Page images
PDF
EPUB

meet the argument of our author in a sober, matter-of-fact style of reasoning.

And first as to his astronomical argument. The substance of the argument is this: On account of " the deviation of the earth's axis," the northern and southern hemispheres enjoy unequal degrees of heat and cold. When this difference is at the extreme, the seasons of "spring and summer are eight days longer than autumn and winter." But "the history of progressive human civilization with which we are acquainted is comprised within one. hemisphere, and under climacteric accidents the most favorable to advancement." These "favorable climacteric accidents" are the seasons of spring and summer being longer than autumn and winter. Therefore, as man has mostly lived in the northern hemisphere, his creation must have taken place when the heat was greatest in this hemisphere, i. e., about 20,000 B. C., and the flood must have taken place about 10,000 B. C., when the cold was at its maximum.

'

In regard to this argument, we remark: First, we neither admit the premises nor the conclusion. Having passed some fifteen years in the southern part of that belt which has been most densely peopled by the race, we have a little experience that bears directly on the point. We thought and felt decidedly, that the cool season was more favorable to physical and mental vigor, to physical and mental development, than the hot season. And, if we mistake not, such were decidedly the thoughts and feelings of all in that land who had much to do in the various spheres of bodily and mental activity. So that if

for going back to a preceding epoch of twenty-one thousand years; but less than one period is impossible, were it only because of the stubborn fact of the strata of languages. To what point, then, is Egypt brought back by this calculation? To the middle, at least, or the ninth millennium of man, as the period of the immigration of the western branch of our race into the valley of the Nile. But this is the very close of the primitive world in the strict sense, that is to say, of the history of our race before the great convulsion of that part of Central Asia to which we turn as the cradle of mankind. This convulsion, which we know as the flood of Noah, in all probability coincides with that epoch of the northern hemisphere when the temperature was lowest, or from 9000 to 10,000 B. C., just as the origin of our race coincides with that period of it when the temperature was highest, which was ten thousand five hundred years earlier.

"If this principle be correct, the Egyptians can have known nothing of the flood, allusions to which we find everywhere among the Iranians and Semites; and in truth no such tradition is current among them, any more than it was among the old Turanians and Chinese." (Vol. iv. p. 564.)

In regard to the above hypothesis of the great antiquity of man on the earth, and the arguments in support of it, we think little needs to be said by way of confutation. We must, however, briefly state the reasons why we do not receive the hypothesis, and think the arguments inconclusive. We might use the words "absurd,” “irrational," and other stronger disparaging epithets, in relation to the author's reasoning, and think ourselves justified in their use. But the use of such terms generally weakens an argument. For what one calls absurd, another regards merely as inconclusive, a third, fair reasoning, and a fourth, sound argument. We, therefore, will endeavor to

meet the argument of our author in a sober, matter-of-fact style of reasoning.

And first as to his astronomical argument. The substance of the argument is this: On account of "the deviation of the earth's axis,” the northern and southern hemispheres enjoy unequal degrees of heat and cold. When this difference is at the extreme, the seasons of "spring and summer are eight days longer than autumn and winter." But "the history of progressive human civilization with which we are acquainted is comprised within one hemisphere, and under climacteric accidents the most favorable to advancement." These "favorable climacteric accidents" are the seasons of spring and summer being longer than autumn and winter. Therefore, as man has mostly lived in the northern hemisphere, his creation must have taken place when the heat was greatest in this hemisphere, i. e., about 20,000 B. C., and the flood must have taken place about 10,000 B. C., when the cold was at its maximum.

In regard to this argument, we remark: First, we neither admit the premises nor the conclusion. Having passed some fifteen years in the southern part of that belt which has been most densely peopled by the race, we have a little experience that bears directly on the point. We thought and felt decidedly, that the cool season was more favorable to physical and mental vigor, to physical and mental development, than the hot season. And, if we mistake not, such were decidedly the thoughts and feelings of all in that land who had much to do in the various spheres of bodily and mental activity. So that if

we were to use Bunsen's premises, we should draw the conclusion the opposite to that which he has drawn. We confess we should never advance this argument to prove that man was created about 10,000 B. C.; but we think it worth as much in support of such an epoch of the creation as that of our author in favor of the higher one of ten thousand years earlier.

Again, in point of fact, in what climate has the race of man attained to the highest degree of development in both body and mind? If we look at the present generation, we certainly cannot point to the mildest parts of the temperate zone as furnishing the best specimens of intellectual and physical vigor. Edinburgh and Glasgow are almost 56° N. Lat.; London is almost 52°; Berlin is farther north, and Paris is about 49° N. It is true that, as we go back into the early historic times, we find the region of human superiority a little further south. Greece is between 37° and 45° N., and Italy between 40° and 46° N.; and Palestine, and Egypt, and Chaldea were still further south. But the ancients were not equal to the moderns. The reason was, they, through love of ease, delighted in the softness of tropical climates, where a little effort suffices to meet the wants of a degenerate physical nature. They settled along the banks of such streams as the Nile, the Euphrates and Tigris, the Indus and Ganges. It was when they settled in the more northern and cooler climates that the greater strength of body and mind was developed in the race. Where, we would ask, was the garden of Eden? Mount Ararat is in about 40° N. Lat.; and since geologists tell us that the mighty

currents which have swept over the earth, the marks of which are now seen on the solid rocks, were from north to south, and that which caused the deluge of Noah was probably in the same direction, the ark floated south during that one hundred and fifty days; hence the garden of Eden was north of the mountain where it rested, and was therefore about in the middle of the temperate zone; whereas, according to our author's theory and argument, it should have been further south. We beg our readers not to spend time to criticise this argument, for in itself considered it will not bear criticism. We only put it forth to meet the reasoning of our author. In fact, the

line of argumentation is about parallel to his, and equally conclusive. If we placed any value on the argument from heat and cold as aiding to fix the epoch of the creation of man, we should be inclined to place the epoch at the time when the heat and cold of our hemisphere were in equilibrio, which would be for the last time (according to our author) about 4002 B. C. This differs only two years from the commonly received chronology. But we do not believe in this heat-and-cold argument. Even if we should admit the premises, that the time when spring and summer are eight days longer in our hemisphere than autumn and winter, is most favorable to human development, it would by no means follow that the creation of man took place at that time.

We must devote a little space to our author's chronology of the patriarchs, especially to his era of Abraham. We have here some rich specimens of

« PreviousContinue »