dancers, contortionists, etc., prove of what a variety of motions man is capable.

Man possesses, in addition, organs of assimilation such as no animal enjoys, owing to the structure of his teeth, the alimentary canal, etc. Indeed, there is no animal in which all the three species of teeth are found in such an uninterrupted proportion as in man. The possibility of the distribution of mankind on all parts of the globe is owing to the pliability of man's organization. But few animals can support, like man, the differences in climate, etc. It is also remarkable that the creatures approaching nearest to man, namely, the orangs and chimpanzes, are so far behind man in this respect, that they soon perish when removed from their native spot.

NOTES ON THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN.

WHEN did man make his first appearance on our globe?

Was man a witness of the last change in the surface of the earth, and of the inundations by which the gravel called diluvium has been deposited? And, if so, must he not have been the contemporary of many of the extinct gigantic animals?

No one doubts that the physical condition of the globe we inhabit, and the history of mankind, are legitimate subjects of human inquiry; and yet frequently where these questions have been raised there has been a great repugnance to discuss them on their own merits, from a vague fear that the facts elicited would clash against popular opinion.

The evidence in favour of a much greater antiquity of the human race than was hitherto allowed has been gradually accumulating. The facts which are everywhere brought to light, though perhaps not as yet universally acknowledged, are sufficiently pregnant, and the deductions from them too important to be any longer ignored; they must be thoroughly sifted, and either affirmed, or, if possible, refuted. The present paper is a summary of the leading facts and opinions under discussion.

There is a circumstance connected with our subject which appears rather curious. While individuals or families are most anxious to trace their pedigree as far back as possible, and take pride in the antiquity of their descent, and while nations are equally tenacious of their remote antiquity, humanity, in the aggregate, prefers, in relation

to the existence of the rest of animals, to be considered as a modern creation, not dating further back than sixty centuries.

An intense egotism may, perhaps, be at the bottom of this apparent paradox. Man, in his pride, is so much in the habit of considering himself as the last link, as the epitome of the vegetable and animal world, in short as the lord of the creation, that he conceives it beneath his dignity to appear upon the scene until every thing had been duly prepared for his reception.

Chronological Data.-The Book of Genesis has formed the basis of our common chronology on the assumption that it gives the true epoch of the creation of the world and of man; yet the biblical texts differ. Thus, according to the Alexandrian version, 2,262 years are reckoned from the Creation to the Deluge. The Hebrew account has 1,656, and the Samaritan text 1,307 years.

Hence chronological computators greatly differ, and Desvignoles (Chronology of Sacred History), has collected above two hundred different calculations, varying from 3,483, the shortest, to 6,984, the longest period said to have elapsed between the Creation of the world and the commencement of our present era, so that the difference amounts to above 3,000 years.

That the Hebrew chronology falls infinitely short in reference to the creation of our globe is almost universally admitted even by those who contend for the consistency of Geology with Sacred History; hence the six days of creation are by many of these reconcilers considered as periods of time of indefinite length.

Hindoo Chronology.-According to the Indian mythology the world is to last four ages (yugs), three of which have already passed. The last, or the kali-yuga, commenced, according to Lepsius, in April 1302 B.C.

Conarda, a Cashmerian king, is supposed to have reigned 2448 B.C., and the era of king Vicramadyta is fixed at 58 B.C.

The pundits, by extending the Chaldean astrological cycle, make it 4,320,000 years.

Chaldæan Chronology.-The 36 decans of the zodiac multiplied by the 12 months of the year yielded the mystic number 432. The grand year of astronomy, or the time supposed by the Chaldeans to be required for the sun, fixed stars, etc., to return to the same celestial starting point, was first 25,000, then 36,000, and at last 432,000 years, agreeing with the supposed duration of ten Græco-Chaldæan generations. The deluge terminated the cycle.

Chinese Chronology.-Like the early history of every ancient people the Chinese possess also their fabulous and semi-historical periods. Ante-historical periods (Chine Panthier).

Pankon, the first symbolical man, followed by the three Hoangs. 1st, reign of the sky; 2nd, reign of the earth; 3rd, reign of man. They are comprehended in a grand cyclic period of 129,000 years, composed of twelve parts, called conjunctions, each of 10,800 years. Semi-historical period commences with Fou-pi, first emperor, about 3,468 B.C. Several of his descendants are named who have made discoveries in arts.

The historical period commences with the first king Hoang-ti, about 2637 B.C., falling, according to Lepsius' computation, during the pyramidal period of Egypt. It is certain that art and science flourished in China at a remote period, and the Chinese possessed a high degree of civilization while the Hebrews led yet, under the patriarchs, a nomadic life.

Egyptian Chronology.-Manetho, the Egyptian priest's system of chronology, according to recent investigations, chiefly of Lepsius, is as follows:

Cyclic periods anterior to Menes.

Divine dynasties-19 gods reigned 13,870 Julian years.
30 demigods

Ante-historical dynasties

3,650

17,520

320

20,840 years.

Advent of Menes, the first king, commencement of historical period, 30 dynasties, 3893 B.C.

Lesueur places the beginning of the Egyptian kingdom 5773 B.C., while Bunsen assumes the 3,643 B.C. In either case, the history of Egypt reaches further back than that of any other nation. Brugsh is said to have brought from Egypt an old manuscript upon leather 4000 years old. How many thousand years have passed before the Egyptians could have become a mighty nation, and have acquired by mere self-tuition-for we have no record that they have learned anything from any other nation-the arts and sciences requisite for the conception and execution of the stupendous monuments and works of art still extant, cannot be determined.

Menes, of the ancient city of This, built the capital Memphis, between the Nile and the Lybian desert. But before Memphis was built there existed already the important cities of Thebes and This.

Language. Much stronger than the evidence obtained from the chronology of different nations is that derived from the evolution, progress, and development of human language. Whatever view we adopt, it amounts almost to a physical impossibility that a grammatically constructed language should have issued from the mouth of the primitive man. For a very long period language was only transmitted from generation to generation by tradition, and an immense time must have elapsed before the living and dead languages, which are proved to have originated from a common stock, could have acquired a substantive form.

Bunsen, who, with many others, assumes one primitive language, observes,

"Philosophical inquiry shows the monosyllabic or particle language, as preserved in the ancient Chinese, must be supposed, theoretically, to have preceded the organic language, and either each language separately must once have been like the Chinese, or the Chinese itself is the wreck of that primitive idiom from which all organic languages have physically descended."

Arguing from such premises, Bunsen considers that, both from tradition and facts, the age of mankind cannot be less than 20,000 years, reckoning 10,000 years from Adam to Noah, and 10,000 years from Noah to the present era.

The question then arises, granting that the Chinese presents the primitive form does it present the primitive idiom? May it not, and has it not, been preceded by languages far more simple in form, and, if so, must not a long period have necessarily elapsed before it arrived at its present systematic form?

Again, assuming that the cradle of humanity was in a confined spot in the east, and that all the nations inhabiting the earth have proceeded from the same protoplasts, how many thousands of years have they required to spread upon the surface of the globe? Have not the first navigators found human beings every where? And again, what an immense period must have elapsed before the typical forms of the various races, supposing them to be the result of external influences, can have acquired that high degree of firmness and permanent development by which they are distinguished.

The naturally slow progress of civilization among primitive people deprived of experience to guide their steps, and forced, as it were, to grope in the dark, like a blind man, and to feel their ground, render the calculation to fix the age of mankind nearly impossible.

It belongs to Egyptologists and chronologists to separate the fabu

lous from the probability of these computations, they are adduced merely as collateral arguments, which may be taken for what they are worth. Neither shall we dwell upon the argument that the fragment of pottery found by Mr. Horner at a depth of thirty-nine feet from the surface of the ground, consisting of true Nile sediment, must be held as a record of the existence of man 13,371 years before A.D., reckoning the rate of increase in that locality at three inches and a half in a century.

This much, however, is undoubted, that according to the earliest record the Egyptians possessed a degree of civilization superior even to that of many subsequent centuries, a result which is certainly not compatible with the short time said to have elapsed between the Deluge and the time of the Pharaohs. This applies also to the early civilization of the Chinese, the Assyrians, and the Hindoos.

These perplexing considerations have not escaped the attention of devout believers in scripture authority. They have therefore been hard at work to reconcile the apparent conflict between sacred history and profane facts. Thus, among other theories, has been engendered the Præ-Adamite hypothesis, which is too curious to be omitted, and from which it will be observed that the Antediluvian theory is by no means a modern conceit.

In 1655 Izaak Peregre, a Calvinist scholar of Bordeaux, published a work entitled Præ-Adamite, in which he endeavours to prove, from certain passages in Genesis and the Epistles of St. Paul, that Adam and Eve were not the first human beings upon the earth. That there were in fact two separate creations of man, the first of which took place on the sixth day, along with the beasts of the earth, and in the same mode, namely, by the Creator merely bidding the earth to produce them. This he contends was the origin of the Gentiles, who spread upon the whole globe and peopled the earth. He further observes that the people of the new-world could not have been the descendants of Adam, separated as the new continent was from the old, they were obviously the descendants of the Præ-Adamites.

A long time, that is to say many thousand years after the first creation, God created Adam and Eve, but in a different manner; for God made man himself of the dust of the earth, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul. In the first creation man and woman were created at once; in the second, woman was made out of the rib of man. In the second creation the persons are named, no special names are given in the first creation. From several other passages, specially from some verses from Paul's Epistles