Page images
PDF
EPUB

believe there is no diversity of opinion. At least all agree that it was very recent; nay, although geology can rarely give chronological dates, but only a succession of events, she is able to say, from the monu⚫ments she deciphers, that man can not have occupied the globe more than six thousand years." Sir Charles Lyell also, in his "Principles of Geology (vol. i. p. 240), a work published before the recent discoveries of fossil human remains, remarks, "I need not dwell on the proofs of the low antiquity of our species, for it is not controverted by any experienced geologist; indeed, the real difficulty consists in tracing back the signs of man's existence on the earth to that comparatively modern period when species now his contemporaries began to predominate. If there be a difference of opinion respecting the occurrence in deposits of the remains of man and his work, it is always in reference to strata confessedly of the most modern order; and it is never pretended that our race co-existed with assemblages of animals and plants, of which all, or even a great part, of the species are extinct."

Until very recently, therefore, the researches of science, and the supposed teachings of the Scriptures respecting the age of man on the earth, had been in entire accord. But within the last twenty years a series of investigations has been made which to

some extent have again awakened doubt on this subject. Human bones and implements of labor and defense, together with domestic utensils, and even rude attempts of art, have been found in ancient peat beds, in bone caverns, and in the shallow lakes of Europe, in such geological connections as seem to demand for them a much higher antiquity than has hitherto been claimed for the race. Professor H. D. Rogers, of the University of Glasgow, writing in 1860, remarks, "Geologists and archæologists have recently somewhat startled the public by announcing the discovery, in the north-east of France and the adjacent corner of England, of supposed indications of the existence of the human race in the remote age when these tracts were inhabited by the extinct elephant, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, and other animals whose bones are preserved in the diluvium, or great superficial deposit attributed to the last wide geological inundation.” *

These researches have been pursued with great industry and zeal, and are already giving us a new science, not yet twenty years old, called "prehistoric archæology." "It is," says Lenormant,† "like all sciences which are still in their infancy, presumptuous, and claims, at any rate in the case of

* Blackwood's Magazine, October, 1860, p. 422.

+ Manual of the Ancient History of the East. Vol. i. pp. 24, 25.

some of its adepts, to overturn tradition, to abolish all authority, and to be the only exponent of the problem of our origin. These are bold pretensions which will never be realized. Prehistoric archæology, moreover, is yet but in its infancy; it still leaves great gaps, and many problems without solution. There is too often a desire to establish a system, and many scholars hasten to build theories on an insufficient amount of observations. Finally, all the facts of this science are not yet established with perfect certainty."

These claims for the high antiquity of man, derived from his fossil remains, have been fortified by similar claims deduced from the related sciences of ethnology and comparative philology. It is argued that the present races of men, with their great diversities of feature, color, and language, could not, according to any known rate or law of change, have descended from a single pair within the period that has elapsed since the received date of the creation, or rather of the deluge of Noah. Some, indeed, go further, and deny altogether the Bible doctrine of the unity of the race, insisting both upon its plurality of origin and its vast antiquity. As these views will be considered hereafter at length, it is only necessary to remark here that they are advocated with great zeal, and a display of learning

which is well calculated to confound, if it does not convert, the believers in the Mosaic narrative, especially those whose time and attainments will not permit them to examine the subject for themselves. In accordance with these claims of recent scientific research, numerous elaborate systems of chronology have been constructed, all of enormous reach. Some of these systems, indeed, are not new; but inasmuch as they never before acquired any credit beyond that of mere speculation, they did not seriously disturb the faith of mankind in the chronology of the Bible. It may not be inappropriate to give an outline of these speculations in this place, partly because they will not need any extended consideration further, and partly since they will serve to show us, at the outset, the extravagance of those speculations, as contrasted with the moderate and reasonable teachings of the Scriptures.

It has been remarked that not less than ninetyseven systems of chronology have been put forth, some of them professing to be derived from the Bible, but most of them avowedly and irreconcilably differing from it. There are three of these which are specially worthy of notice, viz., the systems of Bunsen, Boëckh, and Rodier.

The system of Baron Bunsen is too elaborate to .

* Iteler, in Halma's Almageste, vol. iv. p. 165.

be fully set forth here. In this system the creation of man is placed at B. C. 20,000, the flood of Noah at B. C. 10,000, the founding of the Egyptian empire by Menes at B. C. 3623, the birth of Abraham at B. C. 2870, the exodus at B. C. 1320, &c. For his reasons for these dates, and for a consideration of the value of his system, see Appendix, A.

The chronological system of Boëckh * is confined to Egyptian history and antiquities. According to this writer, Hepæstus, the first god-king of Egypt, began to reign on the 20th of July, B. C. 30,522. He reigned nine thousand years, and was followed by other gods, as Sol, Typhon, Horus, Jupiter, &c., * then by demigods, heroes, and manes. Of the gods there were three dynasties, of demigods three, together extending through nineteen thousand and twenty-four years. These were followed by a dynasty of manes, ruling five thousand eight hundred and thirteen years. The whole period thus embraced under the government of the gods, demigods, and manes, which he styles tempus mythicum (the mythic period), amounts to twenty-four thousand eight hundred and thirty-seven years, reaching down to July 20, B. C. 5702. Then follow historic times.

* See Müller's Fragmenta Hist. Græc., vol. ii. pp. 599-606, at the close of a résumé of the fragments that have been preserved of Manetho.

« PreviousContinue »