ON THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN, AND THE ORD BACON, when characterizing the haste of those who rush to broad generalizations from the knowledge of a few, random, isolated facts, says "This kind of experience is nothing but a loose faggot, and mere groping in the dark, as men at night try all means of discovering the right road, whilst it would be better and more prudent either to wait for the day or procure a light, and then proceed" (N. O. Aph. 82). If this remark were appropriate when the barren logic of the schools was thought equal to the discovery of all truth, when opinion was put in the place of argument conducted after a sound method, and when natural science. was, in this country, no better than a confused heap of speculations on the works of creation, it has not ceased to have a profound meaning still. Few can treasure up facts and hold observations in suspense, without drawing from them conclusions which nothing but perfect knowledge can warrant. A true light might indeed be procured by increased observation, and by the discovery of co-related facts which might show the absurdity of such conclusions. But it is hard to wait. It might seem very unlikely that an age such as ours should be prone to err in this way, when great prominence is given to true methods of investigation in the study of the works of God. But every man familiar with almost any branch of natural science knows, that most pages of its history illustrate the quaint words of Bacon. Its students have been forward to generalize on slender evidence and doubtful phenomena, rather than prudently to wait for the day, or to procure an unerring light by a full knowledge of particulars. The present subject is fruitful of illustrations. In treating it I shall briefly state the importance of the question by indicating those general beliefs on which it impinges directly, or contradicts. It is believed, 1st, That we have the only true account of the creation of man in the first chapter of Genesis; 2nd, That the opening verses of Genesis ii. refer to the same man named in ch. i.; 3rd, That the creation of Adam and Eve took place about B.C. 4004; 4th, That from them all the families of mankind are descended, and 5th, That the Adamic race was acknowledged as the only race of man in the great and gracious plan of redemption. Thus the theory to be discussed brings us at once into the very heart of interest the most momentous that can be proposed to man. Though no apology is needed for giving this prominence to it, there are one or two things which should be stated in order to clear the ground. It has often been alleged, that all who mix up the Bible with the discoveries of science, and with discussions, often keen and bitter, resulting therefrom, are neither the best of friends to that best of all books, nor deeply imbued with the spirit of scientific research. A multitude of well-meaning but weak men, whose charity is so wide that they let the enemies of revelation think for them, are led away by such statements. But put aside the haze which hangs over this question! Is it possible for any man to pursue science aright without thinking of that personal Creator whose works science deals with? And if you think of Him, it must become a matter of interest to you to know, that he whose mind is seen in his works has revealed to us his heart in the Scriptures. Why should men try to forget that creation and Holy Scripture are the twofold revelation of one God? The true Christian will ever rejoice over the true man of science, and smile on his labours. It is not, however, forgotten that there are narrow-minded theologians, just as there are narrow-minded men of science; and perhaps the latter are even more suspicious of the dogmas of the former than the theologian is of the theories of the man of science. The true state of matters should not be concealed. There are many workers in the wide, rich fields of present science who are constantly anxious to give their observations theological bearings of a most pernicious kind, but who cry out in alarm the moment a brother worker demands distinctly to be heard on the merits. They demur to the theological views, and everywhere urge the point, "Why refer to the Bible at all?" Touching the subject now before us, it would be impossible for any man who believes the Bible to be the Word of God, to shake himself free from the influence of revealed truth on his own mind. Should he imagine that he can put off the deepest convictions of his spiritual nature, and judge dispassionately of topics in which the very foundations of his belief are interested, he deceives himself as thoroughly as the mere student of science would do, who, while he is consciously an unbeliever in the inspiration of the Word, would hold himself equal to determine impartially points on which his theories are at issue with Scripture statements. I say his theories, for all true science is in complete harmony with revelation. The theory of a race of pre-Adamite men appeals to three great branches of knowledge for confirmation-namely, Archæology, Geology, and Scripture. The last, however, is appealed to by a few only. The review of these will set the subject fully before us. The necessity for such a wide discussion will be apparent. Recent researches in the fields now named have created a wide-spread impression, that the hitherto recognized date of man's creation must be given up. This has led to unwise attempts to preserve the chronology of the Adamic race entire by linking up the traces of human art, in the remote antiquity pointed to, with another race of whose origin no account has come down to us. In characterizing these researches, this state of matters is kept constantly in view. Of course it is to be borne in mind. throughout, that they have been for the most part conducted by men who have given no opinions as to a plurality of races, but who simply hold that the discoveries demand a date for man on the earth far more remote than that generally assigned to him. Others try to save us, as they think, from the consequences by adopting the theory of a preAdamite race. This I. ARCHEOLOGY.-In the application of the principles of historical criticism to antiquities, the modern archæologist has reached a threefold generalization. Articles used by man in the industrial arts and in war are classified under great epochs. Thus we have-1st, The Stone Period; 2nd, the Bronze Period; and 3rd, the Iron Period. classification may be accepted in connection with the topic now under notice. It has, however, already been shown, that there are grave objections to this, and that to apply it rigidly would often land us in most extravagant conclusions. Suppose, for example, that the hosts led by Joshua against Jericho had received no place in authentic history, but had continued unknown, as so many eastern tribes have done; and that a modern antiquary had discovered under eight or ten feet of earth "the knives of flint" (Josh. v. 2) made use of in the general circumcision which took place before going up against the doomed city—these knives of flint, he would argue, were used by a tribe to whom the metals were unknown, a tribe who had passed away ages before even the foundations of mighty Nineveh were laid! Again, we have seen that in the description of the five millions led |