, 377.
Moffatt on African languages, 292.
Morse on the evolution of man, 391.
Mosaic Genesis, 27.
Mueller'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.
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 geology, 343.
Pattison on the antiquity of man, 318.
Pengelly on Kent's Cavern, 302.
on stalagmite, 387.
Periods, creative, 126.
geological, 330.
Persians, cosmogony of the, 147.
Philological evidence of the antiquity 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 _bhemah_, 406.
Prayer and law, 171.
Progress in nature, 75, 337.
Proverbs, viii., 74, 96, 176.
Psalm viii., 208.
viii., 1, 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 geology, 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.
Ruach Elohim, 106.
Rutimeyer on interglacial 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.
_Tannin_ (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, 11.
Variation, laws of, 414.
Veda, its cosmogony, 110.
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.
By PRINCIPAL 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
University, Montreal. With Twenty Illustrations. 12mo, Cloth, $1
50.
An admirable book. It is a clear and interesting _resume_ of
the results of geological investigation, told in simple
language, devoid of technicalities. 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 paleontology 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.--_Athenaeum_,
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. 12mo, 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 Slates, on receipt of
the price._
By ALEXANDER WINCHELL,
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 WINCHELL,
LL.D. With Illustrations. 12mo, 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
important American and Foreign Synonyms, the Economical Products of the
Rocks, and numerous Typical Localities; 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 Principles, its
Speculations, and its Theistic Bearings. By ALEXANDER WINCHELL,
LL.D. 12mo, Cloth, $1 00.
RECONCILIATION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION. By ALEXANDER WINCHELL,
LL.D. 12mo, Cloth, $2 00.
_Published by HARPER & BROTHERS, New York._
HARPER & BROTHERS _will send any of the above works by mail,
postage prepaid, to any part of the United States, on receipt of
the price._